The events of EDSA

This paper explores the events of EDSA 3, its viability as a social movement, and assesses how media stirred public opinion and interest as the event unfolded. It does so with reference to some accounts as presented in a distinct form of mass media- newspapers. An attempt was made to illustrate EDSA 3 in a non- linear mode, not to purposely make it fit and be seen as a viable social movement, but rather to reach a fitting explanation to its evolution as reflected on the evidences examined. People Power: An Overview

The idea of People Power –almost an indigenous social occurrence this side of the world- reveals certain pervasive beliefs among its critics, participants and proponents. For instance, the church and its members retain it as a culmination of non- violent, and prayerful mass street demonstrations for a greatly noble cause and a truly rewarding religious experience. Its proponents judge it as a justified means of saving the country from disaster in the hands of a tyrant. In EDSA 1, Enrile flew off from the Marcos block due to his excruciating distaste of Marcos’ involvement in numerous irregularities and abuses.

In EDSA 2, it ranged from uncontrolled rage stemming from exposes on Estrada’s abuses and alleged involvement in various illegal affairs, his eventual impeachment trial, and most notably, the senator- jurors’ refusal to unveil the truth. People Power 1 and 2 both registered to its advocates as such. With participants mostly comprised of members from the upper and middle classes, the military, business leaders and various cause- oriented groups, the phenomenon emerged as the epitome of a great social awakening to institute a highly- sought after social change.

To its critics, the events of both EDSA’s greatly displayed the idea of an “Imperial Manila” since participants to both events were mostly limited to those from Metro Manila. Amando Doronila described it in his column in the Philippine Daily Inquirer: People power movements have been an Imperial Manila phenomenon. Their playing field is EDSA. They have excluded the provincianos from their movement with their insufferable arrogance and snobbery … ignoring the existence of the toiling masses and peasants in agrarian Philippines[1].

Apart from questioning the justification of people power, it also highlights an apparent result of these uprisings. This hint of marginalization occurring in a supposed collective national action, invoked other notable arguments. . Dr. Maria Cynthia Rose Bautista clearly took note of this in her article “The Revenge of the Elite on the Masses’? ” She states: …People Power 2 upheld high ethical standards of public service and inspired a new constituency for new politics. Unfortunately, the uprising superseded existing processes in particular the impeachment trial in the senate.

Thus, resulting in constitutional ambiguities that sustain the call for Estrada’s reinstatement. From an institutional perspective, Estrada’s ouster through the impeachment process would have been preferable. It could have avoided the constitutional dilemmas that continue to hound Macapagal- Arroyo. But the way events unfolded in January, moral sensibilities and the question of national integrity overrode procedural considerations. In the process, People Power 2 ironically circumvented an institution it had hoped to eventually strengthen. Not surprisingly, this generated problems[2].

It’s logical to say that EDSA 2 stimulated a wide array of consequences, among which is the staging of the pro-Estrada camp of their own version barely 3 months after. Naturally, international media also took notice of the uprising. One editorial article states: …Whatever curious legal construction anyone may now attempt to put on the ouster of Estrada, he was ousted by a military coup, with the connivance of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church, major business groups and two former presidents. This will have any number of consequences, none too pleasant, for the coup makers- and more importantly- for the country.

One loser among the coup makers will be Archbishop of Manila, Jaime Cardinal Sin, and his church… Economically, from the standpoint of foreign investors, would you put money into a country whose constitution and legal system are only as reliable as the will and whim of an entrenched oligarchical elite[3]? Many have already discussed the shortcomings of People Power 2. Its deviation from democratic ideals was clearly visible to its observers. Looking at the cited works, both mention the economic, institutional, and judicial repercussions of the staging of EDSA 2.

But perhaps the most prominent implication of the uprising was the disregard for the overwhelming mandate that went down the drain with the ousting of Estrada. For our purpose, it is important to highlight the complications that spawned from its staging primarily because EDSA 2, hands down, was the starting point for the more convoluted events that culminated in EDSA 3. Erap and the Masa The plight of the poor Filipino was once again brought to the fore as a consequence of EDSA 2. Theirs has always been a long but enduring struggle to escape centuries- old oppression and exploitation, and seem to be an even longer wait for a defender.

