Sunday, November 21, 2021
Duterte to mining firms: Face closure if you pay NPA tax (2017)
Duterte to mining firms: Face closure if you pay NPA tax
NOV 21, 2017 7:45
PM PHT
INFO
The New People's Army, says President Rodrigo Duterte,
will not 'thrive' if it were not for the 'financial support' of mining
companies.
MANILA,
Philippines – Mining companies will soon have to make a difficult choice:
suffer from attacks by the New
People's Army (NPA) or face government sanctions.
President Rodrigo Duterte on Tuesday, November 21, warned mining companies and other groups paying revolutionary tax to stop giving in to demands of communist rebels or else he would shut them down.
"If you continue to support them financially, I will close you down. In the interest of the security of the state, all those funding the NPA, we will trace you," said Duterte at the Ang Huling Tikas Pahinga event in Taguig City.
Before this warning, Duterte explained how big mining companies "without exception" pay taxes to the NPA, allowing the rebel group to "thrive." (READ: Suspected NPA rebels kill CAFGU member, abduct 2 cops)
"All mining companies are paying taxes to the NPA. That's without exception. And the NPA would not thrive if the companies didn't give it," said Duterte in a mix of English and Filipino.
Back in
February, Duterte ended
peace talks between the government and the communists, represented by
the National Democratic Front (NDF). Given this state of affairs, he said everybody
else has to reconsider their approach to the NPA
"We have to decide once and for all. If I go against the NPAs, everybody has to reconfigure their relationship with the NPAs," said the President.
The NPA is known to impose revolutionary tax on businesses operating in the countryside, like mining companies and plantations.
The
communist rebels are said to threaten such businesses with destruction
of property if they fail to pay the tax. (READ: Duterte
eyes proclamation tagging CPP-NPA as 'terrorists')
In his Tuesday speech, Duterte again emphasized his decision to end talks with the communists.
But he had an additional order to chief government negotiator Silvestre Bello III and Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process Jesus Dureza.
"I told Dureza and Bello, you tell the guys there in the Netherlands, I'm no longer available for any official talk. Let's just go to war," said Duterte. (READ: Military agrees NPA should get 'terrorist' tag) – Rappler.com
Duterte meets with leftist Cabinet members [nominated by the CPP] (2017)
Duterte meets with leftist
Cabinet members
ABS-CBN
News
Posted at Feb 21
2017 03:34 PM | Updated as of Feb 21 2017 11:30 PM
MANILA - President Rodrigo Duterte met with leftist members
of his Cabinet at the Palace on Monday, weeks after the collapse of peace talks
between the communist rebels and the government.
Photos and a video released by the Palace on Tuesday show
Duterte in discussion with Social Welfare and Development Secretary Judy
Taguiwalo, Agrarian Reform Secretary Rafael Mariano, and National Anti-Poverty
Commission (NAPC) Secretary Liza Maza, who were all nominated by the Communist
Party of the Philippines for the Cabinet.
Also present in the meeting were Presidential Adviser on the
Peace Process Jesus Dureza, and Labor Secretary and chief peace negotiator
Silvestre Bello III.
Presidential Spokesperson Ernesto Abella earlier said
leftist members of the Cabinet would remain in their posts even after the CPP
and government lifted their unilateral ceasefires, and Duterte suspended peace
negotiations.
Duterte, who won an election last year on a vow to wipe out
illegal drugs, had raised hopes of bringing an end to the communist insurgency
that has stunted development for years, especially in central parts of the
Philippines.
A ceasefire was declared in August and last month, the
government asked the U.S. State Department to remove the rebel movement's
Netherlands-based founder and leader, Jose Ma. Sison, from its terrorist
blacklist to move negotiations forward.
But both sides later traded accusations of truce violations
and negotiating in bad faith.
Duterte said he had "walked the extra mile" to
bring peace by resuming talks and freeing rebel leaders but his efforts were
never reciprocated by the communists who took advantage of the talks to recruit
fighters and extort money. – with Reuters
https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/02/21/17/duterte-meets-with-leftist-cabinet-members
NPA taxation a reality, just pay them - Duterte (2013)
NPA taxation a reality, just pay them – Duterte
Oct. 22, 2013 DAVAO TODAY
DAVAO CITY – City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte had this advice to agri-business players who might be asked for ‘revolutionary taxes’ by the New People’s Army: just pay them.
