The Pigs are throwing Tantrums Demanding for their Swill Back; The Pigsty Seems to Agree

The Palace, through the Solicitor-General, joining the House of Representatives, in its 23-page comment, has asked the Supreme Court  to junk petitions calling for the declaration of pork barrel funds unconstitutional. Now we’re seeing that even Pnoy is no impervious to the evil lure of money.

Just weeks after announcing he was scrapping the pork barrel system –responding to mounting calls from the public for its abolition– the president seems to have had a sudden change of heart, now seeming to have succumbed to the irresistible beckoning of tens of billions of pesos that would slip out of his control and those of his cohorts if he made good on his words.

Sadly, in the eyes of the public, the President, once thought to be different and of unswayable moral compass, has shed his skin and revealed his familiar porky hide. The duplicity!  Again, the argument that the TRO on pork barrel would work to the damage of the students and sickly is lame, and a hokey ploy as explained in yesterday’s post.

The trouble is, the Palace and Congress don’t get it and continue to underestimate the outrage that the public continue to harbor over the subject. If the Palace pushes ahead with its posturing, I would not be surprised if the People graduate from demanding abolishing the pork barrel to abolishing the Pnoy administration.

Miscalculations at this point would have catastrophic consequences for the administration. It’s like toying with matches next to a powder keg.

 

Lawmakers to SC: "Free Up Pork Barrel Funds for the Students and the Sick." Nice try, but No Can Do

Even as the outrage over pork barrel funds scam continues to linger, if not intensify, lawmakers are already itching to feel out public sentiment by floating their intention to petition the Supreme Court to Free up a portion of TRO’d funds allegedly for Student’s tuition and medical assistance to the elderly/sickly. As though they have done good, they’re now cunningly attempting to impress upon the public that they are concerned for these citizens who have been dependent on their PDAF for support.

Goodness, the portion they’re claiming to go to these allegedly worthy ends, to begin with, is scant in proportion to the whole, and you know where the rest goes. It is like a dressing over the funds to give them a semblance of legitimate use. And if they think the public buys the idea that they are doing these as concerned leaders to their constituents, they are underestimating the public’s intelligence.

It is common knowledge that they do these as schemes of maintaining their army of voters. It is like payola. And they have been paralyzing these people by acculturating in them dependency, beggary, and mendicancy. No wonder why many among so-called beneficiaries who used to go out and make a living braving their chances in a competitive small-scale market –street peddling, pedicab-driving, etc– have stopped waking up early for their industry, instead go into long slumber of the day like fatteners being grown for slaughter.

These people have unwittingly lost their real-life survival skills. Thanks to the politics of patronage employed on them by their politician-sponsors. We are no socialist country. People have to earn the food they intend to put on the table.

If the state is to provide them anything, it should be by means of training in fields that respond to the needs of today’s multitude of enterprise in order to be employed and be a productive member of society.

For certain, before they have been conditioned to be, and molded into the, dependents that they have become now, they used to be proud workers who did not shirk on their responsibility to provide for their family. They were stoic who did not complain work was so difficult for the little amount that they earned. They understood the workings of life: If you invest in your future, it will be brighter.

Aptly, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish, and you feed for a lifetime.”

If they are genuinely concerned about the welfare of their beneficiaries, they may continue to provide for them, but not from the public funds that public clamor has saved, and the Court has ordered withheld. They can take them out of the bulk of pork barrel funds that they have amassed over the years that are still with them. I know they must be thinking “But they are in properties now.”

Well, sell them, and you might, just might, save your soul in the end!”

 

 

How Calloused Public Officials Have Become

Now, it is coming to light that all these Malampaya Funds worth over P23B were spirited from public coffer in the chaos that ensued from natural calamities wrought by Typhoons Ondoy, and Pepeng.

The thieves, consisting of an elaborate net of conspirators, exploited the tragedies, and hid behind ardent public sympathies for the victims. Little did the public know that it was only a pretext to far more insidious and sinister motives of plunder.

That bulk of the funds were ordered released by former President GMA during the height of spending binge for the 2010 elections is of no surprise. She had three terms, and this had been a familiar pattern, but this was the grandest of all in terms of its sheer scale.  This only confirms what many already had in mind, but without proof.

Now all hands, though first to be hauled out are those from the opposition, seem to have soiled and sullied by stolen public funds.

There’s really no way of euphemizing this, the public officials stole taxpayers’ funds, and should be tried and punished if and when proven guilty.

