ANG PAGBABALIK

Agosto 9, 2011

Sa araw na ito, ako ay miling babalik sa aking pag-lilimbag ng mga sanaysay hingil sa napapanahon at makabuluhang mga istorya. :)

Ako ngayon ay babagtas sa isang mas napapanahon, mas mapangahas, mas makabuluhang pag-aaral hinggil sa ating lipunan. Maghintay nalang po kayo sa mga susunod na araw at ako ay mag-lilimbag.

-JC

Martial Law is Not a Substitute for Competent Police Work:
Statement on the Reported Proclamation of Martial Law in Maguindanao

[This note is Public Domain and may be circulated]

Marvic M.V.F. Leonen
Dean and Professor of Law
University of the Philippines

The heinous massacre of civilians in Ampatuan, Maguindanao deserves competence of the highest order in the gathering, preserving and evaluation of evidence as well as in the subsequent arrest and prosecution of its perpetrators. It should also be the platform for a sober approach that will comprehensively address the issue of private armies of misguided politicians. Any meaningful solution should be led by civilians preferably those who can remain independent of influence from national public officials who have openly declared partisan interests in the upcoming election.

The reported declaration of Martial Law in Maguindanao should be assessed in this light as well as in terms of its compliance with the very stringent requirements contained in the 1987 Constitution.

The President should also observe an extraordinary level of transparency and accountability with this declaration. She must clearly demonstrate why martial law needs to be declared. The proclamation of Martial Law can be used as a means to gain unfair advantage in the upcoming elections or as an excuse to declare a failure of elections contrary to the people’s will. The need for transparency and accountability is even more urgent given the unnecessary proclamation from the spokespersons of the Office of the President that the incumbent has remained “friends” with those widely suspected of having committed the atrocities in Mindanao. The need for transparency and accountability is also necessary in the light of the role of the suspected perpetrators in the controversies surrounding the 2004 elections.

Under the 1987 Constitution, martial law can only be declared in cases of invasion or rebellion and only when public safety demands it. Rebellion requires that there is at least a taking up of arms publicly directed against an existing government. Martial law cannot be declared because the state has failed to prevent massive human rights violations by leaders that the national government itself has nurtured. Martial law cannot be proclaimed to cover up the lack of professional competence in the gathering, preservation, evaluation of evidence and in the arrest and detention of the perpetrators. Martial law is also not the proper legal response to the issuance of a writ of amparo in favor of the Ampatuan family.

A report on how the proclamation was executed must be made within 48 hours of its proclamation to both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Congress must convene within 24 hours after it is proclaimed. Any proclamation of martial law by the President can only have a maximum effectivity of 60 days. This can be revoked (or extended) by Congress. Any revocation by Congress cannot be overturned by the President. In case martial law has been proclaimed, the electoral ambitions of all members of the House of Representatives and the Senate should be put aside so that they can observe their obligations required in the Constitution.

The proclamation of martial law does not supplant the civilian bureaucracy. It does not supplant the operation of the Constitution including its provisions for the protection of individual and collective rights. It does not supplant the operations of local government nor the fact that local governance is subject to existing law. Martial law does not automatically suspend the writ of habeas corpus or justify illegal arrests and detention. In other words, it is not authority for the Commander in Chief or the military to replace civilian government. Certainly, the public should be encouraged to engage the courts should there be any violation of any provision of law or the constitution.

Abuse of executive privilege will only tarnish the memories of those who have been martyred by the violent excesses of misguided public officials. I call for vigilance for competent, transparent, accountable government as well as for the protection of human rights of peoples in Mindanao.

Quezon City, December 5, 2009

No to GMA’s Illegal Constituent Assembly

Tuesday, July 28, 2009



A Statement of the University Council of the University of the Philippines Diliman

On the eve of her supposedly final state of the nation address (SONA), the feeble attempt of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her allies to change the Constitution shows that she is planning to stay in power even beyond 2010 so that she can enjoy immunity from suit.

