Presidencies and piracies

Presidencies and piracies

The verdict is out: Joseph Estrada is guilty of plunder!

The mixed reactions are understandable, given the prominence of the accused and the yawning political divide the plunder case has created since Joseph Estrada’s ouster in 2001. Everyone has a right to react to the decision based on one’s personal convictions and affiliations. Still, others have an equal right to react to those reactions. Let these be expressed openly.

Leaving the legal options to lawyers, what is worth pondering at this time is the subliminal message conveyed by the said anti-graft court Sandiganbayan’s verdict to civilized society, or to polities where the rule of law, and not of men, is an established norm.

The verdict on Estrada is undoubtedly a verdict on our justice system as well. By rendering the guilty verdict despite veiled threats of a consequential social unrest or even violent protests from die-hard Estradap fans, the Sandiganbayan justices effectively and clearly conveyed a message to public officials, more particularly to those on the totem poles of political power, that in this country justice is, indeed, blindfolded. Justice doesn’t see nor hear nor feel political power and is, therefore, not daunted by it.

Through its decision, the Sandiganbayan has stressed that no one -- not even the highest official of the land -- is above the law. The relevant laws contemplated in this case are perhaps best captured in these words prominently displayed on the main menu page of the Sandiganbayan website: “Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice and lead modest lives.”

The strong message implied in the decision is likewise sent to the corridors of power in Malacañang for its current occupant and her family to reckon with. That same message also goes to what-used-to-be-august halls of both houses of Congress, for the “witch hunters” and “whistle-blowers” in the Upper House and the “tongressmen” in the Lower House to heed. That same message should echo in the courts, for scalawags therein to think over. That same message should reverberate in all public offices, from national government agencies and constitutional bodies to provincial capitols, down to city, municipal and “barangay” [village] halls. Yes, that same message should send shivers down the spines of those involved in the fishy National Broadband Network deal.

Now, for the first time, Filipinos can hold their heads high before the Japanese and the South Koreans and tell them that in this country, too, there is a high sense of honor in public service. That sense of honor, that unequivocal standard of right and wrong, transcends politics. Now, for the first time, Filipinos can proudly proclaim that in this country’s drive toward transparency, honesty and accountability in public service, we don’t catch the small fish only; we get to catch the biggest ones, as well.

Had Estrada been acquitted despite the overwhelming evidence against him, the subliminal message would have been that in this country we confuse presidencies with robberies. Had Estrada been freed, we would have demonstrated to the world the inability of our justice system to draw the line between the roles of a president and the roles of a pirate. For, as Saint Augustine said, it is justice that distinguishes a kingdom from a band of robbers, an emperor from a pirate. In our context, to paraphrase Augustine, we can say that it is justice that distinguishes a presidency from a piracy, a president from pirate.

In this regard, what the saint and sage wrote in his City of God merits rereading and pondering:

“Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies? For what are robberies themselves, but little kingdoms? The band itself is made up of men; it is ruled by the authority of a prince, it is knit together by the pact of the confederacy; the booty is divided by the law agreed on. If, by the admittance of abandoned men, this evil increases to such a degree that it holds places, fixes abodes, takes possession of cities, and subdues peoples, it assumes the more plainly the name of a kingdom, because the reality is now manifestly conferred on it, not by the removal of covetousness, but by the addition of impunity. Indeed, that was an apt and true reply which was given to Alexander the Great by a pirate who had been seized. For when that king had asked the man what he meant by keeping hostile possession of the sea, he answered with bold pride, “What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you who does it with a great fleet are styled emperor.”

Who's Next

Who's Next

After the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan convicted deposed President Joseph Estrada of plunder last week, government officials, civil society leaders and media people began asking, “Who’s next?” The Sandiganbayan decision has shown that no one is exempt from accountability, not even a former president, and it should embolden everyone to pursue graft and corruption cases against those who have to answer for them.

For her part, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo last Thursday created the Procurement Transparency Group, which will monitor procurement for public projects and report irregularities to the agency heads concerned. She also formed a Pro-performance Infrastructure Monitoring Group.

But what is needed in dealing with the problem of graft and corruption are not new government agencies but resolute action against grafters. We already have many government agencies charged with bringing corrupt officials to justice. What is needed is the political will to go after these officials and not to let up until they are all behind bars.

For starters, Ms Arroyo and other officials should act on the following cases:

(1) The $2-million extortion charge against former Justice Secretary Hernando Perez filed by former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez in 2001. Estrada had said then that Jimenez gave Perez $2 million to approve the $470-million contract to rehabilitate a power plant in Laguna won by the Argentine firm Industrias Metalurgicas Pescarmona Sociedad Anonima (Impsa). Graft prosecutors said there was sufficient evidence to establish that Perez and company had committed “illegal acts.”

(2) The P1.3-billion election computerization deal. The Supreme Court on Jan. 13, 2004 voided MegaPacific’s contract to supply the Commission on Elections (Comelec) with 1,991 automated counting machines because the deal was tainted “with graft and legal infirmities.” Strangely, however, the Ombudsman on Oct. 2, 2006 absolved of any wrongdoing Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos and other officials involved in the deal.

(3) The alleged P532.9-million overpricing of the P1.1-billion 5.1-kilometer President Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard in the Manila Bay reclamation area. The Ombudsman has upheld the allegation of whistle-blower Sulficio Tagud Jr., a former director of the Public Estates Authority (PEA), that the road was overpriced by 250 percent and the bridge by 67 percent. The Ombudsman has approved the filing of graft charges against 20 PEA officials, six auditors of the Commission on Audit and Jesusito Legaspi, owner of JD Legaspi Construction firm that constructed the road, described by Tagud as “the most expensive asphalt road in the country.”

(4) The P200-million Jose Pidal case. In 2003 Sen. Panfilo Lacson accused Jose Miguel Arroyo, husband of President Arroyo, of amassing more than P200 million from campaign contributions to Ms Arroyo and putting the money in secret bank accounts, including that of “Jose Pidal.” Last June, Lacson criticized Sen. Joker Arroyo, former chair of the Senate blue ribbon committee, for sitting on the Jose Pidal case.

(5) The $503-million Northrail project. Former Senate President Franklin Drilon said the project was one of the “colossal corrupt deals” of the Arroyo administration. In August 2005 the University of the Philippines Law Center said the contract between Northrail and the China National Machinery and Equipment Corp. Group was illegal because of “questionable terms” and should be annulled. It also urged the filing of criminal, civil and administrative charges against some public officials and private individuals.

(6) The P728-million fertilizer fund scam. Former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante was accused of distributing P728 million in fertilizer funds to local leaders to ensure Ms Arroyo’s election victory in 2004. Bolante fled to the United States, was arrested at the Los Angeles International Airport. He has chosen to be detained in the US rather than be deported to Manila.

(7) The $329-million National Broadband Network.

If the President is sincere in going after grafters in the government, she should order all the government agencies concerned, including the two offices she recently created, to go hammer and tongs after all the individuals and offices involved in these seven high-profile cases. The Estrada plunder case has shown that “big fish” can be caught, prosecuted, sentenced and put behind bars. From now on, there should be no pussyfooting and foot-dragging on graft and corruption.

Meet the cowinners

Meet the cowinners

This is the people’s verdict after the antigraft court’s guilty verdict on Estrada’s plunder case: Estrada and President Arroyo are cowinners. We just don’t know who, later on, will emerge as the bigger winner. But both won because this is how things are playing out.

Estrada is now seen as a martyr. Not bad for somebody who squandered his towering political mandate and ruined himself while in office in pursuit of his hedonistic, baser urges.

The sentiment that Erap was a victim of political prosecution and not a crook is an across-the-board sentiment. Only the billionaires share the sentiment of the Arroyo hard-liners that Erap is a thieving buffoon who deserves a lifetime in jail. The verdict only enhanced the already awesome popularity of Estrada.

Estrada’s popularity will lead to two scenarios.

First, a premature presidential pardon just like what Vice-President Noli de Castro had suggested. Expect de Castro to take it up with the national leadership in the name of his new buzzword—reconciliation. The leadership is inclined to respond positively and urgently.

Before we know it, before the Estrada hardliners can even agitate people to take up to the streets to protest, Estrada might be out of Tanay, although with a minor inconvenience—the mark of a pardoned convict. But with our moral bar so low, who cares?

Even if this does not take place, Estrada can just sit back and relax in his Tanay rest house cum jail and wait for 2010. Sure as the sun rises in the morning, the presidential candidate who will win in 2010 will have to have Estrada’s backing. With Estrada’s mass base, a big 30 percent of the voting population, the candidate only needs to work on his or her own 20 percent to win.

The 30-percent solid Estrada voting bloc will be of greater significance if there are three or more candidates. Victory in the 2010 presidential election will be owed to Estrada.

In this context, the 2010 winner can pardon Estrada right after assuming power and this will be a popular (very) decision.

Those who doubt the political leverage and muscle that go with popularity should take it from Homer Simpson. Son, he told Bogart Simpson, “Popularity is the most important thing in the world.”

Especially to politicians.

What made Mrs. Arroyo a cowinner? Easy.

With Estrada in Tanay, she can go about with her business of governing without having to worry about having Estrada on the loose and physically proselytizing about injustice and corruption. The second-level leaders of the opposition do not have Estrada’s clout and popular appeal and they can’t stir the crowds as deeply and passionately as Estrada.

So she is safe in office. From his Tanay detention center, Estrada cannot manipulate the events in the country and sow the seeds of popular revolt. To be agitated and rebellious, the Estrada crowds need his physical presence.

She actually bought enough time to decide on what her course for the next two years or so would be: governing well or the guillotine.