Politicians, in turn, have since included the alleviation of the poor folk from poverty in their respective platforms during elections. This is not surprising, though. Logic dictates that they constitute the biggest chunk of the electorate and so remains as a valuable source of much- needed votes. Still, no politician has ever claimed to enjoy the full backing of this enormous social sector. In 1998, however, the country stood face to face with the person who, undoubtedly, commands the respect and adulation of the people he always maintained as his own.

Indisputably, Joseph Estrada came from the ranks of the elite, but he defied conventions and was able to transcend the class divide mainly due to his portrayal in his movies of a hero and a champion of the masses. He was perceived as a modern- day Robin Hood, elite without elitist tendencies that the poor often shies away from. Sensed and received by the masses as such, Estrada was catapulted to the presidency with the largest margin in the history of the presidential elections[4]. Estrada clearly recognized that he owed the presidency to the masses.

The same people who collectively consolidated their ranks to propel Estrada to the highest position in the land. The masses shared the glory of Estrada’s victory the way they partake of his triumphs in the movies. To them, Estrada’s conquest spells an indication that their suffering days are about to end, that suddenly, they have a chance to make it after all. The ride didn’t last long, though. The masses’ explicit display of support spawned animosity towards the Estrada administration. Without a favor to return to the traditional power brokers in Malacanang, Estrada’s leadership seems doomed upon its inception[5].

With the circumstances surrounding the impeachment trial, the wheels of change turned in favor of the anti- Estrada group. He was eventually ousted and was left to ponder about his torment. Throughout his ordeal, the masa never left his side. Looking at it from the masses’ perspective, Erap’s fall from grace and conviction was a direct attack to their already worn out sensibilities. It’s not a strange tendency for the masses to salvage some pride, or what’s left of it. Estrada need not ask them for aid in his darkest hours.

This they showed in a dramatic display of collective strength, the size of which still controversial and highly debatable up to this day, as they amassed in EDSA for their own People Power. [6] EDSA and the Media As it is with EDSA 1 and 2, newspapers ran discussions on the matter with much fervor, thereby stirring public outlook and attention. In this review, three major and widely circulating broadsheets were extensively used, namely, the Philippine Daily Inquirer, The Philippine Star, and Malaya, all of which claim, to some extent, to be the harbingers of truth in print media.

Perhaps the most crucial point in the evolution of EDSA 3 was Estrada’s arrest and subsequent detention which aroused a barrage of estimation from a variety of observers. Inquiries ranging from the motive behind the arrest, its implications, its significance, and its aftermath glossed the pages of the nation’s broadsheets. Articles in these dailies present a bevy of opinion pertaining to Erap’s arrest. For instance, an editorial article on the Philippine Daily Inquirer states: And so it comes down to this.

For the first time in our history, a former president of the Republic is under arrest. Whatever happens now, in the courtroom and in the streets, it is clear that the nation has just crossed a threshold. We hope the crossover leads to greater political maturity. But let us not deceive ourselves. The potential for backsliding is great. As easy as slipping an agent provocateur into the middle of an angry crowd, yesterday’s milestone can be turned into an occasion to indulge in politics of the worst kind. …But the backsliding into political immaturity can also come from Estrada’s supporters.

In the days leading to Estrada’s arrest, the lawyerly rhetoric from his defense team struck a starkly different tone from the sloganeering of the die- hard supporters who had massed in Greenhills, San Juan. There is no need to send the troops, the lawyers said; Estrada will “surrender voluntarily. ” But the crowd that gathered at Greenhills mixed that signal completely. That the Estrada camp is quite ready to play the masa card- it is doing so in the present election campaign, running on a rich- versus- poor, us- versus- them theme- can only make an already volatile situation even more uncertain[7] .

Easily, the arrest was seen as a step in the right direction for the country. Though viewed as significantly successful, a clear awareness of the possible generation of animosity, especially coming from the masa, was mentioned. Conrado De Quiros share a similar- toned piece: My first reaction was jubilation. The arrest of one Joseph Estrada, ex- president and future con, for plunder, was a shining hour in ways that made even Manny Villar’s brilliant coup in Congress, which began the impeachment trial, and Loren Legarda and Franklin Drilon’s breaking into tears in the Senate, which sealed Erap’s fate, lose some of their luster.

It was a shining hour in ways that rivaled even the miracle that was ordinary Filipinos tumbling out of their homes like a flood into the streets to oust a tyrant. [8] The fear of retaliation from the masses was hurriedly dismissed, however, by Art Borjal in his column “Jaywalker”. He states: Some said that Erap’s arrest will lead to EDSA 3. Wrong. The reality, which is harsh for the allies of Erap, is that many people from the Silent Majority actually wanted the Sandiganbayan to order the arrest of Erap.

