THE Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed a December 2017 Manila court decision finding a Chinese company and its three local partners guilty of copyright infringement and ordering them to pay P24.7 million in damages to a Philippine publisher.
In an 11-page decision dated April 11, the CA 11th division upheld the decision of Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 24.
“Indeed, the RTC was not in error in its ruling aptly citing prevailing jurisprudence on the matter. There is no doubt or controversy on what the law is, given the statement of facts in the instant case,” the court said.
The Manila court found that Fujian New Technology Color Making and Printing Co. Ltd., M.Y. Intercontinental Trading Corp. (MITC), Tedwin T. Uy, and Allianz Marketing and Publishing Corp. guilty of Copyright Infringement and ordered them to pay damages to St. Mary’s Publishing Corp. (SMPC) and its President Jerry Vicente S. Catabijan.
SMPC and Mr. Catabijan filed the civil case after entering a contract with MITC to print its textbooks but MITC failed to deliver the books. However, it was found that Fujian New Technology authorized MITC to enter into a contract to sell the books, and the textbooks were then imported by MITC and Allianz, and sold through Allianz.
The RTC in its decision directed MITC, Mr. Uy, Fujian New Technology, and Allianz to “desist from printing and distributing the textbooks and were ordered to pay damages of P18.06 million, moral damages of P1 million, exemplary damages of P2 million, attorney’s fees of P500,000 and court costs of.
MITC, Mr. Uy, and Allianz appealed the court’s decision to the CA.
The CA also affirmed the finding of the RTC that the Deed of Assignment, from which the petitioner derived its authority to sell the books, “indicated flaws in its notarization” and it had “not been properly executed.”
The decision was written by Associate Justice Ricardo R. Rosario and concurred in by Associate Justice Nina G. Antonio-Valenzuela and Perpetua T. Atal-Paño.
In a statement, Oscar M. Manahan, lawyer for SMPC, said he believes that the CA’s affirmation of the decision “is consistent with the Philippine commitment to recognize and to enforce Copyright Laws in the Philippines being a party to Berne Convention.” — Vann Marlo M. Villegas
THE House committee on Metro Manila Development questioned the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA)’s spending on garbage collection in 2018, raising the possibility that the MMDA overpaid or is not going about it efficiently.
Reynaldo Estipona, acting director of MMDA’s Solid Waste Management Office, said that the agency spent over P1.77 billion on solid waste collection last year.
The committee’s chairman, Rep. Winston Castelo, said: “Hindi kaya nagkakakroon ng overpayment? (Is it possible the MMDA overpaid?) Because that money is more than sufficient to (collect) that volume of trash.”
Mr. Castelo did not provide an estimate for what he thought is a proper level of spending for garbage. Mr. Estipona said that MMDA collected 56,032.37 cubic meters of trash per day in Metro Manila last year.
Non-government organization Mother Earth Foundation proposed during the hearing that waste collection management be done at the barangay level, which it claims has the effect of reducing garbage levels as well as costs.
“It should be decentralized. In our model, we do it per barangay. (It results in) lower waste generation, there are fewer people involved, the implementation is faster and efficient,” said Sonia Zamora, chairperson of Mother Earth Foundation.
She noted that the City of San Fernando, Pampanga has been bringing down its garbage collection costs using this approach.
“In our model, San Fernando City, where it has been ongoing for six years… only 19% of trash goes to the landfill,” she said. — Vince Angelo C. Ferreras
The way the Philippine Party List System has worked, since it was created by the 1987 Constitution to assure “proportional representation” in the House of Representatives and the Party List Act ( Republic Act 7941) was passed in 1994, has provoked even the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to consider asking Congress to amend the law. But it is unlikely that that body will do so — at least not towards making it truly serve the voiceless and marginalized sectors of Philippine society.
Article VI of the Constitution specifies that half the 58 party list seats in the House of Representatives “shall be filled by the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.”
The obvious intention is to assure the representation, even if only to a limited extent, of those sectors of the population that have historically been denied a voice in the so-called House of Representatives. The Constitution implicitly acknowledges that their concerns have not been addressed by a legislature whose membership has over the years mostly consisted of landlords, provincial despots, political dynasties and/or their surrogates, agents and allies.
