Whether pork should be abolished is a different question from can it be abolished.
Following the successful Rizal Park protests on August 26 spontaneously organised by netizens through social media against the abuse of pork barrel, the question now has to do with next steps. The president sought to pre-empt the rally on Friday, the 23rd by abolishing the Priority Development Assistance Fund, only to reinstate with the same breath congressional earmarks through a different mechanism.
It became apparent from his remarks that pork barrelling would remain, albeit with more stringent constraints placed on the identification of projects and awarding of contracts to suppliers. With three years remaining in the presidency of Mr Aquino, doubts regarding the effectiveness and durability of his reforms began to sink in.
Twitter hashtags #ScrapPork and #MillionPeopleMarch were soon brimming with suggestions on how to name pork’s new incarnation. Interesting acronyms such as BABOY, LIEMPO, NACAW and KUPIT bubbled up across the ether, expressing the cynicism people felt towards the president’s determined effort to re-insert pork in line agency budgets. Many were calling for the abolition of the president’s special purpose and discretionary funds, which are seen as no different from congressional pork.
Like the EDSA uprisings which relied on mass media as in 1986 and SMS text as in 2001, this uprising relied heavily on social media, which is how the original idea was conceived and spread. Unlike the EDSA revolts, this one does not seem to be calling for regime change but instead seeks changes in policy to be made.
It can be characterised as a taxpayer’s revolt against the politics of patronage and privilege that the country is so prone to. Although leaderless and inchoate, the message from the masses seemed clear: (1) they want pork abusers to be investigated and prosecuted, (2) they want greater transparency and accountability in the use of their taxes from their leaders, and (3) they are for the total abolition of pork, including the president’s own special purpose and lump sum funds,
With regards to the first point, the investigations into abuse are nearing completion. The Department of Justice will be filing cases soon, Sec De Lima says, although the prosecution of cases will take some time to culminate (Clarification: this refers to the Janet Napoles scandal; the Interagency Anti-Graft Coordinating Council is about to commence a separate investigation into the anomalies uncovered by the COA special audit of PDAF from 2007-09). On the second point, the administration has already been providing information regarding PDAF releases on the Department of Budget and Management’s website.
With these funds being abolished and new pork being reinserted into line agency budgets, a freedom of information law will be needed to facilitate greater access to information, and a whistle blower protection law would encourage whistle blowers to come forward without fear. The third and final point on the abolition of pork is perhaps the stickiest of them all. Let me explain…
Policy questions crystallised
What to do with pork?
There are several policy questions, which the PDAF scam has crystalised. The main policy question is: what to do with pork? The palace wants to keep it. Legislators sensing the changing political winds are saying they are willing to give it up, so long as the president does the same. A principled few point out that pork does have its uses in a representative democracy. The people on the street, as previously mentioned, want it abolished completely.
To be legally enforceable, however, the abolition of pork would have to be enshrined in law. The enabling legislation would have to prohibit congressmen and senators from lobbying for certain projects. This might be deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court given the powers of congress, the lower house in particular, over the budget. Abolishing the president’s slush fund on the other hand can be done legally by amending the charters of the PCSO and PAGCOR and overriding EO 683 covering Malampaya royalties.
The abolition of congressional pork can only be achieved if congressmen, senators and the president voluntarily abstain from it. That is the crux of the problem. Those who want to abolish pork would either have to create a radical, moral transformation in our leaders. Barring that they will have to call for constitutional change, and that is probably not in the offing.
But with proper prudential measures in place, pork can at least be scrutinised and evaluated more closely. The only problem is that without a legal mandate to bind successive administrations, such measures could be easily reversed. And even if such procedures were codified in law, nothing prevents the next congress from relaxing them later on when public anger has subsided.
This leads us to two supplementary policy questions. The first one has to do with how to improve the calibre of politicians running for public office. The second question has to do with development planning, on how it should proceed so that local needs are appropriately identified, prioritised and met.
How do we improve the calibre of our politicians?
The abuse of pork is really a symptom of a much deeper problem in our state: the weakness of our political parties, making elected members of congress extremely vulnerable to the patronage of Malacañang and consequently more compliant to its wishes. Conceptually, pork was a way for congress to exert the power of the purse through the budget. It has not worked out that way in practice. The palace still has a way of withholding pork from specific congressmen unless they kowtow to its preferred line.
A weak president suffering from illegitimacy can use pork to stave off an impeachment complaint and other embarrassing congressional investigations. The executive then becomes hostage to the whims of a rent-seeking congress. A strong president on the other hand can use pork to railroad legislation through congress and produce poor public policy, as a result. Congress becomes compliant, addicted to Malacañang’s patronage in that situation.
The question on how to maintain the integrity of both branches in the face of patronage from Malacañang and rent-seeking from congress can be answered if we were to look at electoral campaign finance and political party reform measures as well as compensation for elected officials. I have written extensively on this already.
If we were to follow the pattern set by many modern democracies, the Commission on Elections would be given the task of administering election campaign funds. The distribution of these funds could be based on a prescribed formula, for example, pro-rata based on the votes received by each accredited party at the last election. This would mean that if an elected official switches parties, the funds that his party is entitled to at the next election would not transfer to the new party. They would remain with the former party.
This reduces the incentives for turncoats. It also prevents the administration from withholding the funding of opposition parties, since the budget of Comelec would include the state subsidies for all political parties, which would guarantee that all of them receive the state funds that they are entitled to based on law. The compliance unit of Comelec would need to be beefed up to conduct proper audits of election campaigns.
Making the provision of taxpayer funds to accredited parties conditional on their adherence to equal opportunity in the selection of candidates, as evidenced by a low threshold for political dynasties would also promote a merit-based selection of candidates for public office. Political dynasties will not be sanctioned through state funding. If political dynasties want to compete in elections, they would have to do so outside the state funded system. This would provide the electorate with a real choice through viable alternatives. Raising their pay and providing allowances to deal with their work in their electorates would keep them honest.
How do we improve the identification and prioritisation of development projects?
If the calibre of our politicians is improved and their integrity protected through campaign finance, political party reform and better pay, it follows that the formulation of public policy would be improved. Consequently, the identification and prioritisation of development projects would have a better chance of following a more rational process. This is essentially what taxpayers get in return for supporting their politicians and their parties adequately. In a representative democracy such as ours, it is the right of congresspersons to press for the interest of their constituents. Whether local projects can then be characterised as pork depends on the basis for their approval.
If funded by the administration to buy votes, with less of a consideration for economic and social benefits relative to other alternatives, then yes, they could be considered pork. If on the other hand, these projects are properly scrutinised for their economic and social returns and productivity dividends, then they would be considered good public policy. The bottom-up budgeting approach which the administration is currently pursuing may lend itself to both pork barreling and rational planning.