It will be difficult, as the thieves, seasoned as they are, have prepared and continuously conducted clearing operations as the crime happened. They did away with any trail. If it was inevitable, they ordered their staff to act for them. If it is yet imperative that they do the signing themselves, I am sure they deliberately signed differently, so they could claim forgery in the end. Everything else, that remained they had sweepers to make sure they were destroyed.

Except the tucked memories of experiences  and personal records of events of Benhur Luy, and the rest of the whistleblowers, and Janet Napoles herself, if she finally decides to do the right thing to save whatever is left of her muddy dark soul, and bare all out.

It will be a long and risk-riddled trial. Each day, the lives of the whistleblowers, including that of accused Napoles, hang in the balance. One shot can change the course of the case. A few hitting their marks could be a game changer.

 

 

AMLC Strangely Out of the Pork Barrel Picture

Amidst testimonies by Benhur Luy and his fellow witnesses that they had been depositing and withdrawing from bank accounts of their erstwhile boss, Pork Barrel queen Janet Napoles, large sums of money to the tune of tens of millions of pesos, I wonder why the Anti-Money Laundering Counsel (AMLC), tasked to implement the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) of 2001 or RA 9160, as amended by RA 9194, is not being summoned to shed light on what actions, if any, it took concerning the supposed reports, if any, the banks involved submitted to it (AMLC) regarding said deposits.

For sure, the deposits constituted “covered transactionS” under its definition in the law considering the amounts (total of over 500k deposits in a day). They could even be classified as “suspicious transactions,” considering that it is patently abnormal and suspicious for a legitimate business person to be withdrawing in cold cash large sums that would necessitate inconveniently bagging and hauling them.

Banks and other covered institutions enumerated under the law are required to “know their customers.” I wonder how Napoles introduced or represented herself to the banks when she opened her account and throughout her relationship with them in order to override the suspicion (large deposits) triggered by the law (or justify her transactions):

·         there is no underlying legal/trade obligation, purpose or economic justification;

·         the amount involved is not commensurate with the business or financial capacity of the client.

It should not have been enough that she said she was a contractor dealing with the government. In fact, that should have heightened the suspicion and set into motion a thorough investigation, unless those whose duty it was to so do were conspirators or accomplices to these predicate crimes of graft and corruption, and/or plunder.

Legitimate business transactions nowadays are sealed and payments of consideration therefor made through writing checks, wiring direct to accounts, letters of credit, telegraphic transfers, and so forth. When you withdraw cash purportedly to settle business transactions, it’s not only red flag or alarm going off, it is on its face screaming and stinking anomaly that should have triggered covert and extensive investigation.

If banks did not make a report for covered and suspicious transaction to BSP and AMLC, then banks must made to explain why no such actions were taken, and if found remiss, must be meted punishment as provided for under the law.

If banks did what it was incumbent upon them, but AMLC failed to conduct the necessary investigation, then it must be similarly subjected to the process and accountability as the banks, and more, for this time it involves government officials, and if proven that they purposely turned a blind eye, or colluded with the perpetrators.  

It is strange that the Inter-Agency Anti-Graft Coordinating Council (IAAGCC) -quite a mouthful for an ad hoc committee- has been eerily silent on AMLC’s role in their investigation. But I hope that in the coming days it will start to break down its role in detecting these anomalies if only it acted by its mandate.

Presumption of Regularity in the Performance of Official Function Accorded the Public Officials, (Elective or Appointive) Proves Anachronous Now and Must be Stricken Out.

For decades, this presumption has already proved to have outlived its application. Since we were plundered, and thrown into darkness for decades by the Marcos regime, where official abuses were rampant and committed openly with impunity, this presumption should have been overthrown by the judiciary.

While it may be argued that such is necessary for government efficiency, and to obviate the burden for public officials of having to substantiate the nature by which they performed their duty, experience had taught us that the entitled (public officials) have taken shield behind the presumption to commit corruption, exact oppression, and generally perpetrate injustice upon the public they ought to serve, more than the public has shown any penchant for harassing them with suits/complaint, against which the presumption could have come handy .

Seriously, ask yourself now: Do you honestly believe, as it stands now, that it promotes government efficiency? or as it looks now, has it been exploited by those it sought to protect? The intention is laudable, but the beneficiaries do not have the moral rectitude to wield it.

How would you react if public officials involved in the pork barrel scam claimed innocence to any wrongdoing invoking the presumption of regularity in the performance of their official function?

Wouldn’t you be gnashing your teeth in anger?

While the presumption disputable, it is an insult to the public that it is even afforded them in the face of their shameless and callous propensity for pillaging public coffers, while the rest of us, mockingly called the “bosses,” break our backs working just to get by.

