MAKE MORE, SAVE MORE, SPEND MORE THIS CHRISTMAS!

I was asked to write an article on Christmas spending by our office. Here's a soft copy of it. Ours is posted on a bulletin board. We're still a "brick and mortar" regime like in the dinosaur age. You know the limitations imposed in view of confidentiality agreement.

MAKE MORE, SAVE MORE, SPEND MORE THIS CHRISTMAS!

By Atty. Reggie Duran

It’s that time of the year once again, when most homo sapiens behave the same way: SPEND! It is Christmas season!  The spirit of the season can be overwhelming, and the temptation to go on a spree is almost irresistible. It is something that happens like clockwork, yet remains difficult to prepare for. I guess, for most mortals like you and me, it is the constant scarcity of resources that deserves reproach.

Sure, no one wants to be a miser –one who lives poor just so he could die rich. We want to enjoy, and share our blessings with loved ones and friends –and the needy, particularly the disaster-stricken. We all want to participate in life!  Nothing is wrong with extra generosity –for most it is impulse buying–but let’s be careful that it doesn’t bankrupt us. So how do we indulge in Christmas shopping without smashing our bank accounts? The quicker answer is simply to make more money, duh! Alright, so let’s talk about making money. Most of what we’ll cover here you may not feasibly implement this Christmas, but at least, I hope they will help you prepare better for the next.

Do more OT’s.  We’ve got tough competition on this one here. Sadly, looks like we’re not going to get help from it this time. But it’s still a month to go, though, and hope springs eternal.

Be a financial advisor. Let us crystallize this so as not to scare the prospects among us: you don’t need to do a hard sell. I don’t mean you to be a hard core salesperson. You are still a lawyer. Let us just do other things on the side.  I did insurance agency in the past dealing largely on non-life (e.g. car and fire). It required no hard sell, but more on contacts: friends and network of clients who trust you in what you do. Unlike life insurance, which I found and continue to find difficult and require pushy selling, non-life is more relationship-based. The thing for you to do is sell them better coverage; venerable, reliable, and dynamic insurers; competitive pricing; and most of all your relationship, which equates with personal service.

Do real estate. Again, this is “big item” sales you don’t need to push people to get them to buy. Here, quality is more important than quantity in determining your success rate. Focus on people you have relationships with, business that is, because you likely know what business/es they are into and their ordinary requirements, or extraordinary purchase requirement at a given time, instead of pitching to every warm body you find next to you. Imagine if you are able to close just one deal in a year, that could pretty much take care of your Christmas shopping!

get a license as salesperson, broker or appraiser. Talk to your friends and clients like you are offering them help, which in fact you are. Unlike in the past, prior to 1999, when everyone may sell real estate and claim commission, there is now Republic Act 9646, which punishes real estate practice without the required license with fine of not less than One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PHP100,000.00), or imprisonment of not less than two years, or both. Or better yet, TAKE MORE CASES! Uh uh! Only if you are a Project Attorney (PA). That’s a no-no to Full Time Employees (FTEs). True, we take that to heart here, or you’ll be damned. For FTEs you can do all else, but practice –why is this raising eyebrows?  For PA’s, you can be an arbitrator: ask Raymond how.

Working more only gives you so much. SAVE!  Gladly, working more is not the only way to make more money, try saving! I know this can sound BS. You might say saving is not making more; it’s like a dog eating its own tail and calling it nutrition, says a cliché. True, saving may not make more, but it does make more available. By SAVE I meant to say not only to set aside a percentage of what you make, but to save without cutting on spending. Yes, you heard me right, you can save without cutting your list short. Now, this becomes more confusing so let me break it down.  You remember the things you spend on every month/year, right? Insurance premiums; real property taxes; credit card bills, etc. You tweak a little the way you deal with these expenses and you make relatively substantial savings.

Pay your Real Property Tax (RPT) early and get 20% discount. If you are like one of our friends who lives in a Mansion in Multinational Village, you must be paying, hmm let me see, 20% assessment level on land, say 40%-50% on improvement? At say 2% RPT, your 20% discount (most cities in metro manila provide discounts to encourage payment) for one-time whole year payment within deadline (usually end of January) would be some Fifteen to Twenty Thousand Pesos (P15k-P20k). Not bad, you’re paying for it anyway.  You can even schedule borrowing to pay off your RPT in cash to enjoy the 20% discount. Even if you borrow at 10% per annum, you still get a 10% differential.

