Gloria's Chairman

'This is the Chairman Calling'
By the NEWSBREAK team

ON May 13, 2004, Efraim Genuino, chair of the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp. (Pagcor), had a dinner meeting with then elections commissioner Virgilio Garcillano at the pricey Yura-kuen restaurant at the Manila Diamond Hotel.

It was three days after the national elections and the Commission on Elections (Comelec) was already canvassing some of the provincial and city certificates of canvass for the senatorial and party-list race.

Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr., in a press conference the following day, denounced the meeting. He said it was held "under the circumstances when Pagcor stands accused of funding the President's election bid."

On the run-up to the May 10 polls, Pagcor sources told NEWSBREAK that the gaming agency had been channeling its intelligence funds to finance the campaign bid of President Arroyo. The sources also said Pagcor had been spending hundreds of millions of its public relations and advertising funds to promote Arroyo's candidacy. The intelligence and the public relations and advertising funds combined easily amount to P500 million.

While admitting that he was at the restaurant that night, Garcillano however denied he met with Genuino. He said he did not even know Genuino personally.

But new evidence, courtesy of the wiretapped Garcillano conversations, now reveal otherwise. Moreover, they shared more than a nodding acquaintance, with one casually addressing the other as "padre" or "pare" and their conversations being more than a social chat. The conversations establish Garcillano as an operator and Genuino as a source of pay-offs.

Genuino, through Pagcor spokesperson Dodie King, denied knowing Garcillano personally. He said Genuino never had any business with the Comelec or any of its officials.

Not Mike, not Barbers

Aside from a woman who sounded like President Arroyo, other politicians and election officers based in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao made several calls to Garcillano. But Garcillano had one regular caller: an unidentified male who kept asking him for election updates and, in two instances, possible pay-offs to election manipulators.

In previously published transcripts, the man was identified as losing senatorial candidate Robert Barbers, who barely missed the 12th senatorial slot. In some instances, the man was identified as First Gentleman Jose Miguel "Mike" Arroyo.

For instance, in a conversation on May 24, 2004, the male voice that asked Garcillano if it would be possible "to increase the vote to 200 [to] 300 [thousand]" was identified in earlier transcripts released by the opposition as belonging to Barbers. In a May 27 conversation, the man talking to Garcillano and complaining that he was dealing with a wishy-washy poll operator was identified as Mr. Arroyo.

But Pagcor managers told NEWSBREAK that the man was actually Genuino. They reviewed the tapes from the ABS-CBN Web site and the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism blog site.

The review was prompted by two portions in the transcript, both dated June 8, 2004, where a man who sounded like Genuino and an unidentified male talked of meeting at a Japanese restaurant. The Pagcor managers' suspicions were further roused after recalling the Yura-kuen meeting last year.

While there were calls made by Barbers and Mr. Arroyo in the tape, the Pagcor sources, being familiar with their chairman's voice, easily identified those of Genuino's.

Moreover, unlike Genuino, Mr. Arroyo and Barbers identified themselves to Garcillano when making calls, while the Pagcor chair casually addressed the former poll official as "padre" or "pare."

15 Recorded Conversations

Based on a Pagcor manager's review, Genuino made at least 15 calls to Garcillano from May 24 to June 14, 2004. Most of the calls apparently revolved around Genuino's frantic effort to put Bigkis Pinoy Movement, a party-list hopeful founded by Genuino and Mr. Arroyo's close allies, in the winning circle.

Incorporators of Bigkis Pinoy, which started as a foundation, hold different posts in cash-rich government agencies. The contents of the Genuino-Garcillano conversations were corroborated by events that transpired last year.

In their first recorded conversation on May 24, 2004, Genuino identified himself as "chairman," in apparent reference to his position as Pagcor chair. Garcillano readily acknowledged his caller.

In that call, an anxious Genuino told Garcillano that certificates of canvass from four provinces had yet to arrive. Garcillano replied: "Bakit ilan na ang panalo nila? (Why, what have they won?)"

The man said: "675,000 na eh, 175,000 ang boto natin. Kung madagdagan lang sana ng mga 200 to 300. (650,000 already. We have 175,000 votes. If we could just add around 200 to 300.)"

A check with Comelec showed that on May 23, Bigkis Pinoy had tallied 175,971 votes, or only 1.5 percent of the votes cast for the party-list race. This means its vote percentage was still way below the required 2 percent of the votes cast for it to earn a seat in the House of Representatives. A group can garner a maximum of three seats.

As of May 23, Bigkis Pinoy was 21st in the party-list ranking.

In a succeeding conversation, a man who sounded like Genuino sought Garcillano's advice regarding a group of alleged Comelec people who offered their services to rig votes. Genuino said the group was asking for P5 million.

Apparently unsure which group had approached Genuino, Garcillano told him not to strike a deal so readily. "Makiki-ano ka muna, pagkatapos titingnan ko kung sino. Kunwari lang maki-ano ka. Ipasok mo ang tao mo (Just play along while I check them out. Bring your people in)," Garcillano advised.

Genuino said he was willing to increase the pay if needed.

On May 27, Genuino called Garcillano, complaining, "'Yung kausap namin eh atras-abante, umatras na naman. (These people we spoke with keep changing their minds, they've just pulled out again). "

Garcillano told Genuino not to pursue the deal any longer. "Baka kaya na rin kasi (We may not need them after all)," adding that he would try his best.

On June 2, 2004, Genuino called Garcillano, asking if the latter was able to remedy the situation. Garcillano said they were able to proclaim only 15 winners and that he would try to have one included in the winning list.

Garcillano also complained that he was having a hard time "because Madame was calling incessantly" regarding the missing Camarines Norte ballot box.

A check with the Comelec clerk of court showed that on June 2, the en banc commission proclaimed 15 party-list groups that met the 2-percent minimum required votes. Bigkis Pinoy had so far only received 186,264 votes or 1.4 percent of the total votes cast.

Desperate Bid

Based on the wiretapped conversation, Genuino is one who does not give up easily. On June 3, 2004, he placed three calls to Garcillano that were only minutes apart. In these calls, he took pains to find a solution to his problems.

In his June 3 calls, Genuino informed Garcillano that no one was watching the counting in Basilan anymore, and asked if it would be possible therefore to "put 70,000 [votes] there." In another call, he told Garcillano that Isabela province might also provide additional votes.

Genuino repeatedly stressed that only 70,000 votes were needed "and if there are other considerations, just tell me for any additional..." Garcillano replied in the affirmative.

Apparently, the 70,000 votes Genuino was referring to were the additional votes that Bigkis Pinoy needed to satisfy the 2 percent requirement.

A few hours later that same day, Genuino again called Garcillano. This time, the conversation dealt with the cost of fixing the operators. Based on the context of their conversation, Garcillano had assured the operators P1 million for the job but told Genuino they might ask for more.

The following day, on June 4, 2004, Genuino and Garcillano had agreed to peg the bribe between P1.5 million to P2 million. Garcillano instructed Genuino to deliver the money to his secretary, Ellen Peralta.

On June 8, at 11:05 a.m., Genuino called Garcillano to inform him that the he was already waiting at a Japanese restaurant. "Pero 11:30 pa magbubukas 'tong Japanese restaurant (But it'll open only at 11:30)," Genuino said.

An hour later, Garcillano called Genuino to inform him that he was stuck in traffic on Buendia.

The Japanese restaurant was believed to be Yura-kuen in Manila Diamond Hotel, which Garcillano has admitted he frequented. The restaurant is also within walking distance of the main Pagcor office along Roxas Boulevard.

The last recorded conversation between Genuino and Garcillano was on June 14, at 7:45 p.m., when Genuino finally mentioned Bigkis.

Garcillano said he was trying his best to enable Bigkis to get the 2-percent requirement, but told Genuino that the group ALIF might get it first. On June 29, Ang Laban ng Indiginong Filipino or ALIF was proclaimed by Comelec as the last party-list group to have satisfied the 2-percent requirement.

