ANTONIO ZUMEL CENTER FOR PRESS FREEDOM
February 25, 2006
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo blames what she calls the historical enemies of the democratic state to justify her Proclamation 1017 declaring a state of emergency. In doing so, she tramples upon democracy. And yes, she blames the media for “magnifiying” the claims of these historical enemies of the state.
While stating that Proclamation 1017 does not include arrests, the police and military have begun arresting leaders of the opposition.
While declaring respect for civil and democratic rights of the people, she has ordered the violent dispersal of the people exercising their freedom of speech and assembly.
It will serve President Arroyo well to remember the fate of her predecessors who put their, their families’ and their cabal’s interest first before the interest of the country and the Filipino people.
Curtailing freedoms enshrined in the constitution will not solve the political and economic crisis. It will only exacerbate the crisis. Therefore, we demand the full respect of these freedoms including the right of media to bring the truth to the people.
Media should be allowed to operate and make available to the people the news and the different views on the events in the Philippines. Harassments, threats and arrests of media practitioners and personnel are clear violations of press freedom and should be condemned and defied.
The threat of Ronald Solis, chairman of the National Telecommunications Commission, that the government can close down a television or radio station during a state of emergency, the raids on newspaper offices, detention and interrogation of journalists, columnists and publishers are a vile portent of things to come.
Thus we call on our colleagues in the media to be vigilant and courageous in the face of any threats to curtail press freedom. The Filipino people have the right to be truly informed.
************************
SAMAHANG PLARIDEL
February 27, 2006
It’s a travesty on our history that we have to argue the inviolability of the freedom of speech and expression, familiarly known as the Freedom of the Press, in a free, democratic, and open society.
In the 19th century, Jose Rizal, Marcelo del Pilar (PLARIDEL), Graciano Lopez Jaena, and other illustrious Filipinos exiled themselves, formed the Propaganda Movement, published La Solidaridad, fought as writers, forebears of journalists, for Filipino freedom. Inhere nt in the struggle is the freedom of the press.
In the 12 years of martial rule, Filipino journalists along with the freedom-fighters wrote, again in exile, while those who remained in the country did so clandestinely – as virtual exiles.
Today, Proclamation 1017 patently exiles journalists through censorship and in doing so banishes in exile the bedrock liberty of a democratic society.
The government’s imposition of “standards”, intimidating sectors in media into asking for “guidelines” from government, is without precedent in a democracy. It is not even sanctioned by our Constitution, which provides that even under Martial Law, civil liberties will be respected.
History clearly shows that civil liberties are irreparably impaired without press freedom.
History shows that a free and independent press is a conservative rather than a disruptive force of a free society. The press does not subvert but instead promotes democracy, that by freely reporting on events and freely and vigorously commenting on them, a free people is able to protect itself from the inevitable abuse of power. A free press is the people’s defense against deception, intimidation, and subjugation from forces inimical to their welfare.
Only in despotic regimes is a free press considered a subversive force, for it is subversive of the arbitrary exercise of power, subversive of conditions that “exalts the few over the degradation of the many,” subversive of the despotism of armed duplicity.
Let lawyers and constitutionalists argue the legal merits of Proclamation 1017.
We in PLARIDEL need no arguments to justify the freedom of the press. We find it degrading to have to argue for a sacrosanct freedom that is the shining mark of civil society and the one guarantor of every man’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
A government, nay, a free society, that cannot see this has already enslaved itself.
**************************
Senator Mar Roxas
27 February 2006
Delivered at the Senate
The events over the weekend and the last several days prior to that are very disturbing for us as a nation. Announcements of coup or aborted coups, talks of conspiracies and machinations to subvert our democracy have been all over not only in the airwaves, but to include as well the text messages. And yesterday, this was all capped by what otherwise should have been a normal course of business event, a simple transfer of command which unfortunately, nearly held our country hostage to its successful implementation. All of these of course, Mr President and distinguished colleagues, under this rubric of Proclamation 1017 that has discombobulated, that has turned topsy-turvy, that has made even more turbulent, the goings-on here in our country. Much has been said about Proclamation 1017. I myself have said so to the media and in other fora.
But I rise today this afternoon to state for the record, for the record of this Senate, that I oppose Proclamation 1017 and I call on the executive for its immediate revocation. To my mind, Mr President, 1017 is a direct assault on our democracy. By intimidating the media and the opposition, it attacks the principle of freedom of expression, which is the very bedrock of our liberties.
