Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube
Home Blog Page 6088

Cabinet members under Ramos back Robredo’s presidential bid 

OVP.GOV.PH

MORE THAN 20 former Cabinet and senior officials under the Ramos administration have backed the presidential candidacy of Vice President Maria Leonor “Leni” G. Robredo, saying the 2022 elections is crucial for the country’s economic recovery.

In a signed statement dated Jan. 12, the 23 former government officials said the country needs a unifying leader who can empower marginalized groups and “bring out the best of servant leadership in government officials and public servants by being the foremost example of integrity, dedication, professionalism, level-headedness, statesmanship, pursuit of excellence, hard work, and true caring and sharing for our fellow Filipinos.” 

The high-level officials under President Fidel V. Ramos said Ms. Robredo can lead the country into the “positive path” considering the May polls is “a critical crossroads for the country” as it emerges from the deep scars inflicted by the pandemic.

They committed to do their “share to help her become the next President of the Republic of the Philippines.”

They also called out the prevalence of fake news and disinformation, which they said could compromise the electoral campaign. They noted deliberate attempts to misuse certain polls and surveys “that may not necessarily reflect and represent true voter preferences.”

They also raised alarm over the “continued patronage and money politics,” which they said have perpetuated dynasties and diverted people’s choices away from electing principled leaders.

Mr. Ramos, who won the presidency in 1992, was endorsed by his predecessor, the late Corazon C. Aquino, who took office in 1986 after the late dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos was toppled by a popular uprising backed by military generals. 

Under his administration, Mr. Ramos, who hails from Pangasinan in northern Philippines, implemented liberal economic programs that encouraged private enterprise and foreign investments. 

The former military general was also known for his so-called Philippines 2000 program, which aimed to make the Philippines a newly industrialized country by the turn of the century. — Kyle Aristophere T. Atienza 

Presidential bet Gonzales: Agri dep’t first to be reformed 

COMELEC

AGRICULTURE will be the first department to undergo reforms under a Norberto B. Gonzales presidency, the standard-bearer of the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP) said in a virtual press conference on Wednesday. 

He said agriculture will be his priority to boost food production and generate more income for farmers. 

“Kaya ang una kong lilinisin, hindi naman natin malilinis agad… uutusan natin para kumilos agad ay yung (That is why the first to be revamped… we will order to immediately take action is the) Department of Agriculture,” he said. 

Mr. Gonzales, a former defense secretary and national security adviser under the presidency of Gloria M. Arroyo, said food security “is a national security question.”

“We want to make sure that a strategic crop such as rice will be produced by us. And let us not oppress those who produce them,” he said. 

He said rice production could be made more profitable by using more modern equipment.

He also said that stable food supply would mean improved health conditions for the population, which helps provide protection against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). 

The presidential aspirant also said that the pharmaceutical and drug industry should be strengthened and reorganized to address medicine supply issues. 

His other administrative priorities include cleaning up urban areas and decongesting crowded communities.  

The PDSP party chair advocates for social democracy, which he said is an alternative political philosophy that puts the means of production more in the hands of government. — Jaspearl Emerald G. Tan 

Visayan Electric says addressing reported extortion in post-typhoon restoration

VISAYAN ELECTRIC CO. FACEBOOK PAGE

VISAYAN ELECTRIC Company, Inc. (Visayan Electric) said on Thursday that investigation is underway on reports of contractors or linemen extorting money from customers to get priority in having their supply back as restoration works continue in the aftermath of typhoon Odette, which toppled power lines almost a month ago.

“We ask for cooperation from the public not to entertain or participate in these illegal activities,” the Aboitiz-owned utility company said in a statement first released to the Cebu press on Jan. 7. 

The company assured that those who will be proven to have committed “such illegal actions will be penalized accordingly.”

Visayan Electric also warned customers that it would not be liable for “any damage or loss arising out of or in connection with the unauthorized re-energization arrangement.” 

The service provider underscored that restoration of electricity is free of charge and that its teams have been working 24 hours a day to fast-track repair works.

As of Jan. 12, the company said it has reconnected 269,747 customers, with power demand reaching 374 megawatts or about 75% of the pre-typhoon level. 

Visayan Electric, the second largest electric utility in the country, covers an area of about 674 square kilometers with a population of about 1.73 million. 

It’s franchise area includes the cities of Cebu, Mandaue, Talisay, and Naga, and the towns of Liloan, Consolacion, Minglanilla and San Fernando.

