More bag of tricks from Glo Editorial Daily Tribune 12/22/2006 As if it has never been caught with its hands in the cookie jar, Gloria's scheme and scam gang is again trying to slip in an obvious political racket for use in the coming national elections. The 2007 budget is again on the brink of a stalemate between Gloria and her stooges in Congress and the Senate over a P4.7- billion program to supposedly feed school children. Even at first glance, the program reeks of a scam. The Department of Agriculture (DA) is again figuring prominently in the Gloria scheme as a conduit for the importation of 1 million metric tons of rice for the school feeding program. Sen. Edgardo Angara, apparently giving the purpose of the program the benefit of the doubt, has questioned the need to import rice to feed school children. Rice importation has long been suspected as a huge source of illegal funds in this administration. Importation or outright smuggling of the grain has been associated with a person in Malaca who has a lot of weight to throw around. A grains depot in a supposed transhipment port in Quezon has been the center of the grains smuggling which is essentially done through the usual misdeclaration of imports, say 1 ton of grains is declared when the actual weight is about 3 tons of imports. The 1 million metric tons of imports for the program would make the country the biggest rice importer in Asia. Just this year, the country imported 1.5 million metric tons without the school feeding program. It is harder to envision the altruistic goal of the program than ascribing sinister motives behind it. With the Joc-Joc Bolante fertilizer scam, which has a similar dole-out character of an alibi as the feed the school children program, still being tucked, with a lot of effort, away under Gloria's skirt, the school feeding program would likely fall the same way. Malnutrition cannot be expected to be treated with the handing out of bags of rice as the shallow purpose of the program envisions. What would effectively be Gloria feeding the school children and their parents would obviously be the administration candidates that would expectedly be all over the rice packagings. Gloria's absence of credibility, as borne out by every independent survey done on her, reflects in everything that she does from the the Charter change (Cha-cha) campaign to the various photo opportunities that she pretends as her way of immersing with the people. But that is not the end of it, as there is now yet another scam in the making the school feeding program. It would not be a big surprise if the 2007 budget stalls as a result of an expected insistence by Malaca to have the program budgeted. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita may be right in saying the school feeding scheme would not be an election gimmick since it forms part of the yearly political stunts of Gloria anyway. With Cha-cha practically in the works again, expect more of the same sleight of hand that Gloria would undertake as she turns her attention to getting a winning ticket going in the 2007 elections, a hard task with the kind of credibility she has built up with the people over the years. She knows that not only would the 2007 elections serve as a referendum on her administration, but also that there is a more fearsome future for her should her congressman-allies, a sizable number of them, lose to opposition congressmen which would then lead to her facing an impeachment bid that may well end up in a conviction by Senate trial. By hook or by crook, Gloria apparently would be working to keep her allies in the majority in Congress and this means pouring in more of the stolen public funds into the candidacies of her administration bets. If she did this in 2004 for herself and her congressmen, when she still had the support of her elite civil society, to force her way into retaining power and position, she certainly will do so again, and more desperately, since her political survival hinges on the number of congressional allies to be voted in by the electorate. It would not be malnutrition that the Gloria scheme would be addressing but the flagging political health of her administration.
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
Thursday, 28 December 2006
GMA allies oppose IMPSA Senate revival
Gloria, allies oppose Impsa probe revival Daily Tribune 01/13/07
By Angie M. Rosales,Sherwin C. Olaes & Dona Policar.
With the announced move by senators to reopen the $14-million Industrias Metalurgicas Pescarmona Sociedad Anonima (Impsa) payoff probe, Malaca yesterday gave clear signals it is opposed to the Senate’s move to revive the hearings on this matter, saying this is a waste of time, since the investigations hae been already made in the past, and that the same issue is now in the Ombudsman’s office, skirting the fact that the Impsa probe will deal mostly with the alleged payoff to powerful officials in exchange for the sovereign guarantee, while the Ombudsman’s case deals merely with indicted former Justice Sec: on extortion, graft & falsification of documents. But there is nothing Malaca can do to stop a Senate probe this time. Vows have been made that no stone will be left unturned as the Senate braces itself for the reopening of the controversial Impsa power deal, with no possibility of a stonewalling of the proceedings, as opposition Sen. Panfilo Lacson virtually expanded its coverage, to uncover what he said is the truth, not only on actual personalities involved but also the reason behind the Arroyo government’s reluctance to determine the source of the purported $2 million bribe or extortion money received by the former Justice chief.
It is more believable to conclude that the said amount was part of a grand scheme that facilitated the signing of the Impsa deal that contained the government’s sovereign guarantee and not a mere case of extortion as alleged by some quarters, Lacson said in his new resolution filed Thursday, 11th January 2006..
All possible loopholes will be plugged, with Lacson vowing to insist on the holding of the inquiry even during the campaign recess, possibly to be handled by the Senate’s energy committee.
Lacson’s move came following administration Sen. Joker Arroyo’s expressed apprehension in taking up the Impsa bribe probe by his blue ribbon committee citing a number of reasons, although a number of their colleagues, this early, have rallied behind the proposed reinvestigation. Senators Sergio Osme II and Ralph Recto posed no objection to the proposal of Lacson, even on the conduct of public hearings during the congressional break.
Osmena also recommended the issuance of invitations or summons to concerned government officials, apart from the alleged source of the bribe or extortion money, former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez, and officials who served under Presidents Arroyo and Estrada, specifically those who held the position of secretary in the Departments of Energy (DoE), Finance (DoF) and Justice (DoJ).
Osmena said former Bulacan Rep. Wilfredo Villarama, businessman Ernest Escaler, present and former presidents of the National Power Corp. (Napocor ) as well as a representative of the Coutts Bank in Hong Kong.
In a telephone interview, Lacson said he had already effected the filing of resolution No. 607, replacing his former resolution No. 477 introduced in Nov. 2002, to pave the way for a fresh inquiry and more thorough inquiry. I will leave it up to the Senate leadership, to Senate President Manuel Villar Jr. to direct whichever standing committee is appropriate to handle the probe, he said.
Lacson said, if possible, he would rather that the proceedings be handled by the energy panel or the government corporations to ensure a smooth flow of the probe even during campaign recess.
In introducing his new resolution, Lacson indicated that the probe should not only concentrate on the $2 million alleged bribe money received by Perez but the entire supposed $14 million payoff that was purportedly made by the Argentine firm Impsa to some government officials in exchange for the approval of its contract to build-rehabilitate-operate-transfer the Caliraya-Botocan-Kalayaan (CBK) hydroelectric plant. The said contract, that was earlier reported to have been disapproved by Estrada when he was still in office, was approved four days into the Arroyo administration, prompted by the legal opinion rendered by Perez as the newly appointed Justice secretary.
Perez reversed the opinion of his predecessor, Justice Secretary Artemio Tuquero . Previous reports also alleged that in exchange for this presidential approval of the Impsa contract, $14m was allegedly deposited in the Trade and Commerce Bank of Uruguay in the Caymans and of this supposed amount, some $2 million purportedly found its way to the bank account of Escaler and Ramon Arceo Jr., Perez’s brother in law, with the Coutts Bank in Hong Kong.
The said amount was later transferred to the accounts of Arceo and Perez wife Rosario in Switzerland.
It will be recalled that when the Swiss government issued a report sometime ago, suspecting the amount deposited as laundered money, it made a formal request to the Philippine government to assist in determining the source of this fund.
Lacson pointed out, as he had bared recently showing evidence on Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez’s order to withhold processing of the needed papers, from the time the request was made until last Jan. 9, when the Office of the Ombudsman announced its resolution recommending the filing of charges against Perez, the Philippine government did nothing to lend assistance in determining the source of this fund. To date, statements were made that the case filed against former Secretary Perez et.al was purely a case of extortion and that the occupants of Malaca had nothing to do with the said money, he said, adding there is need to uncover the truth as it puts to doubt the sanctity and validity of the contracts entered into by the Executive Department. Lacson also reiterated the unveiling of the identity of the parties who facilitated the approval of a contract for them to be prosecuted for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and of the Plunder Act.
Also yesterday, Senator Arroyo issued a press statement belying insinuations that his blue ribbon committee stonewalled the conduct of the probe into Lacson's resolution No. 477
According to the director-general Emilia Pueyo, of the blue ribbon committee, there was no Impsa resolution some years ago. But to the best of her recollection, the blue ribbon was only a secondary committee. The Senate offices are closed so this can be ascertained only on Monday. The blue ribbon committee has no pending matter un-acted upon as the primary committee, he clarified.
Nonetheless, he said in a radio interview that should Lacson introduce or re-file the resolution, he is open to the idea of reviving the probe. But he warned that the proceedings may only be redundant or an end up an exercise in futility considering that the Ombudsman had already conducted the same and even came out with a set of recommendations recently.
The matter is already in the hands of the government prosecutors. We should give ample respect to the other departments of the government. Otherwise, it would look as if we’re competing with them. Sen. Arroyo admitted, however, that if the Senate leadership would accede to the proposition of Lacson, the upper chamber cannot be prevented from issuing summons or to order the investigation of anyone. Presidential Legal Adviser Sergio Apostol used the same excuse made by Senator Arroyo, saying it makes no sense reopening the inquiry since the Senate had already started the probe.