Mr President, I recall I was a young high schooler in 1972. I woke up one morning and there was no newspaper. There was no TV. There was no radio. Hence, my father, who was in public service at that time, was very much involved in meetings and all sorts of efforts to try and reverse what had happened the evening before and in the day before, which was Proclamation 1081. It was too late. The forces of the executive, the military in particular, the police, were already in place. And what was stolen from us, our liberties, our democracy in 1972, could not be so easily or so immediately reversed.
It took our country until 1986 to gather enough strength psychologically, spiritually, and physically to rise up and take back what was stolen from us that September of 1972. We fast forward from 1972 to 2006. My father is no longer around, but because of the grace of God and the help of the people, I find myself now here in the same job that he had. And I register today my opposition to Proclamation 1017 in the hope that we can arrest this headlong slide to the loss of our liberties and our democracy.
Mr President, let me also state for the record that I was and I continue to be a true believer in the concept of a strong republic. A strong republic that shall serve as a balancer of the inequities that life gives the ordinary person. A strong republic, government that will intervene that will level out the playing field and to give a hand up to those that begin life with lesser than other citizens. A government that will assure a fair and competitive playing field for all. A government that helps and supports those that those that don’t start out life with as much as others. This to my mind is what a strong republic is. This to my mind is something worth fighting for, worth dying to implement and operationalize. But nowhere in this definition of a strong republic is a definition that this strong republic will be a bully that then removes the rights or intimidates the citizens that this government is sworn to defend, protect, and help.
Mr President, this is a very, very sad turn of events for our country. It signals, to my mind, another data point in this head-long slide towards more autocratic, less tolerant governance in our land. It started with CPR, continued on with 464, and now we have 1017. What do all of these proclamations and orders have in common? What they have in common is a lack of tolerance for dissent, a lack of openness to listen to possibly what could be, valid views and an attitude of knowing it all.
Mr President, if the views that are expressed in dissent in opposition, contrary to whatever is the government line are so patently void of validity, then the appropriate response, Mr President, is to offer one’s own ideas and the support for these ideas. Certainly, it is not to say we will not listen, we will not hear, and you will remove your right for expressing the same.
And so that’s all I have to say, Mr President. I oppose Proclamation 1017. I say for the record, I say it mindful of what my father did in 1972 and what others like him did all those years.
Our democracy is very, very precious and we must do all that we can to uphold and preserve it.
Thank you, Mr President. Thank you, distinguished colleagues.
Ellen,
As of the date Proclamation 1017 was issued, the Philippines
ceased to be a democracy. The assumption in a democratic system of government is that the government’s basis of support is the people. Proclamation 1017 means that henceforth the support of the GMA administration is not the people but the military, at least those factions of the military which are supporting her. It is a replay of Proclamation 1081 by Marcos. When Marcos issued 1081 he shifted the support of his regime from the people to the military.
However, please note the differences, and they are significant, between 1972 and 2006.
1) The military was united in its support of 1081 until 1986, when the FVR/JPE faction split from the FM/Ver
faction.This gave rise to EDSA I.
2) It was a simple task in 1972 to control the flow of information. All Marcos had to do was seize a few TV
stations and the major newspapers. It will be almost
impossible to do the same now. The cyberspace and the
widespread use of the internet and text messaging will
pose a serious obstacle to restricting the free flow of information. Even Beijing with its vast internal security apparatus cannot control cyberspace in China.
3)In 1972, Proclamation 1081 had a shock effect on the
population. The people, save for a few brave souls, were
initially intimidated. But EDSA I proved to the people
that they have it within themselves to remove an oppressive
regime. If there is one thing we could safely predict at this point, it is the fact that Proclamation 1017 will be lifted by the people themselves if GMA does not do it. As
Rizal said : “There are no tyrants were there are no willing slaves.” Our people know this lesson now.
The best she can do is postpone the inevitable. She will as
usual, use patronage to prolong her stay in power. She can give a lot of inducements to the top brass of the AFP who are still supporting her. In fact there is a change now in our ruling elite. The military top brass have become part of the ruling elite as in days of FM.
