COALITION FOR CHANGE Stalwarts of the Partido Demokratiko Pilipino-Laban and the Nationalist People’s Coalition, among them Senator-elect Sherwin Gatchalian, Sen. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel 3rd and Davao del Norte Rep. Pantaleon “Bebot” Alvarez, raise their fists after signing the Coalition for Change agreement at the Diamond Residences in Makati City. PHOTO BY RENE H. DILAN

The political party that catapulted presumptive President Rodrigo Duterte to the highest post in the land has formed a coalition with the reputedly second-largest political party in the country in a move seen aimed at ensuring dominance of the House of Representatives.

Duterte’s Partido Demokratiko Pilipino-Laban and the Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC) sealed the deal on Friday, or a few days after PDP-Laban coalesced with the Nacionalista Party (NP) and dozens of party-list groups.

The NPC is headed by business tycoon Eduardo ”Danding” Cojuangco Jr.

The coalition is seen auguring well for the Speakership bid of newly elected Davao del Norte Rep. Pantaleon “Bebot” Alvarez, who had been handpicked by Duterte to be the next House leader.

“We have a minimum of 180 members of the coalition [supportive of my Speakership bid]. I already talked to Speaker Belmonte yesterday [Thursday]. Our meeting went well, the Speaker said he would be supportive of President Duterte’s call for change. Lalaban pa rin siya [He will still fight for] the Speakership, and we see him be ing the Minority [Leader],” Alvarez said on Friday, referring to incumbent Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. of the Liberal Party (LP).

The Davao del Norte congressman-elect added that PDP-Laban is also expected to ink a coalition pact with the National Union Party (NUP) headed by Antipolo City Rep. Robbie Puno.

“From here [meeting with the NPC], I have a scheduled meeting with NUP, hopefully within the day [we can agree],” Alvarez said in an interview.

In a separate interview, the PDP-Laban president, Sen. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel 3rd, expressed confidence that Alvarez already has the Speakership of the 17th Congress in the bag with the party’s coalition with the NPC now in place.

There are 44 NPC members who will be sitting as district representatives in the 17th Congress, on top of the party’s nine allied party-list representatives.

“He [Alvarez] has 180 out of the 300-member Congress. That should be enough, more than enough. And I am here [today] to tell them [lawmakers], why not extend such support to the Senate?” Pimentel said, referring to his bid to be the next Senate president.

“I am very optimistic that since we have new partners, we can pursue the agenda of the President and [Alvarez] will be the new Speaker of the House of Representatives,” the senator added.

The PDP-Laban earlier coalesced with the NP headed by former Senate President Manuel Villar Jr. and 47 party-list groups led by Ako Bicol Rep. Rodel Batocabe.

The House Majority Floor Leader, according to Alvarez, would either be Rep. Ronaldo Zamora of San Juan City (Metro Manila) or Rodolfo Fariñas of Ilocos Norte.

Camarines Norte Rep. Rolando Andaya, a former Budget chief who is an NPC member, was named by Alvarez as  possible chairman of the powerful House Committee on Appropriations.

Alvarez, however, refused to name LP members who will be shifting allegiance to the PDP-Laban.

“There are a lot who want to join us. We will know next week. If there are others who would still want to join us, they are welcome. The possibilities are endless,” he said.
The LP is headed by outgoing President Benigno Aquino 3rd.

XINZHENG, China: Scarves emblazoned with red dragons draped over their black business suits, Chinese officials lit incense and bowed solemnly at the feet of a mythical ancestor known as the Yellow Emperor.

The avowedly atheist Communist Party is promoting worship of the ancient figure as it seeks to bolster its legitimacy—and emphasize Chinese blood ties, including with Taiwan ahead of the inauguration of Beijing-skeptic president Tsai Ing-wen.

Thousands gathered in the heartland province of Henan, where the Yellow Emperor—described in archaic annals and present day schoolbooks as the founder of Chinese civilization—is said to have been born 5,000 years ago.

Shots from gold-painted cannon began the annual ceremony, and the crowd, many in replica antique costume, listened to a booming announcer heralding the “ancestor of the Chinese nation.”

High-ranking cadres—including the province’s top official, and a former vice culture minister—processed up a red carpet, placed offerings in front of an altar and gazed into the statue’s chiseled visage, before bowing.

Lydia Zhou, an investment manager who flew from Shanghai to attend, told Agence France-Presse: “I’m here to worship. He is our ancestor and this is his birthplace.”

The lauding of an individual comes as Communist chief Xi Jinping is increasingly lionized in China’s state-run media, and the announcer echoed his slogans: “Revive China, a one hundred year dream, ruling by law, moderate prosperity for all.”

Mixed up

Historians say there is little evidence the Yellow Emperor actually existed, but school textbooks widely describe him as the founder of Chinese culture and ancestor of all Chinese people—includeing its 55 official ethnic minorities, some of whom chafe against identifying as Chinese.

The same books assert China has existed for 5,000 years since his birth, though historians date the first Chinese dynasty—covering a tiny fraction of the present country—to around 1600 BC.

The Communist Party attempted to outlaw religion after taking power in 1949.

Under Mao Zedong, “Yellow Emperor worship was seen as feudal superstition,” Ren Dahuan, vice president of a state-run research association into the figure, told AFP.

But now the party says religion can be harnessed for social good ahead of it eventually melting away with economic progress.

Searching for tourist and investment income, officials in the emperor’s supposed birthplace of Xinzheng revived offerings in the 1990s. The ceremony was endorsed by the State Council, China’s Cabinet, in 2008.

Flesh and blood

With economic growth slowing, the ruling party has turned to a grab-bag of traditions as it attempts to portray itself as a natural outgrowth of Chinese culture.

“These events are becoming bigger and bigger, because the state needs them to explain its legitimacy,” said Zhu Dake, a cultural critic at Shanghai’s Tongji University.

At the same time it is looking to forge a single identity for an ethnically diverse population.

“The state needs this bloodline,” Zhu added. “It’s a political strategy. China is a multi-ethnic country. Chinese people are a mixed-up thing, rather than descendants of a single ancestor.”

The message of unity applies to all ethnic Chinese, including the diaspora abroad and those in Taiwan, which split from the mainland in 1949 at the end of a civil war.

Its new president Tsai—from the traditionally pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party—will be inaugurated on Friday.

Among those lighting incense in Xinzheng last month was the head of Beijing’s Taiwan Affairs Office, which handles relations with Taipei.

Similarly, the former vice-chairman of Taiwan’s incumbent Kuomintang party Chun Chun-po attended another event at the reputed site of the emperor’s death in neigboring Shaanxi province, telling local media: “As descendants of the Yellow Emperor, this is the happiest event in our life.”

His remarks recalled those of Taiwan’s outgoing leader Ma Ying-jeou at last year’s first cross-strait summit since 1949, when he said that people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait were “of Chinese nationality” and “children of the Yellow Emperor.”

For his part President Xi offered: “We are brothers connected by flesh even if our bones are broken, we are a family whose blood is thicker than water.”

