Downloadable MP3
BILL CLINTON said a Monica Lewinsky mouthful of nonsense, when he praised Gloria Macapagal Arroyo for "turning the Philippine economy around," noting how, just recently "everyone had written her off as politically dead" (referring I suppose to her impeachment troubles which could easily start up again depending on what happens to Romulo Neri's claims of executive privilege.) But like the Democratic Party in general, Mr. Clinton has always ignored Filipinos in America. He is obviously not aware that it is the hard- and painfully earned incomes of ten million Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) --nurses, doctors, teachers, engineers, domestic helpers, construction workers, entertainers and care-givers, that is keeping the country afloat on an annual tide of 15 billion dollars in repatriations that is raising all boats. That includes the Ship of State, ponderous and wasteful. Whereupon the corrupt officialdom of this Archipelago, headed by the object of Bill Clinton's blind praise, makes like Ali Baba and the forty thousand thieves playing golf and scheming with corrupt Chinese bureaucrats--ahem, capitalists who call themselves market socialists.

I guess "Classmate" Bubba doesn't read Transparency International reports either (which at No. 131 just yesterday ranked the Philippines among the most corrupt in the world at par with Burundi, Honduras and Yemen, with whose long-suffering peoples Filipinos share the cellar); or those of the Heritage Foundation, which warned way back in 2005 that "Chinese influence will continue to expand while Arroyo fights for her political life," -- which qualifies as a prophetic warning come true in the wake of the ZTE National Broadband Network bribery scandal compared to which even the cartelized pricing of Globe and Smart , reportedly US $20 per Megabit per second of bandwidth, compared to 11 cents in the United States and 22 cents in Japan seems merely greedy, but not venal. I suppose what he really admires in her accidental economics is that VAT of heavy taxes extracted like blood from the Filipino people, that President Arroyo has been spending to finance the Pork Barrel instead of what she promised it was for--avoidance of more foreign debt. She has apparently entered into dozens of agreements with China that are sure to indenture Filipinos for the next few generations. It's all part of China's new East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere scheme in action.

Lookie here, Bubba. The OFWs are suffering enough as it is from the unfavorable peso exchange rates and heavy E-Vat taxation used to finance the pork barrel. Why add insult to injury by praising the economic architect of these vexations.

Of course, colossal-size corruption is just par for the course of Filipino presidents, but a lot of equally serious trouble is brewing for the Philippines because of the President's utter lack of leadership in handling the jihadist and communist insurgent threats. She is even planning to give the MILF rebels a big reward for all their murderous ambuscades and armed violence -- in the form of their own "ancestral domain" or Muslim Juridical Entity which is said to encompass 1000 barangays in Maguindanao and will incorporate what is now the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (read MNLF-Nur Misuari terriotry.) This last wrinkle will probably be enough to guarantee decades more of armed insurgency in Mindanao as the MNLF wages war on its MILF brethren. American Chronicle writer Kurt Stallings echoes our own sentiments here at Philippine Commentary that the Moro rebellion has been hijacked by the Global Jihad on vilization launched by Al Qaeda, with this analysis of the situation in Mindanao:

Abu Sayaf is not nationalist; it is international jihadist, closely allied with al-Qaeda. For them, the southern Philippines are a marvelous base from which to project terrorist activity throughout Asia.

A dangerous break toward jihadist, rather than nationalist, leadership is signaled each time MILF factions collaborate with Abu Sayaf. If that shift takes hold, the prospects of a relatively peaceful resolution to the situation substantially decrease, and the odds of terrorist activity throughout the Philippines increase.

Tragically, this comes at a time when the Philippine economy appears on an unprecedented spurt of growth. The Philippine people are already highly literate, educated and politically acute, ordinarily a recipe for refining their democracy and eliminating abuses of corruption and governmental terror tactics.

The Islamists know -- and fear -- just that possibility, which may be why they are pushing so hard to win over the new generation of young Muslim males away from the older, traditional Muslim nationalists who had been steadily gaining relative autonomy for their region within the country. The mutilation and beheading of Philippine marines this summer brought the armed forces into Muslim territories with a vengeance (literally), ostensibly seeking the perpetrators, and now mired in the jungles while the politicians try to talk it out.

For the theoretically inclined, the US Army War College periodical, Parameters has its Summer Issue out. I recommend two essays there: A Social Network Approach to Understanding Insurgency and Good Anthropology. Bad History. The Cultural Turn in Studying War.

Of course, the President is clearly basking in the afterglow of Clintonesque flattery. She needs the break, considering her own First Gent is skulking about somewhere in China, whilst she faces the prospect of Manila's seething political cauldron over the ZTE scandal and the possible breakup of her political coalition in the House. Joe de Venecia just ruled out inhibiting himself from the explosive Abalos impeachment process that was really ignited by his son Joey's testimony of a $10 million bribe offer and Romulo Neri's "200". If Abalos is impeached and tried, the radioactive proceedings could create a dangerous fallout over the Palace.

CONTRETEMPS UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan has the latest on the Iowa primary and the race between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton

ABSCBN News reports SC Approves Use of Writ of Amparo
Full Text at Philippine e-Legal Forum
I am sure that the significance of the above news item is not lost on the Philippine Military and defense establishments, because the "legal innovation" being copied from Latin America is nothing less than a thinly veiled accusation against them by no less than the Supreme Court itself that they are probably responsible for the spate of "extrajudicial killings" and enforced disappearances in the country and are hiding it! Moreover, it is my opinion that the Supreme Court has embarked into uncharted Constitutional matters and is likely to make things a lot worse than they are now because the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

CHIEF JUSTICE REYNATO PUNO has delivered two noteworthy speeches on the role of the Judiciary in the protection of human rights recently.

The first was at the National Summit on Extra Judicial Killings last July. Puno's welcoming remarks The View From The Mountain Top (PDF) is posted at the Supreme Court website under the headline: CJ Puno Defends Judicial Activism in the Protection of Human Rights.

Second was at Silliman University recently. Here are the full text and an audio recording of Chief Justice Puno:
MP3
No Turning Back on Human Rights! (Word DOC)

I must salute the Chief Justice for above speech which I found to be a lucid explanation especially of the writs of amparo and habeas data.

He asserts that the 1987 Philippine Constitution does something revolutionary with Separation of Powers because it grants to the Supreme Court certain powers that are normally LEGISLATIVE in character in Artcle VIII Section 5

"In the landmark case of Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance I made the submission that “in imposing to this Court the duty to annul acts of government committed with grave abuse of discretion, the new Constitution transformed the Court from passivity to activism. This transformation, dictated by our distinct experience as a nation, is not merely evolutionary but revolutionary. Under the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions, the Court approached constitutional violations not by finding out what it should not do but what it must do. The Court must discharge its solemn duty by not resuscitating a past that petrifies the present. Secondly, the paucity of power of the Judiciary in checking human rights violations was remedied by stretching its rule making prerogative.

Article VIII, section 5 (5) empowers the Supreme Court to `promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights x x x.’ Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform 1 G.R. No. 115455, 30 October 1995, 249 SCRA 628..- 4 - for all courts of he same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.”

In the Silliman University speech, a most memorable passage has to be the following:

I respectfully submit further that the framers of the 1987 Constitution were gifted with a foresight that allowed them to see that the dark forces of human rights violators would revisit our country and wreak havoc on the rights of our people. With this all-seeing eye, they embedded in our 1987 Constitution a new power and vested it on our Supreme Court – the power to promulgate rules to protect the constitutional rights of our people. This is a radical departure from our 1935 and 1972 Constitutions, for the power to promulgate rules or laws to protect the constitutional rights of our people is essentially a legislative power, and yet it was given to the judiciary, more specifically to the Supreme Court. If this is disconcerting to foreign constitutional experts who embrace the tenet that separation of powers is the cornerstone of democracy, it is not so to Filipinos who survived the authoritarian years, 1971 to 1986. Those were the winter years of human rights in the Philippines. They taught us the lesson that in the fight for human rights, it is the judiciary that is our last bulwark of defense; hence, the people entrusted to the Supreme Court this right to promulgate rules protecting their constitutional rights.

Was legislative power really given to the Supreme Court by the 1987 Constitution? I don't think so! CJ Puno cunningly abbreviated that 1987 provision upon which the Court's activism is based. The whole provision with the words in the x x x restored seems to mean something other than the expansive interpretation he gives it.

(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

It really sounds like the Constitution is merely giving the Supreme Court the right to make such changes in the rules and practices of Judiciary (courts, the Bar, etc.)--not the expansive secret weapon that he claims to have now unsheathed.

The approval for courts (even lower than the Supreme Court, including Regional Trial Courts!) to use the writ of amparo is in the nature of legislation of such a high order as to touch upon the realm of constitutive power, since, in his speeches on the subject the Chief Justice has declared that this mere change in the Rules of Court "gives life" to the people's "Right to Truth".

The Chief Justice is conscious of, but is not apologetic about leading a "judicially activist" court, noting the inutility of the political branches of the government to solve the vexing problem of alleged extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, and considering it a Constitutionally mandated duty of the Court to exercise the rule making power clearly granted by the Constitution.

I think they are stepping into a minefield here and opening up a Pandora's Box of unpredictable evils. The new rules on the issuance of writ of amparo also constitutes in my opinion an improper usurpation of the Chief Executive's Commander-in-chief powers and the intention to allow the inspection of military facilities looking for desaparecidos could create a host of unforeseeable situations and problems that not even the Supreme Court will be able to remedy.
Moreover, the CJ's claim that "in the fight for human rights" during "the winter years" of Marcos' authoritarianism "our last bulwark of defense" was the judiciary. Yet it is a matter of historical record that the Supreme Court blessed the Martial Law Constitution of the fascist dictator Ferdinand Marcos in the infamous decision, Javellana vs. Executive Secretary.

So I think it is important for the Supreme Court to think over carefully its activist innovations.
And there is more to come yet from the activist Supreme Court.

Someone has recently edited the Wikipedia entry for HABEAS DATA from which the following useful chronological and legal history of the writ of habeas data in various Latin American countries and soon, in the Philippines.

Brazil: The 1988 Brazilian Constitution stipulates that: “Habeas Data shall be granted: a) to ensure the knowledge of information related to the person of the petitioner, contained in records or databanks of government agencies or of agencies of a public character; b) for the correction of data, when the petitioner does not prefer to do so through a confidential process, either judicial or administrative”.

Paraguay: The 1992 Paraguay constitution follows the example set by Brazil, but enhances the protection in several ways. The Article 135 of the Paraguayan constitution states: “Everyone may have access to information and data available on himself or assets in official or private registries of a public nature. He is also entitled to know how the information is being used and for what purpose. He may request a competent judge to order the updating, rectification, or destruction of these entries if they are wrong or if they are illegitimately affecting his rights.”

Argentina: the Argentinian version of Habeas Data is the most complete to date. The article 43 of the Constitution, amended on the 1994 reform, states that: “Any person shall file this action to obtain information on the data about himself and their purpose, registered in public records or data bases, or in private ones intended to supply information; and in case of false data or discrimination, this action may be filed to request the suppression, rectification, confidentiality or updating of said data. The secret nature of the sources of journalistic information shall not be impaired.”[3]

Philippines: On August 25, 2007, Chief Justice Reynato Puno (at the College of Law alumni of Silliman University in Dumaguete City) announced that the Supreme Court of the Philippines was drafting the writ of Habeas Data. By invoking the truth, the new remedy will not only compel military and government agents to release information about the desaparecidos but require access to military and police files. Reynato Puno announced earlier on the draft of the writ of amparo -- the Spanish for protection -- which will prevent military officials in judicial proceedings to simply issue denials on cases of disappearances or extrajudicial executions. With the writ of habeas corpus, the writ of Habeas Data and the writ of amparo will further help those looking for missing loved ones.

[It always scares me when our native mechanics start tinkering with the Ship of State's Main Engine in order to effect some transcendentally important course correction. Must be the dumb old sailor in me.]

The Writ of Habeas Data originated in Latin America as a Brazilian Constitutional innovation of rather recent vintage--1988, younger by a year than our own present 1987 Constitution. Which however is not where the Philippine version of habeas data will be originated--unlikeBrazil. No. It is being drafted as a new Rule of Court that will soon be promulgated by the almighty Supreme Court of the Philippines as a solution to "extrajudicial killings."

I can't wait to see what Chief Justice Reynato Puno and our most honorable Judges at Padre Faura come up with in this regard. There is very little time to examine the basics of the matter...

Fundamentally speaking, there appears to be a personal private right that is sought to be protected by the writ of habeas data when issued by a Constitutional Court on behalf of a person. That right is the right to know what information about our persons exists, in government agencies and databases, as well as in any publicly or easily accessible "source of information." In Latin American countries above, the right further includes that of assessing by individual self-determination the accuracy and veracity of such data and to demand its correction or suppression.

I hope it is a wrong impression being given in the last paragraph about the Supreme Court's plans for a Philippine-style writ of habeas data. Because it appears that the new "rules" being drawn up by the High Court in fulfillment of its sacred Constitutional duty to protect human rights, may very well be limited by design, letter and spirit, to government, military, police and other "official" databases only. But I claim that would be an unjust limitation on the underlying human right sought to be protected a writ of habeas data, namely the right to know what information other people may have on you. This is a right to review and correct such any false information found by "self-determination."

Associate Justice Dante O. Tinga talked to Ricky Carandang and Marieton Pacheco this morning about it. He discusses some of the details, but I think this matter deserves everyone's circumspection, if not outright skepticism given the not exactly sterling record of the Philippine Courts. And Tinga didn't seem to understand Ricky Carandang's excellent question: Don't the new "Rules of Court" seem to negate any presumption of innocence? Take for example,

SEC. 9. Return Contents. – Within seventy-two (72) hours after service of the writ, the respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits which shall, among other things, contain the following:

(a) The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate or threaten with violation the right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party, through any act or omission;

b) The steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the person or persons responsible for the threat, act or omission;

(c) All relevant information in the possession of the respondent pertaining to the threat, act or omission against the aggrieved party.

Blow me down! To comply with the writ, Respondent must prove a negative in 72 hours! This could turn the whole AFP into Clerks of Court, Judge and Justice! But I will reserve a detailed analysis for later, and the Supreme Court sink into self-mockery.

Downloadable MP3

(Well, President Bush, "a lady can always change her mind" as you once said.)
Downloadable MP3
President Arroyo is in the United States for a three day "working visit". Yup,she's working alright, she's working on Hillary Clinton already as she immediately cozied up to the prospective First Gentleman, Bill Clinton at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting (LA Times reports) and they talked hotly of geothermal energy just before she met with lots of Filipino American voters to defend her Mindanao policy. I am not sure exactly what she told them, but the true situation is this. Last April 19, 2007, the Abu Sayyaf kidnapped for ransom and eventually beheaded five students working on a summer road construction job in Sulu to earn money for college and a fish vendor who they happened to be with, dumping their severed heads in a burlap sack outside a Marine base in Sulu. That's part of them on the back of a truck. The picture is from Adrian Ayalin's blog. On July 10, Moro Islamic Liberation Front guerillas ambushed and killed fourteen Marines who were looking for the kidnapped Italian priest Fr. Giancarlo Bossi near Tipo-tipo, Basilan. Ten were later beheaded by what the MILF claimed were "unknown forces". After a Basilan judge issued arrest warrants against 130 suspects, the Peace Processors Jesus Dureza and Gen. Rodolfo Garcia stepped in, delayed service of the warrants, blamed the beheadings on "Abu Sayyaf bandits". Six weeks after the Basilan beheadings, the President supposedly launched an all-out war, but not against MILF or the MNLF who together with the Abu Sayyaf have now killed 57 uniformed Philippine soldiers. NOT A SINGLE SUSPECT in these terrorist crimes has been arrested, though the Philippine Military just yesterday reported killing 10 Abu Sayyaf gunmen in a violent encounter, (but without recovering the bodies.) The President has also announced her intention to grant, without plebiscite, 1000 barangays and all of ARMM to the MILF as their own Muslim Juridical Entity. This is Bangsamorostan for sure.



Recent Philippine Commentaries on Mindanao, the Basilan Beheadings and terrorism are numerous.

THE SENATE AGAIN RISES Meanwhile, it has been a momentous week in the Philippine Senate with two high profile investigations in aid of legislation: first into the role of major telecomms Globe and Smart in the illegal wiretapping of President Arroyo and Comelec Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano by the Intelligence Services of the AFP in 2004, and then into the National Broadband Network bribery scandal, at the heart of which also happens to be a telecommunications project involving China's 3rd largest telecomm player, Zhongxing Telecommunications Equipment Corporation. The controversy may have been a factor in the just announced plunge of the Philippines to No. 131 in Transparency International's 2007 corruption ranking (down from No. 121 least corrupt in 2006).

Nota bene: Both controversies involve the telecommunications industry and government officials allegedly working together in the commission of crimes of serious crimes.

---

WHAT'S IN A HAND GESTURE? Language Trainers Blog has an excellent post on the The Top Ten Hand Gestures. Here is Number 3:

3. The “Moutza”
Opening your palm to your target and stretching out your fingers seems harmless enough to most Westerners. Most of us would think you’re waving. In Greece, however, the gesture is known as a moutza, and is one of their most traditional manual insults. With fingers slightly apart, you thrust your hand into your target’s face, usually coupling the gesture with a brash “na!”, meaning “here you go!”. The basic suggestion is something like “eat shit”, implying that you’re not particularly impressed and would rather the target of the moutza leave you alone – comparable to the American interpretation of the same signal as “talk to the hand, because the face isn’t listening”.

The gesture is also an insulting one in Pakistan and many parts of Africa. The Japanese use a very similar sign to insult their old enemies, the Koreans. Roughly translating as ‘animal’, the signal is similar to the moutza in every way except they tuck the thumb into the palm.

Amusingly, Microsoft used to use a very similar-looking hand signal as an icon for warning dialogs in previous versions of Windows – what Greek users must have thought of that, I don’t know… “This application has performed an illegal operation - now, eat shit!”.

In the most severe fallout over the ZTE scandal for the Arroyo administration, an impeachment case has been filed in the House by Gov. Rolex Suplico and endorsed by Rep. Teofisto Guingona III against Benjamin Abalos, chairman of the Commission on Elections for bribery, corruption and breach of public trust. Although Presidential Legal Counsel was bravely predicting a "lack of numbers" in the House for the case to prosper, Gov. Suplico told media today that his evidence against Abalos was strong since two accusations of attempted bribery against him have been given under oath and before the Senate by no less than Joey de Venecia III, the son of the House Speaker Jose de Venecia, in addition to former Neda Director General Romulo Neri. In some ways, Abalos' fate is in the hands of Speaker Joe de Venecia.

Aside however, from Neri's accusation against Abalos, he also testified to something that has gotten the attention of a lot of ordinary people. This was his revelation that Filipinos are paying US$20 for every Megabit-per-second of bandwidth, compared to 11 cents in the US and 22 cents in the Philippines, even if the technologies being used are the same: DSL, cable and wireless delivery modes. Obscene profits are thus being made, but then again it may have something to do with the fact that the Philippines has no anti-trust law, and even if it did, it is also the Archipelago the Artful Areglo. Neri's revelation was done to justify the concept of a National Broadband Network, which no one buys, but it does point to a real problem: the telecommunications industry in the Philippines is cartelized, as charged several years back by the United States Dept. of Justice.

OFWs have been the loudest at complaining about the high telecomm rates charged by Smart and Globe. Clearly some kind of competitive regime needs to be fostered to drive down the obscenely high rates being charged by the incumbent telecomms for broadband and other servies.

Today, the nail on the coffin of ZTE National Broadband Network project may have been hammered in by Deans Raul Fabella and Emmanuel de Dios of the University of the Philippines School of Economics, who delivered a paper analyzing why the deal is GROSSLY ADVANTAGEOUS to the government entitled "Lacking a Backbone."

The wiretapping investigation involves 3 Senate committees led by National Defense (Rodolfo Biazon) and including the Blue Ribbon (Alan Peter Cayetano) and Trade and Industry (Mar Roxas). But I think the tone for the whole week was set by Senate President Manny Villar as he confronted representatives of Globe and PLDT for not sending their previously invited Chief Executive Officers (Globe's Gerry Ablaza and Smart's Roberto Nazareno).

