The gender mix: More women voters, still more men in power

By Davinci Maru, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

IN TRADITIONAL SOCIETIES, the home remains the primary domain of women. They are often relegated to supposedly feminine roles as child-bearers and housekeepers, or as all-around nurturer of families.

Exactly 79 years ago, on April 30, 1937, Filipino women gained the right to vote and to run for public office. But it was 30 years earlier or in 1907 when Filipino men of some education and property claimed that right.

Starting 2004, a new trend has emerged — that of the number of women outpacing the men in the league of registered voters.

Total RV by sex

During the 2004 general elections, there were 17,014,643 registered female voters and only 16,495,449 male voters, for a gap of 3.1 percent.

In the 2007 legislative and local elections, the difference was slightly lower at 2.6 percent. There were 16,503,110 registered female voters compared to 16,084,962 registered male voters.

In the 2010 elections, however, the gender gap rose to five percent in favor of the women. There were 19,068,323 registered female voters and 18,155,722 registered male voters.

In the May 2013 elections, there were 27,406,600 registered female voters than men, 26,379,623 voters, for a variance of 3.9 percent.

For the May 2016 elections, there are 28,052,138 registered female voters and only 26,311,706 male voters, a sharp 6.6 percent difference.

In 2013, the top provinces with more registered female voters than male voters were the National Capital Region (NCR), Cavite, Cebu, Rizal, and Laguna.

Girl Power

In contrast though, some of the provinces beset with conflict, such as North Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat, and Maguindanao, registered bigger numbers of male voters.

Male Domination

For Filipino women. exercising their right of suffrage came much later. They were denied their right to vote and deemed not fit to join the affairs of the government, under the country’s first election law or Act 1582. They were allowed to cast their vote for the first time only in 1937.

Article V, Section 1 of the 1935 Constitution stated that “the National Assembly shall extend the right of suffrage to women, if in a plebiscite which shall be held for that purpose within two years after the adoption of this Constitution, not less than three hundred thousand women possessing the necessary qualifications shall vote affirmatively on the question.”

On April 30, 1937, the date set for the plebiscite, a total of 447,725 women cast their votes in favor of women’s suffrage.

In truth, however, politics, remains a man’s world in the Philippines. Still more men than women hold the reins of power, on all levels of officialdom.

In a statement dated April 30, 2015, the Philippine Commission on Women (PWC) notes that, “statistics show that women hold 25 percent of seats in the Senate and 27 percent in the House of Representatives.”

“At the local level,” it added, “women comprise 22.5 percent of gubernatorial posts, 18.5 percent of vice gubernatorial posts, and 20.86 percent of mayoralty posts.”

There has been some major improvement with respect to women’s rights in the political landscape, but many women in power still come from the ranks of traditional political families, serving as benchwarmers for the menfolk of their clans.

Of the 44,448 candidates in 2013, only 18 percent or 7.921 were women. Of the 33 candidates for senator, only eight were women. And of the 630 candidates who ran for district representatives, only one in six or 125 were women.

What’s evident in the May 2016 elections, though, is that women have become a significant, discerning community of voters.

Currently, only three women are seeking the highest offices of the land – Grace Poe and Miriam Defensor-Santiago are two of five candidates contesting the presidency, and Leni Robredo, one of six candidates for vice-president. — PCIJ, March 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The ‘vulnerable’ amongst us

By Davinci Maru, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

THEY MAY be fewer and weaker but their right to vote is just as important as that all voters share.

Their sorry situation is a context for the May 2016 elections. In large measure, their being “vulnerable voters” derives from the internal conflict and the poverty that afflict us all in the nation.

As of the last elections in October 2013 we voted our barangay officials, records from the Commission on Elections (Comelec) showed a total of 626,236 registered voters with disability, and another 339,144 who are illiterate or with had little or no formal schooling and could not read or write.

And they come from areas that are also the most vulnerable if not to cheating and fraud, then to other irregularities that may visit the balloting this year.

The big numbers of persons with disability (PWDs) among registered voters are from the conflict-affected regions of Mindanao.

WITH DISABILITY

Interestingly, these provinces are also considered by then authorities as election watch-list areas (EWAs) in the May 2016 elections. They include the province of Maguindanao that has witnessed politically motivated incidents and threats from armed groups in recent elections.

Meanwhile, Comelec data also revealed that big numbers of illiterate registered voters, as of the October 2013 elections, are from provinces with the highest poverty incidence among families from 2006 to 2012.

ILLITERATE

These provinces, according to the National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC), include Samar, Zamboanga del Norte, Negros Oriental, Sultan Kudarat, and Saranggani.

Republic Act No. 10366 “An Act Authorizing the Commission on Elections to Establish Precincts Assigned to Accessible Polling Places Exclusively for Persons with Disabilities and Senior Citizens” was enacted on August 30,2013.

Section 2 of the law says that PWDs refer to “qualified voters who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which, in interaction with various barriers, may hinder their full and effective participation in the electoral processes on an equal basis with others.”