The mayor raised this point, along with other concerns on peace and order, in his address during the opening day of the Davao Trade Expo 2013 last Thursday at the SMX Convention Center.
“It’s a fundamental question for business: is it good to do business in the mountains? Do we give in to them?” the mayor asked.
He said as mayor of a city in Mindanao dealing with “revolutionary” and “ideological” groups such as the Communist Party of the Philippines and Moro revolutionary groups, the way to deal with them is to talk to them.
“It’s a matter others want to avoid. But it’s a reality that has to be talked openly, since the NPA is more active now in Region 11, notwithstanding the statements from the AFP (Armed Forces of the Philippines),” Duterte said.
December last year, Duterte drew flak when his pronouncement during a visit at the Communist Party of the Philippines quoted him as saying that he pays revolutionary tax. A youtube video later circulated accusing him of giving P125 million as annual revolutionary taxes.
He clarified that he attended the CPP anniversary at a Typhoon Pablo-affected area where he gave some amount for the typhoon victims; the funds were sourced out from private donors. He said he merely kidded that the funds were the taxes that he would pay to NPAs, but because there was no barangay captain around to receive the donation, he coursed it through local NPA leaders.
In Thursday’s trade expo, Duterte said, “I can talk, but I can’t talk them out of their ideology. You have to realize the Communist Party is entering its 45th year here. You have to admit there’s been historical injustice committed on the people.”
Duterte said the national government should deal with the revolutionary groups by talking peace.
“Crimes I can deal with it. But with the revolutionary (groups), I give it to the (national) government, but here, I advised government not to make arrests of revolutionaries” he said.
As to the NPAs asking taxes he said “I cannot put it to a stop. So factor that in your investments. If you pay to the BIR (Bureau of Internal Revenue), you prepare also for the NPA.” Some participants giggled and smiled on this remark.
Duterte went on and explained that the NPAs are open to discuss terms.
“You give credit to these revolutionaries, you can exchange words and deal with them,” he said, citing experience that the NPA could be negotiated in the release of captured government soldiers and police.
The mayor added his account when the NPA apologized for the grenade attack in a gym in Paquibato district that injured civilians and paid 5,000 pesos for all the victims.
“When they informed me they will pay 5,000 pesos, I said ‘good’. When I asked where they will get the money, they said they will get it from banana planters,” Duterte quipped.
The mayor also assured investors of safety from crime and from corrupt officials and police in the city.
He also assured efficiency in business applications in local government services, as he emphasized his “72-hour policy that all transactions will be done.”
“If this fails, bring your papers to my office and I will work on it,” the mayor said.
This year’s Davao Trade Expo, organized by the Davao City Chamber of Commerce, focused on the region’s agricultural expansion to boost production and income. The expo promoted “five golden crops” in agriculture namely coconut, coffee, cacao, corn and cassava. The event drew in around 500 participants and 200 exhibits in agri-business products. (davaotoday.com)
http://davaotoday.com/main/politics/new-peoples-army/npa-taxation-a-reality-just-pay-them-says-duterte/
Saturday, October 16, 2021
Saturday, August 21, 2021
The Curse of August 21 - Mauro Gia Samonte
By Mauro Gia Samonte
August 21, 2021
We could recall that an extremely minuscule group began agitating for some happening around midnight of February 21, 1986 at the corner of Aurora Boulevard and EDSA in Cubao, Quezon City, to what later on evolved into the EDSA People Power Revolution (Edsa Uno).
The group was waving a singular flag on which were written the words: “August Twenty One Movement ATOM.” The group was calling for the downfall of the government of President Ferdinand E. Marcos. That augured what eventually Corazon C. Aquino would brag as the “bloodless revolt” that brought down the Marcos dictatorship.
Galunggong skyrocketed to P80 per kilogram from the low P28 immediately before Cory assumed the presidency. Meralco, which Marcos had placed in the name of the Filipino people all throughout his rule beginning upon the declaration of martial law in 1972, was restored to the private ownership of the Lopezes, together with the retrieval also by the Lopezes of ABS-CBN.
Meantime, immediately released were Jose Maria Sison, chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), and Bernabe Buscayno alias Kumander Dante, chief of the New People’s Army (NPA), who were both captured and incarcerated by Marcos together with Ninoy Aquino since 1977. Since Sison’s release and bloody re-assumption of revolutionary leadership, the CPP-NPA-NDF (National Democratic Front) has shifted back to utter terroristic activities that in due time would divest its insurgency of any pretensions to a legitimate people’s uprising.
