Quantcast
Channel: Newsbreak
Viewing all 8648 articles
Browse latest View live

Newsbreak Chats: The GCTA law, Cardema, Bikoy, and how laws can be twisted

$
0
0

Bookmark this page to watch and join the discussion live on Thursday, August 29, at 4 pm!

MANILA, Philippines – Laws that were twisted or whose loopholes were abused in the past few months take center stage in Newsbreak Chat discussions on Thursday, August 29.

The Newsbreak team sits down to discuss and analyze the events that dominated the news cycle in the past month, including the inciting to sedition charge against the opposition, the long battle between Ronald Cardema and the Commission on Elections (Comelec), and the good conduct time allowance law.

August saw the filing of inciting to sedition charges against 36 people, including Vice President Leni Robredo, members of the opposition, and Catholic church figures, on the basis of an affidavit by Peter Joemel Advincula over the viral Bikoy videos. (READ: Bikoy vs Bikoy: The biggest flip-flops of the government's star witness

Former National Youth commissioner and frustrated politician Ronald Cardema still insists that he should be in the House of Representatives – to the disgust of Comelec Commissioner Rowena Guanzon whom he accused of bribery. (READ: Stretching the rules: Duterte Youth's bid for Congress

The month ends with controversy over the supposed early release of convicted murderer-rapist Antonio Sanchez. As the public backlash put a stop on this plan, the discussions now focus on whether or not there is a need to revisit good conduct time allowance law

Are laws in the Philippines taken seriously or are they being twisted to suit a personal agenda? What safeguards should be undertaken? Watch the discussion on Thursday, August 29, at 4 pm! – Rappler.com

MORE ON 'NEWSBREAK CHATS' IN 2019

MORE ON 'NEWSBREAK CHATS' IN 2018


IN CHARTS: 2 years on, PH courts have 30% compliance with continuous trial

$
0
0

PH COURTS. A woman looks at the bulletin board of one of the busiest court houses in Metro Manila, the Manila Regional Trial Court. Photo by Lian Buan/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – Two years after the rule became effective, Philippine courts are 30.53% compliant with the continuous trial rule that mandates trial proper to last for only 6 months or 180 days.

This latest data as of June 30, 2019, was provided by the Supreme Court to the House committee on appropriations when it defended its P38.71-billion budget for 2020 on Wednesday, August 28.

According to the same data, before the rules on continuous trial, only 2.13% of criminal cases on average completed trial in 180 days. The 30% compliance is an impressive improvement.

The revised rules on continuous trial became effective in 2017. It requires that arraignment and pre-trial be done within 10 days for detainees, and within 30 days for non-detainees. Trial proper should last only for 180 days, while the judgment should be promulgated within 90 days of terminating the trial.

The compliance rate is the average for all lower courts. Family courts were the best performing, with 63.70% compliance with the 180-day trial period. Metropolitan trial courts were the worst performers, with a compliance rate of only 22.19%.

The same data showed that for cases filed after continuous trial became effective, 64.3% were resolved within 100 days or below. But for cases which were filed before the continuous trial rules, only 2.7% were resolved within 100 days.

This spells more adjustments for the judiciary as a whole, as it endeavors to provide faster and more efficient administration of justice to Filipinos.



However, unfilled vacancies remain a problem. As of August 27, there were still 742 vacancies for judge positions across courts nationwide. There were 11,833 unfilled positions for lower court personnel as of June 30.



Drug cases

The deluge of drug cases under the Duterte administration has forced the judiciary to make adjustments. The Supreme Court has had to assign more drug courts to cater to drug cases which have overtaken the country's courts since 2017.

Because of continuous trial, 40% of the drug cases which were filed after the continuous trial rules took effect were resolved within 75 days. But for the drug cases filed before continuous trial, none or 0% were resolved within 75 days.

At least 23% of drug cases filed after the effectivity of continuous trial still lagged in the docket, or for 100 to 200 days.

For drug cases which were filed before continuous trial but which proceeded during its effectivity, most were still resolved beyond 500 days, indicating difficulty in catching up with procedures.

As seen in the chart, there's not much difference in the length of time it takes to resolve drug cases decided before continuous trial, and drug cases filed before continuous trial but which proceeded during its effectivity.



As of December 31, 2018, first-level courts (municipal and metropolitan courts) had 160,153 pending cases, while second-level courts (regional trial courts) had 546,182 pending cases.

Budget

The judiciary wanted P55.66 billion for 2020, but the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) approved only P38.71 billion.

Instead of interpellating judiciary officials on their budget, lawmakers during Wednesday's budget hearing asked the DBM why it slashed almost P17 billion from the original request. They were told that recurring expenses were removed.

The budget hearing lasted for less than 30 minutes only, with Misamis Occidental 2nd District Representative Henry Oaminal saying the swift approval is a "courtesy" to the justices.

Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta, a chief justice applicant, attended the budget hearing with Associate Justice Alexander Gesmundo and Court Administrator Midas Marquez.

Cagayan de Oro City 2nd District Representative Rufus Rodriguez backed possible increases in the budget when it reaches plenary debates.

For now, the House committee has approved the judiciary's P38.71-billion budget. 

Talking to reporters after the hearing, Supreme Court Spokesperson Brian Keith Hosaka said the budget also aims to augment security assistance to judges and justices. – Rappler.com

When Duterte meets with Xi: What West PH Sea deals were reached in past talks?

$
0
0

AT A GLANCE

  • Filipino access to Panatag Shoal's outer area, continued supply missions to Ayungin Shoal without Chinese interference, and China's quiet acquiescence to Pag-asa Island refurbishments were all reached during Duterte-Xi meetings
  • Despite such arrangements, China continues to push the envelope with its behavior in the West Philippine Sea
  • Duterte mentioned the Hague ruling to Xi before, to no avail
  • Xi supposedly threatened Duterte with "war" but sources privy to the meeting say the word he used translates more closely to "trouble"

MANILA, Philippines – It is, perhaps, not a little ironic that Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte and Chinese President Xi Jinping will be holding their August 29 bilateral meeting at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse, a lush lakeside resort.

When Duterte raises the 2016 Hague ruling and Filipino fishing rights in the West Philippine Sea, he will be doing so in what was once a favorite fishing spot of Chinese emperors.

The Diaoyutai State Guesthouse, now used to host visiting foreign dignitaries, was once a royal fishing pavilion.

Duterte's avowed plan to mention the Hague ruling before Xi is a big deal for Filipinos because, thus far, Duterte had placed the ruling in the back burner, despite it being an astounding victory against China’s claim to the West Philippine Sea.

The ruling affirmed Philippine rights over the area and slammed China’s reclamation activities and aggression towards Filipino fishermen.

But because Duterte wanted to get on Beijing’s good side, he said he would assert the ruling another time. That time has come, said Malacañang.

Duterte built hype around his plan. He had his spokesman announce it. He himself mentioned it thrice in public speeches, making it sound as if raising the landmark ruling was the main purpose of his China trip. 

Chinese officials have tried to convince their Filipino counterparts to avoid discussion on the ruling but were told no one can change Duterte's mind.

The impact of merely mentioning the ruling is questionable, as maritime law experts have said. China may just ignore it. What might make more of a difference in the South China Sea situation and Philippine-China relations are the possible talks on joint oil and gas exploration that are likely to happen during the visit.

The West Philippine Sea had been dealt with in previous Duterte-Xi bilateral meetings.

In the most critical ones, the two reached various “consensus” or a modus vivendi on key West Philippine Sea features, like Panatag Shoal (Scarborough Shoal), Pag-asa Island (Thitu Island), and Ayungin Shoal (Second Thomas Shoal), not captured in formal agreements announced to the public.

Some of these were discussed by Philippine Ambassador to China Chito Sta Romana in an interview with reporters last April 24.

A diplomatic source privy to such deals said they are more like “provisional arrangements of a practical nature” – temporary arrangements not necessarily formalized in communiques or revealed to the public officially, but are recorded in transcripts of high-level meetings.

“Provisional agreements of a practical nature” are recognized in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Article 74 of UNCLOS says states may enter into such deals “in a spirit of understanding and cooperation” during a “transitional period” before a final agreement is reached. These arrangements “shall be without prejudice to the final delimitation.”

Rappler compiles the most important compromises reached between Xi and Duterte on the West Philippine Sea, based on the President’s public statements confirmed by two sources or information from diplomatic sources aware of the discussions during these meetings.

October 2016 Duterte state visit to China

  • Agreement on access to Panatag Shoal, no reclamation on Panatag Shoal, no blocking of supplies to Ayungin Shoal, “fishing deal”

As Duterte prepared to embark on his first visit to China as president, he faced mounting pressure to secure Filipino fishermen’s access to Panatag Shoal, a triangle-shaped rock in the West Philippine Sea that yields plenty of fish.

At the time, there had been reports of Chinese Coast Guard blocking Filipino fishermen from the area. Duterte promised to “demand” access from China. 

After the visit, Duterte refused to say what exactly transpired during his meeting with Xi but teased of upcoming “developments.” Days after, his spokesmen and security officials announced that Filipino fishermen were no longer being intercepted by Chinese Coast Guard, touting this as an accomplishment of Duterte’s trip.

Today, Duterte talks freely about how he secured a commitment from Xi to let Filipino fishermen fish in the shoal freely. Chinese Ambassador Zhao Jianhua has also said China has given such access to Filipinos “out of good will.” Sources privy to the meeting confirmed such an arrangement.

FIRST VISIT. President Rodrigo Duterte and President Xi Jinping hold their October 2016 bilateral meeting in the imposing Great Hall of the People in Beijing. Malacañang file photo


The consensus reached by both leaders was for both sides to allow their fishermen to fish outside the shoal’s lagoon but not inside the lagoon, where fish lay their eggs. Both countries promised to treat the lagoon as a marine reserve area.

This is not at odds with the Hague ruling which declared Panatag Shoal as a common fishing ground for both Chinese and Filipino fishermen. But the Philippine Constitution considers Panatag as part of the country’s EEZ since it lies within 200 nautical miles from the Philippine coastline. 

Despite this 2016 agreement, Filipino fishermen still reported harassment incidents, including the taking of their catch by the Chinese Coast Guard. Rather than condemn this as a violation of his deal with Xi, Duterte wrote it off as a practice of “barter trade” and not outright seizure. 

It was also during the October 2016 bilateral meeting when China promised not to do any reclamation in Panatag. But does China urgently need to reclaim Panatag when it continues to fortify its existing artificial islands in the West Philippine Sea? 

Another major arrangement reached was a commitment from China not to block the Philippine military’s delivery of food and humanitarian supplies to the BRP Sierra Madre, a World War II warship stranded in Ayungin Shoal. The rusting vessel is the Philippines’ only outpost in the remote area and is a lonely home to a tiny unit of marines.  

PHILIPPINES' GUARDIAN. An aerial view shows the BRP Sierra Madre that has been grounded since 1999 to assert the Philippines' sovereignty over Ayungin Shoal. File photo by Jay Directo/Agence France-Presse

 

Any interdiction of supplies would be a major issue. It was cause for worry then for Philippine officials when a Chinese Navy chopper harassed a Philippine Navy rubber boat en route to Ayungin Shoal for a resupply mission in May 2018.

More recently, the Philippine military reported the presence of a Chinese Coast Guard ship near Ayungin Shoal for 3 weeks starting August 1. The ship did not interfere with BRP Sierra Madre operations but appeared to be monitoring its activities. 

China, however, draws the line when it comes to delivery of construction supplies to Ayungin Shoal. Fearing Philippine construction of a lighthouse or similar structure, Chinese officials have said they will react to the sending of these types of materials.

The“fishing deal” which Duterte has recently been mentioning – and which has prompted an uproar in the aftermath of the ramming of Filipino boat Gem-Ver by a Chinese vessel – was also discussed during the 2016 meeting. 

That arrangement pertained specifically to waters in the Philippine EEZ and the waters beyond it but which are part of the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) that China claims jurisdiction over. Both sides promised not to drive out or arrest the other’s fishermen from these waters.

May 2017 bilateral meeting on the sidelines of Belt and Road Forum

  • Duterte brings up oil, Xi mentions “trouble”

 It was during this May 2017 meeting when Duterte told Xi of his intention to exploit oil and gas resources in the West Philippine Sea. In a press conference, Duterte claimed Xi’s response was to threaten him with “war.” 

“Mr Xi Jinping, I would insist that, that is ours and I will drill oil there,” Duterte claims he told Xi. 

Xi supposedly replied: “We would want to maintain the present warm relationship. But if you force the issue, we will go to war.”

In reality, Xi never mentioned the word “war,” according to sources privy to the meeting. The word he did use translates more closely to “trouble.” Diplomats Rappler spoke with said a Chinese leader would never mention such a provocative term as “war” in a bilateral meeting. 

Duterte would later on use this incident to claim he can’t assert the Hague ruling, as critics have called on him to do, because it would goad China into a war that the Philippines would surely lose. 

Lawmakers and maritime law experts have sought to punch holes in this doomsday scenario and dismissed it as just another attempt by Duterte to justify his shelving of the Hague ruling.

April 2019 bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the Belt and Road Forum

  • Duterte “reminds” Xi of the Hague ruling, brings up “swarming” of Chinese ships around Pag-asa Island

This Xi-Duterte meeting was yet another meeting shaped by a recent West Philippine Sea flashpoint. Right before it took place, the military reported the“swarming” of Chinese vessels around Pag-asa Island, the largest Philippine-occupied island in the Kalayaan Island Group and home to roughly 100 civilians.

Duterte publicly admitted discussing the “swarming” report. His tactic was to assure China that he would never allow US troops to set foot on the island and so China had no need to surround the island.

"So why are you surrounding my island with so many ships? You’re wasting your gasoline,” Duterte claims he told Xi. 

A source privy to the discussions of that meeting confirmed Duterte made these remarks. What’s more, the Chinese were not prepared for them.

