Category: Journalist Killings

Duterte Revisited: What he said in 2001 about drugs, vigilantes

mcmangahas

By Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews

Duterte Revisited

DAVAO CITY (MindaNews / 29 June) — Days before President-elect Rodrigo Roa Duterte declared a boycott of the media on June 2, 2016, MindaNews had asked the first Mindanawon to govern this country of 100.98 million, for a sit-down interview, as it had asked him in the past, on major issues confronting this city of 1.63 million.

Arrangements were made with Christopher Lawrence “Bong” Go, Duterte’s Executive Assistant, for “A Day with the President-elect” where the interview would be done after lunch (which is usually when his day begins) and the MindaNews team would follow him in his next schedules until his day would end at dawn.

June 2, however, turned out to be his last press conference. Immediately thereafter, journalists (national, international, and yes, local) were barred from entering the compound of the Department of Public Works and Highways in Panacan, where the Presidential Guesthouse (dubbed under the Arroyo administration as “Malacañang of the South” and now popularly referred to as “Panacañang”) is located.

When he will lift his boycott, no one can say for now. He has repeatedly said in speeches after June 2 that he would not talk to media until the end of his six-year term.

In lieu of what would have been a Q and A that MindaNews would have published in the run-up to his oath-taking as President, we are re-publishing this Q and A done in November 2001, shortly after Duterte announced in his Sunday TV program, “Gikan sa Masa, Para sa Masa” (From the Masses, For the Masses), the names of 500 persons who he said could help the city in its fight against drugs. At the time of the interview, at least four of those on the list had been killed or ended up dead. Another 17 suspected drug pushers and celfone snatchers, four of them minors, were eventually slain soon after.

Between 2001 and 2016, Duterte had been investigated several times by the Commission on Human Rights, including a 2009 probe by then CHR chair and now Senator Leila de Lima, and other international human rights groups. But no charges have been filed against him.

Fifteen years had lapsed since MindaNews ran this interview with Duterte, who prefers to be called “Mayor of the Philippines” instead of “President.”

In his own words, here is Mayor-President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, interviewed in 2001 but speaking like he does today.
———————————————————————————————————
Duterte Revisited: What he said in 2001
By Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews
First of Three Parts
———————————————————————————————————
28 November 2001: “Pinaka-unfair sa lahat ng krimen ang drugs”
———————————————————————————————————
MANY in Davao City were “shocked,” to say the least, to see their controversial mayor on national television late Tuesday night last week, talking tough (his expletives unedited), toting a gun and kicking the corpse of a suspected drug pusher reportedly killed by the vigilante group, “Davao Death Squad” (DDS).

Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, 56, knew he’d be featured on “The Probe Team” but didn’t watch it, claiming he doesn’t want to watch himself on TV or listen to the radio.

Duterte has repeatedly said he doesn’t give a damn what his critics say about him. But among millions of viewers that Tuesday night, the only person whose feedback he cared about was Sara, his only daughter who is studying Law in Manila.

“She said it was bad enough that the expletives I uttered were not edited… She said ‘you were portrayed somehow as being linked to the DDS by the way you framed your answers,'” Duterte said.

“I was quick to point out to my daughter that if it’s a matter of government abetting the killings or having sponsored the slayings or encouraged or had taken initiatives, it’s absolutely false because the mayorship or I had nothing to do with it. Pero sinasakyan ko… because to be really truthful and honest about it, I would rather see criminals dead than innocent victims die, being killed senselessly.”

He then cited several cases of killings by people, including minors, under the influence of drugs.

Last month, Duterte announced in his Sunday TV show the names of 500 people whom he said could help the city in its fight against drugs. At least four of those on the list had been killed or ended up dead.

At least 17 suspected drug pushers and celfone snatchers, four of them minors, were killed by suspected vigilantes last month. Since 1995, at least 150 persons have been reported to have been felled by the vigilantes.

That his name is being linked with the DDS does not seem to bother Duterte.

A government prosecutor (from 1977 to 1986), Duterte was named OIC Vice Mayor of Davao City in 1986, was mayor from 1988 to 1998, moved on to become congressman of the first district and reclaimed the mayoralty this year.

The day after “The Probe Team” featured the vigilante killings, Davao Archbishop Fernando Capalla wrote a pastoral letter, “Thou shall not kill,” made public last Sunday through the masses in all parishes. The letter finally broke the “long silence” of the Church on the vigilante killings in the city.

But who are the vigilantes? Is Duterte behind them? Is he their godfather?

Duterte sat down with MindaNews’ Carolyn O. Arguillas one evening last week to answer these and more.

———————————————————————————————————-

Excerpts from the interview follow:

Q. Why did you make that list public?
A. I was appealing to the patriotism, the civic spirit I might rekindle in the minds, hearts of these people. (Also) to put them on guard (that) we know something about you (so) you stop it. Second, the community must know. For example, neighbor mo..

Q. But it’s being viewed as witchhunting. A number of those on the list…
A. No it’s not withchunting. There was a process that we followed. Of the five families who were outraged by my announcement and who came to me really angry, after I showed them the proof…. yung isa gusto pa nya suntukin sa harap ko yung anak nya… Besides, I laid the predicate in my announcement. I said I’d like to mention the names of persons here in the city… who can be of help to us if they would just be patriotic enough to help government and try to save the generations from being devastated by drugs.

Q. But the list, it is said, spared the rich, that most of those on the list are poor, a number of them minors…
A. It’s not a matter of minor or a person of age. That’s what I was trying to explain to ‘The Probe Team.’ Because..that guy who shot and killed that girl (whose celfone was snatched inside a taxi), he was only 17. When the mind is devastated by drugs, the age doesn’t really make a difference, whether you are 17, 50 or 70. When you go crazy, you go crazy. (Age) does not count anymore. Most of these are aged 18, 19, either sinasaksak nila yung mga estudyante dyan … or binabaril….

Q. I think one of the reasons why you are being linked to the DDS is because the killings stopped during the term of (then Mayor Benjamin) de Guzman and returned when you came back.
A. Hindi baya. Remember that de Guzman filed a case against this priest because he declared to the world that de Guzman is the head of a death squad that at that time killed two snatchers? I hope that they would temper their conclusions about me. Pero kung sabihin mo na naawa ako (sa victims), sinabi ko naman eh, do not ask for a tear. I never shed tears for mga ganong klaseng tao.

Q. Is that the solution? Finishing them off?
A. No it’s not. Killing can never be the solution to what ails this country.

Q. What’s the solution?
A. ..we have to try to mature as a nation and add more policemen. For example, for the city of Davao, so I can patrol and build a case against them individually, I would need about 5,000 policemen which we cannot have, and improve police methods, yung mga night vision and maybe listening devices which unfortunately we cannot afford for the next 10 years or so.

Duterte on Killings

Q. There was a dialogue between teenage gang members and some legislators. The teeners said some of them got hooked to drugs because of policemen pushing drugs, that they became indebted to the policemen so they became user-pusher.
A. I do not know of any policeman direkta na ganon. But if (there) is, then he’s a dead policeman…

Q. A UN agency on drug control has said the city government should..
A. I don’t give a sh_t what they say. I don’t have a treaty with them.

Q. You’re not bothered about people refering to you as the godfather of DDS?
A. No. Because it’s not true. So if the truth will set you free, I am free because there is no such thing as a government-sponsored killing in the city.

Q. Who are the vigilantes?
A. I really do not know. A guy who went public in a newspaper interview said he’s a former rebel and he claims it is composed of former rebels and policemen. I even suffered a rebuke (that the) mayor is putting up a time limit that is not realistic. So may timetable pala sila… their own timetable.

