Mandatory ROTC
Mandatory ROTC
Mandatory ROTC
The extreme sides of the argument—for and against implementing a mandatory Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC)
program—fall like this: On one side, this would brainwash our youth into mindless killing machines to serve the nefarious
purposes of the government. On the other hand, it would create an army of warriors ready to take on any invaders,
perhaps both human and from space.
Somewhere in the middle we might find some common sense.
In context, more than two-dozen nations around the globe require mandatory military service. The list includes a wide
diversity, geographically and economically. Perhaps North and South Korea are not a surprise, as well as Israel and
Taiwan. Austria and Brazil require their men to serve, as does Singapore. Some are like Mexico where a man is obligated
to a year of military service consisting of a few hours of drill or social services on weekends, not true military training.
While not making military service mandatory, many countries require that its men—and women on a voluntary basis—sign
up to be inducted into its military based on a lottery system.
The problems with the Philippine mandatory college ROTC program—that ended in 2002—were supposed to be solved
with the revised National Service Training Program (NSTP). This had both male and female college students active in one
of three sections—ROTC, Civic Welfare Training Service or the Literacy Training Service.
According to the Commission on Higher Education, over a 10-year period from 2002-2012 the Civic Welfare component
produced 10,614,000 graduates, followed by the ROTC component, with 1,435,000 Armed Forces of the Philippines
reservists and the Literacy Training with 538,700 graduates.
In speaking with some of our own students who went through the college program, there was general agreement that the
Civic Welfare and Literacy Services was a good experience for both sides. One person who attended an exclusive school
said that the students in the poor areas that he helped to read better felt more a part of the broader community than
before. Another said that it was a good feeling giving something back to the community.
One young man said that all his friends thought that his joining the ROTC was a waste of time by marching around with a
wooden gun. But his final reaction was that the ROTC component helped him learn more discipline. He had to submit an
excuse letter why he could not attend an ROTC training session. However, his letter did not follow the exact format
required, and he was given a demerit.
Perhaps rather than making ROTC training mandatory in senior high school, the existing NSTP format could be
implemented. From all accounts, in general the NSTP has been successful for both the students and the community. If
ROTC is important, then the government should explain why and how to the students. If they are old enough to be trained,
then they are mature enough to make their own decisions.
https://businessmirror.com.ph/2019/06/14/mandatory-rotc-2/
Why is mandatory ROTC opposed by some lawmakers? Kabataan Representative Sarah Elago posted on Facebook
her opposition to HB 8961's passage in the House. (READ: Mandatory ROTC? How about no?)
"House passes on 3rd and final reading today the institutionalization of mandatory ROTC in Grades 11-12, railroaded
without senior high school/K to 12 implementation review, and even without status report/resolution on the program's
widespread cases of harassment, hazing, and corruption," said Elago, who said she will later file her written opposition to
the bill.
Other legislators previously argued that requiring ROTC for students in Grades 11 and 12 would expose them to
corruption.
ROTC was previously implemented at the college level, but it was scrapped in 2002 after an investigation showed that a
University of Santo Tomas student was murdered after he exposed alleged corruption in the program.
Who would be exempt? Under HB 8961, only students deemed by the Armed Forces of the Philippines surgeon general
or his or her medical officer as physically or psychologically unfit for the ROTC program would be exempt, "in pursuance
to the recommendation of the educational institutions where the concerned student is enrolled."
Also to be exempted are students who have undergone similar military training, varsity players in sports competitions, and
those exempted by the Department of National Defense for other valid reasons.
Advertisement
What would be the punishment for non-completion of the training? Any student who would not complete the
mandatory ROTC program would not be allowed to graduate. This would also be a ground for compulsory military training.
A school that would refuse to offer the required ROTC program would be subjected to "administrative sanctions" by the
Department of Education, Commission on Higher Education, or the Technical Education and Skills Development
Authority. – Rappler.com
Instilling patriotism
Meanwhile, Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) spokesperson Marine Brig. Gen. Edgard Arevalo said they strongly
welcome this development.
"The AFP is a consistent advocate of a military training program that shall form part of the curriculum because that will
help nurture nationalism and patriotism to the youth in schools," he added.
Also, ROTC enrollment among Grade 11 and 12 students envisions to instill discipline and sense of purpose; respect for
the laws and the authorities; and obedience to rules and regulations.
"Today’s young generation needs to be exposed to the rudiments of basic soldiery no matter brief to help develop and
hone their leadership potentials," Arevalo emphasized.
Arevalo added that this move will protect the youth from getting brainwashed by communist rebels.
"They need to be exposed to the rudiments of basic soldiery no matter brief (four semesters) to help develop and hone
their leadership potentials and character. Not to the teachings of local communists and their minions who are wolves in
sheep’s clothing They enter school premises or are already inside school grounds in search for fertile minds. Idealist
young men and women whom they can plant the seeds of discontent and hatred and later on exploited and manipulated
to lead NPA’s to fill the dearth of their cadres — to the detriment and suffering of parents who bear all the sacrifices and
hardships in sending their children to school in the hope of a bright future," he added.
imposition of maximum penalty for offenses under existing laws committed by implementors;
pilot program implementation to limited number of schools in the first two years of implementation;
authorization to use existing budget for pilot implementation prior to inclusion in the annual General
Appropriations Act;
allocation of special annual budget to cover implementation, such as but not limited to training of instructors;
The House of Representatives is poised to pass a bill reviving the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) after the May
elections. The Senate is still deliberating on its version of the measure at committee level.
