Administration
accused of arm-twisting the opposition
With barely two weeks into the campaign period, the opposition seems
to be in for a tough fight as reports state that the administration
is already engaging in “dirty tactics.”
Genuine Opposition (GO) Senate bet Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel
III has identified Bobby Capco as pulling the strings for a shadowy
group calling itself “Aladyn” or Alyansa Laban sa Dinastiya
(Alliance Against Political Dynasties). Aladyn has released a political
ad published in several newspapers urging the electorate not to vote
for opposition candidates labeled as members of the so-called Kamag-anak,
Inc (Relatives, Inc.). The ad bore photos of three GO candidates –
Pimentel, Alan Peter Cayetano and Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino
III – with the words “kamag-anak” (relative) stamped
on their faces. Capco has been identified as belonging to Malacanang’s
“Dirty Tricks” department since 2004.
Last February 28, GO was forced to cancel its first major out-of-town
campaign rally in Iloilo City after organizers received an anonymous
text message warning that a “serious incident” would occur
should it persist in staging the activity. Provincial administrator
Manuel Mejorada said the threat could have come from pro-administration
personalities.
Deposed President Joseph Estrada’s legal counsel Rufus Rodriguez
has asked AFP Chief Hermogenes Esperon, Jr. and Commission on Elections
(COMELEC) Chair Benjamin Abalos Sr. to investigate the military’s
alleged harassment of barangay chiefs and other local officials into
supporting the congressional bid of President Arroyo’s son Diosdado
“Dato” Macapagal-Arroyo in the Second District of Camarines
Sur.
Oppositionist Senator Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. has accused COMELEC chair
Benjamin Abalos, Sr. of “blatant partisanship” by initially
claiming that the GO is not considered the minority party under Republic
Act 7166 (Synchronized Election Law of 1991), and is therefore not
entitled to the fifth copy of the Election Returns during canvassing
procedures. Pimentel said such erroneous interpretation of the law
could be aimed at crippling the Opposition of access to poll results
and, worse, remove safeguards against possible fraud. |
|
