Regina "Gina" Paz Lopez is leading her entire clan in a familiar battle that involves politics and business. The quintessential Filipino business family is up against the mining industry this time.

A professed anti-mining advocate, Gina Lopez is currently the environment secretary who recently made a bold move to order the closure of 23 mines, which represent about half of the key industry players in this mineral-rich country.

Considered to be at stake in this battle is her family’s empire, valued at about US$1 billion by Forbes in September 2016. The clan is behind the country’s biggest media and cable group, and the most active investors in power generation and real estate.  

Are the Lopezes prepared for it? Well, they are not coming in blind. 

When President Rodrigo Duterte offered the post to Lopez after he won the presidential race last year, she not only got the consent of the family but their support too. Environmental issues are not just their passion; it's their business as well. Gina’s cousins are the country’s biggest investors in geothermal and wind energy sources.

The family understands that any controversy that one member finds himself in ultimately affects them all, and mining has been one of them.

MVP vs Gina

In 2012, Gina went into an anti-mining rant during an industry event, and picked a fight with Manuel V. Pangilinan. The businessman, known as "MVP," had by then led the purchase of the Lopezes’ tollroad, water, and power distribution businesses, and just acquired gold and copper legacy miner, Philex Mining. Pangilinan wouldn’t have any of Gina’s sweeping statements that all miners were irresponsible. He stood up, pointed a finger at Gina, and uttered what would become a viral line: “You’re lying!” 

{source}

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Es9PvwIO_qY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

{/source}

The media picked up that rare public display of momentary loathing between the two representatives of the country’s business elite. The macho-cultured miners shrugged off Gina as just the greenwashing handmaid of the Lopezes, so they pounced on the family’s business practices. They revived issues against the Lopezes – such as the leaking pipes of the Lopez-led First Philippine Industrial Corp that displaced residents of the West Tower condominium in Makati in 2010, as well as the “Wowowee" stampede in 2006 during a television show of the Lopez-led ABS-CBN that killed over 70 and injured hundreds. 

Gina was asked to stand down. She busied herself with her eco-tourism work. Before she became environment secretary in 2016, her public statements focused on the communities she has helped and the good her advocacy partners has done in the lives of countryside folks.  

Business and politics

Gina is not the first member of the family to join government.

Fernando Lopez, her grand uncle, pursued a career in politics while his brother, Eugenio Lopez Sr, or Don Eñing, worked on the vast expanse of sugar land in Western Visayas.

Mina Roces, author of Kinship Politics in Post-War Philippines: The Lopez Family, noted that Don Eñing became one of the country’s most powerful tycoons at the time when Fernando entered national politics. Fernando started as a mayor in Iloilo before becoming vice president to President Elpidio Quirino and Ferdinand Marcos from the 1940s to the 70s. He also served concurrently as secretary of agriculture and natural resources under Marcos. Don Eñing’s eldest son and Gina’s father, Eugenio Lopez Jr, or “Geny," was once also quoted as saying that it was necessary to have "some clout in Congress to ensure that one’s businesses were not affected by adverse legislation."

After all, the Lopezes are the poster family for lessons on how being on the wrong side of the political fence affects business. Not only were they reduced to helplessness when Marcos turned against them politically, their stakes in power distributor Meralco, and TV channels ABS and CBN were also seized. 

They were reminded again of this lesson when pension fund GSIS general manager Winston Garcia launched an attack against the family over some governance issues at Meralco in 2008. This was during the Arroyo administration, which had no love lost with the Lopezes, whose media empire was at the forefront in covering the scandals hounding the First Family then. Gina’s uncle, Manuel “Manolo” Lopez, who was at the helm of the power distributor at the time, eventually stepped down. 

They took the lessons from those years to heart. To reduce their vulnerability to political attacks, the family re-aligned their empire’s corporate structure, allowing them better control of their companies should they find themselves on the defensive again.

It’s the same now in the case of Gina. Family members and close associates have said they are supporting her by fortifying her legal and communications capabilities as a public official.

So far, the family sounds optimistic. President Duterte likes her. They both speak their minds – no matter who gets hurt. They are both impatient in showing results of their good intentions. They both want to get things done fast. She also speaks bluntly about the cause of the country's many problems: government corruption.

Look at those bald mountains and dying rivers, she would say. She is in her element when she shows pictures and videos of destruction, no thanks to the miners she calls irresponsible over and over again, a public relations style more convincing than the industry’s. And since most of the major miners in the country are still digging for nickel or gold or copper, there is little or nothing to show for what they promise as a responsible post-mining life. 

The computers or schools or free houses that mining companies provide their host communities in far-flung areas can be easily seen as a dole-out, an effort to appease. These pale in comparison to Gina's pictures of "poisoned" rivers or silted soil. Never mind that those mountains have rich mineral deposits near the top soil that in turn stunt the growth of trees, or that incessant rain days before had caused the orange silt to slither down the beach.

Against an extractive industry with a long list of past sins, abandoned quarries and ugly digs, Gina wins the visual battlefield hands down. The passionate lover of nature is the face of green, not greed. 

Fight and might

So far, the current conflict has remained civilized.

The industry is keeping the fight on the legal level, questioning the process she chose in ordering the mine closures. It’s not above board, they claimed. The supposed lack of due process sounds like a strategy that the mining businessmen hope President Duterte, a lawyer, will agree with. 

It’s a strategy that was chosen over an old one: pointing fingers at small miners who, according to experts and analysts, are not compelled to adhere to global standards of taking care of the mountains and rivers while they dig. Nickel miners are among the most notorious and have sprouted in various remote areas and islands in the past years to meet China’s and Japan’s growing appetite for steel. These small miners are not as accountable to national agencies as their bigger, publicly-listed counterparts, and don’t have to be bothered by reputation.

The mining industry has an ally in Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez, who has not been keen on Gina’s Cabinet appointment from the beginning. Dominguez has cited concerns on the impact of the closures on local governments and communities, stressing the logical need for transition plans. He revived the Mining Industry Coordinating Council to direct succeeding moves toward the oversight of the multi-stakeholder body, in effect reminding Gina to proceed with caution and less unilaterally.

Gina signed the council's joint statement, but, in keeping with her bull-headed nature, said the day after that the council’s efforts are just a “recommendation.” It's her decision that will count since it’s for the “common good.” (READ: Gina Lopez: MICC 'cannot tell me what to do')

During the press conference following the 5-hour MICC meeting on Thursday, February 9, the body language of Gina and Dominguez spoke volumes. They were seated next to each other but an invisible Chinese wall separated them. They were not only far apart in points of view but also in their reading of how this mining saga would unfold.

Dominguez is all too familiar with mining. He headed the rehabilitation of Rapu-Rapu gold-copper mine in Albay, following two mining spill incidents, which leaked effluents containing cyanide into nearby creeks. And he served as CEO of copper-smelting company, Philippine Associated Smelting and Refining Corp (PASAR), in the 1990s.   

Unlike Gina who bagged the Cabinet position only after presenting to Duterte her wishes of an environmentally healthy Philippines in an hours-long meeting after the May elections, Dominguez goes a long way with the President. They are childhood friends. The former agriculture secretary under the Corazon Aquino administration, ex-bank president, and previous chief of dozens of companies was the President’s rainmaker during the presidential campaign. 

President Duterte listens to Dominguez, as was the case when he broke his campaign promise on hiking Social Security System pension fund benefits, which would have put the fund life in peril. Economics and finance are, admitted Duterte, not his forte, and he defers to Dominguez on these issues.

Between Lopez and Dominguez, who will the President listen to? Should the conflict escalate, Duterte may eventually find himself in a position where he has to choose. And that would impact the continuing story of the fabled family that is the Lopezes. – Rappler.com

There has been a lot of analysis that social media has become a monster, what with fake news and trolling. It’s a bit like inviting the dumbest people and the worst perverts into your home via your computer screen.

But there is also still a good side of it, which is why I suppose some of us remain addicted. And I recently have a good example of this where what was meant to be a playful and shallow post turned into an insight into Filipino culture.

My post on my social media account read:

First of all, what happened was a lot of terms came up. Most of these are familiar. But let’s list them here:

I did not expect this post to have the most comments for the week. What does it say of us that so many cared to answer? Indeed, what can we say of the numerous terms and variations? Those variations ranged from the traditional (Ale and Mama in Filipino for example) to the contemporary (Ate and Kuya) to the recently contemporary (Bossing).  I also note that various language groups have their own versions and it would be so lovely to learn of terms from other Philippine languages. Whether slang or formal this list is far from complete. 

Intimate Filipinos

My own feeling, is that one sounds more sincere using these terms that personalize what is being said. “Salamat” is less sincere as “Salamat, pare.” This seems validated by Satoshi Miyawaki’s comment: “We have similar problem of aging and the choice of expressions, but as we Japanese don't call people by the words borrowed from relative or familial nouns , and it is just natural for us to say hello or excuse me without them, we are not so at a loss what to do. Sounds the problem is that these words are coming from familial vocabulary and it may be difficult to find somewhat distanced expression which is so used that it can be made for less specified use or more generalized use. So you cannot use "pamangkin" which is too specific and cannot be generalized, and also too long...

Anyway I love and often miss this Filipino choice of intimate vocabulary as compared to Japanese way of polite yet distanced functional expression. We are too good at expression comfortable distance...”

I am indeed culture bound this way, so that I need to use a term that makes a stranger a little less a stranger. Thus despite the very practical suggestion of one commenter that if all I wanted to do was be sincere about thanking the bag boy and “salamat” didn’t seem sufficient, then “maraming salamat” would do the trick.

Nuances galore

The explosion of terms also is an indicator of a thousand nuances of social status and levels of intimacy. For example, an elderly person in Waray calling a younger male “intoy” captures an aspect of nurturance or even gentle admonition.

Other wise friends note that “appropriate” can be very situational. The comment of Maisie Faith J Dagapioso illustrates this so well: “It depends on who I am with. With colleagues who are younger, I have 'insisted' that they call me by my name. Students still find it difficult to call me by my first name (they compromised, not calling me ma'am but 'prof' or 'doc' - which incidentally, I'm not) For community members who we work with, first names, too, but in some cases we call each other 'bay'. Among Bisaya drivers and conductors of a bus company, i have heard them call each other 'gaw'. Some people in the office call each other 'couz' (cousin), 'gang'/gah. One thing about not using 'ma'am' or 'sir'; i've been reprimanded by one person who told me that these terms are 'signs' of respect and not using this means one is disrespectful. I have three apos, and they call me and their abuelo by our first names; my sister, though, much younger than i am - by thirteen years - 'insists' on being called Lola.” 

Let’s add to this the term, “pal” used only during a certain period in Ateneo Grade School.

I note further  that our capacity to shorten – “gah” from “palangga” for example – is evident in many of the terms.  What I also observe however is that like our penchant for nicknames, shortening makes the term less formal and therefore, less serious. Thus "palangga" loses the inappropriate intimacy of “darling” when it is shortened to “gah”. But maybe this is only used to soften terms with a romantic content because the adapted and non-romantic  Spanish term “amigo” shortened to “migs” adds “lambing”. 

But such nuances are also, as many observed, person and situation specific. Perhaps the very slang “bostsip” so far removed from the English “boss” and chief” may be appropriate for an older woman calling a younger man, but I would feel uncomfortable with this because I found this too informal and therefore not fitting for an older woman who must create more distance. 

Of course there were also friends who, encouraged by my lack of specifics. came up with witty remarks which for purposes of completion I must note. (I actually was wondering what to call the young man who bags my groceries. So none of these remarks apply.) But as I love smart alecks I have acquired a number of them who suggested I use, “hoy", “psst”, and even “kamote” (though the friend says this would be an insult to the kamote). I replied we should now call people “kams” and “kamo”. I think this would work for trolls.

A proper place

Indeed as I rejected various terms on the basis of  “hindi siya kagalang-galang” (not worthy of respect) I realized something about the term, “kagalang-galang”. It would seem that the the older or more high-status person has to be worthy of respect is a social duty. It is not a one way relationship that demands respect only  from the younger or lower status person. Rather it is only polite for a higher status person to behave towards persons of lower status by being respectable. Thus people of lower social status will often chide the higher status one as “hindi kagalang-galang” when they behave too informally.

I am almost certain that the reader is already running up her own list of terms and agreeing (or disagreeing) with some of the nuances me and my  friends have attached to the terms.

I guess what we can all agree on is that is an IMPORTANT linguistic issue for us Filipinos.

As for me, I think I might try to use what the locals use wherever I am – say “ading” in Ilocos and “Nyor” in Zamboanga, etc. This doesn’t solve the problem of what to use in the culturally bastard region of Metro Manila. Maybe I will use ‘ading” because it is a gender neutral.

I have this strange feeling that when I finally find the proper terms, I will have re-discovered my place in the world.

In the meantime, let me wish you all a happy Valentine’s Day, palanggas.– Rappler.com

Plunder is corruption writ large, and cronyism is graft at the highest levels. Alas, these social ills are so embedded in our politics that we think of them as being one and the same monster.

But can we suspend, even for a moment, our scrutiny of our highest officials, and instead look around us? At least twice in our history we have tried to kill the beast by going after its head, but has only grown larger. Perhaps we can learn how to fight it more effectively by understanding the cells and tissues that give it life. 

Broken down to the level of our everyday lives, corruption is the misuse of shared resources for one’s personal benefit. Graft is the misuse of one’s influence for personal gain. Working with these simple definitions, I propose that we look at graft and corruption in our everyday lives as a way of understanding how they operate in our society, which in turn is key to fighting them in a more fundamental and lasting way. 

Just by looking at my own life, I can think of many examples. Once, when I was the president of my year level in high school, a shirt printer offered me a “kickback” if I were to chose them for our intramurals uniforms. I turned it down, but looking back, I can still remember the allure of the temptation: several thousand pesos was a huge sum for a 15-year old.

Moving on to medical school and later, to my medical career, I also found graft and corruption in the health care sector. Some physicians who prescribe certain drugs get rewarded by pharmaceutical companies (e.g. in the form of foreign trips) even when those drugs aren't the best or the most cost-effective ones for their patients. Some unscrupulous staff in public hospitals claim to be the relatives of desperate patients so the latter can be admitted – but they demand a price for this fake kinship.

If you think with me about this, I’m sure you can come up your own stories – not just from your professional lives, but your everyday transactions: from the speedy acquisition of licenses and permits to the malversation of office supplies and even fuel allowances (I would argue that even using the road as one’s parking space counts for corruption). While many offices in government are, to their credit, doing their best to curb corruption, it still happens – partly because it works for both parties involved. 

“This is for everyone in the office, not just for me. Let’s help each other,” the government official you’re dealing with might say, and at the personal level, the temptation is real. After all, it’s much easier – and even cheaper – to hand a P500 bill to a traffic enforcer than to lose your license and attend a half-day driving seminar. When graft and corruption are the norm, fairness is difficult because it involves sacrifice.

Role of leadership

Surely it is absurd to compare the act of a teacher getting a few thousands from a field trip to a congressman getting millions from the construction of a highway. But looking at these as belonging to one and the same spectrum raises the question of whether the immorality of the Marcoses and the Napoleses is not one of absolute sin, but one of magnitude. 

If so, then perhaps the reason we are not able to fight graft and corruption as aggressively as we should is because we do not have the collective moral authority to do so. We search for the line we should not cross, not realizing that we have actually crossed it long ago. 

Let me be clear: leadership plays a decisive, if not central, role. In one of our conversations, National Artist F. Sionil Jose recounted to me that when Ramon Magsaysay was president, corruption in many government agencies came to a halt – but it was back just a few weeks after his fateful plane crash. And so we must always demand the highest standards from our leaders.

But we can also fight the monster with our bare hands. By demanding fairness, not just from others, but from ourselves. By insisting that we fall in line even when we can go ahead. By refusing special treatment that goes against the law, no matter how much it works for our benefit.

These are the values we need to teach our children, but they will only learn if they see them in our lives. – Rappler.com

Gideon Lasco is a physician, medical anthropologist, and commentator on culture and current events. His essays have been published by the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Singapore Straits Times, Korea Herald, China Post, and the Jakarta Post.

He has been criticized tremendously but Manny Pacquiao does not back down.  That's what happens when you have a religious individual with the tenacity of an athlete joining the Senate.