This bill could give new meaning to the May 2019 elections for the youth. It is a bill that directly impinges on the interest of
the youth, especially those aged 16 and 17 who have yet to take Grades 11 and 12.
If the Duterte-endorsed senatorial candidates win in the elections, this bill will certainly pass. If the opposition senatorial
candidates win, the proposed revival of ROTC will fail. The reason is simple — it is Mr. Duterte who has urged Congress
to pass the measure, threatening to issue an executive order to the same effect if they fail to do so.
If the bill passes this year, and it takes another year to formulate the new ROTC Program of Instruction and set up the
training system (facilities, instructors, resource materials), the first batch of Grade 11 students who will take the course will
be those in September 2020 or September 2022.
How can the proposed mandatory ROTC be hardwired to deliver on its purpose to “instill patriotism, love of country, moral
and spiritual values, and respect for human rights and adherence to the Constitution,” and avoid past evils, such as
corruption and murder (Cadet Officer Mark Chua case, 2001)? Passing another law is not enough. Learning from the
lessons from ROTC and similar civic training and development programs is the best way. Consider these lessons:
Lesson 1. Generate acceptance, ownership and support by key stakeholders.
In a democracy, it makes sense to consult the people who will be most directly and heavily affected by a new proposal.
Hold consultations with the youth, the military and the civic orientation and engagement institutions. Consult the relevant
literature, experience of other countries and experts. Lesson 2. Resuscitate corroded civic institutions and strengthen
recently created ones.
People have forgotten about these powerful civic orientation and engagement institutions that have been hijacked,
neglected and weaponized for private purposes, among them the Boy Scouts of the Philippines, the Girl Scouts of the
Philippines, the Sangguniang Kabataan, the Red Cross. We must strengthen and nurture these institutions that provide
the resources, opportunities and capabilities for the youth to engage in community problem-solving, not only family or
personal
problem-solving.
Review the performance of similar institutions that have yet to mature in the performance of their functions due to lack of
support for institutional development — the National Service Training Program, the National Service Reserve Corps, the
Philippine National Volunteer Service Coordinating Agency. Review these institutions together as a system. If necessary,
scrap and build structures, but do not layer redundant systems one on top of the other.
Lesson 3. Look forward, not just back. Conjure the envisioned outcome and impact of the proposed ROTC law, 10 years
or 20 years down the road. What is the best scenario? What is the worst scenario? What is the preferred scenario? How
do these compare with a “do nothing” (no mandatory ROTC) scenario?
Let us have more informed discussion and debates about the kind of citizen civic-military orientation and engagement the
country requires. To insist on imposing half-baked mandatory ROTC proposals is to play god with the time, energy, trust,
resources and lives of our youth, with no cogent arguments to convince them of the wisdom of our decisions. Contrary to
the intention of the proposed law, poorly designed mandatory ROTC will tend to turn the youth against the government,
and kill in them whatever urge for selfless service to community and country they may be capable of.
It is a pity that the youth affected by the mandatory ROTC are too young to vote on the issue in the May 2019 elections.
[OPINION | Dash of SAS] The Divorce Bill: Legislating love, sex and marriage
It is the judicial system infested with corruption and bribery that make a mockery of the institution of marriage – not the
two people who once vowed to love each other till death do them part but failed
To some legislators, the Divorce Bill is like a red flag to a raging bull.
They come charging at it with impassioned counter arguments:
“Over my dead body.” Senator Joel Villanueva, son of born again Christian group leader charged with misuse of P10M of
Priority Development Authority Funds (PDAF).
Well, given how long annulment proceedings take, death can come faster.
"Ok to divorce but not unli,” said noob Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa who is heading the Senate panel probing the drug
war that he led as former Philippine National Police (PNP) chief.
But even unli-load lasts for only 3 days. Then you have to load up again.
“Ok to divorce, but you cannot remarry,” according to Senator Ping Lacson.
That option already exists. It’s called legal separation. Under legal separation, you can legally separate everything – your
bed, your finances--but you cannot marry again.
“It’s not the right time for us to have divorce. I think we will have a hard time because we are a predominantly Catholic
country,” said Senator Cynthia Villar, real estate magnate and author of the recently passed Rice Tarification Law that has
reportedly led to the influx of cheaper imported rice and the closure of thousands of local rice mills who could not
compete. Villar is currently the head of the Senate Committee on Agrarian Reform and Agriculture & Food.
We already have divorce. Under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws, Muslim Filipinos can divorce. Our ancestors like the
Tagbanua in Palawan, the Gaddang in Nueva Vizcaya and the Cordillerans all practiced divorce before the Spanish came
and changed the rules. Various permutations of divorce were allowed under the American Period and the Japanese
Occupation until the Civil Code was passed in 1950 and again outlawed divorce. To date, the Philippines is the only
country in the world without divorce. Divorce is also outlawed in The Vatican City State but its residents are mostly men
who vowed to celibacy so that doesn’t really count.
“Hindi ako pabor sa divorce kasi (I am not in favor of divorce because) I’m a Christian. What God joined together, let no
one separate,” said bible quoting Senator Manny Pacquaio. The boxing world champion also claimed that he is a
marriage counselor.
All of these counter agreements to divorce are premised on personal opinion or some baseless prediction that if a divorce
law is passed, those with repressed heartbreak will finally be able to move on and do the unthinkable: trade in their Netflix
binge watch weekends for a marrying-divorcing-re-marrying-divorcing spree to possibly to make up for all those years
when they were imprisoned in failed marriages
Some of the rationale is punitive.