The company said damage assessment so far indicates 1,997 poles were affected. Inspection is still ongoing in remote areas. 

Duterte signs law naming QC road after iconic actor FPJ

FERNANDO Poe Jr. Avenue northbound from its intersection with Quezon Avenue. — JUDGEFLORO

PRESIDENT RODRIGO R. Duterte has signed into law a measure renaming Roosevelt Avenue in Quezon City (QC) after the late Filipino iconic film actor Fernando Poe, Jr. 

Under Republic Act No. 11608, the road, which runs between Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) and Quezon Avenue to the south, would be renamed as Fernando Poe, Jr. Avenue. 

The law directed the Public Works department to issue necessary rules and circulars to implement its provisions within 60 days from effectivity. 

Mr. Poe, who died at age 65 in Dec. 2004, was most known for his action films, but he was also considered a luminary of the Philippine cinema industry having been a director, producer, and screenwriter.

His daughter, Senator Grace Poe-Llamanzares, said her family is “humbled by this legislation.” 

In a statement, Ms. Poe said the road would give her father’s works and legacy a sense of place in the country’s history. — Kyle Aristophere T. Atienza

Beyond Nomura’s uncertainty: The biggest irony of a Marcos Jr. presidency

PHILIPPINE STAR/ RUSSELL PALMA

While Vice-President Leni Robredo was considered by Nomura Global Research as the market-friendly choice as the next president of the Republic, former Senator Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. was dismissed as an uncertain choice. Nomura believed that Marcos Jr. is less market-friendly because his victory might cast doubt on the May 2022 elections.

To Nomura’s ASEAN research team based  in Singapore, “a Marcos victory will likely be viewed negatively owing to perceptions against him, in part because his candidacy is facing some petitions for disqualification on grounds of making false statements and a previous conviction of failing to file income tax returns.”

Indeed, there is not only one petition but seven petitions questioning the qualifications of Marcos Jr. as candidate for president. Seven petitions were filed with the Commission on Elections (Comelec) for the invalidation of his candidacy. Of these petitions, four wanted him disqualified on the basis of his 1997 tax conviction. Two petitions asked Comelec to cancel his certificate of candidacy (COC) on account of his conviction and therefore ineligibility to run for public office. One petition is for him to be declared as nuisance candidate because “his purpose was mainly to have his family’s political comeback in Malacañang.” This last one was dismissed by the Comelec outright.

To Nomura, choosing Marcos is choosing uncertainty as to the possible outcome of the May elections. His scores in Nomura’s rating of the presidential bets and their running mates paled in comparison with Robredo and Senator Kiko Pangilinan’s performance. They topped all the teams in all the five criteria of national experience, business friendliness, fiscal discipline, infrastructure progress, and continuity/good governance.

Marcos Jr. and Sara Duterte’s team obtained four out of five in infrastructure progress but only three out of five in fiscal discipline and continuity/good governance. They had dismal ratings in national experience, even lower than Senators Ping Lacson and Tito Sotto; and in business friendliness, they had the lowest score among all the other teams.

The other issue of uncertainty focuses on platforms of government. Except for his brief comments on specific issues of the day, Marcos Jr. has not exactly bared his platform of government. As late as December last year, when approached by a CNN reporter for an interview on his business and economic platform, he declined, reasoning that he had nothing much to say.

A month earlier, Marcos Jr. failed to attend the 47th Philippine Business Conference and Expo. This could have been a great occasion to give the business community a glimpse of his vision. All the other presidential candidates showed up to present their respective plans on what the Filipino people could expect from them in the first 100 days in office if elected chief of state.

The Nomura report raised the issue of uncertainty even as Marcos Jr. is leading many national surveys. The Nomura economists must have recognized that his campaign strategy seems to have bypassed the traditional media where fact checking and editorial supervision normally operate, and has leveraged on social media and reached out directly to the people with its own narrative. Sadly, the narrative does not conform to both history and facts. Martial law as proclaimed by his own father Marcos Sr. really happened with all the violations of human rights and confiscation of private corporations. Contrary to the Marcos family’s claim that their wealth came from Marcos Sr.’s fabulous legal fees, there are enough laws and court rulings that contradict the family narrative that until today continues to dominate social media, especially YouTube.

But following the kind of narrative that is being peddled to the Filipino people, there is a more fundamental, more difficult issue if Marcos Jr. wins the presidency.

Winning an election represents not only an ascension to power, but also a curtailment of one’s private rights and freedoms. Few people realize this. As a private citizen, Marcos Jr. is virtually free to criticize government institutions and revise history based on his own whims and opinions, no matter how unfounded.