Now, as Erap’s trial begins and as interest over his arrest wanes, the country can begin in earnest its search for national prosperity and progress. [9] This observation, though, did not pass as a fact, as evidenced by the events that would later unfold. However, it does represent part of the spectrum of opinion concerning Erap’s arrest. The Malaya, meanwhile, presented quite a different view from the aforementioned articles. It states: …In an ideal world, the trial of Estrada should be governed by the cold, impartial rules of judicial proceedings.

But this case has been driven by politics from the very start. Estrada was the elected president with three more years to go in his term when he was forced to leave Malacanang by a mob. The same mob continues to cry for his head. The complaints filed against him have been rushed to satisfy the mob. This was practically admitted by the Ombudsman when it sought leave from the Sandiganbayan to withdraw five of the eight charges against Estrada. Estrada haters claim sending him to jail or to the death chamber (one case is plunder, which is punishable by death) will serve as a closure to this controversy.

How we wish we could agree with them. The cases will drag on. Final resolution could possibly not come within the lifetime of these protagonists. In the meantime, the nation is distracted from the problems facing it. People cannot find work. The take- home pay of those fortunate to hold jobs is being eroded by spiraling prices. The detractors of Estrada might succeed in putting him behind bars. But the people in power might just find that without Estrada to kick around, they would no longer have a convenient excuse for their own incompetence. [10]

Far from being critical of Estrada, the article fires back at the proponents of the Estrada ouster and readies them with an impending judgment once the aftermath of the arrest do not come nicely as expected. Characteristically a media frenzy, the actual arrest has these as headlines[11]: The Philippine Star: “Erap jailed for plunder” Philippine Daily Inquirer: “This is not the movies” (Joseph Estrada: From Palace to prison) Malaya: “Erap arrested” Simply gazing at the headline, one can surmise the thrust of the succeeding texts. It’s also equally essential to look at how Erap’s supporters esponded to his arrest as presented in the newspapers. For instance, in Malaya: …Up to 6,000 Estrada supporters gathered overnight, then dwindled to a few hundred by morning. Police said the crowd swelled to around 5,000 after the arrest order. …Some protesters proceeded to the EDSA shrine from Greenhills for the beginning of what they claim to be EDSA 3. …Members of the media perceived to be critical of Estrada were pelted with stones and bottles of mineral water. Estrada’s son, JV Ejercito, at one point came out of the family residence to appeal to their supporters to refrain from harming mediamen[12].

What does this entail? The arrest showed how the masses can accrue a crowd if need be. The people who trooped to Greenhills attempted to prevent Erap’s detention, to no avail. More significantly, most of Erap’s supporters viewed his capture as the final nail on their coffin. For them, the administration deliberately caused the arrest to be how it is just to sensationalize the event in the eyes of the public. For the anti- Erap faction, what could be better than this? For Erap’s loyalists, its time to stand up for what they believe in and defend their hero from further humiliation.

The succeeding events unfolded at a pace that even seasoned analysts failed to fully grasp. A gathering of Erap’s supporters in the site of two previous people power revolutions confronted the administration after his arrest, prompting them to clamor for a third. As read in the headline ran by the Inquirer: For the supporters of arrested former President Joseph Estrada, a new “numbers game” has begun. “Tuloy- tuloy na ito (We’re going all the way),” said former first lady Luisa “Loi” Ejercito, who spent the night with thousands of demonstrators at the EDSA shrine in Mandaluyong and called the rally “poor people’s power. …the number is expected to swell to 1. 5 million- enough to effectively hold People Power 3[13] Malaya ran a similar story on its front page: Supporters of Joseph Estrada continued to gather at the EDSA Shrine yesterday to protest what they said was the grave injustice committed against the former president. Crowd estimates ranged from a low of 60,000 to a high of 350,000. …“This is a spontaneous outburst of the people’s anger against what the Arroyo administration is doing to President Estrada,” said Jesus Crispin Remulla, spokesman of the Laban ng Demokratikong

Pilipino- Puwersa ng Masa[14]. The “poor people’s power” commenced as the masses’ response to perceived injustice at the hands of the government. Beyond the Facts Among the goals of this paper is to examine the chosen medium’s treatment of the event. As EDSA 3 unfurls and up to its tumultuous conclusion, newspaper columnists spoke of the uprising in varying tones, starting with some of De Quiros’ view of the uprising[15]. He states: …The last few days would have shown that the crowd is truly massive.

