SALN – Who is the Honest Filer?

First of all, who are required to file a sworn Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth [SALN]?

Section 17 of Article XI of the 1987 Constitution states:

“Section 17. A public officer or employee shall, upon assumption of office and as often thereafter as may be required by law, submit a declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth. In the case of the President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional offices, and officers of the armed forces with general or flag rank, the declaration shall be disclosed to the public in the manner provided by law. ”

This obligation of a public officer or employee was also included in the provisions of RA 6713 – Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees under Section 8, which states:

“Section 8. Statements and Disclosure. – Public officials and employees have an obligation to accomplish and submit declarations under oath of, and the public has the right to know, their assets, liabilities, net worth and financial and business interests including those of their spouses and of unmarried children under eighteen (18) years of age living in their households.

1. Statements of Assets and Liabilities and Financial Disclosure. – All public officials and employees, except those who serve in an honorary capacity, laborers and casual or temporary workers, shall file under oath their Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth and a Disclosure of Business Interests and Financial Connections and those of their spouses and unmarried children under eighteen (18) years of age living in their households.”

The question now arises as to what value to use in determining the “net worth” of the filer? Although the SALN form provides a column for “acquisition cost” some filers do not use this column in determining their net worth.

This leads us to ask how do government determine the value of our real properties?

As far as the government is concerned, the values of our real estate assets are the values indicated in the Tax Declaration [TD] as assessed by the Assessors’ office. These are the values the government used as the amount of just compensation whenever it expropriates our real properties.

So as far as the government is concerned the net worth of a person should be the difference between the government assessed value of his/her asset and liabilities.

We all know that the value of land appreciates in time, this is the reason why the Assessors’ office revised the value of our land every three [3] years to conform to the increase of the current value of the time. So the property tax we pay increases in time.

If a SALN filer uses the acquisition cost of his/her real properties, it will remain the same over time, which when used in determining the net worth will not result to the current net worth of the filer because his/her land already appreciates in value while he/she still used the old value.

If a SALN filer uses the government assessed value of his/her land in determining the net worth of the filer, his/her net worth reflects the logical true value in current time. And this is the logic behind the used of assessed value in determining the current net worth of a filer and why it is a generally accepted practice among filers of SALN.

Take HLI as a case in point, its acquisition cost is 5M pesos, based on 1986 assessed value is around 102M pesos and in 2006 assessed value is 10B pesos. If the owner of this land is a government employee and he/she used the 5M pesos acquisition cost every time he/she files SALN does his/her SALN reflects his/her true net worth?

Based on these, who is more credible filer of SALN, the one who used the acquisition cost that remains the same over a period time or the one who used the assessed value that increases over a period time as determined by the government?

Immature And OJT President – Product of a Defective 1987 Constitution

Slowly, we are realizing the defects of the 1987 Constitution, a constitution that is institutionalizing “mob rule” borne out of the “civil disobedience” of the metro manila lynching mob.

Proof is the ongoing impeachment trial of CJ Corona; it reveals an immature politician acting as OJT president the product of the political system under the 1987 Constitution.

The unfolding issues in the trial by publicity in the court of public of the impeachment proceeding reveals the style and mindset of the people of the present administration from the president and his allies in Congress and Senate.

What kind of a Chief Executive Officer do we have, acting and deciding on matters without considering all issues surrounding the matter at hand?

Is this the kind of leader who is supposed to lead our country towards economic growth and political maturity? His recent pronouncements tell us, it is enough to render a guilty verdict of a person by considering only one side of the argument/evidence.

Is this the decision maker we entrusted our country, giving judgment and decision based on incomplete information? A seasoned leader would evaluate evidences of both sides before passing a verdict and/or making a decision.

But because of his immaturity, here is an executive officer telling the people “this guy is ought to be hung” without giving the guy his chance to present his evidence proving otherwise. Because of his vengeful mindset, he forgets that as president of a nation there are more pressing economic issues he has to address besides the impeachment of his opposition.

