Press Statement (08 February 2011)

As we continue our search for truth and give justice to every man in the light of issues of corruption in the Armed Forces of the Philippines, we offer our condolences to the family of Secretary Angelo Reyes.

Learning from tragedies like this, it is our duty to moderate our proceedings from hereon and manage public information in this regard so that the premature and unwarranted trial by publicity of any person or institution shall be avoided.

We understand that an informed citizenry is essential to a functioning democracy. Freedom of information and determined institutional reforms will help ensure transparency, accountability and a vigilant citizenry.

-30-

Altered Natives Looking at Alternatives (Second of two parts)

The Filipino identity is an unfinished business, a work in progress.   It is a mosaic portrait which is the result of a long history of interaction with politico-cultural influences that have made the Filipino

cosmopolitan, thereby, resilient and revolutionary.  Culturally, we are Asian, Arabic, European, American, indigenous, etc. etc. rolled into one.  This is manifested in our diet, in our songs and dances, in our religious beliefs, in our patriotic political ideals and in our physical features which are as varied as the world can offer.  The Filipino, an amalgam of all these, is in the process of becoming.

Negative ascriptions like fatalistic, crab mentality or “ningas cogon” (or short-term enthusiasm) do not define the Filipino personality. Social scientists disclaim these characteristics as uniquely Filipino. They are behavioral traits generally bred in a society of uneven opportunities and hopelessness that are dispelled when people realize that they can pro-actively work together to uplift themselves.

The Filipino identity draws inspiration from the path our national heroes have taken in the struggle for freedom and national independence, bringing us to a vantage point where we can view where we have been from the perspective of where we want to be.   Our directions are clarified by the lessons that world history has taught us – that a nation will travel confidently in its journey if it decides internally to shake off all forms of bondage. 

The liberation of the people from the bondage of Egypt was not so much the decision of Pharaoh but the determination of God’s children acting out His will.  And this is true for all peoples that have to gain genuine freedom.  If we believe that our journey must be charted by mainly relying on our talents and treasures as a people, not even Globalization can dictate our destiny.  We take our place with the nations of the world by strengthening our foundations from within, not by casting our fate along globalist paradigms that often put us at a disadvantage. 

Reinforced by the principle of loving and helping one’s neighbor found in Christian, Muslim and Buddhist scriptures, as well as in the religious and cultural practices of indigenous Filipinos, genuine spirituality does serve as a purifying factor in our secular world.  “Bahala na ang Diyos” is not necessarily a fatalistic incantation but an affirmation that there is a Supreme Being, on the side of truth and justice, who metes out the final judgement, not in a detached way, but by being present in history. 

Our patriotism and our faith in a merciful and just God form part of the Filipino psyche.  This is not to say that Filipinos are in full agreement.  It only means that we have more to unite on than otherwise and that there are more than sufficient reasons for us to live in solidarity and harmony amid diversity.

We may never reach a final destination and that is part of our destiny.  But history has shown us the way and it is our turn to carry the torch and to pass it on to our children.  They, too, will continue with the journey.

Altered Natives Looking at Alternatives (First of two parts)

Is there a Filipino identity? Yes, there is and the celebration of Araw ng Kagitingan should be an occasion to put in proper historical perspective the development of that identity. 

Our Filipino identity is rooted in the development of our political and cultural consciousness.

Before the Spaniards came, our people already had commercial relations with neighboring Asian countries such as China, Indonesia, Malaysia and even India and some Arabian countries.  This is not to mention inter-island trading among the populace.  The people had governments as may be shown in the sultanates, the barangay and the indigenous tribunals in the hinterlands.

Pre-hispanic Philippines was predominantly Muslim with other indigenous tribes practicing primitive animistic religion.

Spanish colonialism interrupted what would have been a natural development of our society and superimposed a political and cultural system that supplanted much that it found.  More than three centuries of Spanish rule made Roman Catholics a larger percentage of the population. 

An outstanding benefit under Spanish colonialism was the unification of the Filipinos in common struggle which led to the growth of a nationalist consciousness. The launching of The Propaganda Movement by Filipino émigrés in Europe hastened the culmination of events marked by the Revolution of 1896.  This resulted in the secession of the Philippines from the Spanish Empire. 