APRIL MEETING. Xi and Duterte, along with their ministers and Cabinet members, hold a bilateral meeting at the Great Hall of the People on April 25, 2019. Malacañang photo


The President did something else offscript: he mentioned the Hague ruling. He said he was merely “reminding” Xi of the ruling but that he would raise it formally another time. 

Panelo confirmed this to reporters in Beijing on Wednesday, August 28.

"In April, he raised it impliedly, as if laying the predicate. Maybe he really intended, even back then, to bring it up," said Panelo.

A source said this was not in the agreed-upon talking points. Surprised Chinese staff scrambled to piece together a response for Xi during his turn to speak.

In these bilateral meetings, one leader gives his remarks first without any interjection from the other leader. The other leader instead responds to issues raised during his turn on the microphone.

Duterte always speaks in English while Xi speaks in Chinese which is then translated into English by an interpreter. Even in restricted meetings, Duterte and Xi always bring along translators. Unlike Duterte, however, Xi always reads his remarks and never goes offscript.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi managed to hand Xi the quickly-written response to Duterte’s extemporaneous inputs on time. The response was to reiterate China’s position: that it does not recognize the Hague ruling. 

Which begs the question – will Xi simply react the same way when Duterte again brings up the Hague ruling on August 29? How will Duterte make this next meeting more fruitful than the last? 

It was also during bilateral talks when Duterte and Xi agreed on another Pag-asa Island policy. It was explained to Philippine officials that China is “opposed in principle” to the Philippines improving facilities and building lighthouses on features already occupied by the Philippines, but that it would not block the supply ships bringing in construction materials.

This explains why the Philippines has built 5 lighthouses in the KIG in 2018 and plans to build 5 more in 2019, as announced by National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon Jr. Meanwhile, despite delays, the military continues building a beaching ramp to kickstart repairs on Pag-asa's runway.

The Sandy Cay agreement

One important agreement not reached during a Duterte-Xi meeting was a “consensus” on Sandy Cay. 

Sandy Cay is a string of sandbars only 3 nautical miles away from Pag-asa Island. It only became permanently visible above the water surface in 2017 when deposits from China’s illegal dredging in nearby Subi Reef elevated it.

Sometime in August 2017, the Philippine military undertook a plan to build a “shelter” on Sandy Cay. The plan was proposed during a National Task Force on the West Philippine Sea meeting and approved by Duterte. 

China somehow got wind of the plan and sent an armada of Chinese Coast Guard, Navy, and maritime militia as a show of force. Sources said there would have been a high possibility of an armed confrontation were it not for then-Philippine foreign secretary Alan Peter Cayetano and his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi. The two ministers were said to be on the phone all day to sort out the mess. 

In the end, Duterte called off the plan, saying the two countries agreed not to build any structure on new features.

“Why should I defend a sandbar and kill the Filipinos because of a sandbar?” Duterte said afterwards.

The agreement was to keep Sandy Cay unoccupied. The Philippines would take down the shelters and China promised not to occupy the sandbar.

Esperon likes to say the Philippines never lost an island to China during the Duterte presidency. But was Duterte’s concession to China a loss of Sandy Cay? 

There was, after all, a very good reason to establish Philippine presence in Sandy Cay. With its new elevation, Sandy Cay now generates its own 12-nautical-mile territorial waters. Subi Reef, an artificial island already heavily fortified by China, lies within those waters. So if China controls Sandy Cay, it could “legitimize” its claim over Subi Reef, according to Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, a vocal critic of Duterte’s approach to China.

Not only that, because Sandy Cay is so close to Pag-asa Island, Chinese control of it could also take away a third of Pag-asa’s own territorial waters. 

China wants to apply the Sandy Cay rule to Ayungin Shoal, but the Philippine side is resisting.


With Xi and Duterte able to hash out provisional arrangements on the West Philippine Sea during their bilateral meetings, can we expect another such deal during their upcoming dialogue?

Recent events show that even these agreements have not prevented Chinese harassment. The Pag-asa Island swarming, persistent monitoring of Chinese Coast Guard in Ayungin Shoal, and Chinese backlash over Philippine plans in Sandy Cay show the Asian power is willing to push the envelope. 

The military has also reported cases of Chinese warships passing through Philippine territorial waters over the past few weeks and months without the required notification to the government.

Looming over the meeting is the still-unresolved June ramming by a Chinese vessel of a Filipino fishing boat and the abandonment of its crew to the elements. The Chinese government has sent an apology from the boat's owner but no punishment has so far been reported leveled against the Chinese crew, even after the Philippine government found them guilty of violating maritime laws.

Closely tied with Duterte’s plan to raise the Hague ruling and West Philippine Sea flashpoints is his promise to extract economic gains from China.

This is why, apart from the bilateral meeting, the signing of deals and talks on joint oil and gas exploration are included in the visit.

The clock is ticking for Duterte, now on the last half of his presidency, to show Filipinos his China gamble was worth it. – Rappler.com

FALSE: Leni Robredo spent over P200M for her LA trip

$
0
0

Claim: A reporter “exposed” Vice President Leni Robredo’s expenses in her Los Angeles trip, saying it amounted to over P287.7 million. The claim appeared in an article posted by newsmediaph.online on July 25, 2019.

Reporter Pol Pinoy estimated the cost of Robredo’s one trip to Los Angeles as a response to a Rappler article published in June 2017 about President Rodrigo Duterte’s P386.2 million worth of expenses spent on his foreign trips. The post claimed that Pinoy “resorted to true-to-life estimates” because the Office of the Vice President denied their requests for actual data despite the Freedom of Information Act.

Rappler spotted the article via Claim Check, Facebook’s tool that flags suspicious posts shared across the platform for fact checking. It also flagged the same content from another website pilipinews.xyz. The pilipinews.xyz link is now inaccessible.

Three other websites reposted the same article in July 2019. These are newsboxesph.blogspot.com, balitangupdates.blogspot.com, and pinastrends.xyz. The claims from these websites were shared in 42 Facebook groups and pages that had a combined follower count of 1.7 million. It generated over 791 engagements, according to CrowdTangle.

Rating: FALSE

The facts: The source of the article that appeared in the mentioned websites is Adobo Chronicles, a satirical site.

The claim was rehashed and pertained to Robredo’s trip to Los Angeles for a fundraiser of the Filipino American Symphony Orchestra (FASO) in June 2017. Adobo Chronicles originally posted their article in June 2017.

While Adobo Chronicles has a disclaimer on its website saying that their content is fictitious and satirical, the other websites that carried their story word-for-word and reposted it two years later did not explain this and spread it as if it was new and real.

The Commission on Audit said in its annual audit report that traveling expenses of the Office of the Vice President for CY 2017 amounted to P27.4 million – P26.4 million for local and P953,550 for foreign trips. Rappler asked the OVP for the total number of foreign trips the Vice President took in 2017, but they failed to provide the information after several follow-ups.

COA also flagged the OVP for liquidation issues involving its local travels in 2017. – 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.

Ex-adviser Michael Yang hosts private lunch for Duterte in China

$
0
0

ENJOYS ACCESS. President Rodrigo Duterte and adviser Michael Yang sit beside each other in this file photo. Photo from Philippine Full Win Group of Companies website

Controversial former economic adviser Michael Yang hosted a Peking duck lunch for Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte on the first day of his August trip to China, showing the Chinese national continues to enjoy access to the leader.

Two sources in Beijing told Rappler that the lunch took place at a branch of Dadong Roast Duck Restaurant on Thursday, August 29, the day after Duterte and members of his delegation arrived in China. Senator Bong Go, Duterte's longtime aide, later on confirmed this to reporters. He was present at the lunch too.

Duterte seems to enjoy the Dadong food chain since a Dadong branch was also the venue of a lunch hosted for him by Chinese businessmen during his first visit to China as president, in October 2016. Yang had also been present then.

Only select members of the Cabinet and Philippine delegation were invited to the gathering, said the source. Aside from Go, also present was Chinese Ambassador to the Philippines Zhao Jianhua.

Who is Yang and why is he able to invite Duterte to lunch?

Yang is a Chinese citizen with business interests in the Philippines and whom Duterte has known since he was Davao City mayor. His name made headlines earlier this year when an ex-cop accused Yang of links to drug syndicates and claimed Duterte ignored an intelligence report on Yang.

Yang and Duterte maintained their ties in 2015 as Duterte was mulling a presidential bid. That year, he paid his friend Yang a visit in Xiamen where the businessman's company headquarters is located. Weeks later, Duterte declared his intention to run for president.

During his presidency, Duterte named Yang his "economic adviser," based on contracts from Malacañang obtained by Rappler. This, despite Duterte saying Yang could not hold such a position because "he is a Chinese."

Presidential Spokesman Salvador Panelo has not responded to Rappler's query about the lunch with Yang.

But the lunch was not in Duterte's official schedule of activities. Based on this schedule, his first event on Thursday was supposed to be the bilateral meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in the evening.

Panelo, asked if Duterte had activities before the bilateral meeting, told Rappler there were "private meetings."

Large chunks of Duterte's China schedule sent to media are empty. On Friday, his first official event of the day begins late in the afternoon. A sparse schedule had also been the case in his October 2016 first visit to China.

Duterte's other companions

The President brought with him more companions than is indicated in the official delegation sent by Malacañang.

The official delegation is composed of 11 Cabinet members, but also spotted in China were Special Envoy for Public Diplomacy to China Ramon Tulfo and senators Bong Go and Ronald dela Rosa.

The last two are neophyte senators who won big in the May 2019 elections, largely due to their close association with Duterte. Go was Duterte's longtime aide while Dela Rosa was Duterte's first police chief.

Dela Rosa had led Duterte's controversial Oplan Tokhang, or the controversial knock-and-plead anti-drug campaign that human rights groups have blamed for thousands of killings.

Tulfo, meanwhile, has his own connections with Chinese businessmen, including Jose Kho, a real-estate tycoon who founded the Friends of the Philippines Foundation (FPF).

The group has made donations to the Duterte administration, including a drug rehabilitation facility in Bukidnon. Kho himself donated funds for a Fujian Normal University program, "Soledad College," providing scholarships to Filipino students. Kho's son heads a corporation seeking major reclamation projects in Manila. – Rappler.com

Locsin breaks through 'Great Firewall' of China

$
0
0

TOP DIPLOMAT. Philippine Foreign Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jr answers questions from media after his meeting with Chinese Foreign Affairs Minister Wang Yi in Davao City, Philippines on October 29, 2018. File photo by Manman Dejeto/Rappler

Tweeting from the capital city of Beijing, Foreign Secretary Teodoro "Teddyboy" Locsin Jr appeared to have broken through the "Great Firewall" of China.

Prior to his departure as one of the Cabinet officials in President Rodrigo Duterte's delegation to China, Locsin had initially bid farewell to his Twitter followers just after dawn on Tuesday, August 27.

"Going to Beijing. No Twitter there. See you in a week," Locsin said.

 

But the silence did not last long.

By Wednesday night, August 28, Locsin was once again tweeting his trademark thoughts on current affairs of the Philippines such as the Good Conduct Time Allowance law and the recent public apology made by the owner of the Chinese ship involved in the sinking of a Philippine fishing boat in the West Philippine Sea last June. 

As secretary of foreign affairs, Locsin is known to use the social media platform to announce the filing of diplomatic protests and respond to reporters' questions, among others.

Twitter users quickly took notice of the top diplomat's active feed. "I figured it out," Locsin said in response.

 

China is known to have tight controls over web content facilitated through sophisticated technology known as the "Great Firewall." The system can monitor people's internet use and block content and websites such as Twitter, Facebook, and Google.

Chinese citizens with activity and posts considered unfavorable by government authorities may also face fines and even jail time.

One way internet users go around China's firewall is through the use of a virtual private network (VPN) which allows people to access blocked websites.

Asked by a Twitter user if he accessed a VPN, however, Locsin played coy.

"What's that?" he tweeted.

In the past, other foreign state officials such as US President Donald Trump had used platforms such as Twitter while in China.

President Duterte and his delegation are scheduled to be in China until Sunday, September 1. – Rappler.com 

FALSE: PNoy responsible for Sanchez’s possible release due to RA 10592

$
0
0

Claim: Former president Benigno Aquino III is responsible for the possible release of Antonio Sanchez, convicted murderer-rapist and ex-mayor of Calauan, Laguna.

In a video flagged by Facebook through its Claim Check tool, which identifies suspicious content shared across the platform, pro-administration video blogger Dante Maravillas said that Aquino is to blame because of Republic Act 10592 or the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law.

Facebook flagged a YouTube link titled “Antonio Sanchez lalaya dahil kay Noynoy (will be set free because of Noynoy) – Dante 8/22,” posted by the channel "Its JL" on August 22, 2019. The video had over 28,000 views and 768 likes on YouTube as of writing.

The YouTube video took clips from Maravillas’ Facebook live published on the same date. The original content, where he also opposed the SOGIE Equality bill, was almost 3 hours long. Maravillas’ tirades against Aquino started around the 54-minute mark.

In the video, Maravillas questioned why “dilawans” ("yellows" or supporters of the Aquinos) are blaming Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo for the reduction of Sanchez’s prison time, when it was Aquino that signed the law that made it possible (Panelo was Sanchez's lawyer in the UPLB rape-slay case).

Maravillas’ live video had over 17,000 views, 1,200 shares, 987 reactions, and 648 comments as of writing. The pro-administration vlogger regularly conducts live broadcasts on Facebook.

Facebook Claim Check also flagged 3 other Facebook pages (Kamay na Bakal PH, Ang Bumangga, Giba, and  Luminous by Trixie Cruz-Angeles & Ahmed Paglinawan) and one website (pinoytrendingnews.net) that posted similar claims blaming Aquino. As of writing, their posts have over 8,900 combined shares, 17,100 reactions, and 6,000 comments based on Facebook and CrowdTangle data.

