R.I.P Partylist System
What is the Partylist System?
In a nutshell, every elections, voters vote for one accredited group that represents various marginalized sectors (such as workers, farmers, urban poor, indigenous peoples, youth, women, OFWs, PWDs, etc.). Through a complicated formula, groups with a certain number of votes receive at least one seat, to a maximum of three seats in the House of Representatives.
According to Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, the partylist system is a countervailing means for the weaker segments of our society to overcome the preponderant advantages of the more entrenched and well-established political parties.”[1]
In other words, it was to give a chance for candidates who did not have the 3Gs of traditional politicians (guns, goons, and gold) to be elected to the House of Representatives. It was also a recognition that the trapo, or traditional politician, who dominates Congress and Senate does not really represent the interests and welfare of the poor and marginalized.
After the controversial Supreme Court ruling on the partylist system last week[2], a former COMELEC commissioner and member of the Commission that drafted the 1987 Constitution reiterated that the intent of those who included the partylist system in the Constitution is to allow the marginalized to represented.[3]
The Partylist System and the Marginalized
Since Bayan Muna first ran in 2001, there have been cases where the partylist system actually advanced the interests of the ‘ordinary Filipino’. Partylist reps under Bayan Muna, including Teddy Casiño, have authored and co-authored laws such as the Anti-Torture Act, Anti-Enforced Disappearances Act, Rent Control Act of 2009, Tax Relief Act of 2009 (for Minimum wage-earners), Public Attorneys’ Act of 2009, and RA 10366 (An Act Assigning Special Polling Places for Persons w/ Disabilities, Senior Citizens, and Expectant Mothers).
The youth-oriented Kabataan Partylist, meanwhile, filed the Anti-’No Permit, No Exam’ Bill which was passed by the House and was almost passed by the Senate before the Catholic Educators’ Association of the Philippines (CEAP) blocked it. Workers and farmers brought their campaigns for wage increases and land reform, respectively, through Anakpawis Partylist which filed (and re-filed) the P125 Wage Hike Bill and the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill.
The Partylist System and the Status Quo
But the partylist system is in no way perfect, and even during the first-ever partylist elections in 1998, trapos, members of the ‘ruling elite’, and other non-marginalized were already exploiting the said system. Many trapos realized one needed less votes to win a congressional seat in the partylist race than if he/she were to run in a congressional district. Incumbent solons on their third straight term formed their own partylist groups to run for a fourth.
This became apparent by 2010, where many partylist groups registered in names starting with ’1-A’ just to get a chance that they would have a better chance of being easily seen in the ballot.[4] In the said elections, presidential son Mikey Arroyo ran as a representative of security guards and tricycle drivers, while the fugitive criminal General Jovito Palparan ran to represent ‘victims of communism’. Even worse is this year’s elections, which includes a partylist group where the first three nominees are the relatives of a Supreme Court justice, groups where the nominees are either former government officials or relatives of incumbent ones, and even two where the nominees are relatives of a famous TV preacher.[5]
Partylist System: Now a Playground of the Rich?
Many are cynical of the partylist system. My own professor in Constitutional Law said that the partylist system was merely hatched as a means of discouraging the poor from joining the armed revolution as their means of fighting for their rights. Anyone who’s studied Marx would call the partylist system as a way to ‘create the image of change’ without any actual social change.
But even this limited space for the poor and marginalized in Congress is now under attack.
In last week’s decision in Atong Paglaum vs. COMELEC, the Supreme Court essentially removed the ‘marginalized’ from the partylist system. Major traditional political parties, like the Liberal Party and UNA, can now field candidates in the partylist race. There is no need for a partylist nominee to be part of the marginalized sector he or she claims to represent.
Hence, the ridiculous situation in which landlord Tingting Cojuangco is running as a representative of landlords, socialite Leah Navarro is running as a representative of the urban poor, and presidential undersecretary Barry Ibarra is running as the representative of farmers, will most likely be repeated in 2016 onwards.
Not only has the Aquino government allowed the rich to invade the tiny portion of the Government where the poor actually have a chance to access, they are now banning those who actually represent the poor.
Partylist System: Pro-Aquino groups only?
KABATAAN, and PISTON Partylist (which represents the public transport sector), are about to be disqualified for allegedly violating COMELEC rules on putting posters in public places. Yet it is clearly a case of discrimination and harassment because of all the partylist groups and senatoriables who have been charged with similar violations, only the two mentioned above are about to be disqualified.[6]
In fact, the partylist group with the most violations (Akbayan, which received more than P100 million from the Aquino family back in 2010)[7] does not face any disqualification case. Senatoriables under Team PNOY lead the way in poster violations, and Akbayan’s Risa Hontiveros is ‘The King of Kings’, yet none of them are facing any disqualification proceedings.
Why are the two being discriminated against?
KABATAAN and PISTON are among the most active critics of the Aquino administration. PISTON has relentlessly exposed President Noynoy’s ‘cooperation’ with oil firms to keep petroleum products’ prices overpriced. KABATAAN meanwhile has taken the lead in the yearly campus strikes against budget cuts to education.
Even from a purely ‘lawmaker’ point of view, partylist groups like KABATAAN (those affiliated with the MAKABAYAN bloc) are better than their counterparts. They produce more bills, resolutions, and laws, especially those which are actually related to the interest of the sectors they claim to represent.
Declaring war against the youth
With the recent suicide of Kristel Tejada, the announcement of 451 universities and colleges hiking their tuition fees for the nth time next semester, and reports of a P900 million budget cut to state universities, the youth in particular needs representation in Congress. There is clearly no use relying on President Aquino, who is the one taking the lead in allowing schools to increase their profits, and slashing the funding of education. The partylist system, for all of its many flaws, is possibly the only way the youth can uphold their rights while working with the government and within the current system.
The Filipino youth must understand: this is not a loss for the partylist groups affected and their members and supporters. This is a loss for everyone of us. The tiny space in which we were able to influence laws in our favor has now been taken. At a time when the Aquino administration is determined to remove our right to education, we cannot afford to lose any avenue or means to defend our welfare and interests.
[2] http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/302522/news/nation/sc-party-lists-need-not-represent-marginalized-sectors
[3] http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/04/09/928551/groups-picket-sc-over-ruling-party-list-groups, http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/302900/news/nation/concom-member-solons-blast-sc-ruling-on-party-list-system
[5] http://kontradaya.org/kontra-daya-slams-accreditation-of-non-marginalized-partylist-groups-linked-to-aquino-arroyo/, http://natoreyes.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/what-happens-next-to-the-partylist-system/
Pirates of the Tubbataha
Filipino netizens are up in arms over the ‘grounding’ of the U.S Navy warship U.S.S Guardian on the Tubbataha Coral Reef off the coast of Palawan last Friday, causing a yet-undetermined amount of damage to the world-famous corals.
Anyone who’s gone to Palawan on vacation knows how treasured these corals are. Tourists are made to wear special footwear (or were they diving flippers? I can’t remember exaclty) whenever they wade into those reefs. In fact, Tubbataha was designated as a ‘World Heritage Site’ back in 1988. To protect the said reefs, authorities of the Tubbataha Reef National Park forbid ANY and ALL kinds of naval vessels from entering the area without any permission.
There’s a good reason to be seemingly overprotective: it takes centuries for a coral reef to develop. That’s what makes the January 17 incident enraging: in the blink of an eye, a U.S warship destroyed what took centuries to be created.
Even worse, the U.S.S Guardian did not ask for permission from the Park authorities. The latter’s repeated queries over the radio were ignored. And when the warship finally crashed into the reef and Park rangers went over to investigate, the guns of the Guardian, as well as the soldiers on its deck, were pointed at the Filipinos.
Even if the U.S government agreed to fork over the P12,000 per square meter (the initial estimated cost of the destroyed corals), the damage is irrepairable.
A long history of environmental destruction
The Tubbataha incident is symptomatic of Philippine-U.S relations. While the Philippine government tries to ease anti-U.S sentiment by invoking the ‘hospitable’ culture of Filipinos, American soldiers and corporations regularly act in a way no decent and well-mannered visitor would in our own homes.
Take note that under Noynoy, there have been two incidents in which U.S warships dumped their stored human wastes into Subic Way. Wikileaks meanwhile revealed that in 2007, the U.S secretly extracted uranium from a U.S nuclear submarine which sank off somewhere in Philippine waters. Way back in 1991, thousands of Filipinos were exposed to American toxic wastes when they were billeted in the abandoned U.S bases after the Pinatubo eruption. Many of them now have various forms of cancer and leukemia, while many of their children have been born with various physical defects.
And of course, mining firms from the U.S and other foreign countries are the #1 perpetrators of cutting down our forests, causing landslides, and poisoning our streams and rivers.