But that reason-for-being of the Party List System was completely missing in R.A. 7941. As a result, the Supreme Court made it possible through a series of decisions for the already over-represented political parties as well as those who claim to represent such sectors as tricycle drivers and security guards but who are neither to seek party list seats.
As indifferent to the voicelessness and underrepresentation of vast sectors of the Philippine population as any warlord coven, the Supreme Court based its decisions on nothing more than the letter of the law rather than its spirit.
The consequences are glaringly evident in the results of the May 13 party list elections. Billionaires are among the nominees of certain victorious party list groups as well as government officials and oligarchs from various dynasties. The case of a former National Youth Commission chair is specially demonstrative of how the system has been debased. The Comelec not only allowed his campaigning for his party list group while he was still in government and had access to its resources, but may even approve his representing it in the House despite his being overaged.
The Comelec did take note of how a system meant to represent the marginalized, in the hands of the most corrupt and most self-aggrandizing political elite in Southeast Asia and its minions, has morphed into just another means for the dynasties to keep their monopoly over lawmaking in this country. That dominance has over the decades made reforms practically impossible through legislative means, and made rebellion and the rise of armed social movements inevitable. But like the passage of an anti-dynasty law, any amendment to R.A. 7941 that would help make representation in the House at least partly proportional through the Party List System is doomed to failure, that option not being in the interest of the ruling majority in government.
What could prosper, however, are amendments to make the System even more pliable to the manipulation of the creatures who claim to be this country’s leaders. The primary reason for that travesty would be the failure of the present regime to prevent the election of the party list groups that truly represent marginalized sectors.
Despite police and military harassment, threats, intimidation and even the murder by supposedly unknown assailants of some of their leaders, these groups have nevertheless again won seats in the House. Even the fact that their number has been reduced, though not significantly, is unacceptable to the present regime, on the argument that they’re no more than “fronts,” allies and supporters of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP).
Any similarity between the programs of such groups as Bayan Muna, Gabriela, Act Teachers, Kabataan Party List, etc. and the CPP’s doesn’t prove that allegation. But their detractors used the anti-communist bogey to campaign against them — and only partly succeeded. Whatever their political and ideological convictions, the fundamental issue, however, is whether the presence in Congress of these party lists has been and is of any value at all to the imperative of giving the marginalized a voice so they can be part of the public discourse on what can be done to address the country’s legions of problems.
That of course is the point of the Party List System. It was part of the attempt by the more enlightened drafters of the 1987 Constitution to make government responsive to the plight of the poor, underprivileged and powerless, ignoring which had fed and continues to feed social unrest and even rebellion.
The sense of history implicit in that assumption is totally absent in the Duterte regime and its equally benighted police and military accomplices, for whom mindless violence is the only solution to any problem. Far more sophisticated in its approach to the ruling elite’s determination to end the armed rebellions that have haunted much of Philippine history, the 1992-1998 presidency of Fidel V. Ramos supported and supplemented the Party List System’s potential to make government open to reforms. It also revived peace negotiations with both the CPP and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF). Its congressional allies repealed the Anti-Subversion Law (RA 1700) in 1992, in effect legalizing the CPP and similar organizations.
The idea was to enable reformists and even revolutionaries to have the legal opportunity to work for their programs, and even get elected to public office. It would then send to the dispossessed and discontented the message that they need not take up arms because the political system works well enough to welcome the demand for reforms and even radical change. Among the indicators of how effective this approach could be was the successful forging of a peace agreement between the Philippine government and Nur Misuari’s MNLF during the Ramos administration.
The assumption is that only the certifiably insane — and those militarists who benefit from it — prefer war over peace. Unfortunately for the ruling system, that basically sound approach met only limited success. It is failing, among other reasons because dynastic dominance over the political system has made running for public office an exclusive billionaire and warlord game, and because of police and military allegiance to their local and foreign patrons and the unjust order that has so enriched and empowered them.
Together with the rapid and irreversible perversion of the already limited Party List System, the exclusion of the poor, powerless and voiceless from participation in their own governance partly explains why rebellions and so-called “insurgencies” have been, and will always be, part of the Philippine landscape for decades. It is a blueprint for social unrest driven and protected by the very same ruling elite that’s focused on preserving itself and the political, economic and social systems that have served it so well.