Public officials should stand in the same footing as any Juan. If the presumption is any good, they must earn their entitlement to it.

Zamboanga Under Siege; A Sham to Drown the Pork Barrel Tsunami?

In August, I wrote about the almost ineluctable after-event, diversionary tactic, every time a furor of pork’s magnitude breaks out. Could yesterday’s Zamboanga invasion by Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) contingents loyal to former ARMM Governor and MNLF Chairman Nur Misuari have been staged to deflect the public’s fixation over the Pork Barrel Scam?

Since I was waiting for an event loud enough to get the public’s attention, no matter how momentarily, I thought so right away the moment I have learned of the MNLF adventure. And look at the motivation that compelled them to undertake such a dangerous excursion: they wanted to hoist their flag over at the city hall. Really!?

Before we make our judgment, let’s look at some antecedents for MNLF relating to the issue. The government has struck a Malaysia-brokered peace deal with the MILF, which to date continues to iron out details, and in fact is scheduled to resume in October. MNLF opposes such deal and insists, instead, on the implementation of the 1996 MNLF peace accord with the government, which it claims the latter abrogated.

Nur Misuari went on to declare Bangsamoro Republik Independence in August, and installed himself as the Chief of the Bangsamoro Armed Forces. Now we can see that the premise has been laid, which could justify the event. But what has Nur Misuari’s MNLF, splintered, in its arsenal to carry out such undertaking? With Sema’s group dissociating itself from that of Misuari’s, MNLF has not much to fuel this kind of endeavor. But we can see that they have a passionate motivation.

The question is funding.

Somewhere in the archipelago, men (and women) awash with funds are desperate for some kind of “national interest” events that could throw off public attention from them. Let me break it down: one who has the motivation meets another who has the means (hoping to benefit from the logical effect) equals OPPORTUNITY. And the first shot was fired.

They could not have done it in Metro Manila, or they would have been all over the mess. Mindanao is a convenient excuse for this kind of event. It is a stage for local armed conflict, staged or for real.

 

 

BIR Chief is Going Berserk Demanding More Taxes at a Time When Government is Faced with Raging Accusation of Plunder of Taxpayer’s Money by Public Officials; Where’s the Sensitivity?

BIR’s Kim Henares’ announcement that her agency is crafting a memorandum circular that would require Lawyers and Doctors to post a schedule of rates they charge their clients/patients (just like sari-sari store) is, at least, at the point of view of a lawyer, preposterous for a number of reasons:

1.       The timing is awful, coming on the heels of yet the most pervasive and massive corruption scandal (pork barrel scam) involving lawmakers, politicians, and members of the executive department. Given what she is trying to achieve: “to collect more to finance the expenditure of the government.” Who’s going to buy it at this time? What this sounds to taxpayers is to collect more so that the thieves in government can funnel more into their own pockets.

It sounds like saying that taxpayers have not sacrificed enough; the thieves have not built enough mansions, have not acquired enough posh flats; have not partied enough; have not bought enough luxury cars… ENOUGH!

2.       It is the Supreme Court that has the power to regulate all aspects of the practice of legal profession, broad enough to include whether to post rates or not (honestly I can’t believe I even have to discuss this, the genius) so it is clearly a case of an executive agency overstepping its authority.

Section 5, Article VIII, of 1987 Philippines Constitution provides:

“Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: xxx

(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.”

It is the Supreme Court’s longstanding view that lawyering is not a business, but a noble profession thus, not to be peddled like a commodity or a commercial undertaking. That explains why in its Canons embodied in the Code of Professional Responsibility (Rule2.03), lawyers are not allowed to advertise (whether on TV or paper, or any other means) except only to list in professional directories which one hardly knows exist, if in fact, they do, or even actively seek referrals.

This makes the playing field more tilted in favor of big law firms who can afford a not-so-innocent media exposure –calculated to go around the prohibition–  to gain publicity, popularity, and further their marketability, while the small private practitioners, regardless of their ability to deliver the same quality of service, are left in oblivion. This has enormous impact on their ability to make a living.

Now, imagine while lawyers are not allowed to advertise or even to hang or mount an attractive law office sign, but only a plain drab insignificant unnoticeable signage bearing their name and title, they are being required to post their rates, in color I surmise.

“Rule 2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit legal business.”

Under the same Canon and Code, a lawyer is prohibited from charging a rate lower than the custom, but qualified by circumstances of the prospective client or his case. That makes uniform rates unfeasible, if not improper.

