vonjobi: wow, congratulations! kelan ang trip? i hope i'll be around when you come. had a good time with diosa last...
Keith Bacongco: Knowing Nograles and his Big Boss...garapalan na lang talaga.
Vinia Datinguinoo Mukherjee: Congratulations, PCIJ! Mabuhay kayo!
Lead Philippines: But without credible mass media there, what is left to protect the people..?
vonjobi: it's juned sOniDo.

Latest Message 3 months, 4 weeks ago

hopeless_race : Lets not just focus sa mga malversation of funds, sa mga overpricing..ating pagtuunan ng atensyon ang diskarte ng mga politiko na umuutang ng bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno."Small time" ang ibang pamamaraan ng pangungurakot kumpara sa pag-utang sa gobyerno ng bilyon na tunay ngang masasabing "pinaka big-time" at wala pang sabit.
hopeless_race : Mukhang tikom ang bibig ng lahat pagdating sa diskarte ng mga politiko sa pagutang ng mga bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno na tinatakbuhan. Itong pamamaraan na ito ang tunay na kumakain ng malaking porsyento ng ating national budget batay na din sa sinasabi ng world bank.
hopeless_race : Pakisilip naman po ang mga utang ni Villar sa BSP, ang mga utang nila RAMON JACINTO, RONNIE ZAMORA, JOE DE VENECIA at madami pang ibang mga pulitiko. Iilan lamang yan sa mga nababanggit sa balita na may mga malalaking utang sa gobyerno.
hopeless_race : Nagmimistulang "small time" lamang ang malversation of funds kumpara sa laki ng kinakamal ng mga umuutang sa gobyerno. At ito ay malinaw na natatakbuhan dahil hindi nga naman pwede makulong ang may-ari ng kumpanya sa pagkaka-utang lamang. Tunay na mga tuso at magagaling sa batas itong mga politiko natin. Masasabi ko na malamang lahat ng mga politiko ganito ang diskarte...wala pang kulong.
hopeless_race : PCIJ pkitingnan naman po ang mga gaya ni Villar na my malaking utang sa Gobyerno pero tinatakbuhan. Magtatayo ng kumpanya at uutang ng bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno ng walang balak bayaran. Tunay ngang walang nakukulong sa utang...ito ang prinsipyo ginagamit ng mga politiko ntin kaya nakakapagtaka kung san napupunta ang daang bilyong pera ng gobyerno.
hopeless_race : Sana itreat naman po ng media ang hacienda luisita at mendiola massacre na parang MAGUINADANAO MASSACRE. Ipublicized ang mga katotohanan at ipakita sa tao ang karumaldumal na pinaggagawa sa mga farmers dun. Untouchable po ba sila cory at danding at hindi magawang batikusin ng media about these two massacres?
hopeless_race : Kapag napaguusapan ang mendiola at hacienda luisita massacre ay parang walang nangyari at parang hindi big deal. Anu po ba ang pinagkaiba ng dalawang nabanggit na massacre sa maguindanao massacre?
hopeless_race : Its sad that we pinoys are blind to the fact of what had happened in mendiola and hacienda luisita. Ang tanong..bakit ang media ay hindi manlang matackle ang ganitong usapin? Takot ba sila kay cory at danding?
hopeless_race : Wilkins" brand, for P1.4 billion.-1999 Sugarland Multi-Food Corp. for P2.9 billion 2001- Purefoods Corp P7 billion P60 billion Coca-Cola ... See More 2002- Cosmos Bottling Corp. from RFM Corp. for P14.1 billion October 2008- GSIS' shares in Meralco worth PHP30 Billion. December 2008- country's biggest oil refiner, Petron Corporation. international company shopping spree: Australian boutique brewer J. Boag and Son for A$96 million in 2000. $97 million for Thai Amarit Brewery Ltd $35.5 mi
hopeless_race : Gud am..glad to be back.
jr_lad : rip mr. alecks pabico. you'll be greatly missed!
sevens21 : Dati input mo lng name at SSS ID makukuha mo agad STATIC INFO...
sevens21 : tawag ka sa HOTLINE nila walang ANSWER grrr we need pa namn ng static info SSS Gising!!!
sevens21 : Gawa naman po kayo ng article about SSS. Pangit ng site nila dali ma blocked ng account
guest_899 : we must check the background of each potential candidates to avoid having another big mistake like GMA
guest_899 : congratulations to PCIJ, more power and God Bless !
jazzymuver : how did Arroyo swallow that kind of things!! how come that she just spend the money our countrymen for her own sake!!
guest_3664 : i would be glad if u can include the investigation of the manner public officials announce infra projects as per COA regulation. It is frustrating to see their faces on the tarpaulin instead of the prescribed information like name of project, date of implementation,amount of contract, source/s of fund, among other things. This is very rampant here in Marikina. Thanks and more power on your noble endeavors. We need people like you to have make our country great again.
jhanz_08 : im making research on R.A 9136...with rgards to the privatization of NPC..could someone out there can let me understand more bout this matter?why was monopoly dismantled?email me..jhanycem@yahoo.com...thanks much
erika marie : P.S.:) my paper is due next week and i do hope someone could provide me these reports coming from reliable resources thank you ulit.
erika marie : P.S.
guest_4275 : i am currently doing a study regarding political killings in the philippines. could someone out there please send me human rights reports under Aquino and Ramos administration. you could send it at my email: erikamariet@yahoo.com your response would surely be very much appreciated. thank you everyone. god bless.
guest_4275 : i am currently doing a study for my paper regarding political killings in the philippines. i noted that there are no human rights reports during the Aquino and Ramos administration. could someone out there please send me reports regarding these matter? i do hope these reports came from reliable resources you could send it in my email; erikamariet@yahoo.comyour response would surely be appreciated. thanks everyone. god bless.
jayson bourne : gusto ko po maging member ng PCIJ, panu po ba? may application po ba? sana mapadalhan nyo ako ng info sa email ko... www.jboxpenshoppe@yahoo.com
jayson bourne : cory is OK, but kris & Noynoy sensationalize masyado...
guest_9891 : LABAN pa rin!
meow : boycotts worked during marcos years. how about doing it now against the businesses of the con-ass congressmen?
meow : aside from 168, what other establishments can we boycott that belong to the arroyos and their cronies?
Jalenack : Your shoutbox is blank. Add a message!