Rating: FALSE

The facts: The decision to put Sanchez as a candidate who's "very likely for release" under the GCTA came from the Department of Justice (DOJ), which later changed its mind following public outrage.

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra said on August 20 that the Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) has started processing inmates convicted in the 1990s after the GCTA was made retroactive by the Supreme Court (SC) in June this year. The list included Sanchez, who has been serving jail time for 25 years for the Eileen Sarmenta-Allan Gomez case and for the double murder of Nelson and Rickson Peñalosa.

Under the law, those authorized to grant time allowances are the director of BuCor, the chief of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology, and/or the warden of a provincial, district, municipal or city jail. (READ: Early release of Antonio Sanchez? Here's what the GCTA law says)

The news that Sanchez might soon go free enraged Filipinos. The backlash prompted the DOJ to backtrack on August 22, the same day Maravillas’ video was released. BuCor Director General Nicanor Faeldon said that Sanchez may not be qualified after all, because of reports that he committed violations in jail.

 

On August 23, Guevarra said the law excludes inmates convicted of heinous crimes, a view shared by Malacañang. But he said later that it would be best if the Supreme Court or Congress clarified this once and for all.

Meantime, the DOJ temporarily suspended the processing of inmates’ early release under the GCTA. A House resolution was also filed on August 27 that seeks to clarify provisions of the GCTA law, particularly about its exemptions. 

All this has nothing to do with former president Aquino.– 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.

 

MAP: Major political families in PH after the 2019 elections

$
0
0

MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – Elections come and go, but many political families in the Philippines manage to retain their strong hold over their respective areas.

The 2019 midterm elections were no different. While Filipinos voted out the likes of the Estradas and the Eusebios, many of the same powerful clans elsewhere earned fresh terms in office.

The Philippines' top seat of power itself belongs to a political family. President Rodrigo Duterte hails from Davao City, where his children hold elective posts: Sara Duterte is mayor, Sebastian Duterte is vice mayor, and Paolo Duterte is the city's 1st district representative.

Rappler maps these major political families, starting with the senators, representatives, and governors, and their relatives who won in the 2019 polls.

In this story, we define a political family as a set of at least two politicians who are related to each other up to the 3rd degree of consanguinity (by blood) or affinity (by marriage) serving at the same time in a 3-year term, usually in one locality. This is to distinguish it from a political dynasty, or families who have served across several terms, even in various localities.

Excluded here are political clans whose members lost in 2019, or have one remaining family member in office after the polls, despite ruling a locality for a long time. The family links represented in the map were verified through various documents, news reports, and other official sources.

Click on or hover over the dots to know more about a politician from a political family. You may also zoom in or out of the map.

(This map will be updated when names of other relatives are thoroughly verified.)

Half of each chamber from political families

Based on 2019 official election results, there are at least 163 political families whose winning members include senators, House representatives, or governors.

Of this number, 88 are in Luzon, 29 in the Visayas, 44 in Mindanao, and two families in separate island groups: the Suansings in Luzon (Nueva Ecija) and Mindanao (Sultan Kudarat), and the Arroyos in Luzon (Pampanga) and the Visayas (Negros Occidental).

Two more families serve in different provinces, but in the same island group: the Amante-Matbas in Agusan del Norte and Tawi-Tawi, and the Mangudadatus in Lanao del Sur and Maguindanao, all in Mindanao.

Among the regions, only the Cordillera Administrative Region seems to be less prone to family rule, with the provinces of Abra, Apayao, and Benguet having only one major political family each.

In Congress, 14 of 24 senators belong to a powerful clan, while in the House, 162 of 300 representatives do – indicating that about half of members come from political families. 

Of the 14 senators, 5 are from Metro Manila: Senators Cynthia Villar (Las Piñas City), Nancy Binay (Makati City), Pia Cayetano (Taguig City), Senate President Vicente Sotto III (Quezon City), and Sherwin Gatchalian (Valenzuela City).

Seven senators are from Luzon: Imee Marcos (llocos Norte), Juan Edgardo Angara (Aurora), Joel Villanueva (Bulacan), Ralph Recto (Batangas), Panfilo Lacson, Ramon Revilla Jr, and Francis Tolentino (all from Cavite).

Senators Juan Miguel Zubiri of Bukidnon and Manny Pacquiao of Sarangani represent Mindanao. As of the 2019 polls, no member of any political clan from the Visayas is in the Senate.

Meanwhile, of the 162 members of political families in the House of Representatives, 89 are from Luzon (including Metro Manila), 27 from the Visayas, and 46 from Mindanao.

Relatives serving together in Congress

At least 18 political families even have two or more members in Congress. Among them are the Dys of Isabela, the Suarezes of Quezon, and the Pacquiaos of Sarangani, with 3 lawmakers each coming from their families.

The Dys in the 18th Congress are all neophytes and cousins of each other. Ian Paul Dy replaced his father Napoleon in Isabela's 3rd district, while Faustino Michael Dy III (son of Faustino Jr) and Faustino Dy V (son of Faustino III) took the newly-created 5th and 6th districts, respectively.

The Pacquiao brothers also spread themselves out across 3 Congress seats: Manny Pacquiao in the Senate, Rogelio Pacquiao with a district seat for Sarangani, and Alberto Pacquiao with a party-list seat for OFW Family.

In Quezon, David Suarez and his mother Aleta Suarez won in the 2nd and 3rd districts, respectively. David's wife, Anna Villaraza Suarez, represents the Alona party-list organization.

Like Villaraza Suarez, 9 more party-list representatives hail from political families, from Ilocos Norte (Rudys Caesar Fariñas of Probinsyano Ako) down to Sulu (Shernee Tan of Kusug Tausug). (LOOK: Political dynasties use party list as backdoor to Congress)

Meanwhile, 6 married couples, like the Suarezes, are serving at the same time not just within the House, but also in the House and Senate:

HusbandWife
House Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano
(Representative, Taguig-Pateros)
Lani Cayetano
(Representative, Taguig City)
Rashidin Matba
(Representative, Tawi-Tawi)
Ma Angelica Rosedell Amante Matba
(Representative, Agusan del Norte, 2nd district)
Ralph Recto
(Senator)
Vilma Santos Recto
(Representative, Batangas, 6th district)
Ferdinand Martin Romualdez
(Representative, Leyte, 1st district)
Yedda Marie Romualdez
(Representative, Tingog Sinirangan)
Horacio Suansing Jr
(Representative, Sultan Kudarat, 2nd district)
Estrellita Suansing
(Representative, Nueva Ecija, 1st district)
David Suarez
(Representative, Quezon, 2nd district)
Anna Villaraza Suarez
(Representative, Alona)

  

Other cases in either or both Houses are parent-and-child tandems (with 6 pairs), siblings serving together (with 8* sets), and 3rd-degree links like cousins, aunts/uncles, or in-laws (with 9 sets).

Parent-child pairsSiblings3rd degree links

1. Rodolfo Albano Jr (LPGMA)
Antonio Albano (Isabela, 1st district)

2. Abdullah Dimaporo (Lanao del Norte, 2nd district)
Mohammad Khalid Dimaporo (Lanao del Norte, 1st district)

3. Elisa Kho (Masbate, 2nd district)
Wilton Kho (Masbate, 3rd district)

4. Aleta Suarez (Quezon, 3rd district)
David Suarez (Quezon, 2nd district)

5. Eduardo Villanueva (Cibac)
Joel Villanueva (Senator)

6. Cynthia Villar (Senator)
Camille Villar (Las Piñas City, lone district)

1. Pia Cayetano (Senator)
Alan Peter Cayetano (House Speaker)

2. Ria Cristina Fariñas (Ilocos Norte, 1st district)
Rudys Caesar Fariñas (Probinsyano Ako)

3. Sherwin Gatchalian (Senator)
Weslie Gatchalian (Valenzuela City, 1st district)

4. Manny Pacquiao (Senator)
Rogelio Pacquiao (Sarangani, lone district)
Alberto Pacquiao (OFW Family)

5. Ramon Revilla Jr (Senator)
Strike Revilla (Cavite, 2nd district)

6. Samier Tan (Sulu, 1st district)
Shernee Tan (Kusug Tausug)

7. Francis Tolentino (Senator)
Abraham Tolentino (Cavite, 8th district)

8. Juan Miguel Zubiri (Senator)
Manuel Zubiri (Bukidnon, 3rd district)

1. Ansaruddin Adiong (Lanao del Sur, 1st District)
Yasser Balindong (Lanao del Sur, 2nd District)

2. Juan Edgardo Angara (Senator)
Rommel Rico Angara (Aurora, Lone District)

3. Juan Miguel Arroyo (Pampanga, 2nd district)
Ma Lourdes Arroyo (Negros Occidental, 5th district)

4. Lorna Bandigan (Davao Occidental, lone district)
Claudine Bautista (Dumper PTDA)

5. Nancy Binay (Senator)
Luis Jose Angel Campos Jr (Makati City, 2nd district)

6. Ian Paul Dy (Isabela, 3rd district)
Faustino Michael Dy III (Isabela, 5th district)
Faustino Dy V (Isabela, 6th district)

7. Janette Garin (Iloilo, 1st district)
Sharon Garin (AAMBIS-OWA)

8. Imee Marcos (Senator)
Eugenio Angelo Barba (Ilocos Norte, 1st district)

9. Kristine Singson Meehan (Ilocos Sur, 2nd district)
Jose Singson Jr (Probinsyano Ako)

  

Local families

At the local level, 60 of 81 governors are from political families. They have a combined 108 relatives holding lower local posts, such as vice governor, provincial board member, mayor, vice mayor, and councilor.

Separately, 40* governors are related to incumbent House representatives. Two governors are kin, too, of senators.

Ilocos Norte Governor Matthew Marcos Manotoc replaced his mother Imee Marcos, who was elected senator in 2019. His uncle, Eugenio Angelo Marcos Barba, is the province's 2nd district representative, while another uncle, Michael Marcos Keon, won as Laoag City mayor. His aunt, Cecile Araneta Marcos, is Ilocos Norte's vice governor. The Marcoses have held the Ilocos Norte governorship since 1998, from Ferdinand Marcos Jr (3 terms) to Michael Keon (1 term) to Imee Marcos (3 terms).

The patriarch of the Zubiris, Jose Maria Zubiri Jr, sits as Bukidnon governor. His sons are Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri and 3rd district congressman Manuel Zubiri.

There are even 14 governors and vice governors from the same family, 7 of whom are parent-child pairs, 3 are siblings, and 4 are related to the 3rd degree. 

Parent-child pairsSiblings3rd degree links

1. Governor Mamintal Adiong Jr
Vice Governor Mohammad Khalid Adiong
(Lanao del Sur)

2. Governor Douglas Cagas
Vice Governor Marc Douglas Cagas IV
(Davao del Sur)

3. Governor Antonio Kho
Vice Governor Olga Kho
(Masbate)

4. Governor Gerardo Noveras
Vice Governor Christian Noveras
(Aurora)

5. Vice Governor Lilia Pineda
Governor Dennis Pineda
(Pampanga)

6. Governor Milagrosa Tan
Vice Governor Reynolds Michael Tan
(Samar)

7. Governor Abdusakur Tan
Vice Governor Abdusakur Tan II
(Sulu)

1. Governor Claude Bautista
Vice Governor Franklin Bautista
(Davao Occidental)

2. Governor Jurdin Jesus Romualdo
Vice Governor Rodin Romualdo
(Camiguin)

3. Governor Aurelio Umali
Vice Governor Emmanuel Antonio Umali
(Nueva Ecija)

1. Governor Albert Raymond Garcia
Vice Governor Ma Cristina Garcia
(Bataan)

2. Governor Matthew Marcos Manotoc
Vice Governor Cecile Araneta Marcos
(Ilocos Norte)

3. Governor Francisco Emmanuel Ortega III
Vice Governor Mario Eduardo Ortega
(La Union)

4. Governor Ryan Luis Singson
Vice Governor Jeremias Singson
(Ilocos Sur)

 

Meanwhile, two governors are married and at the helm of different provinces: Sultan Kudarat Governor Suharto Mangudadatu and Maguindanao Governor Mariam Mangudadatu.

In Ilocos Sur, one can find the most number of politicians in power from just one blood. Based on Rappler's count, the Singson family won 14 positions in the 2019 race, from representative to governor down to provincial board member and councilor.

The Dy family of Isabela, the Ortega family of La Union, and the Matugas family of Surigao del Norte have 9 members each winning local posts in 2019. The Bautista family of Davao Occidental, a province created only in 2013, has 7 winners in the 2019 polls, led by Governor Claude Bautista.

The bigger the province in terms of population, the more political families emerge. The top 20 most vote-rich provinces in the country (including independent cities within them) have a combined 67 families.

In the top 3 vote-rich provinces of Cebu, Cavite, and Pangasinan, for instance, 17 families dominate.

Cavite has at least two members from the families of Revilla (2nd district), Advincula (3rd district), Barzaga (4th district), Loyola (5th district), Ferrer (6th district), Remulla (7th district, including the governor's seat), and Tolentino (8th district).

Pangasinan’s political giants – Espino (2nd district), Celeste (1st district), and Primicias-Agabas (6th district) – preserved their seats in their respective districts, while the Guico family defeated the Espino patriarch for the 5th district House seat. 

Prominent clans in Cebu also stood strong in their bailiwicks, like the families Garcia (3rd district), Gullas (1st district), Caminero (2nd district), and Calderon (7th district). Meanwhile, the families Frasco (5th district) and Ouano (6th district) won House seats as well as other local posts in 2019.

Influence, power of families

Political families enjoy a great deal of influence in their respective localities. With them in power, checks and balances in governance tend to decrease, said election lawyer Rona Caritos of the Legal Network for Truthful Elections (Lente).

This is evident, she added, when they seek support for their policies, programs, or political agenda.

