No more postponement

No more postponement

If this were a presidential election, postponement would have triggered another people power revolt. But because the lowest ranking officials in the local government totem pole were involved, opposition to a postponement was muted. And so the election of village officials and youth council members, originally scheduled in October 2005, was reset to October this year. Now, with election day again approaching, congressmen want yet another postponement, this time to 2009 – another two-year term extension for their grassroots political leaders.

Those endorsing a postponement have a good excuse: elections are expensive and this exercise will cost billions of pesos in public funds. But there will never be a lack of excuses for postponing all electoral exercises in this country, foremost of which is the disaster that is the Commission on Elections. National leaders will simply have to see to it that all voting schedules and term limits are followed, even as lawmakers review the wisdom of holding the barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan elections separately from major electoral exercises.

Since Ferdinand Marcos tried to make himself president for life, Filipinos have been leery of any attempt to allow any official to serve in perpetuity or extend his term of office. A proposal last year to extend the terms of lawmakers by only six months, to make way for constitutional amendments, was immediately shot down. The same aversion to term extensions should apply to all elective officials.

Lawmakers can authorize a postponement of the barangay and youth council elections. This means they don’t have to shell out funds to contribute to the campaigns of their political leaders, who helped them in the May elections. This also earns them the gratitude of those leaders, who get another bonus of two years without having to seek re-election. By the time Congress allows the elections to push through, the current youth council members will be too old to be classified as youths. Barangay and SK officials who have performed badly must be replaced. There are other people who want to serve and must be given a chance. That is the essence of democracy, and lawmakers must not stand in the way.

New Englishes

New Englishes

FILIPINOS have long learned to read, speak and write En-glish. Call it what you will, "American English, Philippine style" or "Philippine English" or whatever, it is still English language. And it is one of many new Englishes spoken and written in many countries of the world, from the Philippines to Singapore and Malaysia, from India, Ceylon to Pakistan, from North America, Australia, New Zealand, to South Africa.

Unlike Filipinos who learned American English, in those other countries the peoples there learned English from the British. And today, as I wrote in this column last Thursday, English is being learned by millions and millions of young students in China, South Korea, Vietnam, Japan, Germany, Austria and Greece. In these nations, with strong national identities, they are aggressively promoting bilingualism. And their citizens, young and old alike, are remarkably becoming proficient in English.

And here in the Philippines, our people have learned English long, long ago. As a matter of fact there was a time when English and Filipino were considered both as official languages, until some language nationalists succeeded in making Filipino as the national language in the 1987 Constitution.

And, very recently, a group of educators, savants, writers and two National Artists in Literature went to the Supreme Court to stop a Department of Education order implementing a presidential directive mandating that English be used as the medium of instruction for math and science in public schools, beginning with the third grade and for all subjects in secondary schools.

This is strange, indeed. They are prominent persons who are what they are today because they read, speak and write in English! And they want to deprive our young students of learning a second language? They don’t want our youth to acquire English skills which would surely be useful to and help them compete in a globalize world where English is growing rapidly as an international language.

Instead, they insisted that Filipino and the regional languages should be used as the primary media of instruction. They said that the government’s failure to do it has, "led to serious difficulties in learning among elementary and high school students, such as ineffective communication in the classrooms, low academic achievement and a high dropout rate."

They continued, "the harmful effects of using a foreign language for learning are not just limited to low academic achievement and cognitive growth, it impairs the emotional security and sense of self-worth and the ability to participate meaningfully in the educational process by lower class children who develop an inferiority complex as they are stigmatized by their use of the native tongue."

Furthermore, they added, "the use of Filipino would enable them to learn to read and write since it is easy for them to understand… This change will make students stay in school longer, learn better, quicker and more permanently, and will in fact be a bridge to more effective learning in English and Filipino."

These are quotations from their petition filed with the Supreme Court. If you, the ordinary citizens, have become breathless or moved to mirth or irritation by just reading their long-winded, boring, unbearable, run-on and hard to read sentences, and getting lost in the thick verbiage, what more of the fifteen magistrates of the land?