In the end, no system however well-designed will withstand the pressure to conform to established norms of behaviour unless the people that manage it are of exceptional character and skill. To promote an inclusive, participative budget process when our political process is exclusive and favours only the connected and powerful few would simply guarantee that the process is rigged from within.
Policy tools need sharpening
In the final analysis, both the government and the people it represents and hopes to govern will have to come to some kind of new arrangement. The August 26 movement has signalled that the old status quo cannot hold. The question now on everyone’s minds is what the new state of affairs will look like. What policy tools are best suited to address the problem presenting itself through the PDAF scam?
The measures announced by the president last Friday fell short of the mark. They failed to measure up to the expectations that the public rightly held regarding what to do with PDAF in the first instance, and with pork more broadly. Prosecuting abusers and increasing transparency, two of the demands of protesters are arguably happening, but abolishing pork altogether is a bit more challenging.
For one, the constitution gives congress the power of the purse. Within a representative democracy, this gives legislators the right to pursue the interests of their constituents in setting the budget. They might voluntarily abstain from pork, but they cannot be prohibited from it. The abolition of the president’s discretionary funds on the other hand can be achieved legally. New legislation could require the proceeds of gambling revenues and mining royalties to go to the national treasury to fund general appropriations submitted to Congress for approval.
An alternative I would suggest is to create two trust funds: one from the Malampaya account of the Department of Energy to pay for climate change mitigation and adaptation programs in the island of Palawan and other vulnerable communities, and another from the president’s social and charity fund from the PAGCOR and PCSO respectively to provide deferred loans to tertiary students and fund universal health care through the National Health Insurance Fund.
With regard to congressional pork, the measures announced by the president last Friday need augmentation. An FOI law will equip the citizenry with the necessary tools to examine the way their taxes are spent. Beefing up the capacity of the Commission on Audit, Department of Justice and Ombudsman to undertake forensic accounting and electronic surveillance will help preserve the integrity of the system. Codifying the new administrative budget measures in law will tie the hands of successive administrations to conduct budget processes above board.
Finally, to transform our politics, we need campaign finance and political party reform measures. You can keep fiddling with the system. But if the people running it are selected and then compensated in such a way that makes them susceptible to rigging the system, all this reform will come to nothing in the end. To improve the process, one needs to improve the people, through better selection and compensation.
To use an analogy in business. You hire someone to run the shop for you, but you don’t really monitor that person’s performance properly, you don’t pay him adequately, and you give him unlimited discretion to make decisions. After a while you suspect that person of robbing the firm, blind. You conduct an audit and find out that he has been charging his personal expenses to the firm.
You are upset, you withdraw all his expense accounts and limit discretion. Do you really think that having had a taste for easy living, this will stop the shenanigans? The answer, is no, so you fire him. But replacing the person won’t deal with the problem unless you change the way the firm handles employee selection, pay, performance and decision rights. The government is currently focused on improving performance monitoring and limiting discretion, but it also needs to address the way we select and elect our politicians and the way we pay them.
Abolishing all forms of pork through legal mandate is close to impossible, but improving our political system to prevent the abuse and misuse of pork is actually quite do-able.
First off, it is a bold move in that there should be protection for underage women. And there are laws like the anti-child pornography law. So it isn’t like there is no protection at all or to even suggest that the Philippines isn’t out stumping out this form of evil.
Second, it is one of those ridiculous and dangerous things— even taking into account protecting underage women. We have just gotten out of a really bad situation in Dubai— where the Internet fought to be kept open and free. And the Philippines signed off against U.N. regulation of the Internet.
Near as I can understand it, MTRCB is beyond its Authority. In fact, why skimpy women dance on noon time shows is a matter of much concern, if we are being moralist about it.
What’s dangerous here is government stepping up on censorship on the Internet. It never has ended well. Justifying it on moralist ground is a danger in and on itself. And that’s what they really are after here isn’t it? Justification for RA 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act. The move of the MTRCB wishes to have some justification for law and the takedown clause in the cybercrime law.
The question here shouldn’t be a take down clause. It should be who is deciding what should be taken down and when. It can not be the cops or the prosecutor— in this case– the executive department of the government. It should be the court of law that should decide if someone has stepped out of bounce because that’s the equal protection we all enjoy.
What is to stop someone years down the road for using RA 10175 as justification for doing an Egypt-style crackdown on the Internet? Or a Chinese-style one? One of the biggest flaws of the cybercrime prevention act is that it doesn’t really fight cybercrime. Neither is it cognizant of what cyberwar could be.
@rom disagrees with me. He says, “I don’t think they can think at far ahead. LOL.”
@philippinebeat tweeted, “Here we go again. Afraid of the Internet and netizens?”
@ceso: wrote: “@philippinebeat i think it was just a knee-jerk reaction frm the complaint. good tho that people are thinking about internet freedom”
@gelolopez says, “@philippinebeat There are reasons why they are called MTRCB. Movie and TV.”
“@philippinebeat altho, drive vs. exploitation & trafficking of minors online is being strengthened under #MCPIF,” @ceso added.
@philippinebeat replied: “@ceso Likely. We need orgs that think something through carefully before they act. Clearly this goes beyond MTRCB’s mandate.”
The answer really is the Magna Carta for Philippine Internet Freedom. What this does is fix the flaws of the Cybercrime Prevention Act. It does it better by starting with protecting rights enshrined in the bill of rights. It stands for an open and free Internet by balancing those rights out with the need of government to protect us. It doesn’t think of the Internet as a medium, but a living breathing ecosystem. We are giving the government the right tools, the proper mindset to go after the real bad guys, and at the same time being cognizant that the Internet is an economic driver.
Disclosure: the Author helped draft the Magna Carta for Philippine Internet Freedom.
[Editor’s note: we updated this entry to reflect a few comments]
In seeking closure to the 2004 and 2007 elections, which type of book (history or law) should be thrown at the fraudsters first?
The truth has a funny way of coming out regardless of how it is suppressed.
After years of hiding and running from the law, former election supervisor of Maguindanao Lintang Bedol decided to surface last week and attest to what many already knew: that fraud had been committed in the 2004 presidential and 2007 senatorial elections favoring Mrs Arroyo.
The suspended regional ARMM governor Zaldy Ampatuan who is contemplating a life in prison for complicity in the Maguindanao massacre has also implicated Mrs Arroyo last week in a sworn statement.
When such evidence had been suppressed, some anti-GMA stalwarts sought to prod it out of complicit subalterns through a Truth Commission. Now that some of these subalterns have confessed to their involvement, they seem incoherent about the way forward.
Take Sen Chiz Escudero for instance. His proposal for a joint congressional fact-finding committee to determine the real winner of the 2004 presidential elections was echoed by his ex-partymate and vice presidential candidate Loren Legarda who suggested putting the picture of Fernando Poe, Jr her runningmate in Malacanang as a way of “correcting history” if it is proven that he won against Mrs Arroyo in 2004.
Such a move would be frivolous according to the senate president, Juan Ponce Enrile, who believes that prosecuting the case now lies with the Department of Justice whose chief says it is ready to handle it. Creating a separate body to deliberate over the issue would only impede the investigation. The point of Escudero and Legarda is to correct historically the results of the 2004 election, the point of Enrile is to determine criminal liability and prosecute the case against those found liable.
Congressman Ted Casino on the other hand wants Congress to go beyond the issue of who might have won or lost in the 2004 election and look at investigating and perhaps legislating ways to address vulnerabilities in our electoral system to protect it from manipulation in the future. A good point I might add. The problem however is how to deal with an issue that would already be under the jurisdiction of the courts.
Perhaps the best way forward is to expedite the legal proceedings first and then to use whatever evidence, insights or lessons uncovered in the process to inform future legislative proposals. While correcting the record books for posterity might be essential for the people involved, there will be ample opportunity to pursue this in the future. Right now, perhaps we need to let the proverbial wheels of justice turn.
The sooner we can get on with this, the sooner we can move on.
Question: In governing you will need the cooperation of Congress, what’s your strategy for getting their cooperation particularly in a situation where you do not control either or both of the houses?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: Well sir I think you will agree with me that the tradition for the past congresses has been that the dominant party becomes the party to which the President belongs to. If I’m elected president, we already have our Liberal Party, we have our allies in other aggregations and party-list groups but more importantly, the vast majority will always want to be siding with the administration, whoever it is, so cooperation with congress doesn’t seem to be a problem at this point in time as we foresee.
Question: South Africa, after apartheid, formed a Truth Commission. De Klerk, Mandela, wound up winning the Nobel Prize. In South Korea, a similar search for the truth landed … in jail. Given the sustained unpopularity and perceived excesses of the present leadership, will there be priority given by your administration if you win, to ferret out truths about the GMA years? You talk about Garcillano, you talk about Pidal, Peter Wallace and his Wallace 11, ZTE and the like of transactions. What is your administration going to do in this regard?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: The job of the Chief Executive is to enforce all of the laws; recovery of ill-gotten wealth, if it exists, is not a proscribed activity, meaning there are no time limits to it but it has to be a priority. I’ve already made a public statement that I want closure on all of these issues if elected president. That means that one of the four platforms, the top four in the agenda is judicial reform. There has to be certainty of conviction and punishment if you do commit crimes in this country.
A sad fact is that all of the cases that are filed by the prosecutors, only about 18% wind up as convictions. As you know our system says that a prosecutor, before he introduces a case, should be convinced about the validity of the case, the preponderance of evidence at present. But after having undergone that process, it only results in 18% and those are official statistics. 33% are dismissed; we lose all of these cases. Therefore, adherence to the rule of law seems to be honored more in the breach. Now so, in direct answer to your question, there have never been answers to all of the issues that you have mentioned, be it Hello Garci, be it ZTE. For instance in ZTE, there was a board meeting by the NEDA, there were clear-cut instructions on sovereign guarantees on a BOT basis. This was reversed. Those were orders of the head of NEDA and also who happens concurrently to be the head of republic. Who can supersede the orders of the president of this republic? That has to be settled. What are the loopholes that were exploited so that the NBN-ZTE deal almost became the nightmare? But fortunately the people rose up to oppose.
Again, let me reiterate, it will be one of the priorities that will happen within the first 6 months; I guess within the first month we will already be tackling all of these issues under the Department of Justice and to ferret out and move the investigation, and if so warranted, to file the necessary charges.
Question: Will you or will you not form a Truth Commission?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: In the Truth Commission, was something I’ve always been studying ever since I became a congressman the first time in 1998. I thought that the model and the idea of closure for a lot of things. One question that I wasn’t able to answer then was, as you know, in South Africa, a necessary component of availing of the privileges was to reveal everything you knew about crimes that you had committed during the apartheid regime, by both sides, which included very vivid descriptions of various tortures employed. I was asking myself, in the Philippine context, if a father were to revisit a crime committed to a child, who was tortured by government forces in the martial law years, will that not in turn, foster a new cycle of violence? I’ve never really been able to answer that question. But in terms of reviewing this past decade and the lost opportunities in what are the systemic loopholes that were exploited that got us to this point, yes, but in terms of filing charges against those who are guilty of committing crimes that I think should be left to the Department of Justice, in the very capable hands of a very active and proactive Secretary of Justice, who I will not name at this point in time lest he be persecuted for that.
Question: Over the last decade or so the Philippine economy has not done well in manufacturing, it has not come out competitive in the world, and agriculture has not developed as you mentioned the way it should, and the country has moved more and more toward being a service industry, very successfully in some cases, call centers, BPO, tourism beginning to pick up, this is an area which I think there is a great potential for the Philippines. But it requires one thing that the two other sectors don’t require, education. And the educational system in the Philippines has deteriorated dramatically and alarmingly. We only have a ten-year primary/secondary school system where everywhere else in the world has 12. as you mentioned only 14% graduate from college level. We don’t have enough classrooms, books full or errors, all the things you know. What specific things will you do to correct the situation? And where and how will you get the funds?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: There are various solutions to the problem, and first of all let me agree with you Mr. Juarez with all the things you’ve said previously. What are solutions? How much will it cost to…there is an estimated twenty to forty thousand classroom need in this country. If our main focus will be to pump prime the economy and generate employment, then we will build the schools.
Our experts tell us within a year, maximum of two years we can complete the twenty to forty thousand, even at the cost of a million per classroom, although at this point in time the average is at about 500,000, and where will we get the money? As I’ve mentioned earlier, there are so much leakages in our revenue collection efforts. The 150 billion, we can allocate a portion of the 150 billion towards meeting at least part of the 40 billion necessary, if pump-priming was the necessary goal.
On the other hand we want a more effective use of the resource, we can contract private schools. I’m made to understand that middle-tier schools have a tuition in the 5,000 to 8,000 bracket. What does that mean? For a class size of 50, that translates into Php400,000 cost per classroom of 50. When we build classrooms, the shell, the basic shell lacking, the chairs, the blackboard, electricity, the books, the teachers, etc., just the basic shell is already on average nation-wide Php500,000. So if we are to send these children, there’s an existing program using a voucher system called “Gasbi.” If we send these children to private schools but in a direct contracting basis so that there are no abuses in the system, we can save about Php100,000 per classroom. That translates into, or we can utilize that resource into supplemental feeding programs, into a better book development program, into a scholarships for college, into scholarships for teachers, benefits, so on and so forth.