Party List Blues

PARTY LIST

Favored party-list groups got more than a little help from the Comelec fraud squad.

by LUZ RIMBAN

	STRUGGLING FOR RECOGNITION. Party-list groups like Bayan Muna, whose members are shown here, in an anti-U.S. rally, are taking a crack at electoral politics. [photos courtesy of Malaya]

PITY party-list organizations. Although Republic Act 7941 reserves 20 percent of House seats for these groups, which are supposed to be from marginalized sectors whose interests are not represented in Congress, the reality is that it is difficult for them to win votes. That's because Filipinos are still mostly uninformed about the party-list process and the Commission on Elections has done nothing in terms of a voter-awareness campaign to remedy the situation.

Based on the Garci tapes, however, it now seems that some party-list groups that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo supported may have been counting on help from no less than a Comelec commissioner himself. In several instances, Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano was heard discussing the chances of at least five party-list groups getting seats in Congress: VFP (Veterans' Freedom Party), ALIF (Ang Laban ng Indiginong Filipino), ANAD (Alliance for Nationalism and Democracy), SMILE (Samahan ng mga Mangangalakal sa Ikauunlad ng Lokal na Ekonomiya) and TUCP' (Trade Union Congress Party).

"These were all publicly endorsed by GMA," says Ronald Llamas, national president of Akbayan, another party-list group. "They are all identified with GMA. There are no anti-GMA among the party-list groups mentioned in the tapes."

Two of these groups have already been proclaimed winners and are currently holding seats in the House of Representatives; Ernesto Guidaya represents the VFP, while Acmad Tomawis represents ALIF. The Cornelec is also expected to proclaim ANAD as another winner, meaning its first nominee, ex-communist-turned-vigilante Jun Alcover, will soon have a seat in Congress.

The VFP was proclaimed ahead of ALIF, having been among the 15 party-list organizations declared as winners by the Comelec on June 2, 2004. Sitting as the national board of canvassers for the party-list elections, ihe Comelec proclaimed 15 organizations as winners, resulting in 23 party-list representatives. But this was only a partial proclamation. At that time, the Comelec said it was suspending the canvass as it was still awaiting a final Certificate of Canvass from the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).

FAVORED GROUPS FIRST?
The next day, June 3, Garcillano is recorded as having called up someone named Lyn and telling her, "Ipaalala mo kay Romy meron silang reward niyan pero 'wag maingay...Meron pa kasing isa pa sana kung pupuwede pero hindi ko alam meron silang ikakuwan, 'yung SMILE din ke kuwan pa naman 'yan, sa kaibigan diyan sa tabi. Pero 'yung isa sigurado na 'yun...Pagkatapos ng kuwan, tatanungin ko pa 'yung isa. (Remind Romy they have a reward but that they should keep silent...There's still another one that could be included] but I don't know if they have...and then there's SMILE, which is our friend's. But one's already for sure...Later, I'm going to ask about the other one.)" SMILE, which represents small and medium-scale businesses, including vendors and service providers, had former bastketball star Ramon Fernandez as a nominee.

Five days later, a certain Ruben called up Garcillano, asking, "Papaano 'yimg ano natin, sa party list (so how's our, you know, in the party list)?" The commissioner replied he could not do anything yet because " wala pang usapan ang mga tao tungkol diyan (there hasn't been talk about that yet)." But Ruben pressed on, asking specifically about TUCP and ANAD. TUCP is the party-list arm of the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines, which has had its former secretary-general, Ernesto 'Boy' Herrera, become senator in the past.

Garcillano told Ruben that doing anything would be difficult because the proclamation of party-list winner was over and expressed concern about being too aggressive in pushing forward "favored" groups — '" yung mga malapit" — since they could be noticed. Ruben then reminded him that the organizations he mentioned were "malapit 'yan ha kesa sa SMILE (they are more favored than SMILE)."

A few minutes after this conversation, Garcillano accepted another call that turned out to be about the VFP. The caller, an unidentified man, wanted to know if there was a chance the group could have another representative aside from Guidaya. Garcillano again said the proclamation was over, bul like Ruben die caller was insistent. Garcillano finally said that the number of votes garnered by the group had already been recorded and official; the implication was the figures could no longer be played around with.

Exactly a week later, on June 14, Garcillano accepted a call from another unidentified man who asked when something would be clone about "the party list." The commissioner replied that he was still working on it, but that " ang mauna siguro iyong ALIF. Pero gusto ko masabay-sabay (ALIF could be first. But I would want them proclaimed all at the same time)."

QUESTIONABLE QUALIFICATIONS
As it turned out. the Comelec did proclaim ALIF as a winner. But other party-list groups have since questioned that act. They note that ALIF was proclaimed alone, separate from the first batch, and ahead of another expected batch that to this day is waiting to be proclaimed. Why, the groups ask, did ALIF get special treatment? How did it get in, while other party-list organizations are still wailing for either their first or second nominees to be proclaimed?

As far as other party-list organizations are concerned, VFP, ALIF, and ANAD are among those vested interests seeking entry to Congress through a backdoor that has made a mockery of the party-list system. Long before the Garcillano conversations were made public, the party-list group Partido Manggagawa (PM) had already sought the disqualification of eight party-list organizations, including VFP, ALIF and ANAD, on the grounds that these did not meet the criteria for accreditation.

Had the Comelec been stricter in screening party-list candidates, these groups would not have had a chance in running in the elections. VFP is a reincarnation of the Veterans' Federation of the Philippines, a group previously disqualified from the party-list contest because it was an entity supported by the government. It changed its name to Veterans' Freedom Party less than a year before the elections. Its representative Guidaya was in fact a retired military man who used to head the Philippine Veterans' Affairs Office (PVAO), an agency under the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).

ALIF Representative Tomawis, meanwhile, was a party-list nominee of the Laban ng Demokrutikong Pilipino (LDP) in 2001. The LDP was disqualified then because it was clearly a traditional political party that was more than amply represented in both houses of Congress. PM asked the Comelec to disqualify ALIF this time because it violated one of the criteria for party-list accreditation: that not only must the party be marginalized, so must its candidate. "Tomawis is a big businessman engaged in overseas trucking, particularly trucking services in Iraq," the PM said in its petition. A number of party-list representatives see Tomawis's assumption as congressman as the most questionable of all the controversial party-list nominations.

	VICTIMS OF FRAUD. The cheating in 2004 also affected radical party-list groups, like those above taking part in an anti-war demonstration.

The third group included in the petition for disqualification is ANAD, which is composed of former members of the notorious anti-communist vigilante group Alsa Masa. "It is in truth a project organized and an entity assisted by the government to promote an anti-communist position," the PM said.

How such groups were able 10 sneak in anyway has long been a frustrating mystery for other party-list organizations. Another puzzle is the suspiciously high number of votes certain first-time party-list groups obtained in Mindanao, particularly in the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao or ARMM. Since the Garci tapes surfaced, however, speculations have grown that negotiations were being made at the Comelec level, not only for questionable groups to be included in the race, but also for these to obtain votes afterward.

IMPROBABLE FIGURES
Just months after the May 10.2004 elections, party-list groups were already questioning the results in some provinces in ARMM, which also happens to be an area where Garcillano is supposed to be the most well-versed among the Comelec commissioners. At least two patty-list groups — PM and the Citizens Battle Against Corruption (CIBAC) — have since filed complaints with the Comelec on what they say are dubious election results. The most basic issue is the turnout of votes.

• In Lanao del Sur, the number of registered voters was 273,011 yet the total number of votes cast for party-list groups was 279,927, which translated to a 100.3 percent turnout for party-list polls.
  
• In Basilan, the total number of registered voters is only 150,282 while the total votes cast for party-list organizations was 163.385.
  
• In Maguindanao, the total votes cast for party-list candidates was placed at 283,012 out of a total of 334,331 registered voters, equivalent to a high turnout of 84,65 percent.
  
• In Tawi-Tawi, the total number of votes for party-list groups was 76,334 out of 120,402 registered voters, or a turnout of 63.4 percent.