But if history is any guide to human affairs, the very same blueprint could also help end the oligarchy’s decades-long monopoly over the political power it has so steadfastly denied the marginalized millions of this alleged democracy. More than the supposed “fronts” of the CPP, the message it is sending the poor and powerless is that the system doesn’t work, and reforms cannot be achieved through parliamentary means.
Luis V. Teodoro is on Facebook and Twitter (@luisteodoro).
Jeju, S. Korea — The two largest economies in the world, the US and China, have GDP sizes in 2018 of $20.5 T and $13.4 T, respectively. Third to fifth largest are Japan with $5 T, Germany with $4 T, and UK with $2.8 T.
In terms of per capita income and by extension individual productivity, the US is far way ahead of China, a multiple of more than 6x. The Philippines, while having the 13th largest population in the world, is a midget, both in GDP size and per capita income (see table 1).
Among the major sources of disagreement between these two giant economies is merchandise trade. Data from the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) World Trade Statistical Review (WTSR) show that China is the world’s biggest exporter and the US trade deficit is indeed large, $863 billion in 2017 or average of $2.4 billion a day (see table 2).
People often talk about “protectionist Trump/US” and they imply that China, EU, etc. are non-protectionists and free traders. They may be jokers.
Here at the Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity 2019 Conference, May 29-31, the first plenary discussion on Day 2 is on the subject, “Destined for War? The Future of US-China Relations and its Implications for the Korean Peninsula.” The three speakers were Prof. Graham Allison of Harvard University, Li Zhaoixing, former Foreign Minister of China, and Prof. Martin Jaques of Cambridge University. Moderator was Prof. Moon Chung-In of Yonsei University and Special Advisor to the ROK President for Unification and National Security Affair. Congratulatory remarks before the discussion started were given by Wang Guoqing, former Vice-Minister of the State Council Information Office, China.
Wang talked about the importance of Asia, did not lambast the US. Li talked about peace, repeatedly. Allison talked about a possible “2nd Korean war” that would also involve the US and China, the “Thucydides trap” where a rising power can wage a war to topple the established power, and indirectly attacked Trump. Jacques talked about a “new cold war” where before, the US was a rising power, now a declining power as China is now the world’s biggest economy, a technological superpower, and in this trade war, the US will suffer.
My impression is that the two Chinese ex-government officials were hoping for more peace while the two American academics and consultants were entertaining a new war. In case there will be a shooting war someday between the US and China, it could be partly due to alarmist but influential US academics, US media, and US politicians that tend to exaggerate things.
Meanwhile the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom (FNF) held its panel discussion in Day 2 here on “Smart Cities and Startups — Opportunities for Business Innovation.” Speakers were Christian Taaks of FNF Korea Office, Marc Bovenschulte of the Institute for Innovation and Technology in Germany, and Prof. Whang Ji Eun of the University of Seoul in Korea. Moderator was Waltraut Ritter of Knowledge Dialogues in Hong Kong, and Rapporteur was Pimrapaat Dusadeeisariyakul of FNF Thailand. I will write about the discussion and related subjects in my next column.
Peace and prosperity. More trade, investments and tourism among countries and not more bombs and missiles. More smart and innovative cities and countries, not war-freak ones. Tomorrow should be better than today. We should hope and work for this future.
Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the president of Minimal Government Thinkers.
Perhaps Naomi Wolf, the liberal progressive feminist writer, symbolizes it best.
The Vagina author thought she discovered something legions of Victorian historians missed: evidence of 19th century prudish cruelty against homosexuals.
Seeing the term “death recorded,” Ms. Wolf took that as proof that the British government executed those committing sodomy. She promptly weaved an entire book on that: “Outrages: Sex, Censorship, and the Criminalization of Love.”
Only thing is: she was wrong.
Tragically, laughably, horribly wrong.
A cursory glance at Wiki shows that death recorded “meant that the judge was abstaining from voicing a sentence of capital punishment in cases where the judge foresaw that a royal pardon would be forthcoming if a proper death sentence were to be issued. It was, in other words, a death sentence in name only, with no actual effect in law.”