Wouldn’t those learned justices, who write their decisions well, vividly, and wisely in plain English that every one can understand, throw that petition (of those savants, linguists and writers), which smacks of pedantry, into the garbage heap?

Already, according to the Social Weather Stations, our national proficiency in English has declined by 10% over the last 30 years. And, sad to say, we are being left behind, particularly by China where some 175 million people are now studying English, in the global march to English proficiency.

Indeed, English has become the lingua franca of the world.

Impossible dream?

Impossible dream?

Justice was ill-served when retired Chief Justice Andres Narvasa said the book on the assassination of former Sen. Benigno Aquino Jr. should be closed. Narvasa said the commission on which he had worked -- at times to the extent that it irked the dictator Ferdinand Marcos -- had already unearthed the truth or come as close to it as is humanly possible. That truth resulted in the conviction of some soldiers, but it never revealed who the mastermind was behind Ninoy’s killing. No point in further trying to find out, Narvasa said.

Narvasa recalled that “the burning question at that time was whether it was President Marcos or the First Lady [Imelda Marcos]” who ordered the killing. He even recalled public suspicions concerning the alleged involvement of businessman Eduardo M. Cojuangco Jr. in the murder. That question burns still. But Narvasa said, “I have to be frank. There was no evidence pointing either way… There was no direct evidence. They remained speculations.”

Today, even former President Corazon Aquino has publicly stated she wouldn’t oppose executive clemency for the soldiers who have been convicted for the crime and who remain in jail. They were the only ones caught in the net of justice during her presidency. The late dictator himself died abroad and never ended up being deposed in court or properly investigated about the assassination. Gen. Fabian Ver, too, avoided the long arm of the law until the day he died.

And by 1992, the restoration of the disgraced and dispossessed leaders of the New Society had well and truly begun. It will be recalled that had Imelda Marcos and Cojuangco combined their forces, their combined votes would have defeated all other contenders for the presidency. As it was, their individual votes were remarkable and politically formidable. In a sense, it paved the way for the defeat of the Edsa People Power I political forces with the election of an unrepentant Marcos loyalist, Joseph Estrada, to the vice presidency in 1992 and to the presidency in 1998.

We forget, too, the circumstances surrounding Ninoy Aquino’s return home. Imelda Marcos had gone to see him. She issued a warning: there were people loyal to them and whom they could not control and they might kill him. She offered him financial inducements not to go home. He refused the offer.

And yet today Narvasa maintains, “Doña Imelda, I don’t think was deeply involved ... in such a dreadful thing. Maybe [she knows something] because she’s the President’s wife, she could not have been excluded from conversations by President Marcos.” The record tells us the “something” she knew at the time was quite specific; and that her concern for Aquino could have been feigned. This certainly deserves further investigation, precisely because the dictator is dead.

Explaining his decision to come home, Aquino told his friends: “When we start to feel the pain of those who have been victimized by tyranny, it’s only then we can liberate ourselves… The feeling right now is, ‘Fred was tortured, thank God it’s Fred, not me.’ That’s the tragic part. Society is atomized. Until the Filipino nation can feel the loss of one life as if it was their own, we’ll never liberate ourselves.”

Liberate ourselves we did; the rallying cry of those days was, “Justice for Aquino, Justice for All.” It included demands for his killers to be exposed. That demand has only partially been fulfilled. Now Narvasa, who once zealously sought the truth, whatever the cost, thinks it’s time to declare the quest ultimately defeated.

Were we to adopt Narvasa’s suggestion, the ultimate lesson here would be the ultimate victory of the dictator’s attitude toward the law: that style matters more than substance. Narvasa said the Narvasa Commission did its work, it filed its report and now the case “is finished, functius oficio.” The paperwork may be done, but the case remains ultimately unresolved.