Both men’s declarations were disparaged by many in Taiwan, where Tsai’s message of Taiwanese identity resonated with voters and surveys show people feel increasingly separate from the mainland.

But in the People’s Republic, where the ruling party tightly controls presentations of history, there are few such concerns.

After the official ceremonies at the Shaanxi tomb complex—refurbished a decade ago at a cost of around 250 million yuan (US$38 million)—thousands of ordinary citizens poured in, many prostrating themselves before the emperor’s statue.

“He definitely existed, there are ancient books and bone carvings which prove it,” said student Shen Yuyan. “He’s the ancestor of all Chinese ethnic groups and of Taiwanese people.”

AS he ascends the staircase of the palace a couple of months from now and enters his study, the new chief of state will immediately be greeted by important staff memos, the most important of which is the file marked foreign affairs that will be a brief on the powder keg in the West Philippine Sea and the simmering problem of peace and order in Mindanao which, unfortunately, has been internationalized. In treating these issues, it is hoped that the chief off state will be guided by the spirit of independence and nationalism while discarding the culture servility and mendicancy that has characterized our bilateral relations with our former colonizer. This is only in compliance with the constitutional mandate for the country, to pursue an independent foreign policy, the Constitution specifically states that in its relations with other nations that the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest and the right to self-determination.

It is to be noted that in the preservation of the integrity of the archipelago, the Constitution ordered that the government must preserve its domain as defined by the Treaty of Paris and historic treaties.

At a time when a neighboring country is nibbling at our national boundaries and a minority group is fighting for the creation of a sub-state, this mandate of the Constitution must be taken very seriously by the next tenant of Malacañang.

China has gained significant tactical advantage in the West Philippine Sea with its occupation of reefs and islets claimed by the Philippines in the face of the Obama pivot to Asia that involved the deployment of some 60 percent of US naval assets in the China Sea.

With the construction of structures on these islets, China is able to project its defense perimeter deep into the economic zones of the Philippines. Control of the Paracels, a base at Scarborough Shoal and the erection of facilities on Mischief Reef and Fiery Cross which can accommodate a complex of missile sites, fighter jets and surveillance stations will give China de facto control of larger swaths of airspace and water in the South China Sea. This development has caused much alarm in this country and those of its allies forcing this country to seek international arbitration and strengthen its alliance with the US through the EDCA.

How will standoff in the China Sea play out?

My best judgment is that China, having achieved a strategic advantage in the China Sea vis-à-vis the US and its allies, will now be wary about pushing the envelope farther since this would bring the standoff to the brink of war which in turn will work against China’s strategy to extend its soft power all over the world.

This soft power is designed to expand Chinese influence in Asia. Its reply to the US pivot to Asia through its “One Belt, One Road,” better known as modern-day Silk Road network which is intended for “five connections” with the world through trade, infrastructure, investment, capital and people, which in turn will create a community with shared interests, destiny and responsibilities. This is reminiscent of the Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere the Japanese invaders tried to market in the last war but a lot more ambitious. With this concept, China hopes to diversify exports, contribute to the development of Eurasia, increase access to food and energy, lessen dependence on the US currency and improve relations with developing countries in world affairs. To back up its commitment to the above project, China has poured some $100 billion in the Asian Infrastructure and Development Bank, which has now a membership of 57 countries including the Philippines.

The Chinese initiative described above can be viewed as an attempt to create trade and economic relations with the Asean community through trade, port and continental land bridges. In brief, China has a much bigger agenda than just playing bully in the South China Sea, thereby risking going to war with its smaller neighbors and courting a war with the United States and its allies.

Negotiations with China can cover a range of multifaceted relations we enjoy with our neighbor, with the end-view of forcing the latter to adhere to the rule of law governing the China Sea, specifically to accept a code of conduct that ensures the freedom of navigation in the disputed area.

Our relations with America in political and economic realms are ironclad while our relations with China are genetic with a quarter of our population tracing its ancestry to that mainland. If we went through a bloody Fil-American war during the annexation and put that behind us, if we have treated our Chinese brothers like second-class citizens in this country and they still maintain the friendship and confidence of our people, I am sure that we can manage the current crisis. If the new government can surmount present disagreement in the looming Asia Pacific century, which will surely be dominated by China, at least economically, this country will and can play a very important supporting role within the Asean+China partnership. This win-win scenario will be the fruit of accommodation rather than appeasement.

SOMETIMES newspaper people and photographers forget that they should be doing journalistic reporting instead of acts of clairvoyance.

This thought came to mind when a few days after the 2016 local and national elections, a leading national newspaper’s online edition came out with a worm’s-eye photo of a candidate for Philippine president, decked with a floral garland, gesticulating to an unseen audience against a backdrop of blue skies and cirrus clouds.

The stand-alone photo feature had this caption: “During his campaign sortie in Tabaco City, Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte seems to leave his fate to the heavens. The presumptive President has since taken matters into his hands and made himself scarce to media after his landslide win.”

The caption writer or the photographer evidently got totally carried away by the photo’s atmospherics. The caption made the gratuitous presumption that Mayor Duterte “seems to leave his fate to the heavens.” And I daresay that there was absolutely no logic nor correlation between that presumption and the succeeding observation that “he has since taken matters into his hands and made himself scarce to media after his landslide win.”
In short, with that photo and language misuse, that newspapaper was indulging not in honest-to-goodness journalism but in unwarranted blue-sky thinking.

***

Talking about objectivity, here’s a question posted by ‎Marianne Freya Gutib‎ recently on the Facebook page of Jose Carillo’s English Forum: “What’s the difference in meaning between ‘select’ (adjective) and ‘choice’ (adjective). When do we use each word?”

My reply to Marianne:
The adjectives “choice” and “select” are generally synonymous in the sense of having been preferred from a number or group in terms of a particular attribute. The difference is in the degree and manner of selection. A choice candidate in a lackluster election lineup may be the best of the lot but not entirely desirable, but a select group of candidates is more judiciously winnowed to include only those with truly outstanding qualities and no known major undesirable attributes.

***
Here’s another question, this time about sports news reporting, posted in the Forum recently by a new member who goes by the username Rix:
“Sir, I always watch sports action on TV and very often, I would hear sports commentators say, ‘The score is tied at 8 all; the score is again a deadlock at 89 apiece.’ Shouldn’t it be, ‘The score is tied at 8,’ or ‘The score is again a deadlock at 89?’This is because “all” and “apiece’ are obviously redundant.”

My reply to Rix:
Anything goes in the language of sports, redundancies and all. Grammatical correctness isn’t really the strongest suit of sportscasters; creating excitement and getting excited themselves is the name of the game. How dry sportscasting would be if sportscasters attempted to be exemplars of English grammar and usage all the time during a breakneck sporting event!

***
Lastly, here’s a grammar question posted in the Forum by new member Youssef:
“Which is correct, ‘Other equipment will be purchased after the second quarter,” or “Other equipments will be purchased after the second quarter.’?”