Come to think of it, the Sisonite insurgency has been the major factor contributing to the underdevelopment of the Philippines over the past more than half century. From being already second to Japan in economic terms, the Philippines fell into the cellar among Asean nations. It is this pitiful condition of the country which President Duterte has been striving to lift.
But where did this condition begin in the first place?
In the August Twenty One Movement!
Oh, the curse of August 21 upon the nation!
At the start of the colonization by America of the nation, the Thomasites arrived in the Philippines. What were the Thomasites? They were American teachers sent to, in the reckoning of US President William Mackinley, “civilize the Philippine natives.”
The American aggression, which claimed some 200,000 Filipino lives, actually not only subjugated Philippine sovereignty to the United States but also killed the civilization the brown race was already enjoying even long before the earlier Spanish colonization began in 1521.
It would be interesting to dwell on this topic elaborately except that it is not the topic for the day. What this discussion stresses for now was that the Thomasites succeeded in erasing from the Filipinos their ancestral roots and in their stead implanted the now continuing American culture, in words, thought and deed.
The Thomasites crushed the Filipino soul.
When did the Thomasites arrive in the Philippines?
Hold your breath, Aug. 21, 1901!
How ironic that in the progression of history, August 21 seems to be a harbinger of horror for the Philippines.
On August 21,1971, two grenades exploded in the Liberal Party miting de avance (final political rally) in Plaza Miranda, which killed two vendors and seriously wounded more than a hundred others, including the entire senatorial ticket of the Liberal Party – except one, the “star of the show,” the secretary-general of the Liberal Party, Sen. Benigno Aquino Jr.
In one hearing of the Senate in 1989, former CPP secretary-general Ruben Guevarra revealed that the Plaza Miranda bombing was ordered by Jose Maria Sison. Who is Sison? He conspired with Ninoy Aquino in the establishment of the CPP in 1968.
More than 10 years after the Plaza Miranda bombing, August 21 stood out again as a decisive point in the country’s history.
On that day in 1983, Ninoy, against all expressed warning from various sectors, executed his widely touted historic return from the United States to perform what could be the most ingenious magic in the history of Philippine politics: euthanasia (what the Greeks call “good death” for mercy killing) in order to achieve the heights of heroic martyrdom.
Yes euthanasia, for wasn’t it no less than Salvador Laurel who testified in his “Memoirs” that Ninoy sought him out at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy on the summer of 1981 in Boston, Massachusetts and confided to him he “had two more years to live?”
Since his heart bypass operation, his days have been numbered and that instead of dying in bed, he told me “I would rather die in my own country, meaningfully and with a big splash.”
Ninoy Aquino’s death in the tarmac, beside his alleged assassin Rolando Galman (in blue shirt).
So, a bullet to his skull snuffed out the life of Ninoy at the tarmac of the Manila International Airport, thus enshrining him as the hero who intoned, “The Filipino is worth dying for.”
It might be asked, of what use is one killing himself when he won’t live to achieve his obsession to be president of the Philippines?
Oh, yes? Not only the widow of Ninoy had become president of the land as fruit of that self-inflicted death. The son became president after her death. And now increasingly getting similarly aspiring is the youngest daughter.
Nation, beware. Today, Saturday, is another August 21.
What is particularly horrifying about this is that the bombing of Plaza Miranda took place on an August 21, more than just a year to the country’s next presidential elections, which then was slated to take place in 1973. Today is another August 21 preceding another presidential election, slated in 2022.
As Ninoy’s ambition to be president was forever frustrated by the declaration of martial law in 1972, an event that could take place today might just have the effect of frustrating forever someone else’s current presidential election. That declaration of martial law was preceded by the Plaza Miranda bombing on Aug. 21, 1971.
What will happen today that will force the hand of the President – or anyone so constitutionally authorized to do it – to declare martial law and thereby, albeit unintentionally, cancel the elections in 2022.
Time and time again, August 21 has done its historically destined part. What shall this part be this time around?
Wednesday, June 16, 2021
1972 Martial Law
1972 Martial Law
Juan Ponce Enrile, 16 June 2021
Much of what had been said against the 1972 Martial Law was fiction.
President Marcos became president of the country in 1965. The United States and
the Soviet Union were locked in a bitter Cold War. And the communist ideology
went on a rampage and set the world ablaze.