You must be a registered user to participate in this chat

Deception and the Sigaw initiative

Posted by: Avigail Olarte | November 3, 2006 at 8:48 am
Filed under: Charter Change, In the News

NONE of the earlier bravado is evident among the ranks of Charter-change proponents following the Supreme Court dismissal of the Arroyo administration-backed “people’s initiative” petition barely a week ago. And going by the intramurals that have ensued particularly between members of the Cabinet and talks circulating that Malacañang is set to abandon its political allies, the initiative mode may very well be a lost cause.

The cracks started to show with Defense Secretary Avelino Cruz Jr. becoming the subject of controversy when Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez said “there appeared to be a big law firm that is cheering” the defeat of the administration. Reports also portrayed the Supreme Court decision as an indication of a falling out between the influential Villaraza & Angcangco law office or “The Firm” and First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo.

Cruz, who has openly opposed what he called as a “legally harebrained” people’s initiative, is co-founder of The Firm. Justice Antonio Carpio, author of the decision junking the petition, is also a founder and was senior partner prior to his appointment as a Supreme Court justice.

There were also reports that Malacañang might sever ties with allies such as House Speaker Jose de Venecia in exchange for the support of the Senate for a constituent assembly. The Palace has denied the rumor.

“There’s obviously a conscious effort to sow intrigue and foment conflict and division within the administration. It’s a crude but vicious attempt at disinformation and intrigue meant to cripple the resolve of the administration to pursue Charter change or erode its strength in the coming elections,” said Gabriel Claudio, presidential adviser for political affairs.

But Claudio did admit the defeat of the initiative, saying that the administration will “avenge” this come May 2007 elections, where signatories of the petition and local officials “would not hesitate to show their displeasure at those who mocked their honest intent to bring about stability and development through constitutional reforms.”

Sigaw ng Bayan spokesperson Raul Lambino remains nonetheless confident that pro-Charter change groups could still win the battle in court.

In a forum held at the Sulo Hotel last Tuesday, Lambino said they have until November 9 to file the motion for reconsideration and he hopes that by then, the justices will have a different view of the petition.

“I hope the great justices will open their minds (and) put in their hearts the welfare of the nation and our people,” Lambino said.

Lambino explained that Sigaw, the Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP), and the 6.3 million people who signed the petition were denied the opportunity to be heard when the High Court junked on October 26 their petition to amend the Constitution through people’s initiative.

“There is somehow a denial of due process,” he said, adding that the High Court should have remanded the case to the Commission on Elections (Comelec) where they could present evidence that they have sufficiently complied with the 12-percent requirement under Republic Act 6735 or the law on initiative and referendum.

The Court, however, said the petition could not be remanded to the Comelec, which had earlier also dismissed the Sigaw initiative, because it is first and foremost void and unconstitutional.

“It dismally fails to comply with the requirement of Section 2, Article XVII of the Constitution that the initiative must be ‘directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition,’” the Court said.