What made it worse was that Wolf tried to pass off as academic source an article written by an AD Harvey, later on revealed as having the reputation of being a hoaxer.
Making her book based entirely on a wrong or false premise.
Unfortunately for everyone, wrong or false premises are what makes the same sex “marriage” and SOGI advocacy.
At this point, a caveat: this column of course believes in the dignity and respect for every human being.
But the SOGI fight, for example, is a fight for rights the LGBT already has.
Every reasonable thing they say they want in the SOGI is in the Bill of Rights (and the Civil Code and the Revised Penal Code).
As for marriage, nothing is stopping gay couples from celebrating their relationship publicly and to live openly. There are legal instruments available to protect property and testamentary arrangements.
So what is being truly asked, therefore, are something else: privileged “rights” and government recognition for same sex “marriage.”
Because if you’re asking for rights over and above that available to everyone, then you’re asking for a “privilege.” Which begs the question, why?
For same sex “marriage,” considering that the Bill of Rights, actually our entire civil liberties legislation and jurisprudence, are designed to restrain government interference, the LGBT lobby strangely is asking the reverse: control us.
Because control is what government recognition effects. Which again begs the question: why?
For SOGI rights, the why leads to an impossibility. Because there are no reasons. Homosexuals have every constitutional right as heterosexuals.
Participants hold a giant rainbow flag during a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Pride Parade in Hong Kong on Nov. 8, 2014 — REUTERS
And why only them? They constitute 2% (5% at most) of the population. Indigenous peoples are 10-20%, yet they live under the same constitutional rights framework as everyone else.
Also, who is homosexual? Set aside gaslighting pseudo-medical articles declaring everyone is actually gay (which if true actually demonstrates why everyone should indeed be under the same legal framework), there is the absence of any medical, psychological, physical categorical evidence to conclusively prove a person is homosexual or transgender (or whatever permutation that liberal progressives can invent).
No gay gene, no gay blood, offerable in court.
Only subjective personal testimony for one to claim discrimination under a SOGI law or for another to prove that no discrimination was intended.
Just imagine the chaos that will ensue: rights imposed and penalties borne all out of a passing feeling or fleeting desire at a particular time.
For gay “marriage,” why should the government recognize it? Sex and children are not what marriage is for, so the gay lobby tells us, but love. Why should the government use up resources and tax money to regulate “love”?
And why not the love barkadas have for each other? Or teen heterosexuals when they start dating? Or parents and their children, or foursomes or twentysomes, or owners to their pets? Why can’t they get married as well and have the government recognize it?
But what do you care? Gay marriages or civil partnerships won’t affect you. Also, heterosexual couples cheat and priests molest, so how’s that for marriage?
The latter is an ad hominem, which does not detract from marriage’s rightness.
The former we know is not true, that even private acts have public consequences.
Look at the boy gamers and Japan’s declining marriage (and child) rate.
Or China’s one child policy and their present scarcity of women.
When President Duterte joked about rape, many were correctly appalled. Because we know that even words have social consequences.
But what the LGBT lobby is asking for go beyond mere words. They’re demanding Philippine society be reengineered.
There are millennia of facts and reason demonstrating why marriage can only be between a man and a woman in comprehensive union ordered towards procreation and family life.
The problem is if Filipinos decide to ignore all that and instead indulge in the fallacy of wishful thinking: yes we know facts but we’d rather believe this.
Hopefully, we choose good sense and the common good.
Otherwise, one can only say: hell is not only paved with good intentions, it is polished, furnished, and heated with it.
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.
Goldfish and tropical fish are like humans in the limelight. Life in an aquarium or a glass house is a constantly moving spectacle.
Exhibitionists love an audience.
To simplify, let’s observe the intricate swirling patterns of fish. Their movements are choreographed to show off to maximum advantage the shimmering scales, luminous colors and translucent tails. Their vain counterparts strut and flaunt their flashy finery to impress the viewer.
Life is a stage.
And we are all players and actors who move according to a script and choreographed by a director. Occasionally, some are out of synch and out of tune.
Politicians and showbiz celebrities share the traits of the goldfish in the sense that they are always on view. They work and live in glass encasements under the glare of public scrutiny. Their actions (usually negative) are exposed, recorded, magnified (exaggerated), reported in great detail for public consumption.