I asked the TV people who interviewed me the last few days about its size and they told me that on the first day alone of the rally it already reached the scale of EDSA II. Not all of those who went there could possibly have been bought or coerced. And I am not so sure that even those who were so did not find the money or religious sanction purely gravy. Nothing but resolute blindness can make anyone fail to appreciate the size of that crowd- the same resolute blindness e- mail writers and “texters” are accusing the crowd of, calling their rally an exercise in exonerating a thief.

De Quiros seem to accept the merits of EDSA 3 along the lines of the “numbers game”. It can be recalled that unlike print media, major TV networks literally ignored the uprising, with only Net 25 maintaining a substantial amount of coverage. Admittedly, EDSA 3 was at par, if not superior compared to EDSA II in terms of size. He also touched the issue about majority of the participants being of the “hakot” variety, a line cunningly used by one Malacanang official to downplay the event. But de Quiros was further pointing to another important consideration: The other side of that coin is the call to fight fire with fire, to muster the EDSA II forces to rival the throng at EDSA or to let their sentiments be known through a noise barrage. Several groups who were at the forefront of EDSA II have actually called for that. Some have even suggested police action to rid the EDSA shrine of the plague that has visited it. The last one is idiotic. I have no doubt that crowd includes thugs and hooligans- some of them were caught on TV puncturing the tires of cars, and they have been harassing TV and newspaper reporters- and should be arrested when caught in the act.

But to dismiss the throng as nothing more than a riffraff that should be gotten rid of like garbage, that is not to be anti- Erap, that is to be anti- people. Visibly, de Quiros recognizes the danger of an inappropriate handling of the crowd. He castigated the call for a head- on collision between EDSA II forces and the masa, not because of its “class” intonation, but rather simply because it is not the suitable measure. The masses are airing a legitimate grievance. A violent response therefore, would only create more problems than solutions. He then concludes:

You cannot fight “EDSA III” with mere calls for counter demonstrations, or legal arguments, or even with replaying the impeachment trial on TV. You can only fight it with new story lines, new images, new signs and symbols- which you cannot produce overnight. It is not enough to know what lessons to teach, it is just as vital- if not more so- to know how to teach them. What De Quiros is lobbying here is for a careful study of the nature of grievances since solutions depend on the type of problems they attempt to address. The events in EDSA 3 should bring enough wisdom for the leaders in confronting tribulations.

Meanwhile, The Philippine Star’s Max Soliven also penned interesting thoughts on the subject[16]. Playing the numbers, he states: Let’s face it. The pro- Estrada rally at the EDSA shrine was much bigger than the day before. On its second day, the crowd’s numbers had swelled to significant proportions. …their streamers proclaiming their “difference” from EDSA I and EDSA DOS, by calling themselves “Poor Have Power”… …Many observers are shaking their heads or that the 5,000 or so arriving at the scene belong to the rent-a-crowd and were brought by hakot.

Like de Quiros, Soliven find the size of the crowd hard to dismiss, but with a much stringer reference to the “hakot” phenomenon. He then continues: Let’s hope the situation simmers down, the protesters lose steam, and things begin to return to normal. And yet, what did we expect? When you glorify a mob surging into the streets as a glorious revolution of “People Power”, what can you call a similar mob whose sentiments are on “the other side”? As for me, I believe the attempt to arouse an EDSA III in favor of the imprisoned ex- President Erap will peter out- but we’ll have to see.

One thing is clear: the former chief executive is in jail, and he’ll stay there. The Armed Forces and the Philippine National Police, after all, having “switched” once, aren’t ready to switch around again. That’s the long and short of it. Soliven’s lines here appear perilous. He anchored everything to Erap languishing in prison and to police/ military adventurism. Very little was stated about the legitimacy of the uprising but rather, more on its demerits. Paredes also gave his outlook on the uprising[17]. He begins: As I write this piece in the early morning of Thursday, a crowd is gathering again at EDSA and Ortigas Avenue.

It is an angry crowd, unlike the perfumed one that gathered there in January and caused a change in governments. This one is also unplanned, unlike the earlier one which, after reading all of the pieces claiming credit for what happened, had to have been meticulously planned from Day One. This is quite an opening for Paredes. He lavishly attacked EDSA 2 while legitimizing EDSA 3 with just a few lines going. He employs the classic elite vs. masa plot to set his story on course. He continues: The police felt a great need to show force.

