It is a test we – or at least the registered voters among us which the Comelec says will number to about 45 million – will have to take as we troop to the polls on Election Day.

It is a test some of us have already started taking – specifically those who have come forward to propose themselves as potential public servants of our republic: Richard Gomez as much as Cesar Montano, Chiz Escudero as much as Mike Defensor, Noynoy Aquino as much as Migs Zubiri, Koko Pimentel as much as Oliver Lozano, and, yes, Alan Peter as much as Joselito Pepito Cayetano. Indeed, when these men (and their women colleagues) trooped to the Comelec to file the necessary papers offering themselves as candidates for the rest of us to choose from, they were taking themselves as well as the rest of us through a very important first test of which principles truly matter in our budding (if at times misguided) democracy.

A few days ago I espied clips of a senatorial "debate" that cable news channel ANC is conducting. The clip I saw featured GO’s Coseteng, Team Unity’s Zubiri and KBL’s Chavez responding to questions from a panel that was focused on the environment. As expected, Coseteng and Zubiri responded to the questions put to them with some amount of expertise; but when Chavez was asked whether as senator he would vote for or against JPEPA, he responded along these lines: If it will be good for the people why shouldn’t I support it? But if it will be bad, why should I support it? When pressed that he had to vote favorably or unfavorably, he again simply repeated the same line.

In short, what he was saying without saying it outright was that he did not know or understand what the heck the question was all about, and surely couldn’t make heads or tails of JPEPA.

I think when a candidate like that presents himself to us, he is both testing his principles as an individual and our principles as intelligent voters. My fear, however, is that when a candidate like that presents himself to the voters he is actually mocking us and is in the race not to win but for the heck of it. Never mind if he were running to promote a cause, as are the members of the Ang Kapatiran Party. But Chavez is only one example of a candidate put forward by an erstwhile respected and accredited political party for no other purpose than to mask the mockery they are committing.

Which brings me to the second most popular KBL senatorial candidate, Joselito Cayetano. It is amazing that he has been able to stay away from the glare of media lights, or avoid putting himself in a situation where he would have to explain why the hell he is running in the first place. Notice that in at least two instances when he had to do so, not he but his lawyer and fellow KBL candidate Oliver ("Oliver Twist!) Lozano was the one who did the talking. Is that a mark of things to come? And is that an indication that someone the KBL puts forward as a potential senator cannot even stand up and defend his own self without Lozano acting as his mouthpiece?

It would be interesting to ask of Joselito a few simple questions: Why are you running? What cause are you running for? Do you seriously believe you have a chance of winning? If yes, on what basis? If no, then why run? Given that another candidate has the same family name as yours and therefore you both risk canceling each other’s vote out, what will you get out of running? And do you realize the implication of your candidacy, given that the other candidate with your family name is perceived to be one of the bigger nemesis of the First Gentleman, and that your running has the potential of derailing this other candidate’s campaign?

It is very clear that there are individuals who are not happy at the prospect that Alan Cayetano of Taguig-Pateros will be elected a member of the Senate of the Philippines. Is it because he has dared ask questions that very few had the guts to ask, or rile people so many of us are afraid of? If so, then is that not the type of senator we should have – one who does not take the most convenient route, the least troublesome route, the most profitable route, the route of compromise and about-face that so many of our elder politicians have taken too often for too long?

And yet it was not enough for those who cringe at the thought of an Alan Cayetano victory that they campaign against him; they had to find a legal way to further damage his chances, by latching onto Joselito Cayetano and parading him before the rest of the country as a legitimate and qualified candidate for Senator. One who, without his own lawyer, could not even defend himself? And, interestingly, one who, unlike movie star Cesar Montano, seems to have no problem financially in waging a national campaign? Actually, the candidacy of two Cayetanos for the Senate is a perfect test of our principles. And the test is simple. If you have serious misgivings about Alan Peter Cayetano’s qualifications to be Senator, then all you need to do is not include him on your list of twelve. If, on the other hand, you have serious misgivings about the opponents of Alan Peter Cayetano and see the entry of a second Cayetano as a deceitful way to deny Alan victory, then all you need to do is make sure you write "Alan Cayetano" on the very first blank space on your ballot that is reserved for your choices for Senator.

I think the ultimate test that this electoral exercise in May brings is a test of our adherence to the principles of democracy and good government and accountability and all the others that should be linked together to make our system and our society work decently. As electoral exercises in the past have shown, there are so many ways for the powerful to foil us and make us fail the test. But then again, there are also so many ways for us to rise above the schemes and machinations of the powerful, and speak in a voice loud and strong enough for the manipulators to have second thoughts.

Which is why, come Election Day, if you believe in all that he has been fighting for, then write in clear bold letters the name "Alan Cayetano" as the first of your twelve choices for Senator. There can be no bolder declaration of your solidarity with his principles and to his cause than that.