(Conclusion)

Part 1: Vote-buying is not just giving and taking cash 

In vote buying, the vote buyer’s chief concern is how to make sure that those who receive the money hold their end of the bargain. 

In most cases, that strange brew of uniquely Pinoy social values of “hiya” (shame), “palabra de honor” (word of honor), and “utang na loob” (sense of gratitude accompanied with an urge to payback) would often be enough to “morally” compel vote-sellers to honor their promise.

Many voter-buyers, however, would go to the extent of employing intimidation or threats to make sure they get votes out of their “investment.” 

Vote-buying have been working because of a popular assumption that there are ways for vote-buyers to know who the vote-seller voted for. But is there really a way for them to know?

Ballot secrecy is the core value of every democratic process. It is not only essential but integral to the integrity of elections. It is that guarantee that voters’ choices in an election are anonymous (and will remain anonymous) to forestall attempts to influence them by intimidation, coercion, or blackmailing. It also averts potential vote-buying by allowing voters to freely cast their vote according to their conscience, even if circumstances force them to receive money from politicians.

Thus, Section 2, Article V, of the 1987 Constitution specially mandates Congress to “provide a system for securing the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot.” 

Under the current system provided by Congress and implemented by the Commission on Elections (Comelec), secrecy is assured by the combination of the following: 

• Limited access to the polling places
• Chairs are placed distant from each other
• Use of secrecy folder
  
• Unnamed ballots
• Prohibition of the taking out of the voter receipt
• Prohibition of photography of ballots
• Random jumbling of ballots after counting
• Unavailability of remedy to open ballot boxes post-election, except by judicial order and only through an election protest
  

All of these, if observed faithfully, collectively assure the voter that it would be impossible for anyone to know whom he or she has voted for. However, if the electoral board, for example, would allow persons other than watchers and voters to access the precinct, like barangay officials, and if the voter himself would allow them to see his ballots, then secrecy breaks down.

In other words, achieving full secrecy in voting would largely depend on the compliance of the members of the electoral boards with Comelec’s rules, the vigilance of watchers to call out their laxity, and the cooperation of voters.  

A lot of people ask me: why is no one jailed or disqualified if almost all politicians have been violating the law? That assume the Comelec has not been doing anything.

My answer is always: it's complicated. The public should understand that the faithful execution of our election laws, including the prosecution of violators, is not the sole job of the Comelec. Just like in the case of other laws, the effective enforcement of our election laws equally depends on our law enforcement agencies and the active participation of our citizenry.

While the Comelec prosecutes election offenses (jointly with regular prosecutors) and handle disqualification cases of candidates, it is not a law enforcement agency. It is not omniscient and it has no manpower to oversee every square inch of the country. There are only two Comelec employees in every city and municipality. If we want to counter vote-buying effectively, both the citizenry and candidates have to be vigilant. 

Vigilance means taking photos or videos of candidates distributing money, t-shirts, food packs, or health cards. Recording campaign promises which constitute as vote-buying. Setting up surveillance, like putting up CCTVs, to record movement of vote-buyers and people in the streets, houses, and major thoroughfares. We now have the technology and everyone has a smartphone that recording and gathering of evidence should no longer be as difficult as in the past elections.

This vigilance should likewise be followed by concrete action. Witnesses should not stop at posting them on Facebook or Twitter. They should file formal complaints or gather evidence at the very least, send them to the authorities, and be ready to attest to their authenticity.

Candidates must also be on the lookout for what their opponents are up to. It must be noted that vote-buying, other than being a criminal offense, is also a cause for disqualification under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code. It can be filed with the Comelec anytime after the start of the campaign period. If found guilty, the winning candidate will be barred from assuming office, and his office will be declared vacant. 

If the general public and the candidates are vigilant and reporting is efficient, we can perhaps achieve a self-policing environment. This, however, would also mean that the Comelec has to step up and match the public’s enthusiasm — resolve cases quickly and be aggressive in disqualifying erring candidates. Otherwise, the public’s vigilance would mean nothing and we would be back in the sorry and apathetic state that we are in now.

We can simply go back to the very intention of the law in prohibiting vote-buying. The reality of this scheme is that the money that will be used in vote-buying will be recouped by the winning candidate by stealing tenfold or more from the government’s coffer or by imposing “mandatory” cuts (aka, “pa-10%” or “happy money”) from government contracts.

In the end, when thieves and plunderers abound, government service suffers or totally go undelivered. Contractors who are unqualified and incompetent, yet are willing to pay the “mandatory commission,” get the contracts, and so we end up with bad roads, defective government buildings, or, worse, structures that only exist on papers and phony audit reports. 

The law urges us instead to choose candidates based on our impression of their competence, qualifications, and integrity, not out of bribery or inducement of money, which is often resorted to by candidates to compensate for having none of those good qualities.

If we allow ourselves to be swayed by money and we end up with a terrible government run by idiots or by plunderers or, worse, the combination of both, then we have no right to complain. In the words of 19th-century French philosopher Joseph de Maistre, “Every nation gets the government it deserves.”– Rappler.com 

Emil Marañon III is an election lawyer specializing in automated election litigation and consulting. He is one of the election lawyers consulted by the camp of Vice President Leni Robredo, whose victory is being contested by former senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Marañon served in Comelec as chief of staff of retired Comelec Chairman Sixto Brillantes Jr. He is a partner at Trojillo Ansaldo and Marañon (TAM) Law Offices.  

Naramdaman ko rin iyon kahapon. Nasa opisina ako sa matandang unibersidad sa Maynila. Wala talaga kaming pasok, pero kailangang tapusin ang accreditation papers and some academic institutional longing (oo, sorry na, #IdealEmployee). Masayang kausap ang chairpersons ng iba pang academic departments ng kolehiyo. Patapos na ang trabaho. Naghahanda nang lumabas. Yumanig ang paligid. Palakas nang palakas. May sumigaw. May iba pang nagsigawan. Hindi ko alam kung kasama ako sa sumigaw. Nag-falsetto. Yata. Basta. 

Pinigilan kong huwag mag-panic, hanap agad ako ng mesang kakasya ako. Iyong mukhang matibay, iyong hindi collapsible at corrugated. Wala. Front office desk na idinesenyo para maging mahaba at dugtong-dugtong, hindi standalone. Bahala na. Sumiksik ako sa isang siwang ng mesa. Nakalabas ang kalahati ng katawan ko. Mukhang hindi ako ililigtas ng mesa kung magtutuloy-tuloy ang paglakas ng pagyanig. Dasal. Umiingit ang mga glass doors ng opisina. Kapag lumakas pa, mababasag ang salamin, tatalsik ang bubog. Pinakamatagal ang bawat sandali kapag lumilindol. 

Dumaluyong pabalik sa akin ang alaala noong hapon ng July 16, 1990. Lunes iyon. Pang-umaga lang ang klase ko sa Obando, Bulacan. Second year high school ako. Nanonood ako ng nagche-chess sa kapitbahay sa Valenzuela. Umuga. Napakatagal, pero wala pa palang isang minuto. Ganyan kahapon. Ilang segundo, pero mistulang kaytagal.

Hindi ko alam kung tapos na. Nahihilo na ako. May sumisigaw, may nagdarasal nang malakas, pasigaw, may umiiyak. Pinagmamasdan ko ang mga bagay na puwedeng umuga. Kung umuuga, eh di lumilindol pa nga. Nang masegurong wala, tumayo ako. Hilo pa rin. Parang lumilindol pa rin. Inayos ang sarili. Kumapit sa gilid-gilid dahil baka nga matumba. Lumabas sa gusali. Pumunta sa open space kasama ang kasamahan sa trabaho. Nang maramdaman ang kaligtasan, tumawag ako sa pamilya ko sa lalawigan ng Quezon. Hindi raw nila naramdaman. Salamat.  

Kuwentuhan kami ng mga kasamahan ko. Tantiyahan kung gaano kalakas ang pagyanig. Inihambing sa mga dati nang naranasang lindol. Ang mga kasamahang may edad, binalikan ang karanasan noong 1990; ang mga mas matanda, iyong pagguho ng Ruby Tower sa lindol ng 1968. Para makatiyak kung gaano kalakas, kung nasaan ang epicenter, kung may napinsala at biktima, isa-isa kaming nagbukas ng smartphone. Nagbasa ng news feed sa social media. Na wala pang 5 minuto, binaha na ng status: lindol. 

Marami ito. From short ones in uppercase: LINDOL! Hanggang sa mahaba-haba, in few words, replete with mura, telling na umuga sa lugar kung saan sila naroroon. Habang tumatagal, papahaba na nang papahaba ang status message. Composed na. Ligtas na. May mga status na parang news dispatch. Pero meron na ring nagpapatawa. Nagiging hugot na kesyo wala na silang pakiramdam o manhid na. 

Dagsa na rin, natural, ang mga larawan at short video clips during or moments after the quake kung saan nasa ligtas na silang lugar na may data signal at pupuwede nang mag-upload ng post. Of course, may magte-trending. Maraming magiging viral. May mabibilis gumawa ng meme na kagyat iniugnay sa pinakamaiinit na isyung pambansa ang lindol. Para saan pa ang pagiging number one nating gumagamit ng social media sa mundo kung hindi natin ipaaalam ang nararamdanan natin sa kabila ng lahat ng natural o intelligence fund-induced calamity man? 

Well, kasama rin ako sa nag-status. Isa ako sa maraming smartphone-toting Pinoy na nagwawaldas ng ilang oras kada araw sa harap ng gadget. Pero totoo ang status ko – akala ko talaga high blood ako dahil nagme-maintenance medicine naman talaga ako. Nahihilo. Naalala ko ang huling kinaing liempo. Lindol pala. Meron ding hindi totoo, in a form of payo. Since ramdam niya, ’ka ko, ang lindol, sabihin na rin kay crush na may nararamdaman din siya para kay crush.   

Matapos ang isa o dalawang oras na pagtunghay sa social media, nagdatingan ang impormasyon. Mas malala ang naging tama sa Pampanga. Maraming nag-crack o tuluyang nasirang gusali sa lugar na sakop ng 6.1-magnitude na lindol. At ngayon, habang isinusulat ko ito, matapos ang isang araw, naglalabasan na ang mga kuha ng CCTV sa epekto ng lindol lalo na sa matataas na gusali sa Kalakhang Maynila.  

May nag-private message sa akin kagabi. Bakit ko raw nagagawang magpatawa sa kasawian ng iba?  

Puwedeng mali ako, pero iba ang dating sa akin ng private message. Gusto yata niyang sabihin na hindi na dapat maging humorous sa panahong may kalamidad. Na dapat ang lalabas sa social media at mamutawi sa virtual mouths natin ay pakikidalamhati, pagtulong, pakikiisa.  

Hindi gaya ng ibang kalamidad, walang pasabi ang lindol, lalo na iyong tectonic ang origin. Wala pang malinaw na babala maliban sa pagsasabi sa atin ng Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (Philvolcs) na aktibo ang ganito at ganoong fault sa ilalim ng lupa. Kaya nga malinaw ang panawagan: laging maging handa dahil instant o walang babala, hindi gaya ng bagyo o monsoon rains. Kaya nga maraming drill na isinasagawa tungkol sa lindol. At sa lindol lang naman yata naglalabasan ang maraming nagpapatawa o ginagawang magaan ang pangyayari. 

Pero maiiwasan ba ang ganitong uri ng dagsa ng status? Impulsive ang pag-status bilang extension ng ating kakayahang magsalita at magpahayag. Boses natin ito. Kung paanong sinabi kong lumilindol kahit pa ramdam naman ng lahat sa paligid ko na lumilindol. Mabilis itong pagtiyak na hindi cholesterol-fuelled ang pag-uga at hilong nararamdaman ko. Kaya ang mga unang mababasa sa news feed ay maiigsi, mabilisang pahayag na lumilindol nga. Mayroon pa ngang real time ang pag-upload, kung pagbabatayan ang time stamp sa status. Thus the title: Duck, Cover, Upload.   