Many people might not want Manny in the Senate.  But here's the incontrovertible truth: he won a seat and he represents the conservative worldview of many Filipinos.  He has been criticized for his statements on homosexuality, Jennifer Laude, cross-dressing, and the death penalty.  

But he presses on, precisely because Manny Pacquiao's statements resonate with the conservative worldview of many Filipinos. That worldview, however, is implicit and that is what makes it more treacherous.  

To prove my point: There are prominent LGBT figures in the entertainment industry and their flamboyance makes us laugh. But when they show up in our household, we tame them. And when it is our children who are involved, we punish them. And when someone is killed for being a transgender, we think it is justified. 

Fundamentalism

Manny Pacquiao can continue to preach not just because he reads the Bible everyday.  He can get away with his Bible-thumping speeches because he has a captive audience.  These are the people who think that their conservative worldview on gender and the death penalty is justified because it is the law of God.  

Forget the fact that many Filipinos do not read the Bible. The point is that they are implicitly convinced that the Bible supports their convictions. Even those who don't own a Bible will readily say that God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.  

It is in this light that there is a close connection between fundamentalist religiosity and intolerance.  

Fundamentalism has a long religious history especially in Christianity. But it has become increasingly associated with extremism and a literalist view of the Scriptures. In other words, fundamentalists take many of the statements of the Bible at face value.  

This is not a new development in the Philippines. In the 1990s, my colleague, Dr Ricardo Abad, documented a notable shift in the attitude of Filipinos toward the Bible. In 1991, a national survey showed that 55% of Filipinos agreed that "the Bible is the actual word of God, and it has to be taken literally word for word." The figure went up to 72% in 1998.  The most recent data shows that it was 75% in 2008.  

Our predominantly Catholic society is, in other words, fundamentalist.

This is why Manny Pacquiao has a captive audience. He can quote Bible verses to support the death penalty and argue that those who engage in homosexual acts are "worse than animals" (http://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/122778-religion-bigotry-pacquiao).  

Manny is not the enemy

Inasmuch as many of us are irritated at Manny Pacquiao for using the Bible in the Senate, the reality is that he is not the enemy here. Pacquiao simply articulates the fundamentalism of Filipinos, many of whom are not aware of the complexity of Biblical interpretation and progressive theological thinking.

What we should find problematic is that Manny Pacquiao's fundamentalist message seems to resonate with his wider audience. This situation calls for incisive conversations on our deeply held assumptions as a people.

There are, for one, apparent moral contradictions and they need to be confronted. How can we, for example, talk about mercy and compassion when Pope Francis was here and a year or so later entertain the need for the death penalty?  

It is for this reason that discussion among religious individuals, regardless of faith tradition, must be opened up. People must not draw back from respectful religious conversations.  

Otherwise, our public sphere will be hijacked by only one interpretation, which in effect disregards the depth of reflections other religious individuals and traditions might be able to offer.   

Some people have also criticized Manny Pacquiao for being too religious in the Senate.  But given the inherent religiosity of Philippine society, there is no way that religion can be completely banned from legislative speech and ordinary talk.  

And it must not be, especially because religion also has intelligent contributions to offer.  

But there is a caveat, what political philosophers call "mutual accountability." Individuals like Manny Pacquiao can draw from their religious convictions to advance issues they find important.  They must, however, be willing to respond to objections based on reasons generally acceptable to people who may not share the same faith. Secular values to which they need to appeal include equality and the right to life.  

In the final analysis, Manny Pacquiao's use of the Bible is not inherently problematic. A democratic space must be able to welcome different perspectives.  

To me though the bigger controversy has to do with the quality of conversations shaping the future of our society. When individuals rely on their religious worldview as the sole basis of truth and wisdom, it creates enemies more than it builds bridges.

It is at this point that we need to be reminded of what our Constitutions says: We, the sovereign Filipino people, are to "build a just and humane society." – Rappler.com 

Jayeel Serrano Cornelio, PhD is a sociologist of religion and the director of the Development Studies Program, Ateneo de Manila University.  He is the author of Being Catholic in the Contemporary Philippines: Young People Reinterpreting Religion (Routledge, 2016) and one of the authors of Introduction to World Religions and Belief Systems, a Senior High School worktext published by Rex. Twitter: @jayeel_cornelio   

Habang isinusulat ko ito ay nakasalang si Wally Sombero sa Senado, sinasagot at sinasalag ang mga tanong na ibinabato ng mga senador kaugnay ng kasong inihain niya sa Ombudsman noong Disyembre 15, 2016.

Pinaparatangan niya sina Bureau of Immigration associate commissioners Al Argosino at Michael Robles ng paglabag sa Republic Act 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act). Tumanggap umano ng P50 milyong ang dalawang opisyal mula sa kampo ni Jack Lam, ang negosyanteng Tsinong binansagang “Online Gaming Magnate” at may-ari ng Fontana Leisure Park sa San Fernando, Pampanga. Aniya, nangikil ang dalawang opisyal para palayain ang may 1,800 na mga ilegal na manggagawang Tsino sa Fontana.

Nagsasabi ba si Wally ng totoo? Bakit malakas ng loob niyang bumangga sa pader? Ganito ba siya talaga katapang? Baka naman marami lang siyang koneksiyon sa loob at labas ng pamahalaan? O baka naman naipit lang siya at pilit na lumulusot para mailigtas ang sarili?

Sa aking palagay, makakatulong na masagot natin ang mga katanungang ito kapag nakilala na nating lubusang kung sino si Wenceslao “Wally” Sombero.

Batang Crame

Patapos na ang dekada '80 nang makilala ko si Wally, ang pinakakontrabersyal na retiradong pulis sa ngayon. Ang natatandaan ko, laking Camp Crame siya, nakatira sa may likuran lang ng kampo, na noon ay munting village ng mga miyembro ng Philippine Constabulary (PC). Isa siyang kawal na may mababang ranggo sa Army bago naging isang kabo sa PC-Integrated National Police (INP) na siyang katumbas ngayon ng Philippine National Police (PNP).

Nakilala ko siya nang makasama ako sa mga operasyon ng noon ay Criminal Investigation Service (CIS), na ngayon ay mas kilala na bilang Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG), na nilipatan niya noong 1987. Nakasama si Wally sa mga hinahangaan at nirerespeto kong matitinik na operatibang gumiba sa halos 20 grupo ng mga holdaper ng bangko na namayagpag at naging sakit sa ulo ng pamunuan ng PC-INP na pinangungunahan noon ni General Ramon Montaño.

Tuwing matatapos ang kanilang operasyon, madalas ko siyang nakakakuwentuhan sa lilim ng punong mangga – ang piping saksi sa lahat ng confidential na kuwentuhan ng mga operatiba hinggil sa mga tinatrabaho ng CIS – sa may tagiliran ng gusali ng CIS-National Capital Region (NCR). Matapang at buo ang loob ni Wally. Ilang beses ko itong nakita at nasubukan sa mga na-neutralize nilang syndicated crime groups na mga naiko-cover ko nang ekslusibo noong ako’y police reporter pa sa People’s Journal at hanggang sa lumipat ako sa Philippine Daily Inquirer.

Napilitan silang isama ako sa mga lakad dahil hindi rin naman nila ako mapigil sa pagbuntot sa kanilang mga itinatagong operasyon. Kapag ako ay kasama, kinakailan kong kumilos na parang isang na ring operatiba, kaya’t may mga pagkakataong nakiki-surveillance na rin akong parang isang “ahente” at nakaka-buddy ko pa ang mga operatiba. Dito ko nakakasama si Wally – kapalit naman ito ng mga ekslusibong detalye kapag natapos na ang operasyon.

Nakatulong nang malaki sa mabilis niyang promotion sa serbisyo ang mga “meritorious accomplishment” ng kanyang grupo sa CIS-NCR, na sa aking palagay ay “cream of the crop” ng lahat ng mga operatibang nakatalaga sa Camp Crame. Kaya’t nagulat ako nang malaman kong umalis si Wally sa NCR at naka-detail na pala siya sa isang dating congressman na tumakbong presidente ngunit natalo.

Police captain na siya noon. Naging usap-usapan sa lilim ng punong mangga ang paglipat niyang ito na nakumpirma ko rin naman sa kanya. May mga pagkakataon din kasing nagkakabungguan kami sa Camp Crame at sandaling nagkukuwentuhan. Hindi ko lubos na maintindihan kung ano talaga ang ginagawa niya, basta ang malinaw lang sa sinasabi niya ay “nakalubog” siya at mga taong masa ang lagi niyang kahalubilo.

(Dekada '90 – Enero 29, 1991, ang eksaktong petsa – nang naging sibilyan ang PC-INP at tuluyang nahiwalay sa Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). Naging PNP na ito, samantalang ang CIS ay naging CIDG naman, at nagkaroon ng maraming mga pagbabago sa operasyon ng mga pulis dahil sa bagong liderato ng buong PNP. Naging “civilian” in nature na ang buong PNP kaya’t pati ang kanilang mga ranggo ay pinalitan ng angkop sa kanilang mga estado. Si Director General Cesar Nazareno ang huling PC-INP chief at unang naging PNP chief din.)

Business deal

Nabalitaan kong na-promote si Wally hanggang chief inspector (major) sa PNP, ngunit di nagtagal ay nabigla ako nang malaman kong umalis na siya sa serbisyo at nangibang bansa nang matalo sa eleksiyon ang naging boss niyang congressman. Doon na raw ito nagtatrabaho at hahanapin ang kanyang suwerte.

Hindi nagtagal, ang usap-usapan naman ng mga kaibigan niya sa kampo ay nakatiba raw si Wally sa isang malaking “business deal” na kanyang ipinag-ahente, at ito ang naging baon niya at ginamit na puhunan sa negosyang itinayo niya sa Amerika. Nag-aral din siya at nagpakadalubhasa sa matagal na niyang ng gustong matutuhan – ang “number games” na tulad ng Poker.

Medyo nagtagal siya sa ibang bansa. Paminsan-minsan, nagkakabalitaan kami sa pamamagitan ng cellular phone na unti-unti pa lamang na sumisikat noon. Hindi niya direktahang kinukumpirma 'yung mga balita tungkol sa kanya. Ang tanging nabibigyan niya ng malinaw na sagot ay ang pagiging bihasa niya sa larangan ng Poker at pagkakaroon ng respetadong pangalan sa larong ito, na ayon sa kanya ay magiging pamosong laro rin ito sa Pilipinas, dahil ipakikilala niya ito sa mga “number gamers.” Inamin niya sa ilang pag-uusap namin na malaki rin ang kinikita niya sa paglalaro ng Poker, at sa pakiramdam ko iyon gusto niyang isipin ng mga dati niyang kasamahan sa Camp Crame na source ng kanyang kinikita ng mga panahong iyon.

Di naman nagtagal ay pumalaot na rin ang pangalan ni Wally sa larangan ng Poker. Nakakasama na siya at nananalo sa mga international competition, na naging tulay sa pagkakaroon niya ng mga kaibigang sikat sa larangan naman ng iba pang sports, gaya nina Senator Manny Pacquiao at Ilocos Sur Governor Chavit Singson.

Ito na ang naging dahilan ng madalas na pagbabalikbayan niya, pagbisita sa mga kaibigan niya sa Camp Crame, pakikipagbalitaan, at ang unti-unting pagnanais niyang makabalik sa serbisyong pansamantala lang naman daw niyang iniwan. At dumating ang panahong ito – nang manalo bilang pangulo si Joseph “Erap” Estrada noong 1998 at gawin niyang PNP chief ang ngayon ay senador nang si Panfilo Lacson.

Kuratong Baleleng

Malaki ang papel ni Wally sa pagkaka-dismiss ng pamosong kaso ng Kuratong Baleleng na matagal ding naging tinik sa lalamunan ng noo’y PNP chief Lacson. At sa palagay ko ay ito rin ang nagbigay-daan upang makabalik si Wally sa serbisyo at makakuha ng linya sa administrasyon ni Pangulong Estrada at magamit ang kanyang nakatagong kaalaman sa “number games” na ipinagkatiwala naman sa kanya, katuwang ang isa pang “number games” genius na si Charlie “Atong” Ang.

Ang kaso ito ay tungkol sa sinasabing pagkaka-salvage sa Commonwealth Avenue sa Quezon City noong Mayo 18, 1995, sa grupo ng mga notorious na magnanakaw ng bangko. Umano’y nang-holdap sila ng isang money changer na may dalang $3 milyon malapit sa Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA). Naaresto ang mga ito sa kanilang safehouse sa Parañaque, dinala sa Camp Crame nang madaling araw, at napabalita nang napatay ang 9 na Kuratong Baleleng at 3 sinasabing mga “pugo” (mga suspek na tumbahin at nakatago sa safehouse). Nakipagbarilan daw ang mga ito sa mga operatiba ng Traffic Management Group.

Tatlong matitinik na imbestigador ng CIDG-NCR – si Eduardo delos Reyes at ang magkapatid na Corazon at Rene dela Cruz – ang umalma sa “drama” at nagsibaligtad. Nagbigay sila ng mga statement na “salvage” ang naganap sa Commonwealth Avenue at hindi isang “police encounter” gaya ng mga naging press release ng PNP noong mga panahong iyon. Kinumpirma naman ito ng isang news correspondent ng isang tabloid, si Mandy Capili, isinama ng CIDG para magkuha ng retrato ng operasyon nang hindi alam ng TMG. Maging si Capili ay napatahimik matapos na bigyan ng sarili niyang jeep na pamasada ng kampo ni Lacson.

Matapos makapag-isyu ng kanikaniyang affidavit ang 3 imbestigador ng CIDG-NCR, biglang nagpulasan ang mga ito, kanikaniyang tago hanggang sa ibang bansa. Naging sakit ito sa ulo ni Lacson hanggang maging pangulo na si Estrada at gawin niyang PNP chief si Lacson. Dito na pumasok si Wally.

Hinanap niya ang mga dati niyang kasamahan sa CIDG-NCR, isa-isang kinausap at kinumbinsing magsumite ng Affidavit of Desistance. Sarili niyang diskarte, walang hininging tulong pinansiyal mula sa kampo ni Lacson, sarili niyang bulsa ang binutas hanggang makumbinsi niya ang pinakahuli at matinding testigo – si Delos Reyes na nagtatago sa Vancouver, Canada. Kung ano mang pamamaraan ang kanyang ginawa ay siya lamang ang nakakaalam. Basta ang pinaninindigan niya, hindi siya humingi ng kahit singko sentimos kay Lacson kapalit ng “paggapang sa mga testigo” na ginawa niya.

Kuwento niya sa akin, nagulat daw si Lacson nang iabot niya rito ang affidavit of desistance ni Delos Reyes at tinanong daw siya kung ano ang maigaganti niya. Wala raw siyang hiningi maliban sa pagsasabing “magaling na choice para sa CIDG post ang kanyang kaibigang si Atty Luke Managuelod” na noo’y isa rin naman sa mga pinagpipilian para sa sensitibong posisyon ng CIDG.

Makalipas ang ilang araw, umupo si Managuelod bilang director ng CIDG at di rin nagtagal, nakabalik sa serbisyo si Wally at hinawakan ang isang Special Task Force ng CIDG – na ang pangunahing gawain ay sugpuin ang illegal gambling.

Ang dating mahiyain at mailap sa mga taga-media na si Wally ay unti-unting nakilala, nagkaroon ng mga dumadalaw na kaibigang reporter at kolumnista at di nagtagal naging “darling of the press” na yata siya. Madalas siyang mag-imbita ng goodtime sa mga ekslusibong club sa Quezon Avenue na pag-aari ng mga naging kaibigan niyang negosyante – na karamihan ay mga Poker player din na kagaya niya – pagkaupo niya sa special task force ng CIDG.

Habang tumatagal siya sa puwesto sa CIDG ay lumalawak ang kanyang kaalaman at koneksiyon sa “numbers game” kaya’t di kataka-takang ang mga pinaghirapan niyang matutuhan hinggil sa “numbers game” sa ibang bansa ay nagamit niya rito. Napansin siya ng grupo ni Pangulong Estrada at pinagtiwalaang humawak at magpalakas ng kanilang negosyong may kaugnayan sa “numbers game.” Dito niya inilabas ang ideya niyang Bingo 2-Balls na siyang dapat na ipalit sa ilegal na jueteng para kumita nang legal ang pamahalaan.