They already conducted an inquiry before. They have the records until now so they can use it to file charges or have a proposed bill. There’s no need to reopen the case. Apostol said.
Apostol also accused Lacson of using the Impsa deal to advance his candidacy in the May polls.
Not surprisingly, administration congressmen defended the Arroyos in the Impsa bribe controversy. Lacson, according to Reps. Douglas Cagas (Davao del Sur) and Edwin Uy (Isabela) should stop being a fishwife and come out immediately with his evidence on the alleged involvement of the First Couple in the extortion case against Perez. Put up or shut up, they told Lacson. These are unsubstantiated charges similar to previous unproven charges against the Arroyos of which Ping has always been wont to do, Cagas said.
Uy, for his part, said Lacson has nothing to show and that he is now dragging the First Gentleman into the issue to divert public attention that he cannot show proof of what he is saying. Ping could not even say where the $14 million comes from. So for the sake of his reputation as a senator, I appeal to him to stop wasting his time on rumors, the congressman said.
Anakpawis Rep. Crispin Beltran, for his part, expressed belief that an agreement has been forged between Jimenez and Malaca, which sole intention is to unite against former President Joseph Estrada and undermine the opposition which still considers the former president as its head.
More bag of tricks from Glo EDITORIAL Daily Tribune 12/22/2006
As if it has never been caught with its hands in the cookie jar, Gloria's scheme and scam gang is again trying to slip in an obvious political racket for use in the coming national elections. The 2007 budget is again on the brink of a stalemate between Gloria and her stooges in Congress and the Senate over a P4.7- billion program to supposedly feed school children. Even at first glance, the program reeks of a scam. The Department of Agriculture (DA) is again figuring prominently in the Gloria scheme as a conduit for the importation of 1 million metric tons of rice for the school feeding program. Sen. Edgardo Angara, apparently giving the purpose of the program the benefit of the doubt, has questioned the need to import rice to feed school children. Rice importation has long been suspected as a huge source of illegal funds in this administration. Importation or outright smuggling of the grain has been associated with a person in Malaca who has a lot of weight to throw around. A grains depot in a supposed transhipment port in Quezon has been the center of the grains smuggling which is essentially done through the usual misdeclaration of imports, say 1 ton of grains is declared when the actual weight is about 3 tons of imports. The 1 million metric tons of imports for the program would make the country the biggest rice importer in Asia. Just this year, the country imported 1.5 million metric tons without the school feeding program. It is harder to envision the altruistic goal of the program than ascribing sinister motives behind it. With the Joc-Joc Bolante fertilizer scam, which has a similar dole-out character of an alibi as the feed the school children program, still being tucked, with a lot of effort, away under Gloria's skirt, the school feeding program would likely fall the same way. Malnutrition cannot be expected to be treated with the handing out of bags of rice as the shallow purpose of the program envisions. What would effectively be Gloria feeding the school children and their parents would obviously be the administration candidates that would expectedly be all over the rice packagings. Gloria's absence of credibility, as borne out by every independent survey done on her, reflects in everything that she does from the the Charter change (Cha-cha) campaign to the various photo opportunities that she pretends as her way of immersing with the people. But that is not the end of it, as there is now yet another scam in the making the school feeding program. It would not be a big surprise if the 2007 budget stalls as a result of an expected insistence by Malaca to have the program budgeted. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita may be right in saying the school feeding scheme would not be an election gimmick since it forms part of the yearly political stunts of Gloria anyway. With Cha-cha practically in the works again, expect more of the same sleight of hand that Gloria would undertake as she turns her attention to getting a winning ticket going in the 2007 elections, a hard task with the kind of credibility she has built up with the people over the years. She knows that not only would the 2007 elections serve as a referendum on her administration, but also that there is a more fearsome future for her should her congressman-allies, a sizable number of them, lose to opposition congressmen which would then lead to her facing an impeachment bid that may well end up in a conviction by Senate trial. By hook or by crook, Gloria apparently would be working to keep her allies in the majority in Congress and this means pouring in more of the stolen public funds into the candidacies of her administration bets. If she did this in 2004 for herself and her congressmen, when she still had the support of her elite civil society, to force her way into retaining power and position, she certainly will do so again, and more desperately, since her political survival hinges on the number of congressional allies to be voted in by the electorate. It would not be malnutrition that the Gloria scheme would be addressing but the flagging political health of her administration. Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
By Angie M. Rosales,Sherwin C. Olaes & Dona Policar.
With the announced move by senators to reopen the $14-million Industrias Metalurgicas Pescarmona Sociedad Anonima (Impsa) payoff probe, Malaca yesterday gave clear signals it is opposed to the Senate’s move to revive the hearings on this matter, saying this is a waste of time, since the investigations hae been already made in the past, and that the same issue is now in the Ombudsman’s office, skirting the fact that the Impsa probe will deal mostly with the alleged payoff to powerful officials in exchange for the sovereign guarantee, while the Ombudsman’s case deals merely with indicted former Justice Sec: on extortion, graft & falsification of documents. But there is nothing Malaca can do to stop a Senate probe this time. Vows have been made that no stone will be left unturned as the Senate braces itself for the reopening of the controversial Impsa power deal, with no possibility of a stonewalling of the proceedings, as opposition Sen. Panfilo Lacson virtually expanded its coverage, to uncover what he said is the truth, not only on actual personalities involved but also the reason behind the Arroyo government’s reluctance to determine the source of the purported $2 million bribe or extortion money received by the former Justice chief.
It is more believable to conclude that the said amount was part of a grand scheme that facilitated the signing of the Impsa deal that contained the government’s sovereign guarantee and not a mere case of extortion as alleged by some quarters, Lacson said in his new resolution filed Thursday, 11th January 2006..
All possible loopholes will be plugged, with Lacson vowing to insist on the holding of the inquiry even during the campaign recess, possibly to be handled by the Senate’s energy committee.
Lacson’s move came following administration Sen. Joker Arroyo’s expressed apprehension in taking up the Impsa bribe probe by his blue ribbon committee citing a number of reasons, although a number of their colleagues, this early, have rallied behind the proposed reinvestigation. Senators Sergio Osme II and Ralph Recto posed no objection to the proposal of Lacson, even on the conduct of public hearings during the congressional break.
Osmena also recommended the issuance of invitations or summons to concerned government officials, apart from the alleged source of the bribe or extortion money, former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez, and officials who served under Presidents Arroyo and Estrada, specifically those who held the position of secretary in the Departments of Energy (DoE), Finance (DoF) and Justice (DoJ).
Osmena said former Bulacan Rep. Wilfredo Villarama, businessman Ernest Escaler, present and former presidents of the National Power Corp. (Napocor ) as well as a representative of the Coutts Bank in Hong Kong.
In a telephone interview, Lacson said he had already effected the filing of resolution No. 607, replacing his former resolution No. 477 introduced in Nov. 2002, to pave the way for a fresh inquiry and more thorough inquiry. I will leave it up to the Senate leadership, to Senate President Manuel Villar Jr. to direct whichever standing committee is appropriate to handle the probe, he said.
Lacson said, if possible, he would rather that the proceedings be handled by the energy panel or the government corporations to ensure a smooth flow of the probe even during campaign recess.
In introducing his new resolution, Lacson indicated that the probe should not only concentrate on the $2 million alleged bribe money received by Perez but the entire supposed $14 million payoff that was purportedly made by the Argentine firm Impsa to some government officials in exchange for the approval of its contract to build-rehabilitate-operate-transfer the Caliraya-Botocan-Kalayaan (CBK) hydroelectric plant. The said contract, that was earlier reported to have been disapproved by Estrada when he was still in office, was approved four days into the Arroyo administration, prompted by the legal opinion rendered by Perez as the newly appointed Justice secretary.
Perez reversed the opinion of his predecessor, Justice Secretary Artemio Tuquero . Previous reports also alleged that in exchange for this presidential approval of the Impsa contract, $14m was allegedly deposited in the Trade and Commerce Bank of Uruguay in the Caymans and of this supposed amount, some $2 million purportedly found its way to the bank account of Escaler and Ramon Arceo Jr., Perez’s brother in law, with the Coutts Bank in Hong Kong.
The said amount was later transferred to the accounts of Arceo and Perez wife Rosario in Switzerland.
It will be recalled that when the Swiss government issued a report sometime ago, suspecting the amount deposited as laundered money, it made a formal request to the Philippine government to assist in determining the source of this fund.
Lacson pointed out, as he had bared recently showing evidence on Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez’s order to withhold processing of the needed papers, from the time the request was made until last Jan. 9, when the Office of the Ombudsman announced its resolution recommending the filing of charges against Perez, the Philippine government did nothing to lend assistance in determining the source of this fund. To date, statements were made that the case filed against former Secretary Perez et.al was purely a case of extortion and that the occupants of Malaca had nothing to do with the said money, he said, adding there is need to uncover the truth as it puts to doubt the sanctity and validity of the contracts entered into by the Executive Department. Lacson also reiterated the unveiling of the identity of the parties who facilitated the approval of a contract for them to be prosecuted for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and of the Plunder Act.
