Nowadays, we often hear of government leaders who are incompetent and who use their position of leadership for their self-interest: they are corrupt, despotic, immoral, power-hungry, materialistic, abusive, and more concerned about their image or status. This can be found also in the police and military organization as well as the corporate world.  Sadly, this kind of leadership may also be found in the Church. The scandals that rock the Church are not just about sexual abuse or misconduct, but also the self-serving way leadership is exercised.

Pope Francis in a homily on June 15, 2014, acknowledged the presence of corruption not just among politicians and businessmen but also some members of the clergy:

"We hear too much talk of a prelate who has become rich too and left his pastoral duty to care for his power.  So the corrupt politicians, the corrupt businessmen, and the corrupt clergy are to be found everywhere – and we have to tell the truth: corruption is precisely the sin that the person with authority – whether political, economic, or ecclesiastical – over others has most readily at hand. We are all tempted to corruption. It is a 'handy' sin, for, when one has authority, one feels powerful, one feels almost like God."

The great temptation of those having authority is to "feel powerful and almost like God" – that one is above the law and can do anything he likes. Jesus warned his disciples about this kind of leadership: "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and the great ones make their authority over them felt. But it shall not be so among you." (Mt 20:25)

Many of these problems and scandals may be caused by the failure to recognize and overcome the dark side. There is a dark side of leadership which has to be brought out into the open, into the light. The dark side which is often toxic and destructive brings out the worst version of the self.

From a psychological perspective, the dark side is often associated with personality disorder and abnormal behavior which has roots in the unconscious. Among the manifestations are narcissism, insecurity, bipolar disorder, obsessive compulsions, despotic behavior, aggression, uncontrolled anger or intermittent explosive disorder, addictive behavior, sexual abuse, etc. More often, the underlying causes of such disorder is complex – some involving childhood psychological trauma, abuse, rejection, etc.

Christian tradition often associates the manifestation of the dark side with the so-called 7 deadly sins or cardinal sins: pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath, and sloth. Every human being, including priests, are prone to these "capital vices." The dark side is associated with the 4 cravings or basic temptations that try to dominate the life of each human being, especially those in leadership positions: (1) the craving for sensual pleasure; (2) the craving for material possession; (3) the craving for power and influence; and (4) the craving for popularity, fame, and glory.

One basic temptation for a leader is to gratify one's sensual desire. The leader has at his disposal whatever he wants and he can easily indulge in addictive behavior – whether it be food, alcohol, gambling, drugs, or sex. The leader can spend a lot of time in the casino, cockfighting arena, or the mahjong table. In order to deal with the pain – whether physical or psychological – he can become a drug addict (which is a form self-medication). Another temptation is to indulge in illicit sexual behavior/misconduct (whether heterosexual or homosexual) – keeping a mistress/or concubine, including abuse of minors.

A leader has access to huge amount of money. The big temptation is to use his position to accumulate wealth and material possessions. The dark side of leadership becomes evident when this becomes his main motivation. His heart is full of greed and avarice. He needs more to maintain a luxurious lifestyle – a palatial home, the latest fleet of cars, clothes, gadgets, etc. This is also necessary to maintain his vices and addiction – to drugs, alcohol, gambling, sex, or seducing minors.

For many politicians and government officials, a leadership position becomes a source for accumulating wealth and material possessions. This is also a means for gaining and maintaining political power. This is often associated with patronage politics. No wonder, many will run for office – as local government officials (barangay leaders, mayors, governors), as representatives and senators, as presidents. There is money in public office and government bureaucracy. Running for office requires huge amount (campaign staff, advertisement, vote-buying, etc.) and once in office, he needs to recoup his expenses and generate funds for reelection. The temptation of wealth and material possessions can also lead many police and military personnel to engage in criminal activities (kidnapping, hold-up, extortion, drug-pushing, gambling, etc). The temptation of wealth is the main source of corruption in the government. It is like cancer that metastasize or spread in all levels – from the highest to the lowest. 

When a person occupies a position of authority and leadership, he often feels powerful. Traditionally, this power is associated with the capacity to impose his will and dominate others. He makes decisions and expects to be obeyed. He can threaten and coerce others to do his bidding, to demand respect and even fear. He can even have the power of life and death over others. He can get away with murder. This power comes with perks and privileges. He has at his disposal the wealth and resources that comes with the office.

Power tends to be aphrodisiac. Sexual abuse can be an assertion of power. He thinks he is the law, that he is above the law. This is the biggest and most destructive temptation of leadership – the drive for power. How to come to power, how to exercise power, and how to perpetuate himself in power. When this becomes the dominant motivating force, the dark side of leadership is fully manifested.  Lord Acton's popular dictum is correct: power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. A person who is narcissistic and lacks a sense of remorse and guilt and who thinks of himself as god is most dangerous when he is in a leadership position.

The leader is often placed in the limelight. He is the focus or center of attention – especially from followers and the media. Honor, fame, popularity and prestige tend to accompany the position of authority and leadership. The dark side is evident when seeking fame and being conscious of one's image become the underlying motive of the leader's behavior and decisions. He is full of vanity. This can also be accompanied by a sense of entitlement and the expectation of being given a VIP treatment.

The biggest temptation that a leader faces is to use his position as means for satisfying these drives, to allow himself to be dominated by one or all of these drives. The account of the temptation in the desert was symbolic of Jesus' struggle and rejection against this type of leadership – motivated primarily by self-gratification, wealth, power, and privilege.

Thus, everyone occupying leadership positions are subject to one or more of these diabolical temptations. This is part of the fallen, sinful nature of human beings. At the core of all these is selfishness, greed, and pride. The dark side is associated with ignoring or breaking God's commandment and falling into sin. When he does this, the leader makes himself a god – failing to recognize that he is only a creature and there is someone greater than himself to whom he is accountable. He thinks that he is above the law and does not have to follow or observe the law – whether it be the divine law or the laws of society. He can easily lie, cheat, steal, or use coercion or violence to get what he wants – whether it be sensual pleasure, wealth, power or fame. He does not respect the dignity and rights of others. He does not listen to his conscience or has a dull conscience.

He lacks a moral compass and becomes immoral. Sexual misconduct or abuse come easy. For him, there is nothing wrong with cursing others or even God. He lacks a sense of remorse and guilt. He becomes cruel and corrupt. Having a hardened heart, he does not  care if others suffer as a consequence of his acts and decisions. All he cares about is himself. This kind of leader can be encountered in the political and economic arena. This can also be found in the religious sphere. The dark side of leadership is responsible for the reign of evil in the world – for the corruption, violence, injustice, poverty, inequality, tyranny, violation of human rights, the destruction of the environment, etc.

The Church has been wracked with scandal and weakened due to her leaders who have been dominated by the dark side. This should never be allowed to happen again. There is indeed a need to confront the dark side of leadership in the society and the Church. The Church must exercise a prophetic role vis-à-vis the political and economic leaders and systems dominated by the dark side. In order to be credible, this prophetic role must also be exercised within the Church and directed to Church leaders. The clergy must listen to the prophetic voices within the Church – whether priests, religious, or laity. There have been saints who by their witness of life have been a conscience to the Church whose leaders have succumbed to the temptation of wealth, power and glory and failed to become good shepherds.

There is a need to develop a corporate culture among the clergy where everyone is encouraged and inspired to live up to the high standards of the priesthood and those whose behavior is inappropriate or sinful can be corrected or held accountable. Such culture, while compassionate, should be intolerant of any wrongdoing. They should never cover up for the misconduct and immoral deeds of their fellow priests. Ultimately, the only way to overcome the dark side of leadership is to live in the light, to undergo a constant process of conversion and to become humble, loving, compassionate good shepherds and servant leaders, following the example of Jesus. – Rappler.com

This piece was originally published on Father Amado Picardal's blog on August 30. Rappler is republishing this with his permission.

(Father Picardal's photo courtesy of CBCP News)

Kung nasisikmura ni Agriculture Secretary Manny Piñol na kumain ng kaning may bukbok, hindi ng taumbayan.

At lalong di natin masisikmurang magsaing ng bigas na binugahan ng kemikal.

Kung totoong ligtas kainin ang weevil-infested rice, bakit pa nag-fumigate?

Ipagpalagay nating patay na ang mga bukbok, andiyan pa rin ang katawan ng mga patay na insekto! Andiyan pa rin ang tae ng mga ito! At may kemikal pa! Inay ko po! 

At hindi pa natapos ang buhol-buhol na palusot ng gobyerno. Tiisin na raw natin ang mataas na presyo ng bigas, sabi ni Piñol, nakikinabang naman ang mga magsasaka!

Hindi niya binanggit na rice traders at middlemen ang tumatabo sa nagaganap na rice crisis. Hindi rin niya binanggit na bumibili rin ng mahal na bigas ang mga magsasaka at, sa kabuuan, mas maraming bigas ang kinukunsumo ng mga magsasaka kaysa inaani nila.

Isa pang kalokohan ni Piñol: hindi raw mataas na presyo ng bigas ang ugat ng inflation; reaksiyon lang daw ito sa mataas na presyo ng krudo at mataas na palitan ng dolyar.

May henyong solusyon pa si Piñol: tanggalin na raw ang pagkain sa pagkuwenta ng inflation! Aba’y ginagawa pa tayong tanga ng mga opisyal ni Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte! Kahit sinong estudyante ng economics ay makapagsasabing ang sinusukat ng inflation rate ay ang pagtaas ng presyo ng consumer goods.

At magkano ang nilustay ng National Food Authority sa inangkat na bigas na ngayo’y bumaba na ang kalidad?

Hunyo pa lang ay nagsimula nang dumating ang inangkat na bigas mula sa Vietnam at Thailand. (Read: The alarming depletion of NFA rice under Duterte’s watch) 

Ang nakabubuwisit na dahilan bakit natengga ang bigas sa mga barko at pinutakte ng bukbok: maulan daw at hindi puwedeng mabasa ang bigas dahil mabubulok!

Sa loob ng dalawang buwan, walang diskarteng naisip ang lahat ng rice traders kaya’t hindi naibaba ang mga bigas? Talaga? O naghintay silang lalo pang tumaas ang presyo ng bigas para lalong tumaas ang tutubuin nila?

Kaya't naisip naman ni Piñol na payagan na raw ang smuggling ng bigas. Ano raw? Payagan ang bawal at ilegal? Bibigyan pa ng trabaho ni Manong Manny ang mga pirata sa Mindanao?

Huminga nang malalim, mga kababayan.

Ayon kay JC Punongbayan, kolumnista ng Rappler na nagtuturo ng economics sa UP, walang ibang puwedeng sisihin sa krisis sa bigas, lalo na sa Zamboanga City at Basilan. (Read: Filipinos don’t deserve fumigated nor weevil-infested rice)

Ang ugat ng problema ay ang di wastong pamamahala ng NFA – na hinaluan pa ng mga eksena ng kalihim ng palabigasan, este agrikultura. 

May mga ulat din na nakinabang umano ang mga kaibigan ng Pangulo sa mga kontratang maaga pa lang ay nabakuran na.

At tulad ng nangyari sa inflation at giyera kontra-droga, muling ipinamalas ng administrasyong Duterte na salat ito sa kahusayang magpalakad ng gobyerno o kampanya. Walang istratehiya, maliban siguro sa paano makikinabang ang mga nakaluklok sa puwesto. Walang sentido-komon na umiiral. 

Hindi rin masisisante ang mga bugok at bulok na opisyal na nagdala sa bayan sa krisis tulad nina Jason Aquino ng NFA at Piñol. Ayon kay Pangulong Duterte, buo ang tiwala niya sa mga ito. Matibay talaga ang pagkakaibigan!

Puro tumbling at gimik lang ang ginagawa ng mga nasa pamahalaan – ibabaon sa binubukbok na bigas ang katotohanang korupsiyon at kainutilan ang puno’t dulo ng lahat. – Rappler.com

Perhaps it is an instructional coincidence that 2 days before the Supreme Court denied Senator Leila de Lima’s motion for reconsideration to allow her to appear in the oral arguments on the ICC Case, Zaldy Ampatuan was attending her daughter’s wedding by virtue of a furlough granted by the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City trying the Ampatuan massacre case.

On the one hand, we have a case of a sitting senator, whose continued detention on vague charges was dissented upon by 6 justices of the Supreme Court, being denied the opportunity to represent herself in oral arguments before the same Court.

On the other hand, we have a primary accused in the biggest massacre of journalists in human history, resulting in the murder of 58 human beings, being allowed to attend his daughter’s wedding.

Both occurred within two days of each other, presenting the Philippine legal community with a study in irony of how, at least on the issue of granting furloughs, considerations of justice and equity seem to evade our judges and justices.

Judge as tyrant-king

The matter of furlough has always been highly discretionary on the courts.

There are no rules or guidelines on furlough. The fact that the Supreme Court has not bothered to lay down rules on the grant or denial of furloughs is itself a testament on how this remains an area of law where the judge is allowed to act like a tyrant-king, where any decision rendered rests solely and entirely upon the judge’s discretion.

The only similar and comparative grant of power is the presidential pardon or executive clemency, a legal remnant from the medieval times of absolute monarchs where kings held the power of life and death over their subjects in the absence of any regime that recognized the modern concepts of the right to life and liberty.

In a sense, especially under circumstances where there are no written rules or guidelines, the power and discretion of the courts to grant or deny furloughs can thus be characterized as despotic, one that entirely relies on the musings of a single judge, unhampered by written rules or precedence – albeit “discretionary” is the kinder word that is used.

It is precisely because of the absence of written rules on the grant or denial of prison furloughs why we have this study in irony of a detained senator being refused furlough to represent herself before the highest court and an accused mass murderer being granted one to attend a wedding.

The contrast is absurd.

But this is exactly the reason why such absurdity exists, because of the absence of a normative construct that otherwise pervades modern society as we know it, especially in the arena of lawyers and judges known as the criminal justice system.

If one takes time to contemplate this fact, it is absolutely mind-blowing to realize that in the modern era of complex legal systems, we have allowed magistrates to possess a remnant of absolute power characteristic of the dark ages. Worse, we have allowed it to remain for so long.

But only because it is not so much a violation of rights, as it is a play on privileges that, more often than not, only applies to a social class capable of such status as to merit the attention of a court. There are no rules on furlough only because it is not a general privilege attainable by all those similarly situated.

Admittedly, common criminals without the political or social status and the lawyers to access the courts for such privilege ordinarily are not granted furlough. It is not every day that courts grant furloughs to poor criminals who are denied bail. One might have to be a former president, a senator, or in the case of Zaldy Ampatuan, a powerful figure, in order to even contemplate applying to the courts for a temporary leave from detention. 

In actual practice, furlough is limited as a privilege to detention prisoners with either status or title. Laying down clear rules and guidelines will necessarily have the effect of democratizing the privilege.

Thus, in a highly stratified society such as ours, where privileges of social class apply even among – or especially among – prisoners, writing rules on furlough will have unintended consequences. Since, in current reality, equal application of the privilege to all prisoners similarly situated is more of an exception than the rule, the problems to the judiciary that written rules would create might prove overwhelming. 

Political tool

At present, the paramount drawback of absolute court discretion in the grant of furloughs is that it can be used as a political tool even against prisoners with the political status to apply for it.