“You err once, you make amends; you err twice, you deserve to suffer,” Lacson said on Twitter. The former PNP Chief
Superintendent, who was among those cleared of murder charges in the Kuratong Baleleng rubout in 2012, said that
divorce should only be “once in a lifetime”. Lacson plans to introduce an amendment to the Divorce Bill that will prohibit
the spouse who filed for divorce from remarrying, but the one who did not file may do so.
Advertisement
Lacson hinted at a change of heart when he later tweeted: “Apropos my tweet on divorce, legislation is enhanced by
listening to people, sensible or not. Even nonsense sometimes makes sense. When the measure us put to a vote, it is
important that we are well-informed and guided.”
The social media backlash may have helped in his illumination.
As different versions of the Divorce Bill have been re-filed at the lower and upper House this 18th Congress, we can
expect the discussions to become even more heated.
In the aid of legislation, how about elevating the discourse and discussing the legal basis for a Divorce Law and how
simplifying the process of dissolving marriages would greatly reduce corruption?
In 2015, Rappler published an investigative report series called, “The Business of Annulment” which exposed the rampant
corruption in the judiciary. Courts functioned as annulment mills and churned out annulment decisions in wholesale
quantities. Stenographers copy pasted old annulment decisions and changed only the names of the couple. To cope with
the quantity, stenographers in one court reportedly resorted to making up the personal testimonies of the complainants,
drawing inspiration from telenovelas. Con artists posed as lawyers and scammed people out of hundreds of thousands of
pesos by giving them fake annulment decisions. Municipal officers doubled as “fixers” promising that they knew someone
“on the inside” who could cut down the annulment process from the usual minimum 3 to 4 years to 6 months. One room in
the Philippine Statistics Office (PSA) is stacked high with annulment decisions--all fake.
In one particularly ludicrous case, a friend of mine filed for annulment from his estranged wife only to find out that she had
secured one years ago from a court in a remote province that he had to Google to locate. She never bothered to tell him
about this small detail until he told her of his plans to file for annulment.
The current annulment process breeds corruption in the already problematic and case-loaded judicial system. Its legal
provisions defy logic and common sense. For example:
1. The grounds for Annulment or Declaration of Nullity are fixed and do not include domestic violence or infidelity as
grounds for annulment. (These conditions are under legal separation--that option that lets you live apart but not
remarry.)
Many resort to “psychological incapacity” which means having to undergo a psychiatric evaluation and prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that the spouse cannot fulfil the responsibilities and obligations of matrimony. If that
sounds vague, it’s because it is. (READ: Rappler: Untying the Marriage Knot 101)
2. The anti-collusion provision means that there should be no consensus, connivance or collusion between the
couple to obtain an annulment, meaning the could should not mutually want to severe the marriage; one must
contest the annulment proceeding.
3. The judge has the final say in granting an annulment. A judge who does not know you from Adam decides
whether or not your annulment petition has merit. The judge has the power to deny your petition, forcing you to
stay married to someone whom you may not have seen or spoken to in years.
To be clear, legalizing divorce does not excuse the government from going into the bigger fixes for corruption like the
automation of certain processes but if the State is serious about eliminating any whiff of corruption, legalizing divorce is a
crucial first step.
It is the judicial system infested with corruption and bribery that make a mockery of the institution of marriage--not the two
people who once vowed to love each other till death do them part but failed.
ffering a humane and respectful way of dissolving a marriage honors the happy loving years that a couple spent together
while acknowledging the reality that the union is no longer tenable. A simplified and realistic way to dissolve marriages
through a Divorce Law that adequately reflects life’s realities that lead to failed marriages makes the heartache easier to
bear for the couple and their children.
Divorce is the just way to legislate love, sex and marriage. – Rappler.com
Legalizing divorce in the Philippines: What you need to know
12.7Kshares72320
Kristine Joy Patag (Philstar.com) - March 20, 2018 - 4:47pm
MANILA, Philippines — March 19 marked a monumental day for advocates of divorce.
In a vote of 134-57, the lower house of Congress approved on third and final reading House Bill 7303 or "An Act Instituting
Absolute Divorce and Dissolution of Marriage in the Philippines."
Seen as a "pro-women legislation," the bill aims to legalize divorce in the Philippines—the only other country aside from
the Vatican City where it is illegal to do so.
The proposed measure pushed by progressive party-lists in Congress also saw support from two unlikely allies:
opposition lawmaker Rep. Edcel Lagman (Albay), the main sponsor of the bill, and House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez,
one of its co-authors.
Here's what you need to know about moves to legalize divorce in the Philippines.
1. What options are available for Filipinos who want to get out of marriage?
Currently, the only legal recourse available to Filipinos who want to exit a failed union is through an annulment or a
petition for legal separation. These two options have different grounds and end results.
Under the Family Code of the Philippines, a marriage may be annulled if any of the following grounds exist: lack of
parental consent, psychological incapacity, fraud, marriage by force or intimidation, inability to consummate the marriage
and if one party has contracted a sexually-transmissible disease. The 1987 Family Code was introduced under the
presidency of Corazon Aquino.
Those seeking annulment must undergo a mental exam, testify in court and sometimes even claim they or their spouse
entered the union while afflicted by a psychological disorder. The process can cost at least P250,000 and take anywhere
from one to 10 years given the congestion in Philippine court dockets.