34-inch waist line

Nang maglabas si Lacson ng kautusang dapat ay physically fit ang mga pulis, kaya’t dapat na maging 34 inches lamang ang sukat ng beywang ng mga ito, isa sa tinamaan si Wally. Dati na kasi siyang may katabaan at alam ko ring matagal na siyang naka-Pacemaker dahil sa problema niya sa puso, kaya’t hindi siya maaaring sumama sa mga exercises na ginagawa ng 3 beses isang linggo ng mga pulis sa loob ng Camp Crame.

Kaya sa halip na lumapit at makiusap kay Lacson, mas minabuti pa niyang magretiro na lamang at lumabas na sa serbisyo para magpakadalubhasa na lamang sa kanyang “first love” – ang “numbers game” – na siya ring dahilan kaya’t nasa sentro na naman ulit siya ngayon ng kontrobersiya.

Dito na siya nag-fulltime sa pamamahala ng BW Company ng mga kaibigan ni Pangulong Estrada na sinasabi niyang ibinangon niya mula sa pagkalugi. Madalas din siyang mag-organisa ng mga international poker competition dito sa bansa, paminsan-minsan ay sinasalihan din niya.

Nahilig din siyang magsulat, at ang ilang likha niyang studies hinggil sa “numbers game” ay naging basehan ng ilang investigative writer sa kanilang mga isinulat na special report tungkol sa illegal gambling. Makailang ulit na rin siyang nahilingang magsulat ng special report tungkol sa kalagayan ng “illegal gambling” sa bansa sa ilang pahayagan base sa mga pag-aaral niya sa bagay na ito.

Isang makata

Ang isa pang hindi ko alam sa kanya na kamakailan ko lang natuklasan ay ang pagiging mahilig pala niyang tumula. Habang isinusulat ko nga ito ay namonitor ko sa TV na pinagagalitan siya ni Senator Richard Gordon dahil sa tila wala sa kumpas na biglang pagbasa nito sa isa niyang isinulat na tula habang sumasagot sa tanong ni Senator Risa Hontiveros.

Palagay ko ang gusto niyang basahin ay ang nilalaman din ng email na ipinadala niya sa akin noong siya ay nasa abroad, at ideneklarang “wanted” ng mga awtoridad dito dahil sa hindi niya pagsipot sa mga imbitasyon sa hearing sa Senado. Aniya, nagpasiya siyang bumalik nang mabasa niyang muli sa kanyang tab ang isang bahagi ng tulang kanyang isinulat noong bago matapos ang termino ng administrasyong Arroyo – hinggil sa isang taong lulutang para isalba sa problema ang ating bansa.

Medyo naintriga ako kaya’t binalikan ko ang naka-attach na tula sa kanyang email sa akin. Ang pamagat nito ay “Ang Liham,” at narito ang bahaging sa palagay ko ay tinutukoy niya at gustong basahin sa hearing:

VIII
Hindi naman lahat patuloy na magkakalat,
may sisibol ding Alamat lalaban sa alat.
Likas man na maagos mga asin sa dagat,
magpapasyang kumilos sa paraan n’yang dapat.

IX
Pinilit kong tumayo, pinilit kong lumaban,
sa gitna ng panahon na aking ginalawan.
Katunggaling higante galit sa kinabukasan,
karapatan ng anak madiing tinapakan.

Iyan si Wally, at ito ang pagkakakilala ko sa kanya. Kung mababasa ninyo lang ang halos 200 pahinang “affidavit of complaint” na inihain niya sa Ombudsman laban sa dalawang opisyal ng BI na inakusahan niya nang pangingikil, makikita ninyo ang takbo ng kanyang isipan – mula sa umpisa pa lang ng kanilang pag-uusap hanggang sa matapos – bilang isang bihasang operatiba at imbestigador. – Rappler.com

She comes in on the train from the Chicago suburbs. I am not even sure what town it is, although she has told me often enough. 

Only the slight gray around her temple would betray her age. Lina could still pass herself off as in her early 30s although she is near 50. She is flattered when someone would come onto her, smiling sweetly afterward. 

Her 3 kids would be left behind in the care of her sister, who stays with her and helps pay the mortgage. The youngest child has autism, and she constantly worries about who will take care of her as she grows older.

With the increasing crescendo of an immigration crackdown, Lina has stopped traveling due to fear that her status would be discovered. She misses vacations spent in the Caribbean. 

You see, Lina, who hails from the Visayas, is undocumented.

Her story is duplicated around an immigrant community that is worried US immigration agents would scoop them up in the middle of the night, slap them into a crowded jail, and then deport them within a matter of hours.

The Trump administration insists it is only deporting criminals, but those caught and booted out of the United States include scores of people with fake identity documents who are not violent.

For this government, there is no distinction. They are seen as criminals.

Even those who are holding bullet proof documents that they are in the US legally wonder about their fate.

Mario and Josefina live in Virginia. Both were naturalized about 5 years ago. He has a thriving consultancy business and she works in a bank.

A year ago, they visited Germany. This year, they are thinking of Greece in the summer like most affluent Americans do, and maybe Christmas back home in Leyte.

They read about the chaos that erupted at airports when even green card holders – permanent residents in the United States one step short of becoming citizens – were held up and detained by authorities.

The Philippines is not among the 7 majority Muslim countries named in the executive order issued by Trump. But there is no reason the country will not be added in the future. 

During his campaign, Trump lumped the Philippines among countries harboring terrorists, famously calling them “animals.”

The number of Filipinos – about 300,000 or so – who may be deported comes from a rough approximation. If 10% of the estimated 3.4 million Filipinos in the US are undocumented, the calculation of possible deportations is easy.

The thing is, the number is likely conservative.

Despite the daunting developments swirling around immigrants, Mario is determined to go home and see his 90-year-old parents, along with a gaggle of brothers and sisters who live there and whom he has not seen for more than a decade. He had no plans to go home until he became a US citizen.

“You kind of wonder,” Mario said. “I wonder what would happen if the Abu Sayyaf beheads an American while we are abroad. What happens to us if we travel and come back? Do we need to have the number of a lawyer if they hold us at the airport because we came from a ‘terrorist’ country?”

 “But you’re a US citizen,” I told him. “That should give you some level of protection.”

“The problem is how this government looks at immigrants. For them, anybody who is not white is a suspect.” 

Every legal immigrant in this country knows of a relative or a friend whose status remains in the shadows.

Asian or otherwise, immigrant communities are in a state of panic because of Trump’s crackdown. Muslim women wearing the hijab are screamed and spat at to go back where they came from.

Lina is bracing herself for the worst.

Her two children were born in the US and she has filed the paperwork to transfer her assets to them. She put a downpayment on a house in Iloilo. She opened a bank account in the Philippines. 

“If I have to go back, I will go back. I hope this will blow over, although it seems really bad this time. I have almost no family back home. I just have to survive.”

The increasingly hostile immigration atmosphere under the Trump administration is turning darker ever so quickly, almost by the day.

I try to avoid watching the news these days, especially over the weekend. It is just too upsetting. After all, I am also an immigrant. The whole thing is impossible to ignore. 

Relatives and friends whisper furtively, calling or messaging to ask what to do and what the future would hold for those who came to the country just looking for a better life, trying to grab a hold of their "American dream."

A country that has been built on immigrants is turning inward. 

I sometimes wonder if it is worth it to stay in the country. The emotions boil over. Two cups of coffee are not enough to calm me down.

I turn off the TV. – Rappler.com 

Rene Pastor is a journalist in the New York metropolitan area who writes about agriculture, politics, and regional security. He was, for many years, a senior commodities journalist for Reuters. He is known for his extensive knowledge of international affairs, agriculture, and the El Niño phenomenon where his views have been quoted in news reports.  

“Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the masses.” - Karl Marx

In penning those famous lines, Marx must have wondered about the ideals that made people, particularly the working class, content with their lot - instead of harboring subversive thoughts. Religion, in his view, made people docile and content despite the oppression they are experiencing, for it takes away the pain of the present - hence his use of opium, a strong narcotic, as a metaphor.

Marx wrote at the dawn of the industrial period; some people say that we are entering the post-industrial age, even as, arguably, we have never gone past feudalism. Amid the differences and similarities with the past, what can we consider as the opiums of today?

Religion perhaps, remains so, if we look at it from a purely secular perspective. Though it has been in decline in the West, organized religion remains very vibrant, resurgent even, in many parts of the world. As in the time of Marx, religion allows people to make sense of hardships and even calamities, and give them hope that even if we live in an unjust world, there is still divine justice. The charismatic experience, moreover, of lights, music, and communitas, provides a “high” that some neurologists claim is similar to the effect produced by drugs.

Drugs, of course, can be the literal opium of the masses. While opium was, during Marx’s time, accessible only to the wealthy, the industrialization of narcotics and its global spread has meant that even the underemployed tambays can afford them. For my master’s thesis I studied shabu and learned that its users find and make use of its different “functions”: pampagilas, pampagising, pampasigla…and there remains the psychological element: “pantanggal ng problema”. Shabu acts like a true opium by giving them a “high” that temporarily makes them forget their predicaments.

But shabu is not the only narcotic of our time. In our country we have many “legal addictions”, foremost of which is alcohol. Looking at call center agents alone and their patterns of drug and alcohol use should point to the fact that stressful environments engender a demand for substances that can help people drown out their troubles.

Keen observers of Philippine society and culture would also point to the fact that teleseryes have also functioned not just to entertain people but to distract them from the harsh realities of their everyday lives. Thus there is an “escapism” inherent in the plots of these shows: a poor but beautiful maid is discovered by and marries a handsome prince; twins separated at birth are reunited against all odds; the unexpected blushes of one Yaya Dub suffice to beguile one Alden Richards.

What these “opiums” have in common is their abilities to ease people’s pains, and perhaps provide happiness and fulfilment – albeit momentary – that life itself cannot provide. They also provide a feeling of belonging; a togetherness that is part of their potency. Just as religion is received not by individuals, but by congregations, telenovelas are watched together; alcohol is drank in one ‘tagay’.

Imagined or real, politicians can also intoxicate people’s minds by giving them a sense of unity and purpose, a master narrative for what’s happening today, and a vision of a better tomorrow. While nation-building itself is a gargantuan task for which we need to be inspired by leaders we could look up to, there is also a brand of politics that makes use of people’s emotions to legitimize its exponents’ rule, regardless of the direction they’re taking - or their (dis)regard for facts and cherished values. Like the intoxicating alcohol that can distort one’s sense of right and wrong, the emotions this populism inspires can likewise confuse the people’s sense of good and bad - even as they feel too “high” to realize the confusion.

Thus when I see people today pinning their hopes on a political messiah, seeing a glorious future with them, and taking this rosy picture as an article of (blind) faith, I cannot help but think whether this kind of politics, too, plays on the same appeal as religions past and present: an escapism that offers people a future salvation and makes them forget their everyday struggles and pains.

And then I wonder if politics, too, can be an opium for the masses. – Rappler.com

Gideon Lasco is a physician, medical anthropologist, and commentator on culture and current events. His essays have been published by the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Singapore Straits Times, Korea Herald, China Post, and the Jakarta Post.

“My interest is to see to it that justice is done.” So said Solicitor General Jose Calida in defending his office's decision to move for the acquittal of Janet Napoles in a detention case for which she had been convicted. 

Justice for whom? 

Justice for President Rodrigo Duterte's friends and schoolmates, who defended the alleged pork barrel scam mastermind in the series of cases lodged against her? 

Justice for Napoles, who corrupted lawmakers by creating layers of fake NGOs to siphon off government funds in the guise of doing projects for the poor?

Justice for her family, who at one point would convert their bath tubs and dining tables into cash dens for sheer lack of space? 

What is the solicitor general thinking? That we are a nation of fools?

All the courts in the land – the court of public opinion, the local court, the Supreme Court – have weighed in on the Napoles case since the pork barrel controversy broke in 2013. 

No corruption case in recent years has put all 3 forums on the same page: that there is strong evidence of guilt on her part, and that her scheme has been deeply entrenched in the bureaucracy and the private sector.

No corruption case in recent history has been given closure – to a great extent. Close to half a million Filipinos, in fact, marched to the Luneta to protest and show indignation. Government filed volumes of cases against the accused. The courts had powerful politicians arrested and jailed. The Supreme Court ruled that the pork barrel system is unconstitutional. To this day, various pork barrel cases continue to be filed with the anti-graft court. 

Yet, in one stroke, Jose Calida, mandated to promote and defend public interest, made a mockery of all that. 

He's reopening what to many Filipinos is an already closed case. (READ: Janet Napoles gets life sentence for detaining Benhur Luy)

Benhuy Luy, a Napoles aide and principal witness to the scam, has told the public and the courts in great detail how he was forced to testify against Napoles after he had been pushed to a corner that made him fear for his life. 

But Calida is now telling the court not to believe him.

Lest we forget: Napoles is the alleged mastermind of the entire scam that has brought to court more than 30 public and private sector officials, and jailed 3 senators. Luy's testimony against her is the link to all subsequent allegations against her and her entire network. (READ: Navigating the PDAF scam affidavits)

If Calida, representing this government, succeeds in destroying the credibility of Luy in court, common sense should warn us of what lies ahead.

And for what? To accommodate friendship and personal ties. The ones that bind the President to Napoles' lawyers. The ones that make light of everything we've fought for. – Rappler.com

Sukdulang nakababahala ang mga kaso nina Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II at President Rodrigo Duterte laban kay Senator Leila de Lima. Babuyan na ang sistema ng hustisya sa Pilipinas ngayon.

Simple lang naman ang kuwento. Ayon sa mga mga drug lord at kidnapper sa Bilibid, humingi raw si Senator De Lima ng pera sa kanila. Kaya, ang bahagi ng kinita nila sa pagbebenta ng ilegal na gamot mula sa loob ng kulungan ay ipinadala nila sa kanya.

Maliban sa mga presong ito na pinabuyaan ng kung ano-anong pribilehiyo – habang ang mga ayaw tumestigo laban kay Senator De Lima ay sinaksak sa loob ng kulungan – walang ibang ebidensyang mailabas ang administrasyong Duterte. Wala itong ibang patibay sa mga salita ng mga kilalang sinungaling.

Kagalang-galang na talaga ang hustisya sa Pilipinas. Ang salita ng kidnapper ay ebidensya na ngayon. Habang pinapatay ang mga pinagsusupetsahan lamang na adik at small-time pusher, sinasanto na natin ang salita ng mga drug lord.

Nakapagtataka pa, kahit magpantasya tayo na humingi at tumanggap nga si Senator De Lima ng pera mula sa mga ito, kelan siya naging drug queen? May ebidensya ba na sinabi niyang “Magbenta kayo ng bawal na gamot”? Kung ganoon, bakit ang isang testigo ay kidnap-for-ransom king at hindi drug lord? Sinabi kaya ni De Lima, na noon ay justice secretary, na “Magbenta kayo ng gamot at mangidnap”? Kung ganoon, nasaan ang testigo man lamang na nagsabing iyan ang iniutos niya? Wala po. Wala. Gagawa lang ng drama ang gobyerno, kulang-kulang pa ang rekado.

Halatang ang tunay na dahilan kung bakit ipinagpipilitan ng Department of Justice (DOJ) na ilegal na droga ang ikaso ay De Lima ay dahil naghahanap sila ng lusot para diretso sa korte ang kaso. Kung idaraan kasi ito sa Ombudsman, na tiyak na may integrided pa, ay itatapon nito ang kaso sa imburnal.

Maaaring gumawa ng iba pang kuwento laban kay Senator De Lima. Baka naman ang sinabi niya noong panahon niya sa DOJ ay “Mag-gardening kayo sa Bilibid, mag-handicraft kayo, gumawa ng tocino, ibenta ninyo ang mga produkto at gamitin sa sariling kapakanan”? Tapos, sa kagandahang loob, ay nagpadala ang mga preso ng kontribusyon sa kanyang kampanya. Bigyan lamang ako ng pera, kapangyarihan, at masunurin na pulis ay maraming nasa Bilibid ang tetestigo na ito nga ang nangyari.