Proclamation 1017 is at best a transitory step, either GMA lifts it soon or she will have to go all the way and proclaim Martial Law. Again a replay of 1972. Marcos initially suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus. When that did not work he went all out and declared Martial Law. As
noted, it was our people during EDSA I which ultimately lifted Martial Law.
They can say whatever they want, or spin it in any way, the bottom line is that freedom of the press is repressed thru this proclamation.
It has to be lifted and the issuing party be sanctioned. In the current setup and officers of the government, this is not going to happen because they are getting away with anything at the moment.
28 Fberuary 2006,
Thanks for sharing with us the speech of Sen. Mar Roxas, I agree, that government must not bully the people, much more to protect them at all. The same scenario in 1972 is happening right now, although I was still very young then, but base on what I read and heard of, the same is happening right now. Why is the vice president so quiet, he will give a statment but that’s it. Curtailing the freedom of expression, much more curtailing the freedom of the press is an indication that the administration right now is panicking. If GMA claims that she is the best to lead us in the transition (what transition???), the why is she not calling for a snap election. If the claim they won fair and square in 2004, then we have to pressure them for a snap election now, not in 2007 or wait for 2010. Agin to lead us (the filipinos) to transitio, transition to what, MARTIAL LAW???there’s no difference between 1081 of marcos and 1017 of GMA, both are curtailing/suppressing the freedom that our fore fathers fought in the early years of the country’s existence. 1017 will lead us to nowhere, but the cancellation of our basic rights. I say again, the only thing that can save our country is to call for a snap election, and then after that we move forward.
jinx
Proclamation 1017 has a tint of martial law. Its prime purpose is to suppress press freedom and crack down political oppositions. A free press is one of the foundations of a democratic society. The Arroyo regime cannot fool the Filipino people with the old communist bogey. It appears that government agencies have over reacted to the declaration of national emergency. The Gestapo police have arrested without warrants the usual suspects. The National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) has no power to close down mass media. These agencies may have misinterpreted its role or deliberately abuse its power with a blessings from Malacanang Palace. It’s expected that the Supreme Court will side with the administration. No thanks to GMA’s banana republic!
Just been over at the Daily Tribune website. The front page is full of weird characters and strange symbols. I guess the new copy editor can’t type and doesn’t know the difference between an apostrophe and a question mark. (Baka it’s the work of the new editor:Gen. Arturo Publisher Lomibao
Ellen, I posted the comment below a while ago in your blog right after I posted same in DJB’s (although one I posted in DJB’s contained entire text of my comment in MLQ3’s) but curiously, it’s not here.
Did you delete it? Or could I have pressed the wrong key? Just asking. If you feel, the contents are not fit for publishing here, it’s ok, I will understand. Thanks.
“Ellen,
“There is a very interesting point raised by a commenter in MLQ3’s blog on the subject of “disciplining” Lim & Querubin (which got me going) and which indirectly has bearing on the declaration of Emergency Rule!
“I am ’satisfied’ that Gloria and her government acted in panic, that the reasons they are mouthing to media and the citizens of the Republic are born of their desire to further dupe them. There’s nothing technically new (government has already been under armed siege since WWII) and the most ridiculous spin is something to do with COUP D’ETAT.
“Gloria panicked and then hastily went on TV invoking some gibberish. Gloria was at her best in the SEO act, lying, cheating the public out of their hard-earned Edsa!
http://www.quezon.ph/blog/?p=847#comments “
Ellen,
Just read that “US state dept. official arriving for 3-day visit”.
http://www.inq7.net/globalnation/sec_new/2006/feb/28-02.htm
Hmmm, interesting…
Like Philip Habib , a State Dep’t trouble shooter, calling on FM on the eve of EDSA I? Proclamation 1017 cannot continue without the support of Washington DC. In much the same way Proclamation 1081 would not have lasted that long
without US support.
The GMA administration is now propped up by the military
without any popular support. If US aid is cut, our military
will be cut off from its logistics and will become a hallow
shell. Our military in other words, will be forced to withdraw its support of GMA if the US withdraws its support. So like it or not, Washington has a big say on
how long we will endure 1017.
Thanks Ambassador!