Meanwhile, a petition for legal separation requires any of the following grounds: repeated physical abuse from partner,
coercion to change religious or political affiliation, attempt of respondent to corrupt petitioner or their child to engage in
prostitution, respondent meted with imprisonment of more than 6 years, drug addiction of spouse, lesbianism or
homosexuality, bigamous marriage, sexual infidelity or perversion, attempt against the life of spouse and abandonment
without justifiable cause for more than a year.
If the petition is granted, the couple may live separately from each other. The conjugal partnership is also dissolved, but
the marriage bonds are still in effect.
The CBCP warned that lawmakers packaged divorce as an "easy option," which may result in marriages and families
breaking up more easily.
"We merely ask that they consider the possibility that divorce, while it may indeed provide quick legal remedies for some
seemingly 'failed marriages,' might end up destroying even those marriages that could have been saved by dialogues or
the intervention of family, friends, pastors and counselors," Archbishop Romulo Valles, president of the CBCP, said.
The CBCP, however, cannot participate in the bill's interpellations. Some also raised the separation of the Church and
State as enshrined in the 1987 Constitution.
Gabriela Women's Party Rep. Emmi de Jesus in a statement after the bill hurdled the lower house reiterated calls for its
legalization.
"Ang pagpasok sa kontrata ng kasal, na kinikilala ng estado ay isang karapatan. Karapatang may karampatang
obligasyong kailangan tuparin ng dalawang panig. Dapat naroroon ang pagmamahalan, paggalang, suporta at iba pang
factors na magbibigay ng kaligayahan at kalusugan sa kanilang relasyon," she said.
(Entering the contract of marriage, that is recognized by the state, is a right. A right that has corresponding obligations
which must be met by both sides. There should be love, respect, support and other factors that ensure a happy and
healthy relationship.)
"Kapag may paglabag sa mga obligasyong ito, na kung minsang umaabot pa sa puntong nakataya na ang buhay at
katinuan sa pagitan ng mag-asawa, marapat lamang na kilalanin din ng estado ang karapatan na wakasan ang kontrata
at karapatang umalis sa relasyon."
(If there are violations of these obligations, that sometimes even endangers the life and sanity of the couple, it is just for
the state to also recognize their right to end the contract and exit the failed relationship.)
Gabriela Women's Party has been pushing for the legalization of divorce since the 13th Congress when it first secured
seats in the lower chamber.
Muslims in the Philippines, however, are not covered by the ban on divorce. Presidential Decree No. 1083, signed by the
late strongman Ferdinand Marcos Sr., provides that a couple married under the Muslim laws "have the right to divorce."
3. How did the divorce bill fare in past administrations?
This was the first time that a proposal to institute divorce in Philippine laws reached the plenary of the lower house.
Rep. Edcel Lagman (Albay) is the main sponsor of the bill. It was approved on March 19.
The divorce bill was first introduced during the 13th Congress in 2005. Bills pushing for divorce was also filed by
lawmakers for the 14th, 15th and 16th Congress.
For the 15th Congress, then-Rep. Rufus Rodriguez (Cagayan de Oro) and Rep. Marlyn Primicias-Agabas (Pangasinan)
sponsored House Bill 4368 that seeks to "harmonize" the Family Code "with recent rulings of the SC on divorce obtained
by the alien spouse in another country." The House plenary approved the said bill on Sept. 26, 2012, and was received by
the Senate on the same day.
Then Gabriela Women's Party Rep. Luzviminda Ilagan also filed a bill to amend the Family Code and introduce divorce.
The bill was referred to the Committee on Revision of Laws on Jan. 26, 2011.
Five similar bills on divorce were also filed during the 16th Congress. The Ilagan-sponsored bill has been pending with the
Committee on Population and Family Relations since May 20, 2014.
4. What are the pertinent details of HB 7303?
House Bill 7303 aims to make divorce more accessible to a wider range of couples seeking liberty from irreparable
marriage.
It provides that the "State shall assure that the court proceedings for the grant of absolute divorce shall be affordable and
inexpensive, particularly for court assisted litigants and petitioners."
The proposed measure also pushes for a pro-women legislation as the bill notes that in most cases of irreparable
marriages it is the wife who is entitled to liberation from an abusive relationship.
The status of the children of divorced couples also takes precedence. A joint petition for divorce should include a plan for
parenthood that details support, parental authority, custody and living arrangements of the common children.
For the legitimate and adopted children of divorced spouses, they will retain their legal status after the petition for divorce
is granted. A child born or conceived within 300 days after filing for divorce is also considered a legitimate child, except
when the basis for divorce is marital infidelity of the wife.
The bill also proposes that divorced spouses shall have the right to remarry.
One of the grounds under the proposed bill is when "one of the spouses undergoes a gender reassignment surgery."
Other grounds include:
reasons stated under legal separation and annulment under the Family Code
psychological incapacity
Senate President Aquilino "Koko" Pimentel III, a party-mate of President Rodrigo Duterte, had earlier said that he is more
inclined to add more grounds for annulment than push for divorce.
Should the two chambers of Congress approve the same version of the bill, it would be elevated to Malacañang for the
signature of the president. Duterte, however, might veto a Congress-approved divorce bill as he has been vocal of his
disapproval of it. During the March 2016 presidential debates, Duterte has thumbed down divorce.
