MANILA, Philippines – Historian Leloy Claudio and sociologist Jayeel Cornelio confront deeply ingrained perceptions that Islam as a religion is inherently violent.

Are religions instruments of war or peace? Is Islam to blame for radicalism among Muslims? What is fundamentalism? – Rappler.com

MORE ON 'BASAGAN NG TRIP'

On using the term 'Filipino'
Is human rights relevant to Filipinos?
Whom to trust – journalists or social media stars?
What liberalism, LP, and yellow really mean

July 31 was the feast day of Saint Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus. In celebration, I remembered the Jesuits of Xavier University-Ateneo de Cagayan (XU), those who helped build our city of Cagayan de Oro and especially those who formed me in my earliest and younger years and enlisted me in the one true Standard.

Most of them are buried in the Jesuit Memorial Park in Manresa, Cagayan de Oro, but a few were lay down in tombs in the Jesuit cemetery in Sacred Heart Novitiate in Novaliches. One of them is in the Cebu Jesuit cemetery and a few left the society at some point. I make it a point once in a while to visit both the Manresa and Novaliches seminaries because, for some reason, I am filled with consolation and hope when I commune with the Jesuits of my past.

For the early years, I have to start with Fr Theodore Daigler, grade school headmaster for all the 7 years I was in elementary school. With a stern face, a loud voice, a posture every boy and man would want to aspire for, Fr Daigler was to generations of us in XU the second father. He scolded us frequently yes, but he loved us as if we were his children.

He called me by name Antonio when I first met him in 1965, when he was in his mid 60s, and continued to do so in the 1990s whenever I bumped into him in the Ateneo de Manila when he was already in his 90s (he died at 98 years old) teaching the appreciation of art until the Lord invited him to heaven. 

I thought then that Fr Daigler, who was a close friend of my maternal grandfather (a mason and a Protestant) during the war when they both evacuated in Zamboanga del Norte, the man of grand entrances (his annual plays in Xavier were majestic), always with his immaculate white soutane and upright posture, would live forever. I thought we would forever see him walking the Loyola campus sanctifying our campus with his presence. 

When I visit his tomb in Novaliches, I never fail to thank Fr Daigler for my first confession, my first communion, my first spelling bee and religion contest medals, my first experience of classical music, and my first theater appearance as fiddler in Jack and the Beanstalk. I thank him always for introducing me first to the two standards, warning to avoid Satan’s and to embrace The Lord’s.

Fr Tony Cuna also called me Antonio but always appended "demonyo" to that, saying we tocayos knew each other and should stick with each other. He came in and out of Cagayan de Oro and eventually settled there and was never transferred again. I knew Pads (others call him Derps but that's more of a Tagalog/Manila word) as our glee club conductor in grade school and high school, where I was happily accepted first as a Tiple and then as a First Tenor.

My being an Antonio must have had something to do with that as to this day I cannot carry a tune. Or maybe, he and Tita Mely Malferari, who was one of his pianists (the other was the late Lino Abrio; Tita Mely and Lino could play anything you asked them to), were impressed when I sang Pilate's Dream from Jesus Christ Superstar with passion during my high school glee club audition. 

Later, Fr Cuna became my religion teacher in senior year high school where one day he taught all of us the full meaning of the Eucharist by explaining to us in real time, while celebrating mass, every part and implement, and of course how the host and the wine were made and what it meant to receive the body and blood of Christ. After that lesson in the chapel of XU's Loyola House, I had always desired to go to Mass daily. It is a desire that has never left me.

For generations of Cagayan de Oro youth of course, Fr Cuna would be remembered for BIL and BTL (Days with the Lord) retreats and for being the university guidance counselor. He would be remembered for his Christmas Eve masses in the old wooden gym of XU where as a young philosophy teacher in the 1980s, Pads and I became close again. I would visit him regularly in his office for conversations and ask him to celebrate Mass with the student group Xristka I was moderating at that time. All the way to the end, Fr Cuna was on a mission, and there was no doubt which standard he was following.

In high school, there were several Jesuits who became influential in my life as well. In particular, Pepe Fuentes and Alex Benedicto, both deceased now (both also left the Society), inspired me to be engaged with the world, in the context particularly of Marcos’ Martial Law, to commit to change it for the better and to overcome my fears of becoming a man for others. They nurtured whatever leadership potential I had, which got unleashed in full only much later.

I also remember Fr Blitz Cavan, my first year high school moderator. He was so young and brimmed with confidence when he taught us. He died young and is apparently buried in Cebu. I must make a pilgrimage to his tomb one day.

I also knew Fr Agathonico Montero since I was a child because he was a friend of my parents. But I will always be grateful to him for hiring me for my first job as a philosophy teacher in XU. Fr Montero and our philosophy chair Amy Chaves, gave me a load of 21 units – 7 classes in total, making me teach subjects as diverse as Logic, Philosophy of Man, Ethics, Existentialism, Marxism, and Philosophy of Religion. Whenever I am in the Manresa cemetery, I go to Fr Montero’s grave and blame him for my addiction to teaching. Nothing beats the joy of teaching philosophy when you are young, poor, and full of passion and hope.

During my teaching years in Cagayan de Oro, I became close to former Jesuit provincial, the late Fr Rene A. Ocampo who was doing his PhD there at that time. Even now, especially now with the state of the country once again being challenging, recalling the weekly dinner and conversation with Fr Rene still yields wise advice for me as I struggle to discern where the Standard of Christ directs us in this time of crisis for our country.

Also during my teaching years in Cagayan de Oro, I became good friends with Fr Bob Suchan who was our librarian in Ateneo de Manila. After years of being the czar of Rizal Library, he struggled to reinvent himself as a theology teacher; it was edifying to witness that. Fr Bob also gave me access to the books he gathered in the US for Mindanao libraries. I bought philosophy books, including original texts, by the kilo from him and up to now, majority of my philosophy books are from Fr Suchan.

On a less personal note, just days after the Ignatian holiday, I also recognized the Jesuits who built Cagayan de Oro into what it is now. 

Someone once said that there are 3 bosses in Cagayan de Oro – the mayor (usually an alumnus of XU), the bishop (the first one, William Hayes, was a Jesuit; the current one, Bishop Ledesma, is again a Jesuit), and the XU President (the current one is Fr Bobby Yap, who will object to and find this characterization strange). But true or not, Cagayan de Oro would not be what it is today without the many Jesuits of Xavier University who have served our city. 

Fr William Masterson was notorious for buying the Loyola/Katipunan Avenue property of Ateneo de Manila. It is said that his fellow Jesuits thought he was crazy and exiled the good father to Cagayan de Oro. There he started the XU College of Agriculture which has become a giant of a school. He also promptly bought another "white elephant" property, hundreds of hectares in what he called Manresa (honoring Saint Ignatius). That property now hosts thriving communities of Cagayan de Oro and has enabled the university to traverse serious financial situations. 

Fr Masterson also mentored dozens of young Cagayanos to positions of intellectual and political influence, including Senator Nene Pimentel.

The standard of Christ calls people to use wealth and power wisely.

On the social science side, Cagayan de Oro owes Fr Francis Madigan and Fr Francisco Demetriu a lot for the work they did to help the city and the region – of which we are part – understand the past and the present. Fr Miguel Bernad, whose footprint is national, also contributed to that self-understanding through his writings.

On the natural science side, the quiet contribution of Fr Jim Mckeough stands out. He built the marine science department of XU to be one of the best in the country. Personally, I knew Fr Jim also as a good confessor and spiritual adviser. I turned to him also for the spiritual needs of Xristka members.

Those who studied in XU in the 1960s and 1970s would not forget Fr William Nicholson and his motor bike. He introduced the discipline of economics to the city and at some point in the 1960s headed its planning board. 

Believe it or not, Cagayan de Oro was originally well planned as Mayor JR Borja, its third city mayor, was a visionary. He had enlisted, among others, Fr Nicholson and my late father Gabriel La Viña Jr, to that effort to plan the city well. Alas, Mayor Borja died too young and those plans were not fully realized. 

Science, literature, all knowledge, and rational planning are gifts that can be of service to those who follow the standard of Christ. 

Finally, how can I not mention Fr John Gordon, long time treasurer of Xavier University? We do not remember him for that finance work but for his commitment and love for the street children of Cagayan de Oro. Like Christ, he fed their bodies and souls, and gave them and their families hope.

There are many more Cagayan de Oro Jesuits I should recognize and tell more stories about. There are also those who are still living and of course the Jesuits I have worked for, and with, in other places – mentors, classmates and peers, students, younger ones. There are my spiritual advisers, both living and in heaven.

There are so many stories to tell about the Society of Jesus, of the members of this least society. This includes the more recent story of Brother Ritchie Fernando, who died so his Cambodian students would live. Fr Tony Moreno, outgoing Jesuit Provincial, announced last Sunday that the work for Brother Ritchie's beatification will now begin.

Today’s times call for saints like this young Jesuit, when we are all called to defend the least of our brothers such as the Lumad and poor young men in the slums threatened with bombs and bullets.   Whether he becomes a saint or not, definitely this young Filipino, like his Cagayan de Oro brothers, was fully and unconditionally faithful to the standard of Christ. – Rappler.com

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

Three months before the barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) elections scheduled for October, Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez recently rekindled the talks on the postponement of the nationwide exercise. 

It must be recalled that on March 28, 2016, Surigao del Norte Representative Robert Ace Barbers filed House Bill 5359, which seeks to postpone the October 23, 2017, village and youth council elections to the 4th Monday of May 2020.

On May 23, 2017, or two months after, Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III filed Senate Bill 1469, also seeking to postpone the elections, this time to the 4th Monday of October 2018.

Both versions, however, agree that vacancies will be filled in by appointment, and not by holdover as in the previous cases of postponement.

Since the passage of these two bills, we heard nothing from them. In fact, CIBAC Representative Sherwin Tugna, the chairman of the House committee on suffrage and electoral reform, had expressed pessimism on the passage of the bill, citing lack of time on the part of Congress.

But last July 18, or barely 3 months before the scheduled elections – right when everyone thought that the issue of its postponement is dead – Speaker Alvarez rekindled the talks on postponement. In his press statement, he did not only confirm the support of the House of Representatives to the move, but gave an assurance that Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III shares his view as regards the “necessity” of the postponement. 

Alvarez said the postponement of the elections and the appointment of officers-in-charge through the Department of the Interior and Local Government are intended to get rid of those barangay officials who are involved in the illegal drugs trade. He said this was a necessary step for the President’s war on drugs to succeed. Congress will lobby with President Rodrigo Duterte to certify the measure as urgent to ensure its swift passage, the Speaker said.

As in previous years, news of postponement put the Commission on Elections in a dilemma: should it slow down in its preparation, anticipating the cancelation, or go full blast despite the lack of assurances the exercise will push through? Usually, the Comelec would halt certain operations and slow down the rest of its preparations to avoid unnecessary expenditures should the proposed postponement materialize. It runs, however, the big risk that if the election pushes through, it will not have enough time to prepare.