My reply to Youssef:
The word “equipment” is a mass, noncount noun that in normal usage can be both singular or plural depending on whether it refers to a single unit or to several units of that equipment. In its plural form, it doesn’t need the suffix “-s” but stays as is—“equipment.”

Also, a noun preceded by the adjective “other” must be in its plural form, as in “Other girls are joining the picnic.” In the case of “equipment,” of course, it’s already plural even without “-s” as suffix.

So, assuming you mean to say that several units of that “equipment” will be purchased, the correct phrasing of the statement you presented would be the following: “Other equipment will be purchased after the second quarter.”

Visit Jose Carillo’s English Forum, http://josecarilloforum.com. Visit me on Facebook. Follow me at Twitter.com @J8Carillo. E-mail: j8carillo@yahoo.com

THIS presidential election is like no other.

Most election years around this time, I do a TV show on nasty political commercials.
Pundits explain which ads worked, which didn’t, and who won because he raised more money and spent more on negative ads.

Among Republicans this year, says Ad Age, Jeb Bush’s campaign and supporters spent the most, $80 million, followed by Marco Rubio’s at $70 million. It didn’t seem to help.
Democrats spent even more. Hillary Clinton’s campaign and backers spent $153 million and Bernie Sanders’ $76 million.

Donald Trump, of course, was the brunt of much of that negative advertising. Clinton, Sanders, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Bush, the Club for Growth, Our Principles, New Day for America, Correct the Record and Keep the Promise super PACs ran commercials that I thought would devastate the Trump campaign.

Some replayed his crude comments: “Does she have a good body? No! Does she have a fat ass? Absolutely.”

Some replayed flip-flops. After Trump complained about China “stealing our jobs,” David Letterman asked Trump where his ties came from. “China,” admitted Trump.

“Where are your shirts made?” asked Letterman.

“We employ people in Bangladesh,” said Trump. And in a debate, he said, “We’re doing many, many deals outside of the United States.”

Political commercials showed that Trump once pushed for forms of Obamacare that most Republicans hate. In one ad, a reporter asked Trump about health care:
Reporter: Universal health care?

Trump: I am going to take care of everybody.

Reporter: Who pays for it?

Trump: The government is going to pay for it.

Other ads played a sound bite of Trump saying, “I probably identify more as a Democrat.”

Trump’s opponents spent millions to reveal Trump in his own words, caught contradicting himself on TV. Pundits called the ads “devastating.” Most Republican primary voters didn’t care.

Soon, the ads may get still nastier.

Every election season pundits complain about “negative campaigning.” When President Obama last ran, he said, “It can seem like a return to civility is not possible.” Four years before, reporters claimed “candidates have taken dirty to a whole new level.”

People say they long for a return to politeness in politics—but politics was never polite.

Thomas Jefferson’s supporters printed handbills that said: “John Adams is a blind, bald, crippled, toothless man who secretly wants to start a war with France. When he is not busy importing mistresses from Europe, he’s trying to marry one of his sons to a daughter of King George III.”

Adams supporters came back with: “If Thomas Jefferson wins, murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest will be openly taught and practiced. Are you prepared to see your dwellings in flames? Female chastity violated? Children writhing on the pike?”

Had TV existed then, those would have been powerful commercials.

One hundred sixty-eight years later, when Barry Goldwater ran against Lyndon Johnson, Johnson supporters claimed Goldwater was a John Birch Society member and a schizophrenic. A magazine called “Fact” got a thousand psychiatrists to sign a statement that said Goldwater was insane. None of it was true, and Goldwater later won a defamation suit against Fact. But by then, the election was over.

Despite such deceit, we’re probably better off with negative ads.

Every year some candidates say, “I will run a positive campaign.”

Part of my brain says, “That would be nice; maybe we’ll learn more about their plans.” But research shows that’s rarely true. Fluffy “positive” ads don’t tell us much.

This year Bernie Sanders ran ads showing him hugging people while cheering crowds surrounded him and singers sang “All come to look for America.”

What does that even mean?

The beauty of negative ads is that the accusations at least purport to be facts. Vanderbilt University political scientist John Geer found that three-quarters of negative political ads from 1960 to 2004 attacked real statements of policy from the opposing candidate. Such policy statements can be checked.

Even if those statements turn out to be based on lies, those lies force the other side to reply with facts. Voters actually learn something. And usually, eventually, the truth comes out.
So two cheers for negative ads—something good comes from nasty. I’ll play some of the worst ads on my show this week. The messages are mean, but truth often is.

Creators Syndicate
COPYRIGHT 2016 CREATORS.COM

“Those who make peaceful revolutions impossible render violent revolutions inevitable.”
-President John Fitzgerald Kennedy

EVERY revolutionary has dreams. In the case of Chairman Nur Misuari of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), he dreams of Mindanao independence. Chairman Nur is a Tausug, the Mindanao tribe that rules the provinces of Sulu, Tawi-Tawi and Basilan—all island-provinces in Southern Mindanao.

I did not have the opportunity to meet Nur Misuari either in the University of the Philippines at the Diliman campus or in Mindanao. While I read about him in the Manila dailies and saw him in Philippine television, our paths never crossed until late 1986.
It was Abul Khayr Alonto, scion of the legendary Alonto family of Lanao, who created the opportunity for me to meet with Nur Misuari outside the country. Abul, a Maranao, which is the Mindanao tribe that controls the provinces of Lanao del Sur and Lanao del Norte, was once the vice-chairman of the MNLF under Misuari. He is the son of then-Gov. Madki Alonto, who was appointed by President Cory Aquino as Philippine Ambassador to Libya.
Abul Khayr was one of the staunchest and youngest opposition leaders in Mindanao and he organized and headed the Muslim Federal Party based in Marawi City, the capital of Lanao del Sur. As regional chairman of the united opposition in the country, popularly known as the United Democratic Opposition (UNIDO), I and Abul became the closest of friends.

After Cory Aquino was installed President of the Philippines, I asked Abul to place me in touch with Misuari, considering that as a kid and editor-in-chief of the Philippine Collegian, the official student publication of the University of the Philippines (UP), I also dreamed of seeing Mindanao independent from the Republic of the Philippines.

Why should Misuari and I, and other dreamers from Mindanao, want Mindanao independence? There are several incontestable reasons why, we believe, Mindanao should be independent from the Republic of the Philippines. First, one national administration after another come and go, yet none of them gives us adequate representation in the highest councils of government—from the executive to Congress and the judiciary. In the history of the Republic of the Philippines, 12 Presidents come from Luzon—Emilio Aguinaldo of Cavite, Manuel Luis Quezon of Quezon province (formerly Tayabas), Jose P. Laurel of Batangas, Elpidio Quirino of Ilocos Norte, Ramon Magsaysay of Zambales, Diosdado Macapagal of Pampanga, Ferdinand E. Marcos of Ilocos Norte, Corazon Aquino of Tarlac, Fidel V. Ramos of Pangasinan , Joseph Estrada of Metro Manila, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo of Pampanga, and Benigno Aquino III of Tarlac; three from the Visayas—Sergio Osmena, Sr. of Cebu; Manuel Acuña Roxas of Capiz, and Carlos P. Garcia of Bohol; none from Mindanao.

