By: Modesto P. Sa-onoy
Let me cite a portion of yesterday’s column on the Yanson family constitution the message, nay the ultimate will of Ricardo Yanson: We must never be distracted and divided by our own adversary – our attitude – and the way we perceive things in not so practical way.
He identified clearly that the family enemy is not other people but their attitude, the enemy within. That kind of enemy is difficult to control and defeat because it can hide even in the guise of goodness and sacrifice ostensibly for the greater good.
Ricardo knew, it seems, that their greatest enemy is “our attitude” and he is proven right by the unfolding events after his death. In that way, he was prophetic because of the conflict now dividing and bringing the family and its wealth into the brink of a seemingly unsolvable situation, is the attitude clouding the hearts and minds of its members.
The uniqueness of their constitution is that Ricardo crafted it to prevent the enemy, the destructive “attitude” from entering or gaining ground and destroying the legacy he had worked so well.
Attitude is a very complex and unpredictable mental behavior. It is encompassing and is oftentimes very difficult to understand much less to overcome. It takes a lot of proofs to convince, granting a person is willing to change and embrace what he or she had rejected. It takes moral strength to change attitude, and for a Catholic a lot of humility and prayer.
As the lyric of an old song of Bobby Vinton’s, Greenfields rightly said, “you can’t be happy until the day you learn, you can’t be happy while your hearts on the roam, you can’t be happy until you bring it home…”
To me only Olivia Yanson can bring the family home “once again.” Only then will the family live in what I believed is the harmony that Ricardo Yanson wanted to prevail in his family. The family constitution is replete with his yearnings.
In fact, this Tele-Ceres came into a public square because a provision of the constitution was violated. Let’s take an example.
Article I (Family Core Values and Beliefs), Section 4 provides, “We believe in the importance of family. We will build trust among family members. We will continuously strive to be united as a family. Suits between or among members of the family shall never be resorted to even as a last recourse.”
Note the word, “never” even if that was the last remedy to resolve family problems. He emphasized the importance of trust and unity in the family. A suit breaks down all these values he wanted to preserve.
The series of columns that I have written already exposed the facts as to who violated the several points of Section 4.
Who filed the first suit? Who preferred, defended and protected an employee to the detriment of the importance of family and breaking it up? Who refused to divulge unaccounted expenditures of company funds? And, the trigger, who filed another suit to discard an amicable agreement that partitioned the family properties? Did not that agreement distribute the Vallacar Transit Incorporated shares only to the six children and not a single share to Olivia?
The answers had been discussed at length in previous columns and they had not been refuted. Instead of taking stock of the situation that was destroying the family, did not Olivia wage a campaign to discredit her children who remained faithful to their constitution, to the values that Ricardo attempted to enshrine in the document that embodied his will?
Although the constitution had been shredded and trampled upon by the actions of the Yanson 3, the other siblings took the defensive mode, responding only to preserve the family. I recall Roy even expressed their offer to resolve the issue and reconcile but the response of the Yanson 3 was more belligerence and conditions that violated their constitution and contrary to the will of Ricardo.
Not content with bringing in the police and condoning their use of brute force, the Yanson 3 are now using proxies to file criminal charges against their family members. Are these not blatant violations of their constitution?
Did the Yanson 3 agree to the drafting of this document merely to please Ricardo but with no intent of complying when the patriarch is no longer around to impose penalties?
We’ll continue Monday.