I pity our country for having this kind of president who is supposed to redeem and raise-up the Philippines from the quagmire of economic stagnation and make us at par with our Asian neighbors. I just can’t imagine him deciding on important economic matters based on a limited information and/or data!

It would be a wonder if even a small start-up entrepreneurial company will hire this man as a manager but because of the 1987 Constitution, we are stuck with an immature politician as an OJT president of the country!

His immaturity makes us wonder how he could formulate long term plans for the economic growth and political maturity of the country addressing the following concerns:

1. Reforming an over-prescriptive  and defective constitution;
2. Creating a business environment that can employ millions of talented Filipinos forced to find gainful employment abroad;
3. Breaking up business cartel, specifically in the oil industry;
4. Delivering workable land reform;
5. Stimulating the economy;
6. Alleviating widespread poverty; and
7. Ending the Moslem and communist insurgencies, but don’t sleep with the enemy when you do it;

With this kind of leadership, where do we expect our country to go? Can this administration make us economically at par with our Asian neighbors?

The Absence of Justice In An Impeachment Court Composed of Senator-Judges: One of the Defects of the 1987 Constitution

The ongoing impeachment trial of CJ Corona borders on being a television legal mini-series and could be considered as a prime time entertainment show, purely for the enjoyment of the viewing public where every players, defense, prosecutors, and senator-judges shows their knowledge and/or versatility in court proceedings and interpretation of the law.

But will the rule of law prevails in this proceeding?

For instance, it’s so nice to see the grandstand performance of the senator-judges in their role as inquisitors, hiding their style of fishing expedition in the guise of finding the “truth” and in the name of “justice.” And whenever they embarked on a fishing expedition, they show that as senator-judges, they lord it over the issue at hand regardless of what the law says, the message they sent is something to be afraid of.

Notably, the battle cry of this impeachment trial by both the congressman-prosecutors and senator-judges is let the “truth” comes out so “justice” will prevail.

But then, is there “justice” in using illegally acquired evidence? Is there “justice” when nobody can object to what the senator-judges is saying and/or doing except his/her co-senator-judges?

More so, will the defendant get justice even if the “truth” of his innocence comes out in this impeachment proceeding that is being simultaneously tried by media in the court of public opinion?

Along this line of thought, we have to ask, who are the judges in this trial?

They are the senators who get their mandate from the electorate. How many among the senators, now sitting as judges, will run again in the coming 2013 election? And even if they will not run in the 2013 election, they still have to face the electorate, one way or the other. Simply put, these senator-judges owe their position from the people!

With this given fact facing the senator-judges and with their constant pronouncements that they represent the people, what will guide them when they cast their votes at the end of the impeachment trial? Will they base their judgment on the rule of law, that is, based on evidences? Or will they be biased in favor of the public opinion that has been created by the media trial?

And with their mindset focused on the premise that they are the voice of the people and personally, as politicians who have vested interest in the power given them by the electorate, it is very difficult to believe that they will uphold the rule of law come judgment day at the end of the impeachment trial.

Clearly, senator-judges cannot be impartial in their judgment of the case. They cannot ignore the public perception and/or opinion. Their being a senator depends on the electorate.

This is the dilemma of CJ Corona, or for that matter any official facing impeachment under the 1987 Constitution, at the end of the day impeachment will be based on the public opinion regardless of what the evidences show

In this case, CJ Corona must sway the public opinion in his favor. But can he match the demolition job of the administration fed in the media for the trial by publicity?

Let us not be too naive, to ignore the truth that this impeachment is a test case between CJ Corona and President Aquino. And this is the reason why this impeachment has the full backing of the present administration.