But what happens if he becomes the Chief Executive? How would he implement various laws with respect to martial law and its atrocities which he continues to deny? How would he abide by the various court rulings that unequivocally declared the family’s wealth ill-gotten from public treasury?

The irony of it all is magnificent: Marcos Jr. — who has repeatedly failed to acknowledge the martial law atrocities and plunder of the nation — would now be charged by the Constitution to enforce the very laws that recognize what he denies.

For instance, RA 10368, approved on Feb 25, 2013, provides for reparation and recognition of victims of human rights violations during the Marcos Regime. Also known as the “Human Rights Victims Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013,” the law overturns nearly everything that Marcos Jr. has denied knowing, much less, admitting.

Marcos Jr. will be challenged in implementing this law because it declared it a state policy to “recognize the heroism and sacrifices of all Filipinos who were victims of summary execution, torture, enforced or involuntary disappearance and other gross human rights violations committed during the regime of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos covering the period from Sept. 21, 1972 to Feb. 25, 1986 and restore the victims’ honor and dignity.”

No less than Congress acknowledges its moral and legal obligation to provide reparation to the victims and their families as well as those whose properties or businesses “were forcibly taken over, sequestered or used, or those whose professions were damaged…”

There is another formidable challenge to Marcos Jr.

Section 27 of the same law mandates the establishment, restoration and preservation of a museum, library, and similar institutions in honor of the human rights victims during the Marcos Regime. Thus, a Freedom Memorial Museum is about to rise on a 1.4-hectare lot in UP Diliman under the auspices of the Human Rights Violations Victims’ Memorial Commission.

As its Executive Director Carmelo Crisanto explained, a state-sponsored museum perpetuating the atrocities of military rule is “akin to the government apologizing for unleashing state forces upon hapless citizens — and a reminder for succeeding administrations not to make the same mistake.”

Will Marcos Jr. attend the inauguration of this Museum, and commit to allocate a sufficient amount in the General Appropriations Act, to supplement the initial funding of P500 million of the Memorial Commission, knowing that its vision is to enable our civil society to know and be reminded of martial law as a “way of promoting good governance towards just, humane and democratic society”?

What about the issue of ill-gotten wealth?

Former Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban in his Inquirer column made it easier for everyone to keep track of court rulings with a common theme: the Marcos family accumulated ill-gotten wealth.

For instance, the Supreme Court in the Republic v. Sandiganbayan (July 15, 2003), penned by Justice Renato C. Corona, forfeited $658 million owned by Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos in favor of the Philippine Government. Kept in multilayers of front foundations and organizations, the Court ruled the amount was not in proportion to the “known lawful income of the (Marcos couple from 1965-1985) since they did not file any Statement of Assets and Liabilities, as required by law, from which their net worth could be determined.” Their lawful income only totaled $304,372.43. Anything above this was deemed ill-gotten.

Other Supreme Court rulings which forfeited assets and other properties held by Marcos’ cronies to the Philippine Government proved that the Marcos era as “well-entrenched plundering regime of 20 years.” While the Marcos family also won some cases at the High Court, it was because of the prosecutors’ utter failure to observe simple procedural and evidentiary rules, to use CJ Panganiban’s own words.

So far, everyone should know that more than P170 billion has already been recovered by the government, which puts to rest the issue of whether there is stolen wealth or not. However, more than P100 billion remains hidden and awaiting recovery from the Marcos estate. Will a Marcos Jr. presidency result in its return to the Philippine government?

To be sure, the issue goes beyond Nomura’s uncertainty. It is also beyond an existential dread because all these years, Marcos Jr.’s credo was consistently counter to history and our body of laws. It is up to the Filipino electorate to decide on the side of history and avoid this fruitless irony.

 

Diwa C. Guinigundo is the former deputy governor for the Monetary and Economics Sector, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). He served the BSP for 41 years. In 2001-2003, he was alternate executive director at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC. He is the senior pastor of the Fullness of Christ International Ministries in Mandaluyong.

Challenge and opportunity

PHILIPPINE STAR/ RUSSELL PALMA

“Defending democracy” and “upholding the rule of law” have long been in the United States of America’s ideological arsenal of justification for its intervention in the affairs of other nations. But if we are to believe its own President, his political party, and much of its media, the country Filipinos trust the most is in crisis because both are under threat at home. Rather than the foreign foes the US has waged multiple wars against, it is its own citizens who have made that danger imminent.