At the height of the Garci scandal, the University Council (UC) on July 13, 2005 called for her immediate resignation. And on February 28, 2008, the University Council, in the face of massive corruption in GMA’s administration and unsolved extrajudicial killings, unanimously approved a resolution telling GMA it was time to go. To this day, GMA continues to ignore calls from various sectors of society for her to step down.

Today, with 345 days left to her term, GMA and her allies are not preparing to leave office. They are instead preparing to change the Constitution in order to, among others, lift term limits.

House Resolution No. 1109 which seeks to convene the House of Representatives (HOR) into a constituent assembly shows that in the next few days, GMA and her allies would try to prolong her rule. The brazen manner in which this is being done is manifested by the House Speaker’s pronouncement that immediately after the SONA, the HOR would convene itself into one, with or without the Senate and with or without public approval.

Any attempt to change the Constitution at this time could result in the amendment or revision of the following contentious issues: term limits of the President and members of Congress; the date of the elections, or whether such elections would be held; change in the form of government from presidential to parliamentary.

The attempt of GMA to remain in power and to escape accountability is an affront to the values that we hold dear in the University: public accountability, transparency, honor, and excellence in service. There now exists political uncertainty as the public is unaware of what will happen between now and May 2010 when elections are supposed to be held. There is no justice in a situation where an extension of her immunity from suit would bar any prosecution when her term as President expires on June 30, 2010.

In the hundred-and-first year of the University, the University Council of UP Diliman reiterates its call for public accountability, and renews its commitment to work for a just and progressive society. We in the University Council oppose all attempts of GMA and her allies to convene an illegal constituent assembly and to prolong her rule. The people should freely choose leaders that would truly represent the people’s interests.

U.P. Diliman University Council, 20 July 2009



University Council Secretariat
University of the Philippines Diliman
Office of the University Registrar (3/Floor)
Phone 981-8500 ext. 4558, 4554
Fax 927-6084; Mobile 09199464416
************************************************************************************************
Official Statement of the University of the Philippines Diliman University Council.
Retrieved from http://www.up.edu.ph on 28 July 2009.

UP CMC’s assessment of the media under Macapagal-Arroyo regime

Tuesday, July 28, 2009



Under Siege and Fighting Back
An Assessment of the State of the Philippine Media

University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication (UP CMC)
led by Dean Roland B. Tolentino, 24 faculty members, 5 staff,
11 student organizations and the UP CMC Student Council

Philippine media have been under siege since Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo came to power. The hostile environment her watch has created, unprecedented since the Marcos period, has undermined the constitutionally protected freedom of expression in general and press freedom in particular.

The killing of journalists persists. More than half of the journalists killed during the post-Marcos period were killed during the Macapagal-Arroyo administration. Only in three cases – the murder of Edgar Damalerio, Marlene Esperat and Armando Pace – have the killers been convicted. However, no mastermind has been prosecuted.

A slew of libel cases, of which those filed by First Gentleman Mike Arroyo are the most obvious evidence of regime hostility to criticism, transparency and press freedom, have been filed against critical journalists. Media groups and at least one journalist, Carlos Conde, have been tagged as enemies of the state either by the military’s infamous “Knowing the Enemy” presentation or its 2007 Order of Battle in Davao.

The imposition of a state of national emergency in 2006 highlighted the hostility of the administration towards the free press as media organizations were put under surveillance and threatened with sedition charges. The mass arrests of journalists during the Manila Peninsula siege in November 2007 also show not just the government’s ignorance of the workings of the press but also its contempt for press freedom.

Macapagal-Arroyo and other officials profess their commitment to press freedom, but their statements have proven to be nothing but lip service. The list of cases of media repression since 2001 is endless. The imprisonment of Davao broadcaster Alex Adonis as a result of a libel case filed against him by the Speaker of the House of Representatives shows how government officials can use the law to silence and intimidate those who are critical of the powers-that-be. Broadcast journalist Cheche Lazaro was sued for wiretapping by a government official as a result of her work in exposing corruption. Journalists who went to Maguindanao were briefly detained when they covered the conflict there. All are the result of an atmosphere the Arroyo administration has created which encourages media repression.