“Rule 2.04 - A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so warrant.” (emphasis and italics supplied)

3.       It is no one-size-fits-all for legal services, and so for the fees. Unlike in the case of doctors, where medical cases may be homogeneously categorized, e.g. if its heart surgery, it is relatively the same across all patients as it involves the same human heart and procedure, and involves the patient alone.

In the case of lawyers, a case of ejectment would vary a great deal depending on who you are trying to eject: take into account the resistance the defendant puts up or exerts or is expected to put up, and the consequent risk it presents on the life of a lawyer; the period it is likely to take to conclude the case; the complexity which, often, a lawyer cannot conclusively evaluate until the defendant’s answer reveals it is part of a squatting syndicate, so forth and so on.

Times have changed as I have learned firsthand, there is quite a number of squatting syndicates now hell bent on usurping and wresting possession and ownership of properties from their lawful owners through tactics and stratagem of intimidation, connections, and exploiting the weakness of our justice system – knowing its inner workings.

5.       Not all lawyers are in private practice. While obviously, the target of Henares’ pronouncement are those in private practice, it demonizes lawyers in general as tax evaders, even comparing miserably to teachers in terms of alleged average tax annual payments. That is stupid, and a lie! A lawyer in an LPO pays as much as two hundred thousand pesos in taxes a year, and withheld.

Even if they say a lawyer is not covered by the memorandum (I’m even just guessing) if he doesn’t intend to practice privately, it is still onerous because if and when a lawyer decides to take a case, even if it’s pro bono, and even if it’s a single case in a year, he will have to comply with the memorandum, and is subjected to corresponding penalty. The prospect of harassment I can only imagine.

6.         What Henares should preoccupy herself today, paying a little respect and sensitivity to, and solidarity with, the grief that has gripped the public over the multi-billion scam (including lawyers and doctors), is to investigate all who are involved in the pork barrel mess to see if they have paid taxes for their loots, since money earned whether legally or illegally is liable for taxes. Why isn’t she as adamant in her investigation on these politicians as she is on Napoles? (not in any way to side with Napoles)

Lastly, she has to learn one unwritten rule: Timing makes sense.

PDAF, CLF, CIA: Whatever Name You Call It By, It is Taxpayers’ Money Plundered

Lawmakers are becoming so lame in their efforts to put a spin in their involvement in the misuse of public funds. Can you imagine some of them go as desperate as to attempt to excuse themselves from wrongdoing by postulating that it was not all PDAF they spent, but in combination with Congressional Leadership Fund (CLF), and Congressional Initiative Allowance (CIA)? How can these knuckleheads think it makes them less guilty?

No matter what you call it, it is taxpayers’ money plundered, and that is what the people are demanding accountability for. For sure, the traditional politicians in Congress (almost all of them) have come up with abundant assortment of labels for funds they can dip their hands on, if only to convolute and muddle their trail.

Detention Facility Snafu

It seems like smarts are becoming increasingly rare in our officials these days. What was Mar Roxas Thinking? Why does he have to concede to a request that accused Napoles be given an air-conditioned detention cell? Against the avalanche of public outrage over the scandal in which Napoles plays a central role (although she’s being detained for a different case), it is easy to anticipate a tsunami of malignant reaction. The question in every Juan’s mind is, “why is she being accorded special treatment, when she’s accused of pocketing P10B in taxpayer’s money?” What’s the deal?

It’s understandable that we are interested in her safety and security, considering the amount of information she could bring to light concerning the personalities, more so as they count the clouted and powerful Lawmakers, involved in this elaborate scheme of theft of public funds.

She should be provided with round-the-clock security to make sure they’re not outplayed and infiltrated by operatives of those who stand to suffer from her anticipated testimony. Truly, her life is in danger. She’s playing cat and mouse with her assassins, with her hope hanging largely on the integrity of government protection facility -although how many times has this been compromised for the right price?

Notwithstanding, though, there is no need to pamper her with air-conditioned detention cell. She must be allowed to sweat and stink it out in an ordinary cell. She must endure everything, except that which pertain to her security, that every other detainee does: insect bites and all. Why, she’s not even a public officer to be accorded residual respect, that which was extended to Erap and now to GMA, although equally assailed by the public?

Regardless of the truth, a doubt has been cast on the mind of the public as to how fair and neutral the administration is going to play its role in this saga. Unwittingly, Mar et al. has stirred in people’s mind what relation He and Pnoy have with Napoles as to risk public rebuke for such insensitive “playing favorite”attitude towards one who is touted to have robbed the Filipino people of funds that could have been used to better their circumstances.