Fueled both by malice as well as disinformation, that crisis, because occurring in one of world’s supposedly “most mature democracies,” nevertheless has an upside to it. It underscores how even more fragile democracy can be in such countries as the Philippines once lies, because repeated so often, assume the appearance of truths.

In the United States it has alerted those who take democratic rights for granted to the perils to those rights that lurk in the economic and political establishment from which they choose their leaders. For the first time in US history, a sitting President not only described his 2020 rival for the White House as a liar and as “a threat to democracy” but also as “a defeated former President” who refused to respect the peaceful transfer of power and who instead “held a dagger at the throat of American democracy.”

Joseph Biden minced no words in referring to Donald Trump as the US marked the first anniversary of the Jan. 6, 2021 storming and occupation of Congress by hundreds of Trump supporters in an attempt to stop Biden’s official declaration as the 46th President of the United States.

Biden blamed that “armed insurrection” on Trump’s “web of lies” about the 2020 elections whose result he and his followers say was “rigged.” He went on to declare that the former President egged on the rioters because he “values power over principle,” “because he sees his interests as more important than his country’s interests,” and “because his bruised ego matters to him more than our democracy and our Constitution.” A year after, the threat to both had not waned. Biden told his audience that “we are in a battle for the soul of America” — that what is at stake in that war is democracy itself.

Much of the US media except Fox News agreed that US democracy is under grave threat. They weighed in with specials on, among others, “saving democracy,” and interviews with the families of the police officers killed and injured by the rioters, and with some members of the Republican Party who contradicted Trump’s claims and lamented much of their party’s support for his lies and the insurrection.

The information the media and other institutions provided was a major factor in Trump’s defeat in the Nov. 3, 2020 Presidential elections. Trump and company’s repudiation of its results, and the violence that ensued on Jan. 6, 2021 are as unprecedented in US history as Biden’s words.

The integrity of elections is crucial to democratic polities, while the use of violence in questioning them presumes the need for force in resolving differences. Trump has claimed the first and encouraged the second. It is in alarm over both that Biden, the Democratic Party, and much of the US media agree that US democracy is under threat and must be defended from the likes of Trump and his cohorts both in and out of government.

Trump is no longer in power. But he still has much of the Republican Party and various groups like Christian fundamentalists, neo-Nazi, pro-gun, white supremacist, and racist formations behind him. He has declared that his losing the 2020 elections will not stop his campaign for an anti-immigrant, exclusionary America, and he has threatened to run again in 2024. Although he is now 75, and claims to be in perfect health, time could still catch up with him before that year. But even if that happens, what some analysts are already referring to as “Trumpism” will quite probably outlive him. Even without Trump, that “philosophy” has already ushered in a period of political instability that will outlast Biden’s term.

What the US is going through is in many ways what other countries and peoples have had to endure, and much worse — in many cases with the instigation and support of various US administrations whether Democrat or Republican. Among others, the September 1973 coup d’état against, and assassination of, the democratically elected President of Chile, Salvador Allende, which put a brutal military dictatorship in power, comes to mind.

So does the support by a succession of US regimes for the Marcos dictatorship in the Philippines that began with the declaration of martial law in 1972. In both instances, the US in effect validated the use, in behalf of its and its local collaborators’ interests, of the very same violence and lawlessness the Biden administration is now condemning.

US economic, military, and political support helped keep the Marcos kleptocracy in power for 14 years. The dictatorship made Marcosismo, home-grown Philippine fascism, a perennial threat to the democratization of the country and a lethal virus the Philippine political elite often uses to threaten critics and dissenters with. It has outlived “People Power” twice, and outlasted six post-Marcos regimes. Its current version values violence and intimidation as the first and last methods of governance, and has made corruption and indifference to human lives, liberties, and the people’s welfare its first priorities. An even worse mutation of it could come to power this election year.

The resilience of Marcosismo is based on the ignorance that disinformation generates and the willful indifference to factual evidence among millions of Filipinos. It is a crucial factor in the acceptability of “strong man” rule.

Much of the lies and rewriting of history that feed that preference are deliberately cultivated by the trolls and hacks in print and broadcast media in the pay of those handful of families that have monopolized political power in these isles for decades and who want to keep it whatever the cost to this country and its people. Those dynasties are not only threatening to completely overwhelm the relatively few adherents of reason, democratic choice, reform, and just plain civility among the citizenry. They are also flourishing by using the ideology of dominance, repression, and exploitation that lives on in what passes for the minds not only of the ruling oligarchy but also of its benighted followers.