The Philippines was not spared. Two insurgencies were organized in the
country in 1968. The CPP-NPA in Luzon and the Moro National Liberation Front
(MNLF) in Mindanao. These insurgencies were on top of ongoing Datu Maffallen,
Datu Mampatilan, Datu Mabbalao, and Ilaga rebellions there. Beyond these were
also the heavily armed political warlords in many parts of the country. Such
was the status of law and order in the land at that time.
The CPP-NPA and the Moro National Liberation Front were organized by
three young men: Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino, Nur Misuari, and Jose Maria
Sison. These three were former students in the University of the Philippines.
They were allegedly supported by a country in East Asia that wanted to keep the
Philippines busy.
The AFP then - which included the Philippine Constabulary - was a
military force of some 48, 000 men and women. Its combat weapons were Cal. 30
M1 Garand and Cal. 30 M1 Carbine rifles that the United States used in World
War II.
The CPP-NPA was armed with copies of Cal. 7.62mm U.S. M14 rifles, P-40
rocket launchers, mortars, and other lethal explosive devices imported from red
China. The MNLF was armed with modern European guns from Belgium.
The CPP-NPA and MNLF recruitment was quick and extensive. The CPP-NPA
for one penetrated all sectors of society: youth, students, teachers, academe.
colleges, universities, churches, professional and intellectual groups, media,
labor, farmers, fishermen, transport systems, urban and rural poor. Both also
targeted the military for recruitment.
The NPA started its violence in Metro Manila and Central Luzon.
Initially, its headquarters was in Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac. It built a
labyrinth of underground tunnels in the town of Capas. It terrorized the
countryside and murdered those that resisted it. During the national election
in 1969, about August or September, the NPA massacred twelve laborers in
barangay Sta. Lucia outside Clark Air Base.
In January, 1970, while President Marcos was delivering his SONA in Congress,
the CPP barricaded the old Congress building on P. Burgos Street in Manila. It
trapped President Marcos, his family, Senators, congressmen, Cabinet members,
Supreme Court Justices, ambassadors, diplomats, other political and religious
dignitaries, and leading business leaders inside the Congress building.
A day or two after, CPP elements stormed Malacañang, burned a hospital
there, threatened the presidential residence. President Marcos had to evacuate
his family to his presidential (yacht) in Manila Bay.
With the help of barrio self defense units that it organized in Central
Luzon, the AFP was able to dislodge the NPA from there. It pushed them north to
Isabela in the Cagayan Valley. And from there the NPA spread to Region IV in
the south to the Bicol region to the Visayan Islands, and to Mindanao.
Meanwhile, in Metro Manila, the communists continued their destructive
work. First, they bombed the Joint US Military Advisory Group (JUSMAG)
headquarters in Quezon City. They bombed the Liberal Party rally at Plaza
Miranda during the political campaign in August, 1971. Several people were
killed. Many were injured. Senator Jovito Salonga, among others, suffered
severe wounds on different parts of his body. He nearly became blind.
From 1970 to 1972, metropolitan Manila suffered weekly bombing. The
communist insurgents bombed Oil firms, pipelines of water utilities, Meralco
electric power systems, public and private buildings, business structures,
public and private markets. Even the US Embassy was not spared. So were the
Food Terminal Market, the Arca building, the Filipinas Orient Airways, the
Court of Industrial Relations, the Philippine-American Life Insurance Company,
to mention some of many.
Massive labor and transport strikes were mounted. The communists tried
to isolate and paralyze Metro-Manila. SLEX and NLEX were not existing yet then.
One of the transport strikes created a traffic jam that stretched from Los
Baños in Laguna to Manila.
The communists also captured UP Diliman in Quezon City. They established
a Communist Commune there under Erickson Baculinao as Chairman. For several
weeks UP Diliman was off limits. No one could go in and out of the place.
Permission from the Commune was required. UP President Salvador Lopez became a
virtual prisoner in his university. One person was shot and killed in that
incident.
In July, 1972, Defense Minister General Maraden Panggabean of Indonesia
was my official guest in Manila. When he observed what was going on in the
country, he said in one of our conversations: "You know, Johnny, what I
noticed about your country reminds of what happened to us in Indonesia during
the communist trouble there. Be careful!"