The propaganda machinery and financial resources of the present administration are being used in this impeachment trial. It cannot be ignored that the propaganda machine of the administration is being used to the hilt for the demolition job against CJ Corona to condition the minds of the people that he is not fit to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

To this end, the allies of the administration, the 188 congressmen were given the marching order to nail down CJ Corona. And like obedient soldiers, loyal to their superior, these 188 congressmen blindly signed a defectively drafted Articles of Impeachment, which the administration’s senator-judges are fervently trying to prove.

Nevertheless, if by a certain stroke of miracle, CJ Corona is acquitted contrary to the public opinion as fed by the present administration through the media it is a certainty that mob rule will show its ugly head.

At the end of the day, when this impeachment trial is over, we shall come to realize that an impeachment under the 1987 Constitution will:

• Show what kind of Congressmen and Senators we have;
• Jeopardize the banking industry; and in effect
• Adversely affect our economy;
• Cause division among the people;
• Make public opinion prevails over the rule of law;
• Force the senator-judges to use public opinion when they vote; hence
• There is no “justice” in the impeachment under the 1987 Constitution.

Finally, the crucial question we have to ask ourselves is, up until when are we going to use the 1987 Constitution, in spite of its glaring defects in giving us grandstanding politicians who only care for their personal vested interest, a constitution institutionalizing mob rule instead of the rule of law, a constitution sowing disunity instead of uniting the people, and drowning us in the quagmire of economic stagnation and political immaturity, making the Philippines the sick man of Asia?

How to Prove the Articles of Impeachment Against CJ Renato Corona?

Impeachment is a political process to remove a government official from his/her office, it is not a civil nor criminal case. In a Unicameral Legislative System, impeachment is triggered by a motion of “no confidence.”

If the impeached officer does not resign, the Articles of Impeachment [AOI] is presented and the members of the chamber vote for or against the AOI.

More often in a Unicameral System, the officer resigns, out of delicadeza.

A short and simple process.

Compared with a Bicameral System, impeachment process is a very divisive,  tiresome, long and costly process.

While we are it, what happen to the pending bills in Congress and Senate. Bills that we need for economic and political stability.

And these are what the prosecutors have to prove for the appreciation of the Senator Judges in the ongoing impeachment to remove CJ Corona from the office.

SUMMARY OF THE IMPEACHMENT COMPLAINT v.

CHIEF JUSTICE CORONA 

 

I.          RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS TRACK RECORD MARKED BY PARTIALITY AND SUBSERVIENCE IN CASES INVOLVING THE ARROYO ADMINISTRATION FROM THE TIME OF HIS APPOINTMENT AS SUPREME COURT JUSTICE WHICH CONTINUED TO HIS DUBIOUS APPOINTMENT AS A MIDNIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE AND UP TO THE PRESENT.  

• Midnight Appointments in violation against Sec. 15, Article VII of Constitution
• Arturo de Castro v. Judicial and Bar Council and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, et. al., SC held that the prohibition does not apply to SC but only to executive department and other courts lower than SC.
• Indeed, Newsbreak report showed that “he has consistently sided with the (arroyo) administration in politically-significant cases”. Newsbreak further reported when it tracked the voting pattern of Supreme Court justices, “Corona lodged a high 78 percent in favor of Arroyo”
• A table shows that in 10 cases show respondent’s voting pattern in cases involving Arroyo government’s frontal assaults on constitutional rights prior to his appointment as Chief Justice.
• During his tenure as Chief Justice, Respondent also sided with Arroyo in the following 3 cases such as in (1) Biraogo v. The Philippine Truth Commission of 2010, (2) Bai Omera D. Dianalan-Lucman v. Executive(revoking midnight appointments) and (3) Aquino vs. COMELEC (redefining districts of camsur)

II.         RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND/OR BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST WHEN HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC HIS STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES, AND NET WORTH AS REQUIRED UNDERSEC. 17, ART. XI OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.

• Respondent failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required by the Constitution.
• Some of the properties of Respondent are not included in his declaration of his assets, liabilities, and net worth, in violation of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act.
• Respondent is suspected of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits (among others, a 300-sq. meter apartment in the Fort in Taguig).