Second, Mindanao is one of the richest islands in the Philippines, considering its vast natural resources. Almost all minerals in the Mendelyev scale are in Mindanao—gold, copper, nickel, iron, manganese, silver. It contributes a lot to the national treasury yet it does not have enough share of national development.

Third, Mindanaoans have no participation in defining national policies, including those that affect Mindanao and the lives of millions of Midanaoans, concrete example of this is the recently concluded establishment of Bangsa Moro, which benefits only a minority within a minority in the Maguindanao provinces.

Fourth, the continuing pursuit of the divide and rule policy in Mindanao by the national government—pitting Christians against Muslims; lumads—the native Mindanaoans—against Muslims and Christians; driving a wedge among differing Muslim tribes.
Fifth, discrimination against Mindanaoans.

With these arguments alone, Nur Misuari has every right to rebel against the national government and move for Mindanao independence. But Misuari’s problem has always been an error in the choice of strategy and tactics, the same errors that the other rebel movements in this country continue to commit.

Since the Muslim population of Mindanao is only about 15 percent of the whole area, it is irrational to imagine that a Muslim will be the leader of Mindanao, at least initially. It is unthinkable. There is no charismatic Muslim leader who could be an instrument in uniting the various contending elements on the islands, Nur Misuari including.

Nur could not unite the various tribes of Muslims in Mindanao. The big ones are Maranao, Maguindanao and Tausug. There is always a battle of supremacy among these tribes. The best time for Chairman Misuari to have united the Muslims in Mindanao was when Abul Khayr Alonto became the vice-chairman of the MNLF. But that was short-lived. While Abul Khayr joined the political mainstream, Nur Misuari continued with his revolutionary war against the Philippine national government. But considering his diminishing living space in his area of operations, he had to go to Muslim foreign countries to escape capture and to have a base to launch his international propaganda campaign.

As a credit to the intelligence and creativity of Chairman Misuari, he managed to get support from the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC). While MNLF could not secure membership in the OIC, Chairman Misuari secured an observer status for his revolutionary organization. Not any Muslim leader has done this precedent-setting achievement. Only Nur did it and he loomed large in Muslim Mindanao and the international Muslim community. Countries like Malaysia and Libya gave Misuari active and meaningful support, including refuge and freedom of movement in their territories, despite their continuing diplomatic relations with the Republic of the Philippines.

It was in this setting that I decided to see Misuari, courtesy of Abul Khayr Alonto. While Abul was no longer vice-chairman of the MNLF, still he had continuing linkages with Nur.

So Abul and I planned this trip to the Middle East via London, England. What was the rationale behind the trip? It was to find ways of agreement to forge an alliance between the Muslims and Christians in Mindanao.

The plan was to see each other in Saudi Arabia. Abul and I flew to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, for the scheduled appointment and stayed at the Marriott Hotel. Chairman Misuari failed to make the appointment as he was not granted a visa to enter Saudi Arabia, considering he was based in Tripoli, Libya, and the rulers of Saudi Arabia wanted to be away from any controversial connections.

We flew back to London to wait for Misuari’s notice on the time and place where we could meet. Misuari told Abul it would be in Damascus, Syria. We flew to Damascus and stayed at the Sheraton Hotel, where Nur met us in our room. After the usual greetings, Nur opened the conversation, saying; “It’s good of you to come all the way from the other side of the world.”

“Well, for Mindanao, I’ll fly to the ends of the Earth,” I answered.

“What can we do now to bring about Christian-Muslim unity in Mindanao?” he asked.

“Simple, we design a common plan of action. Then we implement it and determine the mechanics of power-sharing. Let me be frank with you, though. As of now, we do not have funds to pursue revolutionary action. Since you have access to funds, you must help us,” I replied.

“What do you need?” he asked.

“Well, we need to arm our people now,” I answered.

“How many arms do you need?” Nur asked.

“Ten thousand Armalites,” I said.

“That’s not difficult to produce. I’ll get in touch with you when I’m ready,” he answered.
We parted ways after that and I saw Nur drive away from Sheraton in a limousine with a flag, which I assumed was that of the MNLF.

It was years later that I met Nur Misuari again. He was facing charges of rebellion, which is non-bailable. He was confined in Fort Sto. Domingo, Laguna, in the same cottage that was home of President Joseph Estrada when he was charged with plunder, another non-bailable offense. Nur decided to get me as one of his lawyers.

The trial was in Fort Sto. Domingo. This was to ensure the safety of Nur and eliminate the possibility of escape. We filed a petition for bail on the ground that the evidence of guilt was not strong. When such petition is filed by the defense, under the rules in our courts, the prosecution must present evidence proving the guilt of the accused is strong to prevent bail from being granted. In the course of the presentation of evidence for the prosecution, election fever in 2004 was beginning to intervene in the case of Nur.

One uneventful morning, I saw buried in the inside pages of a Manila daily a story that Chairman Misuari was endorsing the candidacy of President Gloria Arroyo for another run of the presidency. I was disturbed and flabbergasted by the news of Nur’s endorsement of Gloria’s bid as she was running a graft-ridden and immoral administration.

I rushed to Fort Sto. Domingo to get Nur’s confirmation or denial of the news report.

When I arrived at Nur’s cottage, I immediately asked him, “Is the news story correct you endorsed Gloria’s candidacy?”

“Yes, Bono, I did,” he meekly answered.

“Why? I thought Gloria brought you here and, therefore, she is your enemy.” I asked him in a very emphatic language.

“You know, Bono, Speaker Joe de Venecia and National Security Adviser Bert Gonzales came to see me here telling me that if I endorse Gloria for President, I will be ordered released before the May 2004 elections,” he answered in his usual modulated and unpretentious words.

“And you believed them?” I asked Nur, unbelieving in what I heard.

“Yes, Bono. These two people are gentlemen. I expect them to live up to their commitment,” Nur answered, the gentleman that he is.

“You know Nur, in this game, in the words of Ninoy Aquino, there are no gentlemen because gentlemen finish last. This is war, Nur, and in war there is no room for gentlemen,” I commented.

“Bono, I cannot help but believe in them. I have been here for two years and I’m already tired. I’m growing old,” he said very sadly.

“But, are you a revolutionary?” I asked, a little irritated by his reply.

“Of course, I am,” he replied, maintaining his composure as a gentleman.

“If that is the case, you still have 26 years in prison because that is the time Nelson Mandela spent in the apartheid prisons to build a new South Africa,” I told Nur, half jokingly.

Almost immediately and seriously, he answered, “Bono, I don’t think I can survive that long in prison.”

In an effort to lighten the seriousness of the conversation, I asked Nur, “Did you finish at UP and taught there too?”

“Yes, I did. Why?” Nur answered, probably noticing the impish look in my face.