But our freedom was short-lived.  The development of the first Philippine Republic under Emilio Aguinaldo was aborted with The Treaty of Paris at the end of the Spanish–American War which transferred control of the Philippines to the United States.  The Philippines came under American military rule from 1898 to 1901, a US territory from 1901 to 1935, then finally a Philippine Commonwealth from 1935 to 1945 supposedly as a transition period to prepare the Philippines for self-rule. 

However, four decades of direct and indirect American rule prepared a political elite that took turns taking the reins of government through democratic elections. To most Filipinos, the exercise of the right of suffrage is the hallmark of a democratic government regardless if these are generally intramurals among a certain section of the citizenry. 

While the Spaniards entrenched the feudal base, the Americans made use of this as a resource for its industries.  The Philippines, thereby, became an exporter of raw materials to the US and at the same time a market for its finished products.  We became a clientele not only for American-made consumer goods but for an educational school system and mass media that encouraged a cultural consciousness that was Western and colonial in orientation.   This generated a kind of cultural schizophrenia which made many Filipinos embarrassed about the color of their skin and the shape of their noses. 

But Filipinos are neither broken pieces of driftwood lashed by the waves of time nor passive onlookers making conjectures from the sidelines.  Historical events have been periods of engagement where Filipinos have learned to separate the chaff from the grain, myth from reality.  We have been altered by history but we can also alter the course of history. 

An Open Letter from the Lacson Family

As requested by the family of my colleague, Senator Ping Lacson, I am sharing the full version of the open letter they have written to give all of us the opportunity to hear their side of the story.

In Defense of Our Family’s Honor

In every Filipino family, two things are most treasured: honor and home.

Our brother, Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson is accused of masterminding the murder of Salvador “Bubby” Dacer and his driver. The principal evidence against him that the previous administration’s DOJ investigating panel and the court considered “probable cause” was an affidavit by a lone witness, Cesar Mancao. In that affidavit, Mancao narrated a supposed conversation inside a car between Ping and Michael Ray Aquino wherein Ping allegedly ordered Aquino to have Dacer murdered. He claimed to have overheard the conversation while seated at the front seat of the car next to Ping’s driver, Reynaldo Oximoso, while Ping and Aquino were at the backseat.

To establish “probably cause”, the investigators and the judge must find the evidence credible. It must lead a reasonable person to believe that the person being accused committed a crime.

We believe that a careful consideration of the following facts will lead reasonable person to a conclusion that Mancao’s allegation in his affidavit was a fabrication and an absolute lie:

1.    Oximoso denied in a sworn affidavit submitted to the court that such conversation or car ride ever happened. He explained that during the whole period that he served as Ping’s security aide-driver, the front seat was always reserved for the Aide de Camp. Therefore, Mancao’s claim that he occupied the front seat is not true. Oximoso also said that there was never a time that Ping, Aquino and Mancao rode together in a car during that period. Likewise, Aquino, in a sworn affidavit subscribed before a Philippine consul in the United States, denied having been in the same car as Ping and Mancao during the time that he was serving as PAOCTF Operations Division Chief, or having any conversation with Ping regarding any order or plan to liquidate or eliminate Dacer. He categorically denied ever receiving any order from Senator Lacson to liquidate any person, including a certain “Bero” or “Delta”.

2.    Mancao unwittingly proved his own affidavit to be a fabrication and a lie. His sworn affidavit indicated that the alleged car conversation took place “sometime in October, 2000”. He clarified in a hearing for his petition to become a state witness that the car conversation took place “sometime in September, 2000 or early October, 2000”. He clarified that he could remember it very well because it happened during the time that then Pres. Estrada was out of the country. He made such clarification spontaneously upon direct examination conducted by DOJ prosecutor Hazel Valdez. He did so, however, oblivious to the fact as sworn to by Sen. Mar Roxas and Usec. Mike Toledo that at the time President Estrada was abroad and hence when the car conversation supposedly happened, Ping was with President Estrada, Usec. Toledo and Senator Mar Roxas was on official visit to the United States. Incidentally, DOJ prosecutor Hazel Valdez was part of the DOJ panel that drafted Mancao’s February 14, 2009 while both were in the U.S. Thereafter, Mancao was sworn to his affidavit in his U.S. detention cell by the Philippine consul on a weekend, accompanied by DOJ Prosecutor Valdez.