Ang sa akin, huwag agad masamain ang masasayang status matapos ang lindol. Walang intensiyong gawing katatawanan ang kasawian ng iba. Kung hindi malaki ang pinsala sa lugar kung saan naroroon ang nag-status, basahin ang status bilang impormal na pagtugon sa application ng Facebook na “<insert FB account name> marked himself safe <insert kalamidad at kung saan nangyari ang kalamidad>.” 

May signal sa lugar kung saan naroon ang nag-status. Magandang sintomas itong maayos sa kaniyang bisinidad; otherwise, hindi ganito ang kaniyang status kung meron mang signal. Kaya ito ang una kong ginawa matapos lumabas sa gusali, matapos kong maramdaman at matiyak ang kaligtasan: tawagan ang mahal sa buhay, makaramdam ng lugod kapag nag-ring ang kabilang linya; ibig sabihin, buo pa ang communication infrastructure. Malugod lalo kapag sagutin at sabihing ligtas sila, o, sa kaso ng pamilya ko kahapon, hindi nila naramdaman sa lalawigan ang lindol.

Indibidwal na boses ang birtwal na status ng bawat isa tuwing may kalamidad tulad ng lindol. Kapag tinutunghayan sa news feed, nakikita at nababasa ang kolektibang boses ng mga taong kabilang sa iyong birtwal na ugnayan. Ligtas ang karamihan dahil nagagawang magbiro, nagagawang pagaanin ang kanilang sitwasyon. Pero hindi nangangahulugang ginagawa nilang katatawanan ang kasawian ng iba. Ligtas ka rin dahil mayroon kang kapangyarihan, via social media, na makita ang nagaganap. Kasunod na nito dapat ang pakikiisa at paglingap. – Rappler.com 

Bukod sa pagtuturo ng Creative Writing, Pop Culture, and Research sa Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas, Writing Fellow din si Joselito D. Delos Reyes, PhD, sa UST Center for Creative Writing and Literary Studies at Research Fellow sa UST Research Center for Culture, Arts and Humanities. Board Member siya ng Philippine Center of International PEN. Siya ang kasalukuyang tagapangulo ng Departamento ng Literatura ng UST. 

Ms. Ellen Tordesillas, who, strangely enough, now finds herself in the middle of a so-called “plot to oust Duterte,” makes a really strong case about the state of the government’s intelligence services. Or the sorry state of it, to be more precise.

I cannot deny Ms. Tordesillas’ logic. But let us set aside for the moment the baseless accusation against the Malaya columnist and book author emanating no less from the occupant of Malacañang Palace.

This is not the first time that President Duterte has threatened to (or actually) release(d) a list, or in this case, a matrix. On several occasions he has publicized a “narco” list (twice) and a matrix of the so-called anti-Duterte elements (twice). Both lists and both matrices were headline-grabbing for at least two similar reasons: both were full of errors and both got the wind knocked out of them in short order.  The latter, as in this latest episode, would quickly get comments from national security authorities as “no such threats have been monitored by our intelligence agencies” or, more damagingly, “the information of the President did not come from us.”

Dubious is the least of the adjectives I would use to describe this latest presidential caper.

What troubles me more, like Ellen, is the implication – a glimpse if you may – of the kind of tomfoolery that is now the habit of the Chief Executive and the commander-in-chief of all our armed forces (in small caps, because they now cover more agencies, and not just the Armed Forces of the Philippines).

Assuming that this did not go through the usual intelligence channels of the State, and was merely fed straight to the President unvarnished, and therefore not vetted, then all the more this is troubling. That the Presidential Spokesperson had to devote time for this in his regular Malacañang press conference, and that the quad media has to devote space and ink to report this chicanery, merely scratches the surface.

The chief sources of intelligence for the executive include the Armed Forces of the Philippines (through the ISAFP and the intelligence units of the Army, Air Force and Navy), the Philippine National Police, and the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (which is supposed to provide intelligence fusion, as is its mandate). Imagine for a moment that some segment of this intelligence apparatus has to re-allocate some resources just to verify the so-called “Oust Duterte matrix.” 

Wouldn’t that be a waste of valuable resources, nay, a disservice to the national security of the State?  All because the President is currently fixated on the idea of tearing down his latest whipping boys (or girls) – that still-independent, critical, and hard-hitting segment of Philippine media?

Failures of intelligence

What is nauseating in all of this is that, national security withstanding, several “failures of intelligence” continue to bedevil our defense and security establishment. Allow me to enumerate some of them:

• The failure to anticipate the scale and depth of armed resistance awaiting the operation to arrest Isnilon Hapilon that led to a full-blown siege in Marawi;
• The lack of maritime domain awareness and situational updates on Chinese incursions within the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone since after the PCA arbitration ruling of July 2016;
• The botched coalition/unity government effort with the extreme Left at the cost of the release of high profile communist leaders and the appointment of card-carrying members of the communist movement to high offices of government, effectively rejuvenating their ranks; 
• Failure to prevent the bombing of the cathedral in Jolo, and why it remains unsolved to this day; and 
• An unclear picture, until now, of the scale and scope of the drug problem despite the high number of drug-related casualties (not to mention the bluster of the President and his tokhang acolytes), to name only a few.

Should not these issues be of more concern to the President and his national security officials?

Instinct and experience informed me 3 years ago that when then-candidate Rodrigo Duterte said that he would take a jet ski to the Spratlys and offer himself up to China in a “supreme act of sacrifice for flag and people” as his way of dealing with the issue in the South China Sea, we would be in serious trouble IF he became president.

Now he is President, and we are INDEED in serious trouble.

Don’t believe me? Just wait for the next security crisis to blindside this administration and our authorities. Then you’d wish the President paid more attention to his job and his men to theirs. – Rappler.com

The author was a former member of the House of Representatives (16th Congress). Prior to this, he was a helicopter pilot and an officer of the Philippine Air Force and thereafter served as consultant for the National Security Council from 2010-2013. He is currently finishing his Juris Doctor at the University of the Philippines College of Law.

Many know Ambassador Rod Severino as a Filipino diplomat. Some of us know him as a global diplomat. I am privileged to be among those few who worked and observed him very closely as his special assistant and communications director when he was secretary-general of ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations) for 5 years in Jakarta. 

That assignment gave him an opportunity to shape the issues and influence the flow of events in our part of the world, even as they also influenced him to think beyond his country.

“Communicate or perish.” This was his consistent marching order to various ASEAN bodies and his staff at the ASEAN headquarters. He truly believed that ASEAN had a story to tell that would benefit not only the region, but all countries and multinational companies who chose to engage it.

He believed that ASEAN had a good brand of “open regionalism” that, with the right amount of support from its members, neighbors, friends, and the media around the world, could make a real difference in the relations among nations and a great impact on our lives.

Severino led ASEAN at a time of major challenges: the Asian financial contagion, series of terrorist attacks from New York to Bali, the spread of bird flu, and the raging forest fires that caused transboundary haze pollution, among others.

These serious challenges highlighted Severino’s view of the world as interdependent and interconnected. This sharpened his message that the world needed more international understanding and cooperation.

Opportunities

Severino also came at a time of great opportunities. The Asean Free Trade Area project was in full swing. Severino championed regional integration as a means for the 10 ASEAN economies to have a voice and credibility in shaping the kind of globalization that we wanted.

A regional security forum had just been established following the end of the Cold War. Until now, it is the only official multilateral forum dedicated to addressing political and security issues in the Asia-Pacific region. He believed that between bilateral and international relations, regionalism is just as important.

“It is past the time for platitudes.” Severino made this remark about 20 years ago at that regional security forum participated in by about two dozen countries, including the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. He was referring to the repeated motherhood pronouncements of several countries wanting to set aside differences and finding common ground in the South China Sea.

In time, ASEAN called on all parties to the overlapping claims to forge a legally-binding code of conduct in the South China Sea. But not all of them were ready. Severino was quietly disappointed when ASEAN and China adopted only a political statement.

He wanted to see a binding commitment that would lead to negotiations toward eventually settling the disputes building on the content of the Philippine-Vietnam joint statement that he earlier negotiated. Nevertheless, he considered it a step in the right direction that China took cognizance of the disputes.

He was no longer active in the policy circle when a United Nations tribunal accepted, heard, and decided the case brought before it by the Philippines. I have no doubt that he welcomed it, not just because of the decision, but also because of the use of peaceful means in dispute settlement.

The world according to Severino is a stage full of opportunities accompanied by never-ending issues, disputes, competition and challenges. It is a world with many voices competing for attention by important decision-makers, public support, the mainstream media, and today’s virtual social media.

Whoever captures their attention and imagination has a better chance of winning the issues of the day and the shape of tomorrow.

The world according to Severino is a world that we make of it. That community-building is possible beyond our shores. That dialogue, cooperation, and norms-building have transformative value among peoples and nations. He wove this into his realist worldview that, in politics among nations, the use and pursuit of power is a given.

Severino will be remembered as a great Filipino statesman in the tradition of those who served their homeland well by serving the world of nations. – Rappler.com

*The author is a former director at the ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta and the author of The Philippines in ASEAN (Manila: Anvil, 2011).

China has big ambitions. It wants to overtake the United States as the world’s superpower by 2049, a hundred years after the Communist Party took power in Beijing. And this will be at the expense of the U.S., which unwittingly helped its strongest rival now closer to attaining its dream.

This is the gist of a 2015 book, “The Hundred-Year Marathon: China’s Secret Strategy to Replace America as Global Superpower,” by Michael Pillsbury, an American China watcher who had served several U.S. administrations since the time of Richard Nixon in the 1970s.

Washington was so focused on its archrival Moscow during the Cold War that it even helped strengthen Beijing to counter the former Soviet Union, which had some issues with China, including minor border disputes.

For over 40 years, China took advantage of this strange arrangement in its hidden desire to avenge the humiliation it had suffered from Western powers from the middle of the 19th century, when colonial powers Great Britain, Germany, France, and even Japan and the U.S. – at the turn of the 20th century – carved out territories of the weakened Qing dynasty,

In his book, Pillsbury warned that China used deception to mask its hidden intention to supplant the United States’ global supremacy, just like how Washington replaced London as the world’s global power in the 20th century.

China is claiming the 21st century as its own, rising not just as the world’s number one economic power but as a dominant military as well.

As Russia retreated after the collapse of the former Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the late Denig Xiaoping built a formidable economic engine from the time of the Tiananmen Square revolt and then powered its military muscle, which it is starting to flex in the Asia-Pacific region.

Soft power, too

Like the United States, China has started putting up overseas military bases and has been expanding influence, through loans and official development assistance to Latin American, African and South Pacific island countries – the same way the West tried to dominate poor and weak countries in the past 

The building of 7 man-made islands in the South China Sea and the imposition of an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) in northeast Asia did not happen by accident. These are deliberate actions to protect China’s national interest.

So, it is not right to blame the Philippines when it filed an arbitration case before the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague for China’s action in the South China Sea. It was bound to happen as Beijing implements its island-chain of defense. This is why it continued to ignore the international court victory of Manila in July 2016.

It’s also not a surprise that Beijing continued to control Scarborough Shoal, just nearly 150 nautical miles off Zambales, as it expands its anti-access and area denial (A2AD) operations in the South China Sea, pushing away the United States to the Pacific near its base in Guam. It has started patrolling east of the Philippines and has conducted naval drills out in the Pacific, testing the waters in how far it can go with its surveillance and reconnaissance operations.

China could not be faulted for its aggressive actions in South China Sea.

It carries its own paranoia because of the United States’ increasing freedom of navigation operations (Fonops) in the South China Sea and its effort to build a coalition of friendly allies around China, beginning from South Korea and Japan in the northeast, Taiwan and the Philippines and Australia on its eastern side, and Vietnam, Singapore and India to its south. The United States also has military bases in the former Soviet Republics in central Asia as well as in the Middle East, almost encircling China.