The uneven grant of furloughs by courts to public figures, as our study in contrast of the De Lima and Ampatuan cases shows, demonstrates how political elements are factored in in the exercise of the court’s discretion.

While other political figures were allowed, in the past, to be with their families during Christmas, graduations, and weddings, there could only be one explanation to the courts’ repeated refusal to give De Lima an even break.

And this is because her case remains a highly politically-charged case, one that is even personal to President Duterte, who appoints judges and justices to the courts.

We must remember that the President himself laid the groundwork for De Lima’s prosecution, pronouncing her guilt and promising her destruction even before the House hearing and the National Bureau of Investigation probe into the Bilibid drug trade started. From day one, the President himself was De Lima’s accuser, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.

This is the strong arm of the state at play. And in political cases where the highest official of the land, who is in charge of appointing judges and justices, has a personal stake, even courts become a part of this strong arm, whether wittingly or unwittingly.

Thus, even in the simple request for a temporary leave to speak before the Supreme Court, in a case that directly challenges the President’s withdrawal from the international tribunal that can one day order his arrest and try him for crimes against humanity, De Lima’s political persecution continues. Indeed, during dark periods of strongman rule, our courts, even the Supreme Court, have demonstrated a capacity for cooptation.

Even the post-EDSA Supreme Court has recognized this tendency in the Martial Law Supreme Court where, instead of becoming the guardian of constitutional liberties against the strong arm of the state as espoused in the case of Brocka v. Enrile (G.R. Nos. 69863-65; December 10, 1990), the Court merely becomes part of the workshop that forges a strongman’s iron rule.

In its experience with dictators and strongmen, the High Court – not as a collection of specific individuals, but as the third branch of government ordained under the Constitution to check the excesses of an authoritarian President – still has to demonstrate that capability to fulfill such constitutional ideals on which its very reason for being is founded: to challenge impunity, to oppose authoritarianism, to uphold the bill of rights, and to protect citizens from the brazen strong arm of the State.

This is certainly not to blame the current members of the Court during said particular periods. From a sociological vantage point, they might even be helpless to do otherwise. After all, the judiciary remains a part of the State, neither separated nor uninfluenced by it.

The way it dispenses justice will always be a reflection of the State’s reality.

Its challenge however, is to not make the strong arm of the State its own, regardless of how it is doomed to remain a part of it.  

There is no other way to describe the decisions on De Lima’s request for a furlough by the Regional Trial Court in the case of her son’s graduation and by the Supreme on her appearance as counsel for the ICC case: these are unjust to De Lima, an injustice to all of us. – Rappler.com

A lot of things in the Philippines are not as clear-cut as they seem.

The rice shortage is one of them. There are a number of basic questions that appear to have been lost in the competing press releases handed out by government officials.

As a matter of policy, the government would keep a buffer of rice in its warehouses of around 15-20 days’ worth of daily consumption. The buffer was aimed at keeping prices under control and prevent a runaway spike.

With prices surging, we are left with a number of questions.

First, why were rice inventories in government warehouses allowed to fall to less than 2 days of consumption? In effect, the government was disarmed in keeping rice prices stable.

It seems running the government’s rice stock to practically nothing was done deliberately. The shortage appears to be man-made.

Which leads to the next question that is just as disturbing.

Who would benefit from an emergency order for imports of around a million tons because government rice stocks were artificially run down?

If they are rice millers and/or importers, how are they connected to the Philippine government?

Was the shortage for their benefit?

Are these rice importers supporters of this government?

And do they donate to its politicians and their campaigns?

One friend tartly commented that with the elections set for next year, it is time for “fund-raising.”

In these kinds of cases, the best thing to do really is to follow the money. It works for nailing crooked politicians. 

While rice farmers may enjoy some benefits from the current high prices, what happens to the consumers who have to pay for the staple food of the 105 million Filipinos? Inflation  shoots up, which of course hits everyone in sight.

According to the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), the latest data they have showed retail prices of well-milled rice have hit 46.35 pesos/kg in the third week of August, up almost 10% from the level last year.

As for wholesale well-milled rice, the price has jumped 11.5% from last year to 43.81 pesos/kg.

Shrinking arable land

While the shortage is top of mind in the Philippines, the more fundamental issue is why rice production in the country is always falling short.

The amount of arable land in the country is limited and it is shrinking as the number of people increase. 

When I was growing up in the last century, Parañaque was salt pans and the southern stretches beyond Muntinlupa were rice or coconut farms. Today, you have Festival Mall in Alabang and the Ayala developments in Laguna.

In the April to June quarter alone, the PSA said the harvested area for rice fell to 939,790 hectares, from 947,190 million hectares in the same period last year.

Yields have also remained flat in the second quarter at 4.38 tonnes per hectare, the PSA added.

It is incredibly hard to boost production of rice when both yields and your farms are shrinking. 

The growing weather has also been atrocious for pretty much this decade, and there is every indication the future may well get worse.  

Since 2012, a typhoon or several of them in succession has struck the Philippines during the last quarter of the year. This included typhoon Yolanda/Haiyan, which nearly obliterated Tacloban from the map.

Why is the last quarter important for rice? The last quarter is when most of the rice in the Philippines is harvested. If the main rice areas in Luzon, Mindanao, Iloilo and Leyte-Samar are hit, that pretty much guarantees Manila will be forced to import rice the following year. 

Imports of rice have happened every year since.

Climate change and global warming is not doing the country any favors either. With warmer oceans, the typhoon season is lasting longer and becoming more intense. Even the monsoon rains are firing up because of the warm waters surrounding the country.

That’s science.

The country is also vulnerable to El Niño, which happens every 3-7 years and always seems to hit the Philippines with drought. Since most of the rice farms are rain-fed, a dry spell is the last thing Filipino farmers need.

One severe El Niño hit the country a few years ago. The US Climate Prediction Center forecast another is likely to develop after the northern hemisphere summer ends this month and batter the Philippines in 2019.

Will tariff work?

Now the government of President Rodrigo Duterte is pushing to replace the current system for rice imports with a tariff system. 

But even with a 35% tariff on imported rice, the price will still come around to about 30 pesos/kg, sharply below current levels of 42 to 46 pesos/kg.

Will the plan being pushed by the government help? The farmers’ groups in the Philippines are already squawking against it.

As always in things of this nature, the devil is in the details.

The proper question on this proposal to allow unlimited rice imports is, who gets the business? 

Will the importers be the government's friends?

Money talks.– Rappler.com

Rene Pastor is a long-time journalist who wrote about commodity issues for an international news agency and has written extensively about the rice situation in the Philippines. He is based outside New York City.

In issuing Proclamation No. 572, the President revoked the amnesty granted to Senator Sonny Trillanes for being void ab initio on the ground that he did not comply with the "minimum requirements to qualify under the amnesty proclamation."

The Proclamation cited a certification from the Armed Forces of the Philippines' Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel that there is no available copy of Trillanes' application for amnesty, and that he refused to admit his guilt. Much like Sereno who was booted out of office after her appointment was declared void ab initio, Trillanes now finds himself under threat of arrest after his amnesty proclamation is being revoked for the same reason.

A patent illegality

The revocation of the Trillanes amnesty is  illegal. Without any doubt, Proclamation 572 is a patent illegality, if not outright unconstitutional. It is riddled with legal loopholes to such an extent that it gives the unmistakable impression that it has been dished out for no other reason than to silence a staunch and implacable critic of the President.

Proclamation 75, under which Senator Trillanes applied for amnesty in connection with his involvement in the Oakwood mutiny, was processed by the military, approved by then president Benigno Aquino III, and concurred in by Congress.

Unlike pardon, amnesty looks backward and abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense itself, it so overlooks and obliterates the offense with which Trillanes was charged that he, being released by amnesty, stands before the law precisely as though he had committed no offense. There is no question that Trillanes is a grantee of a valid amnesty proclamation, as such his criminal liability was fully extinguished.

Contrary to the President’s statement that Trillanes did not submit an application and a copy of which cannot be found in the Requirement Room, there is ample evidence that this application was in fact submitted. Abigail Valte, a spokesperson of former President Aquino, in fact shared on Twitter a photo of Trillanes' amnesty application and a video of the document's filing.

Even assuming that a copy of the application could not be found, can the presumption of regularity at least be held in favor of the officials who issued, processed, and had custody of his amnesty application? Same goes with Trillanes’ admission of guilt which, prior to the issuance of Proclamation 572, had never been questioned nor put under scrutiny by the previous administrations.

The Proclamation tethers as an ex post facto law for ostensibly inflicting punishment upon Trillanes for an act done prior to its issuance when before the eyes of the law, he has not committed any crime. It is akin to a bill of attainder which singles out the opposition senator for punishment without trial. Both are proscribed under the Constitution and have no place in a democratic and civilized society.

It should also be noted that an amnesty is not a unilateral act by the President. Granting it required congressional concurrence. This is to make sure the whole government, indeed the country, is bound that decision. It cannot be undone by the presidential fiat.

That the President is ordering the immediate arrest of Trillanes, a civilian, is another reason to declare the Proclamation illegal. We all know that a warrant to arrest an individual can only be issued by the courts. The President is but the chief implementor or executive and is not vested under the Constitution with judicial powers. Hence, he cannot simply order the arrest of an individual whimsically, without a judicial fiat.

The courts on the other hand cannot issue an arrest warrant for cases that have already been dismissed by virtue of the amnesty.

An unwise policy

The revocation of the Trillanes amnesty is not right for the country long-term. Indeed, policy-wise, the revocation of any amnesty is disastrous for a country riven by social conflicts. Time and again, political amnesties have been resorted to as a means of healing social and national strife.

In the Philippine-American war, as the hostilities wound down, amnesty was resorted to so that everyone would have an option to come down from the hills. After World War II, even as it was controversial, amnesty was offered even to collaborators with the Japanese so the country could move on. In the 1960s and 1970s, and even during the Martial Law era, amnesties were resorted to bring the Huks, Moro rebels, and other groups back to the fold of the law.

More recently, members of the Moro National Liberation Front, the Cordillera People’s Liberation Army, several left-wing groups independent of the Communist Party of the Philippines, and military rebels were granted amnesty. In the future, amnesty has to be granted to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front as well as the cadres and combatants of the Communist Party of the Philippines, New People’s Army, and National Democratic Front of the Philippines if a permanent peace settlement is achieved with the latter groups.

As far as I know, there has never been an instance when amnesty given by one president has been revoked by a subsequent president. If this becomes a rule, future presidents would have lost an important tool for national healing and unity. Who would trust any president who makes promises to rebel groups if his or her successor could at a whim revoke an amnesty?

Immoral and unjust

The revocation of the Trillanes amnesty is evil. It is immoral and unjust because it is done for a personal reason, for partisan political motives, and not for the good of the country.

Most of President Duterte’s most vociferous critics have been silenced or are in danger of being silenced. First on the chopping block was Senator Leila de Lima who had the misfortune of initiating an investigation against then mayor Duterte for supposed human rights violations when she was still the head of the Commission on Human Rights.

Then the Commission on Human Rights itself was attacked when it questioned the President’s prosecution of the war on drugs, the administration’s centerpiece campaign. His allies in Congress made an attempt to emasculate the constitutional body with a paltry P1,000-budget. Fortunately, this attempt proved too blatant even for administration allies. Then came former chief justice Maria Lourdes Sereno who had to go after she was ousted under dubious circumstances by her own colleagues via a quo warranto conviction.

Vice President Leni Robredo’s position is also under threat because of a pending electoral protest before the Supreme Court sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal. Of course, we all have been witness to the verbal attacks made by no less than Duterte against the Catholic Church, the President’s favorite whipping boy, which remains an influential institution in the country.

So, it is no small wonder that Senator Trillanes, President Duterte’s nemesis, would be targeted next. If at all, it is a cause of wonderment why it took this government so long, more than two years, to make its move. It may be because the senator proved to be the hardest nut to crack of all the lot.

Considering all the recent actions being undertaken by this administration to stifle any and all opposition and critics, coupled with the President’s chilling pronouncements giving preference to a dictatorship or a military junta over the Vice President, as the mandated Constitutional successor, one cannot help but entertain the thought that we are inexorably sliding towards an extraconstitutional regime.

Is a repeat of the Marcos dictatorial regime in the offing? After Trillanes, who’s next? The prospects are simply too chilling to contemplate. – Rappler.com

Nagbabagang paksa ang bigas ngayon. Tumataas ang presyo, mahahaba ang pila sa mga outlet ng National Food Authority (NFA), at binabatikos ang gobyerno dahil hindi nito sineguro ang sapat na suplay. 

Napag-alaman din na hindi maayos ang pag-imbak ng gobyerno sa inangkat na bigas. Naiulat pa na 330,000 sako ng inangkat na bigas ang kailangang gamutin ng pestisidyo dahil pineste na ng bukbok ang mga ito.

Dahil sa sitwasyong ito, nagpahayag ang kalihim ng Departamento ng Agrikultura na si Emmanuel Piñol na siya mismo ang kakain ng ginamot na bigas o di kaya ng bigas na hindi ginamot kaya’t puno ito ng bukbok. Di nagtagal at nagdeklara ang NFA na ginamot na nila ang mga binukbok na bigas na inangkat mula Thailand at Vietnam at maaari na itong kainin.

May mga video si Secretary Piñol na kumakain siya ng kanin na binukbok at ang mga opisyales ng NFA na kumakain ng sinaing na bigas na ginamot.

Ligtas ba ang bigas na may bukbok?

Sapat na ba ito para magtiwala ang publiko na ligtas ang bigas na may bukbok? Hindi po. May ilang tanong na kailangang sagutin ng gobyerno bago natin madesisyunan na puwedeng kainin ang bigas na ito.

Totoo na maraming Pilipino ang kumakain ng kanin mula sa bigas na binukbok. Ang mga bigas na inimbak ng mga magsasaka nang ilang buwan matapos ang ani ay pinepeste ng bukbok. Huhugasan lamang ang bigas nang ilang ulit hanggang wala nang nakikitang bukbok, at kinakain na ito.

Subalit hindi natin alam kung gaano kagrabe na ang impestasyon ng bigas na ibinebenta ng NFA.

Sa mga salita ni kalihim ng departamento ng kalusugan na si Francisco Duque III, maaaring isaing ang bigas na binukbok at kainin,“unless it has massively infected the rice supply, this poses no harm” (kung hindi naman grabe ang impestasyon, hindi ito mapanganib).

Ngunit ano kaya ang ibig sabihin ng “massively infected”?

Sinubok kong hanapin kung may pamantayan ang gobyerno para sa antas ng impeksiyon ng bigas na inaangkat natin sa ibang bansa. Wala akong makita.

Ayon din sa isang eksperto na kinonsulta ng Rappler, maaaring matanggal ng paghugas ang mga insekto mismo, ngunit hindi natin malalaman kung nahugasan na rin ang mga itlog at dumi nito.

Sa pananaliksik ko rin, maaaring magkasakit ang ilang indibiduwal kung malanghap nila ang alikabok na galing sa bigas na pineste ng bukbok.

Kaya’t hanggang hindi sinasabi ng gobyerno kung grabe o hindi ang impestasyon, mahirap sabihing ligtas ang NFA rice.