I thought so and had even posted question on DJB’s blog which is somehow related to the subject but of course, is mere speculation on my part:
http://philippinecommentary.blogspot.com/2006/02/proclamation-1017-state-of-rebellion.html
However, Ambassador, allow me to go back to the “prop up” point…
The US is not the sole source of military financing for our Philippine military. The Philippines has its own defence and procurement budget albeit small. The mere $25M that the Philippines sources from US FMF is not enough to “prop up” our military.
In other words, Hill’s visit, although tied to further military aid to the AFP may be more politically motivated than say of a practical military nature.
You remember when Cory was under siege by Gringo’s men; she asked Bush for help with air defence firepower that she would pay for but Bush did not agree so Cory went and asked Mitterand who SOLD the MISTRALS to her (and which, incidentally, Gloria inherited).
Over the last 5 years, the AFP have been purchasing equipment from various suppliers (on top of American suppliers). To give you a more specific example, ss we speak, the British are supplying the Philippine Navy with naval guns and fire control systems paid for by purely Philippine government defence funds – not out of US FMF, the legal source of AFP funding from the US.
In other words, today more than at anytime, Gloria and her government through the AFP have a realistic purchasing power is push comes to shove. I’m of the opinion that the military prop up aid, while it is there, is not quite the backbone of the coming meeting with the US official.
Anna,
I should have mentioned that withdrawal of US support will also include the rest of the aid programs. The US remains the second largest ODA donor to the Philippines after Japan.
The US military aid program contains many hidden items not just military hardware. Some could be traced to the practice of the US to hide some of its CIA covert operations
abroad in the appropriations of other US government agencies. The reward money for the Abu Sayyaf and JI
leaders is one such example, it must be in the CIA
disguised budget. The annual Balikatan training exercises must be a big budget item. Imagine the cost of moving all
those troops , air and naval units from all over the Pacific
to the Philippines. Like it or not the continuation in office of our administrations depends a great deal on Uncle
Sam. The only time this influence will be at its low ebb
is if our government in office has the overwhelming support
of the people. The US knows that it is difficult to topple
a government which has widespread public support. That is
what the GMA administration don’t have now. It meets the
defintion of a client state, whereby its continuance in office depends on the imprimatur of Uncle Sam.
Ambassador,
Balikatan training costs are part of the US FMF budget for P.I.
Of course, I agree with you on everything else – just wanted to point out the military part – and thanks for elucidating.
Absolutely spot on Ambassador.
If America blinks, GMA is dead!
If the AFP senses that there is somethig wrong, they will go the whole hog and topple Gloria.
Ellen,
Just received this from an US based friend member of an e-mail group I belong to. It’s a wild but excellent suggestion to confront Gloria and her SOE head on:
“let hundreds of thousands of disgrunted soldiers lay down their arms and join the college students who will be lining up to be put in prison by arroyo. let arroyo worry how to feed the millions that she has threatened to put in jail. “you want to throw people in prison? here, you got millions of volunteers to satisfy your insatiable gluttony of power! we are not afraid of you and your prisons. do with us what you will while the whole world watches.”
Anna, I didn’t delete anything.
Thanks, Ellen – I think I pressed wrong key!
Ambassador,
I would like to share the link below on the new strategic scenario shaping in the far east
http://news.inq7.net/breaking/index.php?index=3&story_id=50514
Ex-opposition leader wants Australia to ditch US alliance.
IMHO, US-UK alliance will use Philippine Is. alongside Australia to balance the growing Chinese hegemony in the Asia Pacific.
Sacristan FVR and his golf buddies will again “put into service” (aka use) the english speaking middle class(burgis) to penetrate chinese market inorder to serve his bibingka ambition.
Lots of apolitical lumpen/burgis are available once a call center is setup in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao with funds coming from the Ozzies. Up for grabs is the low labor market.
Do I need to say long live the union jack?
Most likely bogus President Gloria Arroyo will bow-out to U.S. State Departure pressure. GMA will lift presidential Proclamation 1017 ASAP to save her ass. Uncle Sam can dump her anytime.
It is highly ironic that while we, Filipinos, marked the 20-year anniversary of freedom from the Marcos dictatorship we suddenly found ourselves living under the shadow of the state of emergency, this time imposed by Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
I believe that the emergency rule will just give rise to increased human rights violations, leading to more violence, as evident from our experience more than 30 years ago. It is not only illegal; it is farcical as well. Why did Mrs. Arroyo put the country under the state of emergency when she, herself, believed that the ‘crisis’ is under control. We know that the real reason for the declaration of Presidential Proclamation 1017 is to keep herself glued in the seat of power. She is an illegal president and she has no right to govern us in any other circumstance.