Q. If you’re saying it’s not you, then who’s behind these vigilantes?
A. Yung mga tatay na hindi tumatanggap ng ganon. Maybe they were just waiting for somebody na kakampi nila dyan who also nurtures this kind of outrage sa drugs…

Q. Rich?
A. Maybe. You cannot move if you do not have the money. In all probability, these are people who have the means to pay (the vigilantes) at kung totoo yung sinasabi ng lumabas sa newspaper, maybe yung may tinamaan talaga (yung mga anak)… Ako personally, personally ha — not as mayor because may oath of office ka pagka mayor ka, you protect the Constitution, follow the Constitution, protect everyone’s rights — but if I were an ordinary citizen of this city tapos tinamaan ang anak ko, maybe ganon din ang gagawin ko. Talagang hihirit ako, put–nang yan hihiritan ko yan. I mean it’s not really fair. It’s not fair… Rich or poor, ang lahat ng efforts mo sa buhay nandon sa anak mo… Lahat tayo, corny man pakinggan, we do not even live, we exist for our children…. lahat ng efforts mo, pera mo nandoon sa bata, eskuela …… Mas gusto ko pa yang kidnapping pati hold-up. Ikidnap mo anak ko, isauli mo lang, maghingi ka ng pera, babayaran kita, then the next time I will just really guard my children with my life… Put–na itong drugs, pagsinabit mo ang anak ko, I have lost the child forever. He loses his mind, he loses his future…you leave with me a goddamn criminal in the making, kasi pag wala nang pera, wala nang manakaw sa akin, magnanakaw yan sa iba, maghoholdup sa iba, magre-rape yan, maghohostage… Pinaka-unfair sa lahat ng krimen ang drugs. Meron pa dito sa Davao, hindi ko lang sabihin ang (pangalan), well-to-do, ni-rape nya yung sister, pinasok nya sa kwarto, pag pasok ng tatay pati nanay, tinutukan nya ng (cal.) 45 na baril… I’m sure pag nabasa nya (ito), malaman nya na alam ko.

—————————————————————————————————–
DUTERTE REVISITED: What he said in 2001

By Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews
Second of Three Parts
———————————————————————————————————

29 November 2001: “I will even shoot my son in front of you”
———————————————————————————————————

Q. They’re saying your son, your relatives are also involved in drugs.
A. ..Pati ako raw… Nag-research ako, and I studied the matter very carefully, seriously. Sinabi ko sa anak ko (Paolo), ‘wag na wag kang pumasok dyan sa put–nang droga na yan kasi gagawain kitang example. Kung kaya kong mag-resign (nung) nanuntok ka lang, kaya kitang patayin kung…hiyain mo ako.’ I resigned (as congressman) for a very trivial reason…. nanuntok (ang anak ko) ng security guard tapos inatake ako kay hindi maka-file (ng kaso) kasi daw congresman ang tatay….di mag-resign tayo so you can file charges. Unfortunately, nobody accepted my resignation but I was ready to go down.

This time I’m ready. Just produce a credible and true witness (that my son is involved in drugs) and I’m going to resign as mayor of Davao City and I will shoot my son in front of you. Siguraduhin mo lang yan kay pag hindi, ikaw talaga babarilin ko. Yan ang trade off ko sa iyo. I will resign from the mayorship anytime. I don’t have any illusions dyan sa mayor mayor na ‘yan. I can always run again and win. I can sacrifice a few years. I can lose my child. Dalawa yang anak ko (na lalaki). May mga apo na ako na lalaki. I can lose (my son)…. Ngayon kung maniwala yung mga tao (that my son is into drugs) bahala ka. My son is there, you can ask him to go for a drug test .. but I will not insult my son by asking him publicly so kung sino yung interesado, kausapin ninyo anak ko. Just produce a true, credible witness against my son and I will resign. And I will even shoot him in front of you.

Q. Were you ever asked by Malacanang about the vigilante killings here?
A. Wala. Well, I know my style. In this game, you cannot afford to (be on) low profile (because if you do that), walang mangyari… Look at the three years (1998-2001). What did it produce? A very resurgent drug situation. So I had to go back all over again. Kaya nga sinabi ko kay (Local Governments) Sec. (Joey) Lina when they offered me the regional chairmanship of the Peace and Order Council — now I can make this public — I declined… Sabi ko, ‘maghanap na lang kayo (ng iba) dyan because you might not like my style. I have my own style of doing it.’ Sabi nila, ‘well as long as your style is legal and good then proceed.’ Sabagay, legal gud talaga yang ginagawa ko..

Q. Let me go back to the solution. Maturing as a people takes so long. What is the immediate solution?
A. I think we would require from kindergarten (to) college, a lecture everyday on the evil of drugs..

Q. Where is the supply of illegal drugs here coming from?
A. Cotabato and Marawi but we suspect that there’s a factory nearby which I’m not at liberty to divulge to you right now.

Q. Within the city?
A. No. Peripheral cities.

Q. Shabu?
A. .this guy who’s manufacturing it knows that I know and a lot of us in the law enforcement know.

Q. So how come you’re not raiding it if you know…
A. Well, one of these days, kung na-DDS yan, ah hindi ako yan..

Q. .. if you know, why don’t you go after him?
A. Because you have to have evidence. You cannot just approach him anywhere and everywhere. May militia ito na sarili nya. Ganyan man talaga yang mga druglords na big-time. Ito ang pinaka. As a matter of fact, pag ito ang nakuha ko, puede na akong mag-retire pagka mayor..

Q. How bad is the problem of drugs here?
A. Very bad. Look at the list of 500… validated yan, 250 of them have been convicted, on parole or on bail. Yan ngang mahirap sa problema sa drugs…kasi pag-evaluate, assess na kung puede ba sya sa probation, good behavior is enough….automatic ang probation…. paglabas, babalik na naman (sa droga).

Q. What about rehabilitation? You don’t believe in rehab?
A. Wala tayo dito… next year baka maghingi ako kay Presidente… for a rehab dito sa Davao, regional (rehabilitation center). Because a rehab for that kind of, actually it’s a sickness eh, you would need a prison. Otherwise mag-eskapo yan.

Q. A prison?
A. Because when they are caught, they are not tried (in court)… they now opt to be treated… pag nilagay mo yan sa bintana na walang (rehas), a manibat na. Preso gyud na. Presohin mo talaga.

Duterte on Son

Q. How big will your rehabilitation center be?
A. …maybe I would need a facility good for 300 persons. Hindi halfway house. It’s really a rehab center and it’s almost like a prison.

Q. But rehab centers now don’t go into preso-preso..
A. Ah magsibat yan. Remember I was prosecutor for 11 years before I became a mayor. Sisibat yan…

Q. You were seen on TV kicking the corpse of..
A. Review again. Review again.

Q. I saw you on TV.
A. Nah, nah. May granada yon. Ano ako, gago, mag-upo ako..eh pag pumutok yan sa mukha ko?.. Kaya binaligtad ko yung katawan, nakita mo yung granada?

…Review the footage again, please. Hindi ako ganon kagago na may camera na magsipa. Ginanon ko kasi sabi, ‘Sir, ma-o nang gagunit ug granada.’

Q. In the meantime that the vigilantes are busy, what is your police doing?
A. Maybe they are also going after the vigilantes. Excuse me ha, yung footage na yon sayop yun. Tingnan mo uli. Binaligtad ko yung katawan because may granada. Eh kung mag-upo ako tapos ganunin ko yung katawan ko eh kung puputok yon? Mabuti nakatindig, at least pag nakita mo yung granada, di mulukso ka…

Q. October was the month of the killings. What was the feedback direct to you? More criticisms? More praises?
A. I don’t give a sh-t. I don’t give a sh-t whether they are for or against me. I was elected by the people after I promised them that I would go after kidnappers, druglords, drug pushers, holduppers and rapists… That’s already a non-issue to me. What they say for or against me, I don’t give a damn, I don’t give a sh-t. Tapos na yan. What I should do now is to honor my commitment because the people voted for me on the basis of my commitment and my promise to them… All things come naturally, infrastructure, public works. You can project the things you need. Crime? Can you project how many people will be contaminated by drugs, how many will be killed, how many girls will be raped?

Q. What’s the drug profile here like? Does it cut across..
A. Malala dito. Even professionals…Hayun, nasira ang mga pamilya.