III.        RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST BY FAILING TO MEET AND OBSERVE THE STRINGENT STANDARDS UNDER ART. VIII, SECTION 7 (3) OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT PROVIDES THAT “[A] MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY MUST BE A PERSON OF PROVEN COMPETENCE, INTEGRITY, PROBITY, AND INDEPENDENCE” IN ALLOWING THE SUPREME COURT TO ACT ON MERE LETTERS FILED BY A COUNSEL WHICH CAUSED THE ISSUANCE OF FLIP-FLOPPING DECISIONS IN FINAL AND EXECUTORY CASES; IN CREATING AN EXCESSIVE ENTANGLEMENT WITH MRS. ARROYO THROUGH HER APPOINTMENT OF HIS WIFE TO OFFICE; AND IN DISCUSSING WITH LITIGANTS REGARDING CASES PENDING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT. 

• Respondent previously served Arroyo as her chief of staff, spokesman when she was Vice-President, Presidential Chief-of-Staff, Presidential Spokesman, and Acting Executive Secretary.
  • Flip-flopping of the Corona Court on FASAP vs. PAL  on a mere letter from Philippine Airlines’ counsel Atty. Estelito Mendoza (and also in the flip-flopping case of League of Cities v. COMELEC)
• Respondent compromised his independence when his wife, Cristina Corona, accepted an appointment as on March 23, 2007 from President Arroyo to the Board of the John Hay Management Corporation (JHMC) in violation of Code of Judicial Conduct
  • serious complaints were filed against Mrs. Corona by her fellow Board members because of acts of misconduct and negligence. Instead, on acting on the complaint, the complainants were removed and Mrs. Corona promoted as OIC board chair
• Respondent has been reportedly using the judicial fund as his own personal expense account, charging to the Judiciary personal expenditures.
• Respondent Corona discussed with litigants (Lauro Vizconde and Dante Jimenez) regarding the Vizconde massacre case, which was then pending before the SC, and accused fellow Justice Carpio for loobying for acquittal, in violation of Code of Conduct and Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
• Respondent Corona irregularly dismissed the Inter-petal Recreational Corporation case under suspicious circumstances. 

IV.        RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST AND/OR COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION WHEN IT BLATANTLY DISREGARDED THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS BY ISSUING A “STATUS QUO ANTE” ORDER AGAINST THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN THE CASE CONCERNING THE IMPEACHMENT OF THEN OMBUDSMAN MERCEDITAS NAVARRO-GUTIERREZ.

• Respondent railroaded the proceedings in the Guttierez case in order to have a Status Quo AnteOrder issued in her favor.
  • Newsbreak showed that most of the justices received the Petition after the deliberations, while three (3) justices (Velasco, Bersamin and Perez) who voted to issue the Status Quo Ante Order received the petition a day after the status quo ante order was granted.
• Its issuance violated the principle of separation of powers since the Supreme Court prevented the House from initiating impeachment proceedings.

V.         RESPONDENT COMMITTED CULPABLE VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION THROUGH WANTON ARBITRARINESS AND PARTIALITY IN CONSISTENTLY DISREGARDING THE PRINCIPLE OF RES JUDICATA AND IN DECIDING IN FAVOR OF GERRY-MANDERING IN THE CASES INVOLVING THE 16 NEWLY-CREATED CITIES, AND THE PROMOTION OF DINAGAT ISLAND INTO A PROVINCE. 

• Respondent violated the principle of the immutability of final judgments (“flip-flopping”) known to have been instigated through personal letters or ex-partecommunications addressed to the Respondent:
  • League of Cities v. COMELEC case involving the creation of 16 new cities,
  • Navarro v. Ermita which involved the promotion of Dinagat Island from municipality to province,
  • FASAP v. Philippine Airlines, Inc., et al.