“It may likewise refer to qualified voters whose physical inability to accomplish the ballot, on Election Day, is manifest, obvious, or visible,” it adds.

As of February 2011, the National Household Targeting System For Poverty Reduction of the Department of Social Welfare and Development said there were 4,466,649 households in the country with PWDs.

This number excludes as yet those form the Set 1 areas of the government’s Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps or Conditional Cash Transfer Program), or 333,281 households from the same poorest provinces of the country who had been served from March to December 2008.

For its part, the National Statistics Office (NSO) said that as of 2010 Census of Population and Housing, of 71.5 million Filipinos aged 10 years old and above, 97.5 percent or 69.8 million were literate or could read and write. This was better than the literacy rate of 92.3 percent recorded in the 2000 census.

The flip-side though is that this number also means that across the nation.1.7 million or 2.5 percent of all Filipinos 10 years or older are unlettered or could not read or write.

The National Capital Region or Metro Manila leads with a 99.7 percent literacy rate.

Seven other regions also performed better than the national rate — CALABARZON or Region IV-A (99.3 percent), Central Luzon or region III (99.2 percent), Ilocos Region or Region I (99.1 percent), Bicol Region or Region V (98.5 percent), Western Visayas or Region VI (97.9 percent), Central Visayas or Region VII (97.7 percent), and Caraga (97.7 percent).

Yet still, ARMM scored the lowest literacy rate at 82.5 percent. Among the provinces, Sulu had the lowest literacy rate at 76.6 percent.

Among the regions, ARMM, too, had the lowest school attendance at 59.3 percent, and among the provinces, Basilan, at 52.8 percent, as of the 2010 census. — PCIJ, March 2016

Pol ads bill vs. net worth in SALN: Top bets in debt, deficit spending?

By Malou Mangahas, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

Last of Three Parts

CAN we trust them with the public purse?

At the rate they are splurging billions of pesos on political ads, with nothing or little to show in their asset records as their own spending capacity, the candidates for president and vice president in the May 2016 elections are possibly the least smart amongst us when it comes to math and money.

In truth, if they have been dipping into their pockets for pesos for their ads, nearly all of them would now be in grave deficit spending status. Or even in the throes of bankruptcy.

Altogether, four of the five seeking the presidency, six seeking the vice presidency, 22 aspiring to be senators, and few dozen local and party-list hopefuls have acquired a record P6.69 billion worth of pre-campaign political ads, mostly on television, and some on radio and the newspapers.

Three wannabe presidents – Manuel ‘Mar’ Roxas II of the Liberal Party (LP), Jejomar ‘Jojo’ Binay of the United Nationalist Alliance (UNA), and Grace Poe of the Galing at Puso (GP) slate — had even made it to the Billion-Peso Club of ad spenders ahead of the official 90-day campaign period that started on Feb. 9, 2016.

According to Nielsen Media’s monitoring reports, as of Jan. 31, 2016 and by the rate card of media agencies, the political ads featuring these three as “advertiser” and “product” had reached the billionth mark: P1,050,065,096 for Binay, P1,016,414,123 for Poe; and P969,173,267 for Roxas.

And while he decided to run only in December 2016, a fourth candidate for president, Rodrigo Duterte of the PDP-Laban Party, had also recorded a bill of P146,351,131 for his pre-campaign ads.

Six wannabe vice presidents, meanwhile, have incurred similarly significant expenses for their solo ads:

  • P419,002,456 for Duterte’s official running mate Alan Peter Cayetano;
  • P273,856,544 for LP’s Maria Leonor ‘Leni’ Robredo;
  • P252,503,856 for Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos Jr.;
  • P29,673,341 for UNA’s Gregorio ‘Gringo’ Honasan II;
  • P8,953,380 for Antonio Trillanes IV; and
  • P2,776,000 for GP’s Francis ‘Chiz’ Escudero.

Caps in law, net worth

Even then, they are probably poised to splurge millions of pesos more to get elected. Election laws allow a candidate for national office to spend during the official campaign period up to P10 per voter, or a maximum of P540 million for the nation’s 54.3 million registered voters, to cover all his or her allowable expenses.

But the 2014 statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) of the candidates show no evidence that any of them can finance multi-million-peso campaigns, let alone billion-peso ones. Nearly all of them have little to modest net worth and even the more affluent ones would have gone bankrupt by now if they financed their pre-campaign ads on their own.

For the candidates for president, here’s what their 2014 SALN numbers, compared to their pre-campaign ad expenses, reveal:

  • Roxas declared a net worth of P202,080,453 and cash on hand/in bank of P24,833,667. He incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P969,173,267. If he spent his own money, he would be on deficit spending by P767,092,814.
  • Binay declared a net worth of P60,250,983 and cash on hand/in bank of P38,843,866. He incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P1,050,065,096. He would be on deficit spending by P989,804,113.
  • Poe declared a net worth of P89,464,819 and cash on hand/in bank of P1,071,406. She incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P1,016,414,123. She would be on deficit spending by P926,949,304.
  • Duterte declared a net worth of P21,971,733 and cash on hand/in bank of P13,846,733. He incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P146,351,131. He would be on deficit spending by P124,379,398.

