2013 elections | Prepys' Homepage

House body firms up sked for FOI bill deliberations

November 26, 2013November 26, 2013 Ed Lingao Leave a comment

THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON public information and mass media has given its technical working group (TWG) only until the middle of February to consolidate at least 19 different versions of the Freedom of Information (FOI) bill for the consideration of the committee.

The self-imposed deadline has heartened proponents of the FOI bill, who are hoping that the 16th Congress would act faster on the measure than the previous Congress. The FOI failed to make it to the plenary in the 15th Congress because of long delays in the committee on public information and mass media.

With the February deadline, the technical working group could have at least five meetings to hammer out a consolidated version of the FOI to present to the committee for consideration.

But during the first public hearing on the FOI under the 16th Congress, several legislators already made clear which issues could be the sticky points in the deliberations.

While DIWA Party-List Rep. Emmeline Aglipay moved to give the TWG only until February to hammer out a consolidated bill, Zamboanga Rep. Celso Lobregat and Cebu Rep. Gwen Garcia opposed the deadline, saying this was like “putting the cart before the horse.”

Garcia and Lobregat argued that the committee must first constitute the whole TWG before coming up with a working deadline. Interestingly, both Garcia and Lobregat emphasized several times during the public hearing that while the press may be given the right to information, the press should also be constantly reminded of its “responsibilities.” In fact, when the committee deliberated on another bill by Rep. Christopher Co declaring Nov. 23 as Philippine Press Freedom Day, both Garcia and Lobregat asked that a phrase be inserted in the bill reminding the press that its freedom “was not absolute.”

Consideration of that bill was deferred to a future date.

In addition, one of the 19 bills that the TWG would have to consolidate is House Bill 1940 filed by Nueva Ecija Rep. Magnolia Rose Antonino Nadres.

Nadres’ bill exempts the statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) of government officials from the proposed FOI law. All government officials and employees are required by the Code of Conduct for Public Officials and Employees to submit their SALN before April 30 every year. That same law requires that the SALN be made available to the public.

The SALN is also used by journalists as a tracker document in order to determine whether a public officer has been amassing wealth over the years.

However, Nadres argued that the SALN contains what she calls private, not public information, including the address of the government official or employee, as well as the names of the family members. Nadres argued that this information is no longer public information, but information that is protected by privacy rights.

Nadres is the daughter of former Rep. Rodolfo Antonino, who was criticized during the 15th Congress for allegedly delaying the proceedings in the House committee on public information by insisting on a right of reply provision in the FOI bill. Antonino was on his last term in the 15th Congress, and was succeeded by his daughter Nadres.

Nadres, Garcia, and Lobregat however told the committee that they all agree on the need for an FOI bill. The three however cautioned against passing just any FOI law that would not have the proper safeguards.

Still, Right to Know Right Now Coalition Convenor Nepomuceno Malaluan said he was happy that the first committee hearing got off to a good start, with a fixed timeframe for the TWG. Malaluan said this was much better than the 15th Congress, when the committee dawdled until the last minute when it was already too late.

Maguindanao Year 4: PCIJ docus on media murders in campus tour

November 21, 2013November 21, 2013 Ed Lingao Leave a comment

IN COMMEMORATION of the fourth anniversary of the Ampatuan massacre, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ), together with other media organizations such as the Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists (FFFJ) and the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP), has been holding a series of documentary screenings in various colleges and universities.

On November 15, the PCIJ partnered with the Journalism Club of the University of the Philippines – Diliman for the first leg of the campus roadshow. About forty to fifty students – a mix of freshmen, sophomores, juniors and seniors – attended the activity, which showcased the PCIJ documentary “Angkan Inc.”. The documentary features the clans of Maguindanao and the dynamics of history, culture, tradition, and politics in the province that gave rise to influential political families such as the Ampatuan clan, whose patriarch has been tagged as the mastermind in the 2009 Maguindanao Massacre where 58 people, including 32 journalists, were murdered.