A wake-up call to Filipinos
Hopefully, something good will come out of the Tubbataha Incident. Right now, I can think of two things: first, that people finally become aware that the presence of U.S troops carries a huge cost not payable in pesos and dollars, and which is being paid by the ordinary Filipino. Second, that Filipinos now go beyond the typical understanding of ‘environmentalism’ which consists of using paper bags instead of plastic bags while shopping. ###
Sources:
“Tubbataha officials protest U.S. behavior”, Rappler
“Wikileaks document claims uranium smuggled out of PH”, Philippine Daily Inquirer
“Seeking Fairness and Justice: Toxic Wastes Left Behind at the former US Military Installations in Clark and Subic, Philippines”, Bayanihan Foundation
America’s Death from the Sky is now in the Philippines
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), more popularly known as ‘drones’, are used by the U.S military to supplement its over-extended military forces. With the rise of many national governments who oppose U.S meddling in their affairs (such as Venezuela, Cuba, other Latin American nations, Iran, North Korea), as well as armed liberation movements against occupying U.S troops (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya), there are not enough American soldiers to impose U.S control. Thus, drones literally allow a single American soldier in a dark, air-conditioned room to conduct the ‘work’ of dozens in ‘the ground’.
The usual justification by the U.S military, as well as pro-U.S stooges like our own president, is that these are part of the ‘war on terror’ against ‘Islamic extremists’. What Mr. Noynoy Aquino has conveniently omitted is that ‘drone strikes’ have killed thousands of civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia in the past decade[1][2].
‘Double-tapping’[3] is a term used for the U.S military’s practice of conducting a second drone strike right after a first one, and at the very site. Aside from killing civilians who were just wounded and could have been saved with proper medical attention, ‘double-tapping’ deliberately targets paramedics and other civilians rushing to help the victims of the first attack. According to the Pakistani government, eight out of every ten people killed in a U.S drone strike are civilians[4].
The destruction caused by the drones extend beyond the deaths of those killed in the blast and by shrapnel: in many parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan, civilization has literally collapsed[5]. Parents have stopped their children from going to school out of fear. Gatherings such as funerals and weddings are being discouraged as these are also routinely targeted[6]. The deaths of parents leave their children in danger of dying of starvation.
In the face of the Masbate discovery[7], the Aquino government, the Armed Forces, and the U.S Embassy will again try to justify the drone operations by saying that these will be used against ‘insurgents’, primarily, Moros. Now, assuming for the sake of argument that these insurgencies are something bad (which it isn’t) that need to be eliminated, is it acceptable to trade four civilians’ lives for one rebel?
Drone operations are a menace and a crime against humanity. It is something no freedom and independence-loving Filipino would never allow in Philippine airspace.
[5] Supra
Ka Eden
As a Sociology freshman at the University of the Philippines, Ka Eden Marcellana was the face of human rights violations perpetuated by the military. Before she was brutally murdered, she was the secretary-general of the human rights group Karapatan’s Southern Tagalog chapter. In that capacity, she worked tirelessly to expose the atrocities committed by the forces under the command and explicit direction of then-Army Col. Jovito Palparan in Mindoro Island.
Before that, she was constantly accused by Palparan of being a ‘communist’ without presenting a single shred of evidence and without filing a case in court to give Ka Eden a chance to clear her name.
Without giving her due process, she was abducted by soldiers, as attested by her companions who were made to kneel on the dirt, blindfolded, in the middle of nowhere in Mindoro. Less than a day after, her body was discovered with stab wounds from an ice pick, her head smashed beyond recognition, and her hands tied behind her back.
Three years after, the mastermind behind Ka Eden’s death was promoted by the then-President and given praise in no less a venue than her State of the Nation Address. Six years after that, that mastermind continues to enjoy his freedom under the current president.
2.
We all die. The goal isn’t to live forever. The goal is to create something that will.
- Chuck Palahniuk
I came across this quote in Facebook just minutes after I saw several FB friends ‘greeting’ Ka Eden on what should have been her birthday today. I think it is quite fitting. In our country, those who expose wrongdoings by the government have short life expectancies. In terms of shortness, Karapatan members are at the top of the heap.
Yet she resolutely continued her advocacy despite the threat of death hanging inches from her head. I don’t know if she knew about this quote. But if she did, I’m sure she would have agreed with it. She knew that human life, fleeting and precarious as it is, could contribute to something tha would live on and continue to stand long after one is dead and gone. In her case, I’m sure it would’ve been a truly just and humane society, one where human rights are truly respected.
3.
Many of us are so caught up in living in the moment that we forget to ask ‘What are we living for?’. Even worse, many of us simply accept the pre-supplied answer to the question, given to us by society, family, and mass media.
Be honest to yourself: What are you living for? Are you simply following a route or path pre-programmed by people other than you? Are you following values that you didn’t really consciously choose, and merely digested as it was mixed with your baby food?