In the hearing it became clear that wiretapping CAN be done quite easily in a number of ways, if there is collusion between wiretappers and insiders within the service provider sensitive operations divisions. However, one thing that Globe's Rudy Salalima said which I found intriguing was his suggestion that ISAFP could have carried out the wiretapping with "spiked" cell phones in which the user is unaware every call he makes or receives is actually a conference call with Vidal Doble or some other agent of the MIG-21 group. This would certainly explain the description put forward by Ping Lacson of conversation signals being "split." The Senate wiretapping investigation resumes Friday.

Former Director General of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) Romulo Neri has testified under oath that Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos offered him a 200 million peso (US$ 4 million) bribe to approve a project with Chinese firm ZTE [Shenzen] to build a nationwide computer network to interconnect all government offices and agencies, the ZTE National Broadband Network Project. He made the claim upon questioning first by Sen. Loren Legarda and then by Senator Panfilo Lacson. Asked if he reported the matter to President Arroyo, he answered yes, that she told him to reject the bribe but does not know how and why the project was later approved by the President. Paradoxically, after accusing Abalos and excusing Arroyo, "opening up the conversation" so to speak, Mr. Neri refused to answer further questions about his discussion with the President about the matter, invoking Executive Order No. 464 and its provision on EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. Under questioning by Senate Majority Leader, Neri admitted he had no written order from the President or Executive Secretary Ermita, to so invoke executive privilege. The Senate is now in a quandary about how to deal with this invocation of executive privilege when the session resumes shortly. If you ask me, the Palace may have already decided to let Abalos hang, whilst safeguarding the President.

Luckily Philipppine Commentary has many posts on this matter of executive privilege:

Supreme Court Upheld the Half of EO 464 that GMA Really Needs

King Solomon Just Cut the Baby in Half

Executive Privilege Covers Information -- Not Executives

Supreme Court Decisions As English Grammar and Composition

Before all these developments, Foreign Relations Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago delivered one of her patented tirades in which she declared China and the Chinese as the "inventors of corruption" using sex, golf and lucrative bribes "to corrupt human civilization". She called the hearings a public squabble over sleazy bribe monies, and promptly walked out.

The statements could damage Philippine-Chinese relations. I am counting on it! There may be dozens of ZTE-type projects from what has just been discovered here.

---

UPDATES: In part 2 of today's Senate hearing on the ZTE National Broadband Network deal, several senators asked a number of good questions. I have to adjust my personal evaluations of them.

Pia "Compañera" Cayetano asked a very clever question of ALL the resource persons and witnesses present, including Romulo Neri, Joey de Venecia, Mendoza, Abalos, Formoso, etc, whether any of them participated in, were the subjects of, or were aware of the "discreet investigation" into the project that the Palace claimed yesterday to have completed. Not a single one of them answered in the affirmative, nor could any of them claim to know who did participate in it. Pia ended with the most sarcastic pronunciation of the term "discreet investigation." Touché!

MAR "Mr. Palengke" Roxas meanwhile wrestled for a long time with Romulo Neri over the matter of what happened after he had reported the 200 million peso bribe offer from Abalos to President Arroyo, which seemed to be nothing. At one point, near the end, he got Neri admit that even if he knew that the project itself was tainted by briberies and corruption, he still agreed with the continuance of the project even if nothing appears to have been done about the reported irregularites. This Mar Roxas considered to be a stunning admission, wondering if this was now the level and standard of public officials in their handling of the people's money.

After Mar Roxas asked a question on behalf of the detained Senator Antonio "Sonny" Trillanes, Juan Ponce Enrile objected calling it a precedent that was not accorded to him while he was incarcerated himself. To which Panfilo "Ping" Lacson moved that the next hearing be held at the Marine HQ at Fort Bonifacio so that a member of the Upper House who is "helpless" might have a chance to participate.

---

The Senate has gone into Executive Session in order to find out from Romulo Neri the basis for his invocation of executive privilege.

Meanwhile, Rolex Suplico announced that tomorrow he would file a case for IMPEACHMENT against Commission on Elections Chairman Benjamin Abalos.

The truth about what really happened at the San Carlos Seminary between June 10-13, 2005 is coming out at the Senate investigations into the Garci wiretapping scandal. No matter how hard Juan Ponce Enrile and Dick Gordon tried, the overwhelming preponderance of eyewitness testimonies of many well known persons there present, including Bishop Teodoro Bacani, Senator Sergio Osmena, Oscar Orbos, Mayor Jejomar Binay, and Atty. Luis Sison seemed to win the day. For one thing, the claims that Vidal Doble was being "illegally detained" at San Carlos Seminary by former NBI Deputy Director Samuel Ong are now completely unbelievable (if they weren't already before!) because of the mass of corroborating details from all these witnesses. What was really happening was that Sammy Ong, who claimed to have the Mother of all Tapes (actually four in number) given to him by Vidal Doble, was about to hold a press conference in which he would reveal everything about the scandal that had been precipitated a few days before on June 6, when Press Sec. Ignacio Bunye first revealed the Garci wiretappings. They were seeking sanctuary in the "Bahay Pari" (House of the Priests) of San Carlos, when the place was surrounded by heavily armed units of the Armed Forces, police, and the Intelligence Services. Now according to Atty. Luis Sison, who was also present during the entire three day incident, there came a point in time when Bishop Soc Villegas came to pick up Vidal Doble and bring him to General Abu at Camp Aguinaldo, where he said Doble's wife and children were waiting to see him. Doble folded and the press conference was off because of the pressure of his family being fetched all the way from Kidapawan City by Palace trouble shooter and the niece of Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, (a Ms. Medy Poblador). They were then given a deadline to leave by 7 pm June 13. Sison relates how Atty. Samuel Ong, having no other sanctuary to run to, asked Bishop Soc Villegas for just a one hour extension. The good bishop is said to have coldly looked around the room and declared, "You will be ALL out of here by 7 o'clock!!" At that point, Sison described Bishop Soc Villegas "MERCILESS." Another eyewitness, a Mr. Dan or Don Remo said that he gave up being a Catholic on that very evening. Atty. Sison also said that when he tried to explain to Bishop Soc Villegas that Sammy Ong truly feared for his life (since the Seminary was surrounded by reported sharpshooters and several armed agents had actually entered the Seminary and ended up leaving their car full of firearms on the grounds), whereupon he says the Bishop made a big show of making a phone call to the President to assure her there was no need for that and to call off any "sharpshooters."

The role played by Church personalities in that whole incident at San Carlos Seminary really needs more airing and examination. There are, I believe, CRIMINAL liabilities involved here on the part of persons like Soc Villegas and his boss, Gaudencio Rosales. (Never mind the MORAL questions, which they may answer to whatever god it is they actually pray to!)

JAMBY'S THREE EXCELLENT QUESTIONS: I hate to admit it because I deeply disagree with her leftist politics, but today Senator Jamby Madrigal got a lot of points from me for asking three excellent questions, two techie questions and one psychological during the Senate's Wiretapping hearings.

The first was about the possibility that the telecomm firm's data bases are being used for marketing efforts either by the firms themselves or unscrupulous employees who are selling them to outside marketers. Jamby herself is apparently being beseiged by offers of land, seminars, cars, houses, etc. But I think it is universal experience, much detested and ought to be more closed regulated and prevented.

The next was a brilliant technical question (which I suspect was suggested to her by former Sen. Serge Osmeña) directed at Mon Isberto of Smart and Rudy Salalima of Globe. She asked the two telecomm representatives if they had the capability to do TRIANGULATION which is a process widely used in KIDNAPPING investigations when law enforcement works with telecomm service providers. In a typical case, someone is kidnapped and the kidnappers use his cell phone to contact relatives in order to demand the ransom. Because the mobile phone networks use a collection of cellular base stations to service their customers, the distance of a given cell phone unit to nearby cell sites can be determined from the signal strength received from it when it initiates a call or sends a text message. Thus, if the distances from at least three nearby cell sites can be found, then the location of the cell phone can be uniquely found. Without going into the mathematics, the location of the sending unit is at the intersection of three circles, one each centered at the known geographical locations of the base stations, and each having a radius equal to the distance to the unit as measured from the received signal strength. With data from only two base stations, it is even possible to get two locations at one of which the cell phone is likely to be. I think most sophisticated kidnappers probably know about these techniques and so will make ransom calls while on the move, though determined law enforcers could still get an idea of velocity and direction if they work fast enough.

I think this question of Jamby's really broke the silly logjam during the hearing over whether or not the telecomms participate in wiretapping activities or have the capabilities to assist external wiretapping agents. It is undeniable that they do in the case of kidnapping cases and what Jamby really segued into was Serge Osmena (attending as a resource person) who testified to the fact that in 1999, the US Government already donated to the Philippine Government sophisticated wiretapping equipment for GSM networks. I wrote about this item here at Philippine Commentary in 2005, noting that with the knowledge of certain codes built into every customer SIM Card, it is possible to do "on-air, off-network" wiretapping because then the digital transmissions can be decrypted. I think that is indeed how it was done. In the case of the President and Garci's conversations, someone working within the Smart Telecommunications was splitting the digital signal stream to and from the target cellphones and sending a copy of it to the ISAFP Project Lighthouse GSM Decryptors, which were then being pumped into the Monitoring/Recording cellphones. In effect the GSM decryptors CLONED the target phones so they could receive and decode the arriving digital bitstreams. All Doble and his men did was actually to monitor the Nokia 3600 model units that were used as clones, to download their memories after recording their conversations, and to make tapes and CDs for their superiors to review. Indeed, that is how Vidal Doble's voice got onto the tapes, announcing time, date and conversation participants, which also by the way is the best proof that HE, Vidal Doble made those recordings!

Jamby's second question was psychological and directed at Mrs. Arlene Doble, the estranged first wife (of which there are allegedly "three" in Doble's colorful life, including live in partner Joyce Andaya and girlfriend Mayet Santos). Jamby asked her if she still loved Vidal Doble, and in a series of gentle but eventually too painful, questions, she got her to admit that perhaps it was her anger that was causing her not to back up Doble's testimony by denying any pressure had been put on her. Biazon and Jamby herself relented and ended the line of inquiry just as Arlene Doble seemed to about to burst into tears.

But it shows Jamby Madrigal can ask "senatorial" quality questions.

Senate President Manny Villar made a short but quite meaningful appearance to make a simple but forthright statement that the Chief Executive Officers of Smart and Globe MUST make the statement under oath in the Senate that they did not have anything to do with the illegal wiretapping operations of the Isafp, and to pledge and reassure the public that they would never participate in such activities. I think he was right to make this demand, because it is really part of the Senate recovering its rightful place in the Government, to defend the right of Congress to information and to be respected by all with at least their attendance to an invitation by the Upper House. He reminds sternly that they have subpoena power over such private individuals, though I think how the telecomms are actually treated in this matter will separate the patriots from the mendicant and the beholden--both in the Senate and the Media.

RELATED: The Hello Garci Case -- Selected Philippine Commentaries

A Commenter named TDC on Ricky Carandang's blog points to this report in the German magazine Der Spiegel which fingers two Chinese telecomm firms, including ZTE Corp.

Der Spiegel

A report suggesting that the Chinese military has hacked into German government computers could have a negative impact on the prospects in Western markets of Chinese equipment vendors Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. and ZTE Corp. (Shenzhen: 000063 - message board; Hong Kong: 0763), believes an analyst at Dresdner Kleinwort .

German news magazine Der Spiegel reported recently that computers in the German chancellery and the foreign, economic, and research ministries had been infected with Chinese spyware software, and German officials say they believe the hackers were linked to China's People's Liberation Army. (See China's Premier 'Gravely Concerned' by Hack on Germany and China to Use Computer Viruses as Cyberwarfare First Strike.)

Although the ZTE project has been ordered 'temporarily suspended', as Ricky points out on his blog, the Supreme Court has already ordered it temporarily restrained.

THE ROMULO NERI MOMENT (Newsbreak Online)

The pathbreaking local newsmagazine Newsbreak (now mostly online) reconstructs what may have been the conversation between Romulo Neri and Benjamin Abalos when the latter allegedly offered the former a 200 million peso bribe. I won't spoil Newsbreak's "scoop" so you will have to read it all at their website. In any case the moment of which they speak, is yet to come this coming Wednesday at the Senate, when the Blue Ribbon and Trade and Industry Committees of Senators Alan Peter Cayetano and Mar Roxas take up once more the ZTE National Broadband Network hearings.

There is palpable hope in the media and blogosphere that Romulo Neri will have the smoking gun on Abalos. That he will not kiss, but tell of the attempt. But Wednesday is an awfully long time from now...

COLLATERAL DAMAGE

It looks like the Cyber-Education project of the Department of Education will suffer the same fate as the tainted ZTE National Broadband Network. Worth 26 billion pesos, it was considerably larger than the government's internal computer system worth 16 billion. But I think the provision of telecommunications infrastructure into the public schools is a worthwhile goal. However, I also believe that the government as such is absolutely the last choice I would make to implement any given proposal. Any future Cyber Education Project should be undertaken largely by the Private Sector. Simple as that. Keep government out of it because the government is inherently incapable of implementing such projects. A key consideration is the matter of technical obsolescence and its interplay with cost and deployment decisions, best handled again by the private sector. The dismal record of DOTC in the Telepono Para Sa Barangay project certainly disqualifies them in my mind, automatically!

What then is the role of government? I think it is to do the ONE thing that they did NOT do in the ZTE NBN thing. The Government does not have a Specification of what it wants to buy. They just take whatever proposal happens to float by and take the best one, according to Secretary Leandro Mendoza in the Senate last week. I think that is nuts. Most of these projects have very good goals, but the best way to get them done is with full transparency. We cannot build complex machines in the dark, why should we attempt it with the government's computer and telecommunication's facilities?

These big complex systems should have clearly defined and publicly discussed Functional Specifications and ought to be publicly bidded out for optimal results. In fact, a BOT project not cornered by the son of the House speaker would do the job, at least for the education department. I think DOTC should not be in the telecomms business however. The government computer system should be run by the Department of National Defense.

Realizing there is so much more money to make in online advertising, the New York Times has abolished its pay-for-view TimesSelect feature and opened up its entire website to the global online public during the last week or so. The page Now everyone is entitled to our opinion showcases the many op-ed columnists, news writers, online exclusives and other feature that have suddenly come online and become available to everyone free from the NY Times. Whatever one thinks of its editorial policies and political positions, as a pure source of information and now instantaneous communication, the grand old lady of newspapers has become a great addition to the Blogosphere.

The quintessential liberal Op-Ed print columnist Paul Krugman (The Conscience of a Liberal) now even has a blog of the same name, compleat with an already lively comment thread. His inaugural post, Introducing this Blog does not disappoint, addressing the Gap Between the Rich and the Poor (a central theme which he calls "the politics and economics of inequality") using an intriguing graph showing the share of the richest ten percent between the years 1917 and 2003.

In fact, let me start this blog off with a chart that’s central to how I think about the big picture, the underlying story of what’s really going on in this country. The chart shows the share of the richest 10 percent of the American population in total income – an indicator that closely tracks many other measures of economic inequality – over the past 90 years, as estimated by the economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez. I’ve added labels indicating four key periods. These are:

The main point about "the big picture" that Paul Krugman wants to make with the above plot is contained in his last line: "...the important thing is to realize that the story of modern America is, in large part, the story of the fall and rise of inequality."

The statistic that is tracked over time, and which falls and rises during the last 90 years is the percentage share of total income that goes to the Richest ten percent. During the Long Guilded Age of Inequality, the Top 10% got about 45% of total income, but drops precipitously in the late 30s and by the end of World War II we see their share plateau at just above 30% of total income, which is labelled "Middle Class America in the plot. During the 80s and 90s the share oif total income going to the richest 10% is observed to be driving back towards the 45% level of the long-ago vanished guilded age, which may now be returning. Krugman says,

"The great divergence: Since the late 1970s the America I knew has unraveled. We’re no longer a middle-class society, in which the benefits of economic growth are widely shared: between 1979 and 2005 the real income of the median household rose only 13 percent, but the income of the richest 0.1% of Americans rose 296 percent."

As a measure of inequality, the statistic shown in Krugman's graph works superbly to make the usual point: the Rich are getting richer, but are the poor getting poorer? Well yes, but only in comparison to the Rich, but not in absolute terms. I guess it would be more accurate to say that the Rich are getting richer, but so are the Not Rich, only at a slower rate.

The statistic in the historical plot used by Krugman is a tricky one, because the "total income" itself is a very dynamic and changeable number. It is related in a very complicated way I would think to the statistic that is measured and graphed, which is the share of that total income earned by the richest 10% of the population.

Suppose for example there are exactly ten people in an epoch like the "Middle Class America" period when the Richest Person got about 30% of the total income. Suppose one day, one of these ten persons , not necessarily the richest one, invents and sells something that greatly benefits everyone else, for example by cutting the cost of energy or food in half. Such an invention could certainly cause the total income to rise dramatically because of the savings in food and fuel inputs. How should the increase in income now be distributed?

Let us assume for the sake of simplicity that we are a completely egalitarian society such that all economic gains and losses must be shared equally by the Rich and the Poor. Before the invention arrives, the share of the Richest 10% is 30% of total income so we want to maintain that arrangement, more or less. Thus if the invention causes total income to double, we would want everyone's incomes to double and that would not change the Gap between the Rich and the Poor since everyone would have the same percentage share as before.

Now of course the Inventor Person would seem to be unfairly treated, and such a purely egalitarian arrangement would not give him or her any new incentive to reveal a perhaps even more marvelous but difficult invention that could potentially quadruple the total income.

This only means that during times when the total income is rapidly increasing, we should expect this "gap between the rich and the poor" to increase rapidly also, because I think one is actually a measure of the other. This is evident even during the Middle Class America period, which I interpret as follows. After WW2, there was a tremendous economic expansion in the United States as millions of war veterans went to college, established new families ("the Baby Boom") and earned significantly greater income than generations before them. So the "drop in inequality" as measured by the share of the Rich from the long guilded age level which is observed in the Great Compression is really due to large numbers of people greatly improving their income earning capacity. During the ongoing Great Divergence, new wealth of all kind is being created by all kinds of innovative new economic activity...like the revolutionary technological innovations that have forced the New York Times into the Blogosphere.

A complex moral dilemma clearly faces the country as a result of the plunder conviction of Joseph Estrada and the evident plan of the Palace to get him to accept a PARDON of some kind. Now whether you are pro- or anti-Erap or neither, let me for the sake of the argument layout this moral dilemma.

A moral dilemma means it is not clear to moral and reasonable human beings what the right thing to do is in a given situation.

That situation, if I may summarize the matter in a few quick steps is:

(1) The democratically elected President Joseph Estrada was removed from Office in 2001, more than three years short of his Constitutionally mandated six year term.

(2) Joseph Estrada was charged with and convicted of plunder in 2007, six years later.

If Erap accepts his conviction and does NOT appeal his plunder conviction in the Supreme Court, the President can grant him pardon. If Erap appeals his case, and maintains his innocence, the President can NOT grant him pardon, absolute or otherwise.

The dilemma lies on the Chief Executive, in whom alone resides the power of executive clemency for convictions that are deemed final and executory, a matter to be declared by the Supreme Court. (That is why the earliest Erap could be pardoned is Christmas, according to Ronnie Puno).

If Erap does not appeal, should the President pardon him for committing plunder?

Frankly I think it would be morally bankrupt of her to do so, for what kind of example and precedent would that set? Who's next? The Marcoses? The Abu Sayyaf beheaders? Jose Maria Sison? Benjamin Abalos, Mike Arroyo, herself? It would establish a new tradition for getting away with plunder and its hairier siblings, in which every President gets to break the law and steal the citizens blind, knowing full well that pardon awaits, from his or her successor.

Although I don't believe it some people are floating the idea that Erap is open to the idea of an "absolute and unconditional pardon". [Update: Here is Atty. Rufus Rodriguez's denial they are negotiating for a pardon. ]

This would erase not only the sentence of reclusion perpetua (20-40 years in jail, no "life imprisonment as such under Philippine law). It would also restore to Erap the civil and political rights stripped by conviction, such as the right to run for public office. Erap has expressed complete disinterest in returning to politics, professing a desire to do Museum Work for the rest of his natural life. But that could change and it could become a testable political question whether or not he could run for President in 2010. He doesn't have to since he has the professed support of most of the 2010 front runners like Manny Villar (who headed the Genuine Opposition last May) and Mar Roxas (I don't know why.)

I think a swift pardon is an immoral, unjust and unfair resolution to the dilemma because it mocks the sentence of punishment deemed appropriate to the crime of plunder by the Sandiganbayan, reducing it in effect to time served in Tanay.

Moreover it does not resolve the real moral dilemma at hand. For surely, the most important issue is not whether Erap has suffered enough or has been punished enough, but whether our system of justice has worked justly, fairly and morally in his case. In deciding what to do now, our greater interest cannot possibly be in Erap per se, but in the welfare, peace of mind and lawful order of our society.

For it must not be forgotten that there were TWO steps that set up this dilemma: (1) as president, he was removed from Office and (2) as ordinary citizen, he was criminally charged and convicted of plunder.

I frankly don't think there was anything "wrong" with the procedures of the Sandiganbayan in Step 2, but there was something stupendously wrong with the first step: how he was removed.

I believe he was removed illegally and unconstitutionally, others think otherwise.

But it is precisely this DISAGREEMENT that must be settled with definiteness and finality in a full blown appeal to the Supreme Court, because IF President Joseph Estrada was removed illegally and unconstitutionally then he should be acquitted by the Supreme Court of plunder on the grounds that the Sandiganbayan never acquired legal jurisdiction over him.

If the Supreme Court however insists that its Chief Justice's acts on 20 January 2001 were indeed justified and legal, and if they uphold the Court's decision in Estrada vs. Arroyo in March 2001, then they MUST convict Erap with finality of the charge of plunder.

Therefore, I think that the just and fair resolution of the moral dilemma presented can only be accomplished in the Supreme Court in the context of an Erap appeal.

A pardon would be morally ultra vires until after such a determination by the present Supreme Court of its honest judgment of what a past Supreme Court had done.

In so much as the case of Joseph Estrada involved a titanic and destructive clash not only between individuals and social classes, but also of the three main institutions of government, the Presidency, the House and Senate and the Supreme Court, it's resolution is as much about them as it is about him.

RELATED: Our Bantay Salakay Supreme Court and Separation of Powers


Senate President Manny Villar praises Filipino maturity for generally accepting the verdict, but expresses the opinion that Erap is not guilty of plunder.
Senator Mar Roxas has filed a resolution urging the President to pardon Erap on humanitarian grounds "at the appropriate time" and "in order to finally and sincerely put a just closure to national divisiveness".

ehn Cervantes and Neri Colmenares were talking to Ricky Carandang just now on Dateline Philippines...I'm getting really sick and tired of these old Leftists like Behn Cervantes (an old friend and comrade, actually, who abused the letter "h" in proper names long before it became bakya to do so) spinning and weaving and embellishing the myth that the anti-Marcos struggle was primarily conducted by the Left. Now, don't get me wrong, I had lots of personal friends lose their lives and families in those dark days, but it is no use today grousing about the fact that lots of other people back then did not support the Left against Marcos either. Then, as now, the Left has no monopoly in the fight for freedom. In fact, what many Filipinos have come to see is that the Left is not and has never been truly interested in anything but a dictatorship of the professoriat of Jose Maria Sison and the rest of the Nice People's Army in the Utrecht Space Station. Proof of that would be Behn's own protest right about now that HE doesn't support such a totalitarian regime either. He is, as he puts it, "a cultural warrior."

So let me quarrel with him about his take on "culture". In my opinion, the main reason for the Philippines unexplained poverty, despite its rich natural and cultural heritage, is this longest running communist insurgency, which too many Filipinos speak of with a weird kind of pride, as if such a thing were like an Eight Wonder of the World, a kind of bloody Rice Terraces uniquely our own. In part, that is because cultural warriors like Behn have convinced many people that we have to fight for some kind of --(here is that magic word again)-- indigenous culture that is somehow free of the culture and idiom he is himself using to conduct the same fight! For him Spain and America are still "foreign" cultures to the Filipino, and deserve to be rejected because of what them thar imperialists did to us. That position, which I can only describe as aboriginal ignores the facts and realities of the last four centuries of Philippine history. What is ironic is how oblivious Behn is to his anti-Americanism being a form of colonial mentality of its own, of which he ought to be justly proud, as it comes straight from Mark Twain (of Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn fame) and the US Anti-Imperialist League. That is how unavoidable America is in our culture! Even our anti-Americanism is soooo recognizably--American!

When Behn speaks nostalgically about the Sixties, he strums my own heart-strings, but I am afraid his sentimentality for the Protest Culture that accompanied Flower Power, has ossified and degenerated into what I call a "protest attitude" that is endemic in the modern Filipino Inteligentsia (yes I know the latter is an archaic term, but I am just an old fogey), in the Media, Academe and the professional activists. When one adopts the Protest Attitude one does not need to examine the actual progress or lack thereof in society at large for protest is enough to fulfill one's moral duty. But I think we delude ourselves when we believe that Protest is good in and of itself because the Root Conditions of society are so deeply embedded and wide spread that we cannot go wrong protesting something or even anything. Such protest activities are directed at eternal enemies--imperialism, feudalism, bureaucrat capitalism and take on the trappings of a Fight Between Good and Evil. Once the protest attitude gets there, the transmogrification is complete from protest to moral copout.

When Behn demands that we fight for "a change in the basic structure of society" (even if it is just the management of the Cultural Center and the NCCA) he expresses the biggest justification for a never ending protest movement, protest culture, protest attitude and protest ideology, because that is essentially "moving the goal posts" as they say in a certain foreign land. It is a goal that can only be asymptotically reached, as in the ends of Ideal Grace.

I think the solution to poverty is getting rich, not protesting it forever. The OFWs have led the way with Virtues Greater Than Nationalism, not the activists. It is the global Filipino whose rising tide of hard earned bucks is what is raising all boats. Meanwhile, in the Archipelago, the boys and girls with their deadly toys and even more lethal ideas are keeping the tourists away from what should be Hundred Hawaiis and the "foreign" investors from 7100 Singapores. They just have to get out of the way and not insist on "changing the basic structure of society" using the methods of protracted warfare and cultural self-mutilation.

Tagalog term, "bantay salakay" is almost impossible to translate into English. Roughly speaking, it means a guardian who attacks that which it must guard. In this case, I am referring to the Supreme Court itself, and its history of destroying the Constitutions it has been given to defend.

I have already considered in great detail (in the Commentary entitled The Law As Prediction: Javellana at 33) the historic dereliction of duty of the Supreme Court in the matter of Ferdinand Marcos' Martial Law Constitution of 1972 when it issued the infamous Decision, Javellana vs. Executive Secretary in which the Court proclaimed a new principle of surrendering to fascism: the principle of political acquiescence, by which we the People are said to have acquiesced to a new Constitution by a mere show of hands under the watchful eyes and guns of the fledgling Fascist Dictator.
My own disgust for Ferdinand Marcos and his legacy is rather COMPLEAT: it is personal, political, ideological and even religious. I visited his floating cadaver in Sarrat once just to savor the Ozymandian truth that only words and ideas survive, not men and their power--only now to realize that the evil Marcos did lived on after him -- specifically in the Supreme Court of the Philippines--even after he was overthrown.

Many others are commemorating this week the imposition of martial law in 1972 and are worth reading:

Conrad de Quiros who compares Gloria to Marcos when he says, "People who are not bothered by the crypt that holds the remains of the national hero won’t be bothered by the papyrus, or its modern equivalents, that holds the essence of their being, also called their word."
Manolo Quezon who asks the philosophical question: "Why do we look back at the lives of people like Ferdinand E. Marcos? As long as humanity is around, a fundamental question will always be, how is power gained, maintained and ultimately for what purpose is it wielded?"

In a democracy, power is gained by free, fair and regular elections of representatives of the people in whose name and for whose benefit that power is wielded. But power in a democracy is invested in a divided government composed of a Legislature to make the laws, an Executive to enforce and apply the, and a Judiciary to resolve the inevitable conflicts that arise among men and institutions. The secret of maintaining power within beneficial bounds in a democracy lies in this principle of the Separation of Powers in a divided government in which the separate parts serve as check and balance on each others hold on power.

Without a strictly and scrupulously obeyed Separation of Powers, there is actually very little to distinguish a democratic government from an authoritarian or autocratic state in which power is indeed, concentrated in one man or one party.

That of course was the evil in the Javellana decision: it acquiesced to the monopolization of power in one man, Ferdinand Marcos, and later on to that of his party of relatives, cronies and sycophants when it blessed their criminal wrong doing in case after infamous case.

But was Javellana the nadir of the Supreme Court's history of moral and intellectual failures? I don't think so! At least in that case, the ACTS sought to be over-ruled in the Supreme Court were acts of the President turned fascist dictator, Ferdinand Marcos. What they blessed in that instance was an act of the Chief Executive to inaugurate a new regime: Marcos' New Society. However, in 2001, in the equally historic decision, Estrada vs. Arroyo, the Supreme Court touched an even lower level when it blessed an unconstitutional ACT of the Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr., in which the principle of Separation of Powers was violated directly by the Supreme Court itself!

For the little-recognized FACT explicitly stated in the Constitution is that the Supreme Court has NO JURISDICTION, not even JUDICIAL REVIEW when it comes to the question of how this Democracy decides upon the removal from office of Constitutional Officers, like the President and the Chief Justice themselves by a process other than election or appointment, namely that of IMPEACHMENT.

The matter is exhaustively examined in a recent post that looks at the true limits of SupremeCourt power, What Is Fair Has Just Priority Over What Is Good.

Many Filipinos, for one reason or another, have come to regard the Supreme Court as the secular equivalent of the Roman Curia of the Catholic Church--such that when it speaks through the Chief Justice or when it rules upon a case before it--then it is just like the Pope teaching the Catholic Magisterium, interpreting the Word and Will of God, in this case, the People and their Constitution. In other words, being the good Roman Catholics that they are, (and even when they are not!) too many Filipinos actually believe that the Supreme Court is largely infallible, or at least, unquestionable and unassailable. It is even believed that every Supreme Court decision is final, as if the Supreme Court has never reversed itself.

It has become almost impossible for many Filipinos to even imagine that the Supreme Court's powers are actually limited, and that there are cases in which it has no jurisdiction and does not even have the power of judicial review.

This is a "childhood" illusion, an infantile phase of our advance to political maturity in which our faith and understanding of Democracy is still largely mystical and not rational. Filipinos have not yet come to appreciate the genius of Democracy as a system of checks and balances in which a well-defined separation of powers MUST be maintained if the machine that we call the Government is to function smoothly and beneficially. This idea of democracy as a machine with separate parts comes from Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.

The Supreme Court, which is the only Constitutionally vouchsafed part of the Judicial Branch of the Government, actually has a very well-defined JURISDICTION or domain of justiciable cases that are within its power to adjudicate and rule upon.

Is there anything the Supreme Court may not decide upon?
Are there JUSTICIABLE cases that are OUTSIDE the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?

YES there are, a big one being the entire matter of how this society gets rid of criminals it finds in high office. It is a two step process in which the official must first validly be removed from office and deprived of the particles of sovereignty won at election, a step EXCLUSIVELY and SOLELY invested in the House and Senate as the political departments of the government; then, and only then, do they fall into the jurisdiction of the Judiciary for criminal prosecution.

In 2001, the Supreme Court usurped the Congress' powers, with ACTS and WORDS that surpass Marcos' own duplicity and his fascistic violation of the separation of powers with their own judicial putschism. They are worse than Marcos in the sense Conrad de Quiros mentions: for we have have acquisced to their "papyri" -- to the evil content and consequences of their written words.

RELATED POSTS:

Davide's Chicken Is Coming Home To Roost

The Paradox of People Power

Laughable Textbook Errors In Crucial Supreme Court Decisions

Text Message suggests a new alphabet that goes:
AB ZTE FG HI JDV
(or Abalos, ZTE, First Gentleman)

---

In a reversal which could be momentously significant, President Gloria Arroyo this afternoon has just ordered three of her Cabinet members to attend Thursday's Senate hearing on the ZTE National Broadband Network deal, which only this morning she had been deriding as "vaudeville show."

Perhaps hoping to avert a major collision with a Senate that is becoming more and more assertive of its institutional rights and prerogatives, the President has ordered Transportation and Communications Secretary Leandro Mendoza, Trade Secretary Peter Favila and Romulo Neri, former National Economic Development Authority to answer questions on the controversial deal with a government-owned Chinese firm, the lid on which blown wide open Tuesday with explosive testimony from telecommunications entrepreneur (and the House Speaker's son from a previous marriage) Joey De Venecia III.

The President had only the unpleasant option of forcing another battle with the Senate in the Supreme Court, but she has to relent because even her Senate allies like Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago "had no objection" to issuing subpoenas and making petitions to the Supreme Court to compel the attendance of high government officials at Senate hearings. The magic words are "in aid of legislation" since the landmark 2006 decisions, Senate vs. Ermita and Gordon vs. Sabio, both unequivocally upheld the obligatory nature of answering a Senate summons to appear and testify before it.

Blue Ribbon Committee chairman Alan Peter Cayetano also demolished the original excuse of
Sec. Mendoza that because of a pending case in the High Court involving the ZTE contract, the matter was "sub judice" and he could therefore not testify. The DOTC lawyers have apparently not read Gordon vs. Sabio which rules otherwise:

"Let it be stressed at this point that so long as the constitutional rights of witnesses… will be respected by the respondent Senate committees, it is their duty to cooperate with them in their efforts to obtain the facts needed for intelligent legislative action."

"The unremitting obligation of every citizen is to respond to subpoena, to respect the dignity of the Congress and its committees and to testify fully with respect to matters within the realm of proper investigation."

Although the ZTE controversy is huge in its own right given that First Gentleman Mike Arroyo and Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos, are involved in alleged criminal wrongdoing of plunderous proportions, perhaps the even more significant issue is the disordered relationship between the President, the Senate and the Supreme Court.

Ever since the issuance last year of Exec. Order No. 464, and even after the Supreme Court issued a unanimous but ambivalent decision questioning it, the rights and obligations of Executive Dept. officials with respect to Congressional investigations and hearings can only fuzzily be limned and and can only be tentatively construed from the ruling in Senate vs. Ermita.

In my post last year analyzing the Supreme Court Decision, I thought that King Solomon Just Cut the Baby In Half.

Today, President Arroyo may have blinked and may now be forced to admit that the true Mother of Public Accountability and the true repository of the Public's Right to Know, is indeed the Congress of the Republic of the Philippines.

On the hand, she may yet cling on to the half the Supreme Court did give her, a matter I have addressed recently in How the Supreme Court Upheld the Half of EO 464 GMA Really Needs.

Also, I've been considering the limits of Supreme Court Power and myth of the Supreme Court's supremacy and posted a preliminary salvo against its despicable record in the commentary, What Is Fair Has Just Priority Over What Is Good.

In the latter, I advance the theory that in EDSA DOS the Supreme Court basically USURPED the sole power of the Senate over all cases of impeachment and removal of public officials, which the Constitution unequivocally invests in the Political Dept. of the government, namely the Congress as House and Senate. The implications of this anomaly and its continuance and amplification under the Arroyo administration can explain much of the dysfunctional situation we are observing in the government. More on this in coming posts.

CLICK TO ZOOM
After 14 Philippine Marines were ambushed by MILF rebels and killed on July 10 near Tipo-tipo, Basilan looking for the kidnapped Italian priest, Giancarlo Bossi, the local RTC Judge Leo Principe issued 130 Arrest Warrants against the suspects in their gruesome deaths, which included the beheading of ten of them. The ambush was readily admitted by the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. But the MILF quickly denied being involved in, or even knowing who carried out the decapitation, mutilation and robbery of the dead or dying Marines, despite claiming that they killed the Marines for daring to enter "their territory" without "coordination." At the point when local police were going to serve the arrest warrants and detain the suspects, Peace Advisors Jess Dureza and General Rodolfo Garcia stepped in, illegally stayed the arrest warrants, organized a "joint independent investigating committee" that included MILF representatives, then took a week to add four names to the list of suspects, submitted its report but never released it, and blamed the whole incident on "lawless elements of the Abu Sayyaf". Then an "all-out war" was declared, although there was really little evidence of that, but it naturally attracted the 100 point headlines from the usual Media Leftists, who suddenly found it profitable to publish front page pictures of cute, wide-eyed toddlers in the foreground of arriving tanks and and heavily armed soldiers. This lasted for about a week, while peaceniks got a chance to remember with self-satisfied nostalgia what it was they used to believe in with such passion. The deaths of the soldiers were blamed on all sorts of other things than the murderous intent of the rebels, who only want Peace in the Archipelago. (Or is it a PIECE of the Archipelago?) Since those events, a total of some 57 Philippine Marines and Army servicemen have been killed in action in Mindanao.

I'm beginning to wonder if there is anything at all connected to the outside world inside all those OPEN MINDS arguing that all these are WASTED LIVES, that Law Enforcement is nothing but "all-out war" when directed at "defenseless" Muslims, and that "peace talks" are the only way to alleviate the "root conditions" that are the alleged true causes of lawless violence and savagery. They fumed and fulminated at all the war mongers "hungry for vengeance" and "full of blood lust" while counseling that everyone keep an open mind and not lose their heads [sic!].

The problem with heartless intellectuals is...they are heartless intellectuals!

Fact is, there never was an "all-out war" --only a half-hearted and showy effort-- to arrest only the beheaders of those Marines, because it so happens that their ambush-killers are all the government's "partners in the peace process" -- the MILF in Tipo and-tipo, the MNLF in Maimbung, killed the majority of those 57 soldiers in Mindanao since July 10.

It's all been one big moro-moro of a whitewash perpetrated by the patrons of Eid Kabbalu and Hashim Salamat within the administration, who had to delay "peace talks" for a month to let things cool down a little after their murderous ambuscades these past few months. Of greater conern to these big-time patriots is that the United States might get involved and decide to "violate Philippine sovereignty."

And that is why not a single one of those killers or beheaders has been brought to Justice, and probably never will be. Some of them are probably on the Peace Panel sitting across their counterparts in the peace process, waiting for the President's grant of Ancestral Domain, aka Bangsamorsostan, whose hard, cold soil is warmed and watered by brave Filipino blood.

Related: Zamboanga Journal reports on the Abu Sayyaf's foreign funding efforts.

Senate Testimony of Mr. Joey de Venecia September 18, 2007
Downloadable MP3
The son of House Speaker Jose de Venecia, Mr. Joey de Venecia and a principal in Amsterdam Holdings, Inc. has just implicated First Gentleman Jose Miguel "Mike" Arroyo as the "Mystery Man" involved in the highly controversial ZTE National Broadband Network project during a hearing of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee headed by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano. In a signed affidavit and testimony under oath, Mr. Joey de Venecia also named Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos and Dept. of Transportation and Communications Secretary Lito Mendoza as principals in what he called an overpriced deal prejudicial to the interests of the government. On questioning and in interviews with the Media in the past few weeks, Mr. de Venecia asserted that a 100% overprice is contained in the US $330 million deal to connect government offices to an Internet backbone, representing alleged kickbacks to various government officials.

Mike Arroyo quietly left for Hong Kong yesterday, according to news reports.

Ricky Carandang has the inside scoop on this matter -- it's worth watching his blog for updates.

An interesting issue emerging as a result of the ZTE National Broadband Network controversy is the issue of OBSOLESCENCE. Blue Ribbon Committee Chairman Alan Peter Cayetano pointed out that the government has a dismal record in managing high technology projects, and even Administation stalwart Sen. Joker Arroyo admitted a prejudice against the Comelec under Ben Abalos because of the earlier Automated Counting Machine scandal, under his watch in the last Senate.

Abalos is headed for impeachment, I reckon.

CATHARSIS is an emotion experienced by the audience or spectator in a Greek or Roman dramatic tragedy that is also experienced in real life by the public in high profile criminal cases when (1) they see that the wicked are punished based on the truth; and (2) that the Justice system works in a fair and lawful manner.

Catharsis is a rare feeling we get whenever "Justice is done!" -- legally, poetically and with finality. But it is distinctly absent for many people in the case of Joseph Estrada's removal from office and trial on crimes considered to be common and even petty under the dispensation of his successors.