Thus, China has to create its own defensive rings with several manmade islands in the Spratly and Paracels. It has made some dangerous moves in the Taiwan Straits and in the Japanese-claimed Senkaku islands, enough for Taiwanese and Japanese to scramble fighters recently.

Swarming tactics

But, what is more disturbing recently, is the deployment of dozens of militia vessels in the Spratly, near the Philippine-held islands of Thitu, Kota and Panatag, where huge numbers of Chinese boats were seen around the almost defenseless territories.

China’s “swarming tactics” are intimidating enough for the handful of Filipino troops stationed on these isolated features and could effectively choke food, fuel and other supplies coming from the main Philippine island of Palawan. The military has not reported any aggressive actions, or any effort to blockade these islands, but the mere presence of a large number of Chinese ships in the area is already a scary scenario.

Should China carry out an action against the Philippines, it can easily take out and wrest control of these features. Remember, the Philippines has lost an island before to Vietnam when troops guarding Northeast Cay went partying to the nearest island. 

Pillsbury, in his book, recommended sets of action for the US administration to compete strategically with China.

For the Philippines, can it do something other than file a diplomatic protest, or should it surrender because, as what President Rodrigo Duterte and his spokesman would readily say, “wala na tayong magagawa” (we can’t do anything)? Should they simply be blaming the previous administration?

The Philippines must stand its ground and protect its national interest. It cannot rely on any outside power to fight its battle or war. There are many diplomatic and international legal mechanisms available.

Standing up for one's rights does not necessarily mean going to war. Doing nothing is treason, a betrayal of public trust. – Rappler.com

A veteran defense reporter who won the Pulitzer in 2018 for Reuters' reporting on the Philippines' war on drugs, the author is a former Reuters journalist.

Among all institutions in the country, religion – alongside the academe – is the most trusted. That is according to the 2017 Philippine Trust Index.

To get the endorsement of religious leaders is thus useful to politicians. To tap into their religious capital is to tap into the trust accorded them by their followers.

What this means is that religion will continue to play a big role in politics. And more often than not, religious leaders take advantage of the opportunity by endorsing candidates.

But is it wise?

Convictions

Some weeks ago, candidates were at an El Shaddai prayer rally. For Brother Mike Velarde, their convictions on same-sex marriage, divorce, and the death penalty matter.

These visits enable him to assess candidates he would eventually endorse. To him, however, his followers have their own free will when it comes to choosing their candidates.

Iglesia ni Cristo, by contrast, expects its adherents to follow the line of its leadership. For them they have a religious and moral obligation to honor their leaders whom they believe are divinely appointed.

Whether all of them follow and whether these endorsements are effective in the end is not always clear. Their sway matters in some communities, but not in others, as a Rappler investigative report shows.

The Catholic clergy

Even Catholic priests have not stayed silent.

Archbishop Socrates Villegas is among the most vocal. While he is right to think that Catholics do not vote as a bloc, he appeals nevertheless to their conscience. In a viral video, Villegas sends a clear message to all faithful: “My dear brothers and sisters, are you going to betray God, are you going to deny your faith, by your vote?”

For the archbishop, good Catholics cannot in their right consience support Duterte’s candidates.

Fr Robert Reyes echoes the same sentiment. For him it is “zero Duterte” because “they will all be ‘yes’ men and women” of the President.

Power elite

Regardless of one’s political convictions, what all these illustrations go to show is that religion is deeply implicated in the political life of our country.

And religious leaders are at the heart of it all.

Whether they like it or not, priests, pastors, and other ministers are called upon to make statements about the political state of affairs. No other season apart from the elections can make them more important in national and local politics.

But inasmuch as I have respect for religious leaders and their role in the public sphere, being implicated in politics puts them in a very delicate situation.

How?

Politicians and religious leaders constitute our society’s power elite. In sociology, the power elite is the segment of the population that makes decisions for the rest of us. Typically, these are the leaders in the military, business, and politics. They are all connected to each other through social capital and wealth.

But to them could be added religious leaders who have their own followers.

The only problem is that when religious leaders enter politics – whether through endorsements or even their own party lists – they themselves become implicated in a power struggle. They are forced to form alliances and become backers of specific individuals.

When that happens, they cannot pretend that they are just the voice of conscience.

Thus they become embroiled in the very padrino system that characterizes much of our national and local politics. This is why such candidates as Cynthia Villar can claim that “I have been friends with them [religious leaders], many of them. And I go to their affairs.”

Way forward

The main problem of our politics is that it is thoroughly personality-driven. So, when religious leaders throw their support behind certain candidates, they inevitably echo the divide according to existing political loyalties.

So it’s either pro-Duterte or dilawan all over again.

To make it worse, the division paints one group as heaven-sent and the other evil. Truth be told, this is the very temptation that political machineries themselves have conspired to lead us to.

And yet, due to their disappointments, many religious leaders understandably give in.

But this division cannot be eternally accurate because politicians change loyalties depending on who is in power. At the same time, many of these candidates – even those we assume to be morally upright – do not necessarily have spotless records.

Thus the nature of the elections cannot rest on personalities. This is the blind spot of seeking and giving religious endorsements.

Instead, elections must be defined by certain values and a shared vision of the common good. Among all institutions, religion has the cultural capital and the widest influence to articulate these values.

This, unfortunately, is a missed opportunity. Too bad for a society that considers religion its most trusted institution. – Rappler.com

Jayeel Cornelio, PhD is a sociologist of religion at the Ateneo de Manila University. A 2017 Outstanding Young Scientist, he currently documents the rise of religious nationalism and its challenges to pluralism and democracy. Follow him on Twitter @jayeel_cornelio.

Administering public health requires a team. It requires scientific and artful efforts of several disciplines – from historians and anthropologists, from clinicians and researchers, to economists and financial managers, to policy wonks and filmmakers, to social media influencers and the arts itself. This cross-cutting diversity is crucial for promoting and improving our health.

Yet much of public health worship a false idol: the Filipino doctor.

Physicians have a monopoly in leadership positions. Nearly all top jobs in the Department of Health are held by doctors. There is a medical hegemony – from hospital chiefs and down – at provincial and local hospitals and centers. It is nearly impossible for career managers and directors to hold key management positions because there is a preference for those with a medical degree.

Crucial public health decisions are made by health professionals with a vested interest in treating disease but whose medical training lacks the health systems thinking required in preventing it. Working to improve the health of the public is not the same as practicing the principles underlying it. Their seat at the head of the table is not justified.

What we are born into, how we grow old, where we live and work – these are the conditions that are mostly responsible for our health. 

How money, resources, and power are distributed is the reason why some get sick more than others. When we target these conditions, we save money, live longer and healthier, and reduce these avoidable and unfair differences. But doctos are not trained how to redistribute these scarce resources and how to affect change in these conditions. And our health system suffers for it. (READ: [OPINION] Why public health is public wealth)

The 2018 report of the Asia Pacific Observatory on Health Systems and Policies is very telling. We spend more of our own money on health care compared to our Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) neighbors. 

Our spending on prescription drugs and physician fees account for the bulk of this out-of-pocket spending. There is also no standard fee schedule for services. Hospitals, led by physicians, are left to decide how much to charge for which service. They might prioritize our health, but no hospital, especially private ones, survives unless it maximizes profits.

These weaknesses in our health system reflect the challenges of PhilHealth – also led by physicians – to minimize financial hardship when we get sick. But more than that, it shows the limitations of a service-oriented, prescriptive medical model. 

Doctors are expected to be experts in budget constraints and financial protection on the very health problems from which they profit. Which class in medical school had a deep dive in how to police their own behavior? (READ: Bringing care back to health care)

Our worship of doctors is dedicated to identifying how they improve the health of the nation. Indeed, most go into the profession with a genuine resolve to help others. What is less discussed is that health problems, especially among the poor, make possible the dominance and popularity of medicine as a profession.

Doctors need sick people. They benefit from a health system that perpetuates chronic ill health. They benefit because our health care prioritizes clinical and pharmaceutical interventions, rather than prevention. Our poor health system makes sure that Filipinos stay sick and that doctors are there to rescue them.

Public health requires managing and reconciling uncertainties. We have opaque knowledge about any one health-related problem.

The body of medical information about the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) cannot fully account for the alarming rise of the disease in the country, for the low rates of starting anti-retroviral treatment (ART), for the high dropout rates when HIV-positive Filipinos do start ART, for the low condom use, and for the poor access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), which can substantially reduce risk of getting the virus.

HIV is a complex biomedical, social, behavioral, economic, environmental, and health systems problem. Each of these disciplines is not enough to apply public health practice to HIV. Our worship of doctors and their dominance in positions of leadership are therefore irresponsible. Scientific evidence shows that public health practice cannot rest in one discipline. The way forward against HIV, as with other problems, is shifting our bias away from physicians.

This necessary rude awakening also demands that other disciplines step up their game. If other non-medical sectors no longer wish to feel marginalized, they must reposition public health as core to their professional practice.

The Filipino anthropologist is excited to understand how sociocultural and linguistic influences shape our understanding of health.The Filipino economist is committed to closing the gap between what the doctor knows and what the patient knows. The Filipino behavioral scientist does not stop at mental illness but rather links these to sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology), health care services, and social inequities. The Filipino teacher is enthusiastic when a student wants to be a doctor or nurse but is equally eager for the student to be a landscape architect, a graphic artist, or a social worker.

Each discipline, including medicine, is vital. Public health thrives when these sectors work together with no one field as superior.

The newly signed Universal Health Care Act is a watershed moment. Rules and regulations might encourage cross-disciplinary collaborations. But in the current policy climate, medicine is ascendant, with other disciplines serving a supporting role. This is antithetical to the proper implementation of public health strategies and to the multidisciplinary partnerships universal health care requires.

Medical paternalism has no place in a public health team. – Rappler.com

Dr Ronald del Castillo is professor of psychology, public health, and health policy at the University of the Philippines Manila. The views here are his own. 

Obviously, by their very nature, earthquakes are a terrifying phenomenon: they’re unpredictable, they’re unstoppable, and, precisely because they cannot be fathomed to the degree that man might be able to do anything about them, they are haunting.

The inevitable sense that they are unleashed by a power greater than any earthly one also makes an earthquake experience chastening. Surely, man wishes that messages sent via earthquake came to him, if not chiseled in stone tablets, at least in less vague and violent a form than a sudden shaking and heaving and rending of the ground beneath his feet.

To be sure, earthquakes can be explained scientifically, as a geological occurrence, but the transcendent signals they send can only be guessed at. But again, in certain circumstances and from certain perspectives, those signals might seem sensible, as may well be the case with the latest significant earthquake to rock Manila and other parts of Luzon – a magnitude 6.1.

That one struck hard on the heels of a tale told of a plot to oust President Duterte, which should make the deciphering not too difficult for the suitably disposed. The propagator is Sal Panelo, and his source the man he officially, sycophantically, speaks for – the President himself, who would be not only quick to admit to it but proud to reveal, though not exactly to name, his own source: foreign friends listening in on conversations among the conspirators.

Here, in other words, is a tale that bears the hallmarks of that one told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. But, if it were a nothing tale, why should the earth-shakers bother? Because idiots abound on both sides – peddler and consumer – and they all need a sensitizing jolt.

Even before becoming the presidential spokesman, Panelo had distinguished himself as a man who likes to open his mouth and put his feet in it. He just surpassed himself by accommodating those of his master, too. He in fact went even further with the trick; mouth packed now with two pairs of limbs, he managed yet to blurt out, when pressed by the press for evidence of the plot he was alleging, “It’s all common sense!”  

What common sense – indeed, what sense, common or rare – may be made out of a diagram drawn to represent a plot implicating a random collection of journalists, lawyers, leftists, and people of other professions and persuasions I don’t know. I see only lines connecting names and the pictures that correspond to them. A fashionable and weighty-sounding word was picked to name the drawing – “matrix” – but that only made the joke more hilarious, instead of attenuating it.

