There is a joke about the practice of men kissing the hands of ladies. Apparently, it is a gesture of chivalry, courtesy, and respect and does not have flirtatious overtones. But leave it to comedians to say something funny. It is said that a Frenchman was asked by a lady to explain the rationale of this gesture. He replied, “Mademoiselle, we have to start somewhere.”
I am reminded of this joke whenever I read comments that the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte is unfair since it singles her out. Are there not hundreds of thousands of corrupt officials in our land? Needless to say, selective justice is wrong. But in the current context, to demand that all must face justice before we even start bringing to justice a particular person is a recipe for inaction. It is impossible to bring to justice every dishonest Dick, Tom, and Harry at the same time. Indeed, the same demand from the Duterte camp for universal justice falls flat when we consider that others have already been imprisoned even if their crimes involved infinitely smaller amounts. Private prosecutor Amando Ligutan stated that a case where a school principal is imprisoned for misusing P5,000 motivated him to assist in the impeachment of the Vice President. Pointing out that there are other officials who may be involved in corruption, while factually correct, can serve as an excuse for not doing anything. In other words, we let Sara off the hook under the guise of a noble concept of fairness. As the joke goes, we have to start somewhere, or with someone.
The same is true with statements like we, in one way or another, have contributed to a culture of corruption by bribing traffic officers and government bureaucrats. We are told to look at ourselves in the mirror before we judge others. Indeed, we need to examine our consciences and admit that there is a gap between the ideal that we proclaim and our real selves. Sadly, such a statement is true. But this again should not serve as an excuse not to do anything. Instead, it should motivate us to moral cleansing of ourselves and of society in general.
Let us cite some historical examples. The majority of Germans contributed to the rise of the fascist Adolf Hitler. Many were aware of the existence of gas chambers. But silence prevailed over protestations coming from the likes of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. We can speak of a collective guilt. But collective guilt did not stop the Nuremberg trials. Nearer to home, the deaths of thousands in the war against drugs cannot be solely blamed on former President Rodrigo Duterte. There was a whole apparatus responsible for the killing spree. Many approved of such drastic measure to combat the prevalence of prohibited drugs. But not everyone can be prosecuted at the same time.
Let us now go back to the issue of corruption. Corruption may have reached epidemic proportions and it is impossible to prosecute everyone at the same time. But we have to start with someone. It may be true that the choice of where to start may be motivated by politics. But the allegations cannot be dismissed simply because of the presence of political motivations. To fight corruption with political motivations is better than not fighting corruption at all. Obviously, we cannot stop at the starting point. For instance the investigation and the eventual prosecution of those involved in the ghost flood control projects must be pursued vigorously. A starting point is not the end point. Real lovers are not satisfied just to kiss hands.
