Skip to content

Why I Am Against Impeaching the President

Malaya 07.24.14

 

 

Binay, the vice president becomes president if an impeachment against the President succeeds. Would that be in the best interests of this country?

by Ducky Paredes

        There are now three impeachment complaints against the President that have been endorsed by sitting congressmen and two others that still need a endorser. As with a lot of things that  politicians do, most of these were done only to gain notoreity for the authors.

        What would impeaching the President accomplish?

        Remember that we tried to impeach President Joseph Estrada. That failed but we still got rid of Erap as President by a hate campaign that the so-called “intelligent” voters fell for. Among those who moved for the impeachment and when that failed, forced the President out of his office, was former President Cory Aquino.  Cory had the good sense to eventually ask Erap for his forgiveness when she realized that she was on the wrong side of history. After all, what did we get for the effort to impeach Erap and finally illegaly forcing him out of office and putting a sitting President in jail (who, according to the Constitution, can be removed only after a successful impeachment?) There was an impeachment but it failed since the Senate’s vote on the impeachment failed.

        So, what did that accomplish? What did we get?

        The only winner was Gloria Arroyo, the vice president took over who eventually turned out to be worse than the one she replaced. Imagine that we had a President who never had a budget that was passed by the legislature. She was given each year the budget that was passed the year before which meant that while the total amount for the budget would be the same as the passed budget the year before, she could assign the items and the amounts as she went along. She ran the country like her own household and was even virtually a Chinese agent who gave the Chinese rights to explore in our seas and even to share in our resources.

        That’s what we got when we tried to impeach Erap and failed.

        If we succeed in impeaching President Aquino, who profits? Who takes over? Jejomar Binay?  I have nothing against Jojo but I cannot help wonder how he got to be a billionaire. Did he practice a profession that could give have given him the billions that he now obviously has? Or, did he have a business that could have earned him that kind of money? I don’t know of any. In fact, he never ran anything but the City of Makati, through 24 years for him, nine for his wife and now his son as mayor. Yet, he obviously has a lot more money now than when President Cory appointed him OIC in Makati City in 1986.

        Binay, the vice president becomes president if an impeachment against the President succeeds. Would that be in the best interests of this country?

* * *

        We have a President who, despite the disrespect that he gets from his critics and the various political enemies who regard him as a lightweight has moved this country forward, even as to its being regarded by the World Bank as an example to the rest of the world. World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim praised the country as an example of one that is run with good governance: ” “Good governance means delivering public services effectively and efficiently, while being transparent about what you spend and the results you achieve,” Kim said. “Good governance involves choosing wise policies and investments; maintaining public assets; and ensuring that civil servants are skilled, motivated, and have the tools to work effectively. It is about fostering a transparent regulatory environment that will allow the private sector to create growth and jobs.”

        According to the United Nations, supporting good governance is an important component of the World Bank Group’s new Philippine’s Country Partnership Strategy, which supports the country’s goal of promoting sustainable growth, reducing poverty and creating jobs. Under this new four year strategy, the World Bank Group plans to provide US$3.2 billion in financing for development to the government and another $1 billion for investments in business and industry from IFC, its private sector arm.

        WB President Jim Yong Kim also said: It is now well established within the academic literature on institutions and growth that there is a strong and positive correlation between the principles of good governance and a country’s GDP per capita.  As you, President Aquino, have so eloquently noted, “good governance is good economics.”  The precise causal relationships are less well understood, but some recent studies have begun to confirm what many of us have long suspected—that effective institutions (or their absence) have an important impact on economic growth.  There is plenty of evidence that corruption can deter private investment. And studies at the sectoral level have documented the perverse effect that corruption and weak administration can exert on education and health outcomes, or on the quality and selection of infrastructure projects.  Some recent studies from the United States underscore that high levels of corruption are associated with increased inequality, as well.”

        The WB President continued: “Under your leadership, President Aquino, the Philippines is in the forefront of this transformation. You’ve doubled government budgets for social services and made performance-informed budgeting the norm. Citizens increasingly see your conditional cash transfer program, Pantawid Pamilya, as an instrument to realize their rights to education or health care. 

        “Your administration has also streamlined business regulations, bringing down the cost of doing business and reducing opportunities for corruption. Your Open Data initiative has reinforced accountability at all levels of government. For instance, the Philippines is now using electronic procurement technology to encourage citizens to be observers in all stages of the bidding process and, just recently, started the use of geo-tagging. Similar tools are now being used to monitor assistance for people affected by Typhoon Yolanda. Your commitment to transparency is a beacon for the nations of East Asia, and beyond.”

* * *

        This is the man who is now facing impeachment complaints and possible jail term for having violated our Constitution? One has to wonder: what is wrong with us?

# # # #

hvp 07.23.14


Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

Impeachment Na Naman?

Diretsahan

 

ni Horacio Paredes

 

Hindi na ba tayo motututo? Tumatnaw na naman ang mga walang utak nating mga mambabatas sa impeachment upang matangal ang ating halal na Pangulo na minamata ng ilan nating “madudunong” na mambabatas. Parang nakalimutan na nila kung ano ang nangyari noon ang ating pangulo ay ai Joseph Estrada na ngayon ay alkalde ng Maynila at napakaganda naman ng ginagawa.

Noong Pangulo si Erap, ang mga nagtanggal sa kaniya ay ang mga  “intelligent” voters kuno. Sa totoo nadala sila sa mga batikos ng kung sino-sino tungkol sa ating Pangulo noon na si Joseph Estrada hanggang umabot na nga sa impeachment. Ngunit, noon namang dinidinig pa ng Senado ang kaso tungkol sa kung dapat bang matangal si Erap bilang Pangulo, hindi maka-hatol ang mga Senador kung kaya si Erap na ating Presidente (kahit na ayon sa ating Saligang Batas ay maaari lamang matanggal pagkatpos ng tagumpay na impeachment) ay kinulong at tinanggal sa pwesto (labag sa ating Saligang Batas.)  Eto ay ginawa ng mga taong nag-aakalang “intelligent voter” sila,

Mabuti naman na si dating Pangulong Cory ay humingi ng tawad kay Erap sa kaniyang naging papel sa mga pangyayaring natanggal si Erap sa puwesto. Sa aking pagkaka-alam wala nang iba pang nag-sorry kay Erap sa kanilang naging papel sa paglabag sa Saligang Batas sa pagtanggal kay Erap.

Naririto na naman tayo. Ang mga kumakalaban sa ating Pangulo ay wala nang respeto sa kaniya at tinuturing siyang Abnoy at mas masahol pa kahit na ang buong mundo ay  panay ang puri kay PNoy sa pagsulong ng ekonomiya ng Pilipinas dahil na rin sa “good governance” ng ating Pangulo.

Ang mga papuri ang nanggagaling sa World Bank at sa United Nations. Sa totoo panga, kaamakailan lamang ay naririto ang mga taga-World Bank dala ang mga ilang mga taga-Europa na mga ekonomista upang madinig ang mga payo ng ating Pangulo tungkol sa “good governance” dahil sa pananaw ng World Bank napatunayan ng ating Pangulo na maaaring magpalakad ng bansa na walang corruption at malinis na pamamahala.

Ngunit sa mga “marurunong” nating mga pulitiko na minamata ang ating Pangulo at kanilang tinuturing na “abnoy” wala silang nakikita kundi ang  matagal na nilang pinapantasya na mababang uri ang ating Pangulo, kaya — ayan — kanila na namang panaginip na makakabuti sa bansa kung matanggal si PNoy sa paamagitan ng “impeachment.”

Parang hindi pa sila natuto na noong impeachment laban kay Erap, lalo lamang sumama ang bansa  noong napalitan si Erap ng kaniyang Bise na si Gloria na lumitaw na isa sa pinakamasama nating naging Presidente.

Hindi impeachment ang lunas sa ating problema. Dapat na maging mas madunong tayong mga botante at hindi dapat mga ganitong klaseng mga kongresista (sa mga distrito man o sa mga saling-pusang partylist) ang piniipili nating niluluklok bilang ating mga mambabatas na walang alam kundi “i-impeach ang Presidente!”

# # # #

hvp (07.23.14)

 

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

The Daylight Dialogue

‘This project has the potential to be truly transformational for Mindanao and critical to poverty reduction in the Philippines.’

 

by Ducky Paredes

            The day after our President delivered his diatribe against the Supreme Court. which has always been sacrosanct in our country because of the held belief that even when the Supreme Court is wrong, it is still right, I heard  on my car radio a program then happening in Malacanang  – a “Daylight Dialogue: The Good Governance Challenge” good governance conference of The World Bank Group gathered various members of civil society, the academe, media, international development organizations, and the private sector to discuss the progress and outlook of the Aquino administration’s governance initiatives.

            Other participants in the Daylight Dialogue include representatives from international civil society groups, such as those based in Switzerland, Cambodia, and Bangladesh.

            “International organizations have taken great interest in our good governance efforts and how we’ve been able to pull them off. The Daylight Dialogue is a wonderful venue for exchanging insights on how governments can be more transparent and accountable, and not just from the perspective of those working in the bureaucracy.

            According to the government’s Official Gazette, the Daylight Dialogue shared how the government’s openness has created a paradigm shift in Philippine governance practices—a shift, from adversarial to a more constructive civil society engagement, to promote open government;Share the Philippines’ experience in initiating and implementing good governance reforms, overcoming challenges along the way; andFoster discussion on how key good governance reforms will be sustained and institutionalized.

World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim announced a US$119 million funding, which is part of a proposed new Philippine Rural Development Project promising support for farm-to-market roads, bridges, communal irrigation systems, and potable water, including in the conflict affected areas of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).

Investments to generate at least 6,000 jobs in Mindanao, including the ARMM are also being proposed by IFC, the Bank’s private sector arm.

“Together with the IFC, the World Bank is scaling up support for rural development and job creation in the region, with the Bank providing financial assistance to critical public infrastructure and the IFC promoting private investment in agribusiness,” said Kim. “This project has the potential to be truly transformational for Mindanao and critical to poverty reduction in the Philippines.”

It was announced that Kim and the President met that morning at Malacañang Palace, where they discussed an additional $US 6.6 million in World Bank funding for the Mindanao Trust Fund. That funding helps support livelihoods for over 100,000 people and will support the creation of a development plan for the conflict affected areas.

 “Good governance means delivering public services effectively and efficiently, while being transparent about what you spend and the results you achieve,” Kim said. “Good governance involves choosing wise policies and investments; maintaining public assets; and ensuring that civil servants are skilled, motivated, and have the tools to work effectively. It is about fostering a transparent regulatory environment that will allow the private sector to create growth and jobs.”

According to the United Nations, supporting good governance is an important component of the World Bank Group’s new Philippine’s Country Partnership Strategy, which supports the country’s goal of promoting sustainable growth, reducing poverty and creating jobs. Under this new four year strategy, the World Bank Group plans to provide US$3.2 billion in financing for development to the government and another $1 billion for investments in business and industry from IFC, its private sector arm.

I wondered why we had to listen to a diatribe against the SC which was badly received by all who heard it when there was good news that would come from Malacanang itself the very next day.

The fighting speech against the SC should not have been given. Instead, the Daylight Dialogue with the World Bank ought to have been given prominence. After all, isn’t the UN’s giving our President fulsome praise for his good governance answer enough for the Supreme Court’s criticism of the President’s Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP)?

Because this came after the President’s speech against the SC’s condemnation of his DAP, the Malacanang event was generally ignored, although it was proof that the DAP was being used for the good of the country.

Too bad that instead of the “Daylight Dialogue” working for the government and the country, it was virtually ignored. while  all of  the President’s critics concentrated on his harsh words on the Supreme Court and its justices, many of whom were appointed by the President.

In WB President Jim Yong Kim’s speech. he said: It is now well established within the academic literature on institutions and growth that there is a strong and positive correlation between the principles of good governance and a country’s GDP per capita.  As you, President Aquino, have so eloquently noted, “good governance is good economics.”  The precise causal relationships are less well understood, but some recent studies have begun to confirm what many of us have long suspected—that effective institutions (or their absence) have an important impact on economic growth.  There is plenty of evidence that corruption can deter private investment. And studies at the sectoral level have documented the perverse effect that corruption and weak administration can exert on education and health outcomes, or on the quality and selection of infrastructure projects.  Some recent studies from the United States underscore that high levels of corruption are associated with increased inequality, as well.”

The WB President continued: “Under your leadership, President Aquino, the Philippines is in the forefront of this transformation. You’ve doubled government budgets for social services and made performance-informed budgeting the norm. Citizens increasingly see your conditional cash transfer program, Pantawid Pamilya, as an instrument to realize their rights to education or health care. 

“Your administration has also streamlined business regulations, bringing down the cost of doing business and reducing opportunities for corruption. Your Open Data initiative has reinforced accountability at all levels of government. For instance, the Philippines is now using electronic procurement technology to encourage citizens to be observers in all stages of the bidding process and, just recently, started the use of geo-tagging. Similar .tools are now being used to monitor assistance for people affected by Typhoon Yolanda. Your commitment to transparency is a beacon for the nations of East Asia, and beyond.”

To my mind, listening to the WB President would have been more constructive than having to hear our President berate the SC Justices for their decision calling the DAP unconstitutional, which only gave the certified PNoy haters the proof they needed to  hate him even more.

# # # #

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

Sundries

This is an LTO  racket that has been going on for years now. Why can’t anyone put a stop to this? What sort of government do we have that allows crooks to take advantage of motorists? Aren’t the LTO and the rest of government supposed to be on the side of those who religiously pay their taxes, registration fees and licenses?

 

by Ducky Paredes

 

For the first time since 1992, my columns in Malaya and Abante missed their deadlines. I did not have power due to typhoon Glenda. What made it worse for me was that, while others on my block had electricity by 4:00 p.m. Wednesday, my house was still without. I finally discovered on the morning of Thursday when I asked a neighbor when their power was turned on. “Four o’clock yesterday,” she replied.

My house was the only one still without power. The electrician from the school on my street stopped by and looked at the meter since I was obviously worrying over it.  He took one look and told me that the breaker between the meter and the house was grounded. He proved it to me by trying to force the breaker on. It turned itself off.

Thus, I had to buy a breaker and have it installed before I could again work on my writing. Thus, I had no columns on Thursday for both Malaya and Abante and no Malaya column on Friday.  Several friends actually missed the columns and asked me what happened.

* * *

I do all of my non-life insurance business with BPI/MS Insurance Corporation. When I had my car registered last week, I reminded my driver that the car already had Third Party Liability (TPL) coverage amounting to P500,000 for Bodiy Injury and for Property Damage another P500,000. I paid premiums on these amounting to P2,400.

When he got to the LTO Office, he was told that he had to buy TPL Coverage of P100,000 for the insurance cover being sold by the LTO personnel. My driver called me and I talked to the LTO person who informed me that the coverage that BPI/MS wrote out for me me was not registered with them. He asked me to clear this with the insurance company. I asked him how long it would take for my insurer to be registered. He told me that he was not sure. So, to get my registration done that day, I told my driver to buy the insurance being offered by what looks to me as a fly-by-night insurance company which is probably an insurer that will not be around when he is needed to settle a claim.

This is an LTO  racket that has been going on for years now. Why can’t anyone put a stop to this? What sort of government do we have that allows crooks to take advantage of motorists? Aren’t the LTO and the rest of government supposed to be on the side of those who religiously pay their taxes, registration fees and licenses? So, why do they make me buy an insurance cover that is next-to-worthless compared to the one I chose for myself and is guaranteed by the oldest bank in the country?

* * *

I received a text from someone who identified himself as Globe Telecom telling me that I had earned some points that could be applied to my billings. So naturally. I did as instructed and sent off a text with the amount indicated to a four digit number. As soon as I did that, the text I received told me that I had just transferred the amount to a number that is not mine.

Of course, the person who did this — stole the rewards due me — had to be someone inside Globe Telecom. He knew my number and knew that I had rewards coming to me. This now makes me wonder if the telecom company that I have been with since its inception has now become — for me — unreliable.

Certainly, it had to be someone inside Globe to know what rewards subscribers have earned and their phone numbers while having access to a four number phone that he can use for his scheme. The number to which I inadvertently  gave my rewards was 63926500287.

I am writing this as a warning to Globe Telecom users and other cell phone users even those using Smart and other telecoms.

* * *

The Philippine-Vietnam Friendship Association has elected former Senator Eddie Ilarde as its president. The new group will officially be launched  at 5 in the afternoon of  Tuesday, July 29 at the Manila Hotel.

According to Ilarde, there is need to foster closer and stronger trade and cultural relations between the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the Republic of the Philippines considering their shared historical backgrounds and proximity. I would also add  common  problem — that of China forcing itself in our seas and claiming these through its nine-dash line.

The Philippines and Vietnam have had good relations. Operations Brotherhood had medical mission in South Vietnam. (I joined OB in Laos when I was in my 20s and only have a nodding acquaintance with Vietnam.)

Vietnam’s Ambassador to the Philippines. Trong Trieu Duong, said that the Associaiton will “enhance the two countries’ people-to-people relations.”

The other principal founders and members of the board of directorsare: Dr. Gonzalo Jurado, Alfredo M. de las Rosa, Ernesto Banawis, Dorrigo Domingo, Jr. Ricardo Wagan, Luis Arriola, Luis Arranza and Victoria Orsts.

Dr. Jurado was elected Chairman, Atty. Domingo as Secretary General and Atty, Uranza as secretary-trasurer. Among those invited to the affair are the Vietnamese Ambassador to the Philippines, the Philippine Ambassador to Vietnam, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, former President Fidel Ramos and several prominent citizens from various sectors of Philippine society.

* * *

The 5th Leg of the Federation of Philippine Amateur Senior Golfers, Inc. (FPASGI) will hold it 5th Leg of the 2014 Golf Tournaments on Mondy, August 4 at the Capitol Hills Golf Course in Loyola Heights. The course is a par 62. I was a member of Capitol some years back and was even president of the Capitol Seniors. When the course was converted from a Par 72 to a Par 62, I moved to Valley Golf and Country Club where I am now a member. It may be interesting to play Capitol’s short but difficult course again. FPASGI members should be there by 6 in the morning to register for this tournament, which has a shotgun at 8:00 a.m.

# # # #

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

Lahat Panalo

Diretsahan

 

                                                                                   

ni Horacio Paredes

 

Hindi maikakailang marami pa rin sa ating mga kababayan ang tumatangkilik sa jueteng kahit ito ay mariing ipinagbabawal ng ating gobyerno.

 

Napakalungkot lang isipin na karamihan sa nahuhumaling sa ilegal na palarong ito ay mga kababayan nating ang pamumuhay ay maituturing na “isang kahig, isang tuka.” Kung tutuusin, para sa kanila, walang masama na sa papiso-pisong taya nila ay maaari silang manalo ng malaking halaga. Sino nga ba naman ang ayaw na makipagsapalaran para sa posibilidad na biglang suwertehin?

 

Ngunit may nananalo ba talaga sa pinagbabawal na sugal na ito? Paano ba nalalaman kung magkano ang premyong mapapanalunan dito? At saan o kanino ba talaga napupunta ang malaking perang tinataya sa jueteng ng ating mga kababayan? Madaming sagot sa huling tanong, at isa na riyan ang mga nangongotong, nangungurakot, at tumatanggap ng regular na payola, padulas o lagay mula sa mga jueteng operator.

 

Nakakabagabag din ang mga mistulang nahuhumaling sa bisyong ito. Sa halip na ilaan ang kanilang araw-araw na kita sa kanilang mga pangangailangan tulad ng pagkain, isinusugal nila ito sa isang sugal kung saan napakiliit na tiyansang manalo.

 

Hindi naman talaga masasabing bisyo ang pagsusugal kung ito ay na-ko-kontrol ng tama. Kung ang iyong ipininanglalaro ay maliit na halaga lang naman, at kung ang inilarong iyon ay nagagamit para sa kapakanan ng mga mas mahirap nating mga kababayan, marahil ito’y hindi maituturing na masama. May mga palarong legal na nakakatulong sa ating mga mas nangangailangang kababayan, kagaya ng mga larong nasa ilalim ng Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO).

 

Noong isang araw habang aking binabaybay ang EDSA, napansin ko ang mga nakapaskil na poster sa mga bus tungkol sa ilan nating kababayan na ‘di umano’y sinuwerte sa palarong Scratchit Kaskaswerte. Libu-libo na pala ang pinalad sa mga iba’t ibang papremyo na nakalakip sa mga game cards.

 

Ayon sa kilala ko nang waiter sa isang paborito kong restoran, ang nakakatuwa sa palarong ito ay pagkatapos mong kaskasin ang play area sa card, agad mo nang malaman kung ikaw ay nanalo at kung magkano ang iyong mapanalunan. At agad mo ring makukuha ang iyong premyo. Nung sinabi sa akin ito, parang hindi ako agad makapaniwala. Subalit sa aking paguusisa, sa mismong PCSO, sa talaan ng Scratchit para buwan ng Hunyo at Hulyo ng taong kasalukuyan, dalawa mula sa Metro Manila ang umano’y suwerteng nakasungkit sa pinakamalaking papremyo na Php 500,000. Tatlo naman ang pinalad na manalo ng Php 200,000; isa ang nagmula sa Cagayan, isa sa Calamba, at isa sa Navotas. Tatlo din ang pinalad na makakuha ng Php 100,000; isa muling taga-Calamba ang pinalad, isang taga-Baguio at isang taga-Rosales, Pangasinan.

 

Bukod sa mga nabanggit na mga papremyo, marami na daw ang sinuwerte mula nang nagsimula ang palarong Scratchit sa ating bansa noong taong 2007.

 

Bukod sa mga pinalad na manalo, marami sa ating mga kababayang kapus-palad ang natulungan at patuloy pang natutulungan dahil nga PCSO ang nagpasimuno ng larong ito. Sa bawat Scratchit na naibebenta ay may kaukulang porsiyento na napupunta sa kawang-gawa.

 

Ang Scratchit ay isa sa mga palarong masasabi nating  ang lahat ay panalo. Bukod sa potensyal na swerte nito para sa manlalaro, naipapasa sa mga mas nangangailangang Pilipino ang perang nalilikom mula dito. Kaya kung isusugal mo lang rin ang pera mo, doon na sa legal at nakakatulong – at sa mas malaki ang tiyansa.

# # # #

hvp (07.21.14)

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

The Daylight Dialogue

‘This project has the potential to be truly transformational for Mindanao and critical to poverty reduction in the Philippines.’

 

by Ducky Paredes

            The day after our President delivered his diatribe against the Supreme Court. which has always been sacrosanct in our country because of the held belief that even when the Supreme Court is wrong, it is still right, I heard  on my car radio a program then happening in Malacanang  – a “Daylight Dialogue: The Good Governance Challenge” good governance conference of The World Bank Group gathered various members of civil society, the academe, media, international development organizations, and the private sector to discuss the progress and outlook of the Aquino administration’s governance initiatives.

            Other participants in the Daylight Dialogue include representatives from international civil society groups, such as those based in Switzerland, Cambodia, and Bangladesh.

            “International organizations have taken great interest in our good governance efforts and how we’ve been able to pull them off. The Daylight Dialogue is a wonderful venue for exchanging insights on how governments can be more transparent and accountable, and not just from the perspective of those working in the bureaucracy.