The Angkan, Inc. documentary was produced by the PCIJ with assistance from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

The second leg of the campus roadshow was held at the Centro Escolar University last November 18, where about a hundred Mass Communication students attended. PCIJ Multimedia Director Ed Lingao served as the main speaker for the activity. He presented PCIJ documentaries on media killings and the culture of impunity. Among the cases discussed were the killings of Marlyn Esperat, the first journalist to expose the P700 million fertilizer fund scam where former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was implicated, and Palawan environmental broadcaster Gerry Ortega.

The third leg was held at the University of the Philippines – Los Banos last November 19. The documentary showing and discussion were attended not only by UPLB students, but also by high school and college students from nearby towns and cities. With theme,”Clan Feuds and the Press: Maguindanao Massacre Four Years After” , the forum featured the Angkan Inc. documentary and discussions from FFFJ Legal Counsel Atty. Prima Jesusa Quinsayas and Ed Lingao.

Supreme Court reverses self, declares pork unconstitutional

November 19, 2013November 19, 2013 mcmangahas Leave a comment

FOR THE first time in the Philippines’ history of jurisprudence, the Supreme Court en banc reversed three separate rulings that it had itself issued in 1994, 2001, and 2012: It voted on Tuesday, Nov. 19, to declare as unconstitutional the use of pork barrel for the pet projects of senators and congressmen.

The three prior rulings of the high court had invariably upheld the role and power of Congress over the use, allocation, and disbursement of pork or the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).

Voting 14-0-1, the high tribunal partially granted the petitions filed by defeated senatorial candidates Greco Antonious Beda B. Belgica and Samson S. Alcantara and a certain Pedrito M. Nepomuceno.

Only Associate Justice Presbitero J. Velasco Jr. abstained from voting because his son, Lord Allan Jay Velasco, is the incumbent congressman of Marinduque province.

The decision penned by Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe declared all past and present legal provisions on pork as unconstitutional. These include the entire PDAF provision in the 2013 General Appropriations Act (GAA) or the national budget, and all other provisions of past and present congressional pork-barrel laws that pertain to PDAF, CDF (Countrywide Development Fund), or congressional insertions.

Pork was initially called CDF in the early 1990s before it was renamed Congressional Initiative Allocations (CIA), and finally, PDAF in the early 2000s. (See related stories here and here.)

The high court declared that congressional pork barrel laws, which have authorized legislators to intervene, assume, or participate in project identification, modification, and revision, fund release and/or fund realignment are “unrelated to the power of congressional oversight.”

The court likewise deemed past and present congressional pork barrel laws to be unconstitutional because these “confer/red personal, lump-sum allocations to legislators from which they are able to fund specific projects which they themselves determine.”

All informal practices of similar import and effect, which the court also considered as “acts of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of discretion,” were also considered as unconstitutional.

District and party-list representatives were allocated at least P70 million each a year, and the 24 senators, P200 million each a year, under the PDAF system.

In addition, the high tribunal nullified the phrases (1) “and for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the President” under Section 8 of Presidential Decree No. 910 and (2) “to finance the priority infrastructure development projects” under Section 12 of Presidential Decree No. 1869, as amended by P.D. No. 1993.

Both phrases failed the sufficient standard test, which violated the principle that legislative power cannot be delegated, according to the high court.

The ruling comes in the wake of a plunder complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman against incumbent and former lawmakers, government officials, and detained businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles. The filing of the case was prompted by a series of news reports, as well as special audit of the Commission on Audit (COA) on pork barrel spending from 2006 to 2009, that revealed irregularities in the use of PDAF.

The ruling also declared as permanent a court temporary injunction on the use of PDAF dated September 10, 2013. This means that the disbursement or release of the remaining PDAF funds allocated for 2013 and all previous years will no longer be allowed.

All prosecutorial bodies of the government were also ordered by the court to investigate and prosecute all government officials and private individuals who may be involved in the irregular, improper, and unlawful use of PDAF.

Yet still, the high tribunal denied the petitioners’s request for the Executive Secretary and/or the Department of Budget and Management to provide the public and COA complete lists and detailed reports on the use of PDAF, citing that these are already publicly available, subject to the custodian’s regulations.

