Anointment

The furor caused by the statements made by former Naga City Mayor Sulpicio "Cho" Roco in a citizens' forum held at the Ateneo de Naga University last January 26 provokes closer examination.

In the said forum, three mayoralty candidates of Naga City were invited, namely Roco of Aksyon Demokratiko, Atty. Adan Botor of the Nationalist People's Coalition, and City Councilor John Bongat of the Liberal Party (LP). While both Roco and Botor attended the forum which was titled Citizens in the Public Square: A Forum on Democratization, Bongat who was hailed as Naga Mayor Jesses Robredo's "anointed" one, chose to snub the citizens' forum despite acquiescing earlier. He cited an "LP national meeting" as reason for the snub.

During the forum, Cho Roco declared that he was a victim of oligarchic politics in Naga when he claimed he was made a "benchwarmer" by his predecessor, current Mayor Jesse Robredo. Cho, younger brother of the late DepEd Secretary Raul Roco, claimed that he and Robredo (who was then in his third and last term as mayor) came to agree that the younger Roco would be endorsed and "anointed" by Robredo as a mayoralty candidate for the 1998 Elections.

More significantly still, the younger Roco claimed that after his first term as mayor, he would have to "hand back" the mayoralty post to Robredo, an arrangement which in effect turned the former into a "benchwarmer," which in Philippine political culture means someone who temporarily occupied a post until its "owner" is able to return to claim it after the latter was forced to observe the term-limit provision in the law.

Immediately after this statement reached media outlets sympathetic to Mayor Robredo, Roco was quite expectedly assailed with criticism. A columnist of a local newspaper even declared Roco an ingrate to Robredo after the latter "gave [Roco] the chance to seat [sic] in City Hall, and then Congress." Unwittingly however, the said columnist-with that statement-had supported the charge made against Mayor Robredo and other traditional politicians (trapos) of perpetuating themselves in power through the transfer of power on their "anointed" ones.

At any rate, it was Roco's motive which was the focus of the criticism. To be sure, his revelation (arguably, already widely acknowledged even prior to his declaration) was prompted by his own political interests of attacking Councilor Bongat's candidacy. This has caused the reaction from Bongat's camp to defend him by arguing that he will not be a benchwarmer to, nor will he be a clone of Mayor Robredo.

Yet, what is being overlooked in this "benchwarming furor" is the incontrovertible fact that Mayor Robredo "anoints" his successors, a common practice in political dynasties and oligarchies. Moreover, with the vaunted "ubos kun ubos" phenomenon in Naga City, it stands to reason that the anointment becomes a guarantee of being elected mayor of Naga City. In fact, this is exactly what the proponents of "ubos kun ubos" is trumpeting about: those chosen by Mayor Robredo to be part of his team, most especially his successor, is assured of victory.

But is this not unlike in overt oligarchies and political dynasties in which power is passed on to chosen successors by the one wielding it? Does this not practice of anointment cause the "anointees" to be beholden, not to the people who voted for them, but to the one whose popularity they acknowledge to be the reason why they were elected at all? Does not Mayor Robredo's practice of anointment entail owing one's election victory to him who made the anointment, especially when victory had been assured by the "ubos kun ubos" phenomenon? Accordingly, the practice of anointment imposes an unspoken bond of loyalty to Robredo and his interests, and not to the people and theirs.

If this is what Naga City claims to be a democracy, then it is not so different from an oligarchy after all.

<!--Session data-->