Hours before the voting at the lower house, presidential spokesperson Harry Roque reiterated Duterte's stance against it.
The 72-year-old Philippine leader has separated from his estranged wife through annulment long before he was elected
president. — with a report from AFP
'I almost died': Abused Filipino women hope divorce will become legal
Divorce may also be filed when the spouses are legally separated by judicial decree for at least two years or when they
have been separated “in fact” for at least five years and reconciliation is highly improbable.
Hontiveros said in the 17th Congress, her divorce bill languished at the committee level.
She said while the state continues to recognize the sanctity of family life, “it is also duty bound to promote and protect the
well-being of its citizens.”
“It is a duty that should extend to circumstances whereby this well-being is being compromised by the inability to break
free from irremediably broken marriages and start anew in healthier family and living arrangements,” she said.
In March 2018, the House of Representatives, under the leadership of former Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, approved on
third and final reading a bill providing for divorce and dissolution of marriage.
President Rodrigo Duterte said he would not support the bill as his daughter, Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte, "is not
happy with it."
Duterte won't back divorce bill, says Sara not happy with it
More fisherfolk withdraw writ of kalikasan petition to protect West Philippine Sea
Mike Navallo, ABS-CBN News
MANILA – Eighteen more fishermen have opted to withdraw a writ of kalikasan petition before the Supreme Court, based
on a filing by their counsel the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) on Wednesday.
In its submission to the high court, the IBP said its lawyers were able to talk to 2 more fisherfolk from Zambales and 1
from Puerto Princesa, Palawan in person, while they managed to contact 14 other fishermen from Pag-asa Island through
the Facebook Messenger app.
All 17 plus another fisherman signified their intent to withdraw the petition, which sought to compel government agencies
to protect marine life in the West Philippine Sea by enforcing Philippine laws.
In total, all 3 of the petitioners from Zambales, 22 from Palawan and the IBP itself have chosen to withdraw the petition for
the protection of the country's exclusive economic zone in the disputed South China Sea.
There were 41 petitioners named in the plea but the rest, according to IBP lawyers, were not able to sign the verification
page.
Calida: Parties agree to dismiss SC plea to protect West PH Sea marine environment
Despite objections from the IBP lawyers and collaborating counsel Chel Diokno about the Solicitor General's alleged
breach of legal ethics in communicating with the opposing party’s clients without the knowledge of their lawyers, the Court
allowed Calida to submit the affidavits and required the IBP to coordinate with its clients on how to proceed with the case.
On July 19, the IBP filed a motion withdrawing the case on its behalf and on behalf of 7 fisherfolk. It also asked the high
court to allow its lawyers to withdraw as counsel for the remaining 20 petitioners.
Not satisfied with the motion, the Supreme Court required the IBP to exert more efforts to reach their clients, provide proof
that the 20 remaining petitioners actually knew about the contents of the petition and justify why the Court should allow
the IBP to withdraw and leave the remaining petitioners unrepresented.
The IBP, in its filing Wednesday, attached letters from 18 of the 20 remaining petitioners.
Zambales-based petitioners Rolando Labandelo and Nilo Labrador both wrote the IBP: “Pakiurong n'yo ang kaso namin
Abogado vs. DENR (Please withdraw our case Abogado vs. DENR),” in a letter dated Aug. 4 attached to IBP’s filing.
Meanwhile, 15 Palawan-based petitioners signed a letter dated Aug. 5 saying “[s]umasang-ayon kami sa pag-atras ng
kaso namin (Abogado vs. DENR) [We agree to withdraw our case (Abogado vs. DENR)].”
Another Palawan-based petitioner, Ricardo Natural, added his signature to the July 15 letter signed by 6 of his co-
petitioners withdrawing the SC case, which had earlier been submitted by the IBP to the high tribunal.
The IBP asked the high court to allow its withdrawal as counsel for petitioners despite not being able to reach the 2
remaining petitioners.
It also asked the court to give it until Friday, Aug. 16, to submit the letter from the officers of the Kalayaan Palawan
Farmers and Fisherfolk Association and an affidavit from former IBP Zambales president Josefina Ela Bueno detailing the
circumstances surrounding the filing of the petition.
The IBP had maintained during oral arguments that its lawyers in the Zambales and Palawan chapters were the ones in
direct contact with the petitioners, but Associate Justice Marvic Leonen told IBP’s lawyers present during the oral
arguments that it was their responsibility to talk to all their clients and show them the petition.
Calida had earlier claimed the parties have agreed to dismiss the petition right after the July 9 oral arguments. But the IBP
first consulted its clients before it filed any motion in court.
Two Palawan fishermen told ABS-CBN News last month it was the Philippine Navy who approached them to execute
affidavits and statements denying any knowledge about the petition, contrary to Calida’s claim during the oral arguments
that it was the fishermen who approached the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources.
The SC has been silent so far on the IBP’s claim of breach of legal ethics against the OSG and respondent government
agencies.
Lorenzana to China: What are Chinese research vessels, warships doing in our waters?
While Panelo said he agrees with Lorenzana that China should have asked the Philippines for clearance, he however
noted that it is yet to be confirmed whether Beijing’s government allowed the move.
“Even on the basis of friendship, then a matter of courtesy require that we should be informed of any passage to our
exclusive economic zone,” Panelo said.
Chinese Ambassador to the Philippines Zhao Jianhua meanwhile downplayed the rising tensions Friday, saying Beijing is
"not seeking trouble" amid unresolved disputes in the South China Sea.