I am also suspicious of certain provisions in PP 1017 aimed at muzzling our constitutional right to free speech and other civil liberties. The raid on the offices of the Daily Tribune and her lieutenant’s recent pronouncements seeking to censor broadcast media sent chills down our collective spines. These actions bring back painful memories of the Marcos brutal regime. It is a paradox that 20 years on, the Filipinos’ cherished freedoms are again being taken away.
She must immediately revoke PP 1017. She may believe that she has effectively silenced us through PP1017 thus ensuring her continued stay in power but in truth she only accelerated her downfall. The people will not be cowed by PP1017, we will prevail.
What is worst is that, the the ‘brains’ of PP1017 INVENTED and PLANTED EVIDENCES just to justify their proclamation. read this link:
http://news.inq7.net/nation/index.php?index=1&story_id=68041
Anna,
Thanks for the info. The Australia-US ties actually replaced
the previous cornerstone of Australian foreign policy which
was “Imperial Preference, Imperial Defence.” The defence portion did not work out in WW II because the UK was over
extended in Europe and it was the US which came to the defense of Australia in WW II.
I don’t expect Mark Latham to get far in reviving new ties
with the UK. In fact Australian voters narrowly rejected
converting their country into a Republic and remove Queen
Elizabeth as chief of state in a recent referendum. The initiative lost only because the republicans split their votes. But many believe that in the next referendum Australia will become a republic with an elected President as chief of state.
There has been a shift of Australian foreign policy though
calling for strengthening relations with” Countries in the
North” meaning ASEAN, Japan and S. Korea. I guess this became a pressing matter when it was discovered that the
JI had plans for establishing an Islamic Fundamentalist state embracing Indonesia, Malaysia, S. Thailand, Mindanao and Northern Australia. We can expect that there will be increasing Australian military presence in our country due to the recent terrorist threats. As Geraldo Rivera, the
Hispanic-American correspondent for Fox news stated recently, the Philippines has become a “frontline state” in
the fight against terrorism. Rivera was in the Philippines
about a year ago. We do not have resources to fight terrorism on our own. So we have to tap foreign sources.
Moreover, the terrorists have ample suppliers of logistics from overseas. We have to level the playing field.
Anna,
To continue, you have an interesting observation about the
Philippines sourcing some of its military hardware from
Great Britain. Let us digress and discuss this topic because of its relevance to the current key role of the
military. In effect they have become part of the ruling elite.
The AFP had shifted to global sourcing of some of its
military hardware to lessen its dependence on the US. But this will create its own problems as you will see. You
must have heard of the artillery shells purchased from
Pakistan which had many duds. And the defective Kevlar helmets sourced from Taipeh.
Well there is a big ticket item that is recorded in the book
Military Vehicles by Chris McNabb. The book is published in the US. However the design and illustrations was made by
Amber Books of London. So the book must be available in the UK.
In page 197 of the book, there is an entry for the Simba
APC ( Armoured Personnel Carrier) which is made in the UK.
The entry states that “Only the Philippines has bought the
Simba.” Why this is so is because the Simba has only four
wheels just like an ordinary truck. Most APCs are either
tracked vehicles or have six or eight wheels. They are
supposed to be off the road vehicles and must be able to travel cross country, off the beaten path. If an APC is
constructed like a truck it will have limited off the road
capability. I cannot imagine how much use the Simba will be in running after the Abu Sayyaf in uneven and hilly terrain.
When the wife of Gen. Garcia was under investigation, she
mentioned kick backs from suppliers of the AFP. She must be referring to foreign suppliers. We are dealing here with big numbers. An APC probably costs around $500K.
Buying from the US lessens kickbacks. The US Internal Revenue Service does not allow kickbacks and bribes paid
to foreign governments as tax deductions and legitimate business expense. This is not true in other countries which
allow such deductions. You are in a better position to tell
us what is the UK and EU tax regime on the same topic. But
as you could see global sourcing of AFP supplies opens a new
venue for graft. This creates also the logical suspicion that the frequent trips of the wives of the military brass
may be coming from those kickbacks.