Also yesterday, Senator Arroyo issued a press statement belying insinuations that his blue ribbon committee stonewalled the conduct of the probe into Lacson's resolution No. 477
According to the director-general Emilia Pueyo, of the blue ribbon committee, there was no Impsa resolution some years ago. But to the best of her recollection, the blue ribbon was only a secondary committee. The Senate offices are closed so this can be ascertained only on Monday. The blue ribbon committee has no pending matter un-acted upon as the primary committee, he clarified.
Nonetheless, he said in a radio interview that should Lacson introduce or re-file the resolution, he is open to the idea of reviving the probe. But he warned that the proceedings may only be redundant or an end up an exercise in futility considering that the Ombudsman had already conducted the same and even came out with a set of recommendations recently.
The matter is already in the hands of the government prosecutors. We should give ample respect to the other departments of the government. Otherwise, it would look as if we’re competing with them. Sen. Arroyo admitted, however, that if the Senate leadership would accede to the proposition of Lacson, the upper chamber cannot be prevented from issuing summons or to order the investigation of anyone. Presidential Legal Adviser Sergio Apostol used the same excuse made by Senator Arroyo, saying it makes no sense reopening the inquiry since the Senate had already started the probe.
They already conducted an inquiry before. They have the records until now so they can use it to file charges or have a proposed bill. There’s no need to reopen the case. Apostol said.
Apostol also accused Lacson of using the Impsa deal to advance his candidacy in the May polls.
Not surprisingly, administration congressmen defended the Arroyos in the Impsa bribe controversy. Lacson, according to Reps. Douglas Cagas (Davao del Sur) and Edwin Uy (Isabela) should stop being a fishwife and come out immediately with his evidence on the alleged involvement of the First Couple in the extortion case against Perez. Put up or shut up, they told Lacson. These are unsubstantiated charges similar to previous unproven charges against the Arroyos of which Ping has always been wont to do, Cagas said.
Uy, for his part, said Lacson has nothing to show and that he is now dragging the First Gentleman into the issue to divert public attention that he cannot show proof of what he is saying. Ping could not even say where the $14 million comes from. So for the sake of his reputation as a senator, I appeal to him to stop wasting his time on rumors, the congressman said.
Anakpawis Rep. Crispin Beltran, for his part, expressed belief that an agreement has been forged between Jimenez and Malaca, which sole intention is to unite against former President Joseph Estrada and undermine the opposition which still considers the former president as its head.
More bag of tricks from Glo EDITORIAL Daily Tribune 12/22/2006
As if it has never been caught with its hands in the cookie jar, Gloria's scheme and scam gang is again trying to slip in an obvious political racket for use in the coming national elections. The 2007 budget is again on the brink of a stalemate between Gloria and her stooges in Congress and the Senate over a P4.7- billion program to supposedly feed school children. Even at first glance, the program reeks of a scam. The Department of Agriculture (DA) is again figuring prominently in the Gloria scheme as a conduit for the importation of 1 million metric tons of rice for the school feeding program. Sen. Edgardo Angara, apparently giving the purpose of the program the benefit of the doubt, has questioned the need to import rice to feed school children. Rice importation has long been suspected as a huge source of illegal funds in this administration. Importation or outright smuggling of the grain has been associated with a person in Malaca who has a lot of weight to throw around. A grains depot in a supposed transhipment port in Quezon has been the center of the grains smuggling which is essentially done through the usual misdeclaration of imports, say 1 ton of grains is declared when the actual weight is about 3 tons of imports. The 1 million metric tons of imports for the program would make the country the biggest rice importer in Asia. Just this year, the country imported 1.5 million metric tons without the school feeding program. It is harder to envision the altruistic goal of the program than ascribing sinister motives behind it. With the Joc-Joc Bolante fertilizer scam, which has a similar dole-out character of an alibi as the feed the school children program, still being tucked, with a lot of effort, away under Gloria's skirt, the school feeding program would likely fall the same way. Malnutrition cannot be expected to be treated with the handing out of bags of rice as the shallow purpose of the program envisions. What would effectively be Gloria feeding the school children and their parents would obviously be the administration candidates that would expectedly be all over the rice packagings. Gloria's absence of credibility, as borne out by every independent survey done on her, reflects in everything that she does from the the Charter change (Cha-cha) campaign to the various photo opportunities that she pretends as her way of immersing with the people. But that is not the end of it, as there is now yet another scam in the making the school feeding program. It would not be a big surprise if the 2007 budget stalls as a result of an expected insistence by Malaca to have the program budgeted. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita may be right in saying the school feeding scheme would not be an election gimmick since it forms part of the yearly political stunts of Gloria anyway. With Cha-cha practically in the works again, expect more of the same sleight of hand that Gloria would undertake as she turns her attention to getting a winning ticket going in the 2007 elections, a hard task with the kind of credibility she has built up with the people over the years. She knows that not only would the 2007 elections serve as a referendum on her administration, but also that there is a more fearsome future for her should her congressman-allies, a sizable number of them, lose to opposition congressmen which would then lead to her facing an impeachment bid that may well end up in a conviction by Senate trial. By hook or by crook, Gloria apparently would be working to keep her allies in the majority in Congress and this means pouring in more of the stolen public funds into the candidacies of her administration bets. If she did this in 2004 for herself and her congressmen, when she still had the support of her elite civil society, to force her way into retaining power and position, she certainly will do so again, and more desperately, since her political survival hinges on the number of congressional allies to be voted in by the electorate. It would not be malnutrition that the Gloria scheme would be addressing but the flagging political health of her administration. Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
Ostracism as protest against GMA
March 27, 2006 at 8:01 am
Ostracism as protest
If you are a peace-loving citizen who believes in truth, honor, integrity and all the values we have been taught to cherish, how do you fight Gloria Arroyo, whose brazen abuse of power intensifies everyday?
At a forum organized by a group calling themselves “Concerned Citizens of the Philippines” at the Manila Polo Club last week, sociologist Randy David called on the people to tap our “moral capital” and campaign for a social boycott of Arroyo.
Disliked by 65 percent of the people (67 million Filipinos), Arroyo clings to power through coercion and remuneration.
In his Sunday column in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, David expounded on his idea of an Arroyo boycott: “There is no way we can fight the power of money except holding the face of truth to it and there is no way we can fight coercion except by acts of solidarity with its victims.”
He also said that we should not allow ourselves to be drawn “into a brawl” that her regime is methodically drawing us into.
David said we are citizens of a state. “But we are also, in our daily lives, members of our communities. Our children go to the same school, we often attend the same social functions, we shop in the same places. In short we share the same social spaces where respect is earned, and is not always automatically accorded the rich and the powerful.
“These spaces are regulated not by law alone but by norms of decency. These are the sources of our moral identities, far richer and older than the wellsprings of our common citizenship. It is from these that we ultimately draw confirmation for the correctness of our actions in everyday life.”
He further said, “We have not consciously mobilized the power inherent in these moral identities, whereas Ms. Arroyo has been brazen in the way she seeks to replenish her rapidly vanishing social and political capital.”
He cites Arroyo’s visits to a number of Catholic bishops and archbishops, obviously a propaganda ploy.
David suggests that “ordinary priests and nuns may call their bishops to account for their actions. The laity, who constitute the core of the church as a community, may whisper to their parish their misgivings.”
He said: “What may begin as misgivings could evolve into an explicit resolve to avoid contact with persons who actively work for or who callously profit from this immoral and repressive regime.”
“Such avoidance can ripen into open ostracism. This is the extreme form of assertion of the power of a moral community. Its effect is social isolation. It is the consumers boycott in the realm of social relations.”
There has been an incident of ostracism of Arroyo at the wake of her former best friend about two years ago.
The deceased was one of the very few friends that Arroyo had since their Assumption high school days. She was with Arroyo during her Senate days and was in Malacañang during the first six months of Arroyo’s unelected presidency.
After a bitter departure from Malacañang over an issue that involved Mike Arroyo, the lady was found to have cancer. A source who was close to the family said as the lady lay dying at the hospital, Arroyo sent word that she would like to visit her. She was asked if she had forgiven her powerful friend. She nodded. Asked if she would welcome her visit, she shook her head.
At her wake at the Santuario de San Antonio in Forbes Park, Arroyo sent word that she was going to visit and there was not much that the family could do.
When Arroyo entered the room, someone who was there described the scene as like “parting of the Red Sea.” All those who were seated near the aisle, moved out. When Arroyo took the seat on the left side, almost everybody went to the right side.
The source said, the hostility of the other guests towards Arroyo was so palpable she left immediately after the mass.
That experience must have been the reason why Arroyo did not dare foist her presence during the wake of a distinguished journalist and also of an incorruptible lady government official last year. Malacañang officials, who paid their last respects to both personalities, must have told her that her wreaths were relegated far away from the coffin, an eloquent statement how she was regarded in those circles.
David said: “We must begin to deploy in this struggle the moral resources that cannot be taken from us as communities.”
