WOW, “it’s more fun in the Philippines”

Richard Gordon’s WOW Philippines may have left a lasting legacy among Filipinos, after said tourism campaign dominated every corners of our major thoroughfares with slogans like “WOW CAMIGUIN”, “WOW CEBU”, “WOW DUMAGUETE”, and all other WOWs out there. It was really WOW in the Philippines then, claimed by the Department of Tourism headed by Gordon.

And it was “Pilipinas Kay Ganda” thereafter, sounding like a variety show in a tv station and reminding of Kris Aquino. Wow Philippines was out. Pilipinas Kay Ganda was in. But the campaign slogan was a dead piece of idea after it had failed at the outset. Secretary Alberto Lim’s resignation carried with it the death of DOT’s Pilipinas Kay Ganda.

Now we have “It’s more fun in the Philippines“, a brainchild of Secretary Jimenez. Wow Philippines was gone. Pilipinas Kay Ganda was dead. It’s more fun in the Philippines is now in! It’s just like we are keeping on changing the campaign slogan of our dear Philippines, every other administration as if the former Wow Philippines wasn’t that successful in promoting our country to the world. At least the Pilipinas Kay Ganda created no slogan but a reminder of a failed idea.

This reminds us of “continuity” in our government, especially in terms of projects being implemented by every other administration. There is no continuity of projects. Every administration is hesitant to adopt a project of its predecessor though successful, leading to implementing a new one – meaning, back to zero. New project. New budget allocation. Starting from scratch.

It’s just like having fun in the Philippines. It’s really a big wow for the DOT for its new slogan, claiming it having “more fun” in our country amidst political bickering, disaster, and criminality. No doubt the Philippines is a great country, blessed with great people and natural resources and endowed with many tourist destinations and landmark. Just like Switzerland, just like USA, just like any other country in Asia and the Pacific.

There is still a big WOW in the campaign that we call “It’s more fun in the Philippines” compared with other countries in the world.

Great.

2012
01/06
CATEGORY
People
TAGS
















Write comment

An independent judiciary is no lip service

Shouting on a red painted streamer at the Sandiganbayan building are the words of Jose R. Hernandez which read: AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY IS THE BULWARK OF DEMOCRACY. We presume the signatory is the current justice of the Sandiganbayan’s 4th Division.

True enough, the Supreme Court and all other lower courts would argue the same, that an independent judiciary is indispensable in a democratic and republican state. Former Chief Justice Claudio Teehankee once observed that without that independence, no Supreme Court, no judiciary can be either respectable or useful. At the very least, such independence being raised by the defenders of the Chief Justice is that independence from political interference of the Executive and the Legislature, as manifested by the seemingly “clash of ideas”, “challenge to status quo”, and “power struggle.”

But when did the judiciary, the Supreme Court being at the helm, attain such independence under the doctrine of separation of powers? What is the real “test of judicial independence” in our jurisdiction?

Often the Supreme Court is associated with the Malacanang, justices being associated with the President who sworn them in to their sacred and solemn duty as magistrates of the highest court of the land. Counting the majority from the minority in terms of votes is tantamount to counting the votes in favor of the Executive. Public perception of such mindset over the SC seems a glaring contrast with the very essence of independence of the judiciary. And to say that the Court is an obstruction to Malacañang’s policies is neither always a good basis of “court-packing plan” nor always a solid ground of impeaching the members of the Supreme Court.

And where is independence of the judiciary here?

Former Supreme Court justice Isagani Cruz once remarked in his Inquirer column that he doesn’t believe in the Judicial and Bar Council though, he had recognized that Art. VIII of the 1987 Constitution considerably enhanced the independence of the judiciary. Justice Antonio Carpio lectured that institutional and individual independence are both necessary for a court to render impartial justice based only on the facts and the law, without any improper influence from the Executive and the Legislature. Ideally, we may conclude that this must be judicial independence.