It comes with the turf, they say.
Sudden fame can be a heady, blinding experience. From obscurity, an individual is thrust into the spotlight. From a slow lane to the fast track, he has to keep a steady accelerating pace. Or stumble and drop out.
Fame is a two-edged sword. The price is high. The loss of privacy and relative anonymity.
Favor seekers queue at one’s doorstep. At social functions and restaurants, sycophants gush and fawn.
In the rarefied air of the stratosphere the newly minted personality suffers spatial disorientation. He loses his perspective and sense of equanimity. He begins to believe the hype about himself. Soon, he starts to demand royal treatment.
He aspires to live the lifestyle of the rich, powerful and famous. To the point of wanting it to last forever.
The audience does not distinguish between the private individual from the public persona. As far as society, the constituents and fans are concerned, the big shot is public property.
Gone is the protective shield of one’s family and personal affairs. He becomes easy target for envy and intrigue. He is fair game for media, opportunistic predators and social climbing acquaintances. His life becomes an open book with added embellished features.
There are few perks for fame (or notoriety). One’s face (usually with unflattering angles) appears in the newspapers or on television and social media. One’s voice becomes familiar on the airwaves. Stories (fact and fiction) are printed and circulated in the internet and lost in cyberspace. Vicious rumors are packaged for titillation.
A sensitive soul catapulted into an open arena recoils from the heat and seeks refuge in a protective cocoon. In contrast, the tough, pragmatic individual takes everything (good and bad) with a grain of salt. He seeks attention, enjoys controversy and basks in the spotlight and publicity.
The supreme egoist echoes the line of a famous actor, “I don’t care what they say about me. Just spell my name right.”
Fame is fleeting and glory is transient.
Time has a way of exposing pretenders. Under high pressure, the bubble will burst for pseudo-luminaries and their illusions of grandeur.
In a glass showcase, it is not difficult to spot the difference between gold and brass. The genuine will always outshine the fake.
In the survival scale, talented individuals with substance will be recognized. Despite the hazards, the intelligent, persevering and determined hard worker would still prevail. Long-term, consistent exposure enhances experience for enduring quality performance.
A career in showbiz or politics is a high-profile, high-energy high-risk 24-hour extravaganza on an all-weather stadium — recorded for posterity.
Fish have a comparatively easy life vis-à-vis their human counterparts. They produce visual entertainment by making waves, blowing bubbles or jumping rings and tossing balls. In the aquatic realm, the colorful performance halts as soon as the bright lights dim.
In real life, the show ends temporarily only when the performer falls and fades.
Maria Victoria Rufino is an artist, writer and businesswoman. She is president and executive producer of Maverick Productions.
THE PESO recovered against the dollar on Thursday as market players positioned ahead of US gross domestic product (GDP) growth data released last night.
The local unit closed Thursday’s session at P52.19 versus the greenback, 16 centavos stronger than the P52.35-per-dollar finish on Wednesday.
The peso opened the session flat at P52.35 against the greenback. It dipped to as low as P52.37 intraday before climbing to its best showing of P52.155 per dollar.
Trading volume increased a tad to $892.15 million from the $873.2 million that switched hands the previous day.
A trader said the peso strengthened against the US currency yesterday as market participants onshore and offshore sold their dollars.
“We saw heavy dollar selling throughout the day. We saw a lot of banks having the long position for the past few days. Maybe they were just spreading out given there will be US GDP data tonight,” the trader said in a phone interview.
The trader added that the market expects a three percent US GDP growth in the first quarter. If realized, this will be faster than the 2.2% print posted in the fourth quarter.
“The data will most likely predict how will the dollar move, so most players would want to be square or just trim their position to a minimal level,” the trader said.
“They sold their dollars because of the uncertainty of what will come out in the GDP. Three percent is the expectation. Any figure above that will drive the dollar higher, but any figure below that will drive the dollar lower.”
Meanwhile, another trader said the peso strengthened as market participants opted to pocket profits following the continuous depreciation of the local unit earlier this week due to uncertainties brought by trade tensions between China and the United States.
