Archive

Posts Tagged ‘santiago’

actions from the de lima report – noynoy aquino’s last chance to save himself

September 17, 2010 Leave a comment

an 83 plus page  final report and at least four other thick booklets have been given to president noynoy aquino by leila de lima, head of the 5-man committee that investigated the lunata bus hostage rescue bloodbath.

several doors are still open, we are hoping at minimum at least a few will be closed. with the end of de lima’s investigation and the submission of the final report. one big door that we are hoping will be closed is the this gaping hole of aquino’s weak leadership.  aquino has a last chance to close that door, for him to show true leadership and save himself from a tarnished image as a leader of a nation.

aquino should show, finally good leadership by taking the final report’s conclusions and fire DILG Usec puno, PNP chief versoza, NCRPO chief santiago, ground commander magtibay, leader of the SWAT team pascual, the SWAT team members,  leaders of all the teams who were at the hostage crisis and the RMN radio anchors who interviewed the hostage taker.  they should all be fired and with some charged with crimes for bungling the rescue of the hostages.  sec robredo should be fired for not managing the situation and not saving his boss, president aquino after the hostage crisis.

if aquino does not take this decisive action as the leader fo the country, aquino’s image as a leader will be tarnished forever. henceforth, he will be indexed against this incident.

noynoy aquno’s ho-hum leadership style is killing his presidency and the country oh so softly

September 6, 2010 3 comments

we are desperately seeking a proper term to describe president aquino’s style of leadership as we have seen it  in (in)action during and after the august 23 bus hostage bloodshed at the luneta. we first described his brand of leadership as “weak, invisible and minuscule” (read here:  http://wp.me/pnw03-1l7) ). that can be summarized as ho-hum leadership, something that might make you fall asleep if you are not a coffee drinker.

first off, we do not blame aquino for the failed rescue of the hostages and the deaths of the hostages. that goes to the leadership and leaders of the philippine national police  who were at the scene. but we blame aquino for some of what happened after the hostage bloodshed.

there are two parts to the hostage bloodshed – one is the operational part which is essentially the attempted but failed effort to save the hostages and resolve the matter peacefully.  it is a police matter, one of security and safety.  the police are responsible for such matters.

what happened is a failure in police operation and as we saw on live tv, most oof the failure was caused by poor planning, poor execution, lack of equipment and bad decisions.

for those failures, the field commander, magtibay, the SWAT team leader  and all the other team leaders who were operating during the hostage crisis are to be blamed for the errors committed during the siege. they need to be fired by the police top brass.

for command responsibility, santiago the NCRPO chieh and versoza the PNP  chief need to resign their post as well. they had leadership  roles to fulfill but they did not exercise them. both even knew errors were being committed but they did not act in their capacity as heads of the PNP.

the PNP is under the DILG. usec puno apparently is directly responsible for the PNP . puno by command responsibility should offer his resignation., he also failed to exercise his leadership role during the failure.

it’s chief, robredo,  is indirectly accountable for the failure of the PNP.during the rescue attempt. he did not have a direct operational role but it is his agency that failed.

the second part of the whole situation is post hostage crisis. for that second part, DILG robredo is directly responsible for,. for that, he needs to resign his position.

the dismal failure of the PNP resulted to lives lost during the hostage crisis and the country humiliated because of the PNP’s failure.  because his agency caused that, he should have shown leadership to manage the  situation, even for damage control.

it  also embarrassed his boss, president noynoy aquino, he should have shown leadership to  at least minimize the embarrassment  if not prevent it.  but  as it happened, he really did not do anything post-hostage crisis.

in fact it seems nobody from the philippne government showed leadership, not even presdient noynoy aquino.  everyone seemed to b e just standing there waiting for the punches to come in.  no action was done to evade the punches not to  counter punch. they all just stood there and took the punches.

robredo was the man who was supposed to do that. but he was nowhere to be found, lost and hidden from everyone. he did not even do anything to defend or protect his boss. if he did not protect his boss, then he did not protect the country as well.

he needs to resign for this failure. in fact, he should really be fired from his job.

noynoy aquino was also nowhere to be found. he did tiny things to fix matters but nothing worthy of the leadership to which he was voted for by the people.

there is universal agreement that PNP failed during the hostage crisis and yet no one seem to have taken the right step to impose accountability on the failure.

aquino’s presidency is getting hit bad and is suffering. to stop that, aquino needs to show his leadership by firing everyone who obviously made an error during  the hostage crisis. there is already universal agreement that there were failures, we just want to know who committed them and we want to be relieved of  them.

DILG chief robredo, usec puno and  PNP chief versoza are hurting aquino and his presidency by not resigning their post. the longer they stay in those positions, the more they hurt aquino.

in fact the more effective action, one that will have better effect is if aquino himself fires them and does not wait for their resignation. firing them, two being his close friends and political allies will transmit the message that aquino is serious about what happened and that he values good performance among his people by acting on bad performance.

aquino accepting responsibility does not do anything for aquino, it only confuses matters. the country did not give a collective sigh of relief when he said he was taking responsibility, it only confused them.  people want accountability, him taking responsibility begs the question why is he not resigning from the presidency. people  have a hard time to differentiate responsibility and accountability.

aquino’s brand of leadership seem to be one of a wait-and-see style. rather than action, he waits for things to happen and then takes action after the fact. it is one that will makes us fall asleep and one that is giving his presidency nightmares.

ho-hum.

%d bloggers like this: