Manning, Assange and Suu Kyi

DIE HARD III

Herman Tiu Laurel

6/29/2012

On April 5, 2010 WikiLeaks released a classified US military video of three air strikes from a US Apache helicopter last July 12, 2007 in New Baghdad, Iraq. Eighteen people were killed, including two journalists working for Reuters, Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen, while two children were wounded in an incoming private van that was going to rescue one of the reporters before it was fired upon. We know of the children because the video that showed US ground troops arriving at the area--recorded by the gunsight camera on the Apache helicopter, Crazyhorse 18--had a soldier "running as he (carried) one of the children wounded in the attack on the van."

Thanks to YouTube, millions of global citizens laid witness to those gruesome events. But had it not been for Private Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old intelligence analyst with the US Army in Baghdad who allegedly passed on the material to WikiLeaks, the world might still have not had any inkling of the atrocities that transpired on that fateful day.

Manning was arrested in May 2010 in Iraq on suspicion of passing classified materials to the whistleblower Web site, then charged with communicating national defense information to an unauthorized source and aiding the enemy--all of which could result in lifetime imprisonment.

Meanwhile, the other figure in this controversy, Julian Paul Assange (aged 42 today), is an Australian computer programmer, Internet political activist, publisher, and journalist, best known as the founder and editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks, a Web site that publishes information from whistleblowers everywhere.

A hacker-activist in his youth, Assange has garnered numerous awards and nominations, including the 2009 Amnesty International Media Award, the 2010 Readers' Choice for Time's Person of the Year, the 2011 Sydney Peace Foundation gold medal, the 2011 Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, and a nod for the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize. Fearing the accolades were a build-up for another "useful idiot," I kept quiet about him; now, I'm convinced he is genuine.

In 2010, a European arrest warrant was issued for Assange on what appeared to be trumped-up charges of rape and sexual assault. He was later arrested in the UK and freed on bail after 10 days. On May 30 of this year, Assange lost his Supreme Court appeal to prevent extradition to Sweden. Then on June 19, Assange entered the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he sought political asylum on the basis of political persecution. Ecuador granted him temporary protection pending deliberations by the Ecuadorean parliament.

Just before his asylum bid and while serving house arrest in the UK, Assange had around half a dozen episodes of his own talk show beamed over Russia Today (seen here on Destiny Cable Channel 86). Every episode and interview I had the chance to follow was always interesting and in-depth; the last one with Imran Khan of Pakistan was no exception as it exposed the US as well as the Pakistani ruling class' corrupt politics.

The work and sacrifice of these two heroes, at a time when US imperialism is at its apogee, highlights the power of truth and modern information or--to borrow from another Internet dissident Alex Jones--the "Information War." This "Infowar" is one that will rouse the world against the US war industry and its controlled war-coddling mainstream media all over the world.

Indeed, these are the people who deserve all the international peace and democracy awards (except for the debased Nobel Peace Prize after it was bestowed to a mother-and-child killer in the White House, now infamous for his unmanned drone terrorism all over the world).

Sadly, there is no clamor yet in the Philippines for the kind of heroism of these two whistleblower-warriors for truth and global transparency. This is perhaps because a lot of column inches are being devoted to certain darlings of Western "human rights" advocates such as Aung San Suu Kyi.

Our Tribune colleague, Ken Fuller, wrote in "A rendezvous with disappointment" a good assessment of Suu Kyi and with apologies I summarize: "US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton flew in and… met Aung Sang Suu Kyi for talks … Then, on April 13, following the NLD (Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy) by-election victories, in came UK Prime Minister David Cameron … What is happening here… is that Western leaders… are now hurrying to secure a place at the head of the line … Surely Aung San Suu Kyi would not allow them to pillage her country? … (But as) we get to socio-economic questions… what will the economy look like? Will Myanmar attempt to industrialize? What will be the balance between public and private, local and foreign enterprise? … voters were told that the NLD would 'focus on seeking necessary international assistance for development of the nation,' and that 'it is required to make a shift to market economy with a right balance between freedom, stability and social justice, based on the rule of law.' So, there will be a market economy. But that is not all. 'It is required to closely cooperate with the International Monetary Fund…'"

Last week in Oslo, Suu Kyi personally received the Nobel Peace honor bestowed on her 21 years ago, getting "two standing ovations as she gave her long-delayed acceptance speech." Before the Norwegian Nobel Committee, the King and Queen of Norway, and about 600 dignitaries, "The 66-year-old champion of political freedom praised the power of her 1991 Nobel honor both for saving her from the depths of personal despair and shining an enduring spotlight on injustices in distant Burma."

But I wonder, notwithstanding the fact that Myanmar has never invaded other lands, what has Suu Kyi really said and done about Western imperialism and its heinous cruelties all over the world? Hasn't she merely epitomized the hypocrisy of the West by serving as "human rights" leverage against struggling Asian and African nations?

Indeed, placing her side-by-side with the heroic Manning and Assange only reveals who the real glove-puppet of the West is.

(Watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., this week on "The Oust PiNoy Movement" with Mon Pedrosa; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)

Debasing the CJ post

DIE HARD III

Herman Tiu Laurel

6/25/2012

From the noisy media circus atmospherics the past two weeks surrounding the scramble of Cabinet-member wannabes and outsiders for the Judiciary's top post, to the buzz on whether or not these nominees' Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) interviews should be televised, down to the paparazzi fervor with which these prospective candidates are being introduced to the public, all efforts in finding a replacement for ousted Chief Justice (CJ) Renato Corona ultimately bring up one question: Isn't this a debasement, a trivialization, of what in the past was considered a rarefied post, along with the essential attributes of detachment and transcendence that the candidates — not just for the Supreme Court (SC) but for the Judiciary as a whole — are supposed to possess?

Thus, it was with a sense of disbelief that I witnessed the likes of the country's chief tax collector showing off her wares in a cable news interview and of law deans and professors parading themselves to catch media attention, like in a burlesque show. It really is a sad spectacle; and sadder still when you think of how low it speaks of the ruling powers' regard for the Judiciary.