Ambassador,
I am aware of those purchases. It is not the act or the ability of being able to purchase from a supplier other than the US which is bad but it is the graft that accompanies the act.
The Simba, Ambassador was purchased during the Cory adminsitration and under FVR’s CSAFP tenure when there were no specific acquisition guidelines. The AFP Modernization Law which became law under FVR’s term and sponsored by then Sen Orly Mercado changed all that.
In theory, the Law is very specific – the acquisition provisions are draconian.
These were based on the findings and the many years of research done by each major service command for a number of years under each service’s Modernization Board, which later on was put together under one roof and called the AFP MODERNIZATION BOARD.
The AFP sent a great number of officers abroad to learn, assess and put up their recommendations for acquisition of this and that hardware.
Obviously, because the AFP modernization act is only in its early stages (a mere 8 years or so), the AFP still has to learn.
Having said that, it is incumbent upon the CSAFP to keep a tight watch on the procurement programs of the major service commands and to ensure that BIDS AND AWARDS COMMITTEES follow the extremely stringent rules prior to making an acquisition.
It doesn’t stop there because the DND as provided for by law must check and cross check all contracts that are brought to its office for acquisition recommendation and approval.
The AFP Modernization Law is very strict but its execution to the letter rests on the people of this government and its military. No amount of legal promulgations, etc. can stop a military officer, a civilian counterpart and overall, their departments from accepting bribes if they choose to.
Now on the Simba itself: you are right, the Philippines is the only country that Cadillac Gage sold those vehicles too.
The Marines helmets’ were procured by Gen Espinoza who was Marine Commandant at the time (the one who was prepared to lead a Marine battalion to Edsa and violently overthrow Erap had Angie not decided to mutiny) . He used his discretionary powers at the time and forced the Navy bids and awards Committee to overturn its own recommendation and to buy the Taipei helmets. Because the cost of the purchase (can’t remember anymore huo much) fell within the buying authority or power of the Navy command, Gen Espinoza, who had been blessed by Gloria, was able to exercise clout. In other words, Ambassador, this was one of the first act of graft and corruption of a Gloria general.
On the subject of the US: Although the US has very strict rules against graft and corruption or against bribing foreign government officials (Ricoh Law), American suppliers are not immuned to practising a bit of bribery here and there. It is done with better legalesse and within rules but the practice of bribery by US suppliers is current. I revealed the story to a journalist friend who was here in Europe some 3 weeks ago of how Lockheed Martin circumvented the Ricoh Law or how they would have circumvented the Law had they been able to sell some of the mothballed stock of F16 to the Philippines.
I will refrain from revealing how they did or will do it, for the moment.
There are other ways of circumventing the Ricoh Law, Ambassador. This is why the European based OECD has declared an all out war against any European company that intends to sell their wares by bribing foreign officials, i.e., Philippine government officials. The nations who signed the OECD agreement will be able to investigate, prosecute and jail company officials who break the anti-corruption rule. No need to investigate the Philippine officials who are virtually untouchable. The OECD will prosecute its own citizens if they break the anti-corruption law in their countries here.
But let me just conclude by saying that it is incorrect to believe that if the Philippines sourced its hardward from America solely, there would be less corruption or there would be less kickbacks. Nope, Ambassador – there will be the same level of corruption because US suppliers will always attempt to make a sale and beat foreign competition even if they have to break the Ricoh Law. Sadly, US suppliers have found a fantastic way of circumventing the Ricoh law in the Philippines.
It really is up to the Philippines to get rid of corruption so that the AFP can get it’s money’s worth!
Ambassador,
To continue on the Australia point: The Australians has deployed more intel assets to the Philippines than the US has done these last 10 years.
They need to revive a tactical alliance with the UK and the US not only to forge a united front against China but also to protect the sea lane of communication in the Malacca straits. The US needs that sea lane of communication because the US fleet would be very stretched if they have to go around the indian ocean in order to reach the Gulf.
The united front against China makes it all the more practical for them, hence they will need a friendly country in that part of the world to allow that front to materialize – the Philippines!
It is the only country with a Christian government that they could align with.
Anna,
The Ricoh and the US tax policies are deterrents to corrupt
deals overseas by US citizens. There will be always daring
people who will try to circumvent the laws. However, it is
being implemented by the US, although most of the penalties are in the form of consent decrees and fines rather than court sentences. Eventually, there will be a convergence in the policies of the US and the EU on the issue of racketeering overseas.