Paano naman ang bigas na ginamitan ng pestisidyo?

Ang pangalawang tanong ay kung ligtas ba ang bigas na ginamitan ng pestisidyo o panlason ng bukbok? Muli, hindi natin alam hanggang hindi sinasagot ng gobyerno ang ilang katanungan.

Una, ano ang ginamit na panlason? Ayon sa ilang pinagtanungan ko, maaaring ang ginamit ng NFA ay ang mga pestisidyong phosphogene o aluminum phosphide. Ayon sa sariling pananaliksik ang isa pang posibleng ginamit ay ang methyl bromide.

Ang 3 ay malakas na makapanglason (highly toxic) kung masinghot o makain ng tao. Kaya’t higit na mahalaga ang tamang paggamit ng mga ito.

Para sa kapakanan ng mga manggagawang nag-bubuga ng pestisidyo, dapat tanungin ang Department of Agriculture at ang Department of Health kung ano ang kanilang ginawa upang maseguro na ligtas ang mga manggagawang ito.

Para naman sa publikong magsasaing ng bigas, kailangang malaman kung gaano katapang ang anumang panlason ng insekto na ginamit. Para sa bawat pestisidyo, may antas na itinatakda ang mga eksperto. Hindi dapat humigit sa antas na iyon ang nilalamang lason ng bigas upang maging ligtas itong kainin araw-araw.

Mayroon ding itinatakdang panahon kung kailan hindi puwedeng ibenta ang bigas dahil kailangang bigyan ng oras na sumingaw ang lason. Kaya't higit akong nabahala nang inanunsiyo ng NFA na, matapos ang dalawang linggo, hinihikayat na nito ang tao na kainin ang bigas na ginamitan ng pestisidyo.

Ang isa pang kailangang itanong ay kung ilang beses nabugahan ang bigas. Ginamitan ba ito ng pestisidyo bago isinakay sa barko papuntang Pilipinas? Kung ganoon, may natitira pa bang lason na siya namang dinagdagan ng panibagong lason? Tumaas ba ang dose ng pestisidyo na naiwan sa bigas dahil dito?

May mga test na puwedeng gawin ang NFA upang malaman kung mababa ang antas ng pestisidyo sa ibinebenta nilang bigas. Ngunit ginawa ba nila ang test na ito? Paano? Sapat ba ang bilang ng sako na sinuri? Sa isang warehouse o sa lahat? Kung oo, dapat nilang ipaalam sa mga eksperto at sa publiko ang mga resulta.

Samakatuwid, hanggang hindi nasasagot ng gobyerno ang maraming katanungan tungkol sa kalidad ng bigas na pineste at ginamitan ng pestisidyo, mahirap sabihin kung ligtas nga itong kainin ng tao. Bilang isang manggagawang pangkalusugan, pinagpapayuhan ko si Secretary Piñol at ang iba pang opisyal ng NFA na tigilan na muna ang pagkain ng bigas na binukbok at tigilan na rin ang paghikayat sa mga mamamayan na tularan sila.

Pangkalahatang ginhawa

Hindi lamang pisikal na kalusugan ang dapat bigyan ng konsiderasyon kung bigas ang pag-uusapan.

Para sa nakararaming Pilipino, bigas ang pang-araw-araw na pagkain. Sukatan ito ng ating kaginhawahan sa buhay. Kapag masarap ang bigas, kahit simple na lang ang ulam. Bumababa ang ating pagtingin sa sarili kapag kumakain tayo ng mabaho, ginamot, o pinesteng bigas.

Sa larangan ng mga aralin tungkol sa pag-unlad, lalong nararamdaman ng mahihirap ang kawalan ng hustisya at nawawalan sila ng tiwala na kaya nilang umahon sa hirap, kapag ipinamumukha sa kanila ang kanilang pagkadukha.

Hindi ba ito ang ginagawa ng gobyerno sa kanilang solusyon sa krisis ng bigas? Ang ipamukha sa ating mamamayan na dapat na naman silang magtiis? Partikular sa mga kababaihan na siyang madalas na nagsasaing, hindi yata naiisip ng mga opisyales na ang payo nilang hugasan nang mabuti ang bigas upang matanggal ang bukbok o ang pestisidyo ay dagdag na pasakit. Mahirap mag-imbak ng tubig sa maraming lugar at magastos pa.

Sa halip na makipagtalo tungkol sa bukbok, iminumungkahi ko kay Secretary Piñol na magbitiw na lamang kung hindi niya kayang gumawa ng mga agarang hakbang upang maseguro na ang supply ng ating bigas ay ligtas, masarap, malinis, katanggap-tanggap, at sapat. – Rappler.com

Si Sylvia Estrada Claudio ay isang doktor ng medisina, doktor ng pilosopiya sa sikolohiya at dekana ng Kolehiyo ng Gawaing Panlipunan at Pagpapaunlad ng Pamayanan ng Unibersidad ng Pilipinas. Nais niyang pasalamatan si Dr. Lynn Crisanta Panganiban, ng National Poison Management & Control Center, sa pagbibigay niya ng mga teknikal na datos hinggil sa methyl bromide, phosphogene at aluminum phosphide. Ganunpaman, ang interpretasyon ng datos at mga opinyong nakasaad sa artikulong ito ay pawang kay Dr. Estrada Claudio lamang.

Yesterday, we were greeted by truly shocking news: the Philippines' inflation rate, which measures how fast prices are rising, reached a whopping 6.4% in August.

Not only is this the highest in 9.4 years, it also exceeded the government’s upper forecast of 6.2%, and is way above the government’s 4% upper target for 2018.

Data also show it’s now the highest in all of ASEAN. Figure 1 shows that Vietnam’s inflation rate (at least as of July) was only at 4.5%, Indonesia 3.2%, Thailand 1.5%, Malaysia 0.9%, and Singapore 0.6%. 

Notice too that when President Duterte came into office, Philippine inflation can be found right in the middle of the ASEAN pack. These days, we’re on top of everyone else. 

But why is inflation running away in the Philippines and not in other ASEAN countries? 

Figure 1

World oil prices 

Inflation is always going to be a mix of international and domestic factors. 

One obvious suspect is the continuing rise of oil prices worldwide. 

Countries with no substantial oil production to speak of – like the Philippines – are forced to import oil. Consequently, they are at the mercy of global oil price movements determined largely by supply and demand.

Figure 2 shows the close correlation between domestic inflation and the yearly changes in global oil prices. Based solely on this graph, you might be forgiven to think world oil prices alone can explain much of the changes in Philippine inflation.

Figure 2. A similar graph was made by Jun Neri using WTI Crude instead of Brent Crude.

One possible reason for this pattern is that the Philippines is one of the biggest net importers of oil in ASEAN. 

One study showed that, back in 2016, we imported as much as 94% of our oil requirements, vis-à-vis Thailand which only imported 70%, Indonesia 41%, Vietnam 20%, and Malaysia 10%. 

If indeed valid, this theory gives us reason to think President Duterte’s tax reform law (TRAIN) is patently ill-timed. 

If you recall, TRAIN included tax hikes on several petroleum products, such as unleaded gasoline, diesel, and kerosene. Unknown to many, TRAIN also provides for two more rounds of automatic petroleum tax hikes in 2019 and 2020.

This policy, to me, is like rubbing salt on one’s economic wounds. 

Combined with the fact that global oil prices later this year could reach up to $90 per barrel—because of limited supplies from key oil exporters like Iran and Venezuela—it seems cruel to impose additional tax hikes on fuels come January 2019. 

Therefore, the proposed bill to stop the implementation of TRAIN’s petroleum tax hikes seems more and more justified by the day – if only as a stopgap measure to arrest runaway inflation immediately.

Weak peso

Another factor that contributes to runaway inflation is the weakening peso. 

As of September 5 the peso closed at P53.5 per US dollar, the lowest it’s been in 12.2 years. The peso is also one of the weakest currencies in ASEAN today.

Because we pay imports in foreign currencies, a weaker peso necessarily makes imports costlier. As such, oil becomes costlier too, as well as all the other goods and services in the economy that rely on it. 

But why is the peso slumping to begin with?

I argued before that perhaps the largest reason is a domestic one: imports are experiencing double-digit growth rates, even as exports have shrunk for 6 consecutive months.  

This widening “trade gap” roughly means we’re shelling out more dollars than we are earning, and the relative abundance of pesos in the local market robs it of its value.

Note that a lot of such imports are raw materials (like iron and steel) and capital goods meant for Duterte’s infrastructure push called Build, Build, Build. Therefore, you can say that Build, Build, Build is partly to blame for the weaker peso. 

This is not necessarily bad. But insofar as a weak peso makes imports costlier in general, then Build, Build, Build also sows the seeds of future inflation. 

People’s expectations

But perhaps the biggest – and most underappreciated – factor behind inflation is people’s expectations of inflation.

A recent study by IMF researchers, for example, shows that at least half of inflation in ASEAN-5 countries is attributable to how people anticipate future inflation. This factor (the blue area in Figure 3) overwhelms all other factors such as oil and import prices.

Figure 3. Relative contributions to inflation in ASEAN-5 countries. Source: Dany-Knedlik and Garcia [2018]. 

Inflation expectations matter because they change how people behave. 

For example, if news outlets announce that oil companies will hike gasoline and diesel prices at midnight tomorrow, consumers today will race to the gas stations to fill up, spiking demand and stoking prices further.

This mentality applies to inflation as well. If people expect inflation to rise in the coming months, not only will consumers hoard basic goods, but workers will also lobby for higher wages, and firms will also revise their menus or price lists to safeguard their profits.

All these effects add up to further inflation. In this sense, the original expectations become “self-fulfilling prophecies.”

It’s in government’s interest, therefore, to manage (or “anchor”) people’s inflation expectations from time to time. 

If, say, the government wants inflation to fall between 2% to 4% from 2018 up to 2020, then government must ensure this is credible. For that to happen, the people must see that government is on top of inflation.

For its part, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas already raised its key interest rate in recent months: by 0.25 percentage point in May and June, and by 0.5 percentage point in August. Many analysts expect another big rate hike this month.

Some people have argued that this “tighter” monetary policy came in a tad too late. Still, others worry that this won’t do much anyway because monetary policy usually operates with a long lag, and recent inflation is largely supply-driven (rather than demand-driven). 

Rice crisis

Finally, domestic inflation has also been boosted by tighter supply of many agricultural products, notably rice.

Last week I wrote about the burgeoning rice crisis. Since then, President Duterte has flatly denied there’s any problem. Agriculture Secretary Manny Piñol also laughably ate weevil-infested rice on national TV, as if that will do anything to cover up the bungling policies of the National Food Authority (NFA). 

What’s not laughable is the fact that some regions have experienced double-digit rice inflation rates last month (see Figure 4). The situation is direst in Bicol, which not only suffered the highest regional inflation rate (9%), but also the highest rice inflation rate (12.5%).

Figure 4

It’s not just rice, by the way. Vegetables inflated by 19.2%, corn 12.6%, fish 12.4%, and sugary goods 9.1%. For these products, there are regional variations as well.

What to do? At least for rice, government can mop up its errors by importing more rice, fast-tracking the distribution of imported rice, and passing the rice tariffication bill.

Duterte will also do us all a favor by immediately firing the inept officials who brought about this needless rice crisis, namely the NFA Administrator and the Agriculture Secretary. Duterte might also consider abolishing the NFA for good.

This is not fine

By and large, August’s 6.4% inflation rate surprised everyone, not least the economic managers. 

The first order of business is to arrest inflation immediately. The economic managers can do this by decisively halting TRAIN’s petroleum tax hikes next year, further raising interest rates, and hastening the importation and distribution of rice nationwide.

More importantly, however, the economic managers must rein in people’s expectations about future inflation. They can do this by regaining the people’s trust and showing us all they’re on top of the economic situation.  

They can’t do this by continuing to deny there’s a problem. In the wake of the 6.4% inflation announcement, for example, Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia said it’s “not alarming” and “quite normal in a fast-growing economy.” 

It’s one thing to remain calm in the face of a crisis. It’s another to flatly deny there’s a problem, even if it’s already staring you in the face.  

The economic managers’ blithe remarks about inflation call to mind the famous “This is Fine” meme circulating the net, where a humanlike dog, sitting in a room engulfed by flames, sips coffee and tells himself, “This is fine.” 

Needless to say, our present economic situation is not fine. Our economic managers will do well to acknowledge the flames around us before things are too late. – 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. 

Deep in the dungeons of the Department of Foreign Affairs on Roxas Boulevard lies the 479-page verdict of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague on the maritime dispute between the Philippines and China. 

This document is treated by Foreign Secretary Alan Cayetano like the mysterious Mr Rochester in Jane Eyre treated his mad wife: kept out of sight and under lock and key lest she burn the house down.

Unfortunately for Cayetano and his boss in Malacañang, Marites Vitug, one of the country’s leading journalists, has salvaged the historic ruling from the obscurity that threatened to engulf it and made it and the story behind it come alive in her latest book, "Rock Solid: How the Philippines Won its Maritime Case against China" published by the Ateneo de Manila University Press.  

This book is controversial, so much so that National Book Store, the country’s prime retailer, has refused to distribute it for fear of inviting President Rodrigo Duterte’s wrath.  But wherein lies the controversy? In the fact that the book unveils for a lay audience the massive legal victory the Philippines won in The Hague not only for itself but for all countries intimidated by big neighbors. 

This has placed Malacañang in the uncomfortable position of having to explain why it treats a historic win for the country like a mad wife.

Having some acquaintance with the best works in investigative journalism that have come out in the last few years, I would say that the only other work that matches the depth, comprehensiveness, and drama of Vitug’s book is Andrew Sorkin’s prize-winning "Too Big to Fail," on Wall Street and the financial crisis.I am sure this book will also garner its fair share of awards.

Vitug’s fishing lines

There are 3 lines that Vitug unrolls in the book. 

One follows the confrontation between the Philippines and China on the ground as well as on the high seas. The second delves into the legal intricacies of the case and simplifies them for us laypeople. The third introduces us to a cast of characters who, as in all good journalism, are made to personify the various issues and problems that the author deals with. (Even I have a cameo role, but the author should have made me a footnote instead of giving my flyboy antics two pages worth of valuable column inches). 

Then, like a good fisherwoman, the author pulls the lines together into a dramatic narrative that never flags.

Now this book might be said to be partisan, that it presents only the Philippine side. But this is not the author’s fault since Beijing refused to participate in the proceedings and, outside the proceedings, has done little to prove its case except assert continually that China has historic ownership rights to the South China Sea, with no historical, cartographic, or legal proofs for it. 

Unlike the complex Philippine case, the Chinese side was very simple: we own what you call the West Philippine Sea. This fact is not a matter of legal dispute but an eternal truth. So don’t fuck with us. 

Well, Beijing did not quite put it that way, but at some points, its representatives uttered something close to it. Vitug quotes former Chinese foreign minister Yang Jiechi saying in Hanoi at a meeting in 2010, with his gaze at a Singaporean official, “China is a big country and other countries are small countries, and that’s a fact.”

