MANILA, Philippines – Eight-hour Cabinet meetings. Midnight monologues on repeat. Curve-ball policy pronouncements. These are just some of the presidential habits a Duterte Cabinet member must learn to live with.

At the midway mark of Rodrigo Duterte’s presidency, only a little over half of his original Cabinet members remain standing. The other half were fired, pursued political ambitions, or failed to get confirmed by Congress. A few were transferred to other government posts. (READ: Cabinet members hail Duterte at halfway mark of presidency)

Among the survivors are Duterte’s oldest pals – his longtime lawyer Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, childhood friend Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez III, and retired generals Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana and National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon Jr. 

The most trusted of them all, Special Assistant to the President Bong Go, has moved to the Senate, though in actuality, remains Duterte’s constant companion and whisperer.

Duterte holds Cabinet meetings every first Monday of the month at the Aguinaldo State Dining Room in Malacañang. There have been a total of 40 Cabinet meetings so far, with the last one taking place on August 5. They usually start around 4 pm, with a prayer by the assigned Cabinet member, and last well into the night, sometimes stretching until the next morning.

Through the years, Cabinet members have faced controversies, with only a few getting the sought-after presidential assurance of trust and confidence. Already, two are being investigated for corruption based on complaints filed by private individuals. (READ: Keeping up with Duterte: One year inside the Cabinet)

Secretaries live in constant fear of demolition jobs, given Duterte’s “one whiff, you’re out” policy and his mysterious sources of information on the doings of his appointees. 

Keeping up with Duterte is a challenge in itself, with his penchant for announcing shocking policies without consulting Cabinet members most affected. 

Another marked change in the Duterte Cabinet is its composition of former military and police generals. 

From only 4 at the start of his term, the number nearly tripled, to 11. Duterte said it’s discipline, obedience, and efficiency that he values in retired generals.

The Cabinet is composed of heads of executive departments and officials who serve as advisors of the president. They are “alter egos” of the president and wield his power over their respective departments, according to the Official Gazette.

The president appoints them but for most Cabinet members, their designations must still be confirmed by Congress through the powerful Commission on Appointments. But a president can fire a Cabinet member any time and for any reason. 

The Duterte Cabinet’s work was rewarded with its highest-ever net satisfaction rating in a Social Weather Stations survey last May.

In this piece, we look at the many changes the Duterte Cabinet has undergone and explain the roles and spheres of influence certain critical Cabinet members have.

THE WINNOWING

Duterte has made changes to 22 Cabinet posts so far. That’s a little less than half of the entire Cabinet (46 officials).

The most spectacular Cabinet changes were the replacements of former interior secretary Ismael “Mike” Sueno and Vice President Leni Robredo. 

Not only did these take place in Duterte’s first year as president, they were drawn out in public. Sueno was fired during a Cabinet meeting and accused of corruption by Duterte in several public speeches. To this day, Duterte still sometimes refers to this episode to prove even his friends are not spared from his supposed intolerance for abuse of power. 

Robredo was eased out of Cabinet meetings because of her opposition to the Marcos burial and other Duterte policies. She was not technically fired. The Vice President decided to resign from her Cabinet post – the first clear political separation between the two highest elected officials of the land.

Cabinet members fired due to alleged corruption or misuse of funds (all have denied the accusations):

• Mike Sueno
• Terry Ridon
• Dionisio Santiago
• Patricia Licuanan

 Cabinet members who resigned after facing a string of controversies:

• Leni Robredo
• Vitaliano Aguirre II
• Wanda Teo
• Rodolfo Salalima
• Jesus Dureza

 Cabinet members not confirmed by the Commission on Appointments:

• Perfecto Yasay Jr
• Gina Lopez
• Paulyn Jean Ubial
• Rafael Mariano
• Judy Taguiwalo

Cabinet members who resigned to run for an elective post:

• Bong Go
• Leoncio Evasco Jr
• Alan Peter Cayetano
• Guiling Mamondiong
• Harry Roque

 Cabinet members transferred due to performance:

• Ernesto Abella
• Manny Piñol

Pool of replacements

Duterte showed interesting patterns when choosing replacements for his department Cabinet members. There were times when he picked lower-ranking officials who made an impression on him – such as Menardo Guevarra (previously Medialdea’s righthand man in Malacañang before becoming Justice Secretary) and Bernadette Romulo-Puyat (previously agriculture undersecretary before becoming Tourism Secretary).

He’s chosen from outside his circle: then-congressman Harry Roque as presidential spokesman and journalist Teodoro Locsin Jr as Foreign Secretary (though Duterte had previously appointed him United Nations envoy). 

The military and police establishment is another constant source of new Cabinet members for Duterte. Military generals are plucked upon retirement to head agencies like the interior department (Eduardo Año), Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (Carlito Galvez Jr), and social welfare department (Rolando Bautista).

The pattern extends to non-Cabinet members like Bureau of Customs chief Rey Leonardo Guerrero, Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System board member Emmanuel Salamat, and National Irrigation Administration chief Ricardo Visaya. (READ: LIST: Duterte's top military, police appointees)

CONSTANTS

Twenty-four original Cabinet members have managed to keep their posts. A handful of them have proven to be key advisers – officials who have Duterte’s ear, can change his mind, and even take positions contrary to Duterte’s without drawing presidential ire. (READ: The many times Duterte and his Cabinet members contradicted each other)

Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea  

Fondly referred to as the “Little Big President” by Bong Go, Medialdea is one of the few who can convince Duterte to ease up on certain policy decisions. It was Medialdea who got the President to allow the resumption of lotto operations after his blanket ban on PCSO-regulated gambling operations. It was Medialdea, too, who told Duterte he could not unilaterally abolish the National Food Authority Council, prompting him to move it under the Office of the President instead.

Aside from Go, it’s Medialdea he tasks with informing Cabinet members of their impending exit. Remember the House coup that delayed Duterte’s 2018 State of the Nation Address by an hour? It was Medialdea going from one room to another for a compromise between then-House speaker Pantaleon Alvarez and Pampanga representative Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. 

Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez III

Dominguez and Duterte have known each other since they were kids. But while Duterte was the resident “bugoy,” often getting into scrapes in school, Sonny was the achiever, getting top marks and winning declamation contests. To this day, Duterte sees Sonny as his better in subjects he cannot grasp – economics and finance.

Duterte rarely interferes in matters of economic policy and often goes with Dominguez’ recommendations on appointments to posts with big economic impact – such as Nestor Espenilla as his first Bangko Sentral governor and William Dar as new agriculture chief.

He’s largely backed Dominguez’ tax reform advocacy. When Dominguez tutted at Duterte’s plan to lease military lands to commercial establishments, the President went with the finance chief’s suggestion of a new government insurance program for soldiers.

Dominguez, in turn, is constantly under pressure to fund populist policies Duterte has been bull-headed on, like free tertiary education and the senior pension hike. The President sometimes calls Dominguez “Mr Tsk Tsk Tsk” because of his supposed penchant for finger-wagging at costly initiatives.

Based on Duterte’s accounts, Dominguez has also played a key role in his decisions to fire certain officials. It was the finance chief who whispered in his ear before he fired Sueno and Piñol. 

National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon Jr and Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana

Largely because of the nature of their portfolios, Duterte always has an open ear for his security officials. He may not consult them on everything, but he listens to them and gives them free rein to interpret his policy pronouncements. And so even if he once declared a military separation from the US, the Philippine military continues its exercises and other engagements with the Superpower. Even if Duterte said he can’t keep Chinese fishermen away from Philippine waters, Esperon said the Coast Guard will continue catching Chinese trespassers. 

Duterte has not been shy in making his opinion of his Cabinet members publicly known. He’s praised the performances of Mark Villar, Arthur Tugade, and Ramon Lopez – all members of his economic team.

To lighten the mood in his public events, he speaks in awe of the unsmiling demeanor of Eduardo Año or pokes fun at Salvador Panelo’s fashion sense. 

Save for Vice President Robredo, no Duterte Cabinet member chose to leave the Cabinet due to a difference in policy positions. In the time of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, 8 Cabinet members and two bureau heads, known collectively as the “Hyatt 10,” resigned in the wake of the Hello Garci scandal that implicated Arroyo in the alleged rigging of the 2004 elections.

Duterte’s predecessor, Benigno Aquino III, did not change Cabinet members as often as Duterte and was often criticized for keeping some accused of corruption or incompetence.

With 3 more years to go, the Duterte Cabinet continues to be under pressure to deliver the meaningful change the President promised Filipinos. – Rappler.com

If Duterte Youth chairman Ronald Cardema wants to intimidate Commission on Elections (Comelec) Commissioner Rowena Guanzon, he has to try harder – a lot harder.

Judging from Guanzon's tweets, she's merely annoyed, amused, or baffled by Cardema's claims.

In a nutshell, the congressman-wannabe accused the feisty Comelec commissioner of demanding money and political favors from him, in exchange for voting favorably on his case.

Cardema, at 34 years old, is simply too old to represent the youth sector in Congress, so the poll body's 1st Division canceled his nomination. His remaining hope is the Comelec en banc, which Guanzon is part of.

But to him, Guanzon had these to say:

No way.

I will not inhibit from the cases of Cardema . period. pic.twitter.com/sUVysFEWx8

— Rowena V. Guanzon (@commrguanzon) August 17, 2019

Oops, another violation?

Note his allegation that the incident occurred early 2019 when he was still NYC Chair. Is he saying he was engaging in partisan political activities while he was NYC Chair? @COMELEC

— Rowena V. Guanzon (@commrguanzon) August 17, 2019

Birthdates are forever.

before it was death threats, now extortion. Ano sunod, impeachment? All intimidation tactics to coerce me to reverse my vote. Again, friendly advise, study your case and get a good lawyer. But u can't change your date of birth.

— Rowena V. Guanzon (@commrguanzon) August 17, 2019

Who, me, extort?

why will I extort money from him or anyone? I don't need it. I am richer than Cardema for sure. https://t.co/pdGcciXQYa

— Rowena V. Guanzon (@commrguanzon) August 18, 2019

Too old, trying too hard.

Cardema said I demanded 2Million from him . I dont think he even has P500K in his bank account. Aber , show us, you overaged trying hard name dropper. https://t.co/BJ20o05gNP

— Rowena V. Guanzon (@commrguanzon) August 18, 2019

Bleat?

Here is my private army. cheap to maintain because they only eat grass. pic.twitter.com/IllaBUpbPU

— Rowena V. Guanzon (@commrguanzon) August 18, 2019

To add insult to injury, Malacañang doesn't want anything to do with Cardema's battle against Guanzon. As Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo put it, "Wala naman kaming pakialam sa ginagawa [niya] (We have nothing to do with what he's doing)." Ouch! – Rappler.com

Last August 6, President Rodrigo Duterte spoke of a "building" in a Fujian university being built in honor of his mother, Soledad Roa Duterte. It's yet another reason why he must visit China soon, he said.

"Kaya may building siya doon, Soledad, for ‘yung mga foreign students na niyayaya nila to study in China (She has a building there, Soledad, for foreign students they invite to study in China). So I’m going there to inaugurate that," said Duterte.

It's in Fujian Normal University where you will find "Soledad College," which now hosts a number of Filipino students, thanks to the generosity of Chinese tycoon Jose Kho.

A real estate tycoon who is also known by his Chinese name Xu Minliang, Kho provided $20 million in seed money to put up Soledad College in 2017, according to a press release on FNU's website, dated May 30, 2018.

The college is named after Soledad Duterte, who is said to descend from Chinese immigrants from Fujian and who was a teacher in Davao City.

FNU identifies Kho as an alumnus (graduating class 1976) and vice-chairperson of its board of directors. 

In a write-up about Soledad College's first batch of Filipino masteral students, Kho is described as the "scholarship sponsor of Soledad College."

The Filipino students, according to the write-up, thanked Kho and promised to be "messengers of China-Philippines friendship and help exchanges in science, technology and culture between two countries."

They were welcomed into the college last March 26.

Four months later, Soledad College was offering 50 scholarships to Filipino students interested in obtaining masters degrees in Business Administration, International Business, Tourism Management, Materials Engineering and Radio and Television.

An ABS-CBN news report promoting the scholarships said FNU wanted 30 of the target 50 scholars to come from Davao City, the hometown of the Dutertes.

Goodwill gesture

Soledad College and its scholarships for Filipinos are only the latest in a string of goodwill gestures from Kho.

He and the group he founded, Friends of the Philippines Foundation (FPF), donated a P500-million drug rehabilitation facility in Bukidnon. It was inaugurated in August 2018 with Duterte himself as guest of honor.

Another Chinese business closely associated with Duterte, his former economic adviser Michael Yang, also helped fund the center and is a member of FPF.

So appreciated is Kho by the administration that he is the first foreigner to be conferred the Order of Lapu-Lapu, Kamagi medal, a recognition created by Duterte to honor individuals who support his advocacies (Yang was present at the ceremony, based on Palace photos).

An FNU press release also said Kho contributed to the "successful resolution of the 2010 Hong Kong hostage incident."

Back in April 2018, Duterte made a historic public apology for the crisis that happened during the term of his predecessor, Benigno Aquino III.

Kho and FPF enjoy access to Duterte. They even treated him to a Peking duck lunch at a Beijing shopping district during the President's first official trip to China in October 2016.

When Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Manila in November 2018, Kho was part of the exclusive guest list for the Malacañang state banquet held in Xi's honor.

Jose Kho and son

Kho and his son Kitson Soriano Kho have met with Duterte in Malacañang at least twice, once in the company of Ramon Tulfo, who was eventually named Special Envoy for Public Diplomacy to China. (READ: Chinese businessmen flock to Duterte's Malacañang)

Kitson Kho is chairman of a company gunning for a massive reclamation project in Manila Bay, with Chinese partners.

His Hong Kong-based the Kho Group and UAA Kinming Development Corporation want to build a 407-hectare New Manila International Community, a smart “city within a city.”

It was greenlighted by the Philippine Reclamation Authority and then-Manila mayor Joseph Estrada. It's not clear if new Manila Mayor Isko Moreno will be just as receptive but he had said reclamation projects are not a priority of his administration.