            According to the government’s Official Gazette, the Daylight Dialogue shared how the government’s openness has created a paradigm shift in Philippine governance practices—a shift, from adversarial to a more constructive civil society engagement, to promote open government;Share the Philippines’ experience in initiating and implementing good governance reforms, overcoming challenges along the way; andFoster discussion on how key good governance reforms will be sustained and institutionalized.

World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim announced a US$119 million funding, which is part of a proposed new Philippine Rural Development Project promising support for farm-to-market roads, bridges, communal irrigation systems, and potable water, including in the conflict affected areas of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).

Investments to generate at least 6,000 jobs in Mindanao, including the ARMM are also being proposed by IFC, the Bank’s private sector arm.

“Together with the IFC, the World Bank is scaling up support for rural development and job creation in the region, with the Bank providing financial assistance to critical public infrastructure and the IFC promoting private investment in agribusiness,” said Kim. “This project has the potential to be truly transformational for Mindanao and critical to poverty reduction in the Philippines.”

It was announced that Kim and the President met that morning at Malacañang Palace, where they discussed an additional $US 6.6 million in World Bank funding for the Mindanao Trust Fund. That funding helps support livelihoods for over 100,000 people and will support the creation of a development plan for the conflict affected areas.

 “Good governance means delivering public services effectively and efficiently, while being transparent about what you spend and the results you achieve,” Kim said. “Good governance involves choosing wise policies and investments; maintaining public assets; and ensuring that civil servants are skilled, motivated, and have the tools to work effectively. It is about fostering a transparent regulatory environment that will allow the private sector to create growth and jobs.”

According to the United Nations, supporting good governance is an important component of the World Bank Group’s new Philippine’s Country Partnership Strategy, which supports the country’s goal of promoting sustainable growth, reducing poverty and creating jobs. Under this new four year strategy, the World Bank Group plans to provide US$3.2 billion in financing for development to the government and another $1 billion for investments in business and industry from IFC, its private sector arm.

I wondered why we had to listen to a diatribe against the SC which was badly received by all who heard it when there was good news that would come from Malacanang itself the very next day.

The fighting speech against the SC should not have been given. Instead, the Daylight Dialogue with the World Bank ought to have been given prominence. After all, isn’t the UN’s giving our President fulsome praise for his good governance answer enough for the Supreme Court’s criticism of the President’s Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP)?

Because this came after the President’s speech against the SC’s condemnation of his DAP, the Malacanang event was generally ignored, although it was proof that the DAP was being used for the good of the country.

Too bad that instead of the “Daylight Dialogue” working for the government and the country, it was virtually ignored. while  all of  the President’s critics concentrated on his harsh words on the Supreme Court and its justices, many of whom were appointed by the President.

In WB President Jim Yong Kim’s speech. he said: It is now well established within the academic literature on institutions and growth that there is a strong and positive correlation between the principles of good governance and a country’s GDP per capita.  As you, President Aquino, have so eloquently noted, “good governance is good economics.”  The precise causal relationships are less well understood, but some recent studies have begun to confirm what many of us have long suspected—that effective institutions (or their absence) have an important impact on economic growth.  There is plenty of evidence that corruption can deter private investment. And studies at the sectoral level have documented the perverse effect that corruption and weak administration can exert on education and health outcomes, or on the quality and selection of infrastructure projects.  Some recent studies from the United States underscore that high levels of corruption are associated with increased inequality, as well.”

The WB President continued: “Under your leadership, President Aquino, the Philippines is in the forefront of this transformation. You’ve doubled government budgets for social services and made performance-informed budgeting the norm. Citizens increasingly see your conditional cash transfer program, Pantawid Pamilya, as an instrument to realize their rights to education or health care. 

“Your administration has also streamlined business regulations, bringing down the cost of doing business and reducing opportunities for corruption. Your Open Data initiative has reinforced accountability at all levels of government. For instance, the Philippines is now using electronic procurement technology to encourage citizens to be observers in all stages of the bidding process and, just recently, started the use of geo-tagging. Similar .tools are now being used to monitor assistance for people affected by Typhoon Yolanda. Your commitment to transparency is a beacon for the nations of East Asia, and beyond.”

To my mind, listening to the WB President would have been better than hearing our President berate the SC Justices for their decision calling the DAP unconstitutional.

# # # #

hvp 07.22.14

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

Petilla’s DOE Task Force

 In light of the grand, if not herculean, tasks of this joint study group, one is perplexed as to what somebody like David Relito Tan is doing in this A1 task force after getting embroiled with his companies in a string of legal battles here and abroad—and now recycling himself as a self-styled industry “expert” at the height of last semester’s power crisis.

 

by Ducky Paredes

 

Power industry leaders are giving the thumbs up to Government’s creation of a long-needed multisectoral task force to cobble together a masterplan to solve the nagging crisis by pulling down electricity rates in the long haul, but are flummoxed by the inclusion of a shady character and his  inoperative consumer group in this top-caliber joint study group.

They point to an erstwhile president of the Philippine Independent Power Producers Association (PIPPA) with a seemingly checkered past and who now heads an almost obscure pro-consumer group as the odd man out in this task force.

The Department of Energy (DOE) has created a task force to “study ways to reduce the price of electricity in the country” under its Department Order No. 2014-05-0009 dated April 28 and signed by Secretary Carlos Jericho Petilla.

Petilla’s mandate for this task force is to “evaluate current breakdown/components of electricity and identify factors affecting them, conduct multisectoral public consultations nationwide to present their findings; identify ways and measures to help reduce the price of electricity and ensuring its efficiency.”

His order is for each task force member to represent his or her sector and “ensure complete dissemination of all discussions and agreements during the conduct of dialogues.”

Funding support for this joint study will come from the Office of the DOE Secretary, while technical support will be rendered by the Office of the Directors of the Energy Policy and Planning Bureau (EPPB) and Electric Power Industry Management Bureau (EPMB), according to the April 28 department order.

The creation of this task force, bared this DOE order, was an offshoot of the May 31, 2013 dialogue at the Heroes Hall in Malacañang in which “labor groups proposed for the creation of a dedicated group, which will include the labor sector and consumers groups representatives, to monitor, discuss and resolve issues affecting the power supply and affordability of electricity in the country.”

The same order recalled that this proposal for a more detailed study focused on power supply and pricing was reiterated during the Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and Consultative Dialogue that the DOE initiated during the February-March 2014 period on the review of the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA).

* * *

In light of the grand, if not herculean, tasks of this joint study group, one is perplexed as to what somebody like David Relito Tan is doing in this A1 task force after getting embroiled with his companies in a string of legal battles here and abroad—and now recycling himself as a self-styled industry “expert” at the height of last semester’s power crisis.

Tan managed to do a personal makeover as an “expert” by coming out in the media with supposed think pieces inappropriately blaming certain industry players for the electricity mess, on the basis of his obviously biased and intentionally distorted facts about the Philippine power situation.

The inclusion of Tan—described in his newspaper articles as a certified public accountant, founding director-former president of PIPPA, and “volunteer strategy adviser” to several legislators during the congressional deliberations on the EPIRA—has somewhat cast suspicions on the task force’s true agenda.

                                                                                       * * *

 

As shown by an organizational chart, this multisectoral task force will be headed by Dr. Adoracion Navarro, a senior fellow at the  Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) specializing in evidence-based research studies on practical economic planning and policymaking information. She is on Devex’s 2013 list of  “40 Under 40” awardees or  the 40 global development leaders in Metro Manila who are under 40 years of age, and will be represented in the task force by PIDS president Gilberto Llanto.

The same organizational chart shows that this task force will be made up of over 30 representatves from Government, academe, the business sectors and labor and consumer groups.

Task force members include Secretary Petilla and businessman Raul Concepcion of Gov’tWatch; plus representatives from the Joint Foreign Chambers (JFC), Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), Federation of Filipino Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FFCCCI), PIPPA, Manila Electric Co. (Meralco), National Consumers Affairs Council (NCAC), National Federation of Women’s Club of the Philippines (NFWCP), Coalition for Consumer Protection and Welfare Inc. (CCPW), Matuwid na Singil sa Kuryente Consumer Alliance Inc. (MSKCA), Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL) and NAGKAISA (United).