Q. You said you’re not behind it but “sinasakyan” mo lang. But due process requires.
A. Due process is the thing that I should be following when I do it. Alam mo itong mga vigilantes….and it is really true for any human behavior…. sabihin mo ‘wag mong gawin yan,’ pag gusto nyang gawin, gagawin man talaga nya yan. Sabihin mo ‘hoy mga gago, mga buang, gawin nyo ito’ tapos ayaw naman nilang gawin, wala. So bahala kayo. Pag nahuli, sige, go ahead, kayong mga drug pushers, magtago na kayo, may mga gago on the loose pero kung mahuli ko kayong mga vigilantes, then that’s it. You also go to prison.

Q. You’re not gonna shoot them?
A. Well, I might just give them a dose of their own medicine. Ang sinasabi ko lang dito sa mga vigilantes, mga put–na na ito, ang problema ngayon, baka ipalusot ninyo yang patay ninyo, na pumatay lang kayo ng tao para sabihin lang ninyo na ‘ah drug pusher yan, druglord yan.’ Yan ang mahirap. One of these days I will catch up with them (vigilantes) and they’ll have to pay the price….because… whether it’s true or not, it’s already a crime but what makes it doubly sad for all of us is baka ang pinatay nila hindi nga (drug pusher). Then by the time I catch up…

—————————————————————————————————–
DUTERTE REVISITED: What he said in 2001
By Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews
Last of Three Parts
—————————————————————————————————–
November 30, 2001: “Totally, totally, totally unacceptable”
—————————————————————————————————–

Q. It seems like some other local chief executives are following your example.
A. Copycats. (Pause). Ah, example? Eh kung pinapatay ninyo, gago kayo, bawal yan. Salita lang, hanggang salita ka lang dapat dyan tapos let the others do it if they want. But if they are caught, again it’s your duty to punish them. Sakyan mo na lang….

Q. You’re not afraid? That druglords would..
A. I am, I am….there’s a report. I do not want to make it public, I do not want sympathies. But you always tread on dangerous paths… Kung wa tay suerte, di ganon na nga but I said I do what I have to do.

Q. If I were a druglord, I’d probably target you.
A. Mabuti yan kasi ako nakatutok rin sa iyo.

Q. I mean, if we follow their… you’re an obstacle.
A. Yes, because they’re losing business dito sa Davao…. They cannot really be based here — walang homegrown na criminal syndicate dito sa Davao — yan mapagyabang ko yan. Kidnapper, wala. Sa labas yan sila… sa peripheral cities. Yang kanilang pasok, they utilize the teenagers kasi alam nila teenagers dili mapreso eh…. always minors yang mga runners nila kasi pag minors, pagdating sa korte, suspended ang trial. The minor now goes to a halfway house, magsisibat yan or if at all they are caught… halos lahat na nahuli sa drugs… may perang pang bail (so) labas na naman yan sila, the following day laro naman. So if you’re doing brisk business in Davao, maski ganon ang delivery system mo, konti-konti lang, below 200 kasi bailable ang below 200 grams, masasaktan ka. And they (druglords) also correctly read me – nagpaplano rin ako sa kanila. Maybe one of these days, our paths will cross suddenly. It’s either their skin or mine… But I just want to assure everybody that there is no such thing as government-sponsored killing, initiated, abetted or encouraged by government. That is utterly false, I swear to God. Walang budget ang gobyerno para ganon.

Q. Narcopolitics is…
A. It will come.

Q. It’s not here?
A. I fear that one of these days it will just really come. Pagkaganon ang kinita nila, they can now support a mayor who’s a fencesitter…. Sa totoo lang, sino mang official nagsalita about drugs? Puro lip service…. ako, at least may ginagawa ako dito maski salita lang (na) “patayin ko kayo.”

Q. How much money on the average, daily, changes hands in the city in illegal drugs?
A. P600,000 to P700,000 daily. …may nahuli ngayon o yesterday, two kilos….I just came in from Manila. They will be presented tomorrow. Eh kung totoo yan, eh di pinatay ko na yan, laliman ka two kilos?

Q. (Laughs) Kay wala ka man, you were in Manila.
A. Cellular lang man na. Hello, hello..(laughs). Bu-ng. Pataka lang ka (laughs)

Q. P600,000 to 700,000? That’s a lot of money.
A. That’s a lot of battered brains. Kita mo, the city is cosmopolitan, 500 yung naglalaro dito, yung nasa listahan..half of that or a third of that validated na.

Q. Of the 500 on the list, how many approached you, aside from the families you mentioned.
A. More than a third of them naghingi ng tawad and … wanted their names delisted. Sabi ko, ‘no, your name stays there. All you have to do is to behave and I assure you nothing will happen.’ Because hindi naman talaga siguro papatay ang mga DDS kung wala ka na, gago naman tong mga vigilantes kung ganon. Sabi ko nga, pag nagkamali kayo na pinapatay na inosente eh di
pag inabot ko kayo, sila puy akong putulan ug ulo.

Q. Kung dili diay inosente, okay ra?
A. Hindi naman pero mas grabe kung (inosente). Doble nga eh. The fact that its’ being done is already sad. But to do it for personal reasons tapos i-attribute mo lang na drugs tapos wala naman pala, then you’re really sh-t.

Q. Isn’t this a slap on the face of the police?
A. No. The mayor has the operational control of the police. It’s a slap on me.

Q. It’s a slap on your face.
A. I admit full responsibility for the failure of the police to catch the vigilantes and

Duterte on Drugs

Q. And the drug pushers as well?
A. At least naghina na. That’s what I promised the people. I said you vote for me, I’ll do this. And sinakyan ko yung mga gago dyan (vigilantes). Maybe encouraged sila because bumalik na ako and they know that hardliner ako dyan sa crime. Sinakyan nila ako, sinakyan ko rin sila. Alang-alang magsabi ako na ‘o mga vigilantes, wag kayong pumatay, yung mga drug pushers dyan, hayaan lang ninyo, kung sa mahuli lang, kung hindi mahuli pasensyahan na lang.’ Ganon? Ah, patay ang syudad kung ganyan.. Lubong. With 1,600 policemen, 255,000 square hectares, 1.4 million population, you expect the police to solve every crime, not only to solve but build a case against each and every one of them? Ah, naghahanap ka ng langit nyan. That’s utopia. That’s Republic of Utopia. It’s not a republic anywhere in this planet.

Q. But we’re talking human rights here.
A. Human rights is there. Pero most of all, yang human rights is really for the defenseless, the hopeless, yung wala na silang matakbuhan. That’s my governance.

Q. Why do you like to be more chief of police than chief executive?
A. Because from my experience, if the place is not stable, forget about progress and development. I do not want to pull my own chair but to a modest degree, alam nyo na yan dito sa Davao, bakit gumanon tayo ngayon? Because I got rid of the kidnappers. I killed them all. Ah yang kidnappers, talagang I admitted it in public sa kampanya, pinutulan ko talaga ng ulo yung mga walanghiyang yan.

Q. Whatever you say, some people would still look at you as godfather…
A. Over and above all these loose talks, over and above all these allegations about these killings, about me as godfather, grandfather, uncle or whatever, the father of DDS, basta drugs, kidnapping, hold-up… rape tapos pinatay, those crimes are really unacceptable to me. Lalo na yang drugs because I’ve shown to you the dimensions of its inequity. You leave with me a problem which I have to solve for a lifetime…. Iwanan mo ako ng anak na criminal, na I do not know if he would rape his own mother, which is always happening everyday, pakinggan mo lang yang telebisyon, he will hostage his own sister, his own son, put a knife at the neck of an infant.