Last March, Kitson Kho was given Philippine citizenship through Republic Act No. 11242. The bills for this were introduced by brothers Bukidnon 3rd District Representative Manuel Zubiri and Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri. 

Duterte approved Kho's Philippine citizenship on March 11.

Representative Zubiri's explanatory note for his bill says that though Kitson was born in China, his grandfather is Filipino and Kitson himself has lived in the Philippines since 2006.

It also mentions Kitson's reclamation plans.

"He has spent the last 12 years in the Philippines, arriving in 2006 and staying here to fulfill his job as CEO of Am-Phil and UAA Kinming, companies that contribute greatly to the Philippine economy, and create numerous job opportunities for Filipinos, with greater prospects of job creation ahead once their reclamation project in Manila Bay commences," says the document.

And while it was his father who was most visible during the inauguration of the Bukidnon drug rehabilitation center, the note says Kitson donated P700 million to fund the facility. – Rappler.com

MANILA, Philippines – The Commission on Elections (Comelec) is once again in the spotlight, this time over the controversial case of Duterte Youth chairman Ronald Cardema's winding attempts to sit in Congress.

His most outspoken critic is none other than poll commissioner Rowena Guanzon whose biting comments against Cardema have left the two locked in a word war that has grabbed the public's attention.

From fiery media interviews to stinging tweets, Guanzon has shown she won't back down from pointing out the ineligibility of Cardema to sit as youth representative in the House of Representatives. (READ: Stretching the rules: Duterte Youth's bid for Congress)

Guanzon's fiery rhetoric is matched by her decisions against Duterte Youth and Cardema. As part of the Comelec's 1st Division, Guanzon voted to cancel Cardema's nomination as he was found to breach the age limit required to sit as a youth representative in Congress. She was also the lone dissenter in the Comelec's decision to give due course to Cardema's last-minute substitution bid, which, she said, was a "mockery of democracy."

While Cardema is the latest to be singled out by Guanzon, the poll commissioner's biting remarks have spared no one – including President Rodrigo Duterte. Guanzon's headstrong nature is also displayed in the position she's taken on controversial issues and her advocacies that have charted the course of her career.

Ruffling feathers

An independent voice in the Comelec since she was appointed in 2015, Guanzon has clashed with many individuals in the past, including Duterte, former poll chairman Andres Bautista, Senator Grace Poe, the Comelec's infamous hackers, and supplier Smartmatic.

In the run-up to the 2016 presidential elections, Guanzon was again the only person in the 7-member Comelec en banc who voted not to accept Duterte's petition to substitute PDP-Laban member Martin Diño who filed a certificate of candidacy (COC) to run for president.

At the time, Guanzon said this was due to a pending case against Duterte filed by broadcaster Ruben Castor. Castor requested the Comelec to declare the COC of Diño, who Duterte eventually substituted, as null and void because of an error: the COC indicated he was running for mayor of Pasay City. (READ: Duterte hits Comelec’s Guanzon for ‘palpable bias’)

Guanzon and Bautista also locked horns after Guanzon filed before the Supreme Court, the poll body's comment against then-presidential candidate Grace Poe. Poe's presidential bid was opposed on the grounds that she was not a natural-born Filipino and that she did not meet the minimum 10-year residency requirement for presidential candidates.

This prompted Bautista to disown the comment filed by Guanzon and to issue a memo ordering her and the poll body's Law Department to explain the filing. (READ: Election officials mend ties after public feud)

Challenged, Guanzon said, "I must emphasize that as a Commissioner, I am not a subordinate or employee of Chair Bautista and he has no administrative supervision or control over me." Guanzon was also among all 6 Comelec commissioners who issued a memo criticizing Bautista for his supposed "failed leadership" of the poll body.

Apart from this, Guanzon made headlines for scolding Smartmatic officials and hackers who leaked voters' data mere weeks away from the 2016 elections.

Responding to the hacking incident, Guanzon appealed to them saying, "Tama na 'yan, mga anak. Sige na, you na. Ikaw na ‘yun. Genius na kayo. Tama na. Huwag 'nyo na kaming i-hack uli, mag-eeleksyon na. Sige na, genius ka na. Okay na 'yan."

(Stop it, my children. Now we know, you've made your point. You've made your point. You're geniuses. Stop it. Don't hack us again. We're close to elections. Okay, you're geniuses. That's okay.)

Even before her appointment to the poll body, Guanzon earned the ire of former opposition party United Nationalist Alliance (UNA), which claimed in 2015 that the then-ruling Liberal Party might use Guanzon to ensure the victory of Interior Secretary Manuel Roxas II, the LP's presumed presidential bet, in the 2016 elections.

This was because UNA said Guanzon "pressured" state auditors to investigate Roxas' rival and UNA's presidential candidate, then-vice president Jejomar Binay, over an allegedly overpriced housing project during her stint in the Commission on Audit (COA). Guanzon denied this.

Guanzon, a fighter

Apart from her role as a Comelec commissioner, Guanzon is known as a long-time women's rights lawyer and trailblazer in the field of gender equality and laws on violence against women.

A co-founder of the Gender Justice Network, Guanzon was among the group composed of women-lawyers providing free counsel to abused women. She brands herself on Twitter as an advocate of women's empowerment in politics, and has carried her passion for womens' rights in all the government positions she's held.

Before joining the Comelec, Guanzon first joined government under the Philippines' first female president, Corazon Aquino. In 1986, Aquino named her officer in charge and city mayor of Cadiz City, Negros Occidental. Guanzon was then 28. She was later elected mayor of the same city in 1998, and served in this position until 1992.

Later on in 2013, Guanzon served as a commissioner in COA, making for an all-women-led commission. Upon taking her oath before former Supreme Court chief justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, Guanzon vowed to prioritize monitoring the utilization of gender and development budgets in different government agencies.

As Comelec commissioner, Guanzon has also pushed for increasing women's representation in politics.

In between her stints in COA and the Comelec, Guanzon in 2014 likewise set her sights on the Supreme Court, applying for a seat in the country's highest court.

During public interviews with the Judicial and Bar Council, Guanzon declared, "For women's rights advocates like me, the personal is the political," referring to the prominent feminist argument and slogan.

She proclaimed, "I chose to be single, because I am a feminist...having grown up in a family where women are strong... We were not compelled to marry. We were not encouraged to marry. We were not discouraged to marry."

True to form, Guanzon – as head of the Comelec's gender and development committee – did not shy away from lambasting Duterte's joke about the rape and murder of an Australian missionary during the campaign period for the 2016 presidential elections.

Backed by poll figures that showed there were more women voters than men at the time, Guanzon said, "That’s 27.9 million women voters who can be raped. And Rodrigo Duterte, a presidential candidate, makes a disgusting ‘joke’ about it."

Guanzon holds a master in public administration degree from Harvard University, and degrees in law and economics from the University of the Philippines. She is also a recipient of the UP Alumni Association's outstanding alumna in gender equality and women empowerment award, and the Outstanding Sillimanian Award from Silliman University.

Guanzon's term at the Comelec will expire on February 2, 2022. Until then, expect her to continue being vocal.

As she said in reply to Cardema's proposed impeachment case against her, "Go ahead, make my day! Comelec army, prepare for battle."– Rappler.com 

TOP PHOTO: FIERCE COMMISSIONER. Comelec Commissioner Rowena Guanzon is known for her independent stand and advocacy for womens' rights and empowerment. Photo by Darren Langit/Rappler 

Claim: Filipinos can now obtain selected government documents for free under Republic Act 11261.

Facebook page Philippines Report posted an infographic on May 24, 2019 that enumerates 9 government documents covered by the new law: barangay clearance, birth certificate, marriage certificate, medical certificate (public hospitals), unified multipurpose ID, NBI clearance, police clearance, tax identification number, and official transcript of records from state universities and colleges.

Philippines Report’s post was flagged by Facebook Claim Check, the social media network’s tool that identifies potentially dubious content shared across the platform. Though it was posted 3 months ago, the post was still getting new engagements as of writing, with over 75,000 shares, 5,000 reactions, and 1,300 comments.

Rating: MISLEADING

The facts: RA 1126 applies to first-time job applicants only and not to everyone, as implied in Philippines Report's post. It is also known as the “First Time Jobseekers Act.” Under the law, the benefits should only be availed of once.

RA 1126’s long title is “an act waiving government fees and charges in the issuance of documents required in the application for employment of first time jobseekers.” President Rodrigo Duterte signed it on April 10, 2019.

Apart from the 9 documents listed by Philippines Report, the law also includes on the list “other documentary requirements issued by the government that may be required by employers from job applicants.” (READ: New law waives gov't document fees for first-time job seekers)

To avail of the benefits, first-time applicants are required to present a barangay certification to prove his/her eligibility.

However, applications to take professional licensure examinations conducted by the Professional Regulation Commission are not covered by RA 11261. First-time job seekers are also still required to pay for Philippine passport authentications and applications for a career service examination. – Pauline Macaraeg/Rappler.com

Keep us aware of suspicious Facebook pages, groups, accounts, websites, articles, or photos in your network by contacting us at factcheck@rappler.com. Let us battle disinformation one Fact Check at a time.

MANILA, Philippines – In June 2006, two young women traveled to Hagonoy, Bulacan to see how farmers were toiling and tilling the land.

One was a student researcher, the other was a pregnant community organizer. They were drawn to the workers and their stories about their land and how somehow, they never seemed to make enough.

The young women were on a mission, hoping to change what they saw.

But they did not go far. 

On June 26, Karen Empeño and Sherlyn Cadapan were dragged out of their rented house, blindfolded, pulled into a jeep by gun-strapped men wearing army fatigues. A farmer, Manuel Merino, tried to stop them, but he was also taken along with them.

The military said they had not the faintest idea where the two women were. What the major general who ruled over the area, Jovito Palparan, said was this: his men took two female communist rebels in Hagonoy, Bulacan, but they were not the missing women.

None of them have come home – daughters forever younger than 30 in the memory of their mothers, snatched on mere suspicion of having communist ties.

The story of Cadapan and Empeño comes to mind as the Philippine government mulls the return of the anti-subversion law, which makes arrests based on communist ideology – even mere suspicion of it – within easy reach of the police and the military.

Many of the country’s key democracy and human rights icons were charged with subversion during the Marcos dictatorship, including statesman Jovito Salonga – a senator who faced subversion charges after he was implicated in the Metro Manila bombings in 1980, but was cleared of crimes by the Supreme Court 5 years later.

It's a push that did not come from nowhere. Consider the longstanding conflict of the Philippine government against communists. It has produced its own star lobbyist for the revival of the anti-subversion law, whose reputation for hunting rebels rivals Palparan’s. 

Also consider the President, who has tried to patch up the conflict with the movement, but has instead been disgraced. (READ: The end of the affair? Duterte's romance with the Reds) 

From Huks to ‘legitimate dissent’

The anti-subversion law can be traced to more than 60 years ago in the aftermath of World War II. The Communist Party of the Philippines, including membership to the group, was declared illegal for the first time in June 1957 through Republic Act 1700.

The law, signed by Carlos Garcia, stated that the CPP “constitutes a clear, present and grave danger to the security of the Philippines,” after the Hukbalahap shifted from being an anti-Japanese movement to becoming the armed wing of the CPP.

In 1976, then-president Ferdinand Marcos issued Presidential Decree 885, which expanded RA 1700 to include other groups organized to overthrow the government, “with the open or covert assistance and support of a foreign power by force, violence, deceit or other illegal means.” 

The Marcos dictatorship utilized this decree to stifle legitimate political dissent and criticism amid widespread human rights violations during Martial Law. 

In 1981, two years before the lifting of Martial Law, Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 1835 or the anti-subversion law of 1981 to allegedly “support the continuing efforts of the government aimed at solving the problems of public disorder and lawlessness, and the restoration of normalcy in the country.” 

The reinstatement of democracy in the Philippines led to the repeal of Marcos decrees through Executive Order No. 167, signed by then-president Corazon Aquino in 1987.

Five years later in 1992, Congress repealed RA 1700 by passing RA 7636 as the Ramos administration began its peace talks with the Communist Party. 

Repealing the law, Ramos said, assures communist insurgents of political space and at the same time “challenges them to compete under our constitutional system and free market of ideas – which are guaranteed by the rule of law."

The revival’s poster boy

It was at the peak of Marcos’ anti-communist policies in 1983 that a bright lieutenant entered the Philippine Army by way of the Philippine Military Academy: Eduardo Año.

Decades later, he made a name for himself as the military’s “Rebel Hunter," a title that only rivals Palparan’s “Butcher” nametag.

A former intelligence chief and army commanding general, Año retired as the military chief then but was readily embraced by Rodrigo Duterte in his Cabinet as interior and local government secretary.

In the decades since Ramos initiated the peace talks, 4 other presidents have tried and failed to reach an agreement with the CPP, with the turbulent process punctuated by encounters on the ground which have left people dead on both sides.

Then came Duterte: a popular president who, in his first year, proclaimed himself a leftist, only to have a falling out with his supposed comrades.

It was in 2018, as Rappler earlier reported, that Año began sending Duterte daily reports of the CPP-NPA’s infractions: every gunfight with the government, every burning of property, every collection of revolutionary taxes.

Año had seen the peace talks crumble before, and he wanted to see the conflict end with certainty.

“In good faith, the government acceded to those demands for the sake of peace. But instead of laying down their arms and joining mainstream society, the Communists grew bolder and used the democratic space accorded to them to regroup, organize, and mobilize,” Año said in a statement on August 14.

He told the Senate that he wanted a return to the old days. He wanted the anti-subversion law revived.

“Specific naman 'yung mga organizations na gusto nating ma-list as subversive, particularly the communist party, ang kinatatakot kasi ng iba diyan baka 'yung opposition at saka mga ibang political party malista,” Año said, attempting to calm fears.

(The organizations we want to list as subversive are very specific, particularly the communist party. Because others fear that opposition groups and other political parties will also be listed.)

The DILG’s vision

In an interview with Rappler, DILG Undersecretry and spokesman Jonathan Malaya laid down what the DILG wanted.