VI.        Respondent Betrayed the Public Trust By Arrogating Unto Himself, And To A Committee He Created, The Authority And Jurisdiction To Improperly Investigate An Alleged Erring Member Of The Supreme Court For The Purpose Of Exculpating Him. Such Authority And Jurisdiction Is Properly Reposed By The Constitution In the House of Representatives via Impeachment.  

• Vinuya vs. Executive Secretary,it was alleged that rampant plagiarism was committed by the ponente, Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo
• It appears that, with a clear intent of exonerating a member of the Supreme Court, Respondent, in violation of the Constitution, formed an Ethics Committee thereby arrogating unto himself, and to a Committee he created, the authority and jurisdiction to investigate an alleged member of the Supreme Court.

VII.       RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST THROUGH HIS PARTIALITY IN GRANTING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO) IN FAVOR OF FORMER PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO AND HER HUSBAND JOSE MIGUEL ARROYO IN ORDER TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO ESCAPE PROSECUTION AND TO FRUSTRATE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, AND IN DISTORTING THE SUPREME COURT DECISION ON THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE TRO IN VIEW OF A CLEAR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT’S OWN TRO.            

• The Supreme Court, under the Respondent, immediately acted upon the Petition and granted the TRO despite the fact that there are clear inconsistencies in former President Arroyo’s petition
• It appears from reports that the ponente to whom the petitions were raffled was an Associate Justice. Under the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court, a TRO can only be considered upon the recommendation of the ponente. In view of certain objections against the grant of the TRO, a holding of a hearing within the short period of five (5) days was recommended. Despite this recommendation, the Respondent engineered a majority of 8 votes (as against five dissenters) the immediate grant and issuance of the TRO in favour of former President Arroyo and her husband in blatant violation of their own internal rules.
• Despite the conditions laid by the SC for the issuance of the TRO, Respondent allowed the issuance of the TRO notwithstanding the fact there was non-compliance of an essential pre-condition
  • Due to the Arroyos’ abject failure to comply with Condition 2, the Supreme Court en banc in its November 18, 2011 deliberations, by a vote of7–6, found that there was no compliance with the second condition of the TRO. Consequently, for failure to comply with an essential condition for the TRO, the TRO is not effective. However, by a vote of 7-6, the Supreme Court decided there was no need to explicitly state the legal effect on the TRO of the noncompliance by petitioners with Condition Number 2 of the earlier Resolution.
  • However, the SC decided that the TRO was effective despite non-compliance with an essential condition of the TRO. It is notable that Respondent did not chastise Marquez for his outrightly false and public misrepresentation.
  • Worse, the Respondent did not correct the decision that was issued despite the fact that the decision did not reflect the agreement and decision made by the Supreme Court during their deliberations on November 18, 2011.

VIII.      RESPONDENT BETRAYED THE PUBLIC TRUST AND/OR COMMITTED GRAFT AND CORRUPTION WHEN HE FAILED AND REFUSED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE JUDICIARY DEVELOPMENT FUND (JDF) AND SPECIAL ALLOWANCE FOR THE JUDICIARY (SAJ) COLLECTIONS.

• Respondent has reportedly failed and refused to report on the status of the JDF Funds and the SAJ collections.
• There is likewise the reported failure of Respondent to account for funds released and spent for unfilled positions in the judiciary and from authorized and funded but not created courts.
  • In particular, the annual audit report of the Supreme Court of the Philippines contained the observation that unremitted funds to the Bureau of Treasury amounted to P5.38 Billion
  • the Special allowance for Judiciary along with the General Fund, Judiciary Development Fund in the amount of P559.5 Million were misstated resulting from delayed and/or non-preparation of bank reconciliation statements and non-recording /uncorrected reconciling items.

PALAWAN – Hold On!

