Recently saying "New Senate majority waiting for sign to oust Enrile" (Inquirer 10/22/2012), Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago may have wittingly or unwittingly spilled the beans as to what ulterior move President Aquino has in mind: to make the Senate its next rubber stamp.
Everybody knows he has done that to Congress, as evidenced by the blitzkrieg approach by which he had ordered congressmen to impeach Corona. It is still a bit doubtful that with Corona out and Sereno in, he has similarly succeeded in the high tribunal. On the one hand, most of the magistrates had been clearly insulted and lost a great deal of morale with Sereno's appointment as CJ. On the other hand, the high court has still to rule on the final fate of the Hacienda Luisita case, at least among several other critical issues still pending there, in which the President has a personal stake. The latter would then be the turning point on whether we should call his incumbency "Aquino government" or merely "Aquino administration."
Back to the Senate, Santiago was right that Enrile's potential ouster could arise out of his reluctance to endorse two of the administration's pet legislative agendas: the Reproductive Health and the Sin Tax bills. Incidentally, Santiago is principal sponsor of the former, and has also filed her own version of the latter, which is much closer to the incremental P60-B tax take that Aquino and his allies in the Lower House had always wanted than Recto's relatively watered-down tax proposal of P15-B, which Enrile is in turn more or less endorsing. Except for Sen. Trillanes, who has been quite vocal in his desire to oust Enrile, no other senator has yet voiced out his dislike for Enrile as Senate President. And so, Santiago was just telling the truth -- well, something she might not have done if she were not leaving the Senate soon in favor of the post awaiting her at the International Court of Justice -- that senators are just waiting for the sign, which certainly, though Santiago didn't say it, can only come from none else but President Aquino.
At any rate, whether or not Enrile would be eventually ousted still remains everybody's wild guess. On one hand, I refuse to believe that at this point in his long political career, Enrile can still be intimidated. Methinks he has grown amply immune to presidential influence. He was certainly right saying he holds no Torrens Title to the Senate presidency, although he believes being just an ordinary senator would give him better freedom to vocally oppose his peers than, at least initially, remaining neutral as Senate President. On another, I believe President Aquino is not too naive to realize that, just in case, his voicing out the signal to oust Enrile and to replace him with a truer ally (Drilon most probably) simply because of Enrile's refusal to approve the additional, repeat: additional, P60-B sin taxes for cigarette and liquor that he lusts for, may sooner or later bounce back to him in terms of even much higher and no longer curable budget deficits in the years to come. (As a matter of fact, that P60-B has been factored into next year's budget.) For, indeed, an additional P60-B is absolutely unachievable. Based on reliable records -- look at the Business Day's annual listing of top Philippine corporations -- the local cigarette and wine industry has been averaging only about P12-B in combined net profits every year. Moreover, the President is neither naive to realize that with or without his behest, the RH Bill has already a very very slim chance of passage in the current Congress.
But whether or not Enrile will remain Senate President is the least of my concerns in this write up. It is rather that from the looks of it, President Aquino has discovered an even surer way than what Marcos had in his time to make the legislative -- if not as much yet the judicial -- branch of government his virtual rubber stamp. I mean, Marcos used the military, Aquino uses the pork barrel.
Huwebes, Oktubre 25, 2012
Miyerkules, Oktubre 24, 2012
A NEW DIVISIVE ISSUE IN THE OFFING
Given this country's unarguable reputation, or notoriety, as the world's greatest copier of everything foreign, we should probably brace up ourselves for another divisive legislative issue that looms in the offing. I am referring to the United Nation's recommendation to the Asia-Pacific region, and that includes the Philippines,
to decriminalize prostitution, the envisioned objective being to prevent kuno the rapid spread of HIV and other sex-related diseases particularly in highly urbanized communities.
Well, that's how we are naman as a nation, di ba?. As soon as one deeply divisive public issue begins to subside, there will surely be another coming. And so, now that the HR Bill is about to bow out from the public forums -- its advocates are now virtually beginning to concede their eventual defeat in Congress -- a new and equally controversial issue, the decriminalization of prostitution, is before us. In due course, this is going to be the subject of endless heated debates from the highest down to the lowest echelons of Philippines society. I just cannot help but ask: "Kala ko ba, one of the primary objectives of the government's unbridled proliferation of condoms and the like throughout the archipelago is to curb STD (sexually-transmitted diseases)? Our drugstores from Batanes to Jolo have long been flooded with condoms and the like even long before the HR Bill became a controversial public issue in these parts. And we all know every call girl in town keeps them handy in their bags. Then, why does the UN suddenly think these contraceptives are not enough and so prostitution now needs to be decriminalized? Doesn't the UN now admit that neither has or may the RH Bill prevent the spread of STDs? With more reason, then, should we throw the RH Bill into the dust bins of perpetual oblivion! But why must the proposal to legalize prostitution suddenly come from the UN.