Duterte’s verbal attacks were not enough. Not even an executive order that had declared the Communist Party a terrorist organization. They want a law crafted by Congress, and which could only be repealed by Congress again.

The DILG so far wants the ban of two things: membership and association with the CPP, NPA, and NDF; and “direct support” of the CPP.

By membership, the DILG does not simply mean registration with the party, but adherence to its ideology.

“Membership in the Communist Party of the Philippines, which is clearly defined by their program, and their program is the violent overthrow of government through revolutionary armed struggle through a protracted peoples war wherein guerrilla fronts are established,” Malaya said.

The DILG also envisions government running after organizations that are simply “associated” with the CPP, such as labor, youth, and religious sector groups – should they be proven to support the CPP.

“These organizations directly support the Communist Party of the Philippines, therefore, if we can prove that they are directly supporting the CPP, then they should be liable under our laws,” Malaya said.

Malaya said the “direct support” of the CPP can take various meanings: from financial backing to taking part in the recruitment of members.

Criminalizing mere membership or subscription to the ideology of communism infringes on constitutionally-guaranteed rights, such as freedom of expression and association, among others, according to Far Eastern University Institute of Law dean Mel Sta Maria. 

One should be able to distinguish between “advocacy or thought or a principle and a desire to commit violence.” 

“People should be aware that in a democratic society, we are not homogenous as we have different advocacies…But when it reaches the area of violence that you want, then that’s the problem, ” Sta Maria said. 

He added that the government should just make use of existing laws, such as the Revised Penal Code, to hold accountable people who subscribe to communism and who have committed violence.

The backlash 

As for the limits? Malaya said they are open to discussing the crafting of the bill with members of Congress.

What they are certain of, he said, is they do not want a return to a Marcosian political persecution drive marked by illegal detention, murder, and enforced disappearances. (READ: Martial Law, the dark chapter in Philippine history) 

“This is not the authoritarian martial law which is of the Marcos period, when someone is arrested and not heard of, and suddenly he's dead. This is a different context,” Malaya argued.

He added: “We don’t want the presidential decrees passed by Marcos. We understand that these were repressive.”

The people behind the revival of the anti-subversion law should think about the huge implications especially on the freedoms of individuals, according to Sta Maria. 

He cited the concept of the Bill of Attainder which, in relation to criminalizing mere membership to an organization, automatically penalizes a person as a criminal without trial. 

“Nahusgahan ka na bago pa magkaroon ng (You’ve been judged before) due process which ideally should start with the very principle of presumption of innocence,” he said, describing the law as “ensnaring” because it can be utilized by an abusive executive power.

Commission on Human Rights Chairperson Chito Gascon also stressed that historically, governments used laws against subversion to stifle legitimate dissent. 

“It is for this reason that countries that have transitioned to democracy and away from authoritarianism have either repealed those laws or have in practice not utilized them favoring toleration of pluralist voices while drawing the line on the use of violence,” he said in an interview with Rappler.

Human rights and other progressive groups also beg to differ on assurances that the planned revival will not be as undemocratic as previous laws. Even without an anti-subversion law, they see political persecution as they continue to advocate against repressive policies of the Duterte administration.

Ellecer Carlos of In Defense of Human Rights and Dignity (iDEFEND) sees a new anti-subversion law as part of the “overall efforts to set up the state apparatus to stifle any and all forms of dissent.” 

“Due process and the rule of law has been blatantly disregarded on a massive scale, routinely, by this government,” he told Rappler, adding that it is a slippery slope that may lead to more repressive laws.

“You can just imagine the new human rights crisis that this will usher in if they continue with the anti-subversion law,” Carlos added.

Not unfounded fears

Carlos' and many other progressive groups’ fears are not unfounded. After all, many critics accuse the Duterte government of using and twisting the law to suit its agenda, particularly to silence dissenters – to include critics of the violent campaign against drugs. (READ: Duterte's war on dissent)

According to data from rights group Karapatan, at least 2,370 human rights defenders have been charged by the government from 2016 to 2019. The numbers under Duterte, many said, are clearly the worst of the last 3 administrations. 

The Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA), a member of iDEFEND, is one of at least 30 organizations red-tagged by the government, accusing them of being CPP fronts.

Red-tagging, according to the Supreme Court, refers to "the act of labeling, branding, naming and accusing individuals and/or organizations of being left-leaning, subversives, communists or terrorists (used as) a strategy...by State agents, particularly law enforcement agencies and the military, against those perceived to be ‘threats’ or ‘enemies of the State.'”

Groups accused of being communist fronts have cried foul, condemning the government's attacks as "dangerous." 

In February 2019, the military asked the European Union to stop funding progressive groups, including church and human rights organizations, as they are allegedly being used to fuel terrorist acts. 

In 2018, the Department of Justice wanted to declare 656 people as terrorists, including United Nations Special Rapporteur Victoria Tauli-Curpiz, in line with Duterte's Proclamation No. 374 declaring the CPP-NPA as a terrorist organization. It has since trimmed the list down to 8 amid a massive backlash from both local and international bodies. 

The Duterte government has also been active in its crackdown on alleged recruitment of students into activist groups in various colleges and universities. 

Worsening repression is what many organizations fear may happen with the revival of the anti-subversion law, especially given what critics call a climate of impunity and the erosion of democracy under Duterte. 

The National Union of Peoples' Lawyers (NUPL) warns that the government’s plan is “an excavation of a jurassic idea which has the effect of curtailing freedom of association and political beliefs which are in fact crucial ingredients for democracy to flourish.”

“This draconian measure, together with a menu of other repressive laws and policies, and on top of vicious red-tagging of individuals and groups, is essentially antidemocratic even if packaged for purportedly salutary ends,” NUPL president Edre Olalia said in a statement. 

But how do we end Asia’s longest insurgency? For Carlos, the best way to address insurgency is to address root causes of systematic oppression, including poverty and social inequality. 

“Naging violence ang response to the insurgency problem whereas, ang sagot naman ay investment in a life of dignity,” he said. “Kung ang lahat ay makatatamasa ng maayos na pamumuhay, wala naman mag-iisip na sumali sa insurgency.”

(Violence became the response to the insurgency problem whereas, the answer should be investment in a life of dignity. If everyone is able to live a comfortable life, no one will think of joining insurgencies.) – Rappler.com

TOP PHOTO: 
ANNIVERSARY. The flag of the Communist Party of the Philippines during its 50th year anniversary in 2018. Photo by Alecs Ongcal/Rappler

SECOND PHOTO: 
VISITING SULU TROOPS. President Rodrigo Duterte speaks with then martial law implementor AFP chief Eduardo Año during a visit to a military camp in Jolo, Sulu in 2017. Presidential photo

THIRD PHOTO:
BURN. Protesters burn an effigy during a demonstration against government policies. Photo by Alecs Ongcal/Rappler

FOURTH PHOTO:
DEFEND OUR SCHOOLS. Students of UP Baguio condemn the militarization of schools in line with the government’s crackdown on leftist organizations. Photo by Mau Victa/Rappler

It was an interesting cast of characters assembled at the inauguration of a hybrid solar-diesel power plant in Romblon on Wednesday, August 21.

President Rodrigo Duterte was the evening's guest of honor, accompanied by his longtime aide and now senator, Bong Go, and Energy Secretary Alfonso Cusi.

Their host? Elizaldy Co, the Bicol-based businessman who flip-flopping government witness Peter Joemel Advincula or "Bikoy" once accused of being part of a drug syndicate and hosting its operations in his Misibis Bay resort.

Co is also currently AKO Bicol Partylist representative, having replaced Justin Batocabe, son of slain lawmaker Rodel Batocabe at the last minute. Co is AKO Bicol chairman emeritus and founder.

Advincula had also claimed that Duterte and Go, among other government officials, had visited Co's resort and used Co's private helicopter.

Advincula has since retracted this allegation while Co filed a cyber libel suit against him.

Co was described during the inauguration as the founder and former chairperson of Sunwest Water and Electric Company Inc. (Suweco), the company behind Tumingad Solar Power Plant.

Said to be the first and largest hybrid solar-diesel microgrid with battery in the Philippines, the power plant will provide partly green electricity to Tablas Island.

Co gave the opening remarks that night. Duterte, in his speech, spoke of Co in familiar terms, using his nickname "Zaldy."

"Ang sabi ni Zaldy, it (power plant) has been built to last so many times over and I’m happy for you. If it would last longer, wala na tayong problema actually at si Zaldy na ang, give or take a few years from now, siya na ang pinaka-Lopez na papalit," said Duterte.

(Zaldy said it has been built to last so many times over and I'm happy for you. If it would last longer, we won't have any problems actually and Zaldy will be, give or take a few years from now, he will be the replacement of Lopez.)

Duterte was likely referring to the wealthy and powerful Lopezes who own broadcasting giant ABS-CBN. The President has threatened to block its franchise renewal, accusing the network of "bias" and "swindling."

Duterte does not visit every inauguration of a renewable energy plant. Often, events that merit his presence are those with great impact or involve people important to him.

Secretary Cusi, asked by Rappler if DOE was aware of Co being part of Advincula's old accusations, said Duterte attended the inauguration out of support for electrification projects.

"It's (Co's power plant) a hybrid power source which the government or DOE is promoting to help improve supply and bring down cost, especially in SPUG (small power utilities group) areas," Cusi said in a message.

Asked if there was any personal connection between Duterte and Co that also partly explained his attendance, Cusi said, "PRRD (President Rodrigo Roa Duterte) visited the project because of its importance and [to] be with the people of Romblon. He wanted to see the project firsthand." – Rappler.com

MANILA, Philippines – Chinese vessels have been criss-crossing Philippine waters even as the government claims friendlier ties with China, casting doubt on the merits of President Rodrigo Duterte’s so-called independent foreign policy that has largely favored Beijing.

A growing list of incursions by different kinds of boats and ships from China indicate a scenario that Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana himself described as "alarming."

Rappler has listed reported sightings and incidents involving Chinese vessels in Philippine waters, with at least 12 episodes occurring so far in 2019. 

I. China Coast Guard vessels

Panatag Shoal

In April, ABS-CBN News reported 4 China Coast Guard (CCG) vessels guarding the shoal. Two were anchored in the lone passage into the inner lagoon while another two were patrolling the periphery.

China’s white Coast Guard ships have become a permanent fixture in and around Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal ever since a standoff with Philippine vessels in 2012.

Filipino fishermen said the CCG prevents them from entering the shoal’s lagoon, where there is more fish to catch.The white ships fire water cannons at Filipino boats that attempt to enter the lagoon or else they deploy speed boats to accost the Filipinos’ wooden bancas.

Access to the inner lagoon is vital to Filipino fishers. Leonardo Cuaresma, chairman of the Federated Fishermen Association of Masinloc in Zambales, told Rappler recently that their catch has declined by as much as 80% in the years they have been barred from the lagoon.

Action Taken: The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) said it filed a diplomatic protest against China not over its Coast Guard’s presence, but the mass harvesting of giant clams by Chinese trawlers.

Ayungin Shoal

On August 20, the Armed Forces of the Philippines Western Command (AFP Wescom) based in Palawan reported that a China Coast Guard ship has been lingering around Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal since August 1.

AFP Wescom Spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Stephen Penetrante said the Chinese white ship just “goes around the area, stopping and going” in the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG), the Philippines’ name for the portion of the Spratlys that it claims sovereignty over.

Ayungin Shoal is where the rusting, World War II-era Philippine Navy ship BRP Sierra Madre is purposely aground to serve as a permanent outpost of the AFP.

Action taken: Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said on Tuesday, August 20, that he had yet to receive an official report on this, and declined to comment on what action would be taken, if any.

II. Maritime militia vessels

Swarming of Pag-asa Island

In February 2019, reports showed China deployed its maritime militia to the vicinity of Pag-asa Island (Thitu Island) in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) as early as July 2018, after the Philippines began constructing on the island.

The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) earlier said more than 600 Chinese ships circled Pag-asa Island from January to March 2019.

This corroborated an earlier report by Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI) of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), which said satellite images captured from mid-December to late January 2019 showed the presence of Chinese vessels in the area.

According to National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon Jr, 113 Chinese vessels were found swarming Pag-asa Island on July 24 – a new record high in terms of the number of Chinese ships spotted in the area at a single point in time. Esperon said last July 30 the ships were supposedly no longer there due to bad weather at the time.

The Philippine government had rejected as "illegal" the presence of Chinese ships in the area, saying it was a "clear violation" of Philippine sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction as defined by international law.

Unlike other areas in the West Philippine Sea, President Duterte usually takes a tough stance against China when it comes to the presence of its vessels near Pag-asa Island. The island is home to a small community of Filipinos.

Actions taken: Foreign Secretary Teodoro Locsin announced the filing of at least two diplomatic protests against China over the issue – one in March and the other in July 2019.

The DFA likewise said the Philippines has "consistently manifested" its position on Pag-asa Island and the KIG, and its objections over illegal or "coercive activities" through diplomatic actions. These included notes verbale and bilateral meetings with China.

Blue ships in Panatag Shoal

Accompanying the 4 China Coast Guard white ships in guarding Panatag Shoal back in April were two huge blue trawlers that local fishermen and security officials understood to be Chinese maritime militia.

News crews that have traveled to the area consistently reported seeing the blue ships, which hardly move or show any activity aside from standing guard over the shoal.

Action taken: None reported.

III. Fishing boats

The sinking of Gem-Ver

On the night of June 9, Chinese trawler Yuemaobinyu 42212 rammed the stern of Philippine fishing boat Gem-Ver as it was anchored near Recto Bank in the West Philippine Sea. The smash left a hole in Gem-Ver that caused it to sink. 

The Chinese ship abandoned the 22 fishermen onboard Gem-Ver in the open sea. (READ: THE SINKING OF GEM-VER: Barko! May babanggang barko!)

After learning of the incident, Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana blasted the “cowardly action” of the Chinese vessel for “abandoning” the Filipinos. In stark contrast, other Cabinet officials downplayed the incident and cast doubt on the account of Gem-Ver's fishermen.