Wannabe vice

Four of the six candidates for vice president declared much less in net worth, and Marcos, a little more. All together though, they all would be on the path to penury, going by their own expensive ad buys:

  • Robredo declared a net worth of P8,032,124 and cash on hand/in bank of P8,049,124. She incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P273,856,544. She would be on deficit spending by P265,824,420.
  • Honasan declared a net worth of P21,225,616 and cash on hand/in bank of P11,058,816. He incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P29,673,341. He would be on deficit spending by P8,447,625.
  • Marcos declared a net worth of P200,598,008 and cash on hand/in bank of P8,000,000. He incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P252,503,856. He would be on deficit spending by P51,905,848.
  • Cayetano declared a net worth of P23,314,540 and cash on hand/in bank of P8,500,000. He incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P419,002,456. He would be on deficit spending by P395,687,916.
  • Trillanes declared a net worth of P5,549,000 and cash on hand/in bank of P2,300,000. He incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P8,953,380. He would on deficit spending by P3,404,380.

By these metrics, only two — Escudero and People’s Reform Party candidate for president Miriam Defensor Santiago — remain in surplus spending status. Escudero had acquired, by Nielsen Media’s data as of Jan. 31, 2016, too few ads; Santiago had not run any pre-campaign ads at all.

Escudero in 2014 declared a net worth of P7,565,029 and cash on hand/in bank of P3,237,947. He incurred pre-campaign ad expenses of P2,776,000. Assuming he used his personal funds, he would be on surplus spending by P4,790,029.

Santiago, meanwhile, declared a net worth of P73,033,539 and cash on hand/in bank of P48,480,291 in her SALN for 2014. — With research and reporting by Vino Lucero, Davinci Maru, and Earl Parreno, PCIJ, March 2016

How Not to Get Sued for Online Libel

As we’ve seen with Neri Naig recently being issued an arrest warrant for violating Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, simply reposting something online could already be used against you in court. Aiming to raise awareness and to be more responsible netizens, here is our 5 best advice not to get sued for online libel.

cyber-crime-law
source: philstar.com

1. Avoid reposting out of emotions

When you scroll through your news feed and see someone’s post ranting about bogus sellers or a dead mice found in a coffee drink (no matter how shocking it may seem), try to first know the authenticity of the story and don’t be overly-emotional and repost without knowing first the entire truth about it.

If we were one of those to repost negative things and it turns out that there’s no truth to the issue, then legal action is likely to come our way.

2. Attack ideas, not people

If you feel the need to criticize online, try to attack ideas and not people directly. Say, “That is a stupid idea”. Not, “You are stupid”. Basically, lessen trash-talking and don’t their mothers in the topic.

3. Use safe words

If you have to blog or report a post of someone, use safe words such as “allegedly” or “reportedly”. This way, you cannot be held liable for disclosing unverified ideas or issues as you’re just merely informing the public of the currently presented facts.

4. Try to remain anonymous

Elements of libel include an identifiable target, identifiable culprit, and motive to malign or destroy the reputation. If you use an alias or be anonymous, one or two of the elements are missing and cannot be pursued with legalities.

5. If in doubt, don’t

Lastly, if you’re not sure whether what you’ll say online will have consequences, it’s sometimes better to not post or reply to anything at all. You can simply Like the post if you agree or you just want to show sympathy to your friend. After which, you can scroll past it and move on with your life without being involved in any issue.

Got any bits of advice that could save anyone from being sued for online libel? Feel free to contribute in the comments section below.

The post How Not to Get Sued for Online Libel appeared first on YugaTech | Philippines News & Tech Reviews.

Globe Prepaid Surf20 w/ 400MB exclusively in Cebu

Globe-logoFor Globe Prepaid subscribers living or visiting Cebu for Sinulog Festival, you’re in for a treat as Globe offers 400MB of data for only P20/day.

400MB of data at Php20 for 24 hours is not bad at all when compared to other promos like the GoSurf30 with 50MB. The catch is, it’s exclusively available in Cebu, primarily for Sinulog. So, if you’re in Cebu to enjoy the festivities, you can avail of this promo to post, share, and explore more of Cebu. If it’s time leave the region, you’ll still be able to spend your unused data if still valid. According to the FAQs on the Globe portal, it’s the registration that’s only available in Cebu.

To register, just text SURF20 to 8888. This promo is exclusively for Globe Prepaid users in Cebu and is not available for Globe Postpaid and TM.

Source

The post Globe Prepaid Surf20 w/ 400MB exclusively in Cebu appeared first on YugaTech | Philippines News & Tech Reviews.