"For example, in a local government, the mayor is the father while the son or daughter is the vice mayor. The vice mayor is the one heading the local legislative council and primarily approves local ordinances, which the mayor will implement. If a mayor would like an ordinance to be in place, he can just talk directly to his son or daughter about this ordinance," explained Caritos.

"The probability of this ordinance being passed is higher compared to a situation wherein the two positions have occupants who are not related to each other," she added.

However, Caritos argued, their political power remains strong "as long as there is a dominant titular head at the helm of the family."

"Once this titular head is gone or is not that influential anymore...these family relations are not that reliable," she said, citing the case of the Estrada family, whose members lost in all positions they vied for in 2019, as well as that of the Binays in Makati City, where ex-vice president Jejomar Binay lost in his congressional bid while his two children battled it out in a 6-way race for mayor.

With the defeat of some political families in 2019, Caritos is hopeful that it would plant the seeds of electoral reforms, especially concerning families and dynasties in politics.

Caritos proposed, among others, the strengthening political parties, and changing the electoral system from the current first-past-the-post contests to proportional representation.

She also stressed the need to harness and harvest potential new blood from the reformed Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) or youth council. "There is a need to introduce in the public consciousness young bloods coming from the new SK and other new blood coming from the non-traditional political parties." Rappler.com

* Editor's Note: In an earlier version of this story, we mistakenly included Stephen James Tan and Sharee Ann Tan of Samar in the list of siblings serving together in the House of Representatives. We have corrected this. We have also updated the number of governors related to representatives, on account of the vacant seat for Southern Leyte's lone district, pending special elections there after it was split into two congressional districts.

 


[PODCAST] May silbi ba ang diplomatic protest laban sa China?

$
0
0

MANILA, Philippines – Sunod-sunod na diplomatic protest ang inihain ng gobyerno ng Pilipinas laban sa China nitong mga nakaraang buwan. 

Nito lamang ika-9 ng Agosto, inanunsyo ni Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jr ang diplomatic protest patungkol sa mga Chinese vessels na nasa karagatan ng Pilipinas. (LIST: China's incursions in Philippine waters

Sa podcast na ito, susuriin ng foreign affairs reporter na si Sofia Tomacruz at researcher-writer na si Jodesz Gavilan ang konsepto ng diplomatic protest, bakit mahalaga ang transparency sa mga detalye nito, at kung ano ang epekto nito sa relasyon ni President Rodrigo Duterte sa China. 

Ano nga ba ang kayang gawin o epekto ng isang diplomatic protest? May ngipin ba ito laban sa mga aksyon ng China? 

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

Pakinggan ang iba pang episodes ng Newsbreak: Beyond the Stories: 

A look at SOGIE anti-discrimination laws around the world

$
0
0

PRIDE. Thousands are gathered at Taipei's Gay Pride parade. File photo by Daniel Shih/AFP

MANILA, Philippines – Discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity continues to happen in many parts of the world, highlighting the need for laws to protect the LGBTQ+ community.

In the Philippines, only 20 local government units have ordinances against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Quezon City has an ordinance against LBGTQ+ discrimination but it was in a mall in that city where trans woman Gretchen Custodio Diez experienced discrimination – an incident that fueled discussions on the SOGIE equality bill.

(EXPLAINER: What you need to know about SOGIE, part 2 )

The SOGIE equality bill, which seeks to protect people against discrimination, was first filed in Congress in 2000 by then-senator Miriam Defensor Santiago and then-Akbayan representative Loretta Rosales. Senator Risa Hontiveros reintroduced the bill in the 18th Congress. (TIMELINE: SOGIE equality in the Philippines)

What are some of the anti-discrimination laws shielding the LGBTQ+ community from harassment and abuse in other parts of the world? 

1. Taiwan

Taiwan is considered the most progressive when it comes to LGBTQ+ rights in Asia. 

In May 2019, the bill recognizing same-sex marriage was passed into law – a first in Asia

In May 2017, Taiwan's Constitutional Court voted to legalize gay marriage. The court ruled that denying marriage rights to same-sex couples is unconstitutional.

2. France

France boasts of a tradition rooted in freedom and privacy that made it easier for the LGBTQ+ community to head towards acceptance. In 1985, a law was enacted to protect the community from discrimination in employment, housing, and other public and private provisions of services and goods. Three decades later, the law was expanded to include gender identity protection. 

In 2004, an anti-discrimination law was amended to include homophobic, sexist, and racist remarks. Penalties may increase if the physical assault or murder is linked to the sexual or gender identity of the victim.

In 2008, the education ministry launched a campaign against LGBTQ+ bullying in school. Education Minister Xavier Darcos also introduced the policy that battles against all forms of discrimination, including homophobia.

In 2013, a law was enacted allowing same-sex marriage and adoption rights for same-sex couples. This made France the 13th country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage. 

3. South Africa

Under apartheid in South Africa, homosexuality was a crime punishable by up to 7 years in prison. 

By 1996, South Africa became the first in the world to give constitutional protection to the LGBTQ+ community by constitutionally prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Section 9 of the South African Constitution states that “(3) The state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth." 

The Employment Equity Act was introduced in 1998, which protects workers from labor discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, among other things. 

The Civil Union Act was was enacted in 2006 after the Minister of Home Affairs vs Fourie case declared same-sex marriages legal. However, a clause states that civil servants are permitted to refuse civil unions on the grounds of their religion or belief. When it comes to legalization of same-sex marriage, South Africa lands, which enacted that law in 2006, was first in Africa and 5th in the world.

4. Israel

The Equal Opportunities in Employment Act of 1992 prohibits discrimination in the workplace on account of sexual orientation, with some exemptions for religious organizations.

The Libel and Slander Law of 1997 was revised to include prohibition of uttering and publishing defamation driven by one’s sexual orientation. If a violent crime which is proven to be motivated by sexual identity or expression, the act can qualify as a hate crime.

Discrimination by bouncers at nightclub entrances also prompted the Prohibition of Discrimination in Products, Services and Entry into Places of Entertainment and Public Places Law enacted in 2000, which also protects a person’s sexual orientation. 

5. Iceland

Iceland is regarded as a sanctuary for the LGBTQ+ community. Based on a 2015 poll conducted in 127 countries, gay men are happiest in Iceland.

In 1996, amendments were made to the Icelandic Penal Code to include sexual orientation in the country’s non-discrimination law, which include provisions of goods and services. It was again revised to include gender identity to the list of anti-discrimination grounds in 2014. Discrimination in education has been illegal since 2008.

It was only in 2018 when Iceland enacted a law against employment discrimination called the Law on Equal Treatment in the Workplace. It prohibits workplace discrimination because of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and even sex characteristics.  

6. Canada

The larger, more well-known cities of Canada have been reported to be more accepting of the LGBTQ+ community. Based on a Pew Research Center survey in 2013, 80% of its citizens  favor social acceptance of homosexuality.

Canada is one of the most advanced countries when it comes to LGBTQ+ legislation. In 2016, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau proposed to include gender identity or expression to the existing Canadian Human Rights Act which ensures equal opportunity to all individuals regardless of race, status, sex, among others. 

While there are reports that there are areas in Canada where people are not as welcoming or open to members of the LGBTQ+ community, every province has enacted human rights acts that forbid harassment on several grounds, which later became inclusive of the LGBTQ+ by 2017.

The Canadian Criminal Code prohibits hate propaganda directed towards those who are distinguished by sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. 

7. Spain 

Spain legalized same-sex marriage back in 2005, making it the 4th country in the world to do so. 

Laws against employment discimination on the basis of sexual orientation in several communities have been around since 1995, but do not cover gender identity. Ten autonomous communities additionally banned discrimination based on sex characteristics.

Article 4(2) of the Workers’ Statute reads: “In labor relations, workers have the right: ... not to be directly or indirectly discriminated in employment, or, once employed, discriminated by reason of sex, civil status, age within the limits set forth by this Law, racial or ethnic origin, social status, religion or convictions, political ideas, sexual orientation...”

Hate crime and hate speeches on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity have been prohibited since 1995. In the same year, the law has prohibited discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation and gender identity. 

Like anti-discrimination laws on employment, laws that concern provision of goods and services on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity depends on the autonomous communities. 

8. Sweden

Sweden is regarded as one of the most progressive countries in Europe when it comes to the acceptance of LGBT. In 1972, it become the first in the world to allow a change of legal gender after undergoing sex reassignment surgery.

In 1987, the provision in the Swedish Penal Code which deals with discrimination was expanded to include discrimination against the LGBT. 

Article 12 of the Constitution of Sweden states: “No act of law or other provision may imply the unfavourable treatment of anyone because they belong to a minority group by reason of ethnic origin, color, or other similar circumstances or on account of their sexual orientation.”

The 2003 Prohibition of Discrimination Act forbids discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in relation to labor market policies, pursuing a profession, running a business, membership in employee organizations, among others. Two years later, it was expanded to include social services, social insurance system, unemployment insurance, and healthcare. 

Some provisions of the Prohibition of Discrimination Act were amended in 2017 to strengthen battling discrimination in the workplace and educational institutions. They must seek to promote equal rights and opportunities for all, including transgender identity and sexual orientation.

Transgender identity is now protected by the anti-discrimination law in all other areas.

9. Netherlands

A small country with a very diverse population, discrimination is said to be more apparent in the Netherlands than the rest of the countries on this list. While still one of the most globally friendly when it comes to the LGBTQ+ community, support for this movement has subsided over the years. Some members of the community still find it difficult to come out and express themselves.

According to the Central Agency for Statistics in 2013, homosexuals generally felt much more unsafe when compared to hetereosexuals. 

In 2016 alone, there were 1,574 reports of homophobic violence in the Netherlands. Because of this, the Dutch government has been constantly working towards crafting laws and policies that to its people from acts of discrimination and abuse. 

The Equal Treatment Act of 1994 bans discrimination based on sexual orientation in terms of employment, housing, and public and private accommodations. In 2017, a bill was proposed to add sex characteristics, gender identity, and gender expression to the growing list of anti-discrimination provisions. 

Joining this growing list of countries with anti-discrimination laws are Denmark, Finland, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, and some states in the United States. 

The presence of anti-discrimination laws aids in protecting members of the growing minority as it strives towards achieving equality for all. The Philippines could learn a thing or two. – Rappler.com

Micah Avry Guiao is a Rappler intern from the Ateneo de Manila University.

Too young to marry

$
0
0

MARAWI CITY, Philippines – It was long past midnight, and Fatima* was awake. She had been awake 10 nights. She lay on a mattress on the floor of a rickety wooden shack in the village of Olawa Ambulong in Marawi City, listening to the breathing of the man beside her.

Outside, the occasional tricycle rattled down the muddy alley. Inside, Fatima watched the rise and fall of the man’s chest. She had braced herself up for what could happen when he opened his eyes. She was ready, every time, to slap away the hand that reached across the pillow she had shoved between them.

There were nights when she would drift off to sleep, and wake up with a start, terrified. On those nights, she would rise quietly, her steps light as she made her way to the small kitchen for coffee, the scalding liquid burning down her throat. Most nights she stared up at the ceiling. She would wait bleary-eyed until morning, when he stood and dressed for work. 

Safe, she would think, safe for one more day. 

On the 11th night, when the man across the pillow reached over to touch her, Fatima was asleep. He was inside her before she could protest. She never said a word. She closed her eyes and prayed, until he pulled on his clothes again, rolled over, and fell asleep. 

Fatima lay awake, weeping quietly, beside the man she now called her husband. 

She was 14 years old.

"I said I didn’t want it to happen," said Fatima. "But I had no choice."

A futile fight

Anywhere else in the Philippines, young people like Fatima are permitted by the Family Code to marry only after reaching the age of 18. Muslim minors are an exception. Presidential Decree (PD) No. 1083, or the Code of Muslim Personal Laws, allows Filipino Muslim males the right to marry at the age of 15. Muslim females, provided they have begun menstruating, are allowed to marry as young as 12, provided there is permission from their male guardian, or wali

There are many reasons these marriages occur at an early age. Some girls are married off because their elders hope to ease the financial burden of their upbringing. Others marry to protect their honor, as any suspicion of premarital sex brings shame to families.

According to an Oxfam International survey on child marriage conducted in 2016, 51% of respondents in Lanao del Sur, where Fatima lives, had gone through arranged marriages, compared to 22% in the nearby province of Maguindanao. Only 14% of females in Lanao del Sur said they gave their full consent to the marriage, while the figure is much higher for men at 89%.

The situation was further compounded by fighting in Marawi, Lanao del Sur’s capital, a year after the study was conducted. The once-prosperous capital was left in shambles after 5 months of clashes between homegrown terrorists and government troops. While no numbers are available, displaced residents and local non-governmental organization (NGO) workers say poverty and uncertainty in the aftermath of the siege led to an increase in early marriages among the Maranao youth. 

The wedding

Fatima discovered she was to be married three days into 2019. The war had been over for more than a year. She and her family had been allowed to return to Olawa Ambulong, a Marawi village spared from the violence that had ravaged large swathes of the city. It was the same home Fatima had lived in since she was orphaned just after her birth.

Isha*, Fatima’s aunt, had raised Fatima since her parents’ early death. Fatima was one of many: 4 of the children she called siblings were Isha’s own, while 7 others, like Fatima, were adopted. She called Isha ommi, or mother.

Fatima woke up early on January 3. The sun was up, but it was dark inside the two-story shanty where she lived. Her small siblings were piling their folded mattresses into a corner of the loft. Fatima ate breakfast and played with the children as Isha looked on. Their laughter rang through the house, until Fatima saw her grandmother striding up the muddy path leading to their front door. 

Fatima stood to greet her. There were few pleasantries before the elderly woman spoke directly to Fatima. The words were a shock to the young girl. 

“I was told to get ready because I was getting married,” Fatima said. 