If she governs well within the next two years or so and make amends for the many corrupt, bizarre and mediocre acts her administration has committed since 2001, she will be spared the guillotine. She will exit office, if not on a blaze of glory, on an appreciative note from the nation.

But if the rest of her term will be of the same deplorable stuff: ZTE, Jose Pidal, “Hello, Garci,” she will suffer a fate worse than a Tanay detention.

The choice is hers. She has time on her side. She can still reverse what is looming to be a cruel verdict of history.

The verdict was a temporary hump for Estrada. It also gave Mrs. Arroyo enough time to make amends for her past indiscretions and work for an acceptable closure to her mistrusted presidency.

The nation, in some weird sense, is a bit of a winner. It got its break, a relief from a head-on clash between two contending political forces (both lusting for power) which our prostrate and polarized people do not even deserve.

With our national expectations so low, with our national mood so downcast, that can be considered a win.

Moving on

Moving on

MOVING on” or “let’s move on” is the catch-phrase of the season.

The phrase has dripped from the mouth of politicians, columnists, editorial writers, broadcast journalists, Palace officials, the President and everyone wishing to sweep a nightmare away.

We are advised to move on after the resolution of a big political scandal, a messy business scam, an ugly congressional investigation or an unsuccessful attempt to destabilize the government.

It means that Filipinos should keep moving, get the nightmare behind them and just push on. Get a life, please!

We should move on after the trial of President Estrada, which consumed us for more than six years. We heard that advice after the nursing exam scandal, the May 14 election anomalies, the military boo-boos in Sulu, the attempts at government destabilization and poor government response to natural disasters.

Manfully, we collected ourselves, shook off the scary headlines and the TV news, and told ourselves we were flexible and strong, and that we have survived.

Filipinos, after all, are a forgiving and a forgetful people. We have a short memory for national troubles, sensational crimes and man-size scandals. We have a very high threshold for patience and leniency.

OK, we promise to move on. We close the book on the Estrada case. It’s time to resume our normal life. We have other important things to do.

Besides, look at the bright side. The peso is strong. OFW deployment will hit one million in less than a year. Remittances are up 16% in seven months.

S&P has reaffirmed its “BB+B” (plus or minus) for foreign and local currency issuer credit ratings on the Philippines, meaning the outlook is stable. Employment has risen as of July. Foreign investments are pouring in. Our ‘economic fundamentals’ are very strong.

Of course there are other worries on the horizon. The government has a hard time selling the national broadband network project. The Department of Education’s cyber-education program smells like a fake diploma. The Commission on Higher Education has discovered a suspicious P500-million campus-based call-center project on its backyard. The customs bureau and the BIR have not met their collection targets. It’s 2007 but we have not automated the voting system. We need to address the long-playing MILF secessionism and the NPA insurgency that are hindering development in the regions.

But what the heck—let’s move on.

Let’s book that trip to Macau next week. Order the Wagyu beef from TriNoMa. Let’s wake up late today, Sunday, and pretend nothing bad happened. Join the barkada for gin and coke. Rent the new Angel Locsin DVD. Take the family to Luneta. We will move on. We will not be defeated by the system. We will help the nation survive.

Gross national joy

IT would not be a bad idea if President Arroyo creates a National Commission on National Happiness to determine the level of our well-being and satisfaction.

The thought came to mind after reading that the World Database of Happiness, which lists 95 countries, has determined that Denmark (with a rating of 8.2), Switzerland, Austria, Iceland and Finland, all with high per capita income, are the “happiest” countries.

But wealth is not only the gauge of the Database, the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Institute and the Cambridge Institute of Well-Being, all doing research on what makes races and nations happy. Their yardsticks include education, nutrition, freedom from fear and violence, gender equality, mental health and having choices.

The United States makes it to the top 15 with a 7.4 index rating. In the middle range are the Philippines (6.4), Indonesia (6.2) and Iran (6). At the bottom are Tanzania (3.2), Zimbabwe (3.3) and Moldova (3.5).

The small kingdom of Bhutan said goodbye to gross national product a long time ago and said Bhutans should aspire to Gross National Happiness. Bhutan’s idea of collective happiness is based on equitable development, environmental conservation, cultural heritage and good government.

Today think tanks and research institutes are working on development models for methods to find out what makes peoples happy and why.

Filipinos are generally a happy people. Our sense of humor does not fail us even during national tragedies. Martial law and the Aquino assassination inspired many jokes, some still circulating today. OFW jokes about life in the US, Japan and the Middle East are plentiful. The only people who do not appreciate humor—especially jokes at their expense—are government officials.

We have a popular observation about Filipinos: Mababaw ang kaligayan (easy to please). We make do with the basics: three meals a day. A roof over one’s head. A good job. Family and friends. We are a hospitable people. We make friends easily. Pakikisama (the ability to get along) and utang na loob (returning a favor) are national virtues.

But the Presidential Commission on National Happiness could raise our level of well-being. It could look into quality-of-life issues, such as having clean air and water, less public noise, building more parks, making traffic more tolerable, building an efficient public-transportation system, insuring prompt trash collection, making medicine cheaper and making the neighborhood safer for children.

If we cannot become a First-World country, we could at least expand our national smile.

Health for the wealthy

Health for the wealthy

Filipinos can live with the high prices of food supplements with no approved therapeutic benefits, which are popular among health buffs. People can also live with the high prices of drugs for non-life threatening afflictions, such as Viagra and Cialis. But why do Filipinos have to contend with the high prices of drugs for chronic illnesses and even ordinary infections?

The House of Representatives committee on trade and industry, which is deliberating on a bill that will bring down the prices of medicine, reported that drug prices in this country are 22 times higher than those in India and five times higher than those in Pakistan. A 500 mg tablet of the popular painkiller Ponstan, for example, is retailed at P21.82 in the Philippines but only at P2.61 in India. An 80 mg tablet of the common antibiotic Bactrim costs only 69 centavos in India but P15.55 in the Philippines.

People can survive without ordinary painkillers. But what about a diabetic whose life could be shortened without maintenance drugs? A tablet of Diamicron, a drug for diabetics, is priced at P4.71 in India and P11.46 in the Philippines, the House panel learned.

There has to be more to the yawning price discrepancies than the fact that India has a flourishing local pharmaceutical industry – something that the Philippines has neglected to develop. The Philippines in fact imports from India several generic drugs sold in government health centers. But medicine prices are also lower in neighboring Asian countries compared to those in the Philippines. Congressmen pin the blame on what they describe as monopolistic pricing schemes of those in the pharmaceutical value chain.

House members are trying to address the problem by passing a new law that aims to bring down medicine prices – something that the 20-year-old Philippine National Drug Policy and the Generics Act have failed to do. Millions of Filipinos already lack the means to undergo complex medical procedures such as heart bypass surgery. Millions cannot afford even the expensive tests needed to determine cardiac problems. They should at least be able to afford maintenance drugs for common afflictions such as hypertension and asthma. It is often said that health is wealth. The government should avoid turning the country into a place where good health is only for the wealthy.

Automated barangay elections?

Automated barangay elections?

Gloria Arroyo strikes again all the way from left field with her proposal to auto-mate elections starting with the October 29 exercise covering barangay officials.

For starters, there is no more time to prepare for automated elections which are scheduled in six weeks. Second, results of barangay elections do not require consolidation. Third, the barangay elections are nominally non-partisan. And fourth, as result of the second and third factors, barangay elections are hardly afflicted by the cheating, the buying of votes, the intimidation and the violence that characterize local and national elections.

In short, the barangay elections are not the problem. The local and national elections are. And automation, while it would help speed up the count, is a technical solution that misses out on the wider dimensions of the problem.

We don’t mean the sort of transformation in individual values that some argue is a prerequisite to an authentic exercise of the people’s sovereign power to elect their leaders. For we can storm the heavens with our prayers that the phone pals of Virgilio Garcillano be struck by their conscience and stop cooking the tabulations of votes, and only end up losing our belief in the power of prayer.

If we want honest and clean elections, we can start impeaching and jailing the election officials whose actions are for outright sale or, in the case of someone who is now in the limelight, in exchange for multi-million dollar- denominated overpriced deals.

But corrupt Comelec officials are the effects, not the cause, of a degenerate electoral process. For elections to be honest, we have to overhaul the structures and reverse the trends that make elections the equivalent of a war of total annihilation.

Joseph Estrada has just been convicted of plunder and sentenced to lifetime in jail. Many see his conviction as a triumph of the law. We certainly wish it were so, because we would be seeing most of the current high officials joining him in Bilibid in the not too distant future.

But the more likely outcome of Erap’s conviction is not the return of law. It is more likely to lead to a further travesty of the law.

Gloria is exiting in 2010. That certainly means a more dirty and bloody election for the presidency. Gloria will pull out all stops to secure the victory of her candidate, for she has to ensure she and her accomplices do not end up in the slammer like Estrada.

That’s the kind of dynamic we expect political developments to follow in the next three years and possibly further down the road. Computerization of elections is a minor sideshow to the grand drama unfolding before our eyes.

Stickup

Stickup

ON THE SAME DAY THE SANDIGANBAYAN ended the trial of the century by sentencing her predecessor, Joseph Estrada, to life in prison for plunder, President Macapagal-Arroyo announced the creation of a new body to help curb graft and corruption in government. The President told the Bishops-Ulama Conference in Malacañang Wednesday that she had created the Procurement Transparency Group to monitor procurement for public projects. The inter-agency body, chaired by the Department of Budget and Management, will have representatives from civil society. It will monitor procurement biddings and report anomalies to agency heads as well as the Office of the Ombudsman and the Commission on Audit. Its main purpose is “to ensure transparency and good governance in our massive public investments,’’ Ms Arroyo said. A separate group will “also harness civil society and the private sector in ensuring that public works projects serve the needs and objectives for which they are undertaken, and contract terms and timetables are complied with.’’