Insurance: car and fire. Here’s the thing that demonizes insurance: it is an expense. You’re spending on something you’re praying won’t happen. The problem is you can’t buy it when you need it. By that time, it is too late. For it to work, you have to procure it while the risk is still contingent. So for your peace of mind, procure a comprehensive Motor Insurance policy. Motor insurance premium for a comprehensive Policy could be anywhere between 1% and 2.5% for private vehicles, and 3% and 6% for commercial vehicles (haven’t checked lately though). It comes with coverage against Own Damage and Theft, as well as Voluntary Third Party Liability (VTPL) Bodily Injury and Property Damage (BIPD) coverage. That means you are covered against damage to and theft of your own car, and against death or injury, and property damage, to third parties, including legal liabilities. It also provides coverage for Unnamed Passengers Personal Accident (UPPA) for your car’s driver and passengers against death and injury. Make sure, though, you ask for coverage against typhoon, flood, earthquake, or volcanic eruption at an additional premium. Otherwise, you could not claim against Yolanda, for example. Now, If you’re creative, and you have an insurance license (if you don’t and you wish to acquire, you just have to take an exam and pay a minimal regulatory annual fee) a call to a friend in an insurance company can cut your expense by a fourth (representing commission of 25%). As regards your house, or commercial properties, including their contents, the stakes are higher. You don’t want to leave such precious property to chances or to the vagaries of the weather –Yolanda’s recent rampage gives us a clue of what we’re up against. For the same Mansion in our example above, you might be paying more or less 10k. That’s just P27 a day for your invaluable peace of mind! And you know now what happens if you’re a licensed insurance agent, cha-ching!

Credit cards can get you mired in debt even before you knowing it.  With this magic plastic in your wallet, some observe and I agree, you’d be twice, if not more, as likely to spend on things you don’t need.  You are an attorney and you will likely get two to five times as much for your credit limit. That’s a recipe for financial quicksand, if you are not careful. So don’t stoke your ego, the credit card company does not care about you, ouch! It only wants to make a cash cow out of you. So get back down to the ground, wise up, and make it a point to pay off your entire bill every billing cycle. The way credit card companies charge for purchases that are left unpaid after due date is convoluting. Some say they compute the interest charges reckoned from the date of purchase, implying that payments may not always apply to earliest purchases –mind boggling. To avoid it, keep in mind, as motivation, the money you end up saving by paying all every cycle. It takes discipline and deliberate consciousness, but you can do it.

Now that you have some funds, and you see it’s still way to go before Christmas. It’s time to make those funds work for you. There is a myriad of ways you can make your money work for you for a short term: Trust Funds, Mutual funds, Money Market Placements, Special Savings, so forth and so on. You already know all those.

Join auctions on real properties.  Pursuant to Section 260 and 263 of RA 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991, the local treasurer (City or Municipality), upon its certification of Delinquent properties, is authorized to auction said properties to satisfy the tax delinquency, penalties, and expenses of sale. You can actually bid and win even with few tens of thousands. But to make sense of you going through all the exercise, 50,000.00 to 100,000.00 or even millions of capital if you have that much sitting idly in your savings account, would make your while worth it. What’s in it for you? You might be thinking wild: “damn I can own property for as little as 50k to a 100k in QC?” Yes, you can!

Now, let’s crank up the calculator and see how much money you have made. No doubt you’ve made enough to make your Christmas shopping delightful and your bank account intact.

Mission accomplished! Merry Christmas!

Yolanda Can Allow Only So Much Preparation, and Luck, but Has Anyone in PAGASA Warned of the Possibility of Storm Surge?

My family in Calbayog City, Samar, like most, braced itself for Yolanda’s landfall Friday. Early in the afternoon, although power had gone out, my family shared with me a rather good news. Apparently, Yolanda had veered a little off its forecast path, missing Calbayog enough to spare it from complete destruction.

The mood was celebratory and grateful. The city had once again escaped a looming catastrophe, and as always, they turned to thank God for His protection.