So, the plan is, transform it from 10 to 12, there is a bridge program, it’s already in the books, that’s why my theme is always “there are no secrets.” The plan is a good plan, it’s already there, it’s really just a question of implementing the same. Now, I think it is unfair for our students to, to expect rather, our students to be able to absorb 12 years’ worth of education in a 10-year program, further compounded by the desire to be solving the problems by saying we have no more classroom shortages, and this was done basically by shifting. Shifting is making 2 or 3 classes utilize 1 classroom. And I would just like to emphasize because that really angers me every time I think about it. You’re a Grade 1 student, which is the entry level, in our public school system, you have a class supposedly for English, to which Science and Health have been included. So, the child who probably doesn’t understand English, is tasked to understand scientific concepts taught in English and together with health. To further compound it, as if he didn’t have enough problems, he’s given a textbook that has errors known only to the teacher, who is in possession of teacher’s notes. The Grade 1 student, I think no, by the DepEd is expected to be able to discern what is right and what is wrong at Grade 1, in a language he doesn’t understand.
Therefore the investment is a guarantee of problems down the line. People who cannot be employed think, limitations as to what we can do given the talent that is there before us. So we want to get to the 12-year program, we want to have a pre-school level where they are taught or conditioned to be able to study. And of course those textbooks will really have to be corrected and people who accepted the same and contracted for the same should be liable.
Question: Could we encourage Congress to spend its pork barrel on education?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: Pork barrel will be limited to national priority programs, and of course one of them will be school-building programs.
Question: Mr. Senator, there are a couple of questions that deal with governance issues, particularly corruption, and I’d like to read them and maybe you can answer them as a whole. How will you handle the Lucio Tan cases of tax evasion and the Marcos wealth? Second, you talk about how different you will be from the present administration, what exactly will you do to make GMA, FG and all pay for their crimes? What will you do with the tong of all congressmen? There’s another one that has to do with encouraging whistle-blowers. So maybe your strategy with dealing with corruption?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: Can I start with how do I deal with whistle-blowers? It’s a sad fact no, I learned this close to about 3 decades ago, if you catch somebody smuggling, you’re supposed to entitled to, I’m talking about at this point in time, to a reward of 20% when you give information to catch the smugglers. If you facilitate smuggling, I was told by my informants, you get a 10% fee. So I asked this person, why will you participate in something illegal to get 10% when you can go legal? And point the authorities towards the commission of this crime and get a double reward? And the simple answer was: the 10% is kaliwaan, I get it right away, the 20% I will get when I retire and probably 5 years after that. The explanation is you go through so many processes, the seizing, the goods, for instance, of smuggling, the appeals process, auctioning, etc., I don’t think it’s that difficult point for government to advance this reward system to make it an effective reward system, point one.
Point 2, as I keep saying, the judicial reform is so essential. We cannot have a situation where a criminal is not deterred from committing a crime basically because even if he gets to trial, he doesn’t even have a 1 in 5 chance of being convicted. It seems you are the most unlucky individual to be convicted in this country. Now we have so many leads with regards to the first family, statements of assets and liabilities are there, there are dramatic changes in the statements of various members, and obviously, there are various provisions already with our laws, unexplained wealth, is presumed to be ill-gotten. And in that situation, they are tasked to answer for that.
And at the same time, my father was a very…one of my father’s most important advocacies was human rights. Therefore I will ensure that their rights are also protected. Because again, from my father, the true test of a democracy is not your ability to defend the rights of your friends, but more importantly those of your enemies. Because if you allow one group to be oppressed, you are setting up the situation for your group to be oppressed at some point in time. So they will be afforded all of the rights, they will be given all of the opportunities to answer the charges, and like any other citizen, they will be presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
Now with regards to the Marcos and Lucio Tan cases, and these are subjudice, I will be entering the situation, what, at the second or third decade of litigation? One would hope that there is closure to all, even to those issues. When you go into this country, you can expect adjudication of cases to happen in a timely manner. One of the sad facts, and that’s why judicial reform, again, our stake, has to be improved, is that on average we understand that it takes 6 years to adjudicate a case. Again, it leads to, a condition where it moves everybody not to follow the laws, and that has to stop.
Question: 2 quick questions, Senator. the heart of the Cory Constitution is social justice. The phrase is not anywhere in your platform, as advertised. What are the specifics of your social justice program? And related, that is the question of what will you do June 30, 2010, we do not have a president or vice president who can be proclaimed and we wake up on July 1, 2010, GMA is still the ruler of this country in one form or another?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: I take exception to the fact that social justice is not in the platform, it is actually embodied in practically all of the 16 points of the platform that we have published on the site. For instance, we want to have the provision of opportunities for everybody to improve themselves, that’s why job generation is first in the list of priorities. What does that mean? I think a father wants best, provide me the job and I’ll take care of my children’s education and health. Education is the second factor, again empowerment, again, opportunities. If you are not educated enough, there are you know, what jobs actually can, what skills do you have, and what jobs can you acquire? Therefore, to have meaningful job generation, the educational support should be there, hence our drive for the 12-year program and even the inclusion of a nursery stage prior to the formal education program.
The ecology, the platform on ecology is very, very simple. We want to translate it so that there’s no confusion among anyone. If there are no forests, there are no watersheds. No watersheds, no water. No water, no food, no food, no people. Are you aware that we have an 8% remaining primary forest cover? But what is more criminal, is up to today, we have not delineated the forestry lines. So when you talk about preserving forests, you don’t even define what the forests is obviously, we are not preserving anything, and that is there also. I’m sorry, I’m missing the second question.
Question: The second questions asks what you will do come June 30, 2010 when we have no elected president and vice president…
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: Number one, the laws on succession are very clear. But can I just tell you, instead of telling all of you our plans, people, let’s not be naive, no? There are talks that certain quarters want to exploit that situation. There are talks of failure of elections or non-proclamation, no-el, so on and so forth. Now, does it behoove me to reveal publicly the plans that we are contemplating at this point in time, and to make our job of preserving this democracy harder by telling our enemies precisely what we will do. I think I will leave my plans close guarded at this point in time and we assure you we are not babes in the woods, and we are ready, as much as possible, we are getting all the necessary info, intelligence and alliances in place, to forestall the grabbing of power by people with purely vested self-interest.
Can I just add, sorry, this has to be really laid in the minds of everybody. We in the Liberal Party say that we are espousing platform-based, issue-based politics. And I am very, very confident that even if I were not in the seat, this occupation is fraught with dangers. I have in the person of my partner, Mar Roxas, somebody who is exactly of like mind, somebody who will pick up if I am unable to finish the job. Therefore, we can assure everybody that will join us, there is a continuity of expectations that are realistic. This is not person-based.