Eventually, they used water cannons to disperse the crowd in front of the house on Polk St. in Greenhills and finally arrested Erap. No handcuffs were placed on the former president. No rough stuff was used except on the crowd, made up exclusively of the poor and the economically disadvantaged. Is this- what is going on at EDSA- something that will go away to be dismissed as just another gathering of the downtrodden who do not, anyway, have what it takes to change things in the manner that the elite that calls itself the Civil Society has perfected into a science?

Or is this something that will end only with another change in administration? He repeatedly highlighted his design to pit the masses against the elite with his succeeding lines. Evidently, for Paredes, what’s brewing at EDSA, as being led by the pro- Erap crowd has the makings of an offshoot to the elite- led EDSA 2. He then concludes: The crowd continues to gather. EDSA, according to the radio, is no longer passable. But this is still early in the morning. Maybe, the police will come around, break a few heads, use their water cannons and clear the roads in time for the morning traffic.

And then, again, they may not and the crowd could continue to grow and grow and grow. Whichever way this particular development goes, it is something that we Pinoys wished on ourselves. Thus, there is nothing to complain about. This is apparently what we always wanted to happen to us. That is the underlying theme to all these. This is part of the secret wish of the elite- to see the rise of the underclass and have them claim their rightful place in society. After all, if this were not the case, why else are we allowing this to happen to us?

A masa- led uprising similar to EDSA 2 is highly probable for Paredes, he even sound to be endorsing it. It will not be surprising perhaps, to find his succeeding articles approving a masa uprising. What’s been already checked here are some articles before the tragic attempt of the pro- Erap crowd to seize power in Malacanang. A review of the articles after the “rebellion” reveals yet again a variety of inputs. To start with, an editorial piece points out: …When the smoke cleared, three persons were dead and scores were wounded on both sides.

The orgy of violence also saw several stores being looted, many windows broken and several vehicles battered and burned. At least 50 demonstrators were arrested in the course of the violent dispersal- all of them unknown. In fact, none of the prominent political personalities believed to have organized, financed or encouraged the pro- Estrada demonstrations was seen at Mendiola or J. P. Laurel Street when violence erupted. It was Estrada’s loyal masa who took the fight to the palace gates; it was the same masa that bore the brunt of government’s counteraction.

Now, they will have to answer for the violence, the vandalism, the arson and the looting[18]. The collective screams that reverberated in EDSA, the grand display of enormous numerical capacity, and everything acceptable that has happened in that junction, turned disastrous with the crowd’s motion to proceed to Malacanang, and with it, a multitude of criticisms thrown from all fronts by detractors waiting for an opening. The ploy was seen as the handiwork of the opportunistic politicians backfiring tragically to the masses. The supposed leaders took turns denying their involvement, as seen in this article: Even JV Ejercito, one of his (Estrada’s) sons, has denied involvement, telling GMA- 7 in Taglish:” This is a spontaneous gathering, there were no leaders. If just one person agitates the crowd, the rest will follow because they are emotional. I did my part in pacifying them. [19]” This one comes from a family- member of the supposed aggrieved party. This is how it goes coming from an alleged “agitator”: “I totally deny that I was a participant to any cabal act or movement to undermine the stability of the Republic. ” Enrile told reporters at Camp Crame. But they have to restudy the meaning of rebellion. What happened today does not fit the meaning of rebellion. I should know. I was arrested many times before for rebellion. ” He said, adding: “The government is very nervous about what happened (in Malacanang). There is some degree of the government being threatened. But the declaration is not justified. [20]” Enrile, along with then reelectionist senators Defensor- Santiago, Honasan, and Lacson denied having any involvement with the decision of the crowd to march and stun Malacanang.

Seemingly circular arguments of challenging the legality of their incoming arrest dominate Enrile and his companion’s post- EDSA 3 talk. Government allies, meanwhile, wasted no time condemning the siege and the people they perceive to be behind it: “I support strong moves at this time. They should be investigated and charged in court if there is evidence,” said Drilon, a former Senate President and justice secretary. Winnie Monsod, another PPC candidate, scoffed at claims by Estrada’s allies that no one was leading the loyalist protest. “Who is the fool who will believe that this is a spontaneous action?