The High Court explained that “certainly” the initiative is not “directly proposed by the people” because the text of the draft proposal was not attached to the signature sheets. Therefore, they “could not have known” the nature and effect of the proposed changes, among which are:

The term limits on members of the legislature will be lifted and thus members of Parliament can be re-elected indefinitely;

The interim Parliament can continue to function indefinitely until its members, who are almost all the present members of Congress, decide to call for new parliamentary elections. Thus, the members of the interim Parliament will determine the expiration of their own terms of office;

Within 45 days from the ratification of the proposed changes, the interim Parliament shall convene to propose further amendments or revision to the Constitution. (emphasis in original)

Lambino, while admitting that he only printed 100,000 copies of the proposal and that he was not sure if these were attached to the sheets, said other copies were printed by local government executives, copies of the proposal are also available online, and that media have adequately reported on the issues. He argued that the people were also properly briefed in barangay assemblies and forums.

One Voice Inc. spokesperson Christian Monsod however said in a telephone interview that the forums “were all one-sided, propaganda campaign” and that there was never an educational and intelligent discussion of the issue.

Were the people deceived?

“The whole issue is: was it a real initiative?” Monsod said, “(And) were there really 6.3 million people?”

In his latest survey analysis, Social Weather Stations president Mahar Mangahas said the Supreme Court ruling was consistent with the June 2006 SWS survey where “six of every ten of those approached on a petition said that they were not shown the amendments which they were asked to sign.”

“From the start of the signature-gathering campaign, SWS tried, without success, to find the exact text of the petition for constitutional amendment. The signature-sheet passed around Barangay Sikatuna Village in Quezon City, where SWS is located, was the same as cited by Supreme Court, with no attachment; the barangay office had no further information. It was only after the Lambino Group had already filed its petition with Comelec that I first obtained a copy,” Mangahas wrote.

Mangahas added that in fact, as late as July 2006, Rep. Constantino Jaraula, chair of the House committee on constitutional amendments, admitted he “did not know what exactly would be in the petition for constitutional change to be brought before the Comelec” and that “the One Voice Movement is wrong to criticize something not yet finalized.” (The signature campaign started in February. By April, Sigaw announced it had gathered the sufficient number of signatures required. The petition was filed before the Comelec in August.)

“If, as late as July 7, 2006, Rep. Jaraula himself was unaware of the contents of the petition, the most plausible explanation is that the exact petition had not been finalized by the Lambino Group. This is consistent with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the signatories were not told exactly what it was that they were signing for,” Mangahas said.

Other anti-Charter change groups also said there were lack of verification of signatures in several legislative districts. The Alternative Law Groups (ALG), a coalition of 18 legal resource organizations, found that signatures gathered in at least nine provinces were either not properly verified or not verified at all by local election officials. Others alleged there were irregularities in the collection of signatures in cities like Makati, where even signatures of people “long dead, in prison, abroad, and other forgeries appear on the Sigaw ng Bayan signature sheets.”

But Lambino said these issues are “matters of fact” that need to be proved or disproved by evidence. In his dissenting opinion, Justice Reynato Puno agreed that the issue “involves contentious facts” that the Comelec must resolve based on evidence.

“(But) the question is did they abide (by the constitutional requirement)?” Monsod said, explaining that questions of law should have first been resolved before facts surrounding the petition could be discussed.

During the forum, political science professor and Consultative Commission chair Jose Abueva expressed his frustration over the justices who wanted to “satisfy so many requirements.”

“I want to ask the justices, when millions of people approved the whole Constitution in 1987, did they have a complete text of the proposed Constitution? In the 1935 Constitution, did every citizen who voted ‘yes’ have a copy? (It is) stupid to require everybody to have a complete copy. This is where you’re putting technicalities (on the issue),” he argued.

Monsod however said this is not a valid comparison. “In 1987, there were educational campaigns and simultaneous discussions; there was an open debate. Not every voter read the entire Constitution, that’s correct, but the chief drafters were generally understood by the people.”

In her column yesterday, Solita Monsod also said: “There are comments to the effect that the SC was being narrow-minded/short-sighted, looking at the technicalities instead of the broader issues such as the welfare of the people and the country; or that it, in effect, refused to heed the people’s voice…In the first place, the point of the SC was that it wasn’t the people’s voice that was being presented to them, it was more like the voice of a group that was trying to deceive.”

Monsod cited a portion of a decision by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts which was affirmed by the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and was quoted by Carpio in the decision:

“A signature requirement would be meaningless if the person supplying the signature has not first seen what it is that he or she is signing.

Further, and more importantly, loose interpretation of the subscription requirement can pose a significant potential for fraud. A person permitted to describe orally the contents of an initiative petition to a potential signer, without the signer having actually examined the petition, could easily mislead the signer by, for example, omitting, downplaying, or even flatly misrepresenting, portions of the petition that might not be to the signer’s liking.