I call this emotional effect the "catharsis of Justice" because a society is exposed to, or deprived of, its dramatic effects develops a more fastidious and sophisticated sense of Justice as both a RESULT and a PROCESS. The catharsis of Justice, the feeling that justice has been done, is the effect of seeing the Good winning out over the Evil in a real life case that has been resolved truthfully and fairly according to Rules of Law and Order that apply equally to all parties.

Justice as a result of what is TRUE, is therefore the result of Justice as a process that is FAIR.

Now in every "real life case" there is a party accused of a crime who must be adjudged guilty or not guilty by a Court of Law. Sometimes an accused person who actually IS "wicked" and has committed the crime alleged, must nevertheless be acquitted and allowed to go unpunished by the Justice System.

For example, if the Justice System cannot prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for a crime like plunder, it MUST acquit the accused, even if we just KNOW that he is guilty. Acquittal must also be given if the evidence needed to prove guilt was acquired illegally, for example, if it is based on a confession extracted by torturing the accused, or through an illegal wiretap. A person cannot be arrested and evidence gathered against him without a proper Warrant of Arrest or Court Order to seize papers and possessions as evidence of wrongdoing, otherwise that person cannot be properly convicted of the crime.

Since any form of human justice is bound to be imperfect, we have adopted the principle that we would rather see ten guilty men go free than for one innocent man to be unjustly punished. Because of this, persons accused of, and formally charged with crimes like plunder, are given a presumption of innocence that must be overcome by evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in the formal process of a properly conducted criminal trial. In addition, persons who fall under the Constitution's mandate as Officers of the Republic, must first be impeached, tried, convicted and removed from Office, BEFORE they can be charged with and tried for crimes like plunder.

Thus, the "wicked" can only be punished and Justice be done in a Democracy, if the Justice System works and does all the things it is required to do for both Law and Order to prevail, and not Chaos.

In any particular instance, Society itself cannot arrive at the feeling that "Justice has been done" UNLESS (1) the Wicked really are punished; AND (2) we, the Public see that the System actually worked.

There are actually four possible results of any criminal prosecution in which we may assume for the sake of definiteness that the accused has actually committed the crime alleged and may be properly if melodramatically referred to as "the Wicked".

(1) The Wicked are not punished AND the Justice system did not work fairly and lawfully.
(2) The Wicked are not punished EVEN IF the Justice system worked fairly and lawfully.
(3) The Wicked are punished BUT the Justice system did not work fairly and lawfully.
(4) The Wicked are punished AND the Justice system worked fairly and lawfully.

Scenarios (1) and (2) can reasonably be said to apply to the Marcoses and their cronies. Definitely Justice has NOT been done in those cases.

Scenario (3), in my opinion applies to the case of Joseph Estrada, because I do believe he committed various crimes of graft and corruption, (as well as personal foolishness), but the means by which he came to the Court that convicted him of the crime of plunder was entirely unconstitutional and illegal.

The Case of Joseph Estrada will set many legal and political precedents about how we as a nation go about punishing serious crimes like plunder and graft and corruption committed by our highest public officials such as the President, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the Members of the Constitutional Commissions like the Comelec. Ultimately, the important basic principle at stake here is that of Public Accountability, which is addressed in the Law as follows:

1987 Constitution ART XI (Public Accountability) Section 2. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.Section 3. (1) The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment.
. . .
(6) The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.

Constitutional officers such as the President, the Chief Justice and Comelec Commissioners, must first be validly removed from office before they may be prosecuted for serious crimes like Plunder and graft and corruption. Otherwise, such important officials would be too busy to do anything else but defend themselves from nuisance suits. There is a strict two step process required by the Constitution:

(1) Step One: The Constitutional Officer must be impeached by the House, tried and convicted by the Senate and removed from Office. [Exclusive and Sole jurisdiction belongs to the Congress]

(2) Step Two: After removal from office, the former official may be tried under criminal and civil statues like an ordinary citizen accused of the same violations of the law. [Exclusive jurisdiction belongs to the Judiciary].

Nota bene: Nowhere else in the Constitution is the Principle of the Separation of Powers more clearly seen than in the absolute separation between the two Branches of the Government to which the exclusive jurisdiction is given while undertaking Steps One and Two, which must come in lock-step one before the other.

The Constitution clearly provides that no Constitutional Officer may be removed by impeachment except by the lawful action of the Congress first by the House to initiate, next by the Senate which has "the SOLE power to TRY and DECIDE all cases of impeachment." The decisions of a duly constituted Senate Impeachment Court is always final and executory and cannot be appealed to, or reviewed by the Supreme Court, which has NO JURISDICTION whatsoever in impeachment cases, which is entirely and exclusively assigned to the Congress. The above conclusion can be reached by a plain and direct reading of the Constitutional provisions on Public Accountability and on the Judiciary.

Notice however that although Joseph Estrada has just been through Step Two with his recent conviction for plunder by the Sandiganbayan, there is ample reason to wonder why Step One did not involve the Senate Impeachment Court and the trial he was undergoing before Edsa Dos happened.

Whether you choose to believe that then President Joseph Estrada resigned to avoid bloodshed (including his own, I suppose!) or that he was illegally ousted by the Chief Justice acting in concert with the AFP Chief of Staff, the Vice President, the Media and a Hooting Throng assembled as "Civil Society"--it cannot be denied that he underwent Step Two without going through Step One in a clear and unequivocal way.

Just on the face of it, there is something highly anomalous about the fact that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court played such a decisive role in the Regime Change that occurred at Edsa Dos, and that the Supreme Court en banc later also played a decisive role in affirming that role acted in by the Chief Justice.

What role did the Chief Justice and Supreme Court play in that drama which climaxed with the swearing in of the Vice President on 20 Jan 2001? The role they played was that of USURPER, for the Chief Justice and the Supreme Court in effect OVER-RULED the Senate Impeachment Court's clear intent to acquit the impeached President Estrada in the impeachment trial.

There appears to be an INJUSTICE of historic proportions at the heart of the overthrow of Joseph Estrada on 20 January 2001. It is an institutional injustice committed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and later blessed by the same, against the Senate of the Republic, sitting as the highest court in the land, convened as a Senate Impeachment Court trying to decide the Case of President Joseph Estrada.

When Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr. swore in Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, backed by the mutinous AFP Chief of Staff Angelo T. Reyes, he effectively aborted the Senate Impeachment Trial, made the trial moot and academic, and effected an illegal REGIME CHANGE.

That is how Joseph Estrada came to the Bar of Sandiganbayan "Justice" to be tried for the crime of plunder: on the carcass of Separation of Powers and the clear breach of the oath of office of the Chief Justice to faithfully uphold the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

No wonder there is no catharsis in the plunder conviction of Erap. He may be wicked, but the process used against him was most unfair and illegal, and the People know it and they have their priorities straight. They want the wicked punished too, and for the Truth to always be the basis of our decisions, but it is more important in the long run, that the Justice System works fairly.

There can be no Justice, when the Chief Justice and the Supreme Court will not admit to their mistakes, although the appeal of Joseph Estrada's Plunder conviction represents another opportunity for redemption.

In December 2000, the Supreme Court rendered a 7-7 tie decision on the Constitutionality of the Indigenous People's Rights Act (RA 8371) in the case of Isagani Cruz versus DENR & National Commission on Indigenous Peoples.

Today's BLOOPER, probably just an onomatopoeic-pronunciation typo, is from a Dissenting Opinion in that celebrated case:

"IPRA effectively withdraws from the public domain the so-called ancestral domains covering literally millions of hectares. The notion of community property would comprehend not only matters of proprietary interest but also some forms of self-governance over the curved-out territory."

Nota bene, above is not some 40 peso public school textbook, but from the written Ruling of a Supreme Court Justice which only proves that the occurrence of serendipitously funny mistakes in all kinds of printed matter is no one's exclusive domain. This example is from one of the ponencias on IPRA with which I agree.

Here is the En Banc Ruling on IPRA and the various dissenting and concurring Opinions:
Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza and Panganiban
(all from the Supreme Court Website).

The current Chief Justice Reynato Puno presents the case for the seven Justices voting to uphold the Constitutionality of IPRA.

Indigenous peoples share distinctive traits that set them apart from the Filipino mainstream. They are non-Christians. They live in less accessible, marginal, mostly upland areas. They have a system of self-government not dependent upon the laws of the central administration of the Republic of the Philippines. They follow ways of life and customs that are perceived as different from those of the rest of the population.[97] The kind of response the indigenous peoples chose to deal with colonial threat worked well to their advantage by making it difficult for Western concepts and religion to erode their customs and traditions. The "infieles societies" which had become peripheral to colonial administration, represented, from a cultural perspective, a much older base of archipelagic culture. The political systems were still structured on the patriarchal and kinship oriented arrangement of power and authority. The economic activities were governed by the concepts of an ancient communalism and mutual help. The social structure which emphasized division of labor and distinction of functions, not status, was maintained. The cultural styles and forms of life portraying the varieties of social courtesies and ecological adjustments were kept constantly vibrant.

Yet substantial errors in historical fact are pointed out about the above ponencia in Laughable Textbook Errors In Crucial Supreme Court Decisions which looks at how Justice Puno cites legends of Datu Sumakwel and the Code of Maragtas as real history, and weaves a politically correct anti colonialist Creation Myth for the Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines. In this conception, the ancient Filipinos, the original indigenous peoples, lived in harmony with Nature and with each other, even developing literature, culture and laws to govern what is pictured as an idyllic Garden of Eden in the Philippines. Into this pastoral scene intrudes the Spanish colonialists, who are like the Snake in the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, who seduces, conquers and converts SOME of the indios they found here and turn them by religious conversion into the Catholic Majority population. The Fall from Ancient Grace by those who would become the present Christian Majority population of the Philippines results in the expulsion of those who would become the present day indigenous peoples from the Garden of Eden, their flight from the colonial subjugators. The Savior that will reconcile them all again, by offering the Indigenous Peoples a third of the present garden archipelago, is of course the Supreme Court itself and IPRA.

The long and short of the decision is not some fuzzy-wuzzy conclusion, but a definite result. There is an OFFICIAL LIST of 110 INDIGENOUS PEOPLES of the Philippines, representing some 12 million persons, who are entitled to about one third of the Philippine Territory in the form of ancestral lands and domains. However, by virtue of the fact that their ancestors succumbed to Spanish colonialism, the Tagalogs, Pampangos, Ilocanos, Cebuanos, Samarnon, and even the purported descendants of that fabled Datu Sumakwel on Panay Island, are NOT indigenous peoples of the Philippines.

No Catholic majority ethnic group or tribe is on the list of official Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines, even though the Definition itself is vague and even self-contradictory:

"Sec. 3 [h]. Indigenous Cultural Communities/ Indigenous Peoples-- refer to a group of people or homogeneous societies identified by self-ascription and ascription by others, who have continuously lived as organized community on communally bounded and defined territory, and who have, under claims of ownership since time immemorial, occupied, possessed and utilized such territories, sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions and other distinctive cultural traits, or who have, through resistance to political, social and cultural inroads of colonization, non-indigenous religions and cultures, became historically differentiated from the majority of Filipinos. ICCs/IPs shall likewise include peoples who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, at the time of conquest or colonization, or at the time of inroads of non-indigenous religions and cultures, or the establishment of present state boundaries, who retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions, but who may have been displaced from their traditional domains or who may have resettled outside their ancestral domains."

SPECIAL CASE OF THE IGOROTS: There is a curious inconsistency in the prevailing Supreme Court view in the matter of the Igorots of the Cordillera. You see, the Igorots successfully resisted Spanish efforts to conquer and convert them to Roman Catholicism for centuries, and on that basis are considered to be "Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines." Yet, it is a fact that most Igorots now are Christians by the action of American missionaries in the 20th Century, as evidenced by the widespread and fluent use of the English language throughout the highlands. (Most of the residents of Mount Pulag are Lutherans!) Methinks that the Christianized Igorots do not fit the definition of Indigenous People or Indigenous Cultural Community that is found in Puno's ponencia! Igorots are NOT, from my reading of Puno, indigenous peoples at all, but are closer in legal status to the non-indigenous peoples, like the Ilocanos, Tagalogs and Cebuanos.

From the Boondocks (Bill Billig) is a blog on the indigenous Igorots of the Cordillera with whom I've exchanged some interesting comments. The Igorots have been central to some of the historical evolution of the concept of indigenous peoples in the Philippines. The celebrated early case of Mateo Carino is amply discussed in all the ponencias and was important to the concept of "native title." However, my take on that case, which was decided by the US Supreme Court is that "native title" can be claimed by individuals and individual families of descendants and ascendants but not by entire classes of individuals, tribes that are assembled by "self-ascription or ascription by others." However, this is a deep topic and goes to the heart of land ownership, titling, and other matters that are indeed a big part of the controversy.

Justice Artemio Panganiban presents the most succinct and cogent case for the Dissent (the seven Justices who voted against IPRA):

Section 5, Article XII of the Constitution, provides:


"SEC. 5. The State, subject to the provisions of this Constitution and national development policies and programs, shall protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social, and cultural well being.


"The Congress may provide for the applicability of customary laws governing property rights and relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain."


Clearly, there are two parameters that must be observed in the protection of the rights of ICCs/IPs: (1) the provisions of the 1987 Constitution and (2) national development policies and programs.


Indigenous peoples may have long been marginalized in Philippine politics and society. This does not, however, give Congress any license to accord them rights that the Constitution withholds from the rest of the Filipino people. I would concede giving them priority in the use, the enjoyment and the preservation of their ancestral lands and domains.[41] But to grant perpetual ownership and control of the nation's substantial wealth to them, to the exclusion of other Filipino citizens who have chosen to live and abide by our previous and present Constitutions, would be not only unjust but also subversive of the rule of law.


In giving ICCs/IPs rights in derogation of our fundamental law, Congress is effectively mandating “reverse discrimination.” In seeking to improve their lot, it would be doing so at the expense of the majority of the Filipino people. Such short-sighted and misplaced generosity will spread the roots of discontent and, in the long term, fan the fires of turmoil to a conflagration of national proportions.


Peace cannot be attained by brazenly and permanently depriving the many in order to coddle the few, however disadvantaged they may have been. Neither can a just society be approximated by maiming the healthy to place them at par with the injured. Nor can the nation survive by enclaving its wealth for the exclusive benefit of favored minorities.


Rather, the law must help the powerless by enabling them to take advantage of opportunities and privileges that are open to all and by preventing the powerful from exploiting and oppressing them. This is the essence of social justice – empowering and enabling the poor to be able to compete with the rich and, thus, equally enjoy the blessings of prosperity, freedom and dignity.
WHEREFORE, I vote to partially GRANT the Petition and to DECLARE as UNCONSTITUTIONAL Sections 3(a) and (b), 5, 6, 7(a) and (b), 8 and related provisions of RA 8371.

It is noteworthy that the AUTHOR of the Indigenous People's Rights Act is none other than Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. I have theorized that her "Peace Legacy" is going to involve the IPRA in a big and spectacular way in Mindanao, a prospect recently examined here under GMA's Gift to Bin Laden on September 11.

ABSCBN News Europe Bureau Chief Danny Buenafe reports on the release of Joma Sison from Dutch police custody after two weeks under detention on suspicion of having ordered the assassination of rivals in the Philippines. Quoting from "a rough translation" of a Press Release from the Hague District Court, Sison's immediate release was ordered by the Court for "insufficiency of evidence" for crimes in the Netherlands to hold him under detention ( much less "torture and solitary confinement" as some have claimed he was undergoing under those awful Dutch police.) However, Sison remains a suspect, according to Wm. de Bruin speaking for the Prosecutors Office and investigation into his activities would continue.

"The District Court established that these serious offenses have been committed in the Philippines and relate to disagreements inside the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and that the decision to commit these murders was taken within the party structure of the CPP," the press release said.

"Furthermore, the Court recognized that there are many indications in the files which support the point of view that the accused is still playing a leading role in the Central Committee [CC] of the CPP as well as in the military branch of the CPP, the New People's Army (NPA)," it added.

The court also said that: "The files pertaining to the accused do not include indications that Sison, while in the Netherlands, committed the offenses he is charged with in deliberate and close co-operation with the perpetrators in the Philippines."

It added that the Sison's files do not contain information that he incited others to commit serious offenses according to the accusations.

The court also believed that the presumptions that Sison ordered the assassinations of his two former comrades as stated by the widows and alleged triggermen “were insufficiently concrete”.

“The statements of the widows and the marksmen, to which the [Dutch] Public Prosecution Service appeals, only refer to the fact that they assume that the murders have been committed by order of the CC of the CPP and therefore an order originating from the accused being the chairman,” said the court decision.

I wonder what the Dutch word actually was that got "roughly translated" as marksmen? Well I used an online English-to-Dutch Translator to find out the Dutch word that translates into marksmen. It's "Scherpschutters"

Did sharpshooters testify along with the widows?

Buenafe's report continues..

Case won't be dropped
Meanwhile, de Bruin said that the Prosecution will appeal the Court's decision.

“The investigation will be continued. And Mr. Sison is still a suspect and Prosecutor's office will appeal the decision of the court this morning," de Bruin said.

De Bruin said that the charges are not being dropped.

"The court thought there was not enough [evidence] to keep Mr. Sison in custody," de Bruin said.

Sison's release from detention followed a related report that he will remain in solitary confinement in the Netherlands for another 90 days.

RICKY CARANDANG of ABSCBN News also interviewed Rep. Satur Ocampo of the militant party list organization Bayan. Here was a curious revelation from Satur Ocampo after Ricky Carandang asked him why the Left has been questioning the Dutch handling of Mr. Sison's arrest and detention and weren't they better off just working within the Dutch legal system to defend Mr. Sison? Satur did an awful low of hemming and hawing before he couldn't seem to blurt or spit out the words "...WAR CRIMES ..."

Is Jose Maria Sison under investigation by the Dutch authorities for war crimes or crimes against the Dutch anti terrorism laws?

Downloadable MP3

I must say that Ricky Carandang asked a well-conceived question for such a slippery-eel like Satur Ocampo when it comes straight answers. In this part of the interview RC gently pins down Satur Ocampo with what is really a test of moral consistency to which Satur --rolled out a long stemwinder of international humanitarian gobbledygook in answer to Ricky's simple question: why aren't the militant leftists as outraged over the deaths of Tabara and Kintanar as they are about alleged activist killings? Why indeed would Renato Reyes say that the pair were "enemy combatants" (and therefore they deserved to be murdered?) Give a listen to how journalistic surgery is done on a professional propagandist like Satur Ocampo:

Satur Ocampo cannot explain why the militant leftists and he are not outraged over the deaths of Tabara and Kintanar.

Downloadable MP3

What exactly did he say?? Satur Ocampo just did a really good impression of Michael Dukakis didn't he? Well, at least Satur Ocampo is here in the Philippines fightging the Parliamentary Struggle and participating in the House of Representatives. Hope he'll be doing it more for real.

I think that the end of the Maoist insurgency in the Philippines would result in a tremendous economic upliftment for the country . A surge of toursists and foreign investments could immediately be expected, but even more importantly, domestic economic forces would be freed of the NPA's extortion, revolutionary tax collection, permits to campaign, cell site bombings and other organized criminal activities that have abnormalized the situation wherever they operate, and therefore stunt and depress the local economies, impoverish and beggar the common people.

OR: The True Limits of Supreme Court Power

"The Constitution means what the Supreme Court says the Constitution means."

In my opinion, the above statement is true, but only within the well defined judicial domain of the Supreme Court, which is admittedly a vast archipelago of awesome powers defined in so many more words in the 1987 Constitution Article on the Judicial Branch of the government.

Unfortunately, many people erroneously believe that the Supreme Court can decide ALL cases involving Constitutional issues. But there are significant exceptions to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, legal cases over which the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction -- not even judicial review, namely, those cases involving the removal by impeachment of Constitutional Officers, mentioned in Article XI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution on the Accountability of Public Officers:

ARTICLE XI

ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS

Section 1. Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must, at all times, be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency; act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.

Section 2. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.

Section 3. (1) The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment.

(2) A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any Member of the House of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution or endorsement by any Member thereof, which shall be included in the Order of Business within ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter. The Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its Members, shall submit its report to the House within sixty session days from such referral, together with the corresponding resolution. The resolution shall be calendared for consideration by the House within ten session days from receipt thereof.

(3) A vote of at least one-third of all the Members of the House shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution. The vote of each Member shall be recorded.

(4) In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.

(5) No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year.

(6) The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.