Ang drugs… totally, totally, and if I may say it for the third time, totally totally unacceptable sa akin, kaya pag andyan ka, ah, lalo na kung druglord ka, bigtime pusher ka, if you’re into kidnapping, if you are into hold-ups tapos ikaw mang-rape ka dyan.. if we happen to cross paths, if our journeys in life would cross each other, ah pasensya, pasensyahan na lang tayo. The President has declared that drugs is a national security problem… The Philippines may be poor… underdeveloped but it’s the only country I have and I love my country….pag this is the survival of my country, you go first… wag yung community, not the innocent people, not the families …

Q. This emphasis on ‘totally, totally totally unacceptable,’ where is this coming from? I mean, just to let the readers understand, what is your basis? A direct experience? Your son’s experience or what?
A. Well lahat na. No my son, wala, I can assure you (he’s not involved in drugs) otherwise I would resign. Yung unfairness…. Ayoko ng kidnapping. Ayoko gani yang magkapera ka sa mundong ito na hindi ka man lang mapagod, you make a living out of the expense of, specially the poor people. I don’t give a sh-t about the AB crowd. They can sniff heroin and shabu, they can afford it. Itong mahihirap, ito yung tinatamaan na talagang tama na wallop. Sila yung mga … very easy, vulnerable targets. Look, read again the newspapers. Before, every night may patay na taxi driver. Why, because they’re the most vulnerable targets. You don’t have money for the night for your shabu, okay, para ka ng taxi. You know he has the money, you can direct the guy to any place in Davao, secluded, silent, puede mong patayin kasi nakatalikod eh. O ngayon, may pinatay pa ba? See? From every night to nothing. Sabi ko totally, totally, totally because total ang focusing ko dyan. Sabi ko mahuli rin kita. One of these days, you watch out…just be patient, sabi nyo talagang malaki, I will get one but I will crucify him in front of the community. Maybe siguro that would be the first time that you can attribute something (to me) na ginagawa ng DDS. Pag talagang malaking-malaki na, ako na personally, wag na yung DDS. Tumabi kayo dyan, ako na mismo ang papapel, ako na ang magpahambug.

Q. How do you want history to remember you?
A. Simple. I did my duty, period. I did what I promised to the people, period. And I tried.

———————————————————————————————————
Duterte on Leadership . PCIJ:MindaNews

Editor’s note: Fifteen years later, Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte is assuming the post as 16th President of the Philippines, the first Mindanawon to lead the country. The rehabilitation center he promised – the Davao City Treatment and Rehabilitation Center for Drug Dependents does not resemble a prison. Before the city took over its operations, it was called Rehabilitation Center for Drug Dependents and was run by the Department of Social Welfare and Development Region XI with the support of the Regional Council for Welfare of Children & Youth.)

POOLED EDITORIAL: The Prez and The Press

Davinci Maru

NEWS organizations, student publications, and citizen advocates are publishing a pooled editorial today that tackles critical issues concerning on press freedom, the long-overdue passage of the Freedom of Information law, and incoming president Rodrigo Duterte’s controversial statement on the media killings.

Here is the full text of the editorial made by journalists from various media agencies in English, Filipino, and Bisaya.

THE PREZ AND THE PRESS

REGRETTABLY, the conversation between President-elect Rodrigo Duterte and the news media has turned sharp and shrill. All but lost in the noise is the two parties’ common duty in law and tradition to serve and to inform the Filipino people on issues, events and policies that affect their interest and welfare.

A president—all at once the chief executive, fount of foreign policy, manager of the national household, guardian of peace and order, commander of the uniformed services, and arbiter of policy conflicts—is the most important pivot of news and policy in the land. The President is mandated by law to lead the nation and to promote transparency, accountability, and good governance.

But the Constitution also upholds the citizens’ rights to free speech, free press, free expression, and peaceable assembly. It guarantees as well their right to due process, equality before the law, access to information, justice, and life.

As “the people’s private eye in the public arena,” the news media serve as custodian and gatekeeper of some of these rights. It’s a task that must be accomplished, and the President-elect’s predecessors as well as the nation’s journey from democracy to dictatorship and back illustrate why and how we must inquire into, inveigh against, and investigate questionable public officials and agencies, on the citizens’ behalf.

Thus, despite his vexation with those he calls the “lowlifes” and the “mouthpieces” in the news media, we must at all times cover him, his actions, and his statements. In truth, the news media must report more—and better—about him, his policies and his actions, with our reports guided by the best standards of accuracy, fairness and context.

This we must do even as we note at least two disturbing “messages” from the President-elect.

First, by saying that “corrupt journalists … vultures of journalism can die for all I care [because] you’re asking for it,” he mocks the memory of 172 journalists (at latest count) killed in the line of duty since democracy’s rebirth in 1986. The last report filed by a majority of those slain journalists precisely exposed crime and corruption, the same social ills that he says he wants to curb. Sadly, not a single mastermind or principal suspect in these murders, including state agents, local warlords, and criminal elements, have been held to account.

Second, whether intended or not, his volcanic language has dampened, indeed chilled, the daily reportage, so that journalists with valid, if testy, questions are seemingly forced to eat expletives by way of a response.

To be sure, corruption in the news media is as real as the 16-million vote that secured the victory of the President-elect. To be sure, corruption afflicts both individuals and agencies in the news media, and has evolved into a subculture with a language all its own.

As anywhere else, however, corruption in the news media is a supply-demand chain. One solution offers a key role for the incoming administration: Slay it at the source. The government’s own media agents, as well as politicians and corporate PRs who offer more than stories to get favorable coverage or to spike bad news, must, in the President-elect’s words, “stop it.” Another solution calls for quick action from media managers: Provide better pay and protection for journalists.

But here’s the thing: The institutional capture of the news media by politicians has begun in some parts of the country. Local politicians and their families have acquired ownership and control of print and broadcast media agencies, and certain local government units have bought block-time segments using public funds. The corruption of the news media thus also involves partisan political interests driving editorial processes—as the President-elect knows full well.

Yet for all the supposed differences, the news media and the President-elect have complete agreement on one factor: the urgency of a Freedom of Information Law. The issuance of an FOI executive order on Day One of his presidency should prevent the 17th Congress from tarrying in its task.

An FOI Law will provide the necessary institutional and legal framework for full and true functional links between transparency and accountability in government, and for the right of all Filipinos to access information in order to take part in nation-building.

We in the news media wish the incoming administration success in all its endeavors. As journalists and as citizens, we commit not only to do journalism right and better, but also to uphold and defend free speech, free press, free expression, and the people’s right to know.

 

ANG PANGULO AT ANG PRESS

NAKALULUNGKOT na kailan lang ay naging matalim at maanghang ang palitan ng pahayag ni President-elect Rodrigo Duterte at ng mga taga-media. Naipit sa usapang ito ang tungkulin ng dalawang panig, sa batas at sa kasaysayan, na kapwa magsilbi at magbigay ng impormasyon sa mga mamamayan ukol sa mga isyu, pangyayari, at patakaran na apekado ang kanilang interes at kagalingan.

Ang Pangulo — chief executive ng pamahalaan, bukal ng patakarang panlabas, tagapangasiwa ng pondong bayan, punong-bantay ng kapayapaan, pinuno ng sandatahang lakas at pulisya, at arbiter ng magkatunggaling pakatakaran — ang pinakamapagpasyang focus ng balita sa buong bayan. Sa batas, mandato niya ang mamuno at magtaguyod ng transparency, accountability, at mahusay na pamahalaan

Kasabay nito, itinataguyod din ng Saligang Batas ang karapatan ng mga mamamayan– free speech, free press, free expression, at peaceable assembly. Ginagarantiya din ng Konstituyon ang karapatan ng lahat ng Pilipino sa due process, pagkapantay-pantay sa batas, access to information, katarungan. at buhay.

Bilang “private eye” ng bayan sa public arena, ang news media ay nagsisilbing tanod at tagapangalaga ng ilan sa mga karapatang ito. Tungkulin ito na dapat gampanan ng mga taga-media. Sa dantaong paglalakabay ng Pilipinas mula demokrasya tungo sa diktadurya at balik dmokrasya, pinagtibay na ito ng news media. Ito ang dahilan kung bakit kinakailangang magsuri, magbusisi, at mag-imbestiga ang media ng mga opisyal at tanggapan ng pamahalaan, sa ngalan ng taumbayan.