Ngunit hindi gagawa ang kampo ni Senator De Lima ng kuwento. Hindi ganyan ang pagkakakilala sa kanya ng taumbayan. Kaya malugod na tinanggap ng taumbayan ang kanyang panunungkulan sa Commission on Human Rights, bilang secretary ng DOJ. Kaya inihalal siya bilang senador. Sa pagkakaalam namin, ang naasar lang sa kanya ay ang mga akusado ng korupsyon katulad ni Janet Napoles at dating Presidente Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

Tunay na patayan

Sigurado rin ako na hindi kuwento-kuwento lamang ang pagpaslang ng higit sa 7,000 na mahihirap na wala man lamang paglilitis. Hindi kuwento ang pagkamatay ng mga inosentong bata, OFW na babalik na sana sa abroad, boyfriend na tumulong lamang sa pamilya ng nobya, suspect na nagmamakaawa na. Hindi kuwento lang ang pangungulila ng libo-libong pamilya. Hindi kuwento ang takot at kawalan ng tiwala sa isa’t isa na umiiral ngayon sa mga komunidad ng mahihirap. (BASAHIN ang "Impunity" series ng Rappler tungkol sa drug war ng administrasyong Duterte)

Higit sa lahat, hindi kuwento lamang na naasar sa kanya si President Duterte dahil nagkamali siyang punahin ito at panindigan ang karapatan ng mga walang kapangyarihan at walang-awang pinaslang.

Walang kokontra

Mababa ang tingin ni Duterte sa kababaihan. Simula pa ito sa kampanya nang ginawa niyang katawa-tawa ang pagpaslang at panggagahasa. Nagtuloy sa sexual harassment niya sa bise presidente ng Pilipinas na hindi man niya kayang bigyan ng kaunting paggalang. Nagtuloy sa bawat mura na naririnig natin laban sa mga ina. At, higit sa lahat, pinuruhan si Senator De Lima ng kung anong-anong pagbabanta at pambabastos. Nagtataka ba tayo na sa social media ngayon, laganap ang pagbabanta ng rape sa mga sumasalungat sa administrasyon? Sinunusunod lang naman ng mga anak niya ang estilo ni Tatay Digong.

Simple lang naman ang mensahe ng administrasyon: gagawin namin ang gusto namin. Ituturing namin na bayani si Marcos, pakakawalan ang mga kurakot at mga big drug lords (Arroyo, Napoles, Peter Lim), at papatayin nang walang awa ang kung sino ang natitipuhan namin. Kapag kumontra kayo, sisirain namin ang buhay niyo. Kung babae kang kumontra, pati pagkababae mo ay aapakan namin.

Hinintay ni Senator De Lima na makita ang kaso laban sa kanya. Hinintay ko rin. Sa grabeng kabulastugan ng kasong ito, ang masasabi ko ay tuloy lamang ang pambabastos na ginagawa ng gobyernong ito.

Sabagay, hindi ako nagulat. Kaming matagal nang ipinaglalaban ang kapakanan ng kababaihan, alam namin na ang taong walang galang sa babae ay taong walang pagmamahal sa kapwa, sa iba pang maliliit na tao, sa batas, at sa demokrasya. – Rappler.com

Rodrigo Duterte must have by now realized that, in spite of his high popularity and the vast forces under his command as president, he cannot impose his will on the nation as easily as he did on the provincial city he ruled as mayor for over two decades.

Not known to retreat in battle, Mr. Duterte has done just that; he has called off the twin campaigns on which he launched his presidency seven months ago – a war on drugs and peace talks with communist rebels – because he ran into problems with the police and the military.

Until then he had pursued his war on drugs ruthlessly; it left more than 7,000 drug dealers and users dead. It also raised suspicions of summary executions; a Social Weather Stations survey in December showed 78 percent of those polled expressing fears they themselves, or someone they knew, might fall victim to "extrajudicial killing."

These fears were heightened by reports that some policemen were exploiting the situation for personal profit, for instance, reselling confiscated drugs, blackmailing suspects, and using them as runners. Mr. Duterte had ignored these reports until one egregious case turned up, discredited all the defiant rhetoric he had been throwing at his detractors, and caused him a big international embarrassment.

A South Korean businessman, Jee Ick Joo, was picked up on a purported drug charge, taken to the national police headquarters, and there, on the same day, October 18, strangled. Afterward his body was taken to a funeral parlor for cremation, and word sent to his wife demanding ransom.

The case became publicly known only two months later, in December, from reports by the National Bureau of Investigation, whose agents began looking into it at the request of Mrs. Jee, who had gone to the bureau after failing to get answers from the police. It provoked a senate inquiry and diplomatic representations from South Korea, and prompted Duterte to suspend his war on drugs and give way to what the police chief, General Ronald de la Rosa, called his department’s on “war on scalawags.”

Ceasefire and the military

The outrage had scarcely begun to subside when another controversy rocked Mr. Duterte’s government: The ceasefire occasioned by the peace talks he had initiated with the communists broke down when he went back on his promise to release all political prisoners. He said the military was against the concession, arguing that it would seriously weaken the government's position in the talks. If he did not go along, Mr. Duterte said, “the military might not like it . . . [and] oust me.” He had actually freed some of the prisoners, and now, with the ceasefire ended, he ordered their re-arrest.

The situation recalls a comparable initiative taken by Corazon Aquino upon her accession to the presidency in 1986, after Ferdinand Marcos, dictator for 14 years, was deposed. She freed Marcos’s communist captives, including their party's founder, Jose Ma. Sison, who, taking no chances, fled the country and found asylum in the Dutch city of Utrecht, also the site of the just ended talks. Aquino's gambit ignited a series of military coups; the last one, in December 1989, nearly toppled her government.

Taking the opposite tack and siding with the military, Mr. Duterte, on the other hand, earned quick notice from the leadership of the communist ground forces that the cease-fire was off, a decision just as quickly sanctioned by Sison and the other communist elders in Utrecht. Clashes have since broken out intermittently, with the army acknowledging some casualties on its side.

No telling how the breakdown in the peace effort will affect Mr. Duterte's political partnership with other leftist leaders, some of whom sit in his Cabinet, but a strain is bound to develop, if not between them and Mr. Duterte, between them and their comrades.

Fallback war

Meanwhile, Mr. Duterte has begun a fallback war – a war on illegal gambling, of which a numbers game called "jueteng" is the most common. It is popular with the poor because it's an affordable habit and it suits their fatalistic bent. It accepts as low a bet as five pesos, the equivalent of an American dime, yet promises winnings of up to a thousand times that or more.

Jueteng also happens to be a convenient whipping boy for Philippine leaders who are lost for wars to wage, or have just lost one. It’s a good show: they look like they're having a go at it out of some moral conviction, but they are not really expected to win. Mr. Duterte could have left the initiative to the police but decided to issue an Executive Order for his new war, perhaps to give it an air of official seriousness, and promised victory in six months, the same amount of time he had given himself in defeating drugs – and fell gravely short of.

As an autocratic mayor, Mr. Duterte may have succeeded in eradicating jueteng, and much else, in his native Davao City, but on a national scale the odds are simply too great: Jueteng has flourished for centuries because it is driven by market forces and protected by political patrons and government and police officials.

The irony is the Spanish colonizers introduced it to amuse the natives and divert them from subversive thoughts.– Rappler.com

The Philippines is currently in the midst of a new, dangerous wave of policymaking: one that relies not so much on verifiable facts and data, but more on emotions, gut feeling, and beliefs. 

Of course, policymaking has always been infused with some degree of subjectivity. But it’s quite alarming when policymakers start using “alternative facts” in their arguments, especially on the most contentious policy issues of the day. 

In what follows, we list down major examples of this type of policymaking in recent times and explore their implications. We also try to debunk some of the misinformation along the way.

Gut feeling

The use of gut feeling in policymaking is nowhere more manifest than in the death penalty debates and the President’s war on drugs.

In the recent House debates on the reimposition of the death penalty, Representative Lawrence Fortun cited official data showing the decrease of crime rates in recent years. In response, the House justice committee chair, Representative Reynaldo Umali, said that the Supreme Court had previously ruled that such statistics are "not necessary" to re-impose the death penalty.

Rep Umali added: “If you will just read the papers, watch television, and/or listen to radio on a daily basis, you will hear that these crimes are committed left and right. And to me, that is how to view that there is a compelling reason for the reimposition of the death penalty.”

Indeed, the Supreme Court had ruled before that “a positive manifestation…of a higher incidence of crime” need not be proven to validate the reimposition of the death penalty. 

But in a recent article, Kevin Mandrilla and I showed data that the death penalty, as used before, had dire consequences: not only was it ineffective, it was also anti-poor and error-prone. 

By disregarding these facts and relying on perception and outrage, we risk putting so many innocent lives on death row to deter a crime wave that’s not coming.

While the death penalty has yet to do damage anew, President Duterte’s war on drugs has already resulted in more than 7,000 deaths in the past 7 months. Time and again, he has justified this aggressive drug war by saying that between 3 to 4 million Filipinos are currently addicted to drugs. 

However, the Dangerous Drugs Board put the number of drug users nationwide at a much lower level of 1.8 million as of 2015. Before that, the same agency reported the figure to be just 1.3 million in 2012 and 1.7 million in 2008. 

By all accounts, the President’s drug war seems to be an overreaction to the country’s drug problem. Contrary to the empirical estimates, the country’s drug problem is not as big as what the government is portraying. 

By ignoring the facts and letting our fears and anger get the better of us, we ended up deploying so much government resources in an unwinnable drug war that already killed more than 7,000 Filipinos. This is one example where conjuring “alternative facts” literally had deadly consequences.

Beliefs

Personal beliefs and convictions are also playing a more prominent role in recent policy debates.

For instance, Senator Manny Pacquiao recently invoked Bible passages to justify the death penalty. He said: “God gave the government the right to use capital punishment. Jesus Christ was even sentenced to death because the government called for it.” (Wait, what?) 

Regarding “cross-dressing,” Senator Pacquiao also said: “Even in the Bible, we can read na ang babae, dapat magsuot na pambabae; at ang lalaki, magsuot ng panlalaki (that women are supposed to wear womenswear, and men should wear menswear). That’s what I believe.” 

Needless to say, blind religious belief has no place in modern policymaking. First, it’s impudent to impose one’s own beliefs on a policy that could affect Filipinos of all faiths. Second, Bible-based policymaking goes against the need for policies to be timely, responsive, and context-specific. 

DENR Secretary Gina Lopez is also invoking deeply-held beliefs in her crackdown on the mining industry. On February 2, she announced the closure of 23 mining operations in the country, following an extensive mining audit by the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB).

But when asked for a copy of the MGB’s recommendations, Sec Lopez said: “I’m gonna think about it, because if I don’t agree with it then I’m not gonna give it to you….If it’s not resonant with the principles on which DENR runs…why will I give it to you if I don’t agree with it?”

She added, “What I’m sharing with you are the principles on which I stand by, and I truly hope you share the same principles because you’re Filipino.” 

First, her reluctance to divulge the full results of the mining audit flies in the face of basic principles of transparency and accountability. More importantly, the audit report must be made public regardless of its alignment with the Secretary’s personal convictions. 

There’s no denying that certain mining activities have caused irreparable damage to many Filipinos and to our natural resources. But the fight against irresponsible mining should depend not so much on the convictions of the head of agency, but more on the capacity of our institutions to implement our laws and monitor mining activities. 

Without a more strategic and sustainable approach, Sec Lopez’s drastic measures could easily be undone (or even backfire) once she’s out of office.

Conclusion: Let’s make facts matter again 

Policymaking is akin to the way doctors treat their patients. In the same way that we expect our doctors to diagnose our condition correctly before they prescribe any medicine or therapy, we should expect our policymakers to thoroughly assess the state of the country’s problems before they enact any corrective policy. 

When policymakers rely less on facts and more on their personal emotions and beliefs, they are no more different than quack doctors who blindly give out medical treatments that could turn out to be costly, ineffective, and even harmful. 

How do we make facts matter again in Philippine policymaking? 

First, we can use the basics of so-called “moral reframing.” When it comes to policy advocacy, knowing the facts no longer suffices. Instead, advocates should collect their facts and wrap them in stories, narratives, and anecdotes that will resonate with our policymakers and help them see the light. 

Second, whenever politicians discuss public policy, they listen to public opinion. Hence, it behooves every one of us to call out our politicians – harshly, predictably, and consistently – whenever they state blatant falsehoods or distort facts in support of their causes.

Third, we should foster a new culture of fact-checking especially among today’s youth. With the spread of internet usage and mobile technologies, never has it been easier to check the facts. Only by relentlessly fighting misinformation can we prevent the country from retrogressing into a dark age of policymaking. – Rappler.com

The author is a PhD student and teaching fellow at the UP School of Economics. His views do not necessarily reflect the views of his affiliations. Thanks to Kevin Mandrilla for helpful comments and suggestions.

“Get the fuck out of my country you fucking immigrant!” yelled a man at me as he slowly drove by in his pickup truck.

I paused in disbelief. There I was, dead in my tracks in the middle of a schoolyard situated right next to a road, on my way to teach a class of middle school kids. Before I could process what just happened, a handful of kids adoringly ran up to me with their hellos and hugs. Thankfully, none of them heard the xenophobic outburst.

I share this experience, not as a commentary on the current political landscape nor to cause division.

On the contrary, I share this because it is so uncharacteristic of my American experience. 

In the past half decade, I have been shown nothing but acceptance, kindness, love and friendship. I truly believe my experience today was an aberration.

I attribute my unfortunate experience to ignorance and intolerance, whether it be emboldened intolerance or ignorance that hides behind lips that are mute in the midst of bigotry. I cast no blame on any one group, after all, ignorance is not the sole proprietorship of one single race or ideology. As a scholar, and as a student of history, I believe that learning and education is a means by which to overcome this.

To the man in the gray pickup truck, Sir, you have nothing to fear from me. It is I, judging by the lessons of history, who should be fearful. To me, you are an outlier and my admiration and opinion of America have not diminished.

As you choose to hurl invectives while you hide behind the ambiguity of a moving truck, I choose simply to write and treat this subject with the gravitas that it deserves.

Let me share with you a few lessons in history that may not be known by many, but continues to fester in the consciousness of the Filipinos.

History by numbers

10 - “Kill everyone over the age of ten” was the order given by Col. “Howling” Jacob H. Smith to his men when they turned the entire town of Balanghiga on Leyte Island into a howling wilderness.

20 - Twenty million dollars was the amount paid by the U.S. to “purchase” the Philippines from Spain in the treaty of Paris on Dec 10, 1898, later ratified by President McKinley. In defiance to this, anti-imperialist Andrew Carnegie offered to pay the U.S. treasury the same amount so that he could set the Philippines free.

200,000 - Two hundred thousand is the number of civilian Filipino men women and children who died in the U.S. attempt to subjugate and pacify the Philippines. Up to 50,000 Filipinos were killed directly by U.S. soldiers.

1000 - The number of Filipino Moros killed by the U.S. army on a single day, March 7, 1906. The Moros had taken refuge at Bud Dajo, a volcanic crater in the Philippine Island of Jolo.

1898 - The year the water-cure (today known by another name) was first used by the U.S army to torture Filipinos. William Howard Taft describes water cure as "that torture which I believe involves pouring water down the throat so that the man swells and gets the impression that he is going to be suffocated and then tells what he knows."

1911 - The 1911, or better known as the 45 caliber pistol, was developed by the U.S. Army to put down Filipino warriors in the Island of Mindanao, the Filipino warriors would continue charging even after being shot with the less powerful 38 caliber handgun.

As we cast these events to be forgotten in the annals of history, let us also remember the good things brought by America. Like the Thomasites, a shipload of American school teachers who arrived in the Philippines in 1901 to establish the first ever Philippine public school system, which includes my Alma mater, the University of the Philippines.

I am still hopeful and thankful for the beautiful people I have met in America. I have always and still continue to admire American values.

America did not just wake up one day and decide to rule the Philippines. Rather, the debate raged between the Expansionists like William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Randolph Hearst, and the anti-imperialists such as Mark Twain and Andrew Carnegie. The debate featured in the leading papers of the time, occupying America's consciousness and conscience.

In the end, President McKinley chose to occupy the Philippines, vowing “to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them." Unknown to McKinley, the Philippines Islands were already "Christianized," and had been so for over 300 years.

The lessons of the past liberate while dwelling on them enslaves us, but to forget condemns us to repeat them. – Rappler.com

Ivar-Nicholas is a Fulbright Scholar and doctoral candidate at the University of Arizona School of Music. Prior to his studies in the U.S., Ivar taught at the U.P. College of Music in Diliman and subsequently at the U.P. Los Baños Department of Humanities.

Like many, my immediate reaction to the “joint resolution” issued by the Department of Justice to provide legality to the drug charges against Senator Leila de Lima was to make fun of it. For the document – nasty as it is – is quite funny.