(7) Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office and disqualification to hold any office under the Republic of the Philippines, but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial, and punishment, according to law.

(8) The Congress shall promulgate its rules on impeachment to effectively carry out the purpose of this section.

The Constitution clearly provides that no Constitutional Officer may be removed by impeachment except by the lawful action of the Congress first by the House to initiate, next by the Senate which has "the SOLE power to TRY and DECIDE all cases of impeachment" .

This sounds like the JUDICIAL FUNCTION associated with the lawful and orderly removal of ANY Constitutional officer actually resides entirely and exclusively in the Senate constituted as a very special body called a Senate Impeachment Court. So that that if we were seeking a place in the Constitution where the wall of Separation of Powers between the Legislature and Judiciary would be self-evident, like a geological formation, we have found it in the assignment of impeachment cases entirely to the Political department of the government, specifically the Philippine Senate.

Whenever the Senate is constituted as a SPECIAL IMPEACHMENT COURT, it outranks and out-rules even the Supreme Court itself in jurisdiction over the case(s) before it. The VERDICT of the Senate in all cases of impeachment is FINAL and EXECUTORY and cannot be appealed, not even to the Supreme Court.

Should Ben Abalos, for example, be impeached in the House for breach of public trust in matters like the ZTE National Broadband Network scandal, and the Automated Election Counting Machines bid-rigging scandal, and then tried and convicted or acquitted in the Senate trial, such decision could not then be appealed, not even to the Supreme Court.

Unlike the molasses-like pace at which Justice is usually dispensed by the Supreme Court, impeachment cases would have the satisfactory conclusion of being final, and not subject to appeals and judicial cases with a nearly infinite half-life in our Judicial System.

For some reason not found in the Constitution, the Senate Impeachment Trial of then President Joseph Estrada which began in the first week of December, 2000, abruptly ended on 20 January 2001, becoming largely moot and academic upon the swearing in on that date of then Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Hilario G. Davide Jr., under the watchful eyes and guns of General Angelo T. Reyes, Chief of Staff of the AFP who had just declared a mutiny with his entire General Staff the day before. Edsa Dos was a military backed coup d'etat that succeeded but was not recognized as such by the Supreme Court, which has instead elevated to Constitutional hallowed ground the idea that the Philippine Military may, from time to time , legally "withdraw support" for the Commander in Chief, as it pleases the Chief of Staff and whoever might support him or her,

REGIME CHANGE occurred in the Philippines not as the result of a Presidential election but a physical and legal event which occurred on Saturday, 20 January 2001, slightly past noontime, at a religious shrine along EDSA near a famous shopping mall. Aside from the newly sworn in President were her conspirators--the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court -- who effected an admittedly peaceful but utterly illegal REGIME CHANGE -- thus giving the crowd Barrabas but making of Joseph Estrada, the most implausible but recognizably Filipino Hesu Kristo.

Now it is a curious and beguiling fact that both Chief Justice and AFP Chief were there upon the invitation of the Vice President, who had claimed in a faxed letter to the Supreme Court less than an hour before swearing in at the Edsa Shrine, that the President Joseph Estrada was permanently incapacitated. Permanent incapacity was a perfectly valid reason for the Chief Justice to swear in the Vice President as President, and it helped that the AFP Chief had mutinied the day previous and defected. It is just as good as if Erap had voluntarily resigned, or had died, or had been impeached, convicted and removed from office.

However, three months later, in March, 2001, the Supreme Court corrected itself, and ruled that Erap was not permanently incapacitated at all on 20 January 2001, but could be construed and deemed to have validly and voluntarily resigned, ( illogically after knowing for sure he would be acquitted at impeachment trial. "Voluntariness" is of course the essence of a valid resignation, otherwise we would call it a forced resignation, tantamount to an illegal ouster.

So I think future scholars cannot skirt the observation of Alan Paguia that because Erap was not in fact permanently incapacitated when GMA was sworn in by Davide, the assumption to power was void ab initio. Moreover, it seems patently derelict of duty and a gross violation of the explicit provisions of the Constitution for the Supreme Court to have "decided" that they could authorize the Chief Justice to swear in the Vice President as President in the middle of the Senate Impeachment Trial -- no matter how many people were on the streets.

One does not have to be a Constitutional expert or even a lawyer to comprehend the telling dishonesty in this. After all, it could not have escaped the judicial and physical notice of the Justices that the President was then under Senate Impeachment Trial and that the Senate had the sole power to decide Erap's fate. They did not even bother to pick up the telephone to call the Palace and ask IF the President was indeed permanently incapacitated.

The Supreme Court USURPED the sole power of the Senate to decide the Impeachment case against then President Joseph Estrada in a clear and culpable violation of the above quoted passages of the Constitution on the Accountability of Public Officers. By swearing in the Vice President as President, the Senate Impeachment trial became moot and academic.

I guess I belong to the school of thought that regards every democratic Constitution, such as the 1987 Philippine Constitution, as a highly special piece of English Composition that also happens to be a duly ratified Social Contract which is presently in force and binds all citizens, corporations, organizations and institutions to a set of rights and duties, powers and entitlements, freedoms and responsibilities that may not be shirked, at least in moral theory if not in actual practice!

Some people have the mystical view that the Constitution is such a complex legal document that only the Supreme Court can interpret its ultimate meaning, but I think if Erap's trial should have taught us anything, the Supreme Court actually has ZERO jurisdiction in impeachment cases. That is a clear intention of the Separation of Powers, to give the Senate the sole power to decide impeachment cases even against the Chief Justice himself.

I cannot fail to sympathize with those whose basic take on the Rule of Law is that it is a tool for punishing the wicked and corrupt in government, such as plundering, gambling, womanizing dipsomaniac Presidents. Punishing the wicked, or to be less melodramatic, punishing the lawbreakers, is always a GOOD thing to do, based purely on moral principles that are independent of any law or religion.

But this generalized "doing of Good" cannot be allowed to occur upon the whims and initiatives of individual citizens or groups of citizens, otherwise we would have chaos, which is why Law is always paired with Order. In particular we have laws that dictate the rules and the DUE PROCESS regarding who, what, when, where and how certain things may be accomplished so that disputes between men and institutions may be settled in a FAIR way.

Justice is a combination of what is FAIR (in the sense that the Law is faithfully obeyed as a well ordered Social Contract binding upon all citizens and institutions exercising their rights and duties under the Constitution); and what is GOOD (in the sense of being the "moral" or the "right" thing to do based on the actual circumstances of the case.)

But is it possible for there to be a conflict between doing what is FAIR and doing what is GOOD?

I believe there is! Suppose a certain Mr. Big is a jueteng and drug lord doing a brisk daily business. But in order to convict him for his criminal wrongdoing, the police apprehend and torture him into signing a confession. Although it would be GOOD for the Justice system to convict Mr. Big and put him behind bars forever, it would not however be FAIR.

Thus, for any Justice system to be just, it must not only do GOOD, it must do so in a FAIR way, so much so that if it cannot convict the accused fairly, then society must forego doing the good and must acquit the accused.

I believe that Erap's case falls into this class of UNJUST operations of the Justice system whose Letter and Spirit are enshrined in the Constitution.

Erap's "constructive resignation" is analogous to a confession extracted by torture, and his plunder trial the subsequent prosecution of our hypothetical Mr. Big, the Jueteng Lord.

We may grant that it would be GOOD to punish Erap for any plunder he may actually have committed, but because the process was NOT FAIR it cannot possibly be JUST. It was not fair for example that Erap never got a chance to present his Defense in the Impeachment Trial before Joker Arroyo and the House Prosecutors resigned en masse on 16 January 2001.

All of this Constitutional and moral gerrymandering was the Supreme Court's doing in January and March of 2001, making a mockery of the saying that "The Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it means"--- because the statement is only true as long as what the Supreme Court SAYS and what its Justices DO never violate the Constitution's explicit provisions and intent.

The Case of Joseph Estrada has dealt Constitutionalism in the Philippines a damaging blow. It is the victory not of Justice but of Judicial Activism run amuck in the Supreme Court's vain attempt to do the Good even if it is not FAIR. Justice Cecilia Munoz Palma was one of the voices warning Davide against what he was about to do on 20 January 2001. But being the compleat moralist, and not acting with the impartiality of a cold, neutral Judge, Davide succumbed to his own autocratic demiurge.

Constitutionalism as a form of Law and Order is founded upon the notions of a divided government with a clear separation of powers. It is not possible to accept violations of this separation, even as aberrations, because they normally lead to situations in which perhaps the Law and its Supreme Court, or its Senate are put to absurdity and obloquy. To wit,

ON PARDON FOR ERAP:

Where CONSTRUCTIVE RESIGNATION is analogous to a FORCED CONFESSION under TORTURE, the forthcoming ABSOLUTE PARDON is being forced down Erap's throat. If eventually blessed by the Almighty Supreme Court, this will be tantamount to killing two rights with one wrong: a repeal of the "Fifth Amendment" or the Right against Self-incrimination as well as the Right to the Presumption of Innocence. It will render all attempts to appeal a case lost in the lower courts (like the Sandiganbayan Special Court To Convict Erap) squelchable by an absolute pardon. Thereby a forced confession and outright admission of guilt may be extracted by an act of "Executive Clemency." Such a version of "absolute pardon" would be another abominable invention of our Supreme Court, with due respect.

But the fact claimed by Serge Apostol that "pardon" is a privilege of the Chief Executive and need not be applied for by an accused on trial for a capital crime is not effective against the fact that a pardon may not be granted in any case except when the sentence of guilt is FINAL and EXECUTORY.

When and if Erap files an appeal of his Plunder case before the Supreme Court, he will be claiming his Right to a continued Presumption of Innocence until the Supreme Court itself finds him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of plunder, given all the circumstances that led from him being the most honestly elected democratic leader of the Filipinos to a Plunder convict upon whom pardon is so urgently being offered.

I foresee a final, most absurd contradiction about to arise in the Appeal of Erap's plunder conviction before the very Supreme Court that created this Constitutional Brain Twister.

ON ERAP'S SANDIGANBAYAN SENTENCE: (Updated 9/14/07)Father Joaquin Bernas, S.J. says It's enough to make a grown man cry
in reference to the Sentence imposed:

Bernas: "No matter how you look at it, the sentence is enough to make a grown man cry.

It says: “Accordingly, accused former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and the accessory penalties of civil interdiction during the period of sentence and perpetual absolute disqualification.

“The period within which accused former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada has been under detention shall be credited to him in full as long as he agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners.

“Moreover, in accordance with Section 2 of Republic Act No. 7080, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, the Court hereby declares the forfeiture in favor of the government of the following:

1. The total amount of Five Hundred Forty-Five Million Two Hundred Ninety-One Thousand Pesos (P545,291,000.00), with interest and income earned, inclusive of the amount of Two Hundred Million Pesos (P200,000,000.00), deposited in the name and account of the Erap Muslim Youth Foundation.

2. The amount of One Hundred Eighty Nine Million Pesos (P189,000,000.00), inclusive of interests and income earned, deposited in the Jose Velarde account.

3. The real property consisting of a house and lot dubbed as the “Boracay Mansion” located at No. 100 11th Street, New Manila, Quezon City.”

Fr. Bernas then explains:

Forfeitures are easily understood.

Made less than a person

But what does reclusion perpetua mean?

It means imprisonment for at least thirty years, unless a person “by reason of his conduct or some other serious cause shall be considered by the Chief Executive as worthy of pardon.”

Moreover, in the case of Estrada, his years of confinement since his arrest in 2001 would be deducted from the thirty years.

Over and above imprisonment, reclusion perpetua also carries with it the accessory penalties of “civil interdiction” and “perpetual absolute disqualification.”

During the period of sentence, a person under civil interdiction is deprived “of the rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either as to the person or property of any ward, of marital authority, of the right to manage his property and of the right to dispose of such property by any act or any conveyance inter vivos.”

In effect, he is made less than a person.

Perpetual absolute disqualification for public office means deprivation of the public offices and employment which the offender may have held even if conferred by popular election, deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any popular office or to be elected to such office, loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office formerly held.

This sounds harsh!

Fr. Bernas also explains the bidnez of pardon, which I've also addressed. The most important precept is the first sentence in the quote below:

But pardon may come only after final conviction.

Incidentally, Estrada has already said that he will not accept pardon. It is worth noting, however, that only conditional pardon requires acceptance.

An absolute pardon becomes effective even if not accepted.

The nation waited for more than six years for the Sandiganbayan to pronounce its verdict. It will have to wait a little longer for the Supreme Court’s final verdict.

And, of course, today’s decision may be reversed by the Supreme Court.

The fact that this conviction by the Sandiganbayan Court can still be reversed by the Supreme Court means that this conviction is not FINAL. Pardon can not yet be offered and or granted, whether conditional or absolute.

Surely Joseph Estrada is not the worst of our public officials. He is getting overwhelming support and sympathy not only from the general public, but even from his J'accusers like former Vice President Teofisto Guingona, and the present Senate President Manny Villar who headed Erap's Genuine Opposition ticket in last May's election. This extraordinary paradox may be difficult for many foreign observers to understand until one takes two outstanding factors into account:

(1) It is now widely recognized that Joseph Estrada was sure of acquittal in his Impeachment Trial when was illegally and unconstitutionally deposed by then Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr., acting in conspiracy with then Chief of Staff Angelo Reyes, Jaime Cardinal Sin and then Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in the infamous Edsa Dos Coup d'etat.

(2) The regime that replaced Erap turned out to be a far more corrupt, repressive, non-transparent and I would even say, hated administration than Erap's was, if that can even be imagined. But starting almost immediately after they took office, President Arroyo and her allies were immediately embroiled in a whole series of scandals and anomalous dealings that have not yet been properly investigated, prosecuted and punished.

Readers may google any of the following search terms to get an idea of the vast quagmire of corruption and malfeasance that Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and her diehard allies must surely be brought before the Bar of Justice for:

Jose Pidal unexplained wealth
Nani Perez, IMPSA bribery scandal
Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard
NAIA-3
Impeachment of Hilario Davide
Venable Contract Norberto Gonzales EO 464
Oakwood Mutiny
JocJoc Bolante fertilizer scam
Comelec Automated Counting Machine scandal
2004 elections Philippines
Maguindanao Zubiri Pimentel Bedol
Hello Garci Wiretapping and Electoral Rigging Case
Kidnapping Vidal Doble Family Medy Poblador
Extrajudicial Killings
ZTE National Broadband Network Deal
Basilan Beheadings Abu Sayyaf and MILF Peace Talks

I'm pretty sure I've left out a number of others, but these are just off the top of my head. Readers may remind me of any I've missed in the Comment thread.

And if I may point out a FUTURE bit of criminal wrongdoing that GMA and her "peace talk advisers" are about to commit, it is the business of a Muslim Juridical Entity that I think represents a towering crime against not only the Filipino people but the entire Global War on Terror. Before it, the other crimes actually pale in comparison, for this will set in motion what I believe could be decades if not another century of bloodshed and strife in Mindanao and the entire Southeast Asian region.

There are of course varying opinions as to the degree of culpability that the President and her administration may have in one or more of the matters I've listed above. But if one examines the towering crimes there involved, in even one of the above cases, there is already as much there I would say as anything former President Estrada may have engaged in.

Contrary to the claims of many, the Filipino People are not stupid. They love Democracy as many recent surveys have shown. They are a loving and forgiving people (some say too much so). A Day of Reckoning is coming. Men may be unjust, but God is just, and eventually Justice and Truth will prevail. One thing I rejoice in, from my knowledge and observation of our EVOLUTION as a nation and a people, is that Filipinos are learning how to use the rule of Law and the power of Justice as the motive force of a democratic society. The 2007 midterm election results prove that.

I am confident that in the end, WE SHALL OVERCOME. Someday. We shall overcome!

Former President Joseph Estrada was found guilty of Plunder by a Sandiganbayan special court. He has just been sentenced to life imprisonment (reclusion perpetua). His co-accused Senator Jinggoy Estrada and Atty. Ed Serapio were acquitted of all charges. Audio recording of the reading of the disposative portion follows.


Audio of Promulgation of Verdict in Estrada Plunder Trial (MP3)

There are numerous Philippine Commentaries on Edsa Dos.

Chief Justice Panganiban Tells Seminarians The Story of Edsa Dos

Edsa Dos: The Real Coup D'etat

Davide's Chicken Comes Home To Roost

Worthy of note is this Press Release by the constitutional expert, Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago

In a quick reaction to the verdict former President Joseph "Erap" Estrada called the proceedings a "KANGAROO COURT".

UPDATES:

Lawyer Alan Paguia sends in a legal analysis of the case:

President Estrada was formally convicted of plunder by the Sandiganbayan this morning. What should the Filipino people ask themselves? The most important question would be:

DID THE SANDIGANBAYAN HAVE JURISDICTION OVER PRESIDENT ESTRADA IN THE FIRST PLACE?

The answer is NO.

Reasons:

1. Under the Constitution, a duly-elected President may be removed from office only through the process of impeachment in Congress. The anti-Estrada forces wanted him removed, so they impeached him before the House of Representatives. Then they tried him before the Senate. Then, the prosecutors walked out. They were not able to convict him. However, they were able to remove him by way of a military coup de etat led by Gen. Angelo Reyes. Was that removal constitutional? The answer is NO. Constitutional removal contemplates a CONVICTION resulting from an impeachment proceeding. President Estrada was not convicted in the impeachment proceeding. Therefore, his removal is void and inexistent from the beginning.

2. Under the Constitution, the trial of a duly-elected president must be conducted by the Senate of the Philippines. The Senate has SOLE JURISDICTION and is the EXCLUSIVE VENUE for the trial of the President. However, after the effort to remove President Estrada failed in the Senate, the trial was transferred to another venue - the Sandiganbayan. Was the transfer of venue constitutional? The answer is NO. There is no provision in the Constitution which authorizes such transfer. Up to now, the justices of the Supreme Court or the Integrated Bar of the Philippines have not pointed to any such provision.

3. On January 20, 2001, the Justices of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Davide, swore in Gloria Arroyo as president in substitution of President Estrada. What was the constitutional ground they invoked and relied upon to justify their action? The ground of PERMANENT INCAPACITY on the part of President Estrada. This was the ground invoked by Mrs. Arroyo herself in her letter to the Supreme Court justices who went to Edsa II upon such invitation. However, in the justices' decision in Estrada vs. Arroyo on March 2001, the justices invoke the ground of CONSTRUCTIVE RESIGNATION. What is the legal significance of the difference? By invoking constructive resignation, the justices necessarily repudiated the ground of permanent incapacity which they had earlier invoked. What is the legal significance of that repudiation? The justices thereby effectively ADMITTED they swore in Mrs. Arroyo upon a WRONG and INAPPLICABLE constitutional ground. Therefore, Mrs. Arroyo was sworn in upon an unconstitutional ground. Consequently, her swearing in as President was invalid from the beginning. Did her tainted electoral victory during the May 2004 Presidential Elections cure the defect? The answer is NO. Although it is difficult for lawyers, more so for non-lawyers, to accept the pain of being misled into a wrong act, the fact is, the 2004 Presidential Election was invalid for one simple reason. There can be no valid presidential election where the Constitutional term of the last elected president has not yet validly expired. Under the Constitution, whoever takes over after the removal of the President shall serve for the unexpired term. But this provision contemplates a valid and constitutional removal. Therefore, where the removal is unconstitutional, as in the case of President Estrada, the one who takes over CANNOT serve for the unexpired term. Why? The effect of an unconstitutional removal is necessarily the opposite of a constitutional removal. In other words, President Estrada's constitutional clock for six (6) years under the Rule of Law STOPPED on January 20, 2001 when he was unconstitutionally removed. It was replaced by Gloria Arroyo's UNCONSTITUTIONAL CLOCK under the Rule of Force. Consequently, any presidential election, like the 2004 presidential election, would be contrary to the Constitution itself which cannot honor an unconstitutional removal of a duly-elected president. In short, the 2004 presidential election is invalid since the constitutional term of President Estrada has not yet validly expired.

EPILOGUE

The Philippine Government continues its unchartered journey into the constitutional limbo of Gloria Arroyo's unconstitutional clock.

- ALAN F. PAGUIA

FULL TEXT OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN DECISION IS HERE.
Hat Tip: Arbet.