“You know, Nur, you did something which a UP student of your caliber should never have done. The UP student of your intelligence would only have given an endorsement of the candidacy of Gloria at the gate of this Fort while her representative was handing you the release order. Kaliwaan ‘yan (which means, simultaneous exchange of documents).

Nur just smiled and our conversation on his endorsement of Gloria’s presidential candidacy ended there. But not quite! A week later, I received a phone call from Nur asking me to go to Fort Sto. Domingo on a very urgent matter. As soon as I was seated in his cottage, he said: “Bono, I’m sorry. I have to ask you to come here because Mike Arroyo told me I could not be released unless I drop you as my lawyer.”

“Then, why did you not dismiss me as your lawyer? As a friend I want you to be free.
Dropping me as your lawyer makes no difference to me as long as you’ll immediately go free. But, let me tell you this, I don’t think they’ll set you free,” I told him very seriously.

“I can’t dismiss you, I owe you a lot. Just withdraw your appearance, please,” he replied. I withdrew my appearance the following day but Nur was not released even after the court received my withdrawal. I was right. It took his new lawyers to pursue his motion for bail for about five years before he was released by the court, not because of the commitment of Speaker de Venecia, NSA Bert Gonzales or Mike Arroyo, the controversial husband of the equally controversial President Gloria Arroyo.

When I heard Chairman Nur was released, I sought him out and I found him in a rented
apartment at one of the side streets of Tomas Morato Avenue, Quezon City. He had grown old, with graying hair. I greeted him, saying, “Mr. Chairman, you look good.”

“I’m OK,” he replied with the same unfading gentlemanly and friendly smile.” By the way, Bono, can you get me a copy of General Abat’s book, The Day We Almost Lost Mindanao,” Nur continued.

“Yes, I will,” I assured him, considering that General Fortunato “Tony” Abat, former secretary of National Defense and commanding general of the Philippine Army gave me a copy of his book.

“By the way, Nur, I hope you don’t mind if I suggest to you to change your strategy and tactics in your war for Mindanao independence,” I told him.

“No, I don’t,” he immediately replied.

“I suppose you know how to kill a snake?” I asked Nur.

“Of course, everybody does—by cutting the head,” he answered with authority.

“What is the head of the snake that is the Philippines? It’s Manila. Then, why are you waging the war for independence in Mindanao? That is the tail! You should wage it in Manila. By waging the war for independence in Mindanao, you bring death and destruction to Mindanao and Mindanaoans. This is not the way to win Mindanao independence!” I categorically told Nur!

Chairman Nur Misuari’s reply was neither approval nor dissent. It was a warning. “You know, Bono, you are a dangerous man! Don’t tell anybody about that.” We ended the conversation with that note.

I was quite amused by Nur’s warning. Why should I be a dangerous man when I am not the head of the MNLF? I am only a political theoretician—analyzing movements and events; probing strategies and tactics; and trying to read the minds and feel the hearts of participating personalities. But Nur must have aged. No wonder his followers call him Maas, a Cebuano-Visayan term for someone who is very old or aged. When one has grown very old, one is afraid of the dark or even the light. When one is afraid of the dark or even the light and feels aging, one ceases to be a revolutionary in the real sense of the term. Revolutionaries are not afraid. They do not age. When you are afraid, you cannot wage revolutions because courage is a major component of a revolution, especially of revolutionary leadership. It is also a crime for a revolutionary to grow old. Revolutionary dreams never die, they do not fade away—they survive time and circumstance.

That was the last time I talked with Nur. The next time I saw him was on television, charged with having ordered and orchestrated the siege of Zamboanga City by MNLF troopers. If true, then Chairman Nur has not integrated into his system a change of strategy and tactics in the war for Mindanao independence. He was still enmeshed in old, hackneyed and antediluvian strategy and tactics which never worked in the past; not working in the present; and doomed to fail in the future. The recent MNLF experience in the Zamboanga City siege shows, beyond doubt, the inutility of the MNLF strategy and tactics in trying to win the war for Mindanao independence. The MNLF failure is doubly the failure of Chairman Nur Misuari.

Life is a continuing learning process. The moment the process stops, the memorial park or the dustbin of history is just around the corner. Is Chairman Nur Misuari’s waiting for that moment, so typical of those who have failed? Will Misuari ever learn? It is not impossible for him to learn, after all he graduated and taught at the University of the Philippines—the university that champions excellence and effective leadership. Probably it is about time he reviewed his George Santayana, the Spanish philosopher, who is credited to have said: “Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it.” What a pity if Chairman Nur Misuari does not learn the lessons of history or if he does, when events have already overtaken him.

THE brotherhood of pen pushers is vigorously opposing the appointment of lawyer Salvador Panelo as presidential spokesman. The National Press Club headed by Paul Gutierrez has already issued a statement urging President-elect Rodrigo Duterte to reconsider this appointment. I join Paul and the NPC leadership in this call against Panelo.

The main peeve of the NPC at Panelo is that he’s the lawyer of the Ampatuans, the main suspects in the 2009 Maguindanao massacre where 34 media men were among the victims.

“Definitely, members of the press would find it hard to interact and work with a presidential spokesman whose main clients are the suspects in the wholesale murder of the members of the press that has outraged the entire world,” Paul said.

Perhaps, Panelo may argue that the Ampatuans are entitled to legal counsel and that he’s merely answering the call of his profession when hired by the massacre suspects. Oh well, I remember that well-respected former Sen. Rene Saguisag had also served as counsel for Hubert Webb, Mayor Antonio Sanchez and former President Erap Estrada. But Saguisag is a very different personality from Panelo.

Saguisag has never been known to charge astronomical fees for his legal services. He was No. 3 in the 1962 Bar exams (where my town mate from Lupao, Nueva Ecija, Virgilio Jara, was No. 5) but he often gives his services pro bono. No wonder, he never became rich like other lawyers who aren’t as brilliant as he is.

Panelo’s defense of the Ampatuans has understandably drawn the ire not only of the press but also of relatives of victims of the Maguindanao massacre. After Panelo’s claims of “frame-up” and of testimonies/pieces of evidence “fraught with lies,” there’s no way he could gain their sympathy.

Panelo may be articulate, a good speaker, but he hasn’t shown any aptitude at dealing with the press. He’s short fused and as far as I have seen, he ignores some questions he doesn’t like or even ridicules reporters for asking what he considers repetitive or irrelevant questions. Unless Panelo learns how to deal with reporters, especially the “Malacañang brat pack,” he’ll be incapable of presenting the better side of the incoming administration.

Rather than wait for the time when Panelo will be in the media’s “hit list” (or is it more appropriately called “shit list?”), it’s best for Duterte to reconsider his appointment of this controversial lawyer as his spokesman. If his services are direly needed, give him a post, perhaps as presidential legal counsel, where he’ll have fewer opportunities to inflict himself on the press.

Another flaky appointee

The appointment of Las Piñas Rep. Mark Villar as public works secretary is also drawing some flaks. The main beef against him is the perceived conflict of interest for he’s CEO of a giant real-estate company that could benefit from the construction of public roads around their housing projects.