Various party-list groups have noted the mathematical improbability of such figures, especially since the survey group Social Weather Stations predicted before the elections that the voter turnout for party-list elections would not he more than 40 percent. In Quezon City, headquarters of some of the biggest party-list groups and focus of intense election propaganda, the turnout of party-list votes was only 35 percent. Party-list groups wondered how the results could more than double in far away ARMM.

Interestingly, it was in Lanao del Sur where ALIF got the bulk of its votes. Comelec records show that ALIF got 116,489 votes in that province, representing more than one-third of total votes from there. This presents another statistical conundrum: there were 66 party-list organizations that competed, and there were at least three others based in Mindanao or having a Muslim constituency. How could an unknown, first-time organization like ALIF corner the lion's share in such a crowded field?

There were other suspicious results as well. In Basilan. the party-list topnotcher was the unknown Visayas Farmers Party or Agrifil, which got more than 90,000. The party-list group Anak Mindanao (AMIN) called the Comelec's attention to that "irregularity." Last September, the Comelec's first division responded; it said it was indeed statistically impossible for Agrifil to win because its papers showed that its base were the Western Visayan provinces of Aldan, Capiz, Guimaras, and Iloilo where it got only 11,464 votes. The Comelec said Agrifil "had no clear constituency" in Basilan and called for the investigation of the provincial election supervisor.

Shortly after the Garci tapes scandal broke out, Comelec chief Benjamin Abalos himself said that his office would prosecute the Basilan election officials responsible for the Agrifil votes. The decision, though, has yet to be implemented.

The Comelec has also failed in other things, particularly in being more transparent about the party-list count, which to this day remains unfinished. At the very least, party-list organizations are demanding accountability from the Commission. "They (the Comelec) are very evasive when we ask them about the last remaining COC (Certificate of Canvass) that still needs to be canvassed. They never came out with official statement of any sort regarding the conclusion of the party-list canvass," says Blanca Kim Bernardo-Lokin, second nominee of the party-list group CIBAC, which along with party-list groups PM, Butil, and Gabri-ela are awaiting proclamation of their second nominees.

Of course, the Comelec can always say it is besieged with a mountain of complaints from party-list groups — some with legitimate grievances and others without. Most of them are asking for a recount, presenting COCs showing they won enough voles for a seat in Congress.

Groups like Akbayan are wondering how the Comelec will deal with the situation. A recount has probably been granted since the Comelec is poised to proclaim new winners. But Akbayan's Llamas asks: "If they restore the votes of a group which says it was robbed of votes, then that means they have to take away votes from those who stole. We don't know how the Comelec is doing it, And we don't know either how the other party-list groups managed to scrounge for votes. Where are all these votes coming from?"

Parliamentary-Federal Scored

Against parliamentary-federalist system

INQ7.net

OKAY, since Congress and our own dear President insist on opening the can of worms known as the Parliamentary-Federalism versus Presidential-Centralized Government debate, I have been forced to read as much as I can about both sides, if only to feed my hunger for information, and to make sure, as a socially aware Filipino citizen, I can make an informed decision on the matter. After a rather lengthy debate with friends about it last night, here are the reasons why I'm against a change in our current system:

Parliamentary vs. Presidential -- I am against the parliamentary system because of its basic premise, which, when taken to its core essence and stripped of all rhetoric and nonsense says this: that the masses are stupid. Which we definitely are not. Sure, we've had lousy presidents, but, really, do we have much choice? I am against any system that seeks to take from the masses the power of directly choosing their own leader. We are not sheep. And we don't need a damn shepherd.

Federalism vs. Centralized Government -- This one's more complicated. My argument is threefold. The first one is socio-philosophical. The second one is socioeconomic. The last one is of feasibility and logistics. So I use bullet points:

• Federalism assumes two conditions: the "existence of a body of countries so closely connected by locality, by history, by race, or the like, as to be capable to bearing, in the eyes of their inhabitants, an impress of common nationality"; and "the desire for national unity and the determination to maintain the independence of each man's separate State."

We have the first condition (excluding locality). As my friend pointed out, we are differentiated ethno-linguistically (Tagalog, Cebuano, Moro, etc.)

However, we'll have a bit of a problem on the second point, or rather, the first part of the second point concerning "the desire for national unity." This is a terribly complicated debate but, in my perspective, I'm afraid of the consequences of strengthening ethno-linguistic pride at the cost of a national identity. As it is, we already have Muslim Mindanao entertaining the idea of becoming its own country. Our national identity, as it is, is really, really shaky at this point (I don't even really know what it means). So, I'm afraid of the political consequences of deliberately and literally tearing this country apart.

• Second, if the other regions have already branded Manila as "imperial," a federal system would only make matters worse. It is easier for a rich man to become richer. I'd say it would be the same for states. Given its huge advantage against the other regions in terms of the number of industries, businesses and other moneymaking ventures in this current system, a federal one would only give it license to keep more of the money it makes (in terms of taxes) for itself. It would only further solidify its current-role of dictating to the smaller regions what to do and how to run the country.

• Third, let us assume that my first two arguments are incorrect. How are we going to split up this country? Geographically? It won't work. Because it would be an artificial construct and would run counter to what is said to be the first condition for a federalist system (refer to above). Some groups, though they share a common history and belief system do not share a common locality. Ethno-linguistically? It still won't work, because to take this route you'd have to spend a huge, mind-boggling sum of money to displace a lot of people so that they may live with "their own kind."

Anyway, whatever decision a random committee would make concerning state separation will be an artificial construct (as opposed to one naturally created by history) and they're bound to make a mistake. As I see it, it is simply just not feasible.

One last thing -- at the very most, parliamentary-federalism would be a risky endeavor with no real and absolute benefits. If we do make a change towards it, it would be like a blackjack player saying, "Hit me" when he already has a 17 on his hand. Which is a gamble that may work really, really wonderfully or fail really, really miserably. I, for one, am not willing to take that chance.

VON RYAN CUERPO, 28 Makiling St., MMV, Burgos, Montalban, Rizal

Atomic Survivors

Pinoy Kasi : 'Hibakusha'

Michael Tan opinion@inquirer.com.ph
Inquirer News Service

"HIBAKUSHA" is the Japanese term used to refer to survivors of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki 60 years ago.

Curious about the term, I did some research and was amazed at how much has been produced about the hibakusha. One particularly fascinating article looked at how the themes of atomic bombs and the threat of nuclear war have become a distinct genre in Japanese cinema (including the "Godzilla" films!) as well as manga comics.

The more I read about the hibakusha, the more I felt that in many ways, regardless of age or nationality, we are all hibakusha, torn between wanting to remember and yet fearing the pain that comes with those memories.

Heroes, villains.

Last week, I wrote about a symposium organized by the Phi Kappa Phi at the University of the Philippines (UP) on "Truth-telling and national healing," with Dr. Ma. Lourdes Carandang as the guest speaker. Everyone agreed it was important to remember the past, but there were different views on how we should go about it.

An example comes with the Japanese occupation, which receives so little attention in our history classes and textbooks. My "memories" of the war come mainly from my mother, about the day the war broke out and people shouting, "Gyera na! Gyera na!" [The war has started!] It was about living in constant fear of the Japanese soldiers encamped right across their home. It was about Japanese soldiers coming one day and arresting her father. He was jailed at Fort Santiago and sentenced to death for being one of the leaders in the Chinese business community that boycotted Japanese goods. It was about the Americans returning and working for them as a secretary, which included censoring soldiers' letters for any mention of where they were, and for curse words.

Growing up on my mother's recollections spelled out American heroes and Japanese villains. College history lessons topped off this fare with tales of guerrilla heroes and traitorous collaborators.

Dr. Emerenciana Arcellana, professor emeritus in political science, was at the UP symposium and while she agreed that we need to remember the past, she also warned against simplistic conclusions, especially around the issue of collaborators. She reminded the audience that Filipinos were never conscripted into the Japanese Imperial Army, unlike the Koreans, for example, and that this happened in part because Filipino officials were able to negotiate with the Japanese occupation forces.

As she spoke, I thought, too, of the resistance against the Japanese, valiant to be sure, but then there was also Ferdinand Marcos and his claims to being one of the most fearless of these fighters.