Ferdinand is dead, Imelda lives. Ver is dead, Cojuangco lives. At worst, half of the main suspects do not only remain alive, they are living within our shores instead of in exile. To borrow a thought from Ninoy, so long as his murder remains unsolved, until the public feels that the case has been pursued to its ultimate end, what hope is there that the ever-multiplying cases of political assassinations since then will ever be resolved, too?

Conscience of the nation

Conscience of the nation

Former Senate President Jovito R. Salonga, the country’s oldest living statesman and my personal guru for more than 50 years, launched last Aug. 14 another illuminating, persuasive and life-changing masterpiece. The book’s title, “Not by Power or Wealth Alone,” is its best summation. As an exemplary public servant and brilliant lawyer, he has had a generous share of power and access to wealth in this material world. But in characteristic humility, he declares them thoroughly inadequate to satisfy life and to reform society.

Practised what he preached. Dr. Salonga, a Protestant, has spoken before many congregations, Catholic and Muslim included. He was always eloquent, spoke with the tremolo of infectious conviction, and left his audience with thoughts and reflections that led to action. But that is not all. True, he preached powerfully; but equally true, he practised even more stringently what he preached.

Believing that the Marcos dictatorship plundered not only the public treasury but also the people’s values, he sponsored the enactment of the Ethical Standards Law. Remarkably, in his personal conduct, he went even beyond the requirements of this law or of any known code of ethics.

For instance, when he and his law partners, Sedfrey A. Ordoñez (who became solicitor general, secretary of justice, and ambassador to the United Nations) and Pedro L. Yap (who was elevated to be chief justice of the Philippines), were recruited to public office by President Corazon C. Aquino in 1986, he was not satisfied with taking a leave from his prestigious law firm as demanded by law and ethics; he went all the way and dissolved permanently his law partnership.

In serving a government swept to office by legendary people power, he opted to forego the luxuries that wealth could buy to be able to demonstrate the virtues that power and wealth alone could not bring. He chose to live simply so that others may simply live.

Indeed, he is a living model of his teachings. He is a dedicated husband, a caring father, a faithful friend and a devoted man of God. Never compromising his principles in exchange for friendship, kinship, relationship, power or wealth, he lives an almost ascetic life. He does not smoke, drink, or gamble. Money, worldly pleasures, titles and honors hold no fascination for him.

Outstanding and humble. To say that Dr. Salonga is outstanding is to say something ordinary about him. He topped the bar examinations, topped his doctoral class in Yale University and topped the senatorial elections three times, a record unequaled in this nation’s history. Yet he remains humble and child-like, as our Lord Jesus Christ counseled all His disciples to be. No wonder, he had been selected as one of the seven Ramon Magsaysay awardees this year.

Even when I was his assistant in his law firm in the early ’60s, he was never allured by possessions, positions or propositions. He never quibbled over attorney’s fees; did not bill even his wealthiest clients like Don Eugenio Lopez Sr., leaving to them the problem of how to compensate him. Money had very little meaning for him then, and less so now.

Many of the essays, homilies and speeches included in the book had been written some 35 years ago, after his life was almost snuffed out by that bombing in Plaza Miranda, Manila on Aug. 21, 1971. In it are chronicled his pains, struggles and hopes. But like our Lord Jesus Christ, his faith grew stronger as his physical self felt weaker.

Sprightly at 87. On June 22, 2007, Dr. Salonga celebrated his 87th birthday. Yet, despite his advanced age and despite the many tiny pieces of shrapnel that are still imbedded in his frail body as a result of that grenade blast in Plaza Miranda, he is still sprightly. More important, his intellect and his interest in public welfare are still as sharp as when he was 40. Let me give just two recent proofs of this assertion:

1. Peeved at the Commission on Elections’ refusal to reveal the names of the party-list nominees in the last elections, he sued the poll body for violating the people’s constitutional right to public information; the result: a unanimous Supreme Court decision (in Rosales vs Comelec), promptly promulgated on May 4, 2007, commanding the Comelec to follow his demand; and

2. Alarmed that President Macapagal-Arroyo violated the Constitution in appointing to the Supreme Court someone who was not a natural-born citizen, he again sued; the result: again, a unanimous Supreme Court decision (in Kilosbayan vs Ermita), promptly issued on July 3, 2007, enjoining Gregory Ong from accepting his appointment to the Supreme Court, precisely because of his lack of natural-born citizenship.

