From Koko to Tito: Media Ignores the Politics behind the Change in Senate Leadership

Screengrab from GMA News Online’s replay of Sen. Pimentel’s press briefing on May 21.

REPORTERS LEARN quickly to read the politics behind every move in Congress. But coverage of the change in Senate leadership last week has been strangely silent on what really made it happen.

On May 21, Sen. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel stepped down as the Senate President – a post he held for 22 months or nearly two years. His resignation affirmed reports about a looming reorganization in the Upper Chamber, a rumor which Pimentel neither confirmed nor denied initially, other than saying that he was “open” to change.

Pimentel was replaced by Senate majority leader Vicente “Tito” Sotto III. Reports referred to a supposed agreement of term-sharing between the two. It was Sotto who made the formal nomination of Pimentel for the post in July 2016.  Such talk made it look as though Pimentel has returned the favor by nominating the former as his successor.

But Pimentel’s official departure from his office came ten days after the shake-down at the Supreme Court (SC) which ousted Maria Lourdes Sereno from the post of chief justice via quo warranto. This had provoked a resolution from the Senate which criticized the decision as an encroachment of the Senate’s authority to impeach by the judiciary. The resolution was signed by Pimentel along with 13 other senators.

The media did not give much else for the public to think about except to make the connection between that resolution and the change in leadership. There was no big blow up among the various factions in the Senate. In fact, senators who justified why the change was needed were careful not to be too critical of Pimentel, calling him “masyadong mabait” (too kind).

CMFR monitored reports from main broadsheets Manila Bulletin, the Philippine Daily Inquirer and The Philippine Star, primetime news programs 24 Oras (GMA-7), Aksyon (TV5), News Night (CNN Philippines) and TV Patrol (ABS-CBN 2), as well as select news websites from May 14 to 25, 2018.

Politics behind the scenes?

Media coverage during the period of the monitor failed to reflect on a number of earlier developments in March: the slow formulation of the articles of impeachment in the House; senators saying they can’t comment on the Senate standing as a trial court because they had not yet received the motion for impeachment. Commentary and public discussions also noted the weaknesses of the case for impeachment thus far.

But media did report that Pimentel denied having a term-sharing agreement with Sotto in March. In April, Sotto denied plots to oust Pimentel. He also denied a term-sharing deal. Come first week of May, Pimentel also denied any agreement to transfer leadership to Sotto. Media followed this narrative into mid-May as reporters attempted to confirm rumors. On May 17, reports revealed a manifesto signed by at least 14 senators seeking to install Senator Sotto as their next leader.

Reports on the actual resignation did not refer to the Senate resolution that took a position against the quo warranto, a move initiated by Solicitor General Jose Calida. But in the public mind, this had more to do about Pimentel stepping down than any of the other matters reported by the media. After all, the president was heard several times to express his desire to get rid of Sereno in the Supreme Court. That the Senate would question the particular mechanism with which this was accomplished was tantamount to questioning the president himself.

Rather than explore this, the media followed the lead of official sources who brought up issues just to justify the action: including Pimentel supposedly being too kind; his failure to defend the Senate after House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez called them  “mabagal na kapulungan” (slow chamber); and the displeasure of some senators over the formation of the party slate of PDP-Laban.

Did they dare to ask whether President Duterte had anything to do with the Pimentel leaving his post?  Or did they choose to ignore the political question entirely?