This danger seems particularly acute when, in this case, the person giving the description is the drafter of the petition, who obviously has a vested interest in seeing that it gets the requisite signatures to qualify for the ballot.”

This entry was posted on Friday, November 3rd, 2006 and is filed under Charter Change, In the News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

5 people have left comments

This PI thing is really a great distraction and a waste of time. Did it occur to anyone that this whole PI thing is none other than a wholesale well-planned deception crafted by the administration? That actually, it’s just a “test or an advance electioneering campaign” for its senatorial slate this coming election in order to get a majority senators? Lambino, Aumentado, Defensor, Ermita, the Gonzaleses, etc. would surely be in their senatorial line-up and if the 6 millions signatures are genuine, Lambino & Aumendato would already be sure winners. Then, if enough administration senators are elected it will change the senate make-up and they could easily push for cha-cha via con-ass without glitch. Panganiban will also run and win in either senatorial (admin. or oppos.)ticket and depending on circumstances he may redeem himself by siding again with Arroyo by casting in favor the administration or become a swing or deciding vote in the con-ass just in case. Farfetched?

Abueva I think is wrong on his criticism on the Supreme Court decision. Of course he will favor the administration he being the Chair of that all Arroyo-appointed Con-Com. But his comparison about the “people not provided copies of the 1935 and 1987 constitution when they ratified it” holds no water. He forgot the basic difference between “initiation and ratification”.

So, Dear Professor, this is just an unsolicited reminder just in case you overlooked what are the basic differences:

1) Before ratification, the government itself together with the NGOs and basically all sectors of the society embark on a massive educational campaign or informative sorties up to the grassroots explaining to the people the contents of the constitution. It did not happen in the PI. In fact, many groups are similarly campaigning the opposite.

2) In ratification, the provisions were DRAFTED by a neutral Constitutional Convention duly elected by the people. The PI was CRAFTED by vested-interest groups.

3) In ratification, the people campaigning are in good faith. In this PI the people behind have ulterior designs.

4) In ratification the expenses are shouldered primarily by the government with help of the people which is OKAY. In this PI, the expenses were shouldred initially by a vested-interest group of people and the rest were shouldrered by the government which is WRONG.

5) In ratification, you don’t propose another provision, amendment or revision. In this PI, these group of people proposed not only an amendment but revision of the constitution.

Ambuot Saimo wrote on November 4, 2006 - 1:28 am | Visit Link

bakit nagkakagulo ang mga cabinet officials? akala ko ba nagsasaya ang palasyo dahil sa pagkabasura ng PI petition (ayun sa isang expert dito na may paarithmetic-aritmetic pang sinasabi). ang sa akin lang ay logic at common sense basi sa mga aksyon ng administrasyon at mga kapanalig nito. hindi kung ano-ano pang mga arithmetic ek-ek.

heto pa ang sinasabi sa itaas:

“…The cracks started to show with Defense Secretary Avelino Cruz Jr. becoming the subject of controversy when Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez said “there appeared to be a big law firm that is cheering” the DEFEAT of the administration”.

ang ibig sabihin ba yung victory at defeat ay pareho na lang ang kahulugan ngayon?

jr_lad wrote on November 4, 2006 - 4:38 pm | Visit Link

“DEFENSE CHIEF RESIGNS”

gwaping, eto ba ang malaking halimbawa sa sinasabi mong katuwaan ng malacanang sa pagkabasura ng PI petition? ipaliwanag mo nga ulit yung sinasabi mong “arithmetic..”.

jr_lad wrote on November 5, 2006 - 8:16 pm | Visit Link

Sinabi ko nga jr_lad sa ibang loop na matindi ang bangayan sa Palasyo at yung nagsasabing kagagawan ng Malacañang ang pagbasura sa P.I. ay naghahanap lang ng konsolasyon sa kanilang pagkatalo.

Kung si Bunyeng mahusay pumilipit at sumirko, di nagawang manipulahin ang pagkatalo ng Chacha iyan pang mga umaasa sa walang mga iyan!

tongue in, anew wrote on November 7, 2006 - 7:41 am | Visit Link

yun na nga tongue eh. ang lakas pa ng loob magpalusot ng ibang maka-malacanyanayan dito. ayaw na lang tanggapin na talagang luhaan na naman ang kampo ni gloria. ayan ang malaking pruweba. pinagtulung-tulungan si cruz ng mga kasamahan niyang ayaw ding tanggapin ang pagkatalo sa dahilang hindi nakumbinsi ni cruz ang kanyang panyerong si sc justice carpio para pumanig sa kanila. at common sense lang naman ang sinasabi kong kung kontra si gloria dito eh di hindi na sana gumastos ng sangkatutak para lang sa maanomalyang PI move na eto.

jr_lad wrote on November 7, 2006 - 2:06 pm | Visit Link