Many times during his prayers and moments of solitude, he has asked our Lord why his life had been spared, and why he had been gifted with longevity when he was one of the most injured during that deadly Plaza Miranda blast. I dare say that our Good Lord had granted him a long and purposeful life, because He wanted him to be the conscience of the nation; to be its fearless anchor during stormy seas of political upheavals; and to be the indefatigable teacher and model of the young and not-so-young who aspire to lead this country.

TV as a reflection of society

TV as a reflection of society

WHAT appears on television in most countries is a useful reflection of what topics are on the mind of the people and what is considered socially acceptable.

Both Philippine and Brazilian television have current shows that reflect similarities in outlook that come from being developing and Catholic nations.

In Brazil this month I watched the country's most popular telenovela "Paraiso Tropical" (http://paraisotropical.globo.com) which airs on the country's largest TV network Globo. One of its main characters is a social-climber prostitute called Bebel played by Camila Pitanga. She was originally supposed to be an evil "contravida" [villain], but her struggle to lift herself out of prostitution by snagging a rich husband is being viewed positively by a majority of the show's viewers, making Pitanga one of the show's and country's hottest new stars.

In a newspaper interview the head writer of "Paraiso Tropical" said that he and the other writers of the telenovela were surprised that Bebel turned out to be such a favorite of the viewers. But in a country like Brazil where there are so many poor people, and the gap between the rich and poor is still so large, is it no wonder that viewers identify and root for a character such as Bebel?

In the Philippines, ABS-CBN television is embarking on a similar “telenovela” [TV soap] with the launch of "Margarita."

So far only teaser ads are being shown, but it seems to be the story of a female dancer torn between loving two men a la "Burlesk Queen." Starring Wendy Valdez of “Pinoy Big Brother” fame, I'm sure Margarita will undoubtedly pull herself out of the sleaze of nightclubs and into a better life, only to be eternally haunted by her fleshy origins. But the new telenovela is not getting very good previews, even though no one has seen any episode of it yet. One Filipino blogger said: "Brace yourself for crappy acting from the lead stars Wendy, Bruce and Diether on July 30."

ABS-CBN is launching "Margarita" as a replacement for their martial arts, science-fiction telenovela "Rounin," which has been a dismal failure with viewers.

Obviously, television executives believe that viewers will be able to identify more with the struggles of a showgirl than with the flying fights of the characters on "Rounin."

Some commentators made a big deal when "Paraiso Tropical" launched in Brazil because it includes a gay, male couple. But they are depicted as young, professionally successful men who live together in a nice apartment. Globo said it was never going to show the couple kissing each other as it had polled its viewers and found out that the majority of Brazilians were not ready to see that just yet on their TV screens.

But Globo television has been hyper-successful in making and exporting telenovelas to countries around the world. One such weekly series, "Malu Mulher," was a huge hit when it aired in 1979. Starring Regina Duarte, one of Brazil's best actresses, as a recently divorced sociologist living in Sao Paulo with her 11 year old daughter, the show was innovative and progressive for dealing with such sensitive topics such as abortion, divorce and the rights of working women.

I was delighted to find the whole series on DVD when I was in Brasilia. I immediately bought it and watched a few episodes at home, finding that it still was excellent even 28 years after it first aired. What was amazing to me was the bold dialogue of the characters, especially given the fact that Brazil then was still under a military dictatorship and all television shows were closely scrutinized by government censors who strictly monitored programs for anything they could consider immoral or subversive.

If only Philippine television could produce something similar, instead of the dopey programs that networks currently churn out.

