Torn over at Torn and Frayed In The Philippines had once quipped that “No one is too old to escape the massacres in the Philippine countryside” after lamenting how even a 72-year old activist did not escape certain death and was killed right in front of his family members. He was an old man for goodness sake and we know from common sense that old men should not be treated shabbily at all, much less being slaughtered while having his evening meal.

In January, torn also had pronounced European Union’s discontent over the spate of killings in the countryside, mostly of political and some agrarian activists. To date, some 800 politically-motivated killings were recorded from 1991 and about 272 since President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo took office in 2001.

Now it’s the US turn to vilify the Arroyo government for the seemingly relentless spate of political killings that has hounded our nation in recent times; those killings whose frequency has grown mind-numbingly patent. I said mind-numbingly because despite of the apparentness of these killings (like we read such kind of incident almost every week), it escapes me that there is really no such thunderous protestation against the government for this; when in my mind, this burning issue could be more scandalous than the fertilizer scam or even that of the Garci Tapes issue.

If a government is letting its own people die in this sort of gruesome manner, in the name of political gains and interest, then that government should either be impeached or be brought down in the next elections. No administration should ever win elections if in its midst, killings of individuals who merely stood for their political principles are killed like chickens, that in these days and times (as torn said), no one could be too old too escape such malevolence.

I remember that in the Marcos years (at least at the near end of such era) I can recall seeing a lot of red-splattered posters condemning political killings and disappearances as well as rioting in Manila in protestations of alleged political killings done at that time.

But now, the government gives us mostly that ho-hum façade whenever they are confronted with such questions. Who were killing those radical activists all along? Why the manners of killings are all similar? Why the victims always come either from BAYAN MUNA or AKBAYAN almost exclusively? Why such acts always blamed at NPAs when we all know that the NPAs can’t keep on killing their own ranks or they’d easily dwindle down in numbers, overnight? Why the investigations into these killings do not become well-publicized, always dying down after awhile and being forgotten into the guts of general public apathy? Are we all being mass-hypnotized? To turn the other cheek like the German public did while Adolf Hitler was massacring millions of Jews in Auschwitz?

Now—even for once—we can thank America for finally voicing out against this very abnormal circumstance within the Arroyo administration for it seems only America can make our government stop, look and listen. And nobody else can. Like a favorite lover.

In law, there is this silent rule of Res Ipsa Loquitur which is roughly latin for the phrase “the thing speaks for itself” or in my own wordings, “the fact something is wrong, then smoothing wrong has been committed”. It is a legal precept that has very strong application in civil cases, especially in torts and damages, where in any accident or wrongful act, there were instances were despite the lack of concrete evidence pointing out to the wrongful act, the judge meted out damages and penalties. Considering also that in civil cases, the court could have merely preponderance of evidence and act on it. The degree of evidence will not have to be so absolute like that of “beyond reasonable doubt” class, like direct witnessing, fingerprints and DNA traces as object evidences, or judicial admission of guilt.

It is sad however that this principle of Res Ipsa Loquitur has strict applications and requisites and could not be applied in criminal cases or otherwise, these spate of political killings is something so wrong in our present society or in this current administration that despite not having concrete evidence, we know, or almost all of us know and feel correctly that something grave is being done by some unscrupulous men in our midst. And we know who they are.

These killings in the countryside is a grave social illness that would not have gone so worst and malevolent if only the government had acted on it appropriately and in a very timely manner. I don’t know if it can be called as negligence, but for certain these deaths occured because so many just decide to turn a blind eye—including the government itself.