One CJ qualification raised by Malacañang spokesman Edwin Lacierda, in obvious support of 51-year-old Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Chief Kim Henares, was on the matter of age. He told Palace reporters that since "age is not a factor," a CJ candidate does not have to be old. What did he mean by that?
First of all, being 40 is not necessarily "young" to the younger set. Despite that, 50 can now be the "new 40" and 60 the "new 50." Moreover, someone who is 60 can even conceivably be 40 in many respects since it is now widely believed that the mind determines the age. Therefore, someone at age 51 who is crabby, myopic, tyrannical and oppressive can really be an 81-year-old Mubarak in mental state. Got that, Lacierda?

Well, perhaps to buttress his argument, Lacierda also cited the case of US Federal Supreme Court CJ John Roberts, who, upon assuming his post at age 50, serves as an example of a young person appointed to the zenith of the Judiciary. What he failed to note, however, was whether or not this young appointee indeed had a sterling record of public service to begin with.

Objections were already raised about Roberts' pro-right, anti-abortion leanings that allegedly triggered some violence by extremist groups prior to his appointment. Then, in his five years at the helm, a number of major, yet unsettling, changes came about under his leadership, which led retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor to lament, among other things, Roberts' reversal of her major contribution to US jurisprudence of imposing spending limits on political campaigns.
So besides the 40-year-old age requirement for Philippine CJs, should there be any room for petty ageism? Moreover, given the importance of the CJ's position, have we ever had any in-depth, ideological, or jurisprudential discussion on issues relating to the CJ's appointment?

Sadly, it has always been the case of the Chief Executive and his spokesmen, the Legislature, and the media being at the forefront of providing leading, albeit shallow and mediocre, questions in whatever discussions, with politicians, media, relatives, friends of JBC members, or law fraternities holding sway on a personal or parochial basis.

Such a debased (or debasing) process of naming, vetting and appointing the next CJ clearly creates worse conditions for any nominee, as he will no longer be unaffected; will likely feel obliged to respond to private and public parties to which he may feel indebted; or will fear chastisement if he displeases one or the other source of support for his appointment.

We must therefore take a second look at the serendipitous findings of lawyers Alan Paguia and Homobono Adaza in reviewing Article VIII Section 9 on the Judiciary: That there is no constitutional basis for the nomination by the JBC and the President's appointment of the CJ.

Given the fundamental principles upon which our nation's democratic system is supposedly founded (namely, the separation-of-powers, checks-and-balances, the independence of the Judiciary) and taking heed of the caveat from an old adage that says "Absolute power corrupts absolutely," we must end the practice of appointing a CJ from outside the SC once and for all in order to enhance the high court's independence and detachment and for it to focus purely on the interpretation and execution of the Constitution and all its laws.

It is for this reason that Paguia, Adaza, Jojo Borja, myself, and several others will be filing a petition before the SC this Thursday on the issue.
Our thanks thus go to citizens Ric Palompon of Manila, Editha of Batangas, Bonifacio from the South, Romeo Lopez, Olive of Bulacan, Mrs. Villanueva of Mandaluyong, Mrs. Borja of Iligan, and Glen of QC for sending in donations for the filing fee and photocopying. To the few donors who have not sent in their names, we wish to thank them as well. Because of your generosity, I believe we will have enough by the date of filing. Mabuhay to all the conscientious and pro-active citizens who are continuing to support our cause!

(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday-Wednesday-Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m.; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)

RP democracy's chance

DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
6/18/2012

How often in my four decades of active involvement as a citizen in our nation's politics have I heard people and the media complain about the subservience of the Supreme Court (SC) to the President?

 

I remember as far back as the early years of the authoritarian rule of President Ferdinand Marcos how his chosen Chief Justice (CJ) Enrique Fernando, who served in that post in the most crucial years of 1979 to 1985, was lambasted by newspapers and activists alike.  Fernando's association with Marcos was so blackened that even his basic gentleman's gesture of holding up an umbrella to shade then First Lady Imelda Marcos was seen as a proof of his obsequiousness.

 

Indeed, since the time of CJ Fernando to this day, the same suspicion about every Philippine Chief Justice has lingered; and so it will be the same for a BSA III-appointed CJ.

 

Despite the noise for the likes of Henares, De Lima et al., PeNoy will certainly choose a neutral sounding name to dispel any notion of a "beholden CJ."  But who is he kidding?

 

Last week this space floated the idea of the 15 members of the SC choosing among themselves their "primus inter pares" as CJ, an idea that stemmed from Alan Paguia's comprehensive review of Art. VIII Sec. 9 of the Constitution, including his review of the "residual powers" of the President which evinced no constitutional basis for the appointment of the CJ by the Chief Executive.

 

These findings have been confirmed by Bono Adaza who has also come out strongly for ending the traditional but wrong practice of the President appointing the CJ.

 

Paguia likewise assured me that the 1986 Constitutional Commission's transcript reveals no discussion that can support the appointment of the CJ by the President.  It was Adaza who supplied the possible answer to the mystery of the constitutional provision that seems so serendipitous for those seeking greater independence for the nation's high court.

 

As assemblyman from Misamis, Adaza had one of the closest collegial relations with former SC Justice Cecilia Muñoz-Palma at the Batasan Pambansa.  He noted during our discussion of the issue on my GNN program that Muñoz-Palma was always obsessed with the SC's independence and was one of those who pushed doggedly for the independence of the budget of the Judiciary.

 

Muñoz-Palma later became chairperson of the 1986 Constitutional Commission where, Adaza believes, the former SC Justice personally influenced the formulation of Art. VIII Sec. 9 that leaves out any role of the Executive and Legislative branches of government in the selection of the chief magistrate--unlike the US Constitution which gives its President and Senate the power to nominate, and the latter to confirm, that country's Chief Justice.

 

In the Philippine Constitution, the role of the President and the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) ends with the nomination and appointment of the "Members of the Supreme Court."  And that logically makes the CJ selection process open to election by members of the SC.

 

As the democratic principles and aspirations upon which our government is established are founded on the "separation of powers" of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government, as well as the "system of checks-and-balances," the two Houses of Congress elect their respective leadership--the Senate President by the senators and the Speaker of the House by the district and party-list representatives.

 

It therefore stands to reason that the highest body of the Judiciary, the Supreme Court, should also choose its leadership from among itself--a process that will undeniably enhance its independence.

