It's Payday, I Have Been Robbed Again!

It’s payday. All has got plans: Shop, dine, movies, club, chug-a-lug, or whatever suits one for relaxation.  For others, it’s the bills, the tuition, the car or housing loan amortization, the medical needs of the sick and the elderly at home.

Then you innocently peek at your payslip and are drawn to an item that destroys the joy over your gross pay: taxes.  And all hell breaks loose once again. Instantly, you are thrown back to a state of fury. All of a sudden, Napoles and the thieves in Congress and the Executive crowd your agitated mind.

You’re mad as hell that you can hardly keep up with your bills, you make do with basic needs to make sure you are able to buy medicine for yourself and loved ones, you public-commute because you can’t take out a loan on that car you had in mind, NOT BECAUSE YOU CAN’T, but because the rogue and the dishonorable bloodsuckers had to fleece you of their loot first before you’re allowed to live out on your hard-earned money, or what’s left of it. Every freakin’ time, every freakin’ payday!

I am infuriated! We should harbor no qualms in showing our indignation! It is more than justified!

I wrote the other day that we need not scream for blood. I change my mind. The gloves are off now. These thieves must be sent to the gallows, or fed to their own kind, the crocodiles.

How dare they splurge on obscene luxury out of our taxes while we’re forced to scrimp on our needs after breaking our backs working to build those taxes?

We obliged in paying our share to fund this government, this society, this country. The government should make sure that our sacrifices are not for naught.

But they failed us. For the nth time!

Let us keep the spirit of Million People March alive and burning! Let us make it a movement to see through the judgment on all these corruptions that have been heaped and perpetrated upon us.

These have to end, and we should start getting back what is rightly ours out of what we contribute.

Trouble in the Middle

I am calling particularly on the Middle Class. We have long suffered from the neglect of the government.

While the rich, who are mostly in business, are taxed less as they have deductible expenses facility under our system that they use to mitigate taxes (other rich people downright play under the table with corrupt Revenue officials –paying only as less as a third to a half of their tax due); and

the poor, so-called, (many have used this politically correct nonsense as a scheme [heard of professional squatters?] to feed on their ulterior motives and advance their inordinate interest, fact is many of “ poor” are much better off than most of the middle class) pay no taxes, gets Pantawid Pamilya blah blah, gets free relocation houses and cash just to agree to be relocated, and all sorts of subsidies that I and many don’t agree to as they, in fact, far from helping them which is the effect sought, push them only to be reliant and dependent on the government instead of being self-determining productive individuals. It promotes a culture of beggary and mendicancy.

And we’re not even a socialist country. But that’s a topic for another post altogether.

We, the middle class laborers, (apt no matter what naysayers say), have no power to mitigate our taxes: they are withheld against a flawed deduction (uniform) system: how can a married individual with five children spend the same amount on necessities as a single individual (strangely both are allowed a fixed amount of personal deduction of 50k)? But again, it’s another topic for another post.

We’re not picking a fight with our less able brothers and sisters who struggle to better their circumstances. As I mentioned in the previous post, we are happy if tax money were used to better their chances at success.

I will make this point, nonetheless, we subsidize the rich and the poor, and in the process egregiously dilute our earnings. A tax well-managed would have been a fulfilling consolation, but hell it is stolen!

To allow the hooligans in government to plunder the tax money we toil building is too much to bear. It robs me of self-worth. It destroys my self-respect. And that I will not degenerate into allowing this.

Let us flex our middle class muscle and demand they wise up or face unthinkable punishment.

Related posts:

Incorrigibly Corrupt!

Million People March

Lawmakers' Call to Abolish Pork Barrel, a Red Herring

Lawmakers, Preporkcupied

Napoles Surrenders to Pnoy

Sensing that her world had quickly shrunk with Ten Million Pesos (P10M) bounty on her head, Napoles decides it’s game over for hiding, and time to face the music. That was the smartest thing she had done since the pork barrel scandal broke out. In fact, she might have just given up right in the nick of time.

I surmise that when Pnoy put a price tag of P10M on her head, her Subjects in her red book, would have run their own “Get Napoles to Me” campaign for P15M or more. An hour late in her decision would have spelled the difference.

Now, the public is happy she is in custody, safe, at least for now. Why? She has her back against the wall. Her only chance at life is to bare it all. If she sticks to her “I did nothing wrong” tune she will be left by herself in a cell where she could be penetrated and assassinated. If she is made, and if she agrees to be, a state witness, she will be placed under the Witness Protection Program, and her chance of surviving this will become fairer.

Already speculations of all sorts as to what happens to her have flooded the internet. She’ll finally spill the beans on this elaborate 10-year scam; Administration will strike a deal with her to spare the administration porky personalities in exchange for leniency on her; She will be made State witness in exchange for immunity from prosecution?