Question: That highlights a weakness in the political system in the Philippines. When we elect you, we don’t automatically elect Sen. Roxas because you’re voted for independently—so it has to be as a team. In the papers recently there was a two-page ad put in by the government claiming all kinds of things: that this president has achieved. It has numerous faults in it. One of the things is that they are very proud of the fact that this economy had been stimulated and helped by the OFWs and their remittances to the Philippines. Those OFWs are Filipinos who have had to leave their families. So society has been hurt badly by it. It’s in fact an economic failure. A failure of government to provide the jobs that they should have had here. What would you do to reverse the situation, to be able to provide the jobs here for Filipinos instead of overseas?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino:: Well, number one, I think I will be lying if I told you that we will have comparable jobs within six years. That I think is an impossibility. But there is I think an obtainable objective of having compensation for people who have skills that have been improved. We can get it to a certain level whereby the increase in wages—although not the same as working abroad—together with the family being in tact, and together with the idea of being a first-class citizen in your own country will be enough to win people away from seeking the greener pasture elsewhere. We believe that the people who have left and who are opting to leave, primarily have no choice. They are political refugees, they are being forced, not for improvement—where it was 20 years ago—but rather even just for survival. And again you’re right. The opportunities have to exist here. Now, when I go around the country, when I go around Metro Manila, the opportunities are so abundant, and all it takes is to do the right thing. For instance, in Surigao City, the table you’re using right now was about the length of this fish—I don’t know what breed of fish that was. But that particular stall in the public market in Surigao City had three of it. The next stall had five of the same size. And the Media asked me in that point in time—this was the senatorial campaign—”Can you raise it up for a photo op?” And of course I’m very macho, and I proceeded to raise it by the head. And the only thing I raised was the head. It was that heavy. And I was saying: “How much would it cost to set up a blast freezing facility here? How much would it cost to turn these things into steaks, train the people to marinate it into that, and export it to countries like Japan or elsewhere, where they’d be thanking us for sharing the bounty … ” Mar Roxas’s home province of Capiz, you go to the beach at low tide, you have a rake, you rake the sand, you get clams. In Metro Manila you get [the fry] of the clams. Why can’t we even get it from Capiz to Metro Manila?
I’m sorry, sometimes I can’t stop, because really, the absurdity, the simplicity of the solutions that are not being implemented really gets to me. The fertilizer scam: The greatest sin is 723 million pesos at least could have started a chain of improving productivity. And for those of you who are not aware, when you plant rice in irrigated lands—and that was the hybrid rice program, that was the fertilizer input program —you can double to quadruple your income for our farmers, especially if it’s irrigated. You can have five harvests in two years. But this current government made the program in 2004 and really turned it into a disaster. We had ten cropping cycles that we lost an opportunity in. But the biggest sin is that even in investigating this alleged crime took four years. That’s why I said ten harvests were lost. So, again, from Masagana ’99 we had a hundred kabans per hectare. Commercially we are already now growing 240 to 320 kabans per hectare. I am told, but I’m still validating this, that UPLB and IRRI are even working further than that. And again: a true fertilizer input program, adequate monitoring, serious credit facilities, can undoubtedly at least make us self-sufficient in rice. We teach agriculturists worldwide. At the end of the day, we import food. That has to stop also.
Question: I think you will welcome this next question. It says: do you already have enough money for the campaign?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: I will be lying if I tell you we have enough money. But, there is adequate … but of course, it makes the process that much simpler. Can I just share with you this bit of information that was given to me yesterday? I understand there was a tsinoy who went to our headquarters in EDSA the other day. He proceeds to donate a certain amount of money, I was not told how much, but he had a simple request. I’ll say it Tagalog cause it really was… I really made my day that day. He said: “Ito yung pera, bumili kayo ng commercial niyo. Naiinis na ko dito sa isang ‘to.” That by the way is not a joke. It really did happen. At some point in time we will have to report that contribution to Comelec. We’ll have all the details then. But it really made my day.
Question: Two quick questions again, Mr Senator. What will be the roles of your sister Kris and your uncle Peping if you become president? Can you give us a specifically categorical answer on your stand on the Reproductive Health Bill?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: Kris I think will still be my fashion adviser, which means if she does not like what I’m wearing, she will not keep quiet. I think she even had this barong made. So if she complains I’ll tell her you’re the one who designed it. And that will be the extent. Most of my sisters, and Kris included—Kris is a very busy individual … Anything I ask her, I ask her to attend some ribbon-cutting thing if I become president, that will be an imposition on her time. The three are eagerly looking forward to regaining their anonymity. In fact I’m not even sure if I celebrate my birthday, in the period of incumbency, that they will be present, since it will be a Media event. The role of my Tito Peping: I would be foolish not to seek his wisdom, because of his experience; but at the same time, I will be the one holding the fort. The buck really has to stop with me. I am responsible ultimately for all my actions. Therefore any or all of my decisions will be based on discussion with all the stakeholders as much as possible, but in the end of the day it will be something I can live with in conscience, in what I believe is right regardless on who propounded it.
On reproductive health: Of course, somehow, the secretariat at the senate made it appear that I was an author of the Reproductive Heath Bill. Unfortunately I never authored such a bill. And I intend to interpolate the proposed version before us. The portion that I want to interpolate on is: In government when you have a budget, you don’t use it, you lose it. And there will be provisions of the reproductive health for artificial means of family control. And I want provisions that will ensure that if government hospitals—by cunning, by deceit, by misinformation, etc, are able to expend these budgetary items so that they are replenished, then there’d be penal sanctions for the same.
My position is more properly called Responsible Parenthood; and basically it says, “The state has an obligation to remind parents each child you bring into this world carries with it a certain set of responsibilities: to clothe, to shelter, to educate, etc. That is the extent of what the state should do. So there will be educational programs, campaigns, seminars, symposia, to which we will invite all of the churches to put in their two-cents worth. At the end of the day, the state, in preserving the family, mandated by the constitution has to remind everybody that they will and that they should have these set of responsibilities. The state cannot force as to size, the state cannot force as to method. Now, in fact we will oppose any attempt to do so, because a democratic state has to proceed from individual freedoms.
Question: President Arroyo has intervened in a number of industries: power, oil, cement, pharmaceuticals, food—particularly, sensitively, rice. In state of belief, it was necessary to give people relief from otherwise excessive prices. What would be your policy and action?