5 new senators, 8 losing bets did not register with BIR

November 15, 2013November 15, 2013 Ed Lingao Leave a comment

IN THE MAY 2013 elections, 33 candidates aspired to be called senators of the Republic, members of an elite leadership that would help craft the laws of the land.

But what do you do with candidates, both winning or losing, who apparently do not even bother to follow the same laws that they themselves would have helped craft if they had won the post.

In its latest offering, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism looked at whether the 33 candidates and their political parties in the 2013 senatorial race had bothered to follow the simple rules set by the Bureau of Internal Revenue. As people or entities who may receive campaign donations from contributors, the candidates are required to register as witholding agents of the BIR. They are also required to issue official receipts to campaign donors.

These are just some of the laws and regulations that those aspiring for high political office must follow. The PCIJ however discovered that many of the candidates either ignored these regulations, or failed to comply with the law.

For example, the PCIJ found that 13 senatorial candidates did not even register with the BIR as witholding agents. These included winning candidates Alan Peter Cayetano, Gregorio Honasan, Loren Legarda, Grace Poe, and Cynthia Villar.

As well, four political parties did not register with the BIR as witholding agents, including the Kapatiran Party, Bangon Pilipinas, Democratic Party of the Philippines, and the Makabayan Party. The Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino only registered with the BIR on June 13, a month after the elections.

As well, the PCIJ found that there are still some grey areas in the BIR rules that need to be clarified if the Commission on Elections is to enforce campaign finance laws strictly.

The story was produced by the research team of the PCIJ, headed by Research Director Karol M. Ilagan. The findings of the group were also presented to the public in a public forum on Friday in Quezon City. The story caps a series of stories by the PCIJ on campaign finance in the 2013 elections. These stories will all form part of a book on campaign finance in the Philippines that will be published by the PCIJ with assistance from the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES).

For his part, Commission on Elections Commissioner Luie Guia lauded the PCIJ series on campaign finance, saying these stories have assisted the Comelec in enforcing the rules on money politics.

Guia stressed that the commission has just begun enforcing more strictly the laws on campaign finance, and these stories are instrumental in assisting the public, the political parties, the candidates, and civil society organizations through the learning curve. Guia said that many of these laws have largely been ignored by the government and the political parties in the past, and it was only in 2013 that the Comelec took a longer and more serious look at these laws.

In particular, Guia said that the PCIJ story on compliance with BIR rules on campaign donations is important because so many people profit during elections. However, it appears that these profits are not reflected in any way in the revenue collections of the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

“As we all realize, the Gross National Product of the country goes up during election season because of the expenditures,” Guia said. “However, the tax collections just remain constant.”

For his part, Liberal Party legal counsel Raul Daza called on the Comelec to hold seminar workshops for both candidates and political parties long before the election season starts. Daza said this is the best way to minimize the number of violations of election laws.

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” Daza said during the forum, “To the lowest possible level, perhaps we can have workshop seminars long before the elections para malaman kung ano ang required in terms of election financing in order to minimize violations.”

PCIJ Executive Director Malou Mangahas said that while the PCIJ had noted gaps, violations, and errors of compliance with campaign finance laws, what was more important was the fact that both government and the candidates were taking steps forward on the matter of campaign finance.

For example, Mangahas said that while the Comelec would certainly be unable to enforce campaign finance laws on all 800,000 candidates in the last barangay elections, several barangay candidates still bothered to file their campaign finance papers.

“There is a new culture and a new awareness,” Mangahas said. “We can all do well with more transparent and accountable elections.”

Read the PCIJ story:

5 new senators, 8 losing bets did not register with BIR

DATA A DAY: IRA and the barangays

November 6, 2013November 6, 2013 Ed Lingao Leave a comment

MANY FILIPINOS wonder why barangay elections are so hotly contested when barangay officials are not paid any salary. What they get, at least on paper, are honoraria and allowances for their services.

But what a lot of people do not know is that a sizeable chunk of government revenues goes to the barangay. Just how much goes to the barangay? That is today’s Data a Day question.

How many percent of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) goes to the barangay? And in real terms, how much money was given to the barangay officials to spend this year?

For the answer to that question, just click this link, or go the PCIJ’s MoneyPolitics Online website.