Ito rin ang dahilan kung bakit nakatutok ng walang humpay ang news media sa bawat pahayag at aksyon ng Pangulo, sa kabila ng kanyang nasabing pagka-inis sa mga tinatawag niyang “lowlife” at “mouthpiece” sa hanay ng media. Ang totoo ay dapat mag-ulat ng mas pursigido at mas magaling ang news media tungkol kay President-elect Duterte at sa kanyang mga patakaran at hakbang, ayon sa mahusay na panuntunan ng accuracy, fairness, at context sa lahat ng balita at kwento nito.

Ito ang dapat gawin ng news media sa gitna ng dalawang nakababahalang “mensahe” ni President-elect Duterte.

Una, aniya niya, ang mga “corrupt journalists” daw, “kaya namamatay ‘yan… karamihan dyan nababayaran na o sobrahan nila ang atake… Hinihingi ‘nyo, pumapasok kayo sa illegal.If you are a vulture of journalism, that’s not my problem.”
Sa mensaheng ito, tila kinukutya ang ala-ala ng 172 journalists, ayon sa huling bilang, na pinaslang in the line of duty mula nang maibalik ang demokrasya nuonbg 1986. Ang huling ulat ng mrami mga napatay ay exposes ukol sa krimen at katiwalian — mga problemang bayan na nais mismong masawata ni President-elect Duterte. Nakakalulungkot na hanggang ngayon, wala ni isa mang mastermind o pangunahing suspek sa mga pagpatay na ito, kabilang na ang ilang ahente ng gobyerrno, warlord, at kriminal, ang naikulong at naparusahan na.

Ikalawa, sinasadya man o hindi, ito ang pahiwatig ng kanyang mala-bulkang pananalita: Dapat mag-ingat at mahintakutan ang mga nagbabalita. Sinasadya man o hindi, ang pahiwatig sa mga mamamahayag: Mahalaga man ngunit mapanuri ang tanbong, asahang bulyaw at mura ang aanihing sagot.

Walang duda, problema ang korapsyon sa news media. Kasing linaw ito ng 16 na milyong boto na nakuha ni President-elect sa nakaraang halalan. Ang totoo, hindi lang ilang indibidwal kundi pati ilang tanggapan ng media ay nasasangkot sa ganitong masamang gawi.

Pero kahit saan man tumingin, ang korapsyon sa media ay isang supply-demand chain din. May papel sa isang solusyon sa problem ang Duterte administration: Isara ang gripo ng korapsyon. Marapat na istorya lang at wala nang iba pang bagay ang manggaling sa mga media agent ng gobyerno, mga pulitiko, at mga PR sa pribadong sektor. Sa salita mismo ni President-elect Duterte: “Stop it.” Isa pang solusyon ang dapat agad na gampanan ng mga tagapangasiwa ng media: Ayusin ang benepisyo at bigyang proteksyon ang mga mamamahayag.

Gayunpaman, bahagi na rin ng korapsyon sa media ang puilitika. Sa ilang lugar sa Pilipinas, nagaganap na ang institutional capture ng media ng mga pulitiko. Hindi lang block-time segment sa broadcast media ang binibili ng ilang lokal na pamahalaan gamit ang pondong bayan. Hindi lang blocktime kundi buong istasyon ng radyo o diyaryo ang binibili at ngayo’y kontrolado na ng ng ilang lokal na pulitiko at mga angkan. Ang korapsyon sa media ay nababahiran din ng partisan political interest — ito ay batid mismo ni President-elect Duterte.

Sa kabila ng tila ‘di pagakaksundo sa ilang bagay, nagkakaisa ng lubos ang media at si President-elect Duterte sa isang usapin: Ang agarang pagpasa ng Freedom of Information Law. Nagako na siyang maglalabas ng isang FOI executive order sa unang araw ng kanyang pamumuno. Ito’y magsisilbing paniguro na mabilis na gagampanan ng 17th Congress sa tungkulin nitong isabatas ang FOI.

Ang FOI Law ay mahalagang institutional at legal framework sa pagyabong ng tunay at lubos na ugnayan ng transparency at accountability sa pamahalaan. Ito ay proteksyon din sa karapatan ng lahat ng Pilipino na makatanggap ng sapat na impormasyon para sa kanilang lubos paglahok sa mga usaping bayan.

Inaasahan namin ang tagumpay ng Duterte administration sa lahat ng tunguhin nito. Bilang mamahayag at mamamayan, tutuparin namin ang aming tungkulin na magbalita ng tumpak at mahusay. Kasabay nito, itataguyod at ipagtatanggol namin ang free speech, free press, free expression, at right to know na karapatan ng lahat ng Pilipino.

 

ANG PRESIDENTE UG ANG PRENSA

SUBO NGA panaglantugiay ang nahimong tagdanay tali sa media ug sa atong umalabot Presidente Rodrigo Duterte. Tungod niini, daw nakalimtan nga ang duruha managsama’ng may kaakuhan sa pagsilbi ug pagpahibalo sa mga isyu, panghitabo ug palisiya nga kalambigit ang interes sa katawhan.

Ang presidente—isip hepe ehekutibo, tuburan sa direksyon pakigrelasyon sa ubang nasud, tagdumala sa nasudnong panimalay, tigbalantay sa kahusay ug kalinaw, pangulo sa armadong kusog, ug tigpahapsay sa nanagbanging mga palisiya—ang pinakaimportanteng tinubdan sa pagbalita ug palisiya. Subay sa balaod, ang presidente ang mangulo sa nasud ug magpatunhay sa dayag, responsable, ug maayong panggamhanan.

Sa pikas bahin, ang Konstitusyon naglatid sa katungod sa katawhan sa gawasnong pagpamulong, prensa, pagpahayag, ug malinawong katiguman. Gisiguro usab niini ang katungod alang sa due process, patas nga pagtratar sa tanan ilalom sa balaod, kasayuran sa lakaw sa kagamhanan, hustisya, ug pagpakabuhi.

Isip mata sa katawhan, ang media ang tigbalantay ug tig-amoma niining mga katungod. Kini nga tahas angay panghingusgan tungod sa atong kasinatian sa naiaging mga presidente ug ang atong kasaysayan pagkahiagum sa diktadurya. Sa ngalan sa katawhan, ang media angay gawasnon nga manukiduki ug mobatikos sa mga opisyal sa kagamhanan, kung kinahanglan, aron matul-id ang mga kahiwian.

Busa, bisan paman sa kayugot nga gihambin sa atong umalabot presidente ngadto sa media, padayon kitang magsunod sa iyang matag lihok ug ipanulti. Angay nga mas palambuon pa sa media ang pagbalita mahitungod kaniya, sa iyang mga palisiya, ug sa iyang mga laraw, pinasubay sa mga lagda sa kahusto, kaangayan ug tukmang konteksto.

Pursigido kitang buhaton kini bisan pa sa duha ka makasubong mensahe sa umalabot nga Presidente.

Una, ang iyang pahayag nga gipangayo sa mga kurakot nga tigbalita ang kamatayon tungod sa ilang hiwing binuhatan. Dako kining insulto sa dungog sa 172 ka mga tigbalita nga namatay tungod sa ilang trabaho sukad 1986 dihang nahibalik ang demokrasya sa nasud. Tingale, ang ilang kasaypanan mao nga pursigido sila sa pagpanukiduki ug pagbutyag sa krimen ug korapsyon nga mao pod ang gusto masumpo sa atong umalabot nga Presidente. Subo kaayo nga hangtud karon, walay utok sa mga pagpamatay ang nataral sa hukmanan. Lakip sa mga akusado niining mga kaso mga ahente sa estado, mga warlord, ug mga grupo sa mga criminal nga kaabin ang mga anaa sa gahum.

Ikaduha, tinuyo man o dili, ang iyang mga gipanulti kabahin sa media nakakibhang sa kadasig sa mga tigbalita nga moharong aron makakuha’g tubag kabahin sa mga importanteng isyu kay basin pamalikas ang ilang maani.

Dakong kamatuoran ang korapsyon sa media, sama sa realidad sa 16 milyones nga boto nga iyang naangkon sa piniliay. Ang problema nagtunhay sa mga indibidwal ug sa mga ahensya sa media, ug lalum na ang giugatan kay aduna naman gani kaugalingong linggwahe ang mga nagpatunhay niini.