The ramming and sinking of Gem-Ver has been the most heated issue in the West Philippine Sea since the Scarborough Shoal standoff in April 2012, which prompted the Philippines to file a historic case against China months later.

Despite public outcry, President Rodrigo Duterte dismissed the sinking of Gem-Ver as a "maritime incident," echoing the Chinese foreign ministry which downplayed the boat sinking as "an ordinary maritime traffic incident."

Action taken: Locsin raised the incident at the United Nations (UN) as he hit the "felony" of abandoning persons in distress. He cited Article 98 of UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which "explicitly provides for the 'duty to render assistance.'"

The Philippines also slammed the Chinese ship in a statement before the UN's International Maritime Organization.

Since then, Malacañang announced a planned joint investigation with China into the incident. Meanwhile, official findings of an investigation by the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and Maritime Industry Authority said the Chinese vessel failed to prevent the collision and save the Filipinos.

Giant clam harvesting in Panatag Shoal

In April, reports said at least two wooden vessels with Chinese flags were spotted harvesting giant clams from Panatag Shoal. Filipino fishermen said it was a constant activity of the Chinese, despite China and the Philippines imposing a supposed fishing ban on the shoal.

Satellite images revealed widespread scarring of the seabed inside the lagoon, indicating the massive harvesting of giant clams, which were seeded by Filipino scientists years before.

Action taken: The DFA filed a diplomatic protest against China and said it was eyeing "legal action" over the incident. 

27 fishing vessels around Panata Island

On August 20, the AFP Wescom said there were 27 fishing vessels spotted around Panata Island in the KIG. Panata Island, or Lankiam Cay, is one of the smallest naturally-occurring land features in the KIG, and it is 7 nautical miles from the Philippine-controlled Loaita island.

Of the 27 vessels, some were Chinese, said AFP Wescom's Penetrante, while others were Vietnamese. He did not disclose how many belonged to which country. (READ: Satellite maps show foreign vessels swarming Philippine waters)

Action taken: Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said on August 20 that he was still waiting for an official report from the AFP Wescom.

IV. Survey vessels

In August, map images showed Chinese survey vessels operating in Philippine waters.

The images shared by US Naval War College's Ryan Martinson showed Chinese survey vessel “Dong Fang Hong 3" operating in waters near Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte, on August 7. Prior to that, map images also showed Chinese oceanographic survey ship "Zhanjian" operating some 80 nautical miles off the east coast of the Philippines on August 3 to at least August 6.

Martinson is an assistant professor at the China Maritime Studies Institute at the Naval War College.

Under UNCLOS, marine scientific research can only be conducted in exclusive economic zones if permission is granted by the coastal state, in this case, the Philippines.

Lorenzana said China did not inform the Philippines about these activities.

Actions taken: Locsin announced filing a diplomatic protest over the presence of survey ships in the Philippines' exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

He later moved to impose a "universal ban" on foreign marine surveys in Philippine waters but backtracked, saying he would leave it open to all countries with the Philippines’ permission.

V. Warships

Naval ship near Panatag Shoal

A Chinese naval ship, distinguished by its gray hull, was spotted by the PCG as it patrolled the area of Panatag Shoal from June 7 to 10.

Aside from the warship, the PCG said two China Coast Guard and two militia vessels were also plying the waters within its territorial seas 12 nautical miles from the shoal.

Lorenzana said it was “nothing new,” as gray ships from different countries, including the Philippines, routinely pass the area.

Liaoning aircraft carrier

On June 19, Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio said he received and verified information that the Chinese Navy’s first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, passed Sibutu Strait in Tawi-Tawi “2 to 3 weeks ago.”

Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana denied this at the time, saying there were no reports of the Liaoning’s passage from military troops in the area. As the strait is international sea-lane, Lorenzana said there was “no need to ask permission if it is innocent passage.”

4 Warships in Sibutu, Balabac Straits

About a week later on July 25, Lorenzana revealed that the military monitored “4 instances” of Chinese warships passing Sibutu Strait since February.

According to Lorenzana, Chinese Ambassador Zhao Jianhua confirmed their warships traversed the strait but that it was smaller vessels, not the Liaoning. Lorenzana said China should have sought permission before entering the strait, even if it was innocent passage because the vessels were warships.

Zhao committed to tell the Chinese Navy to give notice before passing Philippine waters, Lorenzana said.

The defense chief pointed out that the warships must have turned their automatic identification systems off as they went undetected by Philippine radars. Lorenzana found this questionable, and the AFP called it "duplicity" and “deception."

Lorenzana said the 4 warships also passed Balabac Strait. This came after AFP Wescom said on August 6 that it monitored the passage of 4 Chinese warships in waters around Balabac Island, Palawan on June 17.

AFP Wescom said the warships ignored radio communications from Philippine troops in the area, except for one that identified its bow number (reportedly the Liaoning) accompanied by two vessels of its strike group.

5 more warships in Sibutu Strait

The AFP Western Mindanao Command (Westmincom) said on August 14 that they monitored 5 more Chinese warships that traversed Sibutu Strait in July and August.

AFP Westmincom Commander Lieutenant General Cirilito Sobejana said two ships passed the strait in July, followed by 3 in August. However, photos the unit released afterwards indicated 4 ships spotted on July 2 and one on August 4.

Sobejana said the ships were on a curved course, contrary to innocent passage that should have been a straight line or the shortest way through. The Chinese gray ships changed course and exited Philippine waters after Filipino naval boats and aircraft tried to approach them.

Action taken: Prompted by Lorenzana’s remarks, Locsin ordered the filing of a diplomatic protest against China over all incidents that involved warships passing through Philippine waters.

Lorenzana said he wanted Duterte to bring up the presence of Chinese warships in Philippine waters during the President’s visit to China later in August. Duterte himself insisted he would "invoke" the 2016 Hague ruling the Philippines won against China during his visit. (READ: Philippines loses to China 3 years after Hague ruling) – Rappler.com

MANILA, PHILIPPINES – One key figure involved in the trial of former Calauan, Laguna mayor Antonio Sanchez over the death of two University of the Philippines-Los Baños (UPLB) students holds a high position in the Duterte government: Salvador Panelo.

Sanchez was convicted for the rape-slay of then 21-year-old student Mary Eileen Sarmenta in 1993. He was also charged for the murder of Sarmenta’s boyfriend, then 19-year-old Allan Gomez.

Panelo was among Sanchez's defense lawyers in the trial.

The then-mayor, along with 6 others, was sentenced to 7 terms of reclusion perpetua. The revised penal code allows successive service of multiple sentences, with a maximum period of 40 years. 

Unless there are last-minute changes, after serving only 25 years, Sanchez is reportedly going to be released early, benefitting from the passage of Republic Act (RA) 10592, a law that provides for good conduct time allowance (GCTA). But Bureau of Corrections chief Nicanor Faeldon said that Sanchez may not be part of the first wave of inmates set for release because of his alleged misdemeanors. 

The law was signed in 2013 by former president Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III and provided for prospective application, but in June, the Supreme Court ruled that the law applies retroactively.

Particulars of the case

Panelo was present when Sanchez was subjected to an inquest on August 13, 1993.

According to a transcript cited by the Supreme Court, Panelo was the one who said that Sanchez waived his right to submit a counter-affidavit.

This became a matter of issue as Sanchez would later say the representation of Panelo was “unauthorized and inofficious.”

The SC, however, said that the mayor was present during this exchange and “never disowned Atty. Panelo as his counsel,” adding that “he remained quiet and let this counsel speak and argue on his behalf.”

Panelo has denied involvement in Sanchez’s impending release. On Thursday, August 22, he said that he withdrew from the case after the last day of hearing in 1995, adding that he no longer communicates with Sanchez.

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra said the former mayor is eligible for the reduced jail term. He also cleared Panelo of involvement in Sanchez’s release, adding that the matter of computation of GCTAs is “purely ministerial.”

Apart from the deaths of the students, Sanchez was also responsible for the murder of two others – a father and son. However, these have no bearing on the length of his statement nor the computation of his GCTA, because the revised penal code provides that maximum prison time shall not exceed 40 years.

“Good conduct subject to time allowances is the conduct exhibited during prison time, not conduct before imprisonment, no matter how reprehensible it may have been,” said Guevarra.

Some reports say, however, that Sanchez has had his share of incidents involving contraband while serving time. In 2006, the Philippine Daily Inquirer reported that Sanchez was charged with possession of drug paraphernalia, packets of shabu and marijuana, after he was caught by a prison guard. Sanchez said in an interview that he was “framed” for the drug charges.

In 2010, he was found to be in possession of prohibited items, including an airconditioning unit and flatscreen TV. He explained that he needed these equipment in his cell because he has skin asthma and various heart and kidney conditions.

Asked about these incidents, Panelo said that they will leave it up to the DOJ.

"Hindi namin turf 'yan, turf 'yan ng DOJ," he said on Thursday. "Kung ano 'yung batas, dapat sundin." (That's not our turf, that's DOJ's turft. The law should be followed.)

Who else has Panelo lawyered for?

The Presidential Spokesperson has handled several controversial cases in his years serving as legal counsel. (READ: Duterte's spokesman Panelo and his high-profile cases) 

• Panelo lawyered in 2013 for longtime Senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr, who faced a plunder charge from allegedly acquiring P224.5 million from the pork barrel scam linked to Janet Lim Napoles. He was acquitted by the Sandiganbayan in 2018 after 4 years of detention.
• Andal Ampatuan Jr in 2014 for the Maguindanao Massacre, the country’s worst case of election-related violence. He later withdrew as legal counsel as requested by his client due to “personal reasons.” 
• The Marcoses. A lawyer in one of their cases, Panelo was quoted as saying in a 2006 GMA News report that the Marcoses do not have any ill-gotten wealth. – Rappler.com

Claim: The website balitangupdates.blogspot.com claimed in an article that Senator Risa Hontiveros supposedly faces multiple cases filed by the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC).

The title of the blog post says, "Finally! Sinampahan ng patong-patong na kaso si Sen. Risa Hontiveros at posibleng makukulong (Finally! Multiple cases lodged against Senator Risa Hontiveros who could be possibly imprisoned)."

An edited News5 video was also embedded in the article which contained reports about the filing of cases. However, the content of the video does not support the description in the blog.

In the 8-minute video, two different clips were merged showing VACC lawyer Jacinto “Jing” Paras filing obstruction of justice, wiretapping, and kidnapping versus Hontiveros in the first part. The second half featured former justice secretary Vitaliano Aguirre who was complaining about the senator's alleged violation of the anti-wiretapping law. 

Below the video, the blog description says: “Kinasuhan ng patong-patong na kaso ng VACC si Risa Hontiveros dahil sa pagnanakaw sa pondo ng PhilHealth (VACC filed multiple cases against Risa Hontiveros for stealing PhilHealth funds)."

The claim was spotted on social media monitoring tool CrowdTangle. The blog has been shared by 38 Facebook pages accumulating total interactions of over 9,000. Some of the pages which shared the claim are Sara Duterte for President 2022 Elections, Duterte Para sa Bayan, and President Rody Duterte Facebook Army.

Rating: MISLEADING

The facts: The charges filed by the VACC against Hontiveros were not related to any PhilHealth issues but had to do with the Kian delos Santos case. (READ: Paras prepare slew of cases vs Hontiveros)

In September 2017, Paras accused the senator of kidnapping, failure to return a minor, and inducing a minor to abandon his home when she placed under her custody minor witnesses in the killing of Delos Santos. (READ: Jing Paras files kidnapping complaint vs Hontiveros for taking Kian witnesses)

On October 2, 2017, Aguirre also filed wiretapping raps against the senator. The complaint involving the anti-wiretapping law also came after Hontiveros publicized in a privilege speech a photo of Aguirre's purported exchange of text messages with a certain "Cong Jing," whom the senator believed to be Paras. The said photo was taken by a photojournalist during a Senate hearing on the Delos Santos case. (READ: Hontiveros liable for wiretapping, says VACC's Jing Paras)

This is the third time that Rappler has spotted a claim which linked Hontiveros with supposed PhilHealth controversies. In August 2018, the claim saying that the Commission on Audit (COA) supposedly ordered the senator to return the agency's P163.85 million in bonuses was proven to be "mixed."

Meanwhile, the website balitangupdates.blogspot.com has a disclaimer that says, “This site/blog shall not be responsible for any incorrect or inaccurate information, whether caused by website users or by any of the equipment or programming associated with or utilized in this website or by any technical or human error which may occur.” – Glenda Marie Castro/Rappler.com

Keep us aware of suspicious Facebook pages, groups, accounts, websites, articles, or photos in your network by contacting us at factcheck@rappler.com. Let us battle disinformation one Fact Check at a time.

MANILA, Philippines – Nabulabog ang Pilipinas ngayong linggo nang napabalitang maaaring makalaya ang convicted murderer-rapist na si Antonio Sanchez.

Si Sanchez, na mayor noon ng Calauan sa Laguna, ay hinatulan ng reclusion perpetua noong 1995 dahil sa paggahasa kay University of the Philippines-Los Baños student Eileen Sarmenta. Hinatulan din siya sa pagpatay kay Allan Gomez, isa ring estudyante ng UPLB na kasama noon ni Sarmenta.

Sa huling update mula sa Bureau of Corrections, nagbago ang tono ni Director General Nicanor Faeldon at sinabing baka magtagal pa ng ilang taon si Sanchez dahil sa ilang "bad behavior."

Ang dahilan ng posibleng paglaya ni Sanchez ay ang retroactive implementation ng Republic Act (RA) 10592, o guidelines kung paano bibilangin ang good conduct time allowance na maaaring maging basehan ng mas maikling pagkakakulong. 

Sa podcast na ito, susuriin ng justice reporter na si Lian Buan at researcher-writer na si Jodesz Gavilan ang iba't ibang panig sa kontrobersiyang ito: bakit maraming tutol sa plano at ano ang mga implikasyon nito sa batas. 

Ang Newsbreak: Beyond the Stories ay isang podcast series ng Rappler tungkol sa mahahalaga at malalaking isyu sa Pilipinas. – Rappler.com

Photo by Lito Borras/Rappler 

MANILA, Philippines – Government officials on Thursday, August 22, changed their tune on the possible early release of convicted murderer-rapist Antonio Sanchez. 

Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) chief Nicanor Faeldon said that he may not be among the thousands of inmates set for release soon, based on reported misdemeanors during his imprisonment. Even Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo said on Friday, August 23, that based on the letter and spirit of the law, Sanchez, former Calauan mayor, would be ineligible and disqualified from availing of the benefits of the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law.

Sanchez, who was convicted in 1995 for the deaths of University of the Philippines-Los Baños students Eileen Sarmenta and Allan Gomez in 1993, was initially announced as among those who would benefit from the GCTA law. (LISTEN: [PODCAST] Ang batas na puwedeng magpalaya sa rapist-murderer na si Antonio Sanchez) 

This triggered a major backlash from the public. But what is the law about?

What is the Good Conduct Time Allowance Law all about?

Republic Act No. 10592 or the GCTA law was signed in 2013 under then-president Benigno Aquino III. 

It amended several articles under the Revised Penal Code, including Article 97 which lays out the allowance for good conduct for persons deprived of liberty (PDLs). 

In a nutshell, the GCTA law allows for deduction of sentences of PDLs, depending on how well they abide by rules and regulations inside “any penal institution, rehabilitation, or detention center or any other local jail.” It essentially awards good behavior and recognizes rehabilitation.

The 2013 amendments to the Revised Penal Code, according to a factsheet by the Supreme Court, also expanded the application of the GCTA to the preventive suspension period, increased the number of days that may be credited, and allowed additional deductions, among others.  

Who is covered by the GCTA Law? 

The GCTA law initially was planned to prospectively cover convicted inmates. 

The Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the law, penned by then-justice secretary Leila de Lima and interior secretary Mar Roxas in 2014, provide for prospective application.  

Why prospective? According to Section 4 of the IRR, the rules provide “for new procedures and standards of behavior for the grant of good conduct time allowance…and require the creation of a Management, Screening and Evaluation Committee.”

In 2014, however, several National Bilibid Prison (NBP) inmates questioned this provision before the SC. Top human rights lawyers, including Rene Saguisag and others from the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), intervened in support of the petition. 

The provision, FLAG said at the time, “discriminates, without any reasonable basis, against those who would have been benefited from the retroactive application of the law.”

On June 2019, voting unanimously, the SC granted the petition, making the GCTA law retroactive. In his concurring opinion, SC Associate Justice Marvic Leonen said that the prospective provision of the 2014 IRR “implies that all inmates detained or convicted prior to its effectivity can no longer be rehabilitated for a successful reintegration into society, effectively trampling upon their dignity as human beings.”

According to Bureau of Corrections chief Nicanor Faeldon, 1,000 inmates may be set for mass release.

How about those convicted of heinous crimes? 

This has been the point of contention of arguments that arose after news broke about Sanchez’s possible early release. The former mayor committed gruesome and horrific acts that merited his conviction in relation to the deaths of the two UPLB students and a father and son in Laguna. 

There was a clash between the interpretations of Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra and former justice undersecretary Reynante Orceo who was part of the joint committee that drafted the law manual. Guevarra said heinous crimes should be excluded, while Orcelo said heinous crimes are still "technically" included. (READ: Can heinous crimes be excluded from good conduct time allowance law?) 

Senate President Tito Sotto is for amending the law, while Senator Franklin Drilon is against such move. (READ: Amid Sanchez news, senators split on amending reduced prison term law)

How is the GCTA computed? 

Section 3 of RA 10592 provides the guidelines for calculating the GCTA of inmates: 

• For the first two years of imprisonment: For each month of good behavior, 20 days will be deducted from the total sentence. If a convict behaved well each month, 480 days, or roughly one year and 3 months, will be deducted from his prison term.
• For the 3rd to 5th years: For each month of good behavior, 23 days will be deducted, or a total maximum deduction of 828 days, or roughly two years and 3 months, from the prison term.
• For the 6th to 10th years: 25 days for each month of good behavior or a total deduction of roughly 1,800 days, or roughly 4 years and 1 month, from the prison term.
• For the 11th and successive years: A month of good behavior equals a 30-day deduction. This means that a person serving 25 years who was well-behaved every month from his 11th to 25th years would get a prison term reduction of 14 years and 7 months.
• In addition, an inmate shall get 15 days additional reduction for each month of study, teaching, or mentoring service. 

This means that a PDL who has been in jail for 25 years and who showed good behavior during imprisonment, can have as much as 19 years deducted from his or her jail term. 

What can affect a PDL’s possible early release?

Misdemeanors can make or break a PDL’s chance of an early release based on the GCTA law.

According to the uniform manual on time allowances and service sentence released by the DOJ in  2017, the basis for disqualification from GCTA benefits is violation of any of the following prison rules:

1. Unauthorized selling or bartering with fellow PDL of items not classified as contraband
2. Unauthorized rendering of personal service to fellow PDL
3. Littering or failing to maintain cleanliness and orderliness in quarters and/or surroundings
   
4. Making frivolous or groundless complaints
5. Taking the cudgels for reporting complaints on behalf of other PDLs
6. Late in formation during PDL headcount without justifiable reason
7. Willful waste of food
8. Failure to report for work without sufficient justification
9. Failure to render assistance to an injured personnel or fellow PDL
10. Failure to assist in putting out fires inside the prison
    
11. Behaving improperly or acting boisterously during religious, social and other group functions
12. Swearing, cursing or using profane or defamatory language directed at other persons
13. Malingering or pretending to be sick to escape work assignment
14. Spreading rumors or malicious intrigues to besmirch the honor of any person
15. Failure to stand at attention and give due respect when confronted by or reporting to any prison of authority
    
16. Forcing fellow PDL to render personal service for him/her and/or to others
17. Exchanging uniforms or wearing clothes other than those issued for the purpose of circumventing jail rules
18. Loitering or being in an unauthorized place
19. Unauthorized use of communication equipment
20. Writing, defacing, or drawing on walls, floors or any furniture or equipment
21. Withholding information which may be inimical or prejudicial to prison security
22. Possession of lewd or pornographic literature, photographs, and sexual items
    
23. Absence from cell, brigade, place of work during headcount, or at any time without justifiable reason
24. Failure to turn over any implement/article issued after work detail
25. Making untruthful statements or lies in any official communication, transaction, or investigation
26. Keeping or concealing keys or locks of places in the prison which are off-limits to PDLs
27. Giving gifts, selling, or bartering with any prison authority
28. Keeping unauthorized amount of money, jewelry, cellular phones or other communications devices, luxurious properties and other items classified as contraband under the rules
    
29. Tattooing others or allowing him/her to be tattooed on any part of the body, or keeping paraphernalia to be used in tattooing
30. Forcibly taking or extorting money from fellow PDL or visitors
31. Punishing or inflicting injury or any harm upon him/herself or other PDL
32. Receiving, keeping, taking or drinking liquor and prohibited drugs and smoking
33. Making, improvising or keeping any kind of deadly weapon
34. Concealing or withholding information on plans of escapes
35. Unruly conduct and flagrant disregard of discipline and instructions
36. Escaping, attempting or planning to escape from the institution or from any guard
37. Helping, aiding, or abetting others to escape
    
38. Fighting, causing any disturbance or participating therein and/or agitating to cause such disturbance or riot
39. Indecent, immoral, or lascivious act
    
40. Willful disobedience to a lawful order issued by any prison authority
41. Assaulting any prison personnel
42. Damaging any government property or equipment
43. Participating in kangaroo court, an unauthorized or irregular court conducted with disregard for or perversion of legal procedures as mock court by the PDL in a prison;
44. Failing to inform the authorities concerned when afflicted with any communicable disease, such as tuberculosis, sexually-transmitted diseases, etc.
45. Engaging in gambling or any game of chance
46. Committing an act which is in violation of any law or ordinance
47. Committing an act prejudicial to good order and discipline
48. Any behavior which might lead to disorder or violence, or such other actions that may endanger the facility, the outside community or others
49. Any act analogous to the foregoing

Who are in charge of reviewing time allowance?

The same manual of the DOJ lays out the process, involving key employees.

The person deprived of liberty is screened by a time allowance supervisor at the end of each month. 

The Management, Screening and Evaluation Committee then reviews for appropriate action, including recommendation to prison authorities, of the grant of the time allowance. 

The prison authorities will then act on the recommendation – approve, disapprove, or return it. Decisions will be posted in various places inside the prison facility

Appeals can be made if there are errors or irregularities seen in the evaluation. – Rappler.com

NEGROS Oriental, Philippines – At least 21 people – 17 civilians and 4 policemen – were killed following a string of shooting incidents in this province in just 10 days, from July 18 to July 28, 2019.

Most of the victims were in their homes when armed men attacked them in the wee hours of the day.

The killings continued in the month of August, claiming at least 4 more lives. We have listed the killing incidents, who the victims were, where the killings took place, and the manner with which they were carried out.

JULY 18, 2019

The first casualties are the 4 police intelligence officers– Corporal Relebert Beronio, Patrolman Raffy Callao, Patrolman Ruel Cabellon, and Patrolman Marquino de Leon of the 704 Mobile Force Company of the Regional Mobile Force Battalion in Central Visayas – ambushed by the New People's Army (NPA) in Barangay Mabato in Ayungon town. The 4 victims, who were set up for the ambush, were supposed to meet their contact in the village, who turned out to have links with the rebels.

The chieftain of the village, Sunny Caldera, who was also tagged in the killings of the policemen, dies 5 days after the ambush. He allegedly drank pesticide. More than 20 suspects are tagged in the ambush-slay of the policemen, 8 of them already arrested and charged. 

JULY 23, 2019

Lawyer Anthony Trinidad from San Carlos City in Negros Occidental is killed in Guihulngan City. Aboard a sports utility vehicle with his wife and a client, they are waylaid by unknown assailants who shoot them at close range. The lawyer dies at the hospital, his wife sustains injuries, while the client is unscathed.

JULY 24, 2019

Rebel returnee Weny Alegre and Felimino Janayan, leader of a farmer's association, are gunned down by 4 unidentified men on two motorcycles in Zamboanguita town. The victims, also on board a motorcycle, were on their way home when they were attacked by the suspects and shot at close range.

In Dumaguete City, resident Yngwie Malmstien Fabugais who was watching television inside his home, is also shot several times by two unidentified men who enter his home. The police have yet to establish the motive for the killing. 

JULY 25, 2019

The bloodiest day, thus far, with 7 people killed in a span of 24 hours.

In Guihulngan City, Arthur Bayawa, a school principal and his sister, Ardale Bayawa, an official of the local Department of Education office, are shot dead inside their residence. Unidentified armed men barge into their home and kill them while they were asleep.

About 45 minutes later, Barangay Buenavista chief Romeo Alipan, is killed in Guihulngan, too, after his home is invaded by armed suspects. In Siaton town, Raklin Astorias of Barangay Maloh is shot to death by motorcycle-riding assailants. On board a motorcycle, the victim is attacked by the unidentified perpetrators.

In another shooting incident, Reden Eleuterio of Ayungon town is gunned down by unidentified men on a motorcycle. The victim dies on the spot. In Sta. Catalina town, a family is attacked by unidentified suspects, killing the father, Marlon Ocampo, and his one-year-old son Marjon. His wife and another child are wounded in the shooting.

JULY 26, 2019

Fedirico Sabejon of Siaton town is also killed in his home. The victim is shot dead by unidentified motorcycle-riding suspects. He is declared dead upon arrival at the hospital.

JULY 27, 2019

Armed men in the wee hours of the morning storm the home of Councilor Ramon Jalandoni in Barangay Panubigan in Canlaon City. They forcibly enter the house of the victim then shoot him with an unknown firearm. After a few minutes, Barangay Panubigan chief Ernesto Posadas in Canlaon is also killed after armed suspects attack his residence.

The suspects in the two Canlaon killings flee on a getaway vehicle. They also spray-paint the messages “Traidor sa NPA (Traitor to NPA)” and “Mabuhay ang NPA (Long live the NPA)” on the walls, fences, and vehicles of the victims. 

Over at Ayungon town, still on the same day, armed suspects barge into the home of former mayor Edsel Enardecido in Barangay Tampocon 1 and kill him and his cousin, Leo Enardecido. The former mayor is a cousin of the lawyer killed on July 23. 

JULY 28, 2019

Barangay Bucalan tanod Anaciancino Rosalita is shot dead at the Oval Public Market in Canlaon City, also in the same Panubigan village. While walking in the area, he is followed by an unidentified man who peppers him with bullets. He is the last victim for the month of July.

AUGUST 15, 2019

Joshua Partosa, a Grade 11 senior high school student, is gunned down by 4 assailants aboard two motorcycles in broad daylight in Sibulan town. Walking with his two siblings to school, the victim is shot by one of the suspects. He tries to escape but suspects catch up with him and shoot him again. He is also stabbed in the neck.

On the same day, a barangay kagawad and a former kagawad are gunned down in separate shooting incidents in neighboring Negros Occidental.

Former kagawad Fernando Toreno is shot dead by unidentified suspects on board a Ford Everest, in Barangay Kamaliskis in Salvador Benedicto. An hour later, 3 suspected assailants aboard a motorcycle are intercepted in neighboring San Carlos City. One of the suspects yields a caliber .45 pistol with magazine and ammunition.

After 4 hours, over at Moises Padilla town, Kagawad Raul Fat is shot to death by two unidentified men near the village hall in Barangay Macagahay. Two suspects approach the victim at the clinic then shoot him at close range. The two assailants, along with their 4 companions, who serve as lookout, flee the scene on foot.

AUGUST 18, 2019

Cristal Faith Jastiva of Bago City is shot to death by two assailants aboard a motorcycle while she is waiting for a pedicab at Magsaysay Avenue in Bacolod City, just a few meters from the Bacolod City Police Office headquarters. The victim had just come from the Metro Bacolod District Jail-Male Dormitory, which is adjacent to the city police office, to visit her partner. She is approached by the assailants who then shoot her at close range.