The administration should deal with this carefully. It could find itself walking on thin ice, if it hasn’t already. The public will not be as forgiving as to allow Napoles immunity from prosecution in exchange for her testimony. After all, the government is not facing a blank wall in its investigation. There are Benhur Luy and company; ten of them now who corroborate one another on many points of their individual testimony to Napoles’ scheme of siphoning pork barrel funds in collusion with Lawmakers.

First, she must be stripped, wringed, and dispossessed of all properties she stole from public coffers. All of it. She should be brought to justice and accorded due process like other accused. If she offers testimony, take it without offering anything in exchange. She only has her soul to save for so doing. That should be enough motivation for her.

If she’s offered any leniency by the State, believe me every outcome will be seen as impartial: opposition lawmakers will lace her testimony and a few if any from the administration counterparts. Then we’re robbed of the truth again.

I say let justice take its course. Let her hire her defense. With all the money she stole, I am sure she could get more than what she needs.

Lawmakers, Preporkcupied

Custom Raises Ghost

When you’re used to getting 70M pesos to 200M pesos –no sweat– a year, you have so internalized the routine that you breathe life into what otherwise was nothing more than an imagined entitlement. You so feel its life form you have convinced yourself it existed.

I am talking about lawmakers’ unwitting talking points betraying their rueful sentiment against Pork Barrel’s imminent demise. They just reek of a heap of regret over the fund’s saying sayonara to them. Haven’t you noticed? Even the lawyers among them keep on harping on their alleged constitutional mandate to directly participate in pinpointing projects and funneling funds therefor. One even boorishly equates the prospect of them being prevented access to the funds with being worthy of abolishing Congress. He was seeing red, why?

Yet a reading and countless re-reading of our 1987 Constitution would reveal no such provision charging them of the duty to identify projects, much less have a hand in directing funds therefor. Their mandate is to enact laws, to legislate, that’s why they are called legislators (who can’t even come up with responsive laws). I know legislation covers deliberating on the national budget under the General Appropriations Act, but their role is to determine the wisdom of the proposed budgetary allocations for certain departments of government, whether those justify their programmed undertakings. They seem to have re-written the constitution in their minds to accommodate the pork.

Others are insinuating, perhaps in hopes of harassing Pnoy to make a turnaround on his pronouncement of abolishing the pork, that Pnoy risks impeachment because he had cut off lawmakers’ access to funds. What? I don’t see how righting a wrong or plugging a loophole that led to abuse could be impeachable.

What is wrong with our lawmakers? What's with continued preporkcupation? Couldn’t they understand that it’s over, kaput for the pork barrel? Give it up and go back to what you have been elected to do.  

 

Lawmakers' Calls to Abolish Pork Barrel: a Red Herring.

You listen to Lawmakers voice their consensus to the abolition of the reviled Pork Barrel, and you hear almost a teeny little voice that wished it did not have to come out. It’s hokey! I say deep inside, here’s what they say “Fuck whoever that idiot who blew this up!”

The truth is they’re losing hair and sanity over this debacle they don’t know who to freakin’ lay blame on. If Napoles is to blame for real, or if they decide that Napoles’ carelessness led to all these, I won’t be surprised if she and her brother will never be found. We’re talking of hundreds of fuming powers-that-be, thrown into this deep hole they find very difficult to climb out of and are forced to face humiliating public investigation over the scandal which could permanently destroy their political future, who might be interested in silencing the two for good.

Now the two must be confused over who they’re supposed to run away from: The NBI or the erstwhile friends who now are being scalded in hot water, and raring to end them?

Million People March

I am Reggie, I am a lawyer and an ordinary worker. I work long and crazy hours every day, including Sundays, to provide for my family. Believe me, the most that I can say I have achieved is bring food to the table. I know many are in direr circumstances than I am, and I feel strongly for them. But whether one makes one hundred or one hundred thousand, we all aspire to one goal: A fair chance at success in life. I could have brought more to the family: a bit more comfort, better school for my children, more vacations, if only I did not have to give up some 30% of what I toil and sweat for, lose sleep over, and get sick doing, in taxes to pay the price for the so-called civilized society.

I say private citizens who sacrifice so much in taxes would be happy if they knew that the money is used to better the circumstances of the weaker brethren among us, those who did not have the privilege of sufficient education regardless of underlying circumstances: all those against whom the playing field is grossly tilted, if only we could say we are bringing the playing field to level down one step at a time so that it is in their children’s time.

Sadly, the truth is far uglier. While ordinary taxpayers forgo a good part of their needs and some more for taxes, the leaders who call themselves servants spend taxpayers’ money obscenely.

While we struggle to bring food to the table, they dine in fancy restaurants. While we settle for divisoria garments, they lavish themselves with signature clothing. While we hardly keep up with rent, they are ensconced in million-dollar flats here and abroad.

We have been fooled, we have been blindsided, we have been hoodwinked, but no more.

No more to government shenanigans!

I have lost faith in the government and the incorrigibly corrupt people who run it. I have decided to take upon myself the task of determining my own fate, and I exhort you to do the same. It starts with retaking my country back from the thieves who mask themselves as servants.