How much Comelec is spending

While there are still 3 months to go, people need to appreciate that elections are not prepared overnight. An automated election, for example, takes 3 years of preparatory work, starting as soon as the last one ends. Manual elections, like the upcoming barangay and SK elections, ideally require one year of preparation. When push comes to shove, it can be reduced to a minimum of 4 months for the bidding of the election materials, their delivery, printing of ballots, ballot verification, packing, ballot deployment, and training of election workers.

Given the news of poll postponement, the Comelec decided to push through with the bidding, but withheld the issuance of the notices of award to winning suppliers of items which cannot be used in future elections. It also precariously delayed the printing of the ballots to August 15, 2017, to wait for Congress to decide and pass the postponement bill. 

This phase is critical as once the ballots have been printed and the election is eventually cancelled, these ballots will be rendered unusable in future elections since the Omnibus Election Code strictly requires them to be location- and date-specific. Delaying it further, however, could be disastrous if eventually the elections is not postponed as there will be not enough time to print the ballots, check them one by one for printing errors, pack them per precinct, and deliver them to all corners of the country in time for the October 23, 2017, polls.

For everyone to understand the magnitude of the implication of a belated postponement, we need to go through the numbers. As of June 20, 2017, Comelec reported that there are 56,737,237 voters for the barangay elections, and 20,920,968 voters for the SK elections. These figures are significantly higher compared to the last automated elections since the recent amendment of the SK law expanded its coverage to individuals aged between 15 and 30 years old. In effect, those registered voters between 18 to 30 years of age would get two ballots on election day, one for SK and one for the barangay elections.

This means that the Comelec needs to print 77,658,205 million ballots, excluding the contingency ballots required by law. The National Printing Office (NPO) reportedly charges P3 per ballot for printing, or a total of P233 million for the 77.7 million ballots.

As for the ballot paper, Comelec intends to use the excess ballot paper from 2016 automated elections and even from the prior years. While this does not present any cost on paper, nonetheless they have a monetary value that could conservatively be estimated at P200 million.

The carbonless paper that will be used for election returns, meanwhile, is estimated to cost around P55 million. The NPO’s printing rate is at P25 per election return, or a total of P4.25 million for the 170,000 election returns. The printed ballots and election returns alone would already conservatively cost around P492 million – almost half a billion of the taxpayer’s money.

Since the Comelec has started its preparations, there have been other unaccounted administrative and operational costs – for example, hiring of additional manpower, overtime expenses, preparatory trainings, and interagency coordination. 

Challenge at the Supreme Court

Even if Congress passes the postponement law, the latter will face a serious challenge before the Supreme Court. While postponing barangay elections is certainly not new, the proposal of Congressman Barbers and Senator Sotto to fill in vacancies by appointment is something that has never been done before. As discussed in my earlier explainer, the proposed appointment scheme raises serious constitutional issues which makes the fate of the postponement law also uncertain.

In the end, my point is simple: whether the postponement law will be passed and sustained by the Supreme Court or not, there will be dire consequences. If the postponement law comes too late, we stand to recklessly throw more than P500 million of the people’s money down the drain. And if the government loses its case and the Comelec is forced to conduct the elections as scheduled, this would mean taking risks in the rushed preparations, like making short cuts that leave the process open to mistakes.

All of these could have been prevented had Congress packed even a tiny dash of foresight and a drop of decisiveness. Elections are foreseeable. There is absolutely no excuse for this as we all know that barangay elections regularly take place every 3 years, and 3 years is a very long time for the members of Congress to decide on its cancellation.

Yet year in and year out, it is becoming a congressional habit to whimsically cancel the polls at the last few ticking minutes. Even if we momentarily forget how postponements of elections assault democracy and our collective right to regular and periodic elections, I cannot help but ask: why cancel it this late? Why not cancel it one year before to save time and money and also to give the Supreme Court sufficient time to resolve all attendant issues without being time-pressured?Hopefully this serves as another lesson to our legislators, but for the meantime we have to suffer the consequences. – Rappler.com 

Emil Marañon III is an election lawyer who served as chief of staff of former Comelec Chairman Sixto Brillantes Jr. He completed his LLM in Human Rights, Conflict and Justice at SOAS, University of London, as a Chevening scholar.

In the span of just a few weeks, several women have been raped and slain by Filipino men. In one San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan case, 5 members of the family were killed along with the two adult women who were raped and slain by male neighbors.

Days later, a 19-year-old adolescent from Samal Island, Davao, was raped and killed by a male neighbor. In another San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan case, a 13-year-old male neighbor raped a 5-year-old girl, tied her neck with a wire to kill her, slid her in a sack and threw her lifeless body.

In another incident in Nueva Ecija, an 8-year-old girl was raped and killed by a carpenter living with the family who was just recently out on parole for qualified theft. 

There are many other rapes and attempted rapes that happen in the Philippines. These rapes and rape-slays must stop.

There is something very wrong in how the Philippines is raising its men, women, boys, and girls where these hapless women victims fall prey to rapists and killers. It is a society, a culture, an educational and justice system that raises rapists and killers. We have failed as a society to make women and young girls free from such violent acts.

Where is the outrage? These women and girls cannot just be part of statistics.

A society that is patriarchal, full of machismo, and utterly lacking in respect for women will fodder these violent acts. It is disgusting and offensive how some would think that rape is a joke and find it even funny and laugh. This too must stop.

The entire country has fallen short of addressing the issue of rape. Based on 2015 PNP statistics, at least one Filipino woman was raped every 58 minutes. One in 3 adult deaf women are victims of rape. Although rape and rape-slays in our country are persistently reported, many cases filed by rape victims are still dismissed by prosecutors and judges, denying justice to the women and girls.

We need to join hands to actively prevent, efficiently investigate, and effectively prosecute these rapes and rape-slays. Part of prevention is going back to the basics and teaching in schools and communities respect for women, upholding the human rights of women, informing women and girls about schemes used by rapists, and impressing upon the community the importance of accountability and laws penalizing offenders.

Intensified prevention efforts must be done in schools and communities to conduct human rights-based modules on sexuality education and gender-based violence, otherwise, we will be looking at heightened numbers of violations of women’s rights. Community patrols, lighted pathways, and CCTVs can help as well.

As to investigation, we need the likes of PSupt Jaime Rodrigo Leal, the Chief of the Baguio Crime Lab, who has been collaborating with SOCO in rapes and rape-slay investigations to gather evidence at the crime scene, from clothing and bodies of the victims and perpetrators, and even from the maggots of decaying bodies, and who actively have the DNA samples analyzed by the Crame DNA Laboratory. We need the police to gather crucial evidence such as tape receipts that lead to CCTV footages of stores where rapists are seen purchasing items.

We need prosecutors, judges, and justices to step up in effectively prosecuting and holding the perpetrators accountable. We need the lawyers of the Office of the Solicitor General to file the necessary appeal to the Supreme Court once a rape perpetrator is acquitted. Every acquittal of a rapist will place young girls and women at risk as perpetrators become emboldened to commit further rapes with impunity. Statistics to compare the complaints filed before the prosecutor, dismissed by the prosecutors and courts, and those appealed to the justice department and to the Supreme Court on certiorari are not easily accessible.

We need medical providers to provide information and access to emergency contraceptives to prevent pregnancy resulting from rape. There are no statistics available on the number of women who have become pregnant as a result of rape, however, we have data showing that one in every 9 women who induce abortion are rape victims clearly showing the pervasiveness of the problem.

We still do not have a national anti-stalking law. Our current anti-sexual harassment law does not cover street sexual harassment when the offender and victim are not co-workers, employers, co-students, and teachers. Although other crimes may be filed for such offensive acts, the penalties and prescriptive periods are low placing women and girls at risk as many sexual assaults start from stalking and sexual harassment.

Over 130 countries have registered emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) that prevent pregnancy resulting from rape, yet the Philippines has no registered dedicated ECPs. Many are not aware that different methods of emergency contraception such as the Yuzpe method using combined oral contraceptives within 5 days can prevent pregnancy resulting from rape. There is even a need to revise the RH Law as it currently restricts access of rape victims to ECPs by disallowing national government hospitals from purchasing ECPs, allowing only the local government hospitals to purchase and dispense ECPs.

Many HIV testing and counseling centers are not aware that rape victims can prevent HIV transmission by availing of post-exposure prophylaxis within 3 days from the rape with the 28-day regimen of anti-retrovirals. 

The government needs to increase its number of DNA laboratories as there is only one PNP DNA laboratory and one NBI DNA laboratory for the whole country. We need more medico-legal officers and more psychiatrists and psychologists who offer psychiatric/psychological counseling for rape victims.

It is even very common for girl rape victims to wait 3 months before they receive any form of psycho-social counseling. Many provinces and cities have not established their rape crisis centers despite the requirement of Republic Act 8505 that rape crisis centers be set up in every province and city.

Until now, the government has not paid compensation for Karen Vertido, a rape victim-survivor, despite the recommendation by the CEDAW Committee in 2010. 

Rape victim-survivors must be given credence for effective prosecution of cases. Providing training for the pillars of the criminal justice system is important. All these efforts need the necessary funding support to end this culture of machismo and impunity of rapists to make our country safe for Filipino women and girls.

Rapists belong in jail, not in our streets. – Rappler.com

Clara Rita Padilla is the founder and executive director of EnGendeRights. She has proposed language for draft bills and ordinances that have been passed into law, including the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act, the RH Law, and the Expanded Anti-Trafficking Law. She holds a Juris Doctor degree from the Ateneo de Manila University and has been practicing law for over 23 years.  

Mayor Reynaldo Parojinog is dead. He was killed, together with his wife and 13 others, in an early morning raid conducted by the police. His bodyguards allegedly fired a volley of bullets, prompting the law enforcers to lob a grenade and shoot them in their heads.

He was previously tagged by the President as a narco-politician and the biggest drug dealer in Northern Mindanao. He was also alleged to have links with the notorious Kuratong Baleleng gang which was known for bank robberies and kidnap-for-ransom activities.

Majority of the Filipino people are lauding this latest display of brutal force. They congratulate the police for destroying a political clan which, for decades, had ruthlessly ruled the bustling city of Ozamiz and its nearby environs. They cheer President Duterte for truly embarking on an unrelenting, unremitting violent war on drugs. They pat themselves on their backs for being a part of this national crusade. They jeer the critics, the dilawans: now here is the big fish you are asking for! And they clamor for more. They want more blood. They are eagerly expecting and waiting for the next one to fall – all you narco-politicians beware; dilawans shut up.

The Filipino people are truly fed up and angry. They are angry at drug dealers and addicts. They are angry at criminals. They are angry at the corrupt. They are angry at terrorists. They are angry at every evil that afflicts Philippine society.

And rightfully so.

For a long time, illegal drugs ran unabated. Drug addicts roamed the streets. Families were destroyed. Children and the powerless were victimized. Narco-politicians flourished and gained power. The traditional political elites ruled their local fiefdoms with impunity. Terrorists sowed fear in the countryside. The criminal justice system was fractured, iniquitous, and too slow to respond to crime.