If the twin announcements were meant to signal a fresh resolve to combat graft in government, the President herself diluted the message with her other statements in the same forum. “We must be a government that honors contracts and agreements that go through the required processes, despite media attacks,’’ she said. “We live by the rule of law.’’ Later when asked by reporters if that policy included the ZTE contract to set up a national broadband network (NBN), Ms Arroyo reiterated that “as long as the contract goes through the required processes, we are required to comply’’ with its terms.

It was clear as day that she was referring to the $329-million contract with the Chinese firm ZTE. No other contract, whether involving foreign or local governments or companies, has been the subject of so much “media attacks’’ in recent months. And “transparent’’ is the last thing anyone can say about that contract or the processes that went before and after it was signed -- from the deliberations on the project to the negotiations and the decision to award it to ZTE.

To this day, top administration officials continue to dissemble and mislead the public about the NBN project and how ZTE bagged the contract. They cannot even agree if there is a contract or not. Some Cabinet officials say what has been signed is a memorandum of agreement or understanding, but others call it a contract. Commission on Higher Education Chair Romulo Neri, who used to head the National Economic and Development Authority, says there is a “supplier’s contract’’ but it is only a “prospective contract.’’ If that means it is not the real thing, then why did Transportation and Communications Secretary Leandro Mendoza sign it? And why did the President have to leave her husband, who had just undergone a delicate operation, to witness the signing in Boao, China? If the contract is “prospective,” it is probably because the plans and specifications are not spelled out so that no one can tell exactly what the country is getting for $329 million or if that would be the final price.

When pressed for answers, most Cabinet members point to Mendoza, saying the NBN is his baby and he knows it best. But Mendoza refuses to make the contract public and he doesn’t want to talk -- not to the press, not to the members of Congress. The only talking he has done recently was to the Cabinet where he supposedly explained the project in detail, including how it would save the government billions of pesos a year.

Funny that Mendoza bothered to do that. It was like preaching to the converted or at least to those who must act like true believers, given the President’s keen interest in seeing the NBN project through. But it is not the Cabinet that has been asking questions, it is the Filipino public. Does Mendoza think he owes it to the Cabinet to explain, but not to the Filipino people?

The Arroyo administration wants the Filipino people to approve a contract and pay for a project they know very little about, and it has the temerity to talk about transparency and good governance? In any other place, they would call this secret, rotten deal a stinking stickup.

Grace period

Grace period

THROWING MONEY AT A PROBLEM WON’T SOLVE it. President Macapagal-Arroyo says the government has the cash to automate elections. Clearly, she has the upcoming barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) elections in mind.

We believe pursuing automation in a rush would be counterproductive. The Commission on Elections, in particular as it is presently constituted under the beleaguered leadership of Benjamin Abalos, shouldn’t be entrusted with the authority to shortcut bidding processes in the rush to automate the barangay elections. Instead of modernizing our electoral system, this would only open up another opportunity for a controversial purchase of equipment, which could then put every subsequent electoral exercise under a cloud of doubt. Our political skies are too overcast for this at the moment.

What would a rushed automation of barangay elections next month achieve? An army of dubiously elected ward leaders eager to do the President’s bidding in 2010.

If we are to automate, let’s do it right, under a Comelec untainted by the most disgraceful set of commissioners since the Marcos years. If we are to automate, let’s give a sector that’s pretty much more respected and distinguished than our election officials—the IT sector—a chance to arrive at a consensus on the best form of automation to undertake. If we are to automate, and if we are (sensibly) to use the barangay elections as a laboratory to debug an automated system for voting, then let’s not rush into it pell-mell; let’s give it a year, no more, no less.

A happier confluence of events is possible. The President has a chance to fill the vacancy in the Comelec chairmanship that will occur in February next year—and other vacancies that may perhaps come up (we can only earnestly hope that the current Comelec commissioners see the light and resign en masse, together with their disgraced and disgraceful chairman)—with a credible appointment.

Electoral watchdog groups and the IT sector have a chance to show they can do more than make noise, they can achieve a consensus on solutions and, who knows, even on possible Comelec appointments. Our legislature can institute much-needed reforms, not on the basis of partisanship, but in acknowledgment of the public’s yearning for cleaner elections. There is an obvious opportunity here, for the executive and legislative branches to achieve a kind of redemption—or, at least, recovery of their standing—before the people.

While we’re at it, postponing the barangay elections by a year would also allow Congress to consider a much-needed reform. We endorse the manifesto signed on Sept. 5, in Baguio City, by educators and students calling for the abolition of the SK. The manifesto, signed during the annual training convention of student council leaders in public schools, proposes that the current revenue allotment for the SK—10 percent of every barangay’s budget—be re-channelled to public education instead.

The student-educator manifesto points out that all the SK has achieved is to put in the hands of young people large sums of money that they are not prepared to handle; and to serve as a take-off point for dynastic control of local politics. Money is power; and young people all over the country are getting a corrupt and corrupting introduction into power politics by means of the SK. In contrast, student governments represent a more integrated approach to representative government, without the tempting access to large sums.

Reduce carbs or lose weight to lower cholesterol

Reduce carbs or lose weight to lower cholesterol

Reducing dietary carbohydrates can improve atherogenic dyslipidemia, even in the absence of weight loss. Weight loss also improves dyslipidemia, mainly in people who have not already limited carbohydrates. For patients already restricting carbohydrates, weight loss offers little additional benefit to their lipid profiles. To take the reduced-carbohydrate path, focus on avoiding high-glycemic starches and fructose. Associates randomized 178 otherwise healthy overweight or obese men to one of four diets: one based on standard dietary recommendations (made up of 54% carbohydrates, 30% fat, and 16% protein), a diet with moderate carbohydrate reduction (to 39%), or one of two low (26%)-carbohydrate diets. To keep calorie levels the same initially, the researchers increased protein intake to 29% of the reduced-carbohydrate diet, and in the lowest carbohydrate diets increased either saturated or monounsaturated fat intake.

After 3 weeks (which is enough to stabilize lipids with no weight change), they found a linear relationship between greater carbohydrate restriction and a change in the type of LDL cholesterol. Carbohydrate restriction converted men from phenotype B individuals (who had dense, small-diameter LDL particles that confer higher atherogenic risk) to phenotype A (with medium-to-large-diameter LDL that’s less risky). Investigators then restricted calories, and patients in all groups lost similar amounts of weight. The type of diet “didn’t make any difference as long as they learned to eat less. Lipid levels improved with weight loss, but less so in the low-carbohydrate groups that already had shown improvements.

The only significant reductions in LDL levels were seen with the low-carbohydrate, low-saturated-fat diet. This is certainly the most effective diet in terms of LDL lowering that we’ve seen just by manipulating fat. The reductions in small LDL particles from lowering carbohydrate intake were independent of saturated fat intake. Higher saturated fat intake did not attenuate the lipid benefits of lowering carbohydrates. Saturated fat intake “doesn’t make it any worse.” That’s provocative, but that’s what they found. Previous studies of the lipid effects of low-carbohydrate diets didn’t control for the effects of weight loss.

You can get there either way. If you want to get the optimal result, you can either lose weight or you can drop carbohydrates. If you drop carbohydrates, it may not be as critical how much weight you lose. Other studies are attempting to replicate the findings. A recent study randomized dyslipidemic patients to one of four diets for 1 year: the severely low-carbohydrate Atkins diet, the more moderately carbohydrate-restricted Zone diet, a diet based on standard dietary recommendations, or the low-fat, high-carbohydrate Ornish diet.

The four groups had similar success in losing weight. Patients on the Atkins diet had somewhat better changes in body mass index, compared with the other groups, and profoundly better effects on lipid profiles, notably increases in HDL cholesterol and decreased in triglyceride levels. Changes in the different types of LDL cholesterol were not measured in this cohort, but “there’s just no doubt this would correspond to the same sort of changes they had seen. The most effective diet probably will be one that patients are able to maintain. In the end, that will be the biggest test of whether or not this works.

Losing a World Heritage Site

Losing a World Heritage Site

Filipinos refer to the rice terraces in Banaue as the eighth wonder of the world. The site – the most extensive network of terraced rice paddies in Asia – failed to make it to the new Seven Wonders of the World, officially proclaimed recently. But the rice terraces are in the list of World Heritage Sites drawn up by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Now even that classification may be withdrawn. A recent report said Unesco may take the Banaue rice terraces out of its list of World Heritage Sites if the rice paddies continue to deteriorate. Unesco also noted the presence of structures that are not supposed to be within the heritage site and the apparent lack of a sustainable tourism program.

Local officials in Ifugao province have downplayed the possible loss of its Unesco classification. But the possible withdrawal of the classification cannot be taken lightly. In recent years other groups have expressed concern over the deterioration of the Banaue rice terraces. Though the site remains one of the country’s top tourist destinations, there has been little improvement in the tourism infrastructure in the area, from the two roads leading to the site to the accommodations and telecommunications facilities.

This could be the terraces caretakers’ idea of preserving the natural state of the site. But the terraces themselves are the ones that should be preserved; the surrounding areas can use some upgrading. The terraces themselves, however, are deteriorating. An infestation of giant worms eroded the terraces. Because of the low yield of the paddies and the lack of support to market the fragrant mountain rice, young Ifugaos were reported to be abandoning their farms to seek livelihood opportunities elsewhere.

In other countries, the rice harvested from a World Heritage Site would have been marketed worldwide as a gourmet variety at premium prices. The profits from tilling the terraced fields plus the tourism revenue would have guaranteed that the next generations of Ifugaos would have a stake in preserving their precious environment. It is not yet too late to do this in a site that is a source of national pride.