'Nikkei-jin'

A more concrete example of the need to rethink the past comes with the way we look at the Japanese who came to the Philippines before the war. UP Iloilo professor Ma. Luisa Mabunay (Meloy to me from way back) dropped by my office the other day for a bit of "memory-searching," her current research interest being the Nikkei-jin, descendants of those Japanese.

When the war broke out, the Japanese in the Philippines were rounded up and placed in internment camps, like their counterparts in the United States. They were freed when the Japanese Imperial Army invaded the Philippines, and many of their men were hastily drafted into military service. Since many Filipinos at that time remember seeing their former civilian neighbors suddenly wearing military uniforms, it's not surprising they concluded all these Japanese were sent in before the war as spies.

We will never know if they were spies, but Meloy says the Japanese who came here were often impoverished, taking up jobs as gardeners, construction laborers and farmers. The largest sector among the Japanese in Iloilo province consisted of fishers from Okinawa.

After the war broke out, Filipinos understandably became quite hostile to them and toward the end of the war, these Japanese civilians suffered terribly. Meloy interviewed some of the survivors, who told her about how they fled Iloilo City, attempting to get to Leon for refuge.

Most never made it. In the hills of Cabatuan and Maasin, they found themselves trapped between American and Filipino troops. Many were ready for "jiketsu," or "self-determination," a euphemism for an honorable suicide. But the guerrilla troops got to the Japanese first, executing women and children. Survivors remember some of the children crying out after the massacre; they had survived because their mothers had shielded them with their bodies.

Vaporized

The Aug. 1 issue of Time magazine quotes one atomic bomb survivor's description of the blast as "blue-yellow and very beautiful." As she ran through the streets, she saw "people moaning from pain, with eyes popped out and intestines coming out of their stomachs."

The magazine also quotes Col. Paul Tibbets, the commanding officer for the Hiroshima mission, as he visited Nagasaki after the blast: "I saw a lot of hatred in their eyes, but I could also see that they were glad the war was over... I went up to the top of a hill where a hospital was. I saw a poor guy begging by the side of it; it looked as if he was still bleeding, and his clothes were all ripped up. I felt so sorry for him. Inside the hospital I saw a shadow on the wall-a person had obviously been walking by that wall when the bomb went off."

The atomic bomb literally vaporized people.

Those who saw World War II are now over 60. Their memories need to be retrieved and conserved for future generations. It's clear, too, the memory-keeping must come from all "sides." I've written about a photo exhibit at the Remedios church in the Malate district showing Manila at the end of the war. At the Museo Iloilo, ongoing till Sept. 30, Meloy has a photographic exhibit showing the lives of the Nikkei-jin on Panay Island. Those pictures of Nikkei-jin families and schoolchildren should become part of our memories as well.

The shadows of the dead in Hiroshima and Nagasaki should remind us, too, that we still live in another kind of terrible shadow today, that of thousands of nuclear warheads. In 1945, there were only six nuclear stockpiles, all belonging to the United States. By 1986, at the height of the Cold War, there were 65,000 known stockpiles. The tension has eased but in 2002, there were still about 20,000 stockpiles, the United States and Russia accounting for 90 percent of them.

The nuclear race continues, affecting us often in unexpected ways. This latest crisis of spiraling oil prices was set off when Iran retaliated against world pressure to stop its nuclear program.

The American pilots who dropped the bombs are hibakusha, too, their voices blending with those of the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and of the Nikkei-jin to remind us that with or without atomic bombs, war turns us all into fragile beings, ready at any time to be obliterated.

No To Cha-Cha

As I See It : No such thing as constituent assembly in Constitution

Neal H. Cruz
Inquirer News Service

A SIGN of the fear and desperation of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is that she is trying to make deals right and left with people who can help her survive politically. She is offering a deal to former President Joseph Estrada, the man she kicked out of office and from whom she stole half of his presidential term. She is also dangling an offer to the Marcoses to bury the former president Ferdinand Marcos in, of all places, the Libingan ng mga Bayani [Cemetery of Heroes]. Former President Fidel Ramos is already in her corner in exchange for her support for a shift to a parliamentary system of government to make it possible for him to return to power as prime minister. Marcos, Ramos, Estrada and Macapagal-Arroyo -- four presidents banding together for their own selfish interests and like China, we will have our own Gang of Four.

We Filipinos have a term for it: "kapit sa patalim" [literally, gripping the blade]. The desperate will do anything, even hang on to a sharp blade, to survive. Like Faustus, he or she will make a pact with the devil to get what he or she wants.

Ms Arroyo seems to be making deals with anybody willing to be bought, paying congressmen to vote against impeachment, bribing witnesses to lie, hiding witnesses who could reveal things that would damn her, and committing other illegal acts such as disbursing funds for purposes for which they were not appropriated by Congress. Has she already made bribery, cheating and lying official policies of government? I hope not, but it is beginning to look more and more like that.

Makati Rep. Teddyboy Locsin revealed that shortly before the elections, she released funds intended for the purchase of fertilizers to congressmen, including those from Metro Manila and other urban areas where there are no farms to fertilize. Those fertilizer funds, however, were really intended to fertilize not farms but pockets.

The new fund releases from the Road Users' Tax, on the other hand, are intended not for the construction or repair of roads but to run over the impeachment complaint by the administration's congressional railroad. Proof is that after anti-impeachment congressmen got their shares, Ms Arroyo suddenly stopped further releases so that pro-impeachment lawmakers won't get any.

The bankrupt government is being bankrupted even more by huge payoffs to buy Ms Arroyo's survival. Taxes from the expanded value-added tax, not yet being collected now, are already being spent. As the "Hyatt 10" group of resigned Cabinet members said, money, patronage, appointments, contracts, etc. are not spared just to insure her survival. No position on Earth is worth all that much dirt.

* * *

An indication of what will happen to us once we have a parliamentary form of government is the abuse that the House of Representatives is already committing. Knowing that the Senate is against changing the Constitution through a constituent assembly, the House went ahead and passed a resolution by itself, minus the Senate, to form a constituent assembly to change the Constitution. This despite the fact that opinion polls show that eight out of every 10 Filipinos don't want to amend the Constitution or have a parliamentary government.

We are a representative democracy and congressmen are elected to represent their districts in the House. They are supposed to follow the wishes of their constituents who are their employers. But look at what they're doing. They are disobeying their constituents and pushing Charter change just because of the ambition of their leader who wants to become prime minister by hook or by crook because he knows he cannot be elected president.

The members of the new Parliament will be the same congressmen or their relatives. So you can see what they will do in a unitary legislature where there is no Senate to check their abuses, where they, the members of parliament and not the people, will elect the head of government, the prime minister, and where even the members of the Cabinet will come from among the MPs. Thus, there will be no balance of powers among the executive, legislative and judicial branches as we have now. The people will be at the mercy of the party in power. If our honorable representatives can commit these abuses in a system where there is a balance of power, imagine what they can do when there is none.

* * *

In the first place, there is no such thing as a "constituent assembly" in the Constitution. There was one in the 1935 Constitution but none in the present one. How can the House convene a constituent assembly when it is not authorized by the Charter?

It shows that the members of the House -- not the Speaker, not the members, not even the President who also endorsed a con-ass—read the Constitution. All except Rep. Hermilando Mandanas who also told the Kapihan sa Manila forum last Monday what the other members have also not read: that any individual legislator can propose amendments to the Constitution and that he, in fact, has already filed one.

He said, however, that Charter change should be put in the back burner, as the time is not right for it. This is the worst time for Charter change, Mandanas said, because we are financially and politically unstable. The politicians are only looking out for themselves, not the people, and therefore would change the Constitution for their own benefit.

In spite of the clear opposition of the nation against Charter change, it is still possible that the present gang in the House may be able to change it. In that case, the only way to stop them, short of a revolution, is to vote against the new Charter in the plebiscite. Vote No.

Hail, Mary

Viewpoint : 'Our solitary boast'

Juan Mercado
Inquirer News Service

TIME magazine titled a recent cover story "Hail, Mary." It devoted eight pages to Jesus of Nazareth's mother.