Meanwhile, Colonel Romeo Baleros, director of the Negros Occidental Police Provincial Office, has ordered his men to implement heightened security measures, particularly at the boundary of Negros Oriental and Negros Occidental.

At least 300 Special Action Force commandos were deployed to Negros Island to augment the local police units in their anti-criminality campaign. – Rappler.com

MANILA, Philippines – The retroactive good conduct time allowance (GCTA) law would have potentially granted freedom to 11,000 inmates in penal colonies around the country, but their release may be put on hold.

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra said on Monday, August 26, that the Department of Justice (DOJ) will suspend processing procedures owing to confusion that arose from the case of convicted murderer and rapist Antonio Sanchez.

Republic Act 10592, passed in 2013, could slash in half an inmate's sentence if there is sustained good behavior. When that law was made retroactive last July, it implied that inmates from the 1990s, or those who have served 20 to 25 years, could be walking out of jail.

The Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) pegged the number of beneficiaries at 11,000.

But public backlash on the inclusion of Sanchez on the list could jeopardize the case for many deserving inmates. It also exposed the loopholes of a young law.

How can it be improved?

1. Clarify provisions in the law pertaining to heinous crimes
2. Spell out disqualifying acts

Restorative justice

The law under the Aquino administration was passed to keep up with restorative justice – a belief by the former government that inmates can be reformed and deserve a second chance.

That's why it increased the period that can be slashed from their sentence on the basis of good conduct.

Sanchez, however, made the philosophy of restorative justice very hard to stomach. He perpetrated a horrific gang rape and double murder of college students Eileen Sarmenta and Allan Gomez, and the double murder of father and son Nelson and Rickson Peñalosa.

The Supreme Court called Sanchez an unthinking beast. Does he deserve a second chance?

Debates were sparked, and on Friday, August 23, Malacañang, which appeared to want to put its foot down, said Sanchez is not eligible for the good conduct benefits because he committed heinous crimes, and that heinous crimes are excluded from the law.

There are two problems with this statement which need to be addressed.

Problematic provisions

First, the law is not explicit about excluding heinous crimes from good conduct time allowance. What it is clear about only is this: those who committed heinous crimes cannot avail of a "credit of preventive imprisonment" or CPI. Preventive imprisonment refers to the pre-conviction jail time of persons charged with a non-bailable offense or the period a person stays in jail because he is unable to post bail. CPI refers to the time credit for preventive imprisonment.

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra made a case in support of Malacañang's position (that heinous crimes are excluded), but even he admitted that the last word lies with the Supreme Court or Congress.

Second, the only law that defines what heinous crimes are is Republic Act 7659, which previously imposed the death penalty. Under RA 7659, murder, parricide, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, among others, are considered heinous crimes.

Justice Undersecretary Markk Perete pointed out that RA 7659 was repealed only insofar as imposing the death penalty.

"(The repeal) did not touch the definition of what heinous crimes are. Neither did it repeal the enumeration. That is part of the work of the task force. To reconcile all these laws," Perete said.

The DOJ will start a review and hopes to finish it in 10 days. "We also don’t want the process unduly delayed with respect to those really entitled to the benefits of the law," Perete said.

Spell out disqualifying acts

Senator Leila de Lima, the justice secretary who supervised the drafting of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR), said she is not inclined to exclude heinous crimes from good conduct time allowance that could reduce sentences.

"Personally, you should not exclude heinous crimes because it might defeat the intent of the law, it would defeat the premise that everyone – even those who commit heinous crimes – can be reformed," De Lima told Rappler through a letter from her jail cell in Camp Crame.

Instead, De Lima suggested that the guidelines be revised so that there are certain bad behavior that can disqualify an inmate from ever availing of GCTA.

In an earlier interview, BuCor chief Nicanor Faeldon said even grave offenses such as stashing drugs will not disqualify an inmate from the GCTA – it will only cause him to lose points that could shorten his sentence.

In the uniform manual published by the DOJ and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), there is no mention of acts that can disqualify an inmate from GCTA. There are a total of 49 misdemeanors in the manual, including "willful waste of food," "spreading rumors or malicious intrigues," and even "failure to stand at attention and give due respect to authorities."

De Lima said all prison-based criminal offenses committed inside jail should be the disqualifying factors. In the case of Sanchez and the witnesses against De Lima – possessing and trading drugs inside prison.

"The moment you have that violation, you are disqualified immediately. Because if not, it will not really encourage good behavior, hindi naman puwede 'yung on and off good behavior. Good ka ngayon tapos bad ka ulit (it can't be an on and off good behavior like you're good now and tomorrow you're bad again),"  De Lima said.

Guevarra said it's a "good point."

"It's a matter of policy that our legislators may seriously consider," Guevarra said.

Amendments

Senate President Vicente Sotto III filed a resolution seeking a review of the law with the view of amending it so that those charged with heinous crimes can be excluded.

"Tutal ayaw n'yo ng death penalty, sige reclusion perpetua ka. You die in your cell," Sotto said in an interview with reporters. (Since you don't want death penalty, let's settle with reclusion perpetua. You die in your cell.)

But De Lima cautioned against talks of amendment. 

"If you open up the whole law, there's a chance it might be scrapped, or reduce the period of good conduct time allowance, and I will really fight that it should be retained," De Lima said.

Warning vs death penalty boost

In an earlier dispatch, De Lima speculated that the Sanchez issue was manufactured by the Duterte government to "garner support for death penalty."

Guevarra didn't respond, saying De Lima "is free to think what she wants to think."

De Lima said Sotto's proposal of an absolute life imprisonment needs further thought.

For now, De Lima is sticking with her earlier bill that seeks to impose 50-year imprisonment without parole for heinous crimes. She defined heinous crimes in her bill, including certain drug offenses.

In the short term, De Lima said the DOJ and BuCor can revise the guidelines, which is what Guevarra is set to do.

"We shall of course adopt our own reading of the law, unless we are restrained by a proper authority," the justice secretary said.

What Guevarra meant is that they will implement the law based on their own interpretation for now, but inmates affected – including Sanchez – can challenge that before the court.

This has opened up another legal and political saga, with thousands of inmates having no choice but to just wait a little more. – Rappler.com

Claim: A Facebook page We Support AFP posted several photos of supposed University of the Philippines (UP) students who were killed after joining the New People’s Army (NPA). 

The caption on the post said, "Ang listahan ng mga UP students na sumali sa NPA, at namatay." (List of UP students who joined the NPA and died) 

Three of the supposed students in the photos were identified as Benjaline Hernandez, Recca Noelle Monte, and Melissa Roxas. 

The photo of Hernandez showed details about the date she was supposedly killed, along with her affiliation. Next to her was a photo of Monte, which showed a message praising her for her contribution to the cause. 

Four of Roxas' pictures, on the other hand, were compared against each other to confirm her identity through the earrings she was wearing and a mole on her neck.

The claim was posted on March 17, 2018. Data from the social media monitoring tool CrowdTangle showed that it has since been shared for over 16,000 times with almost 3,000 reactions and 500 comments. It resurfaced weeks after a senior high school student went "missing" and was allegedly kidnapped by Anakbayan. (READ: Youth activist to military: Don’t use me to railroad your agenda)    

Rating: MISLEADING

The facts:Not all the individuals named were UP students or NPA members. Hernandez and Roxas are both human rights activists. Hernandez died in 2002, while Roxas is still alive. (READ: CHR reminds government: Activism is a right) 

The College Editors Guild of the Philippines (CEGP) told Rappler that Hernandez "never became a UP student" and "was not an NPA." 

Hernandez was a human rights activist killed on April 5, 2002 together with 3 other civilians during a fact-finding mission in a Lumad community in Arakan Valley, North Cotabato. The perpetrators were members of the Citizens Armed Force Geographical Unit (CAFGU) led by Master Sergeant Antonio Torilla. 

Hernandez was deputy secretary-general of Karapatan Southern Mindanao Region, vice-president of the College Editors Guild of the Philippines (CEGP), and was a campus journalist of Atenews, the official student publication of the Ateneo de Davao University. (READ: #TruthNeverDies: 'Killing a journalist does not kill the truth')

Karapatan, who keeps records on human rights activists, also dismissed the claim that Roxas is already dead. "Melissa Roxas is still alive today. She is not an NPA. She is a cultural worker," they said. 

Roxas did not study at UP as well. A Filipino-American activist affiliated with Bayan-USA, she was only visiting the Philippines to do community work. While she was in Tarlac province for an immersion program, armed men abducted and tortured her in a military camp for 6 days in May 2009. They tried to force her to admit she was an NPA member but she refused.  

Roxas identified these men as elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). In an ABS-CBN article, then-Bantay representative Jovito Palparan and Alliance for Nationalism and Democracy (ANAD) Representative Jun Alcover accused her of training in an NPA camp in Aurora province based on a video. Roxas’ camp dismissed the allegations. 

An investigative report was released on June 2009 “[clearing] the military from any involvement in her alleged abduction and torture.” She returned to the Philippines in 2014 to seek justice.

It is true that Monte was an engineering UP student who joined the NPA in 2002. She was killed in September 2014 during a military operation in Abra province. (READ: ‘Never be silenced’: U.P. community leads walkout vs campus militarization)

This is the 3rd time in August that a claim was fact-checked in relation to youth activism. (READ: FALSE: Palparan innocent over 2006 abduction of 2 missing UP students)

On August 13, a quote that was attributed to Kabataan party-list Representative Sarah Elago was rated false. (READ: FALSE: Sarah Elago’s ‘response’ to parents of student activists)

The page We Support AFP describes itself as a "Facebook page where you will find news, events, videos, and photos highlighting our Filipino Soldiers."

Karapatan is a non-governmental organization that promotes and protects human rights in the Philippines. – Glenda Marie Castro/ Rappler.com

Keep us aware of suspicious Facebook pages, groups, accounts, websites, articles, or photos in your network by contacting us at factcheck@rappler.com. Let us battle disinformation one Fact Check at a time. 

NEGROS ORIENTAL, Philippines – Just before midnight of July 27, policemen had just finished  patrolling in Canlaon City's major streets and were about to settle in for the night at the police station.

It was quiet in the city of plains and rolling hills, home to the highest peak in the region, Mount Kanlaon, which straddles the Negros provinces. Most of the residents were already in their homes as the local government had implemented a curfew, 9 pm for the minors and 10 pm for the adults.

Lieutenant Colonel Joeson Parallag, Canlaon City Police Station chief, said residents don’t step out of their homes during the curfew, except for some who make quick trips at the newly-opened, 24-hour convenience store near the public market.

It was already past midnight when the police received a call from the wife of Councilor Ramon Jalandoni that armed men had forcibly entered their home at Barangay Panubigan and shot her husband dead.

Six minutes later, before the police could head out to the scene, another shooting incident was reported in the residence of the Barangay Panubigan chief, which was more than 500 meters away from the councilor’s home.

The daughter of Barangay Captain Ernesto Posadas, also a farmer, alerted the police that several armed men stormed into their residence and shot her father dead.

Both victims were rushed to the Canlaon City District Hospital, but they didn’t make it. The attackers fled on getaway vehicles, leaving the cops behind.

Jalandoni and Posadas were among the 21 people killed in this province in 10 days, from July 18 to 28. Some of the victims were policemen, a lawyer, principal, and a one-year-old boy.

Parallag said they have no intelligence reports about the sightings of armed men in Canlaon, even with the curfew and police checkpoints in the city. They, too, were shocked, he said, adding it’s possible that armed suspects were monitoring their movement.

The police chief admitted they’re having difficulty in their investigation as no witnesses in both cases have come forward. He said they continue to appeal to witnesses to help them.

Police probers have yet to establish the motive of the killings, but based on what they've seen, they said they could be perpetrated by the New People’s Army (NPA) – a claim repeatedly denied by the rebel group.

Police evidence include the markings allegedly left by the perpetrators at the residences of the two victims – the suspects spray-painted “Traidor sa NPA (Traitor to NPA)” and “Mabuhay ang NPA (Long live the NPA)” on the walls, fences, and vehicles of the victims. 

“We want to be fair with our investigation and look at all the angles. But based on the evidence, it points to the NPA. But we’re not concluding,” Parallag stressed.

The police officer added they haven’t determined if the same group targeted the two victims, who both enjoy good standing in the community. Jalandoni and Posadas were described by their kin as very kind, with a penchant for helping others. They had no enemies. (READ: TIMELINE: Killings in Negros)

State-sponsored?

The national government has denied that it's to blame for the spate of killings, but the church and cause-oriented groups think otherwise. (READ: Death comes unprovoked upon Negros Island)

After all, the killings intensified after the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police launched an armed campaign in the Negros provinces that targetted communist rebels, criminals, and those involved in illegal drugs.

“Oplan Sauron,” which rolled out in December 2018, was a response of state forces to President Rodrigo Duterte’s Memorandum Order No. 32, signed on November 22, 2018. The order aimed to “suppress lawless violence” in the provinces in Negros, Samar, and Bicol “in order to prevent further loss of innocent lives.”

It marked the start of the spiral of violence in the Negros provinces.

The cities of Canlaon and Guihulngan, both located in the northern part of Negros Oriental, were particularly targetted for being "highly-affected" and "influenced" by communist rebels. 

But even the police acknowledge that the murders could not be attributed to one sector.

Brigadier General Debold Sinas, police chief of the Central Visayas based in nearby Cebu City, said the motives behind the July killings are different – they involve either a personal and political grudge, something related to their profession or business, or a land dispute.

He stressed that investigations are still ongoing, adding they couldn’t pin all the killings on the NPA. Sinas said he told police probers not to conclude their investigations immediately as they still have to probe into the subjects and their affiliations.

So far, investigations into the killings have found no links among the murders. But police have been saying that most of the victims in the recent wave of violence have been found to be sympathetic to the Left. Based on police reports, not all victims were farmers or were poor, as some came from prominent families and had good standing in their communities.

Of the 17 civilians killed, only 5 were confirmed to be perpetrated by the NPA, based on the testimonies of witnesses and the evidence gathered, the police said. These were the killings of the following: Barangay Buenavista chief Romeo Alipan in Guihulngan on July 25, a father and his one-year-old son in Sta Catalina town on the same day, a rebel returnee, and a leader of a farmer’s association in Zamboanguita town on July 24.

