dead links #ninoybook

pre-pandemic i had been working on a ninoy book for some 18 months na.  napatigil lang ako noong mag-lockdown at nabalikan ko lang in july.  so, to refresh my mind, i’ve been reviewing the whole thing from the top, double-checking my sources, especially those online, finally bothering to note the date i last accessed each of them.

to my dismay, some links that had never failed me before lead nowhere bigla. dead bigla.  #five so far.

the first on ninoy’s writings, smuggled from jail in 1973 and published by the Bangkok Post, that led to his and pepe diokno’s disappearance from fort bonifacio for that month-long solitary confinement in laur. “The Aquino Papers” 2010/05/11 by Miriam Grace A. Go  May 5 2010.  https://www.seapa.org/the-aquino-papers/

the second, on “The struggle against forgetting” by Juan L. Mercado, who helped get ninoy’s stuff published abroad.  Aug 19 2011. https://thedailyguardian.net/opinion/the-struggle-against-forgetting/

the third on steve psinakis: the “Anti-Marcos renegade’s years of living dangerously”.  June 3 2009. Rogue’s 2008 State of the Nation Issue  http://rogue.ph/steve-psinakis-1932-2016/

the fourth on the “Enduring nightmare of the Manila Film Center”.  http://rogue.ph/enduring-nightmare-manila-film-center/

and the fifth, “Hello Ninoy, Goodbye Ninoy” by Sol Jose Vanzi, on the weekend of ninoy’s homecoming and assassination. August 20, 2018. https://news.mb.com.ph/2018/08/20/hello-ninoy-goodbye-ninoy/

someone’s (some ones?) cleaning up, erasing historical facts that hurt the marcos revisionism? are authors and websites complicit in these erasures? reminds me of kahimyang.com that i thought was kinda makabayan if not anti-marcos. well, not anymore. anti-ninoy na siya.  posting stuff like  “Marcos – a great man unjustly judged at the wrong time by the wrong minds”.  argh.

stealing us blind (walang accounting)

HENERAL LUNACY
The line between public service and corruption is mind set.

THE PERFECT HEIST

The grandest heist in our history is happening under our very eyes.

It is the perfect con: It is big, it is simple, it is scaleable, it is recurring, it is unaccountable, it can go unnoticed for years. It is taking candy from a baby.

Every Government has a milking cow. In the Marcos era it was the coconut levy and sugar industry funds, in others it was the privatization of Government controlled corporations, the NFA rice cartel. But all these pale by comparison with the latest scam in terms of size, audacity and disgrace. The new idea is to take food directly from the mouths of the poor.

I am referring to the raid on our health and social institutions. [emphases mine]

The 2020 budget for health and social services is P800 billion. This includes P173 billion for Universal Health Care, P109 billion for Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) and P37  billion for unconditional cash transfers. It totals some P5 trillion over 6 years of an Administration. It is a milking cow on steroids.

And the cow is getting fatter.

Under Bayanihan 1 Government has carved out from other departments an estimated  P400 billion for COVID related expenses. This brings funds under DOH and DSWD control to over one trillion pesos.

And fatter.

Congress under ARISE has passed legislation increasing spending by  P1.3 trillion largely for COVID. If implemented, in the two years leading to the 2022 election total funds under the discretion of the DOH and DSWD could increase to over two trillion pesos.

What does P2,000,000,000,000 look like? It is twelve zeros. It is 10% of our annual GDP. It is P100,000 for every household of five. It is 20 times what 18 million families were supposed to receive from 4Ps but never did. It is the amount of money your children will have to pay, with interest, for the rest of their lives. At P1,00 per vote it is 2 billion votes even if only 30 million are needed.

And fatter.

The public – and of course the politicians – want the DOH budget increased to whatever it takes to fight COVID.  It is politically the most popular fiscal initiative. The only person standing between a deficit tsunami and our fiscal home is DOF Sec. Dominguez for which he is being scoured by the pundits. Sonny knows it is only corrupt Government officials and their cabals who will see any of it. The victims of this standoff, unfortunately, are the poor whose social amelioration funds (SAFs) are now frozen.

The heist takes various forms.

There is the raid on social relief programs, the 4Ps and the unconditional cash transfers which this year reached some P400 billion. The LGUs are responsible for many of the distribution points. Millions of the intended recipients have still to receive the P5,000-8,000 promised them even as the Treasury says it has signed the checks.

Corruption in the social sector is chunky, it happens mainly in calamities. Corruption in the DOH is a regular occurrence, as much as P3 billion a week if you believe the head of the Philippine Anti-Corruption Commission.

Philhealth is the poster child of the malfeasance in the department. It is the Toys R’ Us of corruption.

There is the over pricing in procurement. Network switches that cost P62,000 are purchased for P320,000. Test kits bought at P8,150 were available at a fraction of the price. The President defended his Health Secretary Duque saying the kits were urgently required. The President recently asked this same person to organize the purchase of urgently required vaccines from Russia.

