But who is really more contemptible?
Between Miriam Defensor-Santiago and the three members of the gallery audience whom she accused of looking "mockingly" at her, and for which the three were permanently barred from watching the impeachment proceedings, it is obvious who deserves to be eternally banished from the Senate.
This telenovela-crazy nation is familiar with Santiago's propensity for making a spectacle of herself alright, but her histrionics yesterday was most uncalled for. The three viewers said they merely leaned to get a better view of the proceedings, which was being blocked by a post. Santiago, she who claims to have death threats for breakfast, however took that as a slight on her person.
People with low self-esteem are known to react more in that manner. And for Santiago to behave that way is being overly paranoid. Well, it's a state of mind she has time and again exhibited.
More than this, though, Santiago's general conduct in the impeachment court is truly suspect, betraying a bias that was already there before the start of the trial. She seems more a counsel in Erap's defense like Juan Ponce Enrile, quick to dismiss the evidences and testimonies presented by the prosecution. She deals with witnesses with sarcasm and condescencion, feigning surprise that there remain lawyers like Jazmin Banal who are not in the same league as Estelito Mendoza, Andres Narvasa, Raul Daza, Jose Flaminiano and the Fortun brothers. In questioning Clarissa Ocampo, she even posited alibis that Estrada's lawyers could use for his defense.
It is her demeanor, and that of the likes of dagdag-bawas senator Enrile and the balato twins John Osmeña and Tessie Oreta, that serves to ultimately demean the impeachment process.