Today we take to the streets to demand accountability, destroy the evils of corruption, and restore humanity.

I am Reggie, and I am ready!

 

Incorrigibly Corrupt!

How many times has corruption been brought to the spotlight? Countless. How many times has it died a slow and natural death? Every time!

Crooks have learned how to overshadow events of corruption with other public-sensitive events like heinous crimes: massacres, bombing and other acts of terrorism, murders, etc. Once staged, public outrage is diverted. They have mastered this diversionary tactic.

Already, news of diversionary plans mentioned above, have leaked, and the public must meet them with caution. Take heed! Better be safe than sorry. Truly, personalities who are involved in the Pork Barrel scandal have their backs against the wall. Desperate moments call for desperate measures!

On the other side of the coin is public unrest, which finds the Philippines, once again, standing on a powder keg that could explode anytime. Which one eventually materializes or comes first, remains to be seen. Neither would be a palatable event for the country, but one may be necessary, regardless of danger.

Unprecedented by magnitude!

There’s no doubt in my mind that the current corruption scandal concerning Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), more popularly and derisively called Pork Barrel, is the biggest so far in terms of both amount and number of politicians (lawmakers mostly) and executive officials involved. By any standard, this is unprecedented. Remember we are talking not only about the Napoles scam (PDAF allegedly funnelled to Janet Lim-Napoles’ bogus NGOs), but PDAF misuse during the time of GMA, which doubled the amount at over 23B or so.

Why did I always suspect that after all the stones had been turned we’ll find Arroyo’s hands? Now, as we turn each page of what is becoming the most debased and defiled chapter of post-martial rule Philippine politics, we continue to see more and more of political names who until exposed had kept mum, pensive, and even deploring of the issue. Names we thought hardly would be involved.

If God intervenes and purge our politics of moral misfits, He would also have to call snap elections on all posts.

Lame Revolutions, Lame Results

We have had a few EDSA Revolutions (so-called), but none seemed to have left lasting effects. Every administration that followed showed off, and eventually snapped back to its disgraceful norm. All these People Power events, touted around the world as Filipino’s unique version of revolt, had one thing in common: they were peaceful and bloodless. They brought the same result: FAILURE.

Anything of the same kind, or its derivative is doomed for failure. Ever wonder why Egypt after ousting Mubarak in an EDSA-inspired Arab Spring to this time continues to wage, with dying vigor, their Arab (weakening) Spring revolution after Mohamed Morsi, who was installed through what was heralded as first Democratic elections in decades, was dismissed and sent packing by the Military responding to public clamor for his ouster on accusations of installing laws that are pro-Muslim (he is a Muslim for Christ’s sakes)?

Revolution, in its political concept, which means the overthrow or renunciation of one government or ruler and the substitution of another by the governed (Merriam-Webster.com), to leave a mark in the Subjects’ (actual and potential) minds must be resolute and uncompromising in its purpose: to NOT only supplant a new government, but more importantly, to bring to justice those who are responsible, those who have blood on their hands, those who have brought pain and suffering upon the people.

That is to ensure that future Subjects would not venture into the same sins that called forth the revolution, lest they meet the same fate

Anything less is just an escape. It is just like complaining about a problem without offering real solutions.

Another Revolution?

Given the magnitude of the scandal, the Filipino is being called upon again to take to the streets, not by some partisan maneuvers, but spontaneously by their own indignation, anger, outrage, and betrayed passion.

Will history repeat itself? It may, but when it does I hope it adds the missing ingredients that failed the ones that came before it: The Filipino should not be lame revolutionists, let us be resolute. Let the axe fall where it may!

Robbed Before Hit by Typhoon Maring

In the wake of typhoon Maring, thousands of farmers (and family), devastated, with their projected harvest wiped out, go hungry as I write, and look to a bleaker future. But before that, they have already been robbed of some Php40,000.00 that could have gone to each farmer’s farmland and ushered in bounty harvest if only the Malampaya Fund amounting to Nine Hundred Million Pesos (Php900,000.00) released for the purpose found its way to their rightful beneficiaries, according to reports.

That’s like snatching food on the table inside a farmer’s home while they pray with eyes closed! Where did it go?! Damn! They are our servants! Isn’t that what they pitched to you when they wooed you for your vote? Now you see their true color.

That’s how painful it is, not only for the farmers, but for all who sacrifice some of their needs to contribute in taxes, withheld and without the courtesy of being asked, like myself, to pay the price for the so-called civilized society.

Now, the truth rears its ugliest head. What civilized society when the leaders, styling themselves as servants (the gall!), who legislate these laws, including the General Appropriations Act –the law providing for the government budget, and yes you’re right, where these Pork Barrel (of swill) on which the Pigs (you know who they are) feed, come from– are (almost all of them) now caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Red-handed! In flagrante delicto.

And as always, like in the past, when exposed and in their efforts to save face, they all instantly portray themselves immaculate by calling for the abolition of the Pork Barrel. Ah, what with actors and actresses in Congress!