Look back: there was a time when children weren’t expected to go to school, merely work 16 hours a day i a dangerous, dirty mine or factory; when women weren’t allowed to vote because they were just about the same as pigs and chickens for their husbands and fathers; when those unfortunate enough to be born brown or black were viewed fit for no more than being slaves.
Compare it to our existence today. Did you notice a vast change? If you did, you just saw the monument built by activists of generations past. A monument built on the toil, sweat, tears, and even blood of others. That is something which we should aspire to build and be part of.
Review: Supremo
You will watch Supremo, not because of lead actor Alfred Vargas’ acting (it’s lame, as well as most of the cast), not because of the happy ending (it’s impossible), or even the cinematography and musical score (I’ve seen and heard worse, but I’ve also seen and heard better).
You will watch it, however, because it is the first ever movie biography of the lesser-recognized and publicized of our national heroes from the 1896 Revolution. In fact, it may be the first ever movie bio about the Great Plebian since even my parents can’t remember any during their younger days.
That in itself is an achievement. There have been many Rizals but no Bonifacio.
There are a few noteworthy bits. The language used in most of the movie sounds just like what you’d expect the Tagalogs of the 1890s to sound like (very formal and stilted). Macario Sakay acts like a really hyper-active fan boy of the Supremo, Daniel Tirona is perfectly portrayed as a blustering but cowardly ‘hater’, and I think it was a deliberate move to choose a really ugly actor to portray Emilio Aguinaldo.
But that, I must emphasize, is not the reason why I’m giving it a thumbs up.
The reason is that it is finally showing to a wide audience what is at the very least, a highly embarassing moment in Filipino history: when a revolutionary was killed, not by a Spaniard, but by a fellow Filipino. The very first political killing among Filipinos. The legacy of two of the people involved in the assassination of Andres lives on today: the commanding officer of the unit that carried out the execution is an ancestor of former president Gloria Arroyo. The General Headquarters of the military is named after the one who issued the execution order
The entire film is brimming with moments that make you draw comparisons with the present: The soldier manning a checkpoint and demanding an ID from a hapless farmer sounds like something out of a Karapatan human rights report nowadays. A college graduate questioning the capacity of someone who ‘peddles canes and fans’ (if you are really that deficient in history, it’s a reference to the Supreme) to become part of the Katipunan’s leadership sounds like a lot of people I know. The description of farmers roaming the countryside with nothing but their rifles and clothes, subsisting on donations by poor folk while raiding their enemies’ armories, fits the members of the rebel New People’s Army perfectly.
But if you think analogies with the present are what makes this movie politically loaded, you haven’t heard of the outright commentaries by some of the movie’s actors.
One (me and some other people are debating whether it was Mabini or Lanislaw Diwa) said:
“Ang ikinakatakot ay ang himagsikan ay nasa mga timawa sa umaga, ngunit sa gabi ay nasa mga elitista” and “Mag-ingat ka sa mga elitista. Tandaan mo, nagnenegosyo rin sila. At wala silang pinapasok na walang hinihinging kapalit“.
For me, the movie’s redemption is how it forces the average movie goer to take a long, hard, and shocking look at what transpired more than a century ago. A lot of people aren’t even aware that Aguinaldo assassinated Bonifacio. Their ignorance is removed in the most brutal way manner, one that is as brutal as the actual way the Supremo was killed. And it doesn’t gloss over the reason: it shows the supposed First President of our Nation as someone who conspired with elitists who had no respect from a working-class organizer, or a ‘cane and fan’ peddler turned revolutionary.
To repeat, the film itself is nothing extraordinary. If it was submitted as an entry to the MMFF, it would probably shine just because it is beside the worst of Philippine cinema. But what redeems Supremo is the new ground that it breaks. Finally, people will be talking about Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Aguinaldo, and the 1896 Revolution, from its origin to its betrayal. And hopefully, people will be taking more interest in history, not just as a pleasant trip down memory lane, but as a guide to our future.
Andres Bonifacio in the 21st Century
The 1896 Revolution, as described by the historian Constantino, is a people’s war or an armed struggle against the more than 300 years of Spanish rule. It was headed by a laborer named Andres Bonifacio who was influenced by what was considered then as radical ideas in the West. The Revolution was betrayed by another Filipino, a landlord who denied that they sought independence from Spain (just ‘equal treatment’) and sold-out to the Americans.
116 years later, there are still groups composed mainly of peasants and workers, inspired by radical ideas from the West, who are waging war against indirect rule of another foreign country. However, these groups are opposed by other Filipinos, many of whom are landlords, and are known to be pro-America.