For today, the first trader expects the peso to trade between P52.10 and P52.40, while the other gave a P52.10-P52.30 range.
Meanwhile, most other Asian currencies weakened on Tuesday after US President Donald Trump reinforced Washington’s hard stance in its trade dispute with China, dampening market sentiment.
In the absence of any key drivers from US markets, which were shut on Monday for a holiday, emerging Asian currencies fell back on the underlying theme of Sino-US trade tension that have roiled global financial markets for months. — K.A.N. VidalwithReuters
LOCAL STOCKS continued to climb on Thursday as investors brushed off ongoing developments in the US-China trade war.
The 30-member Philippine Stock Exchange index (PSEi) gained 38.80 points or 0.49% to close at 7,836.55 yesterday. The broader all-shares index was also up by 17.27 points or 0.35% to finish at 4,822.06.
“Our index closed positive today after the banking, services, and industrial sector lifted the PSEi due to strong foreign buying activity. Despite the threat that China might use rare earth exports as weapons against the US, our market defied these news and still closed by 38 points today,” Jervin S. de Celis, equity trader at the Timson Securities, Inc., said on Thursday.
“US-China trade tensions continue to weigh on stocks after Chinese state media reports underlined the country’s scope to use rare-earth minerals, used in the production of an array of devices such as mobile phones, computer memory chips and rechargeable batteries, as an economic weapon,” Luis A. Limlingan, head of sales of Regina Capital Development Corp., said in a mobile phone message.
US companies are years away from challenging Chinese dominance of rare earth minerals due to a lack of domestic processing facilities, ensuring the Asian nation will maintain its near-monopoly on refining and powerful leverage in trade talks.
In an escalation of the trade conflict between the two countries, state media on Wednesday implied China could restrict rare earth sales to the United States, stoking fears about Beijing’s role as a supplier.
The US has excluded Chinese rare earth imports from recent tariff hikes, along with some other critical Chinese minerals. China, however, has raised tariffs on imports of US rare earth metal ores from 10% to 25%, making it less economical to process the material in China.
US stocks fell on Wednesday, as worries that a lengthy US-China trade war would crimp global growth pushed investors into the safety of government bonds.
Back home, sub-sectors were split. Gainers were led by industrials, which went up 154.53 points or 1.36% to 11,438.51. This was followed by financials, which climbed 24.38 points or 1.44% to 1,717.41. Services also gained 9.15 points or 0.55% to 1,661.87.
Meanwhile, the property sub-index shed 8.56 points or 0.2% to 4,229.25; mining and oil went down 8.43 points or 0.11% to 7,132.22; and holding firms dropped 1.23 points or 0.01% to 7.463.72.
Some 694.77 million issues valued at P6.57 billion switched hands on Thursday, slightly lower than the previous session’s P6.11 billion.
Meanwhile, foreigners turned net buyers yesterday after several sessions of outflows, logging a net inflow of P392.50 million versus Wednesday’s net sales worth P304.87 million.
Advancers also beat losers, 97 to 80, while 53 names closed unchanged yesterday. — Vincent Mariel P. GalangwithReuters
By Charmaine A. Tadalan andVincent Mariel P. Galang, Reporters
THE shipment of all 69 waste containers back to Canada has pushed through, with the Canadian government shouldering some P10 million in shipment costs.
“ICTSI waived all costs on land; Canada picked up the tab from fumigation to ship side loading, to tomorrow’s departure-including helping get foreign permits for transshipment so ship’s captain will depart (with stops) all the way to Canada,” Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro L. Locsin said in a social media post, Thursday.
The shipment of the waste containers, which had been in the Philippines for six years, was accomplished with the joint effort of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Embassy of Canada in the Philippines, an the ICTSI.
“After containers cleaned & ready to go ship arrival was delayed a day; Ricky Razon made sure once docked ship loaded. Cimatu up early begged for foreign transshipment permits. Canada Amb. Holmes never slept ‘til it all got done,” Mr. Locsin said.
Secretary Menardo I. Guevarra said in a mobile phone message to reporters, Wednesday, the Canadian government covered an estimated “P10 million” for the shipment of the trash back to Vancouver. Mr. Guevarra is standing as Officer-in-Charge, while President Rodrigo R. Duterte is in a 4-day state visit in Japan.