Sendong death toll now 1,080; number of missing unreliable

Back in the ‘70s, when it rains and there’s a foreboding storm in the horizon, my grandfather, a Subanon [taga ilog/river dweller], would always assures us by saying, “ayaw kabaka dili moagi kanang bagyoha dinhi sa atua kay mabungkag mana pag igo sa mga bundok” [“do not worry, the storm cannot pass here because it will be shattered by the mountains.”]

True enough, storms come and go in Mindanao without any wrecking disaster. Back then, mighty yakals, apitongs, narras, guijos, etc…towers in the mountains of Mindanao protecting its lowland areas.

And this is what the government should include in their long-term plans of preventing disaster, the protection of those mighty trees and reforestation of denuded mountains. It is just a matter of POLITICAL WILL to put a ban on any form of logging and irresponsible mining.

But the glint of money and personal greed prevails, and unabated logging and irresponsible mining continues making the oligarchs richer and corrupt politicians more powerful.

We have seen the havoc and deaths of unabated logging, and irresponsible mining at Ormoc, the disaster of neglecting our watershed through “Ondoy,” and now the deaths caused by “Sendong.”

Sadly, the usual finger pointing and “pa-pogi” points of our politicians and government leaders. When will our government learn to finally and firmly put a stop on unabated destruction of our mountains?

The deaths in Iligan and Cagayan de Oro is the result of GREED and CORRUPTION in the unabated logging of our mountains…..

GREED of those oligarchs who worship money above all….and
CORRUPTION of government officials who close their eyes to what the loggers do in exchange for “thick envelops”…

WOE to all of them…..!
May they suffer the same fate….!

I pray that Palawan will maintain its POLITICAL WILL in protecting those mighty trees of her mountains and NOT to succumb to lure of money. Palawan please hold on….!

Why the “Lefts” In Congress Signed the Impeachment Against CJ Corona

“Bayan, whose associates in many front organizations of the Left have been P-Noy’s most unrelenting critics, supported the Corona impeachment.”

“The Bayan congressmen signed the impeachment complaint. One Bayan congressman, a very able lawyer — Neri Colmenares, was nominated to be one of the prosecutors in the Senate impeachment trial. There is no way P-Noy or his allies in Congress could coerce Bayan congressmen to sign the impeachment complaint.”

This is how opinion makers work; to support their side, they want us to believe that the “left” in congress signed the impeachment against CJC in pursuit of justice.

Nevertheless, the knowledgeable read between the lines, the gullible swallows it “hook, line, and sinker.”

But really, what are the motives of the “left” in joining the bandwagon in impeaching CJC? I honestly believe these “Bayan” representatives did it NOT in pursuit of justice for our benefits. Rather it’s in line with their pursuit to overthrow our government.

However, the media, through its opinion makers, would like us to believe that the “left” is doing it for JUSTICE and for our economic growth and political stability.  Media is painting us a picture glorifying the “lefts” as one of the saviors in bringing out justice to our country.

I wonder where media, specifically these opinion makers, would be if ever the “left” takes over our country. A system of government where press freedom is a dream.

Communist doctrines show us that the “left” thrives when there is chaos and disunity. And this is what they are trying to do, foment unrest. Ride with the emotion of the people and instigate mob unrest. The sad part of it is that our system of government allows and helps the “left” to pursue their objective in overthrowing our government.

This is the weakness of the 1987 Constitution.

So sad, our system of government takes money from us [taxes] then gives it to the “left” [as CDF] who in turn uses the money to support their movements in overthrowing our government. This is what the 1987 Constitution brings to our country, allows the “left” to maintain their forces and organizations in overthrowing our government.

There is saying that “too many cooks spoil the broth.” And this is what’s happening in adopting Bicameral Legislative System of governance, added to this is the adoption of the “Party List System.”

This is one of the reasons why we could not achieve unity, economic growth and political stability everyone is going in different directions pursuing only their own vested interests. And in this kind of situation where, chaos, unrest and disunity prevail the country becomes a very fertile ground for communism.