3.     That Mancao’s affidavit was a fabrication is further bolstered by the fact that several months prior to its signing, Mancao who was in the United States at the time, was interviewed over radio station DZMM and over Channel 7. He freely talked about being contacted by Gen. Romeo Prestoza, then presidential security chief in Malacanang. He narrated in both interviews that Prestoza wanted him to implicate Ping in the Dacer murder case and in exchange, he would be discharged as accused and he would be relocated with this family to Singapore, all-expense paid. Is it a far-fetched conclusion that when threated with extradition and being charged in this murder case; Mancao chose the easy way out by agreeing to become a state “witness”?

4.    Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the car conversation actually happened, Mancao admitted in a court hearing that he being seated at the front seat of the car with Ping and Aquino at the back seat, he was not at all certain what he actually heard.

5.    On top of this is the testimony of Glenn Dumlao, who executed several affidavits attesting to Ping’s innocence of the crime. In one of his affidavits, he narrated how officials of the previous administration tortured him physically, mentally and emotionally so that he would implicate Ping, but he held on to the truth.

In spite of very weak evidence to support its case, the previous DOJ filed the complaint. The court issued a warrant for Ping’s arrest during the closing stage of the previous administration whose corrupt ways he exposed in many privilege speeches.

In an effort to strengthen a very weak case against Ping, the previous DOJ even cited a letter from Dacer to Estrada maligning Ping without submitting any proof that Ping knew about that letter. Another frequently told story is that Dacer allegedly told his daughters that if something happened to him, Ping was to blame. If these allegations proved anything, it is the fact that the case filed against Ping extremely suffers from lack of evidence to establish probable cause.

In our last Christmas together, Ping already told us of frantic moves of the previous administration to have an arrest warrant against him. He told us to take comfort in the fact that he had nothing to do with that crime.

Before the warrant for his arrest came out, Ping decided to become inaccessible. That was his personal decision. We understand that it had nothing to do with guilt or cowardice. He had enough information to base it on. For one, he knew then that the RTC judge was an applicant for promotion to the Court of Appeals. An evil trap was set by a perceived corrupt administration and it was about to be sprung on him.

Subsequent events validated his belief. On Friday, February 5, 2010, the RTC judge issued a warrant of arrest against him. On Monday, February 8, 2010 the Judicial and Bar Council recommended the judge to President Arroyo and she was promoted to the Court of Appeals one month later.

Ping became unreachable to avoid being a victim of evil conspiracy to put him away because of his anti-graft and corruption crusade. Self-preservation is a natural human instinct. He did not regard letting evil triumph as an act of decency.

A person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. But with a non-bailable crime like murder, the reality is that punishment comes before conviction. The accused suffers in jail while a court trial is ongoing to prove his guilt or innocence. Our Constitution says that the right to bail can be denied when the evidence of guilt is strong. In the case filed against Ping, the evidence is not only weak; it is fabricated. Just one affidavit with a conflicting story by a witness of doubtful credibility against multiple exonerating affidavits and statements, including two previously made by the accusing witness (Mancao) is why we say it is.

Therefore, we are extremely puzzled why DOJ Secretary Delima continues to ignore calls for a reinvestigation of this case. According to the DOJ secretary’s interviews, she is waiting for additional evidence to start such a reinvestigation. We can only guess that public prosecutors at the DOJ who had a hand in filing this case are giving her the wrong counsel.

1.    Setting legal technicalities and prejudgment aside, is it not common sense to give more weight to the testimony of three people against the uncorroborated account of one “witness”? That lone witness even admitted in court that he was with media months before that he was being enticed by the previous administration to implicate the senator in exchange for a comfortable life.  Out of four alleged passengers in the car where the “incriminating” conversation supposedly happened, three have sworn that it never happened. Why give so much weight to Mancao’s affidavit and disregard Dumlao’s affidavit which contains vivid details of how he was tortured and threatened so that he would implicate Ping in the murder case?