Alipan was known to be very active in the government's anti-insurgency campaign. Police said murder charges against more than 20 NPA members have been filed for his killing.

For his part, former Bayan Muna party-list representative Neri Colmenares, who traces his roots to La Castellana town in neighboring Negros Occidental, said he has the impression that the victims’ families are fearing for their lives. “I can’t blame them because there’s no assurance from the government. That’s why there’s never-ending fear.”

He was in Negros Island on August 7 for the prayer rallies that called for an end to the killings and which demanded justice for the victims.

Colmenares asserted that the killings were state-sponsored based on the pattern of evidence established by human rights lawyers.

CCTV footage

Outside the residence of Councilor Jalandoni, a closed-circuit television camera recorded footage of more than 30 armed suspects aboard 5 vehicles – two vans, two service utility vehicles, and a pick-up truck – who arrived at the Jalandoni compound close to midnight on July 26.

The suspects’ faces were not covered, but they had hoods and caps. They were also wearing vests and carrying long firearms.

After the armed men alighted from their vehicles, they casually headed to the councilor’s house which was beside the warehouse where the CCTV cameras were placed. Some suspects remained at the parking space to serve as lookout.

One of the suspects also aimed the flashlight at the CCTV camera around 12:02 am, just as the armed men entered the house, to blur the footage. Two minutes later, the armed suspects came out of the house and ran to their vehicles. They left the premises at around 12:06 am.

How the armed men were able to penetrate the city during curfew and at a time when the police were supposed to be on red alert raises questions, Colmenares said.

The suspects who wore vests were highly-organized, he said, as the footage showed “firepower and superiority.” This only “cements our allegation that it was state-sponsored,” Colmenares said, pointing out the “brazenness” of the attack.

Many of the killings, he added, were committed in broad daylight, in public places, and even near police stations. “This shows that the perpetrators were never afraid of being accosted by the police.”

“President Rodrigo Duterte and his government publicly vilified the victims or their organization before they were killed, showing motive and threat,” he said.

When asked about the footage, Parallag said he had not yet seen the CCTV video. Nor has he seen the report of the Scene of the Crime Operatives. He said they are still closely monitoring the cases.

Left-leaning targets

Over at Guihulngan City, a neighboring locality of Canlaon, 4 persons – a lawyer, a principal, an educator, and a barangay captain – were shot dead in just 3 days.

Lieutenant Colonel Bonifacio Tecson, Guihulngan City Police Station chief, said investigations are still ongoing and that police probers are looking at all angles and evidence. He said, however, the mode of killing was “NPA style.” 

He added that the area is a "mass base of the NPA" and added without elaborating, that the killings follow "the same style, the same pattern" of alleged NPA killings. In the past, NPAs did not use vehicles, however, and fled on foot after hitting their targets.

Local residents, according to Tecson, refuse to talk for fear of their lives, but he said he knows that rebels have hitmen in the area. "We also have witnesses who saw them," he claimed.

On July 23, lawyer Anthony Trinidad of San Carlos, Negros Occidental was on board a sports utility vehicle with his wife and a client when unidentified assailants shot them at close range. His family refused to speculate whether his killing was related to the killing of his cousin, former Ayungon mayor Edsel Enardecido, which came 4 days after Trinidad's ambush.

Tecson, meanwhile, said there are no persons of interest yet in the killing of Trinidad. While the gunman did not cover his face, there was no CCTV footage of the ambush.

He said they are eyeing motives related to Trinidad's profession and background – Trinidad had handled controversial cases of progressive groups and his father was a staunch critic of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

“His father and siblings are activists. You know activists, they are more sympathetic to the other side,” Tecson claimed. The elder Trinidad was a known martial law detainee in Guihulngan decades ago. His daughter is an incumbent councilor on her fourth term, while a son just completed two full 9-year terms.

“Our siblings won’t get elected if the people there don’t love us,” said Andrea Trinidad, Anthony's sister.

Asked if Anthony was targeted by the government due to his alleged links to the Left, Tecson said he could have been killed by the NPA because he gave up their cases and passed them on to others. 

Andrea Trinidad said her brother wasn’t a human rights lawyer, but confirmed that their father was an activist in the 1970s. “We’re now in 2019, what’s the connection? Our dad died a long time ago. Whatever my dad did, whatever his political leaning was, it has nothing to do with us,” she pointed out.

Their father is the lone connection to the Left. “Since we graduated and have our own professions, we’ve been living quiet lives,” Andrea said.

Other motives 

Trinidad also happened to be the lawyer of the Bayawa siblings – one, the principal of Guihulngan Science High School, and the other, his sister, who was chief of the curriculum implementation division of the local education department. Arthur and Ardale Bayawa were shot dead inside their home while they were asleep on July 25, just two days after Trinidad was killed.

A relative of the Bayawas said he saw 5 to 7 armed men stealthily enter the house next door before 1 am. He heard the suspects, whose faces were covered with masks, break down his relatives' front door. He also heard a vehicle speed away after the shooting.

The police arrived at the scene hours later at around 4 am.

They said the land dispute case appears to be the “most probable motive” for the Bayawa killings. This was disputed by both the Trinidad and Bayawa families who said Trinidad was not even a legal counsel of the Bayawas. The only thing that linked them was their being townmates.

Besides the land dispute, Tecson said they are also looking at alleged mismanagement of school funds as the motive for the killing of the principal and his sister.

What's clear at this point is that the killings in Negros could be perpetrated by different groups with different motives. While the police say some of them were carried out by NPAs, other evidence also suggest they may not be the sole perpetrators.

Lawyer Maria Sol Taule of human rights group Karapatan had earlier been reported as saying that the killings in Negros that involved civilians, rights defenders, activists, and farmers are “all state-sponsored.”

These killings, she added, are "part of the intensified campaign against alleged supporters of the revolutionary movement” – a campaign emboldened by Duterte's Memorandum Order No. 32. 

Why Negros?

Colmenares said Negros Island has always seen extremes in poverty and wealth. This has triggered a "history of struggle," he said. 

“Long before activism became a popular term, there’s already activism in the people of Negros which called the attention of the government and the military, especially those intolerant of dissent. This is the reason why there are many killings,” he explained.

After the series of killings in Negros Oriental, the Diocese of Dumaguete called for a dialogue with stakeholders and government officials to air out their views about the violence, which has created a culture of fear in the community, especially in the hinterlands.

“We acknowledged poverty, lack of economic security and education, rising number of dysfunctional families, weak spiritual foundation, corruption, lack of social and basic services especially for the poor in the upland villages, lack of development opportunities for the marginalized are among the causes of the problems we’re confronted with today,” said the manifest after the dialogue.

The 4 Catholic bishops in Negros Island, meanwhile, had issued a collegial pastoral statement urging an end to the violence that has been gripping the province.

They also ordered all parishes to toll the church bells at 8 every evening, until the killings stop.

Bishop Patricio Buzon of the Diocese of Bacolod said they will release a pastoral letter addressed to the people of Negros. It would hopefully "help us understand what is going on" and provide a roadmap to help "navigate in this situation" and resolve it, he added.

Negros Oriental Governor Roel Dagamo had formed an anti-insurgency task force to boost the local government’s campaign against communist rebels and prevent more killings. The task force had recommended that the age-old problems of agrarian reform and poor access to roads and infrastructure support facilities be addressed.

Will anyone be listening this time? – Rappler.com

MANILA, Philippines – The Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law has been at the center of controversy after initial news about the possible early release of convicted murderer-rapist Antonio Sanchez broke.

As government officials backtracked on cutting short the prison term of Sanchez, the debate has now focused on whether or not those convicted of heinous crimes should benefit from the GCTA. 

But how did the law come to be? What are the arguments for amendments? 

December 1930

The Revised Penal Code is signed into law. Chapter 2 lays out the specifics of "partial extinction of criminal liability," including conditional pardon, commutation of sentence, and good conduct allowances.

November 5, 2012 

The Senate passes Senate Bill No. 3064 which amends several articles of the Revised Penal Code.

January 18, 2013 

The House of Representatives passes House Bill 417 which amends Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code.

May 29, 2013

Then-president Benigno Aquino III signs Republic Act No. 10592 or the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law, which amended several articles under the Revised Penal Code, including Article 97, which lays out the allowance for good conduct for persons deprived of liberty (PDLs).

The GCTA law allows for a reduction of sentences of PDLs, depending on how well they abide by rules and regulations inside “any penal institution, rehabilitation, or detention center or any other local jail.” 

March 26, 2014  

The law’s Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) document is released. Penned by then-justice secretary Leila de Lima and interior secretary Mar Roxas, the IRR provides for a prospective application of the GCTA law.

Prospective application is seen in Section 4 of the IRR, which provides “for new procedures and standards of behavior for the grant of good conduct time allowance" and requires "the creation of a Management, Screening and Evaluation Committee.” 

The IRR takes effect on April 18 of the same year. 

June 18, 2014

At least 13 Bilibid inmates, represented by lawyer Michael Evangelista, file a petition for certiorari and prohibition against Roxas and De Lima, contesting the prospective application of the GCTA Law. 

The inmates include Venancio Roxas, Saturnino Paras, Edgardo Manuel, Heminildo Cruz, Allan Tejada, Roberto Marquez, Julito Mondejar, Armando Cabuang, Jonathan Crisanto, Edgar Echenique, Janmark Saracho, Josenel Alvaran, and Crisencio Neri Jr. 

July 14, 2014

Lawyer Rene Saguisag files a petition-in-intervention, saying that RA 10592’s legislative history shows no intent of being prospective in character. The High Court grants the leave to intervene. 

October 21, 2014

Three NBP inmates file another petition-in-intervention against the provision. Inmates William Montinola, Fortunato Visto, and Arsenio Cabanilla are represented by the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG). 

The provision, FLAG said at the time, “discriminates, without any reasonable basis, against those who would have been benefited from the retroactive application of the law.”

October 24, 2014 

Ten inmates at the NBP’s Maximum Security Compound file a petition for certiorari and prohibition  against the prospective application of the law, saying that the IRR was “issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.” 

June 25, 2019 

Voting unanimously, the Supreme Court grants the petition and makes the GCTA law retroactive.

In his concurring opinion, SC Associate Justice Marvic Leonen says that the prospective provision of the 2014 IRR “implies that all inmates detained or convicted prior to its effectivity can no longer be rehabilitated for a successful reintegration into society, effectively trampling upon their dignity as human beings.”

August 20, 2019

Reporters receive unverified information that convicted rapist and murderer Antonio Sanchez might soon be walking free. (READ: TIMELINE: DOJ backtracks on possible early release of Antonio Sanchez)

Sanchez was convicted in 1995 for the rape and murder of Eileen Sarmenta and murder of Allan Gomez – both University of the Philippines-Los Baños students – and in 1999, for the double murder of Nelson and Rickson Peñalosa. He has been in Bilibid prison for 25 years. 

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra tells reporters that Sanchez "may actually be released," and, in another instance, "is very likely for release.”

"That benefits lahat ng mga nakakulong na preso ngayon kaya isa sa mga magbe-benefit doon ay si Mayor Sanchez... pati siya mae-entitle duon sa computation ng Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA),” he says in a telephone conference.

(That benefits all the inmates, so one of the beneficiaries will be Mayor Sanchez. Even he will be entitled to the computation of the Good Conduct Time Allowance.) 

August 22, 2019 

Senate President Vicente Sotto III files Senate Resolution No. 107 which seeks a review of RA 10592 with a view of amending it. Senator Panfilo Lacson supports the plan to amend the law. (READ: Amid Sanchez news, senators split on amending reduced prison term law)

Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon, the justice secretary at the time Sanchez was convicted, dismisses the need for amendments, saying the law is already “good." He pins the blame on the Supreme Court which decided that a certain provision was unconstitutional.

After a massive public backlash, Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) Director General Nicanor Faeldon says that while Sanchez is qualified to avail of the GCTA, he might still have to stay in Bilibid for several more years because of misdemeanors he reportedly committed. (LISTEN: [PODCAST] Ang batas na puwedeng magpalaya sa rapist-murderer na si Antonio Sanchez) 

August 23, 2019 

Guevarra explains that the wording of Section 1 and Section 3 of the law makes only the inmates eligible for credit of preventive imprisonment (CPI, or the period of imprisonment prior to conviction) also eligible for GCTA (applicable only to post-conviction imprisonment).

To Guevarra, because those charged with heinous crimes are not eligible for CPI, then they are also not supposed to benefit from the GCTA. “It’s been a tough process of interpreting the wordings of a law that has certain ambiguities in its provisions. In the end, however, it is the spirit and the intention of the law that guided us in taking a position,” Guevarra says.

Presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo echoes Guevarra in a press conference, saying that “the inevitable conclusion is that all those convicted of a heinous crime, including Mr Antonio Sanchez, would be ineligible and disqualified from availing the benefits of the GCTA.” 

In a Rappler column, human rights lawyer and former SC spokesperson Ted Te says that there is a need for more objective criteria to determine good conduct. (READ: [OPINION | Deep Dive] What the GCTA law is and what it needs)

He writes that “while the GCTA is a good idea, the question of determining whether conduct falls under ‘good conduct’ to merit the GCTA may be arbitrary sans any objective standards to measure, assess, and rate such. 

Raymund Narag, an expert on criminal justice, writes in his column that “there are sufficient legal and procedural remedies to make sure that the law will not be abused by the rich and powerful.” (READ: [OPINION] Media sensationalism, bureaucratic ineptitude, the common tao's quest for justice)

August 24, 2019 

Guevarra says the DOJ is “considering seriously” the need to suspend the processing of the GCTA of convicts pending a review of guidelines for the early release of inmates.

Those who are deserving to be freed early, he adds, “really have to wait a little.” (READ: Beyond Sanchez: How to improve the Good Conduct Time Allowance law) 

August 25, 2019 

Guevarra says the DOJ hopes the Supreme Court or Congress will be able to clarify whether or not inmates who are convicted of heinous crimes can benefit from the GCTA law. 