Kung sabagay, I have long lost my trust on the UN even as an instrument to prevent war. Originally known as League of Nations, it failed to prevent World War I. Changed into its present calling, it ended up as inutile in avoiding World War II, as well, in relatively more recent times, as the Korean and Vietnam Wars Then came the past and still subsisting atrocities in the Middle East which, likewise, the UN has not contained. Even in the very simple territorial rift between China and the Philippines on the Scarborough Shoal, the UN has just been uselessly watching. Alas, the Asia-Pacific should probably first see the UN succeeding in its most important mandate before even mulling that an otherwise clearly cultural or health problem of nations can ever be effectively curable through the decriminalization of prostitution.
Having said the above, I find it rather odd that at this writing only two Senators (Enrile and Pimental) -- quite surprisingly, both males rather than females, at that -- have yet voiced out strong objections to the decriminalization of prostitution in these parts. (Never mind the Church for now; it will surely soon follow, and in a louder voice).
I am more concerned with our honorable(?) lawmakers, of course. Ah, maybe -- just maybe -- the majority of them are yet waiting for certain other worldwide financing institutions, the World Bank, the ADB or the WHO, for example, to endorse the UN's recommendation, realizing as they do that, like in the case of the RH Bill to whose eventual passage these institutions are known to have offered enormous funds disguised as foreign aid, similar carrots are not far behind. And so, for them it's just too early to shed their truer colors in the interim.
In summing up, I hate to say this but I must. There seems to be good reason to believe that it is these so-called "benevolent" financial institutions, supported by the many corrupt local governments they assist in various parts of the world, that are wittingly or unwittingly conspiring together towards the continuing globalization of poverty and economic and cultural degradation in our midst and times.
to decriminalize prostitution, the envisioned objective being to prevent kuno the rapid spread of HIV and other sex-related diseases particularly in highly urbanized communities.
Well, that's how we are naman as a nation, di ba?. As soon as one deeply divisive public issue begins to subside, there will surely be another coming. And so, now that the HR Bill is about to bow out from the public forums -- its advocates are now virtually beginning to concede their eventual defeat in Congress -- a new and equally controversial issue, the decriminalization of prostitution, is before us. In due course, this is going to be the subject of endless heated debates from the highest down to the lowest echelons of Philippines society. I just cannot help but ask: "Kala ko ba, one of the primary objectives of the government's unbridled proliferation of condoms and the like throughout the archipelago is to curb STD (sexually-transmitted diseases)? Our drugstores from Batanes to Jolo have long been flooded with condoms and the like even long before the HR Bill became a controversial public issue in these parts. And we all know every call girl in town keeps them handy in their bags. Then, why does the UN suddenly think these contraceptives are not enough and so prostitution now needs to be decriminalized? Doesn't the UN now admit that neither has or may the RH Bill prevent the spread of STDs? With more reason, then, should we throw the RH Bill into the dust bins of perpetual oblivion! But why must the proposal to legalize prostitution suddenly come from the UN.
Kung sabagay, I have long lost my trust on the UN even as an instrument to prevent war. Originally known as League of Nations, it failed to prevent World War I. Changed into its present calling, it ended up as inutile in avoiding World War II, as well, in relatively more recent times, as the Korean and Vietnam Wars Then came the past and still subsisting atrocities in the Middle East which, likewise, the UN has not contained. Even in the very simple territorial rift between China and the Philippines on the Scarborough Shoal, the UN has just been uselessly watching. Alas, the Asia-Pacific should probably first see the UN succeeding in its most important mandate before even mulling that an otherwise clearly cultural or health problem of nations can ever be effectively curable through the decriminalization of prostitution.
Having said the above, I find it rather odd that at this writing only two Senators (Enrile and Pimental) -- quite surprisingly, both males rather than females, at that -- have yet voiced out strong objections to the decriminalization of prostitution in these parts. (Never mind the Church for now; it will surely soon follow, and in a louder voice).
I am more concerned with our honorable(?) lawmakers, of course. Ah, maybe -- just maybe -- the majority of them are yet waiting for certain other worldwide financing institutions, the World Bank, the ADB or the WHO, for example, to endorse the UN's recommendation, realizing as they do that, like in the case of the RH Bill to whose eventual passage these institutions are known to have offered enormous funds disguised as foreign aid, similar carrots are not far behind. And so, for them it's just too early to shed their truer colors in the interim.