“There are a lot of ships that [are] navigating in the South China Sea. Within military, I think each one of the ships,
particularly Navy ships, deserves careful observation. Not only the Chinese and the Philippines know but also everyone,”
Zhao said on the sidelines of an event.
“China will continue to be a good friend, a good neighbor and close relatives of the Filipino people,” he said.
We're not seeking trouble,' Chinese envoy says amid S. China Sea tensions
China has conflicting claims with several nations over large parts of the South China Sea through which roughly $3.4
trillion in shipping passes each year.
Aside from the Philippines, other claimants include Malaysia, Taiwan, and Vietnam.
President Rodrigo Duterte is set to fly to China later this month for a one-on-one meeting with his Chinese counterpart Xi
Jinping on maritime tensions and conflicting claims in the resource-rich waters.
MANILA, Philippines — A significant majority of adult Filipinos believe that it is important for the country to take back
control of islands occupied by China in the West Philippine Sea, according to a Social Weather Stations survey.
The survey conducted from June 22 to 26 found that 93% or about 9 in 10 ault Filipinos said it is important for the
Philippines to regain control of China-occupied islands.
According to the poll, 74% of the respondents said this is "very important" while 19% said this is "somewhat important."
Only 1% said the matter was "somewhat not important", 1% said it was "not at all important" while 4% were undecided.
China-held 'islands'
China occupies Panganiban (Mischief) Reef, which is within the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone, according to a 2016
arbitral ruling that China rejects and that the Duterte administration has been playing down in favor of bilateral talks with
Beijing.
In 2018, Beijing had installed anti-cruise ship missiles, surface-to-air missiles and electronic jamming equipment on its
"big three" islands in the Spratly chain — Fiery Cross, Mischief and Subi Reefs — which are also being claimed by the
Philippines.
The Chinese Coast Guard also surrounds Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal, which Manila also calls Bajo de Masinloc, a
traditional fishing ground off the coast of Zambales.
Strictly speaking, none of those features are islands.
SWS noted that the perception of Filipinos on regaining control of islands in the West Philippine Sea in June was four
points higher than the 89% rating in December 2018.
"The proportion has increased steadily in four surveys since June 2018," the polling firm said.
The figure was 87% both in September 2018 and in June 2018.
Calls for government action mount
A hugh majority of the respondents also called for the government to act on the West Philippine Sea.
The survey also showed that 89% said it is not right for the Philippines to leave China alone with its infrastructures and
military presence in the claimed territories.
About 92% also said the Philippines should strengthen its military capability, especially the Navy.
For 83% of the respondents, the government should take the issue to international organizations such as the United
Nations or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
At the same time, 84% of Filipinos said the government should form alliances with other countries to help in defending the
West Philippine Sea.
The survey was conducted using face-to-face interviews among 1,200 adults nationwide. The sampling error margins are
at ±3% for national percentages, and ±6% each for Metro Manila, Balance of Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.
"The Social Weather Survey items on people’s opinion about the issues in the West Philippine Sea were non-
commissioned. They were included on SWS's own initiative and released as a public service," SWS said.
The Second Quarter 2019 Social Weather Survey is the same poll that found that 80% of respondents were satisfied with
the performance of President Rodrigo Duterte.
In a statement, presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo pointed out that the survey was done at the height of the
Recto Bank incident, where a Filipino fishing boat sank after being hit by a Chinese vessel near the Recto Bank, which is
inside the Philippine EEZ.
Panelo said the survey results show "the president is on the right track in his policies and actions of governance."
"More and more Filipinos, even former cynics, are believing in the President's honest intentions for our nation. They see
how PRRD translates his words into action with his programs and policies positively experienced by them," he also said.
Positive
1. Lower retail prices for consumers. Possible savings for the consumers as it allows no limit in terms of the
volume of imports which will eventually stabilize prices. However, in the long run, the economy could benefit more
from the adoption of import tariffs than implementation of QRS which limit the entry of commodities and may lead
to unstable prices.
2. Address the rice shortage. Would address the urgent need to improve availability of rice in the country, prevent
artificial rice shortages, reduce the prices of rice in the market, and curtail corruption and cartel domination in the
rice industry.
3. Lower inflation rates. The law will also reduce government's role in rice importation and lead to more rice
imports by the private sector, thus, lowering rice prices and help tame inflation.
4. Interventions to support rice farmers. RCEF will provide key interventions to support farmers and enhance
their competitiveness and profitability, including farm machinery and equipment to improve farm operations, rice
seed development, propagation, and promotion, expanded rice credit, and extension services. Likewise, it will
open up a window for farmers to export and contribute to the world market.
Negative
1. New law lacks safety nets for Filipino farmers. Farmer groups clamor that the new law will make them
compete with cheap rice imports, making them more penniless. Measures should be in place to ensure that
Filipino farmers will not suffer with the rice tariffication law and that "safety nets" are available for farmers. While it
has its good points, the lack of government regulation worries stakeholders.