The final straw that broke the camel's back came from Ninoy Aquino
himself. In August, 1972, Ninoy asked me for an urgent meeting. I met him in
Urdaneta Village in Maketi in the house of Ramon Siy Lay, our common friend.
His brother Paul Aquino was with him. He told me that he met leaders of the
CPP, and they discussed a coalition between the CPP and the Liberal Party
should President Marcos declare Martial Law.
I made a written report of that meeting to President Marcos. When
President Marcos informed the public about what I reported to him, Ninoy denied
that he met me. President Marcos invited the Liberal Party leaders to
Malacañang for meeting with him, but the Liberal Party leaders refused to
attend. This incident made up the mind of President Marcos. history was made.
He proclaimed Martial Law throughout the land.
https://www.facebook.com/JuanPonceEnrile
https://www.facebook.com/JuanPonceEnrile/posts/10159802919798783
Sunday, May 9, 2021
"COLLEGIAL RULE" FOR "GOOD GOVERNANCE"
“COLLEGIAL RULE” FOR
“GOOD GOVERNANCE”
Collegial
rule promotes “good governance” because it provides for proficiency,
integrity and accountability in making and implementing policies and programs
of government.
Firstly,
collegial rule by its inherent nature harnesses Collegial wisdom. It
extrapolates to a higher level the idiom “two heads are better than one.”
[PROFICIENCY]
Secondly,
collegial rule impedes graft and corruption because its group-based
mechanism necessarily requires the disclosure of material information to many
individuals. As human experience shows, “corruption thrives in secrecy, and
withers in the light.” [INTEGRITY]
Thirdly,
collegial rule strengthens accountability because it separates the
“exercise of power” from the “ultimate hold on power.” As political reality
shows, the individual with delegated authority to exercise executive power,
routinely defers to the Collegial will of the assembly of elected
representatives, because this body holds the ultimate authority to
hire-and-fire him. [ACCOUNTABILITY]
Collegial rule also
promotes consensus building, because it pre-supposes or necessarily requires
the support of a majority to gain and retain political power. On the other
hand, one-man rule may promote authoritarianism, because power may be
gained by mere plurality of votes (i.e. a minority vote vis-Ã -vis the
total votes), and may be retained despite overwhelming opposition, because the
usual remedies for removal are either ineffective or impossible.
Collegial rule by majority
vote in Collegial decision making, is the standard in a parliamentary system
(at the national level) and in a council type system (at the local level). It
is the opposite of one-man rule by an individual decision maker, which is
the virtual standard in a presidential system (at the national level) and in a
mayor type system (at the local level).
Following
the American presidential system with separation of powers, the single
individual who becomes president and assumes one-man rule, takes full
control of the entire executive branch; appoints all the justices and judges of
the judicial branch; enjoys immunity or cannot be sued while in office; and
cannot be removed from office, except by impeachment (i.e. an ineffective legal
remedy) or people’s power (i.e. a practical impossibility). This is the sad and
sorry state of politics in the Philippines which undoubtedly needs to be
revisited, re-examined and restructured.
On the other hand, in the British
parliamentary system that adopts collegial rule, the political branches
of the executive and the legislature are merged, but leaves separate and
independent the non-political branch of the judiciary. Accordingly, an
effective mechanism for checks-and-balances is retained, notwithstanding the
merger of executive and legislative branches of government. This is a working
system of government, where some (not necessarily all) features may be
considered and adopted by the Philippines.
Collegial
rule weakens the control or influence of the oligarchs and the family
dynasties over the government, by dispersing the ultimate power of control from
one individual to an assembly of elected representatives. At the same time, it
strengthens the government vis-a-vis the powerful vested interests, by
consolidating the law-making and law-execution powers in the assembly of
representatives.
Furthermore,
collegial rule diminishes the natural
advantage of “rich and famous” candidates over competent but underfunded and
unknown candidates, through “voting by district” in multiple small
constituencies, instead of “voting at large” in one big constituency.
Notably, a manipulative mass media is less effective in small constituencies,
because here the voter has greater chances of knowing the real qualities of the
candidate.[i]
Moreover, the selection process involving multiple small constituencies
requires a substantially lower number of votes to win the post of chief
executive.[ii]
Finally,
collegial rule makes the chief
executive more readily removable for acts or omissions involving fault or
negligence, through a mere vote of “loss of confidence” in the assembly of
elected representatives, rather than through an impeachment trial,
administrative proceeding or criminal prosecution.
Does
collegial rule have any known disadvantage or systemic weakness? Yes, it
does. The mechanism to easily hire-and-fire the chief executive may cause
instability. Can this be avoided? Yes, it can.
Since
the chief executive is ordinarily removable at any time by majority vote of the
members of the elective assembly for mere loss of confidence, there can be
frequent changes in political leaders over short durations like every few
months or years. Changes in political leaders usually involve changes in
policy. This results in the unpredictability of government that eventually
hampers business and economic activity.
Nonetheless,
this systemic weakness may be addressed by modifying the mechanism to
hire-and-fire the chief executive. The modified method can make it easy to
“hire” the chief executive (such as by simple majority vote), but at the same
time, difficult to “fire” him (such as by qualified 2/3 majority vote). Once
elected, the chief executive may then hold the position until the expiration or
termination of his membership in the elective assembly, or until he is earlier
removed from office by higher or qualified majority vote.
Accordingly,
by modifying the method to hire-and-fire the chief executive, the people may
enjoy the benefits of collegial rule, without the disadvantage of
political instability.
This material was written ex-gratia by Demosthenes
B. Donato
for Tanggulang Demokrasya (Tan Dem), Inc.
All intellectual property rights are granted to the
public domain.
10 May 2021. Makati City, Philippines.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in
this material are those of the author
and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or
position of TanDem.
[i]
The electoral process for public officials needs to be designed in a manner
that is immune from any deliberate manipulation of public opinion by mass
media, considering that many television stations, radio stations, broadsheets,
tabloids and online news sites, are by common knowledge owned or influenced by
the oligarchs and the family dynasties.
[ii]
For example, in a state with 10,000,000 voters and
only 2 candidates, a candidate needs 5,000,000 + 1 votes to win as president
(chief executive), assuming that all voters vote in a “presidential system”
with direct voting. On the other hand, in a “parliamentary system” assuming 100
districts with 100,000 voters per district, the party of a candidate for prime
minister (chief executive) needs to win only 51 seats in the parliament
(national assembly). This would be 2,550,000 + 51 (or 50,000 + 1 per district)
or total of 2,550,051 votes only, assuming all voters in all districts vote.
Another example, in a town with 10,000 voters and only 2
candidates, a candidate needs 5,000 + 1 votes to win as mayor, assuming that
all voters vote in a “mayor type system”. On the other hand, in a “council type
system” assuming 10 districts with 1,000 voters per district, the party of a
mayoralty candidate needs to win only 6 seats in the council. This would be
3,000 + 6 (or 500 + 1 per district) or total of 3,006 votes only, assuming all
voters in all districts vote.
Sunday, January 17, 2021
EMPOWERING THE REGIONS, THE WAY FORWARD
EMPOWERING THE REGIONS, THE WAY FORWARD
As far as anyone can remember, Metro Manila
had always been far ahead compared to any other region in socio-economic
development. To correct this imbalance, many have pursued the regional decentralization
of government, based on the social theory of “subsidiarity,” saying that
regional government systems are in the best position to handle regional
affairs.[i]
As the late Dr. Gonzalo M. Jurado noted, regional government
systems promote the dispersal of development by securing the benefits of
“location” (or advantage of proximity to the regional center), by attracting
the forces of “agglomeration” (or advantage of concentration in the regional
center where there are already large concentrations of people and investments),
and by facilitating “friendly competition” (or advantage of competition among
regional centers to deliver the best services at the most reasonable prices).[ii] If I
may add, they also institutionalize the systematic “integration” of the
social and economic service functions of select government agencies,
consolidating their operations, administration, control and supervision under a
singular authority.[iii]
So how exactly should we pursue regional
decentralization? Based on what we already know, there are at least three (3)
ways to do this - by regional authority (RA), by autonomous region (AR), and by
sub-state (SS). RA is like SBMA, but for a much bigger area like Central Luzon,
and without the tax incentives usually granted in freeport and economic zones.
AR is like the BARMM and its predecessor ARMM. SS is like the component state
of Sabah, that by “accession” has joined the federal state of Malaysia.[iv]
Is there a national consensus on how to
pursue regional decentralization? Based on my personal obversation, there is none.