Prisons were ruled by convicts and drug dealers lived a convenient life. And the political establishment, after the lofty promises of the Edsa Revolution, continually failed them. They are sick and tired of the empty promises of politicians, who, despite the economic growth, failed to provide them safety and security. They are indignant about the pretensions and civilities of liberalist politicians who preached reforms but robbed the people blind. They are powerless and ashamed. They are frustrated by the very essence of being a Filipino.

And so, they expected change. And they wanted an abrupt dramatic renewal. They wanted someone who could release them from the bondage of corruption, from the clutches of drugs and crime. They found a savior in President Rodrigo R. Duterte, a paternalistic, compassionate, and fierce leader.

President Duterte promised and he delivered. He touched a nerve in the Filipino, the angry and frustrated reservoir waiting to explode. He stroked these raw emotions masterfully. Together with a minion of die-hard legitimate supporters, he controlled the national narrative – either you are with me, or you are against me. He is not a legal dictator, but a moral dictator – he intimidates everyone, any established institution, who questions his moral crusade.

He galvanized and fixated in the Filipino the dream of a peaceful and prosperous country. He gave them hope and national dignity. He made the Filipino look up to the world with honor and pride. Overseas Filipino Workers found a champion who redefined their wretched situations. He gave them power – the power to articulate their hate against the pretensions of civility; the power to question the tenets of human rights and due process which, they argued, were coopted by the rich and the powerful to shield them from their shenanigans. As such, any form of criticisms levelled against Tatay Digong is considered a personal affront against their ideals of a better Filipino society.

He entranced the Filipino people – goading them to kill, to physically eliminate those who oppose their visions. He justified deaths in the name of protecting the country. He rationalized killings as a raw message to the addict, the criminal, the corrupt and the terrorist – don’t touch my children; not in my time, not in my watch. He promised to destroy and kill, in the hope of building a new society. And he agitated against those who could not see the righteousness of his cause, those who chastise this crass and unpretentious ways, those who criticize his swift delivery of justice.

And so, Filipinos cheer. They celebrate death. For them, the deaths of the Parojinogs is a great moral victory. And the more dead bodies pile up, the more popular Tatay Digong becomes. The more carnage displayed in the public view, the more he captures their hearts. The blood lust will continue, with no end in sight.

There is a crime wave that penetrated every nook and corner of the country – a wave that unleashes the penchant for violence in the Filipinos; a wave that approves the use of brute force; a wave which knows no moral qualms. 

Surreally, Filipinos hate crime. But in their hearts dwells crime. – Rappler.com

May caption dapat 'to 

    kaso

       pagod na

                   ako...

#FridayFeels is a cartoon series by the Rappler Creatives Team. Cathartic, light, but relevant, it's a welcome break from your heavy news feed! You can pitch illustration ideas by sending a message to the Rappler Facebook page. 

The topic “religion and the secular state” was what scholars talked about at a forum on Thursday, August 3, that starred, so reports say, several of the lights that shine brightly in the legal firmament. 

I had received an invitation to participate, but I was unable to confirm. I still would like to say my piece though.

First, about “secular state” – I assume the posture of a logical positivist. I want to know exactly what its advocates mean by that term. If by it they mean a State that adopts the ideology, the weltanschauung of “secularism”, then at least we would know what they mean. Is it a “description” of what the contemporary state is? And if it is, is it not rather presumptuous to assume that states take on a singular complexion that enables one to characterize them, with confidence, either as “secular” or “non-secular”? Is it, rather, the expression of a desideratum: that the state should be secular?

My point is that States are, among the different human institutions, creatures of their histories, and either their romance or their bitter experience with religion etches itself deeply into the character of a nation. This is the reason for my hesitation about assuming that “secular state” has a definite referent. 

And even when the State’s constitution announces its neutrality in respect to religion, that will not stop the state from assimilating so much that is religious into its public life. Its constitutional neutrality in respect to religion notwithstanding, there will be public observances of religious feasts, references to religion even in official documents, the services of ministers of religion in different departments of national life, and religious rites at public events. And to see in all this invariably a threat to liberty, a derogation of democracy, is just foolish!

If I get the general drift of the argument of the prophets of the “secular state” correctly, it is not really “secularism” as such on which there is a premium but on the liberty, the freedom from coerced association (laicité) and basic human rights that are the real issue. 

With the proposition so indisputably at the heart of any democratic society that a person be free to believe what he chooses to believe and to pursue the dictate of his belief, no matter that these may be bizarre, as long as they transgress not the rights of others, I have no quarrel. But that, to me, does not translate to a “secular state”. 

In fact, when “secular state” becomes shorthand for “state that institutionalizes secularism”, it is then that liberty is threatened, for the State takes on an ideology that makes it hostile to any public displays of religion and that makes of any religious or theological argument repulsive.

But the first demand of rationality is never to reject, outrightly, any claim to truth because of its provenance, particularly when one discriminates on sectarian grounds. But when “secular state” becomes the reason that religion can no longer publicly manifest itself, when faith is expunged from public life for fear of offending those who do not believe, then the latter has been given the determining vote on the shaping of society. And that is not democratic. That is most assuredly a threat to liberty. 

Just as it took some time for philosophy to debunk the myth of the “objective”, perhaps we should get to work speeding up the obsolescence of “complete neutrality”.

When one forbids the display of religious symbols in public spaces or in government offices because these might offend those who choose not to believe, a freer society is not thereby brought about, but one rather that has allowed one persuasion to say what may go public and what may not. And that is most assuredly not fair. 

A freer society is one that is cognizant of the history of a nation – and our nation is one that has religion woven into the fabric of the national character. Such a position, whether in policy or in jurisprudence, would in fact be the Trojan horse of intolerance. Wanting to undo that which is a part of our national narrative is as unphilosophical as the denial of facticity!

A freer society keeps public spaces public – with room enough and room to spare for the expression of all faiths, creeds as well as aversion to creeds and faiths. It is nothing else than the fundamental moral precept of not shutting anyone out a priori from public discourse. But when “secular state” means that priests and rabbis, imams and shamans will no longer be heeded, then the result is most assuredly not a more democratic society, not a freer society but an extremely restrictive society – the polar opposite of inclusiveness and tolerance. 

“Secular state” cannot be the pretext for the nurturing of national intolerance for manifestations of religion. That would assume that religion is wrong and non-religion is right. So why should the icons and symbols, the tokens and rites of religion be hidden from public view, hymns muffled and chants subdued for fear of offending skeptics and atheists? Is it because tacitly we have assumed them to be right and all believers, misled? But that would be a very prejudicial, unpardonably undemocratic assumption.

I prefer “free state” to secular state – for that is to me the highest attribute of mind and intelligence: freedom. And while no believer who does not trivialize his faith will ever grant that others faiths or that unbelief has the same worth and value as his posture, the free mind is one that assures the openness of the agora – so that there is room enough for the proclamation of the victory of God as there will be for the death of God, without anyone being silenced or shoved by law and jurisprudence behind shut doors. 

If anything at all, we should be nurturing the national habit of tolerance and the virtue of accommodation – not so that all religions may become eclectic and syncretist, but in the sobering relation that others with differing, dissenting world-views are as convinced as I, and are as entitled to public manifestations and proclamations of their convictions. – Rappler.com

The author is Vice President for Administration and Finance of Cagayan State University and Dean of the Graduate School of Law, San Beda College.

The Duterte government was elected into office on the promise that “change is coming.” With one year already gone, has change come indeed? How can we tell?

To show signs of change, some government agencies have resorted to the use of statistics, figures, and graphs.

Graphs are particularly useful: our brains evolved to process visual information best, and graphs allow us to digest otherwise complex pieces of information.

But in this article, we show examples of graphs made by the Duterte government that tend to distort the truth, mislead the public, and report false progress.

As we go through these examples, we uncover the various ways by which graphs can be made to lie.

1) Distorted scales

On August 22, 2016, during the first Senate hearing on extrajudicial killings, then-senator Alan Peter Cayetano showed a line graph (Figure 1) that purports to show the declining number of murder and homicide cases reported since President Duterte assumed office.

At first glance, you might think that the murder and homicide cases have indeed tapered off in recent times. But the line graph dipped at the end mainly because the data for 2016 was split into two periods: January to June, and July 1 to August 3.

Connecting yearly and monthly data in a single line graph is a big no-no, the visual equivalent of comparing apples and oranges. (READ: FACT CHECK: Cayetano's line graph of murder, homicide) 

A graph by the Philippine News Agency, tagged under the #RealNumbersPH campaign, also committed the same mortal sin. 

Figure 2 below haphazardly combined data of various durations: the average number of drug cases filed from 2011 to 2014 (first bar); the annual data for 2015 to 2016 (second and third bars); and the data for January to April 2017 (fourth bar).

{source}

<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fpnagovph%2Fposts%2F1324492630966507%3A0&width=500" width="500" height="665" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>

{/source}

No doubt both graphs aimed to show progress in the President’s war on drugs: fewer murder and homicide cases reported, and more drug cases filed.

But “time series” graphs like these work best when successive data points are comparable.

Consider, for example, the graph you find in your monthly Meralco bill. How can you track your monthly electricity consumption if the graph lumps together daily, monthly, and yearly data? Not so well, right?

In the same way, how can we track the drug war’s progress if we look at periods of uneven intervals?

Distorted scales are the oldest trick in the book: not only do they misrepresent the underlying data, but they also defeat the very purpose of visualization. Rather than reveal the truth, they conceal it.

2) Cherry-picking

False progress can also be shown by “cherry-picking,” or selecting favorable data points while omitting unfavorable ones.

A perfect example is the Department of Tourism’s infamous graph that was shared (and bashed) widely on Facebook.

Figure 3 shows a 109% jump in tourism revenues in July 2016 to May 2017 from July 2010 to May 2011. Another graph (not shown here) boasts a 71.8% increase in tourism arrivals.

{source}<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fjbbsantos%2Fposts%2F10154927709133261&width=500" width="500" height="676" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>{/source}

As found in the tourism department’s accomplishment report, these data support the claim that “the tourism industry has become a bright spot of the Philippine economy during the first year of the Duterte administration.”

They obviously wanted to compare the tourism sector’s performance in the first year of former president Benigno Aquino III and President Rodrigo Duterte.

But the appropriate way to do this is to measure the growth of tourism revenues and arrivals from the year immediately before their respective terms. That is, how Aquino’s first year compared with Arroyo’s last year, and how Duterte’s first year compared with Aquino’s last year.

Such a comparison reveals that tourism revenues rose by 16.7% from Arroyo’s last year to Aquino’s first year. Meanwhile, it rose by just 11.6% from Aquino’s last year to Duterte’s first year. (READ: FACT CHECK: DOT’s ‘misleading’ tourism graphs in 2017 report)

So it turns out that tourism revenues jumped more impressively in Aquino’s first year than in Duterte’s first year – a fact conveniently hidden by the tourism department’s cherry-picked graph.

3) Actual vs potential figures

Finally, graphs can be made to lie by comparing actual and hypothetical data.

Figure 4 below shows a bar graph made by the Bases Conversion Development Authority (BCDA) during the inauguration of “Build, Build, Build” in November 2016. It shows the percent share of infrastructure spending to GDP across different administrations.

