[OPINION | Just Saying] Why I want to interview President Duterte

On August 13, 2014, I  interviewed President Benigno Aquino III. His accommodation came to me as a surprise. A year before, I  released a book entitled Read My Mind, about current affairs and politics containing a number of segments describing the ineptness of the Aquino Administration.  

I thought  he was wrong in signing the Cybercrime Prevention Act, the Data Privacy Law, and the amendment to our vagrancy law which discriminates against women. In my opinion, his veto of the Magna Carta for the Poor was also a mistake. I criticized his handling of the Luneta tragedy and the Sabah issue. I pointed out what appeared to me as President Aquino’s  dismissive and insensitive acts on certain occasions. And I did not mince words, saying that he selected some mediocre advisers. When he disapproved Nora Aunor’s recognition as National Artist, I said it was a travesty. I even criticized him for politicizing his speech before Pope Francis. 

When President  Benigno Aquino III announced that a framework agreement between the Government and Moro Islamic Liberation Front  was signed, I hailed the development but commented that there was nothing monumental about it as there was, at that time, no declaration of final settlement.

When I substituted for Orly Mercado in his early morning radio show “All Ready” early August of 2014,  I interviewed Budget Secretary Butch Abad via phone-patch. Thereafter, I chided him that, next time, I  should be interviewing the president himself. I assumed of course that it was an impossibility.  

But to my surprise, President Aquino acceded. It was a no holds-barred interview. I asked him about the Luneta incident, selective justice, West Philippine Sea, constitutional amendment, Supreme Court, disbursement acceleration program (DAP), freedom of information, Framework Agreement, and many others. There was no kid-gloves treatment. In fact, I deviated from the protocol-questions submitted prior to the event.  

I admired President Aquino for his guts in facing me. His answers were  insightful and comprehensive. There were no generalizations. He dished out factual data supporting his responses without notes except a small copy of the Constitution. He acquitted himself excellently. After the interview, we still had some moments to chat.

It turned out to be a great interview. Modesty aside, Fr. Joaquin Bernas SJ, a constitutionalist and a columnist at that time, commented: “It was  a case where the interviewer made as much impact as the interviewee.”

That occasion made me understand President Aquino’s personality more, his point of view, and his frustrations as the President. My perspective about him changed, more or less, making me give passing marks to a number of his endeavors. But, of course, that did not prevent me from making criticisms. For instance, his subsequent  action in relation to the Mamasapano incident, of going to a pre-scheduled auto-factory trade show instead of going to the airport to meet our dead Mamasapano heroes, got me calling his decision insensitively improper.

A one-on-one interview can make the interviewer adjust his perspective of the interviewee, enabling the former to give the latter some benefit of the doubt in future situations. The opportunity can provide a closer look at the subject’s demeanor while listening to his spontaneous answers. 

That is why I want to interview President Duterte. Somehow, he may be able to intelligently answer questions coming from a critic rather than  his  Malacañang press people. 

My questions will not even be unexpected. Among others, I will ask the following: 

Mr. President,

1. Do you really see “good” in the images of the dead and the slaughtered sprawled on the streets? Are you not concerned that, by your attitude,  many of our countrymen may have become more and more cynical, apathetic, and fearful everyday as these images pervade their hearts and minds? 
   
2. Are you not worried that, though you may not intend it, your “kill-them” statements may be the inspiration for vigilantes, the drug lords, the crooked police, and the corrupt politicians to engage in deadly activities?
   
3. Will you not change your attitude towards China? Are you not wary that China is adroitly playing with you in this West Philippine Sea dispute and that you are falling into its devious strategy? 
   
4. Did it not occur to you that China’s friendliness was precisely to make you lower your guard and, by your tolerance and vocal expression of uselessness, make you, the Philippine president, actively and favorably participate in its design to fortify its position in the disputed islands against the interest of your own people? If it did not, why not? 
   
5. Will you not change your habit of making knee-jerk declarations? Are you not worried that an uncontrolled mouth can limit or be the  source of confusion, making public policy ambiguously unsteady to the detriment of the nation? 
   
6. Do you not think that your blusterings may lead the country, the government, and the people down with you into an irretrievable crisis, causing irrevocable damage not salvageable by any subsequent explanation by you or your subalterns?  
   
7. Why the animosity against the press? Its job is precisely to be legitimately and fairly investigative – a necessary duty in a democracy to generate the robustness of public opinion for purposes of official  accountability. Do you expect the press to be your propaganda machine? 
   
8. What is this antagonism against the Catholic Church? Where is this going? Once you said: “Body of Christ sa iyong igit (in your shit).” How can that be a valid response against legitimate criticism? 
   
9. Considering that all those seriously subjected to your threats were former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, Senator Leila De Lima, and journalist Maria Ressa, what could be the special reasons going against these women with legitimate advocacies?
   
10. Should you not adjust to the people for accessibility? What is the point of doing your televised message in the evening, sometimes lasting early in the morning, making the country wait for you, even at times agonizingly? Do you not realize that this is alienating? Or, simply, do you really care? If not, is that not so king-like?
    
11. What is really your administration’s blueprint for combating COVID-19? You always refer to waiting for a vaccine from China and the not-fully-tested Russian one, but is this waiting and hoping a plan of action? 

President Duterte talks firmly and, a number of times, threateningly.   I have not yet seen him face and answer tough questions from journalists, reporters, and critics known for their candidness. Neither have there been occasions for me to witness him confidently explain any important empirical data concerning a problem in any press conference. Despite more than 4 years in office, I am still waiting for an exhibition of thoroughness and competency in the discussion of a policy or even a message.  

President Duterte’s imperious façade must be tempered and corrected by an intelligent and deliberative mind. We are still waiting for its display. Nothing less can be expected of and demanded from him as President. Hubris, to be considered at all, must have substance. – Rappler.com

Mel Sta Maria is dean of the Far Eastern University (FEU) Institute of Law. He teaches law at FEU and the Ateneo School of Law, hosts shows on both radio and Youtube, and has authored several books on law, politics, and current events.