This matrix has been roundly ridiculed, predictably. The police and the army all but pooh-poohed it. While plots such as alleged may exist as a “possibility,” none is in fact afoot, the police said. The military was more dismissive: it saw no plot or any basis for the allegation. Normally, both institutions would hedge in favor of their Commander-in-Chief.  

If any conspiracy existed at all, it could only have been concocted inside the regime itself. Fabricating, after all, is in its DNA, and the closest comparison that may be drawn with the matrix is Duterte’s directories of characters in the illegal drug trade. These are certainly no charge books, only lists of names. The Yellow Pages has more information to offer about its entries.

Appearing first in print, courtesy of The Manila Times, and preceding Panelo’s press conference about it by some hours, the matrix may have gained at first blush some benefit of the doubt from readers who innocently presumed the Times a legitimate newspaper and Dante Ang, under whose byline its matrix story appeared, a legitimate journalist.

The Times was a newspaper once, and Ang a broadcaster on its radio station. He switched early to public relations and has stayed and evidently flourished in it. He now owns the Times. It had become a losing proposition, financially and professionally, when he acquired it, and his reputation and habits as a PR man did not help.  

Duterte has made him Special Envoy for International Public Relations, a role he doubtless landed by extension of his long-standing loyalty to Gloria Arroyo, whose influence on Duterte is decidedly Machiavellian: she overthrew Duterte’s old friend as Speaker, thus signaling she owned the House. Not to forget, not long before, she had rigged her own election to the presidency, confessed to the crime, but managed yet to take office and serve the full term.

She may be a consummate manipulator, but there’s simply no manipulating earthquakes. In fact, during that last one, as she was herself rocking helplessly on her feet, her home province of Pampanga was bearing its brunt.

Anyway, characters like her are not given to a transcendent reading of earthquakes, which is understandable: it can only be bad for them. – Rappler.com

I’ve been working at the Philippine Trade Training Center, now the PTTC Global MSME Academy (PTTC-GMEA), for almost 5 years now. One of my regular tasks is to facilitate training programs, which requires being in front of a number of participants.

It wasn’t an easy ride at first, given my Tourette Syndrome (TS), a neurological condition characterized by multiple involuntary motor and vocal tics.  Imagine a training coordinator suddenly making some strange movements like eye rolling, feet stamping, or creating some sounds similar to a shout. (READ: When diseases have a bad name, change is hard)

The day after I conducted my first training program, someone commented, “Hindi siya dapat pang-frontliner dahil sa condition niya (She shouldn’t be a frontliner because of her condition).”

I was hurt that time, but I didn’t let it stop me. Instead, I focused on the colleagues who believed in me and on the tasks that my bosses gave me. Some tasks assigned to me were really challenging. I felt they had so much trust in me that I sometimes asked myself, “Are they forgetting that I have TS?”

Whenever I’m required to face hundreds of people or represent the Center in media interviews, I would think, “If they never doubted me, why would I doubt myself?”

I decided to inform the participants, at the beginning of every seminar, about my condition. There was never an instance that it appeared in the evaluation form that my tics distracted the participants from learning ever since I started that practice.

Five years after hearing that comment, I am still here. Recently, PTTC-GMEA Executive Director Nestor Palabyab (ED Nes), would often tell me: “Alam mo, natutuwa ako sa iyo (You know, I’m pleased with you). You are a perfect example of inclusivity.”

That is why I thought of holding the Annual Gathering of the Philippine Tourette Syndrome Association (PTSA) in one of the seminar rooms of PTTC-GMEA which happened on March 20, 2019. PTSA is a non-profit organization that aims to promote awareness about TS.

In his inspirational message to PTSA members, ED Nes said: “We have the rights and the honor of being part of the human race. And we shouldn’t think of our imperfection to stop [from reaching] our dreams and ambition.” (READ: Man born with no hands finds his 'hidden ability' in miniaturest

“Empowerment knows no boundaries like looks, gender, religion, even our physical infirmities perhaps. Given the premise that everybody has their place under the sky, ganoon din dapat maalala ang mga may Tourette Syndrome (That’s how people with Tourette Syndrome should be remembered) as members of the society,” he added.

“But we can only realize that by supporting each other. And support is always necessary for us to move forward, because if we don’t have support, it's a lonely world,” ED Nes emphasized.

The annual gathering was open to public – relatives, students, researchers, and even advocates. PTSA President Marlon Barnuevo gave a 15-minute talk about TS, which tackled its possible causes, symptoms and manifestations, and the struggles of people with TS.

As ED Nes said, “We all need support.” I know that I wouldn’t be where I am now had it not been for the trust and support of my colleagues, especially the bosses who never doubted to give me challenging tasks and big projects.

Aside from facilitating training programs, my job now includes attending different meetings and events with partners and stakeholders, which sometimes includes high-ranking officials and foreign nationals.

Now, during the introduction at the beginning of the meeting, I would only have to say, “Just to make you aware, I have Tourette Syndrome” and they would just smile and say, “Oh, okay,” making me feel that it’s just normal and the meeting would just go as it is even with my body twitches and sound effects.

I couldn’t overemphasize how the trust that my bosses give me helps me to grow not just as a professional but also as an individual.

PTTC-GMEA has always believed in me, so I have no reason not to believe in myself. It is the epitome of inclusivity. It shows that each one of us can contribute to development and economic growth regardless of our condition. It shows that the government can do their part by seeing people with disabilities not just as beneficiaries of the programs but also as partners in economic development. – Rappler.com

Guia Roa Soriano is the acting head of the Lifestyle Strategic Business Unit of the Training Division of the Philippine Trade Training Center -  Global MSME Academy (PTTC-GMEA).

On May 13, we have the opportunity to make a difference in our country’s future by electing our nation’s leaders. By reflecting and talking with our friends and neighbors, we can help influence the way our people will vote.  Our country needs men and women of integrity and independence, competence and courage, honesty and honor in our Senate so that they can take a stand on at least 7 of the critical issues that already confront us:

1. Challenge charter change. Congress converted into a Constituent Assembly can change the 1987 Constitution into a charter that will enable the consolidation of political dynasties through a federal system that will weaken the checks and balance in government.  Independent-minded leaders and our people can make a difference in the fate of the basic law of the land.

2. Question the war on drugs. This so-called war has already cost thousands of lives, principally of the poor in our midst.  We need to stop plans to further escalate this spiraling war without end, and rethink better ways of dealing with drugs as suggested by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.  If war must be waged, then it must be the “War on Poverty and Inequality” so that we can help eliminate the causes of unrest and despair in our midst.  We need brave leaders who will not succumb to the “herd mentality” and follow government’s policies because it is part of the “supermajority.”

3. Defend press freedom.  Government’s harassment  of independent media people and investigative reporters in entities such as Rappler, the PCIJ, and others has sent a “chilling effect” on the country’s press.  We need leaders who will stand up for the rights of people and an independent free press.

4. Prevent threats against opinion makers who differ with the government.  Government has attempted to silence voices raised against its policies.  Thus, the deportation of Sister Patricia Fox, its insults against Bishop David and leaders who have dared to take public positions; the jailing of Senator Leila de Lima, and the ouster of Chief Justice Sereno. We need servant-leaders who can stand up, and say “Stop!”

5. Check efforts to unseat the vice president.  Because of the Marcos-Duterte alliance, efforts to put Bongbong Marcos into the Office of the Vice President through the Presidential Electoral Tribunal could be intensified. The people have spoken, and leaders must not allow a betrayal of the people’s will.

6. Uphold our rights to the West Philippine Sea. Stop the encroachment by China into our waters and the entry of illegal Chinese workers in our industries.  Relying on the international ruling in the country’s favor, we must reconsider and resist – if we must –  China’s offer of loans and projects that in the end will cost the country its waters and resources.

7. Stop the moral meltdown in society.  We need national leaders who will take a stand against a President who curses God, the Church, religious leaders, the UN, countries and individuals he differs with.  Contrary to the President’s public pronouncements that “God is stupid,” ours is a “wise and loving God” who watches over us, our country and our people.  Speak truth to power! 

– Rappler.com

Prof Ed Garcia was a framer of the 1987 Constitution who worked with Amnesty International and International Alert, taught at UP and the Ateneo, and in post-retirement works on the formation of scholar-athletes at FEU-Diliman.

Archbishop Socrates Villegas issued the following pastoral message to the Archdiocese of Lingayen-Dagupan on Divine Mercy Sunday, April 28, as the Philippines prepares for the May 13 midterm elections. Rappler is publishing his message in full, with the archbishop's permission. 

All elections are important. Each vote is the power of the people to choose their leaders. It is the backbone of democracy. The candidates are job applicants for vacant positions. They must present their credentials humbly and honestly. We have the duty to assess them diligently and, freed from pressure, check if they meet our standards. We decide, not the candidates.  

Be critical voters. Be Godly voters. Bring your faith as you choose. Do not leave God when you vote.

Church teachings

Pope Benedict XVI called the proper exercise of democracy as the most effective way of ensuring a future for the welfare of humanity.

This right to vote is not absolute. It has limits. The power to vote must be based on truth. The right to vote must be based on the right understanding of human dignity. 

The kind of leaders we elect reveals the kind of people we are. The winners in elections are mirrors of the values and aspirations, dreams, and hopes of the people who voted for them. It can also show our backward moving society.

In the exercise of the right to vote, as recent history shows, values and convictions can be easily manipulated by people who seek brute power. 

Democracy without values can easily turn into a thinly disguised totalitarianism, said Saint John Paul II. 

When we vote as if God did not exist, the nation suffers. Democracy is at risk.

When we demand that religion be purely a private matter that it should not touch political choices, society suffers. Democracy is hurt.

And if we continue to keep ethics out of public service, democracy will be killed quietly unnoticed. And we die deprived of our freedoms.

When religion is removed from the political arena, public life is sapped of its motivation and politics takes on a domineering and aggressive character, warned Pope Benedict XVI.

Our situation: The 6 Ks

How are we? Where are we? What is working and what needs change?

We have 6 primary concerns. Some of you might want to add or remove. Consider KAMATAYAN, KABASTUSAN, KORAPSYON, KAHIRAPAN, KASARINLAN, and KASINUNGALINGAN.  

Killing criminals does not solve problems; it has not solved the drug problem. We need to ask why did they become drug addicts? Where do the drugs come from? Who or where is the source? 

Paraphrasing Dom Helder Camara, if we support the anti-drug campaign, they say we are good Catholics. But if we ask who is supplying the drugs, they say we are obstructing progress. They only want us to pray for the dead but if we ask why are they dead, they get angry at us. 

Vulgarity is not Filipino. The Filipino loves God. Return to the True Decalogue of our hero Apolinario Mabini. That is the true Filipino. It shows the true Filipino soul.

Honesty is still the best policy; it should be; it will always be. There is no place in heaven for liars. Lying candidates should receive no vote. Liar candidates will be the future corrupt officials. Fake news is the mother of corruption. Corruption thrives in the plastic garden of fake news. Ang sinungaling ay kapatid ng magnanakaw. 

A clear and realistic program for the poor, for the homeless and the sick, for those with disabilities, and for the jobless must go beyond sweet promises of candidates. Self-serving moves to amend the Constitution and the prevalence of political dynasties will hurt the poor even more. If we do not vote well, more of our freedoms will be lost to political dynasties.

The steady intrusion of China into our waters and the tightening grip of China on us due to Chinese loans put our sovereignty at risk. We are an independent nation recognized by the family of nations. To joke about being a province of China is not funny; it is painful. It is wrong. 

Who then? 

If you agree that the 6 primary concerns need our attention, look at the candidates and ask:

Have they given the orders to kill? Have they protected liars? Truth is not a political issue; it is a moral issue. Human dignity goes beyond political coalitions. It is a godly concern. Sila ba ang TAGA-UTOS?

Have they contributed to the current problem of 6 Ks?  Have they actively cheered and encouraged, enabled and supported the purveyors of the 6 Ks? Sila ba ang TAGASULSOL?