Figure 4. Source: BCDA

This graph is misleading on at least 3 fronts: 

First, it combines in one graph actual infrastructure spending (from President Marcos to President Aquino) with planned infrastructure spending (under President Duterte) – without so much as an explanatory note.

Second, the graph also distorts scale by lumping the average infrastructure spending in each of the 5 previous administrations, and data for a single year under the Duterte administration.

Third, it cherry-picks the data by hiding the variations in infrastructure spending over the past 4 decades. The original graph (which I traced to a 2013 paper by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies) presented the entire gamut of yearly data across administrations, not just the averages across them.

The Department of Finance also compared actual and hypothetical figures in a “cost benefit analysis” infographic it shared on Facebook. Figure 5 depicts $33 billion worth of “benefits” outweighing the $5.5 million cost of the President’s foreign travels.

{source}<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FDOFPH%2Fphotos%2Fa.280593182101972.1073741827.280557962105494%2F679578608870092%2F%3Ftype%3D3&width=500" width="500" height="369" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>{/source}

Although not strictly a graph, this visual comparison is no less troubling: it compares promised or pledged loans and aid from China and Japan with actual travel expenses.

Following the online backlash it received, the finance department replaced it with a more detailed graphic.

Beware of misleading graphs and figures

In this “post-truth” era filled with “alternative facts,” perhaps our best defense is the widespread use of statistics, data, and graphs.

But as the examples above show, graphs are not foolproof: they can be just as easily used to distort the truth, mislead the public, and report false progress.

If change has really come, then the data should speak for itself, and not rely on any graphical sleight of hand.

It’s bad enough that the government is the source of all these “alternative facts.” But with so many Filipinos spending so much time on social media, the virulent spread of these graphs online makes them all the more dangerous.

So next time you encounter a graph, don’t take it at face value. Examine the variables, scrutinize the labels, check the sources, and understand the message – all before you click “share.” 

Only with a skeptical eye will we be able to know whether or not change has really come. – Rappler.com

The author is a PhD candidate at the UP School of Economics. His views are independent of the views of his affiliations. Thanks to Kevin Mandrilla (UP Asian Center) and Adrian Mendoza (UP School of Economics) for valuable comments and suggestions. Follow JC on Twitter: @jcpunongbayan.

AINARO, TIMOR LESTE – Bright blue election boxes and indelibly-inked index fingers.  These are just some of the vivid colors of democracy that come to mind as I think back to something momentous that just happened in Southeast Asia.

When contemplating the future of the vibrant Southeast Asian region, the tiny island nation of Timor-Leste is unlikely to be top-of-mind among Tokyo or Washington officials or of the top diplomats who have gathered in Manila this week for the 50th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Foreign Ministers’ Meeting 

Yet this small country of some 1.2 million people is a remarkable testament to the transformative power of democracy in a once-turbulent region, and provides a powerful model for an Asia and Pacific that has encountered some worrying backsliding in recent years when it comes to democracy.

Indeed, as ASEAN celebrates five decades and faces new challenges, it is worth pausing to consider who's in and who's out of this grouping of now 10 nations. 

I had the privilege of serving as an election monitor for Timor-Leste’s recent parliamentary election as part of the International Republican Institute’s (IRI) election observation mission. Throughout my visit, I was struck by the passionate commitment of the Timorese people to the democratic process, and inspired by their optimism about their country’s future. I believe that the country is in a strong position to continue progressing in its own development and make a positive contribution to the development of Southeast Asia.  Timor-Leste deserves ASEAN support for its efforts to further integrate and engage with the wider region.

After regaining independence from Indonesia in 2002, Timor-Leste’s government declared its desire to join ASEAN and applied for membership in 2011. While its ultimate accession is likely, there is a chance that the delays that have arisen over the past 6 years may persist indefinitely. Such a development which would not only deprive the Timorese of a much-needed chance for further development; ASEAN would forgo an opportunity to bring a country further into the ASEAN community that can serve as a valuable example of a successful democracy to fellow member states.

Over the past 15 years, Timor-Leste has grown into a well-functioning democracy where citizens actively engage with their government. The country was ranked as the most democratic in Southeast Asia by the Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2016 Democracy Index, and 43rd in the world – an impressive feat given the country’s traumatic experience during the 24-year Indonesian occupation.

One of the important ways Timor-Leste has been able to deliver sustainable democratic reforms has been through its openness to regional and international support. To this end, organizations like IRI have worked with civil society, government bodies and political parties to help them represent Timorese citizens responsively and effectively. IRI has worked in the country since 2002, and its assistance has been an important contributor to the country’s democratic consolidation.

Likewise, when I served as the US Ambassador to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and traveled to Timor-Leste in years past, I saw the importance of regional and international economic assistance to this and other developing countries first-hand. The ADB has supported infrastructure expansion, macroeconomic capacity-building and community-based development in Timor-Leste, and is well-positioned to assist not just in improving the country's roads, but also its water supply and sanitation systems. I grew to appreciate the complementary nature of different types of development assistance, and found that the aid provided by the ADB complements the kind of assistance provided by organizations like IRI, and vice-versa. 

As ASEAN continues to grow in importance, it is vital that its members collectively pursue policies that advance the region’s development in a sustainable manner. At a time when democracy is backsliding in much of the region, Timor-Leste’s accession to ASEAN would provide the region with a valuable example of how citizen-centered democracy can deliver a brighter, more prosperous and stable future. 

Additionally, Timor-Leste’s accession to ASEAN would be economically beneficial to the region. Despite its small size, Timor represents a relatively untapped market for Southeast Asian trade; likewise, Southeast Asia represents a largely untapped market for Timorese goods. In short, this would be a win-win situation for the entire region, and an important example for how inclusive economic development can sustain growth that benefits all.

During the lead-up to the election, election administrators, political parties and other stakeholders worked collaboratively to ensure a credible electoral process. This commitment to the rule of law and democratic institutions bodes extremely well for Timor-Leste’s potential as a cooperative and responsible member of ASEAN. My experience travelling through this small yet vibrant nation has driven home the benefits for all of proceeding with Timor-Leste’s accession.  

Now is a time for coming together.  We owe no less to the many people who across Asia's newest nation proudly held up an indelibly-inked finger as a mark and proof of democracy in action. – Rappler.com

Curtis S. Chin is managing director of advisory firm RiverPeak Group, LLC., and served as U.S. ambassador to the Asian Development Bank. Follow him on Twitter at @CurtisSChin.

While covering the Mindanao Hour press conference in Conrad hotel, I was approached by a supporter of President Rodrigo Duterte named Kelly Dayag. 

Wearing glasses and with an earnest smile on his face, he asked if he could interview me about issues for which I have been castigated on social media by supporters of the President.

I was initially suspicious of the request because of my bad experience with some online defenders (just take a look at my Twitter feed). I knew what I would say might be used against me.

But what convinced me to speak to Kelly were his own words: that he had read all the criticisms and attacks and wanted to get my side “for fairness.”

As a journalist, it was hard for me to ignore this. But it was harder to ignore the refreshing realization that I was finally being asked for my side in a way that wasn’t malicious or insulting. 

So we had a conversation, and it was a good one. 

Kelly asked me if it was true that Rappler is “dilawan” or biased in favor of the Liberal Party. I responded that Rappler supports no party and was critical about the government even when it was helmed by Benigno Aquino III. 

He asked me if it was true that Rappler claims Duterte supporters are all paid trolls. He said he was hurt by this accusation since he received not even a cent for defending Duterte online. I responded that Rappler never claimed all Duterte supporters are paid or that they are all trolls. I told him we even have articles about how Duterte’s social media campaign counted on a big group of volunteers. (READ: Over 600,000 OFWs mobilizing for Duterte campaign)

Kelly and I presented conflicting definitions of who counts as a troll. He said Duterte supporters are particularly sensitive to being called a troll because, to them, a troll is a “faceless” online entity and not a real person.

To which I responded that a troll can be a real person. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a troll as someone who “antagonizes others online by deliberately posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content.”

Nothing in the definition states that a troll is only a fake social media account.

Yet Kelly stuck to his definition of a troll. He also could not move me to reconsider the Merriam-Webster definition.

More than labels

In the end, he suggested that we “agree to disagree.” I agreed. We shook hands.

And then a magical thing happened. I asked him what he does for a living (he is based in the United States) and he said he is a physical therapist. I said physical therapy is one thing I need because of my hunched back, developed from always carrying around a heavy backpack and sitting in front of a laptop all day.

He then showed me some simple exercises and we did them right there in the conference hall lobby. We tiptoed, stretched our arms out, and laughed while doing it. It was fun! And it really did feel good for my back.

Selfies were taken and it seemed we parted on good terms. 

My interaction with Kelly reminded me that we are all so much more than online labels. I am much more than a supposedly “bayaran” or “dilawan” journalist. I’m also a tired workaholic with a bad back.  

Kelly is so much more than a pro-Duterte blogger. He’s also a physical therapist who has great advice for soothing worn out limbs.

Our conversation was also proof that fruitful dialogue can still happen in a time when mean-spiritedness and violent language have sadly come to dominate many a social media feed.

Kelly and I never resorted to name-calling or cursing to get our points across. Don’t get me wrong, this doesn’t mean there were no emotions at all in our conversation. I experienced a range of them, including anger, frustration, and irritation. But strong emotions don’t have to translate to poisonous speech.

A conversation doesn’t even have to end up in agreement to be rewarding. Kelly and I didn’t budge on some of our positions but at least we got to understand each other. Kelly said he felt relieved and happy that Rappler did not mean all Duterte supporters are paid trolls. I felt happy that he wanted to hear my side, that he, at least, wanted to challenge the claim of some online personalities that I am a corrupt journalist.

Passion, compassion

I really hope we can have more of these conversations. I think they are happening. I’ve been hearing people inviting their friends for coffee to discuss their opposing views on Philippine politics. For some, the wounds might still be raw and more time is needed before a frank and candid discussion can take place. 

I’ve heard of families torn apart, barkadas broken up over support or disgust for Duterte and his administration.

We shouldn’t let politics divide us more than it already has. It would be so much better for our democracy if we were passionate in our politics but compassionate to each other. 

I also think social media would be a much more vibrant place if we listened to each other and engaged with each other in more humane ways. This means recognizing that there is a human behind that Facebook profile page. 

What to do with trolls (paid or otherwise, real or fake) and bots? We should ignore them. They’re one reason why social media has been reduced to a wasteland. Real people who troll should know nothing can be had if they continue with their trollish ways. 

Let’s be kind, let’s not hate. Think for yourself, don’t let others determine who is your enemy and who is your ally.

Let’s seek out real people and real conversations. – Rappler.com

Had President Duterte achieved anything significant enough to report to the nation when he was called upon to do so after completing his first year in office? Apparently none, because he himself reported no achievement.

Surely he was not being modest. In fact, no president has been so visible, so loquacious, and so self-promotional as he: his television appearances simply come too often and run for too long to justify what he says, which is usually nothing important or useful or new or comprehensible. But it’s precisely on those occasions that he makes his claims to achievement, not in his State of the Nation Address — his State of the Nation Address is the occasion he seizes to ambush and lambaste targets in their helpless presence in his audience — political foes, disfavored diplomats, and other objects of some raging fixation.    