"A Mary for All" was how the Economist bannered an earlier report. And Life magazine led off with "The Mystery of Mary." And shortly thereafter, Time did a two-page spread titled, "Mary, So Contrary."

What's going on here? After centuries of "sullen neglect … Christians of all denominations are finding their own reasons to venerate Mary," Time reports. Families, pastors and theologians, within US Protestant churches, are rediscovering the Virgin Mother.

Harvard University minister Peter Gomes notes this trend in a joke about a Protestant pastor at heaven's gates. "Ah, Professor. I know you've met my Father," Jesus says in making the introductions. "But I believe you don't know my mother."

The new appreciation of Mary stems from the very arena in which Protestants historically pride themselves most: a careful and full reading of Scriptures.

Mary stood by the Cross. And she figures in "a skein of appearances longer and more strategically placed than any other character in Scriptures," Beverly Gaventa, Princeton University professor of New Testament literature, points out.

"She is present in all key situations -- at Jesus' birth, at his death and in the Upper Room," Gaventa writes in "Personalities of the New Testament," Whether in Egypt, Nazareth or Cana, "there isn't a figure comparable to her."

The new thinkers are exploring the implications of Mary's excruciating presence at the crucifixion. She "kept Christian witness intact almost single-handedly through its darkest moment."

There are critics, Time notes. Southern Baptist Convention leaders complain their colleagues are "guilty of over-reaching."

That would baffle Muslims. Mary is Islam's most honored woman, the Economist notes. She's "the only one to have an entire chapter named after her in the Koran."

"Christians and Muslims alike see in Mary an affirmation that there is no limit to proximity of God that any human can attain," the report asserts. "Surely, that is reason enough for people of any faith to feel reverence for history's foremost Jewish mother."

The Economist cites the "wisdom" texts in Jewish and Christian scriptures and the Eastern Church's lesser-known Gospel by James. It reviews studies by Methodist Hebrew scholar Margaret Barker to Jaime Moran, religion and psychology writer.

Muslim and Eastern Christians "cherish the story of Mary's childhood in a place of supreme holiness. Both name Mary's guardian as the priest Zechariah or Zakariya."

"Catholics would tell you, rather firmly, that Mary is not a goddess," the Economist notes. "She is not worshipped but rather venerated: a human being with a unique role in praying for and protecting the human race."

That hews closely to Muslim belief.

The wisdom texts speak of a "woman clothed with the sun." And down the centuries, "heart-stopping turns of phrase" have been applied to Mary, the Economist notes. "Our tainted nature's solitary boast" was the way one poet put it.

"Shortly after Vatican II, a period of Marian silence descended," recalls Fr. Catalino Arevalo, S.J., of the Ateneo de Manila University. "We, in the Philippines, did not go through that phase."

"Churches in former communist Eastern Europe have not experienced the 'eclipse of Mary' either," notes this Filipino theologian. "What strikes a mainland China visitor, who gets in contact with Catholics there, is that veneration of Mary has never been stronger."

That "Marian silence" and "dechristianization" of Europe led the German theologian Karl Rahner to write: "Many Catholics today are going through a winter of belief."

Once known as "Christendom," Europe built the continent's loveliest cathedrals from Chartres to Notre Dame. Now, Europe suffers from a "vacuum of faith," the Los Angeles Times notes. The Gallup Millennium Survey reveals barely 20 percent of West Europeans attend church services once a week.

"When the new springtime of faith comes … the cult of Mary, the Mother of God, will return," Rahner added. "In fact, it will be its surest sign. Its form may perhaps be different, but if Christian tradition is valid, it will return."

That was in 1968. Today, Rahner's comments resound in essays by, among others, Lutheran Carl Braten: "I can't predict exactly how the (Mary rediscovery) will happen. Some of it will be good, and some may be bad. But I think it's going to happen."

Some 37 years after Rahner wrote of this "second spring," Arevalo notes, "this appears a remarkably prophetic text."

This comeback of Our Lady is seen on the dateline of stories from new Marian shrines -- Medjugorje in Yugoslavia, Akita in Japan, Kibeho in Rwanda and Cuenca in Ecuador. "News accounts fueled renewed interest in the Marian movement."

Then, there was Pope John Paul II. "No pontiff in the entire history of Catholicism has had so strong and articulate a devotion to Mary." He willed that her logo be carved on his plain cedar coffin.

If Rahner was right, then perhaps the current cover stories may be more significant than they appear, Arevalo says. Are they buds of the "the new springtime of faith," which Rahner foresaw, about to begin?

Junk EVAT

As I See It : Don't raise taxes in the midst of poverty

Neal Cruz opinion@inquirer.com.ph
Inquirer News Service

REP. Joey Salceda is right; Finance Secretary Margarito Teves is wrong. If President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo implements the expanded value-added tax (VAT) -- assuming the Supreme Court lifts the restraining order on it-it will be like she is giving up the presidency to which she is now clinging desperately. The expanded VAT will raise the prices of everything to levels beyond the reach of the poor. Then watch the angry masses get together to kick Ms Arroyo out of Malacañang. We are seeing the start of this gathering storm in the many -- though still relatively small -- protest rallies in urban areas. We are seeing and hearing this in the angry faces and voices of the poor. But who wouldn't be angry if his or her family is hungry? In fact, even middle-class families will find themselves unable to make both ends meet, and they, who have kept away from the rallies so far, will eventually join in the storming of the presidential palace.

You don't raise taxes in the midst of poverty, when the price of oil is skyrocketing. A leader would be pretty stupid to do that. A leader who does that deserves to be kicked out on her butt. The price of fuel has a chain effect on the prices of everything else that is transported and requires the use of electricity.

A sensible leader will, in fact, ease taxes during such times to provide the people relief. Leave the people with more spending money and they will boost the economy as they buy more of the goods produced by factories that will, in turn, produce more and pay more taxes. Take more money out of them in the form of taxes and the economy contracts; factories will close shop and lay off workers, and people will suffer and get very angry.

That is why we now see the paradox of the opposition. It opposed the expanded VAT in Congress and filed the petition for restraining order with the Supreme Court; it is now making a surprising turnabout and protesting the law's proposed suspension. Higher taxes will do what the opposition has been unable to do so far-kick the present occupant out of Malaca¤ang.

It is understandable why Teves is bullheaded about implementing the expanded VAT now. His primary job as finance secretary is to raise funds for the government. There is nowhere else to get those funds easily but from the people even if their pockets are nearly empty. Suspend the expanded VAT and Teves will fall flat on his face. The government will not only go bankrupt, it will fall deeper into the debt hole. In fact, Teves' stubborn stance is enough to make you believe that he is actually a secret agent of the opposition.

Other government officials and congressmen and senators who, you think, want President Arroyo to stay on longer, are actually looking out only for themselves, not the people. They are afraid that if the government does not collect the expanded VAT, it will have no money to pay their salaries, allowances and pork barrel. To hell with the people if it means doing away with their pork barrel. It seems it is only Salceda who has some sense left in him.

How will the government get funds to support itself? Do the same thing that prudent families do when their income drops. Cut on spending and do away with the non-essentials. Plant "camote" [sweet potato]. Try to earn extra income somehow without violating the law.

If the government abolishes the wasteful and corrupt pork barrel system, it will save tens of billions of pesos. If it cuts all government allowances by just 20 percent across the board, it will save billions of pesos more. If it collects the fines from drivers and pedestrians who violate traffic rules, it will be able to collect additional billions of pesos. What's more, it will restore sanity in the streets and save billions of pesos in oil bills being burned by all those vehicles creeping along in the traffic and polluting the air. If it plugs all the holes in the tax collection system and jail the tax collectors pocketing collections, it will earn more and save more. There will be no need for the expanded VAT.

The expanded VAT is the lazy man's solution to the problem of lack of funds. Instead of collecting the tax himself, the government forces others to collect it-like it does in collecting the withholding tax and the excise taxes on liquor and tobacco.

It has been the mistake of many governments, past and present, to see the people as a gold mine with an inexhaustible lode of tax money. But many governments have fallen as people revolt because of oppressive taxes. Hungry people become more desperate and reckless. We are nearing that point of despair. But as history has shown, rulers usually don't see it coming until it is too late.