Grammarians and English professors will spend the rest of the President’s term figuring out the sentence constructions, bizarre metaphors, and out-of-this-Earth phrases from this document. It will be a linguistic massacre, pun intended.

After stepping back a bit, however, I found criticism too easy, and asked myself, how about trying making sense of the document's murderous lexicon as a way of putting the kibosh on it? How about clearing up the verbiage of this cabal of mediocre government attorneys and transform this painful-to-read legal document into a readable piece?

I would not countenance writing a new, simpler and perhaps even potent version of this “joint resolution” for obvious political reasons. But let me try to do the next best thing, and that annotates the piece so that we can, at the very least, get a glimpse of how the brain of a Dutertian works (or not work).

So here we go:

Well, if one were to be very succinct about it, these Dutertian minions could just have written, “Drug use has worsened today abetted by Senator De Lima who has abused her power as a member of the Upper House. She is helped by the 'manipulative' Bishop of Manila who uses fallacies to protect the drugs and corruption. This is the reason why President Rodrigo Roa Duterte had launched this anti-drug campaign with impunity. As for Senator De Lima, she has gone down to the bottom of the political muck, but has inched her way out of the well, by impugning the integrity of the Justice Secretary and a senior assistant state prosecutor.”

But they are not succinct. Thank God, they are not. – Rappler.com

Aristotle’s concept of the "golden mean" is one of the most practical moral concepts I have encountered. According to this ancient Greek philosopher, "Virtue is concerned with passions and actions, in which excess is a form of failure, and so is defect, while the intermediate is praised and is a form of success; and being praised and being successful are both characteristics of virtue. Therefore, virtue is a kind of mean, since, as we have seen, it aims at what is intermediate." 

As I wrote in one of my Eagle Eyes column 5 years ago Aristotle's golden mean is relevant to the challenge of mining in the Philippine. In that article, I raise questions which many are again asking in the wake of recent decisions by Secretary Gina Lopez: “Is a middle ground on mining possible? Is there such a thing as responsible mining that conforms to sustainable development? Or is mining always destructive of nature and communities? What is the golden mean in mining?”

Conditions for responsible mining

There is no disagreement that minerals are one of the most important economic resources, from the steel of skyscrapers and bridges, to the rare-earth metals used in semiconductors and electronics. Mining is also an important component of any national economy as it brings hard currency, elicits investment, and generates jobs. 

The situation in the Philippines is however far from ideal.

Weak governance institutions and corruption compromise mining governance, with environmental, safety, and human rights regulations frequently ignored. Our mining claims system is also antiquated, allowing companies and individuals to lay mineral claims on large swaths of Philippine territory and unnecessarily giving the impression that all of the country is open for mining.

I have long advocated a more modern approach of the government – identifying the mineral resources and bidding them out pro-actively rather than granting concessions on a first-to-claim basis. 

For the record, I am not against mining per se. I oppose mining that is environmentally destructive and a mining governance system that does not distribute benefits properly. The latter is more important because if we solve the inequity of revenue distribution in mining, we can ensure that enough resources are set aside to minimize its negative environmental and social impacts. This is true for both small-scale (which I also do not endorse unconditionally because of its environmental impacts and safety risks) and large-scale mining. 

Mining, and similar natural resources issues are best seen and resolved through the prism of environmental and social justice. Hence, the most important reform in mining governance is the proper distribution of powers, responsibilities, and income from the extraction of mineral resources.

Thus, indigenous peoples and local communities must have a voice in the mining decisions and a big share of the revenue. Similarly, local governments should have a major say on whether or not mining should be allowed within their territory and must have a just share of the revenues. Where there is conflict between national government and local governments, mediation is the only recourse. 

No community or local government should be railroaded to accept mining. Opposition however must be based on scientific grounds. For example, the claim that mining causes earthquakes has no scientific basis, although irresponsible mining can increase the risks of both geological and climate disasters. 

Mining’s contribution to economy

Mining operations bring jobs and infuse money into the local economy, and the mining sector contributes to economic growth in general.

Even so, is any positive number in terms of job generation and economic growth always a good thing? How much incentive does the government give to the mining sector, which should be deducted from the net benefits to the country and local people? How much more (or less) can the government get if it considers alternative uses of the land?

In other words, are Filipinos (as a people) really better off with mining, and is the government getting the best deal for its people? 

These are tough questions to answer due to the lack of data and a framework to analyze benefits as a whole. But there are known facts that can help in this analysis. It does not help when supporters of mining exaggerate the figures with inflated claims of job and economic losses.  

As to the benefits that local people can derive from mining, mining companies rightly claim that there are huge economic and social benefits during mining operations. Indeed, a mining operation can result in new roads and access to transportation, increased trade of goods and services supplied to the mining operations, and even improved access to health centers and schools. Some local governments rely only on mining tax revenue to supplement their internal revenue allocation. 

Unfortunately, we have no independent studies that give us accurate estimates of these benefits and that weigh them against the environmental and social impacts of such operations. There is also an accusation that most of the benefits of mining go to a very narrow set of beneficiaries. 

If we are to enable responsible mining, changing the economics of the sector is a high priority. There is really no debate about this and that new legislation is necessary.

Way forward: Good science, due process

Is a golden mean possible in mining?

Yes, but radical reforms in governance are necessary to get there. Those reforms must be based on good science and grounded in due process that allows all affected parties and stake holders to argue their case and present their views. 

Good science means that we are able to make sure that the destructive impacts of mining are minimized, if not avoided entirely. Many in the mining industry will acknowledge the bad environmental legacy of mining. But they argue that responsible mining is now possible. They point to global best practices in environmental management and addressing social impacts which, when employed properly, make mining consistent with sustainable development. 

They are right. However, there are places where mining should not be allowed, where the risk to important biological, environmental and cultural resources are too serious and cannot be mitigated adequately.

Secretary Lopez and President Duterte are correct in asserting that watersheds, whether proclaimed or not, must be absolutely no-go as well. These no-go areas should have been identified years ago; it is a big disservice to the public if again the task is passed on to another body. Let those who want to mine carry the burden of proving that mining should be allowed.

Due process must be followed in mining decisions.

Mining companies, local governments, indigenous peoples, affected communities, and even ordinary citizens have rights that must be respected in the adoption of policies and in suspending and cancelling mining operations and agreements. Those rights are established by law and it does not take rocket science to determine if government has complied or not with what is required. If due process was not followed, corrective measures can be taken.

At the end of the day though, it’s the national interest that must prevail.

Is a golden mean possible in mining? The actions of Gina Lopez are taking us in the right direction. As a society, we must build on that and go forward, not backslide, to a better mining governance system. – Rappler.com

Tony La Viña is former dean of the Ateneo School of Government.

The EDSA uprising was a memorable step in the Philippines’ struggle for democracy, and for this reason alone, it would be important to pencil it in as a red letter day for the country.

Remembering the EDSA uprising, however, should not mean celebrating the EDSA Republic to which it gave birth, as has been the practice institutionalized by the Yellow Establishment over the last 30 years. EDSA was a flawed victory, and its flaws eventually led to its replacement by President Rodrigo Duterte’s barely disguised fascist rule. Indeed, the EDSA Republic’s failure to live up to its promises spawned Dutertismo.

There were three unhealthy birthmarks that marred the EDSA Republic: the role of the military, the intervention of the United States, and the leadership of the elite.

The prominent role of the military rebels in triggering the insurrection gave them a sense of having a special role in the post-Marcos dispensation. Only after seven failed coups was civilian constitutional rule stabilized. But, in retrospect, military discontent was not as damaging to the EDSA Republic as US patronage and elite hegemony.

A US protectorate

The US was not only a player; it was a decisive player. Even before the Aquino assassination in 1983, Washington sought to nudge Marcos and the elite opposition to arrive at some compromise. These pressures escalated in 1985, resulting in Marcos’ calling for the snap elections that became the vehicle for the mobilization of the middle class and some of the popular sectors against the regime and paving the way for the military mutiny.

At that point powerful forces in Washington overcame President Ronald Reagan’s reluctance to cut Marcos loose and moved to directly remove the dictator from the scene.  At an off off-the-record briefing at the State Department in Washington on April 23, 1986, to which I was mistakenly invited, Undersecretary of State Michael Armacost openly boasted of how the US moved during Marcos’ last months in power: "Our objective was to capture... to encourage the democratic forces of the center, then consolidate control by the middle and also win away the soft support of the NPA [New People's Army]. So far, so good."

The US role in serving as midwife led it to consider the EDSA regime as a protectorate.  While the opposition of the Senate majority to a new bases treaty was disconcerting to Washington, it got what it wanted from the government in virtually all other areas.  It got Cory Aquino to make repayment of the foreign debt – especially that owed to US banks – the top priority of the new government. And it eventually brought its overwhelming military presence back with the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, where Cory’s son, President Benigno Aquino III, agreed to allow Washington to set up US bases in nominally Philippine bases.  

From factional monopoly to class monopoly of power

The third flaw of the EDSA Revolution is that it was an uprising whose direction was set by the anti-Marcos factions of the elite. Their aim was to restore competition among the elites while containing pressures for structural change.

The 1987 Constitution enshrined the rhetoric of democracy, human rights, due process, and social justice for popular consumption but these aspirations were frozen in amber owing to the dearth of implementing laws and actions that would translate them into reality.  Via periodic electoral exercises, the factional monopoly of power under Marcos gave way to a class monopoly, open to intra-elite competition for the most important national, regional, and local offices but virtually closed to the lower orders as money politics became the order of the day.

Despite its political shortcomings, the EDSA regime would probably have retained a significant amount of support had it delivered on the economic front. Indeed, it would be an understatement to say that the EDSA system failed to translate its promise of delivering less poverty, more equality, and more social justice into reality. 

Economic debacle

Perhaps the key tragedy of the EDSA Republic was that it came into being right at the time that neoliberalism was on the ascendant globally as an ideology. Even before the February 1986 uprising, the Philippines had become one of four guinea pigs of the new structural adjustment program unveiled by the World Bank, which aimed to bring down tariffs, deregulate the economy, and privatize government enterprises.

As noted above, under the administration of Corazon Aquino, pressure from the International Monetary Fund, the US Treasury Department, and US banks made repayment of the foreign debt the top national economic priority, and Washington and the IMF ensured that succeeding administrations would follow suit by having Congress adopt the automatic appropriations law that made repayment of the state’s debt the first item in the national budget.  Over the next three decades, debt servicing would take up to 20 to 45% of the annual government budget, crippling the government's capacity to invest and stimulate economic growth and provide essential social services.  

With the 1992-98 administration of Fidel Ramos, neoliberalism reached its apogee: tariffs were radically cut to zero-to-five percent, deregulation and privatization were sped up, and the Philippines joined the World Trade Organization — to “benefit”, it was said, from the tide of corporate-driven globalization. Under Ramos and later administrations, the contours of the EDSA political economy were firmed up: pro-market policies, relentless privatization, export-oriented development, export of labor, low wages to attract foreign investors, and conservative monetary and fiscal management. Since the Philippines’ neighbors retained high levels of economic protectionism, neoliberal disarmament contributed to the Philippines' having the second lowest yearly average growth rate in Southeast Asia from 1990 to 2010. Even the second-tier ASEAN economies of Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Burma outstripped it.

Although the economy registered 6-7% growth rates from 2012 to 2015, there was no “trickle down” to counter the legacy of stagnation bequeathed by neoliberal policies. At nearly 25% of the population, the percentage living in poverty in 2015 was practically the same as in 2003. The gini coefficient, the best summary measure of inequality, jumped from 0.438 in 1991 to 0.506 in 2009, among the highest in the world.  For many Filipinos, the statistics were superfluous.  Extreme poverty was so wretchedly visible in the big urban poor clusters within and surrounding Metro Manila and in depressed rural communities throughout the country.

Corruption and class

The neoliberal paradigm was not, however, the only cause of the EDSA regime's failure to address the deepening social crisis. Corruption was a problem, as it was in the Philippines' neighbors. The administrations of Joseph Estrada and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo became synonymous with unbridled corruption. But even more consequential than corruption was class. Just as they had forced Marcos to halt his land reform program in the 1970s, the landed class successfully resisted the implementation of Republic Act 6657, Cory Aquino's already watered-down land reform program.

A civil society push to reenergize the program, which was passed in 2009, bogged down under the Benigno Aquino III administration owing to lack of political will and presidential indifference. By the end of the effectivity of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program with Extension Law (CARPER) in June 30, 2014, about 700,000 hectares of the best private land in the country remained in the hands of landlords, violence against land reform beneficiaries was common, and rural poverty remained stubbornly high. 

Unaccompanied by structural reforms, the World Bank-supported Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) anti-poverty program of the Aquino administration, though it eventually covered some 4.4 million families, or nearly one-fifth of the population, could barely make a dent on poverty and inequality.

Over the cliff

Class callousness, double standards, and inept governance finally drove the EDSA Republic to the edge of the cliff during the Aquino III presidency. Popular support had steadied the EDSA Republic when it was challenged by military coups in the late eighties. 

By 2016, however, three decades of disillusionment had made it a tired, discredited system waiting to be pushed over the cliff, and it was, by the electoral insurgency that brought Duterte to power and his subsequent moves toward fascism. 

Dutertismo was EDSA’s vengeful offspring, calling as it did for radically sweeping away the “dilawan.” The EDSA Republic’s ignominious ending was underlined by the spectacular defection of 95 per cent of the Liberal Party, the political formation most identified with its legacy, to the dictatorial Duterte less than three weeks after the elections--an unparalleled opportunistic  move that was blessed by Aquino himself to protect him and close associates like former Budget Secretary Butch Abad from prosecution under the new dispensation.

Bury EDSA, fight fascism

Let us remember the EDSA Uprising as an event in our country’s long struggle for democracy, but let us not mourn the EDSA Republic. 

It deserves to be buried. Instead of ceremonially evoking nostalgia for the past, what we should do on February 25 is to look to the dangers of present and respond to the challenge of the future. 

Let us march against fascism in power and renew our struggle to fight for a truly democratic system, one that goes beyond EDSA’s fatal limitations. – Rappler.com

Walden Bello made the only resignation in principle in the history of the Congress of the Philippines in 2015 owing to what he considered the double standards of the Benigno Aquino III administration in its anti-corruption policy, the refusal of the president to take responsibility fot the Mamasapano tragedy, and its subservience to Washington.  Currently, he is a visiting research fellow at Kyoto University’s Center for Southeast Asian Studies and Professor of Sociology at the State University of New York at Binghamton.  He is the author or co-author of 20 books, including Capitalism’s Last Stand? (London: Zed, 2013).

Naunsa na ba ka, Martin? Nasapnan nga but-buton ka man diay. Wa nimo matubag ang pangutana bahin sa kung kinsa’y tinubdan sa imong pasangil nga ang mga peryodista gitagaan kuno ug suburno sa kantidad nga $1,000 (dollars pa gyud!!).

Gasugyot ka nga baylo nianing panuburno mao ang paghatag ug importansya sa miaging press conference sa Senado nga asa gipa-ila-ila ni Senador Antonio Trillanes IV ug mga abugado sa Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) si retired SPO2 Arturo “Arthur” Lascanas.

Gibutyag ni Lascanas nga na’y basehan gyud ang mga istorya bahin sa Davao Death Squad ug ang hari-hari niani nga si Presidente Digong niadtong mayor pa siya.

Human nasapnan ang pambubutbut nimo, Martin, nanghinaot ang tanan nga mangayo unta ka ug pasaylo sa mga peryodista ug sa Senado para malimtan na ang tanan. Na, wa man intawon ni nimo gibuhat. Misamot pa kay nagpagka-garboso ka pa!

Gidungagan pa nimo ug usa pa ka bakak: miingon ka nga katong anunsyo base kuno sa mga “intelligence report” nga nadawat ninyo sa Palasyo. Wa ka moingon kung asa kini gikan (secret ni uy!) ug gi-unsa ninyo pagdawat sa taho (gi-text siguro? Kung dili man basig gi-Snapchat!).

Pero nakaplagan na sab nga way badok ning imong panulti, Martin. Kay sa sunod nga adlaw miingon si General Hermogenes Esperon ug Secretary Delfin Lorenzana nga way “intelligence report” silang nakuha bahin nianing pagsuhol sa mga peryodista. Imbis nga mo-angkon na ka, gipakapinan pa gyud nimo ug nagpalakbit ka nga dili tanan miyembro sa Kabinete makadawat sa mga “intelligence report.”