She was told her prospective husband was 8 years her senior. His name was Omar*, a 22-year-old distant cousin whom Fatima had never met. Omar’s father had been searching for a bride for his son. He had arrived earlier that morning to seal the marriage. The details had been decided between Fatima’s wali, her uncle, and Omar’s family. 

The wedding was scheduled for later in the day. 

“I didn’t want to get married yet,” Fatima said, her voice cracking. But she said nothing on the day she was told. She was too afraid to disobey her grandmother.

The matriarch explained the marriage was a way to help ease the burden on the shoulders of Fatima’s mother. Isha had been widowed 6 years before. Her sari-sari store had been destroyed in the siege, and much of their living came from the vegetable garden Isha tended in the backyard. 

It was only after her grandmother left that Fatima told Isha she was afraid. Isha consoled the young girl, then stepped out of their home to follow Fatima's grandmother. Throughout the day, Isha bargained – with Fatima’s grandmother, with Fatima’s wali, with Omar’s parents, with anyone who would speak to her. 

Please, she said, stop the wedding. They told her no. 

Please, she asked, could they postpone the ceremony a few days? She would like time to buy Fatima a gown. They told her no.  

Please, she asked, conceding, could Fatima and her new husband live in Isha’s home after the wedding? Could her daughter still come home? 

Yes, they told her.  

There was a reason Isha stood up for the girl she called her daughter. Isha herself was married young, forced by her own family to bind herself to another stranger at the age of 13. 

“Deep in my heart then,” Isha said, “I kept on asking myself, what will happen to my daughter? Will married life be hard for her? Will her husband or in-laws quarrel with her? Because she had no idea what would happen then.”

Isha stands inside her home in Barangay Olawa Ambulong, where she had tried – but failed – to stop her daughter's wedding.

The vagaries of consent

“Mutual consent of the parties freely given” is among the “essential requisites” of a Muslim marriage mandated by PD 1083. This means a minor Muslim female must give permission before her wali approves of any marriage. 

Muslim scholars – like Anwar Radiamoda, director of the King Faisal Center for Islamic and Asian Studies in the Mindanao State University, and Macrina Morados, dean of the University of the Philippines-Diliman Institue of Islamic Studies (UP-IIS) – say no wedding should take place if the minor says no. 

“The female has to be consulted first. If she really doesn’t want to get married, then it’s not allowed by Islam. Forced marriages in Islam is prohibited,” said Radiamoda.

But PD 1083 is not explicit about how consent is given prior to the wedding ceremony. Fatima did not oppose her family’s decision. And so Fatima’s silence – like the silence of many other child brides like her – was read as consent to the marriage.

“They are reared to be modest,” said Morados of UP-IIS. “They are reared to have modesty in public. If you want to accept the marriage, you wouldn’t say yes out loud. It would be a negative to you.” 

Morados believes that a number of child marriage practices are rooted in culture, and do not always adhere to Islamic teachings. Fear and respect of their elders, whose decisions are treated like law, stifle Muslim girls and women.

Treating silence as consent to marriage is based on what Morados called a cultural context of shame among Muslim women. A Muslim woman who agrees to a marriage offer traditionally stays silent, in an attempt to mask her eagerness. A Muslim woman who is against a marriage offer can, and should say no. But the reality shows otherwise.

Yet coercion, intimidation, and physical abuse, said Morados, are not sanctioned by Islam. “We really need education,” she said. “Even PD 1083 is not popular. If you go to the province, most of the people, they haven’t heard about the provision on marriage, about the essential requisites.”

There are pending bills in the 18th Congress that seek to declare as “public crimes” the facilitation and solemnization of child marriages. If passed into law, the measure would repeal the exemption that PD 1083 grants to Filipino Muslims to marry below the age of 18. It would also punish those who facilitate early marriages.

But imposing these punishments may not be so simple. PD 1083, authorizing the wali to arrange a marriage on behalf of the women, was guided by the provisions of the Quran and the prophetic tradition.

Morados said that while UP-IIS and the Anak Mindanao party-list group are advocating to raise the Muslim marrying age to 18, any amendments to PD 1083 must come from the community. Their consultations take into account the crucial role that ulama or Muslim religious leaders play in the process. 

“We cannot criminalize those parents who opted to marry their children at a younger age,” Morados said. “Because in Islam, you cannot say this is haram or this is prohibited when the Quran allows it.”

Shariah law, said Morados, asks parents to consider the best interests of their children when considering a marriage proposal. It is this that can permit the raising of the marrying age. 

Radiamoda also cited the Islamic principle of building a righteous family. “One of the Prophet Muhammad’s statements is, ‘Teach your family before marriage,’” he said. “That means you have to study first. Prepare for your marriage first – emotionally, financially, and economically. This is what Islam says: You have to teach first yourselves before you marry.”

Smiling for the camera

On the day of her wedding, Fatima sat quietly as her cousins dabbed powder on her cheeks. They brushed shadow over her eyes and lined them with care, in an attempt to mask the swollen lids. They dressed her in an abaya– the loose, robe-like dress traditionally worn by Islamic women. This one was special, a gift from her new father-in-law. It was black with a strip of black sequins at the hem. Her hair was covered with a pale pink hijab and secured by a golden brooch pinned just below her cheek. 

The wedding was to be held in her uncle’s home, just a short walk away from where Fatima lived with Isha. Her uncle’s house saw a flurry of activity, as Fatima’s relatives rearranged the furniture to make way for the wedding ceremony. Pots and pots of food were being prepared.  

Isha refused to leave her own home. She could not stop the wedding, but she would not be a witness to it. 

Fatima stepped into her uncle’s home. She saw her groom for the first time and saw Omar wearing a white sherwani and turban. She became his wife on the same day they met.

Fatima is shy around strangers, and timid even in the company of her friends. Her hands fidgeted, her eyes darted from Isha to the floor and back. She let her mother speak for her. When she did speak, her voice was faint, almost apologetic.  

“I said I didn’t want it to happen,” said Fatima. “But I had no choice.”

Isha kept two photos of the wedding. In one, Fatima and Omar stood side by side, both of them smiling, surrounded by cousins dressed in their wedding finery. In the other picture, Fatima and Omar sat on monobloc chairs. Omar’s right hand was draped around Fatima’s shoulders. She was still smiling. 

“There were so many thoughts running through my head then,” Fatima said. “Of course I was scared.”

"There were so many thoughts running
through my head then,"
Fatima said. "Of course I was scared."

The debate

The United Nations Children's Fund, or Unicef, puts at 650 million the number of women and girls alive today who were wed before their 18th birthday. In the Philippines, 2018 data from the UN counts about 15% of women aged 20 to 24 years old, who were first married or entered a union, before they turned 18.

Those campaigning to end child marriage argue that regardless of culture, the practice robs young girls – and even boys – of their freedom to choose whom to marry at the time when they are physically, emotionally, psychologically, and financially ready to make such a decision.

In 2016, Muslim religious leaders and legal experts in Mindanao endorsed a new fatwa– a formal legal opinion – urging marriage only when the necessary conditions of “mind-maturity” and “intellectual-integrity” are met. 

They put the appropriate marrying age for males at 20, and females, at 18. The fatwa also said that a virgin woman who has reached the age of puberty with sound mind and integral intellect will not be compelled to marry without her consent.

The same fatwa, however, still interprets the woman’s silence as consent to the marriage.

Advocates have gone as far as calling the practice of child marriage a human rights violation

“At the end of the day, it is up to the communities, the people in the communities, especially the women and girls who have experienced it,” said Patricia Miranda, policy advocacy and communications manager at Oxfam Pilipinas. “They are the biggest champions and the strongest voice in changing the way we view child marriage.”

Only 14% of women surveyed by Oxfam in Lanao del Sur said they gave their full consent to their arranged marriage.

‘I’m sorry’

Three months after Fatima’s marriage, Isha heard about a week-long debriefing seminar offered by NGO workers to Marawi siege refugees. Isha decided to attend after learning there would be discussions about early and forced marriages. 

The seminar was part of the “Creating Spaces to Take Action on Violence against Women and Girls” project. It was launched by Oxfam and its partners like Al-Mujadilah Development Foundation (AMDF), across 6 countries – including the Philippines –  in 2016. The goal was to reduce cases of child marriages in 5 years by working with communities where the practice remains prevalent. 

Isha remembers watching a video about her rights as a woman. She remembers the colored sheets of paper, where she was asked to jot down her reflections for the day. 

“Everything I didn’t know when I was younger, I learned there instead,” said Isha with a smile. “If your child does not want to get married, her parents and relatives should not be forcing her to say yes. I only learned about that during the seminar.”

The Creating Spaces project also held a separate week-long youth camp for children. The lessons included awareness of the self, and effective communication with parents. 

AMDF project manager Sitti Nur Mohamad said the lessons have had far-reaching effects. The young have gained the confidence to speak up, while parents have become more open to what their children have to say. One father thanked them, and said he realized he had “sinned against” his wife and children. 

“The first thing I will do when I get home,” the father said, “is to hug my wife and to tell I’m sorry.”

Mohamad said she was lucky to marry on her own terms. She met her husband as an adult, while working in the development sector. She knows she is among the privileged.

“In my line of work, some people have already told me, ‘You’re a Muslim, you’re a Maranao, and you’re a woman, and yet this is your advocacy?’ They can’t seem to accept what I’m fighting for,” said Mohamad.

Fatima gazes at her ommi Isha as they stood in their garden. Both mother and daughter were forced to marry young.

Young mothers

Fatima was 6 months into her marriage when she spoke to us. While the wedding was meant to ease financial burdens, survival was still a struggle, even under Isha’s roof. Omar, a tricycle driver, earned roughly P200 a day, or about US$4. He and Fatima have been forced to rely on assistance from relatives, most of whom live in post-war evacuation centers themselves. 

What dowry Omar’s family paid to Fatima’s family went towards financing the wedding and Omar’s tricycle. 

“It was hard to be with him at first, because I couldn’t accept I was married to him,” Fatima said, as she sat on a rumpled mattress in the humidity of a late June afternoon. 

“We have grown to like each other,” she said.

Fatima has learned to live with Omar. She has learned to like him, perhaps love him. She appreciated the fact that he shared the household chores. She acknowledged he was kind. She was aware, as was Isha, that there may be no returning to school, even as Fatima turned wistful at the thought of becoming a teacher. 

It was only when she spoke of her wedding day that Fatima began to cry. She remembered the date. She remembered the many days she fought sleep. Mostly, she remembered the night she failed. 

Fatima looked down as she spoke. She ran a hand over her rounded belly. Her touch was gentle. 

In 7 months, Fatima will be a mother. The child will be born after she turns 15. – Rappler.com 

*******************

PHOTOS: Bobby Lagsa

ILLUSTRATION: Raffy de Guzman

DESIGN: Patrick Santos

CREATIVE SUPERVISION: Emil Mercado

EDITORIAL SUPERVISION: Miriam Grace Go, Chay Hofileña, and Patricia Evangelista

*Names changed and photos edited to protect identities

This story was produced under the Creating Spaces Project, which seeks to end child, early, and forced marriages in the Philippines. The project is being implemented by Oxfam in partnership with Al-Mujadilah Development Foundation, United Youth of the Philippines-Women, Philippine Business for Social Progress, and the Philippine Legislators Committee on Population and Development.

Rappler interns Amiel Asehan, Arie San Pedro, Francis Acosta, Jessica Gaurano, Rommar Javier, Salvee Fontanilla, and Sophia Sibal helped in putting together this story.

EXPLAINER: What is polio?

$
0
0

HIGH RISK FOR POLIO. The Department of Health says the Philippines is at high risk for poliovirus transmission and advices parents to get children under 5 vaccinated to prevent the disease.

MANILA, Philippines – The Philippines is at high risk for poliovirus transmission, the Department of Health (DOH) announced on Saturday, August 17. 

The DOH said that a 2019 test of Manila’s sewage showed two samples that tested positive for poliovirus. Though the DOH has so far not recorded any infection, it has urged parents to make sure children are protected, since the virus was already found in one community.

This is alarming news: the Philippines has been polio-free since 2000, according to the DOH and the World Health Organization (WHO), with the last case of wild poliovirus in the country recorded in 1993. 

Only 3 countries are not polio-free: Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Nigeria, or what the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) classifies as endemic countries. This means the transmission of polio has never stopped in these areas. 

The GPEI also watches out for 12 outbreak countries spread out in Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean, the Western Pacific, and Southeast Asia. In these countries, there are cases of wild poliovirus reinfection due to wild or vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV). 

What does it mean if the country is at high risk for poliovirus transmission? And what can we do to ensure that the disease does not return?

What is polio? 

Poliomyelitis or polio is a highly contagious disease caused by poliovirus invading the nervous system. It starts with feces – poliovirus in feces enters the body through the mouth and spreads through contact with an infected person’s feces. In rare cases, the virus is transmitted through sneezing or coughing.  

The poliovirus can live in an infected person’s feces for many weeks and can contaminate food and water in unsanitary conditions. 

Symptoms are flu-like: fever, fatigue, headache, vomiting, stiff neck, and sudden onset of floppy arms or legs. 

In more serious cases, the brain and spinal cord may be affected. People with poliovirus infection can experience paresthesia or feeling pins and needles in the legs, and meningitis or an infection of the covering of the spinal cord or the brain. 

Severe infection can also lead to permanent paralysis or even death. Paralysis can lead to death because the virus may affect muscles that help us breathe.

Children under 5 years of age are most vulnerable to the disease.

There is also such a thing as VDPV, which may spread when a community is under-immunized and living with poor sanitary conditions. 

Because the polio vaccine contains a weakened vaccine-virus to activate immune response, it will be excreted through an immunized person’s feces. But if the community is under-immunized and unsanitary, the “excreted vaccine-virus can continue to circulate for an extended period of time,” WHO said.

Why is the Philippines at risk?