Memories, murmurs

Memories, murmurs

I'm doing a buffet column today. the articles can stand alone, but are related. So they can be read in installments. Choose what you want to read and when.

Mercifully brief, I thought to myself at 9:20 on Wednesday as the Sandiganbayan clerk finished reading the verdict and sentence for ex-President Joseph Estrada.

The Sandiganbayan was wise to choose that path because reading the entire decision, said to run more than 200 pages, would have been more "correctly" Filipino and yet dangerous. Like the "Pasyon" sung out every Holy Week, no one would have really been listening, much less understanding, the decision (written in English), but it would have amplified whatever emotions people had. I couldn't help contrasting Wednesday's courtroom atmosphere with that of the "Nicole" trial a few months back, where the "guilty" verdict for Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith was followed by cheering.

I'm glad, too, that government and media seemed to agree that we didn't need to stoke people's passions. The television cameras were not allowed to focus on Estrada while the verdict was being read. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo kept her silence, as did Raul Gonzalez and other presidential advisors with foot-in-mouth afflictions. We did get a still fiery but relatively subdued La Senadora Miriam Defensor-Santiago preaching about Christian magnanimity.

Maybe because there was so little of fireworks and political noise, we ended up hearing more of public "murmuring," muted but perceptible feelings that were actually quite similar, regardless of people's support of or opposition to Erap. I can summarize this feeling as: "But the looting and plundering have worsened," sometimes accompanied by a wistful: "She better be careful; someday she could be the one on trial."

I'm using "murmur" here in a medical sense. A heart murmur may be mild and muted, but it "speaks" of potentially serious trouble, even as it troubles the entire psyche. If the trial seemed anticlimactic, it is because people feel shortchanged . . . not by the verdict itself or the sentencing (which I think many people found too harsh, in the context of Erap's age), than by the way the country continues to plod along, like a patient with heart disease who has gone to see the doctor--and has been advised to stick a band-aid plaster on the chest every time he suffers distress. People want more, but we're not getting it for now, so we just move on.

Histories
Justice, oh justice. Visit Youtube on the Internet and type in "Cebu, Thriller" to get a video of a thousand Cebu prisoners dancing away to Michael Jackson's "Thriller." The star of the show is "Wenjell," a drag queen who ends up getting devoured by the "zombie" prisoners. Well, she's been in prison now for three years on drug-related charges, and has not been brought to trial. Erap got a trial, but languished, sort of, under house arrest for six years before a verdict was handed down.

In the long run though, justice comes not through courts and judges but from the pen (or computer keyboards) of our historians looking back at our troubled times. Years from now, historians not even born today will go through the archives--hard and electronic copies, court transcripts and newspaper columns and yes, blogs and YouTube--and pass judgment. We will hear again of our presidents, from Aguinaldo to Marcos and Aquino and Ramos and Estrada . . . and Arroyo.

Historians are no longer just chroniclers dishing out dates and names of great people. Today's historians are more like explorers and archaeologists, piecing together the most minute of detailed information to produce what they call "total events," complete with descriptions of context of places and people. They are not just using official archives now but also looking into letters and diaries, folklore and life histories. In the graduate anthropology course I teach, I often have quite a few history majors eager to learn new ways of understanding, and interpreting, our past.

Instead of one Philippine history, we have many histories written and waiting to be written. There are Filipinos who grew up learning about the Philippines from American historians. Then Filipino historians came in to rewrite the textbooks, sometimes questioning earlier accounts: Zaide, Agoncillo, Constantino, the Inquirer's own Ambeth Ocampo. Ambeth's books are best-sellers because they show the human side to our heroes and villains--what they ate, whom they loved (now why did I think of eating and loving at the same time?).

Historians give life and color and perspective to the events. For many years, Vietnamese history books tended to be hagiographies, full of praise for all the brave Vietnamese generals who defeated the American imperialists. Today, there are new books talking about daily life during the war. One of the current best-sellers in Vietnam is a book featuring excerpts from the diary of a young Vietnamese woman doctor who wrote about all her fears and anxieties and sadness, even while remaining totally committed to her work of ministering to the wounded and dying. She died before the war ended, and young Vietnamese feel that history must reflect, too, the valor of the Vietnamese outside the war arenas. (It's interesting, too, that the diary ended up with an American GI, who was able to return it to Vietnam after the war ended.)

Future histories of the Philippines will feature more "inside stories" about the famous and not-so-famous that will put many of our presidents in a new light. I have no doubt we will hear more of Joseph Estrada's life, when he was in Malacañang as well as under house arrest. So too, we will hear of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's life in Malacañang, as a president's daughter and as a president.

Time is always on the historian's side, people now silent will come forth in safer times to speak and to hand over important documents. But time is also on the side of controversial figures like Marcos and Estrada and Arroyo, allowing future generations of Filipinos access to more facts and therefore to become more critical, but kinder and gentler in their judgments.

UP memories
Our anthropology department at UP turns 90 this year while the university will be celebrating its centennial next year. From time to time, I'll be talking about some of the anniversary projects and activities, often with an appeal for help. For starters, the UP Diliman Information Office is compiling a coffee table centennial book, "UPD Sights and Sounds," and needs back issues of the Philippinensian (1918 to 1931, 1937 to 1941, 1949, 1951, 1966 to 1968), as well as The Plow, The Veterinarian, The Woolsack and The Tic. (You can figure out which colleges produced the first two magazines, but woolsacks and tics?) Call the Information Office at 924-1881 or 920-5802 if you have copies that you can lend or donate.

Omerta

Omerta

Reports earlier this week said President Arroyo had created not just one but two bodies to promote transparency in government. She should show that she means business by starting with the controversial $329-million broadband deal with Chinese firm ZTE Corp.

The other night Transportation and Communications Secretary Leandro Mendoza, who had signed the deal with ZTE executives in the presence of President Arroyo in Boao, China during the campaign period last April, stonewalled when asked by congressmen to shed light on the broadband project. The deal will require public funds to repay a loan from the Chinese Export-Import Bank that will be used to finance the project. Members of the House appropriations committee who were deliberating on the proposed national budget for 2008 wanted to know the details. Their interest in the funding was valid, but Mendoza, citing the advice of his lawyer, said a restraining order from the Supreme Court on the implementation of the ZTE deal prevented him from commenting on it.

The order of the high tribunal is the latest excuse invoked by the administration for its failure to come clean on a project that will saddle Filipinos with a $329-million debt burden for the next two decades. Administration officials say the document inked in China was stolen shortly after the signing. To this day different government officials have different versions of what exactly was signed. The nation learned of the purported theft of the original document only through a slip of the tongue of one of Mendoza’s underlings.

Malacañang has maintained a stony silence amid reports linking Chairman Benjamin Abalos of the Commission on Elections to the ZTE deal. Would his involvement have anything to do with disputed election results? There is no way of knowing. Officials implicated in the deal are either threatening to sue for libel or invoking orders from the President herself preventing them from facing congressional efforts to unearth the truth. This is not transparency but the code of omerta.

Magnificent

Magnificent

The motion of defense counsel to dispense with a full reading of the Sandiganbayan decisions in the perjury and plunder cases against Joseph Estrada has allowed the ex-president, his family and his allies to fudge the truth--and confuse the public.

This is unfortunate, because the rulings, especially the 262-page decision in the plunder case, are a clear example of solid, straightforward legal reasoning. There are certain errors, to be sure, such as an innocent confusion between the two Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan decisions upholding the constitutionality of the plunder law, but in the main the three Sandiganbayan justices outdid themselves: They sift confidently through the mass of evidence, organize the most salient, set forth their findings of fact--and then apply the law.

Every single assertion made by Estrada and his supporters since Wednesday's promulgation can be answered directly from the decision.

Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, for instance, assailed the court (the same court which acquitted him) for convicting his father on the illegal gambling charge. Since when did jueteng money, he asked for argument's sake, become public funds?

His question is irrelevant, because the plunder law penalizes any public official who systematically amasses ill-gotten wealth. The "public treasury" is only one of six possible sources of illegal wealth specified by the law. The sixth, in fact, can be understood as a catch-all condition: "By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines." (The decision quotes this ringing line toward its conclusion.)

We have to remember that the plunder law--Republic Act 7080, as amended--came into being as a legislative reaction to the excesses of the Marcos regime. (Now that was plunder, on a grand, one-for-the-Guinness-book-of-world-records scale.) As Justice Josue Bellosillo of the Supreme Court wrote, over a decade after RA 7080 became law: "Drastic and radical measures are imperative to fight the increasingly sophisticated, extraordinarily methodical and economically catastrophic looting of the national treasury."

In its own decision, the Sandiganbayan quotes at length from the Explanatory Note to the Senate bill that helped lead to the plunder law. One passage reads: "The acts and/or omissions sought to be penalized do not involve simple cases of malversation of public funds, bribery, extortion, theft and graft but constitute plunder of an entire nation resulting in material damage to the national economy."

In this dark light, centralizing jueteng operations in Malacañang certainly qualifies as plunder.

Estrada himself took the court to task for issuing a "political" decision, saying he could not blame the justices because the Sandiganbayan's special division was "programmed to convict" him. A close reading of the decision on the plunder case, however, will show that--despite obvious pressure from both the Arroyo administration and from Estrada's political camp--the three members of the Sandiganbayan stuck scrupulously to the law's straight and narrow.

They acquitted the younger Estrada and the lawyer Ed Serapio because, in their assessment of the evidence, the prosecution failed to prove the case against the two co-accused beyond a reasonable doubt. They found that the Velarde account contained unimaginable wealth, but said the prosecution failed to prove the money was ill-gotten--except, that is, for P189 million, which they identified, beyond any doubt, as the commissions Estrada received from the purchase of Belle Corp. shares by the Social Security System and the Government Service Insurance System. The language of the decision reflects the quality of the reasoning: measured, assured, humane, just.