2.    Again, for the sake of argument and assuming that Mancao’s story is true, the invented conversation in the car referred to a certain “Bigote” as the mastermind for killing Dacer. Rather than trying to determine the true identity of “Bigote”, why did the previous DOJ instead charge Ping as mastermind? Is this not a tell-tale sign of a concerted effort to put him in jail?

3.    Finally, is the physical impossibility of Ping who was travelling in the U.S. to be riding in a car to Greenhills with Mancao and Aquino not enough to deem Mancao’s affidavit as nothing but imaginary trash?

4.    The most compelling proof that Mancao’s affidavit is a pure fabrication comes from Mancao himself. In a statement filed by his lawyer with the court, he declared that “he only learned of the sordid affair ex post facto” (after the fact). He is in reality being consistent with the affidavit that Dumlao testified to:

Mancao knew nothing about the alleged plan to commit the crime and Mancao repeatedly admitted such innocence in several talks in the U.S. with Dumlao.

Being robbed of something valuable causes us pain and anguish. But when that “something” is our personal or family’s honor, it causes terrible pain and extreme anguish. Our brother may not be in jail right now, but we can feel his suffering. Mental and emotional suffering is worse than physical pain. Being away from home and from loved ones is one of the worst situations to be in. Our wish is for our brother to spend a quiet Christmas dinner with us, like what most Filipinos do, at home.

A friend sent this message: “From dark clouds, we get precious water. From dark mines, we get valuable jewels. And from our darkest trials come our best blessings from God.” This we believe in. We believe that justice and truth will ultimately prevail in God’s own time. Until then, we would like to express our gratitude to those who understand and sympathize with us.

THE FAMILY OF PING LACSON

(Sgd)

Romulo Lacson                           Feliciano Lacson                 Reynaldo Lacson

Juanito Lacson                            Ma. Corazon Lacson-Magpayo

Ernani Lacson                              Ma. Cristina Lacson-Diaz

Can the Small Fish Thrive Alongside the Big Fish?

In a country where raging issues are often shelved to accommodate new ones, the issue of Charter Change keeps coming back.  It has momentarily taken the back seat to give way to the uproar over an expensive gastronomic party and other tidbits shaking the political grapevine.  There are other issues that will probably whet our political enthusiasm for the moment but the issue of Charter Change will keep surfacing because of its far-ranging implications. 

I shall not dwell on the political reasons for Charter Change as these have been more than adequately dealt with in the media and other fora for sometime now.  I shall focus on the economic reasons which are argued by some as less contentious.  In fact, they are not.  Proponents for Charter Change say that the long-term objective of amending the Constitution is to make the country economically stable and competent in the age of Globalization regardless of who will be in government.  At a glance, the declaration seems plausible but there is wisdom to be on the side of prudence especially when the initiative is perceived to be emanating not from the ground but from somewhere else.  What are the amendments being considered?  And would these amendments benefit the country in the long run?

Constitutions are social documents to promote the general welfare of citizens of free and independent nations.  However, this doctrine is presently threatened in the Age of Globalization where neo-liberals have been selling the idea of a borderless world without economic restrictions.  The political leadership in many countries has succumbed to the pressure of amending their constitutions to accommodate investment rules associated with economic globalization.   The specter of Charter Change which has haunted Filipinos in recent years has to be studied in this light.

Historically, the Philippines has been an open field for foreign investments, but proponents of Charter Change want the surrender of our national patrimony and the granting of parity rights to foreigners enshrined in the Constitution.  However, what is constitutional will not necessarily be right.  Consider the following: 

1. Foreign entities will be granted the same rights as Filipino citizens to own residential, commercial and industrial land;
2. Foreign interests will be allowed to exploit our natural resources;
3. Foreign entities will be allowed to control and/or operate public utilities such as water, electricity and telecommunications;
4. Charter Change will allow foreign ownership of mass media, schools, and advertising firms;

We have to be actively engaged in the discourse on Charter Change or wake up one day to discover that we have been fenced off from our land.