                                                                                       * * *

But industry watchers are raising their eyebrows as to:

[1] why MSK is one of five consumer groups in this task force, given its questionable status as a non- functioning non-stock firm or nongovernment organization (NGO), and

 [2] why Tan is a task force member in his capacity as MSK president, considering his checkered past that is marked by a string of court cases in Manila and in the United States against him and his energy companies.

True, Tan was at one time PIPPA president and is thus supposedly knowledgeable about the complex energy sector, but he has been hounded by complaints or cases not only at the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Regional Trial Court (RTC), Court of Appeals (CA) and Supreme Court (SC) but also at the San Francisco Superior Court, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California and the US Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit as well.

In documents submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Tan is listed as an “American Filipino” (with Passport No. 711786375) who is president of this non-stock corporation.

On its website, MSK describes its founders as electricity consumers who have “deep knowledge” of the industry’s privatization and deregulation, and whose goal is “to enlighten the public and policy makers on the specific rules and practices that have been causing the abusive power costs.”

 Furthermore, MSK hits “the giant money making power fraternity” on its website for ostensibly opposing market reforms and warning the public that, “power generation is on its way to dangerous monopolization and more negotiated sweetheart contracts.”

* * *

 But MSK’s ranting looks like a case of the pot calling the kettle black in light of this alliance’s—as well as its president’s—unsavory reputation in the industry.

It appears that this NGO had “tweaked” its GIS submitted to the SEC because it reported having held its annual meeting last April 18, even if it had not actually been in operation since its incorporation in 2011.

Two of its key officers—corporate secretary Lorna Asilo and treasurer Videt Ursula Cusi—certified under oath that this NGO “has not been in operation since its incorporation up to the present.”

SEC records show that Asilo issued this Affidavit of Non-Operation on April 8, 2013, saying that in lieu of an Auditor’s Report, she was submitting this document to report that this NGO had total assets below P500,000 and annual gross receipts of less than P100,000.

 Cusi issued her own Affidavit of Non-Operation attesting to this organization’s true status on May 23, 2013.

So why has Tan been blessed enough to be in the company of distinguished industry leaders in the task force as representative of a fledgling consumer group that is actually dormant, as attested to by its own key officers?

                                                                                       * * *

In his two commentaries that came out in a major daily on Feb. 17-19 and on May 11, Tan was mentioned as a certified public accountant as well as a power generation executive from 1993 to 2013 and now consultant on utility economics at Luna Inc.

What has been left out, of course, is his spotty record during his stint as an energy executive over that 20-year period.

On June 17, 2010, the 7th Division of the Court of Appeals ordered Tan and his Power One Group of Companies (formerly Edison Industries Inc.) to give separation pay to nine (9) retrenched workers who earlier filed an illegal dismissal case against Tan’s firm before the NLRC.

There is also a case at the SC Second Division chaired by Senior Justice Antonio Carpio, in connection with Civil Case No. 70957-SJ that Mid-Islands Power Corp. filed against Power One and Tan on Sept. 11, 2006 over their power supply accord; as well as another one at the ERC over Case Nos. 2005-042 RC and 2008-023 RC pertaining to Power One’s deal with the Oriental Mindoro Electric Cooperatve Inc. (ORMECO).

                                                                                       * * *

 As regards his US cases, these stemmed from the charge of “fraudulent intent” against Tan after the Philippine National Bank (PNB) won in September 1998 in its case against Tan and Edison-Hubbard Corp.  in  the San Francisco Superior Court over a $6.999 million liability in connection with an unsettled bank loan.

 The multimillion-dollar liability of Tan and Edison-Hubbard was the result of his guarantee of a PNB loan to Edison-Hubbard, which prompted the bank to conduct a debtor’s exam on Tan, during which he disclosed equity interest in five (5) corporations—Edison Global, Teledyne Marketing Corp. a.k.a. Powerline Equipment, Edison Mobile Hydraulics, Edison Industries a.k.a. Power One, and Filipinas Electric and Meter Co.

Edison Global is a Hong Kong firm while the four others are Philippine corporations.

Following the US court ruling, PNB obtained an order assigning to it Tan’s disclosed interests until the liability was paid in full.

In his Chapter 7 petition (for bankruptcy) dated Feb. 11, 2000, Tan declared in his Schedules and Statement of Financial Affairs (SOFA) that he was officer or director and/or held at least a 5% stake in the five abovementioned companies.

 It was discovered, however, that he had failed to disclose his interests in seven (7) other companies, among them Stresscrete Pole Corp., Greenenergy Light Co. a.k.a. Edison Energy Corp., and Central Negros Power Corp.

                                                                                       * * *

In his defense, Tan argued in court that the omission of information in his Schedules and original petition with regard to his undisclosed assets and interests was not done with intent to hinder, delay or defraud his creditor or trustee.

Tan asserted that he didn’t need to maintain copies of these stocks and the companies’ financial statements because they were just nominal shares and that he could get copies anyway from these firms’ accountants and corporate secretaries if and when he needed them.

But the bankruptcy court did not buy his arguments and ruled against Tan, prompting him to file an appeal before the US Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit.

This appellate court eventually affirmed the bankruptcy court’s decision against the Debtor (Tan) and Edison-Hubbard.

It noted in its September 28, 2007 ruling that the bankruptcy court found Debtor “generally lacking credibility,” and found he was “lying” as to the undeclared companies.

 “These credibility determinations must be given deference,” it added.  Further, given Debtor’s education, sophistication, and the size and complexity of his business, the explanations, even if true, would be insufficient….the demands of operating a business do not excuse the debtor from keeping basic financial records.”

Again, what is Tan, who has been taken to task in American courts for allegedly trying to defraud his energy firms’ creditors, doing in our country’s energy task force?

* * *

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

# # # #

hvp 07.20.14

Malaya 07.21.14

 

 

In light of the grand, if not herculean, tasks of this joint study group, one is perplexed as to what somebody like David Relito Tan is doing in this A1 task force after getting embroiled with his companies in a string of legal battles here and abroad—and now recycling himself as a self-styled industry “expert” at the height of last semester’s power crisis.

 

Petilla’s DOE Task Force

 

 

by Ducky Paredes

 

Power industry leaders are giving the thumbs up to Government’s creation of a long-needed multisectoral task force to cobble together a masterplan to solve the nagging crisis by pulling down electricity rates in the long haul, but are flummoxed by the inclusion of a shady character and his  inoperative consumer group in this top-caliber joint study group.

They point to an erstwhile president of the Philippine Independent Power Producers Association (PIPPA) with a seemingly checkered past and who now heads an almost obscure pro-consumer group as the odd man out in this task force.

The Department of Energy (DOE) has created a task force to “study ways to reduce the price of electricity in the country” under its Department Order No. 2014-05-0009 dated April 28 and signed by Secretary Carlos Jericho Petilla.

Petilla’s mandate for this task force is to “evaluate current breakdown/components of electricity and identify factors affecting them, conduct multisectoral public consultations nationwide to present their findings; identify ways and measures to help reduce the price of electricity and ensuring its efficiency.”

His order is for each task force member to represent his or her sector and “ensure complete dissemination of all discussions and agreements during the conduct of dialogues.”

Funding support for this joint study will come from the Office of the DOE Secretary, while technical support will be rendered by the Office of the Directors of the Energy Policy and Planning Bureau (EPPB) and Electric Power Industry Management Bureau (EPMB), according to the April 28 department order.

The creation of this task force, bared this DOE order, was an offshoot of the May 31, 2013 dialogue at the Heroes Hall in Malacañang in which “labor groups proposed for the creation of a dedicated group, which will include the labor sector and consumers groups representatives, to monitor, discuss and resolve issues affecting the power supply and affordability of electricity in the country.”