The Philippines had been certified as polio-free since 2000, but low vaccination coverage, poor early surveillance of polio symptoms, and substandard sanitation practices, put the country at risk of losing the status, based on the 2018 risk analysis of the National Certification Committee for Polio. 

The vaccination schedule for preventing polio, as recommended by the WHO, involves 3 doses of oral polio vaccine (OPV) and one dose of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). It is the OPV that contains live, weakened virus that may cause VDPV. 

“In 2018, the vaccine coverage for the third dose of OPV was 66%. This figure is below the 95% target required to ensure that the whole population is protected against polio,” the DOH disclosed on Saturday, August 31. 

Health Undersecretary Eric Domingo told ANC’s Headstart on Wednesday, August 21, that low immunization could also be due to the public scare caused by the Dengvaxia controversy, which saw parents refusing to get children immunized. (READ: A year after Dengvaxia: Immunization drops, measles outbreaks soar) 

But polio has no cure, and vaccination is the best way to prevent the disease. The DOH said it would conduct 3 rounds of synchronized polio vaccination for all children under 5 years old, regardless of their previous vaccination status. 

The health department already concluded its first round in the city of Manila, where the VDPV sample was found. The vaccination campaign is set to expand to all cities in the National Capital Region (NCR) by October, and later on to priority regions – which the DOH has yet to identify – by November 2019. 

“The problem is we haven’t achieved the 95% rate of immunization, just like when the measles outbreak happened. This happens for many reasons, not just due to vaccine hesitancy, but also due to limited coverage due to manpower and funding shortages,” said Josh San Pedro of the Coalition for People's Right to Health (CPRH). 

“The DOH and those in public health must regain the trust of the population in order for our efforts to truly be meaningful in preventing preventable diseases from returning. Doing this must entail proper stocking of essential vaccines, proper access to health centers, and adequate manpower for the population,” San Pedro added. 

Because transmission of the disease happens through contact with feces, good hygiene practices – both individual and community-based – are also very important in eradicating the disease.

The health department urges local governments to intensify their Zero Open Defecation program and calls for proper sanitation practices. 

“If we do not take appropriate actions now, polio will return,” Health Secretary Francisco Duque III said. “We need to urgently act to stop its spread in our communities.” – Rappler.com

Indonesian fact-checkers fight disinformation amid internet shutdown

$
0
0

 

MANILA, Philippines – More than a week has passed since the Indonesian government imposed an internet blackout in Papua, its easternmost province, and its fact-checkers are bearing the brunt.

On August 22, the Indonesian government started slowing down internet services following riots in Papua. The government completely shut down services in the region the next day in an attempt to curb separatism protests that ensued after the detention of 43 Papuan university students. (READ: Thousands riot in Papua, parliament building torched)

The Indonesian government responded to the violent demonstrations by deploying more troops to the region. It also blocked the internet service there to stop online hoaxes on the issue from spreading and triggering more protests, the government said. (READ: Indonesia's Papua hit by fresh unrest as troops deployed)

But the internet shutdown in Papua also raised the issue of a possible cover up of human rights abuses. More than that, it caused an information blackout, which the country’s fact-checkers are currently grappling with.

“We have many pieces of content about Papua that are allegedly false and provocative. But because of internet restriction, our work has been hampered,” Ika Ningtyas, a fact-checker from Indonesian online news portal Tempo.co, told Poynter. “We cannot contact or dig up information from several sources in Papua and the telephone network is also difficult in some areas.”

As if the situation wasn't hard enough, Indonesian fact-checkers are now also dealing with the public’s response to the idea of having a new capital before the separatism protests have even died down, Poynter said.

On August 26, President Joko Widodo said Indonesia is shifting its capital from Jakarta to Borneo island, which is globally known to have a rich biodiversity.

Because of concerns regarding funding and environmental issues, Poynter said many conversations that revolve around the topic are being shared on WhatsApp, Facebook, and Twitter. The bad side? This includes a number of unverified information – which the fact-checkers are expected to debunk.

Tempo.co is one of the 5 fact-checking organizations registered with the International Fact Checkers Network (IFCN) at Poynter, a forum for fact-checkers worldwide to "support fact-checking initiatives by promoting best practices and exchanges" in the journalism industry.

The 4 other organizations in Indonesia that were deemed compliant with IFCN’s principles are: Hoaks Atau Fakta? of Kompas.com, Tirto.id, Cek Fakta of Liputan 6, and Mafindo.

In the Philippines, Rappler is one of the two verified IFCN signatories, along with Vera Files. – Pauline Macaraeg/Rappler.com 

The millennials behind Isko Moreno

$
0
0

MANILA, Philippines – Isko Moreno is live. He leads the flag raising ceremony outside Manila City Hall.

Isko Moreno is live. Again. Now, he’s holding a press briefing inside.

Isko Moreno is live. Once again. He’s back out, roaming the streets of Recto, clearing the roads of illegal obstructions.

Isko Moreno is live. One more time.

This is the usual flood of notifications that the Facebook page of Isko Moreno sends to the public as he broadcasts his every move. His posts have pulled in thousands of likes and shares, racking up views of up to 1.5 million.

The mayor is taking social media by storm. Is this the doing of a veteran public relations chief or an agency with tested political savvy?

No. It is just the 22-year-old Julius Leonen, the youngest department head of the Isko Moreno administration.

“It’s just me. People think we’re a well-oiled team. But we’re not. We’re not at all,” Leonen told me in an interview at a coffee shop across Manila City Hall on August 26.

Leonen is the chief of the Manila City Public Information Office, which has been mandated to tell Manileños everything about every public office in Manila. Their task has been outlined by Moreno’s first executive order mandating an “Open Governance” policy in the city of Manila.

“All procurement and bidding activities, contract signings, official meetings of the City Officers shall be streamed live online via Facebook and/or other social media platforms,” the document reads.

Isko Moreno has been outside the Philippines since August 24, and is set to return on September 1. With the mayor out of the country, Leonen had more time.

But he still had to continue the coverage. Our interview was punctuated by his continuous glances at his phone. Messages from Mayor Moreno. He wanted to broadcast live from New Zealand.

Meet the squad

HUDDLE. The Manila Public Information Office is more of a friend group of millennials than a bureaucracy.

The Manila Public Information Office consists of only 8 people. None of them are above 30 years old.

Christian, 28, and Kyana, 24, take the viral photos of Mayor Moreno.

Kurt, 29, and Carlo, 23, plot and paint all promotion materials, remaining loyal to the white-and-blue branding of Asenso Manileño.

Jules, 22, the office manager, stands as one team in receiving and releasing documents.

Then Leonen has two information technology staffers: AJ, 25, and Nico, 27, who help brainstorm ideas and put up their broadcast sets.

They also have a volunteer group of 4 students aged 18 to 19 – Angel, Hannah, James, and Jannah – who help take photos and put up their sets for Mayor Moreno’s broadcasts.

Managing all of them is Leonen, a former journalist.

Leonen put it bluntly, saying, “We’re all amateurs.”

But this ragtag team of kids is behind the most engaged Facebook page of any politician in the country besides the President himself. As of September 2019, Moreno’s Facebook page lays claim to the likes of 1.6 million followers.

“Because we’re young, we get to use technology more. I am also happy working here,” said Kyana de Asis, one of the photographers.

For their office’s Facebook page, the Manila Public Information Office, Leonen just hoped to inch to 100,000 likers by the end of 2019. But by August, they had already reached 217,0000.

All of them were recruited by Leonen when he joined Isko Moreno’s campaign team in 2019.

Some of them, Leonen knew back in college at the University of the East. The others were referred by his former colleagues in the news industry.

A social media mayor and his social media team

BEHIND THE SCENES. Julius Leonen manages Isko Moreno's social media pages and press releases during an event.

Together, they form a mobile team that follows Isko Moreno everywhere he goes, be it City Hall or a police operation against a cloaked gambling den.

Each event is a coverage. There has to be live video. There has to be tweets. There has to be a photographer. There has to be a news release, and if not, at least notes to send to reporters. At the very least, someone has to be there.

On cue after each event, an Isko Moreno photo with a new quote or announcement printed over with thick text has to be released across Facebook and Twitter pages.

If the routine is akin to requirements from multimedia journalists, it is because Leonen was, in fact, a former journalist. Before graduating from the University of the East in 2018, he already worked for the Daily Tribune.

He then transferred to Inquirer.net as a multimedia reporter before he was pulled into Moreno’s circle prior to the 2019 campaign season.

“If you’re a PIO, you’re still a journalist. It’s just that you’re already a mouthpiece of the local government. There’s no sugarcoating there. The biases are clear,” Leonen said.

Midway through the interview, Leonen lifted his phone, an iPhone Xs with a matte navy blue case.

“You know what his machinery is? This phone. And they think that we have huge cameras, and many computers,” Leonen said.

The biggest problems so far that Leonen and his team have encountered in the field had little to do with what they would write and post, but rather with whether their data allotment in their phones could sustain a continuous Facebook live video.

Sometimes, they would even borrow power banks from reporters in the field just to keep the feed going.

According to political communication scholar Severino Sarmenta, former chairman of the Ateneo de Manila University’s communication department, Isko Moreno’s communications team demonstrates an acute understanding of the media.

“I think Isko Moreno is trying to find a way to connect to the young people. He knows he will not always have airtime so he’s going to use the broadness of social media to get his airtime,” said Sarmenta, who had lived in Manila for over two decades.

As the media blitz calms down, Moreno and his team know that their reach would diminish. As Sarmenta said, “there are other stories to file.”

That's why the young mayor and his young team go live on their own channels as much as they can.

Where youth may fail

FIRST FLAK. Isko Moreno is hit with a wave of negative comments after his team posts a photo of him injected with a dextrose pack.

On August 14, crisis struck the team.

Moreno had a tooth infection, causing the right side of his face to swell. He had to get surgery – an operation he videocasted live – and go to work injected with a dextrose pack.

An employee from the Justice Jose Abad Santos General Hospital who assisted in Moreno’s check-up snapped a photo and posted it on his Facebook page, tagging Moreno in the post.

With transparency in mind as usual, the Manila Public Information Office shared the photo across all platforms. The post didn't get the feedback they had expected.

While Facebook users flooded him with comments to take care of himself, Twitter users bombarded Moreno with criticism for what they saw as a public relations stunt.

“The people’s comments were that he was epal (going overboard) and he was trapo (being a traditional politician),” Leonen said.

The booboo led to a talk with Moreno, where they agreed to be more sensitive to the public’s pulse before posting.

“As a PIO we should only publish what is relevant and necessary,” Moreno said, recalling the conversation after the crisis.

But for Sarmenta, the true test for a communications team is not the self-inflicted crisis, but an external one.

Some examples: A typhoon, an earthquake, a bombing in a public market, a shooting in a concert, a deadly fire in the slums, a stampede – crises with body counts that put the most weight on the mayor.

In these extreme circumstances, would the Manila Public Information Office also continue going live with the same enthusiasm? Can Moreno maintain the same grace under pressure?

“There will be times where transparency will be challenged,” Sarmenta said.

It is in these boiler room scenarios, Sarmenta said, where it pays to have weathered senior communications officers in the team.

The closest figure who fits the description is Moreno’s chief of staff Cesar Chavez, the former transportation undersecretary for railways who dealt with almost daily disasters pertaining to the country’s train systems.

As Moreno’s main gatekeeper, Chavez has, at times, led the Facebook live broadcast, and has helped Leonen respond to inquiring reporters in the official media Viber group.

“He has been a big help. He’s like a father figure to the team,” Leonen said.

Dreams of the kids

TEAM. Manila Mayor Isko Moreno poses for a photo with his communications team.

“All of our work is just the bare minimum. We haven’t yet achieved anything that we can say is our legacy,” Leonen said.

For Leonen and his team, the public is still adjusting to the experience of a “transparent government.” It’s a tacit swipe at the Estrada administration, which kept a hushed public information office.

“For the longest time, the Manila City government has not been this transparent. Before, people say that politicians are only felt when elections draw closer. But now, they can feel them from the beginning, and yet they’re still irked. They’re still adjusting,” Leonen said.

As things stand, Leonen’s team is already understaffed and underequipped.

So far, their schedules have been consumed by Moreno’s events only, leaving other Manila offices out from the promise of "open governance.”

For their Facebook live broadcasts, they make do with tables for their cameras and lights instead of using tripods. Their 4 computers were pulled from the Asenso Manileño local party campaign office. And their office driver, Alden, was only “borrowed” from the city security office.

According to Leonen, they have been scraping the communications office budget left by the Estrada administration, which he estimated to be P4 million for 2019. For the year 2020, he will ask for at least P8 million to hire and procure more.

With more people and better equipment, expect more live broadcasts from Isko Moreno and his team of millennials.

“We refuse to be stagnant, we refuse to be idle. We always want to move forward,” Leonen said. – Rappler.com

TOP PHOTO: JUST BEHIND. Manila Public Information chief Julius Leonen stands behind Manila Mayor Isko Moreno as he faces reporters. All photos from Manila PIO

No, Senator Zubiri, you cannot quo warranto freed convicts

$
0
0

FREED CONVICTS. Senate Majority Floor Leader Migs Zubiri suggests launching a quo warranto procedure against 1,914 heinous crimes convicts who were already released. Photo by Angie de Silva/Rappler

(UPDATED) Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri wrongly suggested that a quo warranto procedure can be launched in order to revoke the early releases of 1,914 heinous crimes convicts already freed.

"Can we not also invoke [a process] similar to quo warranto proceedings and recall these prisoners because this is tainting our adminsitration's fight for criminality?" Zubiri asked Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra during the Senate's investigation into the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law on Monday, September 2.

Quo warranto is the mode by which former chief justice Maria Lourdes Sereno was ousted. It is a procedure that questions the eligibility of a public official to hold his or her current position.

"This is like a quo warranto case, nagkamali 'yung recommendation, 'yung dokumento, sinubmit, in-appoint, therefore mali 'yung proseso, at natanggal. Similar to a quo warranto case, can we not intervene this way, that the process as you see is very flawed, they failed miserably in the conditions for pardon, and they failed in the process?" Zubiri asked.