In Luzon, the people and their leaders
are apparently open to RA (as they already have the SBMA). However, they are
indifferent if not opposed to either the AR or the SS. Note that even the
Cordillera region did not create its own AR, even if so provided in the 1987
Constitution. In Mindanao on the other hand, I recall the words of our late
mentor, Fr. Romeo “Archie” J. Intengan, S.J. He once told me that as far as the
Muslim communities are concerned, anything less than “accession” to a federal
state would not be acceptable. Knowing that Fr. Archie spent a good part of his
life in the South during the martial law years, I take his subtle observations
as words of wisdom. In Visayas, it seems their sentiment is closer to Mindanao.
So how do we move forward if there is no consensus? Well, the
answer should be obvious. We should take the “bottom-up approach” and
let the people of the regions decide for themselves, rather than take the
“top-down approach” and impose on the regions uniform structures designed from
the top. We need to consider that there are many factors that influence the
success or failure of regional decentralization, including culture, demography,
geography, natural resources, public funds and even
insurgency.
While we have heard about the benefits of
regional decentralization, people do ask – are there are pitfalls along the
way? Yes, there are pitfalls ahead. Can we avoid them? Yes, of course, we can.
So what are these pitfalls? From my
engagement with people's organizations and concerned citizens, the major
concerns include the“Balkanization” of the nation (or the secession of
sub-states from the federal state), the huge cost of funding multiple
regional assemblies, double taxation that overburdens the taxpayers, and
a complicated legal system (with divergent legal frameworks across the
regions) that hamper doing business and job creation.
To prevent “Balkanization,” the federal
constitution may categorically prohibit secession, and to this end, vest solely
in the federal state the establishment of military (AFP) and police (PNP)
forces. Borrowing from the laws establishing freeports and economic zones, the
SS may have “internal security forces” which are actually government
security guards with the limited task of protecting persons and properties.
To avoid the huge cost of funding
multiple new regional assemblies, the present mayors and district
congressmen may be designated as ex-officio members of these
assemblies. Under the 1943 Constitution, local officials were made ex-officio
members of the national assembly.
To avoid double
taxation, we can temporarily retain the present public finance system where
only the national government collects the major taxes (on income, value added
and import duties), and thereafter allocate to the regions their fair and
equitable share in the collections.
To avoid a complicated
legal system, we can also temporarily prohibit the enactment by the SS of
laws on banking, insurance, commerce (on goods and
services), insolvency, intellectual property rights, professional practice,
immigration, naturalization.
Looking at all these limitations on the SS, are
we not rendering it inutile? No, we are not. They retain the government powers
most important to them, i.e. the power to approve plans, programs and projects,
and the power to allocate public funds.
So how do we move forward in empowering the regions? Check out the People's Draft (a crowd-sourced constitution), hashtag #PeoplesDraft. It is ready for discussion and deliberation on all points raised, and even more.
Demosthenes B. Donato
13 September 2019
Makati City, Philippines
[i]
Principle of Subsidiarity – “theory in sociology, that functions which
subordinate or local organizations perform effectively belong more properly to
them than to a dominant central organization;” Webster’s Third New
International Dictionary, (c) 2002, page 2279.
[ii]
Gonzalo M. Jurado, Notes on the Federal Structure for the Philippines, pages
2-4, 10 September 2012.
[iii]
Demosthenes B. Donato, Advantages and Disadvantages of Regional
Decentralization, 27 August 2016.
[iv]
Principle of Accession – “the act of becoming joined (as in a confederacy or
union);” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary Unabridged, (c) 2002,
page 11.
WHY LEFTISTS REJECT FOREIGN INVESTORS
WHY LEFTISTS REJECT FOREIGN INVESTORS
Before I answer
the question, let me first define what I mean by “leftists.” I refer to the advocates
of nationalist democracy (NatDem) and socialist democracy (SocDem), who
knowingly or unknowingly, may have been influenced by teachings of the
communist movement, specifically the Communist International (Comintern) of
1919-1943.[i]
The Comintern was
an international organization that advocated world communism.[ii] It was determined to
"struggle by all available means, including armed force, for the overthrow
of the international bourgeoisie and the creation of an international Soviet (i.e.
council) republic as a transition stage to the complete abolition of the
state."[iii]
Comintern “accepted the revolutionary potential of nationalism in the colonial
world.”[iv]
Notably, the
communist ideology was rooted in Marxism and similar schools of thought, that concerned
itself only with the poor worker class, the rich capitalist class, the conflict
between the social classes, the inevitable social revolution, and the goal of
common ownership of the means of production.[v] In other words, it was NOT
concerned with nationalities, ethnicity or race.