The author does not hesitate to bring up the contradictions that surfaced on the Philippine side or the mistakes the government committed. For instance, during the confrontation with China at the Scarborough Shoal in 2012, it sent a naval warship, the BRP Gregorio del Pilar, instead of a coast guard vessel, an act that gave China great propaganda mileage with its claim the Philippines was being warlike and provocative. 

Then there was the internal Philippine quarrel over whether to include the case of the rock Itu Aba in the Philippine case, a quarrel that had a demoralizing effect (fortunately not too great) on the Philippine team and which ended up costing the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court her job.  (This sideshow that resulted in bad blood between then solicitor general, now Supreme Court Associate Justice, Francis Jardeleza, and then chief justice, now private citizen Maria Lourdes Sereno probably deserves a book of its own.)

Given its rock solid grounding, the Philippines’ victory on nearly all of the 15 points its legal team brilliantly argued over three-and-a-half years was probably expected. What was unexpected was the newly ascended Duterte administration’s almost shamefaced response. Vitug briefly touches on what she characterizes as Manila’s “defeatist, self-flagellating” attitude, but does not delve into it since it really is a whole new topic.  

Manila’s mea culpa

The administration’s response to the PCA decision is, of course, part of a bigger question: why has President Duterte so enthusiastically embraced China? Now there have been a number of explanations offered for this, but let me end this review by giving my take on it.

My sense is that Duterte’s actions stem from 3 things: 1) a shrewd acceptance of changing power realities in Asia, in particular, China’s emerging dominant role in the region, 2) admiration for China’s political system; and 3) an ethical condition that we might call Duterte’s “moral vacuum.”   

First of all, in terms of geopolitical realities, Duterte knew that with its consistent position of not taking sides on sovereignty issues in the South China Sea, which it had reiterated to Philippine presidents from Marcos onwards, the US could do little to come to the Philippines’ aid in a military confrontation with China over the disputed territory, even if the Philippines was a treaty ally. 

Washington, of course, always finessed its statements with high-faluting words about being committed to the defense of the Philippines, but Duterte was no dummy. That the Philippines won its legal battle in The Hague with China over the latter’s claim of having exercised sovereignty historically over the area did not cut any ice with Duterte, for whom power realities are paramount.  

In terms of material incentives, with the US in economic crisis for almost a decade prior to 2016 and Washington’s increasing tightfistedness when it came to foreign aid for allies, Duterte knew the Americans did not have money to spare while rapidly growing China did. 

Chinese loans, aid, and investment play the pivotal role in Duterte’s planned acceleration of upgrading and expanding the country’s infrastructure, a program named Build! Build! Build!

Second, what has often been missed in most assessments is Duterte’s admiration for China’s authoritarian system for its ability to “deliver results.” The Philippine leader has periodically declared his “love” for Chinese President Xi Jin Ping – indeed, so often that it’s getting to be embarrassing. 

That bond is likely cemented by a common belief in the superiority of authoritarian rule over the messy politics of liberal democracy. It is likely that Duterte sees himself, along with Xi and Xi’s Cambodian pet Hun Sen, as a part of a regional alliance of authoritarian regimes that promises to deliver effective government.

Third, the previous Aquino administration’s point in bringing China to a court of arbitration was not a belief that China would respect the legal judgment in the short term. It was to gain moral leverage that could translate into diplomatic leverage in the long haul. As one of the chief architects of the Philippines’ legal strategy, Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio, put it, as quoted by Vitug, “This generation will get the ruling. The next generation will convince the world to support us, and maybe the generation after that will convince China.” 

Punk ethics

The Hague arbitration was all about affirming the rule of law on the high seas, and China was found to be on the wrong side of the law. Now respect for the rule of law is not exactly President Duterte’s strong suit. Indeed, I would say that being a serial lawbreaker – sociologist Wataru Kusaka characterizes him as “a bandit who grabbed the state” – he would probably be viscerally incapable of assuming the role of an aggrieved party calling for respect for the rule of law. Can you imagine Duterte going around the word asking China to show respect for the law?

Moreover, like most strongmen and mafiosi, Duterte does not understand or believe in moral leverage. For him current power realities are everything, and China is the biggest boy on the block. You either fight him or suck up to him. Devoid of an appreciation for the strategic benefits of moral authority, Duterte is impatient with a diplomacy that has moral leverage as a key component and thinks he simply has two choices: fight the bigger bully, in which case you will be vaporized, or submit to him   

Despite his constant reference to dreaming about dying for his country, Duterte is actually a punk that is part of Xi Jin Ping’s loyal retinue of neighborhood toughs. 

But his submission has not been without its rewards, for China has strongly supported his withdrawing the Philippines from the International Criminal Court and repeatedly called, in the United Nations and multilateral fora, on the international community – that is, the West – not to interfere with his  priority: the war on drugs.

A new chapter has indeed begun in the Philippines’ international relations. Fortunately, Marites Vitug will be there to chronicle it, whether or not cowardly outfits masquerading as promoters of freedom of thought like National Bookstore agree to distribute the future and present products of her fertile pen. – Rappler.com

Walden Bello authored the House of Representatives Resolution calling for renaming the South China Sea the West Philippine Sea and led the first congressional delegation to visit Pag-asa Island in Kalayaan Island Group in the Spratlys. A critic of China’s hegemonic moves, he also opposed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) with the United States.

Duterte’s Proclamation 572  is chiefly anchored on a DND certification to the effect that there is no amnesty application of Senator Trillanes in their official files.  This is the very same dirty tactic that pinned down Chief Justice Sereno. 

But while the Chief Justice admitted her inability to locate certain SALNs, Senator Trillanes has, in fact, an amnesty application, as shown in reliable photos posted on the internet.  A media report posted on the internet reliably shows Senator Trillanes himself personally applying for amnesty, as confirmed by a DND Undersecretary. This fact is of public knowledge.

The fact that Senator Trillanes has a Certificate of Amnesty proves undoubtedly that he has applied for and fulfilled all the requirements for an amnesty.  This certificate could not have been issued without an application previously processed and approved.   

Indeed, this certificate is a public document entitled to full faith and credence as a prima facie evidence of its contents, including the fact of full legal compliance and especially the requirement of a general admission of guilt.

The DND certification of the non-existence of an amnesty application does not mean that Senator Trillanes did not file an amnesty application or his application was not duly processed.  It could mean that the amnesty application was indeed filed but was lost or misplaced through negligence or by deliberate intention by the DND.

It was Solicitor General Calida who resorted to this dirty trick against Chief Justice Sereno.  He is the brains behind the move to challenge the validity of Sereno’s appointment, not on the basis of acts committed while in office, but on the basis of non-submission of documents prior to appointment.  

The same devious pattern is evident in the case of Senator Trillanes.  He is being pilloried not on the basis of the substantive issue regarding the validity of the grant of amnesty, but rather on a mere technicality of the purported non-submission of an amnesty application.  

The Sereno quo warranto effectively sidestepped the more important constitutional process of a Senate impeachment.  The controversy instead hinged more on the very narrow technical issue of non-existence of certain documents.

In the case of Senator Trillanes, the controversy now is being diverted from the more important issue about the validity and substance of the grant of amnesty to the mundane matter of the non-existence of a document.

Duterte’s trivial and petty Proclamation is now being utilized by the DOJ to apply for an arrest warrant against Senator Trillanes. From reports, the DOJ is applying for an arrest warrant in a criminal case in a Makati court against the Senator.  But the criminal cases against Senator Trillanes have long been dismissed thru court Orders that are already final. 

Why the DOJ would apply for an arrest warrant in a criminal case that is already non-existent boggles the legal mind.  The DOJ should be reminded that its duty is not to imprison a person, but to see that justice is done. How can there be justice in what it is doing!

It is not only of public knowledge, but also of judicial notice already that Senator Trillanes has indeed applied for and fulfilled the legal requirement of an amnesty, as evidenced by his Certificate of Amnesty. That should already settle this trivial, petty legal matter in our courts.

Proclamation 572 reflects the petty, trivial and parochial mindset of a long-time Mayor of Davao City whose only job before becoming Mayor was to prosecute suspected criminals, which is a very easy and routine legal work, as any practising lawyer should know.  

Relishing in their recent success against Sereno, Duterte and Calida with the active support of Justice Secretary Guevarra, are emboldened to do more by replicating their dirty trick against Senator Trillanes.  Of course, they are overconfident that their immense executive power, which they abused to the hilt to unduly influence the Supreme Court against Sereno, could now easily sway a mere judge to favor their political objective.

It is very easy to realize that Proclamation 572, judging from its pettiness and triviality, is a perverted and twisted move by Mr Duterte for political vendetta against his fiercest and bravest critic.  It is an act of vengeance and retaliation coming from a mass murderer who has killed an archenemy in Davao in the person of Jun Pala.  

It is nothing but a politically motivated move to effectively silence the opposition by imprisoning its most vocal critic, after having already imprisoned an equally vocal critic in the person of Senator Leila de Lima who, to Duterte’s utter dismay, has not been silenced at all. –Rappler.com

Jude Josue L. Sabio is the lawyer of self-confessed Davao Death Squad hitman Edgar Matobato. He filed a mass murder complaint against President Rodrigo Duterte before the International Criminal Court in The Hague, The Netherlands, in May 2017.

Five years ago, Super Typhoon Yolanda (International name: Haiyan) devastated the Visayas, killing thousands and causing massive destruction. We were unprepared for that disaster. One would think we have learned from that.

Think again. Are we better off today, more prepared to address the challenges disasters bring? Have we reduced disaster risks? Have we improve our institutions?

Lately, nature has tested yet again our capacity to handle disasters. A typhoon-boosted habagat inundated much of Metro Manila, drawing horrific comparisons with Typhoon Ondoy (International name: Ketsana) which devastated the city 9 years ago. But were our fears warranted? 

Ondoy’s fatal blow came in the form of 600 millimeters of water pouring over the metropolis within 6 hours. That’s about the normal volume of rain that the national capital can carry in a month. This time around, while scientists are still calculating the exact figures, we could hazard a guesstimate that the deluge did not exceed or even reach Ondoy level. Hazard-wise, at least.

However, while the Karding-enhanced habagat was not as relentless as Typhoon Ondoy, we teetered on the brink of another disaster reminiscent of the 2012 Habagat. In Marikina, for example, forced evacuation was imposed in low-lying barangays as water level in Marikina River swelled and peaked at 20.6 meters by Saturday evening, August 11, higher than the 20.45 meters recorded in 2012. We may recall that next to Ondoy, the 2012 Habagat – also enhanced by a storm (International Name: Haikui) that did not even enter the so-called Philippine Area of Responsibility (PAR) – is considered to be the second worst flooding to hit Metro Manila, if not the country, in recent years. 

Improving local government capacity

Six years ago, incessant rain over a 3-day period left 109 people dead, 14 injured, and 4 missing. Across 6 regions, 4.2 million people were affected, 212,632 of whom were sheltered in 656 evacuation centers. Fifty-nine cities and municipalities were flooded, rendering 16 roads and 3 bridges impassable to vehicles in 4 regions, including NCR. All in all, economic damage was pegged at P3 billion.

As of 18 August, reports from the NDRRMC indicate that the impact of the recent southwest monsoon is much smaller for the national capital. Within NCR, only 4 evacuation centers have been activated to accommodate 57 families from Malabon, Marikina and Navotas. Only 3 deaths have been reported in the metropolis, although damage to infrastructure and agriculture remains high at almost P1 billion, albeit affecting mostly Regions I, II, and CAR. 

It is true that no disasters are the same, but the improvement in numbers could also be attributed to the better response of local governments, especially in Metro Manila. A well-established early warning system ensured timely evacuation, while the operation centers of most cities were in full gear as torrential rains pounded the metropolis intermittently. But what created significant buzz among netizens is in how cities like Marikina, Makati, and Quezon City – certainly our “star cities” when it comes to disaster management – have raised the bar in camp and evacuation management. Marikina and Makati put up modular tents, a foldable technology adopted from the Japanese, while Quezon City showcased its own fire-proof and solar-powered pop-up huts. These examples should serve as the gold standard for other cities to up their ante in the provision of temporary shelters.

Call for nature-based solutions

Beyond disaster response, our story in the past few weeks, however, tells more of the same: we live in a city that sinks under the weight of rain. Part of it is geography, but another part, us. We have paved our cities to the extent of severely limiting natural absorption of surface water runoff. And it does not help that logging and quarrying activities in critical upland ecosystems remain unabated in spite of the President’s pronouncements to the contrary. 

Within the disaster management community, there is a growing movement to shift towards nature-based solutions to manage flooding and other disasters. Sadly however, we tend to look the other way as urban parks and other green spaces in the city and surrounding areas continue to shrink in the name of “development.” Multi-billion mega-flood control projects can only do so much; we need to harness nature so it can take back what it gives.  

There are a plethora of other reasons to explain our flood-prone way of life. One could find it in the sea of trash washed ashorealong Roxas Boulevard. Or in submerged gated communities which sit on natural floodplains. Or in densely populated settlements along creeks and river ways that are perpetually a moment’s away from rampaging floodwaters. Or in the absence of a dedicated focal unit looking into all of these things. 

Scaling up of good local practices

Given the immensity of our disaster woes, we cannot rest on the laurels of a few local government units (LGUs). We need a national agency that could dedicate its full resources in ensuring that the good practice of some LGUs become standard practice throughout the country. This is important because to most LGUs, the paradigm shift from disaster response to development-oriented disaster risk reduction is a fairly new concept, if not an additional burden.

Scaling up of good practices cannot be done more effectively and efficiently in the current setup wherein the Office of Civil Defense, the secretariat of the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC), could not even directly receive funds for capital outlay to finance the creation of DRRM training institutes nationwide, as mandated by law. It does not help that the OCD, as an attached agency, has to compete with the bureaucratic priorities of its host agency, the Department of National Defense (DND). 

This is not say that we have not improved our capacity in handling disasters or that we have been lacking in effort to do so. The OCD, DILG and many other government agencies, as well as the private sector and civil society, have been very active in conducting training programs on various aspects of disaster risk management in recent years. However, all of our local successes will be for naught if there is no authoritative and accountable agency that could effectively harmonize these efforts for a coherent whole-of-society and whole-of-government endeavor. Right now, our efforts have been marred by bureaucratic squabbling and largely isolated activities, with LGUs on the receiving end of competing, if not conflicting, information and instructions from various national agencies. 

Need to fast track creation of resiliency and climate change department

The exhortation of President Duterte in his latest SONA to create a standalone executive department is not only timely, but necessary. Certainly, such clamor is not new. When the current law, the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (RA 10121), was conceptualized and discussed by various stakeholders in as early as 2006, the idea of having an executive agency was already put forward. This became paramount in the aftermath of Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng in 2009. In the end, however, the practicality of maintaining a council setup while at the same time expanding its functions prevailed.

As expected, the revamped National Disaster Coordinating Council, now renamed NDRRMC, had to struggle with its bigger mandate but practically unchanged authority and resources. As we have said before, it proved to be old wine in a new wineskin. 

On the response front, the piecemeal reform did not address the need for a more effective command and control, coordination, and communication among different agencies. While it rightly passed on the main responsibility to handle disasters to LGUs based on the principle of subsidiarity in governance – that decisions and actions, as a rule, must be made at the level most proximate to the problem or situation at hand – it failed to provide a robust and redundant mechanism at the national level. The NDRRMC chairperson has no effective control over other member agencies to ensure that we will not lose the so-called golden hour in times of disasters. This limitation reared its ugly head when Yolanda hit us hard in 2013.