(Obviously referring to Sereno, Zubiri said: "This is like a quo warranto case: the recommendation was wrong, the documents submitted were wrong, but there was an appointment. Therefore the process was wrong, and it resulted in an ouster.")

Guevarra said it cannot be done: "The proper remedy is not quo warranto because we're not talking about a public office here."

Rule 66 of the Rules of Court defines quo warranto as an action against "usurpation of a public office, position or franchise."

There are clashing legal views on whether heinous crimes should be excluded from the GCTA law. 

Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) Chief Nicanor Faeldon explained to the Senate that the heinous crimes inmates were released, following an interpretation of the law that has been prevailing since 2014, or after the law was passed in 2013. 

What will happen to the convicts?

Although it is Guevarra's position that heinous crimes convicts should be excluded from the GCTA law, the justice secretary has held off making comments on the 1,914 already freed inmates.

"Puwede ba silang i-recall, consider as wanted o puwede bang shoot to kill?" Senator Bong Go asked. (Can we recall them? Consider them as wanted? Or can we issue a shoot to kill order?)

Guevarra answered: "It's a very complicated issue. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has a view regarding how to deal with those already released but sentenced of crimes considered heinous. But considering that constitutional issues may be involved here, I would rather not make a comment at this time until a more thorough study on how to deal with the problem."

Section 22 of the Bill of Rights says "no ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted." Ex post facto laws are simply laws that penalize a crime committed at a time when it was not yet illegal.

Law professor Ted Te said that if the 1,914 convicts are sent to jail on the basis of a wrong application of the law, it would be applying the law ex post facto, which violates the Bill of Rights.

Article 99 of the Revised Penal Code also says good conduct time allowances "once granted shall not be revoked."

Jurisprudence? 

Senator Franklin Drilon pointed out the 1967 case of People vs Tan, where the Supreme Court ordered the re-arrest of an inmate who was wrongly freed on time allowance.

"The rearrest of those 1,914, if found that the release was in violation of the law and the rules, they can be rearrested on the authority of People vs Tan," Drilon said.

However, the 1967 case may have different facts.  

A jail warden "took it upon himself" to credit convict Fidel Tan under the GCTA and released him on that basis.

The Supreme Court ordered the rearrest because the warden abused a task that belonged to the Director of Prisons.

"We shall take a look at that jurisprudential ruling," Guevarra said.

Guevarra added it may be time for the Supreme Court to make the decision again.

"These are very complicated issues and may require much deeper study. I would rather that a person with interest in a situation like this bring up the matter to the Supreme Court, which will have the final authority to make a ruling," Guevarra said. Rappler.com


Rappler Talk: FLAG lawyer Jun Viterbo on navigating sedition case vs opposition

$
0
0

Bookmark this page to watch the interview at 2 pm on Tuesday, September 3! 

MANILA, Philippines – Thirty-six individuals, mostly aligned with the opposition, are facing inciting to sedition charges on the basis of an affidavit of Peter Joemel Advincula, the man behind the viral Bikoy videos.

The complaint seeks to jail Vice President Leni Robredo and the key opposition members for up to 6 years over what they call “Project Sodoma,” which, according to Advincula, is an alleged plot against the Duterte administration. (READ: Bikoy vs Bikoy: The biggest flip-flops of the government's star witness)

On Tuesday, September 3, Rappler editor at large Marites Vitug sits down with lawyer Jun Viterbo of the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) to discuss the complaint, the defense of the respondents, and what they expect to happen as they navigate what critics call a crackdown on the opposition under Duterte.

Viterbo is the lawyer of former Supreme Court spokesperson Ted Te in the sedition complaint. (READ: Meet the lawyers fighting Bikoy's sedition complaint

Watch the discussion live on Tuesday, September 3, at 2 pm! – Rappler.com

Gaps by both Aquino, Duterte administrations led to GCTA mess

$
0
0

MANILA, Philippines – The mess that surrounds the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law is the result of a series of gaps and loopholes spanning the Aquino and Duterte administrations.

That much was revealed during the Senate investigation on Monday, September 2.

"What is clear is that the law is not very clear," Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri declared as the hearing wound down Monday afternoon.

"[Congress] should amend the law immediately," said Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra, who even suggested that a provision be inserted so that Congress can exercise a continuing oversight function over how the law is implemented. (READ: Beyond Sanchez: How to improve the Good Conduct Time Allowance law)

"Sana kung nagawa 'yun much earlier, 'yung oversight function, natunugan kaagad eh, baka nakita kaagad, kaso naghintay pa tayo na may pumutok," Guevarra told reporters after the hearing.

(They could have exercised their oversight function much earlier, they could have spotted this problem earlier, but we waited for something like this to happen.) 

The Senate investigation was prompted by public outcry over the aborted release of convicted rapist and murderer Antonio Sanchez, and the completed releases of the convicts in the 1997 Chiong sisters case as well as Chinese drug lords.

Senator Risa Hontiveros has also alleged that there are indications the GCTA may be for sale inside prisons.

How did this happen?

TIMELINE

May 23, 2013

During the presidency of Benigno Aquino III, 3 key things happened, starting with May 29, 2013, when Republic Act No. 10592 was passed, increasing the period by which inmates' sentences can be slashed on the basis of good conduct.

The law was not explicit on whether those convicted of heinous crimes are eligible for good conduct time allowance. (Read our legal explainer here on the warring views on that provision.)

"The provisions of this law should be crafted in a better way.... Had it been clearly stated in one single provision, stand-alone provision, then we probably would not have confusion such as what we have now," Guevarra told the Senate blue ribbon and justice committees.

Senate President Vicente Sotto III has filed a resolution seeking a review of the law, with the goal of amending it to exclude heinous crimes convicts.

April 18, 2014

On April 18, 2014, then-justice secretary Leila de Lima and then-interior secretary Mar Roxas published the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the law.

Under the IRR, inmates who are entitled to avail of GCTA were clearly categorized. It declared as eligible "a prisoner convicted by final judgment in any penal institution," meaning all convicted prisoners, the crime notwithstanding.

The IRR also stated that the law is to be applied prospectively, meaning only to those prisoners who were convicted after the law was passed.

In 2014 alone, the Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) released 1,663 inmates, 62 of whom were convicted of heinous crimes.

The number would increase as time went by.

 

November 26, 2015

The Department of Justice (DOJ) under the leadership of then-secretary and now Supreme Court (SC) Associate Justice Benjamin Caguioa issued Department Order (DO) No. 953 on November 26, 2015.

Under this order, an inmate who was sentenced to reclusion perpetua can only be released with the approval of the justice secretary, not just the BuCor chief.

This would have made the process more stringent, as it would add another layer of screening.

But Guevarra said that since he became justice secretary in April 2018, his approval was never sought. Only approval requests for inmates to be released on Special Time Allowance for Loyalty reached him, Guevarra said.

As a matter of fact, Guevarra only came to know about the existence of DO No. 953 when the Sanchez controversy broke out.

 

December 1, 2017

Enter the Duterte administration. 

The task of publishing a uniform manual on the GCTA fell upon the leadership of resigned justice secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II and former interior secretary Catalino Cuy.

By this time, 14,371 inmates had already been released under the GCTA law, 714 of whom were heinous crimes convicts. In 2017 alone, or under the successive leaderships of Benjamin delos Santos and Valfrie Tabian (officer-in-charge), the BuCor released 4,836 inmates under GCTA, 335 of whom were heinous crimes convicts.

On December 1, 2017, the Aguirre-led DOJ published the uniform manual which the BuCor uses to this day. The manual, however, does not clarify the provision on heinous crimes.

Moreover, the manual does not spell out any single act that would disqualify an inmate from GCTA. If an inmate commits an offense, no matter how grave, the inmate loses GCTA points only for that month. (The law provides for guidelines on how to compute GCTA per month.)

This made Senator Richard Gordon furious, considering that Sanchez had been found stashing drugs twice at the New Bilibid Prison, as well as having prohibited luxuries like a television and air-conditioning unit.

Gordon channeled his fury to former justice undersecretary Reynante Orceo, who was among the officials who published the manual.

"That's in the law, your honor, because the law said GCTA is given each month," Orceo said.

"Look at where we are now.... Ang laki-laking lamat ng batas ngayon sa atin, kawawa 'yung mga taong pinatay, 'yung mga pamilya nila (The law has caused us so much conflict, and has brought injustice to the victims and their families). Did you consider that for one moment?" Gordon said.

Senator Francis Pangilinan pointed out the "absurdity" of the system, saying an inmate can stab fellow inmates on 3 occasions in a month but lose points only that month, and can go on to collect more points during "behaved" months.

"Is that right? I don't think that's the intent of the law and the lawmakers, but it looks like that is what's happening," Pangilinan said in Filipino.

January 2016 to April 2018

The hearing revealed that BuCor Director General Nicanor Faeldon had already signed the release order for Sanchez, but only aborted it due to public outcry.

Pangilinan pressed why Faeldon did not seek Guevarra's approval before signing Sanchez's release order, or other release orders for reclusion perpetua inmates, as required by DO No. 953.

This exposed another gap, as Faeldon said there was an "earlier communication between the former director general of the BuCor and the former secretary of justice amending that procedure."

But Guevarra is clueless about that "communication."

Moreover, no one could recall which former officials made the supposed amendment.

Guevarra said it could only be the justice secretaries after Caguioa and before him, which means it's either former secretary Emmanuel Caparas from the Aquino administration or Aguirre during the Duterte administration.

"Hindi na sila secretary, hindi na sila director general, pero sinusunod natin ang kanilang sinulat – na hindi rin natin alam kung may sulat ba o hindi – gano'n ba 'yun?" Pangilinan asked.

(They're no longer secretary and director general, but we're following what they decided – which we don't even know if they really put into writing – is that what's happening?)

BuCor Director for Security and Operations Melencio Faustino said that from June to September 2018 – a period that covers both the Aguirre and Guevarra terms in the DOJ – the BuCor "made several communications requesting for the delegation of power to release inmates."

Faustino said they requested this because they have been "saddled" with cases of inmates complaining of arbitrary detention. They wanted an expedited process, so to speak.

Faustino added that it was even former BuCor director general and now Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa who ordered a "pullout of several documents" concerning inmates up for release.

June 25, 2019 

On June 25, 2019, the SC unanimously declared that the GCTA law should be retroactive. This would grant benefits to roughly 11,000 convicts who have been jailed since the 1990s.

Dela Rosa asked: Was the SC unaware that heinous crimes convicts would be covered by a retroactive application of the law?

Dela Rosa's question, however, is misplaced in that the SC rarely answers a question not formally brought before the High Court. Petitioners only wanted the law to be retroactive, so the SC limited its decision to that aspect.

As Guevarra told Dela Rosa, "The SC really limited itself to the resolution of retroactivity and nothing more."

What now?

As all of these issues are being threshed out, roughly 11,000 inmates wait for their processing, and the already-granted freedom to 1,914 heinous crimes convicts is in danger of being revoked.

Senator Bong Go even asked during the hearing if there should be a shoot-to-kill order for the inmates who were earlier freed.

This mess demonstrates the pitfalls of bureaucracy and the impactful consequences of seemingly imperfect legislation.

"If [Congress] agrees with me that something has got to be done with the law, to prevent these ambiguities, then they should amend the law immediately," Guevarra said. – Rappler.com

All is well? Cayetano berates Ungab over 2020 budget row

$
0
0

SORTED OUT? House committee on appropriations chair Isidro Ungab (2nd from L) stands awkwardly with other House leaders after their meeting on September 2, 2019. Photo courtesy of Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano's office

Looks like the issues in the proposed 2020 budget have not been “sorted out” by the House leadership after all. 

At least two sources told Rappler that Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano scolded House committee on appropriations chairperson Isidro Ungab for opposing the withdrawal of the General Appropriations Bill (GAB) on the proposed P4.1-trillion budget for 2020

The withdrawal was ordered by Cayetano’s ally, Deputy Speaker Luis Raymund Villafuerte, who said it was “premature” for Ungab to have filed the 2020 GAB for first reading in the plenary last week. (READ: Smells like pork? ‘Premature’ 2020 budget bill withdrawn in House plenary)

The sources privy to Cayetano’s meeting with Ungab, Villafuerte, and other House leaders on Monday afternoon, September 2, said the Speaker supposedly threatened to move Ungab to another committee if the Davao City congressman did not cooperate with the House leadership in resolving his row with Villafuerte.

“Ungab was reprimanded and was told there are other committees available for him if he does not compromise,” one source told Rappler.

Another insider said the House leadership imposed a gag order on Ungab to stop talking about the controversy involving the 2020 budget, which his committee on appropriations is primarily tasked to scrutinize. (READ: Ungab to Villafuerte: Bill withdrawal to 'definitely derail' 2020 budget passage

Ungab already warned that changes in the refiled GAB version would "surely raise doubts on our proceedings and the House will be questioned on why it will alter the proposed budget prepared by the executive department."

Cayetano, however, insisted the Ungab-Villafuerte issue had been “sorted out” and was nothing but a mere “misunderstanding” between two legislators. 

Ungab's clash with Villafuerte is a sign that at least two Duterte-allied factions in the House are colliding. 

Presidential children Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte and Davao City 1st District Representative Paolo Duterte initially pushed for Ungab to be House Speaker. But Ungab withdrew from the speakership fight after President Rodrigo Duterte himself endorsed a term-sharing agreement between two of his allies: Cayetano and Marinduque Representative Lord Allan Velasco. 

Villafuerte, meanwhile, strongly backed Cayetano’s bid for Speaker. – Rappler.com

What are heinous crimes?

$
0
0

BILIBID SECURITY. Members of the PNP-SAF patrol outside the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa City. File photo by Ben Nabong/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – In the debate over the good conduct time allowance (GCTA) law, the spotlight shone on heinous crimes.