“The DOJ will be glad to have this issue resolved with clarity and finality either by a congressional amendment of its own act or by an interpretation rendered by the Supreme Court in a proper case brought before it,” he says. 

August 26, 2019

Guevarra reiterates that the processing of early release of inmates under the good conduct time allowance (GCTA) law is briefly suspended.

"Very temporary lang, na i-suspend ang pag-process ng GCTAs para mabigyan ng pagkakataon ang DOJ, BuCor, ang BJMP (Bureau of Jail Management and Penology) na ma-review 'yung mga existing guidelines sa pagbibigay ng GCTAs, pati mga internal procedures," Guevarra tells DZBB. 

(It will be a very temporary suspension of the processing of GCTAs to give a chance to the DOJ, BuCor, and BJMP to review existing guidelines for granting GCTAs, including internal procedures.)

Drilon calls the suspension a "welcome development."

August 27, 2019 

AKO Bicol Representative Alfredo Garbin Jr files House Resolution No. 260 which seeks a congressional investigation to help clarify whether or not inmates who are convicted of heinous crimes should benefit from the GCTA law.

In his resolution, Garbin says that the law “is a good law” but that “there is a need to determine whether the criterion used in the implementing rules of the law is consistent with the very law it seeks to implement.” – with reports from Lian Buan/Rappler.com 

MANILA, Philippines – Senator Bong Go fumed at Albay 1st District Representative Edcel Lagman after the latter called the Malasakit Centers, Go's pet project when he was still the President's aide, a "partisan tool."

On Tuesday, August 27, Go spent about half of his 20-minute privilege speech getting back at the opposition congressman, particularly ridiculing the latter's looks. Malasakit Centers, he said, can't do anything to help repair Lagman's facial features. It was his first privilege speech as senator. 

"Wala rin pong legal basis ang pagtulong ng pag-repair sa inyong mukha. At paprangkahin ko na rin po kayo, your image is beyond repair. Hindi ikakaayos ng mukha 'nyo ang pagkontra ninyo sa interes ng mga Pilipino," Go said.

(There's no legal basis for helping you have your face fixed. I will be frank with you, your image is beyond repair. Standing against the interests of Filipinos won't fix your face. 

Malasakit Centers are one-stop shops for government services that played a role in increasing Go's awareness and visibility prior to his senatorial bid. 

The senator said Lagman should just create his own program and call it "Manhid (Numb) Center" or "Maramot (Selfish) Center" for having no consideration for Filipinos' needs.

Go accused Lagman of "not reviewing" his facts before talking, and said that Albay is among the top beneficiaries of Malasakit Center's services.

During the House of Representatives hearing on the proposed 2020 budget of Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office on August 23, Lagman questioned the funneling of funds to Malasakit Centers. He requested a thorough investigation into Malasakit Centers after receiving complaints that the one-stop shops are not functioning as they should.

Go said that improving the services of the Malasakit Centers is important that's why he has filed a bill institutionalizing it. The President even asked lawmakers to pass this measure during his 4th SONA.

'No partisan politics'

Go, who called Lagman "mema" or "may masabi lang" (speaking for the sake of talking), defended his pet project and said that it is not being used as a political tool.

"Hindi po pamumulitika ang pagbabalik sa mga kababayan natin ng pera na sa kanila naman talaga. Pera po ng tao 'yan. Sa kanila 'yan. Bakit natin ipagkakait ang kanilang buwis? .... Congressman Lagman, don't be anti-poor." Go said.

(Giving the taxpayers' money back is not politicking. That's the people's money. It's theirs anyway. Why would we deny them of that? Congressman Lagman, don't be anti-poor.)

Go accused Lagman of playing politics and showed an purported copy of a "referral letter" that allows a beneficiary to go directly to Lagman's house.

"Tingnan 'nyo yan oh. Iyan ang referral ng kanyang staff. Bakit pa kailangan ng referral na pumunta sa bahay niya, eh pera nila 'yan? …. Now, that is partisan politics. Never ako nagrequire ng ganyan," Go said.

(Look at that. That's the referral letter of his staff. Why do they need a referral to go to his house when that's their money? …. Now that is partisan politics. I never required such things.)

While Go did not allow for any questions after his speech, some senators expressed support for the program. Senator Risa Hontiveros, however, was not pleased and raised inter-parliamentary courtesy as Lagman is a sitting congressman.

Senate President Vicente Sotto III defended the former presidential aide, saying there was no "discourtesy" in Go's speech because it was Lagman who "fired first."

'Epal'

Go said he had never planned to place his name or face on promotional materials of the Malasakit Centers.

Posters and taurpaulins displayed during center openings belie Go's claim. The promotional materials bore Go's face, as the centers were launched leading up to the campaign period and during the campaign itself. (READ: [EDITORIAL] #AnimatED: Bantay-salakay ng Malasakit Center?)

President Rodrigo Duterte during the campaign credited Go for conceptualizing the Malasakit Centers.

Even the Commission on Elections asked the Department of Health to take down these posters after citizens complained that government funds were being used to promote Go’s senatorial candidacy.

"Hindi ito Bong Go Center. Nagkataon lang na 'brainchild' ko ang programang ito…Inuulit ko: hindi akin 'yan at hindi para sa akin 'yan," he said.

(This is not Bong Go Center. It just happened that the program is my brainchild. I repeat: it's not mine and it's not for me.) – Rappler.com

MANILA, Philippines – After trans woman Gretchen Custodio Diez was barred from using her preferred restroom in a Cubao mall last August 13, one wonders how gender equality has fared in the country over the years. 

The State's commitment to upholding the dignity and equality of all persons is enshrined in the 1987 Constitution and in several international covenants it is signatory to, such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

While the protection of the LGBTQ+ is promised on paper, the Philippines is no stranger to notorious cases of hate crimes and abuse against the community.

In its latest version, Senate Bill No. 689, entitled “Anti-Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Expression,” has not been passed in Congress after almost two decades.

It seeks to penalize discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity or expression (SOGIE), and is more commonly known as the anti-discrimination bill or the SOGIE equality bill.

Early movements 

Years before a nationwide measure to specifically protect LGBTQ+ members was filed by lawmakers, activists had begun taking to the streets. An initiative by young lesbian feminists called The Lesbian Contingent joined the International Women’s Day march in 1993. Australian socialist magazine Green Left Weeklyclaimed it was the first time a lesbian contingent marched in public.  

On June 26, 1994, the Progressive Organization of Gays in the Philippines (ProGay Philippines) and Metropolitan Community Church organized what came to be known as the first Pride March in the Philippines and in Asia.

Various LGBTQ+ organizations had begun budding in the country. For instance, the University of the Philippines' Babaylan claimed itself to be the country's oldest LGBTQ+ student organization in 1992.

History in Congress 

The earliest version of the SOGIE equality bill was filed in 2000 by the late senator Miriam Defensor Santiago and former Akbayan representative Loretta Rosales under the 11th Congress.

Refiled in the 14th Congress, the bills reached the committee level only. More senators would file similar bills in the 15th and 16th congresses to no avail. Other significant events are as follows:

2010-2012

Party list Ang Ladlad, which aimed to represent the LGBTQ+ community, files a petition to run in the 2010 national elections. An ABS-CBN report says the Commission on Elections (Comelec) denied the petition twice, citing “immorality” as basis. Its registration is eventually granted by the Supreme Court.

The Department of Education issues an order in May 2012 for the protection of children, including their sexual orientation and gender identity.

2013

On August 3, then-Commission on Human Rights (CHR) chair and pioneer SOGIE bill sponsor Loretta Ann Rosales says the CHR is working on a database on LGBTQ+ hate crimes to better their prosecution and investigation.

By the end of the same month, then-Laguna representative Sol Aragones introduces House Bill No. 2572, which would make LGBTQ+ hate crimes an aggravating circumstance for crimes against persons and chastity.

Shortly after, then-Albay representative Grex Lagman files a measure that would help same-sex couples acquire property together. Neither bill has been passed.

2014

Trans woman Jennifer Laude is murdered by a US Marine on October 11.  

Laude’s case catalyzes discussion and action toward advancing transgender rights.

In the local government scene, former mayor Herbert Bautista signs the gender-fair ordinance in Quezon City on November 28. Prohibited acts include discrimination against the LGBTQ+ in the workplace, educational institutions, and in delivery of goods, services, and accommodation.

The ordinance also includes affirmative acts, such as equal pay and sensitivity training in the workplace.

This would become the law that protected Gretchen Diez when she faced illegal detainment at a mall office in Quezon City.

2016

During the election campaign, then-senatorial candidate Manny Pacquiao calls same-sex couples “mas masahol pa sa hayop (worse than animals)” in a viral video interview by Bilang Pilipino. He has served two terms as a congressman by this time.

Bataan congressional candidate Geraldine Roman makes history as she takes her seat as the first-ever elected transgender woman in the House of Representatives in May.

The first Senate version of the anti-discrimination bill is filed on August 11 by Senator Risa Hontiveros, while its House counterpart remains pending.

2017

After 17 years since its first filing, the anti-discrimination bill is passed by the 17th Congress on its third and final reading on September 20 with a vote of 197-0 in the House of Representatives. 

2018

On August 8, CNN Philippines reports that 5 senators who include Hontiveros, Loren Legarda, Ralph Recto, Franklin Drilon, and Juan Miguel Zubiri express support for the bill. Opposing senators include Manny Pacquiao, Joel Villanueva, and Senate President Tito Sotto.

The CHR backs the passage of the bill through a position paper dated October 8.

2019

The anti-discrimination bill is due for passage by June before the 17th Congress adjourns. The bill languishes after suffering 3 years of interpellations.

On August 13, Gretchen Diez is blocked by a female janitress from using the women’s restroom. The janitress apologizes, but Diez vows to keep fighting for the rights of her fellow LGBTQ+ members. (READ: Gretchen Diez comes out)

After Hontiveros delivers a privilege speech on August 14, renewing her call for Congress to pass the SOGIE bill, Senators Imee Marcos and Bong Go throw their weight behind it.

Meanwhile, several senators express confusion. Senator Aquilino Pimentel III asks for a definition of trans woman, Senator Panfilo Lacson brings up the danger of voyeurism, and Senate President Tito Sotto wonders, “why that lengthy letters? Why not just Homo sapiens?”

Diez meets with President Rodrigo Duterte on August 19, and says he supports her and her push for the SOGIE bill.

Sotto strikes back with another remark about the bill having “no chance” of passing the Senate if it “transgresses on academic freedom, religious freedom, and women’s rights.” – Rappler.com

Veteran lawmaker Edcel Lagman was riled by the first privilege speech of neophyte Senator Bong Go.

Instead of enumerating his priorities and his legislative agenda, as expected of any first-time senator,  Go devoted his maiden privilege speech to lambasting the 77-year-old opposition congressman. He even called the veteran lawmaker names and told him his face was beyond repair – all because he had raised questions about Go's pet project, the Malasakit Centers.

In his speech, Go said, "Wala rin pong legal basis ang pagtulong ng pag-repair sa inyong mukha. At paprangkahin ko na rin po kayo, your image is beyond repair. Hindi ikakaayos ng mukha 'nyo ang pagkontra ninyo sa interes ng mga Pilipino." 

(There's no legal basis for helping you have your face fixed. I will be frank with you, your image is beyond repair. Standing against the interests of Filipinos won't fix your face.)

In a statement issued Wednesday, August 28, the Albay 1st District Representative hit Go's "ballistic reaction" to the questions he had raised to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) regarding the Malasakit Centers. 

"Neophyte Senator Bong Go, instead of defining his legislative agenda, which is usually the subject of a maiden privilege speech, squandered his chance of citing the causes he will promote and defend during his term by personally attacking me for being critical of the Malasakit Centers even as he refused to be interpellated," Lagman said.

He said Go's reaction was "unprovoked" as he did not even mention the senator's name when he asked the PCSO during its budget briefing "to provide the legal basis for its funding the Malasakit Centers and for PCSO to investigate their effectiveness."

Lagman took offense at Go's claims that he is anti-poor and "mema" (short for may masabi lang), or someone who just blurts out something for the sake of talking – just because the Albay congressman wanted clarity on the Malasakit Centers, which he believed was being used as a "partisan tool."

“Paucity of merit and reason cannot be concealed by unparliamentary language and malevolent innuendoes,” Lagman said.

The Malasakit Centers are a pet project of Go, who was the longtime aide of President Rodrigo Duterte before he ran and won for senator in the May polls. The centers are part of the Individual Medical Assistance Program charity program which received P8.68 billion in 2018 from PCSO’s net charity fund.

In the lead-up to the 2019 campaign period, Malasakit Centers displayed large posters of the face of Go, who was present whenever a new center was opened across the country. The Comelec later ordered the Department of Health (DOH) to take down these posters after citizens complained that government funds were being used to promote Go’s senatorial candidacy.

In his speech on Tuesday, August 27, Go accused Lagman of "not reviewing" his facts before talking, and said that Albay is among the top beneficiaries of the centers' services. 

On the contrary, Lagman said on Wednesday: "The allegations against me by Go are completely unfounded and contrived....I always talk sense and my statements are well studied and anchored on facts."

Lagman cited complaints he received from his constituents that representatives of PCSO, the DOH, and the Department of Social Welfare and Development did not regularly man the Malasakit Centers allegedly for lack of personnel.

“Contrary to the repeated pronouncements of Go that the Malasakit Centers are ‘one-stop shops’  for post-confinement financial assistance, they are mere outlets for referral to the main local offices of the participating agencies where the beneficiaries have to just the same queue in long lines because the representatives in the centers do not have the authority nor discretion to make assessments either for partial or full payment of hospital bill balances,” said Lagman. 

He maintained that he had "always been a pro-poor legislator long before the advent of the Malasakit Centers.

"My legislative performance and accomplishments speak of my advocacies for the disadvantaged and marginalized," the congressman added.

Lagman also disputed Go's claim that his constituents were required to go to his house to get referrrals for financial assistance. "Ever since they invariably approach my staff in my congressional and district offices," he said.– Rappler.com