* * *

It is very easy for Ms Arroyo to say that to save on fuel, we should walk more and bike more. Easier said than done. Where would you bike? Where would you walk? There are no bike lanes anywhere except around the Quezon Memorial Park in Quezon City. The sidewalks are full of parked vehicles and sidewalk vendors. Pedestrians have to walk right on the streets where they suffer the risk of being sideswiped by speeding vehicles. In some areas, like Tandang Sora Avenue, Quezon City, paved sidewalks have been totally eliminated. Thousands of students going to and from the Culiat and New Era schools have to walk right on the roadway, on the outer sides of the vehicles illegally parked along the avenue.

In areas where there are sidewalks, the pavements are uneven, with many cracks and obstacles -- even if there is a law that says sidewalks should be friendly to the old, infirm and disabled. Try walking some distance on one of Metro Manila's sidewalks and you will see how hard it is to do this -- that is, if you survive the experience. Walking on the streets of the Philippines is much more dangerous than walking in the war zones of Iraq.

Cruz's Column

Separate Opinion : A farewell salute

Isagani Cruz
Inquirer News Service

RAUL Roco and I were not particularly close, but we were more than mere acquaintances. I admired him as a lawyer and public servant, and I hope the feeling was mutual. At any rate, when I learned of his passing last week, I felt I had lost a valued friend.

There are two memories I have that speak well of him and our relationship as lawyers.

When we were still practicing, we found ourselves opposing counsel along with other lawyers in an important case involving the ownership of a bank. I cannot remember the details of the case because my records were burned with my other papers when fire struck our law office in Makati. But I do recall that several now prominent lawyers participated in the case, among them Frank Chavez and Eduardo Ceniza of the SyCip Law Office, Victor Alimurung and Hector Martinez of Siguion Reyna, Montecillo and Ongsiako, Raul Roco and Francis Jardeleza of the Angara Law Office, and I from the Laurel Law Office.

In the exchange of pleadings, I found myself pitted against Raul, who was quite combative. We had a spirited and running debate that sometimes deteriorated into angry exchanges, mostly provoked by my tempestuous adversary. In fact, there was one occasion when I reminded him, using a familiar quotation, that dirt thrown was ground lost. But despite our irreconcilable differences, we remained cordial and civil to each other.

This was not true of Raul's regard for the other lawyers on our side. In fact, there was one time when two lawyers from the opposite parties almost came to blows. This mutual animosity was heightened later when we appeared for oral argument of the case before the Supreme Court. We all came prepared in lawyers' robes but they might as well have been boxers' trunks for we were ready and rarin' to fight. There was tension between the two groups as we waited outside the courtroom for the justices to arrive.

On one side were gathered all the lawyers for the petitioners, including me. On the other side were the lawyers for the respondent led by Raul Roco. Both sides ignored each other except when they exchanged dismissive looks. Raul acted as if none of us existed, even as the lawyers on our side intentionally disregarded him.

Then, to everybody's surprise, including mine, Raul moved to our side and engaged me in casual conversation. He still ignored my companions, but he talked to me as if we were long lost brothers. Of course I was delighted. Among his many opponents, I was the one he chose to extend his camaraderie to as befitted worthy brethren of the bar. I think we gave an example to the other compañeros who might have wondered what made their enemy suddenly amicable.

The oral argument did not last long because the justices were in a hurry to take their lunch and soon adjourned the session. The case was later settled by a compromise agreement. But I will remember it with a sense of satisfaction because of Raul's affable conduct.

My other pleasant memory of Raul Roco happened when I had just been appointed to the Supreme Court in 1986 shortly after Edsa I. Many of my former students, who were then already practicing lawyers, were glad that I would be sitting on the highest tribunal and would render a fair judgment on their cases. But one lawyer had another reason for his elation. Not knowing me personally, he thought I would be easy to approach like some of the justices of the former Supreme Court under Marcos. In fact, he openly bragged that he would offer me a financial inducement I could not refuse to decide a case in his favor that was before me as ponente.

That lawyer never proved his impertinence and I was to learn why later. Raul Roco had heard of his boast and immediately summoned him to his office. There the indignant Raul lectured the suddenly abashed lawyer and warned him against his plan to try to bribe me. As reported to me by his office mates, their boss minced no words in upbraiding the culprit and caustically reminded him of his professional oath he was going to besmirch with his corruption. Most of all, he stressed on the now totally subdued offender my reputation as an honest judge and made it quite clear that he would have him disbarred if he persisted in his insolent plan. I could imagine the sufficiently chastened offender retreating in shame from the office, like a dog with his tail between his legs.

I never got to thank Raul for his kindness but I am sure he is hearing me now.

Raul Roco was a worthy man. He was a brilliant lawyer, a conscientious legislator and educator, and a valiant defender of the Constitution. He was the special protector of the common tao and of women in general. Despite the many honors he received in recognition of his high achievements, he remained a simple person faithful to his friends, devoted to his family, and obedient to his God.

I voted for him last year although I knew he was not going to win. I did not know, as I mourn for him now, that I was rendering a farewell salute to an esteemed and cherished friend.

Glo's Lapses

A trivial offense, another lapse

Inquirer News Service

IN ONE of his recent columns, Neal Cruz stated: "The fact alone that a candidate (Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) entertained officials of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) at her home before an election is already a violation of our laws and rules of ethical conduct. No amount of media blitz or evasive answers can change those facts. She willfully violated our laws and that makes her unfit to be the leader of our nation."

Such comments have become laughable. The President remains in power despite the "Hello Garci" scandal. What makes Cruz think that this "minor" violation of the law has any bearing at all? Compared to the "Hello Garci" scandal, the dinner with Comelec officials is nothing but another trivial incident. Even if Ms Arroyo admits that she invited the whole Comelec and gave its staff "envelopes," those acts can be excused as just another social gathering and as another lapse in judgment.

Her willful violations of the law have become a common, everyday thing. She is still in power and will stay in power for as long as she likes, because in her eyes the Filipino people don't care anymore. I am sure she has even become bolder now, as can be discerned in her speeches. She and her family will keep on looting the country because the Filipinos have become uncaring victims ready to let an erring President get whatever she wants.

MARK LEE (via e-mail)

Education

Commentary : Moving forward

Edilberto de Jesus
Inquirer News Service

"THE TRUTH that I discovered from my beginnings as a neophyte politician in 1992, rising to become a veteran politician through the years, is this: over the years, our political system has degenerated to such an extent that it is very difficult to live within the system with hands totally untainted. That is the truth."

This declaration, made during her address to the nation in the wake of the controversy over the "Hello Garci" tapes, was arguably the truest statement in the speech. And the saddest, because most people have apparently accepted as truth that the contest for political office requires getting one's hands dirty. Hence, their reluctance to cast the first stone at the President, especially when many of the rabble-rousers calling for the stoning offered even more worthy targets.

But the statement also undermines the claim that talking to a Comelec official was simply a "lapse in judgment." A veteran politician would accept such acts as part of the price exacted by our political process. The lapse was in overlooking the precautions to avoid getting caught. Unfortunately, the biblical injunction against casting the first stone, which she alluded to in her speech, is not an edifying line of defense for an incumbent President.

However, whatever the reservations about the President, there is clearly a strong public consensus against any recourse to unconstitutional measures. Those who have called for her resignation appeal to her better nature to spare the country the pain of a protracted period of political uncertainty and the consequent risk of stunting its growth.

She has declined, as is her right, to take this course. The issue is clear: Can she continue to discharge effectively her responsibility to run the government and to drive needed reform measures? To the extent that she can do this to the satisfaction of the public, she maintains a measure of control over her political destiny.

The appeal, released by officials of the Department of Education to the media on July 15, to keep the department insulated from the current political controversies provides the President with a platform for implementing urgently needed reforms in the education sector, which she has said would be a priority during her second term.