Government officials have been debating whether or not people convicted of heinous crimes should benefit from the GCTA law which allows for a reduction of sentences of PDLs (persons deprived of liberty), depending on how well they abide by prison rules and regulations. 

The controversy was sparked by initial news that convicted murderer-rapist Antonio Sanchez was up for early release in August. Sanchez was convicted in 1995 for the deaths of University of the Philippines-Los Baños students Eileen Sarmenta and Allan Gomez. (LISTEN: [PODCAST] Ang batas na puwedeng magpalaya sa rapist-murderer na si Antonio Sanchez) 

But what counts as a heinous crime? 

According to Department of Justice (DOJ) Undersecretary Deo Marco, they are “constrained to refer to the definition stipulation under the death penalty law.”  

Republic Act 7659, the law signed in 1993 and which imposed the death penalty, says that heinous crimes include: 

  • Treason
  • Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas in Philippine waters
  • Qualified piracy
  • Qualified bribery
  • Parricide
  • Murder
  • Infanticide
  • Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
  • Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons
  • Destructive arson
  • Rape
  • Importation, distribution, manufacturing and possession of illegal drugs

These crimes were considered heinous “for being grievous, odious and hateful offenses and which, by reason of their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity and perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and norms of decency and morality in a just, civilized and ordered society.”  

Individuals convicted of the above-mentioned crimes were sentenced to death.

This, however, was eventually reduced to reclusion perpetua after the abolition of the death penalty in 2006 under then-president Gloria Arroyo through RA 9436Reclusion perpetua entails imprisonment of at least 20 years and a day up to a maximum of 40 years, after which a prisoner can be eligible for parole – unless otherwise specified.

Arroyo's law repealed only the imposition of the death penalty and "did not touch the definition of what heinous crimes are; neither did it repeal the enumeration," Justice Undersecretary Markk Perete said.

According to data released by the Bureau of Corrections, since 2013, at least 1,914 inmates convicted of heinous crimes were released due to the GCTA law. 

In 2019, the year when the Supreme Court ruled the law can be applied retroactively, 819 people convicted of heinous crimes were released. 

The discussions on the GCTA law now focus on whether heinous crimes should be excluded from the law, prompting hearings in Congress. 

In an explainer, Rappler justice reporter Lian Buan dissects the GCTA law and the views of different government officials and lawyers on it. (READ: Can heinous crimes be excluded from good conduct time allowance law?

How can the law be made clearer? For Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra, the DOJ would be "glad" if the SC or Congress is able to clarify if heinous crimes should be excluded from GCTA. – Rappler.com

'Obviously lying': Senators don't believe Faeldon

$
0
0

GCTA CONTROVERSY. Bureau of Corrections chief Nicanor Faeldon was put in the hot seat at the second day of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing on Good Conduct Time Allowance on September 3, 2019. Photo by Angie de Silva/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – "He's obviously lying." "He's not fit for the job."

These are what the senators had to say about Bureau of Corrections chief Nicanor Faeldon, after the two-day Senate blue ribbon committee hearing on the good conduct time allowance (GCTA) law.

The Senate investigation was prompted by the now-botched release of rape and murder convict Antonio Sanchez due to good conduct. The ex-mayor of Laguna was supposed to be out of the New Bilibid Prison by August 20.

While he insisted he was merely following the guidelines of the law, Faeldon took the credit for stopping the release of Sanchez.

The prison chief had admitted that he signed a memorandum starting Sanchez's release process on August 20, but later backtracked from the decision. Faeldon said he recalled the order even if it "does not have any legal basis."

In his version of the story, Faeldon acted on his own to stop Sanchez from getting out of Bilibid. It was because of the ex-mayor's bad record, Faeldon said.

But the senators don't believe him.

What happened?

During the two-day Senate hearing, the senators sought to build the timeline of events from August 20, when Sanchez was ordered released, to August 22, when the decision was publicly recalled.

Based on the accounts of the resource speakers on Tuesday, September 3, Rappler put together the timeline:

August 20, 2019: The supposed release of Sanchez, the ex-mayor of Calauan, Laguna

Around lunchtime, Faeldon had signed the memorandum of release signaling the start of the process for Sanchez. It only takes about two hours to complete the process.

That day, the ex-mayor's wife, Elvira, said that she received a text message from an unknown number informing her of her husband's release.

Shortly around noon, Faeldon said that his office received a call from Deo Macalma, DZRH's station manager. This call, according to him, made him "rethink" his order.

"Tumawag si Deo Macalma. (Deo Macalma called.) I recalled him asking if Sanchez was released. Based on that, I stopped and [had to] rethink if there's still a possibility to stop the release. It was triggered by a call from one reporter. Within that minute, I ordered the recall," Faeldon said on Tuesday.

In the afternoon, Department of Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra told the media about Sanchez's supposed release.

At around 6 pm, Faeldon talked to radio station DZMM about the possible release of Sanchez within the next two months.

At around 7:30 pm, Elvira, with her son Allan Antonio and daughter Ave Marie, went to the New Bilibid Prison expecting to see the Sanchez patriarch. They didn't see him.

"Nagpunta po ako ng August 20. I think that was 7:30 or 8 o'clock in the evening, to clarify things nga about the release of my husband. Sabi ng staff, 'di na siya (Faeldon) puwedeng kausapin. Pinabalik kami," Elvira said.

(I went there on August 20. I think that was 7:30 or 8 o'clock in the evening, to clarify things about the release of my husband. But the staff said that I can't talk to him anymore. So we were asked to return instead.)

August 21, 2019: Sanchez family met Faeldon

At around 11 am, Elvira went back to the BuCor to see Faeldon "for the first time." Her family waited around 15 minutes before they were allowed to talk to him.

The two-hour meeting resulted in a promise: That Sanchez "may be out" in two months if he met the criteria for early release.

But didn't Faeldon decide the day before that he would not be releasing Sanchez?

"They were crying in my office. That's why I said tactfully, 'If the ex-mayor will qualify in the GCTA, probably, he will go in two months.' Because all 11,000 inmates will go because that's the program," Faeldon said on Tuesday.

FAMILY. Antonio Sanchez's wife and 3 children attend the second day of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing on Good Conduct Time Allowance on September 3, 2019. Photo by Angie de Silva/Rappler

In the evening, Senator Christopher "Bong" Go messaged Faeldon, informing him of the President's order to stop the release amid the public outcry. Go said that the BuCor chief replied, "I will comply."

"To the credit of the President, siya ang nag-utos to stop (he ordered for it to be stopped)," Go said.

But Faeldon's version of the story included him telling Go about the reasons why he stopped Sanchez's release.

"Sabi ko (I told him): 'Sir, there are possible two reasons to hold the release of ex-mayor Sanchez because he may not qualify from GCTA. Because he is a convict of heinous crimes, and the other one is because of his kubol (cell) destroyed in 2015," Faeldon told the Senate panel.

August 22, 2019: Faeldon announced that Sanchez may not be freed after all

That morning, Guevarra was informed by the Office of the President about the President's order.

"I got this phone call from Undersecretary Jenny Ong in the morning. Right after that, I relayed the information to chief Faeldon. I think via text message. It's very difficult to call chief Faeldon because of the signal at BuCor," Guevarra said.

At noon, Faeldon called for a press conference. He announced to the media that Sanchez is not qualified for early release.


What's the truth?

The senators are not buying Faeldon's version of the timeline.

For Lacson, Go, and Guevarra's statements, check out the timeline. As for Faeldon, "he's obviously lying," the senator told reporters on Tuesday.

"Malinaw sa mga sagot niya at sa sagot ni Senator Go and SOJ Guevarra. Talagang hindi 'nya pinahinto, kundi inutusan siyang ihinto," Lacson said. (It's clear when you compare his answers to the answers of Senator Go and SOJ Guevarra. It's clear that he didn't stop, rather he was asked to stop it.)

Senator Richard Gordon, the Senate blue ribbon committee chair, said that Faeldon is only making up excuses.

"Tinanong ko nga siya, 'Talagang meron kang desisyon?' Palagay ko, maaaring nalaman 'nya na masyadong mainit at nasabihan siya ng Presidente. Ayaw 'nya lang sabihin," Gordon told reporters on Tuesday.

(I asked him, "Did you really decide by yourself?" I think he only realized that this is a hot issue that's why the President talked to him. He just doesn't want to admit it.)

The Senate blue ribbon commitee chair also found Faeldon's reason for halting Sanchez's release a "very weak statement."

At the Tuesday hearing, Gordon showed a CNN Philippines interview with the Sanchez children. In the video, Sanchez's namesake, Allan Antonio, said that halting his father's release was "different" from what they had discussed before.

"Sir, nag-usap po tayo. Nangako kayo na palalabasin 'nyo ang daddy ko dahil according to GCTA, isa siya sa makakasama at qualified naman po siya," Allan Antonio said.

(Sir, we talked about this. You promised that my daddy would be released because according to the GCTA, he is among the qualified ones.)

As senators think there are "GCTA for sale" instances inside Bilibid, Gordon said he's hoping that the Sanchez family would insinuate that.

"That was what I am hoping that the family will say, but the family is also protective of him. Something happened. Ano 'yun, nagbago isip (What made him change his mind)?" Gordon said.

For Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon, Faeldon committed either negligence or malicious omission of facts when he appeared before the Senate panel.

Is the Sanchez family complicit? Elvira's admission that she destroyed her phone on Tuesday morning before the Senate probe raised eyebrows.

To check if the family never met with Faeldon prior to the August 20 encounter, Gordon said he would issue a subpoena to demand a copy of the CCTV footage when the Sanchez family visited the BuCor, along with the logbook of the bureau.

Clipping BuCor's powers

More than Sanchez, the 2013 GCTA law is at the center of the controversy. The reported releases of the 1997 Chiong sisters murder convicts and Chinese drug lords even added insult to injury.

If not for the Supreme Court ruling on the GCTA's retroactive application, 11,000 inmates would not have hoped for early release. The 2013 GCTA law provided for new guidelines on how to compute "good conduct time," as basis for reducing prison terms. (TIMELINE: The GCTA law and the controversy it has stirred)

The issue shed light on gaps in the law: Should heinous crimes be excluded from its coverage? Is there something wrong with its implementing guidelines? Should the BuCor chief have the sole authority to approve releases? (READ: Gaps by both Aquino, Duterte administrations led to GCTA mess)

Even the justice secretary said that maybe it's "time for Congress to review its own creation."

At the Senate, 4 lawmakers have filed measures seeking not only to exclude convicts of heinous crimes from being granted GCTA, but also to clip the powers of BuCor.

Gordon's Senate Bill 974 seeks to amend Articles 97 and 99 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). His version includes two major points:

  • Article 97: An explicit definition of good conduct and the exclusion of recidivists, habitual delinquents, escapees, and persons convicted of heinous crimes from being granted GCTA
  • Article 99: The computation of good conduct must be reviewed by the Board of Pardons and Parole

In SB 998, Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri also wants to amend the same articles of the RPC. His version excludes heinous crime convicts from GCTA coverage under Article 97. 

Zubiri also proposed to downgrade BuCor's powers. In his proposal, BuCor will only recommend the list of eligible inmates for GCTA, subject to the approval of the justice and interior departments.

Meanwhile, Senator Juan Edgardo Angara seeks to change Articles 29, 97, 99, 171, and 174 under the RPC, and create a new Article, 99-A. Angara's SB 995 has the following key provisions:

  • Article 29: Definition of heinous crimes and its exclusion from GCTA coverage
  • Article 97: Informing the offended party of the convict's early release
  • Article 99-A: Time allowances may be revoked if a prisoner violates prison rules or commits a crime
  • Article 171: Inclusion of the act of issuing false certificate of merit or good conduct in the crimes against public interest. It removes the same provision under Article 174 where the maximum penalty is a fine of P200,000 only.

Go also filed his own proposed measure SB 1003, categorizing the following crimes as heinous: Treason, mutiny on high seas, qualified piracy, qualified bribery, murder, infanticide, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, robbery with violence, destructive arson, rape, plunder, drug-related offenses, and carnapping.

Just like his colleagues, Go moved to disqualify convicts of heinous crimes from GCTA. He proposed that the grant of allowances be subject to mandatory review by the justice secretary, and that the list of grantees be submitted to Congress.

But some senators also want to repeal the GCTA law.

In SB 993, Gordon joined Lacson and Senate President Vicente Sotto III in seeking to repeal the GCTA law altogether, as its provisions need to be harmonized.

Should Faeldon resign?

During Monday's Senate hearing, Senator Risa Hontiveros asked when Faeldon would resign

With confidence, the BuCor chief who had been recycled twice under the Duterte administration said it's up to the appointing authority – the President – to decide.

Asked if he believes he should resign, Faeldon said, "No."

But the senators thought otherwise.

Gordon said on Tuesday: "Kung ako ang Presidente, (If I were the President), I would ask him to resign but I am not the President. He's not fit for the job."

While Senator Manny Pacquiao said he still trusts Faeldon, he said late Tuesday that the latter should "take a leave of absence to spare the President and this administration from embarrassment."

Faeldon enjoyed the favor of the President, being appointed thrice to different posts.

He first served the Duterte administration as chief of the Bureau of Customs, where he was accused by the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency of involvement in the P6.4-billion shabu smuggling controversy.

In 2017, he was appointed deputy administrator III at the Office of Civil Defense. In October 2018, Faeldon succeeded now-Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa as director-general of BuCor. (LIST: No to corruption? Duterte's controversial reappointees)

Malacañang said the President will decide whether or not they will fire BuCor officials after the back-to-back congressional hearings on the GCTA controversy. Go even said that "heads will roll" when the President gets to the bottom of the issue.

Will Faeldon survive this controversy unscathed? – Rappler.com

Viewing all 8648 articles
Browse latest View live