Duterte has doubtless done plenty, but, for achievements, he has dubious or regressive or downright chilling numbers to show, such that the nation might have been better off having stagnated since he assumed office.

A quick, although revealing-enough, survey of three basic areas shows that Duterte’s facts and figures do not come up to any achievement; in fact, his figures don’t add up:

Economy: If it grew by a decent 6.4% plus in his first year as president, it did so on the momentum built by the preceding administration, which has accounted for the highest average growth rate (6.3%) of any presidency since Ferdinand Marcos’s 14-year dictatorship was defeated in 1986. Duterte’s prophecy of progress on his own account rests largely on the word of China as a prospective investor and lender.

But China is known to drive ruthless bargains, as evidenced by cases in which client countries find themselves so mired in debt they are forced into desperate compromises, like ceding to Chinese creditors ownerships of ventures funded by their loans. The Philippines might have found itself in the same situation if the nbn-ztebroadband deal between China and the Gloria Arroyo presidency had gone through. The deal, as it happened, smelled so strongly it aroused widespread and violent public opinion and had to be scuttled.

After keeping off during the six-year presidency of Benigno Aquino iii, whom it smartly thought not a good prospect for its tricks, China is back with a vengeance. Having found either a cowed or a captivated client in Duterte, it has managed to begin collecting profits even before parting with any investments or loans. And it is not taking payments in any perishable currency — it is taking territory.  

On Duterte’s capitulation, the Chinese have taken over the South China Sea waters judged by an international arbitral court as part of Philippine territory. As a particularly cruel result, marginal Filipino fishermen are deprived of resources rightfully theirs.

Drugs: They appear to be Duterte’s biggest hang-up: until they are eradicated, he says, this nation cannot move forward. Upon taking office, he declared a war against drugs, promising total victory in six months; then he asked for six months more; now he says it will take his entire term. This nation, in other words, cannot expect to move forward during his presidency.

Actually, logic has eluded Duterte from the beginning. He counted 3 million drug dealers and users, dismissing without explanation the previous official count of 1.8 million (itself a loose count, including one-time and other non-habitual takers as well as rehabilitated addicts); even at an elimination rate of a thousand a month (the precise rate in the first seven months of his war), he will still fall short of a million on his promise.

The illogic goes on: he claims he’s winning his war; at the same time, he corrects his first count — it’s 4 million, not 3; now, that doubles his expected shortfall.

Terrorism: Going now for 10 weeks, the war against terrorists and brigands in Marawi City would have ended two weeks ago if Duterte’s calculations had been right. But, again, Duterte is not known for his calculations. This war, as his other, against drugs, is attended by confused counts.

At first, enemy strength was put at around 50, which, with martial-law powers, Duterte said, should be easy enough to put down. Then the count rose to 200. Still Duterte said, no matter, the enemy had been boxed in; he predicted final victory in 15 days.

Now, he and his generals are claiming to have killed more than 400 of the enemy.

But the most chilling number yet is possibly the right one: Duterte’s approval rating remains very high — more than 80%. – Rappler.com

The children in the Philippines are not spared from Duterte’s war on drugs. Some are directly killed and others are part of the “collateral damage” as claimed by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte.

The Juvenile Justice Law in the Philippines is under question by Duterte. He repeatedly slammed the existing juvenile justice system in various public events and gatherings expressing the need to lower the age of criminality of children from the age of 15 to 9. The present law states that a child who is 15 years old or younger at the time of the commission of the crime shall remain exempted from criminal liability. The offender, however, will be subjected to an intervention program from the government.

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), expressed its dissent and said that the move of the Philippine Congress to lower the age of criminality is against human rights and would subject children at a young age to become criminals by being brought up in prisons with other criminals.

In May 2017, Pulse Asia released a survey report that 55% of Filipinos believe that the lowest age of criminal liability in the Philippines should remain at 15 years old.

The Philippine Congress, despite its push to lower the age of criminal liability of children, decided to maintain the existing law at 15 – various children’s rights activists and organizations remain vigilant on any proposed state policies and regulations that violate human rights and deprivation of liberty.

According to data provided by the Women and Children Protection Centre of the Philippine National Police, a total of 26,415 children allegedly involved in the use, sale or transport of drugs had surrendered to police as of January.

The Children’s Legal Rights and Development Centre (CLRDC) documented and verified 40 cases of children deaths between July 2016 and April 2017. This figures covers 75% of Luzon and 25% Visayas wherein 27 males and 13 females were intentionally killed and assaulted by state authorities and unknown gunmen. 3 among the 27 males identified themselves as part of the LGBT community. In these alarming death tolls of children being shot dead and arrested without appropriate conduct of legal measures, no one was held accountable. In some cases, even, law enforcement authorities arbitrarily arrested children and post threat to families who will testify as witnesses in court.

Proxy and arbitrary arrests and children’s rights violations

The 31st of March 2017 was just a typical play day for Justin, a 16 year-old boy from Navotas City until unfortunate series of things happened. While riding his bicycle outside their home, a group of policemen arrived looking for his older brother Anthony. They informed them that the latter committed robbery. As the group continued to search for him, the parents questioned about their son’s alleged offense but the group of police was not able to show any warrant of arrest.

Anthony was not in the scene during the search operations which led to Justin’s arrest in lieu of his brother. The authorities bargained with the parents that they will only release Justin if and only if they will inform them of Anthony’s whereabouts.

Few days after, there was no Anthony that showed up in order for Justin to be released from police custody; but a dead body of Justin was found with hands tied, bathed in his own blood. The family grieved for their son’s death but the same group of police officers came back to their home to tell to bury his body right away and was told not to perform a post-mortem examination of their own son’s dead body. The family was threatened by the same group who ought to serve and protect the people.

The search for Anthony continues.

The haggle for sex in exchange of release

In a populated slum community in Metro Manila, a 15-year old girl named Elena was mistakenly arrested early morning while babysitting her neighbour’s baby. She was arbitrarily arrested by the police authorities and accused for being involved in drug trade. She was put behind the bars. The case of Elena, according to children’s rights groups is still a pending case being resolved. Series of horrors in the life of Elena continued to haunt her inside the detention facility. She was promised to be released in exchange for sex.

The party that ended the lives of 5

“Mama, labhan mo naman ang jogger pants ko. Gagamitin ko bukas, may pupuntahan kaming birthday party.” (Ma, can you please laundry my jogger pants. I’ll use it tomorrow at a birthday party), he said.

Patrick, who was a former minor detainee, was just released from a child detention facility previously accused of stealing a cellular phone. He was invited to attend a birthday party, together with a former detainee and three others. The supposed fun night filled with loud party music was intercepted with harrowing sound from multiple gunshots aimed at the owner of the house was allegedly in the watch list of PNP. Everyone was left in state of shock. Patrick, the owner of the house and  five others unfortunately ended up soaking in their own blood, lifeless.

The mother of Patrick laments the inhumane feat of the police without proper conduct of search for the person they were looking for that night.

LGBT children in conflict with the law

Some cases of identified LGBT of minor age being caught in the drug war has also been accounted by human rights and children’s rights groups like the cases of Jenny and Gemma.

In a child-caring institution in Metro Manila where juvenile delinquent are taken care of, Jenny, who identifies herself as transgender woman was arrested for a minor crime. Despite of her sexual orientation and gender identity, she was put in a cell for men. Worse, she was even forced to speak in a manly voice. Basic needs weren’t provided. They sleep on the floor with their t-shirts as protection from the cold at night; heavily-locked in the cage. There were times that she was sexually assaulted by her fellow inmates, and despite her testimony, no action has been done about her case, she narrated.

Gemma was accused of theft. She was detained and later on released after the case for her minor offense was dismissed. Days could have turned brighter for her after she was freed. However, that was not the case. She was brutally shot dead in a police drug operations days after. Perpetrators of minor offenses were instantly tagged as persons who were involved in drug trade. She was one of them.

The rising numbers of orphans

While the death toll of alleged drug suspects killed in police drug operations increased, the number of children who have lost parents is significantly rising. The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) estimates that about 18,000 children were left as orphans. The constant approach of the government worsens the situation of children whose parents were killed in the drug war that put them in the pits of socio-economic setbacks.

According to CLRD’s documented data, they only recorded 42 cases of minor crimes in 2014 for Metro Manila and a significant increment of 7 heinous crimes cases attributed to children and minors involved in drug-related crimes in the first quarter of 2017.

Various human rights groups and children’s rights advocates estimate that in every area of police drug operations, a minimum of 30 head quota is required to facilitate the war on drugs – regardless, if it includes children as collateral damage operations – either direct or indirect violent assaults.

The constant attempt of the government in solving the drug trade issue will be a perpetual series of deaths on the streets including children if the only options being explored and implemented rely on finding ways to legitimize these violent and aggressive schemes against illegal drugs. It is equally important, that civil society groups and organizations should remain vigilant in monitoring state-sponsored impunity; and classify how proposed state policies forward the discount of human life and any potential apparatuses that celebrate vigilantism confined within state fortification.  – Rappler.com

I saw an appeal to push for the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) to investigate the violation of human rights by terrorists in light of the Marawi crisis. There was also a push for CHR Chairman Chito Gascon to resign because "the CHR is focusing more on the rights of the criminals, instead of the victims."

Human rights are enshrined in the Constitution. The entire government and its instrumentalities have the mandate to uphold, advance, and protect the human rights of all the citizens. The structure of the government is precisely organized according to which department or unit is responsible for which rights of the citizens.

CHR's role

The role of the CHR, as a constitutional body, is to make sure that the government does its job in upholding, advancing, and protecting the rights of its citizens. It is also its mandate to ensure that the government does not, in anyway, violate human rights, especially civil and political rights. Civil and political rights have been the focus of the CHR because of its raison d'etre as an institution. This set of rights specifically refers to the exercise of rights of citizens vis-a-vis the state or the limit of the power of the state vis-a-vis the citizens.

Why focus on state abuse?

Such focus on preventing the state's abuse of power and its role in human rights is in reaction to the excesses that the state had perpetrated in the past and is premised on two ideas.

The first idea is the principle that public office is public trust. State powers are granted to state instrumentalities by the people only for the purpose of serving the people's interests and welfare. That's a big complex discourse, but that is a fundamental guiding thought that puts any state action subject to accountability for which the CHR is one of the accountability bodies or mechanisms.

Two, the state is supposedly powerful. As defined, only the state has the monopoly of the legitimate use of force. Because the state possesses immense power unique to it, its abuse of power poses a grave threat to anyone and everything. This makes it crucial in a democratic system to put checks on the exercise of power by the state to prevent abuse or misuse of power.

Of course, a powerful state is theoretical, especially in light of other very powerful societal forces (such as terrorists, political dynasties, economic monopolies), but the fact is that the state can legitimately use and control force and violence, while having the public means and resources to do what it intends to. That is power that no other entity has.

This nature of the state makes state abuse and violation of rights unacceptable in democracy. It is a violation of the principle of public office as public trust and it poses grave danger that could cause serious damage to individuals and the entire society.