Only relevant and accurate information can combat this insidious and continuing threat. That immense responsibility has fallen on those individuals and organizations, most specially those Filipinos for whom the resumption of the democratization process has never been more urgent than today, and those in the media who are in a position to provide that kind of information.

The campaign period for the 2022 elections is a signal challenge and opportunity to do so, not only to rescue the country from despotism and ineptitude, but also to make sure that neither afflicts it ever again.

Like those Americans who claim adherence to democratic principles, their Philippine counterparts are also in a battle —against the corrupt, incompetent and power-mad legions — for their own country’s soul. Their victory can be most clearly expressed in, to begin with, their prevailing in the coming polls. But that would be only the beginning. Like Trumpism in the US, Marcosismo will continue to plague this country until the Filipino millions achieve its economic, political, and social transformation that is the only antidote to the false promises of fascist rule.

 

Luis V. Teodoro is on Facebook and Twitter (@luisteodoro).

www.luisteodoro.com

The Davos Gang’s risk list makes for depressing reading

FREEPIK

THE World Economic Forum (WEF), arranger of the annual Davos shindig, has just published its 17th annual Global Risks Report. It makes for thoroughly depressing reading — for its context as much as its content.

Male, pale, and stale remains the defining characteristic of the Davos crowd. Some two-thirds of the more than 900 survey respondents were male, with almost half based in Europe and more than 40% aged 50 or over. More than 40% were business executives, with 16% working in government, 17% in academia and 10% in nongovernmental organizations.

But the gender imbalance isn’t the most disconcerting aspect of the report. Five of the top 10 risks that survey participants said are the most severe facing the world in the coming decade are tied to the environment. The top three all stem from the climate emergency, with “climate action failure” deemed the biggest global threat in the next 10 years. So much for all those COP conferences and the 2015 Paris agreement designed to limit global warming.

That’s particularly disheartening for two reasons. First, it’s been five years since the failure to address climate change initially rose to the top of the Davos worry list, and yet the situation seems to be getting worse. The WEF’s report ranked extreme weather events as the world’s most challenging peril from 2017 to 2021, and yet the planet continues to overheat.

In the past half century, the last seven years rank as the hottest on record, according to data published earlier this week by the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service. The numbers show 2021 was the fifth warmest period in 52 years, and hotter than both 2015 and 2018. A surge in atmospheric methane, a greenhouse gas more than 80 times more powerful than carbon dioxide in contributing to global warming, helped make July the hottest single month ever recorded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. No wonder wildfires have become almost commonplace in many regions.

The second reason to be dismayed is that of all the risks that society faces, the tools are available to governments to ease, if not end, the climate crisis. Terrorist attacks, natural disasters and cybercrime — all of which have featured prominently in the WEF rankings in recent years — are slippery, amorphous dangers to tackle. Taking action to stop destroying the planet is practical and achievable.

And yet even rich nations continue to miss their targets. Germany’s emissions climbed by 4.5% in 2021 compared with the previous year, according to think tank Agora Energiewende. The country will probably fail to achieve its goals this year and next and has a “drastic deficit” in its efforts to tackle global warming, German Economy Minister Robert Habeck said earlier this week.

Curbing greenhouse gas emissions isn’t easy or cheap, but at least it’s measurable and within the purview of concerted government action to achieve. Let’s hope that in the coming years, countries take enough steps that the climate emergency drops off the WEF’s hazards facing the world.

BLOOMBERG OPINION

COVID revealed that our youth don’t matter

TAYLOR BRANDON-UNSPLASH

Joe Rogan’s December 2021 interview of Dr. Robert Malone is touted as “the most important in our time.” And it might well be that. Exposing the inutility of masks and the evil of mandatory vaccination, Malone (a virologist and immunologist) also talked about, and thus introduced to many, the idea of “mass formation psychosis.”

Medium (“The Original Mass Formation Psychosis…”; Jan. 5 2022) defines it as “when a large part of the society focuses its attention on the leader or series of occasions and their attention shifts on one small issue or point. Followers can be hypnotized and be led anywhere, nevertheless of data proving otherwise.” Actually, it was in another Joe Rogan interview, with cardiologist Peter McCullough, that the concept first came up and from there discussed the four elements thereof and its relevance to the present situation:

• prolonged isolation of population: lockdown

• depriving the population and causing them to despair: violation of rights, bans on religious or social gatherings, etc.