A hundred kilometers or so away, the story was different, but it would not be known until Sunday morning, or two days after super typhoon Yolanda made multiple landfalls and pummeled the neighboring main island of Leyte, particularly Tacloban City, which bore the brunt of its wrath. Other cities, municipalities, that sustained heavy damages were Ormoc City, Baybay Leyte, Basey, and Guian in Eastern Samar, and many more.

In the evening, news of a few dead found littering the streets of Tacloban city had graced social networking sites like facebook and twitter. By Saturday, a hundred more corpses were reported seen on the streets, as stories and short video footages of what appeared at first like flooding, later on clarified as storm surge, had circulated in the papers and social networking sites.

By then, national government officials had reached Tacloban, and had a firsthand opportunity to assess the devastation. One described it as overwhelming, another, cataclysmic, yet another, horrific. The Philippine Red Cross had tried its hunch on the number of casualties placing it at a little over a thousand. This figure had started to get netizens’ attention. Some questioned the veracity of the numbers, having dramatically risen from a few, to a hundred, and now over a thousand.

On Sunday, papers and internet newswires printed what the public was not prepared to hear and read. The news’ numbers have absolutely taken a wild turn, now placing the estimate of the dead at over ten thousand in Tacloban City alone. Accentuating the news were gory pictures of dead bodies piling up everywhere amidst the rubbles stupefying the public,  which had to shake its head trying to make sense of all that was unfolding –faster than it was ready to take.

What was earlier celebratory mood in Calbayog had turned to eerie silence and anxiety. Many of Calbayog’s youth go to Universities in Tacloban City. Many inhabitants of Calbayog have their roots and families in Leyte. After a moment of shock, parents and family took to action. They had to go to Tacloban to find out how their loved ones were, with communications wholly inoperable. It would prove to be very difficult with roads made impassable by fallen trees electrical posts, and the tons of mixed debris, including corpses and carcasses, that had washed along the storm surge –has PAGASA alerted the public of its danger?

My sister, Yvette, and her husband, Carl, who went to Tacloban yesterday taking with them their kids, perhaps not knowing the enormity of the situation, being isolated from news, had to spent hours trying to get in Tacloban and longer trying to get out to make her way to Calbayog tugging along with them Carl’ mother, Ruth, and brother, Abe.

My other brother-in-law, Bong, has braved the odds, too, driving to Tacloban with some friends to look for Hannah, his niece, who went to school in a University, and to check on Yvette and Carl, who all, until early this evening, have not been heard from.  

As of this writing Yvette and Carl are still negotiating their way out of Tacloban amid long line of traffic. It is exodus that is necessary. Those who have family outside of Tacloban and can move out, had better leave. There is hardly any food and water, and the situation is becoming more desperate by the day.

While relief goods have started to fly in aboard the government’s C130, and peace and order being reined in with the deployment of over a hundred Special Action Forces contingents of the PNP and soldiers of the AFP, there is just too many mouths to feed to strain any inventory even with a steady flow of supplies, at least in the days, weeks, or months to come until Tacloban’s own industries return to operations.

Leaving Tacloban, in the meantime, when you can, will give space for emergency and rescue personnel, psychologist, and the like so that the urgent needs of the survivors are attended to while they still matter. Let us remember that like, if not more than, hunger, physical pains and wounds, emotional trauma needs timely arrest if the victim is to be repaired.

Let us give and do all we can. Let us volunteer. Let us make our brothers and sisters in Tacloban and other areas devastated by Yolanda that we are one with them, and that we are committed to helping them rebuild their cities and their lives.  

Good Intentions Do Not Cure Constitutional Defects

On Wednesday the Senate Finance Committee headed by Senator Chiz Escudero passed the President’s mammoth pork barrel, euphemistically called Special Purpose Fund (SPF), for 2014 amounting to a massive P600B. Along with it, it also endorsed to the plenary session the Executive Department’s unprogrammed funds for P139B and DBM’s close to a billion-peso lump sum outlay, both derivative nomenclature for the same fatty pork barrel.

Senator Escudero promised the committee would introduce amendments to the bill that would itemize “as best as we can, as far as practicable,” and that there would be provisions on their release, on reporting requirements and transparency, “so that it will make it almost like a line item.”

He cited as reason for its seeming hasty approval of the SPF its being “pressed for time to approve the budget (next year’s) within the year.” This sounds like a good intention. But that is besides the point. “Almost like a line item” is not a line item, thus not in consonance with the constitutional requirement that proposed expenditure be made as line items.