 

Especially in the Filipino cultural context where "utang na loob" is rubbed in so deeply, the final CJ selection process that is free of any influence by the Executive and limited to the wisdom and consensus of the justices themselves will undoubtedly strengthen that august body's autonomy.

 

This autonomy of the highest court of the land is extra-critical in these crucial times for the Philippines, with issues such as the BangsoMoro "substate" and the burgeoning restoration of US military and nuclear presence looming over the horizon.

 

Fortunately, not a single person I have talked to on this proposed change of practice fails to be convinced after some clarification. It is, therefore, the right thing to do; and if, as Paguia stresses, Aquino III wishes to go down in history as a transcendent statesman, he would yield to this correct and constitutional application of the said proviso and leave the SC members to decide the matter by themselves.

 

However, given the realities and our experience with the manifest dictatorial intentions of the present government that is, moreover, backed by the US Embassy, it is left to us citizens and the people the struggle to institute the right practice of the selection of the CJ and to provide the SC members the basis for taking the right action, with the hope that they, being given a chance to correct a wrong, will have the courage to pursue this just course for the Judiciary.

 

In the next week or so, both Adaza and Paguia--with some citizens and taxpayers, God willing--may file a petition to question and/or stop the appointment of a Chief Justice by the President.  Since both lawyers have on their own shouldered the filing costs of many public interest cases in the past, I thought it only fair that from hereon we should seek the participation of the public in enabling our volunteer legal eagles to keep up the fight.

 

Any petition filed before the Supreme Court already requires a P6,000 fee, plus P1,000 for photocopying.  Thus, I am collecting donations for this next petition.

 

For your convenience or to make arrangements for pick-up of donations, please text me at 0917-8658664.  We will record all donations and acknowledge them on our radio program, TV show, and through this column.  Remember: Any amount is welcome.

 

(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday-Wednesday-Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m.; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)

Unbridled freedom

BACKBENCHER

Rod P. Kapunan

6/16-17/2012

Mahathir Mohammad who served as Malaysia's prime minister for 22 years stands as a maverick leader to the Western-oriented ideology called liberal democracy. He incurred the ire of the West for bluntly telling the world that their version of freedom has become their very instrument to retard democracy that often destroys the indigenous democratic values of the people. In short, Mahathir is telling us that too much freedom is incompatible to progress, just as no amount of progress is possible without it.

That was the gist of the speech he delivered on the occasion of his conferment as honorary professor by the country's premier and oldest university, the University of Santo Tomas. As usual, the controversial straight-to-the-point critic of freewheeling democracy hits the nail on the head of many who continue to look at the Western democratic model as their panacea to solving the problems of corruption and economic backwardness in their society. Mahathir said that real democracy is not all about freedom. Half of that imposes the innate responsibilities that go hand-in-hand in the exercise of freedom.

It is from this standpoint that Mahathir concludes that unbridled freedom often leads to anarchy with those who are wily enough to anticipate the outcome, taking advantage of the situation to commit graft and to abuse to the hilt their power, thus destroying the essence of democracy which they are supposed to institutionalize. It is in this context that Mahathir rejects the American brand of liberal democracy and calls it a failure for accordingly within that system is a built-in mechanism that tends to weaken, erode, and even destroy the native system of an orderly society.

Such values that antedate the Western system are often discredited as hindrance to the advancement of modern freedom that is seldom understood. Traditional moral values that for have long served as foundations for harmony and order in their societies are recklessly substituted by novel freedom which is an artificial creation of modernity. Worse, those clamoring for unrestrained freedom often invoke it as sort of indivisible right, unmindful that freedom has never been an absolute proposition. Put differently, the boundary of one's freedom ends where the boundary of one's responsibility begins. To cross beyond that penumbral political demarcation is to violate on the rights of others.

The problem however is that the liberal democratic orientation of freedom, which is often equated as synonymous to democracy, is in our tendency to value freedom instead of protecting our rights. Such is the case because we have sanctified freedom as immutable. We never even bother to look back that in our unrestrained exercise of freedom, we have only managed to push our country to the precipice of chaos. Despite our overtly gratuitous accommodation of too much freedom, coupled by an idiotic interpretation of democracy, we continue to slide backward when supposedly it was the West that advanced to us these formulas that could propel us to progress and prosperity.

We refuse to correlate the economic success of Malaysia and many of our more economically successful neighbors in Asia to their adoption of a responsible system of democracy —that the greater part of freedom is responsibility. For that, we in effect vandalized the Western system imposed on us. This is apparent by the absence of civic consciousness among our people. In fact, civic consciousness as a form of responsibility is nobler because its aim is to achieve a higher level of progress.

Freedom, for whatever one would say of it, is always selfish and individualistic. As Mahathir rightly noted, our observance of absolute freedom is to propagate anarchy in our society. It is on this score why the theoreticians of Western liberal democracy purposely obviate the truth – that to achieve the higher goals of collective progress and prosperity would equally demand from our people their collective sacrifice and discipline. Rather, any attempt to adopt that system is instantly denounced as authoritarianism, and any leader who might set the tone to impose discipline is branded as a dictator. The West continues to proscribe this approach despite the fact that untrammeled freedom has led to the moral decadence in our society.

Mahathir and many other leaders like President Marcos have their reservations about the ideology that has netted nothing positive to our people. Many suspect that the imposition by the West of the liberal democratic system is a subtle form of subversion because countries adopting it sooner found themselves economically at the bottom of the pit, mired in graft and corruption, deep in debt, and often traumatized by violent civil disorder. The net result is the institutionalization of a very weak central government that is pliant to foreign dictation and exploitation, yet made grateful for the assistance and protection extended to it.

Thus, as the West continues to orchestrate that brand of licentious freedom, our people descend to the bareness of instinctively acting like dogs. As the cycle of failure continues, it is the West that takes out from us the advantage of anarchy, while leaving to us the disadvantage of having to engage in what we might say "political cannibalism" at its worst.

Serge's power blocking

CONSUMERS' DEMAND!

Herman Tiu Laurel

6/11-17/2012

After five and a half months of the Corona impeachment dissipated the crescendo of anti-Epira voices from all over the country, Senator Serge Osmeña, as chair of the JCPC (Joint Congressional Power Commission) charged with investigating and finding solutions to the recent Mindanao Power Crisis, finally convenes the commission last week after a lengthy postponement from an April meeting Serge himself aborted.

