In the political culture of the country, impeachment is basically a numbers game. Whoever has more partisan political followers in the legislature need not worry with any impeachment call.
This is particularly true in the case of an incumbent chief executive. Being both a benefactor to and a beneficiary of political alliances in the majority, a ruling president can feel safe and secure when confronted with impeachable offenses.
Sad but true: impeachment being but a basically partisan political exercise, what is just and true in its cause is practically irrelevant. What really matters is the head count of the political affiliates of a president being threatened by an impeachment process.
In the history of the country, what in fact ultimately gets a president out of office are the citizens—not impeachment. It is ultimately the people’s move that terminates the reign of a president or not. This is an established national phenomenon in the life of the country.
But that fact notwithstanding, neither impeachment nor people’s move seems to be a prudent option, considering the obtaining circumstances in the country—even if only for the following two more salient reasons.
First: There were already two effective people’s moves but their consequences are really nothing to be proud of nor to rejoice about. As of today, the citizens are again complaining, protesting, agitating. Many people in the streets are again unhappy and angry.
Second: There is the nagging question about who takes over the national leadership in the event of another successful people’s move—or even by impeachment if such were at all realistic and successful. While the question is worth asking, the assuring answer thereto is far from coming.
What seems to desperately cry for attention instead is the country’s suspect election process: known illegal campaign sourcing. Blatant over-spending. Open vote buying. Consistent wrong vote counting. Unending election results questioning.
Impeachment? Citizen’s move? Think again!
11 February 2005