In summing up, I hate to say this but I must. There seems to be good reason to believe that it is these so-called "benevolent" financial institutions, supported by the many corrupt local governments they assist in various parts of the world, that are wittingly or unwittingly conspiring together towards the continuing globalization of poverty and economic and cultural degradation in our midst and times.
Lunes, Oktubre 22, 2012
A "STRAIGHT PATH" THAT'S "PAURONG," NOT "PASULONG"
An Inquirer news item this morning reveals, "Pnoy suspends 3 bridge projects worth P3-B due to overpricing." It's truly nice to hear that! But reassuring, I still have some doubts.
I know that the news refers to the Bridge Projects Scam apparently began in GMA's time, and is the subject of Sen. Serge Osmena's ongoing Senate probe "in aid of legislation" kuno -- even as only the devil knows if there is going to be a legislation to emanate therefrom. As far as I know -- to give credit where credit is due -- this mega scam was first revealed by a movement called "InfraWatch," with my good friend, Rick Ramos, at its helm.
As I said, it is nice to hear that the present administration's drum-beaters have been earnestly pursuing Pnoy's much ballyhooed "tuwid na daan." The only little problem, it seems to me, is that the "straight path" they are pursuing might only be selectively leading to the past -- in other words, "paurong" -- rather than "pasulong" or a walk through the present to eventually lead to a brighter future.
Why do I say that? Simple! The present administration has now been on its third year. Since bridges do not normally take too long to build, it is not entirely far-fetched to speculate, then, that the implementation of the three now-suspended bridge projects had began not as much before as during the present administration. And so, two curious questions ache for equally curious answers: Have these three specific projects continued to be pursued under the self-same anomalous circumstances as those pursued in GMA's time? I have no quarrel with the need to make GMA accountable for her past "sins" on the bridge projects in general. So be it in the interest of truth. But why, with respect to these three projects, call quite selectively only GMA's public works men ( Ebdane, et al) and not likewise, in fact more appropriately, the present DPHW bosses, to shed a probably brighter light? For all we know, they may have themselves made of these three suspended projects their very own milking cow. I mean, fair is fair!
This is what I mean in saying -- nay, just imagining -- that Pnoy's "straight path" is being pursued rather "paurong" than "pasulong." If that is the case, then, where is that path leading us to?
I know that the news refers to the Bridge Projects Scam apparently began in GMA's time, and is the subject of Sen. Serge Osmena's ongoing Senate probe "in aid of legislation" kuno -- even as only the devil knows if there is going to be a legislation to emanate therefrom. As far as I know -- to give credit where credit is due -- this mega scam was first revealed by a movement called "InfraWatch," with my good friend, Rick Ramos, at its helm.
As I said, it is nice to hear that the present administration's drum-beaters have been earnestly pursuing Pnoy's much ballyhooed "tuwid na daan." The only little problem, it seems to me, is that the "straight path" they are pursuing might only be selectively leading to the past -- in other words, "paurong" -- rather than "pasulong" or a walk through the present to eventually lead to a brighter future.
Why do I say that? Simple! The present administration has now been on its third year. Since bridges do not normally take too long to build, it is not entirely far-fetched to speculate, then, that the implementation of the three now-suspended bridge projects had began not as much before as during the present administration. And so, two curious questions ache for equally curious answers: Have these three specific projects continued to be pursued under the self-same anomalous circumstances as those pursued in GMA's time? I have no quarrel with the need to make GMA accountable for her past "sins" on the bridge projects in general. So be it in the interest of truth. But why, with respect to these three projects, call quite selectively only GMA's public works men ( Ebdane, et al) and not likewise, in fact more appropriately, the present DPHW bosses, to shed a probably brighter light? For all we know, they may have themselves made of these three suspended projects their very own milking cow. I mean, fair is fair!
This is what I mean in saying -- nay, just imagining -- that Pnoy's "straight path" is being pursued rather "paurong" than "pasulong." If that is the case, then, where is that path leading us to?
Biyernes, Oktubre 19, 2012
AN INSATIABLE GREED FOR TAX
None else but insatiable greed for tax lies behind the administration's unbridled desire for a P60-Billion increase in the sin taxes. A recent report says the government has watered-down its incremental sin-tax take to P40-Billion. Let me repeat, INCREMENTAL, meaning an additional tax of P60/P40 billion over and what the cigarette and alcohol companies have been taxed before.
