Many of us are probably familiar with the anecdote about the controversial ancient Greek philosopher Diogenes (the Cynic), who went around the streets of Athens in broad daylight with a lamp, holding it up to the faces of the people he met. When asked why he was doing this, his answer was, “I am looking for an honest man.”
Honesty must have been a rare commodity even in those days.
On another occasion, when asked why he alone praised a mediocre harp player, he replied, “because he plays the harp and does not steal.”
If Diogenes were alive today, his cynicism might be vindicated by the observation of Mayor Sara Duterte that if honesty were a requirement for senatorial candidates, all the candidates would be disqualified. When she got a lot of flak for this, she clarified that honesty was required of public officials, but not of candidates before they were elected.
Even this hair-splitting based on the literal interpretation of the pertinent Constitutional provision just doesn’t cut it.
How can anyone expect a dishonest and corrupt candidate to suddenly change his stripes and transform into an angel once he gets elected?
It’s a no-brainer that the Constitutional requirement of honesty in public service is a prerequisite for those who aspire to serve the people.
Corruption
More specifically, the principal form of dishonesty in governance is corruption, a perennial, major social issue in our country. The Philippines is in the lower half (No. 99 of 180 countries) in the 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index of Transparency International. Corruption in its many forms—bribery, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, influence peddling, graft, embezzlement—leads to the loss of billions of pesos of the people’s money every year, reinforcing and perpetuating the vicious cycles of poverty and disempowerment of many Filipinos.
Secretary Salvador Panelo has opined that honesty may not be a major factor when voters make their choices in elections. If true, this explains why we have not been able to break the stranglehold of traditional politicians who keep being recycled by the undiscerning electorate.
But in the broadest sense, honesty (or integrity) is more than an election issue. It is a life issue. As I wrote in our class’ golden jubilee yearbook, “Integrity is a lifelong habit, not an occasional virtue.”
True, all of us have fallen short of the gold standard on some occasions in our life, but the bottom line is that the habit of honesty must grow deep roots as we go through life, defining our eventual character.
They say that the game of golf is like life in many ways. It has ups and downs, surprises, needs a lot of patience, and is difficult to master.
But most of all, this challenging sport is a true test of character.
Some years back, I had a regular golf mate who emerged as the sole winner in one of our foursome’s golf rounds. He collected his winnings and we all went home and forgot about it.
Courage and humility
But the very next day, he called the three of us who had lost and told us that on one hole, he had deliberately improved the lie of his ball with his club (an infraction subject to penalty or disqualification), and, therefore, did not deserve his win. He then returned our money, but I told him that since he had now lost due to his self-disqualification, he also had to pay those of us who had become winners as a result. This he also did.
The point is, it took a lot of courage and humility for my golfing friend to call us up out of the blue, admit that he had cheated, and make the necessary amends.
How many times does dishonesty occur in golf, and for that matter, in many other more important areas of life, without the unsuspecting “losers” ever knowing they have been cheated?
How many times are ordinary citizens like us victimized by public officials who literally rob us blind of our taxes, but whom we elect again and again because of their “name recall,” “popularity” and our glaring lack of diligent discernment?
Sara Duterte and Salvador Panelo are right—not in principle but in fact. The honesty of candidates is not an issue to many voters and they have only themselves to blame for the consequences.
Realizing that most Filipinos (about 95 percent) do not have the time, resources, or even the inclination to delve deeply into the qualifications of candidates, concerned Christian lay leaders from faith-based (Catholic, Protestant and Evangelical) communities got together to screen and select from the original 62 senatorial candidates to arrive at “the 10 best candidates that our country and people need during these times.”
Strict criteria
Using a set of strict criteria and a two-step screening process in a one-day selection convention, 130 lay leaders from around the country arrived at their 10 recommended candidates. By the time this comes out, this nonpartisan group of concerned citizens, called the People’s Choice Movement (PCM), would already have announced its choices.
The reader can access the results on the PCM page on Facebook, or through the news in regular and digital media.
The PCM (and hopefully other objective, concerned organizations will follow suit) has shone a bright searchlight on each of the would-be leaders seeking the approval of the Filipino people.
“The first law of leadership is that your foundation is built through integrity, character and trust.” —Brian Cagneey, “Leadership: the 7 Laws of Leadership” —CONTRIBUTED