Category: altered states

Polvoron highs

If you’re paying attention to the DDS campaign to oust PBBM that’s happening on social media, you would be coming to the conclusion that the DDS camp is seriously thinking People Power: Kung nagawa natin sa ama noong 1986, kaya nating gawin sa anak ngayong 2024. And you just know that the DDS dream is for VP Sara to take over — she should never have slid down to veep, she could would have beaten BBM.

These days ang isyung nangingibabaw na naman vs BBM is that he was known to be a cocaine user — may bagong witness pa na taga-Davao na dating kerida ng isang kabarkada etc. etc. when BBM was in the Senate — and the DDS say that the people are asking for proof that he’s not using any longer, and that long-term use has not negatively affected his mental faculties and decision-making capacities so important in running the country, atbp.

The same sort of questions we asked of PRRD back in the days when he looked sick and stumbling or just plain slow and barely understandable, and he admitted to being on Fentanyl — a potent and highly addictive prescription drug — for severe pains. If memory serves, we also asked for an official medical report to assure us that  he was still up to the demands of running a government, and the Duterte admin completely ignored such questions.

Maybe the DDS peeps and vloggers have forgotten, or maybe they hope we’ve forgotten.

And what if, even if, a credible witness steps up with indubitable proof that the prez continues to use in private, would not the president enjoy immunity from suit?

ANTONIO T. CARPIO : Under Philippine law the President enjoys immunity from suit and cannot be investigated or prosecuted for any criminal offense while he remains in office. https://opinion.inquirer.net/137151/presidential-immunity-from-suit

I imagine that this would be when “People Power” could come in. The question is, would the DDS be able to rouse and mobilize a critical mass to oust the prez nonviolently as in EDSA?

Hard to tell, actually. Magugulat ako, either way.

kwentong kokeyn… itutuloy?

senator bato says he wants a fourth hearing — isa-subpoena na niya si paquito ochoa, executive secretary ni PNoy in 2012, na dalawang beses nang naipatawag ngunit busy daw noong una, at may covid naman nitong ikalawa.

ang tanong, can sen bato be stopped from holding one more hearing?

at the last one, senators jinggoy and chiz and senate prez migs mismo were quite obviously unhappy that the hearings were being used as platform for a jonathan morales who insists that the PDEA document attributed to him that someone leaked to the hitad vlogger is authentic. but jinggoy chiz and migs insist right back that morales is not exactly a credible source, given his history, which decidedly does not inspire confidence that he’s telling the truth at any time. parang he has his own agenda, the way he’s been pandering to both the senate and the hitad vlogger.  and really, what does jinggoy’s credibility (or lack of it) have to do with morales’s credibility as reluctant whistleblower. loose cannons get boring, too.

Dela Rosa is persistent. He said that as chairman of the Senate committee on public order, he has the prerogative on the matter, including scheduling one more hearing next week.

“I am asking my colleagues and the Senate President that even though it’s just a motu propio investigation, [allow me] one more time, it will only be one more,” he said. https://www.rappler.com/philippines/bato-dela-rosa

my fearless forecast, given the political temper of the times: mananaig ang interes ng nakaupo. no 4th hearing.

of course i’m half-hoping i’m wrong, na sen bato prevails, and exec.sec ochoa either shows up, or does not. #abangan

Kaabang-abang ang next episodes… kuwentong Tsina at kuwentong kokeyn

KUWENTONG TSINA

May 7 Tuesday, China released an audio recording of a Jan 2024 phone conversation between some Chinese official and Vice Admiral Alberto Carlos (AFP Western Command) where Carlos is supposed to have agreed on a new way of managing tensions over Ayungin Shoal.  Also, China was supposedly assured that Defense Sec Gibo Teodoro, National Security Adviser Eduardo Año, and AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Romeo Brawner “all concurred with the plan”.

Say pa ng China, they released the video not to embarrass the Philippines but to prove that they were not lying about a recent agreement. One that China alleges was unilaterally abandoned by the Philippines “for no good reason.” 