Regardless of where the Pork issue ends up, those responsible must be pursued with the full force of the law. If found guilty, he/she must be sent to jail. If the president exercises his power of Pardon, then Juan must go for the president with similar swift action, in real revolution. It is time we learned the lessons of history.

Successful Revolutions are Painted in Blood

Many successful revolutions known the world over that graced the annals of history had been laced with blood, fueled by violent passion, and punctuated by exaction of deaths on the ousted oppressors, as their hallmark. Targeted Carnage seemed to be the operative catapult to effective revolution.

Should we call for the same? We have tried to avoid them, but so far we have not achieved the same results.

Okay we’re not screaming for blood. But scolding these pachyderm politicians just doesn’t cut it. Shame them and their families, jail all of them who may be found in conspiracy with the sitting clan member/s. They must feel the teeth and claws of the law cutting into their flesh. No more Mr. Nice Juan!

Better yet, let’s restore the death penalty to apply only to public officials who commit crimes of graft and corruption, or plunder. There's a philosophy where I come from which favors pardon for a murderer, but demands death for the thief.

And no lethal injection, electric chair, or firing squad, those are too civil for these suckers. Let’s go old-fashioned like impalement, disembowelment, breaking wheel, flaying or skinning alive, or death by boiling. A little costly, more hassle, or messy, but sure sends a loud message.

Disclaimer: I know a good number of public servants who serve with integrity and dedication. They are not the subject of this Blog.

Thank Goodness Some Senators are Finally Talking Sense

I laud Sentor Santiago’s dismissive disfavor of a Senate inquiry into the 10 Billion-Peso Philippine Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) scam allegedly perpetrated by Janet Lim-Napoles, and implicating lawmakers from whose pork barrels (proving to be, now more than ever, an apt epithet for PDAF) funds were drawn and funneled to bogus Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) allegedly created by Napoles.

Senator Peter Cayetano also aired his reservation saying he preferred an investigation by the Department of Justice.

With two no-nonsense senators doubting its own (senate’s) effectiveness in conducting investigations, especially on issues where its otherwise prominent members are accused of wrongdoing, which quite often end up like premature campaigns/grandstanding and all, I hope the Senate has finally spoken some sense into this issue.

Senator Escudero must back down, and instead join the two senators in indorsing either the Office of the Ombudsman or the Department of Justice (DOJ) or joint, considering the limited human resource at the Ombudsman office, for the conduct of thorough investigation on the issue.

As of this writing former Justice and now Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, and DOJ Secretary Leila De Lima must be psyched up of the prospect of this war-like coalesced endeavor considering the public outrage and indignation the issue has spawned.

Let us not forget and sidestep our Accounting stalwart Heidi Mendoza, now a Commissioner at the Commission on Audit (COA), who is definitely a fit to this gargantuan task.

The people are worn out by, and dead tired of, all these anomalous scandals involving often, if not always, politicians and appointive officials, so-called public servants.

It is high time we demanded as a people that those involved be brought to justice and if proven guilty in the courts of law, sent to jail without exception, fear or favour.

We’ve been called “boss” all too often, let’s flex our boss muscles now: wring the truth into the open, and wheel the perpetrators to penitentiaries where they belong. That’s a much better use of taxpayers’ money.

Criminal Contempt v. Civil Contempt

In People v. Godoy, this Court made a distinction between criminal and civil contempt. The Court declared:

A criminal contempt is conduct that is directed against the dignity and authority of the court or a judge acting judicially; it is an act obstructing the administration of justice which tends to bring the court into disrepute or disrespect. On the other hand, civil contempt consists in failing to do something ordered to be done by a court in a civil action for the benefit of the opposing party therein and is, therefore, an offense against the party in whose behalf the violated order is made.

A criminal contempt, being directed against the dignity and authority of the court, is an offense against organized society and, in addition, is also held to be an offense against public justice which raises an issue between the public and the accused, and the proceedings to punish it are punitive. On the other hand, the proceedings to punish a civil contempt are remedial and for the purpose of the preservation of the right of private persons. It has been held that civil contempt is neither a felony nor a misdemeanor, but a power of the court.

It has further been stated that intent is a necessary element in criminal contempt, and that no one can be punished for a criminal contempt unless the evidence makes it clear that he intended to commit it. On the contrary, there is authority indicating that since the purpose of civil contempt proceedings is remedial, the defendant’s intent in committing the contempt is immaterial. Hence, good faith or the absence of intent to violate the court’s order is not a defense in civil contempt.

Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition as amended by Republic Act 10591

President Pnoy, on May 29, 2013, signed into law the latest amending legislative act on Firearms and Ammunition, Republic Act 10591, to take effect 15 days from its publication in a newspaper of national circulation. As of this writing, the law would have taken effect.

While the PNP (now tasked what DOJ and DILG were under RA 8294) is still crafting the Implementing Rules and Regulation (IRR) for the law, which the law mandates to be ready for roll out in 120 days from effectivity of the Act, it is presumed that the substance of the law are already reflected in the procedure for procuring license and PTCFOR.