Oversight to ensure compliance

The CHR plays an oversight role on the government's compliance with human rights. Its role is to check whether the different units of the government are doing their job in upholding, advancing, and protecting the rights of citizens.

There have been efforts to expand the rights that the CHR can scrutinize, to include socioeconomic, environmental, and cultural rights. Aside from practical constraints (such as resources, manpower, institutional capacity, to name a few), the main mandate of the CHR, while vital, remains limited: oversight. The CHR may look at the violation of those rights, but it will most certainly end up demanding the immediately responsible branch or instrumentality of the government to take the appropriate action.

For example, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) is the immediate responsible agency for the right to a decent job. If DOLE is not doing its responsibility, it is legally and theoretically possible for, the CHR, with its expanded mandate, to attend to this right. But the CHR's action will still be limited to pressuring DOLE to respond to cases of violation of the right to a decent job. That's because DOLE is the agency immediately responsible for that problem and because the CHR is mainly an oversight agency especially on this particular right.

Surely, given the state of democracy and justice in the country today, the challenge for the CHR is to review its core mandates and focus and see how it can best serve the interests of ordinary citizens decades after it was formed. The change in dispensation, after years of democracy, demands rethinking in institutions of democracy, like the CHR.

Deeper sense of dissatisfaction

There is no denying that the recent criticism of the CHR are rooted in a much deeper societal dissatisfaction over how the current political order underperformed in protecting and advancing the interests and welfare of its citizens. There is a deeper reason why this is so; and we can only move forward in surfacing, understanding, and addressing the root causes of this growing dissatisfaction over the political system if we start recognizing the part we each play in it and how the current distribution of both economic and political power benefit and hence perpetuate such a situation.

Looking at it from the power perspective, is it the CHR which enjoys enormous powers in the government? Who exactly have been enjoying monopoly of economic and political power in the country who could have done more?

Who has control over vast power are the ones foremost accountable for the failing state of human rights compliance in the Philippines today and who should be held to account by citizens, especially by those failed by the political order. – Rappler.com

Joy Aceron is convenor-director of G-Watch (www.g-watch.org), an action research organization working on accountability and citizen empowerment in the Philippines. Concurrently, she is a research fellow at the Accountability Research Center (ARC) based at the School of International Service (SIS) of the American University in Washington, DC. 

Ngayong ikalawang linggo ng Agosto, magbubukas na ang lahat ng paaralang nagbago ng school calendar upang makasabay sa global school openings. Parusa na namang magdaan sa C5-Katipunan area, sa U-belt, sa Taft, at siyempre sa EDSA. Eto rin ang buwang tiyak na maulan, at kapag may konting ambon ay sigurado na rin ang trapik.

Sa binagsik-bagsik ng retorika ng administrasyong ito tungkol sa pagbabago, hindi maitatangging usad-pagong ang pagresolba ng traffic congestion.

Kumbaga sa sipon, ang problema ng trapik ay mistulang uhog na di umaandar, naging plema na, at ngayon ay malapot na alkitran na sa baga ng Kamaynilaan.

Sa kanyang 2016 State of the Nation Address, ito ang sinabi ng Pangulo: “Our anti-colorum campaign and out-of-line apprehension, including the removal of terminals, will be intensified and, my God, it will be done. [applause] Immediately, immediately.”

Bising-busy 'ata ang LTFRB sa paninita sa Uber at Grab, pero nagkalat pa rin ang colorum at karag-karag na jeep at bus sa kalye.

Weather-weather lang ba talaga ang crackdown sa colorum busses? Kapag nagkakahulihan sa EDSA, maluwag ang trapiko, pero kapag nakatingin sa malayo ang mga kinauukulan ay naglalabasan na ang mga damuhong bus?

Ngayong 2017 SONA, tila hugas-kamay na ang tono niya habang pinupuntirya ang isang senadora: “You know, when I became President, EDSA was already horrendous as it was a horror of the other administrations. Now, I brought in [Arthur] Tugade, because Tugade is to me, a bright boy…. But we needed money and we tried to get your help to raise money. Eh ayaw naman ninyong ibigay, di hanggang ngayon, 'andiyan pa iyong EDSA.... We will not make it all smooth in the Philippines, we leave a little alley known as EDSA as the road to perdition."

Sa isang press conference, sinabi ng MMDA na nabawasan na ang biyahe sa EDSA nang 14 minutes, ayon sa sarili nitong pag-aaral. Talaga? Tila walang nakakaramdam nito.

Ang siste, maraming ring pag-aaral na sumasalungat dito.

Sa kasalukuyan, kasama ang Pilipinas sa 12 bansang itinuturing na may pinakamalalang trapik.

Ayon sa isa pang survey, para sa 30% ng mga Pinoy, pinakamasaklap na parte ng araw nila ang pagbibyahe.

Ayon sa isa pang pag-aaral, P3 bilyon ang nawawala sa kita at productivity araw-araw dahil sa traffic noong 2016. Kapag walang nagbago, P6 bilyon kada araw ang masasayang dahil sa trapik pagsapit ng 2030.

Hindi pa kuwentado riyan ang health cost ng mga mamamayang nakababad sa polusyon araw-araw – kandidato na sila sa respiratory disease at cardiovascular illnesses.

Hindi rin kuwentado ang emotional cost ng traffic, pero ang alam nating lahat, sawang-sawa na tayong gumising nang maaga at umuwi nang late. Sawang-sawa na tayong datnan ang malamig na hapunan, tulog na ang mga anak na dapat kasabay sa hapag-kainan, patang-pata ang katawan, at wala nang ibang magawa kundi matulog para muling magising nang maaga kinabukasan.

Nasaan na ang pagmomodernisa ng MRT at LRT, na sana’y nakapagpapagaan ng trapik? Wala nang ipinagbabago ang mahabang pila sa mga estasyon dahil sa 'di sapat na bilang ng coaches na seserbisyo sa lumolobong bilang ng commuters. Sapalaran na lang ba na di tumirik ang sinasakyan mong coach?

Sabi naman ng bagong-luklok na MMDA Chairman Danny Lim, "back to basics" daw ang approach niya. Ang di niya binanggit ay kung ano ang iniusad ng giyera kontra-trapik sa panahong si Tim Orbos ang nakaupo.

Trapiko daw ang isa sa magiging pinakakritikal na problema ng administrasyong Duterte. Pangalawang taon na mula nang binitawan niya ang campaign promise na resolbahin ito. 

Ayon kay John Forbes, senior adviser ng American Chamber of Commerce sa Maynila, magiging “uninhabitable” ang Metro Manila sa loob ng 3 hangang 5 taon kapag di nasolusyunan ang trapik.

Palaisipan ang bitaw ng Presidente nitong nakaraang SONA na hayaan nang maging "Road to Perdition" ang EDSA.

Nasaan na ang pagbabago? Nag-detour ba palayo sa EDSA? – Rappler.com

The Philippine legal system is a miserable failure. It has produced lawyers who are adept in using the law to pervert the law. And I say this with so much pain because I worked with many dedicated Filipino lawyers.

Individually, these dedicated lawyers introduce innovative practices. Collectively, these dedicated lawyers' efforts are gobbled by the very corrupt practices of the legal profession.

First, many bright young lawyers are frustrated by the fact that to win a case, they need to pull connections. Even if they have produced a well-crafted motion or brief, even if they spent numerous hours of doing legal research, all these may be thrown away if the opposing party uses extra-legal tactics. In the legal profession, this is called "gapangan".

That is why many of the laypersons I interviewed would say, "Kaya naman kasi gapangin ang piskal o judge." (They can make arrangements with the fiscal or judge.) A hard reality is striking: the law that they read in the books is very different from the law that they practice. And it would be considered naiveté for the bright young lawyers to insist on the ideal. As one lawyer I talked to said: "Wala kang maipapanalong kaso kung puro galing ka lang sa papel." (You can never win a case if you rely on the formalities).

Second, confronted with these harsh realities, bright young lawyers adapt to this practice. They become socialized in the realities of the law profession. Though many of these lawyers want to maintain a corrupt-free identity, they are, in one way or the other, forced to play to the "tune of the music."

That is where the law fraternity connections come into play. Law fraternities are, by nature, very idealistic student organizations. They fight for the rule of law, for nationalistic aspirations, for service to the people. However, all these idealistic visions of the law fraternities are temporarily suspended, and the social capital accrued in the connections are the ones maximized. That is why it pays if the judge or justice is a "brod."

Aside from the fraternities, other forms of social entanglements can be maximized: familial relations, classmates in law schools, coming from the same province – the traditional strength of the Filipino social relations. These are all utilized, one way or the other, to get an edge in winning the case. Thus, to be a good lawyer, it pays to be adept at both the formal elements of the law (the technical side) and the informal elements of litigation (the political side).

They need to know when or which tactics to use in a particular case or context. The capacity to switch between "santong dasalan" (soft or diplomatic way) or "santong paspasan" (tough way) will elevate them in the community of lawyers. While there are instances that lawyers can win on merit alone, most lawyers I talked to lament that these are rare instances indeed.

Third, these harsh realities affect the legal careers of many lawyers: many of the appointments and promotions are based on personal connections. Judges who are efficient in court administration, as measured by the speedy disposition of their cases, for example, are not promoted, if they do not have connections to the appointing authorities.

The disconnect between promotions and merit translates to a culture of inefficiency in the court management. Some inmates in jail are undergoing trial for as long as 15 years, yet judges who have heard these cases are promoted anyway.

Thus, currently, we have a very legally cynical public. Filipinos do not trust the legal system. They would rather approve the action of a police officer to summarily kill a drug pusher rather than try the offender in front of a judge who may likely use technicalities to dismiss the case.

And they cheer when the President of the Republic, who is a former prosecutor, calls for the sidestepping of due process and human rights of the suspects, with the belief that we need to cleanse first the corrupt legal system before we can even introduce any meaningful reforms. And I understand their frustrations and pain. The popularity of the President is rooted in a genuine reality: the brokenness of the legal and criminal justice system.

Thus I say with a heavy heart that the legal system is a massive failure. As part of the legal system myself, an educator in the field of criminal justice, I say, we are losing, and we are losing poorly. We carry a heavy burden because the public call for blood is our own doing. Mga panyero, tayo ang may gawa niyan. (My friends, we are the cause of this.)

But we should not take this sitting down. May I call on all lawyers, judges, prosecutors, legal scholars, who are truthful to their profession, please stand up and be counted! Let us do our fair share to improve the criminal justice system. Let us be truthful and honest.

Or else, the public sentiment that calls for blood will eventually wipe us all out.

If you are a lawyer who makes this commitment, or if you want to challenge a lawyer you know, please tag, pass and share. Let us re-sensitize them with the nobility of their profession. – Rappler.com

The author is assistant professor at the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice of the Southern Illinois University in Carbondale.

My fiancée’s dream wedding has always been a small, private ceremony in San Francisco’s city hall. She will, fortunately for her, get her dream wedding, and, unfortunately for her, be stuck with me for the rest of her life. The civil ceremony abroad begs a question for some friends and relatives: So, when is the Church wedding and reception in the Philippines?