Yes. The housewife in Tondo who slammed her door on Arroyo’s face at the beginning of her stolen presidency did the right thing. Asked later why she did it, the housewife explained, “Ayaw ko sa kanya. Ninakaw na niya ang pagka-presidente. Pati ba naman ang dignidad ng pamamahay ko, nanakawin pa niya? (I don’t like her. She has stolen the presidency. And she still wants to rob me of the dignity of my household?)
Ostracizing her is not only a gesture of disgust over her lies, her thievery and her trampling of our basic rights. It’s sparing ourselves of her shameless presence.
Let’s do ourselves that favor
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
‘Not everyone who speaks against iniquitous arrangements with the United States is a leftist.’ Gonzales is off-tangent on Pozon There he goes again, shooting his mouth off, uttering uncalled for smart-alecky remarks unbecoming of a person in his position. I refer to our pathetic Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales who accused Judge Benjamin Pozon of "interpreting the provisions of the VFA in order to suit his agenda." He said Judge Pozon was "sympathetic to Nicole and leftist group." And who, may I ask, is the honorable(?) secretary sympathetic to? As a Filipino, and justice secretary at that, shouldn’t he be sympathetic to Nicole, the victim and not foreigner found guilty of raping her? Then Gonzales adds: "I think his (Pozon’s) agenda is to please the Left. Maybe he thinks that by doing so, he would be praised and would get the kudos and hosannas of certain sectors. He’s sympathetic to the victim. He’s sympathetic to those who support the victim, and who are those supporting the victim? I have news for Gonzales. The majority of the Filipinos are sympathetic to the victim, Nicole. Not everyone who speaks against iniquitous arrangements with the United States or any Western power is a leftist. Has it ever occurred to Gonzales and others like him that they could be patriotic Filipinos who love their own people and country above others? Even if they are leftists, at least they are Filipinos who most certainly love the Philippines more than the Americans or other foreigners do. What does that make of Gonzales and others like him in government and elsewhere, who would take the side of foreigners over their own countrymen? In certain situations, they would be called traitors. Please don’t talk to me about keeping our obligations under the VFA. Don’t make it sound as though the other party to the agreement always keeps its international commitments as it likes to claim. It does not when it goes against its nationals and national interests. In case people have forgotten, the United States is not exactly a model of a law-abiding member of the international community. The invasion of Iraq , for instance, is contrary to the United Nations Charter and international law. Also, I need not remind anyone that the US , notwithstanding the fact that virtually the entire international community has done so, refused to accede to the International Criminal Court established by the United Nations. The reason? It does not want any of its nationals committing criminal offenses abroad subjected to the jurisdiction of courts other than its own. The Americans are just being consistent in the case of Lance Corporal Smith. And I, for one, do not begrudge them for that. I understand fully their sentiments about the Nicole case. They are simply protecting the interests of one of their nationals. And they, being what they are, should be the first to understand if we were to do the same, as in the case of Nicole. What saddens me further about this whole sordid affair is the stance of the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is supposed to be the front liner in the defense of our nationals and sovereignty. No amount of legal mumbo-jumbo as expounded by the DFA in its submission to the Court of Appeals can ever detract from the fact that it should be defending Nicole and looking after her interest, not the convicted rapist, a foreigner. By the way, I have not heard or read any statement from our peripatetic Secretary of Foreign Affairs Alberto G. Romulo on the case. Has he, by any chance, been avoiding getting embroiled in the controversy that he has decided to throw to the wolves his beleaguered Undersecretary for Special Concerns Rafael E. Seguis instead? But I understand the DFA position. They have no choice but to follow orders from their boss in Malacañang. Unsolicited advice to the DFA, DOJ and the Garci-cum-military-installed squatter in Malacañang: Do not be cowed by the US Embassy statement that "continued US-Philippines military cooperation relies upon adherence to the VFA." Discard any notion that the Americans are doing what they are doing for altruistic reasons. Not by a long shot. They are doing it because it serves their national interest to help us in the common fight against terror. We are only incidental to the pursuit of their principal agenda which is to keep the terrorists away from their shores. They won’t care a bit how many of our people are slain by terrorists, just as they don’t care how many innocent Iraqi civilians are killed everyday. And please, Mr. Gonzales, don’t ever say that Pozon’s ruling had already "ruffled" RP-US relations. You make it sound as though we are to blame. If the relations have indeed been ruffled, it is simply because we are merely trying to protect our own interests – just as the Americans would if they were in our position. I am not a communist, a Leftist or anti-American. I am pro-Filipino. And if there are idiots out there who equate being pro-Filipino with being a communist, a Leftist or anti-American, I suggest they should have their heads examined. Malaya Newspaper by ReyO. Arcilla 12/21/06
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
Ostracism as protest
If you are a peace-loving citizen who believes in truth, honor, integrity and all the values we have been taught to cherish, how do you fight Gloria Arroyo, whose brazen abuse of power intensifies everyday?
At a forum organized by a group calling themselves “Concerned Citizens of the Philippines” at the Manila Polo Club last week, sociologist Randy David called on the people to tap our “moral capital” and campaign for a social boycott of Arroyo.
Disliked by 65 percent of the people (67 million Filipinos), Arroyo clings to power through coercion and remuneration.
In his Sunday column in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, David expounded on his idea of an Arroyo boycott: “There is no way we can fight the power of money except holding the face of truth to it and there is no way we can fight coercion except by acts of solidarity with its victims.”
He also said that we should not allow ourselves to be drawn “into a brawl” that her regime is methodically drawing us into.
David said we are citizens of a state. “But we are also, in our daily lives, members of our communities. Our children go to the same school, we often attend the same social functions, we shop in the same places. In short we share the same social spaces where respect is earned, and is not always automatically accorded the rich and the powerful.
“These spaces are regulated not by law alone but by norms of decency. These are the sources of our moral identities, far richer and older than the wellsprings of our common citizenship. It is from these that we ultimately draw confirmation for the correctness of our actions in everyday life.”
He further said, “We have not consciously mobilized the power inherent in these moral identities, whereas Ms. Arroyo has been brazen in the way she seeks to replenish her rapidly vanishing social and political capital.”
He cites Arroyo’s visits to a number of Catholic bishops and archbishops, obviously a propaganda ploy.
David suggests that “ordinary priests and nuns may call their bishops to account for their actions. The laity, who constitute the core of the church as a community, may whisper to their parish their misgivings.”
He said: “What may begin as misgivings could evolve into an explicit resolve to avoid contact with persons who actively work for or who callously profit from this immoral and repressive regime.”
“Such avoidance can ripen into open ostracism. This is the extreme form of assertion of the power of a moral community. Its effect is social isolation. It is the consumers boycott in the realm of social relations.”
There has been an incident of ostracism of Arroyo at the wake of her former best friend about two years ago.
The deceased was one of the very few friends that Arroyo had since their Assumption high school days. She was with Arroyo during her Senate days and was in Malacañang during the first six months of Arroyo’s unelected presidency.
After a bitter departure from Malacañang over an issue that involved Mike Arroyo, the lady was found to have cancer. A source who was close to the family said as the lady lay dying at the hospital, Arroyo sent word that she would like to visit her. She was asked if she had forgiven her powerful friend. She nodded. Asked if she would welcome her visit, she shook her head.
At her wake at the Santuario de San Antonio in Forbes Park, Arroyo sent word that she was going to visit and there was not much that the family could do.
When Arroyo entered the room, someone who was there described the scene as like “parting of the Red Sea.” All those who were seated near the aisle, moved out. When Arroyo took the seat on the left side, almost everybody went to the right side.
The source said, the hostility of the other guests towards Arroyo was so palpable she left immediately after the mass.
That experience must have been the reason why Arroyo did not dare foist her presence during the wake of a distinguished journalist and also of an incorruptible lady government official last year. Malacañang officials, who paid their last respects to both personalities, must have told her that her wreaths were relegated far away from the coffin, an eloquent statement how she was regarded in those circles.
David said: “We must begin to deploy in this struggle the moral resources that cannot be taken from us as communities.”
Yes. The housewife in Tondo who slammed her door on Arroyo’s face at the beginning of her stolen presidency did the right thing. Asked later why she did it, the housewife explained, “Ayaw ko sa kanya. Ninakaw na niya ang pagka-presidente. Pati ba naman ang dignidad ng pamamahay ko, nanakawin pa niya? (I don’t like her. She has stolen the presidency. And she still wants to rob me of the dignity of my household?)
Ostracizing her is not only a gesture of disgust over her lies, her thievery and her trampling of our basic rights. It’s sparing ourselves of her shameless presence.