Apan ang korapsyon sa media susama sa merkado, dunay nanginahanglan sa serbisyo ug dunay tigsuplay sa maong serbisyo. Usa ka solusyon pwedeng mahimo sa umalabot nga administrasyon: ang pagpuo sa tinubdan sa korapsyon. Dakong kabahin sa korapsyon ang mga ahente sa gobierno uban sa mga pulitiko ug PRs sa mga korporasyon nga tuyo ang madayegon nga pagbalita bahin kanila o kaha negatibong pagbalita batok sa ilang mga kaatbang. Lain pang solusyon mao ang paghatag maayong panweldo ug benipisyo sa mga tigbalita.

Laing aspeto sa problema mao nga ang media outlets sa daghang lugar sa nasud gipanag-iya sa mga pulitiko, ug daghan sa mga local government units ang nanag-unang kliyente nga nagbuhi sa ilang operasyon pinaagi sa mga blocktime programs gamit ang kwarta sa katawhan. Dinhi, nalambod ang interes sa mga pulitiko sa unta gawasnong proseso sa pagbalita.

Taliwala niining tanan, ang media ug ang atong umalabot nga Presidente nagkasinabot sa usa ka importanteng punto: ang panginahanglan sa balaod alang sa Freedom of Information (FOI). Kung mapakanaug ang executive order alang niini sa pagsugod sa iyang pangatungdanan, naglaum kita nga dili na maglangay ang Kongreso nga ipasa kini isip balaod.

Ang balaod sa FOI maghatag og gambalay sa tiunay nga dayag ug responsableng pang-gobierno, ug magtuman sa katungod sa katawhan nga masayod ug busa manginlabot sa pagpadagan sa kagamhanan.

Kami sa media nanghinaut sa kalampusan sa umalabot nga administrasyon sa iyang mga gidahum nga kab-uton. Isip mga tigbalita ug mga lungsuranon, gisaad namo ang mapadayunong pagpalambo sa propesyon ug sa pagsunod-kanunay sa sugilanon sa katawhan ug sa nasud. Kami hugtanon pod nga mobarog alang sa gawasnong pagpamulong, gawasnong prensa, gawasnnong pagpadayag, ug sa katungod sa katawhan nga masayod.

(This pooled editorial is supported by the Philippine Press Institute, National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Philippine Star, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, Notre Dame Broadcasting Corporation, Mindanao Cross, Mindanao Gold Star Daily, Sun.Star-Cagayan de Oro, The Journal, The Freeman, Bicol Today, College Editors Guild of the Philippines, Kodao Productions, Bulatlat, Philippine Collegian, Eastern Vista, Pahayagang Balikas, Banat News, Northern Dispatch, Panguil Bay Monitor, Mindanao Monitor, Catarman Weekly Tribune, The Standard, Lanao del Norte Today, Panay Today, Pinoy Weekly and Blog Watch.)

 

 

Sheila Coronel: A Golden Age of Global Muckraking at Hand

mcmangahas

By Sheila Coronel*
From Global Investigative Journalism Network

Editor’s Note: We are pleased to present this transcript of the keynote speech by Columbia University’s Sheila Coronel at the 2016 conference of Investigative Reporters and Editors on June 19. Coronel, who has played a key role in spreading investigative journalism worldwide, spoke to 1,850 people — the largest ever gathering of investigative journalists — about networks, collaborations, nonprofits, and a new golden age of global muckraking.
_________________________________________________________________________________________

TEN YEARS AGO, when I first moved to New York and gave my first lecture at the Columbia Journalism School, I told students that I believe we are at the dawn of a Golden Age of global muckraking. They were a great class, but they didn’t believe me.

But look at where we are now: It may not feel like it to some of you, but we are seeing, like never before, an explosion of investigative reporting around the world. There are now over 100 investigative reporting centers and organizations outside the U.S. Today, there are muckrakers even in places like Armenia, Bulgaria, Nepal, Venezuela, the Arab world.

Ten years ago, I told my students that I believe we are at the dawn of a Golden Age of global muckraking. They didn’t believe me.

These watchdog groups have seeded the unprecedented collaboration of journalists working across borders and across newsrooms. This past year has shown us how far international investigative reporting has come. Three examples.

This was the year the Panama Papers shook the world. Some 400 reporters from nearly 80 countries produced stories that made headlines everywhere. Their reporting on a leak of 11 million documents from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca caused the downfall of Iceland’s prime minister, Spain’s industry minister and Armenia’s most senior justice official. It also sparked tax evasion and money laundering investigations in several continents.

Working together under the direction of the International Consortium for Investigative Journalists, these reporters proved ¬– once and for all – that there is no such thing as offshore secrecy. Thanks to them, tax-evading billionaires, kleptocrats, drug lords and assorted money launderers are quaking in their private jets. They can run but they can’t hide.

Also this year, Seafood from Slaves, an investigation by the Associated Press, won the Pulitzer Prize’s highest honor. A global team of AP reporters found thousands of poor workers from Laos, Burma, and Cambodia held in bondage by operators of Thai fishing vessels.

The AP’s reporting led to the release of 2,000 slaves like Myint Naing, who had been trafficked from Burma and found on one of the Spice Islands in Indonesia. He had been kept 22 years a slave.
Finally, this is also the year the Azerbaijani journalist Khadija Ismayilova was released from prison.

Khadija was arrested in Dec. 2014 and found guilty of tax evasion, embezzlement and abuse of power. Her reporting had exposed how Azerbaijan’s president, Ilham Aliyev and his family had snapped up state assets. Using shell companies and nominees, they squirreled their wealth in luxury goods and real estate around the world. And yet it was Khadija, not them, who was accused, tried and jailed.

Khadija would still be behind bars today. But journalists all around the world, including many of you in this room, wrote about her and advocated on her behalf with their own governments and with the EU and the UN.

Her colleagues in the Organized Crime and Corruption Project and elsewhere also collaborated on stories exposing the corruption of the Aliyevs. They called it the Khadija Project, after the IRE’s own Arizona Project.

A lot has been said about how technology has empowered the new global investigative reporting. But it’s not machines that made all this great work possible. It’s people. People like us.

Many of you know that in 1976, a team of investigative reporters from IRE got together after Dan Bolles, an investigative journalist at the Arizona Republic, was killed by a car bomb. They agreed to continue reporting the story that Bolles had not lived to tell.

Their principle was: You can kill the journalist, but not the story.

Similarly, the Khadija Project’s message to the Aliyevs was: You can jail Khadija, but you cannot put an end to exposés. In the end, the Aliyev government realized that the political cost of keeping Khadija in prison outweighed the benefits of setting her free.

Last month, Khadija was released.

A lot has been said about how technology has empowered the new global investigative reporting. The Panama Papers and similar stories benefited from software that allows reporters to communicate and share documents securely across oceans, and from algorithms that enable them to search millions of documents in real time wherever they are.

Dateline New Orleans: Coronel’s record crowd included journalists from 32 countries.

Technology has given us new tools for dealing with big digital leaks and new sources of information, including, as in the case of Seafood from Slaves, ship sensors and satellites.

But let me tell you this: It’s not machines that made all this great work possible. It’s people. People like us. The successes I’ve described demonstrate not so much technological power as collaborative power… the power of individual reporters working together to produce journalism that is greater than the sum of each of their individual efforts.

Since the late 1990s, journalists from around the world have been meeting regularly in conferences and training workshops – like this one — and working jointly on increasingly ambitious cross-border reporting projects. These activities – and also those spirited discussions after hours (and by spirited, I mean alcohol-fueled) – have fostered camaraderie and trust. They have laid the groundwork for a truly global and networked journalism.

The era of the lone wolf is over.

Local and national accountability reporting will continue to be important, but the muckrakers of the future will no longer be so tightly tethered to the nation-state. Crime, corruption, you name it, pollution, human trafficking, money laundering, tax evasion, viruses like Zika, purchases of luxury real estate, the food we eat, the clothes we wear: All these breach national boundaries.