The meeting should have been well publicized due to its primodial importance, but media apparently have not been informed and no announcement has appeared. It was only when we checked with one of the top NGOs and power consumer protection advocates that we found out Serge has called a meeting, but there was a big "BUT". TUCP's power sector expert Louie Corrale informed us that a JCPC meet had been called for June 7 but no anti-Epira Mindanao businessmen and regional leaders were invited; only Lopez representative and pro-Epira resource persons were invited. Anti-Epira NGOs and advocates have been victimized by Serge's power blocking again.

The same blocking maneuver has been done consistently in the Low House of Congress where Dina Abad, wife of budget chief Butch, holds the energy committee and sits on every motion from the few solons raising concerns over power issues affecting their constituencies. Lately, we have also received word that Cong. Cresencio Paes of the NATCCO party-list (a cooperative movement) is also opposing moves from Cong. Dina Abad in the energy committee that would abolish electric cooperatives and open them to the predatory mass takeover from the energy oligarchs which have taken over almost all power assets of the National Power Corporation over the past ten years. Abad has been sitting on calls for investigation of the Mindanao power crisis and demands of Mindanao legislators to stop the drive to privatize Agus-Pulangui (much like what Serge is doing in the Senate), as well as sitting on such motions such as Cong. Toby Tiangco's call for the investigation of the VAT on "systems loss" levied on consumers, and Rufus Rodriguez's demand to stop privatization of power barges 101 to 104.

Despite the power oligarchs' "serge-ant at arms" policing the legislature from doing anything positive to investigate, expose and dismantled the plundering power privatization and rate gouging of the power oligarchs, more and more Filipinos are standing up and fighting them. One of the champions of the anti-power oligarchs crusade is a pioneer in the power industry, Mr. Jojo Borja who owns the Iligan Light and Power Inc. (ILPI) providing electricity to 60,000 customers of Iligan City at the fair but still very profitable rate of P 5.75/kWh. He is incensed with what he has seen of the disastrously damaging impact of Epira and Meralco's mega-franchise that charges the killer rate and "highest power rate in Asia" which today stand at P11 to P12/kWh on five million Meralco customers. Last week Borja informed us that another major power industry leader form Mindanao is joining the crusade against Epira, none other than former Cepalco (Cagayan Electric Power and Light Co.) vice-president for engineering David Tauli whom Borja said was made to choose between his vice-president post and stopping his criticism of Sen. Serge Osmeña and his policies; Tauli chose to give up his position to wage the fight against Epira.

In an Internet posting way back in 2010 Eng. Tauli posted this: "Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2010, 1:13 AM… My concentration is on the short-term problem caused by acts of commission and omission by the NPC-PSALM that resulted in their inability to produce electricity from their existing power plants. … My previous postings have identified the causes and the solutions to the short-term problem. And let me remind everyone again that the causes are all man-made, and cannot be attributed to El Nino. What was not adequately covered in previous posts is the reason why the PSALM perpetrated these acts of economic sabotage…." Eng. Tauli is also the spokesperson of the Mindanao Coalition of Power Consumers, which is among the chorus of voices demanding a stop to the privatization of the Agus-Pulangui hydroelectric complex. Speaking of hydro-electric plants, power oligarchs are also salivating for several Luzon based hydro-electric and other power facilities. Among these are the Angat and Casecnan multi-purpose hydroelectric dam facilities, the 640-MW Unified Leyte geothermal, the 65-MW Malaya thermal plant and four power barges, i.e. 101, 102, 103, 104.

Will the privatization of these few remaining power generation facilities help bring down electricity rates? We know after eleven years of Epira that every privatization results in greater increases in power rates because the number of public-owned and operated power plants providing cheaper power are reduced. The remaining publicly owned and operated power plants are the only things left to counter-balance the profit and greed based independent Power Producers, and the appeal from many NGOs and leaders is to end the privatization at this point. Privatization of multi-purpose hydroelectric plants also increases charges of privatized irrigation, pushing up agricultural production costs resulting in higher food prices. The FDC (Freedom from Debt Coalition) on the eve of Serge's JCPC meet issued a press release entitled "Don't allow sale of Agus-Pulangui in Mindanao" and concluded "'EPIRA has systematically prevented the national government from developing and improving state-owned and managed utilities as, over the years, it was geared more into privatizing such assets. This resulted in most of our power utilities being under control of the oligarchic few,' said Agee Linan, FDC power campaigner."

Last week, the first week of June, Meralco announced that its generation charges would increase by up to P 0.54 centavos/kWh giving the reason that demand will be going down due to cooler climate compared to the high demand of hot May. This is the only commodity that when demand goes down the prices goes up, everything else from pork to banana-Q prices would go down if demand goes down. The reason for the gravity defying stunt of Philippine electricity prices is again Epira which provided a "auction" agency called the WESM (Wholesale Electricity Spot Market) to apportion a certain percentage (about 10% today) of electricity generation to the different IPPs to achieve a generation rate that will ensure all IPPs get their predetermined and guaranteed profit levels. Hence when demand goes down they look for the highest rates to compensate the reduction in profits of the IPPs based on a constant "demand rate". These IPPs are lucky SOBs of the Epira, protected by law while the same law penalizes, punishes and impoverishes the entire nation.

Meanwhile, the 'power' struggle continues raging: Last Friday, June 8, Filipino power consumer advocates led by Atty. Bono Adaza, advocates Butch Junia, power expert Jojo Borja and many volunteers, faced the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) in the hearing on 2013 Maximum Average Price (MAP) petition by the Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) for its distribution charge, which would again raise electricity rates in the coming years. The group is also bracing for a massive struggle to stop the Meralco-National Power Corp. (Napocor) P14-billion settlement predictably granted by the Rizal Regional Trial Court (RTC) and will pass-on cost to consumers through the ERC is they are not stopped. Anent the 2013 MAP deliberations are premature since the 2012 MAP hearings still have unresolved issues as raised by Mang Naro Lualhati (our octogenarian hero of the first P30-billion Meralco refund, along with Cefie Padua and others), as well as the 500-percent overpricing of transformers and other costs of Meralco approved by the ERC, as charged by Iligan Light and Power Inc. (ILPI) against the power distributor before the Court of Appeals. ERC just gave its provisional green light for Meralco to implement its 2012 MAP, why on earth is it now hearing the MAP petition for 2013 without first resolving any of the important prejudicial questions?

Lualhati issued this warning (through text): "Ka Mentong, ERC refuses to exclude the P46,015-billion asset base bloating. This means P48-billion overcharge in 2015. They will approve a charge of P2.50 to P3.50 per kWh, instead of P0.90 per kWh, in 2013 as they have done in 2012…" In the medium run these fears of Lualhati may become a reality although for now Meralco is making only small tentative moves of petitioning for a few centavos increase again on their already 100% overcharged ARR (Annual Revenue Requirement) base and MAP (Maximum Average Price), but we always expect the worse form them and the ERC if consumers are not guarded against their blocking moves.

(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday-Wednesday-Friday [change of sched], 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m. on "Will Malampaya be sold off?"; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)

Lawmakers, lawbreakers

DIE HARD III

Herman Tiu Laurel

6/11/2012

The recent Corona impeachment and conviction displayed the situation our title highlights today: Lawmakers as lawbreakers. In a sense, that is the rule instead of the exception because those who make the laws have the power — the same power that allows them to break the laws they make with impunity.

The same thing happened in 2001 with Estrada's impeachment and street mob ouster where the Philippine Establishment — from the oligarchs to the Church, to the "evil society," all backed up by the US — ran roughshod over the Rule of Law to install the leader they wanted.

But make no mistake: The same also prevails in the international stage where the US violates with impunity the multifarious laws the West has written for the world through the UN. For instance, despite the many anti-terror statutes written into international law, it is common knowledge that the US is leading the supply of arms to anti-Assad terrorist rebels in Syria today.

Last week, lawyers Homobono Adaza and Alan Paguia, together with yours truly, filed a petition for "Certiorari and Prohibition with a Prayer for a TRO (temporary restraining order), writ of preliminary injunction" against the Congress and the Senate, as represented by their respective leaders, and an urgent motion for "oral arguments" on what we allege are violations of the Constitution and the Rule of Law in the conduct of the entire Corona impeachment and conviction process. When a few friends say that the petition is laughed at by some, I contend that it is because they are ignorant of its purpose.

On the morning of our filing, former congressman Teddy "Boy" Locsin on his radio program took a pessimistic view of our action. However, according to those who tuned in to his evening TV "editorial" just about 12 hours later, he had changed his position and agreed that the issues must be raised before the Supreme Court (SC), even if just for the benefit of "posterity."

My personal experience in this has been the same as my opposition to Edsa II, where many old friends looked askance at me but four years later, after "Hello Garci," turned around to say I was right.

In fact, some of my political friends from the Estrada camp today (like Rez Cortez) even ask me, "On whose side are you, Corona's?" By answering that I am on the side of the Rule of Law, I hope that they've seen the very reason for my being an ally of Estrada.

When I was asked by another in the same group about the reactions to our petition from Senators Lacson, Drilon and Enrile, I merely cited the very proof that was presented before the Senate but which it had clearly disregarded — the testimony of Rep. Toby Tiangco showing how the House and its Speaker Sonny Belmonte ran roughshod over the Constitution and rules of verification to railroad the Articles of Impeachment; and why it was wrong for Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile to have accepted it. But I don't think these can be any worse than the non-action of the SC on a separate petition of ours last January — with colleague Rod Salandanan of Bataan and Raffy Tongco of Quezon City, represented by Paguia as counsel — questioning the severely infirmed and blatantly illegal Articles of Impeachment, plus five other petitions questioning the omissions and short cuts that had caused the grave injustice.

Enrile contradicts himself when he leads the conviction of his hapless victims then defends those victims by saying they committed no crime. If we are to go by the law, there should be a pursuit of all alleged guilty parties. But as Alan Paguia points out, the law and the matter of justice for the Filipino people in these cases of purported corruption and abuse of high government officials are merely made into chips in the horse trading of politics.

In the case of former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, for example, all corruption charges were immediately dropped in the wake of her resignation. You see: There should have been no compromise if she had been guilty; but, as all the politicians know, most of them are as guilty, if not more, than those they accuse.

I think Corona believes that those who have accused him are far worse than anything they can ever accuse him of, with his final act of exposition of all that he is a declaration of how much more honest he is. To this day, Corona's major accusers, particularly Lacson and Drilon, still refuse to execute waivers for their bank accounts and other financial records.

The latest news is that senators allied with JPE got the biggest pork — a product perhaps of that last JPE meeting with Legarda et al. to convict Corona?

The Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) is a law inspired and lobbied for by the US, supposedly to track illegal and terrorist money. But guess what? The biggest illegal funds transacted globally involve the $500-billion annual drug money transfers that have the Philippines as one of the biggest sources. Even though we have no data on the Philippines yet, we can see how the West and the US banks break the global anti-money laundering regime, by reading "Western Banks, Immune, Enjoy Biggest Slice of Drug Money Profits" posted by The Agonist and "American Banks 'High' on Drug Money" about Martin Woods, an expert at "sniffing out dirty money passing through International Banking Systems."

So, the US as the originator of the global anti-money laundering rules, is in reality the world's chief violator. Thus, every law abiding citizen of the world today, without yet capturing power and supplanting the present plutocratic structure, can only expose the chicanery, fraud, hypocrisy and misanthropy; and hope the majority comprehensively imbibes the practice of the Rule of Law to lay the groundwork for a genuinely democratic culture and political structure.

(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday-Wednesday-Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m.; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)

Not privatization

BACKBENCHER

Rod P. Kapunan

6/9-10/2012

It is most gratifying to note that the doctors and medical personnel of the UP-Philippine General Hospital are the ones taking the cudgels in resisting the privatization of government hospitals.

According to Representatives Teddy Casiño of Bayan Muna and Angelo Palmones of Agham Party List, the government is seeking the passage of House Bill No. 6099, authored by Bacolod City representative Anthony Golez and Negros Occidental representative Alfredo Maranon III, that would allow the 26 government hospitals to contract loans and grants, and even seal joint ventures to expand or build private rooms for paying patients so they all could be operated independently like any money-making government-owned corporations, thereby justifying the imposition of more budget cuts in government subsidies and services to indigent patients.