A reading of the law highlights significant differences from its predecessors. It is, by far, more comprehensive and well-thought of. It is more stringent in its requirements for issuance of license, and a leap more rigorous for issuance of Permit to Carry Firearms Outside Residence (PTCFOR). I know, because I have just gone through the process, and I haven’t finished yet.

It is more cumbersome now if you fail to renew your license within six (6) months before expiry date. It will have the effect of NOT only revoking your license, but the registration of your firearm as well, even if the latter is effective for four (4) years. This is a far cry from the eight (8) years that it took for an unrenewed license to get revoked prior to this law, I was told.

In case your license is revoked, and you intend to renew the same, you will be required to submit, on top of NBI clearance and proof of billing (make sense but something I don’t remember having to bother about in the past), a Letter of Explanation for failure to renew the license. Your application for renewal will be evaluated taking into account the validity or reasonability of your justification for failing to renew. A Resolution will be issued therefor, so you can’t say it is simple procedure, you could actually be prevented from renewing your license.

Failing twice, in succession, to renew the license or registration within the time allowed, will perpetually bar you from applying for any firearm license.

This is how stringent the law is worded, but let’s await the guidance in the IRR.

Who May Be Issued a Firearm License?

As in most laws, if not all, there is entitlement and prohibition. Let’s discuss entitlement first before we go to prohibition. Let’s look into the policy of the state declared in the law:

Section 2. Declaration of State Policy. – It is the policy of the State to maintain peace and order and protect the people against violence. The State also recognizes the right of its qualified citizens to self-defense through, when it is the reasonable means to repel the unlawful aggression under the circumstances, the use of firearms.

xxx

So we see there’s a colatilla on firearm possession and ownership – qualified citizen.

Who are Qualified Citizens?

                                                         ARTICLE II

Section 4. Standards and Requisites for Issuance of and Obtaining a License to Own and Possess Firearms. – In order to qualify and acquire a license to own and possess a firearm or firearms and ammunition, the applicant must be a Filipino citizen, at least twenty-one (21) years old AND has gainful work, occupation or business or has filed an Income Tax Return (ITR) for the preceding year as proof of income, profession, business or occupation.

In addition, the applicant shall submit the following certification issued by appropriate authorities attesting the following:

(a) The applicant has not been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude;

(b) The applicant has passed the psychiatric test administered by a PNP-accredited psychologist or psychiatrist;

(c) The applicant has passed the drug test conducted by an accredited and authorized drug testing laboratory or clinic;

(d) The applicant has passed a gun safety seminar which is administered by the PNP or a registered and authorized gun club;

(e) The applicant has filed in writing the application to possess a registered firearm which shall state the personal circumstances of the applicant;

(f) The applicant must present a police clearance from the city or municipality police office; and

(g) The applicant has not been convicted or is currently an accused in a pending criminal case before any court of law for a crime that is punishable with a penalty of more than two (2) years.

For purposes of this Act, an acquittal or permanent dismissal of a criminal case before the courts of law shall qualify the accused thereof to qualify and acquire a license.

The applicant shall pay the reasonable licensing fees as may be provided in the implementing rules and regulations of this Act.

An applicant who intends to possess a firearm owned by a juridical entity shall submit his/her duty detail order to the FEO of the PNP.

OWNERSHIP AND POSSESSION OF FIREARMS

Subparagraph (a) makes sense. If a person has been convicted (I presume by final judgment to reconcile with legal presumption of innocence), it is doubtful if it serves the policy of the state of protecting its citizens if it allows him to possess or carry firearm/s, notwithstanding. Although, the doctrine of non-sequitor taught us against concluding that one who has committed a crime in the past will surely have committed a similar crime now or in the future, it is certainly not the intent of the law to take a gamble on one’s innate character (hoping it is immaculate), after having been convicted by final judgment, by putting a gun in his hands for his self-defense than protect the rest who are presumed to be law-abiding.

But what is moral turpitude?

"Moral turpitude has been defined in Can v. Galing citing In Re Basa and Tak Ng v. Republic as everything which is done contrary to justice, modesty, or good morals; an act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes his fellowmen, or to society in general, contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals.

This is not to say that all convictions of the crime of homicide do not involve moral turpitude. Homicide may or may not involve moral turpitude depending on the degree of the crime. Moral turpitude is not involved in every criminal act and is not shown by every known and intentional violation of statute, but whether any particular conviction involves moral turpitude may be a question of fact and frequently depends on all the surrounding circumstances. While . . . generally but not always, crimes mala in se (inherently evil) involve moral turpitude, while crimes mala prohibita (simply because the prohibits) do not, it cannot always be ascertained whether moral turpitude does or does not exist by classifying a crime as malum in se or as malum prohibitum, since there are crimes which are mala in se and yet but rarely involve moral turpitude and there are crimes which involve moral turpitude and are mala prohibita only. It follows therefore, that moral turpitude is somewhat a vague and indefinite term, the meaning of which must be left to the process of judicial inclusion or exclusion as the cases are reached." (IRRI v. NLRC and Nestor Micosa, G.R. No. 97239 May 12, 1993).