For heaven's sake, that is the most callous, the most unconscionable expression of greed I have heard in all my 73 years in Planet Earth. Consider this: A recent business magazine reports that the top 50 corporations in the Philippines have posted an aggregate, repeat: aggregate, net income of P134.0 billion. None of the cigarette or liquor companies in the country is even included in that least. According to Sen. Angara in a recent television interview with Karen Davila in ABS-CBN's "Headstart," the local cigarette and liquor industry is netting only P12.0 Billion annually. And imagine that the new sin tax law is yet intending to reduce cigarette and liquor gross sales, and hence net income, by nobody knows how much. Alas, if that which this government wants is not GREED in its absolute superlative degree, I do not know what is.
The government's greed for tax money becomes even more condemnable as soon as we begin to think that PNoy has already included that incremental P60-Billon sin-tax take in the government's budget for next year. Of course, that should most particularly delight Finance Secretary Purisima and BIR chief Henares because they are expecting that with that new revenue their tax collection figures next year could improve.
Tax collections per se, maybe yes. But budget deficits, NEVER. Since when, may I ask, has this government ever been able to balance its budget after the passage of a new tax law? Has the VAT law, for example, ever achieved that? Definitely not! I really doubt if our Finance managers realize the fact that none of them has ever predicted accurately what the government expects to receive from a new tax law. Chances are, they would even overstate the predictions so that they could justify as much newer budget expenditures as possible, in turn to finally end up with budget deficits very much higher than they had been before a new tax law is passed. And that, without doubt, is what is likely going to happen in the aftermath of the new sin-tax law. That is the JINX this government has never been immune from since time immemorial!
It is certainly not that I am for smoking. Of course, not. I used to smoke nearly three packs a day before I stopped this high school habit of mine only less that five years ago. But for me, the single biggest antidote against this habit -- nay, this abominable vice -- is self-discipline. And the best example of self-discipline in a more or less national scale could only come from a country's very own leaders. But how can that be possible in a country whose highest leader, PNoy, keeps saying: "I really want to tax cigarettes to extinction, but I cannot stop smoking!" Alas, if this country's top leader do not know how to discipline himself against continuing with an abominable vice, how can he impose discipline against graft and corruption into his ranks in the government service? Call it motherhood statement, but it still remains that self-discipline is every true leader's most essential qualification. PNoy says if he stops smoking there will be nothing to help him docompress? How laughable! Alas, does that apply only to himself and not to every Filipino in that habit? Isn't he then virtually saying: "magsitigil kayo sa inyong biso, ako hindi, presidente yata ako!"
At any rate, I tend to maintain that extremely high prices of cigarettes and liquors can't really give a significant dent on people's smoking habit. Look at shabu. It does not only command the most prohibitive price in the market place; it is also illegal and one may be jailed for using it. But let's be honest, indeed, more and more are being hooked to drugs day in and day out in our midst and times. That's where a vice differs from a habit.
Yes, let's adjust our existing sin taxes. But as Recto says, let's be realistic. And it is definitely unrealistic for government to tax the cigarette and liquor industry with an increment that is nearly five times what it has been netting annually on the average. Not only unrealistic, also extremely insensitive! Do some extents, aren't we killing the goose that lays the golden eggs?
For heaven's sake, that is the most callous, the most unconscionable expression of greed I have heard in all my 73 years in Planet Earth. Consider this: A recent business magazine reports that the top 50 corporations in the Philippines have posted an aggregate, repeat: aggregate, net income of P134.0 billion. None of the cigarette or liquor companies in the country is even included in that least. According to Sen. Angara in a recent television interview with Karen Davila in ABS-CBN's "Headstart," the local cigarette and liquor industry is netting only P12.0 Billion annually. And imagine that the new sin tax law is yet intending to reduce cigarette and liquor gross sales, and hence net income, by nobody knows how much. Alas, if that which this government wants is not GREED in its absolute superlative degree, I do not know what is.
The government's greed for tax money becomes even more condemnable as soon as we begin to think that PNoy has already included that incremental P60-Billon sin-tax take in the government's budget for next year. Of course, that should most particularly delight Finance Secretary Purisima and BIR chief Henares because they are expecting that with that new revenue their tax collection figures next year could improve.
Tax collections per se, maybe yes. But budget deficits, NEVER. Since when, may I ask, has this government ever been able to balance its budget after the passage of a new tax law? Has the VAT law, for example, ever achieved that? Definitely not! I really doubt if our Finance managers realize the fact that none of them has ever predicted accurately what the government expects to receive from a new tax law. Chances are, they would even overstate the predictions so that they could justify as much newer budget expenditures as possible, in turn to finally end up with budget deficits very much higher than they had been before a new tax law is passed. And that, without doubt, is what is likely going to happen in the aftermath of the new sin-tax law. That is the JINX this government has never been immune from since time immemorial!