Have they been quiet fence sitters who just allowed the 6 Ks to turn from bad to worse? Silence in the face of evil is itself evil (Bonhoeffer). Sila ba 'yong mababait pero TAHIMIK sa masama? Walang paninindigan? Have they chosen to stay safe rather than stand up for truth, sovereignty, and human dignity?

Taga-utos? Tagasulsol? Tahimik? 

God will judge us for the way we vote. Our children will judge us for the way we vote. This election is important for them. Think of them. 

Be careful. Be critical. Be courageous. How would Christ vote? Vote like Christ. Do not leave God at the altar. Bring your Christian faith when you vote.

May Our Lady who appeared to the 3 children at Fatima guide us and show us the face of her loving Son. – Rappler.com

"Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."

I have to admit. I feel so detached and distant from these words. I cannot hear myself praying with these. To me, these are the words of a man who lived a life of wickedness, which I have not. What about these words that made our Lord Jesus respond with such gratuitousness? (READ: 7 Last Words reflection: 'Today you will be with me in Paradise')

"Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."

Last Holy Monday, I visited the medium security camp at the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa City for the first time. With the facility being heavily guarded – all its possible passage enveloped by an endless loop of barbed wire, visits coordinated with the Bureau of Corrections, and visitors inspected upon entry – I can say that the inmates, or politely called persons deprived of liberty, are much secured inside. (READ: IN NUMBERS: The inmates of New Bilibid Prison)

One thing you might find interesting if you had not known yet – inside the penitentiary is a school offering the inmates mainly a course on entrepreneurship and other programs on fine arts, and technical and vocational skills.

Having the chance to interact with each other, the inmates, ranging from young adults to nearly senior citizens, are students. The younger ones, who proudly call themselves the College Guild, even entertained us with a song, dance, and skit. On May 9, another batch of inmates will graduate and will receive their diplomas.

Outside the school, there are areas that come alive with basketball and volleyball tourneys. There's also a market, a bakery, spaces for crafting products that they sell for a meager income, chapels for various denominations, and the sleeping quarters in crowded multistorey buildings. (READ: They spoke to dozens of jailed extremists, and here's what they learned)

Bilibid is a prison, but it is a community – a community even more alive than the noiseless, walled, camera-secured, and luxurious villages we all aspire to live in. Ironically, people inside find new beginnings even in a desolate situation.

Yet it still baffles me. If you were inside, what could possibly get you up from bed – no, the floor – to rehearse and perfect a performance? What is there to dance, or sing, or to act to if you were given a life-long sentence? What is there to paint, or learn, or to earn an educational degree for, if the shadow of your past haunts you? What is there to live for if a quarter or even half of your life will be spent inside a facility secured with a roll of barbed wire?

With great struggle to find an answer, I was led to the very thing that made the thief say to Jesus, "Remember me when you come into your kingdom…" and that is hope.

Hope is abundant inside Bilibid. I saw it with my own eyes, incarnated in the community, in every individual living one day at a time, joyfully, without minding too much the number of years left off of their sentences.

I enjoin you, my dear brothers and sisters, to visit them and see it for yourselves too. It is far from perfect; it is a prison after all. But because of the glimmer of hope, it bears a semblance of Paradise. (READ: Pope Francis washes feet of Filipino prisoner on Holy Thursday)

Finally, notice Jesus' words, "Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise." The time of fulfillment is today, says Jesus. Not tomorrow, not next week, not next year, but today!

Jesus does not wait until the inmates finish their sentences before he shows them mercy, compassion, and forgiveness. He remembers them right now, even while they are inside. My dear friends, forever is not merely in some future time. It is in the here and the now. We are already living in it. And so look around you.

What paradise has God given you today? – Rappler.com

Jaime Martin P. Candelaria, 26, is a management engineering graduate of Ateneo de Manila University. He aspires to become a Jesuit someday.

Hindi na namin iinsultuhin ang mga kutsero at tatawagin itong kuwentong kutsero.

Hindi na sana kapatol-patol ang pinakabagong kahunghangan na pinakulo ng Palasyo – ang "matrix." Hango na naman ito sa pantasya ng punong-abala ng bansa na mahilig sa mga pelikulang Hollywood. Naaalala n'yo pa ba ang red-tagging na Red October? At ang dalawang bersyon ng narco list?

Pero ayan, hinimay-himay ng Rappler ang mga datos at ipinakita na laway lang ni Duterte ang nagdidikit sa kunwaring matrix. (Basahin: FALSE: 'Ouster plot' against President Duterte 'bared')

Hindi kailanman ikinalat ng mamamahayag na si Ellen Tordesillas ang “Ang totoong narco list” video.

Hindi kailanman itinago ng PCIJ, Vera files, at Rappler ang foreign funding nila. (READ: The Rappler Story: Independent Journalism with Impact)

At hindi bawal ang foreign funding, tanging 100% ownership ang bawal. (At 100% Filipino-owned ang Rappler.)

Naglista nga ng mga website IP address ang matrix fantasy story ng Manila Times, pero wala naman itong napatutunayan maliban sa marunong sila mag-extract ng IP address. Duh.

At higit sa lahat HINDI reliable source ang Presidente.

Nainggit ba sila sa mapa ng disinformation ng Rappler at mga mananaliksik na hinalaw sa masusing pagsusuri ng big data at kayang patunayan lahat ng mga konklusyon? (BASAHIN: Part 1: Propaganda war: Weaponizing the internet; Part 2: How Facebook algorithms impact democracy; Part 3: Fake accounts, manufactured reality on social media) (BASAHIN: Chief disinformation architects in the PH: Not exactly who you think) 

Sabi nga ni Vergel Santos (at hindi na namin ito isasalin): "Here, in other words, is a tale that bears the hallmarks of that one told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Tulad ng 7 milyong durugista sa bansa sa utak ng Presidente, na noong 2016 ay 3 milyon lang, na lumobo mula sa 1.8 milyon noong 2015, lumalaki ang kuwentong walang kwenta. Kahit pulisya'y napapakamot ng ulo dahil sa namamagang mga pseudo-datos ni Duterte. (BASAHAN: [ANALYSIS] How Duterte’s exaggerations worsened the Philippines’ drug problem)

Wala palang bisa ang gyera laban sa droga? Bakit dumoble pa ang bilang ng itotokhang?

Tinawag din ni Santos ang Manila Times na naglathala ng "matrix" na "newspaper once." Ayon sa Rappler, may leksyon dito: "How not to write an investigative report or even straight news."

Bread and butter ng may-ari ng Times na si Dante Ang ang PR. Siya ang pinakabagong bersyon ng car salesman – inilalako lahat ng pipitsuging kotse at laos na conspiracy theory kahit salat sa lohika at pananaliksik. Kahit kay Sara Duterte at sa Department of Justice ay di bumenta ang "matrix."

Matapos ang lindol sa Luzon at Kabisayaan, ang kailangan natin ay matinong pamumuno sa panahon ng krisis – hindi mga ouster plot na ipinanganak sa pilipit na imahinasyon ng isang PR man at kanyang amo sa Malacañang.

Nanawagan ang Rappler sa mga nananatili ang katinuan at propesyonalismo sa gobyerno at sa loob ng Times. Tulad ni Ipe Salvosa, ang Times managing editor na nagresign matapos kwestyunin sa Twitter ang pinasabog ng kanyang pahayagan – kumibo rin kayo.

Ngayong, Mayo 3, Press Freedom Day sa buong mundo, kailangan ng mga journalists ang inyong suporta – upang manatili ang malayang pamamahayag; upang tumigil na ang walang humpay na legal at verbal harassment ng mga mamamahayag. Akmang-akma ang tema ngayong taon: "keeping power in check."

Upang huwag na ma-empower ang mga alagad ng kasinungalingan at ang makinarya ng disimpormasyon.

Upang manatili ang access ng mga Pilipino sa facts, sa katotohanan – at hindi pantasya. – Rappler.com 

When the 6.1 magnitude earthquake jolted Luzon on Monday, April 22, I found myself putting to practice the infamous triumvirate of security actions I learned in grade school: duck, cover, and hold.

The fluorescent tubes flickered across the floor, as my colleagues and I hid under our respective desks, and shouts of worry and signs of distress and anxiety became evident. My heart was pounding tremendously. I was at work in a high-rise building in Manila.

It was around 5:11 pm, and with my knees bent, my world swayed back and forth as if I was floating in the middle of the ocean with no life vest on. It was horror. I’ve never felt that vulnerable before.

After about 30 seconds, and when the movement momentarily halted, I waited for the emergency alarm to sound. But it never came. I approached the officer who was standing just a few meters away from me.

“Sir, when are we going to use the stairs?” I said calmly. “We have to get out of the building.”

“There’s still no advisory from management yet,” he said. “We have to wait a little longer.”

Dismayed by his response, I returned to my small embankment under my desk. The company-issued laptop was still on, and the coffee I was enjoying just moments ago turned as cold as did my sweat brought by adrenaline flowing through my whole body.

But after about 20 seconds, I headed toward the officer for the second time. I was on survival mode.

“Kuya, we have to exit the building,” I uttered. “There could be aftershocks!”

“You can go ahead,” he responded while holding a two-way radio.

“But how about the others?” I said. There was silence on his part.

Then, I tightly held my phone and hurtled towards the exit. I left my bag thinking that I’d be able to run faster. And I did.

While I was going down the stairs during the fleeting countdown of floor numbers all the way to the ground floor, a tornado of thoughts ruled my mind. They arrived and departed like scenes in a film – temporal fragments of pictures fading into the unknown.

How about my family? Are they safe? What’s going to happen to my friends, my laptop, our dogs, our car at home? Is the building going to collapse? San Andreas. Thriller Netflix movies. Tsunami in Japan. Dwayne Johnson. Survivor. Is she okay? Could it turn out to be “The Big One?” Why is it just me in the emergency exit? Why were the others prevented from leaving? Is it because I insisted?

I ran to safety at one side of a wide open road and joined a pack of people like me who were confused about what could happen next. They were on their phones, talking to their loved ones, trying to check on them even if they were just about 180 kilometers away from the epicenter of the tremor.

As I realized that it was not an earthquake exercise but a real-life one, I asked myself: why didn’t we implement the evacuation procedure? Where have all the drills, preparations, and talks gone? Weren't we supposed to have deserted the building by then? (READ: Earthquake tips: What to do before, during, and after)

In the aftermath of the temblor, the Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) Industry Employees Network (BIEN) called out firms for not evacuating employees following the earthquake: “We call on the government to enforce the new occupational safety and health standards law (RA 1105) and penalize companies who have violated the safety standards putting workers’ lives at great risk…Keeping business as usual in the midst of this life-threatening situation is not only illegal; it is utterly inhumane.”

We know that BPO companies have to perform at their best to compete with other organizations. Putting a stop to operations even for an hour or so can have direct consequences on the rating of the quality of service they offer, as well as on their image as dependable and efficient hubs for business.

Of course, there are technical requirements and standards that must be met before a need for evacuation is declared. But is it worth putting hundreds or thousands of lives on the line with such an approach?

Yes, we’ve been able to successfully capture the first image of a black hole after years of vigorous research and study aided by an army of about 200 scientific minds and experts from different parts of the globe, but one fact remains: humanity still doesn’t have the capacity to know with certainty when and where the next earthquake will strike.

The possibility of the arrival of more powerful aftershocks is always present. Unlike typhoons, earthquakes erupt without a hint. We know that building managers and structural engineers implement the latest possible technology in their respective areas to monitor earthquake activities with the support of their owners and financiers, but we cannot predict next moves.

Filipinos are a resilient people, but an earthquake is not one to laugh about. Earthquakes remind us of how ephemeral our lives are. Photos that prove a drill has been conducted by a company become irrelevant during an actual shake. Memes on Facebook making fun of this catastrophe should be deleted in cyberspace.

We need courageous and compassionate people to call the shots; not everything should depend on numbers or figures or scales. Leaders have to communicate to employees or workers in detail and with transparency what should be done during an emergency to keep their trust.