The DepEd witnessed last September a seamless transition between one administration and the next, ensuring that the momentum for reform continued without disruption. If the President is interested in maintaining this momentum, she might surprise the public by appointing Undersecretary Juan Miguel Luz as the next education secretary. Luz has served the DepEd for almost three years and has been a key figure in developing the DepEd Roadmap, originating some of its most innovative components, such as the hugely successful Brigada Escuela Program.

Second, the President can present as a priority measure a bill liberating the teachers from the mandatory obligation to staff the electoral process. This inequitable and onerous burden exposes the teachers to political harassment and the DepEd to political pressures on the appointment, deployment and promotion of staff. It has also been on the list of urgent priority reforms in education for well over a decade. Surely, if the President can mobilize her allies in the legislature to defeat any impeachment move, she should be able to persuade them to pass a measure that its own Educational Commission had recommended in 1992.

Third, the President can respond to the call from various sectors to reform the electoral system, beginning with the overhaul of the Commission on Elections. She created the problems with her appointments, and she must take the responsibility of addressing those problems. Christian Monsod and Haydee Yorac proved that it was possible to clean up the Comelec and keep it clean. Is it within the President's power to convince her appointees to step down so that the process of renewal can be accelerated? Or probably not. They may find no reason to resign, since she herself would not.

Reforming the Comelec, including the automation of the electoral process, is clearly the most challenging task. But it should not be as difficult as persuading the Senate to cooperate in its own extermination by supporting the move to a parliamentary system. More important, it goes deeper toward the roots of the "degeneration" of the political system that she bemoaned in her statement. Our problem is less the form of government than the electoral system and the practices that it has spawned and that we have tolerated.

The world recognizes our claim to be a democracy, because we enjoy the right to vote for our leaders in regularly scheduled elections. But guns, goons and, increasingly, gold (which can buy guns and goons, as well as government officials, both civil and military) have figured regularly in all of our elections. A few years back, some newly elected legislators confessed to shock and embarrassment when they found out that the post-election conversation in the congressional lounge focused on the relative retail price for votes in their respective constituencies.

No one can hope to win an election now without building up a war chest to fund a campaign. It can take only one election to turn the youngest and most idealistic politician into an instant trapo, beholden to those who made his victory possible. Once elected, the trapos can use the perks of office and the position of rule-maker to free themselves from their earlier patrons and to lay the foundation for building political dynasties.

Most of the contending parties in the current political controversy ought to agree on reforming the Comelec and the completion of the automation project as priority steps. Even the snap elections demanded by some groups make sense only on the assumption of a Comelec that can be trusted to supervise an efficient electoral process.

Whether we have a presidential or a parliamentary system, as long as the electoral process and the determinants of electoral success remain the same, we will be entrusting power to the tainted hands of the same breed of trapos. The parliamentary system may be even worse, since, normally, only those who have gone through the electoral muck and won can qualify for executive positions.

The appointment of a credible leader for the DepEd, the release of the teachers from their bondage as election servants, the automation of the electoral process and the overhaul of the Comelec are necessary-although not sufficient-steps to reform the political system. Their attainment would send a clear signal of the President's commitment to a genuine reform agenda and her capacity to keep the country moving forward.

Edilberto C. de Jesus is a former education secretary.

Transport System

Pinoy Kasi : ET takes the LRT

Michael Tan opinion@inquirer.com.ph
Inquirer News Service

IF other planets had intelligent life, they'd be producing anthropologists too. And if one of those alien anthropologists ever landed on Earth and checked with me on how they could quickly gain insights into a country's society and culture, I'd tell them to check out their metros, or urban rapid mass transit systems.

Let's imagine now one of these extraterrestrial (ET) anthropologists from the planetoid Quaoar (that's close to Pluto) landing on Earth. Courtesy of a transponder, she (female anthropologists are always bolder and more insightful) becomes one of us, taking every metro on earth, the "REC" button, built into her brain's frontal lobe, busily recording everything, including her thoughts on what she sees.

Let's imagine, too, having access to the notes from one such anthropologist recounting her visits to different cities on our planet, including Manila.

Political will

Earthlings, and especially Filipinos, like to use a term called "political will," which can be loosely defined as the determination of governments to do some good for their people. It's something difficult to measure, but I'm convinced now that a country's mass rapid transits -- whether they're present or not, how many there are, how much they cost, and the conditions they're in -- can be infallible indicators of political will.

Our data banks show that the most developed countries on Earth have such systems. These systems rapidly transport hundreds and thousands of people each day from their homes to their destinations: their workplaces, schools, places of worship, as well as parks, theaters and other recreational areas. The rapid transport allows people to arrive at their destinations fresh and alert and of positive and cheerful spirit.

The best part about rapid mass transit systems is the way they help to preserve the environment. Some developed countries, like the United States, still prefer individual transport vehicles, which means paying a heavy price in terms of their dependence on processed fossil fuels from Earth. These fuels are processed into something called gasoline to run their vehicles. Although the US produces its own gasoline, its demands are so heavy it still has to import the fuels. So precarious is its dependence on a particular region on earth that it has to go to war to keep its access open to these countries. Then, too, gasoline is a major source of pollutants with serious effects on earthling health.

In so many words then, mass transit systems tell us about how governments care about people's welfare, as well as their concern about preserving environmental integrity. The political will seems to have been exerted quite early in some countries: the London Underground, for example, was inaugurated way back in 1863.

Tale of two transit systems

So what does Manila's mass transit system tell us about their leaders?

Manila and the Philippines seem to have followed the lead of their former colonial master, the United States, with little effort to develop rapid mass transit. There are thousands of private vehicles, owned mainly by the rich and the middle class, but most Filipinos have to rely on a mass transit system consisting of dilapidated buses, usually passed on after use in Japan, and jeepneys, which used to be hailed as mobile works of art but are now drab smoke-belchers using low-grade processed fossil fuel called diesel.

Both bus and jeepney drivers are themselves worthy of study. My chemical scanner kept registering extremely high levels of lead in their brains, obviously coming from the fossil fuels. The lead impairs their intellectual capacities; even worse, many of them seem to be powered by a crystalline substance called "shabu," which keeps them awake, alert and unduly aggressive. Trips on these shabu-powered jeeps and buses can be major ordeals, passengers arriving at their destinations looking like survivors of a major inter-galactic battle.

A cleaner and more efficient mass transit system is being developed in Manila. A Light Rail Transit (LRT) was inaugurated in 1984, followed years later, in 1999, by a Metro Rail Transit (MRT). The two systems total 37 kilometers and were built over more than 20 years, certainly a revealing indicator of political will.

I've taken several trips on the two metro systems and I can say it's like visiting two countries. The MRT runs through a more modern part of the city, with an upper-middle class clientele. The trains can become quite crowded at certain hours but trips are generally quiet and uneventful, passengers wrapped in their own worlds with personal sound systems called MP3 players.

The older LRT runs through a run-down part of the metropolis. The trains are falling part, maintenance neglected perhaps because it caters mainly to a lower-middle class stratum. The ordeal starts even when purchasing tickets, with long queues and people constantly trying to break into the lines while other irate commuters scream expletives in protest.

Asses

Many LRT commuters have to take the jeepney or bus before getting on the trains, and it is clear the high levels of lead in their brains have affected them -- they seem unable to understand what it takes to board a train. Every train that arrives sets off a stampede, with commuters trying to squeeze in even when it's obvious there's no more space. Once, I saw the train doors suddenly shutting with a commuter's bag caught in between. Electronic sensors automatically reopened the door, giving the commuter a chance to pull her bag back ... but in the process, three more lead-poisoned earthlings tried to jump onto the train.

Trips on the LRT are tense. I was warned not just to watch my belongings but also my ass, an English slang term for the rear part of earthling bodies. The LRT stations do have a special section for females to board but all genders eventually end up on the same train, subject to the same risks of having their asses picked or pinched.

Asses are frequently on Filipinos' minds these days. One of their newspapers recently had a front-page headline about something called the Con-Ass, accompanied by the picture of someone's behind, but I am told the Con-Ass is a different matter, that it is meant to be a grand Convention of Asses. Here, ass is used as a Filipino term of endearment for politicians, yes, the ones who exert political will and decide on mass transit systems.