Ha? Si Esperon nga National Security Adviser ug si Lorenzana nga Secretary of Defense? Nagyasmi man ka intawon, Martin, uy! 

Dayon, nasuko pa gyud ka sa pangutana ni Marlon Ramos. Ang imong tubag mao ni: “Let me tell you Marlon. I am Bisaya. I grew up in Cagayan de Oro. I also grew up in Surigao. So my Tagalog may not be as perfect as your Tagalog. So let’s put it at that!”

Sa akong pag-tanaw maayo unta ug nasulbad ni ninyo sa pamaagi sa pag-bugno, kay sa pagka-tinuod lang laay kaayo maminaw sa imo, Martin. Di na ka makakurat kay ang imong tubag kanunay mao kanang gitawag sa mga Amerikano na “stock answer.” Ug kasagaran ang mga pangutana sa mga peryodista “stock questions” sab. 

Ang akong dahom nga usahay pakuratan unta ta ninyo, Martin. Mahimo nga mag sinumbagay, pero OK sab mangisog ka.

Kay nabuking ka man gud.

Maka-irita kining imong tubag Martin, kay imbis nga tubagon ug tarong ang pangutana ni Marlon, gihimusdan hinuon nimo ang atong mga kaubanan nga Bisaya. Gapaduding ka nga di ka makasabot sa pangutana ni Marlon kay Bisaya man ka.

Primero,  nganong i-apil man mi nimo sa imong tinonto? Unsa ba tang mga Bisdak sa pananaw nimo, Martin? Mga bugo? Mga wa naka-ang-ang sa high school ug college?

Nanghinaot ka nga paluyohan ka namo, no? Para sa unsa kini, Martin? Nga mangasuko sab mi kay sa pagka-tinuod ang katuyoan gyud ni Marlon kanang pang-insulto sa atong mga Bisaya? Ang gusto ba nimo, Martin, nga makigbulig mi sa imoha kay kinahanglan panalipdan ka namo kay morag nang-insulto sa ato-a si Marlon?

Ug ngano man intawong mobulig mi sa imong binutbot, Martin? Di ni away namong mga Bisaya batok sa mga peryodista. Imoha ra ni. Angkona na na, kay kung modaug ka, makaila ang tanan sa imong kabantog. Pero nasapnan man ka, busa imoha ra sab ang kaulaw!

Ikaduha, lahi na karon ang atong tan-aw sa Tagalog, bai Martin.  Kaniadto siguro maglisod ta ug sabut kay di man sa pang-adlaw-adlaw ta maka-panglambigit sa Tagalog. Sa sinehan ra nato ni mapaminaw kay sa klase katul-gan lang man nato ang “Pilipino.”

Pero karon, mas makasabot na ang mga Bisdak sa Tagalog, labi na ang mga batan-on. Kabalo ka kung ngano? Hay, kada gabii gayawyaw sa atong atubangan si Noli “Kabayan” de Castro bahin sa mga balita sa adlaw. Buot ipasabot, kada gabii aduna ta’y libreng pag-tulun-an sa Tagalog.

Ang mga ginikanan nako, di makasugakod sa Tagalog pero ang akong mga pag-umangkon ug batang ig-agaw, kanang gitawag nga “multi-lingual” na.

Pastilan, nasapnan na sab ka nga namakak. Ang mga Bisdak karon lunghay na mag-istorya ug makasabot sa Tagalog.

Makalagot lang kay gigamit nimo ang imong pagka-Bisdak. Ug sa ingon morag gipadayon nimo ang usa sa mga gikasuk-an nato sa mga Tagalog – nga kitang Bisaya di kaayo utokan.

Martin ayaw na mi intawon i-apil sa imong kabuang. Angkona na nga nabisto ang imong pambutbut ug pangayo na ug pasaylo sa mga peryodista, apila na pud si Trillanes ug uban pang mga senador. Ay, kung mahimo gani, sa Cabinet meeting pangayo pud ug pasaylo kang Esperon ug Lorenzana.

Pero pinaka-importante pangayo ug pasaylo sa among mga Bisaya kay di gyud maayo nang pakaulawan mi nimo para lang makalusot ka. 

Angkona na na imong sayop, Martin. Husto na ang pamboladas.

Mao ra ni…

– Rappler.com

Bisayang lunghay si Patricio N. Abinales 

What is happening to you, Martin? You've been caught as a liar. You weren't able to answer the question about which journalists you were pointing to, claiming they were given $1,000 (dollars really!!).

You mentioned that, in exchange for the bribe, was the prioritization of the Senate press conference where Senator Antonio Trillanes IV and Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) lawyers introduced retired SPO2 Arturo “Arthur” Lascañas.

Lascañas revealed there is proof of what they are saying about the Davao Death Squad and their leader, President Digong, back when he was still mayor.

After you were caught lying, Martin, everyone was hoping you would apologize to the journalists and the Senate so we could move on. But you didn't do it! You made it even worse by being arrogant.

You even added one more lie. You said that the announcement was based on "intelligence reports" that you received in the Palace. You never revealed where this information was from (it's a secret!) or how you received the taho (maybe it was texted? If not, maybe it was Snapchatted!).

But it was revealed that there is no truth to what you're saying, Martin. Because the next day, General Hermogenes Esperon and Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said that they never received any "intelligence report" about the bribing of journalists.

Instead of admitting your mistake, you claimed that not all Cabinet members received "intelligence reports." Huh? Not even Esperon who is the National Security Adviser or Lorenzana who is Secretary of Defense? You're making things up, Martin!

You then got mad at Marlon Ramos' question. You answered with, "Let me tell you Marlon. I am Bisaya. I grew up in Cagayan de Oro. I also grew up in Surigao. So my Tagalog may not be as perfect as your Tagalog. So let's put it at that!"

The way I see it, it would have been better if you had resolved this with a fistfight, because, to be honest, it's very boring to listen to you, Martin. We're never shocked because the things you say are what Americans call a "stock answer." And usually the questions journalists ask are "stock questions" as well.

My wish is that sometime you surprise us, Martin. You could fight it out, you could also get aggravated.

Because you've been caught already.

Your answer is irritating, Martin, instead of properly answering Marlon's question, you're degrading us, Bisayas. You tried to be cute and used your being Bisaya as an excuse for your failing to understand Marlon's question.

First of all, why did you include the rest of us in your idiocy? What are we BisDak (Bisayang Dako = grew up Bisaya), to you, Martin? Stupid? People who learned nothing in high school or college?

You were hoping that we'd have your back, weren't you? Why did you say this, Martin? Was it so that we'd all be angry at Marlon because his real objective was to insult the Bisaya? Do you want us to side with you, Martin, because we need to defend you over what you implied was Marlon's insult to us?

Why on earth would we side with your lies, Martin? This isn't a fight between the Bisaya and journalists. This is just you. Own it, because if you win, the fame will be all yours. But you were caught and so it's the shame that is all yours.

Secondly, our views on Tagalog are different now, Bai Martin. Back in the day, it may have been harder for us to understand because we weren't exposed to Tagalog every day. We could only hear it in cinemas because we'd fall asleep in Pilipino class.

But these days Bisayas can easily understand Tagalog, especially the youth. You know why? Hay, every night Noli "Kabayan" de Castro gives us the news of the day. This means that every night we get a free Tagalog lesson.

My parents aren't able to understand Tagalog but my nephews/nieces and younger cousins are what we call "multi-lingual" already.

Damn, you were caught lying once again. The Bisayas of today are now fluent in speaking and understanding Tagalog.

It's aggravating that you used your being BisDak as an excuse. In doing so, you furthered the notion that we take against the Tagalogs – that Bisayas aren't very smart.

Martin, please don't include us in your stupidity. Admit that your lies were exposed. And seek forgiveness from the journalists, including Trillanes and the other senators. Oh, if you're able, at the Cabinet meeting apologize to Esperon and Lorenzana.

But, most important, apologize to the Bisaya because it was horrible that you shamed all of us just to find a way out.

Own your mistake, Martin. Enough with your deceit.

That's all. – Rappler.com

 Patricio N. Abinales is a fluent Bisaya.

Eksaktong 31 taon ngayong araw, katanghaliang-tapat ng Sabado, nagsimulang turuan ng sambayanang Pilipino ang buong mundo kung paano ipaglaban ang demokrasiya’t kalayaan, sa isang matiwasay at walang pagbubo ng dugong pamamaraan – ito ang binansagang “1986 People Power Revolution” – ang apat na araw na pakikipagmatigasan ng mga Pilipino upang mapatalsik ang diktatoryang rehimeng Marcos, na halos dalawang dekada ring nagtampisaw sa karangyaan at kapangyarihan, habang naka-pasang krus naman ang mas nakararaming mga mamamayan.

Police reporter ako noon sa muling pagbubukas ng pahayagang Manila Times, na ang haba ng panahong nakasara ito, ay halos kasing edad na ng Martial Law na umiiral sa buong bansa – isa kasi ang pahayagang ito sa mga ipinasarang media establishment matapos na mag deklara ng Martial Law ang dating Pangulong Ferdinand E. Marcos. Hindi na ito muling binuksan ng pamilya Roces na siyang may-ari nito, hanggang sa maipit sa isang interview si Pangulong Marcos at mapilitang ipagsigawan sa buong mundo, na nakahanda na siyang tumawag muli ng eleksyon para patunayang hindi siya isang diktador. Dito na muling binuhay ang diyaryong Manila Times at isa ako sa apat na unang mga naging police reporter nito. Maging ang lingguhang magasing Inquirer ay biglang naging broadsheet sa pasiyang ito ni Marcos.

Ang totoo, kahit na police reporter na ako noon at labas-masok sa mga presinto at kampo ng militar at pulis sa Metro Manila at mga karatig na lalawigan, ni katiting na hinagap na magaganap ang People Power sa EDSA ay wala akong naramdaman – ‘di naman marahil sa manhid ang aking pakiramdam kundi talaga lang sobrang confidential ang planong pagpapabagsak sa rehimeng Marcos ng grupo ng mga militar na pinamumunuan ng noon ay isang military colonel na si Gregorio “Gringo” Honasan, na napakalapit naman sa noo’y Secretary ng National Defense (SND) na si Juan Ponce Enrile. (READ: Key players in the 1986 People Power Revolution)

Nabuking ang planong paglusob sa palasyo, at ang dalawang opisyal ng grupo ng militar na kung tawagin ay Reform the Armed Forces Movement (RAM), na mga kasama sa gagawing pag-atake sa Malacañang, sina Major Saulito Aromin at Major Edgardo Doromal, ay naaresto at agad “ipinakanta” ang lahat nilang nalalaman sa planong paglusob sa loob ng Palasyo – kaya’t bago pa lang makapananghali ng Pebrero 22, 1986, ay kumalat na sa mga taga-media ang gagawing pag-aresto kay Secretary Enrile, dahil siya ang kilalang “godfather” ng grupong RAM. Kapansin-pansin ang mga armadong sundalo sa paligid ng gusali ng Department of National Defense (DND) na unti-unti na ring napapalibutan ng mga taga-media na naghihintay sa napabalitang presscon na magaganap sa mga oras na iyon.

Gadget

'Di pa uso ang mga gadget noon tulad ng mga smart cellular phone at laptop ngayon. Walang pang text, email, chat at mga digital na litrato, kaya’t kanya-kanyang paraan sa pabilisan nang pagkuha at pagbato ng impormasyon kaming mga taga-media sa aming mga opisina at sa mga sideline na kung tawagin ay “abugadi” at “tabo” na mga foreign news agency. Sa bagay na ito, ay hindi ako magpapahuli, lalo pa’t gadget din lamang ang pag-uusapan. Siyempre mayroon ako – isang Radio Frequency Scanner at Tone Beeper na sobrang gamit na gamit ko sa aking mga coverage.

Nakatulong sa akin para agad kong malaman ko kung ano ang mga nagaganap sa kapaligiran ay ang aking AOR scanner na kasing laki lang ng mga cellular phone ngayon pero may 100 memory channel. Dito ko na momonitor ang mga “alert move” ng mga operatiba ng pulis at militar, RAM man o “loyalist” (Ang tawag sa mga rebelde noon ay RAM, “loyalist” naman ang sa mga sundalo ng pamahalaan) kaya’t kadalasan ay nakatatakbo agad ako sa lugar kung saan may inaasahang mangyayari, bago pa man ito malaman ng ibang taga-media.

Sa pamamagitan naman ng aking Tone Beeper ay madali akong ma-locate ng aking mga editor sa opisina kung ako ay kailangang utusan at patakbuhin sa isang lugar na may nalaman silang nangyayari. Wala kang mensaheng maririnig o mababasa sa Tone Beeper, maliban sa kapag nag-beep na ito ay senyales na dapat kang maghanap ng landline na telepono para tumawag sa iyong opisina(long beep) o sa bahay (short beep na paulit-ulit), para malaman mo kung ano ang bilin. Kalimitan itong gamit ng mga doctor para agad sila makontak sa ospital lalo pa’t may pasyente silang nasa emergency ang kalagayan. Ang beeper ko ay pamana ng isang kaibigang doktor na nangibang bansa na upang doon magtrabaho dahil nga sa hindi na raw magandang kalagayan pang ekonomiya sa bansa.

Napakalaking tulong ng dalawang gadget na ito sa aking coverage sa loob ng apat na araw na ang sentro ng mga nangyayari ay sa loob at labas ng Camp Crame at Camp Aguinaldo, kung saan ako ay paikut-ikot lamang, dala ang isang telang may nakabaligtad na bandilang Pilipino, ang gamit kong “counter-sign” sa paglabas-masok sa mga kampo. Ipinamigay ito sa Camp Crame sa mga nag-boluntaryong tutulong sa mga rebeldeng sundalo o RAM sa loob ng opisina ng PC –INP Public Information Office (PIO) na pinamumunuan ni Colonel Luis San Andres at nang kanyang senior staff na si Captain Cris Maralit. Kung marunong kang kumalabit ng gatilyo noon ay agad-agad ka rin pahahawakin ng isang Baby Armalite para makasama ka na sa mga magtatanggol sa kampo na noon ay napabalitang lulusubin na ng mga Marines.

Breakaway

Habang papadilim na noong Pebrero 22, 1986, unti-unting napupuno ng mga taga-media, local at foreign, ang loob at paligid ng magkabilang kampo sa pagitan ng EDSA at pagpatak ng ganap na 6:30 ng gabi – magkakasabay na isinara na ang mga gates sa Camp Crame at Camp Aguinaldo at isang press conference ang isinasagawa sa loob ng gusali ng DND at dito na pormal na inanunsiyo nina Secretary Enrile at General Fidel V. Ramos ang kanilang pag-BREAKAWAY sa administrasyon ni Pangulong Marcos.

Hindi na ako pumasok sa loob ng DND, hindi ako nakatalagang i-cover ito. May mga kasamahan na akong taga Manila Times ang nasa loob na ng DND kaya’t ang sitwasyon na lamang sa buong paligid ang aking minomonitor. May bitbit naman akong transistor radio at nakatutok sa broadcast ng Radio Veritas na tuluy-tuloy na nagre-report sa lahat nang ginagawa at sinasabi ng mga nag-breakaway na sundalo at mga opisyal, na nagkulong na sa loob ng Camp Aguinaldo.

Habang palalim na ang gabi, patuloy ang pagbabalita ng Radio Veritas sa mga nangyayari sa loob ng kampo at bandang 9 pm ay nanawagan si Archbishop Jaime Cardinal Sin sa mga mamamayan na nakikinig sa kanilang radio na magpunta sa EDSA at suportahan sina Enrile at Ramos sa ginawa nilang pagtalikod sa pamahalaang Marcos. Nanawagan pa si Cardinal Sin na magdala ng mga pagkain para sa mga sundalo sa loob at labas ng dalawang kampo sa magkabilang panig ng EDSA.

Naging mainit at napakasigla naman ang naging pagtugon ng mga mamamayan sa panawagan ni Cardinal Sin sa radyo. Unti-unting nadaratingan sa EDSA ang pami-pamilyang mga tao na unti-unting umuukopa sa kahabaan ng EDSA, mula sa lugar ng Cubao sa Quezon City hanggang sa may tulay ng Guadalupe Nuevo sa Makati, animo papunta sa piknik sa dami ng kani-kaniyang bitbit na mga pagkain na iniaalok at ibinabahagi nung mga maraming dala, sa grupo naman ng mga walang bitbit. Masaya ang mga tao. Nagkakantahan ang pami-pamilya ng ilang makabayang awitin, gaya ng “Ang Bayan Ko” at “Pilipinas Kong Mahal.” 