If there are shortcomings and lapses, they should be professionally disclosed and discussed in a proper forum with a spirit of humility with no excuses. This is true not just in BPO firms, but also in malls, supermarkets, and other establishments. 

We only have one chance, and those in authority must do everything in their power to protect lives. Safety is everyone’s responsibility, but it’s a blatant disrespect of workers to directly or indirectly abandon the drill practices and bar them from exiting the building during a quake, and then observe business-as-usual shortly afterwards.

There were reports that penalties could be slapped by government on companies proven to have erred in the handling of the turmoil last week.

Let this be a learning experience for everyone to unite and formulate adjustments in the existing policies and guidelines on emergency situations especially during an earthquake.

After all, there is no perfect organization and we’re all in pursuit of happiness, security, and peace in this life – in whatever form. – Rappler.com

*JC Ibarra is the pseudonym of the author who works at a BPO firm. So as not to put at risk employment, s/he requested that his/her identity not be revealed.

Well-trodden to the point of exhaustion and relegation to cliché na ang katagang “nagmamadaling Lunes.” Nagmamadali naman talaga ang karamihan ng mga kabilang sa rat race ng buhay at kabuhayan sa nagmamadaling lungsod kapag nagmamadaling Lunes. Lalo ngayon habang isinusulat ko ito. Kinalunesan matapos ang mahaba-habang bakasyon. At Lunes kung kailan isang linggo nang sinisimulan ang dry run bilang bahagi ng unti-unting pagpapatupad ng provincial bus ban sa kahabaan ng EDSA. Dry run. Susubukan. Pero ngayon pa lang, masasabi kong magastos, anti-poor, at lubhang makakaabala sa buhay at kabuhayan ang panibagong eksperimentong ito ng MMDA. Hindi na tayo nagtanda.  

Ito ang napatunayan ko sa kahabaan ng pamumuhay ko sa lungsod: nasa isip lang natin ang pagmamadali lalo kung Lunes. Hindi naman talaga tayo pinapayagang magmadali ng pagkakataon. Mistulang nagkakaisa ang lahat ng sektor at salik para pabagalin ang ating pagmamadali:

• Ginagawang kalsada ngayong kampanya, check.
• Nagkasagiang sasakyan sa highway, check.
• Walang enforcer sa choke point ng highway kaya nakabalandra ang mga city buses, check.
• Illegal na estruktura at terminal ng mga dyipni at traysikel sa mga kanto-kantong sumasanga sa highway, check.
• Double parking sa mga tributary alternative roads, check.
• Halos isinarang kalsada dahil nagha-house-to-house si mayor at konsehal, check. 

Status nga sa social media ng mga naiwan sa lungsod nitong nagdaang Semana Santa, huwag na raw tayong bumalik dahil masaya na sila sa kaluwagan ng mga kalsada. Huwag na raw tayong bumalik. Oo, tayo, dahil nasa Vietnam kami ng pamilya ko buong Semana Santa. 

Huwag na raw tayong bumalik, sabi ng mga naiwan na, ewan, baka wala lang pambakasyon o babakasyunang lugar noong Mahal na Araw, o dahil walang kinikilalang Holy Week ang trabaho. Maluwag nga naman ang Metro. Parang airstrip ang luwag ng EDSA batay sa nag-viral na larawan. Ganoon din ang masikip na España Boulevard kung saan naman ako naghahanap-buhay. 

Pero lahat iyan ay pababagalin (or more of like, pasisikipin) ng nagmamadaling Lunes. Idagdag pa ang mainit na panahong nakakapagpabula ng pawis sa kilikili, manaka-nakang water at power shortage, blaring trompa jingle ng mga trapong kandidato, pati na ang kanilang eyesore na naghambalang at naglipanang tarpaulin at campaign materials. Balik na uli sa realidad at irony ng nagmamadaling Lunes ng lalong papainit na kampanyahan.   

Which leads me to this: homestretch na kasi ng kampanyahan. Ilang araw na lang, pipili muli tayo sa, aminin na natin, limitadong pamimilian ng maglilingkod (o mananamantala, depende sa pananaw mo) sa bayan.  

Homestretch, gaya ng “nagmamadaling Lunes,” is a much maligned cliché. Pero mabisa pa rin. Umiiral sa maraming layers ng buhay natin ang salitang “homestretch.” Sa mga karerista, ang homestretch ay iyong huling pagliko ng mga nagkakarerang kabayo hanggang sa finish line. Sa homestretch nangyayari o inilalabas ang mga huling trick ng mga hinete sa kanilang sinasakyang kabayo. Wika nga, kung may ibubuga pa, ibubuga na sa homestretch.  

Umiiral ang homestretch lalo doon sa mga nakakapit lang sa survey o sa lokal na posisyon, iyong hindi masyadong napapansin, o hindi dala ng mga religious denomination na may block voting, which, as of this moment, malamang, nasabi na kung sino ang bibitbiting mapapalad na kandidato, kaliwa’t kanan man ang kinakaharap na kaso. Sa homestretch lumalabas ang Plan B o C. Sa homestretch kadalasan nagiging marumi ang kampanya, o mas lalong dumudumi kung dati nang marumi.  

Umasa tayo sa homestretch ng kampanyahan. Mas lalong magiging hardsell ang pagbebenta sa sarili ng mga kandidato, mas lalong mambubulahaw, mas lalong magpapaka-relevant. Mas lalong magbabatuhan ng putik o maglalabas ng mga “alas.” Pansinin, sugal ang pinagmulan ng homestretch, sugal din ang cultural reference ng “alas.” Dahil, hindi ba, sugal din ang “karera” ng buhay? Kung paanong tayo – ang sambayanan at ang kaakibat na kapangyarihan at kaban ng bayan – ang premyo sa sugal ng mga kandidato? 

Basta. Maghinay-hinay. Huwag magmadali. Magnilay. Lalo sa pagpili ng iboboto. Kilalanin pa ang mga kandidato. Huwag iboto ang gagawin lang premyo ang puwesto, lalo na iyong may kasaysayang manlapa ng ating buwis at pondo.

*** 

Sa unang pagkakataon noong nagdaang dalawang linggo, nailabas ko ng bansa ang aking pamilya. Unang beses nilang makatuntong sa lupaing hindi nila mabasa ang karamihan sa signage at hindi sila magkaintindihan ng binibilhan nila ng ice cream sa mall. Isama pa ang nakalilitong paggasta ng pera nilang maraming zero. Maganda ang aming karanasan sa Ho Chi Minh City sa Vietnam.

Hindi ito mangyayari kung hindi sa pakikipagtulungan ng maraming tao. Nagpapasalamat ako sa aking kapatid at sa kanyang asawa, ang aking Ate Cecil at Bayaw David, na propesor sa isang prominenteng unibersidad sa Ho Chi Minh o mas kilala pa rin sa tawag na Saigon, na nagsilbing host at tour guide sa mahaba-habang lakaran noong nagdaan Linggo. Sa tinutuluyan nilang condo unit kami nanatili nang limang araw ng aking asawa at dalawang anak pati na ang ang kapatid kong si Ditse Teresa.  

Si Bayaw David ang kasa-kasama ko sa pag-inom ng malamig na serbesa o masarap na kapeng kilala sa bansang ito sa labas ng kanilang compound, pati na ang pagdayo sa mga kainan ng phở at bánh mì na mga prominenteng delicacy sa Saigon na na-enjoy din ng aking mga anak. Nangamba ako, sa totoo lang, na baka hindi nila ma-appreciate ang maraming herbs na inilalagay sa pagkain ng mga Vietnamese. 

Nagpapasalamat din ako kay Ma’am Maria Coloma ng Travel Specialist Ventures, isang magaling at masinop na travel and tours agency na matatagpuan sa Quezon City at Lucena City na nagbigay sa aming pamilya ng napakagandang offer para makapaglakbay sa bahaging iyon ng rehiyong ASEAN. 

Narito na rin lang, sasamantalahin ko na ang panawagan. Sa Mayo 11, Sabado, 2 pm hanggang gabi – ang huling araw kung kailan wala pang liquor ban dahil sa eleksiyon kinalunesan – muli kaming magkikita-kita ng aking mga kaklase sa elementarya sa barangay at lungsod kung saan ako lumaki, namulat, at nagkasungay: ang Coloong, Valenzuela.  

Kabilang ako sa batch 1989 (oo, ganyan na ako katanda) na matapos ang ilang dekada ay magre-reunion sa Sebastian Resort sa Coloong 1. Tatlumpong taon na kaming graduate sa elementary bagamat masasabi kong may bahagi pa rin ng pagkatao kong elementary pa rin kung umasta. Mukha at katawan ko lang yata ang tumanda. 

Maganda ang barangay namin, parang hindi bahagi ng Kalakhang Maynila dahil, totoo ito, sariwa pa ang hangin. Malawak ang mga palaisdaan, maraming puno, kaya parang nasa probinsiya pa rin. Mas mukha pa ngang urban landscape ang mga kahanggang bayan ng Obando at Meycauayan sa Bulacan kaysa sa Coloong. 

Dahil sa traffic at distansiya mula sa trabaho ko sa Maynila, bihira na akong bumalik sa aming barangay kung saan naglingkod ako bilang, ehem, pinagpipitaganang barangay secretary nang tatlong taon noong early 2000. 

Sa mga nagbabasa sa espasyong ito na kabilang sa Batch ’89 ng Coloong Elementary School, tara! Maaari kayong makipag-ugnayan kay Asuncion Layson sa numerong 09097309316 at kay Antonio Pasco sa numero 09227356492. – Rappler.com 

Bukod sa pagtuturo ng Creative Writing, Pop Culture, and Research sa Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas, Writing Fellow din si Joselito D. Delos Reyes, PhD, sa UST Center for Creative Writing and Literary Studies at Research Fellow sa UST Research Center for Culture, Arts and Humanities. Board Member siya ng Philippine Center of International PEN. Siya ang kasalukuyang tagapangulo ng Departamento ng Literatura ng UST. 

It has been puzzling for many human rights advocates that the satisfaction rating of President Rodrigo Duterte remains high.

In spite of the many jaw-dropping controversies facing the Duterte administration, the Social Weather Stations (SWS) reported that for the first quarter of 2019, a combined 79% of wealthier up to low-income Filipinos gave Duterte a net satisfaction rating of +66 in March, which SWS categorizes as "very good." Thus, Duterte is back to his high satisfaction rating achieved in June 2017. (READ: Duterte's satisfaction rating bounces back to personal high – SWS)

Many have offered varying explanations regarding the persistence of this phenomenon. In this piece, I would like to explore more on Duterte's success in tapping into our capacity for violence, which may explain his high ratings.

The thing about violence is that it is built into our human genes as an evolutionary adaptation to crudely get what we want. In the work of Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature, he explains there are 5 primal motivators behind our propensity for violence. I will explain each vis-à-vis how Duterte exploits them to his advantage.

• Predation – Use of physical force and the fantasy of killing someone to secure resources or one’s position in society. From the very start of his political campaign and his presidency, Duterte continued to vow killing tens of thousands of criminals in a relentless war on crime. Tirades against the nation’s elite that cast him as an anti-establishment hero. He is consistent with his “Kill, Kill, Kill” approach in solving the nation’s problems. Duterte e continues to publicly urge people to kill persons addicted to drugs and others which he considers as undesirables – these include his critics such as human rights activists, truth tellers in media, and religious and consecrated persons. (READ: How Duterte gov’t tried to fix legal loopholes of drug war)

• Dominance– Use of relative size and strength to gain the upper hand in society. Duterte always woos the police and military by giving them lavish gifts, perks, and bonuses to solidify his political dominance. Up to date, he is the President who has the highest number of appointments of ex-military officials in various civilian government posts. Since military personnel has been trained to neutralize enemies of the state, such specialized training would be instrumental for Duterte to liquidate his opponents since he sees himself as the personification of the state. Evidence? Just look how Duterte addresses the police, the military, and the country – he treats them as his possessions at his disposal.

