From Fear to Resolution: A Satirical Anecdotal Inquiry into Filipino Sovereignty
From Fear to Resolution: A Satirical Anecdotal Inquiry into Filipino Sovereignty
Amiel Gerald A. Roldan™
February 25, 2026
Forty years ago, takot ang mga Pilipino na baka bigla na lang silang arestuhin at ikulong. Fear was not an abstraction then; it was a daily companion, a shadow that followed every jeepney ride, every whispered conversation, every glance at the policeman’s baton. The martial law years were not simply about curfews and censorship; they were about the terrifying possibility that one’s freedom could evaporate overnight. And now, in a twist of historical irony, we find ourselves sponsoring Senate Resolution No. 307 — a resolution that insists, prospectively, that every Filipino must pass through the courts of our Inang Bayan before being surrendered to foreign powers. Is this progress, or is it merely a bureaucratic reincarnation of our old anxieties dressed in the robes of sovereignty?
---
I. The Ghosts of Arrests Past
Let us begin with a rhetorical question: what is more frightening, the midnight knock on the door or the daylight subpoena stamped with foreign ink? Forty years ago, the midnight knock was enough to silence entire households. Today, the fear is subtler, more procedural, more clothed in the language of international cooperation. But is not the essence the same — the possibility that a Filipino body, a Filipino soul, could be whisked away without the blessing of a Philippine judge?
The anecdote of the martial law detainee — the poet who scribbled verses on cigarette paper, the activist who memorized the cracks on the prison wall — still haunts us. And yet, we now debate whether a warrant issued abroad should have power over our citizens. Is this not the same story, merely translated into the language of globalization? Are we not still negotiating the boundary between fear and freedom, between sovereignty and surrender?
---
II. Senate Resolution No. 307: A Legal Comedy of Errors?
Ah, Senate Resolution No. 307. Prospective, noble, patriotic. It declares: kapag may Pilipinong aarestuhin under a warrant not issued by a Philippine judge, kailangan dumaan sa korte natin ‘yan. At ang bawat Pilipinong may tanong, ay may karapatan pumunta sa korte ng ating Inang Bayan! A stirring proclamation, indeed. But let us ask: is this resolution a shield, or is it a performance? Is it law, or is it theater? Is it a genuine assertion of sovereignty, or is it a rhetorical flourish meant to remind us that we, too, can draft documents with bold fonts and nationalistic punctuation?
Consider the irony: we insist on judicial review for foreign warrants, yet how many Filipinos truly believe they can walk into a courtroom and demand justice? How many jeepney drivers, market vendors, or call center agents feel empowered to invoke the majesty of Senate Resolution No. 307? Is this resolution for the people, or is it for the senators who wish to be remembered as guardians of sovereignty?
---
III. The West Philippine Sea Analogy: Sovereignty as Archipelago
The resolution’s defenders argue: kung gaano natin pinaninindigan na atin ang West Philippine Sea, ganun din dapat tayo manindigan para sa ating mga kapwa Pilipino. Atin ito, kababayan natin ito, tao ito — hindi basta dapat sinu-surrender! A beautiful analogy, but let us interrogate it. The West Philippine Sea is a body of water contested by superpowers. The Filipino body, too, is contested — by foreign courts, by international treaties, by extradition agreements. But can we truly equate coral reefs with human rights? Can sovereignty over fish be the same as sovereignty over flesh?
And yet, the analogy works in its absurdity. Just as we plant flags on sandbars, so too must we plant flags on our citizens’ wrists, declaring: “This body belongs to the Philippines!” Is this not the ultimate satire of nationalism — the idea that sovereignty extends not only to territory but to the very epidermis of its people? Shall we tattoo “Property of the Republic” on every Filipino arm, lest a foreign warrant mistake them for free-floating entities?
---
IV. Anecdotes of Sovereignty in Everyday Life
Let us pause for humor. Imagine Juan dela Cruz, summoned by a foreign court for alleged tax evasion in a country he has never visited. He walks into a Philippine courtroom, clutching Senate Resolution No. 307 like a talisman. “Your Honor,” he pleads, “I am a citizen of the Republic. I demand that my arrest be filtered through your gavel!” The judge, bemused, asks: “Do you have legal counsel?” Juan replies: “No, but I have nationalism!” Is this not the quintessential Filipino anecdote — the belief that patriotism can substitute for paperwork?
Or consider Maria, a domestic worker abroad, accused of petty theft. The foreign warrant travels faster than her remittances. But thanks to Resolution No. 307, she insists that her case must pass through Philippine courts. Will the judge in Manila fly to Riyadh to cross-examine witnesses? Will sovereignty pay for airfare? Or is Resolution No. 307 merely a rhetorical umbrella, shielding us from rain that has already soaked our clothes?
---
V. Rhetorical Questions as Sovereignty
What is sovereignty, if not a series of rhetorical questions? Who owns the Filipino body? Who decides the fate of the Filipino soul? Who has the right to arrest, detain, extradite? Who has the authority to say “No” to foreign powers? And most importantly: who benefits from these declarations of sovereignty? Is it the ordinary citizen, or is it the political class that thrives on patriotic soundbites?
