Julian Assange, now free, rekindles the debate on journalism and free speech, and inevitably, human rights.
Maria Ressa once claimed that his arrest had no bearing on journalism, insisting WikiLeaks isn’t journalism. But isn’t journalism, like WikiLeaks, rooted in free speech? Perhaps Ressa and her oft-scrutinized Rappler hold the monopoly on truth and political impact. One might expect a Nobel Laureate like Ressa to champion not only truth and information but also human rights. Yet, her dismissal of Assange’s plight raises eyebrows. The irony is rich: a laureate of free speech seemingly indifferent to a man persecuted for it.
Many argue Assange was more deserving of the Nobel, and it’s hard to disagree. This twist in the tale leaves us pondering if the guardians of truth sometimes gatekeep it too.
In the grand theater of global politics, the line between championing truth and curating it remains ever so blurred.
Leila de Lima’s dilemma is a masterclass in political irony.
The former senator urges President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to support the ICC investigation and enforce the arrest warrant against her nemesis, ex-President Rodrigo Duterte, essentially declaring the Philippine justice system ineffective.
Yet, this is the same justice system that recently acquitted her of drug charges brought against her by the Duterte administration. Her acquittal could be seen as a beacon of hope for judicial fairness, but her plea for international intervention suggests otherwise. It’s like praising a lifeguard for saving you from drowning while simultaneously insisting they need swimming lessons.
Marcos Jr. cooperating with the ICC would indeed be a bold move, but it would also mean publicly admitting that local mechanisms are broken — mechanisms that, ironically, just worked in de Lima’s favor.
In the end, this saga is a fascinating dance of justice and politics where no step is straightforward.
The Adobo Chronicles 
You must be logged in to post a comment.