They’re trying to fool us. It was executed with military precision. [21]” We can go on enumerating the accusations and denials of the protagonists, for there’s quite abundance. We will not delve into them, though. Of utmost importance is the detectable outcome of the uprising to the masses. Once more, we go back to the Opinion section of our chosen medium, and see how it treats the aftermath of the struggle. Firstly, in de Quiros’ column[22]: …But there is a drug more powerful than shabu, and that is anger. Maybe some of them have taken shabu, but most, if not all, of them would have been overdosing only on anger.

An anger they had felt all their lives for getting a raw deal on life, an anger that had been whetted, like the appetites of ferocious dogs kept without food in kennels for days, by the relentless stoking of wounds by Enrile, Santiago, Gregorio Honasan, Panfilo Lacson, Ernesto Maceda, and their ilk. An anger that had then been pointed in the direction of the government- or more than the government, society itself- like those same starved ferocious dogs unleashed from the kennels with the instruction: Kill! De Quiros probed into the heart of it- the masses’ felt sentiments.

The agitators, to him, were condemnable for using the masa’s emotions accumulated in EDSA. After all, it is the image of their hero being routinely maltreated that served as the impetus for their coming together in one enormous assembly. Over and above the prodding of Enrile and company, it is an expression of restrained rage. Secondly, here’s a glimpse at Borjal’s thoughts on the subject[23]: Whoever conceptualized and implemented the scrpt that led to the storming of Malacanang by Erap fanatics must have been a disciple of Adolf Hilter.

Apparently, he utilized Hitler’s techniques in brainwashing, mind- control and mass hysteria. And he knew the pawns he would use- unlettered, drug- crazed robots who would sway and move with his every command. It appears clear to Borjal that the masses were in a severely questionable state of mind, thus being easily manipulated, and controlled by the initiator of the tragic uprising. In essence, in no way that it occurred to him that those who trooped to the palace acted on impulse. Lastly, a look at the presentation of Paredes[24]: While the poor will quiet down, the turmoil is not quite over. There will again be flare- ups of the magnitude of what is called EDSA 3 at the most unexpected times. Watch for them. They came to us with a list of grievances and no one among the ruling classes gave them the time of day. Even in Fort Sto. Domingo in Sta. Rosa Laguna, Erap, the object of their loyalty is surrounded by the poor who, even as he was being brought to the seven- hectare compound, were demonstrating in front of the camp for his freedom. Paredes kept to his stance.

Until that point, it’s still a case of the elite and its representatives blatantly discounting the masses’ grievances. Conclusions Drawing conclusive lessons or predictions from the circumstances surrounding EDSA 3 would have been more viable if done by an actual participant or an ardent observer of this phenomenon. But then, again, the examination performed on the various accounts somehow lends enough courage to the writer to craft a few. To start with, of the three broadsheets utilized in this study, the Philippine Daily Inquirer somehow represents a middle ground.

Noticeable in the works cited from the Inquirer is an attempt to at least veer away from giving sweeping statements that will exclusively venerate one side or conveniently condemn another. The Philippine Star, meanwhile, appeared to be strikingly critical of the uprising. Its pages reveal some attempts to downplay the struggle either by discrediting the participants or heavily slamming the leaders. Malaya is stunningly pro- Erap. Only recently this researcher found the rational for Ducky Paredes’ support to the Estrada camp. Paredes and Estrada were classmates at the Ateneo.

In fairness to Paredes, he maintained his position all throughout. Hopefully not a case of over reading, EDSA 3 revealed a hideous side to the church. Though not presented in the paper, the Church’s hand is highly visible in affecting the course of the event. The church leaders made it clear that the demonstrators desecrated the Shrine what with the filth they generated during their weeklong dissent. Unfortunately, it appears that the Church was more concerned with the physical aspect of the Shrine rather than the spiritual attachments the struggle created.

Also, a clear attempt to counter the masa with the People Power moral forces was arguably, a dangerous proposition to make. If so, what then was it aiming to achieve? It could have been a bigger disaster than the “rebellion” if it materialized. Finally, the consequent declaration of a “state of rebellion” sum up the government’s handling of the event and confronting the masses’ protest. It summarized the whole duration of EDSA 3 into that violent episode, after that, no more. It summarily referred to the EDSA 3 crowd as a crowd that was stirred up and incited by vague leader- provocateurs, which acted mainly upon the whims of its organizers.