A Philhealth consultant, Thorrsson Keith, recently resigned from Philhealth testifying the agency’s ICT equipment was overpriced by P734 million. He said a “mafia” in Philhealth was involved in P15 billion of fraud over the years.

There is the padding for health care services. Stories of claims for unnecessary procedures for dialysis and ophthalmology amounting to P154 billion have been going around the medical community for years and continue unabated.

There are the thousands of ghost patients. Some 5,000 Philhealth members, average age 130, reportedly still claim benefits.

Sen. Ping Lacson reported that millions of funds earmarked for COVID patients have been diverted to “maternity and dialysis centers”.

Sen. Zubiri disclosed a 10 bed hospital in Davao has  been receiving P18 million yearly for God knows what.

There are the non-COVID deaths being passed as COVID so hospitals in collusion with Philhealth can hike their claims.

The Philhealth website cites its core values as integrity, innovation, service, and care. It does not mention lies, shame and corruption.

Philhealth is chaired by DOH Sec. Francisco Duque (yes him again) with Brig. Gen. Ricardo Morales as CEO and Annel de Jesus as COO. The latter two were subpoenaed by the Senate to testify over the anomalies but their medical conditions suddenly prevent them from doing so. It is the medical equivalent of taking the Fifth Amendment against self incrimination.

In the Philhealth 2018 annual report, its latest, Morales proudly wrote “he introduced  reforms to safeguard Philhealth funds against abusive policies. Philhealth remained to be the most trusted agency in the country based on multiple citations and independent surveys conducted during the year”. I hate to think what the other agencies look like.

In 2018 Philhealth had a capital of P97 billion, paid claims of P121 billion with P49 billion pending. It did not disclose how much of the P170 billion in claims was real and how many imaginary. Philhealth received contributions of P132.5 billion from the hard earned money of its 53.8 million members. Now they are told the agency could go bankrupt by 2022.

There has never been a cookie jar in our history so large and so ready for the pickings. So now you know why the head of the DOH is so critical.

Philhealth is the mother of all scams, bigger than anything in Customs, the BIR or the so called anomalies in our water concessions; yet it never made it to the presidential SONA. It is a cess pool, a personal and possibly political slush fund masquerading as universal health care. It is a vulture feeding on the carcass of the weak and the poor. And nobody is accountable.

Fifty five lowly Barangay captains have been put on “preventive suspension” for suspected malversation of millions of SAF pesos while 5,526 addicts were officially gunned down for a few ounces of shabu. It does not pay to be poor in this country.

The President announced he will “run amok at the whiff of corruption” in any Government office. Surely billions of pesos in over-pricing, padded claims and stolen cash must qualify as a whiff if not a smoke or a fire. It is economic sabotage of the highest order. It should be termed as terrorism punishable without warrant or bail under the Anti-Terror bill.

If nothing should come of the announced investigations, the raid on our social and health coffers will indeed be the perfect heist.

A Field Guide to the Anti-Terrorism Law Without Preempting the Courts on the Issue of its Constitutionality

by ADOLF AZCUNA

It is Rep Act No 11479 signed into law on July 3, 2020 and effective after publication for 15 days in the Official Gazette or newspaper of general circulation in the country. The Anti-Terrorism Council and the Secretary of Justice are to draw up the IRR or implementing rules in 90 days after the law’s effectivity.

It repeals or replaces the Human Security Act of 2007 which was allegedly largely unused because of the heavy fines provided against law enforcers who violated its safeguards.

It adopts a policy against terrorism and seeks to defend the nation against it. It then defines what constitutes terrorism, penalizes proposals to commit it, terrorist training, funding and recruitment activities and membership in designated terrorist organizations. It covers foreign terrorist activities that have links to the Philippines.

It creates an Anti-Terrorism Council composed of Executive Officials that will oversee the Act’s implementation.

It provides for an elaborate system of surveillance including wiretapping by state agents of suspected terrorists upon directive or permission from the Anti-Terrorism Council with the approval of the Court of Appeals, for a period of 60 days extendible for another 30 days.

It allows arrests without judicial warrants and detention without filing of charges in court for a period of 14 days extendible for another 10 days in the name of fighting terrorism.

And it removes the heavy fines on law enforcers if they transgress the law’s safeguards and instead provides for imprisonment of up to 12 years.