Is sovereignty a courtroom, or is it a karaoke bar where senators sing ballads of nationalism? Is Resolution No. 307 a legal instrument, or is it a punchline in the comedy of Philippine politics? Is the West Philippine Sea truly ours, or is it merely a metaphor we deploy when we run out of legal arguments? And finally: is the Filipino truly free, or is freedom merely the illusion we perform every time we draft a resolution?
---
VI. The Satirical Esoterica of Legal Nationalism
Let us venture into esoterica. The resolution is prospective, meaning it looks forward. But does it not also look backward, haunted by the ghosts of martial law arrests? Is it not a palimpsest, a rewriting of old fears into new legal language? And is this not the essence of satire — the recycling of trauma into comedy, the transformation of fear into rhetoric?
Consider the absurdity: we insist that foreign warrants must pass through Philippine courts, yet we routinely surrender our sovereignty in trade agreements, military pacts, and cultural imports. We guard our citizens’ bodies, yet we allow our minds to be colonized by Netflix algorithms. Is this not the ultimate irony — that sovereignty is defended in the courtroom but surrendered in the living room?
---
VII. Anecdotal Reflections on Nationalism
Let me share a personal anecdote. I once attended a barangay meeting where the topic was not foreign warrants but garbage collection. The residents argued passionately: “Atin ang basura! Hindi dapat dalhin sa ibang barangay!” And I thought: is this not the same logic as Resolution No. 307? Sovereignty begins with garbage, extends to fish, and culminates in human bodies. Atin ito, kababayan natin ito, basura ito — hindi basta dapat sinu-surrender!
Another anecdote: a child in school, asked to draw the Philippine flag, mistakenly colors the sun green. The teacher scolds him: “That is not sovereignty!” But is it not sovereignty to imagine the sun in any color we choose? Is Resolution No. 307 not also a green sun — a legal imagination that insists on sovereignty even when reality paints it otherwise?
---
VIII. Conclusion: Sovereignty as Performance
And so we return to our premise: forty years ago, fear was the currency of arrest. Today, Resolution No. 307 is the currency of sovereignty. But is this progress, or is it merely a change in costume? Is the Filipino freer today, or is freedom merely rehearsed in the theater of resolutions? Is sovereignty a shield, or is it a stage prop? Is the West Philippine Sea truly ours, or is it merely a metaphor for our longing to belong?
In the end, perhaps sovereignty is not about territory or warrants. Perhaps sovereignty is about the ability to ask rhetorical questions without fear of arrest. Perhaps Resolution No. 307 is not a legal instrument but a satirical anecdote, reminding us that freedom is not guaranteed by courts but by the courage to laugh at our own contradictions. And perhaps the ultimate sovereignty is this: the right to turn fear into humor, trauma into satire, and resolutions into rhetorical questions.
---
If you like my any of my concept research, writing explorations, art works and/or simple writings please support me by sending me a coffee treat at my paypal amielgeraldroldan.paypal.me or GXI 09163112211. Much appreciate and thank you in advance.
Just featured at https://www.pressenza.com/2026/01/the-asian-cultural-council-global-alumni-network-amiel-gerald-a-roldan/
Amiel Gerald A. Roldan™ curatorial writing practice exemplifies this path: transforming grief into infrastructure, evidence into agency, and memory into resistance. As the Philippines enters a new economic decade, such work is not peripheral—it is foundational.
I'm trying to complement my writings with helpful inputs from AI through writing. Bear with me as I am treating this blog as repositories and drafts.
Please comment and tag if you like my compilations visit www.amielroldan.blogspot.com or www.amielroldan.wordpress.com
and comments at
amiel_roldan@outlook.com
amielgeraldroldan@gmail.com
A multidisciplinary Filipino artist, poet, researcher, and cultural worker whose practice spans painting, printmaking, photography, installation, and writing. He is deeply rooted in cultural memory, postcolonial critique, and in bridging creative practice with scholarly infrastructure—building counter-archives, annotating speculative poetry like Southeast Asian manuscripts, and fostering regional solidarity through ethical art collaboration.
Recent show at ILOMOCA
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/16qUTDdEMD
https://www.linkedin.com/safety/go?messageThreadUrn=urn%3Ali%3AmessageThreadUrn%3A&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pressenza.com%2F2025%2F05%2Fcultural-workers-not-creative-ilomoca-may-16-2025%2F&trk=flagship-messaging-android
https://alumni.asianculturalcouncil.org/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPlR6NjbGNrA-VG_2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHoy6hXUptbaQi5LdFAHcNWqhwblxYv_wRDZyf06-O7Yjv73hEGOOlphX0cPZ_aem_sK6989WBcpBEFLsQqr0kdg
Amiel Gerald A. Roldan™ started Independent Curatorial Manila™ as a nonprofit philantrophy while working for institutions simultaneosly early on.
The Independent Curatorial Manila™ or ICM™ is a curatorial services and guide for emerging artists in the Philippines. It is an independent/ voluntary services entity and aims to remains so. Selection is through proposal and a prerogative temporarily. Contact above for inquiries.
Comments