But such developments leave out many countries in the world
which are potential arms suppliers, where crooked deals can be made. Countries like Pakistan, India, S. Korea, Taipeh,
Union of South Africa, Brazil, Chile, Israel, Russia and China to name some. Ultimately, this issue also revolves on how much control the President can exercise over the AFP. I will say at his point, not much, because GMA’s regime survival now depends on the support of the military.
You are right Ambassador.
Indeed, the Ricoh Law and the OECD anti-corruption rules that have been adopted by the EU nations as anti-corruption law are useless in the face of aggressive foreign suppliers, countries you named and the corrupt officials in the Philippine government.
There is really no law that can restrict bribery and corruption in the Philippines unless the Philippine government enforces it.
Just look at the bridges that were supplied by a UK company to the Philippines.
The UK company in question was a relatively obscure family-owned business but since it started dealing with the Philippines (for some 14 years now), its owners have amassed tremendous wealth and became one of the richest families in the UK .
How did they do it? I can tell you one about how they do it (Philippine papers published the case) – a recent cause celebre involving these makers of portable bridges, etc.,
As you know most European nations have an ODA policy. The UK had earmarked (from UK taxpayers’ money obviously) 200-million pound (almost 400 million US$(?) grant for the Philippines before the presidential elections of 2004.
In order to take advantage of that grant, the Philippine government must show proof of where they are going to spend it and preferably use it to purchase from UK govt approved suppliers if they accept the grant. But this is not quite a restrictive clause, the Philippines if it chooses to accept the grant can buy from other foreign suppliers.
Anyway, the company apparently got wind of this grant and having dealt with the Philippines supplying the Mount Pinatubo Disaster Commission with portable brdiges in the past besides the other ongoing project, they must have instructed their agents in the Philippines to assemble a technical file and present it to the Philippine govt through the Dept of Public Works and Highways to be used by the govt in its acceptance of the UK grant.
The 200m£ grant didn’t have to be used solely for the acquisition of these bridges but since this particular company was one of the very few which had probably inside knowledge of the grant, the recommendation was probably made focusing solely on the grant use for their bridges. Besides, their past dealings with the Philippines helped them greatly vis-a-vis Philippine authorities in securing the contract ousting any other UK supplier competitor bidding for the grant.
It is quite common and classic practice for the Philippine government not to accept a foreign grant even if it is virtually at no cost to the government unless somebody receives a CUT, a bribe, cash, gifts, etc. in any form whatsoever but which in reality is graft. The money may be there for the taking but “Heck, no. I would take it if I could be assure of a cut of the UK taxpayers’ money.” – that is how a deal arising from a foreign grant is virtually and realistically made.
So what happens now? The following is a very likely and very, very plausible scenario*:
UK company Pres-CEO comes to the Philippines and practises public relations speak on Gloria so she accepts the grant. He doesn’t mention anything about bribes obviously. But his agents (non-government and DPWH government officials alike) makes sure that some 40% to 50%of the 200million pound grant (remember this is UK taxpayers’ money) would be set aside for the people at the top! In other words, the company is alleged, suspected to have swindled the UK govt of taxpayers money by overpricing their goods to the Philippines.
In the haste of our officials to obtain money that is needed to help fund the election campaign of Gloria, they order bridges right and left resulting in the cause celebre called “The Bridges To Nowhere”!
While the UK anti-corruption authorities cannot touch the Philippine officials who were recipients of the bribe, legal investigations are now ongoing in the UK – based on the OECD anti-corruption ruling of which the UK is signatory – into corruption accusations against the UK company, their owners and their corporate officials. If found guilty, they will face imprisonment and heavy fines.
The company officials are being investigated as we speak today.
There are allegations that the Arroyo family through daughter Lulli and son Dado were recipients of two pieces of real estate in England as gifts.
The search for the addresses of the 2 properties is ongoing.
Evidences are being gathered but they are hard to obtain because Philippine authorities can not be relied upon to help in the UK investigation and refuse to cooperate.
A high power anti-corruption watchdog group, and a news publication of high repute are helping bring out the truth or ferret out the truth concerning the corruption accusations against the UK company.
*A high power anti-corruption watchdog group, and a news publication of high repute – ALL IN THE UK.
Defend press freedom!