SPEAKING to reporters in Sydney, Australia after the APEC Conference, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo announced the beginning of a "pilot program" to issue Certificates of Ancestral Domain Title to "the Muslim community" as part of "confidence building measures" with the terrorist Moro Islamic Liberation Front.

(Juliet Labog reports for PDI)
SYDNEY (VIA PLDT) -- President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo plans to award certificates of ancestral domain to Muslim communities even while the peace talks are ongoing between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.

In an interview with reporters Saturday on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) Summit, Ms Arroyo said the “pilot implementation” of ancestral domain was part of the government’s confidence-building mechanism to encourage the peace talks with the MILF.

“I want to give certificates of ancestral domain to a Muslim community so we can see that it works with them as well,” she said.

The President said this was in line with the existing policy of giving ancestral domain certificates to indigenous peoples.

“We already have a regulatory framework for ancestral domain. I was the one who authored that bill when I was a senator,” she said. “I’m not aware of the ancestral domain title given to Muslims as a tribe. [But] it’s given to indigenous peoples.”

Ms Arroyo said the certificates could be awarded to Muslim communities even before a final peace agreement is signed with the MILF and without any need for a plebiscite.

Notice that the President insists this move does not "need a plebiscite" -- even if the Indigenous People's Rights Act certainly says it does!

With the President intent on making her legacy to peace by breaking the laws of the Republic, naturally the confidence of said terrorist organization, or should I say, "partner in the peace process" has indeed been raised to elation. MILF Hails Arroyo Vow to Resume Peace Talks and the statements of both the Philippine Govt and the MILF's spokesmen should dispel any question in our minds that the "ancestral domain" talk is really about Philippine Sovereign Territory being handed over to the Maguindanao and Sulu warlords:

Chief government negotiator Rodolfo Garcia was quoted as saying that Manila is offering a new formula to resolve the ancestral domain issue.

He said he will present the new formula once the talks resume anytime.

Iqbal said he was surprised the government is again changing its stance on the territorial issue.

He said he was afraid the government might change what has been agreed upon. "Our panel wanted to find out what is this new formula," he said.

Jaafar said the early resumption of the peace process would good for everyone.

"Almost everybody is waiting for the resumption, we are waiting, peace advocates are waiting, representatives from Japanese, Canada, Libya and Malaysia are waiting, the businessmen in the ARMM [Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao] and the country are waiting, everybody is waiting for this because it is for all of us," Jaafar said.

One wonders WHO ELSE is waiting for this Allah-sent gift to the Global Jihad.

In the meantime of course, NOT A SINGLE SUSPECT in the July 10 ambush killing of 14 Philippine Marines near Tipo-tipo Basilan--admitted to and bragged about by the leadership of that self-same MILF--has been arrested. Instead, the self-same "chief Peace Negotiator" General Rodolfo Garcia led in preventing the service of Basilan Judge Leo Principe's 130 arrest warrants against his "partners in the peace process", got their Joint Independent Investigating Committee to declare that four Abu Sayyaf suspects did the beheadings, and then launched an "all out war" on the Abu Sayyaf. The result as I said is ZERO suspects arrested for the murder and beheadings of now 57 Philippine Military service men.

So now, neither has justice been done for the murdered and mutilated Marines, nor for their grieving families, but their killers and decapitators are to be rewarded with 1000 villages in the Pulangi River Basin of Mindanao (where the MILF used to hide Dulmatin and Umar Patek and where they will soon again be hosting many delegations from South Waziristan and the Jemaah Islamiyah's Bali bomberos). There is also talk that the government will abrogate the 1996 peace accord with the Moro NATIONAL Liberation Front of Nur Misuari and give the ARMM over to the newest partner in the peace talks, the MNLF's mortal enemies in the MILF. That will surely drive the MNLF to change its name to the NMLF (NEXT Moro Liberation Front) which will launch the next round of peace talks and all out war but with a major difference--this is now the Global Jihad and not the old Moro rebellions.

Mong Palatino, the voice of the CPP NPA at Global Voices Online, gooses the "all out war" in Mindanao in a recent post, using the old trick of confounding "peace or war" with law enforcement. My comment on that thread follows:

“Peace and Order” is a very different problem, in my opinion, than “War Or Peace” in the context of the Moro rebellions of southern Philippines. Roughly speaking the preferred solutions to the two problems respectively are “Law Enforcement” and “Diplomacy”.

Both are central to our concerns, but they are also central to our inability to resolve the Mindanao situation when the solutions to one of them are expected to apply to the other. This confounding, I can show is part of the reason for the unending violence there.

I think that the tasks of law enforcement should continue regardless of the progress or lack of it in the peace talks and other negotiations that comprise diplomacy as a long term solution to the question of war or peace between the Govt and the Moro rebels.

So, whenever a judge of the Republic issues an arrest warrant for a criminal suspect in a serious crime, all of the people, whether Moro or not, are entitled to an expectation that the police will serve the warrant,arrest the suspect and process them through the justice system.

If it should happen, as it did with the Marines who were ambushed and some beheaded on July 10 in Tipo tipo Basilan, that a case is related to the activities of Moro rebels (MILF/MNLF) or rogue elements or terrorist bandit gangs like the Abu Sayyaf, there ought to be no undue interference or micromanagement by peace negotiators into the normal workings of Law Enforcement authorities in a given province, town, city or other locality in the country.

It is simply amazing to me that none of the suspects in those crimes have been served the arrest warrants issued against them six weeks ago by Basilan Judge Leo Principe. But not inexplicable, for indeed, it was the hemming and hawing and the backstgage areglo going on with their counterparts in the MILF Ceasefire [sic!] Committee, that Jess Dureza and Co. got the efforts to simply serve those warrants delayed, until finally of course, an “all-out war” was called anyway, but suspiciously only against the Abu Sayyaf, not the “partners it the peace process”.

But nota bene, both the peace talks and the so called “all out war” are really the two main implements (peace or war) of the Diplomatic efforts to settle with the MILF rebels(who want to supplant the MNLF, the ARMM, all that Nur Misuari stuff). As such they enmeshed in a complex multinational negotiation driven by Politics with a cap P, involving, Malaysia, Dar Us Salaam and the OIC.

The needs of diplomacy are different from the needs of law enforcement, and ought not prevent each other’s goals.

But insofar as all sides surely agree that “There can be no peace without justice.” all must unite and support the idea that the activities of law enforcement ought to be regular and unimpeded irregardless of what is happening on the Diplomatic negotiating table.

Because of this, the needs of Law Enforcement have a just claim of Priority over those of Diplomacy. They should not impede each other, but in cases of conflict, the order of priority of satisfying needs, belongs to the Rule of Law, not the Rule of Talk.

The policies and actions of the Philippine Government should be carefully examined by all of our allies, especially the United States and Australia, as well as the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, because all will be directly affected by this.

Here for example are the insightful comments of the Belmont Club interpreting last week's video from Osama bin Laden:

Here's a link to the transcript of Osama Bin Laden's message to the American people. Two things stand out. The first is his claim to victory in a theater (Iraq) where by all accounts his forces have been worsted and the only insurgent force with a plausible claim to victory is not al-Qaeda's but Iran's. Secondly, his talking points, with their references to the Global Warming, taxes, Noam Chomsky, etc. almost seem to suggest an inversion. It's almost as if Osama the Muslim, not the infidel, has converted. From the tone of his remarks, Osama no longer speaks to the American people as the potentate of an unstoppable international apocalyptic movement, but rather as someone, who if you were ignorant of his true identity, might just as well be a spokesman for the Muslim wing of a Western political party.

Does that mean Osama has joined "us" or does it mean that some of "us" have joined Osama?

Well, I don't know about OBL joining us, but I do know that some of us have definitely joined him.

Read more than a hundred Philippine Commentaries on terrorism and Mindanao
including:

Ancestral Domain or Bangsamorostan?

The Human Security Act of 2007 (Anti Terrorism Law of the Philippines)

Understanding the Definition of Terrorism Under the Human Security Act

We Are All Abu Sayyaf Now

Laughable Textbooks Errors in Crucial Supreme Court Decisions

Are Tagalogs, Pampangos, Ilocanos, Cebuanos "Indigneous Peoples" of the Philippines?


click to zoom

UPDATE: Is Osama bin Laden in Indonesia or the Philippines?

RICHARD CLARKE, formerly a counter-terrorism adviser for the White House spoke to ABC News and has an intersting speculation involving OBL's black beard which is prominently obvious in both of the video tapes of the Al Qaeda leader released in the last week.

The jihadist Web site announced the tape with a banner, showing a still picture of bin Laden, now 50 years old, looking fit with a full beard of dark black hair, no gray at all.

"It does look oddly like he is wearing a false beard," Richard Clarke, a former White House counterterrorism official and now ABC News consultant, said. "If we go back to the tape three years, he had a very white beard. This looks like a phony beard that has been passed on."

The "phony beard" may be an important clue as to where bin Laden is hiding, according to Clarke.

"One place where a beard would stand out would be southeast Asia, the Philippines, Indonesia," Clarke told ABC News. "No one's thought he was there, but that is an environment where most men, Muslim men don't have beards."

While this logic has some appeal, I think that even clean-shaven, bin Laden's HEIGHT would stick out in most of these countries, where six footers are a rarity.

An alternative explanation appeals to me more as closer to the possible truth: that it is a sign of war in the Salufi sect of Islam to which OBL is said to belong.

It is a paradox of Filipino proportions that a President overthrown six years ago and on trial for capital plunder, nonetheless enjoys the highest public trust rating among all national leaders as Joseph Ejercito Estrada does.

It is not "mere popularity" either, for Erap is also the titular head of the political opposition whose standard bearer during the last election is now Senate President Manny Villar, said to be eyeing the Presidency in 2010. But his strong supporters also include Senators Mar Roxas, Loren Legarda, Noynoy Aquino (along with his mother, Corazon Aquino), Chiz Escudero, Alan Peter Cayetano, and such national stalwarts as former Senate President Franklin Drilon, and Senators Serge Osmena and Ernesto Maceda. And of course, he has never dipped below the two thirds level of public support and sympathy, as measured in survey after public opinion survey over the last six years, whilst all his tormentors, including Gloria Arroyo can barely scare up double digit percentages of those who trust them. His wife Loi and son Jinggoy have been elected to the Senate and almost everyone who earns his endorsement reaps victory at the polls.

This Wednesday the verdict in Erap's trial will be announced but I believe his personal political power can only grow even greater--whether he is convicted or acquitted. Here is why...

JOSEPH ESTRADA was an absolute disaster as President. He brought shame and scandal to the seat of Executive Power of Malacanan Palace, where he reportedly hosted all night drinking sessions with cronies and sycophants eager to urge all sorts of corrupt deals on him. He was impeached in November, 2000 when he was accused by Gov. Luis Chavit Singson of taking jueteng money and tobacco tax kickbacks. Erap's trial in the Philippine Senate proved to be a disaster when the Prosecution walked out and worse, the Presiding Judge joined them and aborted the Trial for no good reason whatsoever.

HILARIO G. DAVIDE Jr. was a disaster as the Presiding Judge in the impeachment trial of Joseph Estrada which was aborted when Prosecutors led by Joker Arroyo walked out and Davide did not bother trying to call them back to finish the trial. Instead he effectively sided with the Prosecution, and the anti-Erap forces when he walked out on the trial himself, went to the Edsa Shrine and swore in the Vice President, with absolutely no legal or ethical basis. It was simply that Davide himself could not accept the inevitable verdict of acquittal that the Vote on the Second Envelope actually foretold, since it became clear at that point that Erap had the numbers to definitively win acquittal on all four impeachment charges brought against him. But in order to get rid of Erap, Davide knew he could not simply continue with the Impeachment Trial since that would surely lead to Erap's acquittal. He fell in with GMA, Jaime Cardinal Sin, the Chief of Staff of the AFP and agreed to simply swear in the Vice President while a Mob threatened to take Erap out of Malacanang in a horizontal position.

What Davide did to Erap was pure and simple: a DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS. Only conviction at his impeachment trial could validly remove Erap from office in January, 2001, unless he died, was permanently incapacitated, or if he resigned. The Supreme Court ruled in March 2001 that Erap "constructively resigned." This was necessitated by the fact that it was an overt ACTION of the Supreme Court's own Chief Justice that aborted the Impeachment Trial and effected the Edsa Dos regime change that overthrew Erap's Presidency and allowed him to be turned into a suspect charged for capital plunder.

IF CONVICTED of Plunder by the Sandiganbayan Court, can former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada be granted pardon?

I don't think so, even if almost everyone, including the Palace itself wishes that Erap would accept a pardon, thus proving his guilt and finishing off his legal case. But Erap vows to appeal his case all the way to the Supreme Court. If he appeals his case immediately after a prospective guilty verdict is rendered this coming Wednesday, I don't believe a Presidential Pardon can even be validly granted, for it is of the essence of a pardon that it can only be granted after the sentence of guilt has become final and executory. An immediate appeal would mean the accused maintains his innocence and refuses to accept the Sandiganbayan's verdict as final or executory. Therefore a Pardon cannot validly be granted, for it would mean an admission of guilt and therefore contradict the appeal.

Of course, the Powers-That-Be in the Judiciary did manage to force a Constructed Resignation on him in 2001, so it would not be more absurd I suppose if they could somehow force a Pardon on him for alleged plunder. But having willingly spent these last six years in detention professing his innocence, it would be illogical for Erap to cop a pardon if convicted now, which would be tantamount to admitting guilt. By parity of reasoning, a Pardon cannot be forced upon him as that would be a violation of the right against self-incrimination, often called the Fifth Amendment, a forced confession, as it were.

Thus an appeal against a guilty verdict by the Sandiganbayan (which is equivalent to a mere Court of First Instance or perhaps a Regional Trial Court) cannot be denied him since he has maintained his innocence from the day he was charged, hoping to clear his name. Neither did Erap flight like Ferdinand Marcos, Virgilio Garcillano, and JocJoc Bolante, and he publicly rejected several immoral offers from his captors to take a Get Out of Jail Free Card as delivered at various times infamously by Nani Perez and Mike Defensor.

IF CONVICTED must Erap go to Bilibid Prison?

DILG Secretary Ronnie Puno said recently that the Palace would insist on Erap staying right where he is--in his Tanay residence, but Erap has declared that if found guilty he ought to be put in with the rest of the penal convicts of Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa. It would be a security nightmare, as Puno claimed, though I doubt it is really Erap's security he was worried about! Erap in jail would only reprise one of his many movie roles and he would become even more powerful as a martyred figure, hamming it up with the capos and presos in jail.

Whether or not he goes to Bilibid Prison if convicted of Plunder, the unavoidable fact is that Erap will surely gain even more political power as a result of the inevitable popular sympathy for his plight. No one today feels the effect of whatever plunder he might have committed with the likes of Luis Chavit Singson, whom he derided on television recently since the electorate decisively rejected his bid for the Senate (he ended up where he started out in 24th place). But a whole series of scandals, both political and economic in the Garci and ZTE cases, is engulfing the Palace at the moment and the comparison is not at all flattering for them. The all-night drinking, gambling and carousing that Erap conducted with his cronies in Malacanang Palace actually seems like mere juvenile delinquency now compared to the whole string of allegedly corrupt doings of the Arroyo administration.

Whether former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada is convicted or acquitted of Plunder this Wednesday in a much ballyhooed Sandiganbayan promulgation event and official extravaganza, it won't much affect Erap's personal circumstances and political standing, which has never actually been higher than right now. Erap is far more powerful today than he ever was as President, when he was vulnerable to a relentless scrutiny and attack by the righteous mass media, as well as legal and political proceedings like impeachment and People Power.

But today, by a variety of misguided decisions on the part of the highest officials of the land since 2001, which may be described summarily as a DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS, Joseph Estrada has ironically been put beyond the reach of the Law. He is more powerful than the law, because his tormentors are not so insane as to kill him, yet being unable to get him to leave the country to their tender mercies and go into exile, the Law must deal with him on his own terms.

Since his Resignation was actually constructed and forced on him, there is no end in coming ironies if he is convicted and then some genetically modified Pardon is constructed and forced upon him also!

IS THERE A CASE FOR ACQUITTAL?

The lawyer of President Estrada at the Impeachment Trial in 2001, the esteemable Estelito Mendoza, claims that by all the rules of Court, Erap should be acquitted because the Prosecution simply did not prove its case and he explained succinctly recently to Pia Hontiveros:

The brevity and crystal clear wit of Mendoza's explanation I find convincing in the way that a clever but straightforward mathematical proof often does for me. Of course the Sandiganbayan is not Solon of Athens who was after all a Pythagorean by religion and philosophy, and so they may not find Estelito Mendoza as convincing as I do.

MP3: Estelito Mendoza Plunder 101 on the Erap Case

If you would believe another of Erap's several lawyers, the equally esteemable Alan Paguia, the Sandiganbayan should rule from the outset that they had, have and could never possibly have JURISDICTION over the case of President Joseph Estrada.

Alan Paguia would go further, that an unpunished criminal of Edsa Dos is former Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr., who aborted the Impeachement Trial of the former President, instead of presiding over it to a successful conclusion. Instead, it is a matter of historical record, that the Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr., on Saturday 20 January 2001, for some inexplicable and certainly illegal, improper, immoral and unwise reason, suddenly swore in the Vice President, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo as President, thus effectively overthrowing the Chief Executive in swift coup d'etat conspired and participated in by no less than the Chief of Staff Gen. Angelo T. Reyes. Later, in March 2001, the Supreme Court, with Davide abstaining of course, blessed the acts in January of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Chief of Staff of the AFP, and called the events "Constitutional throughout." The magical realist stinkeroo of the historic decision Estrada v. Arroyo is the invention of the mode of enacting Regime Change and overthrowing any democratically elected President called CONSTRUCTIVE RESIGNATION, though the more accurate term is CONSTRUCTED RESIGNATION.

Now in the 20/20 of historical hindsight, and purely as a matter of record, we only need to observe that on Tuesday, 16 January 2001, a vote was taken on the matter of the Second Envelope by the Senator Judges at Erap's Impeachment Trial, which Davide was presiding over. Eleven Senator Judges showed their hand in that vote, meaning to say, President Estrada was sure of eventual acquittal at the Impeachment Trial on that date, Tuesday, 16 January 2001. Purely as a matter of record again, the Supreme Court in Estrada v. Arroyo then constructed a sequence of events and rationalizations, of narrative and self-justification, between that Tuesday and the following Saturady, 20 January 2001, by which time President Joseph Estrada had somehow decided to resign, or showed by his actions, (a boat ride home from the Palace to Green Hills!) that he had decided in fact resigned.

Erap has denied it ever since, as a matter of record. And he filed a case against GMA on Monday 22 January 2001, which only resulted in the ruling I've already mentioned in Estrada v. Arroyo.

In retrospect also, I must say, Erap and his lawyers made a curious mistake on that Monday. Why indeed did they sue GMA, and not Davide? For who was the bigger transgressor of their Oath of Office and moral duty on Saturday 20 January 2001, when GMA was the mere recipient of Hilario Davide's towering DERELICTION OF DUTY.

His duty was to continue the Impeachment Trial of President Estrada. If he had done his simple duty and merely ordered back the walkout copout Prosecutor, Joker Arroyo, now JPE's sidekick (what strange bedfellows, I wonder who is more revolted?), Erap would've been acquitted, probably, but so what. The Rule of Law would not have been destroyed as Davide did. His restoration of Zion is more like the destruction of the Temple of Justice!

And so now we come to the Sandiganbayan farce this coming Wednesday.

Observe that if there is anything they agree upon, both the anti-Erap Edsa Dos diehards and the two thirds majority sympathetic to the former President, enduring support as measured by outfits like the Social Weather Stations (SWS) and Pulse Asia, Inc.. Not that they are equally happy at such measurements of course, but how does it come about that a President supposedly overthrown by a People Power Revolution in January 2001.

Erap, in my opinion, is beyond the reach of the Law and Justice, except the poetic kind now, because the Law and Justice were most unfair in their dealings with him as Chief Executive.

Only God can get rid of Erap now, because his human prosecutors broke the Law themselves to get rid of him instead of respecting the Social Contract that is the Constitution.

There are numerous Philippine Commentaries on Edsa Dos.