Let’s do ourselves that favor
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
‘Not everyone who speaks against iniquitous arrangements with the United States is a leftist.’ Gonzales is off-tangent on Pozon There he goes again, shooting his mouth off, uttering uncalled for smart-alecky remarks unbecoming of a person in his position. I refer to our pathetic Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales who accused Judge Benjamin Pozon of "interpreting the provisions of the VFA in order to suit his agenda." He said Judge Pozon was "sympathetic to Nicole and leftist group." And who, may I ask, is the honorable(?) secretary sympathetic to? As a Filipino, and justice secretary at that, shouldn’t he be sympathetic to Nicole, the victim and not foreigner found guilty of raping her? Then Gonzales adds: "I think his (Pozon’s) agenda is to please the Left. Maybe he thinks that by doing so, he would be praised and would get the kudos and hosannas of certain sectors. He’s sympathetic to the victim. He’s sympathetic to those who support the victim, and who are those supporting the victim? I have news for Gonzales. The majority of the Filipinos are sympathetic to the victim, Nicole. Not everyone who speaks against iniquitous arrangements with the United States or any Western power is a leftist. Has it ever occurred to Gonzales and others like him that they could be patriotic Filipinos who love their own people and country above others? Even if they are leftists, at least they are Filipinos who most certainly love the Philippines more than the Americans or other foreigners do. What does that make of Gonzales and others like him in government and elsewhere, who would take the side of foreigners over their own countrymen? In certain situations, they would be called traitors. Please don’t talk to me about keeping our obligations under the VFA. Don’t make it sound as though the other party to the agreement always keeps its international commitments as it likes to claim. It does not when it goes against its nationals and national interests. In case people have forgotten, the United States is not exactly a model of a law-abiding member of the international community. The invasion of Iraq , for instance, is contrary to the United Nations Charter and international law. Also, I need not remind anyone that the US , notwithstanding the fact that virtually the entire international community has done so, refused to accede to the International Criminal Court established by the United Nations. The reason? It does not want any of its nationals committing criminal offenses abroad subjected to the jurisdiction of courts other than its own. The Americans are just being consistent in the case of Lance Corporal Smith. And I, for one, do not begrudge them for that. I understand fully their sentiments about the Nicole case. They are simply protecting the interests of one of their nationals. And they, being what they are, should be the first to understand if we were to do the same, as in the case of Nicole. What saddens me further about this whole sordid affair is the stance of the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is supposed to be the front liner in the defense of our nationals and sovereignty. No amount of legal mumbo-jumbo as expounded by the DFA in its submission to the Court of Appeals can ever detract from the fact that it should be defending Nicole and looking after her interest, not the convicted rapist, a foreigner. By the way, I have not heard or read any statement from our peripatetic Secretary of Foreign Affairs Alberto G. Romulo on the case. Has he, by any chance, been avoiding getting embroiled in the controversy that he has decided to throw to the wolves his beleaguered Undersecretary for Special Concerns Rafael E. Seguis instead? But I understand the DFA position. They have no choice but to follow orders from their boss in Malacañang. Unsolicited advice to the DFA, DOJ and the Garci-cum-military-installed squatter in Malacañang: Do not be cowed by the US Embassy statement that "continued US-Philippines military cooperation relies upon adherence to the VFA." Discard any notion that the Americans are doing what they are doing for altruistic reasons. Not by a long shot. They are doing it because it serves their national interest to help us in the common fight against terror. We are only incidental to the pursuit of their principal agenda which is to keep the terrorists away from their shores. They won’t care a bit how many of our people are slain by terrorists, just as they don’t care how many innocent Iraqi civilians are killed everyday. And please, Mr. Gonzales, don’t ever say that Pozon’s ruling had already "ruffled" RP-US relations. You make it sound as though we are to blame. If the relations have indeed been ruffled, it is simply because we are merely trying to protect our own interests – just as the Americans would if they were in our position. I am not a communist, a Leftist or anti-American. I am pro-Filipino. And if there are idiots out there who equate being pro-Filipino with being a communist, a Leftist or anti-American, I suggest they should have their heads examined. Malaya Newspaper by ReyO. Arcilla 12/21/06
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
The people have spoken
‘At the Rizal Park, they – Catholic prelates, evangelists, representatives of all sectors of society, from the rich to the poorest – raised their collective voice against insidious attempts to rape our democratic Constitution.’ The people have spoken! THE VOICE of the people, so goes the beautiful and universal maxim, is the voice of God. Those now illegitimately wielding power should heed this message from heaven. The people don’t want Gloria Arroyo and her political minions, particularly Speaker Joe de Venecia and his houseful of lawbreakers, to change the Constitution. Last Sunday, we all saw the people, representing all sectors of society, Catholic Church prelates, evangelists of various denominations, priests and preachers, nuns, politicians, senators, congressmen and other opposition figures, businessmen, students and gurus from academe, and the long-suffering masses, gathered in a massive show of genuine people power, "...at the Luneta Grandstand, within sight of Jose Rizal’s monument." Oh yes, former members of Gloria’s Cabinet, belonging to the "Hyatt 10" group that resigned in disgust from their posts at the height of the scandalous cheating and manipulation of the 2004 presidential elections, were conspicuously present there. Their "Watch and Pray" was replicated in other key cities all over the nation, from Makati, Baguio, Dagupan, Cebu, Iloilo, Bacolod, Zamboanga, Cagayan de Oro, to Davao. All of them, like those at the Rizal Park in Manila, voiced their opposition to the insidious attempts to tamper and flout the sacred Charter, at this time, by the likes of Gloria and Joe de V and their callous sycophants and mouthpieces. The people, indeed, have shown by their united action that they are absolutely fed up with the rigging of elections, the raiding of the national treasury, the phony wars against official corruption, poverty and environmental desecration, the sterilized speechifying, the insipid photo-ops and the idiotic propaganda, which marked these past five years of Gloria’s illegitimate presidency. The Catholic Church prelates who presided at the prayer rally may not have polemicked like politicians, but their rapier-like words truly cut the issues to the bones. Much more needed than charter change, they intoned, is character change. They were referring to those who have been using dirty tricks to perpetuate themselves in power. And, they added, succinctly, "if those rushing charter change are really sincere about reforms. Then let them first reform the electoral system and restore its trustworthiness, starting with a thorough revamp of the Commission on Elections (Comelec). Make the 2007 elections truly credible." All this indicated that the religious leaders have been watching closely how Gloria and her political strategists had manipulated the Comelec and engineered the conduct of the last presidential elections to insure, unlawfully, the victory of Gloria in 2004. The words of the bishops, as surely shared by the religious heads of other Christian followers, are deadlier than all the chants of the populace calling for Gloria to step down from power, the red banners of street demonstrations, and the persistent denunciations by the political opposition, the rights and the leftist, and perhaps even the incisive views of political pundits and analysts. The men of God were telling Gloria and the other powers-that-be the inconvenient truth about their transgressions, scandalous misdeeds and misgovernance. What indeed is the truth so inconvenient to Gloria and company? It is the truth that they have all been scheming to change the Constitution through foul, illegal, means all these many months. They first started with the hoax of a so-called "People’s Initiative." This was thrashed by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional – twice! Failing in this, they next changed the rules of the House of Representatives and railroaded the approval of the so-called "Constituted Assembly," sans Senate concurrence. But with the public tremendous uproar over their nocturnal action, they were compelled to bury the unwanted "Con-ass." And now they are toying around with the idea of calling for a Constitutional Convention. But this, too, is meeting public disapproval as premature, not the right time and not the right persons to introduce changes in the Charter or draft an entirely new one. The people are still wary. They did pray for unity at the Rizal Park, but they also said they are ever watchful for any monkey business to rape the Constitution. No, they won’t sell their votes, anymore. No, they won’t sell their freedom, not for the cheap political appeals of Gloria and Joe de Venecia and their conspirators. No, no, no, not anymore! Now, more than ever, the Filipino people are watchful, ever ready to stop those who are power mad, power hungry, from perpetuating themselves in office, and destroying democracy in our country! Diplomatic black eye. Do you remember the cancellation of the ASEAN Summit in Cebu City by Gloria Arroyo? Her propagandists claimed it had to be put off for next month because of impending bad weather. It turned out it was not just the coming storm (it spared the summit site) or the terrorist threat (as reported by Australia and Britain), but because of the political weather in Manila. And not jus the Moro Islamic secessionists in Mindanao, but by the heightened political situation over Gloria’s plan to push through radical charter change (this has been aborted already). Well, the repercussions of that cancellation are hitting Gloria right smack in her face, a kind of diplomatic black eye. According to The Nation, an influential Bangkok national newspaper, it "looks bad" for Asean. In its editorial, the Thai paper stated that it caused "considerable damage" to the regional grouping’s image, and that it "reflected poorly on the leadership of the Philippines. "Gone are the days when the organization was steered by Indonesia’s Suharto, Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew and Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamad. They were called dictators, but they did lead ASEAN and made it a real entity in world affairs." And who’s to blame for this fiasco? Gloria’s foreign affairs people have to do a lot of explaining to her for the diplomatic faux pas, not to mention those who bungled the handling of the whole sordid affair. Maylaya Newspaper by Nester Mata 12/21/06
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
2006 Arroyo worst year v human rights
2006 worst year for RP human rights - Tribune 12/30/2006
Another record-high has been notched by President Arroyo and her administration, in line with political murders in the Philippines reaching their highest level in 2006 since the toppling of former President Ferdinand Marcos in 1986, human activists were quoted by Agence France Presse as saying.