This persisting disregard of the edict of the constitution is what has taken us to the mess we are in now. If the Executive department is too indolent to craft the budget for Congress to deliberate and approve in time before the year ends, and in a manner that satisfies the requirements of the Constitution, then we must go the US way of shutting down the government for Congress’ Failure to pass the Budget Law or the General Appropriations Act (GAA).

The line mechanism prescribed by the Constitution is in acknowledgment of the perils of discretion in the use of funds. Where there is discretion, there is always corruption, as we have painfully learned.

Sadly, the Senate while condemning pork barrel, moves quickly anew to perpetuate the same in next year’s budget. This is proving what has been observed before of Lawmakers’ chorus in demonizing pork barrel as outrage over its scam erupted: it was hokey.

Will JLN Bare it All or Will a Senate Contempt Reward Her?

As the Nation awaits the appearance of Janet Lim-Napoles (JLN), alleged mastermind of the 10-billion PDAF scam, before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee on Nov. 7, 2013 presumably to testify on what she knows of the issue under investigation, speculations and analyses on whether she would bare all or whether she should be made a State Witness, thereby affording her immunity from prosecution, to cajole her into naming the lawmakers, executive officials, and private person she had conspired with and bribed, have swirled in the papers and online publications.

One senator opines that Janet Lim-Napoles should be made a State Witness citing the committee’s power and the fact that it had done so in the past, arguing that the country’s quest for truth about who among the government officials and private persons she colluded with in carrying out the elaborate scheme should justify letting her off the hook.

Another says the fact that she is already under detention on a charge of the illegal detention of her erstwhile trusted operator, and cousin Benhur Luy emasculates the coercive nature of the Senate committee’s contempt power as there is no incentive in avoiding the same –you can’t compel her under threat of detention if she refuses when she is detained elsewhere anyway.

Yet another senator even provides more color by hunching that she may even deliberately court senate contempt by refusing to answer any question so that the committee would detain her in the chamber’s holding room, citing the air-conditioned room, better amenities, possible internet and pc use are enough lure to escape her less desirable detention in a Police’s Special Action Force camp in Sta. Rosa Laguna.

These could spark a debate and even protest among the readers, so let’s give each of the above a short discussion.

On the issue of making her a state witness, it is worth noting that not every one (of the accused) may be made a state witness. Even the courts, upon which the power to discharge is bestowed as an exercise of its jurisdiction, on proposal and initiation of the prosecutor, have to be satisfied with the requirements of the law.

So who can be a State Witness? Section 9, Rule 119 of the Rules of Court provides enlightenment, to wit:

“Sec. 9. Discharge of accused to be state witness.

When two or more persons are jointly charged with the commission of any offense, upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case, the court may direct one or more of the accused to be discharged with their consent so that they may be witnesses for the state when after requiring the prosecution to present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state witness at a hearing in support of the discharge, the court is satisfied that:

(a) There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested;

(b) There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of said accused;

(c) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points;

(d) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty;

(e) Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude.

Evidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial. If the court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as State Witness, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence.”

Is there absolute necessity for JLN’s testimony? This is answered by the answer to question no 2. It would not be difficult for the judge, on whom such determination is charged, to give a negative answer to question number one owing to the positive answer in question number two, and obviates answering question number three.

Put another way, there is no necessity, much less ABSOLUTE necessity, because there are whistleblowers who have similar firsthand detailed accounts of JLN’s inner workings such that their testimonies are enough to sustain conviction of the accused, including JLN.

On question number four, even considering that the law does not require that the person sought to be discharged be the LEAST GUILTY, but simply not the most guilty, JLN hardly seem to be lesser guilty than the other co-accused, she having masterminded the scam based on testimonies of the whistleblowers. If at all, she could ONLY BE equally guilty as her co-accused.

Lastly, whether she had been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude, we have not heard the DOJ, the Court, or the Ombudsman making any pronouncement on the issue, but even on the first four requisites, JLN would not qualify as a State Witness.

Why others are floating the idea, no one really knows for sure what the real score is. Certainly, the public who has since been dumbfounded by the scale of the scam of which JLN et al. stand accused, would never sit idly if the ombudsman would eventually propose or resolve to discharge her as an accused in favor of her testifying for the State. Plainly, the tradeoff is unwarranted.