The nation in Arroyo’s eyes

The nation in Arroyo’s eyes

A State of the Nation Address (Sona) is interesting not only for what it says but also for what it does not say. The nation hears not only the speech but also its silences. Every Sona reveals a president’s way of seeing, and there is no way of excusing its blind spots by referring to the speaker’s limited time.

In a speech lasting 56 minutes, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo took her listeners on an archipelagic tour of the Philippines. She hopped from island to island, identifying regional growth centers by their main political players and sponsors, and cheerfully acknowledging their presence in the audience. You realize that what is being described is not merely a location map of the new infrastructure, but the whole terrain of political patronage -- the path of the gravy train.

Unseen and unmentioned is the state of the people living in these regions. Do they have jobs? Do they have enough food on their tables? Are there enough schools and teachers for their children? Are they adequately sheltered? Do they have water, electricity and basic medical care? Are they safe in their homes? How did they vote in the last election, and what messages might they be sending out by the way they voted?

What set the 2007 Sona apart from the past Sonas of this administration was the bravura and callousness that attended its entire delivery. Ms Arroyo sounded as if she was the winner of the recent election. She spoke as if the problems that have troubled our society over the past years -- the political killings, the mass hunger and unemployment, the threat of renewed conflict in Mindanao, the government’s continuing dependence on massive foreign and domestic borrowings, etc. -- are nothing but figments of her enemies’ imagination.

For the first time, Ms Arroyo gave the nation an idea of what she thought defined the limits of her powers: none. “From where I sit, I can tell you, a President is always as strong as she wants to be.” I think only a dictator can say that with a straight face. Do we still wonder why our institutions are weak?

I used to think that former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban’s rebuke of Ms Arroyo’s Presidential Proclamation 1017 was sharp. Justice Panganiban had written: “Some of those who drafted PP1017 may be testing the outer limits of presidential prerogatives and the perseverance of this Court in safeguarding the people’s constitutionally enshrined liberty. They are playing with fire, and unless prudently restrained, they may one day wittingly or unwittingly burn down the country.” I now think it was too subtle, and that it had fallen on deaf ears. This president is not in the business of testing “the outer limits of presidential prerogatives.” She recognizes no such limits.

The wonder of it all is that Ms Arroyo could, in the same breath, talk about her vision of a modern Philippines in the coming years. “We will have achieved the hallmarks of a modern society, where institutions are strong. By 2010, the Philippines should be well on its way to achieving that vision.” This is empty rhetoric. She said nothing that would substantiate that vision. Modernity is not just about physical infrastructure. It is about institutions, a way of running the complex affairs of a nation.

But all these blind spots and omissions should not surprise us anymore. The key to Ms Arroyo’s rise to power and political survival has been precisely her ruthless disregard for institutions. She justifies it as a normal survival reaction to the demands of a “degenerated” political system. (That clumsy word comes from one of her previous Sonas).

She knows that what has worked for her is not the rule of law but the system of patronage that permits her to buy the support of politicians and generals. What she may not know is the brittleness of any form of authority that rests chiefly on remunerative and coercive power. It breaks as soon as the resources run out. Worse still, this style of leadership tends to invite reprisals, while offering no protection against them, once the ruler is out of power.

“It is my ardent wish that most of the vision I have outlined will be fully achieved when I step down,” she said toward the end of her speech. Almost every one noticed that she did not say when that was going to be. Under the Constitution, her term ends in 2010. But, once we consider how she managed to get this far, it becomes easier to understand why a lot of people don’t believe her and why they think a push for constitutional change is likely to be attempted again.

She doesn’t even need to demand Charter change on her behalf. Someone is bound to say it for her, to shout to the world how we cannot live without Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Mass demonstrations and posters will suddenly appear on our streets to bring this message of great urgency to the public. This theme will be picked up by a chorus of columnists and commentators who, even as they sing hosannas to Ms Arroyo, will note the absence of worthy leaders among those currently waiting in the wings.