Mrs. Arroyo's poor record on political murders and human rights abuses have topped the numbers racked up by Marcos, Aquino, Ramos and Estrada years combined.
More than 180 activists including journalists, human rights workers, left-wing politicians, trade unionists, judges and lawyers ? were assassinated this year for their criticism of those in power, they say.
An average of three extra-judicial killings are occurring every week in the country, a Canadian human rights team concluded recently after a fact-finding mission to the Southeast Asian nation.
A clear pattern of state-perpetrated politically motivated extra-judicial killings was occurring in the country, the team said.
The Canadian team's report has been dismissed by the Arroyo government as propaganda to serve the country's communist insurgents who have been fighting a Maoist war for four decades in their bid to seize power.
But local human rights group Karapatan says it has recorded 185 such killings in 2006, the highest number since the regime of Marcos, renowed for his suppression of critics and ousted in 1986.
The sheer number has alarmed the European Union, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Roman Catholic Church, all of which have called on Mrs. Arroyo to take action to stop the bloodshed.
Archbishop Antonio Ledesma, vice-president of the Catholic Bishops Conference in this largely Roman Catholic country, said action must be taken irrespective of who was behind them.
In the past, there were allegations of killings from the left and the right but regardless of which end of the political spectrum is responsible, public authorities should be even-handed in trying to resolve them, he told AFP.
Opposition congressman Roilo Golez warned the 'murderous year' was undermining democracy, in a nation with a history of coups and dictatorships.
The most high-profile murder came Dec. 16 when Rep. Luis Bersamin, an ally of the President representing the northern province of Abra, was shot dead along with his security aide outside a church in a Manila suburb after the completion of the wedding rites of a niece where he stood as a wedding sponsor.
Police say they have a witness who has linked Abra Gov. Vicente Valera to the killing. Valera has denied responsibility, saying he and Bersamin were longtime allies.
While the family of the slain Bersamin tags Valera as the mastermind of the murder of the congressman, along with a suspect who, in an affidavit, linked Valera to the murder, the Philippine National Police said the testimony was hearsay and that the police have no strong evidence to charge Valera at this time even as he remains a suspect.
Earlier senior government lawyer Nestor Ballacillo was shot dead along with his son also in a Manila suburb. Police said they had arrested a suspect.
In response to the bloodshed, Mrs. Arroyo has ordered an increase in the visibility of police and for officers to work closer with communities.
She has also set up a special commission to determine who are behind the slayings which has yet to report its findings.
The Melo Commission, a fact-finding body created by Mrs. Arroyo said it would be finished with its task by end December and submit its report to the President. But this early, several commissioners have said that the report would be based mainly on police and military accounts, which would then blame the leftists for these murders.
The Melo Commission, from the start, suffered credibility problems, as the body's composition has as majority members, officials from the Justice Department, who are known to kowtow to Mrs. Arroyo?s directives.
The President, despite many calls for her to order her police and military to stop the killings by foreign governments and international church leaders, along with international press groups, has not done so, preferring instead to direct her attacks at the leftists groups and her other critics, saying it is the communists who have been behind all these political murders to destabilize her government.
Military and police officials have blamed at least some of the deaths on an internal purge or factional fighting within the 7,100-strong Communist Party?s New People's Army.
The military, whose officers have also been accused of some of the killings, claim the overall numbers are bloated.
For its part, the New People's Army has admitted carrying out purges in the past but has largely denied it is behind the latest spate of political murders.
Several international press organizations have also called on Mrs. Arroyo to put a stop to the killings, but these calls have largely been unheeded by Malaca. They also scored the Arroyo government for suppressing press freedom in the country through the filing of numerous libel suits by the presidential spouse, Jose Miguel 'Mike' Arroyo against several journalists, including publishers, editors, reporters and columnists deemed critical of the government and of his alleged power and influence over government affairs.
The Freedom House based in the US has also scored the Philippines under Mrs. Arroyo for the loss of press freedom, pulling the country?s ranking from an earlier 'free' to half-free state.
Last February, Mrs. Arroyo issued Proclamation 1017, imposing a country-wide national emergency rule, where rallies were banned and demonstrators quickly dispersed, with their leaders arrested without warrants.
A newspaper, the Daily Tribune, was raided at midnight by police operatives and illegally searched and seized several documents, without a warrant. The police padlocked the printing press and offices while surrounding the Tribune offices for days.
Then Police chief Gen. Arturo Lomibao announced in a televised press conference that he and his police force would be taking over the editorial aspect of the paper.
The Tribune, along with others went to the high court to question the constitutionality of the emergency rule. This proclamation was struck down by the high court.
During a visit to Finland where European leaders were gathered for a summit, Mrs. Arroyo was also scored by these leaders on the deteriorating human rights situation in the country. In reply, Mrs. Arroyo said she had formed the Melo Commission to look into these murders, but ended up blaming the leftists and the communists, as her police and military do.
But blaming the communists and establishing a commission have failed to ease fears among many Filipinos about their own safety. With AFP
collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
Bishop calls for all out protest
Bishop calls for all-out protest rally Daily Tribune 12/21/06 BY GERARD ANTHONY NAVAL Amid efforts by the administration to revive moves to amend the Constitution, Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz yesterday called for an all-out protest rally instead of a prayer rally by anti-Charter change forces. Cruz, former president of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, said the mass action should be unrestrained in allowing expressions of outrage against the administration, unlike the CBCP-initiated gathering last Sunday which was purely a prayer gathering, "If you ask me, let’s hold another rally but this time let’s drop the tag of a ‘prayer rally’ and call it an all-out protest rally," Cruz said in a radio interview. "Everyone against Cha-cha would befree to come, free to bring their banners, and free to air their grievances. No more restrictions. There were too many of those in last Sunday’s rally". The Sunday rally at the Quirino Grandstand barred political speeches and streamers. Only those who were part of the celebration of Mass were allowed to go up the stage. The CBCP-led rally was originally called to protest moves by allies of President Arroyo at the House to railroad amendments to the Constitution. It was converted into a prayer rally after House leaders dropped the Constituent Assembly mode of amending the Charter. The House move was followed by Arroyo’s statement that it might not be the time to amend the Charter. A day after the prayer rally that failed to gather the expected 500,000 participants, Palace officials said Arroyo has not dropped Cha-cha. On Tuesday, Arroyo said her administration will continue pursuing political reforms through Cha-cha to ensure a better future for the country. She said Charter change is a reality that the country, including its leaders, must face and accept. Cruz, in a statement, said: "True to its well-established unpredictable mentation if not downright deceitful disposition, the present national leadership is once again avidly pursuing Charter change after having decidedly shelved it but some days ago." Cruz said the government’s turnaround is a rallying point to protest the deceit and obsession of Arroyo and her allies. "Now it is clear what this administration wants. It wants a shift to a parliamentary system to prevent impeachment and to extend terms of elected officials. Now that the administration has made clear its interests, the people will likely seethe and protest vigorously," he said.
DANGEROUS LEADERSHIP Cruz said he is planning to bring the idea of a protest rally to Church officials, to include opposition to a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) under the Arroyo administration. The CBCP stand is that if ever there is a need to amend the Charter, its should be through a Con-Con. "A Constitutional Convention under this administration is dangerous. This administration has shown it is willing to interfere in all stages of a Con-Con, from the election of delegates to the plebiscite. It is hell-bent on pushing its interest. This is a very dangerous leadership," Cruz said. He said there is a "big danger" if the administration is allowed to "satisfy its obsession" to change the Constitution during its tenure. "Changing the fundamental law of the land is not the problem. The problem is the holder of the highest office in the land, fixated with making the change," he said.
OBVIOUS REASONS Cruz said if a Con-Con is convened during the Arroyo leadership, it is almost certain that that government will intervene in the process to protect its "super egoistic interests" through "the power it flaunts, the public wealth at its devious disposal and the insidious influence it wields." "It can be readily predicted that among other constitutional changes, the ruling national leadership will resolutely and strongly push for the adoption of a parliamentary form of government. The reason is obvious: First, it would do away with even pending impeachment case. Second, it would be able to extend its rule one way or another. Third, it would manage to hold on to immunity from suits as long as legally possible. How neat!" CONFUSING MESSAGES Senate minority leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. said the change in Arroyo’s Cha-cha tone "betrays her unworthiness and her determination to pursue Charter change by hook or by crook as her ultimate political survival strategy." "It is precisely these forked-tongue messages that confuse the people and lead to the further erosion of what is left of the government’s credibility," he added. Pimentel said Arroyo’s flip-flopping only confirms the opposition’s suspicion she was deceiving the people when she declared a few days ago that the move to change the system of government was dead. Pimentel said the administration’s Cha-cha game plan was further made evident by Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita’s pronouncement that the campaign to amend the Constitution is likely to resume after the Christmas season. "As the alter ego of the President, Secretary Ermita who has been known for prudence should be the last to roil the political waters even before the dust of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines-led prayer rally has yet to settle in the Luneta Park," he said. Senate President Manuel Villar said Arroyo’s renewed call for Cha-cha was only meant to "appease" advocates of constitutional amendments. Villar said: "Alam ng Pangulo ang galit ng bayan dito sa Cha-cha at hindi ako naniniwala na babalewalain ng Pangulo ‘yan… Maaaring iyan ay sinasabi na lamang para mabuhayan ng loob ‘yung mga natitira pang suporta ng Cha-cha." "The people do not want Charter change now. They want the elections in 2007 to push through," he said.