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: Mrs Arroyo when she was my professor said that there should be minimal government intervention (Questioner: “She’s got a poor memory …”), because distortions are created in the marketplace. But then again, given that … you know, it proceeds from a governance of survival there’s no logic used except “will it help me retain power or not?” Therefore every decision is faulted from the onset because of that perception. We are hoping that we will get our mandate clear: clear and clearly won, therefore we will have the confidence to embark and ask our people. At this point in time we will have to sacrifice by X amount to get to this level. We want to be transparent in all of the dealings. At the end of the day I assume, god willing we have an intervention for instance in agriculture. You had that 723 million debt really bought fertilizers that were correct. That were delivered at a timely manner at an appropriate price. And perhaps even the, as I mentioned, the purchasing aspect of it be reformed. Things will work out on themselves because we made the right decisions on every aspect. When I pass EDSA, and I guess everybody who passes … can I just a question? When was the last time you remember EDSA as being a smoothly paved road? And this is the premiere road of our National Capital Region. I think most of you will say Highway 54, those who are honest. But when we export our construction companies, our engineers, our designers elsewhere, hindi ba world class? How many of you are aware that in this recent tragedy in Haiti, there were so many Filipinos in a professional basis. And I was surprised that even in Bermuda, the same situation holds: Accountants, lawyers, etc. I always assumed that Bermuda, beneficiary of the British Civil Service System, would have a very efficient bureaucracy, and an efficient professional corps. But it turns out it is again it’s again another area for Filipino expertise to shine. So again, they can do it there, undoubtably they can do it better here, so long as the milieu is present that opportunities for everybody are extant. Nobody is excluded, hence our phrase is “Walang iwanan at walang maiiwan.”
Question: I was told that we have to wind this up after two final questions, that I’d like to read. One is: “How will you handle the issue of pagbabago the Filipino people dreamt and longed for” and “as a transformational president, what key qualities would you bring to this task?”
Sen. Noynoy Aquino: Well, number one, you will have to lead by example. I think in fairness to my mother, at the onset of her term she inherited a government that was corrupt top to bottom, for the most part because the top set the example. Something as cop on the street who was being bribed for a minor traffic violation: he used to demand for his bribe. At the onset of my mom’s term, the phrase was, “Teka, hindi ko hinihingi yan a. Binibigay mo yan, pinipilit mo.” There was a recognition that that was wrong. And after that, something as simple as … I complain about traffic, and Mar in I already have an agreement. If we win, and if traffic isn’t solved, we’ll participate in the traffic. We will not ask of anybody that which we are not ready to do ourselves first. Hopefully we will not talk as much, because we are trying to put a spin on something that is indefensible. And siguro the biggest ambition is in the fourth year, it will just be Mar and I talking because everything is working and it’s boring.
Sana po ay hindi na naming kailangan tutukan minut-minuto, dahil nga maayos na ang systema. E ngayon palang ho nagiipon na kami ng mga kwento just in case magkatotoo po yan. Diba? Lahat naman ng magulo sa mundo nating to ay dahil nga yung systema, hinayaan na kung saan interes ng isang tao, isang grupo lang ang importante. Yun ang gusto naming baguhin.
MANILA, Philippines – Justice Secretary Leila de Lima nullified yesterday an order of Commissioner Ricardo Abcede designating himself as officer-in-charge (OIC) of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG).
De Lima said in a statement that Abcede’s memorandum last July 14 is void since it did not have her required approval. Abcede’s memorandum was addressed to the PCGG rank and file, declaring himself as OIC, being the most senior commissioner, until a new PCGG chairman or any new commissioner is appointed.
De Lima, who has administrative control over the commission, said the position of OIC of PCGG remains vacant since her office is still in the process of determining from the records who exactly is next in rank and the most senior official of the PCGG.
“Once a determination has been made, an OIC will be designated,” she clarified.
She also ordered Abcede to explain why he should not be charged for declaring himself as OIC without the approval of the Department of Justice (DOJ).
De Lima assailed what she thinks was a “preemptive announcement” made by Abcede that he has been designated as temporary chief of PCGG until President Aquino appoints a new chairman, based on a legal opinion of the DOJ.
“We cannot take shortcuts. So we will look carefully into the records of the PCGG, in order to accurately determine who should be the next OIC. Let no one preempt our decision,” she stressed.
De Lima explained that any designation of OIC of the PCGG would be valid only upon her express and written approval.
In her memorandum circular issued last July 16, De Lima said: “Chairman Sabio is deemed separated from office as of 30 June 2010. The next-in-rank and most senior official of the PCGG, who shall take over as Officer-in-Charge, shall replace Chairman Sabio in the performance of duties and discharge of responsibilities until July 31, 2010 or until a replacement has been appointed or designated.”
But she clarified that there is nothing in her opinion that expressly named Abcede as OIC already.
The STAR reported that Abcede claimed that De Lima’s opinion in effect has already named him as OIC of the commission.
De Lima said she was surprised by the statement of Abcede, who even declared in a memorandum last July 16 that he recognizes the authority of DOJ and also assures her of his full cooperation with her directives.
She said that there was a clear “attempt (by Abcede) to designate himself as OIC.”
Another PCGG executive – Danilo Daniel, the agency’s most senior officer and the commission’s director for research – also claimed to be the OIC of the commission last week.
Daniel issued a memorandum order last July 2 announcing that he was assuming as OIC in view of Memorandum Circular 1 issued by Malacañang
declaring that all coterminous officials appointed by Arroyo are resigned effective last June 30.
Corruption is the main cause of poverty in the country and the reason why Filipinos have lost trust in government. Noynoy Aquino believes that corruption is not part of our culture and that Filipinos are honest, decent, fair and hardworking. Honest and competent public officers and a professional and accountable civil service supported by active people’s participation will remove corruption and restore trust in government.
As President, Noynoy Aquino will lead the fight against corruption and restore trust in government.
Noynoy Aquino will appoint public officials based on their integrity, qualifications and performance record and will hold them accountable to the highest ethical standards of public office.
As required by law, all Department Secretaries, Heads of Agencies, and senior officials from Director to Undersecretaries will be required to have their Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) available and accessible to the public.
An Aquino Administration will ensure transparency and citizen’s participation in crafting and implementing laws, rules and regulations and in monitoring the programs, projects and transactions of government.
Uphold the people’s right to information on matters of public concern and support the enactment of the Freedom of Information Bill in Congress.
To enable citizens to help stop corruption, information about the government’s budget shall be organized, packaged and distributed to the media regularly and posted in the internet so the public may know, understand and monitor how their money is spent.
Strengthen people’s participation with simple and clear procedures for citizens to monitor all government projects and report their feedback through accessible means.
Strengthening the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Office of the Ombudsman will be a top priority in the campaign against corruption. We will fully implement the recently passed Prosecution Service Act in order to strengthen the national prosecution service, attract qualified lawyers, and institutionalize a more effective witness protection program while improving training and equipment.
Ensure the independence of the Office of the Ombudsman by appointing a competent and credible Ombudsman who will be true to the mandate of the office and will pursue unresolved cases of corruption and human rights abuses committed by public officers.
An Aquino Administration will put into place a “zero-based” budgeting system to enhance transparency and improve efficiency.