• supply constant anxiety: daily reportage of new COVID cases and deaths

• single solution from authority figure: vaccine

Of course mass media ganged up on this, immediately scoffing at the idea and spent all their news space trying to debunk it. Google suppressed any objective or positive discussion on mass formation psychosis and Wiki suspended its page, placing it on “temporary maintenance.”

It wouldn’t have been so bad really. If adults and the elderly are happy to behave like psychos and engage in bizarre cultish behavior, that’s their call. The problem is if it’s done on the youth, which for the Philippines constitutes around 70% of the population.

All this — the lockdown, masking, mandatory vaccination — are the complete ingredients to destroy the present and future of our youths. All for what? To protect an identified segment of our society that refuses to be identified as aged or less than healthy, that could have been reasonably protected without the disastrous costs being paid by the youth.

The “20s aren’t supposed to represent stagnancy or solitude. They’re meant to be filled with fun, heartbreak, and growth, where the comforts of friendship buffer us against uncertainty and help us figure out who we are. Yet for the better part of two years now, thanks to COVID-19, we are forced to stay home more than head out, and when we do, have to count who is in or out when we meet for meals.”

“University is meant to be a time to make friends, fall in love, make mistakes but COVID-19 put a hard stop to developing these potential relationships. For one, it took away what matters – face-to-face interactions.” (“Has COVID-19 robbed the young of their youth?”; Channel News Asia, 2022)

The effects are certainly there: Thailand is seeing a rise in suicides; Malaysia and the Philippines saw suicides increase in 2021. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention “reported an alarming increase in the number of suicide attempts by adolescent girls during the pandemic. Between February and March 2021, the number of emergency department visits for presumed suicide attempts was 50.6% higher among girls aged 12-17 compared to the same period in 2019.”

Also “emergency department mental health visits were up 31% among adolescents during the same period, driven by higher incidents of crises among young girls. The data is another piece of the picture showing how much youth have been affected by the pandemic, mentally and emotionally.” (“CDC saw 51% increase in suicide attempts by adolescent girls during pandemic,” Leandra Bernstein, June 2021)

And it can’t be said that locking the youth up is for their own good: “By May and June 2021, pediatricians noticed an unprecedented, counter seasonal surge in communicable illnesses, particularly RSV. Hand, foot, and mouth disease came right along with it, tearing through schools and day care centers all summer with unmistakable boils. Strep throat got in on the action too. Instead of dodging diseases, this catch-up wave suggested, children had largely just deferred them.

“Some alleged COVID-19 mitigation measures, such as more frequent sanitizing of preschool surfaces, would have actually done more to prevent RSV (which does commonly transmit itself via contact with contaminated surfaces) than to prevent COVID-19 (which does not). Yet kids were slammed by RSV anyway. Isolation turned them into dry immunological kindling.

“As it turns out, isolation does not put your immune system on pause; sometimes immunity follows a ‘use it or lose it’ rule. While they were Zooming in to school, children with existing partial immunity to endemic contagious diseases missed many opportunities to be exposed again, which would have refreshed their immune systems. We ended up with the opposite of herd immunity: a bunch of kids with suboptimal immune systems.” (“Closing Schools To Protect Kids Made Them Sick,” Reason, February 2022)

Frankly, the next time any national or local “leader” talks about caring for the youth, the sane proper response should be is: oh, shut up!

 

Jemy Gatdula is a senior fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence

https://www.facebook.com/jigatdula/

Twitter@jemygatdula

Indonesia relaxes coal export ban

REUTERS

JAKARTA — Indonesia, the world’s biggest thermal coal exporter, has allowed 37 loaded coal vessels to depart after they secured approvals from authorities, the Coordinating Ministry of Maritime and Investment Affairs said on Thursday.

In a statement, the ministry said an export ban implemented on Jan. 1 had been eased for miners that had met a requirement to sell a portion of their output for local power generation after the state utility procured enough coal at power stations to ensure 15 days of operations.

“I request that this is supervised closely so this also becomes a moment for us to improve domestic governance,” Luhut Pandjaitan, coordinating minister for Maritime and Investment Affairs, said in the statement.

The 37 vessels included 14 ships whose clearance was announced earlier in the week. It was not immediately known how much coal the vessels carried.

Sending shockwaves through global energy markets, Indonesia set the export ban after state power company, Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN), reported critically low coal stocks at power plants that left Indonesia on the brink of widespread power outages.