Maybe our militant watchdogs in Congress got it wrong. The bill simply seeks to eliminate the costly subsidy by teaching those hospitals "how to fish", and not to beg for funds. The bill would require them to charge patients who could afford, while using those earnings to subsidize who could only avail of the charity ward. Representatives Casiño and Palmones denounced the planned withdrawal of some P4.7 billion in subsidies from 26 of the country's biggest hospitals after it was tentatively approved by the House panel to convert them into government corporations permitted to generate their own funds.

At the surface, there appears to be some sort of wisdom in the logic advanced by the two congressmen. After all, subsidy is a residue of the discredited concept of welfare most prevalent among socialist and neo-socialist states. Aside from costing a heavy burden to the resources of the government, subsidy has often been the source of graft and corruption.

Often, patients who could well afford to pay for their medical bills seek to find a compadre to sponsor them, and that gratuitous accommodation includes not only their room, the best the hospital could offer, and sometimes the medicines. This takes place not only among government hospitals. The well-to-do are able to avail of these benefits and services because of their "connection", thus depriving the poorest of the poor of the program for which it was rightfully legislated.

Instead of scrapping subsidy, that concept should be modified. One must bear it in mind that taxation remains justified, even if at times they are regressive, because people expect something in return for their money. Without that reciprocal obligation, then we would be having a sitting government that is plainly engaged in extortion. In fact, taxes in the name of people's protection and defense have never been fully accepted as valid because that would be tantamount to legalizing a protection racket—no different from what the mobsters are doing.

More than that, there are the so-called "poorest of the poor" as now Ilocos Norte representative Imelda R. Marcos would point it out, who badly need public assistance. Economic inequality is always bound to happen in a system that adheres to free enterprise, and it is in this gray area where government subsidy is needed. Taxation is a sort of indirect equalizer in a social system that can never attain the utopia of absolute equality.

When President Marcos issued decrees creating the Heart Center of the Philippines, the Lungsod Silangan Mental Health Center, the Lungsod ng Kabataan Hospital, the Lung Center of the Philippines and the National Kidney Foundation of the Philippines, he did not have in mind the idea of giving everything for free even to those who could afford such services.

Many of the proponents of welfare failed because their focus of public service was based on universalism and on the egalitarian precepts of socialism. Although it is not a bad idea to provide a universal health care and services, the program tends to escalate, that in the end the program itself is affected. As a result, government hospitals have badly deteriorated. Universal health has become a bottomless well to many of our corrupt officials manning subsidized government agencies. Otherwise, the PGH and the East Avenue Medical Center would not have deteriorated that badly.

Our economic planners failed to anticipate that it is the patient that determines whether he wants to avail of the pay ward or just wants to settle for the charity ward, and people who could afford would always seek the better comfort for himself. If Health Secretary Enrique Ona and the administrators of big government-owned hospitals simply observed this elementary rule, there is no reason why government hospitals would be scouring for funds to sustain themselves. The Heart Center, the Lung Center, the National Kidney Institute are good models of successful government-operated hospitals; that it is possible for them to offer and maintain the same quality of service as those operated by private hospitals at a much cheaper cost.

Besides, the decrees exempting them from the payment of taxes, including payment of customs duties for their importation of hospital equipment for their own use, are more than enough to allow them to rechannel those funds to subsidize poor patients.

(rodkap@yahoo.com.ph facebook.com).

The ‘power’ struggle continues

DIE HARD III

Herman Tiu Laurel

6/8/2012

Several power struggles are going on. A minor one among the ruling elite just saw the victimized Chief Justice (CJ) yield to the unjust persecution. The other is the power struggle between those upholding the principle of the Rule of Law and the self-serving abusers of that very law among those in power.

Last Tuesday, several crusaders for the Rule of Law went to the Supreme Court (SC) to demand action on the pending petitions before it on the jurisdictional violations that were prejudicial to the CJ's case as well as to damn all the institutions involved in the travesty of due process in the impeachment exercise.

Today, as you read this, another "power" struggle is being waged by advocates of the Filipino power consumers' cause at a hearing of the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) on the 2013 Maximum Average Price (MAP) petition by the Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) for its distribution charge, which would again raise electricity rates in the coming years. This is just one among a gamut of issues, including the Meralco-National Power Corp. (Napocor) P14-billion settlement predictably granted by the Rizal Regional Trial Court (RTC) as a pass-on cost to consumers, which we will have to put a stop to. But let us first cut through all the crap.

First, the 2013 MAP deliberations are premature since the 2012 MAP hearings still have unresolved issues as raised by Mang Naro Lualhati (our octogenarian hero of the first P30-billion Meralco refund, along with Cefie Padua and others), as well as the 500-percent overpricing of transformers and other costs of Meralco approved by the ERC, as charged by Iligan Light and Power Inc. (ILPI) against the power distributor before the Court of Appeals.

In view of the fact that the ERC just gave its provisional green light for Meralco to implement its 2012 MAP, why on earth is it now hearing the MAP petition for 2013 without first resolving any of the important prejudicial questions?

Lualhati issued this warning (through text): "Ka Mentong, ERC refuses to exclude the P46,015-billion asset base bloating. This means P48-billion overcharge in 2015. They will approve a charge of P2.50 to P3.50 per kWh, instead of P0.90 per kWh, in 2013 as they have done in 2012…"

Today's hearing will have lawyer Bono Adaza volunteering his legal expertise, in support of Butch Junia, who will be the lead advocate. Several citizen volunteers are also joining, including Lito Villanueva, Boyet Ancheta, and others who texted but didn't give their names. Needless to say, we would always need volunteers to show one and all that we are vigilant — especially a certain lady justice of the SC who was appointed by the current Palace occupant.

Justice Lourdes Sereno, one of those suspected to be shortlisted by BS Aquino III as the next CJ, in an SC decision favoring Meralco, had the gall to fault us consumer volunteers for "not being vigilant" against the power giant's rate increase maneuvers when we had already devoted much of our own time and resources to continuously oppose such abuses — as against the ERC's grant of a P2.2-billion "regulatory liaison budget" for Meralco, at the expense of power consumers, even when the power company merely requested approval for P2.02 billion (or P180 million less).