• Desire for revenge– Use of grudges to seek retaliation over the long term. When Duterte became the President, he successfully polarized the Filipino people. On one side are those who are classified as either the proud Digong Duterte Supporters (DDS), the closet DDS, and those whose apathetic silence help bolster the dominance of Duterte. The other side, which is critical of Duterte, has been falsely labeled as Yellows regardless of their political, religious, and ideological affiliations. This false label has made it easy for Duterte to demonize his critics as propagandists for the country’s oligarchs whose excesses and oppressive actions against the ordinary Filipino need to be squashed and destroyed. (READ: Blogger-propagandists, the new crisis managers)

• Sadism– Deliberately inflicting pain on someone just because the sight of suffering becomes enjoyable. Duterte, on many occasions, has publicly declared his enjoyment in destroying the reputation of those he sees as his enemies. He has effectively weaponized the law, used military surveillance, and encouraged death threats to inflict pain against his critics such as Senator Leila de Lima, Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, Rappler CEO and executive editor Maria Ressa, Caloocan Bishop Pablo Virgilio David, and his latest demolition job, Apo Hiking singer Jim Paredes.

• Ideology– A shared belief that some greater good is so utopian that achieving it warrants limitless violence. Duterte has constantly been reiterating that he is willing to do everything to uplift the lives of the Filipino even if he goes to hell for it. He has also successfully gotten his message across that the country’s problems are so grave that it would require an iron hand and the use of violence, disguised as political will, to achieve it. In short, for Duterte, the end justifies the means, and those who suffer along the way are merely war casualties or collateral damage.

The abovementioned primal motivators for violence has been found by Pinker and other studies to create a pleasurable response in the brain, somewhat similar to that caused by cocaine. Thus, violence can be very highly pleasurable once revulsion towards it is conquered, and in turn, can be very addictive. This is why I suppose Filipinos who got used to Duterte eventually found it amusing when he promotes violence, and I suspect they find it pleasurable when people who are considered undesirable by the President die or suffer in the hands of law enforcement agencies or vigilante justice.

Armed with this understanding, Duterte’s high satisfaction rating will only take a negative turn when we are able to successfully curb the capacity for violence that has been awakened in us. Let us find solace in knowing that violence can be curbed and there is still a way for us to get out of this mess. – Rappler.com

Mark Anthony Abenir is an associate professor and director of the Simbahayan Community Development Office of the University of Santo Tomas in Manila. He is also a development worker and serves as chairman of the Community Development Society of the Philippines.

We were a dollar-earning family. My father worked as a sushi chef in America back when I was 7 years old – we were living comfortably. My mom, a graduate of industrial engineering at the Polytechnic University of the Philippines, chose to be a homemaker back then. But everything changed when my father met his "number two."

The remittances stopped, I had to transfer to a public school, my mother had to work – she was a single mother who had to find a job after more than a half-a-decade career gap. I tell you, my mother faced various kinds of discrimination, but she had to endure all of it because there were no laws that stopped companies from doing so, and the discrimination was masked as part of the hiring process. (READ: IN NUMBERS: What you need to know about the Philippine labor sector)

In all of her interviews, she was asked, “Who will take care of your child while you’re working?”

Asked countless times, my mom would confidently answer, “My grandmother will take care of him.” Afterwards, the company representative will say the most cliché line delivered after a job interview: “We’ll call you.” Companies did not look at her qualifications, but her personal situation – a situation that did not define her, a situation she could not change, and a situation that should not be a hindrance to her employment in the first place.

One time, because of my naivete, I got to the point where I said, “Then don’t state my existence. Eh di ‘wag mo po ko ilagay sa application form (Don’t mention me on the application form)."

Finally, my mother got hired by a popular lifestyle brand to become a factory worker in Taguig City. Living in Tondo, Manila, she had to wake up at 4 am, brave the harsh city pollution, ride a trolley, and immediately jump off from it when a train was approaching. She was doing an 8-hour job in a workplace with a lot of health hazards. All of this for a minimum wage of P492 – a minimum wage that equates to  an inhumane existence after deductions. Take note, I was an only child! How much worse, the situation of others?

One day, my mother went home with a bump on her forehead, about an inch in diameter. She walked towards me slower than usual because she was suffering from a severe headache. She met an accident at work. A filled box that was the size of a Balikbayan box fell onto her while she was working. At that time, she was prohibited to go to the clinic for she was on duty, and was only told to immediately go home after her shift. She had to finish her duty for that day despite her injury. She had to continue working in a work place with almost no ventilation, enduring the large bump on her forehead, a head-splitting headache, and body pain all over. (READ: PH still among world's 'worst' countries to work in – report)

And the injustice did not end there – the company did not compensate her nor cover her medical expenses, claiming that what happened was just a “simple accident.” We were powerless – my mother had to bow down her head so that she could still work there. She had to accept her subclass human condition.

A lot of companies do not see their workers as human beings who can experience pain, emotions, and have limitations. Most companies see their workers as mere objects and instruments that will give them profit. Companies do not see the quality of the situation of the workers, rather the quality of the products they make. Companies see their workers as slaves and not as partners. A lot of employers cannot see the personal lives of their workers. They often forget that workers are humans too. (READ: [OPINION] Contractualization and the rights of workers)

That is why protests are significant today to fight not for special conditions, but to fight for humane situations; not to complain, but to assert rights and to end this subclass human existence of our workers.

This fight is your fight too. The outcome will heavily affect the people who are working right now, and if you are not, will greatly affect you when you start working too. This fight is not only for us, but also for you. We are fighting for your situation, for your rights: we are fighting for you. (READ: PH Labor Day: A history of struggle)

As you read this, I may be in Mendiola, wearing a red shirt, under the sun, braving the police, with a placard containing different slogans and calls, shouting and fighting for our workers, and most especially, fighting and shouting for the injustices my mom faced so that I can live and write this article today. – Rappler.com

Jack Lorenz A. Rivera is a 17-year-old incoming grade 12 student of Manila Science High School. He won first place in the Kabataan Sanaysay at the 68^th Carlos Palanca Memorial Awards for Literature. This piece is his tribute to all fellow fighters of the world, and to his mother, Analea Acebedo Rivera.

In a Senate hearing on a proposed anti-political dynasty law in February 2018, Dean Ronald Mendoza of the Ateneo School of Government put figures to a fact that we know very well. According to him, between 2007 and 2016, the number of powerful clans per position increased: from 75% to 78% among district representatives; from 70% to 81% among governors; from 58% to 70% among mayors. 

In the hearing, Dean Mendoza cited statistics to show that some of the poorest areas in the country also have the highest concentration of dynasties. Maguindanao, for example, which is the second poorest province in the country, has the highest concentration of political dynasties. 

He advocates that these political dynasties should be the target of a law, calculating that banning dynasties can free up 25% of local government positions for the young and upcoming leaders. 

Now how do we restrict political dynasties for a more inclusive elections? 

As early as 1986, or 33 years ago, in the drafting of the 1987 Constitution, its framers were already aware of the evils of political dynasties. Thus, in Article II, Section 26, of the final version of the Constitution, a policy was unequivocally set: “The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

Unfortunately, despite the clear thrust of the provision, its framers tasked the dynasty-populated Congress to define “political dynasties” – a constitutional design seen by many as self-cancelling. It was a flaw that could potentially reduce the supposedly strongly-worded prohibition to a mere lip-service. 

Those fears turned out to be true. After many decades, the phrase “political dynasties” remained undefined, and the prohibition unenforced. In law school, we have been taught of a defeatist interpretation that said the prohibition is “non-self executory,” that an enabling law is needed to implement it. Congress failed to rise above its members’ self-interest. People, in turn, have lost their enthusiasm and accepted it as national fate, an inescapable curse on Filipinos.  

On January 15, 2016, however, Congress surprisingly compromised and promulgated Republic Act No. 10742 or the Sangguniang Kabataan Reform Act of 2015. It provided the qualifications for Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) officials and, more importantly, effectively defined the phrase “political dynasty” for the very first time since 1987, or after 29 years, to wit: 

SECTION 10. Qualifications. – An official of the Sangguniang Kabataan, either elective or appointee, must be a citizen of the Philippines, a qualified voter of the Katipunan ng Kabataan, a resident of the barangay for not less than one (1) year immediately preceding the day of the elections, at least eighteen (18) years but not more than twenty-four (24) years of age on the day of the elections, able to read and write Filipino, English, or the local dialect, must not be related within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity to any incumbent elected national official or to any incumbent elected regional, provincial, city, municipal, or barangay official, in the locality where he or she seeks to be elected, and must not have been convicted by final judgment of any crime involving moral turpitude.

Although passed in the context of SKs, it cannot be denied that Congress, in Republic Act No. 10742, has effectively defined “political dynasty” to mean relationship “within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity to any incumbent elected national official or to any incumbent elected regional, provincial, city, municipal, or barangay official, in the locality where he or she seeks to be elected.”  

Now, did Congress, in defining “political dynasty” in Republic Act No. 10742, unwittingly “enable” the anti-political dynasty provision of the 1987 Constitution? 

Many would readily argue that the law was exclusively intended for SK officials, not covering other local and national elective positions. This interpretation, however, gives Congress too much discretion than what the text of the 1987 Constitution actually provides.  

To interpret otherwise is to give Congress a discretion to rewrite or even reverse a clearly-defined constitutional policy by mere inaction. It must be noted that the Constitution did not give Congress a magic switch to turn on or off its anti-political dynasty provision or an option for its selective application – i.e., only to SK candidates. No such discretion was written or can be inferred in Section 26 of Article II. To me, what was clearly asked of Congress is for it to “define” what a “political dynasty” is and to determine the extent of the prohibition. And it already did in Republic Act No. 10742.

This is further apparent in the fact that the framers especially used the phrase “as may be defined by law.” It was only used twice, unlike “provided by law” or “provided for by law,” which were used 46 times, “prescribed by law” for 11 times, and “fixed by law” for 5 times. The only other instance that it was used is as regards the mandate to expropriate idle or abandoned agricultural lands “as may be defined by law” for distribution to the beneficiaries of the agrarian reform program. Clearly, a different meaning was intended for the phrase. To me, it is a specific and a limited mandate to define, surely not a discretion to enable or not to enable.

If indeed enabled by the definition in Republic Act No. 10742, the constitutional prohibition can already be made a basis for the filing of an appropriate Petition for Disqualification before Comelec – that is, on the ground that a candidate is related within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity to any incumbent elected national or local official. 

Since late-2018, I have been advocating this argument every opportunity I got – in election cases I filed with the Commission on Elections. I hope that the Comelec can take up this issue and rule on it, so I will have the opportunity to bring this matter to the Supreme Court for a definitive ruling or interpretation.

If successful, this can potentially rewrite our political sphere in the same way that the face of the earth was cleansed by that mythical Great Flood in the story of Noah – freeing it from self-interests and ushering new bloods in the world politics. This analogy is admittedly exaggerated, but I am pretty excited about the prospect of great changes that this constitutional prohibition on political dynasty can bring if finally implemented as intended. – Rappler.com 

Emil Marañon III is an election lawyer specializing in automated election litigation and consulting. He is one of the election lawyers consulted by the camp of Vice President Leni Robredo, whose victory is being contested by former senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Marañon served in Comelec as chief of staff of retired Comelec Chairman Sixto Brillantes Jr. He is a partner at Trojillo Ansaldo and Marañon (TAM) Law Offices.  

Your life in the next 3 years hinges on how wisely you vote on May 13.

Lots of sweeping, consequential policies are up in the air. These include the continuation of the war on drugs, President Duterte’s pro-China stance, and the push for federalism via charter change.

The last thing we need is a Senate that will pass these and other measures unquestioningly and uncritically. After all, it’s not the Senate’s job to please Duterte and grant all his wishes.

More than ever, we need to elect into the Senate a bold, united, and sizable opposition that could provide much-needed counterweight to the administration’s pernicious schemes.