On another senator’s suggestion that the Senate contempt power and its consequent order of detention could hardly compel JLN because she is detained anyway already. Not true at all, let us remember that for time spent under preventive imprisonment she gets to earn the entire time or eighty percent thereof, as the case may be, as credit against her eventual sentence (Article 29, Revised Penal Code or RA 3815). The same is not true, though, if she were detained as a consequence of the senate committee citing her in contempt, for the latter is not deprivation of liberty in relation with the crime for which she is being presently detained (Serious Illegal Detention of Benhur Luy), and it is by order of another institution (the Senate), other than that issuing the commitment order (the courts).

On yet another senator’s banter that she might deliberately court Senate’s contempt preferring to be detained in the senate chamber apparently for its better condition, the Senate is not obliged to extend to its detainee the privilege to use and enjoy all its amenities. A detainee, certainly, and more importantly in this case one who is not a public official, or as the upper house would love to call it, a co-equal branch, does not annex to his/her rights the enjoyment of comforts available in a place of detention, which happens to be, this time, the Senate. After all, the Senate is not a correction facility, and the purpose of detention is correction, a penalty, not vacation or sort of reward.

Truth be told, there should be no pressure on the State to extend all sorts of accommodation to JLN. As things stand now, she is an accused, she must be treated like one.

Pnoy’s Obstinate Stand on DAP May Well Cost Him the Presidency

Pnoy has been stumping around at every speaking engagement and media interaction on his recalcitrant position on the legality and constitutionality of the little-known Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) at the backdrop of pronouncements made by a score of the country’s recognized Constitutional Law experts as Senator Mirriam Defensor Santiago, former Senator Joker Arroyo, and Constitutional Convention member Fr. Joaquin Bernas, a member of 1986 Constitutional Commission, which drafted the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Even Former Chief Justice Reynato Puno shares the same view.

Pnoy has, it seems, as source of his basis for his audacious DAP constitutionality argument the opinions of his Budget main man and architect of DAP, Lawyer Butch Abad, Presidential Spokesperson and Deputy Spokesperson, Lawyers Edwin Lacierda and Abigail Valte, respectively, and presumably his Executive Secretary, Lawyer Pacquito Ochoa. I don’t want to take anything away from the latter, but to be pitted against the former (Sen. Santiago et al.) on issue of constitutionality, is like a boxing match between Floyd Mayweather and Oscar Larios (very little-known).

And it is not as if Sen. Santiago et al. simply said DAP was unconstitutional without providing bases for the position, on the contrary, they were almost unanimous on their basis: “No money shall be paid out of the treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation made by law.” (Section 29, Article VI, Philippine Constitution).

The “appropriation” being referred to in the adverted provision is the General Appropriation Act (GAA), the law containing the executive-detailed budget to run the government on a given year. Congress deliberates on whether to approve or reduce the budget so proposed by the president, but it cannot increase the same. Clearly, once the GAA is passed, certified by both houses, and approved by the president, and becomes a law, Congress’s task is done except for its Oversight Committee, and it is the executive department that carries out the provisions thereof.

That the president exercises discretion in the disbursement of so-called DAP, allegedly representing savings from the budget, is paying out money not in accord with an appropriation made by law.

Paragraph 5, Section 25 of the same article on “The Legislative Department” of the Constitution, provides, viz:

“Section 5.

No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.”

While this provision continues to reinforce the argument in favor of unconstitutionality, this seems to be where Pnoy is drawing his constitutionality argument: “xxx the President xxx may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.”

However, that is a clear misreading of the provision. The president may augment any item in the general appropriations law, it speaks of the law or what is stated therein, which negates discretion on disbursement.

The president may continue his stubborn stance on the matter, but the longer he does so the more that his base support will erode. Many of his supporters, at this point, continue to give him a pass on his transgressions, but they have been calling on the President to make his Liberal Party stalwart and DAP architect bow out of office out of delicadeza and spare the president the flak he had brought on him.

If delicadeza, however fails to dawn on Butch Abad, Pnoy must exercise his power to remove and fire Abad. This can save his presidency, and refocus the hunt on the scammers who are enjoying the benefits of muddled issues brought about by DAP.