It is certainly not that I am for smoking. Of course, not. I used to smoke nearly three packs a day before I stopped this high school habit of mine only less that five years ago. But for me, the single biggest antidote against this habit -- nay, this abominable vice -- is self-discipline. And the best example of self-discipline in a more or less national scale could only come from a country's very own leaders. But how can that be possible in a country whose highest leader, PNoy, keeps saying: "I really want to tax cigarettes to extinction, but I cannot stop smoking!" Alas, if this country's top leader do not know how to discipline himself against continuing with an abominable vice, how can he impose discipline against graft and corruption into his ranks in the government service? Call it motherhood statement, but it still remains that self-discipline is every true leader's most essential qualification. PNoy says if he stops smoking there will be nothing to help him docompress? How laughable! Alas, does that apply only to himself and not to every Filipino in that habit? Isn't he then virtually saying: "magsitigil kayo sa inyong biso, ako hindi, presidente yata ako!"
At any rate, I tend to maintain that extremely high prices of cigarettes and liquors can't really give a significant dent on people's smoking habit. Look at shabu. It does not only command the most prohibitive price in the market place; it is also illegal and one may be jailed for using it. But let's be honest, indeed, more and more are being hooked to drugs day in and day out in our midst and times. That's where a vice differs from a habit.
Yes, let's adjust our existing sin taxes. But as Recto says, let's be realistic. And it is definitely unrealistic for government to tax the cigarette and liquor industry with an increment that is nearly five times what it has been netting annually on the average. Not only unrealistic, also extremely insensitive! Do some extents, aren't we killing the goose that lays the golden eggs?
Lunes, Oktubre 15, 2012
THE GRP-MILF PEACE TALK 2
I said in my last blog that already three peace talks, including the Framework Agreement signed yesterday, 15 October, had been concluded by the government with the Muslims of Mindanao. I have to apologize that I was wrong; there has actually been four already, that which I failed to mention was the FPA or so-called Final Peace Agreement concluded in 1996 during the incumbency of former President Fidel V. Ramos. So-called "final," it really was not, as indeed two others -- the MOA-AD in GMA's time and now the Framework Agreement at present. To sum up, the first two were signed with the MNLF, the latter two with the MILF.
The more indeed does this tend to cast some clouds of doubt on the eventual success of the current one. Before anybody gets me wrong, I do not wish to sound a "kill-joy" in this connection. The thing is, as Misuari of the MNLF now tends to show, the new agreement may be on for rough sailing during PNoy's remaining terms, or in his exact words, tantamount to a suicide for the MILF. Of course, he also said, the MNLF is not going to war owing to their disagreement to the ongoing negotiation. Well, my only remaining hope is when the government realizes the need to first agree to between themselves and sincerely assert that either is no longer interested in "liberation," but now in true "autonomy." My common sense -- as well as that of others, I am sure -- would simply suggest that the MILF and MNLF unite under one I-don't-know- what name or calling that has totally shed off or removed the letter "L" for liberation.
As we all know, the purpose for the establishment of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) is give the kind of autonomy -- let's not forget, not liberation -- that the Muslims need towards optimum peace and co-existence with their Christian brothers and sisters in that part of the country. And as everybody, the ARMM's noble objective has failed. But why did it fail, in the first place. Less be honest: isn't it essentially because of graft and corruption and the greed for power among those that governed the ARMM. If that is the case, then doesn't the common-sense solution simply lie in solving that graft and corruption and addressing the ARMM governors' insatiable greed for power? Then, why must the government abolish the ARMM rather than squarely address its basic problems and give it a chance?
As I said, I am no lawyer nor a political analyst. I may be analyzing problems not really as much from the standpoints of law and politics as merely from that of plain common sense. But I have always believed that all laws and governmental policies anywhere in all democratic societies must first and foremost be common-sensical. And I am sure I am not alone in that conviction.
The more indeed does this tend to cast some clouds of doubt on the eventual success of the current one. Before anybody gets me wrong, I do not wish to sound a "kill-joy" in this connection. The thing is, as Misuari of the MNLF now tends to show, the new agreement may be on for rough sailing during PNoy's remaining terms, or in his exact words, tantamount to a suicide for the MILF. Of course, he also said, the MNLF is not going to war owing to their disagreement to the ongoing negotiation. Well, my only remaining hope is when the government realizes the need to first agree to between themselves and sincerely assert that either is no longer interested in "liberation," but now in true "autonomy." My common sense -- as well as that of others, I am sure -- would simply suggest that the MILF and MNLF unite under one I-don't-know- what name or calling that has totally shed off or removed the letter "L" for liberation.