The same order recalled that this proposal for a more detailed study focused on power supply and pricing was reiterated during the Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and Consultative Dialogue that the DOE initiated during the February-March 2014 period on the review of the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA).

* * *

In light of the grand, if not herculean, tasks of this joint study group, one is perplexed as to what somebody like David Relito Tan is doing in this A1 task force after getting embroiled with his companies in a string of legal battles here and abroad—and now recycling himself as a self-styled industry “expert” at the height of last semester’s power crisis.

Tan managed to do a personal makeover as an “expert” by coming out in the media with supposed think pieces inappropriately blaming certain industry players for the electricity mess, on the basis of his obviously biased and intentionally distorted facts about the Philippine power situation.

The inclusion of Tan—described in his newspaper articles as a certified public accountant, founding director-former president of PIPPA, and “volunteer strategy adviser” to several legislators during the congressional deliberations on the EPIRA—has somewhat cast suspicions on the task force’s true agenda.

                                                                                       * * *

 

As shown by an organizational chart, this multisectoral task force will be headed by Dr. Adoracion Navarro, a senior fellow at the  Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) specializing in evidence-based research studies on practical economic planning and policymaking information. She is on Devex’s 2013 list of  “40 Under 40” awardees or  the 40 global development leaders in Metro Manila who are under 40 years of age, and will be represented in the task force by PIDS president Gilberto Llanto.

The same organizational chart shows that this task force will be made up of over 30 representatves from Government, academe, the business sectors and labor and consumer groups.

Task force members include Secretary Petilla and businessman Raul Concepcion of Gov’tWatch; plus representatives from the Joint Foreign Chambers (JFC), Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), Federation of Filipino Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FFCCCI), PIPPA, Manila Electric Co. (Meralco), National Consumers Affairs Council (NCAC), National Federation of Women’s Club of the Philippines (NFWCP), Coalition for Consumer Protection and Welfare Inc. (CCPW), Matuwid na Singil sa Kuryente Consumer Alliance Inc. (MSKCA), Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL) and NAGKAISA (United).

                                                                                       * * *

But industry watchers are raising their eyebrows as to:

[1] why MSK is one of five consumer groups in this task force, given its questionable status as a non- functioning non-stock firm or nongovernment organization (NGO), and

 [2] why Tan is a task force member in his capacity as MSK president, considering his checkered past that is marked by a string of court cases in Manila and in the United States against him and his energy companies.

True, Tan was at one time PIPPA president and is thus supposedly knowledgeable about the complex energy sector, but he has been hounded by complaints or cases not only at the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Regional Trial Court (RTC), Court of Appeals (CA) and Supreme Court (SC) but also at the San Francisco Superior Court, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California and the US Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit as well.

In documents submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Tan is listed as an “American Filipino” (with Passport No. 711786375) who is president of this non-stock corporation.

On its website, MSK describes its founders as electricity consumers who have “deep knowledge” of the industry’s privatization and deregulation, and whose goal is “to enlighten the public and policy makers on the specific rules and practices that have been causing the abusive power costs.”

 Furthermore, MSK hits “the giant money making power fraternity” on its website for ostensibly opposing market reforms and warning the public that, “power generation is on its way to dangerous monopolization and more negotiated sweetheart contracts.”

* * *

 But MSK’s ranting looks like a case of the pot calling the kettle black in light of this alliance’s—as well as its president’s—unsavory reputation in the industry.

It appears that this NGO had “tweaked” its GIS submitted to the SEC because it reported having held its annual meeting last April 18, even if it had not actually been in operation since its incorporation in 2011.

Two of its key officers—corporate secretary Lorna Asilo and treasurer Videt Ursula Cusi—certified under oath that this NGO “has not been in operation since its incorporation up to the present.”

SEC records show that Asilo issued this Affidavit of Non-Operation on April 8, 2013, saying that in lieu of an Auditor’s Report, she was submitting this document to report that this NGO had total assets below P500,000 and annual gross receipts of less than P100,000.

 Cusi issued her own Affidavit of Non-Operation attesting to this organization’s true status on May 23, 2013.

So why has Tan been blessed enough to be in the company of distinguished industry leaders in the task force as representative of a fledgling consumer group that is actually dormant, as attested to by its own key officers?

                                                                                       * * *

In his two commentaries that came out in a major daily on Feb. 17-19 and on May 11, Tan was mentioned as a certified public accountant as well as a power generation executive from 1993 to 2013 and now consultant on utility economics at Luna Inc.

What has been left out, of course, is his spotty record during his stint as an energy executive over that 20-year period.

On June 17, 2010, the 7th Division of the Court of Appeals ordered Tan and his Power One Group of Companies (formerly Edison Industries Inc.) to give separation pay to nine (9) retrenched workers who earlier filed an illegal dismissal case against Tan’s firm before the NLRC.

There is also a case at the SC Second Division chaired by Senior Justice Antonio Carpio, in connection with Civil Case No. 70957-SJ that Mid-Islands Power Corp. filed against Power One and Tan on Sept. 11, 2006 over their power supply accord; as well as another one at the ERC over Case Nos. 2005-042 RC and 2008-023 RC pertaining to Power One’s deal with the Oriental Mindoro Electric Cooperatve Inc. (ORMECO).

                                                                                       * * *

 As regards his US cases, these stemmed from the charge of “fraudulent intent” against Tan after the Philippine National Bank (PNB) won in September 1998 in its case against Tan and Edison-Hubbard Corp.  in  the San Francisco Superior Court over a $6.999 million liability in connection with an unsettled bank loan.

 The multimillion-dollar liability of Tan and Edison-Hubbard was the result of his guarantee of a PNB loan to Edison-Hubbard, which prompted the bank to conduct a debtor’s exam on Tan, during which he disclosed equity interest in five (5) corporations—Edison Global, Teledyne Marketing Corp. a.k.a. Powerline Equipment, Edison Mobile Hydraulics, Edison Industries a.k.a. Power One, and Filipinas Electric and Meter Co.

Edison Global is a Hong Kong firm while the four others are Philippine corporations.

Following the US court ruling, PNB obtained an order assigning to it Tan’s disclosed interests until the liability was paid in full.

In his Chapter 7 petition (for bankruptcy) dated Feb. 11, 2000, Tan declared in his Schedules and Statement of Financial Affairs (SOFA) that he was officer or director and/or held at least a 5% stake in the five abovementioned companies.

 It was discovered, however, that he had failed to disclose his interests in seven (7) other companies, among them Stresscrete Pole Corp., Greenenergy Light Co. a.k.a. Edison Energy Corp., and Central Negros Power Corp.

                                                                                       * * *

In his defense, Tan argued in court that the omission of information in his Schedules and original petition with regard to his undisclosed assets and interests was not done with intent to hinder, delay or defraud his creditor or trustee.

Tan asserted that he didn’t need to maintain copies of these stocks and the companies’ financial statements because they were just nominal shares and that he could get copies anyway from these firms’ accountants and corporate secretaries if and when he needed them.

But the bankruptcy court did not buy his arguments and ruled against Tan, prompting him to file an appeal before the US Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit.

This appellate court eventually affirmed the bankruptcy court’s decision against the Debtor (Tan) and Edison-Hubbard.

It noted in its September 28, 2007 ruling that the bankruptcy court found Debtor “generally lacking credibility,” and found he was “lying” as to the undeclared companies.

 “These credibility determinations must be given deference,” it added.  Further, given Debtor’s education, sophistication, and the size and complexity of his business, the explanations, even if true, would be insufficient….the demands of operating a business do not excuse the debtor from keeping basic financial records.”

Again, what is Tan, who has been taken to task in American courts for allegedly trying to defraud his energy firms’ creditors, doing in our country’s energy task force?