2. Potential displacement of farmers, NFA employees, accredited NFA retailers, rice millers and rice by-
product producers. Aside from the obvious displacement of rice farmers, NFA employees, and some 90,000
accredited NFA rice retailers nationwide, the deregulation of rice imports goes beyond the industry. Some of the
businesses and industries that will be affected by liberalized rice importation includes the following:
a. Millers. There are around 6,600 registered rice millers all over the country, employing 55,000 workers. Industry
stakeholders, in a position paper, said that a complete milling facility costs from Php 30 million (US$572,519.08)
to Php 50 million (US$954,198.47)1 . This would place the value of the whole industry itself at Php200 billion
(US$ 3.82 billion) to Php300 billion (US$ 5.73) ( (Orly Manuntag, Confideartion of Grains Retailers Association of
the Philippines).
b. Animal feeds and beer industry. A by-product of the rice milling process, the rice bran is used for making animal
and aquaculture feeds. A shortage in local unhusked rice production would also mean there would be a drop in its
by-product. If feed mills produce less, it would cause a possible increase in the prices of pork and chicken which
use rice bran as major ingredient for its feeds.
Another by-product which comes from the milling process is the brewer's rice or “binlid” which is used in
manufacturing alcoholic drinks, particularly beer.
c. Biomass, construction industry. A drop in local rice output will also mean a decrease in rice hull, which is used
as fuel for biomass furnaces used in the provinces to provide electricity. Rice hulls are also used as a binder for
cement and land fillers (Orly Manuntag, Confideartion of Grains Retailers Association of the Philippines).
3. Enable cartels of the rice trade and will throw poor sectors into a worsened state of hunger. There is no
guarantee that retail rice prices will be lower in the long run with unhampered importation. Relying on rice imports
makes the country vulnerable to higher world market prices as well as to rice production and export decisions of
other countries. In 2008, for instance, Vietnam, India and Pakistan restricted their rice exports amid rising global
rice prices. Thailand also raised the idea of creating a global rice cartel similar to that for oil exporting countries.
1. Rice imports are cheaper than domestically produced rice. Under a free market, the market price of rice will
decline with the influx of cheaper rice imports.
2. Liberalizing rice imports will help, but will not solve the Philippines' inflation problem.
3. Tariff are set at 35% tariff rate on all rice imports from ASEAN countries, and a 40% tariff on all imports from non-
ASEAN countries. However, some experts claim these tariff rates are still too high, and lower rates (10% to 20%)
might be more feasible in keeping with the central goal of making rice more affordable for Filipinos. While this will
result in imported rice becoming more expensive, the flood of imported grains will still threaten local produce and
worse, affects the farmers.
4. To ensure that the rice to be imported will not be infested by pathogens or pests like bukbok (weevils), the new
law requires that all private players secure “sanitary and phytosanitary import clearances” from BPI before they
can import. Past experience tells us that this could be prone to abuse (Dr. Ramon Clarete, University of the
Philippines School of Economics).
5. The Rice Fund will be put to better use if it were focused instead on improving rice farmers’ access to credit and
crop insurance (Dr. Emil Q. Javier, National Academy of Science and Technology).
Scrap provincial bus ban, find pro-people solution to traffic–IBON
August 13, 2019
Government should find another way of decongesting Metro Manila’s major thoroughfare instead of aggravating
the inconveniences of hundreds of thousands of provincial bus commuters, research group IBON said. Commuters’
welfare should be the primary consideration of the Duterte administration in addressing transport woes, said the group,
but its approach should be comprehensive and regulation should cover private vehicles as well.
During a hearing conducted by the Senate Committee on Public Services, IBON supported calls to scrap the Metro Manila
Development Authority (MMDA)’s Regulation Number 19-002, which aims to remove all provincial public utility bus (PUB)
terminals from the entire length of EDSA in order to ease traffic. That provincial buses are instead directed to load and
unload in integrated terminals in Sta. Rosa, Laguna for PUBs coming from the south, in Paranaque for those with
terminals in Pasay City, and in Valenzuela City for those coming from the north, is inconsiderate of hundreds of thousands
of commuters who have to take the provincial bus regularly, the group said.
IBON said that the MMDA regulation nitpicks on provincial buses servicing a big number of commuters without addressing
the fact that private cars make up most of daily EDSA traffic and pollution. Based on MMDA and commuter network Move
Metro Manila/ Komyut figures, IBON estimates that provincial buses move up to 425,000 commuters, while cars plying
EDSA move at least 370,000. Cars, however, comprise 65% of traffic and also contribute more to pollution and carbon
dioxide emissions, noted the group. Buses, meanwhile, 66% of which are provincial, take up only 3.5 percent.
Metro Manila’s transport system lacking a last-mile system makes relocating provincial bus terminals to limited spots more
difficult for provincial bus commuters, IBON added. Memo 19-002 adds another layer instead of simplifying the
transportation process for commuters. It not only aggravates their plight in combating traffic but even adds cost due to
additional rides for example. IBON said that in other countries, last-mile solutions include publicly available shuttle rides or
bicycle infrastructure that ensure seamless mobility from a central hub or terminal to a passenger’s final destination.
IBON said that the bus ban also disregards how many ordinary passengers live in neighboring provinces but work in the
National Capital Region (NCR) for lack of job opportunities elsewhere. Taking the train is no viable alternative because
the country’s rail systems and interlinkage remain quite underdeveloped to say the least, said the group. The public
Philippine National Railways has not been restored to its full potential and only runs from Tondo to Laguna; the other
public Light Rail Transit (LRT) systems operate only within Metro Manila. The private Metro Rail Transit 3, meanwhile,
traverses EDSA but only partially, and has a record of multiple breakdowns and mishaps due to inefficient management
regardless of fare hikes.
Looming public utility jeep (PUJ) phaseout worsens the scenario and not only for provincial bus commuters, said IBON.