And this is why the “lefts” in Congress join the bandwagon in the perceived fight for justice between the Executive and Judicial Branch of our government. To stoke the fire of havoc.

Let us view the emerging scenario objectively in different point of views to see that,  NOW IS THE TIME TO CHANGE…!

Ako Ang Simula

Para sa Pilipinas… WALA AKONG IHINALALAL NA SENADOR KAHIT ISA…nuong 2004 at 2010 eleksyon! At iyan ang gagawin ko habang hindi nagiging PARLIAMENTARYO ang systema ng ating gobyerno, sapagkat gusto ko ng kaunlaran at AKO ANG SIMULA NG PAGBA-BAGO!

IT’S ABOUT TIME TO CHANGE!

We have been using this Constitution for almost 25 years now and still we are wallowing in the quagmire of economic stagnation and political instability. The system did not help us attain economic growth and political stability.

We are at the bottom of the race for economic growth and political stability among our Asean neighbor…because our political arena consists of too many politicians, actors, actresses, etc. with their own personal agenda rather than a solid group of people representing their common advocacy through their party’s platform of government  thus moving towards the same direction.

All our progressive Asian neighbors are using Parliamentary form of government and we envy and often point to them as an ideal model. But we are so afraid to adapt their form of government!

Presidential form with bicameral legislative bodies works only in rich nations, like the USA, because it can afford the expenses/budgets of the Senate and Congress.

Nevertheless, most rich and developed European nations have Parliamentary form of government. We, a striving nation, CAN NOT AFFORD TO MAINTAIN TWO LEGISLATIVE BODIES!

One legislative body will save us the following and the saving from the budget of the senate could be used in creating job opportunities that would address the problem of unemployment which is one of the main causes of poverty.

In 2008 each senator receives:

• 35,000 = Monthly salary
• 2,000,000 = Monthly fixed budget
• 500,000 = Monthly Maintenance & Operating Expenses
• 500,000 = Monthly Staff & Personal Expenses
• 760,000 = Monthly Foreign Travel Expenses
• 1,000,000 = Committee Chairmanship
• 200,000,000 = Yearly CDF

For the CDF alone we could generate a saving of PhP28.8 billion. At PhP200M/yr CDF of the 24 Senators for six[6] years terms. Imagine the job opportunities this amount could generate.

Besides we have seen elected officials of both the Senate and Congress doing their own gimmicks to earn “pogi” points” notwithstanding the needs of their constituents. They have their own political and financial vested interests, changing their political colors for their own convenience.

This is the time for us to change our system of governance, a system that would stabilize our political environment which in turn would push our economy to grow.

A form of government where we will vote for the Economic and Political Programs of a party rather than the “personalities” of candidates.

Forget the ghosts of GMA or FEM, we have seen what a strong two-party-system in a unicameral body can do in achieving political stability and economic growth (Japan, Thailand, Singapore, Australia, Indonesia, South Korea, and Malaysia).

A unicameral assembly with a strong two-party-system is what we need if we want to be at par with our more progressive Asian neighbors.

Minority President

Before the last presidential election I asked this:

Aquino, Estrada, Gordon, Teodoro, Villanueva, Villar, if one of them became the president he will be the president of the more or less only 20% of the voting population. How about the remaining 80% who did not vote for him?

Are we going to allow to be ruled by the president of the minority? And if he is the president of the minority, how does he expect to implement his programs/plans of governance?

All of them promise to fight/eradicate corruption;

• ergo our GOVERNMENT is CORRUPT!

All of them promise to fight/eradicate poverty;

• ergo our PEOPLE are POOR!

All of them promise economic growth;

• ergo our ECONOMY is STAGNANT!

Nice promises, but not of them give us how he will make good his promises. How he will eradicate corruption, and poverty? What are his plans for economic growth?

Not one of them laid out the plans/steps to achieve his promised goals!