President Duterte on April 23 threatened to wage war against Canada if the waste containers remained in the country. He had also given a directive that the containers must be shipped out by May 15, which the Canadian government failed to meet.
This prompted the Department of Foreign Affairs to recall its diplomats in Canada and later the Office of the President to issue a memorandum directing government officials to prevent holding official trips to Canada.
Senator Loren B. Legarda, for her part as chair of the committee on foreign relations, commended President Duterte’s “political will.”
“I’m glad that years later this is happening now. It’s the strong political will of the President, just like Boracay, is an example of strong political will,” the Senator said in a briefing, Thursday.
She said she hopes the Philippines’ relations with the Canadian government would eventually normalize, in consideration also of the Filipino migrants there.
“I hope so because Canada is home to many Filipino migrants, we also have an economic diplomacy with Canada, I hope the ties and relations will normalize. After the trash issue is settled I’m sure there will be talks, I leave it to DFA Locsin to do that.”
BASEL BAN
Environmental groups, for their part, urged the Philippine government to ban all waste imports in the country and to endorse the Basel Ban Amendment.
“Local NGO (non-government organizations) groups, including Ecowaste Coalition, Greenpeace Philippines, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, BAN Toxics, and the global Break Free from Plastic movement, reiterated the call for the Philippine government to ratify the Basel Ban Amendment, which prohibits the import of all waste for any reason, including ‘recycling,’” Greenpeace said in a statement on Thursday.
The amendment contains the regulation of transfer of hazardous wastes from one country to another, and prohibits developed countries from exporting hazardous wastes to developing ones.
“The groups are also calling on the Philippine government to ban all waste shipments from entering the Philippines, and to stand up for Philippine sovereignty by telling developed countries that the Philippines is not a garbage dump,” the statement read in part.
“While the return of Canada’s waste is a positive development, only a little more than half (69 containers) of the original waste is being shipped back; 26 containers were already landfilled in the Philippines at the time when Canada disowned responsibility for the shipment; the other eight containers were also disposed of locally,” it said.
Other shipments to the Philippines containing garbage are from South Korea (October 2018), part of which were returned in January this year, while the remaining 5,176.9 metric tons (MT) are still in Misamis, Oriental.
In May, waste from Australia and HongKong were discovered at the Mindanao Container Terminal.
These waste importations to Southeast Asian countries started after China stopped accepting such shipments in January last year. A Greenpeace report noted that majority of mixed recyclable plastics that were meant to be shipped to China had been redirected to countries with weak environmental regulations.
PRESIDENT Rodrigo R. Duterte has approved the sale of the jewelry collection seized from former first lady and now Ilocos Norte-2nd district Rep. Imelda R. Marcos.
Presidential Spokesperson Salvador S. Panelo said in a media interview in Tokyo on Thursday, “Sabi ni Presidente kagabi, gusto niya na makinabang ang mga taong-bayan du’n sa mga jewelr(y). So tinanong ko siya, are you going to give your go signal to sell? Yes. Basta ang kailangan makarating sa taong-bayan ‘yung sale, ‘yung proceeds (The President said last night that he wants the people to benefit from the (sale of the) jewelr[y]. So I asked him, are you going to give your go signal to sell? Yes. For as long as the proceeds will go to the people).”
Asked when the President will issue an order on the sale of the jewelry, Mr. Panelo said: “Depende na sa kanya (it is up to him). Basta (It’s enough that) he agrees with it.”
Accompanied by at least 16 Cabinet officials, Mr. Duterte is in Japan until May 31 partly for the Nikkei 25th International Conference on the Future of Asia.
Sought for comment, Executive Secretary Salvador C. Medialdea told BusinessWorld in a phone message: “The Office of the President sees no legal impediment to the disposition of the Marcos Jewelry Collections, this being within the prerogative of the PCGG (Presidential Commission on Good Government).”