Chief Justice Panganiban Tells Seminarians The Story of Edsa Dos

Edsa Dos: The Real Coup D'etat

Davide's Chicken Comes Home To Roost

SOME KINDS of political correctness are actually, well, correct. So I am glad that it has become politically incorrect to be insulting the Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW). For which Malu Fernandez and the Manila Standard are now reaping a whirlwind of disgust, boycott threats and an ongoing castigation, mainly by bloggers and other online Filipinos.

But how quickly we forget that it wasn't these "low-class" writers and newspapers that started and once engaged in writing that is insulting and disdainful towards OFWs. No, it was the biggest newspapers like the Philippine Daily Inquirer and its "nationalistic" pundits, the worse being CONRADO DE QUIROS who used to make hundreds of thousands of copies of screeds and epithets against OFWs of the most sophisticated and malicious kind.

For example, in a series of columns having supposedly to do with Sense of Country, Conrad de Quiros popularized the insult among journalists and other elitists that OFWs are "TOILET BOWL CLEANERS OF THE WORLD" -- even suggesting that we scrap our colleges and universities if that was all we were training our youth for. I can't seem to find the original columns of his at the Inquirer Website anymore (I wonder why?) but fortunately the Asian Journal Online still has him admitting and defending those insults to OFWs.

Conrad de Quiros: "I remember again the irate letter-writer who demanded to know what I had against caregivers and maids-I had asked what we were doing turning ourselves into the toilet-bowl cleaners of the world-when both did completely respectable work. My answer then, and now, is that I have nothing against them, just as I have nothing against janitors and forklift operators. What I have against is the attitude that we can only exist in survival mode and that we can't be better. What I have against is an educational system that imagines its role in life to be to cater to the export labor market by producing standard entrants to it. "

If anyone has the original column, I would like to republish it in its entirety here, but as I said it can't seem to be found at PDI's website anymore.

He was joined in this once gleeful enterprise of vituperation against OFWs by people in such "great" and "high class" schools as the Ateneo, where some folks called that infamous DeQuirosian phrase "eloquent".

Back then (only two years ago) pretty much only Philippine Commentary and Wretchard of the Belmont Club stood up for OFWs, (as well as many irate letter writers and lowly chat room participants) whom the Inquirer gave short shrift by having de Quiros himself and the "readers advocate" Raul Palabrica rebut them. Manuel L. Quezon III defended his newspaper but a frequent Commenter of his, C.V. Jugo had this to say:

I agree with footvoter’s take on OFW’s above (as well as with a similar point made by Dodong a few posts back). Together with DJB, i take offense to De Quiros’ characterizating us as ‘toilet bowl cleaners of the world’, not so much for the designation itself but for the elitist insinuation that this kind of thing is somehow beneath one’s dignity.

I am just glad to see how much things have changed.

I salute efforts of folks like Nick of Tingog.com who is trying to start a boycott of the Manila Standard Today and its dequirosian acolyte, Malu Fernandez.

The C at has some suggested tactics.


Reyna Elena has started an OFW Logo and Slogan Design Contest.

Filipino OFWs in Qatar are mighty incensed.

Pinoy Advertizzing TsisMax ccarries some of the colorful language being directed at Malu and her supporters (all half dozen of them)

Unedited Mara has a a nice, uhmm picture of the fierce and fabulous Malu Fernandez, but it's nothing compared to this one from the Pedestrian Observer.

The Jester-in-Exile doesn't find any of this to be very funny and describes the online seige.

The Rube Tube likens Malu's actions to going to America and making fun of the soldiers fighting in Iraq, which of course is a deviant behavior still practiced by PDI and de Quiros, except in regards to Philippine soldiers and Mindanao.

Coffee with Amee describes Pinoy bloggers on the issue, but pities Malu Fernandez for her deep seated insecurities.

Other significant entries lately have come from:

Far From Neutral Notions ("...no statute of limitations on outrage")

Touched by an Angel wants to combat the bigotry and condescension of the what AWB Holdings calls the "abonimable snub woman".


These efforts are laudable, but I think we and the OFWs have already won the argument, both morally and politically. For even "nationalists" -- who are mostly the mental crustaceans of a failed ruling class--now acknowledge, perhaps with not enough gratitude but certainly with enough false if grudging praises--that the OFWs really are the rising tide that is lifting all boats, even that of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

Conrad de Quiros and PDI, like Renato Constantino and the CPP NPA all these decades have had an entirely mistaken and self-serving view of nationalism, which Overseas Filipino Workers, as the first global citizens of One World are teaching them is not the greatest possible virtue there is.

Here is a nice logo from Proudly Pinoy dot org.


The OFW has discovered virtues greater than nationalism!

PGMA issues proclamation granting amnesty to CPP-NPA-NDF members, other communist rebels

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2007 President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued on Thursday Proclamation No. 1377 granting amnesty to members of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army-National Democratic Front (CPP-NPA-NDF) and other communist rebel groups in the country.

The proclamation, which was signed by the President before she left Thursday morning for Sydney to attend the 15th Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders Meeting hosted by Australia, takes effect “upon concurrence by a majority of all the members of Congress.”

In Proclamation 1377, the President explained that “accepting rebels back into the folds of the law through amnesty, and eventually providing them access to the government’s existing socio-economic services, are essential to attaining peace and reconciliation” in the country.

“An amnesty program is an integral component of the government’s comprehensive peace efforts as mandated in Executive Order No. 3 dated 28 February 2001,” the Chief Executive said, adding that the amnesty granted under Proclamation No. 1377 is part of the Social Integration Program for former rebels as provided under Administrative Order No. 172 she issued on March 23, 2007.

“There is an urgent need and expressed desire to extend amnesty to members of the CPP-NPA-NDF and other communist rebel groups as an instrument of reconciliation, and as a path for their return to a peaceful, democratic, and pluralistic society,” the President said.

Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita said certified copies of the proclamation have been transmitted to the Senate and the House of Representatives for concurrence in accordance with the Constitution.

Under the proclamation, amnesty shall be granted to members of the CPP-NPA-NDF and other communist rebel groups who shall file application under oath with the National Committee on Social Integration (NCSI) and the Provincial or City Peace and Order Council Amnesty Centers (P/CPOC-ACs) within six (6) months from the effectivity of the proclamation.

Section 2 of the proclamation provides that the amnesty “shall cover the crime of rebellion and all other crimes included therein or incident thereto in pursuit of political belief as defined by jurisprudence, whether punishable under the Revised Penal Code or special laws.”

Not covered by the proposed amnesty are “crimes against chastity, rape, torture, kidnapping for ransom, use and trafficking of illegal drugs and other crimes for personal ends and violations of international law or convention and protocols, even if alleged to have been committed in pursuit of political beliefs.”

The initial amount needed to implement the proclamation shall be sourced from the Office of the President, and released to the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP), the President said, adding that regular funds shall be provided for its implementation in the succeeding years under the General Appropriations Act (GAA).

The Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) provincial/city office shall receive the amnesty applications for processing by the P/CPOC.

Other salient points of the Proclamation are:

 Any member of the CPP-NPA-NDF and other communist rebel groups who has committed any act or omission in pursuit of political belief, referred to in Section 2, including those detained, charged or convicted for such acts or omission, may file an application for amnesty.

 Crimes for which amnesty may be granted must have been committed on or before the date of effectivity of the Proclamation.

 Those who have already been granted amnesty under previous amnesty proclamations shall no longer qualify for amnesty under Proclamation 1377.

 Those who have been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction may benefit from a grant of amnesty by the restoration of applicants’ civil or political rights only.

 Persons who applied for amnesty under previous proclamations but whose applications were not considered for having been made outside the reglementary period for filing, may apply under this Proclamation.

 The National Committee on Social Integration (NSCI) upon due deliberation, shall issue the corresponding Certificate of Amnesty to qualified applicants. The filing of an application herein shall not ipso facto result in a grant of amnesty.

The grant of amnesty shall have the following effects:

Amnesty under Proclamation 1377 shall extinguish any criminal liability for acts committed in pursuit of political beliefs, without prejudice to the grantee’s civil liability for injuries or damages caused to private persons.

The grant of amnesty shall restore the grantee’s civil and political rights lost or suspended by virtue of conviction for crime/s covered thereby.

Unless detained pursuant to law, a person who applies for amnesty shall be issued a Safe Conduct Pass by the Provincial or City Peace and Order Council Amnesty Center (P/CPOC-Acs). The Safe Conduct Pass shall provide immunity from warrantless arrests for offenses covered under this Proclamation.

Applicants with firearms are required to turn over their firearms within 30 days from their filing of application for amnesty without incurring liability for illegal possession thereof. “Thereafter, illegal possession of firearms by any applicant or amnesty grantee shall be a ground for denial or revocation of the amnesty, without prejudice to legal prosecution for such illegal possession,” the proclamation said.

National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales was talking with Vice President Noli De Castro on DZMM Radyo Patrol this morning about this new development. A most interesting feature of the "amnesty strategy" of the government is apparently to allow local NPA units and personalities to negotiate directly with Local Government Units and local leaders so they may avail directly of the Amnesty Proclamation without needing to wait for the Central Committee of CPP to approve some still speculative "peace agreement." Sec. Gonzales makes the quite persuasive point that the CPP NPA's top leadership, most of whom are in "self-exile" (or solitary confinement) in the Netherlands, have strongly opposed the Amnesty Proclamation because they fear their members and cadre in the archipelago will now desert their movement and return to the folds of the Law and Democracy. I hope this plan works, as it apparently has in Bohol, where the Governor has successfully negotiated with local NPA members and reduced the number of active guerilla fronts there from four to one. The formula is now being tried in Samar province and could snowball nationwide. The other attractive feature which Sec. Gonzales mentioned is the determined policy now of DISARMAMENT by the rebels. CPP Chairman Jose Maria Sison, may not however be eligible to apply for amnesty because of his pending trial for "remote control murder" of his former comrades Tabara and Kintanar in the Netherlands. On the whole, Bert Gonzales makes a strong case for this newest move to finally end the long running communist insurgency. Early signs are that local NPA members and leaders may be going for this. He even invites them to organize a Communist Party to run in democratic elections.

Not insisting on disarmament was of course the big mistake the government made when it signed a peace accord with the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) in 1996, when it did not insist on a disarmament by the Moro rebels. In this area, there is still some policy confusion I think, because the Arroyo administration under Jess Dureza is not applying the same requirement of unconditional disarmament as part of "peace talks". I suppose that is why 57 Philippine soldiers have recently been killed by "our partners in the peace process."

The Proclamation requires Congressional approval, which process ought also to be used by the government to mobilize the local government units and Congressional leaders for a major effort at ending Asia longest running Maoist insurgency, really an armed nationwide extortion ring.

THE PHILIPPINE SENATE has just concluded its first hearing into the Hello Garci Wiretapping scandal, following the re-emergence of a vital witness and resource person, in the person of a former agent of the Intelligence Services of the AFP. There were at least two new revelations by the whistleblower Vidal Doble Jr., namely (1) the role played by a certain "Medy" --identified by Senator Panfilo Lacson as Undersecretary Remedios Poblador, a close personal confidante of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, including the handling of his wife Arlene and children Danica and Darren from Kidapawan City; (2) the role played by mobile telephone service providers Smart and Globe Telecommunications in the wiretapping/monitoring Operation Lighthouse.
[This post includes audio of the proceedings and links to many Philippine Commentaries].
An interesting position Vidal Doble seems to have taken under near-badgering questions from Senator Dick Gordon is that he and his comrades at Isafp were really just "monitoring" conversations that were being switched to them by "assets" of the Isafp within the two service providers Smart and Globe Telecommunications. There is the suggestion that it is those assets and Doble's superiors who ought to be regarded as doing the actual wiretapping.

I think this has some conceptual merit, since the Mig21 teams of Operation Lighthouse, including Doble's own D-Team, were doing little more than listening in on conversations as they were being recorded onto the Memory Simms of Nokia Model 3600 cell phones, downloading the same onto a personal computer, making transcripts of them and then submitting them to higher authority.

AUDIO OF SENATE WIRETAPPING HEARING AT US INTERNET ARCHIVE (6 PARTS)

Flash and Lo Fi Versions

Part One (Flash) Lo Fi MP3

Part Two (Flash) Lo Fi MP3

Part Three (Flash) Lo Fi MP3

Part Four (Flash) Lo Fi MP3

Part Five (Flash) Lo Fi MP3

Part Six (Flash) Lo Fi MP3

Here are Philippine Commentaries on this issue from the last two hair-raising years of observing the Hello Garci Wiretapping Scandal:

Chiz to Miriam: Nego Supositum!
National Security is the Highest National Interest
The Wire Tapping. The Wire Tapping!
Was the Adam and Eve of All Tapes Digital?
Overhearing the Palace Thinking
Rope-a-Dope Trap: Garci as Poisoned Pawn?
Fingerprinting the Human Voice
Judas Goat On Top Of Mount Pinatubo
Supreme Court Will Now Rule in Garci's Favor
Stunning Break in Gloriagate Controversy
Fourteen Soldiers Are Hostages of ISAFP
Long Live the Anti Wire Tapping Law!
The Right to Privacy and the Public's Right to Know
Only the Opposition Can Save GMA
Dilemma of the Poisoned Fruits
Freedom and Garci's Second Petition

UPDATE: The Nokia Mobile Phone Model 3600 is apparently capable of directly recording telephone conversations as found in this Tutorial:

How do I use the recorder on my Nokia phone?
Go to Menu > Extras > Recorder.

Options in Recorder are:

• Open
• Record sound clip
• Delete
• Move to phone mem
• Move to mem. card
• Rename sound clip
• Add to Favorites
• Send
• Help
• Exit

The voice recorder allows you to record telephone conversations and voice memos. If you are recording a telephone conversation, both parties will hear a tone every five seconds during recording.

Note: When using this feature, obey all laws and respect the privacy and legitimate rights of others.

Select Options > Record sound clip and scroll to a function and press to select it.

Note: Recorder cannot be used when a data call or a General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) connection is active.

That many mobile phone models have this feature certainly opens up a lot of people to casual eavesdropping and "wiretapping". Even though this model says it beeps every five seconds while recording is going on, if one party is not aware that you own a Model 3600 that can do recording, why, "wiretapping" could become a fad around here!

Philippine Commentary readers, especially from North America should note a big difference in the wiretapping controversies currently ongoing in the two countries. Whereas the wiretapping controversy in the US has to do with intelligence gathering for the Global War on Terror, the controversy that has engulfed the Arroyo administration has to do with spying for partisan political purposes during the 2004 elections.

Both are of course important national security issues, but they are of a totally different nature.

I am personally very pleased that the Hello Garci scandal has come to be seen as a national security issue, as seen in the fact that it is the Senate Defense Committee under Senator Rodolfo Biazon that is the lead investigating committee in the Philippine wiretapping controversy. I hope it will lead to major reforms in the Armed Forces of the Philippines intelligence gathering operations, which should really be dedicating 100% of its resources to fighting the twin insurgencies of the CPP NPA and the MILF-MNLF-ASG-JI, and not wasting them on entirely immoral and possibly treasonous partisan political activities.

We do not yet know where the trail will now lead from Vidal Doble. But whatever happens, we must uphold the principle that high Offices of the Govt are absolutely distinct from their tenants, and that the highest national priority must be given to national security.

For this reason, I salute Sen. Biazon most especially, for rising above all partisan or even institutional interest in calling for ALL agencies and branches of the government, and all Filipinos whether in or out of government to cooperate fully in the endeavour to get to the bottom of the wiretapping scandal.

It is simply unacceptable that the Commander in Chief of the Republic has been wiretapped along with other high officials and private persons. It is likewise unacceptable that mobile phone service providers are possibly facilitating such espionage.

As for Vidal Doble, if indeed he is telling the truth, there is the further matter of electoral fraud during the 2004 elections. His revelation that he and his fellow agents and "everyone at Isafp" became aware of amazing conversations between the President and Virgilio Garcillano tending to prove there was massive cheating during those elections is a matter of grave concern that could lead to political turbulence in the near future.

It is ominous that a close personal confidante of the President, Remedios Poblador has been implicated by no less that Bishop Socrates Villegas and Oscar V. Cruz, in the "Bahay Pari" incident after a standoff at the San Carlos Seminary. As Sen Ping Lacson said, this could lead the investigation right to the gates of the Palace.

The Office of Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. (PDP-Laban) has distributed a Press Release ETHNIC LANGUAGES SHOULD BE USED IN SCHOOLS TO SAVE THEM FROM EXTINCTION.

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino "Nene" Q. Pimentel, Jr. (PDP-Laban) today called on the government to save the ethnic languages of the Filipino nation from the danger of extinction by allowing them to be used as a medium of instruction in elementary schools in the respective regions where they are widely spoken.

Pimentel expressed alarm that the ethnic languages are dying except Tagalog which has been mandated by law and by the Constitution as the basis of the country's national language.

"Many of us who were not born in Tagalog-speaking areas believe that unless we take pains to protect our own indigenous languages, they would eventually disappear completely from our consciousness and from use in our verbal and written communications," the senator from Misamis Oriental said in a privilege speech at the Senate.

CAVEAT: Ironically, Senator Pimentel's privilege speech was written and delivered in the English language, not in Tagalog, Pampango, Cebuano, Ilokano, Agta-Aeta or any of the other 171 living and 4 extinct recognized languages in the Philippine Archipelago, just like the Press Release proclaiming the pious desire prevent the extinction of these tongues by having the Dept. of Education use those languages as media of instruction! So it seems to be okay for the Senate to use English for its "verbal and written communications," but now we should pass laws and make Deped teach its curriculum of Math, Science, English, Filipino and Makabayan in "our own indigenous languages." Hmmm...Maybe Nene should talk the talk.

He made it clear that he is in favor of having a national language because Filipinos need it so that they do not speak the language of foreigners (English) to communicate with one another.

CAVEAT: Well, who are those bad, bad Filipinos who insist on speaking the language of foreigners (English)? I guess Nene is referring to the darn Supreme Court, which for a century has issued virtually every decision, resolution and ruling in a foreign language (0.001% Spanish and 99.999% English); and to the treasonous Congress which has done the same and still does, including Senators: write, debate and promulgate laws, resolutions, orders in English; and of course every single Constitution after Malolos was written in English, so the Founding Fathers are also evidently responsible for the extinction from non-use of "our own indigenous languages."

However, he held the view that forcing the language of one ethnic group upon other ethnic groups is "divisive and disruptive of the national fabric.".... The minority leader mentioned several major languages of the Filipino people that should be preserved:

1. Iloko in the Ilocos and in adjoining provinces, 2. Pangalatok in Pangasinan, 3. Kapampangan in Pampanga, 4. Tagalog in Manila and in Southern Luzon provinces, 5. Bikolano in Bicol region, 6. Hiligaynon in Panay and Negros islands, 7. Binisaya in Cebu, Bohol and many parts of Mindanao, 8. Waray in Samar and Leyte, 9. and the languages of the Maranaos in the Lanao provinces, the Maguindanao in Cotabato and adjoining provinces and Tausug in Sulu and nearby areas.

CAVEAT: Ah, but didn't Nene just say it would be "divisive and disruptive of the national fabric" forcing one ethnic group's language on another? Well what makes him think that forcing eight languages out of extinction by forcing the Deped to use them in books, tests and classroom teaching of the curricular subjects would be any less divisive and disruptive? For one thing there are many more than nine languages in use in the country, in fact 175 that are enumerated here, the overwhelming majority of which are not on his "endangered languages" list for saving. As for the Deped itself, they will only chuckle at the Tower of Babel Nene Pimentel is here, insanely, urging, as follows...

He proposed two courses of action to arrest the deterioration of the vernacular languages - 1. a change in the school curriculum to allow the use of dominant languages in various regions as medium of instruction from grades 1 to 6; and 2. the adoption of a federal system in which 10 federal states will be created based mainly on linguistic preferences of the citizens.

Pimentel said the first proposal makes sense because concepts would be more easily understandable to grade schoolers if states in the language of their homes.

He said he is not aware that this change in the medium of instruction needs legislation to implement it.

"All it probably needs is a policy adopted by the Department of Education that may immediately be implemented for the entire six grades or staggered over a few years as may be necessary in accordance with the decision of our education officials in the DepEd," he said.

But if a law is necessary, Pimentel said he believes that enough support from the lawmakers can be easily mobilized to implement the proposal.

"Now is the time to make the first move to revise the curriculum of our educational system so that we can allow the use of the local languages as the medium of instruction in our grade schools. Our other major languages are dying. We have to save them now."