It should not come as a surprise therefore that the country has been tagged as the second most dangerous place in the world after Iraq to practice journalism.

Not only are journalists targeted by this repressive regime. Even those in the broadcast and film industries suffer from harassment and intimidation, mainly in the form of prior restraint. The Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) has been criticized for giving an “X” rating to films that are critical of the administration like “Ang Mabuhay para sa Masa,” “Rights,” “Mendiola” and “A Day in the Life of Gloria.”

Under these circumstances, the media have fought back to uphold and protect press freedom and free expression. There now exists a de facto alliance among media organizations and other cause-oriented groups as the former fight the administration’s hostility towards the press. The Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists (FFFJ) was established precisely in response to the unabated killings. Various media groups have issued position papers against onerous bills like the right of reply and to campaign for access to information and the decriminalization of libel. The UP Film Institute played a major role in the re-establishment of the Task Force Free the Artists (TFFTA) to fight censorship.

Aware of the current administration’s hostility towards press freedom, the College reaffirms its commitment to help media and journalist organizations defend press freedom, and to be part of the de facto alliance that, by resisting the Arroyo administration’s attack on the press and working for the enhancement of professional and ethical media practice, is at the same time defending what remains of Philippine democracy. The College will remain vigilant and continue to watch her, her government and all her minions; and remain critical of all her actions.

Consistent with the call of the University Council of UP Diliman as early as 2005 for President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s resignation, the UP College of Mass Communication believes that her removal from office can help create a better media environment in the country. Let it not be said that the College chooses to be silent as media repression continues under this administration.

24 July 2009

SIGNATORIES

Faculty

1. Dean Roland B. Tolentino
2. Dr. Georgina Encanto, former dean
3. Dr. Nicanor Tiongson, former dean
4. Prof. Luis Teodoro (retired), former dean
5. Prof. Alfonso Deza (chair, Department of Communication Research)
6. Prof. Rosa Maria Feliciano (chair, Department of Broadcast Communication)
7. Prof. Marichu Lambino (chair, Department of Journalism)
8. Prof. Almond Aguila (Department of Communication Research)
9. Prof. Danilo Arao (Department of Journalism)
10. Prof. Marinela Aseron (Department of Broadcast Communication)
11. Prof. Fernando Austria, Jr. (Department of Broadcast Communication)
12. Prof. Yason Banal (UP Film Institute)
13. Prof. Marilou de Ocampo (Department of Communication Research)
14. Prof. Abigael Felix-Esguerra (UP Film Institute)
15. Prof. Melba Estonilo (Department of Broadcast Communication)
16. Prof. Roehl Jamon (UP Film Institute)
17. Prof. Lisa Justiniani (Department of Broadcast Communication)
18. Dr. Jose Lacson, Jr. (Department of Communication Research)
19. Prof. Cenon Palomares (UP Film Institute)
20. Prof. Cristina Rara (Department of Journalism)
21. Dr. Arminda Santiago (UP Film Institute)
22. Prof. Josefina Santos (Department of Broadcast Communication)
23. Prof. Lucia Tangi (Department of Journalism)
24. Prof. Violeda Umali (Department of Communication Research)
25. Prof. Jane Vinculado (Department of Broadcast Communication)

Staff

1. Gina Villegas, administrative officer
2. Arnel Aga
3. Jonathan Beldia
4. Luis Olid
5. Placida Sodoy

Student organizations

1. League of Filipino Students-CMC
2. Samahan ng mga Mag-aaral ng Komunikasyon
3. Student Alliance for the Advancement of Democratic Rights in UP-CMC
4. Union of Journalists of the Philippines-UP
5. UP Broadcasters’ Guild
6. UP Broadcasting Association
7. UP Cineastes’ Studio
8. UP Cinema
9. UP Cinema Arts Society
10. UP Journalism Club
11. UP Sining at Lipunan

CMC Student Council represented by Rupert Francis Mangilit (chair)

For verification, please call the UP CMC Department of Journalism at telephone number 920-6852.



************************************************************************************************
From the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication.
Retrieved on 28 July 2009 at http://www.up.edu.ph.