He added: “Nonetheless, considering the value and circumstances surrounding the subject items, this Office understands and appreciates why PCGG sought the President’s guidance on the matter, and for this reason we have elevated the matter to the President himself. We shall update the public on the President’s decision once he issues it.”— Arjay L. Balinbin, with reports byAlexis B. Romeroof thePhilippine Star
CONTINUED public speculations regarding the health of President Rodrigo R. Duterte, triggered by Malacañang’s handling of this matter, is an important “lesson” for the next administration, analysts sought for comment said.
At least three analysts were asked what potential lessons could be considered by the next administration from how Mr. Duterte and his men are handling rumors regarding his health, which have been recurring since the 2016 presidential campaign.
In an emailed reply to questions on Tuesday, lawyer and Ateneo Policy Center research fellow Michael Henry Ll. Yusingco said that his advice would be “to be honest and practical.”
“Do not pretend [that] people cannot see what is really happening to the President. The public knows the real score and it does not help to lie to them. Filipinos will understand that the President can rest and recover if he is sick. They will be especially be forgiving to a very popular one,” Mr. Yusingco said.
For her part, University of the Philippines (UP) political science professor Maria Ela L. Atienza said in an email on Monday: “I think it is important to be honest with the people about the health condition…of the President. At least, people will not speculate when they know what is the actual situation.”
Also sought for comment, UP Political Science assistant professor Perlita M. Frago-Marasigan said via chat on Monday that the Palace’s “strategy has always been to evade the issue or to spin a story.”
“Since the position is an office that emanates from trust, it should start from there,” she added.
Another lesson, according to Mr. Yusingco, is to “obey the constitutional prescription strictly.”
“Do not circumvent this by equivocating on what ‘serious illness’ really means. Be loyal to the principle behind the provision which is the right of the people to know the health of their President,” he said, referring to Article VII, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution which states: “In case of serious illness of the President, the public shall be informed of the state of his health.”
“Being open and honest about this matter will bring the people to your side. The sympathy of the Filipino public cannot be underestimated,” he added.
Mr. Duterte was visibly not well and skipped some of the traditional ceremonies during the commencement exercises of the Philippine Military Academy last Sunday, but his spokesperson Salvador S. Panelo dismissed this saying the President simply “lacked sleep.”
In his speech at the Palace on Monday, Mr. Duterte said that he has “all” sorts of illnesses, including “in the colon.”
Ms. Atienza said, “It seems [that] the people around the President do not want to give details [regarding his health] because there appears to be a feeling of insecurity among [them] of what will happen should people know that he is sick.”
“While he is still enjoying high popularity and trust rating, some allies might withdraw support if they feel that the President is ill and will not be able to perform his duties. The President’s people may also be wary of giving the Vice President, who constitutionally can be delegated powers and should be ready to assume responsibilities if the President is unable to perform his duties, as she is not considered an ally,” she added.
For her part, Ms. Frago-Marasigan said: “The best way to handle this situation is just to be transparent about it. Presidents owe that to the people.”
THE Supreme Court (SC) has granted a writ for amparo and habeas data in favor of human rights groups for their protection against alleged attacks and red-tagging by the government.
In a seven-page resolution, the SC directed the Court of Appeals to hear the petition of Karapatan Alliance Philippines, Inc., Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, Inc. and General Assembly of Women for Reforms, Integrity, Equality, Leadership and Action (Gabriela), Inc. on June 18, as well as issue writs of amparo and habeas data and resolve the petition’s merits within 10 days after it was submitted for resolution.
The SC also required the respondents to file their comment on or before June 13, 2019.
The respondents of the case include President Rodrigo R. Duterte, Defense Secretary Delfin N. Lorenzana, National Security Adviser Ret. Gen. Hermogenes C. Esperon, Jr., and Armed Forces of the Philippines Chief-of-Staff Gen. Benjamin R. Madrigal, Jr., and other government officials.
The groups filed their petition for writ of amparo and habeas data on May 6 following their allegations of threats, harassment, and “red-tagging” by government forces.
The writ of amparo is a remedy available to anyone whose right to life, liberty, and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission by a public official or employee.
Human rights groups also sought the issuance of habeas data which would order the government to destroy all information gathered against them.
In their petition, they claimed that red-tagging and terrorist labelling” of their organizations have worsened and become “more systematic” with the issuance of Executive Order No. 70 in December 2018 which formed the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF). — Vann Marlo M. Villegas