Since the 1990s, journalists from around the world have been meeting regularly in conferences and workshops. These activities have laid the groundwork for a truly global and networked journalism. The era of the lone wolf is over.

And thanks to a global community of muckrakers, the barriers to doing cross-border reporting are no longer insurmountable.

A borderless world needs watchdogs who can transcend borders. The Panama Papers, the Khadija Project, Offshore Leaks are examples of how this can done. They showcase the new global, networked investigative journalism.

Today, the news industry is facing huge challenges in terms of falling revenues. Moreover, all around the world — even in countries that have a free press — governments, corporations and in too many cases, terrorists and demagogues, autocrats and mafia lords, are stifling independent reporting.

There is no silver bullet, no Holy Grail that will end this crisis of news. We are in uncharted terrain. The new, global, networked journalism provides us ONE path forward, ONE model for doing ambitious, high-impact accountability reporting efficiently, rigorously, more cheaply, also more securely.

The most daring and cutting-edge accountability reporting around the world is being done by nonprofits, financially fragile papers or online news sites, and freelancers. They are extremely vulnerable.

This network model is still fluid and evolving. Unlike traditional newsrooms, networked journalism is, for better or for worse, horizontal and non-hierarchical. Membership in the network is informal – there are no membership lists or dues. Members are linked by bonds of reciprocity and trust, and also by self-interest. Units within the network may be competitive, but they choose to share and to work together on specific projects and for particular goals.

Crime and corruption networks work this way and so do jihadist groups. Their activities and lines of communication reach across national borders. Like the mythical Hydra–many heads, hard to find, difficult to exterminate. There are hubs, but no single mission control. Cross-border journalist networks operate the same way, that’s why they are effective. As the Pentagon has now realized about fighting jidhadists, “It takes a network to defeat a network.”

But how can networked journalism be sustained? Until about a decade ago, investigative reporting in the US was robust because it was propped up by a support structure of profitable news organizations that invested in reporting, independent courts that protected press freedom and the right to information, journalism schools that trained the next generation of muckrakers, and prizes that celebrated outstanding work. And of course, there’s IRE. You don’t know how lucky you were, and still are.

Crime and corruption networks reach across national borders. There are hubs, but no single control. Cross-border journalist networks are similar. As the Pentagon now realizes, “It takes a network to defeat a network.”

Elsewhere, there are huge gaps in the support structure. The most daring and cutting-edge accountability reporting around the world is being done by nonprofits, financially fragile newspapers or online news sites, and freelancers. They can barely scrape the money for ambitious reporting. They are also extremely vulnerable to legal harassment and physical threats. In these places, the courts are compromised and governments are unable to protect journalists from those who would them harm.
In too many places, investigative reporting is a high wire act – without a safety net.

Behind its many successes, cross-border investigative reporting is a flickering flame. It needs to be funded and protected. But how and by whom? Who pays for a global public good?

For sure, we have vibrant organizations that keep the fire burning. The Global Investigative Journalism Network is the communications & resource hub for watchdogs around the world. GIJN organizes meetings that bring international journalists to talk about tradecraft. Many of the early collaborative reporting projects were conceived in the corridors of these global conferences.
We have watchdog groups in Latin America, Europe, Africa, and the Arab world that train journalists, bring them together to discuss common issues and problems, and also fund their work. The OCCRP reports on the Balkans, the former Soviet Union, and other regions on the issues of crime and corruption. And of course, you are all familiar with ICIJ’s stellar work as a hub for distributed, cross-border reporting. It’s headquartered in Washington, D.C. but its staff is a microcosm of the world: The ICIJ director is Irish & worked in Australia, his deputy is from Argentina; the data team is headed by a Spaniard, my former student Mar Cabra, and the chief data analyst is Costa Rican. And there are some very talented Americans there, too, of course.

But funding is tight. David Kaplan, the guru of GIJN, estimates that donors invest at most $20 million a year in international investigative reporting.

That’s about 0.2% of the 7 billion pounds worth of London real estate secretly purchased by prime ministers, business magnates and others using offshore companies established by Mossack Fonseca. Thanks to the Panama Papers, The Guardian found all these properties. Seven billion pounds.

In other words, the investment in global investigative reporting pays off. Massively. The reforms that the Panama Papers have set in motion worldwide will hopefully result in billions of dollars in recovered wealth or unpaid taxes. The OCCRP estimates that the total of money frozen or paid in fines since it started work has reached $3 billion.

The Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism has nearly single-handedly introduced investigative reporting techniques and the notion of accountability in the Arab world. In the past 10 years it has trained 1,600 journalists, including the Arab reporters who worked on the Panama Papers. If we know now that Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and his allies skirted international sanctions by registering shell companies in places like the Seychelles, it’s because of ARIJ.

What a spectacular return on investment.

Where there is despair that nothing can be done, we offer some hope that if we shine the light on the wrongdoing, the world can be a better place. I am proud to be part of this global community of muckrakers.

In the end, however, the most valuable investments in global watchdog reporting have been made by individual journalists willing to put their lives and their freedoms on the line in order to expose wrongdoing. Khadija Ismayilova remained in Azerbaijan to report, knowing that she would sooner or later end up in jail. Not many of us – I hope – will ever be in her situation but we’re inspired by her courage and strength of purpose.

Hamoud Almahmoud continued teaching an investigative reporting course at the University of Damascus, despite the artillery fire around him. “The university was very close to the frontlines of the fighting,” he recalled “I was teaching despite all the shelling.”

Hamoud is in Amman now, where he is research director of ARIJ. But many of his colleagues in Syria have been killed or fled the country. “We see the window of hope is narrowing,” he told me, “but we are surviving and we are still doing stories.”

Lina Attalah edits the independent website Mada Masr in Egypt that could be closed any time under onerous press laws. But she and her young staff continue to do investigative reporting in order, she says, to “activate the conversation, to reopen the political space, and engage the public in conversation.”

Oscar Martinez heads the investigative unit of El Faro, an online news site in El Salvador. He’s received numerous threats for his stories on gang violence and extrajudicial killings. Last year, he had to flee the country. He’s back but he has panic buttons and other security systems in his house. He can’t even take his three-year-old daughter to the park for fear of attack.

Oscar writes beautifully about the most horrific things that people do to each other. Recalling his reporting on migrants crossing from Central America to the US, this is what he told the Texas Observer:

If there are women who had the courage to tell you how they’d been raped along the path… you as a journalist don’t have the right to just pit that back out onto a page. You have to take the time, dedicate energy and put in a lot of work to write this the best way you can so that that person’s story can generate the feeling of impotence, the rage, the compassion and the hate that it should generate.

Writing, he said, is an ethical responsibility.

For Oscar, for Lina, Hamoud and Khadija, as it is for me, and I’m sure many of you, investigative reporting is more than just exposing the bastards, although that is immensely satisfactory. I started reporting during the twilight of Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos, when the press was so heavily censored, we couldn’t even publish photographs showing Imelda’s double chin. For me, investigative reporting is about opening up spaces, providing facts to inform intelligent public debate, making readers empathize with the suffering of others.

Where there is despair that everything is broken and nothing can be done, we offer some hope that if we shine the light on the wrongdoing, the world can be a better place. I am proud to be part of this global community of muckrakers. We can; we should; we must keep going and I hope – I KNOW – we will all stand together.

——————————————————————————————-
*Sheila S. Coronel is Dean of Academic Affairs at the Columbia Journalism School and director of the school’s Stabile Center for Investigative Journalism. She is co-founder and former executive director of the pioneering Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, based in Manila.

Media watchdog condemns Duterte’s statement over media killings

Davinci Maru

THE CENTER for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) takes exception to President-elect Rodrigo Duterte’s statement, made during his May 31st press conference in Davao City, that most of the journalists who have been killed in the Philippines for their work were slain because they’re corrupt.