WHAT’S THE RUSH? Sen. Richard Gordon, chairman of the Senate constitutional amendments committee, said he could not understand why President Arroyo insists on having the Charter revised now when this could wait until after the 2007 elections. "What’s the rush? There’s no rush in changing the Charter. That can wait until after the next elections. She should focus now on helping in the rehabilitation of the Bicol area and other provinces affected by the series of super typhoons that hit our country," he said. He said the "urong-sulong" attitude of the President is creating the wrong impression that she is "fooling the people, believing that she could play games with the public in exchange for her political reforms." The United Opposition called Arroyo an inveterate liar. "The statement of Mrs. Arroyo regarding Charter change reminds all of us that this administration cannot be really trusted to keep its words," said UNO chairman and Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay. Binay said Arroyo might have felt emboldened by the turnout at Sunday’s prayer rally but "it would be a great mistake if they think only in terms of quantity." Binay said the right way of gauging the rally is the participation of leading personalities across a broad spectrum, ranging from militant groups, opposition politicians, the middle class and civil society. Binay said Arroyo’s "flip-flopping" could push the country to the brink of a major political crisis. He said her allies could again start gathering signatures for People’s Initiative to amend the Charter after Christmas despite its rejection by the Supreme Court. He said the political uncertainty generated by the President’s statement could bring the people back to the streets. He said reviving last year’s mass action is one option being considered by the opposition to dramatize their protest against efforts to revive Charter change. – With JP Lopez and Ashzel Hachero
Email: collater.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
DANGEROUS LEADERSHIP Cruz said he is planning to bring the idea of a protest rally to Church officials, to include opposition to a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) under the Arroyo administration. The CBCP stand is that if ever there is a need to amend the Charter, its should be through a Con-Con. "A Constitutional Convention under this administration is dangerous. This administration has shown it is willing to interfere in all stages of a Con-Con, from the election of delegates to the plebiscite. It is hell-bent on pushing its interest. This is a very dangerous leadership," Cruz said. He said there is a "big danger" if the administration is allowed to "satisfy its obsession" to change the Constitution during its tenure. "Changing the fundamental law of the land is not the problem. The problem is the holder of the highest office in the land, fixated with making the change," he said.
OBVIOUS REASONS Cruz said if a Con-Con is convened during the Arroyo leadership, it is almost certain that that government will intervene in the process to protect its "super egoistic interests" through "the power it flaunts, the public wealth at its devious disposal and the insidious influence it wields." "It can be readily predicted that among other constitutional changes, the ruling national leadership will resolutely and strongly push for the adoption of a parliamentary form of government. The reason is obvious: First, it would do away with even pending impeachment case. Second, it would be able to extend its rule one way or another. Third, it would manage to hold on to immunity from suits as long as legally possible. How neat!" CONFUSING MESSAGES Senate minority leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. said the change in Arroyo’s Cha-cha tone "betrays her unworthiness and her determination to pursue Charter change by hook or by crook as her ultimate political survival strategy." "It is precisely these forked-tongue messages that confuse the people and lead to the further erosion of what is left of the government’s credibility," he added. Pimentel said Arroyo’s flip-flopping only confirms the opposition’s suspicion she was deceiving the people when she declared a few days ago that the move to change the system of government was dead. Pimentel said the administration’s Cha-cha game plan was further made evident by Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita’s pronouncement that the campaign to amend the Constitution is likely to resume after the Christmas season. "As the alter ego of the President, Secretary Ermita who has been known for prudence should be the last to roil the political waters even before the dust of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines-led prayer rally has yet to settle in the Luneta Park," he said. Senate President Manuel Villar said Arroyo’s renewed call for Cha-cha was only meant to "appease" advocates of constitutional amendments. Villar said: "Alam ng Pangulo ang galit ng bayan dito sa Cha-cha at hindi ako naniniwala na babalewalain ng Pangulo ‘yan… Maaaring iyan ay sinasabi na lamang para mabuhayan ng loob ‘yung mga natitira pang suporta ng Cha-cha." "The people do not want Charter change now. They want the elections in 2007 to push through," he said.
WHAT’S THE RUSH? Sen. Richard Gordon, chairman of the Senate constitutional amendments committee, said he could not understand why President Arroyo insists on having the Charter revised now when this could wait until after the 2007 elections. "What’s the rush? There’s no rush in changing the Charter. That can wait until after the next elections. She should focus now on helping in the rehabilitation of the Bicol area and other provinces affected by the series of super typhoons that hit our country," he said. He said the "urong-sulong" attitude of the President is creating the wrong impression that she is "fooling the people, believing that she could play games with the public in exchange for her political reforms." The United Opposition called Arroyo an inveterate liar. "The statement of Mrs. Arroyo regarding Charter change reminds all of us that this administration cannot be really trusted to keep its words," said UNO chairman and Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay. Binay said Arroyo might have felt emboldened by the turnout at Sunday’s prayer rally but "it would be a great mistake if they think only in terms of quantity." Binay said the right way of gauging the rally is the participation of leading personalities across a broad spectrum, ranging from militant groups, opposition politicians, the middle class and civil society. Binay said Arroyo’s "flip-flopping" could push the country to the brink of a major political crisis. He said her allies could again start gathering signatures for People’s Initiative to amend the Charter after Christmas despite its rejection by the Supreme Court. He said the political uncertainty generated by the President’s statement could bring the people back to the streets. He said reviving last year’s mass action is one option being considered by the opposition to dramatize their protest against efforts to revive Charter change. – With JP Lopez and Ashzel Hachero
Email: collater.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
American rapes filipina then rapes Philippine Constitution - where's US democracy, dead!
Daily Tribune By Michaela P. del Callar and Sherwin C. Olaes 12/31/2006
Lawsuits are reportedly being readied by several groups against Palace officials, as well as the top executive, following President Arroyo’s ‘rape of the Constitution’ with her order to the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) to free convicted American rapist, Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith, while handing him over to the American Embassy officials who now have Smith in their custody. But a DILG official, Undersecretary Marius Corpus, yesterday insinuated that the Philippine Constitution is inferior to the President’s executive action of freeing the American rapist and handing him over to the US authorities, saying in a Q-TV interview yesterday this (the release of Smith) is a government to government transaction (done) in the course of foreign relations. The Philippines is a member of the community of nations. In international law where the Philippines signed a treaty, we cannot invoke the Constitution. This is a purely executive action. Malaca also yesterday defended the government’s action to spirit Smith away and in the dead of the night. Presidential legal counsel, Sergio Apostol said the Palace did not violate the law nor ignored the court since it used, as basis for Malaca’s decision to free Smith, the ruling of Makati City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge Benjamin Pozon, which states that Smith would be ‘temporarily detained’ at the Makati City jail until an agreement between the Philippines and the US shall have been finalized, on how the Smith case would be handled. Since there is already an agreement settled between Department of Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo and US Ambassador Kristie Kenney, there is now a basis for the transfer of custody, Apostol said, adding that they have acted in accordance with the law. We have not violated anything.
Defending the unusual time of Smith’s release from the Makati City Jail, Apostol stressed that not even the hour of Smith’s transfer should be questioned by anyone because it is within the prerogative of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology. Besides, he said the US Marine convicted of rape had already spent sufficient time in the city jail. A senior Foreign Affairs official yesterday confirmed it was the DILG that authorized the release of the convicted American rapist, but admitted that the release of Smith was in clear violation of the law. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said a DILG legal opinion, which was handed to the US Embassy in Manila last night, was the basis for Smith’s transfer to the US Embassy in Manila late Friday. It contains the same opinion submitted by the Solicitor General which was junked by the Court of Appeals last week, the official said. The official said the document states that custody should be immediately transferred to the US Embassy in Manila. After the transfer, the official said, US military authorities will take charge of the upkeep of Smith while Philippine authorities the police and jail officials are given access to Smith at the US Embassy to make sure that he is still in the country while in detention. But the official said the transfer of Smith was a [violation’ of Philippine laws. It preempted a motion filed by the Solicitor General which has not yet been acted upon by the Court of Appeals. They acted subjudice, the official said. US Embassy spokesman Matthew Lussenhop said Smith, who was convicted of rape, was brought to the embassy at around 11 p.m. and is being held at the same facility where he and his three other co-accused US servicemen stayed for the duration of the trial.
Lussenhop admitted there was no court order but maintained the transfer was ‘legal’ as it was in compliance with the terms of the Philippines-US Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA). I can confirm that Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith has been transferred from the Makati City Jail back to US military custody which is consistent with the terms of the VFA as an international agreement that’s binding on both the US and the Philippines, Lussenhop said. The embassy official declined to disclose the government institution that authorized Smith’s release from the Makati City Jail where he has been detained immediately after his conviction early this month. There was an order but I couldn?t comment further. I can’t go into details and which specific government institution, Lussenhop said.
