<div class="image-550">
<img loading="lazy" src="https://cdn.kahimyang.com/resources/edsa-revolution-dos-sm.webp" alt="EDSA II" />
<div>
(EDSA II)
</div>
</div>
<p>
Macapagal-Arroyo's swearing-in was neither a celebration of <i>"democracy at work"</i> nor a re-run of the <i>"people power"</i> movement that brought down President Ferdinand Marcos in the 1986 <i>"EDSA Revolution"</i>. 
</p>
<p>
Those responsible for Macapagal-Arroyo's promotion made clear that what happened between January 16, when the Senate impeachment trial of Estrada was aborted, and Janunary 20, when Macapagal-Arroyo took the Presidential oath of office, was a pre-planned military coup by retired senior and junior officers, in which retired General and former President Fidel V. Ramos played a key coordinating role.
</p>
<p>
On January 22, the Washington Post quoted Air Force General Ed Abenina (retired) saying:
</p>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
"The Filipino people like to call it 'people power',  but in fact it was a coup. It was the overthrow of the government." 
</p>
</div>
<p>
The Los Angeles Times described Abenina as <i>"one of the ringleaders of the plot."</i> Former Defense Secretary General Fortunato Abat admitted that he had been plotting the coup for months, long before the public charges made on October 9, 2000 by Estrada's former friend, Luis "Chavit" Singson, that he, Singson, had delivered millions of dollars to Estrada in proceeds from illegal gambling and tobacco-tax kickbacks, became the focus of a Senate impeachment trial of Estrada which opened on December 7, 2000.
</p>


<p>
Troops, tanks, and aircraft were deployed to strike on January 20, if military leaders under Estrada's command had not capitulated to the coupmakers. The Washington Post's report added: 
</p>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
"General Panfilo Lacson, the national police chief and a close friend of Estrada's, also withdrew his support Friday (January 19). His announcement came one hour after 50 police officers, armed with handguns and assault rifles, stormed into his office, according to a newspaper reporter who witnessed the event."
</p>
</div>
<p>
What was worse is that the coup enjoyed full support of a second former President, whose name is synonymous with <i>"people power"</i> and <i>"democracy"</i> -  Corazon Aquino. The coup also had the blessing of the most senior official of the Roman Catholic Church in Asia, Jaime Cardinal Sin, who called on citizens to join mass demonstrations at the 1986 monument and to stay there on January 19, declaring:
</p>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
"EDSA is holy ground. God is in this place. Do not go anywhere."
</p>
</div>
<p>
Leading Asian press and statesmen were drawing obvious conclusions:
</p>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
Far Eastern Economic Review Manila correspondent  Deidre Sheehan headlined her report in the February 2 issue, "More Power to the Powerful".  She wrote, "They're calling it People Power II, the sequel to the 1986 ouster of Ferdinand Marcos. That first revolt became a model for civilian uprisings against dictators around the world. But the second revolution is already being criticized as a 'soft coup' that ejected an elected President in order to return the old, wealthy political and business elite to power."
</p>
</div>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
The Asia Times's January 23 editorial adopted a comment from Macapagal-Arroyo's friend, Filipino Senator Franklin Drilon, for its headline: "Philippines: Banana Republic—At Best": "Make no mistake about it".  The events that led up to the swearing in of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo ... were a coup d'eat ... Whatever curious legal construction anyone may attempt to put on the ouster of Estrada, he was ousted by military coup, with the connivance of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church, major business groups, and two former Presidents."
</p>
</div>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
Business Times Manila correspondent Al Labita titled his January 23 column, "The Bottom Line: A Triumph of Mob Rule in the Philippines." He wrote, "The Philippines trumpets itself as a democracy, a nation of laws, not of men. Yet, what was the opposite. It was undemocratic, unlawful, and perhaps even uncivilized. It has set a bad precedent. Now,  no duly elected President can invoke the Constitution and the duly enacted laws of the country to protect his or her term of office. The mob may decide otherwise. ... The new occupant of Malacañang Palace should know that the Constitution has been rendered meaningless, and that she rules with leave from the military and the mob."
</p>
</div>

<p>
Among the comments that are likely to stick in the memory of editorial writers concerning these events in Manila are those of Singapore Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew, who was quoted in an interview with Associated Press: 
</p>
<div class="article-comment">
<p>
<b>
"I don't think it was a plus for the democratic system."
</b>
</p>
</div>

<p>
This situation followed from the initiation of impeachment proceedings against Estrada, first, in the House of Representatives on November 11, 2000, which moved to a Senate trial on December 7, on charges of bribery related to protection money from legalized gambling concessions; graft and corruption related to kickbacks from tobacco taxes, which were used, allegedly, to pay off old campaign debts; betrayal of public trust; and culpable violation of the Constitution.  Those proceedings were aborted on January 17, when 11 out of  21 Senators voted not to admit evidence from certain bank  records, which prosecutors claimed would tie Estrada to ill-gotten wealth,  That vote, a win for President Estrada,  precipitated the resignation and walk-out of the Senate President and the members of the combined civilian/House prosecution team. 
</p>

Remembering "EDSA II" - the triumph of mob rule in the Philippines