What "regulatory liaison" means is beyond anybody's understanding; but it would lead one to believe that it forms part of Meralco's needs in "dealing" with the ERC. Just what the hell is this for? Could it be what is sometimes called an "intermediation" cost? And why would the ERC be so generous as to increase this on its own? Is this where the two dozen-strong, highly paid Meralco legal team gets its fees?

In contrast, poor consumer protection advocates simply dig into their own pockets and take time out from their work to put in hours upon hours of research and attendance in hearings in order to stop the power fleecing.

Then, we have the P14-billion settlement agreement. For those still not in the know, it concerns the contract obligations to purchase a certain amount of electricity from Napocor that Meralco reneged on when it set up its own independent power producers (IPPs) to purchase power from these sister firms. Yet, despite losing the case, Meralco has repeatedly petitioned to pass on this penalty to its customers.

Luckily for consumer groups, this was one of the issues that former Solicitor-General Jose Anselmo Cadiz fought hard against. But, as we now know, a few months after Cadiz's sudden and inexplicable resignation in February, the decision of the Rizal RTC came out, leaving it to the ERC to decide whether the P14-billion penalty will be shouldered by Meralco's customers.

Surprisingly, the replacement for Cadiz was SolGen Francis Jardeleza, who was formerly a general counsel to a major conglomerate that's now among the owners of Meralco. Is it any wonder why consumers lost the case under this new SolGen?

And, given the ERC's unbroken record of favoring Meralco, will its decision on the huge pass-on financial obligation be much of a surprise?

Fortunately, Jojo Borja of ILPI called us with some good news: engineer David Tauli, former senior vice president of Cepalco (Cagayan Electric Power and Light Co.), is now joining the crusade against the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (Epira) — the mother of all these power evils.

Frustrated with the results of the Epira and the years of energy woes Mindanao has faced because of it, particularly the crises of the last two years which peaked in the first quarter of 2012 when the whole of Mindanao was literally up in arms against the lies of Manila's power authorities (e.g., Sen. Serge Osmeña and Energy Chief Rene Almendras), Tauli has become one of those very vocal about such suspicious power crises.

We would thus have to rouse more people like him into action as we continue on in this fight.

(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday-Wednesday-Friday [change of sched], 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m. on "The Power Struggle Continues" with Jojo Borja and Butch Junia; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)

After the big show

DIE HARD III

Herman Tiu Laurel

6/4/2012

The people, especially the younger generations, should be taught how their minds are being shaped by staged cathartic events, such as the five-and-a-half-month-long impeachment and conviction of Supreme Court (SC) Chief Justice Renato Corona.

From all angles, the just concluded drama is no different from Edsa I or Edsa II, where powerful forces behind the scenes — through their manipulation of key political, economic and media factors — produced, directed and marketed a crisis large enough to create a particular state-of-mind in the public. In Edsa I (circa 1986), after years of demonizing Ferdinand Marcos, coupled with that staged election computer operators' walkout, the Yellows laid the basis for military mutiny and the mobilization of Catholic-led middle class mass actions — the same script that was followed in Edsa II with the impeachment prosecutors' walkout.

It is fairly clear that, for such moves to have been a success, these elite forces have had to repeatedly appeal to the mass ego with such myths as "a return of democracy" in Edsa I, or of it being our "Handog sa Mundo" ("Gift to the World"), or even an Edsa II utopian hope for an "end to corruption" — all of which were never realized.

Undeniably, this formula has been replicated by the global power elite through their social engineers all over the world, in such cases as the "Arab Spring" as well as the "Right-to-Protect" campaign in Libya. Both were produced with trained and funded in-country NGOs and "civil society" groups which opened the way for "regime change."

In Egypt, the Sunni-based Muslim Brotherhood that came to power has called for military intervention by the US and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Nato) into non-Sunni Syria, which will obviously lead to an encirclement of Iran.

In Libya, with the way the country is now disintegrating, the objective was to deconstruct the nation-building infrastructure of Muammar Kadhafi and lay that nation to waste.

In a post-Gloria Arroyo Philippines, the design is for the US to continually prop up a totally dependent and dependable puppet regime that will exercise authoritarian power to push vital US interests, such as a Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) "substate" and a restoration of US military bases throughout the archipelago. Of course, an important goal is to ensure a re-colonization of the economy through transnational corporations and the local oligarchy, unhampered by any obstacles. This is most probably the reason for the push for a pliant judiciary that will, for instance, acquiesce to the billions being sought by a feudal family as just compensation for the land that is to be returned to the farmers.

The impact of the cathartic Corona impeachment on another generation of Filipinos is clear. My GNN program guest Christine Conti, UP student regent and law student who was part of an impeachment monitoring initiative, believes the exercise of convicting Corona was good despite her misgivings about the many violations of law by the prosecution, Malacañang, and the Senate court.

The contradiction (hence, invalidation) in her conflicting views is pretty clear: A law student now justifies the violation of the Rule of Law by the "new standard of transparency" supposedly established for public officers. Question is, would that still hold after most senators and BS Aquino III himself finally decline to sign the waivers to their bank accounts?

In addition, despite Conti's fiery conviction that Mrs. Arroyo is "unforgivably corrupt" and that the country was run aground after Edsa II, she still justifies her generation's pride for the Edsa II coup as if it were "the defining moment for (her) generation," inasmuch as Edsa I was supposedly the Philippines' "Handog sa Mundo." Hopefully, she will soon get to see such contradictions.

All told, the participation of mainstream media in the mind manipulation vs CJ Corona has been blatant. They have gone all out to sustain the "legality" of his conviction, with a case in point being the powerful front-page story about a lowly court interpreter being sacked for not declaring one small asset, which was intended for the public to draw a parallel between the small fry and Corona. The only problem is, the former court employee was sanctioned not for the non-declaration but for double compensation.

This outright misinformation and disinformation are part of what is called "manufacturing consent" for the illegal removal of Corona. Anyone desiring to study the mind control techniques of the powerful, especially of establishment media, can watch two documentaries entitled, "A Century of Self" about Edward Bernays (nephew of Sigmund Freud and the father of modern propaganda, marketing and advertising) and "Manufacturing Consent" by Noam Chomsky, both available on the Web.