Budget allocations for the different agencies of government will be shaped by their performance and their compliance with the reports of the Commission on Audit (COA).
Noynoy Aquino respects the professional bureaucracy and will establish ways to motivate and energize the professional bureaucracy.
Qualification standards, especially on eligibility, will be strictly followed, and at least half of the positions of Undersecretaries and Assistant Secretaries will be filled by honest and competent career civil servants to ensure continuity and sustainability of effective policies and programs.
Government offices will be streamlined and rationalized so that agencies have clear cut and distinct mandates in order to spur greater efficiency and accountability.
Performances of government agencies and civil servants will be evaluated rationally and systematically through an effective and measurable performance management system to be approved by the Civil Service Commission (CSC).
The Civil Service Commission (CSC) Performance Management System-Office Performance Evaluation System (PMS-OPES) will be linked with the DBM Organizational Performance Indicator Framework (OPIF) to ensure accountability of government agencies and officials.
Review the mandates and performance of government agencies and Government Owned or Controlled Corporations (GOCCs).
To help go after tax cheats and smugglers, the Philippine Department of Finance (DOF) is looking to the public for assistance by signing up for social networking sites Twitter and Facebook.
On Thursday, Finance Sec. Cesar Purisima said the project is in cooperation with the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the Bureau of Customs.
Coming soon: crowdsourcing leads
“We will be launching it very soon. It is being developed,” Purisima said at a press briefing at the Department of Justice, where BIR Commissioner Kim Hacinto-Henares filed a tax evasion complaint against pawnshop chain owner William Villarica.
He said that on the upcoming Facebook page, the public can post photos of luxury cars, plush homes, and other properties of alleged tax evaders and smugglers.
“With their phones that have cameras, they can take photos of a nice car, a nice house, or a nice watch, so we can follow the lead… We will investigate then we’ll deliver to the Department of Justice,” said Purisima.
Social media and the government
The move comes in the wake of President Benigno Aquino III’s announcement in a press briefing last week that his administration will use social media as “feedback mechanisms” to get information directly from the public.
The DOF is not the first Philippine government agency to set up an active social media presence. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court also launched its own Twiter account, @kortesuprema. The account is currently deactivated, however, court administrator and spokeperson Jose Midas Marquez said that it is being fixed. – TJD, GMANews.TV
MANILA, Philippines – Justice Secretary Alberto Agra has deferred the release of his final decision on the fate of two prominent members of the Ampatuan clan in the massacre of 57 people in Maguindanao on Nov. 23, 2009.
Agra said he opted to give families of the victims until today to file their supplemental motion for reconsideration as manifested earlier by their lawyer Nena Santos.
“While Atty. Nena Santos had previously filed a motion for reconsideration last week, the National Prosecution Service rule on appeals provides that they have 10 days from receipt of copy of the resolution within which to file (a motion). The records showed that the 10th
day falls tomorrow (April 30),” he said in a statement released yesterday.
He said that he wants to give the aggrieved parties the fullest extent of their right to appeal his resolution last April 16 that cleared detained Gov. Zaldy Ampatuan of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao and Maguindanao Vice Gov. Akmad Ampatuan Sr. of involvement in the multiple murder case.
“The DOJ received on April 27 a Manifestation from Santos, the counsel on record of private complainants, that they will file a supplemental motion on Friday. We will wait for that,” Agra said.
Santos is the counsel for the families of 25 of 57 victims in the massacre.
Lawyer Harry Roque Jr., counsel of the relatives of 12 other victims, also asked that the resolution of Agra be nullified because their clients were not given a chance to oppose the petition for review of the two Ampatuans who were cleared by the DOJ chief from any involvement in the massacre.
The massacre resulted in the killing of 57 people, including the wife of Vice Mayor Esmael Mangudadatu of Buluan, Maguindanao and two of his sisters, two female lawyers and 30 journalists who covered the supposed filing of certificate of candidacy of the vice mayor who will run for governor of Maguindanao and challenge a scion of the Ampatuan clan.
The Mangudadatus have blamed the Ampatuans for the incident, specifically pointing to Mayor Andal Ampatuan Jr. of Datu Unsay, Maguindanao as the leader of more than 100 armed men who waylaid Mangudadatu’s supporters.
The Ampatuans denied any involvement in the massacre.
Agra vowed last Monday to review his resolution and release his decision within the week in compliance with an order from Malacañang, but with the recent development, he said his new ruling would be released maybe next week.
“I will consult with the prosecutors involved, and take their opinions and observations under advisement, and give their recommendations the utmost weight and consideration,” he stressed.
Agra said he has decided to act on the appeals himself rather than create a review panel because it is the sole prerogative of the DOJ secretary to resolve any motion for reconsideraton filed before the department.
“Because it is like any other case, where both the victim and the accused are accorded the same constitutional rights, I will not inhibit myself in resolving the MR. I will not create a panel. My faith in my own objectivity has not been shaken, for there is no reason for me to doubt myself. I have, and always will, act in accordance with my conscience, and due regard to my oath as a lawyer and a public servant,” Agra added.
Pending release of a new resolution, Agra begged off from public interviews and said he would devote his time to pending work in his office.
Flanked by over 250 officers and employees, Agra said he has no plans of quitting his job due to mounting calls for his resignation over his controversial resolution.
Instead of just waiting for the court to act on the case of multiple murder, abduction, robbery and damage to property that DOJ prosecutors had filed against members of the Ampatuan clan, Agra said he had to issue a new resolution in view of the pending motion for review that defense lawyers had filed before the DOJ.
MANILA, Philippines – Embattled Justice Secretary Alberto Agra will review his own ruling clearing two members of the Ampatuan clan in the Maguindanao massacre and come up with a decision within the week.
Agra has drawn flak for absolving detained Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao Gov. Zaldy Ampatuan and his cousin, acting Maguindanao Vice Gov. Akmad Ampatuan Sr., also Mamasapano town mayor, of involvement in the slaughter of 57 people – including journalists and lawyers – on Nov. 23 last year in Maguindanao.
The multiple murder case against Ampatuan patriarch Andal Sr. and his son Datu Unsay Mayor Andal Jr. remains, based on Agra’s resolution.
The accused are detained at Camp Bagong Diwa in Taguig City.
Families of the victims have moved for the reversal of Agra’s decision.
The Ampatuans were staunch allies of President Arroyo and were believed to have manipulated the results of the 2004 elections in the province to ensure her victory. Mrs. Arroyo’s political foes have accused her of having a hand in the dropping of charges against the Ampatuans.
Malacañang ordered Agra to take a second look at his resolution, which even state prosecutors openly contested.
Agra, in his resolution, said there was no evidence to prove that the two Ampatuans had conspired with the other accused in carrying out the massacre.