No Crisis-Turned-Opportunity: This Time Let Us Make Sure the Funds Go to Intended Beneficiaries -The Quake Victims

Amid complaints on the government’s languid response to the disaster that the 7.2-magnitude quake brought to Visayas provinces of Bohol and Cebu, the Palace assures “help is on the way.”

Calamity funds are being released, but as we recently learned, calamities are a crisis turned to opportunities by unscrupulous public officials who are given power of control over such funds. This time, while we goad the government to, and root for, the release of funds, the public must be vigilant that they go to intended beneficiaries.

Let us not allow the victims of this “act of God” that is the earthquake catastrophe be victimized twice by the greater man-made calamity of corruption.

DepEd has announced it is mobilizing its contingency fund and releasing some Three Hundred Million Pesos (P300,000,000.00) to farm out the works and repairs necessary to expedite reopening of school classrooms. Let us watch those zeroes in the amount, and make sure they all go to rebuilding the decimated and damaged classrooms and amenities.

One way to lessen the trauma for the victims, especially the children, is to reopen the schools for them as quickly as possible, and comfort them with the sense of normalcy it projects.

 

At the Backdrop of GMA et al. Plunder Indictment, the Pork Scourge Stares Pnoy in the Face

It is amazing how former government officials of the Arroyo Administration are crying foul over plunder charges filed against them for their role in the release of approximately 23B of Malampaya funds (an accumulation of royalty for the government on oil and gas finds in the country), purportedly decreed by an EO issued by then President GMA to attend to the urgent needs of the victims of typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng. COA, however, finds in its report, and on which DOJ bases its case, that they went NOT to typhoon victims, but to pockets of lawmakers, Arroyo cronies, and executive officials as high up as former president herself Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (GMA).

Ermita says he only carried out the orders of the then president GMA. Former Budget Secretary and now congressman Rolando Andaya echoes Ermita saying his job was simply ministerial. But is it really plausible that these heads of offices who wield so much power and clout with then president GMA would just carry out orders and release budget involving billions of pesos all in faithful compliance with the mandate of their office, and without consideration? I tell you that is a tough sell.

On whining why the former president GMA is being indicted. What is the fuss? Even the P10B PDAF scam, as narrated in statements sworn to separately by the whistleblowers, covered the period ten years back, which puts it right within the 3-term (9 years) GMA regime which ended in 2010. Janet Lim Napoles herself, the PDAF Scam mastermind, hinted in interviews prior to her surrender, that she was not the boss, and instead referred to her boss as little girl or small girl. They saw this coming, so the make-believe surprise play is not going to cut it.

It is not to say that I am without beef with the Pnoy administration. I wrote in a previous post how disappointed I was, so were many who until then fully supported him, at his insidious double talk regarding pork barrel. While he said it was finally time for the pork to vanish for good, he kept in his 2014 Budget some P450B in so-called Special Purpose Fund, which he could direct the disbursement of as he would please.

Again, these attempts, never mind the subtlety with which they tried to portray innocence, are what infuriate the Filipino people, inasmuch as they NOT only betray the president’s one-upping them, but more than that, they insult them. How dare the president and his, what appears now to be, not-so-bright boys think that the Filipino people are too dumb to tell pork when it goes by another name?

Then came the DAP debacle, which the flailing Jinggoy brought to fore, coloring it as bribe to Senators for Voting to convict then Chief Justice Corona in his impeachment, even as he later clarified it was not bribe, but incentive. It did not help that they all chorused in defense of said DAP, arguing that there was legal basis for it, for there simply was none. It was patently illegal.

It is these miscalculations that would put the president at a collision course with his bosses, who are now ready to flex their muscles. I am sure right now the president is seeing enough that could provide the impetus to his untimely and drastic ouster, if he is not careful.

If the president wants to preclude a whopping precipitation of events, he must give up some heads. The people are shouting for the blood of whoever architected DAP. Right now, it’s ABAD’s head that towers the rest. Before the situation spins out of control, Pnoy must ask Abad to bow out of office.

Sure, he must have considered Abad’s genius as responsible for most of his administrations praise-drawing initiatives, but the situation demands that he go, if the president is to keep his head above water.

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 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 Anit-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 has 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.

 

 

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.

 

 

 

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 P10Mon 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 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 friendswho now are being scalded in hot water, and raring to end them?