May 8 Wednesday, Defense Sec. Gibo Teodoro response was to cast doubt on the recording, citing the Chinese government’s “propensity for misinformation.” And surprise surprise, Vice Admiral Carlos has gone on “personal leave” and cannot be reached for confirmation. And we are all supposed to just be upset, like Sec Gibo, that the Chinese have apparently violated our Anti-Wire Tapping Law?

It would be good to know if there was such a conversation or not.  If there was not, why was Vice Admiral Carlos allowed (made?) to go on leave instead of being ordered to tell the truth and assisted in disputing the authenticity of the audio recording?  Is it possible that there was such a conversation and Gibo et al knew about it but are resolved to deny it because at the time they were hedging their bets in case the US-Japan-Ph alliance didn’t pull through?  Could this be our version of gray tactics?  Sino ba talaga ang na-embarrass?  Meron bang na-embarrass?  All is fair in love and war? Kaabang-abang.

KUWENTONG KOKEYN

Circa 2012 pa ang dokumentong nakahain — authentic nga ba, tulad ng say ni Sen. Bato?  Mapapa-appear kaya niya sa senate hearing si dating executive secretary Paquito Ochoa na sinasabing siyang nagpahinto ng napipintong PDEA investigation of BBM noong 2012 dahil law partners sila ni Liza Marcos once upon a time? Meron bang basis ang proposed investigation other than info from the two maids whom Maricel Soriano dismissed for theft in 2011?

Pero sabihin pa natin, for the sake of argument, na totoo lahat iyon 12 years ago. What makes DDS vloggers think that it is reasonable to conclude without evidence that BBM is presently a drug addict and therefore not competent to run government?  Doesn’t it remind of Duterte times when he seemed really slow and stumbling and ill or on fentanyl, but when we asked to be assured about his health and whether he was still up to the job, we were ignored? Kesyo confidential daw ang medical records ng presidente, or something like that? Nothing has changed, guys. Tiis muna. Hysterics don’t work.

Pero kaabang-abang pa rin kung totoong ire-reveal na ng hitad na vlogger ang source(s?) niya of leaked documents and phone conversations. Wire-tapping, anyone?

Sympathy for Remulla’s son

Thought-provoking indeed: “Marcos Jr. and the older Remulla must make a sacrifice. Specifically, Remulla, the father, must resign from his being Justice Secretary. And Marcos Jr. must encourage him to do so.”

By FILOMENO S. STA. ANA III  

The title is meant to provoke. I differ from those who think that the son of the Justice Secretary must be punished for possession of illegal drugs.

My stand: The son deserves humane treatment. In fact, in a kinder world, the son does not deserve harsh judgment and heavy punishment.

But to spare the son from the law’s harshness, the father must make a big sacrifice beyond what he has offered.

I do not deny that this piece is political. But I veer away from partisanship as I declare my sympathy for the devil. (My apologies to the Rolling Stones.)

But before I explain why I have “sympathy for the devil,” let us critically examine the troubles of the Remulla family. How this issue is handled will also have repercussions, for better or for worse, on President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr.’s government.

Illicit drug enforcers arrested Juanito Jose Remulla III, the son of Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, through a “controlled delivery operation.” That is, instead of immediately confiscating the contraband at the port of entry, the operatives allowed the parcel containing 937 grams of high-grade cannabis delivered to the young Remulla. Under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, a person convicted of possessing 500 grams or more of marijuana faces the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine ranging from P500,000 to P10,000,000.

But the Philippines is way behind the curve with respect to drug rules and enforcement. We witness an increasing number of countries or societies accepting the use of marijuana and hallucinogens. Cannabis legalization is spreading all over the world. Among countries that have legalized the recreational use of cannabis are Canada, Mexico, Uruguay, South Africa, and neighboring Thailand.

In the US, a growing number of states have made recreational marijuana legal. At the federal level, US President Joe Biden has pardoned thousands convicted of mere possession of marijuana.

Other countries have limited the scope of legalization to medical use or have decriminalized drug use (not just cannabis consumption).

This shift from punitive action to a humane policy is a recognition of the failure of the violent war on drugs. Harm reduction is the emerging framework and strategy.

Indeed, it makes no sense that cannabis use is criminally punished, but the sale of alcohol and tobacco is legal. Yet, the scientific evidence shows that alcohol and tobacco are more harmful than cannabis. (Our society should then be understanding towards the younger Remulla and sterner towards politicians who peddle tobacco and alcohol.)