Literal na masasabi kong bumaha noon ng inumin, mga soft drinks, mga juice na naka-tetra pack at nasa lata, at mga de latang sardinas na pampalaman sa suput-supot na mga tinapay at pandesal. Narinig ko pa nga ang komento ng ilang sundalo sa may gate ng Crame at Aguinaldo, na sa dami raw ng dumating na mga pagkain, kahit tumagal pa ng isang buwan ang giyerang kanilang papasukin ay di sila magugutom. Nakisali na rin kasi sa pagde-deliver ng mga pagkain ang ilang malalaking restaurant, food chain at mga hamburger store – sa pagbabahagi ng kanilang mga food products sa mga sundalo sa loob ng mga kampo at mga undercover agents na naglipana sa paligid ng Kampo Crame at Aguinaldo at kahabaan ng EDSA na mabilis nang napupuno ng mga nagdadatingang mga tao.

Marines

Tahimik at pakiramdaman halos ang mga tao sa buong magdamag, suwerte lang kung makanakaw ka ng konting tulog – maya-maya, madaling-araw na ng Linggo, Pebrero 23, 1986 – sumabog ang balitang nilusob at pinabagsak daw ng mga “loyalist” na Marines ang transmitter ng Radio Veritas sa Malolos, Bulacan kaya bigla itong nawala sa ere at natigil sa pagre-report. Dito na nabalot ng tensyon ang mga tao sa magkabilang kampo at mga nagbi-vigil sa gitna ng EDSA, sa harapan ng dalawang kampo...baka raw kasi ang susunod na pag-atake ng mga Marines ay sa EDSA na.

Ngunit ‘di naman nagtagal ay biglang naghiyawan ang mga tao – muling bumalik sa ere ang Radio Veritas gamit ang kanilang standby generator at transmitter. Ang inirereport nito ay ang intel-information hinggil sa posibleng pag-atake raw ng mga Marines sa Camp Crame at Aguinaldo sa araw na iyon. Dito na ipinasya nina General Ramos at Secretary Enrile na magsama na lamang sa Camp Crame matapos nilang makumpirma ang intelligence report, na naghahanda na raw ang mga Marines at mga taga-Air Force(PAF) sa gagawing paglusob sa kanila. Dito naganap yung madalas ninyong naririnig na “Salubungan sa EDSA” na kasamang palagi sa pag-alaala sa pagdiriwang ng 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution. Ngunit kahit na magkasama na sa Camp Crame sina Secretary Enrile at General Ramos makapananghali, nanatiling mataas at patuloy pang tumataas ang tensyon sa buong paligid ng mga oras na iyon.

Bandang hapon, nag-ingay ang mga radio frequency na naka-save sa memory ng aking radio scanner. Isa-isa kong pinakinggan ang mga maingay ma channel at dito ko nalaman na palusob na sa EDSA ang mga Marines. ilang minuto lamang matapos kong ibato ang impormasyon sa kaibigan kong tiktik na nasa harapan ng Camp Crame, ay nagsimula nang dumagundong ang kahabaan ng EDSA sa mga parating na tangke ng Marines na galing sa Fort Bonifacio – ang target daw ay umatake sa Camp Crame. Live na inire-report din ito ng Radio Veritas.

Ang mataas na tensyon na nagpatahimik sa mga tao sa harapan ng Crame at Aguinaldo ay biglang binasag ng alingawngaw ng kantang “Bayan Ko” ng mga nagdatingang tila mga miyembro ng banda at mga local na singer. Nakatitindig ng balahibo ang mga oras na iyon – biglang natabunan ng pagmamahal sa bayan ang takot na alam kong nararamdaman ng mga tao sa buong kapaligiran, kabilang na ako rito.

Tangke vs rosaryo

Nang i-report ng Veritas na nasa may kanto na ng Ortigas Avenue at EDSA ang ilang mga tangke ng Marines na patungong Crame ay nagsuguran ang pulu-pulotong ng mga taong nasa harapan ng Crame at Aguinaldo, sa pangunguna ng ilang mga madre na armado ng kanilang rosaryo at munting aklat ng banal na bibliya, para harangin at pakiusapan ang mga “loyalist” na huwag nang ituloy ang gagawin nilang pag-atake sa mga rebeldeng sundalo. Wala ring tigil ang pagdarasal ng iba habang kumakanta naman ng “Bayan ko” ang karamihan.

Sa may kanto ng Connecticut Ave at EDSA nagpanagpo ang mga tao at tangke ng Marines. Buong tapang na humarang ang mga tao sa pangunguna ng mga madre sa daraanan ng mga tangke kaya’t ‘di nakausad man lang ang mga ito. Matagal na nakahinto ang mga tangke na waring nakikipagtitigan sa mga taong nakaharang, nang biglang umatungal ang mga makina nito. Nagulat at napatigalgal ang mga nakaharang na tao sa pag-aakalang iyon na ang katapusan nila at umpisa ng madugong labanan – hindi naman pala. Dahil sa halip na umusad pa-abante ay dahan-dahang umatras ang mga ito, kasunod ang nagitlang mga tao, hanggang sa kanto ng Ortigas, sa harapan ng gusali ng Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA).

{source}<div class="blob-full">
<blockquote>
<h4>
Journalist: “When are you going to order your men to attack?”
Brigadier General Tadiar: “What a question! Do you think I am that crazy to give such order and annihilate these freedom-loving people?”
<h4>
</blockquote>
</div>{/source}

Mula roon ay tumawid sa kabilang kalsada ang mga tangke, patungo sa bakanteng lote na kinatatayuan ngayon ng EDSA Shrine at ng Robinson Galleria, na noon ay nababakuran ng mataas na pader, na binunggo ng mga tangke hanggang magiba, para doon sila pansamantalang humimpil habang naghihintay muli ng “order to attack” mula sa kanilang komandante na si Brigadier General Artemio Tadiar. Habang nakatigil ang mga tangke sa lugar ay naganap ang makasaysayang pagbibigay ng punpon ng bulaklak ng mga kababaihang teenager sa mga Marines na sakay ng mga tangke, na ini-immortalized sa larawang nakalagay sa 500-peso bill na inilabas ng Bangko Sentral noong Arroyo Administration.

Papadilim na nang mula sa isang Huey helicopter na paikut-ikot sa itaas ng bakanteng lote na kinatitigilan ng mga tangke ay bumaba sa ibabaw ng isang Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) tank si Brigadier General Tadiar, na agad inulan ng tanong mula sa mga foreign journalist na nakaantabay sa lugar. Maraming tanong at mga sagot, ngunit ito ang tanong at sagot na ‘di ko makalilimutan sa araw at oras na iyon: 

Journalist: “When are you going to order your men to attack?”

Brigadier General Tadiar: “What a question! Do you think I am that crazy to give such order and annihilate these freedom-loving people?” 

Biglang na tahimik ang lahat. ‘Di na nakabato ng follow-up na tanong ang mga taga-media dahil nag-radio na si Brigadier General Tadiar para sunduin siya agad sa naturang lugar ng Huey helicopter na nagbaba rin doon sa kanya. Sumabog ang ingay nang makaalis na ang heneral – ingay nang papalayong helicopter at pagdiriwang ng mga tao dahil walang utos ng pag-atake silang narinig!

Kinagabihan ay nasira na ang remote transmitter na gamit ng Veritas, saglit lang itong nawala sa ere at nang bumalik ay nasa ibang radio frequency na at Radyo Bandido na ang ibinabandong pangalan ng kanilang programa, at ang mga anchor, ay ang mag-asawang June Keithly at Angelo Castro Jr. Pilit na hinahanap ng mga “loyalist soldier” kung saan nagbo-broadcast ang Radio Bandido ngunit nabigo silang ma-locate ito. Ang ‘di nila alam ay halos dalawang kilometro lamang ang layo mula sa Malacañang, sa gusali at radio station ng DZRJ sa may Sta Mesa na pag-aari ng pamilya ni Ramon “RJ” Jacinto, sumasahimpapawid ang Radyo Bandido. Bago ka makarating sa ika-limang palapag ng gusali, sa radio booth nila Keithley at Castro, ay kinakailangang hawiin mo muna ang mga madreng nakaharang sa bawat baytang ng hagdan, na handang isakripisyo ang kanilang buhay para sa dalawang broadcaster.

Bakbakan sa Santolan

Ang unang sagupaan sa pagitan ng RAM at mga “loyalist” ay naganap madaling araw ng Lunes, ika-24 ng Pebrero, 1986 – sa ikatlong araw nang “breakaway” – nang makalusot sa mga nagbi-vigil na mga tao sa may tagiliran ng Camp Aguinaldo sa may Santolan Gate, ang mga sundalong “loyalist” matapos nilang hagisan ng mga nakasusulasok na tear gas ang mga tao. Nabigong lubos na makapasok ang mga “loyalist” forces sa Camp Aguinaldo nang salubungin sila ng putok mula sa mga rebel soldiers.

Napakainit ng tensyon sa buong paligid ng dalawang kampo, lalo na nang mapabalitang lumipad na mula sa Sangley Point Sa Cavite ang ilang armadong helicopter ng Philippine Air Force (PAF) patungong EDSA – ang misyon, bombahin ang mga kalabang nasa Camp Crame.

Nagpaikut-ikot muna ang dalawang armadong helicopter sa itaas ng EDSA na lalong nagpa-init sa sitwasyon at nagpakaba sa mga rebelde at mga taong nasa loob ng kampo. Ngunit makaraan ang ilang minuto, sa halip na bombahin ang Camp Crame, lumapag sa loob ng kampo ang dalawang PAF helicopter at buong giting na bumaba at sumaludo sina Colonel Antonio Sotelo, kumander ng 15th PAF Strike Wings; at Colonel Charles Hotchkiss, kumander ng 205th Helicopter Wings sa sumalubong sa kanilang sina General Ramos at Secretary Enrile.

Biglang piyesta sa buong kampo sa pag-defect ng dalawa sa rebeldeng grupo na buong siglang ibinalita agad ng Radyo Bandido. Nagbunyi ang mga tao sa buong kahabaan ng EDSA na noon ay sinasabi ng mga rebelde na umabot na raw sa bilang na 2 milyon. Bilang isang inhinyero, ‘di kapani-paniwala para sa akin ang bilang na ito dahil kahit anong kuwenta at pagsukat ang gawin ko sobra-sobra ito kahit siksikin mo pa ang mga tao sa naturang lugar – hindi ko na ito pinakialaman at kinuwestiyon – alam kong bahagi ito ng psywar operation at ang importante para sa akin sa mga oras na iyon, ay ang nararamdaman kong nalalapit ng tagumpay ng mga rebeldeng sundalo, dahil sa sunud-sunod na pagdi-defect ng mga opisyal sa AFP, INP at mga local na pamahalaan sa buong kapuluan, sa panig nina Ramos at Enrile.

Fake news

Bago magtanghali ay umuugong muli ang hiyawan at sigawan sa EDSA – pumutok kasi ang balitang lumayas na raw sa Malacañang ang buong pamilya ni Marcos at ito ay ibinabalita na raw ng Radio Bandido. Ilang oras din ang kasiyahang ito na biglang naputol nang lumabas sa Channel 4 (CH-4) si Marcos, kasama ang kanyang mga heneral sa AFP at nagsabing hinding-hindi siya aalis sa puwesto at nananawagan sa kabilang kampo na pag-usapan na lang nila ang problema.

Kasama ang ilang taga-media ay tumakbo kami sa istasyon ng CH-4 sa Bohol Avenue dahil sa impormasyong iri-retake ito ng mga rebeldeng sundalo. Dito ko inabot ang grupo ng mga batang miyembro ng Constabulary Highway Patrol Group (CHPG) na pinamumunuan ni Captain Jojie Cruz na siyang nakita kong unang nakapasok sa compound ng CH-4 kasabay nang nakangingilong putukan. Nagtakbuhan ang mga “loyalist” kaya madaling na-recover ng mga rebeldeng sundalo ang istasyong ginagamit ni Marcos sa propaganda war niya ng mga oras na iyon. Nawala sa ere sina Marcos at nang bumalik ang programa ay sina Orly Punzalan na ang nakaharap sa camera at sinabi nilang balik ABS-CBN na ang naturang istasyon matapos itong i-take over ng rehimeng Marcos sa loob ng halos 20 taon bilang CH-4.

Itinigil na rin ang broadcast ng Radyo Bandido na ginagawa sa istasyon ng DZRJ-AM sa Sta Mesa, Maynila at muling ibinalik sa Radio Veritas na sumasahimpapawid naman mula sa loob nang bagong bawing istasyon ng ABS-CBN sa Bohol Avenue, Quezon City.

Nang humupa ang putukan, sa labas ng compound ay nakita kong pinagkakaguluhan ng mga photographer si Colonel Mariano Santiago habang nakayapos sa kanya ang isang naka-abitong paring Katoliko. Lumabas sa mga pahayagan ang naturang litrato na may kasamang istorya na si Colonel Santiago raw pala ang team leader ng grupong lumusob sa loob ng CH-4 at nakabawi rito. Lumabas naman sa EXTRA EDITION ng diyaryo kong Manila Times, na naka play-up ng malaki sa front page nito, ang kuha kong litrato habang papalusob sa loob ng compound ng CH-4 ang grupo ng CHPG na pinangungunahan ni Captain Cruz. 

Bandang hapon ng Lunes, nakatikim ng sampol mula sa mga rebeldeng piloto ng PAF ang mga “loyalist” ni Marcos. Binomba nila ang ilang “air asset” ng mga ito na nasa Villamor Air Base bilang babala na handa na silang lumaban at may puwersa na sila. At nang pumutok ang balita sa “air raid” na ito sa Villamor, isa-isa nang nagbabaliktaran ang mga PMA officer sa AFP at yung iba ay personal pang nagsulputan sa Camp Crame. 

Natapos ang buong magdamag sa pakiramdaman – papasok na ang ikaapat na araw na wala pa ring uwian, liguan, at palitan ng damit ang marami sa aming mga taga-media.

Marcos flees

Ang bandang dapithapon sa araw na ito ng Martes, ika-25 ng Pebrero, 1986 ang climax ng apat na araw na mapayapang rebulusyong pinaka-hihintay ng lahat -- ang pag-alis ng pamilyang Marcos sa Malacañang – subalit bago ito naganap ay nagkaroon pa ng mga dramang sadyang ginawa ng bawat kampo bago maisakatuparan ang inaasahan na nilang mangyayari, simula sa pagsikat pa lamang ng araw hanggang sa paglubog nito.

Madaling araw pa lamang ng Martes ay naka-buntot na ako sa mga grupo ng rebeldeng sundalo na patungo sa Quezon City para sa isang napakahalagang misyon – ang mapatigil ang isang naka-planong propaganda-broadcast ni Marcos sa natitira pang istasyon ng telebisyon na kontrolado niya- ang CH-9 na ang transmitter ay di kalayuan sa may Bohol Avenue, malapit sa Quezon Avenue.

Nang makarating sa malapit sa transmitter, pumuwesto ako sa lugar na malayo sa maaaring pag-enkwentrohan ng dalawang kampo, ngunit maaari namang maging parang nasa balcony ako sa isang sinehan kung sakali mang magkakaroon ng paglalaban. Batay kasi sa intel info – lalabas ulit sa TV ang pamilya Marcos para ipakita sa mga tao na siya pa rin ang pangulo ng bansa at “still in-control of the situation” – gamit ang broadcast facility sa naturang transmitter.

Nang mga oras ding iyon, abala naman ang kampo ng pamilya Aquino at mga rebeldeng sundalo sa pag-aayos sa Club Filipino sa Greenhills, na pagdarausan ng napipintong inauguration ni Tita Cory bilang bagong halal na pangulo ng Pilipinas batay sa napagkasunduan ng breakaway group nina Enrile at Ramos sa mga kaalyado ng pamilya Aquino.