The Sandiganbayan's plunder decision reminds us again that, through the turmoil of the last seven lean years, beginning with Estrada's aborted impeachment trial in the Senate, the courts have played a leading role in holding our democracy together.

Closing the book

Closing the book

THE Sandiganbayan decision on the trial of former President Joseph Estrada closes a tumultuous chapter in our history. Whether President Arroyo offers Mr. Estrada a pardon or the Supreme Court sees fit to reverse the lower court’s ruling, we should be relieved to close the book on a very controversial case that took the court more than six years to make a judgment on.

The trial took a long time because both defense and prosecution laid claims to postponements and recesses in the interest of a fair trial. Both sides, but particularly the defense, took advantage of the legal dodges allowed by law. They were meticulous in their preparation and thorough in the court skirmishes. In the end, due process was observed. The trial upheld the rule of law.

It was a controversial case for many reasons. Mr. Estrada was not a 20-year dictator but a popularly elected president when he was thrown out of power. His defense in the impeachment trial never prospered because the prosecutors walked out abruptly over an unopened envelope. His own secretary of defense and his generals withheld critical support during the second Edsa revolt. When the Supreme Court validated his ouster and installed the vice president, the accusations against him took a powerful, inexorable force.

The case also had no precedent. Mr. Estrada had claimed innocence from the beginning but the government built a powerful argument against him. He claimed he was offered exile but he refused it. He would turn down a presidential pardon if offered because acceptance would imply guilt. Many Filipinos probably believe him, from the jobless and underemployed masa to the swarm of politicians he helped get elected in the May 14 elections.

The Sandigan cleared Sen. Jinggoy Estrada and the lawyer Eduardo Serapio. That should help console the former president. The lower court also said he could continue to stay in his comfortable home in Tanay. A motion for reconsideration before the Sandigan holds out some hope, even if slim. An appeal to the Supreme Court offers a lifeline.

The nation took the news with remarkable calm. Fears of a violent outrage came to nothing. Philippine share prices closed 1.21 percent higher Wednesday as investors discounted political instability after the court decision. Resignation in the opposition ranks seems to be the popular mood. Mr. Estrada urged his followers to stay calm. The administration said it could now focus on the task of strengthening peace and the economy with greater vigor.

What lessons have we learned? First, almost every Filipino is saying we should forswear “people power” as an alternative to bad government. Second, the Armed Forces of the Philippines, like the professional Civil Service, should uphold neutrality and independence on a grave constitutional issue. Third, the system is unfair because it allows the guilty to walk away from a crime. Finally, we learned that there is no sanctuary from misdeeds in the highest office of the land. The Estrada precedent will cast a lingering shadow on the political landscape for a very long time.

Lesson of Erap case lost on officialdom

Lesson of Erap case lost on officialdom

There’s a big lesson in the Joseph Estrada verdict. If a President can be prosecuted and convicted for graft, so too may lower bureaucrats. And so too other Presidents.

Will that sink into their minds and strike fear in their hearts? They don’t show it.

Red tape and petty sleaze have declined of late due to stricter civil service rules. Anti-graft watchdog Transparency & Accountability Network gave that good news last month. But TAN hastened to add that the secrecy that shrouds high-level government deals has given rise to grander, more lucrative corrupt practices.

TAN executive director Vincent Lazatin pointed out the irony during a workshop on dishonesty. Malacañang’s issuance last year of an anti-red tape executive order dramatically reduced under-the-table transacting and undue delays. But it is also Malacañang that prevents the scrutiny of major deals decried as onerous or overpriced.

Lazatin’s observation came amid cries to reveal the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement and the broadband supply from China’s ZTE Corp. Malacañang has since relented to prior ratification of the pact by the Senate before enforcing, as the Constitution requires. But contrary to constitutional rule for transparency, it still refuses to show the ZTE contract to aggrieved competitors, telecoms experts, businessmen, legislators and the media. And it’s been five months since the contract was signed on April 21 in Boao, Hainan, China, with President Gloria Arroyo no less witnessing.

Last Wednesday Trade Sec. Peter Favila snubbed the Question Hour on ZTE at the House of Reps because he didn’t get presidential clearance to talk. Transport and Communication Sec. Larry Mendoza declined, although he is the contract signatory and thus accountable officer. Expect the same to happen on Thursday at the Senate, where Finance Sec. Gary Teves, former economic czar Romy Neri, and seconds have been invited. A Malacañang factotum yelled to them to secure Arroyo’s assent to go, or else. Teves has gone anew on medical leave.

Opacity marked many recent government acts, among them the sale of sequestered assets. All run to hundreds of millions or billions of pesos. All are being questioned in Congress, the courts, or coffeeshop murmurs. But the worst embodiment of government contracting is the ZTE deal. It not only is being hidden from the public, but also is overpriced, based on the ignored offers of two rivals. An exclusive government broadband setup is even needless and would end up a white elephant, economists aver. Yet it would force Filipinos to repay a loan of $330 million (P16 billion) for 20 years at 3-4 percent interest.

Early this year the Hong Kong-based Political and Economic Risk Consultancy asked businessmen to rate government corruption from 0 as best possible score, to 10 as worst. They graded the Philippines 9. A Social Weather Station poll in March also found high disenchantment due to graft. Lazatin said it was becoming tougher for anti-graft groups like TAN to wring information and access documents from the Arroyo administration. Among such papers are the supposedly public statements of assets and liabilities of government men.

The situation is not about to improve. Last week five major business groups denounced “a growing culture of impunity” in the government. They wondered how Comelec chief Benjamin Abalos could travel at least four times to Shenzhen last year courtesy of ZTE executives, when he was supposed to be busy preparing for clean and orderly elections. They also warned Mendoza against belittling the outcry against secrecy in the deal.

The middle-class Black-and-White Movement also decried the officials’ “acquired narcissism.” People in high places, it noted, find it easy to behave in bizarre ways, as if election or appointment entitles them to do as they please, and operate under different rules because of stature.

Mendoza’s refusal alone to divulge the contract should be grounds for censure. The Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards requires officials to reply to requests within 15 days. The Red Tape Law further makes them produce complex papers within ten days. Yet Malacañang is silent about his silence.

Abalos’ admission of free travels also breaches the Code of Conduct. Yet the Comelec refuses to investigate him.

Estrada’s apologists maintain that if ever he took jueteng payola, he never stole from the public till. That may be hair-splitting. But the Arroyo administration has yet to explain fully the fertilizer scam that presaged the Garci tapes of the 2004 elections. More than a billion pesos were misspent on that. And now it has to explain the ZTE scam that presaged the Bedol affair of the 2007 balloting. About $70 million (P3.5 billion) reportedly was illegally raised for the campaign this time around.

Truly, the lesson of the Erap verdict is lost on officialdom.

Judicious spending

Judicious spending

Now that a former president of the republic has been convicted of plunder, public officials may want to exercise more prudence in pushing projects with stiff price tags to be shouldered by Juan de la Cruz. One of the most controversial projects so far is the government’s deal with Chinese firm ZTE Corp. for a national broadband network, which will require taxpayers to repay a debt of $329 million. That is over 10 times higher than the amount that warranted the conviction of Joseph Estrada for plunder. From the signing of a document in connection with the project during the campaign period last April, the public has been kept in the dark about details of the broadband deal.

Now certain quarters are expressing similar concerns over another project, again involving information and communication technology. A study conducted by the Philippine Business for Education or PBED – a grouping of the country’s top industrialists and groups involved in improving the quality of education – raises questions about the cost of the Cyber Education project and even the necessity for it.

The CyberEd project, to be undertaken by the Department of Education, involves setting up multimedia classrooms in 37,794 of the more than 42,000 public schools around the country. Each special classroom will be equipped with two PCs, four television sets, a printer and an antenna, at a cost of P479,000 per room. The PBED noted that similar projects undertaken by private groups with the education department have considerably lower costs.

The country certainly needs to catch up with most of its neighbors in developing ICT competence especially among public school students. Even within the country, there is a wide disparity in ICT competence between the rich and poor, and the gap continues to grow. Children from affluent families get to play with computers almost as soon as there is no longer any danger that they will spill milk on the keyboard. Less fortunate children learn to use computers only in high school, and only on a limited basis.

Narrowing the knowledge gap, however, must be done with care, especially when huge amounts of public funds are involved. In a sector where every peso in the budget allotment is precious, the government cannot afford careless spending. Before another scandal erupts, the CyberEd project must be reviewed.

Lessons from Erap

Lessons from Erap

It took six years and four months, but it finally happened: a president deposed amid charges of corruption was convicted of plunder and sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison. Where Filipinos failed in the case of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, it succeeded with Joseph Estrada, who was also permanently barred from holding public office.

The ruling handed down by the Sandiganbayan yesterday cannot please everyone, and the political opposition is trying to give the verdict a political spin. Even before Estrada was arrested in late April 2001, however, many Filipinos were already convinced of his guilt, throwing him out of Malacañang amid his impeachment trial for large-scale corruption, and then replacing him with his constitutional successor. An indication of public sentiment regarding the case was the dismal turnout at the rally for Estrada yesterday near the Sandiganbayan. The peaceful response to the verdict buoyed the markets.

The fate that has befallen a man who won the presidency by the largest margin ever in this country should serve as a welcome warning that corruption does not pay. The message is valuable in a society where corruption is deeply rooted and where public office is not regarded as a public trust but rather as a sure path to personal wealth. The nation’s failure to make any of the Marcoses pay for the abuses of the martial law regime, including the “kleptocracy” of the so-called conjugal dictatorship, gave the impression that in this country, the small fry get caught while the big fish get away with everything.