LEDESMA DE JESUS-PARAS v. QUINCIANO VAILOCES, A.C. No. 439             April 12, 1961, illustrates, albeit inexhaustively, what moral turpitude is in layman’s tersm:

"Among the examples given of crimes of this nature by former Chief Justice Moran are the crime of seduction and the crime of concubinage.2 The crime of which respondent was convicted is falsification of public document, which is indeed of this nature, for the act is clearly contrary to justice, honesty and good morals. Hence, such crime involves moral turpitude. Indeed, it is well-settled that "embezzlement, forgery, robbery, and swindling are crimes which denote moral turpitude and, as a general rule, all crimes of which fraud is an element are looked on as involving moral turpitude." (58 C.J.S., 1206).

Subparagraphs (b), (c), and (d), while sensible, I doubt their integrity, especially drug testing, knowing who operate these drug testing centers, you can’t really say if they are reliable at all. For sure, this is money machine for operators.

Gun safety seminars by Gun Clubs? This is another life-saving design, but in reality, hardly implemented. Gun dealers don’t care if buyers eventually attend to their gun clubs for gun handling lessons. What when they’re paid already.

Subparagraph (f) may be replaced by NBI clearance, which is already a requirement as of this writing.           

Subparagraph (g) makes the prosecutors relatively powerful. Note that even a pendency of a criminal case carrying a penalty of more than two years disqualifies an applicant. Good for those who are legally provisioned. They can dismiss a complaint, not always by overt graft, but even by fairly swarming the prosecutor’s office with their legal team, or handing over a courtesy business card from top-notch law firms, quiet but effective. Other times, it’s just plain “money talks.”

Of course, juridical entity, too, are entitled to possess and own firearms. They include security agencies and LGUs.

Section 5. Ownership of Firearms and Ammunition by a Juridical Entity. – A juridical person maintaining its own security force may be issued a regular license to own and possess firearms and ammunition under the following conditions:

 (a) It must be Filipino-owned and duly registered with the Securities   and Exchange Commission (SEC);

 (b) It is current, operational and a continuing concern;

 (c) It has completed and submitted all its reportorial requirements to the SEC; and

 (d) It has paid all its income taxes for the year, as duly certified by the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

The application shall be made in the name of the juridical person represented by its President or any of its officers mentioned below as duly authorized in a board resolution to that effect: Provided, That the officer applying for the juridical entity, shall possess all the qualifications required of a citizen applying for a license to possess firearms.

 

Other corporate officers eligible to represent the juridical person are: the vice president, treasurer, and board secretary.

Security agencies and LGUs shall be included in this category of licensed holders but shall be subject to additional requirements as may be required by the Chief of the PNP.

Section 6. Ownership of Firearms by the National Government. – All firearms owned by the National Government shall be registered with the FEO of the PNP in the name of the Republic of the Philippines. Such registration shall be exempt from all duties and taxes that may otherwise be levied on other authorized owners of firearms. For reason of national security, firearms of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), Coast Guard and other law enforcement agencies shall only be reported to the FEO of the PNP.

Another privilege, and more important, of a qualified citizen is to carry firearms outside residence, for which you have to secure a Permit to Carry firearms Outside Residence (PTCFOR). Since only qualified persons get to enjoy the privilege, it presupposes that for you to be issued a PTCFOR, you must be a license holder. Possession of PTCFOR does not obviate the requirement of a license. The latter is a prerequisite to a valid PTCFOR.

So who are qualified for PTCFOR?

Section 7. Carrying of Firearms Outside of Residence or Place of Business. – A permit to carry firearms outside of residence shall be issued by the Chief of the PNP or his/her duly authorized representative to any qualified person whose life is under actual threat or his/her life is in imminent danger due to the nature of his/her profession, occupation or business.

It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove that his/her life is under actual threat by submitting a threat assessment certificate from the PNP.

For purposes of this Act, the following professionals are considered to be in imminent danger due to the nature of their profession, occupation or business:

(a) Members of the Philippine Bar;

(b) Certified Public Accountants;

(c) Accredited Media Practitioners;

(d) Cashiers, Bank Tellers;

(e) Priests, Ministers, Rabbi, Imams;

(f) Physicians and Nurses;

(g) Engineers; and

(h) Businessmen, who by the nature of their business or undertaking, are exposed to high risk of being targets of criminal elements.

Having identified who the qualified persons are to the twin privilege of possession of firearm (in and outside of residence), let us now discuss the prohibited acts and their corresponding penalties.