Another issue, raised by noted election lawyer Romulo Macalintal, is that Villar will be violating the law against refusing to serve a post after winning it in an election. There have been many instances where a senator or congressman vacated his seat in favor of a Cabinet post, among them Senators Raul Manglapus and Blas Ople as foreign affairs secretary, Rep. Edel Amante as executive secretary, Rep. Robert Barbers as DILG secretary, and Rep. Simeon Datumanong as public works secretary. In all cases, they first took their oath of office as senators or congressmen before accepting a Cabinet position. Let’s see if Villar will no longer take his oath and assume immediately his Cabinet position.

I remember the case of then-Rep. Rodrigo Duterte, who wanted to resign because he was getting impatient at the slow pace of legislative work. He took back his resignation when he was told by the House legal counsel that he could be charged with abandonment of office should he do so. The late Antonio Diaz also didn’t proceed with his planned resignation for the same reason. Then, there’s the case of the late Cesar Climaco, of Zamboanga City, who refused to serve in the Batasan, saying this was a useless post under martial law.

Nobody has been charged yet with abandonment of public office. Unless there’s a law specifically prohibiting elective officials from accepting an appointive position, I don’t think there’ll be any such charges. Of course, if there’s a shift to a parliamentary form of government, then the appointment of a Member of Parliament to a Cabinet post will be par for the course.

19espiloy47@gmail.com

A Kicker Daily News story exactly a month ago (April 20) at this writing tells of an Australia-based overseas Filipino worker (OFW) who claimed that he lost his job “due to unruly pro-Duterte peers, mayor’s rape remarks.”

Kicker News said the OFW claimed “some of his co-workers were rabid Duterte supporters who were unruly and uncouth,” and that their [Australian?] boss felt insulted by Duterte’s remark” and “decided not to renew their contracts.”

Apparently some 50 OFWs were supposed to be involved. Kicker News asked “Did 50 overseas Filipinos workers (OFWs) in Australia just lose their jobs because of Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte’s rape remark?”

Kicker News said that “In a post on the Facebook page of Philippines Defense Forces Forum, a person claiming to be an OFW in Australia said his contract won’t be renewed because of his pro-Duterte colleagues’ unruly behavior and the mayor’s remark involving slain Australian missionary Jacqueline Hamill.”

The OFW’s post reportedly says, per Kicker News: “Sir, I am (a) Filipino working here in Australia. Many of us OFWs who work for the same company live in a company-provided apartment complex here and there’s a group of around 10-15 OFWs from Mindanao who are rabid Duterte supporters, they are very mayabang [arrogant] and even bullied another OFW who openly said that he is against Duterte, they hang Duterte posters over the railings and wear Duterte shirts all the time.”

Apparently, the pro-Duterte Filipinos had been hanging posters and holding happy-talk sessions where they spoke with admiration about now President-elect Rody. But the OFW said in his post that “his pro-Duterte colleagues stopped hanging posters and [holding] their gatherings after word of the mayor’s remarks reached their office.”

The OFW continued: “The owner of the company we’re working for is a very devout Christian and she felt insulted by Duterte’s comments against her fellow Aussie, our supervisor already told us today that the contracts of all of us 50 Filipino workers will no longer be renewed, that we will be replaced by Pacific Islanders.”

This story has “gone viral” on social media. But there is no indication, much less proof that it is true.

Migrante’s pessimistic report

Last February, Migrante was quoted in a CNN Philippines report written by Pia Bonalos, with the headline “Migrante: At least 50,000 OFWs stand to lose jobs.”

The story has a subhead: “According to one Filipino, OFWs have been losing jobs since October.” It goes:

“Metro Manila (CNN Philippines)—Migrante party-list, a group supporting the rights of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs), warned Wednesday (February 17) that at least 50,000 Filipinos in Saudi Arabia will be out of jobs by March, as a result of the ongoing oil crisis in the Middle East.

“The drop in prices has taken a toll on the Saudi government’s budget, since most of its wealth comes from oil production.

“OFWs losing their jobs have been commonplace since October, said Rodel Perciana, an electrical foreman who was retrenched from his job in Saudi last December.

“Stop work ang mga kasamahan doon, pati sa Bin Laden at sa Saudi Oger,” he said.

“[Translation: “There has been a Stop Work Order in my company, as well as in Bin Laden and Saudi Oger.”]

“Bin Laden Co. and Saudi Oger Ltd are two of the biggest contractors hired by the government for construction projects.

“Perciana said most unemployed Filipinos in Saudi cannot leave because they are still waiting for their end-of-contract benefits.

“Others have filed cases against their companies for non-payment of wages and other labor violations.

“Migrante is appealing for the government’s help in extending OFWs’ work permits, as well as acquiring the benefits they are due.

“Malinaw na krisis na ito. Ano ba pamantayan ng krisis? Dapat bang may mamatay pa?” said Garry Martinez of Migrante.

[Translation: “This is clearly a crisis. Does someone have to die for this situation to qualify as a crisis?”]

“The Department of Labor and Employment said it can help with extending work permits, depending on the status of the worker. It also vowed to assist workers in securing employment benefits.

“According to the government, livelihood programs and alternative jobs also await OFWs who choose to come home.”

* * *

No mass job loss has been happening, thank God.

But if the European countries and the US will be like the UK, as described in the following story from London’s Financial Mail, we Filipinos should really be ready.

* * *

1.8M jobs at risk as small firm owners plan exit

BY VICKI OWEN
FINANCIAL MAIL ON SUNDAY, LONDON

MORE than 1.8 million jobs could be lost as 370,000 small businesses plan to cease trading over the next five years, according to new research.

These businesses each employ close to five employees on average.

The survey by Opinium for Bizdaq, a marketplace for businesses up for sale, found that a further 424,000 business owners plan to quit their companies by selling them within five years—a method which is far more likely to protect jobs.

Of the 1.8 million jobs that could be affected by closures, 370,000 will be within the next 12 months, as small business owners start to cease trading, said Bizdaq.

The company’s chief executive, Sean Mallon, said: ‘It is astonishing, given the Government’s rhetoric around job creation, that little is being done to preserve the number of jobs at risk within Britain’s small businesses.

‘If the Government were to make leaving a business easier and promote this as the “norm,” then hard working small business owners could capitalize on their efforts and we could retain more than 1.8 million jobs—it’s a win-win situation.’

The survey found that the business owners most likely to be thinking about an exit within five years are those in London, at 43 percent. Those in the East of England are happiest running their firms, with 11 percent considering exiting.

The revenue of a business did not affect whether an owner was planning to leave—the East of England had both the lowest exit rate and the lowest average revenue, while the East Midlands—which had the highest average revenue—was second only to London for business owners looking to exit.

With the EU referendum edging closer, small business owners across the UK are still split on whether to leave or not—41 percent said the UK should stay in the EU, 44 per cent were in favor of leaving, and 15 percent said they were still undecided.