It is true that our record in saving lives has improved drastically since then. A big reason for this was the increase in our technological and technical capacity to anticipate, communicate,and respond to an incoming storm. But not all disasters can be predicted (e.g. 7.2 magnitude earthquake risk in Metro Manila) and losing one life is still one life too many. 

We must not also forget that we continue to incur significant damage and losses on the economic side. In 2015, the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) has estimated that on average we lose˜ about P230 billion annually from storms and floods alone, accounting for approximately 40 percent of our social expenditures. As reported in EMDAT-CRED, our total economic damage from typhoons were recorded to be highest in recent years, namely, 2009, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015.

The creation of a Department of Disaster Resilience, as championed by Albay Representative Joey Salceda, is one right step towards further strengthening our disaster risk management capability. We suggest that we go further and create a Department of Disaster Resilence and Climate Change, with the Climate Change Commission and its powers and functions absorbed into the new department. This process, however, must be pursued in consultation with the top officials and rank and file personnel of CCC and other agencies which will be affected by the much-needed reform. (To be continued)– Rappler.com

Dr Kristoffer Berse is a full-time faculty at the University of the Philippines’ National College of Public Administration and Governance, where he teaches public policy, local government, research methods, and, occasionally, disaster governance. He has been involved in disaster and climate change work in and outside the Philippines in the past 15 years. 

The trigger-happy civilians in the Duterte administration blinked in their standoff with the Philippines’ most media-savvy mutineer. What happened in the last 5 days illustrates their shallow understanding of military culture and processes, shows their utilitarian mindset toward the armed forces, and unmasks – yet again – a disturbing norm in the bureaucracy: sloppy work.

President Duterte signed Proclamation 572 on August 31, but it was published only last September 4 in the government-friendly Manila Times while Duterte and his security top guns were in Israel. The order voids, ab initio, the amnesty granted in 2011 to Senator Antonio Trillanes IV by the previous Aquino administration.

This might be the first of its kind in recent Philippine history that amnesty has been taken back by a president.

Amnesty is a tool of governments to settle conflicts and rebellions that are caused by legitimate grievances. It erases, obliterates from memory past political offenses. Cory Aquino, Fidel Ramos, Joseph Estrada (even in his short-lived presidency), Gloria Arroyo, and Noynoy Aquino had granted amnesties to various shades of rebels – communists, Muslims, soldiers. (LIST: Who's been granted amnesty?)

In the Philippine military, thousands have benefited from it, such as Armed Forces chief of staff General Charlie Galvez and his academy batch mate, Army chief Lieutenant General Rolando Bautista.

Many amnestied soldiers were involved in bloody coup attempts that killed hundreds of troops and civilians. In contrast, the 2003 Oakwood Mutiny and the Manila Peninsula siege in 2007 led by Trillanes have even been derided as merely marathon press conferences, not mutinies – as the young turks did not fire a single shot or attack any camp in these incidents.

Following Duterte’s order, the government sang one tune on Tuesday: because the charges against Trillanes, the soldier, have been resurrected, naturally the institution that he had wronged – the armed forces – now has automatic jurisdiction over him. 

Return to barracks

It is a line propagated not by military lawyers (in which case they probably would have been forgiven) but by those whom our top universities have produced and who are supposed to know by heart not only the Constitution but the essence of civilian supremacy over the military. 

Solicitor Jose Calida, Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra, presidential legal counsel Salvador Panelo, presidential spokesman Harry Roque – all lawyers – said one thing: the military now can try Trillanes in its own court and revert him to his old status as a Navy officer.

Not only that. Since civlian courts are slow to respond, the military can muscle its way through the Senate, where Trillanes is holed up, and arrest him without a warrant. (READ: DOJ to seek warrant vs Trillanes in another court but 'court martial faster')

This is an insult to any military officer worth his salt, because he knows how inane it is.

It defies logic, makes a mockery of military rules, and destabilizes long-standing norms and practices in the armed forces. Worse, it unnecessarily creates a battle zone that is not even there in the first place.

Taking the cue from these learned lawyers, however, defense department spokesman Arsenio Andolong (a civilian, incidentally) boasted on Tuesday that Camp Aguinaldo has, in fact, already spruced up the detention cell of Trillanes at the custodial center.

Then Andolong proceeded with his “yessir!” logic: the military has deployed its military police and legal officers to the Senate to “acquire custody [of Trillanes] for the purpose of returning him to military control and for the purpose of him facing a court martial.”

This return-to-barracks scenario for a senator is wrong on 6 counts:

First, the basis of the proclamation makes the military look stupid and inefficient. It may not be winning its intermittent wars with state enemies, but the military wins big in one thing: record-keeping. The meticulous, painstaking, annoying kind of record-keeping. You only have to enter a military camp through a military-police guard house to know what I mean.

Yet, Calida chose to call up just one obscure office in Camp Aguinaldo to get a certification on the non-existence of Trillanes’ amnesty application: the Discipline, Law and Order Division, which is under the Office of the deputy chief of staff for personnel, or J1.

On August 30, division head Lieutenant Colonel Thea Joan Andrade issued a certification that said (as partially quoted in the Duterte proclamation) “there is no available copy of his application for amnesty in the records.” 

There's no available document to show, either, that it was Calida who sought for that certification. So how did the public know about it? The military spokesman, Colonel Edgard Arevalo, volunteered that information on the day the news broke on Trillanes.

Read between the lines, Mr SolGen: the military is pinning you down for this fiasco.

Without any further legwork, the government then used Andrade’s certification to make Duterte sign the proclamation a day after, that declared Trillianes “did not file” his amnesty application. 

This smacks not only of lack of due diligence but malice. The military keeps a record of everything about a soldier: family, properties, assignments, awards, medals, conferences, schooling, combat hours, punishment, resignation, retirement, amnesty application, amnesty approval, dishonorable discharge, death, heirs.

The Office of the Adjutant General at Camp Aguinaldo, for example, has all this. So of course Camp Aguinaldo has records of Trillanes’ amnesty application. And the military knows that.

Second, Trillanes resigned from the Philippine Navy 4 years before he could even be granted amnesty, the same amnesty that Duterte voided. He did not become a civilian on the basis of that amnesty. He became a civilian because he ran for the Senate in 2007 – and won.

It was even National Security Hermogenes Esperon Jr, as chief of staff at the time, who acknowledged the resignation of Trillanes from the service. Now Esperon clarified with Rappler that despite this, the military still has jurisdiction over Trillanes because what Esperon merely signed was the senator’s resignation from the service, which happened 4 years before his amnesty. 

But that is precisely the point! How can a void amnesty put Trillanes back in the jurisdiction of a military that he left before that voided amnesty was issued? Truth to tell, my brain has fried in trying to find logic in this.

Third, before the military can even convene a general court martial to try Trillanes for violation of Articles of War, it has to first establish that the senator is now in fact a soldier. 

Does the military have existing rules and processes that allow a resigned soldier to return to the service? Yes, but this assumes one thing: that the resigned soldier is volunteering to return. We have no doubt that becoming a Navy officer again is farthest from Trillanes’ mind.

Still, Esperon argues that when Trillanes committed those crimes, he was a soldier. Ergo, if the amnesty that voided these crimes had been likewise voided, then he has to be tried by the military that ought to have punished him in the first place. 

Let’s follow this logic for one second and imagine a court martial proceeding against Trillanes.

After, say, 4 weeks of hearing, the court martial declares Trillanes guilty of conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman for plotting against Gloria Arroyo. The court will then cite the punishment for that based on the Articles of War. 

Court martial: Lieutenant Senior Grade Trillanes, you will be removed from the service for being a dishonorable officer and a gentleman!

Trillanes: But, sir, I had long ago left the service. In May 2007, to be exact. And I have records to show for this, signed no less than by the honorable National Security Adviser, General Esperon, sirs.

Court martial: Ah, yes. In any case, we will detain you then!

Trillanes: But, sirs, I have already spent 7 years in jail. And records will bear me out.

Court martial: We can always extend that sentence. 

Trillanes: On what charge this time, sir?

The military judges will be left scratching their crew-cut heads. Or, Trillanes can do them a favor by mounting a mutiny right there and then and botching it – again.

Does the military honestly want to go through that?

Fourth, does the President, as commander-in-chief, have the power to revert a civilian to the status of a soldier? No. Precisely because that's beneath him, a task that diminishes the office – like crumbs in a huge plate.

Fifth, how can the military try one ex-soldier for a crime committed by hundreds of others, some of whom not only helped Duterte campaign for president in 2016 but continue to prop his regime today? Spinning his wheels, Roque cockily said, yes, the government will review the amnesty given to all Oakwood mutineers. This will be like spitting in the wind.

Sixth, a military court cannot try a sitting senator without risking its reputation before its own troops and the outside world. The last time they tried civilians in their own regimented courts was during Martial Law, which the current military command never served. They joined the service in the dying years of the Marcos dictatorship – and basked in its death.

Yet Duterte’s so-called law experts in his inner circle did not grasp the folly of dragging the military into this political game. They charged on and pandered to his militaristic view that he can do anything to his critics. 

What was this administration thinking? That an institution that benefited the most from amnesty would, eyes closed, take it back from one of its own? That the military would throw away common sense just to let into its jurisdiction an ex-soldier who they consider a recidivist, having mounted a mutiny not once, but twice?

There is no love lost between the armed forces and Trillanes. Why would this administration ask the military to suffer his presence in the cramped walls of a court martial? Let him fry in a civilian court.

Change in tune

On Friday, after what Roque described as a "long discussion" with the Cabinet, President Duterte abandoned his order for the military to jail his critic and will wait for the courts to decide on the warrant against the senator. The defense department and the military followed suit, in statements that said they were deferring to the civilian courts. 

Indeed, to drag your armed forces into a shabby play is to spook it. And the consequences of that will come in painful increments: rumors, speculation, loyalty check, and God knows what.

To drag your armed forces into this is to spook the other sectors long traumatized by a destabilized institution – the courts, the business community, the stock market, to name a few.

This is not about the “arrogant, megalomaniac” Trillanes (Esperon’s adjectives). This is about a government that, cocksure of its power and too lazy to do hard work to jail a critic, thinks the military can be at its beck and call to finish off a sloppy start – despite all the hard, painful lessons it has learned as an institution.

Last time I checked, that’s not the military I know. (READ: Where does the military stand with Duterte?)

Let me humbly eat my words in the coming weeks, if proven wrong. – Rappler.com

(Part 1: 5 years after Yolanda, imperatives for addressing disasters)

After supposedly going through 6 technical working group meetings and 11 regional consultations involving more than 1,000 local government units, the proposed Salceda bill consolidated 34 bills and 4 resolutions filed within the House of Representatives since last year. The department is initially patterned after the US Department of Homeland Security which put under one roof at least 22 agencies, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The proposed agency is touted to be even ahead of FEMA in as far as instituting resiliency as a core mandate is concerned.

There are a number of good, radical changes in the proposed Department of Disaster Resilience (DDR). First and foremost, the integration of agencies involved in disaster risk reduction and climate change under one roof is the right way to go. The transfer and harmonization of the powers and functions of agencies and offices such as the Office of Civil Defense (OCD) of the Department of National Defense (DND), Climate Change Office of the Climate Change Commission (CCC), the Mines and Geosciences Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), the Health Emergency Management Bureau of the Department of Health (DOH), the Disaster Response Assistance and Management Bureau of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), and the Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) are logical and necessary from an organizational perspective.

The move to bring Phivolcs and PAGASA from the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) to the new department also signals a closer integration of science and technology in all aspects of disaster risk reduction, not just in early warning and hazard assessment. This will also mean the end of extraordinary mechanisms that we have to resort to in every reconstruction phase through the creation of ad hoc task forces.   

The conscious mainstreaming of the BFP in disaster work is a good idea as it provides the needed surge capacity at the local level. For so long, the fire sector has been on the sidelines of disaster response in the country as we tend to rely more on the police and armed forces for support in times of disasters. In other countries like Taiwan and the US, fire personnel – not the security forces – are the go-to first responders during emergencies and disasters. On its own, the BFP is already expanding its wings and has big plans to further bolster its own capability in handling more than just fire-related emergencies. Nevertheless, while it would be sensible for the BFP to remain with the DILG as it implements its own reforms, moving it as a core unit of DDR could fast-track and ensure harmonization of its upgrading efforts with those of other agencies envisioned to be part of the disaster agency. 

Another laudable feature in the proposed bill is the centralized administration of the Quick Response Funds currently allocated to multiple national government agencies. The increase in share of pre-disaster funding from national and local funds for DRRM, now to be called the National or Local Disaster Resilience Fund, is responsive to the paradigm shift that we have been advocating for so long. The increase from 5% to 7% of the Local Disaster Resilience Fund, as well as the creation of a Disaster Resilience Support Fund for 3rd to 6th class LGUs, should help localities address disasters more holistically.

The current bill, of course, is not perfect in its current form. We suggest that Congress do not start from scratch and begin with the findings and recommendations of the nationwide consultations with various groups involved in NDRRMC operations that took place in 2015-2016. That effort, led by NDRRMC Executive Director and Defense Undersecretary Alexander Pama, was done to prepare for the formal "sunset review" of Republic Act No. 10121.

In establishing a new department, Congress needs to be extra careful to avoid creating a bloated and highly-bureaucratic agency. Measures need to be in place to ensure that only qualified staff will be carried over to the new department and that the organization's structure is streamlined for efficient and effective operations. The national government can take this opportunity to review and resolve long-standing staffing issues in the different agencies that are proposed to be unified under the DDR. 

It goes without saying that Congress must be strategic in deciding which existing agencies should be integrated into the new department. For example, we must thoroughly discuss the pros and cons of transferring PAGASA and the MGB to the new department. We do not want the unintended consequence of having the mandate of these agencies, which goes beyond disaster resilience, affected by such a move. Are there other options short of removing them respectively from the DOST and the DENR? Top officials and rank and file from the affected agencies must certainly be consulted so all bases are covered. This move is particularly important for the country's weather agency which has been actively beefing up its capacity since the passage of the PAGASA Modernization Act (RA 10692) in 2015.

The merger of the NDRRMC and CCC, as the highest policymaking and advisory body for disaster risk reduction and management and climate change, respectively, is necessary. These institutions have been managed separately, undertaking activities that should have been integrated from the beginning. The consolidation of NDRRMC and CCC as one executive body is timely especially since climate change, as the President has recently acknowledged, is fast becoming a "day-to-day problem" that affects us all in different ways. Now is the perfect time to make this institutional convergence happen officially to ensure dedicated focus, unity of vision, and coordinated action in addressing both major disasters and slow-onset climate change impacts (e.g., increasing temperature). 

Similar to PAGASA and the MGB, the officials and personnel of the CCC should be consulted, among others, to also identify mandates that might be affected by this change. Mitigation regulatory responsibilities should now be completely returned mainly to the DENR but with the energy, transportation, and agriculture departments playing important roles. The negotiation mandate of the CCC should now be returned to the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) working with all agencies but with the secretary of the new department as the minister in charge for purposes of official meetings.