While corruption is undoubtedly a continuing problem in the press and media, journalists have been killed for other reasons, among them for exposing corruption in government, as in the case of Tacurong City journalist Marlene Esperat, or for their advocacy in behalf of environmental protection, as in the case of Puerto Princesa’s Gerardo “Gerry” Ortega. Some have also been killed for exposing anomalies in local governments as well as for fighting criminality. A 2006 CMFR study in fact found that an overwhelming number of those killed since 1986 were exposing corruption and criminal syndicates in the communities. Because a significant number of those accused of killing journalists are local officials, as well as police and military personnel, the killings also suggest that the slain had been successful in exposing official wrongdoing and collusion with criminal groups.

Nevertheless, CMFR has never discounted the possibility that some of the journalists killed since 1986 were corrupt, or had been irresponsible. But we have always held that no one deserves to be killed for either offense, and that, if a journalist has offended the subject of his reports or commentary, the latter has a number of options for redress, among them bringing the offense to the attention of the media organization concerned, the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP) or the Press Councils, or, as legal resort, the filing of a libel complaint before the courts. Since the KBP and the Press Council are hounded with failed responses, we have to acknowledge libel as a legitimate recourse even though we object to its criminalization.

President- elect Duterte was correct in saying that irresponsible, biased, paid-for reporting and comment do lead to a journalist’s being killed. But the killing of anyone is nevertheless still a crime, and it doesn’t matter whether the victim is a journalist or not. Everyone, including journalists, is entitled to, and deserves the protection of the State. Far from suggesting that nothing can be done about the killing of journalists, we have made policy recommendations that could help to stop such violence, steps which call on law enforcement agencies to do a better job of protecting citizens and which could help to end the culture of impunity.

Although he has said in some instances that some of his statements are said in jest, it did not seem that he was joking in this instance. CMFR hopes that the President-elect’s statements are not interpreted by those who would silence journalists for whatever reason—whether they feel they have been abused by the media, or whether they have something to hide from the public—as a license to kill journalists.

Was he still speaking as Mayor of Davao City, thinking only of the particular case of Jun Pala about which he has strong opinions? As President of the Philippines, Mayor Duterte would hopefully be more circumspect. The killing of journalists is after all not something to be made light of, having earned the attention and condemnation not only of advocate organizations in the Philippines, but also of international press freedom watch groups, the United Nations and the European Community.

CMFR has established that 152 journalists have been killed in the line of duty since 1986. This number is a stain on our claim as a democratic society and exposes our boast about press freedom in the country as a sham. Despite some of its practitioners’ admitted flaws, the killing of journalists cannot be dismissed simply as something that cannot be helped.

A democratically elected president must value the free press as essential to the democratic system that has elected him. Rodrigo Duterte, freely elected by the people, whose campaign relied on the free press to report his candidacy owes the Philippine press more than just this glib response.

Clash of clans? Ampatuans, Ecleos,Sinsuats, Midtimbangs unopposed

mcmangahas

By Vino Lucero

AMONG THE 802 unopposed candidates for the 2016 elections, a few stood out not just because their surnames sounded familiar, but also because of the frequency in which these kept popping up.

Four surnames – Ampatuan, Ecleo, Midtimbang, and Sinsuat – came up five or more times on the Commission on Elections’ list of unopposed candidates in their respective bailiwicks.

This means these clans already have at least five sure seats in their localities that they will occupy for the next three years.

They could have more, of course, partly because all four of these families have other members standing for various local posts, albeit with competitors.

Three of the surnames showed up on the list of unopposed candidates in Maguindanao: Midtimbang nine times; Sinsuat six; and Ampatuan five. Ecleo came up five times on Dinagat Islands’ unchallenged roster.

The Midtimbangs are running unopposed in the mayor, vice mayor, and councilor races of the towns of Datu Anggal Midtimbang and Talayan in Maguindanao. In all, nine Midtimbangs are running sans rivals under the banner of the United Nationalist Alliance (UNA).

The clan, however, also has other members running in the provincial level, as well as in the localities of Talitay and Guindulungan.

A total of 19 Midtimbangs are running for office in Maguindanao this year, which, if they are all lucky, could result in as much as 19 local seats for the family.

PCIJ. Midtimbang. May 2016

Five members of the Ampatuan clan, meanwhile, are running unopposed in the towns of Datu Hoffer Ampatuan and Datu Odin Sinsuat.

Other members of the Ampatuan clan are also gunning for seats – but with challengers — in the Sangguniang Panlalawigan or provincial council, as well as in the towns of Datu Abdullah Sangki, Datu Unsay, Mamasapano, Parang, Rajah Buayan, Shariff Aguak, and Shariff Saydona.

In fact, four Ampatuans are fighting for the mayoralty seat of Shariff Aguak, and three for the office of vice mayor. In this race, candidates of the opposition UNA are pitted against the official bets of the administration, the Liberal Party (LP) headed by President Benigno S. Aquino III.

Sajid Islam Ampatuan (UNA) is in a face-off against Maroph Ampatuan of the LP, Oping Ampatuan (Independent), and Zahara Ampatuan of the Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC) in the mayoralty race.

Anhara Ampatuan (UNA) is up against Akmad Ampatuan (LP) and Datu Puti Ampatuan (Independent) over the vice-mayoralty post.

LP’s candidate for vice mayor, Akmad Ampatuan Sr., is a close relative of the late Andal Ampatuan Sr., the principal accused together with his son Zaldy in the “Maguindanao Massacre” of Nov. 23, 2009 where 58 persons, including 32 media workers, were killed.

A brother-in-law of the Ampatuans, Akmad is one of the accused in the massacre. In March 2015, however, he was admitted into the government’s Witness Protection Program.

PCIJ. Ampatuan May 2016

Akmad, Andal Sr., Andal Jr., and Zaldy were all elective officials in Maguindanao when they were arrested for the massacre in 2009. But then Justice Secretary Leila de Lima cited Akmad as “one of the major witnesses” in the second wave of complaints against 50 new suspects in the massacre, “including 14 Ampatuans, four of them incumbent mayors in Maguindanao.”

UNA’s Bai Anhara Ampatuan, meanwhile, is a re-electionist and daughter of Anwar and Zahara Ampatuan.

Unlike Akmad, UNA’s candidate for Shariff Aguak town mayor, Sajid Ampatuan, remains a principal accused in the multiple murder case that government prosecutors filed over six years ago, on account of the massacre. A former vice governor, Sajid is out on bail. His wife Zandria Sinsuat-Ampatuan is running for a third term as mayor of Shariff Saydona town.

Sajid’s rival bets are close relatives: his cousin, incumbent mayor Maroph; his nephew Oping; and sister-in-law Zahara, a former mayor and the wife of his elder brother Anwar.

In total, 40 Ampatuans are running for the 2016 elections in Maguindanao, and the family can get as much as 33 local seats there.

The Ampatuans are also relatives, either by blood or affinity, of the Sinsuat, Midtimbang, Sema, and Datumanong clans.

Generations of the Ampatuans and the Mangudadatus, meanwhile, had been close political allies until Esmael “Toto” Mangudadatu ran and won as Maguindanao governor against the Ampatuans’s wishes, in the May 2010 elections.

PCIJ. Sinsuat. May 2016

The royal clan of Sinsuat itself has six unopposed bets in Datu Blah T. Sinsuat and Datu Odin Sinsuat in Maguindanao. All the unchallenged Sinsuats are running under the LP.

Ten other Sinsuat family members are aiming for seats in the provincial level, as well as for a variety of posts in Cotabato City, Datu Blah T. Sinsuat, Datu Saudi Ampatuan, Kabuntalan, Shariff Saydona, and Upi.

In the Dinagat Islands, also in Mindanao, the Ecleos are running without rivals for governor, as well as for mayor in three towns, and vice mayor in one municipality.

PCIJ. Ecleo May 2016

A total of 13 Ecleo clan members are running this year under UNA, save for one, Romeo Ecleo, who chose to be an independent candidate for councilor in the town of Libjo (Albor). – PCIJ, May 2016

____________________________
For more details, check out PCIJ’s Money Politics Online