The region most likely to support staying was Wales, with 53 percent of respondents for remaining, while the North West is most likely to support leaving, with 59 per cent in favor of Brexit.

The survey also revealed that small businesses with higher revenue were more likely to want to stay in the EU. The average annual revenue of those in the remain camp was pounds sterling 93,000 against pounds sterling 84,000 for those wanting to leave.

The sectors most likely to support Brexit were the hospitality, construction and professional services industries, while those in education, IT and wholesale wanted to remain.

Mallon said: ‘It is clear that Britain’s small business owners are relatively undecided as to whether it’s “better the devil you know” and remain in the EU, or whether their business would benefit from less EU regulation and more state control. It seems the larger the business, the more EU trade they are likely to have and there seems to be a correlation with these companies wanting to remain in the EU.’

Labor MP Chuka Umunna, who was Shadow Business Secretary until last year, said last week: ‘The Leave campaign often claims that our micro, small- and medium-sized businesses are more in favor of leaving Europe than our bigger businesses, who favor remaining. But there is no evidence for this. Not only are the polls clear—a majority of small businesses consistently support staying in the EU—so is the logic.

‘Our small businesses benefit from the EU’s single market—tariff-free trade and full access to a market of 500 million people. In the single market, they benefit from a simple set of rules, meaning they don’t have to have multiple production lines due to differing product standards.’

Former Business Secretary Vince Cable said last week that it was a myth that Brexit would mean less red tape for small firms.

©2016 Daily Mail (London) / Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

MOST economists and economic managers of nations like the Philippines correctly hold that mining is an essential part of their countries’ development. That’s because mining yields financial returns more quickly than other areas of industry and natural-resource exploitation.

But there is a lot of truth to the claim that in our country the profits in the billions annually yielded by mining ventures largely go to foreigners and rich Filipinos who control the mines and very little of the bonanza goes to the state, the local governments and hardly anything goes to the ordinary people of the mining towns and villages.

Yesterday morning, something unpleasant and mildly violent happened involving the mining industry, the government agencies regulating it and members of communities distressed by wrong things the latter have been complaining about for years.

We think the authorities should be aware that one day, if they continue to condone the illegal activities of unprincipled industrialists who injure the people, real violence could break out.

This is the statement and report of the militant Alyansa Tigil Mina (ATM) about the incident.

Distressed communities lock down
DENR as send-off to PNoy and Cabinet

‘Six years of inaction and injustice’ decried by mining-affected communities
A hundred members of communities displeased with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources stormed the gates of the DENR-Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) on Visayas Avenue, locking the office down until a moratorium on large-scale mining across the country is released.

The mobilization consisted of distressed mining-affected communities supporting communities from Metro Manila and environmental advocates, protesting the “six years of inaction and injustice” against the environment and the people under the Aquino administration.

“President Aquino and his administration, from his first year in office up until his last remaining days, have continued to side with large corporations at the cost of the health, livelihood and security of communities affected by disasters, extractive industries and dirty energy and development projects,” said Atty. Aaron Pedrosa, secretary-general of Sanlakas.

“The most recent confrontation on Manicani Island between communities and a docking ship from the Hinatuan Mining Corp. is a testament of the failure of the DENR to secure mining-affected communities from the sustained operations of suspended mining companies,” said Pedrosa, who also heads Bulig Visayas, a broad solidarity network of affected communities demanding an equitable, just, sustainable and people-oriented rehabilitation and development in disaster-affected communities in the Visayas.

“Last May 15, at about seven o’clock in the evening, a large ship from the Hinatuan Mining Corp. (HMC) attempted to dock on the island and seize the mined nickel resources from the area. The residents of Manicani were quick to assemble and block the HMC representatives, who were even escorted by the PNP-R8,” according to Pascualito Ilagan, of the Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ) Visayas Chapter.

Ilagan reiterated that the HMC was ordered to cease all mining operations as part of its suspension, following its disregard of the environmental protection mechanisms set by the DENR itself. “However, under the guise of ‘rehabilitation,’ the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) Region 8 has issued an Ore Transport Permit, enabling the company to grab mined nickel from the island. This was greatly opposed by the communities in the area,” Ilagan added.

The community organization Save Manicani Movement (SAMAMO) has since called upon the public, media organizations and newly-elected officials, particularly the presumptive President Rodrigo Duterte to stand with them and protect the interests of the residents of Manicani Island.

“We demand the DENR to cancel the permit it has issued and fully stop HMC’s mining operations, including its attempts to hoard the mined resources from the island. HMC must also provide compensation for the destruction it has brought to Manicani,” said SAMAMO Public Relations Officer Becky Destajol.

“We also call upon the newly-elected local and national officials to side with the people of Manicani who have suffered enough destruction and displacement because of the failed rehabilitation program in our area and the presence of large-scale mining activities,” Destajol added.

“The demands of the residents of Manicani echo the demands of many other mining affected communities and indigenous peoples who have time and again assembled in front of the DENR,” said Atty. Pedrosa.

“From those terrorized continuing mining operations in Sta. Cruz, Zambales, all the way to Guian, Samar and to other areas in the country plagued by the environmental destruction, loss of livelihood, deterioration of health and harassment brought about by mining companies, mining-affected communities and environmental advocates demand a full moratorium on large-scale mining activities in the country,” Pedrosa continued.

Pedrosa challenged President-elect Rodrigo Duterte to rectify the mistakes of the Aquino administration and bring about the change mining-affected communities are expecting.
“Environmental advocates and disaster-vulnerable communities will not stop demanding their rights and security even after Aquino leaves office. We urge the presumptive President to side with us in this battle for our environment and the future.” Pedrosa concluded.

THE Senate and the House of Representatives will convene as the National Board of Canvassers (NBOC) on Tuesday to prepare for the canvassing of votes for the presidential and vice presidential election.

Senate President Franklin Drilon and Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. will lead the two chambers in adopting the rules and creating the Senate and House panels that will form the Joint Canvassing Committee.

The actual canvassing of votes will begin on Wednesday at the House of Representatives.
“On May 23, the Senate will first finish its work and pass on third reading a number of bills which are on the last stages of enactment. The next day we will proceed to join the House in convening the NBOC,” Senate Secretary Oscar Yabes said.

Yabes noted that the consolidated canvassing system, which received the electronically-transmitted certificates of canvass (COCs) from provincial and city boards of canvassers, as well as special canvassing panels for overseas absentee voting, has been initialized and stored at the Batasang Pambansa since May 9.

“Likewise, we will physically transport to the House on May 24, Tuesday, all of the ballot boxes purportedly containing COCs and election returns which, as mandated by the Constitution, have been earlier transmitted to the Senate,” he said.

Under Article VII, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution, the Senate and the House of Representatives are tasked to canvass the votes for the presidential and vice presidential elections “upon determination of the authenticity and due execution thereof in the manner provided by law.”

“Unlike the senatorial and local elections where the canvassing of votes and the proclamation of the winning candidates are conducted by the Commission on Elections, it is Congress which canvasses the votes and proclaims the next president and vice-president,” Yabes explained.