One good outcome of this proposal is to have one clear line of accountability, with one cabinet secretary that will now be in charge of both disasters and climate change. It was not effective to have the President, who is very busy, to chair the NDRRMC and CCC. He still of course will have control over the new department as head of the executive branch.

On the financial side, the Peoples' Survival Fund should be included in discussion on funding resilience. By finally integrating disaster risk reduction planning and climate change adaptation, new sources of funding could be identified for resilience projects. This includes the Green Climate Fund where money is available for both mitigation and adaptation.

At any rate, the good news is that the budget requirement for the creation of the department, which has hampered efforts in the past, has already been cleared with the committee on appropriations in the House. We hope that it gets to pass the legislative mill soon so we could finally face the threat of disasters and climate change as a united front. Until then, we could just keep on hoping that future disasters will not be strong enough to overwhelm the capacity of our LGUs. 

We have been calling for the new department for 5 years now, even before the 2013 Yolanda disaster. It would be fitting that we finally get this done on the fifth anniversary of that terrible event. – Rappler.com 

Kristoffer Berse is a full-time faculty member at the University of the Philippines' National College of Public Administration and Governance, where he teaches public policy, local government, research methods, and, occasionally, disaster governance. He has been involved in disaster and climate change work in and outside the Philippines in the past 15 years.

Tony La Viña is former dean of the Ateneo School of Government. He previously served as an undersecretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and also worked at the World Resources Institute in Washington, DC. He has published numerous local and international studies on climate change and the environment.

Lagi ko itong sinasabi sa bawat pagkakataong maiimbitahan akong magsalita o kapag magsusulat hinggil sa mga paksang tungkol sa paglipana ng teknolohiya at ng social media platform, at uulitin ko ngayon: sa dami ng dapat nating matandaang pangyayari, napakadali na nating makalimot.

Halimbawa, kailangan nang ipaalala sa atin ng Facebook ang nangyari sa atin noon, by way of memories app, kung kailan makikita mo ang nangyari sa iyo, at least sa mga status at larawan o video na ini-upload mo; mga birtwal na kaibigang in-accept mo sa Facebook, sa eksaktong petsa ng mga nagdaang taon.

Hindi na nagkakasya sa standard 32 gigabytes na memory card ng mga gadget natin ang alaalang nais nating tipunin: mga larawan, aklat, kanta, laro, scanda...este video na binabalik-balikan hanggang sa maisalin sa mas malalaking hard drives na may kapasidad mag-imbak ng terrabytes worth ng impormasyon, alaala, at, sa iba, buhay.

Bihira na nating matandaan nang walang tulong ng search engine ang mga detalye ng kung anomang kakailanganin sa anomang okasyon. Kapag may nakalimutang detalye o pangyayari, i-search sa internet, tutal may data allowance naman ang gadget kung wala mang wifi sa paligid.

Bihira na ang nagsasabi ng parirala at idyomang "nasa dulo ng dila" nila ang salita. Baka nga hindi na ito alam ng mga millennial. Iyong salitang alam na alam dati pero hindi masabi-sabi.

Bihira na kasi ang walang access sa rumaragasang kaalaman. Kaalaman o impormasyon na, sadly, hindi katumbas ng karunungan o wisdom. Dahil oo nga't nariyan ang kaalaman, kung paano itong gagamitin ang siyang magpaparunong sa iyo. At kung sa kabutihan gagamitin, lalong magpapagaling at magpapabuti sa iyo. Teka, masyado na yatang didactic ang naisusulat ko, para na akong pastor o reberendo.

Bueno, kaugnay nito, gusto ko lang patotohanan uli na walang humpay ang dating ng maraming bagong impormasyon at maraming pangyayari. Marami na rin naman noon, pero mas mabilis lang ang pagkalat ngayon dahil sa iba't ibang communication at social media platform.

Sa dami, nagkakapatong-patong na nga sa pagbabalita. May lalabas na isyu na papatungan na naman ng panibangong isyung worth knowing and remembering din, o iyon kasi ang akala natin. At may lalabas na naman uling bagong isyu, parami nang parami, ad infinitum.

Halimbawa, sumasambulat ang balita nitong nagdaang mga araw. Kung sa media, parang wala nang proverbial slow news day. Paano ba naman, hindi pa man humuhupa ang isyu ng bukbuking bigas (kung may bigas pa dahil mukhang nagkakaubusan na nga kaya sumisirit ang presyo) at imported na galunggong na diumano’y formalin-laced, napatungan na ito ng inflation that exceeded all expectations. At hindi pa man umiinit ang sumisirit pataas ding inflation, hayun, ipinapaaresto na si Senador Trillanes.

Tapos sinisi ng Pangulo ang gobyerno ni Trump sa inflation. At kung paniniwalaan ang mga kaibigan kong pesimista, wala nang nakaalala sa nawawalang kontrabando ng droga. Dahil nga, hayun, nagkapatong-patong ang dapat maalala, nangingibabaw na nga dito ang parang peryahang pulitika.

Hindi ko tuloy masisi ang ibang kaibigang nagsasapantaha (big word, sapantaha!) na ang lahat ng isyu ng pulitika ngayon ay para makalimutan natin ang mga isyung malapit sa ating bituka.

Novelty ang pulitika lalo na ngayong panahon ng masidhi at kung minsa'y halos panatisismo (read: bulag, wala nang lohika) na pagsuporta sa pulitiko. At bago itong isyu ng pag-aresto—as if ito ang "makakaaresto" sa tumataas na inflation at presyo – mainit na usapin ang bigas at galunggong, mga isyung malapit, both in figurative and literal sense, sa bituka natin.

May parang kung anong manipulasyon para makalimutan natin ang napipinto nating pagkagutom; ang makalimutan nating malapit nang mawalan ng saysay ang pera dahil sa pagtaas ng presyo ng bilihin. Manipulasyon para matuon ang ating atensyon at alaala sa kung anong naiwang kaso ni Trillanes. Na para bang, oy, ito ang mas importante kesa lugmok na ekonomiya at bukbuking tsibog.

Huwag sana tayong padadala sa napapanahong usapin sa pulitika. Tandaan pa rin nating bahagya na tayong makabili ng pagkain. Huwag tayong makakalimot na malapit na tayong magutom, kung hindi man nagugutom na nga dahil dinig na dinig na ng marami sa atin ang kalam ng kanilang sikmura.

* * *

Isang walang-hiyang promotion at plugging: sa Linggo, September 16, dadalo ako sa pinakamalaking taunang book event sa bansa, ang Manila International Book Fair, na gaganapin sa SMX MOA.

Magkakaroon ako ng book signing sa dalawang booth, ang sa Visprint Incorporated, na naglathala sa mga aklat kong iSTATUS NATION, TITSER PANGKALAWAKAN at TROYA: 12 KUWENTO; at ang booth ng UST Publishing House, na naglathala naman ng libro kong PAUBAYA at ng bagong-bago, mainit-init pang FINDING TEO: Tula/Talambuhay. 

Lilipat naman ako sa booth ng UST Publishing House sa ground floor ng napakalawak na bulwagan 2-4 pm.Mabibili sa booth ng dalawang publishing companies na ito ang mga nasabing libro. Nasa Visprint booth ako sa second floor ng SMX bandang 12 pm hanggang bago mag-2 pm.

Sa Manila International Book Fair nagkakasama-sama ang lahat ng mahilig sa aklat sa Kalakhang Maynila maging mula sa kalapit-probinsya. May mangilan-ngilan din akong kakilala na nanggagaling pa sa Visayas at Mindanao at pinag-ipunan ang pamamakyaw ng libro sa event na ito.

Napakaraming aklat na pamimilian, napakaraming freebies at discounts, napakaraming meet-and-greet sa mga lokal na awtor sa bansa gaya ng isasagawa ko.

Magaganap ang Manila International Book Fair September 12-16. May murang bayad ang entrance sa exhibition area, pero maraming naglipanang promo sa social media para sa libreng ticket. O kaya punta kayo sa mga website ng academic publishing sa bansa. Karaniwang nagbibigay sila ng libreng ticket. Walang biro, ipapa-print 'nyo nga lang. Ang natipid ninyo sa pambili ng entrance ticket, ipandagdag sa bibilhing libro. Sige, kahit hindi ang sa akin, basta libro – para naman mapalayo kayo kahit sandali sa poltical memes at tahasang disinformation sa social media. – Rappler.com

Bukod sa pagtuturo ng creative writing, pop culture, and research sa Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas, writing fellow din si Joselito D. De Los Reyes, PhD, sa UST Center for Creative Writing and Literary Studies at research fellow sa UST Research Center for Culture, Arts and Humanities. Board member siya ng Philippine Center of International PEN. Siya ang kasalukuyang tagapangulo ng Departamento ng Literatura ng UST.

Last July 18, Pulitizer Prize-winning journalist Manny Mogato wrote for Reuters about the possibility of sanctions imposed by the United States on the Philippines as a result of the Duterte administration's plan to purchase rocket-propelled grenades from Russia.

The concern was that the Russian purchase might involve the Philippines in a diplomatic row with the United States regarding the issuance of sanctions against Moscow by Washington on account of Russia's annexation of Crimea. To implement that policy, the US government established the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, or CAATSA, and a list of 39 blacklisted companies was drawn up that would trigger an American response if purchases were made with them. One of those in the list is Rosoboronexport, which the Philippine government has chosen to deal with. 

Naturally this resulted in a backlash and reaction from the Duterte administration, which downplayed any negative outcome despite the Mogato article citing sources from the US government. The Duterte administration claimed it as part and parcel of a so-called independent foreign policy, while the Russian embassy in Manila went on the warpath against anyone associated with the Mogato article. 

The Yanks complain

In mid-August 2018, Randall Schriver, the US Department of Defense assistant secretary for Asian and Pacific security affairs, arrived in the Philippines and issued an uncharacteristically strong statement regarding the decision of Manila to purchase weapons from Russia.

"I think they should think very carefully about that," he said. "We have to understand the nature of this regime in Russia. I don't need to go through the full laundry list: Crimea, Ukraine, the chemical attack in the UK…So you're investing not only in the platforms, but you're making a statement about a relationship."

A week later, another US delegation led by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Walter Douglas, visited the Philippines and provided the carrot to Manila as opposed to the stern warning of Mr Schriver. Douglas said: "We have close to $300 million in security assistance. The country that receives the largest chunk, as far as I understand, is the Philippines. So we're looking at about $60 million of that $300 million to come to the Philippines."

In the midst of all of those US visits, Duterte revealed to the public the purported contents of a letter given to him by the US Secretary of Defense and the US Secretary of State. In that letter, these American officials had recommended to Manila that purchases for the modernization of the Philippine military would be better sourced through Washington. Duterte then scoffed at the US offer and instead said it is of no use to the Philippines.

Moscow's little pivot to Asia

So what may have triggered this series of contacts by the Americans to the Philippines within this several month period? 

In 2015, the United States noticed a shift in operations by the Russian military. Newer Russian aircraft and ships were slowly and without much fanfare being deployed into the Pacific area of operations. This appeared to be Russians' own pivot to Asia – not in the scale that the Americans were doing but substantial enough to be noticed. From then on, these deployments continued and as the operational assets and capabilities of the Russians increased, so did their sorties.

Two years later, by late 2017, American and Japanese militaries noticed an uptick in numbers of violations being done by the Russians of Japanese airspace as compared to before. To put emphasis on that, this month alone, the Russians invited the Chinese military to participate in Russia's huge Vostok 18 exercise. 

Except for that aberration in US politics known as Donald Trump, American views on Russia are bordering on outright hostility, and this is because of actions committed by the Russians in Central Europe and elsewhere. This perception is not helped by charges of Russian interference in the 2016 US elections. In fact, the US is less tough in its views on China as compared to its views on Russia, which is viewed as a country not averse to using coercive force and reckless underhanded actions to weaken American national and global interests. 

Immature alliance

Unfortunately this geopolitical characteristic between US and Russian relations seems to be lost on Filipinos who, just as Schriver mentions, look at the entire situation as an opportunity to buy weapons – weapons that, given the state of the Philippine economy and the numerous security challenges facing the Philippines, would not even be properly maintained.

From the US side, the Philippines is allied to it via the Mutual Defense Treaty. Although some Filipinos continue to deride it, that alliance has allowed the Philippine military to concentrate on the numerous rebellions that affect the country while enjoying the twin advantages of a US security umbrella against external aggression and the largesse provided by annual US military assistance and logistic support to the Armed Forces of the Philippines aside from sizeable nonmilitary financial aid. This was especially true when the country still hosted the US military bases as there was the actual existence of in-country US forces and the considerable annual base rental.  

The problem with the Philippine defense and security mindset is that it generally looks at alliances as merely an opportunity to receive from the US its desired wishlist of equipment. If the Philippines does not receive such, it will then go into a litany of complaints about Washington's credibility as an ally. Since that is the general appreciation of alliances as a source of military freebies, the aspect of a shared defense then becomes lost to the Philippine defense and security sector. In other words, as the Philippines benefits from the alliance in materiel and guarantees of defense from the US, it also needs to understand that it has a responsibility not to jeopardize the security interests of the Americans. 

There then lies the problem, the inability of the Philippine side to understand the concept of a shared defense it then advances policies that have run counter to this characteristic of the Mutual Defense Treaty. The Duterte administration's concepts of "friend to everyone, enemy to no one" and the "independent foreign policy" may look good on paper but these directly contradict the responsibilities in the alliance that the Philippines has with the United States. Which then has made the Americans wonder as to what exactly does the Philippines intend to achieve with its dalliance with the Russians.

Whereas the Filipinos see Russia as an alternative source of weapons, the Americans see the Filipinos entering into what they see as an uncomfortably increasing relationship with one of their two main rivals. How far will the Philippines take this relationship with the Russians and how will this impinge on US security interests in the region? That most likely is a question that the Americans are trying to figure out. 

Consider that due to the Duterte administration's permissive policy on China, Chinese military aircraft and vessels suddenly enjoyed access into the country in a totally unprecedented manner. That a Chinese military aircraft landed without any security clearances and approval from the Philippine military sets a precedent as to what other countries may do within Philippine territory. This was also not helped by the fact that recently, several Chinese commercial aircraft landed in the Ninoy Aquino International Airport without any approval from Philippine aviation authorities, thus highlighting how easy it is to blatantly violate Philippine territory. 

With Manila considering bilateral military agreements with Moscow, will the Russians seize an opportunity to position themselves firmly in the Philippines given the confusion in the Duterte administration? As an example, the Russians are very interested in the submarine program of the Philippine Navy and it is not a coincidence that the Russian Navy relies on its submarine fleet to project power and intimidation. Would agreements arising out of proposed training programs and planned bilateral exercises between Philippine and Russian militaries end up with Manila granting to the Russians the same access to the Philippines in the same way that China has? How would the Americans react to that? 

The Philippines needs to think carefully how it intends to pursue its developing security relationship with Russia especially bearing in mind its obligations in the Philippines-US Mutual Defense Treaty. For the moment the US has been sending reminders and offering carrots but that can change. Thus, the Duterte administration must carefully weigh decisions and policies and not turn the Philippines into a security threat for US military installations in the Central Pacific. To do so though would most likely result in sanctions being levied on the Philippines by an irritated US and the possibility of American recognition being given to emerging Philippine pro-democracy leaders. – Rappler.com 

Jose Antonio Custodio is a security and defense consultant. He specializes in military history and has post-graduate studies in history from the University of the Philippines. He occasionally teaches history and political science in several universities in Metro Manila.