In the end, most point toward an EDSA 3 that will never be mentioned in the same breath as its predecessors. A movement that for a moment will be defined by the cause of its demise instead of its origins. A struggle by a vast majority judged from its appearance and facade. A dissent that echoes as part of a greater struggle- that of the masa’s unending quest to obtain for itself a taste of fair dealing and sameness. Appendix A MALACANANG MANILA PROCLAMATION NO. 38 DECLARING A STATE OF REBELLION IN THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION

WHEREAS, the angry and violent mob, armed with explosives, firearms, bladed weapons, clubs, stones and other deadly weapons, in great part coming from the mass gathering at the EDSA shrine, and other armed groups, having been agitated and incited and, acting upon the instigation and under the command and direction of known and unknown leaders, have and continue to assault and attempt to break into Malacanang with the avowed purpose of overthrowing the duly constituted Government and forcibly seize political power, and have and continue to rise publicly, show open hostility, and take up arms against the duly constituted Government for the purpose of removing from the allegiance to the Government certain bodies of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police, and to deprive the President of the Republic of the Philippines, wholly or partially, of her powers and prerogatives which constitute the continuing crime of rebellion punishable under Article 134 of the Revised Penal Code; WHEREAS, armed groups recruited by known and unknown leaders, conspirators, and plotters have and continue to rise publicly and by the use of arms overthrow the duly constituted Government and forcibly seize political power; WHEREAS, under Article VII, Section 18 of the Constitution, whenever it becomes necessary, the President as the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines may call out such armed forces to suppress the rebellion; NOW, THEREFORE, I, GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, by virtue of the powers vested in me by law hereby recognize and confirm the existence of an actual and on-going rebellion compelling me to declare a state of rebellion.

In view of the foregoing, I am issuing General Order No. 1 in accordance with Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution calling upon the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police to suppress and quell the rebellion. City of Manila, May 1, 2001. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO President of the Republic of the Philippines Sources: Books Arillo, Cecilio T. Power Grab! The story behind the January 20, 2001 EDSA People Power 2 conspiracy that swept Vice President Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo to power/ Cecilio T. Arillo. Las Pinas: CTA Research and Publishing, c2001. Bernas Joaquin G. , S. J. A living constitution: the abbreviated Estrada Presidency.

Quezon City: Ateneo De Manila University Press, 2003. De Leon, EmmanuelB. Erap and EDSA: the trial and the miracle: a personal documentary diary. Makati City: St. Paul Press, 2001. Doronila, Armando, Between Fires, Fifteen Perspectives on the Estrada Crisis. Pasig City: Anvil Publishing, Inc. , 2001 Hedman, Eva- Lotta E. In the name of civil society: from free election movements to people power in the Philippines. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2006. Henson, Erlinda N. The “people power” phenomenon: a survey of participants’ perceptions. Quezon City: Center for Integrative and Development Studies, University of the Philippines, [1987] Salazar, Zeus A.

Pangulong Erap: Biograpiyang sosyopulitikal at pangkalinangan ni Joseph Ejercito Estrada (tomo I) San Juan: RPG Foundation, Inc. , 2005. Newspaper Articles “A closure? ”[Editorial], Malaya (April 26, 2001), p. 4 Africa, Raymond and Arkhon Antolin. “Supporters dispersed”, Malaya (April 26, 2001), p. 1 and 6 Antolin, Arkhon and Francis Earl Cueto. “Estrada supporters ‘sequester’ EDSA”, Malaya (April 27, 2001), p. 1 Borjal, Art. “Erap finally lands in prison cell”, [Jaywalker, Column], The Philippine Star (April 26, 2001) __________”Sons of Hitler”,[Jaywalker, Column], The Philippine Star (May 3, 2001) Contreras, Volt and Blanche Rivera. “Erap allies mass at EDSA”, Philippine Daily Inquirer (April 27, 2001) p. A1 De Quiros, Conrado. Again, the dumb masa” [There’s the Rub, Column] Philippine Daily Inquirer (April 30 and May 1, 2001) _________________ “Postscript”, [There’s the Rub, Column] Philippine Daily Inquirer (May 3, 2001), p. 7 _________________ “Shining hour but-”, [There’s the Rub, Column] Philippine Daily Inquirer (April 27, 2001) Doronilla, Amando. “Time for paradigm shift,” Philippine Daily Inquirer , (August 28, 2006), p. A1. Herrera, Christine and Armand Nocum. “Gov’t. cracks down on ‘plotters” Philippine Daily Inquirer (May 2, 2001), p. 21 Paredes, Ducky. “Decision time for SMC”, Malaya (May 3,2001) _____________ “People Power 3”? Malaya (April 27, 2001) Pazzibugan, Dona. No Erap ally accepts responsibility for Malacanang attack” Philippine Daily Inquirer (May 2, 2001), p. 1 Soliven, Max. “Is it ‘Poor People’ Power, EDSA TRES, or just plain hakot- power”? [By the Way, Column] The Philippine Star (April 27, 2001) “The Arrest”, (Editorial) Philippine Daily Inquirer (April 26, 2001), p. A6. “Washing of hands” (Editorial), Philippine Daily Inquirer (May 2. 2001), p. 8 Magazine Article “The Philippines: Banana Republic- At Best”,[Editorial], Asia Times (January 23, 2001), p. A16 Online Source ____________ “Proclamation No. 38: Declaring A State of Rebellion in the National Capital Region”(May 1, 2001), Available from http://www. lawphil. net