CAVEAT: Senator Pimentel thinks that the medium of instruction is just the language the teacher uses to communicate with students. He doesn't realize that much more is involved than that. A medium of instruction must be not only universally comprehensible or at least accessible to the students, it must also be a WRITTEN language so that textbooks, tests, homework and other educational activities other than listening and having knowledge poured into your ears can be undertaken. That means we need experts and authorities to tell us whether the material taught is correctly rendered and does not miseducate the students, these experts having to be adept in the medium of instruction AND the material content of the curricular subjects. The Minority Leader does not understand that the Medium of Instruction is much more than the sounds emitted by the spoken tongue, but the sense of things they must convey. The Medium must be able to deliver the Message which are reading writing and 'rithmetic, and the Deped has to be able to deliver an integrated 10 year package of such knowledge.

It is utterly naive to think that just because a young student understands his home language better than any other, that therefore that language should be the Medium of Instruction from Grades One to Six. I might agree for the first six days of school, but after that, we must choose the best medium of instruction we can find. The criteria are simple:

(1) widely comprehensible by the students; (2) comprehensive written and spoken forms; (3) widely supported by existing linguistic and content experts; (4) consistent with the social, economic and political realities for which the students are being prepared.

There are many linguistic, legal, practical and pedagogical reasons why most of the 160 languages we are talking about do not qualify. In most cases it is because there are no written forms of these languages that are not inventions of one or two experts, and no authorities to decide what is right or wrong, because these languages have never been applied to so weighty a task as public education. They are boutique subjects for language doctoral ethnic studies courses.

The choice has always boiled down to English or Tagalog...and I think both Nene and I express our strongest preference by example.

One thing for sure though you cannot use the Medium of Instruction for the purpose Nene piously proposes--no matter how eloquent and perfervid is his English.

RELATED POSTS:

President Quezon and King Canute's Lesson

When then Supreme Court Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, awoke from a fitful night of sleep on the morning of Saturday, 20 January 2001, he was faced with an awesome moral choice: whether to reconvene the Impeachment Trial of President Joseph Estrada and bring it to its proper conclusion, OR, to simply swear in the Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and thus end both the trial and the regime of Erap.

At that crucial moment in the bedroom of the Chief Justice, with the Holy Bible cracked open to a passage in Isaiah about the "restoration of Zion", Hilario Davide knew that both courses of action were open to him.

He knew, for example, that the Armed Forces of the Philippines and Philippine National Police would do nothing to stop him from taking the second course of action above, because Chief of Staff Angelo Reyes had already mutineed with the entire General Staff and had appeared in uniform with them on the stage of the Edsa Dos rallies then on-going in front of a religious shrine-cum-shopping mall in Quezon City. He knew that the powerful Cardinal of Manila, Jaime Sin, would back him, as would former President Corazon Aquino. The Makati elites, many Cabinet officers and the Mass Media would back him too, as well he knew from Amando Doronila who was regularly in touch and giving him feedback on developments outside the Impeachment Court. It was just a matter of showing up himself at Edsa Dos in his black robe costume as Chief Justice, even if he really had no official business there, and the whole nightmare of Joseph Estrada would go away. He would be a hero and history would remember him.

But Davide also knew, deep in his heart, that the Constitution was not on the side of these social forces that wanted Erap Estrada overthrown and replaced with Gloria Arroyo. He knew that his own sworn duty was simply to order the House Prosecutors and Joker Arroyo to return from their walkout, reconvene the Impeachment Trial and bring it to its proper conclusion.

Unfortunately for History and the Filipino People, Hilario Davide, in his Bible-reading mode, no longer considered himself to be the cold, neutral and impartial Judge that the Code of Judicial Conduct absolutely requires. For in that crucial moment, Hilario Davide had removed the Blindfold of Justice that covered his eyes and knew from the vote of the "Craven Eleven" on Tuesday, 16 January 2001, that that conclusion to the Impeachment Trial was already certain: ACQUITTAL of Joseph Estrada by the Philippine Senate at the Impeachment Trial, at which he, Hilario G. Davide Jr. was the presiding judge.

Erap himself already knew he would surely be acquitted if the Impeachment Trial went on to its legal and logical conclusion--how could he not when he had eleven of the Senator Judges ready to vote Not Guilty? This simple and direct observation is what utterly falsifies the claim by the Supreme Court and the unrepentant supporters of Edsa Dos, that he "resigned" four days later, a ludicrous, illogical and deluded claim!

What really happened was that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Hilario G. Davide, Jr. violated his own oath of office, willfully and knowingly ABORTED the Impeachment Trial, went to the Edsa Shrine with no legal or ethical justification, swore in GMA and OVERTHREW the President of the Republic of the Philippines in an act of gross violation of the Constitution. Before the few hundred thousands of Edsa's Hooting Throng, the Chief Justice tore up the Social Contract, threw out the Rule of Law and inaugurated the present Rule of Force, as lawyer Alan Paguia first exposed what happened in a pamphlet with that title.

Now, six years later, Davide's Chicken is coming home to roost. Throughout this time, the unindicted co-conspirators of Hilario Davide in the towering crime that is Edsa Dos, have claimed all along that VICTORY justified their defeat of the Constitution on that day, that a coup which succeeds is automatically legal and moral. These claims have been pressed, even if the Supreme Court itself proclaimed Edsa Dos to be "constitutional throughout" and not some kind of revolution, when in fact it was the Constitution being thrown out the window by an Immoral Cheating Judge, only pretending to be the Chief Justice.

If anyone should be jailed, it should be Hilario G. Davide Jr.

He may escape that punishment, safe now in the cocktail circuits of the United Nations in New York. But he cannot escape the judgment of History that he was a villain, a destroyer of the people's faith in Justice and Democracy.

If Davide had done his duty and simply continued the Impeachment Trial, Erap would've been acquitted--so what?--three years later his term would end, GMA and the Moral Opposition would've swept to a landslide victory in 2004, and by now, in 2007, Erap should've been four years in the Rear View Mirror. We could've survived another three years of Erap, if we have survived six years of GMA. But nooo....

Instead, here is, more powerful than he ever was, daring the Courts to find him guilty and put him in Muntinglupa, while he appeals his case all the way to the Supreme Court, to stuff back iin their faces the sheer stupidity of a Decision like Estrada vs. Arroyo!

Here is Erap Estrada just yesterday, talking to ABSCBN News, saying how the National Security Adviser himself had come to befriend him, to ask him what he, Erap Estrada, wanted to happen. Here is Joseph Estrada, basking in the victory that Hilario Davide actually gave him, more powerful than he ever was.

Joseph Estrada on Coming Verdict (MP3)

This is what happens when we fool with the Constitution. May all of Zion forever curse Hilario Davide and the evil he has wrought!

There are numerous Philippine Commentaries on Edsa Dos.

Chief Justice Panganiban Tells Seminarians The Story of Edsa Dos

Edsa Dos: The Real Coup D'etat

Number of Philippine soldiers killed: 57
Number of Philippine soldiers beheaded: 10
Number of Arrest Warrants Issued by Basilan RTC: 130 (mostly MILF)
Number of Arrest Warrants Served: ZERO
Number of Ambush/Killing/Beheading MILF/MNLF/ASG Suspects Arrested : ZERO
Number of Abu Sayyaf "crushed": 42 claimed, but only 3 bodies recovered.

Soon after General Ben Muhammad Dolorfino took over as the Marine Commandant, it was announced that the military situation on Basilan Island is now "stable", two Marine Battalions were pulled out, and the President announced a humanitarian offensive.

Tonight Tina Monson Palma was having some nice giggles with DSWD twins Cabral and Lozada, At one point they were laughing (I don't really know why) over the fact that the doctors often treat wounded Abu Sayyaf and just let them walk out the tent back to fighting the Philippine Military. The gal from DSWD boasted of supplying food and medicines even to "the enemy." They alternated between that and how terrible it is for the civilians on Basilan, having to live with the all-out war military offensive of the government. Oh those bad, bad soldiers! Trying to serve arrest warrants on beheaders and murderers! Can't they see the poor are suffering?

And when Mr. Sergio Ortiz Luis representing business federations said that the worst situation is like now when the government doesn't actually support the Military and its fighting men are criticized far far more for the possibility of "collateral damage" than the "purely intentional damage" done by the rebel ambushmen and beheaders, Tina chimed in something indignant about Mahatma Ghandi because she realized he wasn't staying in line. Ngek! Ortiz told her to tell that to the Abu Sayyaf, muttering something about India and Pakistan. Tina just giggled some more and suggested that the businessmen would find a way of doing business anyway.

(Oh but they had nice tearful violins playing in the show's opening number, which showed just a tiny glimpse of the real world of closed, flag-draped caskets and grieving relatives. That was enough. Then the giggling started.)

Dhimmitude is setting in hard and heavy. And giggles will be few and far between.

The next big deal is the resumption of the peace talks and the big Peace Legacy of the President: the Muslim Juridical Entity of 1000 villages in Maguindanao and Sulu. The MILF will take over ARMM. The MNLF will probably go back to being rebels. And it will start all over again. Giggling and all. (The really serious folks from South Waziristan are probably giggling too as they pack for archipelagic tropical climates and leave their heavy winter coats behind.)

Indeed, from the heart of what may become the new Bangsamoro "homeland" in Maguindanao, MILF rebels just attacked a Philippine Military patrol base wounding two soldiers. (via Zamboanga Journal). Those are our "partners in the peace process" (as Jess Dureza keeps crowing), and the future rulers of that Muslim Juridical Entity. They haven't gotten it yet and already they are attacking the Military. Dureza should go jump in the Maranao Lake.



Downloadable MP3
Rizalist reads from the El Filibusterismo

Recently, a certain Mr. Antonio Calipjo Go associated with Marian School in Quezon City, has been hailed by the Media as a crusader against laughable errors in textbooks approved by the Dept of Education for distribution to some 20 million public and private school students, which he has exposed in a series of newspaper ads and television appearances.

Most of the errors Mr. Go points to are only accidentally funny typographical errors ("...cows are inseminated by seamen..."), and some of his alleged errors are not errors at all, but funny nonetheless to the equally uninformed. (See my earlier post on magnifying telescopes. where the observation is made that the Mass Media themselves (newspapers, broadcast) make numerous and similarly ludicrous errors of fact, grammar and spelling.

But Mr. Go he has also found many instances of erroneous historical or scientific information being presented in some textbooks, thereby miseducating perhaps millions of students. These are simply inexcusable and would not exist in a world, where more money could be spent on the authoring, editing, publishing and purchasing of better textbooks.

Recently however, I was really flummoxed to discover several of these kinds of ludicrous and disdainable errors not in lowly textbooks or the tabloidish broadsheets, but in no less than the written Opinions of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Reynato Puno!

In the Separate Opinion rendered by now Chief Justice Reynato Puno in the December, 2000 landmark case of Cruz and Europa vs. DENR and National Commission on Indigenous Peoples one finds some distinctively Callipjegoesque passages such as:

The ancient Filipinos settled beside bodies of water.

Hunting and food gathering became supplementary activities as reliance on them was reduced by fishing and the cultivation of the soil.

From the hinterland, coastal, and riverine communities, our ancestors evolved an essentially homogeneous culture, a basically common way of life where nature was a primary factor.

Community life throughout the archipelago was influenced by, and responded to, common ecology. The generally benign tropical climate and the largely uniform flora and fauna favored similarities, not differences.[47] Life was essentially subsistence but not harsh.[48]

This is what I call the "Garden of Eden" or "Paradise View" of ancient Philippines, although I was surprised to find it in an historic Supreme Court ponencia.

In this quaint conception of the way it was long ago in the Archipelago, the "indigenous peoples" have a common way of life in harmony with nature. Whether they lived in the mountainous aeries of the hinterlands (the Igorots) , or in the riverine gorges and valleys descending to the sea (the Tag-ilogs), or indeed the coastal and island peoples of Visayas and Mindanao, Chief Justice Puno paints an idyllic picture of a homogeneous human culture with a common response to the common ecology. Even the flora and fauna are uniform and therefore encourage similarities among the ancient Filipinos rather than differences!

Yet, just last year, the Philippine Archipelago was named the Center of the Center of Marine and Ecological Biodiversity in the world. Moreover, just a few paragraphs before, the Chief Justice had listed 110 rather heterogeneous "indigenous cultural communities" all over the archipelago. Their heterogeneity could be explained by the the fact that upland, riverine and coastal ecologies represent radically different physical, geological and meteorological biospheres, in stark contrast to Mr. Justice Puno's description of a warm, generally benign and tropical environment in which the ancient Filipinos live in harmony with nature and each other. Yet I seriously doubt that the weather and other natural conditions were any different then than now, unless Mr. Justice Puno wants to blame for example the average twenty typhoons that visit annually on those bad, bad Western colonialists. The arrivals of Spain and America are treated by Puno later in the ponencia as a kind of Fall from the Grace of Indigenous gods followed by the expulsion of the Indigenous Peoples from the Garden of Eden. I am getting ahead of the analysis though.

But it gets worse. Much worse. In the very next section, Chief Justice Puno addresses the legal systems allegedly common among the "ancient Filipinos":

The unit of government was the "barangay," a term that derived its meaning from the Malay word "balangay," meaning, a boat, which transported them to these shores. The barangay was basically a family-based community and consisted of thirty to one hundred families. Each barangay was different and ruled by a chieftain called a "dato." It was the chieftain's duty to rule and govern his subjects and promote their welfare and interests. A chieftain had wide powers for he exercised all the functions of government. He was the executive, legislator and judge and was the supreme commander in time of war.

Laws were either customary or written. Customary laws were handed down orally from generation to generation and constituted the bulk of the laws of the barangay. They were preserved in songs and chants and in the memory of the elder persons in the community.[54] The written laws were those that the chieftain and his elders promulgated from time to time as the necessity arose.[55] The oldest known written body of laws was the Maragtas Code by Datu Sumakwel at about 1250 A.D.

Well at this point I just tossed my cookies out the window! The Code of Maragtas by Datu Sumakwel?! But I thought that in the 1960s William Henry Scott decisively proved the true nature and provenance of "The Code of Maragtas of Datu Sumakwel" as originating in the 1907 book of Panay legends by Pedro Monteclaro???

The Verdict of Maragtas

Maragtas was finally placed in its proper perspective as a book of legends rather than historical fact in 1968 by William Henry Scott. For his doctoral dissertation at the University of Santo Tomas, Scott made a painstaking investigation into all the sources of information about the Philippines before the coming of the Spaniards.

Rather than merely plagiarizing past historians, Scott examined the original documents and searched archives and museums the world over for supporting documents and artefacts. He questioned the top historians of the day about their sources of information and consulted with many experts in other fields such as language, geology, archaeology and anthropology. He scoured the vast collection of prehispanic material amassed by his personal friend, Dr. H. Otley Beyer. He interviewed the friends, colleagues and relatives of the figures behind the stories such as Pedro Monteclaro and Jose E. Marco and he examined their correspondence.

William Henry Scott proved in his dissertation that Maragtas and the Confederation of Madya-as were not actual ancient documents from long ago but only legends that were collected and in some cases possibly concocted by Pedro Monteclaro and published in 1907 in his book entitled Maragtas. As for the Maragtas Code, Scott found that it was merely an invention of Guillermo Santiago-Cuino's mind which was probably based on Monteclaro's book and published in 1938.

Scott successfully defended his dissertation before a panel of eminent Filipino historians, some of whom had formerly endorsed and promoted the erroneous facts of Philippine history. The panel included Teodoro Agoncillo, Horacio de la Costa, Marcelino Forondo, Mercedes Grau Santamaria, Nicholas Zafra and Gregorio Zaide. Scott's meticulous research was published in 1968 in his book Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History and since then no historian has contested his conclusions. M12

The Result of Scott's Discoveries
By the 1960s the better scholars already had some doubts regarding Maragtas and they avoided mentioning it in their works. Scott's thesis confirmed their suspicions. However, it was many years before the writers of school textbooks noticed Scott's findings. Most continued to reprint their old texts while others wrote new books that still contained the old mistakes. Take for example this quote from Ang Pagsulong ng Pamayanan (1981):

Maragtas' Code is the premier example of written law and it has been considered the oldest because it was in effect from 1250. M13

Not only is this statement wrong but its authors seem to believe that Maragtas was a person and not a book.

Jose Villa Panganiban used Maragtas to trace the origin of the Tagalog language in the preface of the very popular English-Tagalog Dictionary by Fr. Leo James English in 1965. M14 To this day it remains unrevised in spite of many reprintings.

Even one member of Scott's dissertation panel did not appear to be eager to set the record straight. Gregorio Zaide continued to include information from Maragtas in works such as Pageant of Philippine History in 1979, History of the Republic of the Philippines in 1983 and Philippine History 1984 which he co-authored with his daughter, Sonia Zaide. M15

While making an effort to correct the errors of the past, some historians mistook Maragtas to be one of the many hoaxes of Philippine history rather than a mere legend. When Sonia Zaide revised History of the Republic of the Philippines in 1987, she mistakenly described Maragtas as a fraudulent document:

The legends surrounding the settling of the Philippines by Malay migrants are notably celebrated in the ati-atihan festival and perpetrated by hoaxers in the fraudulent documents containing the Maragtas chronicle and the Code of Kalantiaw. M16E

Zaide clarified her opinion on the following page:

Although previously accepted by some historians, including the present authors, it has become obvious that the Maragtas is only the imaginary creation of Pedro A. Monteclaro, a Visayan public official and poet, in Iloilo in 1907. He based it on folk customs and legends, largely transmitted by oral tradition. M17E

It would be unfair to brand Pedro Monteclaro a hoaxer or his book a fraudulent document because he never claimed that Maragtas was anything more than a collection of legends. Any frauds involving his book were perpetrated by other later writers who misrepresented it as an authentic ancient document.

1998 Paul Morrow
Latest revision: 22 April, 2007

To this day ignorance and misunderstanding of the true nature of Maragtas is still prevalent throughout Philippine society even among its highest institutions and organizations. Evidence of this can be seen in the following list of web sites:

• Supreme Court of the Philippines
  A Brief History. Management Information Systems Office of the Philippine Supreme Court. Copyright © 1998 SUPREME COURT. Author not identified.
• Department of Education, Republic of the Philippines
  Looking Back; Important Dates in Philippines History. Education News.
  Vol. 7, No.4. April 2001. Author not identified.
• Governor's Office, Province of Antique
  Antique Provincial Profile, League of Provinces of the Philippines.
  Copyright 2001 Author not identified.
• Mayor's Office, City of Iloilo
  The Exciting Blend of East and West. Author not identified.
• Madya-as Heritage Foundation Inc.
  Save Madya-as, Save Panay. Author not identified
• Akaenon.Com

By the way if you are wondering where Chief Justice Puno got this information:

The oldest known written body of laws was the Maragtas Code by Datu Sumakwel at about 1250 A.D.

it was public school text book published Rex Publishing House.

Leogardo, Felicitas T., Rosalina R. de Leon & Purification Jacob. Ang Pagsulong ng Pamayanan para sa Unang Taon ng Mataas na Paaralan, Published by Rex Book Store, Manila. First edition, 1981. p.177

I'm not done with the ponencia of Chief Justice Puno in the case because it was that decision which upheld the constitutionality of the Indigenous People's Rights Act of 1997, which is in turn the basis of the Muslim Juridical Entity or Ancestral Domain that the Moro Islamic Liberation Front is negotiating with the government of Mrs. Arroyo in the Malaysian brokered peace talks.

The Opinion of Puno above represents the the seven Justices that voted to uphold the Constitutionality of IPRA, while the seven that opposed it, are represented by this Opinion of J. Artemio Panganiban.


One is forced to wonder how much more of the Opinion is based on comforting old legends or fanciful "history" tendentiously assembled to support an inexorable conclusion?

In my next post, I shall tackle some of the amazing pseudo scientific and historiographic claims of the Mr. Justice Puno and specious reasoning that led to a politically correct result that could have devastating historical consequences very soon.

Related recent posts are:

Ancestral Domain or Bangsamorostan?

Are Ilocanos, Pampangos, Tagalogs and Cebuanos Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines?

Do You Think This Version of Ancient Philippine History Is Correct?

What Some People Don't Know About Magnifying Telescopes.

Chief Justice Puno on Terrorism--Sophomoric, Uninspiring, Self-Loathing"