Paano magluto ng pinakbet sa gitna ng “sizzling inflation”? Aba’y unang una, dagdagan mo ang panggastos mo nang 25%! Problema mo na kung saang kamay ng Diyos mo 'yan huhugutin. 
 
Tumaas nang 25% ang presyo ng gulay sa Metro Manila, Bicol, at Mimaropa, pero mas lalong kawawa ang mga taga-Cagayan Valley dahil 35% ang iminahal ng gulay sa rehiyon nila.

At huwag na natin pag-usapan ang bigas at talagang nakaiinit ng ulo – sa pinakamalala, 12.5% ang itinaas nito (Bicol). May bukbok at kemikal pa!

Pinakbet economics

Sino'ng maysala sa walang habas na pagtaaas ng presyo ng mga bilihin, lalo na ang inflation sa pagkain na umabot sa 8.5%?

Una nang sinisi ng economic managers ang mga problema sa sektor ng agrikultura. Pero hindi ba't malaki ang papel ng Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion o Train Law sa paglobo ng mga presyo dahil tumaas ang buwis sa krudo at matatamis na inumin? Hindi ba't pinuna na ng pribadong sektor ang "wrong timing" ng Train na sumabay sa pinakamalalang pagsadsad ng piso at pagtaas ng pandaigdigang presyo ng langis? 

Maganda ang blueprint ng administrasyon para sa programang Build, Build, Build, pero tila sablay ang implementasyon at tiyempo, lalo na kung sinasabotahe ng mga gahaman. 

Ayon sa ekonomista at ngayo’y kongresista na si Joey Salceda (na, paalala, ay hindi taga-oposisyon), hindi na puwedeng isisi ng gobyerno sa mga oportunista at rice hoarders ang pagtaas ng presyo sa bansa, lalo na't malusog ang minana nitong ekonomiya mula sa dating administrasyon. 

Sabi ni Salceda, “Ang 6.4% ay dahil sa wala o napakaliit ng ating ginawa.” Sabi niya, nakakabalisa ito dahil binubura nito ang mga naipundar sa larangan ng pagbabawas ng kahirapan at gutom.

Kaunti na lang ay tatalunin na ng yugtong ito ang 2009 sa ilalim ng dating presidenteng si Gloria Arroyo. Sa panahon niya umabot sa 6.6% ang inflation.

May iba namang saltik itong kalihim ng agrikultura na si Manny Piñol. Tanggalin na lang daw sa inflation index ang pagkain. Piñol, hindi hokus-pokus ang kailangan para talunin ang inflation. 

Habang naninimbang sa Train, world crude at interest rates ang ekonomiya, parang may sira-ulong tumulak kay Juan dela Cruz sa bangin. 'Yan ang National Food Authority sa ilalim ni Jason Aquino, na tila inuna ang interes ng mga negosyante ng bigas kaysa sambayanan. Bakit pinayagan nilang nakatambak nang dalawang buwan sa mga barko ang inangkat na bigas kaya nagkabukbok ang mga ito?

Squid tactics 

Pasok sa eksena si "bright" Solicitor General Jose Calida. Siya ang batikang tirador ni Pangulong Duterte na nagpakulo ng quo warranto laban kay Maria Lourdes Sereno at nangharang sa paglaya ni Senadora Leila de Lima. Dahil sa kanya, nabura ang pangalang Sereno sa listahan ng mga chief justice. Ngayon, layon din niyang burahin ang pangalan ng isang Antonio Trillanes IV sa listahan ng ginawaran ng amnestiya. 

Medyo halata ang timing ng tirada kay Trillanes. Hindi lamang ito nasabay sa hearing na pinamunuan ni Trillanes sa Senado tungkol sa mga kontrata ni Calida sa gobyerno. Natabunan din nito ang pag-aalburoto ng mga ekonomista. Pero duda kaming natabunan nito ang malulutong na mura ng mamimili sa grocery at palengke.

Kung maaayos ang kamada sa pagtatanggal kay Sereno sa Korte Suprema, barubal ang Oplan Back-to-Barracks para kay Sonny. Wala bang nagsabi sa kanila na sa bayang ito, "Old soldiers don't fade away, they become senators and presidents"? 

Hindi lang sila nabigo na ikulong ang media-savvy na si Trillanes, naging komedya ang pagbabasura ng kanyang amnestiya at tangkang ibalik siya sa militar para mapailalim sa court martial.

Una, mabilis na napabulaanan ang mga batayan ng pagkansela ng amnesty – malinaw na nag-apply si Trillanes at umamin siya sa kasalanan. Pangalawa, hilong-talilong ang Department of Justice sa patong-patong na request sa mga korte para sa arrest warrant. Pangatlo, lalong kakatwa ang pagbubuo ng isang "court martial" para sa senador at ang planong warrantless arrest sa kanya. 

Dito talagang napakamot kami ng ulo: ang pinakamalalang magagawa ng court martial ay itiwalag siya sa serbisyo. Ito'y sa kabila ng dokumentadong pagbititiw na ni Trillanes na dating Lieutenant First Grade sa Navy 4 na taon bago pa makakuha ng amnestiya. (BASAHIN: Don't mess with the military)

Kailangan bang aliwin ng mga alipores si Poong Digong kaya't nagkumahog na lutuin ang hilaw na Proklamasyon 572 bago siya makabalik galing Israel?

Todo-tanggi man ang tagapagsalita niyang si Harry Roque, kahihiyan ang sumalubong kay Duterte sa Israel. Hindi pinalampas ng media doon ang nagbabanggang imahe ng isang lider na nagkumpara sa sarili kay Hitler na dumalaw sa puntod ng mga biktima ng Holocaust. Ganoon din ang pagbisita ng lider na nang-alipusta sa Diyos sa lupain na nagsilang kay Kristo. Ayon sa isang pulitikong Israeli, kinailangan daw nilang lumulon ng gamot para di maduwal habang naandoon si Duterte.

Paglapag ni Digong sa Pilipinas, sinalubong siya ng 8 puntos na pagdausdos ng tiwala sa kanya ng taumbayan, ayon sa kalalabas lang na resulta ng 2nd quarter survey. Ito ang kasagsagan ng "God is stupid" na pahayag ng Pangulo. Hindi pa pasok dito ang matinding hagupit ng nagliliparang presyo ng Agosto. 

Incompetent bully

Sa larangan ng pulitika, muling ipinamalas ng kampo ni Duterte sa Trillanes amnesty fiasco na babaluktutin nito ang batas upang matupad ang mga balakin laban sa mga kritiko. 

Eto pa rin ang small-town politics na tatak ng pamamahala ni Duterte – arogante, magaspang, walang preno. Sa pananaw niya at ng kanyang mga alipores, lahat ay kayang paluhurin ng dahas ng kapangyarihan. 

Sa larangan ng ekonomiya, ipinamalas naman ng Duterte managers na kahit pagsamasamahin ang mga PhD nila, kulang ang Keynessian economics nila kung walang puso para sa masa. Dahil ang economics ay tungkol sa tao – na ngayon ay hirap nang makapag-ulam ng pinakbet. 

Sigang liderato. Nagtataasang presyo. Eto na ba ang katapusan ng honeymoon period ng mga Pinoy kay Digong? – Rappler.com

Imee Marcos was in the University of the Philippines Diliman on August 25, 2018, attending the Kabataang Barangay (KB) reunion held at the Bahay ng Alumni. The venue happens be the site of one bloody bank heist and one political assassination – a fitting venue then, in retrospect?

UP president Danilo Concepcion was also in attendance. It has since been “revealed” – he did not really hide it since it is in his publicly accessible CV, released when he was running for UP president – that Concepcion was a ranking member of the Marcos-era KB.

At least 4 written statements from members of the UP Diliman community, numerous articles and memes, and two apologies from President Concepcion later, many have been reminded about the case of Archimedes Trajano, who was found dead after questioning why Imee Marcos was appointed KB chairperson in 1977. (READ: MARTIAL LAW 101: Things you should know) 

Some also pointed out, as even the United States embassy in the Philippines noted in the late 1970s, that the KB also functioned to keep the country’s potential young radicals in check. A declassified diplomatic cable shows how Imee was well aware of that function. (READ: Gone too soon: 7 youth leaders killed under Martial Law) 

Marcoses in UP

It’s clear now that members of the UP community were up in arms because the chief academic officer, head of faculty and the chief executive officer of the university, attended an event celebrating an appendage of the Marcos regime on UP property. For many, the gesture made it seem that UP was being complicit in the attempts to definitively cast the Marcos regime as a Golden Age. Statements issued have not focused on Imee Marcos being in UP – why would they, she isn’t banned from stepping foot on UP, where she was once a student?  

In fact, to my knowledge, within the last 10 years, she has been in UP Diliman a number of times before August 25, 2018:

• In her capacity as president of the Creative Media and Film Society of the Philippines, she was among the presenters at the 7th Philippine Youth Congress in Information Technology, organized by what was then called the UP IT Training Center, held on September 8-11, 2009, at the UP Theater, the UP Film Institute and Ang Bahay ng Alumni. (Photographs here.)

• She attended the UP College of Law commencement exercises on April 29, 2013, at the UP Film Center, because one of her sons, Michael Marcos Manotoc, was among the graduates. She probably also saw Concepcion, then dean of the UP College of Law, at that event.

• Lastly, on September 22, 2016, at Balay Kalinaw, she, along with her brother, Bongbong, gave some remarks during the launch of a book, titled Accountability in Congress, by former House of Representatives secretary-general and UP National Center for Public Administration and Governance lecturer Marilyn Barua Yap. Then Dean Concepcion was also in attendance, as these photos  posted on UP’s official Facebook page prove.

Yes, there were two Marcoses in UP Diliman a day after the 44th anniversary of Ferdinand Marcos' proclamation of Martial Law. To my knowledge, there were no protests during that event or at the other official UP-organized events in Diliman that Imee attended.

Her brother, in his capacity as Senate chair of the committee on local government, also top-billed a forum on the Bangsamoro Basic Law held on November 27, 2014, at the UP Asian Center. (Here’s a photograph of him with the university seal directly behind him.) No protests then, either.

In contrast, a “Tsikahan with Gov. Imee,” set to be held last September 8 at the Iloilo Science and Technology University, was called off because of protests by student activists.

So, is UP actually more accommodating of the Marcoses than it is commonly believed to be?

Think of it this way: if, as the cliché goes, UP is a microcosm of Philippine society, then as there are numerous supporters and loyalists of the Marcoses in positions of power in the government, so there are numerous supporters and loyalists in the corridors of power in UP.

Where our loyalties lie

During the commencement exercises in UP Diliman on April 17, 1977, Imelda Marcos was given an honorary doctorate by UP. She called UP her “new alma mater” – earning the derision of some of those in attendance. At the time, the US ambassador believed that “bold intrusion of Mrs. Marcos into the heartland of Philippine radicalism [sic] is indicative of [the] Marcos’ regime’s confidence that they now have UP firmly under control.”

That honorary doctorate has never been revoked even after the People Power Revolution.  

In 1991, the UP Board of Regents approved a proposal to establish 25 professorial chairs to be named after former Philippine and UP presidents. During the same BOR meeting, it was decided to rename the Ferdinand E. Marcos Professorial Chair to the Class of 1957 Professorial Chair (see the 51st page of this). However, subsequent mentions of these “presidential” chairs (for example, on the 30th page of this, and on page 20 of this) again referred to a Marcos Professorial Chair.

I haven’t been able to check if it still exists, but I have not seen a notation about it being abolished. If it still exists, then it has fared much better than the Ferdinand E. Marcos Chair for East Asian and Pacific Studies at Tufts University, which was cancelled soon after it was established in 1977 when nobody wanted to fill it.

In President Concepcion’s most recent apology, he acceded to the UP Diliman University Council’s proposal to craft General Education courses on Martial Law for UP students. If courses on the Marcos dictatorship will be developed by UP’s faculty, perhaps they should also look well into how members of the UP community helped in the rise of the dictator, or showed obeisance to him – writing books for him to make him appear to be a historian, calling him “the Grand Architect of our destiny,” allegedly allowing Imee to study at the UP College of Law though she supposedly did not have an undergraduate degree, among others.

They should also look into how members of the UP community today continue to revere the Marcos dictatorship – by naming an entire institute after one of Marcos’s main technocrats, describing him only in the most glowing terms, or defending his economic legacy amid other studies showing the contrary. (READ: Marcos years marked 'golden age' of PH economy? Look at the data.) 

Pseudo-intellectuals are important in the rise and maintenance of dictatorships. Francisco Nemenzo Jr, then dean of the UP Diliman College of Arts and Sciences, noted as much during a 1978 faculty conference titled “Social Science for the People”:

Today, whoever has the research skills and the cynicism to undertake even the most morally reprehensible projects will never run short of funding because those who have wealth and power have come to recognize the value of the social sciences for the manipulation of people. That is why intellectuals in our country never had it so good – perhaps not as professors nor as genuine scholars but as consultants, data gatherers, and ghost writers.

Universities – UP included – can concurrently be home to both the sardonic critics of dictators and the opportunistic collaborators Nemenzo described. A purge of either is desired by some.

My less violent counterproposal is for members of the UP community to make as naked at the Oblation where their loyalties lie, thereby allowing us to “move on” from personality-based partisanship (no, pro-Marcos and anti-Marcos are not political ideologies) toward discerning whether our labors are benefitting a privileged few or the masses we claim to serve. – Rappler.com

Miguel Paolo Reyes is a university research associate at the Third World Studies Center, College of Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of the Philippines Diliman. He is also an associate editor of the Center's journal, Kasarinlan: Philippine Journal of Third World Studies, and a managing editor of Asian Democracy Review (currently on hiatus). The Center has made publicly accessible a number of resources on the Marcoses and the Marcos regime through Kasarinlan.          

Goyo: Ang Batang Heneral was frustrating. But you have to watch it and be frustrated too.

Let me explain: two days ago, I came into the cinema hopeful, positive, and excited to watch Goyo. Two hours later, I came out of the cinema tired, sad, and disappointed.

I thought the movie, the story, the character was slow, shallow, self-indulgent, and indecisive. Unlike Heneral Luna (which I thought was an epic tale of bravery and passion), Goyo didn't inspire or touch me as much.

But two days after watching (yes, I was still thinking about the movie in the days that followed), I had a eureka moment. I realized that I wasn't really frustrated with the movie. I was frustrated with the reality of heroism and leadership. (READ: ‘Goyo: Ang Batang Heneral’ review: Stripping the hero) 

Slow movie 

First, I felt that Goyo, the hero and the movie, was slow. And rightly so.

Years ago, I thought the process of heroism and "making a difference" was a sprint full of milestones and successes. But the older I got, the more I realized that that process was really a marathon – a long marathon with no signposts, no landmarks, no celebrations. Just a slow movement forward with lots of uncertainty, fear, and waiting.