Indonesian authorities blamed the coal supply crisis on miners failing to meet a so-called Domestic Market Obligation (DMO), requiring them to sell 25% of output to local buyers with a price cap at $70 per ton for power plants.

The government has been lobbied by coal miners and also some of its biggest buyers including Japan and South Korea to ease the export ban.

There were about 120 vessels either loading or waiting to load off Indonesian’s coal ports in Kalimantan on the island of Borneo on Wednesday, according to Refinitiv Eikon data.

The ministry said in the statement on Thursday that mining companies that had met their sales contract with PLN and 100% of their DMO requirements for 2021 would now be allowed to begin exporting.

Miners that had not fulfilled their PLN contracts and DMO would face fines, it said.

Citi in a research note on Jan. 5 estimated around 490 out of 631 coal miners in the country had not yet fulfilled their DMO obligation. These 490 coal miners represent about 35%-40% of Indonesia’s total production, it added.

According to minutes of a meeting between miners and the trade ministry earlier this month, 418 miners did not sell any of their coal to local generators last year.

Indonesia’s two largest coal groups, PT Bumi Resources and Adaro Energy, as well as state coal miner Bukit Asam, were among companies who said in stock exchange filings they have met DMO requirements.

Bumi Resources director Dileep Srivastava said on Thursday said the company was awaiting formal confirmation from the government but said an easing would be a positive development.

An Adaro spokesperson said its ships were yet to leave port as of Thursday morning. — Reuters

Omicron less severe than Delta but still poses danger for unvaccinated — WHO

THE HIGHLY infectious Omicron coronavirus variant causes less severe disease than the Delta strain but it remains a “dangerous virus”, particularly for those who are unvaccinated, the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) said on Wednesday.

Speaking at a news briefing, director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said more than 90 countries were yet to meet the target of vaccinating 40% of their populations and more than 85% of people in Africa were yet to receive a single dose.

“We mustn’t allow this virus a free ride or wave the white flag, especially when so many people around the globe remain unvaccinated,” he said.

In its weekly epidemiological report on Tuesday, the WHO said cases increased by 55%, or 15 million, in the week to Jan. 9 from a week earlier — by far the most cases reported in a single week.

“This huge spike in infections is being driven by the Omicron variant, which is rapidly replacing Delta in almost all countries,” Mr. Tedros said.

He said the majority of people hospitalized around the world with COVID-19 were unvaccinated and that if transmission was not curtailed there was greater risk of another variant emerging that could be even more transmissible, and more deadly, than Omicron. — Reuters

Quebec tax on unvaccinated may be lawful but sets risky precedent

A PERSON stands in front of a Canadian flag in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Sept. 20, 2022. — REUTERS

TORONTO — A proposal by Quebec to tax unvaccinated people may be lawful but may also go against the spirit of Canada’s universal public health system, rights and medical experts said on Wednesday.

Tuesday’s surprise announcement by the province’s premier, Francois Legault, came with few details.

While his government would not say Wednesday how the tax would be levied, when or against whom, Canada’s Civil Liberties Association said it could violate Canadians’ fundamental rights, while health advocates expressed concern about its broader implications.

“I’ve not seen anything like this in Canada before. I’m worried about the precedent it would set,” said Danyaal Raza, a doctor with Unity Health in Toronto and former chair of Canadian Doctors for Medicare.

Quebec, Canada’s second-most populous province, is struggling with surging COVID-19 hospitalizations, and Mr. Legault noted that the province’s relatively small unvaccinated population was represented disproportionately among the hospitalized.

Facing a provincial election in October, his government’s response to the pandemic thus far has met with approval from 65% of Quebeckers surveyed, according to a Leger poll released this week.

But the province’s public health director stepped down earlier this week, prior to the tax plan announcement, citing an “erosion” of public trust in anti-pandemic measures.

Asked on Wednesday about the plan, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he “received that proposal with interest” but would not weigh in on it, saying he needed more details.

Canada’s public health system is underpinned by the Canada Health Act, meant to guarantee universality and accessibility, among other things. It precludes user fees for insured services.

Quebec’s tax could be framed as a “sin tax” similar to that placed on alcohol and cigarettes or as a tax on a health risk factor like private insurers charge, Mr. Raza said.

As such, it might not violate Canada’s Health Act but that did not mean it was a good idea, he said.

Cara Zwibel, acting general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, said it might however violate Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms if viewed as “a way of compelling people to get vaccinated.”

It was not clear if the tax’s goal is to convince more people to get vaccinated or to finance health care, she said.