Pasasalamat

Tapos na ang AAP ng Unibersidad. Ngunit palagi ko ngang sinasabi, hindi dito nagtatapos ang lahat.
marami sa inyo ang aking nakilala. marami ang hndi makakalimutan ng aking isipan. Marahil, sa inyo ring parte, papahalagahan ninyo ang naitulong namin sa inyo, at nang sa gayon, kami ay hindi ninyo kakaligtaan. Maraming salamat sa lahat ng ibinigay ninyong panahon. Maswerte kayo sapagkat pinili ninyo na sumama sa affirmative action program ng UP kaysa magpahinga lamang sa bahay o di kayay magpakasarap sa alon ng buhay. maraming salamat sapagkat itinuon ninyo ang lahat sa pag-aaral.
Marahil, matagal-tagal narin tayong hindi nagkikita habang binabasa ninyo ito. Siguro, may nakapagsabi na mayroon akong ginawa para sa aking mga estudyante. Isang malaking pasasalamat sapagkat naging bukas kayo sa mga itinuturo namin.
Marami pa akong sasabihin. hanggang dito na lang muna.



Kung gusto ninyo ng mga larawan ukol sa AAP, magkumento lamang kayo sa liham na ito.
Paalam.

Sir/Kuya JC

THE PHILIPPINES AND THE UNITED STATES

The assimilation of the United States in the Philippines is highly transparent. From the kind of products on shopping centers, the kind of dress we Filipinos wear, the hamburgers we eat, the jazz we are dancing, and ultimately the use of English as a medium of communication are reflective of this cultural integration.
Before the Philippines was colonized by the United States, the prevailing culture was that of the Hispanic feature. The 300 years of Spanish occupation generally did not created the imitation of the Spanish way of life among Filipinos. Instead of imitating the Spaniards, the Filipino’s were repugnant on them. The disobedience of the Filipinos to their colonizers and the rebellions especially on the part of the most exploited masses against the oppression of the Spaniards justifies that the Filipino people are disgusted on the Spanish colonial rule. However, this prospect gradually changed when the United States entered the picture. After the “mock battle” at Manila Bay between the Spanish Navy and the United Sates Naval Force, the Americans were thought to be the “savior” of the Philippines from the wicked Spain. Therefore there was a rapid acceptance on the American means most especially its language.
Why did the Americans colonized the Philippines? According to Teodoro A. Agoncillo the main motives of the Americans for taking possession of the Philippines were mainly economic and political. Before the end of the 18th century, the United States has achieved the condition of monopoly in its capitalist system and in effect created an over-production crisis. The surplus needs to be circulated in another non-American economic sphere. The Philippines was then colonized by the United States to be the one to acquire the economic surplus and to be the source of raw materials for the capitalist production. The Philippines was the “lake of America’’ in the Pacific Ocean and was the pedestal for the eventual colonization in Asia especially China. (Kurso sa Pambansang Demokrasya, Kilusang Mayo Uno,1989). The capitalist nature of the United States was therefore an essential factor on colonizing the Philippines. Politically, the Philippines, for the United States is a steeping stone for further expansion in the other side of the Pacific. The Philippines can be made a military installation in the Pacific because it is in a strategic location for American military activities. Religion was only an accessorial motivation because it does not really justify the colonization in the Philippines by the Americans. Protestantism, although significantly affected the Catholicism in the Philippines, was never a part of any colonial policy in the Philippines.
The motives of the Americans were materially based because they are politically and economically motivated. We cannot say that the American society is greedy because what motivated them to colonize other countries were mostly economical. The United States as a nation, which was never conquered by other countries, have this sense of “educating the barbaric world”. Their identity as a nation was never changed because at the first place they evolved as a society that has a distinctive culture, language, norms, and standards. The American people believe that they were the “standard”.
Now that the Philippines was colonized by the Americans, was there any significant transformation in the colonial liaison as compared to the relationship between the Spaniards and the Filipinos? Essentially, there was none. The mode of exploitation was simply concealed into a perceptive and deceiving system. Specifically, the transformation was evident in the field of economy.
During the colonization of the Americans, most companies were already owned and run by American investors. Colonial trade was formalized thru the implementation of the Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act which secured the tax-free entrance of US-made products. In agriculture, instead of paying high taxes and tributes to the authorities, farmers are deceived to the idea of nourishing their crops with fertilizers from American companies. The idea that the Philippines is an agricultural country and that the Philippines must develop its lands for agriculture also came from the United States. Personally, I believe that this is a strategic measure to prevent the Philippines from desiring to develop other aspects of its resources like the Fisheries sector. In industry, the Filipinos were convinced that the more foreign investors invest in the country, the more profit will the Philippines acquire. The local industry was not given any significant importance as that of the foreign investors. This is again evident until today. Our government is generally allowing more foreign capital to enter in the country. It is not wrong to attract foreign investors; however as a result of intense competition between local companies, our local capital is weakened and is sometimes strained to close. Workers on these local companies are then affected. The best example is the mining industry in the country. The Mining Act of 1995 allows trans-national companies to quarry in the country. Instead of investing in itself, the Philippines even allowed non-Filipino companies to utilize our resources. In general, the Philippines was only used as a resource environment for the United States. The Filipinos were mere cheap laborers for the Americans.
The Philippines was the satellite nation of the colonial United States. This relationship was obscured by the slogans and policies like “Philippine-US Friendship”, “Military Assistance Program”, etc.
The United States colonialism produced major and, sad to say, permanent effects on the Filipino society. The educational system, politics, public welfare, mentality, and ultimately the culture were all altered to meet the American design of colonization.
Probably, the most important “contribution” of the Americans was the educational system that they created in the Philippines. According to Renato Constantino, education served as a weapon of colonial conquest in the Philippines. Through education, they have introduced concepts that are necessary to create a Filipino people that are under the colonial goals. The Filipinos, he said, had to be disoriented through the education from their nationalist goals because they had to become good colonials. The Filipinos were then became conformists to the colonial attributes. The Americans, instead of using the Tagalog language, which is basically the most popularly spoken language, utilized English as the medium of instruction. This is a calculated move to pacify the people, Renato Contantino said. We became literate of English and became conversant with the globalizing world. The kind of education that the Americans have established in the Philippines was really important because it made us not only capable of speaking and comprehending English but made us competitive in the Western cultures. The public school system is very helpful among isolated and deprived places in the country. The Hispanic type of education never satisfied the needs of the Filipinos on that time compared to the public system of instruction that the Americans introduced. Through the public education that is free and accessible to most of the Filipinos that time, the Philippines had improved its literacy rate and the competency of its people as compared to other nations.
The political system in the Philippines during the American period until now was basically designed to correlate with that of the United States. The democratic system that the United States fashioned in the Philippines was very reflective of the American concept of liberty as a free nation. The municipal election of the Americans was very different of that of the Spanish time. Only the elites or the “illustrados” can then vote during the Spanish time vis-à-vis the general public during the American occupation. The creation of the bicameral congress also is an American ideology.
Public welfare also developed in the country as a result of the improvement in the concepts of public health and epidemiology. The Americans contributed at a large extent the importance of hygiene among Filipinos. They also created a Bureau of Public Health on early 1900’s. Contrary to the nature of Bureau of Health of the Spanish authorities, the Bureau of Public Health that the Americans established in the Philippines did not only fight diseases but also inculcated the obliteration of ignorance and false beliefs.
Perhaps the most unhelpful consequence of the American settlement was the indoctrination of Western way of life. The idea is that the Westerners’ way of life is the ultimate experience and that Filipinos must also imitate them. The “Big-Man Syndrome” ultimately became part of the Filipino attributes. Most Filipinos until now are more attracted to brands like the Marithé François Girbaud, JAG, LEE, VICTORIA’S SECRET, etc., than locally designed products. The inculcation of the concept that imported goods are best in quality tricked Filipino consumers and created a notion that local products lack the necessary quality controls to insure product efficiency. This affected the local production and resulted on the economic failure of local textile industry.
The Filipino culture was the most affected component of our identity. Because of the American settlement, most of our local traditions were gone. One of the best example is the value of respecting the elderly people. Nowadays, most liberal families are no more using the particles po and opo. Our language is also directly influenced by the Americans. English is widely utilized as a means of communication. Presently, even the public office of the Republic Philippines for the development of its national language, the Surian ng Wikang Pambansa, is considering the English language as a precursor in translating any foreign word into the Filipino language. The way we dress is also contemplative of Western fashion. Instead of being proud to wear the Baro’t Saya, Filipinos are even ashamed of displaying them on public. Fast-food culture was also introduced to us by the Americans. The hamburger, the pasta, the cola, the pizza, are among the few which Filipinos are captivated to. The kind of music, which the youth and the elderly, is also attracted are mainly that of the Western origin. The jazz, the foxtrot, the waltz, these are non Filipino.
From the very beginning of American colonialism, we Filipinos were attracted to the kind of life that the colonizers have commenced. The Americans, instead of being hated, even gained the status of respect from us. The assimilation between the Philippine and American culture was perfectly establish for the benefit of the colonizers.

IN RESPONSE TO ANNIMADICT AND CLARIZE' COMMENTS

Thank you animaddict and Clarize for posting your scholarly responses to my article!
I reviewed my article and with the help of my good friends I came up correcting myself and reasserting the past notions I have implied.
I will first discuss Clarize' comments.
First and foremost, I will admit that I used the broad definition of Reproductive Health Education (see House Bill No. 5043 Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008, Lagman et al., PHILIPPINES) as a characterization for "SEX EDUCATION" in my article. I cannot argue that they different, however, I considered the current society's perception of the latest development in the House Bill No. 5043 or Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008 where there are echoing debates on the proposal of including "sex education" on the High School curricula. Honestly, what I have written here is a reaction to these debates. I have also cited my personal experience in my high school days where I said 'we were taught only of human sexuality with a limited
notion on the biological nature of sex without addressing any aspect on
the morality of the act and sanctity of sex'. This is the current "sex education" in the Philippines which is optional on educational institutions to place in there respective curricula. I would again say that "sex education" in the Philippines is values-neutral insofar as my experience is concerned.
Secondly, I do not contradict myself. I want to reiterate that sex education must not be taught in High School because the way biology and health teachers teach this kind of education is highly values-neutral and the morality of the sexual acts is hidden. Thank you for citing the study of Dr. Corazon M. Raymundo et al. of the UP Diliman (entitled Unsafe Abortion in the Philippines: A Threat to Public Health ). The study revealed that a high degree (20%) of premarital sex occur on high school students in the Philippines. The study however did not reveal the probable reasons behind this alarming statistics. According to what I have said on the article, the reason for this growing number of premarital sex on high school students is the idiosyncrasy in teaching “sex education”. The unhealthy of way rendering sex education in a non-moral approach inculcates the notion that sex is a mere biological act and is therefore tolerable to perform. High school students are not being trained of the morality and sanctity of the sexual act making them susceptible to experiment and attempt to execute this “biological act”. Moreover, “sex education” must be incorporated with the maturity of the subject individuals. We cannot simply introduce sensitive ideas that are not valued to unprepared minds particularly the current “sex education” we have in this country. It makes sense now that my arguments do conform to my conclusions.
I deeply appreciated the intellectual comments you have submitted. I hope that this will be our venue for further discussion on related issues. Thank you very much!
For the comments of annimadict, I would like to commend her/him for such a good point of information.
I used the word “cautious” to delineate and characterize moral maturity and not of age whatsoever. Age is not a determinant of maturity. “Sex education” in the Philippines, as what I have said earlier, is “values-neutral” and must therefore be associated with matured individuals. I suppose that the above argumentation is already essential.
The media is not the issue here. I would support your assumptions that the media has something to do with the morality of the state. The real issue is how the Philippine government and high school teachers execute this “sex education” in high school. The neutrality of this education in terms of morality must be changed.
Lets discuss this issue further.
Thank you very much for comments!