“I will consult with the prosecutors involved, and take their opinions and observations under advisement, and give their recommendations the utmost weight and consideration,” Agra said in a speech before DOJ employees and officials attending a flag-raising ceremony at the department yesterday.
The DOJ chief said he has decided to act on the appeals himself rather than delegate the task – as he had promised – to a review panel.
He also shrugged off calls for him to inhibit from the case.
“The resolution of this motion for reconsideration belongs solely to the discretion of the DOJ secretary. And I intend to exercise that discretion in full,” he said.
“It is my intention to release the resolution of the MR (motion for reconsideration) this week. Political timing, as has been suggested, plays no part in my strict schedule. Those who know me know that delay is not my style.”
“Because it is like any other case, where both the victim and the accused are accorded the same constitutional rights, I will not inhibit myself in resolving the MR. I will not create a panel,” he said. “My faith in my own objectivity has not been shaken, for there is no reason for me to doubt myself. I have, and always will, act in accordance with my conscience, and due regard to my oath as a lawyer and a public servant,” he said.
No money involved
Agra said his decision to clear the two Ampatuans was based on evidence “with my heart leaning towards the victims, but my mind fixed on the rule of law.”
“With a clear conscience, I declared that burden was not discharged in that instance. Conscience was my motivation, and rule of law my guide,” he said.
“I will say with a straight face, on the honor of my father’s name, I did not receive a single centavo from any quarter, to release the resolution, or rule in that manner,” he stressed.
Agra also rebuffed calls for him to resign, saying he has no plan of turning his back on the challenges besetting his office.
Instead of just waiting for Quezon City Judge Jocelyn Solis-Reyes to act on the multiple murder case against the Ampatuans and several others, Agra caught everyone by surprise by issuing a resolution last April 16 clearing Zaldy and Akmad, who is also the ARMM governor’s brother-in-law.
Agra said he was acting on a motion for review filed by defense lawyers.
He also said he had to act swiftly on the motion in keeping with his personal commitment to address the huge backlog of cases pending in his office.
When he took over as acting DOJ secretary about a month ago, there were reportedly 9,000 cases – some dating back to the 1990s – pending with the Office of the Secretary.
Agra said he hopes to cut the backlog by half by the time President Arroyo steps down on June 30.
The real targets of the Maguindanao massacre were the wife and relatives of Buluan Vice Mayor Esmael Mangudadatu who were leading a convoy of followers, journalists and lawyers on their way to Shariff Aguak to file his certificate of candidacy for governor to challenge Andal Jr.
Witnesses said they were stopped at a checkpoint along the Maguindanao highway by over a hundred heavily armed men led by Andal Jr.
The victims, some begging for their lives, were reportedly taken to a remote hilly area at gunpoint and executed one after another.
Most of the victims were already buried, some still in their vehicles, when help arrived.
More time needed
Malacañang was not bothered by the animosity between Agra and his prosecutors over his controversial ruling, saying they just need more time to resolve their differences.
Deputy presidential spokesman Gary Olivar also called on possible witnesses to the massacre to come forward to help ensure speedy justice for the victims.
“Obviously if both sides – Secretary Agra and his prosecutors – need more time to come to terms then let’s leave them be and let them use the time left to reconcile,” Olivar told a news briefing.
“We cannot force this process. The important thing is they started to talk to each other and hopefully, sooner or later, they would reach a common position,” he said.
He noted that Agra himself had mentioned publicly that he continued to have an open mind on the appeals filed to reverse his resolution.
He also said the reported emergence of new witnesses could also lead to the reversal of Agra’s position.
Executive Secretary Leandro Mendoza earlier directed Agra to meet with protesting prosecutors and submit weekly reports to the Palace on the developments of the case, including the tackling of the motion for reconsideration.
“The important thing is for justice in the end to be served, however long it may need to take,” Olivar said.
A day after the issuance of Agra’s order, state prosecutors walked out of their offices in protest.
“We are deeply concerned that the resolution will all the more convince a long skeptical public that our criminal justice system is impotent when the accused are politically influential,” chief state prosecutor Claro Arellano told reporters after the walkout.
“With all due respect (to Secretary Agra), we still believe that there was probable cause in the case,” Arellano said. With Paolo Romero
A QUEZON CITY COURT has given the lawyers of the Ampatuan clan 15 days to respond to the prosecution’s motion to have four of their co-accused discharged and turned into state witnesses.
Judge Jocelyn Solis-Reyes of QC Regional Trial Court Branch 221, in a two-page order Friday, told the defense lawyers to file their comment to the Department of Justice (DOJ) motion.
The DOJ has sought to have Mohammad Sangki, Insp. Rex Diongon, Insp. Michael Macaraig and PO1 Rainer Ebus turn state’s evidence against the Ampatuans in the killing of 57 people in Maguindanao in November 2009.
The defense lawyers asked the court for more time to study the DOJ motion before they file their answer.
“In view of the manifestation made by the accused’s counsel, accused is given 15 days from today within which to file their comment on the motion, after which the incident should be deemed submitted for resolution,” Reyes said.
The primary suspect in the Maguindanao massacre, Andal Ampatuan Jr., members of his family and over 100 others face trial for the murder of the 57 people who included women members of the Mangudadatu family, the Ampatuans’ political rivals, several lawyers and 31 journalists.
The DOJ earlier asked the court to allow Diongon and Ebus as well as PO1 Pia Kamidon, Takpan Dilon and Esmael Canapia to remain at the Philippine National Police Custodial Center in Camp Crame in Quezon City instead of being transferred to Camp Bagong Diwa in Taguig City where the Ampatuans and some of the other accused are being held.
The state prosecutors led by Assistant Chief Prosecutor Richard Anthony Fadullon cited security concerns for keeping the potential state witnesses at Crame.
Vulnerable to harm
Holding the prospective witnesses with the other accused at Camp Bagong Diwa would leave them “vulnerable to physical harm, serious threats, psychological pressure and undue influence,” the prosecution said.
Suspect Macaraig also asked the court to allow him to remain in the custody of the DOJ’s Intelligence and Security Operations Group.
In a three-page manifestation, Macaraig said he voluntarily surrendered on April 21 and has been arraigned in court.
Macaraig, however, pointed out that the court did not say where he should be detained.
“As a sign of honesty and good faith, the matter was brought to the attention of the DOJ prosecutors who temporarily committed herein accused to the custody of ISOG-DOJ until such time that this honorable court is able to issue a commitment order,” he said.
The police officer said he would prefer to remain at the DOJ to ensure his security, as he was one of those being eyed as a state witness.
The ProPinoy Project is a Global Community Center for all things Pinoy, to connect Filipinos at home and abroad by creating a space for ideas, trends and analyses about the Philippines and the global Pinoy community to inspire informed discussion and transformative action.