CELEBRITIES IN THE NEWS

It is odd but amusing that several local celebrities are now in the big news, fighting not as much in "intrigue shows," like Boy Abunda's "The Buzz" (no ad or promotion intended), as inside our courts of law.  The cases between Nadia Montenegro and Annabel Rama, Amalia Fuentes and (again!) Annabel Rama, Amalia Fuentes (again!) and Ruffa Gutierrez, estranged  sweethearts Andi Eigenman and Albie Casinos and, very recently, journalist Ramon Tulfo against Claudine Barreto and Raymart Santiago -- ah, the real litany is longer -- are just examples.  It's a good thing that the public won't ever give a damn at whatever may happen at the end of these disputes, except probably to say, "ah, to hell with their lies, egos and arrogance."  But it would certainly be not necessarily so with respect to another showbiz personality, Roderick Paulate, who along with a co-councilor in Quezon City,  is now under investigation by the Ombudsman for making money out of "ghost employees" (Yahoo!News, 5/10/2012).

According to the news report, Paulate and Councilor Francisco Calalay Jr. made payments to 59 "job order personnel" from July to November 2010, with a combined total of P3.3 million in wages,  based on allegedly spurious personnel data sheets and payroll.  While it is yet too early to conclude any truth to the charges, I always believe that whenever and  wherever  there is smoke there is always fire.  To be honest, the interim findings of the Ombudsman -- to wit: the fictitious personnel do not have birth certificate records in the National Statistics Office, are not registered voters of Quezon City, have not secured clearances from the National Bureau of Investigation, are not known in the respective barangays where they allegedly reside and that the indicated addresses where they purportedly reside do not exist  (indeed, basic information accompanying all legitimate employee records) -- should be enough smoke coming from a true fire.  At any rate, I still do give Paulate the fullest benefit of the doubt, at least by virtue of the fact, incidentally, that it was from his name that I had christened my eldest son, Roderick,  many, many years ago.

As things are, I take pride in saying that, except for Fernando Poe Jr., I have never voted for any movie personality aspiring for public office.  Even as I did mourn FPJ's passing, I'm happy this personal stand of mine will never be proven wrong any more.  I have always asked myself what farther popularity a celebrity would still wish in life;  I have always believed that his gross earnings may never be matched by his legitimate compensation as a public official.   Well, that is of course barring any ulterior motive to dip his hands into government coffers.

A PATHETIC AND RIDICULOUS DECISION

Methinks the MTRCB quite seriously erred in imposing a "20-day preventive suspension" on the Tulfo brothers' T3 news program at TV Channel 5.  I strongly doubt that the MTRCB has consulted their lawyers before they arrive at that decision; or if they did, then there is reason to believe their lawyers should rather go back to law school. The MTRCB has clearly acted unconstitutionally.

True, a preventive suspension is not necessarily a punishment; it is merely imposed to prevent "something" that the person accused may do while the case is being studied and evaluated.  But what "something" is the MTRCB trying to prevent?  That the Tulfos may again repeat their threats to the Baretto-Santiago couple?  Then, why prevent them for only 20 days?  Or does the MTRCB believe that after 20 days the T3 will never repeat what they did?  I believe "preventive suspension" is out of place in this case.

That 20-day suspension may be either shortened or made permanent, depending on the MTRCB's final decision on the TR case, but subject to a very big IF.  That is, if it has the legal right or mandate to regulate news and public affairs program.  The thing is, the MTRCB has no jurisdiction to suspend a News and Public Service program, such as the T3; it does have jurisdiction only on entertainment programs. In this particular case, its was the Tulfo brothers who, urged by natural emotions -- who would not be seeing a brother being mangled by too many hands -- had erred in their personal capacities. Channel 5 had already lost no time suspending for five days the appearance of the three not only in their particular T3 program but also in all other Channel 5 programs they usually appear.  Shouldn't that be enough penalty.  The Tulfos have also already apologized to the Bareto-Santiagos in public.  What more does the MTRCB wants. 

Still, the Santiago-Bareto couple  may not be prevented to proceed with charging the Tulfo brothers in the proper courts of law, maybe for grave threats or what not.  No one may prevent them from doing so.  But as journalists, the Tulfo brothers do have the inviolable constitutional  right to continue broadcasting news especially in a public service program. 

In summing up, the MTRCB's 20-day suspension of the Tulfo brothers' TR program has no basis either in sheer logic or in the laws of the land.  That decision is not only pathetic; it is also ridiculous and laughable! I am sure a TRO is forthcoming against it.          

I WISH ERAP GOOD LUCK

The sudden decision of former President Erap to run for Mayor of Manila was indeed surprising.  Of course, such rather odd political decision is not anything new.  Former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's decision to run for her congressional district was also not anticipated.  Of course, now talking from hindsight, GMA had rightly anticipated her successor would leave no stone upturned in his one consuming obsession to put him in jail.  Kahit papaano, GMA's being still a member of the Lower House would somehow insulate or galvanize her from PNoy's personal vendetta.