Meanwhile, the propagandists of BS Aquino III did not spare any means to prop up their "feel good" campaign after the Corona conviction. To lull the masses into an unthinking stupor, they tried to create a positive economic mood via the National Economic Development Authority (Neda)'s announcement of a "surprising" economic growth rate that "surpasses (the) Asian growth average of 3.7 percent" (even better than Singapore!), as well as other headlines that proclaim, "investors hail Corona conviction." Even the American Chamber of Commerce through its local gofer got into the act at the last minute with its "strategic analysis" of how inevitable and good the conviction is. But as Ado Paglinawan in the US e-mailed us, "the verdict on Corona came toward the end of May (that) it perked the economic growth during the first quarter (January to March)??? Ano ito, hook shot?"

Interestingly, those prevaricators will not highlight the fact that the first quarter saw surveys reporting increases in unemployment (with adult unemployment at a record high of 34.4 percent and with 13 percent jobs lost), as well as hunger at a record high of 23.8 percent of families (with families that rated themselves poor also rising to 55 percent). As such, we can expect Neda and mainstream media to announce a hushed "recalibrating" of data a month from now.

After the big show, reality seeps back in.

(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m.; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)

Clowns and scammers

DIE HARD III

Herman Tiu Laurel

6/1/2012

The very day that the Senate impeachment hearings were to conclude, the BS Aquino III government also tried to conclude its own P80 billion loan for the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management (Psalm) Corp.'s continued operations, thus ensuring that the agency will be able to privatize the remaining 10 percent or so of the National Power Corp. (Napocor)'s assets and the supply of coal and other fuel requirements of independent power producers (IPPs).

Simultaneous to that, an agreement between BS Aquino III and a foreign finance company, Macquarie Group Ltd. of Australia, was reached to create the Philippine Investment Alliance for Infrastructure (PInAI, like Pinay for Aussies) that will set up an infrastructure fund, whereby the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) will contribute $300 million and the Australian firm $50 million for so-called public-private partnership (PPP) projects.

Going by the foreign financial agent's negligible contribution, the inexplicable thing is, why would anyone even go for such a tie-up, especially when the Philippines has its own Special Deposit Account (SDA) in the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) worth around P1.7 trillion, or 12 times the amount of the P130 billion needed to fund the projects this year?

On the afternoon of the impeachment trial's convoluted conclusion — which this space has unwaveringly predicted would end in conviction — and with the senator-judges hamming it up before the cameras, I compiled and later read out on my radio program the more important issues, foremost of which is the country's debt service. In April of this year alone, our country had already paid out P38.6 billion on principal and P16 billion in interest, or a total drain of around P55 billion.

But more than that, government even has a $2.5-billion borrowing program for the year despite the fact we have P1.7 trillion lying idle in the BSP and foreign reserves of up to $72 billion — as against a debt of $60 billion.

Sadly, the swindles don't end there. The news that a certain bigwig invited foreign partners for financial investments into its MRT project — when it is an established fact that the MRT does not lose money on its operations but only on its financial guarantees to foreign investors — also makes our blood boil.

While it is true that the P5.7 million reportedly spent by the House for the impeachment trial is a measly amount, if we consider what other possible expenses it has meant owing to what the Palace has had to promise congressmen, senators, and other interested parties in exchange for a guilty verdict, we'll also be counting in the tens of billions of pesos.

Aside from the usual pork barrel, what and how much more would it have cost, for example, for the last-minute trip of BS Aquino III to the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) in obtaining the latter's acquiescence to a Corona conviction? Despite Malacañang's pronouncements, the timing of the visit renders its denials laughable. BS Aquino III was certainly in a desperate situation. In order to avoid becoming a lame duck after the ill-conceived impeachment case, he was most probably forced to pay through his nose with the people's resources.

I must admit that I didn't listen to the coverage of the final day of the Corona impeachment as I just couldn't stand the hypocrisy of the kettles and pots pointing fingers and judging others. I did have one hard laugh though from the day before, when the prosecution let out Speaker Sonny Belmonte to close its case. The hard laugh was, of course, triggered by the comedic irony of the chief culprit in what former party-list Rep. Rene Magtubo told of the bribery of congressmen for the passage of the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (Epira) in 2001.

Moreover, columnist Rod Kapunan texted about Belmonte's alleged role in one apparent Edsa I scam, which we Googled and found in veteran writer Larry Henares' 80s column. It concerns "a real estate property at 212 Stockton Street, on the corner of Geary Street, at San Francisco's famed Union Square, known as the Philippine Airlines Building since 1947… (which) had always been a Filipino corner in a square that a San Francisco newspaper once described as 'an island of sunshine and greenery'… considered one of the very best locations in the whole United States." When Edsa took place, the new dispensation "hurriedly and in near secrecy sold the property for $10 million, in other words, at the original purchase price, without recovering the substantial investments made further in the property…"

The column then recounted the Senate blue ribbon committee investigation that ensued, which told of "an intriguing tale… (where) everyone (was) passing the buck and pointing to someone else… (and where) Speedy Gonzalez (claimed that he)… turned the whole matter over to Sonny Belmonte when the latter was appointed GSIS president," with the current Speaker being the one "who made the final decision in April 1986 on whom to sell and at what price."

According to the records, the Philippine government only got $2,000 of what was valued by an "independent, third-party appraiser, Haley-Leslie Appraisal Co. of San Francisco… in a thorough study (of) the market value of the property at the time of purchase on August 1982 (as) $12 million." The appraisal report was even more explicit in that "the property under consideration (was) clearly a prime property." Now why don't we ever encounter such reports in the Philippine Star?

Lastly, from one House Speaker to another, we have this final point: Those who thought Sen. Manny Villar and his group would vote for an acquittal were fooling themselves all along. With the string of cases possibly awaiting him, Villar was likely among the most ready to convict. Indeed, whether seasoned or neophyte, whether young or old, what clowns and scammers these members of the political ruling class are!

(Tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Sulo ng Pilipino/Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m., on "The Corona conviction: Politics or rule of law?" with Atty. Alan Paguia; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio archives)