It won’t happen, we tell them. For one, we are too shy for large, bourgeois affairs in the Pinoy mold – petrified by the monolith that is the wedding/industrial/same-day-edit complex. And, of course, there’s that other thing of me being an agnostic. Not a problem, many of my friends say. In the Philippines, even lapsed Catholics and nonbelievers get Church weddings, because that’s just what you do.

Catholicism is a cultural norm, not just a set of beliefs. My similarly agnostic and then communist mother was forced into a Catholic wedding (actually into matrimony, since she just wanted to live in), because it would have been shameful not to have one. And my parents, of course, had to get me baptized.

Catholicism is influential in this country because it is a default setting. As a consequence, people rarely grappled with it. For many believers, their faith is wallpaper. And when was the last time people had a debate about the state of their wallpaper? Yet the wallpaper of Catholicism shapes our society in profound ways. It can cause harm by denying contraceptives to poor women. And it can save lives by sheltering the “adiks” that Duterte seeks to kill.

The advantage of the nonbeliever is a certain distance. Over the years, I have watched Philippine Catholicism from the outside, but also the inside. I grew up in a secular household: Papa is a non-practicing believer and Mama believes that the only humble response to the question of God’s existence is “I don’t know.”

I was also raised by my maternal grandparents, who discovered agnosticism together as they discovered the depths of their ever-deepening love. Both academics, their favorite philosopher was Bertrand Russel and one of their favorite books was Russel’s Why I am not a Christian. Lolo and Lola died unsure where they were going, but sure of their love for each other.

Unlike many of my nonbelieving friends, I did not stumble upon secularism; I was born into it. And whenever I explored Catholicism, it was always with a sense that I was wading into a tradition not my own. Studying from prep to college at Ateneo, I of course had to learn the faith – a faith I professed as a grade school kid, not wanting to feel excluded. By high school, I was outwardly a secularist, but learned to shut up about this fact since my classmates teased me for being an “atheist” (an agnostic is not an atheist).

Early in college, I was attracted to Catholicism anew. I loved my theology teachers, who presented a version of the faith that satisfied both my intellectual curiosity and my incipient social consciousness. For some reason, I was also more open to the notion of God. I remember meeting an old high school friend who had started studying at UP. She told me that UP was forcing her to question her faith, and I sincerely replied that Ateneo was forcing me to question my non-faith.

I closed the door to Catholicism late in college as I grew more confident in my skin, believing I could confront moral issues on my own by studying philosophy and literature. Through Aristotle, I discovered the virtue of dedication to a political community. Through Foucault, I learned that multiple people could be marginalized in multiple ways. Through Austen, I discovered warmth and the quiet beauty of daily acts of kindness. I value my personal morality as much as believers value their faith-based morality.

In grad school, I had already weaned myself from faith, and any openness to Catholicism dissipated as the reproductive health (RH) wars reached their crescendo. During my experiments in faith, I grew to love the Catholicism of liberation theology: it addressed the pressing issues of inequality and social marginalization. It was a faith of justice. It was practical, real.  But I found the sex-obsessed, anti-RH Catholics strange. Why waste so much energy denying adults consensual fun? No condoms, no premarital sex, no living in, no masturbation, no gay sex – all are prohibitions anchored more on St. Augustine’s bizarre notion of guilt than they are on coherent beliefs about human development.

So when Duterte started cursing the Church, he did so at a good time for a politician. The RH debates had turned off even some true believers. The anti-RH campaign exposed the bishops as bullies, who sought to impose their will on secular politics, denying scientific evidence in the process. At no point had the Catholic Church in the Philippines been so weak against a secular leader.

But Duterte is also an opportunity for the Church to make itself relevant. As Sheila Coronel writes, priests are now the first line of defense for the poor threatened by Digong’s war on drugs. These days, I feel more warmth whenever I enter a Catholic church or a chapel. I know these places and the institution that runs them have become sanctuaries for the poor, the excluded, the “subhuman.” The Church recognizes their dignity because it sees in them the image and likeness of God. Unlike the callous horde that simply view them as refuse.

We are now witnessing Catholicism at its best. Those from the faith would do well to reconnect with their faith today, and join their Church as it tells those who suffer that they too may partake of the kingdom of God – distant but ever present. As for me, I remain an outsider and an observer. But I observe with a growing sense of admiration. Those in the sidelines are, after all, permitted to cheer. – Rappler.com

Lisandro Claudio (@leloyclaudio on Twitter) teaches history at De La Salle University and hosts the Rappler web show Basagan ng Trip.

I noticed that some of my friends are conflicted about the new free tuition law that President Duterte signed recently. It sounds good and feels right, but some analysts have also pointed out its possibly disastrous consequences.

 Here’s a simple thought experiment that zeroes in on the main problem with this law.

In the graph below, the orange bars show the distribution of students in state universities and colleges (SUCs) by income group. Focus on the leftmost and rightmost orange bars: they indicate that only 12% of SUC students come from the poorest income group, while as much as 17.2% come from the richest income group. 

This graph is based on the 2014 APIS (Annual Poverty Indicators Survey). I’m not sure if the 2016 dataset is already available out there, but the latest figures are bound to look similar.

Note also that we are defining income groups in relative terms (based on “quintiles” or 5 groups of equal size), not in absolute terms (based on specified income thresholds).

This graph is important because it tells us who will benefit the most from the free tuition law. 

Suppose we have P100 worth of tuition subsidies to be distributed among all SUC students regardless of their income. Further assume that the income distribution of students remains unchanged by the law. 

Based on the graph above, the P100 worth of subsidies will be distributed to the students as follows:

• P17.2 will go to the 5th income quintile (richest)
• P23.8 will go to the 4th income quintile
• P24.3 will go to the 3rd income quintile
• P22.7 will go to the 2nd income quintile
• P12 will go to the 1st income quintile (poorest)

So a total of P41 will go to the richest 40% of students, but only P34.7 will go to the poorest 40% of students. The discrepancy is also large between the 2 extreme groups: P17.2 will go to the richest 20% of students, while only P12 will go to the poorest 20% of students. 

You can play around the numbers any which way, but the data suggest that, by and large, the free tuition law is likely to benefit the rich more than the poor.

More subsidies for the rich

This regressive outcome is made worse by two things.

First, there’s reason to believe that the graph above underrepresents the richest students. Government surveys like APIS and FIES (Family Income and Expenditure Survey) typically don’t include responses from the richest households (say, the top 1% to 5%). Enumerators can’t easily access gated subdivisions and survey the rich inside their homes. 

Hence, if we adjust for this bias in data collection, the rightmost orange bar should actually be taller (and the other bars shorter). This means that, for every P100 of tuition subsidies, more than P17.2 will go to those in the richest income group.

Second, the free tuition law is bound to make it even more difficult for the poorest students to enter SUCs. On August 7, a news report said that the Commission on Higher Education has instructed SUCs to tighten their admission policies once the free tuition law is fully in effect. 

This is presumably because of the unusually large cohort of students expected to enter college in 2018: the big wave of K-12 graduates, plus the students from private colleges who will be enticed to transfer to SUCs because of the free tuition law. 

This influx of enrollees is bound to swamp faculties and facilities in SUCs, and one way to stem the tide is to impose stricter admission policies. To the extent that the poor are relatively disadvantaged by their circumstances, it’s the richer students who are likelier to hurdle these increasingly stringent SUC admission policies.

Therefore, in the graph above, the bars to the right will become even taller come 2018, so even more tuition subsidies will go to the richest students at the expense of the rest.

‘Free’ is not necessarily pro-poor

We’ve barely touched the surface of the free tuition law’s bad effects. For example, we haven’t yet talked about the reckless nature by which it was passed: it didn’t enjoy the benefit of much debate and study, and it also didn’t incorporate a sound and well-thought-of fiscal strategy.

Asked how his government will fund the program, President Duterte said blankly on August 7, “Ewan ko.” (I don’t know.)

But our simple thought experiment already demonstrates the law’s most pernicious effect: it is likely to benefit the rich relatively more than the poor. 

This new law admittedly deserves more detailed study, and it could take some years before we can observe its regressive impact – for instance, we need to revisit and reconstruct the graph above using 2018 data. Until then, lawmakers must find ways to mitigate such impact. 

Some of them are proposing to limit the tuition subsidies to “deserving” students, and include the appropriate targeting mechanisms in the law’s implementing rules and regulations. But why pass a universal subsidy law that ends up being targeted anyway, because logic and practicality dictate it? Could they not have anticipated this eventuality?

Many Filipinos hailed the free tuition law as a “victory” for present and future generations, one that will automatically improve the poor’s ability to access tertiary education. 

But providing something for “free” doesn’t necessarily make it pro-poor. By falling for this fundamental fallacy, we have ended up with a law that is patently reckless, ill-thought, and inequitable. – Rappler.com 

The author is a PhD candidate at the UP School of Economics. His views are independent of the views of his affiliations. Follow JC on Twitter @jcpunongbayan.

It’s a scene right out of the dystopian novel, The Handmaid’s Tale. Contraceptives are vanishing from our drugstore shelves and public health clinics. Modern birth control as we know it is on the verge of being extinct.

The Commission on Population (Popcom) says that only 23 out of the 48 existing hormonal contraceptives are available in the market and most of them are expected to expire by 2018.

The debacle can be traced back to 2015 when the Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on two contraceptive implant brands, Implanon and Implanon NXT and suspended the product certification and re-certification of all hormonal contraceptives.

Product certifications are like a license to sell. By not allowing their issuance and renewal, the supply of hormonal contraceptives in the market stopped. We were left with existing stock that is now about to run out.

To be very clear, the Supreme Court is correct when they say they did not issue a TRO on the Reproductive Health Law (RH Law) which covers a range of health provisions like building health centers and sex education. They did, however, issue a TRO on contraceptives which is the very essence of the RH Law’s promise to give every Filipino the right and the access to birth control services and products.

Several aspects of the public health supply chain has been impacted in the years that the TRO has been in place.

Community workers, women’s health advocates share their experience about the harmful side effects of the TRO:

1. Fear mongering about contraceptive implants.

Contraceptive implants, which make use of rod-shaped-like matchsticks inserted into the upper arm, are a relatively new birth control technology. They were warmly received by women because they offered long-term birth control (up to 3 years) in a non-evasive manner.

When news about the TRO came out, some women thought or were made to believe that implants cause cancer. “They feared that the product’s 3-year efficacy would mean that they would die after 3 years,” said Lina Bacalando, a barangay health worker for the Likhaan Women’s Health Center. According to Lina, many women scrambled to have their implants taken out.

2. It emboldened anti-RH local government officials to carry out policies that restrict people from accessing contraceptives.

The mayor of Sorsogon reportedly returned their family planning supplies to the Department of Health. In February 2015, Sorsogon City Mayor Sally Lee had already come out with an Administrative Order saying that the city is pro-life and banned condoms, injectables, IUDs and all other forms of modern contraception, alleging they are abortifacients.

The TRO gave anti-RH officials the perfect excuse to restrict the implementation of the RH Law in accordance with personal beliefs.

