A splash of cold water?

On December 9, 2006, administration lawmakers from the House of Representatives were in for a surprise when activist Renato Constantino stood up and started berating them. After being rebuked by the likes of Representative Villafuerte (I'll stick to titles and not use the styling "Honorable" or "Hon." for now) and other lawmakers, Constantino was escorted out by security. What made the incident even more of a media event was how Philippine Daily Inquirer business columnist Victor Agustin walked up to Constantino and splashed cold water in his face.

My jaw dropped when I saw that.

I was already hurling invectives at the TV because of what was said at the press conference. But seeing one guy thinking himself a journalist hurl a splash of cold water at a man was something which I thought only happened in Philippine telenovelas. I was wrong, apparently.

The event was a press conference. That means it was supposed to be an event where invited members of the media are asked to sit, listen to pontification and pambobola by our politicians, and then later, ask questions if they're allowed to. Journalists usually have ground rules for these things.

The thing is, Constantino was not a member of the press. He's been described by some writers as a "leftist activist," by some commentators as a "communist," and by others, an "interloper and usurper." It's clear that he was not one of the guys whom De Venecia wanted to invite (they needed good publicity, after all). And he did come off as pretty strong, if not downright offensive, by saying: "I am completely appalled by your collective gall. You are totally bereft of principles -- that’s why you are without shame." He also called the House leaders a disgrace to the nation.

That pissed quite a lot of people off. Members of the press decried his action. Villafuerte's rebuke was: "“You have a right to ask a question but not to berate anybody!” In reply, Constantino said, “I have a right to be here. As a private citizen I believe I have the right to say what I feel.”

It's true that people have a right to be in different places. I'm not sure if Constantino had a right to be at the press conference, especially since--if my impression is correct--only selected members of media were supposed to be there. Assuming that the event was supposed to be one where anyone could have gone, the fact of the matter was it was meant, first and foremost, for the press. Constantino could have just listened to JDV and company from the comfort of home via ANC. Then again, he decided to crash the party. To make things worse, he tried to steal the show, and did not even bother identifying himself or what organization he belonged to. Not only was Constantino rude, he was also wasting other people's time, all so he could berate JDV.

As much as I'd love to berate JDV and the House majority, I wouldn't do what Constantino did. That was out of line.

So what about Victor Agustin? Agustin has, as of this writing, been suspended for a month by the Inquirer, and has been on the receiving end of much criticism, if not condemnation. Other writers seem to understand where he was coming from. Take Amado Doronilla's latest column for example. We can see that his take on the matter paints Constantino as the one in the wrong. To an extent, I agree.

Doronilla writes that Constantino is "at home in the politics of the streets," and is "used to being hosed down by anti-riot water cannons." He writes that Constantino's "harangue was a monologue of abuse." According to him, Constantino did not come to ask questions, but to inflict answers and impose his own views. It's clear whose side Doronilla is on, at least in this regard.

Again, to an extent, I agree that Constantino was out of line. But I find the characterization of him in articles like this absolutely irrelevant. One can say that he's known to be an activist, and perhaps talk about what sort of activism he's been involved in. That's that. That's being balanced. That's what a journalist ought to have done.

Of course, Doronilla is taking a stand on this rather divisive issue. I think, however, that accusing someone of being "used to being hosed down by anti-riot water cannons" is stretching it. But to say that "the splash of cold water administered by Agustin [is] like baptismal water poured on the head of a child being christened" isn't just stretching it. It's bullshit.

Agustin's justification: "He was boorishly hotheaded and he didn’t want to stop. So he needed a douse of cold water.”

That, dear reader, is what proper thinking is not. For someone who presumed to apply some sort of treatment to cool down Constantino, Agustin's action was one that was characteristic of someone whose own head needed some serious cooling down.

Did the cooler heads prevail? No. A lot of people are still pissed about this whole incident.

I disagree with Doronilla and would like to say that I agree with the statement of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines that what Agustin did was wrong. Of course, Doronilla derided the NUJP for deriding Agustin's action and for harping on "freedom of speech" that citizens are supposed to have. I agree with Doronilla that freedom of speech isn't absolute, and that there's a limit to everything, and that what Constantino did may have indeed be classified under what the law contemplates as "unprotected speech" for being slanderous and defamatory. That still does not justify or mitigate in any way what Agustin did, which was equally humiliating.

Constantino's barbs may have been merely verbal, directed as they were at con-asses. Agustin's little splash of water was physical. Under the law, slander by deed. I don't want to talk about malice, but suffice it to say that I perfectly understand why Constantino got even more pissed and looked like he wanted to bash Agustin's head in with a camera (I also perfectly understand why our other mediamen just couldn't resist filming this sort of drama).

Justifying Constantino's verbal attack on the speaker is an exercise in futility. He's wrong. Period.

Justifying Agustin's physical attack of sorts on Constantino isn't an exercise in futility. It's an exercise of weird thinking and, in my opinion, an utter lack of fairness.

Question is, can we blame Constantino for being so angry? I can't, and I won't. I share a lot of his sentiments. I'd fight for his right to say them. His expression of them, however, is an entirely different matter. I won't fight for how he did it.

On the other hand, I can blame Agustin for what he did. Adding to the wrong doesn't make a bad situation good or right. And being a journalist, with a certain standard of ethics to uphold as prescribed in the Philippine Journalists' Code of Ethics, he should have been the better man and simply pulled Constantino toward the door, or aside, and tried to calm him down. If he was upset, he should've stayed out of it. He could've just given Constantino the glass of water for him to take a swig. But then again, if you're not part of the solution, you're probably part of the goddamned problem, right?

I can probably be attacked right now for simply seeing things in hindsight. But then again, I've never splashed someone with water to calm him down. Last I checked, splashing people with water is something done to people to wake them up, to jolt them, to agitate. It's what we see on TV as the stereotypical splashing of cold water to wake someone up.