RESEARCH PAPER Seminar on the History of Philippine Social Movements Frederick M. Pellazar MA HI 087327 ———————– [1] Amando Doronilla,“Time for paradigm shift,” Philippine Daily Inquirer , (August 28, 2006), p. A1. [2] Found in Doronila, Armando, Between Fires, Fifteen Perspectives on the Estrada Crisis (Pasig City, Anvil Publishing, Inc. , 2001) [3] (Editorial): “The Philippines: Banana Republic- At Best”, Asia Times (January 23, 2001), p. A16 [4] Joseph Ejercito Estrada won the 1998 presidential elections while garnering a total of 10, 722, 295 votes from all sectors of the social strata, but most importantly, from the “D” and “E” classes. 5] See Zeus Salazar’s Pangulong Erap: Biograpiyang Sosyopulitikal at Pangkalinangan ni Joseph Ejercito Estrada (2005). [6] To date, the nomenclature proves to be severely problematic. Anti- Erap groups naturally dismissed the uprising as “people power”, while pro- Erap groups claim otherwise. Yet again, it’s an issue of perspectives. [7] (Editorial): “The Arrest”, Philippine Daily Inquirer (April 26, 2001), p. A6. [8] Conrado De Quiros, “There’s the Rub: Shining hour but-”, Philippine Daily Inquirer (April 27, 2001), p. 8 [9] Art Borjal, “Jaywalker :Erap finally lands in prison cell”, The Philippine Star (April 26, 2001), p. 8 [10] (Editorial): “A closure? , Malaya ( April 26, 2001),p. 4 [11] Headline in the three dailies for April 26, 2001. [12] Raymond Africa and Arkhon Antolin, “Supporters dispersed”, Malaya (April 26, 2001), p. 1 and 6 [13] Volt Contreras and Blanche Rivera, “Erap allies mass at EDSA”, Philippine Daily Inquirer (April 27, 2001) p. A1 [14] Arkhon Antolin and Francis Earl Cueto, “Estrada supporters ‘sequester’ EDSA”, Malaya (April 27, 2001), p. 1 [15] Conrado De Quiros, “There’s The Rub: Again, the dumb masa” Philippine Daily Inquirer (April 30 and May 1, 2001), p. A8 [16] Max Soliven, “By The Way:Is it ‘Poor People’ Power, EDSA TRES, or just plain hakot- power”? The Philippine Star (April 27, 2001),p. [17] Ducky Paredes, “People Power 3”? Malaya (April 27, 2001), p. 4 [18] (Editorial):”Washing of hands”,Philippine Daily Inquirer (May 2. 2001), p. 8 [19] Dona Pazzibugan “No Erap ally accepts responsibility for Malacanang attack” Philippine Daily Inquirer (May 2, 2001), p. 1 [20] Christine Herrera and Armand Nocum “Gov’t. cracks down on ‘plotters” Philippine Daily Inquirer (May 2, 2001), p. 21 [21] Ibid. p. 21 [22] Conrado De Quiros “There’s the Rub:Postscript” Philippine Daily Inquirer (May 3, 2001), p. 7 [23]Art Borjal, “Jaywalker: Sons of Hitler”, The Philippine Star (May 3, 2001), p. 8 [24] Ducky Paredes, “Decision time for SMC”, Malaya (May 3,2001), p. 4

x

Hi!
I'm Mack!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out