3. Confusion among local service providers

Only the DOH and its agents (public health centers/hospitals under it) were prohibited from administering Implanon and Implanon NXT. Service providers at the local government unit (LGU) level were not covered by the TRO and were free to offer implants to women as long as their supplies did not come from the DOH.

However, most local service providers thought that the TRO covered them so they refused to provide implants to women.

Even some pro-RH local service providers took a prudent stance and decided not provide or offer implants just to be sure that they would not be seen as violating the Supreme Court decision.

4. Burdening and restraining the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from performing its mandate and regulatory functions

In a statement, the DOH retraced all the way:

“Considering all the circumstances and incidents in the pending case, the FDA is surprised by the latest SC statement to the effect that “what has been issued was a TRO against two specific contraceptives only, referring to Implanon and Implanon NXT,” read the statement.

“The language of the 2015 TRO is CLEAR:

A.  The TRO  required the FDA to suspend its certification/re-certification of all contraceptives.

B. The FDA was tasked to revise all the relevant procedure and IRR, conduct hearings and decide on all applications under the revised procedure – the very conditions on which the lifting of the TRO has been made to depend.”

5. It affected an estimated hundreds of thousands of women from managing their fertility

According to the DOH, the FDA has already finalized the amended Rules of Procedure/Guidelines for the certification and re-certification of all contraceptive products and is set to hold the first round of summary hearings under the amended procedure this August 21, 2017.

The Supreme Court has included a “sunset provision” that says that the TRO will automatically be lifted once the FDA complies with recertification requirements.

So there is hope but that will take time.

As confirmed by Juan Antonio Perez, Popcom executive director, one brand of the progestin-only-pill (recommended for breastfeeding mothers) is already out of stock. This will affect an estimated 500,000 breastfeeding moms. The TRO on the implants already affected 200,000 women who use them.

“Once the remaining stocks are gone, there will be no more available until new product registrations are issued by the FDA. DOH procurements typically take 6-9 months before new supplies come in,” said Juan Antonio Perez, Popcom executive director.

By 2018, there will hardly be hormonal contraceptives available and we face a possible future where birth control options will be limited to vasectomy, ligation, condoms, and abstinence.

All of this is just a reminder to continue fighting for your right to birth control until the TRO is lifted. 

Post about it. Write about it. Talk about it. Do not stop doing so until the TRO is lifted. Make yourself heard and align with others who are doing the same by using the hashtag #DontTakeAwayMyBirthControl and #ImplementRH when you post. – Rappler.com

Last week, Leloy Claudio invited me to his show Basagan Ng Trip to talk about the relationship between religion and violence. The topic is very timely in light of the Marawi siege. Islam has regrettably become the convenient scapegoat for many people.

From the point of view of sociology, however, religion is at the heart of radicalization not because it is the cause of violence. Instead, religion gives individuals the divine worldview that helps them understand and act upon their situation.

If we looked closely, we'd realize that the situation of the radicalized, often the minority, is full of suffering and discrimination. The violent message of extremist preachers could work if it resonated with the listener's everyday hardships.

The point is that radicalization happens when individuals become convinced that violence in the name of their religion is justifiable. They engage in a cosmic war carried out in the here and now.

And the history of religious violence is not unique to Islam. Buddhism in Southeast Asia, Hinduism in South Asia, and Christianity in the West have all been used one way or another to justify violence.

Islamophobia

Leloy aptly ended the episode by arguing that it is a quick-fix solution to blame Islam for the violence in Marawi.

But in spite of our elaborate discussion – please check out the video – the comments insisted that we are wrong and that Islam is a violent religion. One even declared that "Islam is poisonous. The true followers of Islam are the members of ISIS." Another one dared me to "go to Marawi and declare myself to be Christian."

My quick response: I am a born-again Christian. I have gone there and even lectured at the Marawi campus of Mindanao State University. Some of my close friends are in fact Maranao. They are far more sincere than other people I know.

The folks who made the comments are not the usual faceless trolls who spread hate around. They are real individuals. What their angry comments thus tell us is that Islamophobia is as real as the violence waged in the name of Islam.

Evil, dangerous

There is a compelling assumption that fuels Islamophobia: Islam is an evil religion. Its permutations are endless.

It is convinced Muslims are out there to conquer the rest of the world. It is afraid that they are growing in number and occupying territories. It believes that they are going to forcibly convert everyone to their religion. It fears that all Muslims are capable of blowing themselves up in public.

In other words, Islamophobia indiscriminately assumes that all Muslims are by default dangerous.

To defend their views, Islamophobic folks directly quote the Qur'an. "Muhammad is the apostle of Allah. Those who follow Him are merciful to one another but harsh to the disbeliever."

Verses like this convince them that all Muslims are ready to kill at will.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The same Qur'an speaks of justice and mercy. These are virtues by which any typical Muslim would try to live            .

In fact, there are so many verses that declare Allah to be "all-pardoning, ever-forgiving."

More worrisome is that Islamophobia conveniently overlooks the fact that Muslims themselves are the first victims of the Marawi siege. They are called evacuees.

How then do we respond?

In the final analysis, Islamophobia lives off the same reality that Islamic extremism does: uncompromising hatred.

What fuels both is ignorance. Both are ignorant that Islam as a religion has so much depth. Both are ignorant that there are many other peace-loving Muslims out there.

And yet the bigger danger of Islamophobia is that not many might realize that they perpetuate it. People, in other words, are bothered by terrorism but not by their ignorance of Islam. In this sense, terrorists have achieved their goal.

But all is not lost.

Swami Tyagananda, a Hindu monk, offers a nugget of wisdom. For him, it is "difficult to hate a religion when you personally know that warm, intelligent, and considerate people practice it."

In my view, interreligious understanding does not seek that we give up our own faith. It simply asks us to recognize that there are people from the other side of the fence whose goodwill emanates from their own religious convictions.

We can work with these people to build a better world in which hatred – not religion – becomes irrational.

It is to them we must muster all the courage and humility to say peace be with you – assalamualaikum. – Rappler.com

Jayeel Serrano Cornelio, PhD is the Director of the Development Studies Program, Ateneo de Manila University. The National Academy of Science and Technology has named him the 2017 Outstanding Young Scientist in the field of sociology. Share with him your thoughts on Twitter @jayeel_cornelio.

The threat of House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez to give the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) a zero budget for next year due to its supposed bias against law enforcers shows how human rights advocacy has been misunderstood even by those who are expected to know better.

Speaker Alvarez is a lawyer, just like Representative Carlo Nograles of the House Committee on Appropriations. Both lawmakers have expressed dismay at the way the CHR has functioned as a watchdog of human rights violations perpetrated by state security forces.

A government watchdog

The CHR and human rights groups in general have traditionally functioned as watchdogs of state-perpetrated human rights violations for good reason. It's because the state and state agents, vested with vast political and police powers, are in the most likely position to violate the rights of ordinary people and get away with it.

Why is this so?

For starters, the state is the primary guardian of human rights, with the task of ensuring that ordinary citizens enjoy their constitutionally-guaranteed rights and freedoms. In fact, as citizens we voluntarily surrender some of these rights to the state in order to give it the authority and capability to defend all our other rights.

The state has the following functions with regards to civil liberties and human rights:

• Through legislation, it enshrines our rights and freedoms into laws that everyone should follow
• Through the police and military, it exercises the exclusive use of lethal force to enforce these laws
• Through the justice system, it ensures that criminals – those who violate the rights and freedoms of others as enshrined in the law – are arrested, tried and punished
• Through the educational system, media and various cultural institutions, it ensures that everyone is aware and capable of exercising their rights and freedoms

Because these powers are so vast and awesome, the framers of the Constitution introduced the Bill of Rights to serve as a limitation for the exercise of such governmental powers and a protection against government abuse.

Likewise, due to such powers, it is the state, through the government, that is primarily accountable for upholding international human rights agreements and protocols. When such rights are violated in a country, whether by state security forces, criminal syndicates or rebel groups, it is STILL the government that is accountable because the state is supposed to ensure that such rights are protected from being violated by any party.

But what if the state itself, with these vast powers, starts messing around with our rights and freedoms?

What if Congress comes out with laws that deprive us of our liberty or property?

What if the police and military engage in evidence tampering, torture, extrajudicial killings or indiscriminate bombings of civilian communities?

What if the courts start selling cases to the highest bidder or are bullied into allowing violations of our rights and freedoms?

What if the schools and media are intimidated into silence and acquiescence by those in power?

In other words, what if the state itself, the ultimate guardian of our rights and freedoms, violate these very rights and freedoms? Who do we turn to then?

It is in answer to this fundamental question that independent human rights bodies play an important role, whether international bodies like the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) or the International Criminal Court (ICC), local bodies like our own CHR, or non-government human rights organizations like the New York-based Human Rights Watch or the Philippine-based Karapatan Alliance for the Advancement of People's Rights (Karapatan). They sound the alarm and serve as mechanisms for redress when human rights are violated by the state itself.

Again, why always the state? Why always the government? Because from actual experience in almost all countries where fundamental rights and freedoms have been under attack, it is the state or its agents who engage in the most numerous and brutal violations of human rights. A simple listing of the world's most brutal dictatorships and fascist regimes would bear this out.

Non-state actors

But how about human rights violations committed by drug addicts and other criminals, terrorists and rebels? If the CHR and human rights bodies don't look into that, then who does?

Well, the state of course!

In fact, the main function of the police and military establishment plus the entire justice system is to prevent those so-called criminals, terrorists, and rebels from violating our rights and to investigate and punish them when they do.

For example, when a drug suspect rapes and kills someone, it is automatically considered a heinous crime. There is immediate public outrage. The police, NBI agents, and DOJ prosecutors are all over the place, making sure the crime is investigated and the perpetrator brought to justice. Everyone agrees that the suspect most likely violated the rights of the victim. In such cases, it would be superfluous for human rights bodies to go around town saying what is already obvious and acknowledged.

But when cops kill 4 drug suspects in a raid, the official presumption is that it was done in the regular course of law enforcement. The police, NBI and DOJ usually turn a blind eye to the possibility that the rights of the victims were violated. The victims are branded as drug users or pushers and subject to public vilification. In such a situation, it is crucial for human rights bodies to check for possible human rights abuses by the police. Otherwise, they could easily get away with it.

To reiterate, when a suspected criminal, terrorist or rebel violates our rights, it is automatically considered a crime and the entire machinery of the state is mobilized to go after the perpetrators. But when a law enforcer violates our rights, regularity is presumed and government agencies often ignore or even cover up human rights violations. Thus the need for the CHR and human rights organizations to focus on suspected state-perpetrated violations.

This explains the “bias” of human rights advocacy. It is biased towards documenting and reporting on state-perpetrated human rights violations because these are the ones that are often ignored or covered up by the authorities.

So when people accuse the CHR and human rights organizations of being biased, it means they're actually doing their job. – Rappler.com

Teddy Casiño served as the party-list representative of Bayan Muna for 3 terms, from 2004 to 2013. Prior to his stint in Congress, he was secretary-general of the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan and a columnist for BusinessWorld.