The battle at the end was not the 300-esque highlight reel of epic battle scenes. It was a bunch of frustrating decisions, careless mistakes, and cowardly acts, slowly building up to the tragic finale. Welcome to the real world.

Humanizing the protagnist 

Second, I thought that Goyo was incredibly shallow and self-indulgent. I almost hated him.

But the reality is that many of our heroes and leaders are. They're vain. They're motivated by their ego and self-interest. Some of them are shallow, bias-driven, or incompetent. In fact, many of them are womanizers – like our Gregorio.

I found it easy to root for Heneral Luna because he fought for the "right" side so indignantly he was almost a saint. His gruesome martyr's death only purified him further.

But Goyo – with his women, his cocky smirks, his false sense of security, his inability to truly "lead" his men – made him a real person. The "Batang Heneral" theme placed emphasis on the "Bata" rather than the "Heneral." (READ: [OPINION] Youth as troublemakers)

Yet, in spite of his faults, there were still moments where he stood up to shine, proving that maybe there are no heroes, just ordinary people pushing themselves to accomplish heroic acts.

(I'm not saying we should tolerate incompetence, selfishness, or womanizing in leadership. I just think Goyo did a good job of showing people how incompetent, selfish, or vain our "heroes" can be, if we ever venture to look more deeply.)

Anti-climactic ending 

Third, we all knew he would die at the Tirad Pass, but he died so matter-of-factly, it was almost anti-climactic.

Our history was built (partly) on legendary deaths: the Gomburza priests executed gruesomely, Jose Rizal being shot at Bagumbayan, Ninoy Aquino bloodied on the tarmac. This one was not legendary.

The lesson for me here is: if you want to create real change in this country, don't wait for a heroic death or one big act of courage in crisis that people will eventually worship you for. It may never happen. Instead, aim for everyday small acts with positive effects that can snowball into a lifetime of accomplishment.

The reality of heroism is that most of the real heroism that happens nowadays may never be recognized. Think of the nameless doctors, nurses, scientists, policymakers, and businessmen who have touched lives, formed communities, and created ripples of change.

They're heroes not because they want to be heroes but because they act and do.

In conclusion, watch Goyo not because you want to see the legendary heroism of one of the youngest generals in Philippine history. Watch it because you want to see the reality behind the facade.

Watch it because, when we're seeing only two sides, Goyo asks us to think again. Bad or good. Villain or hero. The movie makes you uncomfortable by keeping you suspended in limbo.

Watch it because we are all Goyos in a way: young, foolish, idealistic, uncertain, selfish, imperfect, vain, and incompetent.

After all, the first step in becoming a better person or leader is recognizing one's own weaknesses and faults. – Rappler.com 

Arizza Nocum is a digital marketing and public relations consultant. She is also the founder of KRIS Library, an education and peace advocacy group.

The past week saw an alarming explosion of myths and misconceptions about inflation (how fast prices are rising).

This came in the heels of the shocking announcement of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) that inflation in August clocked in at a whopping 6.4%.

Not only is this the highest in 9.4 years, it’s also higher than the government’s upper forecast of 6.2%, higher than the government’s upper target of 4%, and highest in ASEAN. (READ: Why is Philippine inflation now the highest in ASEAN?)

But no sooner than the inflation figures were announced than several people – online and offline, in and out of government – proffered faulty and misleading analyses to dismiss its seriousness. Some of these analyses have even gone viral.

In this piece I would like to debunk these pernicious myths and misconceptions which I grouped into 3 main categories.

Misconception 1:  Higher inflation is an indicator of a healthy, growing economy

One viral post online – which earned more than 11,000 shares on Facebook so far – argued that inflation is a “good indicator that the economy is working and heading upwards,” as well as a sign of “higher economic activity and brighter economic prospects.”

A similar message was trumpeted by Duterte’s economic managers. Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia said it’s “not alarming” and “quite normal in a fast growing economy resulting in strong demand and rising expectations of people.”

For his part, Budget Secretary Ben Diokno said 6.4% inflation is “manageable” and that he has “seen worse inflations.”

It’s true that – in the span of many decades or centuries – a nation’s cost of living rises in tandem with its income. Rich countries like the US and Japan, for example, have much higher costs of living than poor countries.

Yet in the short run, we don’t need high inflation in order to grow fast.

Figure 1 shows that right before the Duterte administration, we were, in fact, enjoying a period of low inflation and fast growth. Today, however, growth seems to be faltering even as inflation is skyrocketing.

In August, the inflation rate (6.4%) even exceeded the latest economic growth figure (6%). What gives?

Figure 1.

Data also belie the claim that inflation is a sign of “brighter economic prospects.”

Figure 2 below shows that, in July, consumers’ confidence in the current state of the economy dived into the negative region this quarter – the first time since Duterte came into office. Meanwhile, businesses’ confidence in the same period reached its lowest in almost 9 years.

If inflation is a sign of better things to come, why are these measures of economic confidence plummeting?

Figure 2.

Misconception 2: Inflation today is not so high compared to historical levels

Some have also belittled recent inflation by saying it’s not that high historically.

To bolster that claim, some assembled data – going as far back as 1960 – to show we’re far from the highest inflation rates in history.

Others still, including one “data scientist,” argued that 6.4% inflation is on par with the average inflation rate of the past 5 administrations combined.

Unfortunately, arguments like these are not only misleading, they also provide ammunition to government propagandists. PCOO Secretary Martin Andanar, for example, made very similar claims on state-run radio recently.

Data confirm that inflation used to be much higher. Back in 1984 – right in the middle of the economic crisis brought about by President Marcos – inflation even reached a mind-boggling 50.3%.

But inflation is better judged in relation to the government’s avowed target. For 2018, that target is 2% to 4%. Figure 3 shows that inflation last month was already 60% higher than the government’s upper target.

Figure 3.

Also, to say that 6.4% is not too bad – because it used to be in excess of 50% – is like saying the number of extrajudicial killings in the time of Marcos is no reason for alarm because Duterte’s current record is much higher.

Just as the relatively smaller Martial Law death toll is utterly deplorable, the relatively lower inflation rate of 6.4% today is nothing to celebrate about.

Notice, too, the patent contradiction between this argument (high inflation is bad) and the previous one (high inflation is good). Which is it, really?

Misconception 3: Inflation is largely because of international factors (world oil prices, Trump’s policies) and therefore beyond our control

Finally, many have pointed to international factors as the main culprits for our inflation woes.

Some officials of the Department of Finance, for example, have emphasized the role of higher world oil prices.

Assistant Secretary Tony Lambino – who by the way previously said year-on-year inflation is an “abstract” concept and “not how people experience prices” – also recently claimed that record-high oil prices are to blame, not TRAIN. “Without TRAIN, inflation would still be high,” he said.

Meanwhile, Duterte himself blamed Donald Trump and his trade war against China. In Jordan he told Filipinos there that, “Inflation is – dahil ‘yan kay Trump. When Trump raised 'yung tariff and banned other items.”

One viral post– 13,000 shares so far – echoed Duterte by devoting several paragraphs to the so-called “Chimerica trade war” and spinning wild conspiracy theories about the US.

Although inflation is borne by both international and domestic factors, the latter demonstrably dominate the former.

For example, even if world oil prices are indeed at a 3-year high now, TRAIN’s excise taxes – which are completely within government’s control – add directly to the rising costs of petroleum products like gasoline, diesel, and kerosene.

On January 1, 2019, these excise taxes will increase even more because of TRAIN. Halting these automatic tax hikes – as has been proposed by some lawmakers – only seems prudent to pursue.

Meanwhile, Trump – even if he’s as economically illiterate as Duterte, if not more so – cannot be blamed for our runaway inflation.

First, unless we impose higher tariffs on imports from the US or China – and join the trade war ourselves – I see no immediate reason how the trade war could impact domestic inflation.

Second, some analysts have posited that the Philippines actually stands to benefit (rather than suffer) from the burgeoning US-China trade war, in the form of Chinese investors relocating to ASEAN countries like ours.

Third, perhaps more worrisome is a general slowdown of growth in the US or China that could arise from their trade war. But so far, indicators paint pictures of robust growth in both countries.

In sum, we don’t have to look too far to identify the causes of recent inflation. The problems, by and large, lie within our own backyard. 

Putting the blame on international factors not only distracts us from the real issues at hand – including the rice crisis, TRAIN, and unmoored inflation expectations. More importantly, it could lull our policymakers into inaction and complacency.

Let’s not downplay inflation

You don’t really need to crunch the numbers to know there’s a problem with inflation. Just go to the nearest palengke or talipapa or grocery to see that prices have skyrocketed to alarming levels.

Sadly, there’s now a concerted effort to downplay the magnitude and impact of inflation, whether by misreading the data or blaming foreign affairs.

Worse, a number of people have speculated that government has already started fudging the numbers. 

One report, for example, indicates that the original inflation estimate for August was actually 6.6%, not 6.4%.

But Secretary Pernia, upon seeing the initial report of the PSA, called for a last-minute correction (in his word, a “corrigendum”).

This downward revision of the August figure – which led to an unusual one-hour delay of the inflation announcement last week – raises several questions.

For example, how come the PSA failed to mention this “corrigendum” in their press release as the reason for their delayed announcement? Instead, they blamed congestion and technical glitches on their website. (READ: PSA contradicts Pernia, blames technical glitch for late inflation data)

Regardless of the exact reason, this last-minute “corrigendum” gives the unwelcome impression that government is now in the business of massaging the numbers to hide ugly truths about the economy.

Rather than rebuild the people’s trust in government, such actions only serve to erode them further. – 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.

As Luzon braces for the impact of Typhoon Ompong (international name Mangkhut), the entire Philippines and the world are about to find out just how prepared we are for disasters.

Have we learned from the avoidable mistakes made in past disasters? Are we prepared to effectively handle any emergencies that might happen in the coming days? Can the government coordinate well with other sectors in responding to all possible situations? (READ: What gov't has done so far to prepare for Typhoon Ompong) 

It has been nearly 9 years since the onslaught of Typhoon Ondoy in Metro Manila, yet memories of extreme flooding and strong winds remain vivid among those affected by the disaster. The unprecedented devastation it brought to the nation’s capital  and surrounding provinces led to climate change becoming fully integrated into national and local policymaking. Laws such as the Climate Change Act of 2009 and the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) Act of 2010 were institutionalized to ensure better management of and response to disasters. 

Have we learned our lessons? 

Yet the following years saw different parts of the Philippines suffer losses and damage to one extreme event after another. Super typhoons, El Niño-enhanced droughts, and monsoon rains left communities struggling to fully recover from their impacts. Some rehabilitation efforts, most notably those affected by Yolanda in Eastern Visayas, remain uneven or unfinished to this day. 

Truth be told, improvements have been made in our preparedness for natural hazards. New equipment for PAGASA has allowed improvements in weather forecasting and modeling climate change. Early warning systems and communicating climate and disaster-related information to the public have also seen progress in the past decade. Some regional DRRM Councils have even initiated projects to reduce disaster risks in their areas and increase the resilience of their constituencies. 

Nonetheless, glaring problems in the national and local DRRM remain evident. A lack of sufficient manpower and financial and technical resources hinder the implementation of programs throughout the DRRM framework. Awareness in dealing with disasters remain low in some regions, partially worsened by corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency. Some government agencies even refuse to provide necessary data for planning against disasters to other agencies or civil society organizations.  (READ: EXPLAINER: Who's supposed to be in charge during disasters?)

The most significant of these problems is the focus of governance on responding to disasters instead of prevention and mitigation. Despite improvements in its capacity and its importance in preventing disasters, the science and technology sector remains underfunded and underappreciated. Poor land use planning and ineffective building codes repeatedly expose the most vulnerable sectors, including the urban poor and the marginalized, to the worst of such impacts. (READ: Expert: PH tech, understanding of disasters 'on par with world's best') 

While more avenues for climate change adaptation-based support have opened in recent years, local government units are either unaware of the availability of these options or unsure of how to access these much-needed resources. Specifically, LGUs are not familiar with engaging with academic institutions in coming up proposals to get support. (READ: Disaster imagination: 3 steps toward disaster preparedness) 

Political will, effective leadership 

These are the issues that House Bill 8165, which seeks to create the Department of Disaster Resilience, attempts to address. The resulting super-agency will lead the national coordination of efforts for reducing the risks, preparing for the impacts of hazards, and rehabilitating should disasters occur. The bill also attempts to streamline disaster risk reduction management and climate change adaptation planning to enhance implementation efficiency.  (READ: Duterte sends Cabinet members to Luzon provinces in Ompong's path)

The need for enhancing our DRRM framework is undisputable, given the endorsement of President Duterte, the recent history of damages inflicted by tropical cyclones, and projected worsening climate change impacts. Modifying the systems in place cannot be done overnight but the urgency of the problem requires immediate action.

The Climate Reality Project Philippines asserts that ultimately, what the Philippines truly needs in improving its DRRM is political will and effective leadership. Government officials from national agencies to local units must recognize that climate change is the biggest threat to the immediate and long-term survival of their constituencies. They must also lead the way in changing our mindset in dealing with disasters, from anticipating disasters to mitigating their causes and preventing them from causing too much destruction.

Therefore, the government must enforce existing policies and implement programs to empower communities to prepare for, if not avoid, the impacts of extreme natural hazards.

As they are at the forefront of these impacts, LGUs must explore all available options to build the capacity in their respective areas to respond to possible disasters. Proper land use planning would provide not only DRRM-related benefits such as reducing vulnerability to immediate hazards, but also long-term economic and environmental benefits that can never be matched by short-term pursuit of financial gains.  

There must be adequate manpower and funding for all aspects of DRRM, but efforts on disaster prevention and mitigation must be prioritized. In this regard, the government should engage and coordinate with the private sector, civil society organizations, the academe, and local communities to minimize, if not avoid altogether, loss and damage to extreme events. (READ: Thousands flee in Isabela, Cagayan ahead of Typhoon Ompong landfall) 

In this regard, some regions have shown a glimpse of how far we have come when it comes to DRRM. Communities in Bicol and Cagayan Valley, which will be affected by Ompong, have demonstrated innovations and good practices in local DRRM from prevention to rehabilitation that serve as models for other localities.  

Yet as a nation, we still have a very long way to go. Sooner than later, we should all realize that resilience is no longer enough. Prevention is and always will be better than cure. The following days may be the most pivotal in determining the direction of Philippine policy on climate change and DRRM for years to come.

Is there really a need to change the system if the solution is a change in the people in it? – Rappler.com 

John Leo Algo is the Science Policy Associate of the Philippine Branch of The Climate Reality Project. Founded by Nobel laureate and former US Vice President Al Gore, CRP is a diverse group of passionate individuals who have come together to help solve the greatest challenge of our time. We are cultural leaders, marketers, organizers, scientists, storytellers and more, and we are committed to building a better future together.

MANILA, Philippines – With the country's inflation hitting 6.4% last August, many Filipinos are debating whether it's good or bad for the economy.

But what really is inflation? And when is inflation good? Are we already suffering from hyperinflation?

In this episode of Basagan ng Trip, Leloy Claudio discusses the concept of inflation, deflation, and hyperinflation and how these concepts affect the economy.

Tune in on Friday, September 14 at 9:00 pm. – Rappler.com