Sen. Panfilo Lacson, in justifying his privilege speech showing the "bad side" of former President Joseph Estrada, claimed that his move has nothing to do with politics, since he has long since withdrawn from the presidential race. That’s another lie he has come up with it, because his vilification of Estrada is all about politics.
There is no denying that Lacson, even as he withdrew from the presidential race (not quite the vice presidential race), is definitely supporting the candidacy of Sen. Noynoy Aquino, and has in fact, called on Estrada to drop his bid and endorse Aquino. The response of Estrada was that Lacson had no right to ask him to drop out from the race since it was Lacson who had caused the disunity in the opposition in 2004.
If truth be told, most, if not all opposition-identified presidential bets and even the administration, want Estrada out of the race, but wants his endorsement of their bet as they sense that their chances of winning the presidency are lessened with Estrada around.
If Lacson was honest with himself at least, he knows that this privilege speech of his, painting Estrada as the epitome of corruption, of jueteng lordism, of smuggling and even of coercing businessmen to sell out in a private contract and even attempting to link him to the double murder of publicist Salvador "Bubby" Dacer and his driver, Emmanuel Corbito, is all intended to destroy Estrada as a presidential candidate and pressure him to drop out of the race, apart from trying to frame Estrada while absolving himself in the murder case and finding excuses for his failures during his stint as the chief of Philippine National Police.
It is all vindictiveness on his part, that much is evident. As for his claim of standing up for his principles, to quote his quotation, "If you work for a man, in heaven’s name work for him... If you must vilify, condemn, and eternally disparage, resign your position."
It must be asked: Why, in all that time then, close to a decade, did he not resign his position as the chief PNP? Why did it take a decade for Lacson to vilify, condemn and eternally disparage Estrada, if as he claims, he was working for what he pictures Estrada: As a bully and a crook?
And why, even as he claims he knew Estrada to be what he claims the former President is, did he still seek the endorsement of Estrada as a senatorial candidate in 2001, and again, sought Estrada’s endorsement in 2004, as the opposition’s standard bearer, which Estrada did not grant, and then again, another endorsement for the 2007 senatorial race? Where were his claimed principles? Why did he not, with the rest of the evil civil society, vilify and condemn Estrada then?
Now he does, in a privilege speech, knowing he does not have to bring out any evidence to back up his charges and spew as much lies that he can.
Already, his claim that Estrada had bullied the Yuchengcos into selling their PITC shares to Manuel Pangilinan has been refuted by PLDT, saying that the shares were bought at a premium price.
Lacson also claimed that Estrada had told him to go easy on the illegal numbers game, yet Lacson also admits that he was appointed anyway by Estrada. Why, in logic’s name would Estrada, if he were a jueteng coddler, appoint Lacson, who claimed he was so against jueteng, then be appointed to the top police post? And how does he explain the fact that Estrada had made it clear that he wanted jueteng stopped by legalizing it, which was Estrada’s advocacy even as a senator of the republic?
He claimed Estrada reneged on his promise to appoint AFP chief Joselin Nazareno, but he did appoint Nazareno as the military chief.
Lacson said Estrada asked him to pull out his men from Customs when there was a shipment of smuggled goods in the Cebu port, then says Estrada told him, why did you pull them out? Lacson is being terribly inconsistent.
As for linking Estrada to the Dacer-Corbito murders, claiming the former President was dealing directly with his men, that is difficult to buy, coming from Lacson. Everybody knows that Michael Ray Aquino, Cezar Mancao and Glenn Dumlao, were all his boys, loyal to Lacson then.
Besides, whatever he says about Estrada on the murder case, it doesn’t jibe with their affidavits, linking Lacson directly to the murders. Also Lacson already has that reputation of "salvaging" which he can’t seem to shake off.
He, together with civil society, plays dirty. They should play by the rules, if they want their anointed as the president of the republic — the ethical way.