The thrust of the objections and of petitions to declare all or parts of the law invalid are or are likely to be—

  1. The definition of terrorism is vague and too broad so it violates the right of an accused to be informed of the nature of the charges against him or her;
  2. It violates the provision of the Constitution that says that no warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined by a judge;
  3. It allows arbitrary detentions without charges for an unreasonable length of time in violation of a person’s fundamental right;
  4. It grants the State law enforcers the right to determine that something is terrorism and one is guilty of it without ones being heard thus violating the fundamental requirement of due process;
  5. It makes innocent and peaceful assembly and protest to criticize government a dangerous activity that could easily be deemed as constituting terrorism by state agents acting without the safeguard of requiring court authority;
  6. Granted that there is a need for an honest to goodness Anti-Terrorism Law, one should be adopted after broad consultation with all affected sectors, unlike this law which was hastily passed by both House of Representatives and the Senate;
  7. The law is liable to be weaponized and used to suppress legitimate criticism and put a chilling effect on peaceful dissent, a necessary ingredient of a democratic society;
  8. The law is a divisive one that detracts from the unity needed now to fight the pressing spectre of the pandemic while saving our economy and ensuring the people’s survival.

On the other hand the defenders will claim —

  1. That such a law is needed now due to the sophisticated nature of modern day terrorism that has to be addressed;
  2. The right to a judicial warrant and against detention without charges for 24 days can be restricted under prevailing jurisprudence and treaty law on grounds of public order and public safety;
  3. There are sufficient safeguards against abuse in this and other laws. For example, in case of detention, the nearest court has to be informed, the Commission of Human Rights has to be informed, a logbook entering every detention has to be kept. Congress has also provided for an Oversight Committee to make sure the law is faithfully executed;
  4. Court approval is needed for surveillance, which surveillance cannot exceed 90 days, and for the freezing of assets; and
  5. These counter terrorism measures are needed to fulfill our commitment to the international community and to the our foreign lenders and could compromise our fiscal standing if not put in place now.

How all these will play out remains to be seen in the coming days and weeks.

I suggest you read

The law: RA 11479.

The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation of Fundamental Rights.

The decision of the Philippine Supreme Court penned by Justice Antonio T Carpio ruling that the fundamental rights of the people are binding on the State even during a period when there is no constitution. Sandiganbayan v Republic— the Elizabeth Dimaano case.

Thank you.

Adolf Azcuna was Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, 2002 to 2009. 

https://web.archive.org/web/20201216202503/https://disquiet.ph/

READ ON…

A vague, badly written anti-terror bill

VICENTE V. MENDOZA
Retired associate justice of the Supreme Court

The proposed Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is hard to understand. Yet a criminal statute must be clearly and precisely drawn so that it can give adequate guidance to those concerned.

Section 4 of the law provides that any person, who

(a) Engages in acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person, or endangers a person’s life;

(b) Engages in acts intended to cause extensive damage or destruction to a government or public facility, public or private property; (c) Engages in acts intended to cause extensive interference with, damage or destruction to critical infrastructure;

(d) Develops, manufactures, possesses, acquires, transports, supplies or uses weapons, explosives or of biological, nuclear, radiological or chemical weapons; and

(e) Release of dangerous substances, or causing fire, floods or explosions when the purpose of such act, by its nature and context, is to intimidate the general public or a segment thereof, create an atmosphere or spread a message of fear, to provoke or influence by intimidation the government or any international organization, or seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, economic, or social structure of the country, or create a public emergency or seriously undermine public safety, shall be guilty of committing terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of life imprisonment without the benefit of parole and the benefits of Republic Act No. 10592.

It is not clear whether the phrase “when the purpose of such act, by its nature and context, is to intimidate the general public or a segment thereof, create an atmosphere or spread a message of fear, to provoke or influence by intimidation the government or any international organization, or seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, economic, or social structure of the country, or create a public emergency or seriously undermine public safety,” qualifies the acts separately described in (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e), or only paragraph (e), which refers to the “release of dangerous substances, or causing fire, floods, or explosions,” to which the phrase is attached. [emphasis mine]

Understood as qualifying only paragraph (e), paragraph (a) could apply to soldiers shooting at rebels or to civilians working in gun factories, while paragraph (d), referring, among other things to the possession of explosives, could apply to party celebrators lighting firecrackers. Section 4 is the heart of the proposed law. It must state what terrorism is and who are guilty of it in clear and precise terms.

And what is meant by “serious bodily injury,” “extensive damage or destruction,” “extensive interference,” “seriously undermine public safety,” and “seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, economic, or social structure”?

Confounding the ambiguity and overbreadth of Section 4 are provisions on extraordinary rendition, the dreaded practice of transferring a suspected terrorist or supporter to a foreign country for detention and interrogation on behalf of the transferring country. While Section 3 (c) states that extraordinary rendition may be done “without framing formal charges, trial or approval of the court,” implying thereby that it is allowed, Section 48 prohibits it—without, however, providing penalty for the violation of the prohibition.

What should the conscientious citizen make of these provisions, one of which says no formal charge, trial, or even court approval is necessary to carry out extraordinary renditions, but another says extraordinary rendition is prohibited?

The fact is that Section 4 badly needs a rewriting. A statute whose terms are so vague that persons of common understanding must necessarily guess at its meaning or differ as to its application offends due process. And a statute that sweeps unnecessarily broadly both prohibited and protected conduct is overbroad and likewise offends due process.