Subalit sa umpisa pa lamang ng operasyon ng mga rebeldeng sundalo para makubkob ang transmitter ng CH-9 ay nabigo agad dahil sinalubong sila ng mga bala ng isang “loyalist” sharpshooter na nagtali ng kanyang sarili sa tuktok ng transmitter, dala ang isang Garand rifle at balang nakapaikot sa kanyang katawan. Mula sa mataas ngunit bentaheng lugar, pinadadaplisan nito sa ulo at katawan ang bawat rebeldeng sundalong nagtatangkang lumapit sa transmitter. Ramdam ng mga umatake ang pagiging asintado ng sundalo dahil puro padaplis ang tumatama sa kanila, na pakiramdam nila’y nagbibigay lang daw ng warning na ‘wag na silang pakialaman at ayaw din silang saktan.

Dahil dito ay naka-pag-broadcast na ang pamilya Marcos sa CH-9 ay ‘di pa rin makalapit man lang ang mga rebelde sa transmitter, kaya’t isang helicopter gunship ang niradyuhan nila na lumipad patungo sa lugar para rapiduhin na lang ang sharpshooter na bantay ng transmitter. Tadtad ng tama ng bala sa katawan ang sharpshooter na “loyalist” nang ibaba ang bangkay nito mula sa transmitter. Hindi mapigilan ng ilang rebeldeng sundalo ang humanga at sumaludo sa bangkay ng “loyalist” nang makaharap na nila ang labi nito.

Ilang saglit lang ay naputol na sa ere ang programa ng inauguration ni Marcos at biglang napalitan naman ng balita hinggil sa inauguration ni Tita Cory bilang ika-11 pangulo ng Republika ng Pilipinas. Ang panunumpa ni Tita Cory ay ginawa niya sa harapan ni Senior Associate Justice Claudio Teehankee sa gitna nang pagbubunyi ng mga tao na nasa Club Filipino at maging ng mga nanonood sa kanilang mga telebisyon. Dito ay agad na hinirang ni Pangulong Corazon C. Aquino si Enrile bilang kanyang defense secretary at si Ramos naman bilang kanyang AFP chief of staff.

Mula sa Quezon Avenue, naki-angkas ako sa isang grupo ng mga rebeldeng sundalo na tutulak patungong Malacañang dahil sa impormasyong naka-alis na raw sa palasyo ang buong pamilya Marcos at ililipad na ng mga Amerikano patungong Hawaii.

Umaapaw ang buong Mendiola sa dami ng mga taong kumakanta ng “Bayan Ko” na pawang gustong makapasok sa lugar na halos 20 mga taon ding naging off limits sa mga ordinaryong mamamayan. Halos inabot pa ng mahigit isang oras, simula nang makumpirmang wala na sa Palasyo ang buong pamilyang Marcos, bago tuluyang makapasok sa loob ng compound ng Malacañang ang alon ng mga taong nagbubunyi sa kanilang panalo sa 4 na araw na pakikipaglaban para mapatalsik ng tuluyang ang diktatoryang Marcos.

Patang-pata sa pagod at gutom marahil, habang papalabas ako ng Palasyo at sa aking paglalakad, isang foreign journalist na nagla-live report ang aking nadaanan at nakaringgan na ganito ang sinasabi: “We, the Americans, like to think we taught Filipinos democracy. Tonight, they are teaching the world.” – Rappler.com 

This was delivered at the Relevance of the 1986 EDSA People Power Today Forum, at the School of Economics Auditorium in UP Diliman on February 24, 2017.

It has been 31 years since our people took to the streets in peaceful revolt. I still remember those days. I was a shy and impressionable probinsiyana, and my time as a university student here at the School of Economics was of self-discovery and a growing awareness of the problems of our country. After all, one of UP's many strengths is the way it exposes you to the realities of the world, of the social and political issues that shape those realities. 
 
In those final years of the Marcos dictatorship, all was not well. Resistance against Martial Law was gaining momentum. The people had awakened to the wholesale plunder and human rights abuses of the Marcos family, and they were ready to fight back. I had gotten a hold of a white paper written by our professors on our country's economic troubles. It was a bold and fearless document, debunking the lies that the Marcoses had peddled on the state of our economy. 
 
You see, for a long time, Marcos maintained that the Philippine economy was in good shape. But the white paper showed us that this was far from the truth. Inflation had spiked to the double digits, and the prices of consumer goods were extremely high. Marcos borrowed huge sums domestically and overseas, but we found that the borrowings did not go to public infrastructure. Instead, the paper showed – factually and without doubt – that the funds were funneled away into the Marcoses' ambitions of wealth, state control, and total power.
 
As we know now, the assassination of Ninoy Aquino catalyzed the People Power Revolution. Enough was enough, the Filipino people said. For 3 days in February 1986, thousands of ordinary citizens peacefully marched to EDSA despite the risks: military tanks stood at attention and soldiers held their ready rifles, but they could not stop us. We wanted a government that would take care of the people, not destroy it. We wanted our freedoms restored under a democracy that was rightly ours. We wanted change, and we rose together to make that change possible.

Never forget
 
Exactly 31 years since we got our freedom back, our fragile democracy has yet to get to its feet. We see the reemergence of Marcos heirs who today still try to convince our young that the sins of the past do not matter. They seek to revise our history using money stolen from the millions of tax payers wallets. From your parents' savings meant for you. 

 
Filipinos are too quick to forget, too easy to forgive – how else can a former dictator, whose reign was defined by grave abuses, be given a hero's burial? How else to explain their family's stubborn grip on power? How else to make sense of the desire to be ruled by another iron hand? Is it really much better to be ruled by a tyrant only because the Filipinos lack discipline? How easily we have forgotten the scores of lives lost because of the abuse of a dictator in the not so distant past.

Some leaders would like us to forget the atrocities of Martial Law. Some leaders are too happy to glorify the dictatorship of Marcos, to revise the history so that he is remembered a hero, and not the thief and murdered that he was. Some leaders want to raise the fist of authoritarianism, to sow fear and discord among ourselves, to divide us with lies, violence, and bloodshed. It has begun.

The brave senator
 
In a surprise move, a warrant of arrest was issued against Senator Leila de Lima on Thursday, even after agreement has already been made for her to surrender herslf to the police on Friday morning. Was she to be taken under cover of darkness and to what end the rush, we do not know.
 
The brave Senator who dared begin a probe into the President’s drug war prepared herself and said she will continue to fight.
 
So on Friday, the nation woke up to a worrying scene; a senator and a staunch critic of the president was escorted into police custody. The message was loud and clear: anyone who dares speak dissent is not safe.

Our history as a nation is marred by instances where government officials use the processes of criminal justice to cow, silence, eliminate critics.

We cannot and we must not stand by and let this happen again. We must make sure that our government institutions remain uncorrupted and independent of each other, particularly when it comes to checks and balances in pursuit of accountability.

We believe that those who are accused of any crime must have their day in court, and have the right to a fair and unbiased trial. We exhort the people to follow and scrutinize this case religiously; fight for the right to speak dissent, which is the foundation of our strength as a free and democratic nation.

Change begins with us
 
We hear the grumbling of some Filipinos. Democracy has failed because it hasn’t solved poverty. Is that really true? Or is it us who have failed democracy? Perhaps it is time for us to look at what we have contributed to democracy instead of the other way around. Perhaps it is us who need to remember the lives lost and the sacrifices made so that our society today will be free and enjoy the liberties we take for granted. 

{source} <div class="blob-full">
<blockquote>
<h4>
The real success of EDSA was that it proved the power of the people: that when our citizens come together in courage and in hope, we can be the change that we aspire for our country.
<h4>
</blockquote>
</div>{/source}

The strength of democracy, at its core, is the ability of each one of us to be part of nation-building. Do we keep our faith in our individual goodness, or should we opt to follow larger-than-life, self-proclaimed saviors, who promise to remove our suffering in 6 months?

No, we don't need false prophets of change who claim that they are the people's last hope. The change that we so desire begins with us – in the way we live our lives, in the way we protect the rights and liberties that EDSA restored, in the way we continue the unfinished work of the revolution.

Is it time to junk the 1987 Constitution and replace our system of government? We can’t and we must not. EDSA was exactly what we needed. Not just because its impact rang far beyond our shores. Not only because it conquered a greedy and brutal dictator. The real success of EDSA was that it proved the power of the people: that when our citizens come together in courage and in hope, we can be the change that we aspire for our country.

Therein lies the problem. After we reclaimed our democracy in 1986, our contributions ended. We started looking for saviors to save us again. We forgot that the Constitution and our democracy’s real foot soldiers are the people themselves. 
 
For us who are now in positions of leadership – whether as representatives of the Filipino youth, as politicians, or movers in civil society – the challenge of our time is to counter the cynicism that has marked public discourse. These days, what is dominant is the rhetoric of fear and doom. The public is made to believe that the Philippines is in complete dysfunction, and that only the most bloody measures can cure our country of its ills. We are made to believe that those who protest and oppose are traitors to the nation and its people. 

Reject the lies
 
As we celebrate the anniversary of the EDSA Revolution, we are called upon to reject these lies. Not all is lost in the Philippines. The People Power Revolution asks us to remember that there is cause for hope. I myself have seen these reasons – every day – in the work that I do. I see reason for hope in the men and women who continue to fight for justice and equality in this country. I see that reason for hope in the faces of even the poorest Filipinos, whose dreams for a better life persist despite the odds. 

{source} <div class="blob-full">
<blockquote>
<h4>

Mr President, we call you to task. In behalf of the Filipino people, whose daily struggles are escalating, we ask you to focus on the war that really matters: the war on poverty. Our people are hungry, jobless and poor.
<h4>
</blockquote>
</div>{/source}

Our country cannot afford to be derailed by political noise. While we bicker and fight, 95 children die of hunger every day. Our people need jobs to feed their family with nutritious food. Our farmers and fisherfolk need help in protecting their source of livelihood. More than 5 million families lack decent dwellings and are living in danger zones or deplorable conditions. Our business sector deserves a level playing field and lower costs and higher efficiency in doing business. Poverty is the real problem, but we are distracted by political agenda and division.

Mr President, we call you to task. In behalf of the Filipino people, whose daily struggles are escalating, we ask you to focus on the war that really matters: the war on poverty. Our people are hungry, jobless and poor.

Please use your leadership to point the nation towards respect for rule of law, instead of disregard for it; to uphold the basic human rights enshrined in the institution, instead of encouraging its abuse. Be the leader you promised to be, and stop the lies that are distorting the truth in our society today. 
 
And to you each of you, the Filipino people, we all must defy these brazen incursions on our rights. We have fought so hard and so long for our freedoms. We have come so far since our country's darkest days. 
 
Never forget that liberty rightfully belongs to our nation and its people. Never forget that together, we can make a stand for every Filipino who suffers injustice, for those who have been betrayed and neglected, and for those who continue to aspire for progress in our country. Never forget. Thank you very much, at mabuhay ang ating demokrasya! – Rappler.com

More than 3 decades have passed since EDSA 1. But have we Filipinos truly imbibed the democratic ideals and norms that EDSA 1 restored?

If you ask the current government, we’ve learned our lessons so well that it’s now “time to move on.” For this year’s EDSA anniversary, Presidential Spokesman Ernesto Abella said that, “The emphasis has shifted. It is no longer a celebration of the past… We can’t get stuck to the past.”

But advocates of civil liberties and human rights will tell you otherwise. Last November Chair Chito Gascon of the Commission on Human Rights said that President Rodrigo Duterte’s drug war is the “biggest challenge to democracy” since the Marcos regime. “Not since the Martial Law period are we observing real threats to the established rules of our democratic system.”

This year’s EDSA 1 anniversary is as good a time as any to revisit the state of Philippine democracy. We use data to show that despite Filipinos’ satisfaction with democracy, it is now under threat from the increasing disregard of civil liberties and human rights.

Filipinos still like democracy

Over the years, Filipinos have shown a strong and consistent preference for more rather than less democracy.

Data from the Social Weather Stations show that, as of September 2016, 86% of Filipino adults were satisfied with the way democracy works in our country. This is an all-time high as far as the data is concerned (see Figure 1).

At the same time, 62% of adults said that “democracy is always preferable” to authoritarianism, while 19% said that “under some circumstances, an authoritarian government can be preferable to a democratic one”. As seen in the graph, the former’s lead over the latter has been consistently large (blue vs. red trends).

But what exactly is 'democracy'?

However, the very notion of “democracy” is quite difficult to define. So it’s hard to say what exactly Filipinos are “satisfied” with based on the surveys.

At present there are numerous attempts to pin down the concept of democracy using numbers. The idea is that, by doing so, we can objectively compare – however imperfectly – the level of democracy across different places and also trace how it changes over time.

Today some scholars use “thin” and “thick” measures of democracy. “Thin” measures equate democracy with basic criteria, such as the conduct of free and fair elections.

“Thick” measures, on the other hand, encompass other important pillars of democracy. These include a well-functioning government, a “culture of democracy” that shuns passivity and apathy, and – most importantly – the protection of civil liberties and human rights.

The last item is particularly important. Majority rule alone does not make for a democracy. Instead, democracy requires basic guarantees on civil liberties and human rights, including the protection of minorities. Without these prerequisites, a democracy is no democracy at all.

One of the more prominent thick measures of democracy out there is the Democracy Index produced annually by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). Started in 2006, the Democracy Index looks at the state of democracy in 165 states and territories using 60 indicators that fall under 5 main categories. Each country’s “democracy score” is then used to classify it into 4 types of regimes: “full democracy”, “flawed democracy”, “hybrid democracy”, and “authoritarian regime”.

The Democracy Index 2016 shows that only 5% of the world’s population live in “full democracies”, while 49% live in “flawed democracies”. Around 33% of people live in “authoritarian regimes”, while the rest live in “hybrid regimes”.

Most strikingly, on a scale of 0 to 10, the global democracy score fell from 5.55 in 2015 to 5.52 in 2016. This is because 72 countries saw a decline in their democracy scores over that period.

Also, for the first time, the United States was demoted from being a “full democracy” to a “flawed democracy”. This result made headlines worldwide, but the EIU was careful to note that this was not due to the election of President Donald Trump. Instead, it was due to Americans’ increasing distrust in their government.

PH democracy is increasing, but civil liberties are down

Based on latest Democracy Index, the Philippines’ ranking improved by 4 notches from 2015 to 2016. Indeed, our democracy score has been continuously increasing since 2011 (Figure 2).

But remember that this democracy score is the aggregation of our scores on all other dimensions of democracy. While our scores on the electoral process and political participation increased from 2015, for the first time our score on civil liberties dropped in 2016. From a constant level of 9.12 since 2006, our civil liberties score dropped to 8.24 last year.

Needless to say, this 10% drop in our civil liberties score might be traced to the President’s aggressive war on drugs which, as of January 2017, has resulted in 7,080 deaths borne by either legitimate police operations or so-called extrajudicial killings.

Indeed, the President’s drug war has received a lot of flak – domestically and internationally – because of its blatant disregard for basic human rights. Colombia’s former president has recently warned that force won’t work to fight drugs, and that “the war on drugs is essentially a war on people.”

Despite this advice – and the deeply embarrassing murder of a Korean businessman by police officers – the AFP is now awaiting the President’s go signal to formalize the creation of a battalion-sized task force to help fight the war on drugs.

Without strong and reliable checks, the resumption of the drug war with even more state-sanctioned force could spell disaster as far as our civil liberties and democratic way of life are concerned.

Conclusion: Our democracy is fragile

Perhaps it’s best to remember EDSA 1 not as one great wholesale victory for democracy, but rather as a testament to the fragile nature of democracy.

For instance, immediately after EDSA 1, the number of human rights violations and enforced disappearances did not automatically subside given the immense political upheaval that it brought. Also, EDSA 1 alone did not bring down inequality and poverty significantly. Without a more inclusive economy, it will be hard to promote political participation moving forward.

Today, the tenacity of Philippine democracy is being tested anew, what with new threats to our individual and civil liberties coming from the government, foreign powers, or even social networks. Senator Leila de Lima’s hurried arrest is one of most recent manifestations of this.

Rather than “move on” from the lessons of EDSA 1, we ought to remember that the struggle for democracy is really an ongoing project for the new generations, rather than one that our parents and grandparents finished 31 years back.

If we remain complacent, we risk bringing back a farcical, nightmarish, and Marcosian version of democracy that no Filipino today deserves to relive. – Rappler.com

The author is a PhD student and teaching fellow at the UP School of Economics. His views do not necessarily reflect the views of his affiliations. Thanks to Kevin Mandrilla for helpful comments and suggestions.