As we all know, the purpose for the establishment of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) is give the kind of autonomy -- let's not forget, not liberation -- that the Muslims need towards optimum peace and co-existence with their Christian brothers and sisters in that part of the country. And as everybody, the ARMM's noble objective has failed. But why did it fail, in the first place. Less be honest: isn't it essentially because of graft and corruption and the greed for power among those that governed the ARMM. If that is the case, then doesn't the common-sense solution simply lie in solving that graft and corruption and addressing the ARMM governors' insatiable greed for power? Then, why must the government abolish the ARMM rather than squarely address its basic problems and give it a chance?
As I said, I am no lawyer nor a political analyst. I may be analyzing problems not really as much from the standpoints of law and politics as merely from that of plain common sense. But I have always believed that all laws and governmental policies anywhere in all democratic societies must first and foremost be common-sensical. And I am sure I am not alone in that conviction.
Sabado, Oktubre 13, 2012
The GRP-MILF PEACE TALKS
Tomorrow, 15 October 2012, the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Muslim Islamic Liberation Front are scheduled to sign the framework agreement for the creation of the Bangsamoro autonomous government in Mindanao. This peace agreement is supposed to be the third of its kind. In 2009, a similar agreement called MOA-AD (Memorandum of Agreement - Ancestral Domain) was also arrived at by both parties -- but only to be shut down and declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
Sometime in 1976, If I remember correctly -- we were then under martial law -- the First Lady, Imelda Marcos, made a secret trip to Tripoli, Libya, where she had a communique with then Libyan President Muammar al-Gadaffi towards the settlement of the Mindanao conflict, which the country had long had with the Mindanao National Liberation Front (MNLF), then led by Nur Misuari. At that point in time, the MILF was not even yet born. That was the country's first peace negotiation with the Mindanao Muslims, in turn ending up into the so-called Tripoli Agreement.
As I earlier said, the First Lady's trip to Libya was secret, unknown either to President Marcos or to the Department of National Defense. The Tripoli Agreement called for the cessation of hostilities in Mindanao in exchange for the establishment of a so-called "autonomy of several (more or less thirteen) provinces in Mindanao within the realm of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Philippines." Upon discovering the agreement, President Marcos, calling it a shameless sell-out of the Philippine autonomy in Mindanao, lost no time to have the agreement dissolved. The First Lady went back to Libya to relay to the Libyan President the negative reaction of President Marcos to the agreement, essentially that it violates the Philippine Constitution, to which, nonetheless, al-Gadaffi replied in tantrums: "We are not concerned with constitutions here, we are talking about war." Attempts on the Philippine side to redo the agreement in relatively more mutually reasonable terms had failed. And so, the Tripoli Agreement has since then been considered moot. And that is even as the MNLF continues to refer to it as still valid.
I am saying all these to emphasize my personal position in this connection. First, I think the "autonomy" that our brother Muslims in Mindanao is not really that which prevails and is respected by the cultural minorities in Cordillera up north, nor by the American Indians in the US. As we all know, these two cultural minorities -- truth is the American Indians had been scattered all over the American mainland, several times more numerous than the Muslims of Mindanao, when the first Europeans came -- desire not simply autonomy but total liberation or territorial cessation from the Philippines. I think this is clearly borne out by the fact that, notwithstanding the above three attempts for peace, neither the MILF nor the MNLF has ever tried to remove the letter "L" (which stands for "liberation") in their calling I really find it unthinkable, with due respect, that our very own negotiators: --Leonen, Deles, etc. -- had not at least attempted to convince both groups to drop that "L" in the interest of a truer expression of good faith. And so, as things are, does the MILF truly represent the people of Mindanao? I refuse to think so. Let's not forget that the MILF is merely a breakaway group from Misuri's MNLF. The Abu Sayaf and Umbra Kato's groups are two others to contend with. Methinks these various Muslim groups, each one certainly having a valid stake in this matter, must have first been made to regroup themselves into one, before any attempt to reconcile with one of them was ever attempted. I think this was the primary objective of the government when it put up the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao, alongside a similar set-up in the Cordilleras. Why the latter succeeded and the latter failed may have something to do with how each cultural minority group understands autonomy.
Of course, there are several other critical constraints towards the final conclusion of the framework agreement that is scheduled for signing on 15th October, such as those bordering on its unconstitutionality. But I will leave that to the lawyers, and I am not. Suffice it for me to state that my personal concerns are more a matter of common sense or intuitive gut feel than anything else. And, as far as I can remember, my gut feel very seldom lies to me.