Nothing, perhaps, can be more wretched than the future of a bratty autocrat about to lose power. “They say the campaign for the next election started on May 15, the day after the last. Fine. I stand in the way of no one’s ambition. I only ask that no one stand in the way of the people’s well-being and the nation’s progress.” But who is she to expect anyone to subscribe to her pre-modern notion of “the people’s well-being and the nation’s progress”? Isn’t this what is supposed to be debated in a democracy?

Eh kasi bata

Eh kasi bata

Mong Palatino

A week before the official opening of the 14th Congress, politicians are squabbling over the leadership positions in both chambers. This is unfortunate since there are more important national concerns that need to be addressed by Congress. It is better if politicians are debating on appropriate legislative solutions to key social problems. Party caucuses should not only tackle official nominations for Congress leadership; they should also forge consensus in identifying the priority bills required to improve lives of millions of Filipinos.

The output of the past two Congresses was dismal in terms of number and quality of laws enacted. They made little impact in uplifting social conditions of the poor. It is hoped that the 14th Congress will veer away from the embarrassing record of its predecessors by focusing on human development legislation. Advocates (or lobbyists) base their expectations to the entry of 106 first termers who are more open to progressive proposals than their elder counterparts.

What should be the priority of the 14th Congress? Eradicating poverty is a sweeping goal. I have a proposal: focus on children.

There are 34.6 million children in the country or those living below 18 years old. Almost ten million are under 5 years old. Children belong to the 4.3 million families who are at-risk or live below the poverty threshold. If there is a sector which remains vulnerable to economic difficulties and in dire need of effective poverty-alleviation programs, I would immediately cite the children.

Promoting children’s welfare should begin by protecting women’s health. The cycle of malnutrition begins with the mother. About 300,000 Filipino babies are born each year with intellectual impairment due to iodine deficiency. Leading causes of infant deaths are preventable diseases like poor respiratory conditions, malnutrition and diarrhea. It is distressing to note that 3 of 10 children, especially in rural villages and urban slums, are underweight. A child’s health and development from infancy to early childhood determine the success of an individual in his/her adult years.

Children’s access to schooling is not improving. Only 21 percent of 6.5 million 3-5 year olds go to day care centers. More children drop-out during first three years of schooling. Studies show 4 of 10 elementary graduates do not move on to high school. Of those who enroll in high school, 5 of 10 eventually drop out. Those who finish high school acquire skills and competencies that are below international and even national standards.

Children who need special protection are those engaged in hazardous and exploitative labor, street children, victims of sexual abuse and commercial exploitation, victims of family violence and neglect, those separated from or have lost their parents, children displaced by disasters, armed conflict and aggressive urban development, children in conflict with the law, children with various forms of disability, those living in ethnic/cultural communities and children living with HIV/AIDS.

There are 4 million child laborers working in hazardous and exploitative conditions (like deep-sea fishing, pyrotechnic industry, mining and quarrying, sugar cane plantation). These children are deprived of education opportunities.

Street children are categorized as the highly visible children who remain for more than 4 hours in the streets. The national estimate is 45,000, although I think this is a conservative figure. Natural and man-made disasters affected 12,857 barangays in 2004 according to the Department of Social Welfare and Development. More than 5 million children were displaced by these calamities.

We should all commit ourselves to build a child-friendly and child-sensitive society. The Philippines is signatory to Convention on the Rights of the Child. According to the Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC), there are many laws on children but they are not implemented and funded by government. Policy initiatives are also done more at the national level.

The CWC is proposing the following legislative measures for the 14th Congress: Instituting Foster Care, law against child pornography, legitimation of Children Born to Underage Parents and amendments RA 7610 (Child Special Protection Act). The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child is also proposing the prohibition of torture and corporal punishment

Children are not voters but they deserve special attention from politicians. The 2010 presidential election is just three years away and it is feared that socially-relevant bills will be sidestepped by too much politicking.