But I digress, and my friend Mike Tan is complaining that this column is getting much too long. I will try to write again some time. Now I must beam myself back to Quaoar, where, I have to say, we never had metros. Alas, and this is fair warning to Filipinos, we insisted on an equivalent of your SUVs; alas, we too were governed by Asses, who ended up destroying our planet. Which is why we anthropologists are scouring the galaxies now for guidance from intelligent, even if lead-poisoned, forms of life.

Rufino's Letter

Posted by Vinia Datinguinoo 
PCIJ

Michaelangelo "Louie" Zuce is in the Senate, talking about what he says he knows about payoffs that were made to Comelec officials in exchange for ensuring President Arroyo's victory in May 2004. The former presidential staff officer and kin of ex-Comelec commissioner Virgilio Garcillano first made his story public on Monday morning in a press conference. On Tuesday he disclosed more details in an interview with PCIJ and ABS-CBN. (See " The messenger sings" and "Not once, but twice" posts.)

Late Monday, Malacañang issued to the media a statement signed by Zuce's former boss, Jose Ma. A. Rufino. In that statement, Rufino says he is "shocked and very much saddened by the wild accusations" made by Zuce.

I and my office have never been involved in influencing, much less bribing, Comelec officials to support Lakas-NUCD candidates including President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

Rufino appealed to Zuce "to retract his falsehoods." 

Read Rufino's statement here.

Credibility

Reforms require credibility of implementors

Inquirer News Service

THE CURRENT political crisis is yet another strong reminder of the need for strengthening the institutions of this country. Of primary importance here is, at the very least, creating an impression that this is a country where laws are superior to the people who are supposed to implement them; this is necessary for the successful formulation and implementation of urgent reforms.

The big question is: In strengthening the institutions of this country, where do we begin? Our answer: we begin with the resignation of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. She has lost her moral ascendancy to govern. It disappeared with the admission that she talked with an official of the Commission on Elections during the processing of election results. But even if we assume that the conversation did not in fact involve any impropriety, still it created the perception that irregularities occurred.

Are we asking too much of Ms Arroyo? After all, the allegations of electoral fraud have yet to be proven in the courts. We do not believe so.

First, assuming her administration sincerely wants genuine reforms, she should remember such undertaking requires credibility. How can reforms be effected if the person tasked with implementing them is herself lacking in credibility? And can they be implemented in an atmosphere of serious political uncertainty?

Second, her continued stay in office distracts other government institutions from focusing on their primary functions. A good example here is the House of Representatives. Instead of formulating laws, our representatives are immersed in long debates over the Gloriagate recordings.

And what will happen if the impeachment complaint surprisingly leads to an impeachment trial? Ms Arroyo, as an economist, knows that means spending precious time that could have been used for something else.

Finally, an extra-constitutional way of changing leadership is being suggested by not a few sectors. Is this something that we really want? The chances of avoiding the above can be enhanced with the simple stroke of a pen -- "I resign!"

We would like to conclude this by addressing two propositions brought forth by this turmoil.

The first assumes that no one else of the more than 80 million Filipinos (some of whom are successfully managing foreign corporations) other than Ms Arroyo, is capable of managing this country. This is a great insult to the Filipino people. In the first place, has Ms Arroyo really done a good job managing the country?

The other proposition is: The economy will collapse with the fall of the Arroyo administration. Sure, a new president exposes us to such risks, but are we not facing such risks already?

Economics is not the immediate problem. It's politics, stupid! (With apologies to former US President Bill Clinton.)

UPE RODRIGUEZ, AC CUEVAS and CONCERNED FACULTY MEMBERS, Department of Economics, University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Laguna

Quezon's Column

The Long View : First order of business

Manuel L. Quezon III
Inquirer News Service

THE PRESIDENT'S decision to submit to her party's desire for Charter change ignores one central question: Should the President preside over the undertaking and related efforts? Unless and until the issue on Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's continued fitness for office is resolved, constitutional changes are inevitably, and dangerously, tied to her political fate. Since public opinion has overwhelmingly spoken in favor of the impeachment process, then let that issue be resolved through the impeachment process, before Congress turns itself into a constituent assembly.

To do otherwise-to insist on an accelerated process in which Congress defines the changes to be made, without consulting the public-is to prevent a national consensus from emerging. Without a national consensus, Congress faces a danger. That danger is not in the rejection of Charter changes in a referendum. (After all, one thing is certain: the amendments that Congress will come up with will have to be ratified in a plebiscite, in which public participation has been historically low, and in which the machinery of the ruling party has a tremendous advantage in getting out a "yes" vote.) The danger lies in a widespread public disappointment and suspicion that might greet whatever constitutional order emerges.

However, if the question of the President's fitness for office is resolved; if an advisory commission is put together and consults all sectors and regions; and if, by virtue of the consultations, a reasonable draft of potentially desirable amendments is submitted to Congress, then constitutional reform through a constituent assembly would not only be acceptable, but even desirable.

This scenario, I suppose, is what appeals to Prof. Jose Abueva, who has recently been criticized for going along with the President's proposals. Abueva has been a consistent and eloquent proponent of federalism, although the kind he proposes seems rather different from the kind members of Congress want. Nevertheless, Abueva's heading the consultative commission provides Congress a chance to show it is willing to hear the voice of the people.

In the meantime, Congress can focus on the budget, even as the House wrestles with the impeachment complaint in its justice committee. It is hoped that the matter would be resolved in a manner that inspires confidence-without the House deliberations or a Senate trial triggering a furious backlash from the public (in which case we'd be headed toward a revolutionary government, anyway). All the while, a constitutional consultative commission would have time for study, reflection and consultation. It should not be that only the provinces are heard (and not just the wealthy and well-positioned provinces favoring a federal setup). Other sectors must also be heard. As it stands, congressionally centered proposals do not take into consideration the views of the marginalized sectors, which should have a chance to participate in the debate.

What separates the proponents of Charter change within the government (representatives, governors and mayors) from those outside government is actually an idea often used by former President Ramos: the idea of "leveling the playing field." As proposed by the Speaker and accepted by the President, and loudly applauded by the Lakas-CMD, Charter change seems to be more of a means to establish a government by Lakas, of Lakas and for Lakas, than a way to broaden public participation and ensure greater opportunities for all, and not just a few. I do not believe there is already a public consensus on the particulars: for example, what kind of federalism should be instituted; is unicameralism the only way to go; or will a parliamentary government provide for proportional representation, or a winner-take-all system similar to the absolutely safe, and even for sale, boroughs of England during much of the 18th and 19th centuries?

So it all begins and ends, whether we like it or not, with the President. For those of us who feel she should resign, she has replied: "Impeach me." Most people seem inclined to call her bluff. So let her be impeached. And let it be done in a manner that will lead the public, on either side of the political divide, to accept willingly the results of the impeachment process. Rigoberto Tiglao recently challenged Rep. Francis Escudero to categorically state whether or not the opposition would abide by the result of the impeachment process. I'd argue that the decision lies not with either the administration or the opposition, but rather, with the public. The majority has as much responsibility as the opposition to ensure that the process ultimately ends up with a verdict acceptable to the public. The public knows fair play when it sees it. The public will know if the impeachment process has resulted, anywhere down the line, in something that makes sense or not.

Then, and only then, with the question of the President's fitness resolved, and the reputation of Congress improved because of its handling of the impeachment process, should we turn to the question of fixing the constitutional defects the President, former President Ramos and Speaker De Venecia claim are to blame for the country's woes.

* * *

On Aug. 4, 2005, from 9 a.m. to 12 noon, UP-ISP will be holding at the UP College of Law an iBlog Mini Summit titled: "Blogging Gloriagate." This is part of iBlog's discussion series, which intends to document the impact of blogging in Philippine society. Talks will be on: "Introducing Blogging Gloriagate" (Atty. JJ Disini)-10-10:30; "Blogging Gloriagate: The PCIJ Experience"-10:30-11; "Blogging Gloriagate: A Personal Journey" (Manuel L. Quezon III). It's free. Join us.