Why? Because for each of his promise, he would need a law to implement his program of government!  And if he is the president of the minority, how does he expect to push for the enactment of a law in a house/senate ruled by his opposing legislators? A house and a senate where every member has his own vested interest and/or agenda of power!

So what will happen to our country during his term? NOTHING!

And it would be another six (6) years of agonizing corruption, poverty, and economic stagnation!

This is the weakness of a presidential form of government where multi-party system exists!

And come to think of it,

• WE ENVIED OUR ASIAN NEIGHBORS AND ALWAYS LOOK AT THEM AS MODELS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DISCIPLINE.

But did anyone of us ever think that, our Asian neighbors like, Singapore, Japan, Malaysia, Thailand, and South Korea, has a parliamentary form of government!

A form of government where a strong two-party system exist; where the people vote for a party (NOT PERSONALITY!) with progressive platform of government; where political in-fighting is confined within the parliament; where people are disciplined because of the strong political will of government leaders to implement the laws.

• IF WE WANT TO EMULATE THEM, THEN LET US HAVE A PARLIAMENTARY FORM OF GOVERNMENT!

Why should we suffer corruption, poverty and economic stagnation when we can start the change NOW!

• LET US START BY VOTING A PRESIDENT WHO IS WILLING TO SACRIFICE HIS POSITION TO INITIATE THE TRANSFORMATION OF OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT!

Last election I did not vote for any senator and I will do the same now;

• BECAUSE THEY ARE A DRAIN OF OUR FINANCIAL RESOURCES!

• ergo, WE DO NOT NEED THE SENATE!

In fact, one lady senator realized its uselessness and DARED ALL MEMBERS OF THE SENATE TO RESIGN!

• What a shame to realize it  just now because it has been there for TWENTY FOUR (24) YEARS!

And now that we are being led by a minority president and an OJT at that, it is about time to change the system of our governance. To achieve economic growth and political stability at par with our Asean neighbors, we have to adopt a Unicameral Legislative form of government.

THE CHANGE STARTS NOW AND IT BEGINS WITH ME!

Infinity

"Ask and IT will be given..."

THE SOURCE OF INFINITE WISDOM

Philippines – How to Achieve Economic Growth and Political Stability

We often heard the words “be patient with our President, he is just on his second year of office and still learning.”

The President has only a fixed term of six years to solve the problem of the country and to lead the country towards economic growth and political stability among others.

Hence, the office of the President is neither a classroom nor a training room where the sitting president will be taught how to perform the duties and responsibilities of the office of the president. Much more, the office of the President is not a workshop seminar room where the sitting president will be taught how to prepare short and long term program of works.

The person who occupies this office MUST, before hand, have the solutions to the problems of the country. He must bring in with him, all the short and long term program of works in achieving his mission and vision for the country.

So the question arises, what is his mission and vision for the country?

Compared with our Asian neighbors, where would he put our country after his six years term?

One of the President’s Men said, “No compelling reason to amend the constitution.” This shows the shortsightedness of this administration, its lack of foresight and real care for the future of the country.

Economic growth and political stability could be achieved if we would use a system of government that fits our needs, and that is, a Parliamentary Form of Government with a Unicameral Legislative Body.

We are the only country among ASEAN members who is using the Presidential form of government patterned after the USA. All our neighbors are using Parliamentary form of government and they have left us behind the race to economic growth and political stability, by leap and bounds.

We have been using the Presidential system for more than 25 years now and it doesn’t bring us to the promised growth.

How much longer shall we use this obsolete system that pushes us down political instability and economic retardation?

Why should we suffer corruption, poverty, political instability and economic stagnation when we can start the change NOW!

It is about time to make the painful change for the rebirth of our country.

WE OWE THIS CHANGE TO OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN!

What will happen to them, if we are not going to act now?

Will they be like us, wishing and dreaming to be at par with their Asian neighbors?