On the other hand, Erap says his decision to run for Mayor of  Manila has been essentially triggered by his apparent frustration over the failure of Manila to the level of Makati City as a great city.  Very well said.  Maybe, just maybe,  Manila, as the capital city of the Philippines, should indeed be entitled to a measure of greatness that is at least at par with a comparatively smaller city as Makati.   And so, Erap said he would only want to be Mayor of Manila for one term.  In other words he commits himself to convert Manila into the greater city he wants it to be within only a span of three years.

I am not belittling Erap's capacity to do that.  But I doubt very much if he could really do that.  Kailan pa nga ba naging Mayor si Erap ng San Juan?  Aba, eh, hindi ko na nga matandaan dahil sa katagalan.  At mula noon, pinagtulung-tulungan na nilang buong mag-anak ang paghawak, at siyempre pagpapaunlad sa kanilang bayan ng San Juan.  Naging Senador, Vice Mayor at Presidente pa nga siya, at kung gayo'y nasa kanya at sa kanilang buong mag-anak ang lahat ng espesyal na kapangyarihan para mapaunlad ang San Juan.  Pero, ano ba naman ang San Juan ngayon kumpara nuong bago naging Mayor nito si Erap?  Aba'y city na nga ngayon kung sabagay.  Pero ang pagiging city ay bunga, una sa lahat, ng pagdami ng mga tao.

I wish the former President all the good luck.  

THE CJ NEED NOT TESTIFY (AT LEAST FOR NOW)

I honestly believe SC Corona's defense team, and no one else, are in the best position to say if it is good strategy for Corona to testify in his impeachment trial.  Why, for heaven's sake, would his lawyers not put him on the witness stand if that will be his life-saver, so to speak?

True, the Chief Justice has been quoted saying he will come out in the open, if he needs to, when the right and opportune moment comes.  It is obvious that the Chief Justice and his defense lawyers sincerely believe that opportune moment has not come, at least as of now.  Ergo, former Chief Justice Serafin Cuevas, the CJ's lead counsel, was right in saying the Senators need not bulldoze them into putting their client on the witness stand.  After all, the Constitution provides that no one shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.  Let's respect the CJ's right against self-incrimination.

They will never admit it, but the plain truth is unassailable that the senators, the prosecution, PNoy's allies, maybe even the public, have long been salivating to insult and further demonize the Chief Justice, to the extent that they would never believe whatever he says.  As Chief Justice, Corona has his own personal reputation to preserve, and it's just right for his defense counsel to protect his prestige.

As a matter of fact, what more do they want.  The defense has reduced to pure lies the 45 properties that the prosecution says Corona owns but did not declare in his SALN.  As far as I know, only one remains in dispute, the one the Coronas bought from the Bonifactio Ridge in 2003 which the CJ reported only in 2010 in his SALN, even if there had already been full payment thereof.  I think several witnesses had been presented by the defense to explain that the Corona's refuse to formally accept the property because of several complaints, some consisting of structural defects, that the developer was able to correct only towards 2010.  In my  view, if the CJ did not report it in his 2010, then he would be liable for concealment of a property, and that would be impeachable.  The fact that he did report that in 2010, or before he was impeached, may never be regarded as a form of dishonesty, which is the one impeachable if committed by a Chief Justice.    Senators Enrile and Osmena said that the proper thing to do is to report the amount paid for the property as Accounts Receivable in the asset side of the SALN.  That is perfectly fine under the double-entry system of Accounting, that is, a debit to Accounts Receivable and a credit to Cash, to record an "advance payment."   But there is also another system called "single-entry" accounting or "kuwenta beho" as the Chinese calls it.  Ask accountants and they will surely confirm that neither system is necessary wrong, although it is double-entry that is generally the more acceptable one in customary business practice.  So,  the CJ, a lawyer, apparently not aided by an accountant in preparing his SALN, may have been guilty of ignorance of generally accepted accounting principles.  But was that a culpable violation of the Constitution, or are impeachable offense?  Definitely not.  Isn't it that the solution is merely to correct an error, if indeed an impeachable error it is.

At  the end of the day,  the only important thing to consider is whether the charges against the CJ are impeachable or not.  Methinks his lawyers have successfully proven they are not.  Why then should there be a need for the CJ to testify?        

BETTER LUCK NEXT TIME!

The letter of Ombudsman Carpio-Morales to the CJ asking the latter to explain his alleged $10-million bank deposit has only brought to the fore two unassailable truths.  One, as of now there are as yet not enough senator-judges' votes to convict Corona; and two, Carpio-Morales is no different from her predecessor, Merceditas Gutierrez.  That is, Gutierrez is to GMA as Morales is to PNoy.  They are both rabid lapdogs, ready to bite anyone their masters would ask them to.  I though Carpio-Morales was a different breed;  she is not.