At any rate, I still wish our peace negotiators every measure of good luck that exists in Planet Earth. As now already a septuagenarian who has gone through and experienced a great deal of my native land's history, it remains my sole sincere wish to see true peace in Mindanao ultimately prevailing -- well, before I go.
Sometime in 1976, If I remember correctly -- we were then under martial law -- the First Lady, Imelda Marcos, made a secret trip to Tripoli, Libya, where she had a communique with then Libyan President Muammar al-Gadaffi towards the settlement of the Mindanao conflict, which the country had long had with the Mindanao National Liberation Front (MNLF), then led by Nur Misuari. At that point in time, the MILF was not even yet born. That was the country's first peace negotiation with the Mindanao Muslims, in turn ending up into the so-called Tripoli Agreement.
As I earlier said, the First Lady's trip to Libya was secret, unknown either to President Marcos or to the Department of National Defense. The Tripoli Agreement called for the cessation of hostilities in Mindanao in exchange for the establishment of a so-called "autonomy of several (more or less thirteen) provinces in Mindanao within the realm of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Philippines." Upon discovering the agreement, President Marcos, calling it a shameless sell-out of the Philippine autonomy in Mindanao, lost no time to have the agreement dissolved. The First Lady went back to Libya to relay to the Libyan President the negative reaction of President Marcos to the agreement, essentially that it violates the Philippine Constitution, to which, nonetheless, al-Gadaffi replied in tantrums: "We are not concerned with constitutions here, we are talking about war." Attempts on the Philippine side to redo the agreement in relatively more mutually reasonable terms had failed. And so, the Tripoli Agreement has since then been considered moot. And that is even as the MNLF continues to refer to it as still valid.
I am saying all these to emphasize my personal position in this connection. First, I think the "autonomy" that our brother Muslims in Mindanao is not really that which prevails and is respected by the cultural minorities in Cordillera up north, nor by the American Indians in the US. As we all know, these two cultural minorities -- truth is the American Indians had been scattered all over the American mainland, several times more numerous than the Muslims of Mindanao, when the first Europeans came -- desire not simply autonomy but total liberation or territorial cessation from the Philippines. I think this is clearly borne out by the fact that, notwithstanding the above three attempts for peace, neither the MILF nor the MNLF has ever tried to remove the letter "L" (which stands for "liberation") in their calling I really find it unthinkable, with due respect, that our very own negotiators: --Leonen, Deles, etc. -- had not at least attempted to convince both groups to drop that "L" in the interest of a truer expression of good faith. And so, as things are, does the MILF truly represent the people of Mindanao? I refuse to think so. Let's not forget that the MILF is merely a breakaway group from Misuri's MNLF. The Abu Sayaf and Umbra Kato's groups are two others to contend with. Methinks these various Muslim groups, each one certainly having a valid stake in this matter, must have first been made to regroup themselves into one, before any attempt to reconcile with one of them was ever attempted. I think this was the primary objective of the government when it put up the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao, alongside a similar set-up in the Cordilleras. Why the latter succeeded and the latter failed may have something to do with how each cultural minority group understands autonomy.
Of course, there are several other critical constraints towards the final conclusion of the framework agreement that is scheduled for signing on 15th October, such as those bordering on its unconstitutionality. But I will leave that to the lawyers, and I am not. Suffice it for me to state that my personal concerns are more a matter of common sense or intuitive gut feel than anything else. And, as far as I can remember, my gut feel very seldom lies to me.
At any rate, I still wish our peace negotiators every measure of good luck that exists in Planet Earth. As now already a septuagenarian who has gone through and experienced a great deal of my native land's history, it remains my sole sincere wish to see true peace in Mindanao ultimately prevailing -- well, before I go.
Biyernes, Oktubre 5, 2012
THIS 2013 ELECTION IS GONG TO BE A BIG FARCE
From whatever standpoint one looks at it, the 2013 election is going to be a big farce. It is a stark contrast to the constitutional provision that says, "The state shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibits political dynasties as may be provided by law." What "equal opportunities for public service" or "prohibition of political dynasties" are we talking about f one looks at the senatorial line-ups of both the administration and the opposition kuno that the voting public would choose from?