* * *

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

# # # #

hvp 07.20.14

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

Ang Kapangyarihan ng Korte Suprema

Diretsahan

 

ni Horacio Paredes

 

Sa ating sistema ng  gobiyerno. kung anuman ang maging hatol ng Korte Suprema, iyon ang tama. ‘Ika nga sa wikang Ingles: Even when the Supreme Curt is wrong, it is right!

Maaring ikagalit ng Pangulo o ng buong Kongreso at Senado at ng Simbahan ang hatol ng Korte ngunit kung anuman ang naging hatol ng Korte Suprema kahit na inaayawan ito ng buong bansa, ito pa rin ang tama at dapat na sundin nating lahat. Iyan ang  pinaniniwalaan ng tao at ng bansa. Ang Korte Suprema ay ang Final Arbitrer at kung anuman ang knilang naging desisyon sa bagay na iniharap sa kanila upang sabihin kung sino nga ba ang tama sa gitna nina Jose at ni Juan, kapag kanilang kinampihan si Jose kahit na ang buong bansa ay kumakampi kay Juan, si Jose pa rin ang panalo.

Ganiyan ang lakas at kapangyarihan ng Korte Suprema. Walang kahit na sino na hindi sila susundin kapag kanila nang nahatulan ang isang bagay. Susunod ang lahat pagkatapos na  humiling na tignan ulit ng korte ang kanilang naging unang desisyon.

Inakala ng marami na hindi tinantangap ng Malakanyang ang naging hatol ng Korte na labag sa Saligang Batas ang ginawa ni PNoy na Disbursement Acceleration Program  o DAP. Pinaliwanag naman ng Pangulo tapos niyang binatikos ang naging desisyon ng Korte na kaniyang iaapela ang desisyon at umaasa siya na magbabago ang hatol ng Korte. Samakatuwid, kapag hindi nagbago ang hatol, ang Presidente ay tatanggapin na ang hatol ng korte na ang kaniyang ginawang DAP ay labag sa Saligang Batas.

Mas marami ang naniniwala na sa naging hatol ng Korte kung saan lahat ng miyembro ng Korte Suprema”y nagsabing hindi tama ang ginawa ng Pangulo sa kaniyang paggamit ng kwarta ng bansa sa DAP. Ang naging hatol ng Korte ay nagpahina sa Pangulo at bumaba ang pananaw ng mamamayan sa Malakaniyang at sa kakayahan ng Pangulo kahit na marami naman ang hindi naintindihan kung ano nga ba ang nanagyari.

Sa totoo naman kasi, sa ilalim ng lumang Administrative Code na binago noong bago pa nagbukas ang Kongreso pagkatapos ng People Power noong 1986, merong ilang prosesong nilaman ang bagong Administrative Code na maaring gamitin upang pabilisin ang takbo ng ekonomiya na ginamit naman ng Pangulo upang pabilisin ang takbo ng ating ekonomiya.

Asahan natin na sa pangalawang pagsusuri ng Korte sa mga ginawa ng ating Pangulo na pareho silang  maliliwanagan sa mga isyung ito na hindi na dapat pang maging hadlang sa maayos na takbo ng ating pamahalaanat ng ekonomiys ng ating bansa.

Hindi tayo daopat na nag-aaway. Hintayin na lang nating lahat ang magiging hatol ng Korte Suprema sa apelang ginawa ng Pangulo.

# # # #

hvp (07.18.14)

 

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

The Green Cross Tragic Saga

“‘Also, I wanted to give them self-confidence. I wanted to encourage them. They had no money. They did not do well in their own undertakings. ‘

 

by Ducky Paredes

 

The webpage of Green Cross Incorporated (http://www.greencross.com.ph/company-history) starts off with a lie: “ It was in 1952 when Chinese immigrant Mr. Co Ay Tian founded the company.”

The real founder was not the father but his son, Gonzalo Co It, who has written the book “The Green Cross Saga My Autobiography.” Gonzalo is now 94.

In 1952, Gonzalo Co It  started a single proprietorship called Gonzalo Laboratories which he owned 100%.

It produced the Green Cross Rubbing Alcohol.The next year, he introduced a second product  – Zonrox — in the market.

Notes Gonzalo in an affidavit: “In 1968, I hired my brother Anthony A. Co, He is next to me but twenty (20) years younger.”

He also brought in his other siblings, Joseph, Mary and Peter. It was Joseph who convinced him to change his single proprietorship to a corporation with his siblings and parents as incorporators. Gonzalo did not suspect that his siblings who all had past experiences with failed businesses had a devious plan. He would have been better off if he had made his eight children, instead of his four siblings as the incorporators of Gonzalo Laboratories, Inc. (later to become “Green Cross, Inc.”)

Writes Gonzalo in is autobiography, “I did not realize then that, by agreeing to convert my single proprietorship into a corporation, I was opening the doors to my brothers and sister to take over my business. It was a devious plan that took three decades to unfold and all that time, I had no inkling whatsoever of their maneuverings. If you ask me how it was possible that I did not even suspect what they were doing, I will tell you that I loved them and I trusted them completely. Never once did I think they would betray me. But they did.”

Eventually, on the 50th Anniversary of the company — 2002 — the daughter of  Anthony announced that the founder of the company was the father — Co Ay Tian. Gonzalo’s children wanted to go up on stage to correct the lie but eldest son Syril says that his father held him back.

* * *

In a letter he sent to the Philippine Kho Association, which is a family association that handles problems within the Chinese community, Gonzalo explains:

“I wish to emphasize that I was the only one who paid the whole P70,000 paid-up capitalization. All the subscription right also belongs to me.

“None of my brothers and sisters nor my parents paid with their own money for the shares which I placed in their names only by way of implied trust.

“I had to name them incorporators, because at least five (5) incorporators are required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (”SEC”).

“Also, I wanted to give them self-confidence. I wanted to encourage them. They had no money. They did not do well in their own undertakings. Anthony resigned as an Architect in the William Golamco Construction in Angeles City.

“After a while, Anthony engaged in the garments businesss. It failed. Joseph’s furniture business was also unsuccessful. Peter was working with Ajinomoto in Bulacan, Mary was with a private company in Binondo. Both were monthly paid employees. They had no successful business track records.”

* * *

So, since they could not do it on their own, they decided to take over their kuya’s successful business.

Gonzales’ letter to the Philippine Kho Association continues: “What is now clear is that by 1991, Peter, Joseph and Anthony had reported in their names 29.1% each while Mary had 12.7%. That is a total of 100% of the shares of the corporation in their names.

“Although  I only entrusted those shares to them as my trustees, they took advantage of my trust and had the title of ownership transferred to them. They took over my business.

“It was not my intention to give it to them. As their eldest brother, my intention  was only to help them and share the fruits of the business. Instead, they took the business from me.

“I was ousted. I am not even recognized as its Founder as if they do not want to look back at those long years when I planted the seed of the business.”

The letter to the Philippine Kho Association was written in August 2006. Eight years later, nothing has happened yet.  Now Gonzalo Co It is trying to get back his trademarks, which have been taken over by the Green Cross Incorporated which by all rights should be his but is now controlled by his siblings who never did anything for the corporation. Let’s hope he will live long enough to get back what is, by all rights, his to pass on to his eight children and to his grandchildren as I am sure his parents — Co Ay Tian and Ang Si and his wife Katherine Sia Siu Eng, who have gone ahead, will do what they can to help this old man find his way.

* * *

What is wonderful about the autobiography is that, for all the slights that he suffered from his siblings, he never wrote a bitter word about them. Throughout, Gonzalo was still the kuya who forgave all. He never forgot that he loved his siblings  no matter what they did to him or the way they treated him. In fact, in the photographs of his siblings and their mates and children in his autobiography, he presents their pictures in the same way that he presents his own children’s photos, without rancor or bitterness. What a great man he has shown himself to be

This shows the greatness of Gonzalo Co Ti. He exemplifies the Rotarian, which he is, as someone who dedicates his life to service above self.