Looking Beyond Civil Liberties

The tableau surrounding Cory Aquino’s death brought our memories back to the mystical moment of EDSA Uno when Filipinos rose united to put an end to Martial Law.  There were no tanks to stop this time only intermittent heavy downpour that failed to discourage the outpouring of collective mourning for one widely acclaimed as a symbol of democracy.  Interviews and testimonies of people who knew her at closer distance gave many of us a better glimpse of this woman of substance.  

The sight of the Marcoses expressing their sympathy and the Aquinos graciously accepting it is perhaps one of the more touching sidelights at Cory’s wake, never mind if it happened only for a fleeting instant.  One is humbled by this mutual display of grace notwithstanding deep scars and stands out as one of the moment’s best messages.  It may not have finally settled the issues but showed possibilities of how we Filipinos can reach out to one other in spite of our disagreements. 

In the last few days, we have witnessed euphoria that dispelled distress.  It was like EDSA Uno all over again.  But after the dust shall have settled, will it back to the old ways again?   Is there any hope at all that things will ever be better?

EDSA Uno indeed brought back our civil liberties which many believe constitute what democracy is.   Now we have free speech, free press, free assembly, to mention a few.  Yet democracy is not just about political freedoms.  We can have all these freedoms but if abundance is confined to a more or less exclusively entitled minority, there would objectively be social disharmony.  Democracy also means freedom from poverty, freedom from hunger, freedom from diseases.  It also means economic democracy.  A government is more or less democratic to the degree that it empowers its citizens not only politically but economically as well.

Monopoly power, expressed in cartels and in subtle interlocking directorates, is perceived to be alive and well in the Philippines today.  Economics and politics are inevitably intertwined and the exclusivity of economic opportunities will have an unhealthy impact on the political dynamics of a country which prides itself to be democratic.  A situation marked by economic disparity engenders a system of patronage that negates free political choice.  To empower public stakeholders, government has to regulate excesses at the top while supporting economic activity that will directly benefit the majority who need to be uplifted.  Otherwise, our vision of a progressive and democratic Philippines - even with all our civil liberties - will forever remain an elusive dream. 

Sad Plight of Filipino Inventors

Too often, we love the din of cockpits and the steamy heat of boxing arenas more than the silent quest for life’s more essential things.  We are entertained by gladiators in the ring but are indifferent to the drudgery of painstaking toil.  We are mesmerized by the grandiloquence of fire and brimstone politicians and are unexcited by the sober discoveries of scholarly men and women. 

Somewhere in the back burner, we have relegated the scientists and inventors of our race.  When they come up with something novel, it does not excite us as much as the crowning of Miss Philippines or the routine knockouts of Manny Pacquiao.  We tend to regard the work of our scientists and inventors as of no consequence or at worst a practical joke.  We have not given our inventors the support and the respect that they deserve.

Take the case of Daniel Dingel, a Filipino mechanical engineer who in the 1980s developed a car that could run on water.  Skeptics called it a fraud.  Dingel stood his ground insisting that he had conducted enough tests to validate his brainchild, but officials from the Department of Science and Technology only succeeded in projecting him as an oddball and in pigeonholing his invention. 

Last year Genepax, a Japanese company, launched its water car that practically runs on the same process of electrolysis as Dingel’s car.  The car which has an estimated factory cost of $5,000 is going to be mass produced soon. Similarly, Daewoo of Korea has entered into partnership with Swiss Ethos for the production of water cars which are expected to hit the international market in the coming months.  Isn’t it distressing to see 80 plus year-old Filipino Daniel Dingel forlornly driving his water car while Genepax and Ethos are flaunting their products all because we chose to look the other way? 

The Philippines should be in the lead now had the government given the proper support to Dingel especially considering that he came up with his first prototype as early as 1969.  We would be driving cheaper, environmental friendly cars by now and would have saved revenues by paying much less not only for imported fuel but for imported cars as well.  We could even be exporting to other countries had the government supported his invention.

Filipino inventors and scientists are a cagey lot. They gingerly guard their inventions because they feel they have no protection from patent pirates aside from the anxieties they suffer by being given the usual run-around.   There may be more than meets the eye in the obstacles they have to scale to have their inventions accepted and promoted.  Could there be contrary interests who are not so happy about us Filipinos producing our own?