Prohibition, as economic history has demonstrated, is costly and damaging to society. A “war on drugs” is less effective in curbing consumption, for this merely drives users underground. Worse, it abets corruption and violence (including extra-judicial killings especially during the time of Rodrigo Duterte).

Strong regulation — by distinguishing between hard and soft drugs and using a variety of tools to discourage consumption and apply harm-reduction strategies — is more effective to address substance abuse.

As pointed out by a Time article (Aug. 1, 2018), “Want to win the war on drugs? Portugal might have the answer.” What Portugal did in 2001 was to decriminalize the use of all drugs if individual consumption does not exceed a certain amount for 10 days. According to Portugal’s Health Ministry, 15 years after decriminalizing drug use, heroin use went down by 75% and death from overdose dropped by 85% although this increased slightly in the wake of an economic crisis. Overall, Portugal’s drug mortality rate is one of the lowest in the whole of Europe.

The explanation above should lead us to rethink our drug policy. It should also lead us to sympathize with the younger Remulla and many others accused of or convicted for using drugs.

Moreover, the Remulla controversy is an opportunity for Marcos Jr., to overturn Duterte’s failed war on drugs. Was it Winston Churchill who said: “Never let a good crisis go to waste?”

Turn the Remulla crisis into an opportunity to reform. Marcos Jr. in fact has already taken a different approach, having rejected the violence and brutality that characterized Duterte’s drug policy. He can take a bigger, bolder step by overhauling the Dangerous Drugs Act. At the minimum, decriminalize drug use. (Note that decriminalization is very different from legalization.)

But to do this, Marcos Jr. and the older Remulla must make a sacrifice. Specifically, Remulla, the father, must resign from his being Justice Secretary. And Marcos Jr. must encourage him to do so.

Secretary Remulla’s pronouncement that he will not intervene in his son’s case, nor will he influence the process is nonetheless insufficient. Similarly, Marcos Jr.’s statement that the calls for Remulla’s resignation “have no basis” is off the mark.

Those demanding Remulla’s resignation have raised the questions of delicadeza* and potential conflict of interest. Delicadeza and avoidance of conflict of interest are strong reasons why Secretary Remulla should resign.

I do not doubt Remulla’s statement to “let justice take its own course.” But this is objectively difficult to happen so long as he heads the Department of Justice. Remulla may not intervene, but his employees or subordinates will still regard him as their boss and will continue dealing with him even after the resolution of his son’s case. It is but natural for them to butter up and please their chief.

Here’s the dilemma. The law is the law, and the law is hard. The law must apply to the younger Remulla.

Aspiring for a new direction regarding drug policy, we want the harm reduction approach to prevail. That means giving the lightest sentence to Remulla if he is found guilty.

Prima facie, the case against the younger Remulla is strong. But having a light sentence is the way to go. Doing this sends a clear message that the whole of government will, from now on, lean towards harm reduction.

But giving Remulla, the son, a light sentence in a situation when the father remains Justice Secretary will arouse public suspicion and anger. That will lead to a political backlash.

The public will accuse the administration of having a double standard of justice. The poor are severely punished, even killed, in the course of the war on drugs. The son of a powerful politician gets a light sentence. But as I have argued, everyone charged with drug use or possession deserves humane treatment.

Upholding harm reduction means sparing anyone, including the younger Remulla, from heavy punishment. For Marcos Jr. and Secretary Remulla to show credibility in doing the right thing, they must make the ultimate sacrifice: Remulla, the father, must resign. It is for their own good.

Having himself acknowledged that he used drugs, Marcos Jr. has sympathy for drug users and understands the need for reform. At the proper time, Marcos Jr., using his political capital, can announce that henceforth, government will terminate Duterte’s war on drugs, amend the Dangerous Drugs Act, and adopt harm reduction.

This essay is written in memory of Edgardo Araneta Kalaw, Jr. He was a Filipino pioneer in championing harm reduction.

* Maintaining dignity by avoiding embarrassing situations and comporting oneself properly. A sense of propriety.