McGill University biomedical ethicist Phoebe Friesen was concerned the logic of taxing unvaccinated people could be extrapolated to other behaviors seen as driving health spending — obesity, for example — but that are tied to marginalization.

“If you want to be consistent and logical, you should charge all sorts of people for their hospitalization if it’s based on behavior that they’re ‘responsible’ for,” she said “… And it’s incredibly tricky to figure out what that looks like.” — Reuters

Prince Andrew must face sex abuse accuser’s lawsuit — judge

WIKIPEDIA

NEW YORK — Britain’s Prince Andrew failed to persuade a US judge to dismiss Virginia Giuffre’s lawsuit accusing the Duke of York of sexually abusing her when she was a teenager.

In a decision made public on Wednesday, US District Judge Lewis Kaplan said Ms. Giuffre, 38, could pursue claims that Prince Andrew battered her and intentionally caused her emotional distress while the late financier Jeffrey Epstein was trafficking her.

The Manhattan judge said it was premature to assess Andrew’s efforts to “cast doubt” on those claims, though the 61-year-old prince could do so at a trial.

Mr. Kaplan said it was also too soon to decide whether Ms. Giuffre’s 2009 civil settlement with Mr. Epstein “clearly and unambiguously” shielded Andrew from her lawsuit.

The judge did not address the merits of Ms. Giuffre’s claims.

Lawyers for Andrew did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

David Boies, a lawyer for Ms. Giuffre, in a statement said his client was pleased, and “looks forward to a judicial determination” of the merits of her claims.

Andrew, the second son of Queen Elizabeth, has denied Ms. Giuffre’s accusations that he forced her to have sex more than two decades ago at a London home of former Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, and abused her at two Epstein properties.

Mr. Kaplan’s decision keeps the case on track for a trial that he has said could begin between September and Dec. 2022 if no settlement were reached.

URGENCY TO SETTLE
Sarah Krissoff, a partner at Day Pitney and a former federal prosecutor, said the decision made it more likely Andrew would pursue an out-of-court settlement.

“I can’t imagine that Prince Andrew wants every detailed allegation to come out in the public realm,” she said. “If I were on Prince Andrew’s team, I most certainly would be having a discussion with him right now about resolving this case.”

In the 2009 settlement, Mr. Epstein paid Giuffre $500,000, without admitting liability, to end her Florida lawsuit accusing him of sexually abusing her when she was underage.

Ms. Giuffre’s claims against Andrew have not been proven, and the prince is not accused of criminal wrongdoing.

The case and Andrew’s ties to Mr. Epstein have nevertheless damaged the prince’s reputation and cost him many royal duties.

Andrew’s troubles grew after critics said he failed in a 2019 BBC interview to appear sympathetic toward Mr. Epstein’s abuse victims.

A spokesman for Buckingham Palace declined to comment on Mr. Kaplan’s decision.

Mr. Epstein killed himself at age 66 in a Manhattan jail cell in Aug. 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

Ms. Maxwell, 60, was convicted on Dec. 29 of recruiting and grooming girls for Mr. Epstein to abuse between 1994 and 2004.

She is seeking a new trial after one juror told media, including Reuters, that during jury deliberations he had discussed being a victim of sexual abuse.

‘MUDDLED’ SETTLEMENT
In his 44-page decision, Mr. Kaplan said the “muddled” language in Ms. Giuffre’s and Mr. Epstein’s settlement agreement suggested they may have reached “something of a middle ground.”

The settlement included language to “forever discharge” various people who “could have been included as a potential defendant” in Ms. Giuffre’s lawsuit against Mr. Epstein.

“We do not know what, if anything, went through the parties’ minds” when drafting the settlement, Mr. Kaplan wrote.

Ms. Giuffre and Andrew “have articulated at least two reasonable interpretations of the critical language,” the judge continued. “The agreement therefore is ambiguous.”

Settlement agreements can restrict plaintiffs like Ms. Giuffre from pursuing further litigation, even against third parties.

Mr. Kaplan also rejected Andrew’s claim that letting Ms. Giuffre sue violated his due process rights under New York’s constitution.

Ms. Giuffre sued Andrew last August, less than a week before the expiration of a state law giving accusers a two-year window to sue over alleged child abuse occurring long ago.

Mr. Kaplan called that window, which was extended by a year because of the COVID-19 pandemic, “a reasonable measure for remedying injustice to victims” of child sex abuse. — Reuters

1...6,0876,0886,089...13,373Page 6,088 of 13,373
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube