The effects of Neri vs Senate

The resolution in the Neri vs Senate Committee Case is like seeing "the good, the bad and the ugly"...

• The "good" because finally, everybody can breath upon knowing how powerful the President of the Philippine Republic is. Siyempre next time, alam na kung sino ang puwedeng magsabi ng Noli Me Tang-ina... este Tangere. Siyempre, luminaw na rin ang bolang kristal at alam na kung ano ang mas mahalaga... ang kapakanan NG MGA PILIPINO o ang kapakanan ng ILANG PILIPINO -- that is, the salus populi or the salus presidente.



• The "bad" because the Neri vs Senate Committee show the bias of the Supreme court to the Supreme Law... the law of the salus presidente. Excuse us: wala pa pong personality na involved. We are just talking of the presidential seat here.



• At dahil nakita natin ano na ang hugis ng batas, nakita rin natin ano na ang hugis ng demokrasya sa Pilipinas -- meaning, democracy only caters to a selected few. So if there is a conflict between the salus presidente and the salus populi, the former prevails. Hence, the "ugly".
  
  We have seen also the "ugly" because we have seen that the real democracy ends when secrecy begins. So while we argue that the Executive Privilege is a constitutional fact, we tend to forget that transparency is also a constitutional fact. And when we argue that the Executive Privilege has a constitutional basis, we tend to forget that the ideas of "public office as a public trust" and "accountability" also has a constitutional bases.


The "good, the bad, and the ugly", however, shows how difficult the job of a Justice of Peace and Justice of Court is. It simply means weighing interests against interests, and be conscience-stricken for the outcome. So if Ed Ermita has been doing double-talks, and if there is now a stalemate between the two branches of the government, it now rests with the Justices. And whether or not the Justices can rest in peace with their decisions, kanila na lang yun. But too sad that in the democracy Pinoy style, the fate of a greater number is decided by the lesser few.

Marketing the Rice Importation Idea?

According to Felipe Medalla, UP Economics professor and former planning secretary: The collective wisdom of the market should decide importation… The more the government interferes in the market, the more the economy is vulnerable to shocks and crisis.

What Medalla is saying is to let the market decide everything and that the government should have lesser interference on importation. But will this give us an assurance that:

• The rice cartel will not be in-charged of the importation?


• That the people will be assured that rice prices will become lower?


• That the government will be able to control smuggling, specifically rice smuggling?


• That the farmers will not be on the negative side should there be importation of rice?

Dahil sa patuloy na denial-to-death ng gobyerno lalong nabubuhay ang rice cartel. With this, magkakaroon kaya ng assurance na hindi ang kartel ang magiging in-charged ng importation?

Siyempre dahil open na ang importation, puwedeng lalong umigting ang smuggling. At siyempre dahil mura ang bigas galing sa smuggling, puwedeng mag-usap ang mga smugglers at ang rice cartel. O di ba, happy together? To note, ni hindi nga nakokontrol ang smuggling so this is not impossible. According to whispering spirits, me mga kakutsaba pa nga ang mga smugglers diyan mismo sa gobyerno. Me mga nagsasabi pa nga na ang ilan sa mga smuggling lords ay nakatira pa sa palasyo.

Lastly, opening up the imports will, of course, hurt the local producers. When the Philippines signed up the WTO and the GATT, wala itong ginawang safety nets para sa mga local producers. Lalo na ngayon na ang concentration ng efforts ng gobyerno ay broadband deal at ang "anti-corruption of the corruption efforts". Ibig sabihin, bahala na ang mga local producers sa kanilang mga sarili.

Kung sabagay, even the government's puppy, si Papa Neri, nagsabi na oligarchy ang Pilipinas. Ibig sabihin, the efforts of the government is designed not to answer the needs and interests of the people (as in the case of the real democracy) but to serve the welfare of the selected few.

The fight vs impunity

Defense Sec. Gilbert Teodoro said that foreign groups should not dictate how the Philippines will solve its problems on its own way. As Teodoro said: We are dealing with the issue of extra-judicial killings structurally in the department. It will be at our pace, on our terms, in our own programs.

While we agree with his message as a statement of Philippine sovereignty, we are in buried in doubt. First, what pace? 20 years? 50 years? Ilang beses na rin ba itong sinabi ni Gloria -- na aayusin niya ang culture of impunity sa Pilipinas? During the post-Marcos period, sa panahon niya lamang may pinakamalalang patayan. Worse, instead of a declining figure, lalo pa atang tumataas.

Second, in what terms? Killing the noisy ones lalo na ang media? In the Gloria administration alone, 7 journalists are killed per year. Mas malala sa panahon ni Erap na kalaban talaga ng media, o ni Tabako Ramos na isang military general. Di pa kabilang ang mga frustrated killings.

Third, in what program? Feeding program lalo na ng mga underpaid na media? O kaya PP 1017? O kaya ang pagbabawal na mag-rally at magpahayag ng sama ng loob laban sa gobyerno?

Instead of babbling, mas maganda na ipakita ang blueprint paano ito ma-address. At agad-agad dapat may sample. Alam na pala ni Teodoro na may mga military personnel involved, ba't di pa yun ilabas at i-prosecute? Mas inuuna pa ang Magdalo case na huling nangyari kaysa sa mga journalists and Leftists killed starting from he first few years of Gloria Administration. If they consider the Magdalo's actions are an attack to democracy, mas malala ang nangyaring mga pagpapatay. They are not only an attack to democracy but on the freedoms of life and liberty as well as the freedom of the press - the basic foundations of democracy. Kung baga, bubong lang ang ginulo ng Magdalo samantalang sa mga pinatay na journalists at Leftists, pundasyon ang sinira. Kaya hindi kataka-takang bagsak ang Pilipinas sa pagiging isang tunay na demokrasya sa mata ng ibang bansa at sa mata ng mga international entities.

Random thoughts and GMA's latest disapproval rating

According to Pulse Asia:

Amidst the controversies hounding the incumbent national administration, around three in four Metro Manilans (71%) express disapproval for presidential performance while almost the same percentage of Metro Manilans (76%) distrusts President Arroyo. These figures are essentially the same as those obtained by the President back in July 2005 (68% and 72%, respectively) during which time ten members of her cabinet resigned and various groups and individuals called for her to step down from office at the height of the Garcillano wiretapping issue.

The highest disapproval rating came from the Philippines' socio-economic Class E with 80% and then the Class D with 73%. Classes A, B, and C has the greatest share of undecided respondents with 20%.

Medyo naiisip ko na ang mga sagot ng Malacanang: "Commissioned yan ng oposisyon" o "Hindi yan totoo". Pero ng bumaba ang self-rated poverty survey sabi ng Malacanang "Tunay yan". In simple terms kung paborable sa palasyo, tama ang survey pero kung hindi, it's either commissioned by the opposition or untrue.

Pero aminin man natin o hindi, kahit 20% ang margin of error ng survey, majority pa rin ang ayaw kay Gloria. O kahit sumakay ka lang ng jeep, maririnig mo ang mga reklamo ng mga tao at masasabi mo rin na talagang marami na ang ayaw sa nakaupo sa palasyo. For instance, ilang beses bang nagtaas ang pamasahe sa pitong taon niyang panunungkulan? At ilang posiyento ba ang itinaas? Naalala ni Tikboy, P2.50 lang ang pamasahe noon ng umalis si Erap. Pero ngayon, minimum fare ay P7.50 na. Dagdag din ang itinaas ng mga bilihin...

Ang pinakamalala, sabi ni Mang Pedro, "Ginawa kaming mga loko-loko. Ibinoto namin si Fernando Poe, ng binilang ay Arroyo."

Pero okay lang po. Nasa demokrasya pa rin tayo at sa demokrasya, mas malakas ang bilang ng mga may pera. Kaya nga lalong malapit ngayon ang Pilipinas sa China.

Not all elections symbolize democracy

Medyo pumalpak na naman si Toting Bunye. In a statement with regards the downgrade given to the Philippines by the New York-based Freedom House he said: Our people know best. We held elections last year and many potential candidates have been preparing for the 2010 elections even this early. These are examples of the vibrancy of our democracy.

The communist parties in China and the former USSR are used to holding elections. And almost before every elections, potential candidates also prepare. Pero democratic nga ba ang mga ito? Even the most dictatorial governments in the world also claim to hold elections. Democratic din ba ang mga ito?

In simple terms, elections do not always symbolize democracy. In 2004 we've had elections. And there were questions of legitimacy of the winning president as well as the vice president -- questions which were buried in technicalities. Shall we also say democratic din ito?

Or pinaka-simple: Can we call the Philippines a democratic country when it shun its eyes and ears to the voices of its critics? For instance, Raul Gonzales, in his capacity as the Secretary of the Department of Justice, has been calling the Committee to Protect Journalists and the Freedom House to jump in the river and the Pacific Ocean, respectively, for giving negative ratings to the Philippines. Is this fair and democratic enough? The fact na binabato pa ng mga akusasyon ang mga kritiko ng gobyerno instead of taking their ideas in and incorporating the same to further improve the system of administration, is a clear indication of how undemocratic the Philippines is.

Sabagay, ang mga isda nabibingwit sa sarili nilang mga bibig.