We abide by this dictum: “the end does not justify the means.” This principle is upheld by our country’s fundamental laws and is consistent with Christian belief. Ethically, this principle is sound and reasonable, providing a stable guideline for decision-making. This is also the very reason why the impeachment trial against the Vice President should proceed.
It has become commonplace to violate the principle “the end does not justify the means.” Upholding it has become an exception. A striking illustration is the so-called ‘drug war,’ which operates under a consequentialist logic, contrary to the ethical standards the Supreme Court claims to uphold. Consequentialists believe that the end can be justified by morally questionable means. So long as it delivers the desired result, a means, whether it violates human rights, is permitted.
The principle “the end does not justify the means” is much harder to uphold than consequentialism, for it requires sustained moral discernment, whereas the latter appeals to instant gratification.
Our society is replete with the means-end infractions: for a drug-free Philippines the means is to kill suspected drug-addicts, to get rich the means is to steal, to get government funding the means is to “repair roads,” to win the elections the means is to kill political opponents, to avoid criticism the means is to “silence dissent,” to manage overcrowded schools the means is to mass promote students regardless of literacy, to have a prosperous country the means is to control population through the promotion of the culture of contraception, to get even with one’s enemies in the business sector the means for a politician is to deny them permit renewals, and so on. The means we have preferred thus far as a nation are defined by quick fixes and intrinsically evil acts.
We are considering an impeachment trial against the Vice President because the principle “the end does not justify the means” has been repeatedly violated in our public and private lives, which worsens our poverty, weakens our legal institutions, and hinders intellectual growth.
By facing the impeachment trial, the Vice President has the potential to radically reshape the Philippine political landscape. This act of humility renders politicians vulnerable to the rule of law—demonstrating that they, too, can be tried and scrutinized, simply because the second-highest official in the land submits herself to the demands of justice and reason. The Senate’s role as a court of justice could not be more clearly emphasized.
In contrast to the culture of violence and extrajudicial killings associated with the so-called “drug war,” supporting an impeachment trial involves no intrinsic evil. As a Catholic, this distinction matters: I can support the trial in good conscience, knowing that I do not commit sin. This is an opportune time for rectification – a time for Filipinos to pursue ends through morally good means.
Fr. Christopher Garinganao, O.P. is the dean of the University of Santo Tomas – Ecclesiastical Faculty of Philosophy.
