HOW URGENT IS VETTING PROCESS?

By Philip M. Lustre Jr.

THE INCOMING administration has been announcing new appointments in key positions. The 1987 Constitution vests the authority to appoint the people, who would assist him to run the government. As the chief executive, the incoming president is the appointing authority.

But the key question is whether the new chief executive and commander in chief of the Armed Forces conducts any vetting process to make those appointments. Acknowledging the volatility of his mood, the unpredictable new president does not seem to know and understand the importance of appropriate vetting process in making key appointments.

The phrase "vetting process" refers to the conduct of background checks to determine the fitness and usefulness of certain persons for employment, conferment of awards, or political nomination and selection. Prospective appointees, honorees, or nominees undergo thorough background checks along moral, physical, spiritual, political, and other standards and issues to determine their fitness. 

Political appointments, nominations and selections usually entail a thorough vetting process to a void public embarrassment or humiliation when those appointments, nominations and selections are publicly announced. Usually, the vetting processes are not publicly announced; they are conducted quietly. 

When Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy won over Republican candidate Richard Nixon in the 1960 US presidential elections, the defense portfolio went to a guy named Robert McNamara, an American of Irish descent like Kennedy. 

In his autobiography "Retrospect," McNamara, then the president of Ford Motors, one of the three largest car manufacturers in the US, confessed he did not know Kennedy personally and the only time he met Kennedy in the flesh was when the latter offered him to become his defense secretary.

McNamara was so surprised of his appointment. Kennedy reassured him that he was thoroughly vetted. "But I am not qualified," McNamara told the president elected in what appeared to be his way to reject the offer. McNamara did not feel he needed the job; he was president of a big car producer at that time. 

But Kennedy had his way of soothing his frayed nerves. "So am I," Kennedy told McNamara gently. 

Not all processes are successful vetting. George McGovern, the Democratic presidential candidate in the 1972 presidential elections had to abandon Thomas Eagleton as his running mate after it was revealed that the latter had bouts of depression and was hospitalized several times. Sargent Shriver replaced him. 

John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate in the 2008 presidential elections was also regarded a product of poor vetting process like Eagleton's. 

In Philippine politics, President Noynoy Aquino did not know much about Leila de Lima and the late Jesse Robredo, but appropriate vetting processes by his Liberal Party colleagues prompted him to name them as justice and interior and local governments secretaries.

Aquino had misgivings about Robredo, as he was an acting DILG secretary for more than a year.  Aquino knew de Lima as a competent election lawyer and former commissioner of the Commission on Human Rights.

But their appointments have proven to be pivotal in his administration. 

De Lima led the prosecution of three senators, who were imprisoned because of their involvement in the PDAF scandal. She is now a senator.

Jesse Robredo also did well as DILG secretary. The Filipino people rewarded his widow, Leni, by electing her as the vice president, who is just a heart beat away from the presidency.   

The incoming president must understand that making appointments on the basis of correct vetting processes matter a lot. Any wrong choices in the nominations of prospective Cabinet members could bring disaster for the incoming administration.

As simple as that.