ARTICLE V

PENAL PROVISIONS

Section 28. Unlawful Acquisition, or Possession of Firearms and Ammunition. – The unlawful acquisition, possession of firearms and ammunition shall be penalized as follows:

(a) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a small arm;

(b) The penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed if three (3) or more small arms or Class-A light weapons are unlawfully acquired or possessed by any person;

(c) The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a Class-A light weapon;

(d) The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who shall, unlawfully acquire or possess a Class-B light weapon;

(e) The penalty of one (1) degree higher than that provided in paragraphs (a) to (c) in this section shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully possess any firearm under any or combination of the following conditions:

(1) Loaded with ammunition or inserted with a loaded magazine;

(2) Fitted or mounted with laser or any gadget used to guide the shooter to hit the target such as thermal weapon sight (TWS) and the like;

(3) Fitted or mounted with sniper scopes, firearm muffler or firearm silencer;

(4) Accompanied with an extra barrel; and

(5) Converted to be capable of firing full automatic bursts.

(f) The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a major part of a small arm;

(g) The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition for a small arm or Class-A light weapon. If the violation of this paragraph is committed by the same person charged with the unlawful acquisition or possession of a small arm, the former violation shall be absorbed by the latter;

(h) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a major part of a Class-A light weapon;

(i) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition for a Class-A light weapon. If the violation of this paragraph is committed by the same person charged with the unlawful acquisition or possession of a Class-A light weapon, the former violation shall be absorbed by the latter;

(j) The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a major part of a Class-B light weapon; and

(k) The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition for a Class-B light weapon. If the violation of this paragraph is committed by the same person charged with the unlawful acquisition or possession of a Class-B light weapon, the former violation shall be absorbed by the latter.

Section 29. Use of Loose Firearm in the Commission of a Crime. – The use of a loose firearm, when inherent in the commission of a crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other special laws, shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance: Provided, That if the crime committed with the use of a loose firearm is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which is lower than that prescribed in the preceding section for illegal possession of firearm, the penalty for illegal possession of firearm shall be imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime charged: Provided, further, That if the crime committed with the use of a loose firearm is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which is equal to that imposed under the preceding section for illegal possession of firearms, the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed in addition to the penalty for the crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other special laws of which he/she is found guilty.

If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection with the crime of rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat.

If the crime is committed by the person without using the loose firearm, the violation of this Act shall be considered as a distinct and separate offense.

Section 30. Liability of Juridical Person. – The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum to prision mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon the owner, president, manager, director or other responsible officer of/any public or private firm, company, corporation or entity who shall willfully or knowingly allow any of the firearms owned by such firm, company, corporation or entity to be used by any person or persons found guilty of violating the provisions of the preceding section, or willfully or knowingly allow any of them to use unregistered firearm or firearms without any legal authority to be carried outside of their residence in the course of their employment.

Section 31. Absence of Permit to Carry Outside of Residence. – The penalty of prision correccional and a fine of Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person who is licensed to own a firearm but who shall carry the registered firearm outside his/her residence without any legal authority therefor.

Section 32. Unlawful Manufacture, Importation, Sale or Disposition of Firearms or Ammunition or Parts Thereof, Machinery, Tool or Instrument Used or Intended to be Used in the Manufacture of Firearms, Ammunition or Parts Thereof. – The penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully engage in the manufacture, importation, sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition, or a major part of a firearm or ammunition, or machinery, tool or instrument used or intended to be used by the same person in the manufacture of a firearm, ammunition, or a major part thereof.

The possession of any machinery, tool or instrument used directly in the manufacture of firearms, ammunition, or major parts thereof by any person whose business, employment or activity does not lawfully deal with the possession of such article, shall be prima facie evidence that such article is intended to be used in the unlawful or illegal manufacture of firearms, ammunition or parts thereof.

The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period to prision mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon any laborer, worker or employee of a licensed firearms dealer who shall unlawfully take, sell or otherwise dispose of parts of firearms or ammunition which the company manufactures and sells, and other materials used by the company in the manufacture or sale of firearms or ammunition. The buyer or possessor of such stolen part or material, who is aware that such part or material was stolen, shall suffer the same penalty as the laborer, worker or employee.

If the violation or offense is committed by a corporation, partnership, association or other juridical entity, the penalty provided for in this section shall be imposed upon the directors, officers, employees or other officials or persons therein who knowingly and willingly participated in the unlawful act.

Section 33. Arms Smuggling.– The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who shall engage or participate in arms smuggling as defined in this Act.

Section 34. Tampering, Obliteration or Alteration of Firearms Identification. – The penalty of prision correccional to prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall tamper, obliterate or alter without authority the barrel, slide, frame, receiver, cylinder, or bolt assembly, including the name of the maker, model, or serial number of any firearm, or who shall replace without authority the barrel, slide, frame, receiver, cylinder, or bolt assembly, including its individual or peculiar identifying characteristics essential in forensic examination of a firearm or light weapon.

The PNP shall place this information, including its individual or peculiar identifying characteristics into the database of integrated firearms identification system of the PNP Crime Laboratory for future use and identification of a particular firearm.