Estrada is the biggest fish ever caught in the anti-graft net, and his conviction for massive corruption or plunder shows a nation’s determination to stamp out the scourge. Even if he continues to receive VIP treatment as a prisoner and eventually gets pardoned or paroled, he is being made to account for high crimes. A powerful message has been sent: the people are watching, and no one is above the law.

Erap vindication will come

Erap vindication will come

Joseph Estrada had resigned himself that he would be adjudged guilty even before the Sandiganbayan handed down its verdict yesterday. He said he did not expect justice under the Arroyo administration, and that his worry was the reaction of his supporters to his conviction.

Now Erap is back in his rest house in Tanay pending "further orders from the court." His supporters, stunned by the judgment, have gone home with bitterness and anger in their hearts. Nothing was heard of from Gloria, with her stand in, Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye, pontificating about how the administration has an economy to run and peace to be won.

The nation, in short, is back to where it was before judgment day, deeply riven by fault lines generated by the ouster of Estrada six years ago. The healing presidency promised by Gloria Arroyo has turned out to be more corrupt, more incompetent and more vicious in dealing with its perceived enemies.

The lines are becoming more sharply drawn. The expected review of the case by the Supreme Court may temporarily extend the prevailing uneasy calm. But the closure the nation is hoping for cannot be expected from this source.

As we earlier said it is Gloria, not Erap, who stands on the dock of history here. Despite his conviction and continued deprivation of liberty (being kept away from his friends, his family and his ailing mother is certainly not a vacation in a resort as his critics paint it to be), a defiant Erap is the real judge behind the scene from whom Gloria cannot escape judgment.

From Day One, Gloria wished that Erap had slithered away to foreign exile to legitimize her power grab. Erap, despite his well-known personal weaknesses, has proven to be a man of unbending principles. We would not be surprised if following the Supreme Court’s affirmation of the judgment, Gloria would dangle before him pardon for the "crimes" the Sandiganbayan found he had committed

The reality is, strangely enough, it is Erap who has all the time in the world to vindicate himself. In fact, he is at the moment as good as vindicated.

Edsa 2 is now widely seen as a grievous mistake for severely weakening the constitutional order. The Dionysian carousing of Erap while in the Palace is now seen as an authentic expression of his essential humanity in contrast to Gloria’s unfeeling, uncaring, mechanistic calculus of gains and losses (mostly gains for Gloria and her family; mostly losses for the rest).

In contrast, Gloria is due to exit in three years, with her reputation and her credibility in shreds. We don’t rule out redemption in her remaining three years. But we’re not holding our breath.

A new purpose for APEC

A new purpose for APEC

It’s as good as it gets considering this is APEC.”

That was how a foreign newswire quoted President Arroyo’s view of the just-concluded summit of 21 leaders of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. It is at once a positive assessment of the new initiatives drawn up during the Sydney meet, as well as a subtle indictment of its lack of progress on the key issue of jump-starting global trade negotiations under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The President is no rabid supporter of the WTO. After all, she pushed for delays in the implementation of certain trade commitments early in her term in response to appeals from local industries for import relief.

But as observers have said since its founding, the APEC remains four adjectives in search of a noun, to underline the group’s failure to come up with binding agreements to move forward the global trade agenda.

Frustration has emboldened not a few members to push for the conversion of the consultative body into a free-trade area, much like the growing number of regional and bilateral accords that have risen in the wake of the WTO’s Seattle impasse.

Cynicism over the global trading regime has grown, as the promises of free trade have yet to bear fruit. Instead of more jobs and higher incomes, free trade destroyed homegrown industries and wiped out jobs, especially in the developing world.

This is because the developed world has yet to dismantle barriers that have prevented their poor counterparts from shipping more of their produce. As unemployment and poverty push more of the developing world’s population to seek jobs abroad, the developed world responded by further raising barriers to the movement of labor, especially after the 9/11 terror attack.

In contrast, footloose capital mostly from the developed world lay waste developing markets in what a number of experts is calling “toxic finance,” an apparent swipe at the developed world’s failure to rein in its hedge funds and greedy money-men.

This is exactly how the polemic on substandard exports, triggered by China’s poor safety record, is shaping up: Beijing, as the self-appointed spokesman of the developing world, is trading barbs with the United States and other developed countries that issued recalls of the mainland’s products.

This word war, conveniently framed as a battle between the developed and the developing world, however masks the tensions among members of each bloc. Among the rich countries, the US and the European Union remain miles apart on farm subsidies.

With regard to China’s safety record, other developing countries, mostly in Southeast Asia, have their issues with Beijing. China’s refusal to acknowledge its substandard shipments risks a trade spate not only with developed countries, but also with its developing Asian neighbors.

What used to be an argument between the developed and developing worlds has degenerated to shouting matches and bickering between and among the rich and the poor members of the WTO. In short, the global trading order is in disarray, which is exactly what free traders had warned about years ago if the WTO wasn’t organized soon.

Amid this chaos, we however believe that the APEC may have found a new purpose. It however has to rise to the challenge and help the WTO police its ranks. Standards must be imposed, but the consensus-building approach the APEC is known for can soften increasingly hard positions.

If it were to persist in its role as an informal consensus-building mechanism for the global trading regime, then APEC should be allowed to smooth the trading order’s rough edges. Barring that, then the time to wind down the group is long overdue.

Judgment Day

Judgment Day

The long-awaited decision on the Estrada plunder case will be handed down Wednesday, and everybody is awaiting it with the proverbial bated breath. The accused, former President Joseph Estrada, has been having sleepless nights, and his situation has been aggravated by worry over the condition of his ailing 102-year-old mother. The nation just wants to have a closure to this highly divisive case.

Either way the case ends -- conviction or acquittal -- the government expects some civil disturbance to take place, and is preparing for it. The civil society groups that were largely responsible for Estrada’s fall from power in 2001 cannot see how the Sandiganbayan anti-graft court can return a verdict of not guilty when the damning evidence which were presented with crystal-clear clarity at the impeachment trial of the former president in the Senate were also the evidence presented at the court trial.

The defense contends that the prosecution has failed to prove that Estrada is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. But even some of the former president’s leading lawyers, like former senator Rene Saguisag, seem to be resigned to a guilty verdict. Saguisag said, “We don’t expect a lower court (the Sandiganbayan) to tell the Supreme Court that it is wrong.”

A verdict of not guilty could give rise to some complications, including the possibility of Estrada claiming the presidency back from Ms Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, although he has said he would not do that. The fact is that his unserved portion of the six-year presidential term has lapsed, and there is no way that he can turn back the hands of time.

A verdict of guilty could inflame the supporters of Estrada who still wields considerable political clout, and could spark a repeat of “EDSA 3,” the rising of the enraged masses who came to within inches of taking over Malacañang. The military and the police have said they are prepared for a similar eventuality on Wednesday.

Months before the scheduled promulgation of the decision, calls were made for the grant of pardon to Estrada in the event he is convicted. But Estrada himself has said he would not accept a pardon for that would practically mean an admission of guilt. He said he would appeal a possible decision of conviction to the Supreme Court.

A grant of presidential pardon that would be almost simultaneous with the handing down of a guilty verdict would send the wrong signal to the nation and the world. It would seem as if the government is not serious in punishing grafters and corrupt officials.

The best way to put a closure to Estrada plunder case is just to await the decision of the Sandiganbayan and to let justice and the rule of law take their course. Violence and extraordinary measures have no place in a democratic, civilized society.

Victorious

MANILA, Philippines -- They buried Luciano Pavarotti, the global opera superstar, on Saturday after a final, tear-stained standing ovation at somber funeral rites in his hometown of Modena, Italy. Death has stilled the live voice of one of the best tenors the world has ever known, but his recorded voice -- and his memory -- will live on for as long as recording devices work, and for as long as the world loves good music.

Superlatives have been used to describe Pavarotti, the best loved and most celebrated tenor since Caruso: “one of the world’s greatest voices,” “best-selling classical artist” (100 million records sold since the 1960s) and “an enormous crossover celebrity” whose appeal went far beyond the confines of classical opera. But more than a singer, Pavarotti was a humanitarian, a charismatic personality, a real human being.

Pavarotti took opera out of the stuffed-shirt confines of the opera houses of the elite, and by singing with such artists as Bono, Elton John and the Spice Girls brought opera to the masses and even the hiphop set. He captured a global audience for opera when he sang the aria “Nessun Dorma” (Nobody Sleeps) from Puccini’s “Turandot” for football’s 1990 World Cup finals. The highly successful “Three Tenors” concerts he had with Placido Domingo and Jose Carreras reached 1.5 billion people, and filled stadiums.

The last line of “Nessun Dorma” goes: “All’alba vincero” -- “At dawn I will be victorious.” Truly, Pavarotti has been victorious, his voice has conquered death, and he will be remembered for as long as the world loves good music.

Both sides guilty

Both sides guilty

IT’S BEEN THE BATTLE OF THE ICONS LEADING UP to today. Yesterday, a full-page ad, signed by society matrons who have been busy signing pro-administration manifestos since 2005, came out with another signed statement appealing to the public to respect the Sandiganbayan’s verdict. Their ad was plastered with pictures of Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, former President Fidel V. Ramos and Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Teresita de Castro.

The camp of former President Joseph Estrada did its share. The ex-President himself growled that he was prepared to endure imprisonment in Muntinlupa. Sen. Jinggoy Estrada speculated on an unfavorable verdict. The defendant’s camp certainly did its share of trying to condition the public mind, including applying for a series of rally permits.

Fortress Malacañang has been on pins and needles for weeks now, maneuvering both publicly and behind the scenes to diminish the impact of whatever verdict the Sandiganbayan hands down. On one hand, it has pulled out all the stops to project power. That projection ranges from the Presidential Security Group not only being in full battle gear for some time now, but its commander remaining in the Palace compound even when the President went abroad.