Indeed, it has been a well-known fact from the very outset that PNoy knew he could not successfully impeach Corona in the Senate.  And so, he and his allies demonized Corona with the media and before the bar of public opinion, with the one-consuming obsession to force the CJ to resign his post.  The thing is, he did not.

Now that the prosecution's case in the Senate has been fast collapsing -- it had already reached the moribund stage when the trial took its Holy Week break -- there is clear reason to believe the  Ombudsman knows she must now apply her last-ditch, desperate effort to demonize the CJ even more.  Quite unfortunately, that effort is bound to end up as a futile exercise as far as improving the prosecution's chance in the impeachment trial is concerned.  Why?  Simply because the $10-million charge is rather too late the hero,  being, firstly, not part of the original complaints, and secondly, the prosecution has now rested its case.  More importantly, even granting, yet without accepting, that the  Ombudsman has really the legal jurisdiction to investigate the CJ on allegedly anomalous money matters, Article 2.4 (which relate to unexplained wealth) has been scrapped by the impeachment court.  It is only the Senate that has the right to try an impeachment case.  At best, the Ombudsman's letter may only form some basis for a new impeachment case, but that may only happen one year from now.  Better luck next time, folks! 

Sweeping Dung Under The Rug

I am not surprised at all reading in the news that the Philippine government had built a fence with tarpaulins promoting tourism on the bridge along the highway that runs from the NAIA to the PICC where the ADB held its 45th annual meeting of board governors.  This country has always been famous, or notorious, for "sweeping ugly things under the rugs"  That's practically what PNoy's government has since been doing,  but with a slight difference: -  PNoy hides with impunity every wee bit of corruption that continues unabated under his watch, while he exposes everything that is not worthwhile under the previous administration.

It is ironic that while the ADB's principal objective is to wipe out poverty across the globe, we tend to conceal every semblance of poverty that surrounds us.  By blocking struggling families behind the fence, the government is clearly sending the message that dire poverty can be ignored.  It's then not surprising if the ADB continues to ignore us. 
\
Presidential spokesman Ricky Carandang depends his boss by saying any country will do a little fixing up before a guest arrives, while MMDA chair Tolentino says there is nothing wrong with beautifying our surroundings.  To these two lapdogs of PNoy I say:  "There is always something wrong behind a snow-fake, stupid!"

TELL IT TO THE MARINES, MR. PRESIDENT

I think the President has grossly overstated the effect of the P125/day increase in minimum wage that the labor sector is asking, when he computed it as follows: P125 x 22 days per month x 13 months per year times 40 million workers, and thus arrived at P1.4 trillion additional business cost per year.,  That computation simply defies plane logic.  The workers are asking for an increase in minimum wage.  Therefore, plain common sense suggests that that increase, if granted, applies only to workers on minimum wage, not necessarily to the total 40 million employees that we have, and most specifically to unorganized labor only, or those who have no union, and ergo, whose only chance to improve their working terms and conditions is the government.  This unorganized sector, receiving only the legal minimum wage, is undeniably only a very miniscule portion of the 40 million workers the President has used in his computation -- quite conveniently at that.

Of course, I realize the fact that in our related experiences in the past, the government had also allowed certain increases to other employees (whose prevailing daily wage is just slightly above minimum) to take care of possible pay distortions that the new minimum wage increase might entail.  But even if their said wage may in the interim suffer from some distortion, only very few, certainly not all the 40 million employees, are entitled to such pay-distortion adjustment.  At the very worst, those that have unions, could easily ask for even much higher adjustment in their next CBA.  Moreover,  the 40 million workers refer to all members of the labor force, including supervisors, professionals and perhaps even managerial staff whose salaries are way above the prevailing minimum wage and therefore need not be pay-adjusted.  At the very best, the only employees who really stand to benefit from the legislated minimum wage adjustments are those who, being unorganized, can not negotiate for higher pay and to whom, very much less, their respective employers do provide any merit rating pay adjustment system.  Government employees, also part of the 40 million workers the President was talking about, need not likewise be benefited by any legislated minimum wage adjustment because they do receive their annual pay increase under the government's Salary Standardization system.  In short, the President's computations are downright self-serving and grossly exaggerated: clearly at the expense of the poorest of the poor in our midst and times.

Chances are it was the business and industry sector of Philippine society that may have fed this pathetically wrong arithmetic to the President, who in turn had outright swallowed it hook, line and sinker. This sector has always told all past Presidents that they might be forced to lay off employees, or they would raise their commodity prices, every time the poorest workers of our society asks for a minimum wage adjustment.  The government has long been virtually held hostage by this sector in this fashion.  I thought PNoy was of a different breed when I voted for him.  I was wrong!  And so, to him I now shout all my voices horse:  Mr. President, you tell your very poor arithmetic to the Marines!