Section 35. Use of an Imitation Firearm. – An imitation firearm used in the commission of a crime shall be considered a real firearm as defined in this Act and the person who committed the crime shall be punished in accordance with this Act: Provided, That injuries caused on the occasion of the conduct of competitions, sports, games, or any recreation activities involving imitation firearms shall not be punishable under this Act.

Section 36. In Custodia Legis.– During the pendency of any case filed in violation of this Act, seized firearm, ammunition, or parts thereof, machinery, tools or instruments shall remain in the custody of the court. If the court decides that it has no adequate means to safely keep the same, the court shall issue an order to turn over to the PNP Crime Laboratory such firearm, ammunition, or parts thereof, machinery, tools or instruments in its custody during the pendency of the case and to produce the same to the court when so ordered. No bond shall be admitted for the release of the firearm, ammunition or parts thereof, machinery, tool or instrument. Any violation of this paragraph shall be punishable by prision mayor in its minimum period to prision mayor in its medium period.

 Section 37. Confiscation and Forfeiture. – The imposition of penalty for any violation of this Act shall carry with it the accessory penalty of confiscation and forfeiture of the firearm, ammunition, or parts thereof, machinery, tool or instrument in favor of the government which shall be disposed of in accordance with law.

Section 38. Liability for Planting Evidence. – The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period shall be imposed upon any person who shall willfully and maliciously insert; place, and/or attach, directly or indirectly, through any overt or covert act, any firearm, or ammunition, or parts thereof in the person, house, effects, or in the immediate vicinity of an innocent individual for the purpose of implicating or incriminating the person, or imputing the commission of any violation of the provisions of this Act to said individual. If the person found guilty under this paragraph is a public officer or employee, such person shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua

Increased Penalties

The law highlights the shift in policy direction vis-à-vis penalties imposed for violation of gun laws. The law has distinguished acquisition or possession from manufacture, importation, sale, or disposition, of firearms or ammunition or any major parts thereof, tools, machinery used or intended to be used in the manufacture of firearm or ammunition, or any major part thereof.

In the former the law has maintained the penalty of prision mayor, but at varying degrees depending on the classification thereof whether small arms, Class A-light, or Class-B light weapons. It also increases the penalty by a degree if the firearm is loaded with ammunition or magazine, fitted or mounted with sniper scopes, firearm muffler or silencer, with extra barrel, or capable of firing automatic bursts.

In the latter, the law has increased the penalty to “reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua” for unlawful manufacture, importation, sale, or disposition of firearms or ammunition, or any major parts thereof or machinery or tool used or intended to be used in the manufacture of firearms of ammunition, or any major parts thereof.

Grounds for revocation and other miscellaneous provisions

Section 39. Grounds for Revocation, Cancellation or Suspension of License or Permit. – The Chief of the PNP or his/her authorized representative may revoke, cancel or suspend a license or permit on the following grounds:

(a) Commission of a crime or offense involving the firearm, ammunition, of major parts thereof;

(b) Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude or any offense where the penalty carries an imprisonment of more than six (6) years;

(c) Loss of the firearm, ammunition, or any parts thereof through negligence;

(d) Carrying of the firearm, ammunition, or major parts thereof outside of residence or workplace without, the proper permit to carry the same;

(e) Carrying of the firearm, ammunition, or major parts thereof in prohibited places;

(f) Dismissal for cause from the service in case of government official and employee;

(g) Commission of any of the acts penalized under Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise known as the "Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002″;

(h) Submission of falsified documents or misrepresentation in the application to obtain a license or permit;

(i) Noncompliance of reportorial requirements; and

(j) By virtue of a court order.

Section 40. Failure to Notify Lost or Stolen Firearm or Light Weapon. – A fine of Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) shall be imposed upon any licensed firearm holder who fails to report to the FEO of the PNP that the subject firearm has been lost or stolen within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of discovery.

Likewise, a fine of Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person holding a valid firearm license who changes residence or office address other than that indicated in the license card and fails within a period of thirty (30) days from said transfer to notify the FEO of the PNP of such change of address.

 Section 41. Illegal Transfer/Registration of Firearms. – It shall be unlawful to transfer possession of any firearm to any person who has not yet obtained or secured the necessary license or permit thereof.

The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon any person who shall violate the provision of the preceding paragraph. In addition, he/she shall be disqualified to apply for a license to possess other firearms and all his/her existing firearms licenses whether for purposes of commerce or possession, shall be revoked. If government-issued firearms, ammunition or major parts of firearms or light weapons are unlawfully disposed, sold or transferred by any law enforcement agent or public officer to private individuals, the penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed.

Any public officer or employee or any person who shall facilitate the registration of a firearm through fraud, deceit, misrepresentation or submission of falsified documents shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional.

Note that this law does not repeal the prior laws (particulary PD 1866, and RA 8294) on firearms and ammunition in their entirety, so it helps to also read those laws and articles applying to them.