On the other hand, its efforts to project a sense of unassailable armed strength have been belied by its dangling a proposal for an amnesty. A proposal, we’ve pointed out in the past, that has been used for its own purposes by Estrada’s partisans, even though Estrada himself has gone through the motions of saying he’d refuse any pardon or amnesty offer.

The result has been a country—including the financial markets—nervously awaiting a verdict, while the Palace and Estrada’s people work to undercut both the actual verdict and its effects on the defendants. Both sides, it bears repeating, have thus tried to undercut the court. Just as they systematically tried to undercut the trial itself, including dragging it out, which delayed the delivery of justice but gave both sides additional room for political maneuvering. Central to both administration and Estrada loyalist thinking was projecting the case as a rallying point for the faithful, instead of acknowledging that the justice system represented the best way to secure the interests of the citizenry as a whole.

Ferdinand Marcos might have escaped the long arm of the law. His disgrace, however, raised the bar with regard to the accountability of all his successors. Before Marcos, there was no crime called plunder. Since 1991, plunder as a capital crime has become a Damocles’ sword hanging over the head of every president of the republic.

The two former presidents of South Korea, Chun Doo-hwan and Roh Tae-woo, caused a sensation in Asia when they were convicted and imprisoned for acts committed during their terms. Both served only a year in jail, receiving a pardon from President Kim Dae-jung as an act of national reconciliation. The Philippines had a golden opportunity to match the symbolic impact of the conviction of two former presidents in a sister democracy. Sadly, today, our country has to confront the reality that for too many, the process has been so tainted as to deny the broader public a sense of satisfaction, whatever the verdict might be.

It will be premature to say anything concerning the verdict. We can only hope that the public will be pleasantly surprised by the Sandiganbayan decision. Just as the Supreme Court has managed to pull the nation back from the brink, despite the at times collective madness of the executive and legislative branches, so, too, may the Sandiganbayan amaze the public with a demonstration of the fearless and impartial application of the law.

If not, both prosecution and defense can still file an appeal before the Supreme Court. What the administration and opposition surely deserve censure for, even at this point, is how they both tried to turn what could have been an impartial trial into a never-ending series of opportunities to personalize, and thus politicize, the law. They will always be guilty of that.

Politics: Nothing but corruption

Politics: Nothing but corruption

POLITICS, as the word is commonly understood, is nothing but corruption.

This has been proven beyond cavil about Gloria Arroyo, who has used every dirty trick in the book of politics and corrupt practices to satisfy her intense desire for power and pelf.

She has built structures of deceit and corruption ever since she usurped the presidency from Joseph "Erap" Estrada in 2001, and, once again, when she cheated Fernando Poe Jr. on her way to six more years in Malacañang in 2004.

Indeed, in the last six years of her purloined presidency, she has raised corruption to a new level of magnitude unmatched by past administrations. And this dismaying fact has not escaped the attention of Filipinos in all levels of society.

They know this, and they have seen it all, in the scandal-ridden Arroyo administration. And they have affirmed this in the latest survey of the Social Weather Stations (SWS). It showed that 71 % of the people believe that she has been enriching herself through corrupt practices. Those surveyed came from the ABC or upper and middle classes (73 %), the D Class (69 %), and the E Class (73 %).

Oh yes, in the same survey Estrada got better results on the corruption perception category. Of those polled, 66 % do not believe he enriched himself while he was president.

This latest blow dealt Gloria followed closely an earlier SWS survey that showed her trust rating was only 18 %, compared to a trust rating of 64 % for Estrada. In this new survey 76 % of ABC or upper and middle classes, 71 % in Class D and 73 % in Class E, all agreed that corruption has increased under the Arroyo administration.

The shocking survey results should have sent shivers down the spine of Gloria and her political minions and coterie of economic and financial advisers. But as it has been their wont, they have shrugged their shoulders and dismissed it all as untrue. "Hindi totoo ‘yan, "one Palace factotum arrogantly said. "Wala naman corruption nangyayari sa gobyerno." (That’s not true… There’s no corruption in government.)

This very clearly shows the moral apathy of those now in high places whenever conspicuous corruption in government is publicly exposed.

They are blind, and they refuse to read the handwriting on the Palace wall, mindless of that day when it will collapse into a heap of dust with all of them underneath!

An evening of arias and Broadway songs. I was elated to hear Rachelle Gerodias sing as guest artist in a song recital of baritone Noel Azcona at the Philamlife Theater on UN Avenue last Sunday night.

Rachelle was a clear standout with the clarion brilliance of her soprano voice. She displayed strength, accuracy and clarity in her singing of the arias "Sempre Libera" from Verdi’s "La Traviata" and "Chi il bel sogno doretta" from Puccini’s "Le Rondino." She exuded total security and self-confidence while spinning the melodic lines in the two arias, combining her sensuous and soaring voice to suit the emotion of the moment and inflecting the lyrics with theatrical energy.

Noel Azcona exhibited his musical sophistication in singing nine operatic arias and Broadway songs by Handel, Dvorak, Schubert, Mozart, Gounod, Schoenberg, and Rodgers and Hammerstein. He also sang the haunting "Magbalik Ka Hirang," a kundiman by Nicanor Abelardo. He possesses a superb voice that could easily glide from bass to baritone and even tenor levels, but, sad to say, he lacks clarity in singing the Latin, German, Italian and Russian lyrics in his repertoire.

Noel and Rachelle duetted in the delightfully gay aria "Papageno, Papagena" (from Mozart’s "Magic Flute"), and they also performed two other duets, "I Got Plenty O’Nuttin" and "Bess You Are My Woman Now" (from Gershwin’s "Porgy and Bess.")

In all the arias and songs, Mary Anne Espina, assisting artist, accompanied Rachelle and Noel with verve, dexterity and authority, on the grand piano.

Finally, Noel Azcona ended his song recital with the singing of "Anyone Can Whistle" (from Sondheim’s "Anyone Can Whistle" and "Wheels of a Dream" (from S. Flaverty’s "Ragtime", together with the internationally acclaimed UST Singers, with Prof. Fidel Calalang at the piano.

When the appreciative audience rewarded him with a standing ovation and cries for encore, Noel sang "Lenski’s Aria" from Tchaikovsky’s "Eugene Onegin", and "Iyo Kailan Paman," a serenade by Angel Pena.

By the way, Noel’s song recital was the first of three final presentations of impresario Pablo Tariman who announced, sadly, that he was drawing the curtains to a close on his "Great Performances Series", after the concerts of Alvaro Pierri, gold medalist classical guitarist, and Ilya Rashkovsky, prizewinning pianist, on December 4 and 8.

The legendary Luciano Mar warns drug industry lobbyists. His classic Italian tenor voice has been silenced by the ravages of pancreatic cancer.

"The voice of Luciano Pavarotti," as one music critic described it, "had the warm, enveloping sound, touched with a bit of husky baritonal darkness, which made his flights into the gleaming upper range all the more miraculous."

I heard Pavarotti, then dubbed the "King of the High Cs," for the first time when he sang "Tosca" at the Metropolitan Opera House in New York City. And later, I heard him again at the Philippine International Conference Center (PICC). He was not at his best when he performed there because he was nursing a terrible cold, but he still to managed to spin the lyrical phrases with bel-canto elegance of the arias and Ialian songs in his repertoire.

Now, the world of opera won’t hear anymore that powerful lyric voice that captured the hearts of millions of music opera.

Bravo, bravo, bravo, Luciano Pavarotti!

Guilty or not guilty?

Guilty or not guilty?

That’s the question most Filipinos will be asking more intensely beginning today until the Sandiganbayan releases its verdict on the plunder case against Joseph Estrada, et. al., on Wednesday.

Not that we’ve not been asking ourselves that question since Estrada was first arraigned. It’s just that with the date of the decision being officially handed down just around the corner, the excitement – and the tension – is beginning to build.

And there are so many other factors present today that add up to the tension as well as to the drama.

Even the health condition of Estrada’s mother, Doña Mary Ejercito, has added to the emotions surrounding the coming announcement of the verdict. Somehow, I cannot escape the feeling of that her condition is some blessing in disguise should the verdict be unfavorable as that would always be a tough thing to bear for a mother. At the same time you can just imagine the difficulty that someone in Estrada’s shoes will have to face – a verdict on the one hand which could be unfavorable, plus the deteriorating health condition of your mother with whom you cannot always be.

The other day I tool a poll of friends, asking them what they would like the verdict to be as against what they think the verdict will be. With regard to the latter, the answer was an overwhelming "guilty", for almost the same reasons.

One, they argued that the Arroyo administration cannot afford a "not guilty" verdict as it will re-raise all the questions about the legitimacy of the transition in January of 2001, with some even insisting that a not guilty verdict should restore Erap to the presidency!

Some even said that a guilty verdict is all that the Arroyo government wants, to put a closure to Edsa 2, and provide it a golden opportunity to look magnanimous by offering a pardon or giving a grant of clemency.

A few others also take the tack that the Sandiganbayan wouldn’t dare to "overrule" the Supreme Court with a not guilty verdict – not that the highest court has directly ruled on the Erap case but that the upholding of the 2001 transition would be put into serious legal doubt if the graft court were to rule otherwise.

In fact I don’t even remember hearing anyone of my friends tell me that the ruling will be "not guilty".

On the first question, however, the opinion I gathered was evenly divided. I found most amusing, however, as well as most thought-provoking, the argument that the ruling will hopefully be "guilty" so that Gloria will realize that she is next!

As explained, the reasoning goes like this: A guilty verdict on Estrada should send a clear signal to one and all that even presidents have to go to jail for the criminal offenses they commit. What is true for Estrada should be true for Marcos, as well as Aquino, for Ramos as well as for Gloria – of course with the only exception where the legal period within which to bring a case against any of the former p[residents for a criminal offense has since expired.