Even the most rabid of right-wingers in the country do not deny that we are essentially a ‘neo-colony’ (as opposed to the old definition of a ‘colony’) of the United States. During the height of the Subic Bay toxic waste dumping controversy, they tried to defend the Visiting Forces Agreement by saying that we needed the U.S military to counter the Chinese: an admission that the American armed forces are now inside our territory in violation of our sovereignty and independence.
The attempt by the Aquino administration (through the VFA Commission) to cover-up the toxic waste incident is also proof of our neo-colony status. In fact, it is but the latest of a long line of occasions where the Philippine government obediently followed the ‘policy suggestions’ and ‘proposals’ of the U.S and imperialist institutions such as the World Bank: in exchange for loans from the WB and the International Monetary Fund, we passed the Oil Deregulation Law and the Value Added Tax, privatized the power and water sectors, redirected funds for social services to foreign debt payments, hiked tuition fees in state universities, etc.
There is no denying the fact that Noynoy is a landlord. Neither is the fact that the government is dominated by landlords: the Aquinos, Cojuangcos, Enriles, Angaras, Romualdezes, Marcoses, Singsons, Zubiris, and Ampatuans. Just like in the old days, the rule of the landlords go hand-in-hand with the continued foreign domination and interference in our country.
Thus, the allergy of the Aquino government, and its predecessors in discussing Andres Bonifacio and the 1896 Revolution beyond the usual grade school textbook topics. A grandmother-in-law was surprised when she heard in a TV news show last Friday that Aguinaldo murdered the Supremo (funny how the textbooks gloss over that fact). Noynoy’s speech, as well as the Letter to the Editor of an unimpressive ‘National Artist’ to a daily broadsheet, sought to dissuade the public from Bonifacio’s popular image: that of a courageous and selfless revolutionary.
Andres Bonifacio’s relevance in the present lies not in the past, but in the future: not as a relic that belongs in a museum, but a guide to the problems facing Philippine society in the present as a means of getting to the future.
Elections and Carinderias
Voting in the 2013 elections is like eating in a bad carinderia: you are virtually choosing not which is the most delicious dish, but which is the least inedible and most tolerable. And it is all because you can’t afford to eat in a better establishment, or the alternatives are too far away.
There’s really no choice: the Senate slates of both the Liberal Party and UNA coalitions are clones. Both are overloaded with members of political dynasties (Aquino, Ejercito, Angara, Enrile, etc.). Both are also overloaded with trapos who have little or nothing to show in their many years in power. In fact, UNA has openly claimed that it ‘supports’ the Aquino administration.
The only candidates who have promised to provide a ‘check and balance’ against the current administration are independents like Teddy Casino. In fact, they are the only candidates to actually talk about their stands on various social and political issues, as opposed to the Liberal Party and UNA candidates who keep on mouthing motherhood statements and empty slogans.
Truly, the Filipino people are being forced to choose between a rotten and a spoiled ulam because they cannot afford it. The reason mainstream candidates win isn’t because they are much more credible and qualified than independent ones (Hello, Tito Sotto?). It is because the former has all the resources the latter lacks: TV ads, goons and private armies, bribes for election officials, old-fashioned vote buying, etc.
It is small wonder that advocacies like the ‘Anti-Political Dynasty Bill’, and the ‘Anti-Epal’ Facebook fanpage, are gaining fans. People are tired, disillusioned, and lashing out in frustration.
For the ordinary voter:
RESEARCH. The 12 from the LP, and the 12 from UNA are not the only ones running in 2013. If I recall correctly, there are enough independents for you to be able to put 12 names in your ballot without voting for anyone from the two ruling parties. And if you can let go of some of your deep-seated biases for a moment, some of the names in the Independent camp have pretty good track records.
RISK. You have nothing to lose. Your grandparents have been voting for mainstream candidates. If you really believe that elections are the only way towards change, then it is pointless if you’d vote for the same-old names simply because you are unfamiliar with the alternatives. What are you risking? A guaranteed lack of competence and oversupply of corruption, versus an unknown quantity?
For the already-informed:
READY? If you think rejecting both LP and UNA is a reasonable proposal, then you yourself should ensure that such an idea reaches the largest possible amount of voters before May 2013. Let’s face it: if you are reading this, you are most likely a member of the middle or even upper class. That means that we belong to segments in society that can be outvoted. We must reach out to those who comprise the largest sectors: namely, workers, farmers, youths, and women.
DISILLUSIONED? You can’t be blamed. But don’t take it is a signal to become cynical and feeling helpless and sorry for the country. The recognition that elections under the current system is useless doesn’t mean that social change is impossible. What it simply means is that specific mode of social change doesn’t apply. The next question would be: what is the real path to change?