Further, Justice Carpio lamented that a judiciary can be institutionally independent, but if the Judge rendering the decision has no individual independence, then one cannot expect impartial justice. He also underscored that if a judge is individually independent, but the Judiciary is under the control of the Executive, one cannot also expect impartial justice, especially if the Government is a litigant.
In the recent turn of events, where the Supreme Court is under intense scrutiny, the issue of independence of the judiciary is under paramount consideration. Does the impeachment of the Chief Justice equal to a frontal attack against judicial independence and autonomy?

Indeed, an independent judiciary is the bulwark of democracy. And these should not just be mere words and phrases within the contemplation of the co-equal branches of the government. This is no lip service, an independent judiciary should be for real.

2012
01/04
CATEGORY
Philippine government
TAGS
















Write comment

Grand Plan

The plan was simple, that is, to go after the past administration and its officials, and to persecute them so that there would be no one to hinder the great agenda of the present administration. The plan is simple. It involves a comprehensive process of elimination, whatever means would be employed, to wipe out the “threats” of the Executive.

First, the former president. To pursue the plan, the Truth Commission headed by former Chief Justice Hilario Davide was created. The objective was simple – to put into process the gathering of evidence against the former president. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court declared the Commission unconstitutional. It was the first defeat of the purposes of the grand plan.

To the administration, said decision of the SC was a blatant attack not just against the President, but also against the supremacy being portrayed by the Executive. The first attempt was a failure of the present administration, and then it took so many months after charges were filed against the former president, despite the presence of authorities vested with jurisdiction to push through the plan of eliminating the threat.

The theory was that, the transaction or deal failed between the present and past administration. And it turned into gory events thereafter. It is worthy of our curious imagination why it took that long before filing a case against the former president, waiting for that very moment of her time seeking medical treatment abroad.

Second, appointees of the former president. It seemed that the present administration cannot move forward without eliminating the personalities in the key positions filled by the former president. The next target – the Office of the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman was an obstacle for the President. That’s why, it was agreed to impeach Merci by all means to pave the way for His glorious design in the name of anti-corruption cause. The steps were simple. Impeach the Ombudsman. And because we are used to believe of His great agenda for the country, we thought it right to support the move at the expense of so many democratic principles and processes.

And it was a success. The Ombudsman was pressured to resign, before the Articles of Impeachment would be heard at the Senate. It was a big break for the Executive, and the President himself, and His cohorts in Congress. This gave an opportunity for the Great President to appoint his own Ombudsman. It was great.

It took not that long. The powerful Executive patiently waited for the moment to target the big one, and the finale of it all, the Supreme Court. Since appointees of the former president dominate the SC, the President thought that this scenario would be at his disadvantage. Alas, the time is ripe to make a sample, that is, the Chief Justice himself. Let us eliminate the Chief Justice to send a message to the Supreme Court that it should be a court for the President, and to give a lesson to the associate justices concerned that their future decisions must always be concurring with that of the wishes of the Executive.

Third, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as stated. The plan is now half-filled. The impeachment against the Chief Justice was realized by the disciples in the House of Representatives, railroading the process to put the plan to its majestic stage. The Executive has again imposed its superiority over a co-equal and independent branch of the Government. This has brought “chilling effects” to our democratic institutions and processes, where the Executive is showing great powers and prerogatives.

In the end, the grand plan involves a use of traditional tools like force, threats, and intimidation. It really works, yes. But this is dangerous!

2011
12/13
CATEGORY
Philippine government
TAGS







Write comment

Power struggle

“Ngayon, kung may isang lingkod-bayan na tumatanaw ng utang ng loob, hindi sa taumbayan na siyang dapat na bukal ng aming kapangyarihan, kundi sa isang padron na isiniksik siya sa puwesto, maaasahan po kaya natin siyang intindihin ang interes ng Pilipino?”

It is very unlikely for the Chief Executive, the highest executive official of the land, to utter those words in the presence of no less than the person he was referring to – the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Yesterday, President Aquino addressed the 1st National Criminal Justice Summit at the Centennial Hall of the Manila Hotel. The event is a gathering of stakeholders of the justice system to reexamine the institutional criminal justice issues and to forge strategies towards enhanced delivery of justice. His speech was once again a direct attack against person/s, systems, and institutions.