This is not the case for Gloria, though, as people are waiting for her term to expire in 2010 – or for her to leave public office whether this be before or after 2010, so that proper charges could be leveled against her. An Estrada conviction will set that all-important precedent of a president on the dock, and a number of my friends see this as one of the silver linings of an Estrada conviction.

Erap today, Gloria tomorrow.

I suppose I am like most Filipinos. I am watching the drama unfold with bated breath, knowing that there is far more an impact on our society than just the here and now and the question whether a former president will walk or will remain in jail.

I agree with a newspaper ad the other day that the decision, hopefully, will be a matter of pure application of law on facts, but at the same time I sense that this being the Philippines such will remain an ideal for years to come.

But I do yearn for the time when the law is applied even to presidents and kings, where a president can go to jail for lying, stealing or cheating the same way that a working man can; where theft is theft whether it be for P1,000 or for P1 billion; where a crime is a crime whether it is a Cabinet secretary who commits it or an office secretary.

Will the Estrada decision be the first step in the right direction? Hopefully it will, and in the process take the sting out from the judgment. Because more than the guilt or innocence of Estrada, what is at stake is the process of restoring the rule of law to a country where the high and the mighty benefit from a different interpretation and execution of such rule of law.

Guilty or not guilty? Erap is not the only one on trial here. So is Gloria. So are all of us.

Let’s see who gets justice in the end.

Socialized Medicine: A ‘Sicko’ (1)

Socialized Medicine: A ‘Sicko’ (1)

The infamous low-bud-get and controversial movie producer, Mi-chael Moore, arch-critic of US President Bush, came out with a new docu-film, "Sicko," released July 27, 2007, denouncing the US Healthcare system and advocating Socialized Medicine. The title "Sicko," in my opinion, more aptly describes Moore and his concept than the current healthcare delivery in America.

Otherwise known as a "government, or nationalized, or state-sponsored healthcare system," Socialized Medicine provides what is supposed to be "free" medical care to the people. And this is a misconception, if not a myth. Actually, it is not free, because the funding comes from the massive taxes levied by the government on its citizens. The people are really the ones who pay for their healthcare, with the exorbitant taxes collected from them by the state through mandated steeper taxation. This government-controlled medical care delivery is akin to nationally-sponsored veterans hospitals or provincial/city funded public or charity hospitals in the Philippines, or in the United States.

What does the United States have?

The USA has a free enterprise, private, system of healthcare delivery, where its citizens have a choice, and the options include personal out-of-pocket medical expenses, private insurance coverage (like Blue Cross/Blue Shield, etc.) which they, or their employees, could buy for them, or thru an HMO or PPO, which they could join, and the government-funded Medicare entitlements for all citizens who are 65 and over. Unfortunately, the Democrats in general, exemplified by Hillary Clinton, are in favor of government-controlled, nationalized, or socialized medicine for the country. Thanks to the Republicans, this move has been (and will always be) rebuked and thwarted to protect the integrity of the health care for its people. The imperfections within the US health care system are a direct result of statism, government intervention, and not the failure of its current healthcare delivery system itself. While the existing US healthcare delivery system is not perfect, it provides prompt access to state-of-the-art quality medical care second to none, compared to socialized medicine, where a long wait for medical services is a rule rather than an exception.

Which countries have socialized medicine?

Some of the nations with socialized medicine include the Great Britain and other European countries, Canada, the former USSR, Australia, New Zealand, and Cuba. And practically without exception, the plague of socialized medicine has victimized the citizens of these countries, who are up in arms, vehemently complaining about their "sicko" government-sponsored/managed healthcare delivery system. Like the United States, the Philippines, and many Asian countries, have the fee-for-service free enterprise system of healthcare.

How do people like socialized medicine?

People in those countries who have experienced their government-sponsored healthcare delivery system are mostly unhappy and frustrated, because, while medical care is "free," access to such "free care" is difficult. Most patients have to wait in a long queue, often for weeks, if not months, to obtain the medical services they need. This inefficiency and delays, and the concern about quality of care, have led affluent people in those countries to outsource surgical services to the United States or to Asian countries, where Medical Tourism is a multi-billion dollar new and rapidly evolving industry today. Some of the serious disadvantages of socialized medicine are listed below and continued in this column next Saturday, together with a number of most revealing and critical news headlines in those countries printed and televised media condemning their nationalized government-sponsored healthcare system.

1. To begin with, to provide the so-called "free" healthcare to all its citizens, the government must get the money from somewhere, and act like a health insurance company. To fund socialized medicine, which is exorbitantly expensive, the government must collect inordinately greater taxes from the people. In essence, it’s actually the people who are paying for their own medical care, so in reality it is not "free" healthcare, after all.

2. The high taxes collected from, say, Peter, who is healthy, will be used to pay the medical care of Paul. And if the latter continues to abuse his health, by living an unhealthy lifestyle, and requires repeated medical care, Peter’s taxes will continue to drain from the government coffers. Since people can see a doctor or go to the emergency room, even for a simple cold or headache, because it is "free" and they do not have to pay, they abuse the system, leading to a very high cost of overburdened healthcare system. So, there is that abuse and inequity. In the free enterprise system, you pay for your own healthcare expenses, so if you abuse yourself, you pay for it, and other people do not have to be burdened to pay for your medical expenses. There is more equity, fairness, and responsibility in this system.

3. To begin with, to provide the so-called "free" healthcare to all its citizens, the government must get the money from somewhere, and act like a health insurance company. To fund socialized medicine, which is exorbitantly expensive, the government must collect inordinately greater taxes from the people. In essence, it’s actually the people who are paying for their own medical care, so in reality it is not "free" healthcare, after all.

Beyond personal culpability

Beyond personal culpability

Let’s not be deceived by the formality of the legal processes and the surface meanings of the trial of Joseph Estrada and the handing down of the verdict by the Sandiganbayan tomorrow.

Gloria Arroyo and what she represents, not Estrada, are on the dock here. Whichever way the Sandiganbayan decides, the jury will continue to be out on the question of the guilt or innocence of Estrada.

But the "guilt" of Arroyo, beginning with her usurpation of the presidency and her continuing debasement of constitutional processes to secure her continued stay in power, is as good as proven.

More important than the personal culpability of Erap and Gloria, however, are the social dynamics that that have been temporarily frozen, as it were, during these last six years. We are talking about the continuing struggle between the masses and the elites that are personified by Erap and Gloria in the Filipino’s march toward a just and equitable society.

It may seem anachronistic in this, the first decade of the 21st century, to view social dynamics through the lenses of the masses’ struggle for a place in modern society and the elites’ determination to keep their dominant and privilege position. But that’s precisely the self-understanding of the two protagonists in the drama.

Erap offered himself as the hope of the masses and won the 1998 election with an overwhelming mandate. Erap has been in detention for six years, but the perception that he is the champion of the poor and the powerless remains undimmed. Gloria has been representing herself as the embodiment of the ethos of the modernizing elite. But her mis-governance and corruption makes even the Makati Business Club cringe in embarrassment.

Gloria has given the modernizing elite a bad name. From a historical point of view, this is probably the biggest crime she has committed against Filipino nation. Counting from 2001 to 2010, she would have wasted almost a decade of opportunity in moving the economy strongly forward and in empowering the poor, two processes that are mutually reinforcing.

These unresolved social contradictions will continue to define our future in the near-term.

If Erap is found innocent, the bottled up pressure could tear the social consensus which has been frayed by a government lacking in legitimacy. Hopefully, elections of 2010 could come soon enough to enable the people to air their accumulated frustration and anger.

If Erap is found guilty, we see a massive outpouring of outrage. This could probably be contained through heavy-handed deployment of the state’s repressive apparatuses. Again, hopefully until the 2010 elections.

Three years of uncertainty. Three years of instability either way. And probably beyond as our scenarios are based on the assumption, which we are forced to make because the alternative is too horrible to contemplate, that the 2010 elections would lead to a return of social consensus.

A protracted war

A protracted war

Britain’s Tony Blair stepped down and the Republicans lost the US Congress as the war on terror became defined for many people by the mess in Iraq. Meanwhile, as the sixth anniversary of the terror attacks in the United States approached, the world’s most wanted man again appeared in a videotaped message, hinting at more mass murders.

The appearance of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in a new video was a grim reminder that the global war on terror, dramatically sparked by the suicide attacks in New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001, is going to be a protracted one. While Bin Laden’s continued existence is seen by many as one of the biggest failures of the US-led war, it also serves as a warning to the world against the perils of complacency.

The atrocity of 9/11 was hatched years in advance. To this day the motives that drove the men who actually perpetrated those crimes against humanity remain incomprehensible to much of the civilized world. Six years after 9/11, governments are still responding to the deadly threat through trial and error, balancing the requirements of national security with civil liberties. Around the globe the balancing act is not easy. The Philippines is not the only country where citizens are debating how much privacy and freedom they are willing to give up in exchange for public safety.

Since 9/11, al-Qaeda has launched a major attack or attempted one in different countries about once a year, hitting mostly civilian targets. This is a borderless conflict, where a faceless enemy knows how to bide its time and is not bound by international agreements on the conduct of war.

Governments have developed new weapons to fight the threat, including legal means to foil terror plots. Authorities have apparently scored some successes, or there would have been more attacks on the scale of 9/11, the 2002 nightclub bombings in Bali or the train bombing in Madrid. As Osama bin Laden has indicated to his disciples, however, they aren’t about to give up trying. There will be many grievous errors in this war, but the world cannot afford to stop fighting. Through development, education, dialogue, law enforcement, and yes, through a military response where needed, the world can prevent a repeat of the 9/11 atrocities.