Nonetheless, in
order for the ideology to penetrate the colonial world (then ruled by the
capitalist powers of Western Europe and North America), the Comintern adopted
the strategy of agitating the colonized to rise up against the colonizer under
the banner of “nationalism.”
Thus, their
adherents were indoctrinated about the “evils” of foreign owned businesses (which
were mostly from the Western capitalist powers), and thereafter sent on global
missions to uproot and destroy them. Once the Western colonizers were weakened
if not defeated, the pure communist ideologues can come in to establish a new
world order.
Looking back at my
law school days, where I joined a SocDem group called Sandata, that was
affiliated with a larger coalition called Bandila, I guess I was among
those indoctrinated with ideas of “nationalism” that was basically
anti-foreign. In fact, in our course on constitutional law, we were made to
believe that limitations and restrictions on foreign investors under the
Filipino First policy, was “nationalist” and therefore patriotic.
Today, the
communist movement for global hegemony has dissipated, but its anti-foreign doctrine
lingers on among “leftists” of different shades. I guess they have forgotten,
or maybe they never got to know, that the anti-foreign doctrine was merely a
strategy to penetrate the colonial world for the eventual entry communism.
I for one no
longer believe that foreign investors are almost always predators, who are
simply out to exploit the country and its people. Rather, I see them as simply businessmen,
like any other, who are willing to invest capital and buckle down to work, in
exchange for reasonable profits.
If we take a
survey of workers or employees in the country now, I guess many if not most of
them, will prefer to work for a multinational company (owned by foreign
investors), instead of a purely local company (without any international
exposure). This is because from what I have seen, multinational companies
generally offer higher salaries and benefits.
Just to be clear
on this point, this is not because these foreign investors are benevolent. It
is simply because their foreign owners and management are used to much higher
salaries and benefits in their home country. On the other hand, if we look at
the local investors who are used to hardship, I guess it follows why they are
also hard about salaries and benefits.
As
I look now at the Filipino First policy, that by law restricts or limits the
entry of foreign investors into the country (thereby creating a captive local
market), I see that it makes the fundamentally wrong assumption that the
profits earned by Filipino businessmen, will “trickle down” to the Filipino
workers and consumers.
On
the contrary, economic experience shows that enterprise owners on one hand,
have contradictory interests in relation to enterprise employees and customers
on the other hand. See Theory of the
Firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure, by Jensen and
Meckling (1976). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0304405X7690026X. Law of Supply
and Demand, by Chappelow (2019). https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/law-of-supply-demand.asp.
The
enterprise owners will simply flow as much profits to themselves, unless or
until the enterprise employees and customers push back, whenever they can. The
same motivation for profit of course applies, regardless of the foreign or
local ownership of the enterprise.
Today,
the biggest dollar earners of the country are the OFWs (overseas Filipino
workers) who work for foreign employers overseas, and the BPOs (business
process outsourcing) that are generally owned by foreign investors.
Ironically,
industries dominated by enterprises majority or wholly owned by Filipino
businessmen, have the worst performance. We have the highest power cost (i.e.
power distribution), slowest internet (i.e. telecommunication), expensive
transport costs (i.e. mass transportation), unpredictable water supply (i.e.
water distribution), highly politicized mass media, and largely untapped
mineral and energy resources.
As
I see it now, the Filipino First policy is nothing but a Businessmen First
policy, where the Filipino workers and consumers are last priority. They will need
to get jobs overseas if they want better pay. Otherwise, they will have to swallow
the high domestic consumer prices, because there’s no other choice locally.
Notably, some associations
of big businessmen join hands with the indoctrinated “leftists” to block the
entry of foreign investors that they fear will challenge their monopoly or
oligopoly of the local market. I guess their motivation is obvious, and there’s
no need to write another article about it. They simply seek to perpetuate their
stranglehold of the local market, legalized by no less than the constitution
and the laws, and maintain their artificially high market prices, without having
to worry about new players that will force them to compete like hell.
Atty. Dindo B. Donato, General
Counsel
Tanggulang Demokrasya (Tan Dem), Inc.
16 July 2020.
Makati City, Philippines.
Disclaimer: The views and
opinions expressed in this material are those of the author
and do not necessarily
reflect the official policy or position of TanDem.