On the personal level, I hope that my fellow Rotarian succeeds in what he wants to accomplish — to find a measure of fairness in his life as a businessman. Life and his siblings have been unfair to him. That he continues to love them is a measure of how great a man Gonzalo Co Ti is.

# # # #

hvp 07.15.14

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.

Raissa Robles on the DAP

“Section 38 gives the President the power to stop spending on any project. This naturally would result in ’savings’. Section 49 gives the President the power to pool these savings ‘for certain purposes’. In PNoy’s case, he called the pooled fund DAP.”

 

by Ducky Paredes

Journalist Raissa Robles wrote a compelling argument why the DAP is legal in a long, long article. What follows is a short part that proves her contention:

“The Administrative Code is a 401-page document that lists  the powers and functions of the three branches of government, especially the powers of the president within the executive branch and in relation to the legislature, judiciary and the Constitutional Commissions.

“It was meant to replace the Administrative Code of 1917.

“Seven chapters are devoted to the president’s powers on national government budgeting..

“The Constitution was ratified on Feb 2 1987. Cory Aquino’s Administrative Code came into effect on July 25 1987, two days before the first post-Martial Law Congress convened.

” There’s the rub: the 1987 Constitution explicitly states that the Administrative Code is CONSTITUTIONAL.

“It’s right there in Section 6, of Article XVIII, Transitory Provisions.

“The incumbent President shall continue to exercise legislative powers until the first Congress is convened.”

“In short, it was a mind-boggling one-off deal. Section 6 of the Transitory Provisions of the 1987 Constitution  allowed Pres. Cory to write herself any bunch of laws BEFORE the very first (ever) Congress is convened.

“To state once again: the 1987 Constitution says the Administrative Code is constitutional.

“What does this mean? For nearly six months after the ratification of the 1987 Constitution, Pres. Cory had decree-making powers just like Marcos.

* * *

“The Administrative Code is not a mere Executive Order. It has the status of a law. The Constitution gave it the status of a law.

“So I asked ex-Senator Saguisag, who was once in Malacañang Palace together with Joker Arroyo as Pres.Cory’s spokesman, to interpret for me what Sen. Joker was implying. Saguisag replied to me,

“Well, apparently, dahil sinasabi ni Joker yata na hindi ginamit. So it (the legal basis for pooling funds) must have been there.

“Kung sinasabi ni Joker it was there but it was not used, de ginamit siguro ni Butch at ni Noynoy.”

“The same Constitution said an existing law would continue to remain in effect provided it is ‘not inconsistent’ with the Constitution.

“Now let’s examine whether Sections 38 and 49 of the Administrative Code that Abad cited as the main bases for DAP are “not inconsistent” with Section 23 (5) of Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.

“Section 23 (5) states:

“’(5) No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings to other items of the respective appropriations.’

“I believe Section 23 of the Constitution did not revoke Sections 38 and 49 of the Administrative Code (which Abad cited) because Sections 38 and 49 do not clash with Section 23 of the Constitution, which is prospective in nature – ‘no law shall be passed’.

“Since the Constitution’s Transitory Provisions accepted the enactment of the Administrative Code, then the Code does not fall within the ambit of Section 23.

“When I ran this argument by Sen. Saguisag, he told me it was also ‘legally defensible.’

“So it appears, Sections 38 and 49 of the Administrative Code are still valid and in effect. In fact, the Supreme Court Justices treated the Administrative Code as a valid and binding law. Except that they forgot to examine Section 49 in conjunction with the DAP, Section 38 and the Constitution.

“Why do Sections 38 and 49 have to go hand-in-hand to make DAP constitutional?

“Here is what I think Abad and Pnoy did, using Sections 38 and 49.

“Section 38 gives the President the power to stop spending on any project. This naturally would result in ’savings’. Section 49 gives the President the power to pool these savings ‘for certain purposes’. In PNoy’s case, he called the pooled fund DAP.

“Both sections 38 and 49 of the Administrative Code fall under CHAPTER 5 entitled ‘BUDGET EXECUTION’.

“You will notice, Section 38 gives the President of the Philippines the power to suspend and even stop spending on a project of ‘any agency’ – not just in the executive branch of government, it seems, but in ‘any’ government agency. And the President only has to cite one reason to suspend or stop a project – ‘whenever in his judgment the public interest so requires.’ That’s all.

“Read for yourself Section 38:

“‘Section 38. Suspension of Expenditure of Appropriations. – Except as otherwise provided in the General Appropriations Act and whenever in his judgment the public interest so requires, the President, upon notice to the head of office concerned, is authorized to suspend or otherwise stop further expenditure of funds allotted for any agency, or any other expenditure authorized in the General Appropriations Act, except for personal services appropriations used for permanent officials and employees.’

“Justice Bersamin looked at Section 38 of the Administrative Code. But because he did not look at Section 49, he concluded that Abad and PNoy erred. Bersamin said:

“’Moreover, the DBM did not suspend or stop further expenditures in accordance with Section 38, supra, but instead transferred the funds to other PAPs” (Program. Activity or Projects).’

“I also read the five separate and concurring opinions of Justices Arturo Brion, Antonio Carpio, Marvic Leonen, Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Mariano del Castillo. They discussed Section 38 but were all silent on Section 49.

“If they had looked at Section 49, they would have read that this section gives the President and Budget Secretary vast powers to use ’savings in the appropriations’.

“They might not have noticed this because at first glance, the list for when the President can use the power to pool and use savings seems innocuous.

“Whoever drafted this Code cleverly buried one of the the most important powers of the President in Section 49 – the power to impound and juggle funds. Here is Section 49: pay close attention to numbers 9 and 10:

“‘SECTION 49. Authority to Use Savings for Certain Purposes.—Savings in the appropriations provided in the General Appropriations Act may be used for the settlement of the following obligations incurred during a current fiscal year or previous fiscal years as may be approved by the Secretary in accordance with rules and procedures as may be approved by the President:

“‘(1) Claims of officials, employees and laborers who died or were injured in line of duty, including burial expenses as authorized under existing law;

“‘(2) Commutation of terminal leaves of employees due to retirement, resignation or separation from the service through no fault of their own in accordance with the provisions of existing law, including unpaid claims for commutation of maternity leave of absence;

“‘(3) Payment of retirement gratuities or separation pay of employees separated from the service due to government reorganization;

“‘(4) Payment of salaries of employees who have been suspended or dismissed as a result of administrative or disciplinary action, or separated from the service through no fault of their own and who have been subsequently exonerated and reinstated by virtue of decisions of competent authority;

“‘(5) Cash awards to deserving officials and employees in accordance with civil service law;

“‘(6) Salary adjustments of officials and employees as a result of classification action under, and implementation of, the provisions of the Compensation and Position Classification Act, including positions embraced under the Career Executive Service;

“‘(7) Peso support to any undertaking that may be entered into by the government with international organizations, including administrative and other incidental expenses;

“‘(8) Covering any deficiency in peso counterpart fund commitments for foreign-assisted projects, as may be approved by the President;

“‘(9) Priority activities that will promote the economic well-being of the nation, including food production, agrarian reform, energy development, disaster relief, and rehabilitation.

“‘(10) Repair, improvement and renovation of government buildings and infrastructure and other capital assets damaged by natural calamities;

“‘(11) Expenses in connection with official participation in trade fairs, civic parades, celebrations, athletic competitions and cultural activities, and payment of expenses for the celebration of regular or special official holidays;

“‘(12) Payment of obligations of the government or any of its departments or agencies as a result of final judgment of the Courts; and

“‘(13) Payment of valid prior year’s obligations of government agencies with any other government office or agency, including government-owned or controlled corporations.

“Numbers 9 and 10 extend the president’s powers to pool and deploy savings beyond the executive branch to all other branches of government.”

That’s it. The mother signed it into law and the son called it DAP.

# # # #

hvp 07.14.14

Readers who missed a column can access www.duckyparedes.com/blogs. This is updated daily. Your reactions are welcome at duckyparedes@gmail.com or you can send me a message through Twitter @diretsahan.