Echoing the statement of the US Embassy, the DFA said the transfer of Smith is in compliance with the Philippine treaty obligations.It does not diminish the gravity of his crime for which he has been convicted under our laws, the DFA said in a statement. US officials gave assurances that Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith would not leave the country at any time pending his appeal. The RP-US VFA is a treaty concurred in by the Senate and has the force and effect of law, it added. But the DFA official said the VFA does not bind the court. The source said the turnover of Smith to US custody is ‘illegal.’ Following separation of powers, only the court has full authority (to release him to US custody). It is clear there is subservience to foreign wilh which is derogatory to Philippine sovereignty and highly embarrassing, the official said.
It is the Supreme Court which is the final arbiter since the case is already in court. The court can demand the return (of Smith) but the reality is, if refused, this can only resort in (the court) citing whoever gave order in contempt and, of course, the President as ultimately responsible, is ground for impeachment, the official added. Zosimo Paredes, Executive Director of the Presidential Commission on the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFACOM), said the transfer was ‘irregular.’ Paredes said his office, which supervises all joint military activities with US troops and monitors their movement under the VFA, was not informed of Smith’s release.
The release of Smith is irregular he said. Only the court can effect his release. Smith is detained because of Judge Pozon’s ruling. Not even the CA can order the Makati City Jail to release him. What the CA can do is to order Pozon to reverse his decision. Even if the motion was filed in the CA, there should be a formal ruling. Lussenhop, meanwhile, denied that Washington resorted to ‘arm-twisting’ to pressure the government to transfer the custody of the 21-year-old Marine to the embassy. I’d reject that. The Philippines always maintains the same interpretation that custody belongs to the embassy, he said. I don’t see that (US intervention). I see the whole issue living up to the bilateral agreement, Lussenhop added. But an unimpeachable Palace source told the Tribune yesterday that the US government put the squeeze on Malaca to free Smith. When the Americans squeeze (Mrs. Arroyo), you sit up, listen and do as asked the source said. Both the US and Philippine governments share the same view that custody of the American soldier should be with the US Embassy as stipulated in the VFA.
The US government has cancelled all joint military exercises with the Philippines after the court refused twice to turn Smith over to US custody. Such move would cost the Philippines millions worth of military aid, including counter-terrorism funding. On Dec. 19, the same day the CA junked a motion for a temporary restraining order on Pozon’s ruling, the Philippines and the US signed another joint agreement reiterating both countries position that custody of Smith belongs to the US government. DFA Secretary Alberto Romulo and US Ambassador to Manila Kenney signed the agreement, the third to be signed by the two countries. The first two agreements signed by Chief State Prosecutor Jovencito Zund Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez with the US envoy were questioned by the Makati City Regional Trial Court presiding Judge. On Dec. 20, the DFA filed a petition before the CA asking for immediate transfer of Smith to the US Embassy in Manila. Attached in the petition was the signed agreement between Romulo and Kenney.
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
Lawsuits are reportedly being readied by several groups against Palace officials, as well as the top executive, following President Arroyo’s ‘rape of the Constitution’ with her order to the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) to free convicted American rapist, Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith, while handing him over to the American Embassy officials who now have Smith in their custody. But a DILG official, Undersecretary Marius Corpus, yesterday insinuated that the Philippine Constitution is inferior to the President’s executive action of freeing the American rapist and handing him over to the US authorities, saying in a Q-TV interview yesterday this (the release of Smith) is a government to government transaction (done) in the course of foreign relations. The Philippines is a member of the community of nations. In international law where the Philippines signed a treaty, we cannot invoke the Constitution. This is a purely executive action. Malaca also yesterday defended the government’s action to spirit Smith away and in the dead of the night. Presidential legal counsel, Sergio Apostol said the Palace did not violate the law nor ignored the court since it used, as basis for Malaca’s decision to free Smith, the ruling of Makati City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge Benjamin Pozon, which states that Smith would be ‘temporarily detained’ at the Makati City jail until an agreement between the Philippines and the US shall have been finalized, on how the Smith case would be handled. Since there is already an agreement settled between Department of Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo and US Ambassador Kristie Kenney, there is now a basis for the transfer of custody, Apostol said, adding that they have acted in accordance with the law. We have not violated anything.
Defending the unusual time of Smith’s release from the Makati City Jail, Apostol stressed that not even the hour of Smith’s transfer should be questioned by anyone because it is within the prerogative of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology. Besides, he said the US Marine convicted of rape had already spent sufficient time in the city jail. A senior Foreign Affairs official yesterday confirmed it was the DILG that authorized the release of the convicted American rapist, but admitted that the release of Smith was in clear violation of the law. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said a DILG legal opinion, which was handed to the US Embassy in Manila last night, was the basis for Smith’s transfer to the US Embassy in Manila late Friday. It contains the same opinion submitted by the Solicitor General which was junked by the Court of Appeals last week, the official said. The official said the document states that custody should be immediately transferred to the US Embassy in Manila. After the transfer, the official said, US military authorities will take charge of the upkeep of Smith while Philippine authorities the police and jail officials are given access to Smith at the US Embassy to make sure that he is still in the country while in detention. But the official said the transfer of Smith was a [violation’ of Philippine laws. It preempted a motion filed by the Solicitor General which has not yet been acted upon by the Court of Appeals. They acted subjudice, the official said. US Embassy spokesman Matthew Lussenhop said Smith, who was convicted of rape, was brought to the embassy at around 11 p.m. and is being held at the same facility where he and his three other co-accused US servicemen stayed for the duration of the trial.
Lussenhop admitted there was no court order but maintained the transfer was ‘legal’ as it was in compliance with the terms of the Philippines-US Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA). I can confirm that Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith has been transferred from the Makati City Jail back to US military custody which is consistent with the terms of the VFA as an international agreement that’s binding on both the US and the Philippines, Lussenhop said. The embassy official declined to disclose the government institution that authorized Smith’s release from the Makati City Jail where he has been detained immediately after his conviction early this month. There was an order but I couldn?t comment further. I can’t go into details and which specific government institution, Lussenhop said.
Echoing the statement of the US Embassy, the DFA said the transfer of Smith is in compliance with the Philippine treaty obligations.It does not diminish the gravity of his crime for which he has been convicted under our laws, the DFA said in a statement. US officials gave assurances that Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith would not leave the country at any time pending his appeal. The RP-US VFA is a treaty concurred in by the Senate and has the force and effect of law, it added. But the DFA official said the VFA does not bind the court. The source said the turnover of Smith to US custody is ‘illegal.’ Following separation of powers, only the court has full authority (to release him to US custody). It is clear there is subservience to foreign wilh which is derogatory to Philippine sovereignty and highly embarrassing, the official said.
It is the Supreme Court which is the final arbiter since the case is already in court. The court can demand the return (of Smith) but the reality is, if refused, this can only resort in (the court) citing whoever gave order in contempt and, of course, the President as ultimately responsible, is ground for impeachment, the official added. Zosimo Paredes, Executive Director of the Presidential Commission on the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFACOM), said the transfer was ‘irregular.’ Paredes said his office, which supervises all joint military activities with US troops and monitors their movement under the VFA, was not informed of Smith’s release.
The release of Smith is irregular he said. Only the court can effect his release. Smith is detained because of Judge Pozon’s ruling. Not even the CA can order the Makati City Jail to release him. What the CA can do is to order Pozon to reverse his decision. Even if the motion was filed in the CA, there should be a formal ruling. Lussenhop, meanwhile, denied that Washington resorted to ‘arm-twisting’ to pressure the government to transfer the custody of the 21-year-old Marine to the embassy. I’d reject that. The Philippines always maintains the same interpretation that custody belongs to the embassy, he said. I don’t see that (US intervention). I see the whole issue living up to the bilateral agreement, Lussenhop added. But an unimpeachable Palace source told the Tribune yesterday that the US government put the squeeze on Malaca to free Smith. When the Americans squeeze (Mrs. Arroyo), you sit up, listen and do as asked the source said. Both the US and Philippine governments share the same view that custody of the American soldier should be with the US Embassy as stipulated in the VFA.
The US government has cancelled all joint military exercises with the Philippines after the court refused twice to turn Smith over to US custody. Such move would cost the Philippines millions worth of military aid, including counter-terrorism funding. On Dec. 19, the same day the CA junked a motion for a temporary restraining order on Pozon’s ruling, the Philippines and the US signed another joint agreement reiterating both countries position that custody of Smith belongs to the US government. DFA Secretary Alberto Romulo and US Ambassador to Manila Kenney signed the agreement, the third to be signed by the two countries. The first two agreements signed by Chief State Prosecutor Jovencito Zund Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez with the US envoy were questioned by the Makati City Regional Trial Court presiding Judge. On Dec. 20, the DFA filed a petition before the CA asking for immediate transfer of Smith to the US Embassy in Manila. Attached in the petition was the signed agreement between Romulo and Kenney.
Email: collator.peedee@yahoo.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