This is because PUJs currently play a proxy role in first mile and last mile functions, or in taking commuters to and from
areas near central transport hubs.
IBON said that traffic solutions that are arbitrary and inimical to the public such as the bus ban should be rescinded.
Instead, government should forge a pro-people solution to traffic woes that can start with conducting genuine
consultations with affected sectors for all mass transport endeavors. The group added that congestion due to too many
private cars can be checked, such as with a congestion tax, stricter street parking rules, and perhaps even curbing car
ownership.
It may also be necessary, IBON said, to conduct an audit of road and rail safety including the accountability of
corporations and agencies involved. As with other public services, privatization and the user-fees policy should be
stopped in mass transport, said the group.
In its transport policy study titled “Mass Transport System in Metro Manila and the Quest for Sustainability”, IBON said
that government’s direction should be to craft a sustainable mass transport system: It should be efficient – meaning
shortest travel time, shortest possible distance, and least changes in transport mode. It should be reliable, where
expected travel time is actual travel time, and unnecessary waiting is minimized. It should be accessible – meaning
infrastructure is easy to access, and affordable as well as considerate of the specific needs of various sectors. It should
be safe to prevent harm and ensure pedestrian-friendly conditions. It must also be environmentally sound using clean and
energy-efficient fuels and promoting non-motorized transport such as cycling and walking. ###
Isko Moreno's clearing operations: Which Manila areas have been covered?
What will happen to ambulant vendors? Moreno said vendors who used to occupy these areas will need to set up
shops in designated areas but must ensure people can still pass.
"If you want to organize as vendors, you organize among yourselves based on the policy of the city. What is that? Bigyan
ng madadaanan ang tao. Panatilihing malinis ang inyong mga panindahan. Huwag niyong ookupahan ang lugar na hindi
pinapayagan. Ganun lang. (Give way to people, keep your selling area clean, don't occupy prohibited spaces. That's all),"
Moreno told reporters in a press conference on Tuesday, July 4.
Though the clearing operations may disrupt the livelihood of some vendors, Moreno said it was needed to put order in the
city and give the streets of Manila "back to the people."
In an earlier Rappler Talk, Moreno also said he would only allow vendors who are residents of Manila to sell in the city.
(FULL TEXT: Ano ang plano ni Isko Moreno sa ambulant vendors ng Maynila?)
Moreno is eyeing a long-term solution to have an alternative shopping area for vendors to set up shop permanently.
The mayor said clearing operations will most likely follow in Paco, Padre Faura, and Pedro Gil. (READ: 'Wala nang mayor
na natutulog sa Maynila' – Isko Moreno) – Rappler.com
Isko Moreno effects and consequences
A welcome development in many local governments after new Manila Mayor Isko Moreno started cleaning up Manila, was
the copycat actions of mayors in many cities to also clean up their cities of illegal structures, illegally parked cars and
sidewalk vendors that were obstructing the vehicular traffic and pedestrians.
These mayors realized that the actions of Isko were appreciated by the people and propelling his popularity in Manila and
even in the national scene, pushing up his political fortune. It even goaded Secretary Año of the Department of the Interior
and Local Government to issue an administrative order to all the mayors in the country to “return the streets and
sidewalks” to the people with a warning of possible suspension of the mayors for non-compliance.
In the major cities in Metro Manila, Visayas, and Mindanao whose residents have been suffering from vehicular and
pedestrian traffic congestion partly caused by road obstructions, the clearing and cleaning up of the streets and sidewalks
was a long-awaited relief. The faster traffic and pedestrian flow and the cleanliness got praise from the middle class to the
upper class
The lower class especially those who had to make a living plying their trade in the sidewalk and the streets, were not
ecstatic as they lost their means of livelihood. Some city mayors promised relocation sites and temporary financial support
to those who had no alternative livelihood, but not to the middle-class merchants who were extending their premises to
the sidewalks and to the streets.
The macro-economic effects of these clearing and cleaning initiatives are neutral and at most minimal. The affected
vendors contribute little to the consumption component of the economy and they do not pay taxes. They are part of the
underground economy which is not included in the formal Gross Domestic Product measurement, but their purchases are
implied in the aggregate consumption and indirect taxes.
The more prosperous of those directly affected will just adjust or relocate their business areas and do business as usual.
On the other hand, the savings in terms of fuel expenses, faster commuting time and better productivity of the workers
may be substantial and more than offset the loss of livelihood and temporary financial support to the directly affected
indigent vendors. So, economically, Isko Moreno’s early and hopefully continuing move is a win-win situation that should
be pursued.
There could be more social costs involved in these clear and clean operations of the cities. Aside from the loss of
livelihood, there will be dislocation of people and families, this could lead to children being away from schools, and rising
criminality.
But these are already in the job description of the mayors and the local governments, so it boils down to effective and
efficient local government and governance. The mayors and the local governments will just have to do their jobs better,
and they have the financial resources to do these with their increasing annual revenues from local taxes and IRA shares
from the national government.
The most welcome effect and consequence of Isko Moreno’s good moves, are the heightened expectations of the people
and the voting population from their local government and government officials. The thinking class, which spans from the
upper lower class to the middle upper class, will now expect good governance and performance from their elected
officials. They have seen that politicians will react to positive and negative feedback. And with an active social and main
media, they can make local officials accountable and worry about their re-election and continuance in office. This will go
up to the provincial and then into the national level so that all politicians will have to deliver on their promises or lose in the
elections.