Partial and unofficial tally showed Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte getting an unassailable lead of over six million votes against his closest rival, former Interior Secretary Manuel “Mar” Roxas 2nd.

The vice presidential race remains tight with Camarines Rep. Leni Robredo leading with only around 200,000 votes against Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.

PRESIDENT Benigno Aquino 3rd and other Malacañang officials have started packing up their things as they get ready to leave their posts on June 30.

Communications Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. said his staff at the Presidential Communications Operations Office have begun “cleaning up” for the turnover to the next occupants.

“These preparations… even I have started to clean up as we prepare to go. It’s only natural because everyone knows when we have to go. It is only proper to prepare for it,” he told Palace reporters.

Asked to describe his six-year stay in Malacañang, Coloma said: “It was very meaningful. There was a lot of learning.”

At the same time, he said that Palace officials do not see the defeat of the administration party as something to be frustrated with, explaining that such loss does not mean that the principle of Daang Matuwid (straight path) was rejected by the people.

“How can we say (it was) rejected when all the candidates were against corruption? Wasn’t it the battlecry of the Aquino administration? ‘Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap’,” Coloma explained.

“Even objective observers from te international community gave us high marks… They are impartial,” he added.

HUMAN rights lawyers have expressed their strong opposition to the plan of President-elect Rodrigo Duterte to revive the death penalty for heinous crimes and implement a “shoot-to-kill” policy against suspected criminals who violently resisting arrest.

In a statement, the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) said Duterte will violate the constitution and international law if he pursues his plan.

“These actions are illegal and unconstitutional, render our legal system impotent and meaningless, and blatantly violate international law,” FLAG chairman Jose Diokno said.
Diokno noted that the death penalty and “shoot-to-kill” policy are anti-poor, stressing that more than eighty percent of Filipinos are poor.

“Seventy-three percent of the 1,121 inmates on death row before the death penalty was abolished in 2006 earned less than P10,000 a month. Eighty-one percent, in addition, worked in low-income jobs as sales, service, factory, agricultural, transport or construction workers. If these numbers are any indication, it is those who live in poverty who will suffer the most if the death penalty is restored.,” he said.

Diokno also said that the poor bore the brunt of wrongful death penalty convictions.

Citing data from the Supreme Court, he said that 71 percent of the death sentences handed down by the trial courts were wrongfully imposed. This means that 7 out of 10 convicts on death row were wrongfully convicted.

“The poor are vulnerable to the death penalty because they have no voice, no money, no power, and lack the resources to hire good lawyers. For exactly the same reasons, they will also be vulnerable to the proposed “shoot-to-kill” policy of the President-elect,” the lawyer explained.

Diokno noted that death by hanging reflects a callous disregard for human dignity not befitting a country’s chief executive.

He said the death penalty and “shoot-to-kill” policy will not deter crime, stressing that advocating state-sanctioned killings is not just anti-poor but anti-life.

“What the country needs is a better justice system—not a new one based on the barrel of a gun,” he added.

Diokno said the Philippines signed the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on September 20, 2006 and ratified it on November 20, 2007.

The Second Optional Protocol “is the only international treaty of worldwide scope to prohibit executions and to provide for total abolition of the death penalty.” States that ratify the Second Optional Protocol are required to renounce the use of the death penalty definitively.

He said Duterte is bound by the Second Optional Protocol.

The Philippines would, if it reintroduced the death penalty, be the only nation to have abolished it and reintroduced it twice, and the only nation to reintroduce it having made a commitment to abolishing it by ratifying the Second Optional protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

“If the Philippines reinstates capital punishment after having ratified the Second Optional Protocol, the country would be condemned for violating international law. It would be a great stigma,” Diokno said.

Diokno also said that a shoot-to-kill policy disregards rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Constitution, he noted, guarantees the right to be presumed innocent, to be heard, to counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him/her, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his/her behalf.

“The shoot-to-kill policy gives unbridled discretion to law enforcement officers to take the law into their own hands and act as judge, jury, and executioner. It contravenes Article 110-3 of the Revised Penal Code which authorizes police officers to use deadly force only when it is reasonably necessary,” Diokno said.

All Information Technology (IT) experts as well as representatives of winning candidates are welcome to participate in the system audit of the transparency and central servers of the Commission on Elections (Comelec), the camp of Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. said on Saturday.

“We would like to urge all IT experts to go there [Comelec], to have themselves accredited and take a look and see for themselves what happened,” Marcos’ campaign adviser Abakada Rep. Jonathan de la Cruz announced.

Earlier, Marcos formally asked the Comelec to allow his own IT experts to conduct a system audit to find out what transpired after Smartmatic personnel changed the script of the transparency server on the night of May 9.

The senator said his IT experts will work under the supervision of the poll body.

In addition to the audit, Marcos’ camp also asked Comelec Chairman Andres Bautista to provide additional information concerning other components of the Automated Election System like the transmission logs, the white list (vote counting machines, USB devices, BGAN or Broadband Global Area Network); digitally-signed election returns (ERs), and the public and decryption keys to open the transmitted files.

Marcos also wants to know the number of CCS (Consolidation and Canvassing System) laptops/servers that were reported to contain rogue votes coming from the pre-election logical accuracy test and mock elections on election day; the municipalities, cities and provinces affected and the measures the poll body took to rectify the supposed error.

De la Cruz pointed out that the system audit that Marcos sought is not directed at a particular candidate. He said their camp only wants to determine the integrity of the elections.

“We have to have a system audit. We have to see the transmission logs because that is the only way we can see what really happened,” De la Cruz said.

He added that the people should not accept Smartmatic’s excuse that the change was innocuous because in computer technology, everything can change with just one push of a button or a single letter or icon.

De la Cruz said that they also found out that all vote counting machines (VCMs) did not transmit a single election result at around 10 p.m. on May 9.

“Lahat ng VCM sa buong bansa walang nagtransmit (All VCMs did not transmit) for a period of one hour. After which nagkaroon ng kababalaghan (a mystery happened). Kaya dapat magkaroon ng system audit para malaman kung anong katotohanan” [A system audit will reveal the truth], he said.

De la Cruz earlier filed criminal complaints against Smartmatic executives Marlon Garcia and Elie Moreno for introducing a new script in the transparency server of the Comelec without proper authorization. Also included in the complaint were Neil Banigued, a member of the Smartmatic Technical Support Team and Rouie Peñalba, IT officer of the Comelec who were involved in the script change.

They were charged with violation of the Automated Elections Law which prohibits interfering with “the generation, transmission of election results, data or information.”

De la Cruz said the law also prohibits “gaining or causing access to, using, altering and destroying computer data, program and system software, network, or any computer-related devices, facilities, hardware or equipment, whether classified or declassified.”
The Comelec en banc is set to discuss Marcos’ petition on Tuesday.

Bautista had said that he is inclined to allow a poll audit but it will have to be conducted by a group of independent international experts.