Kung ang mga kandidatong ito ang magsisipanalo -- at ito ang malamang na mangyari -- aba'y we will have 2 Enriles, 2 Cayetanos, 2 Estradas, 2 Magsaysays, in the Senate. In addition, we will retain an old tandem of coup pushers (Trillanes/Honasan), a Marcos and a Revilla whose respective clans also rule supreme in provincial politics. Bilangin ninyo, di ba twelve na 'yan? And add to that a new Angara succeeding an old one (dynasty rin, di ba), three callously indecisive candidates (Legarda, Escudero and Llamanzares) who are riding on two horses (wanting to have their cakes and eat them two - ah, I call that "greed" and "sa pula, sa puti" sa loob ng sabungan), a millionaire and former senator in her own right (Madrugal), a daughter of the Vice President, two very close relatives (Aquino and Cojuangco) of the sitting president, and two former senators (Gordon and Maceda) two popular showbiz characters (Sotto and Lapid), and a non-biological descendant (Llamanzares) of the greatest name in Philippine movies. Aba eh, kayo ang magsabi, di ba ang gobyerno ng Pilipinas ay lantarang gusto nanng usungin ng mga elitista, pawang mayayaman at powerful politicians in our midst and times.
Nasaan na ang equal opportunities in the public service na gustong ipatupad kuno ng ating Saligang Batas? At 'yang political dynasty, paano nga ba mawawala iyan ay di nila nais baguhin ang Constitution? Kahit pa nga magkaroon tayo ng constitutional amendments, aba'y "hindi loko si Pilo," ika nga naming mga Batanggenyo, para magpasa ang mga taong ito ng batas na papawi sa political dynasty na ito.
In fairness to them, before anybody gets me wrong, I am not belittling these people's respective capabilities to run this government. I know and admit that most of them are amply qualified. My only deep concern as a citizen is that in a country where money rules supreme in politics, how can the relatively "have-nots" have an equal chance, as the charter warrants, in public service -- at least for a change? And how can there be change when practically no more "opposition" will exist any longer in the next Congress? Proof is Villar, Aquino's most bitter opponent in 2010, and Marcos, whose late father, Aquino believes, was behind his own father's murder, are now part of the incumbent president's party. Since when -- only now, isn't it-- has the country's oldest political parties, Nationalista and Liberal, joined together in an election? I know what Pinoy has in mind: He wants everybody to adhere to his so-called "daang matuwid." The thing is that is neither a concrete program or platform of governance; it is merely an empty slogan.
Ah, I truly regret to say this but I must: Indeed, this nation is fast going to the dogs!
Kung ang mga kandidatong ito ang magsisipanalo -- at ito ang malamang na mangyari -- aba'y we will have 2 Enriles, 2 Cayetanos, 2 Estradas, 2 Magsaysays, in the Senate. In addition, we will retain an old tandem of coup pushers (Trillanes/Honasan), a Marcos and a Revilla whose respective clans also rule supreme in provincial politics. Bilangin ninyo, di ba twelve na 'yan? And add to that a new Angara succeeding an old one (dynasty rin, di ba), three callously indecisive candidates (Legarda, Escudero and Llamanzares) who are riding on two horses (wanting to have their cakes and eat them two - ah, I call that "greed" and "sa pula, sa puti" sa loob ng sabungan), a millionaire and former senator in her own right (Madrugal), a daughter of the Vice President, two very close relatives (Aquino and Cojuangco) of the sitting president, and two former senators (Gordon and Maceda) two popular showbiz characters (Sotto and Lapid), and a non-biological descendant (Llamanzares) of the greatest name in Philippine movies. Aba eh, kayo ang magsabi, di ba ang gobyerno ng Pilipinas ay lantarang gusto nanng usungin ng mga elitista, pawang mayayaman at powerful politicians in our midst and times.
Nasaan na ang equal opportunities in the public service na gustong ipatupad kuno ng ating Saligang Batas? At 'yang political dynasty, paano nga ba mawawala iyan ay di nila nais baguhin ang Constitution? Kahit pa nga magkaroon tayo ng constitutional amendments, aba'y "hindi loko si Pilo," ika nga naming mga Batanggenyo, para magpasa ang mga taong ito ng batas na papawi sa political dynasty na ito.
In fairness to them, before anybody gets me wrong, I am not belittling these people's respective capabilities to run this government. I know and admit that most of them are amply qualified. My only deep concern as a citizen is that in a country where money rules supreme in politics, how can the relatively "have-nots" have an equal chance, as the charter warrants, in public service -- at least for a change? And how can there be change when practically no more "opposition" will exist any longer in the next Congress? Proof is Villar, Aquino's most bitter opponent in 2010, and Marcos, whose late father, Aquino believes, was behind his own father's murder, are now part of the incumbent president's party. Since when -- only now, isn't it-- has the country's oldest political parties, Nationalista and Liberal, joined together in an election? I know what Pinoy has in mind: He wants everybody to adhere to his so-called "daang matuwid." The thing is that is neither a concrete program or platform of governance; it is merely an empty slogan.
Ah, I truly regret to say this but I must: Indeed, this nation is fast going to the dogs!
Mag-subscribe sa:
Mga Post (Atom)