Words are mightier than the swords. President Aquino’s speech was not just a simple welcome remarks of the program, but a mighty piece aimed at raising his own convictions and beliefs, defying the odds of his administration. And that is the Supreme Court, especially the Chief Justice.

Strong words, yes! President Aquino is used to write (if he’s the one writing his speech) and deliver speeches with strong words, employing direct references to personalities like the Chief Justice. This is great, after all, he is entitled to his personal views and opinions, whether as a private person or as the Great President of this Great Republic.

The problem with his sometimes sarcastic opinions is the higher expectation of the public from, that those words coming from the President’s mouth would not be put in vain and, not just mere speeches. The impact thereafter is the issue which the President’s advisers might well look into. Strong words, yes, which really are implied defiance of powers and authorities of a co-equal and independent branch of the government.

Needless to say, such speech is a struggle against the other side of the system, where President Aquino is devoid of understanding – the dynamism, flexibility and checks and balances. President Aquino himself is an epitome of a superior executive, from his words and speeches, an advocate of a strong executive where the judiciary must conform with. This should not be the case. We need a strong president, strong in the sense that actions speak louder than words. We need a strong executive, but not at the expense of having a weak judiciary because of public perception.

2011
12/06
CATEGORY
Good Governance
TAGS



Write comment

Commonwealth Avenue is not for fun

Yesterday was no ordinary day for the residents of Quezon City who passed by the so-called killer highway, the Commonwealth Avenue, also regarded as the widest highway in the metropolis. It was not an ordinary day especially for those who woke up early for their Sunday activities and work, waiting for buses and FX to go to their respective destination. I was coming from Batasan that day, then patiently waiting for the FX at around 6:30 in the morning for my Sunday class. Oblivious then to whatever event the City was sponsoring that day, I was wondering why it took me almost an hour to wait given that it was Sunday, a different Sunday compared with the regular Sunday routine I have every time I go to school. Until I found out that it was the 3rd Quezon City International Marathon.

This event paved the way, seriously it had drastically made the Commonwealth Avenue an irritating highway that day. The other side of the avenue was exclusively used for the marathon, the right side going to Fairview, leaving the left side crowded of vehicles coming from both directions. Heavy traffic awaited the motorists and commuters. It was awesome, really awesome! The experience was worse than the traffic situation during the State of the Nation Address. Yeah, it was an international event that’s why the Quezon City government had to close the other side of the avenue to give way for the running enthusiasts who participated in in the said “international” marathon amidst a rainy morning.

The hell for that! The inconvenience and other social and economic effects the event had brought to many commuters that time were immesurable, and therefore cannot be underestimated by the organizers of the said marathon. Commuters who came in late to their Sunday work would dare say, why should we close the other side of the Commonwealth Avenue, why not just the half lane so that heavy traffic would not arise. Students like me who went to school that day (I was late more than 30 minutes for my exam) would also complain for the same. Now I was thinking of the social and economic damages inflicted upon commuters and motorists that time, compared with the benefits derived from the conduct of that one day event, which was the proximate cause of heavy traffic as a direct consequence of the closing of Commonwealth Avenue. After all, in my humble opinion, we should not use highways and major thoroughfares for events like marathon. There should have a proper place for the conduct of such event.

Our streets, highways, and major thoroughfares like the Commonwealth Avenue were primarily designed to provide safe and easy access of mobility and means of transport. Often our lives are in the highways waiting for buses, FX, taxi, among others, to and from offices, schools, church, home…A little late in our appointments would mean a lot. That’s why, we also urge a responsible use of these spaces, and when we say “responsible” we mean that we use these highways and thoroughfares not at the expense of millions of commuters out there.

Local governments should find ways to provide for proper spaces for the conduct of activities like ‘marathon.’ Not in our major thoroughfares please!

2011
12/05
CATEGORY
Thoughts of the Day
TAGS







Write comment

AKON FACEBOOK

Joselito Capariño

Create Your Badge
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 29 other followers