In this article let’s examine some specific policies at stake and why you owe it to yourself to vote for the opposition on May 13.

War on drugs

First, we cannot have a Senate that will continue to turn a blind eye to Duterte’s senseless and inhumane war on drugs. Nearly 3 years have passed since it started, yet the country’s drug situation is worse than ever.

Even Duterte himself blurted out on April 2 that his drug war has miserably failed: “I cannot control those drugs, son of a bitch. Even if I ordered the deaths of these idiots, drugs remain, still intensifying.”

Now, the former chief implementor of the war on drugs, a senatorial aspirant, trumpets – on the basis of nothing more than perception – that his program has been “successful.”

Bato dela Rosa said, “If many believe that the number of drug addicts has gone down, then somehow we are successful.”

The Senate could, in fact, provide a powerful voice against the war on drugs.

Sure, the Senate blocked in the 2018 budget P900 million for “Oplan Double Barrel” and P500 million for the Department of the Interior and Local Government’s drug surveillance program called “Masa Masid.”

But has this effectively stopped the PNP from implementing the war on drugs?

A majority of senators have disquietingly kept mum about the whole affair, or otherwise contented themselves with paying lip service. In so doing, they have swept thousands of extrajudicial killings under the rug and allowed Duterte and the police to play their macabre sport of killing the innocent poor.

Lest the death toll rise further, we need to stop the war on drugs once and for all. That won’t remotely happen with a predominantly pro-Duterte Senate.

Pro-China stance

Absent a strong Senate opposition, you can also expect to see more Chinese pouring into the country and Chinese government officials intruding in our domestic affairs.

Foreign policy is another area where the Senate could effectively undo the President’s actions.

For instance, in the wake of the demonstrably onerous loan agreements entered into by the Department of Finance, it is entirely within the Senate’s power to scrutinize such agreements by, say, calling out erring officials and even reversing said agreements if need be.

But just like the war on drugs, most senators have been all too happy to let Duterte be.

The Senate’s acquiescence is most acute when it comes to China’s ever-increasing aggression in our territories (and their exploitation of our natural resources) in the West Philippine Sea.

Experts now agree that the Senate has been largely remiss in its “patriotic duty” to protect our sovereignty. A predominantly pro-Duterte Senate could only make this worse.

If you remember, during the 36^th founding anniversary of PDP-Laban (Duterte’s political party), some senators even invited ranking officials of the Communist Party of China as guests of honor.

Imee Marcos also recently said we shouldn’t have challenged China in the first place: “We started it. We picked a fight and then it turns out we’re no match against them. What kind of thing is that? We’re really looking for trouble.”

Thankfully, the opposition slate Otso Diretso– as well as some senatorial aspirants like Neri Colmenares– have impassioned and compelling arguments against Duterte’s excessive kowtowing to China, as seen in the last CNN Philippines senatorial debate.

Federalism via charter change

Last, and perhaps most unsettling, failing to elect enough opposition members in the Senate could pave the way for Duterte’s grand federalist project.

The House of Representatives already passed on 3rd and final reading a draft constitution that transforms our unitary government into a federal one.

But the draft, shepherded by outgoing speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, brazenly removed congressional term limits and the ban on political dynasties – a move experts claim could lead to the deeper entrenchment of dynasties.

Economic managers also concede federalism via charter change could “wreak havoc” on the economy by blowing up the budget deficit and raising interest rates through the roof. It could also compound the costs of doing business across the country.

Most worrying, the draft constitution includes so-called “transitory provisions,” which some legal experts fear, could be used by the Duterte administration to overstay its welcome and declare a revolutionary government.

The record speed with which the House passed this abominable draft constitution is deeply disturbing. We just got lucky: the Arroyo draft came in too late.

But without sufficient opposition in the Senate, this federalist project – along with all its diabolical features – is as good as done.

Reelectionist Koko Pimentel said that after the elections, the Senate “will have a sense of urgency knowing we are already on the second half of [Duterte’s] term.”

Vote for the opposition

The May 13 polls offer us a chance to prevent the Senate from completely morphing into Duterte’s rubber stamp – if it hasn’t already.

Yet survey data suggest Filipinos are overwhelmingly poised to vote for pro-administration bets. Only Bam Aquino of Otso Diretso entered the “magic 12” in the latest Pulse Asia survey.

The last time the opposition secured only one Senate seat was more than half a century ago, in 1967.

An opposition wipeout of this sort could thoroughly subvert our democratic institutions and degrade the lives of millions of Filipinos, difficult as these already are.

If you value life – and want to put an end to the senseless slaughter brought about by Duterte’s war on drugs – vote for the opposition.

If you respect our country’s sovereignty – and want to avoid paying more onerous Chinese loans and to resist China’s exploitation of our resources in the West Philippine Sea – vote for the opposition.

If you want to stop the federalist project of the administration – and prevent a needlessly chaotic disruption of our system of government – vote for the opposition.

Do not let the disappointing pre-election polls freeze you into inaction. Instead, head out confidently to your polling precinct on May 13 and vote for the opposition bets most in accord with your personal views and opinions.

You owe it to yourself. – Rappler.com

The author is a PhD candidate at the UP School of Economics. His views are independent of the views of his affiliations. Follow JC on Twitter (@jcpunongbayan) and Usapang Econ (usapangecon.com).

A long time ago, when we were young and foolish, Malou Mangahas and I were booted out of The Manila Chronicle for standing up for Bobi Tiglao.

We had wanted Bobi to succeed Amando Doronila as editor of the newspaper. We thought he had the chops to lead the Chronicle, a paper shuttered by martial law but which had reopened months after the fall of Ferdinand Marcos.

How wrong we were.

Since then, Bobi has morphed from being a fact-based journalist to an intellectual apologist for a clampdown on our hard-won freedoms. As a columnist for The Manila Times, he wants us shut down or in jail, based on spurious claims that we are somehow violating the Constitution and are “tools to advance US hegemony over Filipino consciousness.”

This is really more than just a story of a friendship gone sour. It is an assault on the idea of an independent press and on the role of journalists as watchdogs of society. Bobi’s attack on us, since echoed by Yen Makabenta, another Times columnist, is straight from the playbook of Russian President Vladimir Putin. It softens the ground for a clampdown on the press and civil society.

In 2012, Russia passed a law that branded certain NGOs as “foreign agents” simply because they received foreign funding. In 2015, Putin signed an even more restrictive law that would allow the government to shut down foreign-backed groups it – and no one else – deemed “undesirable.” The Putin playbook – aimed at crushing critical voices and silencing civil society – has been used in several other countries, including Hungary and recently, Brazil. Now Bobi wants to bring it to the Philippines.

What a difference 30 years make. In 1989, in the wake of the fall of the Marcos dictatorship, we founded the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. The idea was Bobi’s – but like his notion of raising the bogey of foreign funding to muzzle the media, it wasn’t an original one. Bobi had visited the Center for Investigative Reporting in San Francisco and saw it as a model: an independent nonprofit devoted to accountability journalism. Unlike in a regular newspaper, such a center would allow journalists to devote time and resources to deep reporting on important issues.

We embraced the boldness of that idea. But we had no money. PCIJ’s first office was my bedroom; later, we moved to a borrowed space with two second-hand desks and one DOS-based computer. We didn’t even have a telephone. The 9 founders – including Bobi and Malou Mangahas, PCIJ’s current executive director – pitched in P1,000 each and volunteered their services for free. After a year, we got our first grant from The Asia Foundation. That allowed us to hire an office manager and to give journalists fellowships to work on ambitious projects. We sent our stories to the newspapers and published books on corruption, the environment, and the media.

During the Ramos presidency, a Supreme Court justice resigned because of what we reported; so did a couple of Cabinet ministers. In 1994, we co-produced an award-winning documentary on toxic waste dumping by the US military in its bases in Clark and Subic. That project was funded by a US donor, the Ford Foundation, which never interfered in our editorial decision-making and didn’t even know about the documentary until it was aired. Bobi knows this because he was PCIJ’s treasurer at the time.

Over the years, multiple investigations were conducted because of our corruption exposés. In 2001, our reporting on President Joseph Estrada’s “millions, mansions, and mistresses” was used as evidence in his impeachment. In 2014, PCIJ tracked and questioned the Aquino government’s disbursement of public works and pork barrel funds.

Investigative reporting is resource-intensive and time-consuming; that is why many news organizations do not invest in it. As an independent, donor-funded nonprofit, PCIJ is freed from both commercial pressures and the business interests of media proprietors. Raising funds from local foundations or business groups could be fraught because they are all tied to local political or business groups. Foreign funds can give more independence. That’s especially true when they explicitly – as with PCIJ – are not involved in editorial decisions; and even more so when the money is put into an endowment that they no longer have any control over. Once you’ve given your money away, can you really dictate terms to the beneficiary?

We were among the first, but there are now more than 150 independent, nonprofit, investigative reporting centers throughout the world. Nearly all of them are funded, at least in part, by non-local donors.

In Asia, Africa, and Latin America, independent and foreign-funded investigative-reporting centers are holding power to account. The PCIJ is proud to be part of a global investigative reporting movement that stretches from Armenia to Venezuela. Many of the 300 or so journalists who took part in the Pulitzer Prize-winning Panama Papers investigation on the offshore industry, released 3 years ago this month, were from nonprofit centers like PCIJ. That effort was spearheaded by the Washington DC-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, which is itself a recipient of funds not just from the United States, but also from European countries and Australia. The Guardian newspaper in the UK gets philanthropic funding from, among others, the Ford Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Bobi didn’t use to think this was a bad thing – not even long after PCIJ started publishing its own stories online. In 1998, in an article he wrote for the Nieman Reports, Bobi sang us praises: “The PCIJ has helped change Philippine journalism. Two years after it started coming out with its investigative reports, the major dailies organized their own investigative teams and several newspapers now regularly have their own special, in-depth reports. It’s a success story of an NGO, non-governmental organization, committed to a specific cause and funded by both foreign and local development agencies.” (Emphasis ours.)

Today Bobi wants you to think it’s a crime to get foreign funding, despite his previous explicit support of it. If so, then some of the best journalists in the world are guilty.

Bobi himself said he got a Nieman Foundation fellowship at Harvard paid for by The Asia Foundation, which another Times columnist calls a CIA front. The truth is that even state-run entities, including media agencies under the Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) such as PTV- 4, the Philippine News Agency, and Radyo ng Bayan, get foreign support (of late, from China). The Constitution bans foreign ownership of the media, but this isn’t ownership. It’s funding. Indeed, PCIJ is nonstock, nonprofit. It isn’t owned by anyone, and certainly not by any foreigners. And, by the way, PTV-4 and the other PCOO media outfits aren’t foreign-owned either.

Bobi and PCIJ have clashed before. In 2005, when he was on the staff of then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, the PCIJ found evidence of election-rigging involving Arroyo; we released the “Hello Garci” tapes where Arroyo is heard ordering an election official to manipulate the count. We followed through with other stories on Arroyo’s and her family’s alleged involvement in various scandals, ranging from keeping secret bank accounts to getting money from illegal gambling. Perhaps those stories – the product of good journalism – holding to account an administration he was part of, are driving his anger at us?

Bobi remains loyal to his president. We at PCIJ do not begrudge him that. But we are sad that the man that we once held up, not just as a journalist but as a believer in press freedom, is now abusing and seeking to undermine the freedom for which so many of his – and our generation – fought and died.

We are even more concerned that by raising the foreign funding bogey to target PCIJ and other independent media, he is laying the groundwork for a crackdown on the press – and eventually, on civil society – based on emotive appeals about foreign interference that have zero grounding in fact. If the history of this country tells us anything, it is that freedoms are hard to win, but easy to lose.

We have lived through the dark days when only one view was acceptable – that of Malacañang. In the newspaper I worked for then, we couldn’t even print photographs that showed Imelda had double chins. Do the Filipino people really want that again? – Rappler.com

Sheila S. Coronel is academic dean of Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism. She is a member of the board and former executive director of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.