MikeLigalig.com

GOTCHA

Do PNP-GHQ, Comelec know about these armed moves?

Jarius Bondoc (The Philippine Star)
February 27, 2019

Homonhon Island where Magellan first landed in the Philippines in 1521 is generally peaceful. In recent weeks the quiet was shattered when men in battle gear swooped down on its shores in Guiuan, Eastern Samar. Their supposed mission: to serve a court "liquidation order" against a licensed, operating mine employing hundreds of locals.

Newspapers reported that about 50 unidentified armed men in civvies landed on Homonhon on Feb. 8, accompanied by a team of policemen. Leading them was one Yan Ming, allegedly the Chinese national complainant in a Taguig City court case against Techiron Resources Inc. Apparently the parties are feuding over control of the Homonhon chromite mine.

The unusual display of firepower terrified the residents of Barangays Canawayon and Casiguran. Doors and windows were shut; classes in schools were disrupted while armed bands roamed the streets.

UST professor Coronacion said there have been no other presidents like Duterte who said that drug addicts should be killed—some of the president's supporters say this is part of what sets him apart from his predecessors.

"They were very careful in choosing their words and they never instructed their supporters to harm their fellow Filipinos in their speeches," the professor said.

"For example, former President [Joseph Estrada], another popular leader, asked his supporters not to resort to violence in the aftermath of his impeachment."

https://www.philstar.com/

This led to thousands being detained following ordinances created after Duterte's directive.

Roque said of the policy that lower-income people could just stay at home or find other places to spend their time.

"In Parañaque for instance, they usually hang out in barber shops or in street eateries (karinderya). In Parañaque, those serving puto bungbong, people sit there while they sip their tea," he said.

Off-the-cuff remarks that push policy

Thousands have been killed in the implementation of Duterte's brutal drug war, but the president once made a joke on using marijuana to keep himself awake on a killer schedule.

On January 29, around two months after that joke, the House of Representatives approved a landmark bill allowing the use of medical marijuana,

In June 2018, Duterte directed police to "accost" tambays or loiterers as they are "potential trouble for the public." This later included minors so that they would be "protected" from drugs, Duterte said.

Lawyer Antonio "Tony" La Viña, former dean of the Ateneo School of Government, said in a radio interview at the time that Duterte's statement of EJKs as his only sin could be taken as "admission against interest."

"Kasi nanggaling sa mouth ng presidente. Hindi mo na kailangan i-prove pa. Ang tawag diyan, admission against interest. 'Yan ang pinaka-highest and strongest evidence (It came from the mouth of the president. You don't need to prove that. That's called admission against interest. That's the highest and strongest evidence) because nobody confesses unless they mean it," the law expert added.

Several communications on alleged commission of crimes against humanity—naming the president and his top administration officials—have been sent to the International Criminal Court, whose prosecutor has yet to decide on whether the court had jurisdiction over the allegations.

The method is eerily reminiscent of Duterte's campaign promises to dump drug pushers in Manila Bay to "fatten all the fish there."

In another freestyle speech on Sept. 27, 2018, Duterte quipped: "What are your sins? Me? I told the military 'what are my sins?' Did I steal money? Even just one peso? Did I prosecute somebody I sent to jail? Ang kasalanan ko lang yung mga extrajudicial killing (my only sin is the extrajudicial killing)."

Former human rights lawyer Harry Roque, presidential spokesperson at the time, framed Duterte's remarks—claimed by critics as an admission—as the president just being "playful."

"You know the president. He wasn't serious. He was just saying that because that's what [critics] always say he does, no?" Roque added.

The editorial noted before Duterte arrived in Israel that the president is known for his "dubious comments" and whose administration has been accused of human rights violations had just made another "rape happens wherever there are 'beautiful women'" remark.

"The president of the Philippines isn't a wanted guest here, and his visit is a shameful diplomatic stain," the editorial dated Sept. 2, 2018, read.

Extrajudicial killings

Duterte has also repeatedly said in his speeches that drug addicts should be killed. At one point, he said that the bodies of drug addicts would be used as "pataba" or fish food in Manila Bay.

A Washington Post article about finding a body dumped in Tondo referenced those speeches:

Summary executions are often characterized by bound limbs, taped faces, cardboard signs reading "I am a drug addict" and — in cases like Santos's — bodies dumped in the city's waterways. They are often found stashed in metal drums and loaded down with concrete, to try to keep them from floating.

The Commission on Human Rights urged officials of the government in January to "refrain from making statements that may contravene its commitment to uphold the rights of Filipino workers abroad, such as the previous remark by the President claiming to have abused a female domestic worker during his teenage years."

The same commission has repeatedly warned against using rape as fodder for jokes, saying in 2017 that "even in the context of a joke, the statement is a step-back to the advancement of human rights, particularly for women."

The president went on a historic visit to Israel in 2018, which sparked a strongly-worded editorial from Haaretz, a newspaper published in Hebrew and English, on the "controversial" Philippine leader's visit.

The statement was issued as the president reaped criticism for saying he had touched a sleeping housemaid when he was younger. His spokesman Panelo said the president's story was fictional and was meant to highlight sexual abuse by Catholic priests.

"If it was obscene, the reaction of the audience would have been bad, they would have been angry at him," Panelo said then, repeating a common defense of the president's remarks.

The PCW, in its statement, said "sexual molestation or abuse, including rape, are public crimes and a violation of human dignity," adding "it is an abhorrent attack on a person's self-worth and should never be used as subject matter to prove a point."

The Commission on Human Rights warned in December that "statements that could embolden the violence against priests and other religious persons are gravely alarming in the face of continuing attacks against those deemed as critics of the government."

'Jokes' at the expense of women

Duterte has also trained his "colorful" language at women, prompting government bodies to issue reminders for people who are not president not to follow suit.

In January, the policy-making Philippine Commission on Women said in a statement that government officials are "supposed to uphold the dignity of its citizens, especially women, promote gender equality, and be exemplars of honor and integrity."

David has been at the receiving end of Duterte's tirades for years. The president previously accused him of stealing donations and of involvement in the drug trade.

The bishop has denied all the president's allegations and stressed that he doesn't even take multivitamins.

Presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo on Tuesday said the blame for the threats against David and other priests should not be on the president or his words but on Duterte's critics.

"If it's hyperbole, then it's not an encouragement. It is only the opposition, the critics who make it so. That is precisely why they should be blamed for that, not him," he attempted to argue. Panelo said that people "have [gotten] used to this president's style of delivering his responses, his remarks."

Duterte briefly softened his stance against priests and told those threatening to harm the priests to "lay off or deal with [him]."

Caloocan Bishop Pablo Virgilio David, one of the priests who reported receiving death threats, was supposed to receive the Ka Pepe Diokno Human Rights Award at the De La Salle University on Tuesday but had to miss it for his safety.

The bishop, in a message read by his brother, Sociology professor Randy David, said: "For over a week now, my mobile phone has been buzzing with text messages written in screaming and intimidating capital letters telling me that I was next in line for execution."

It has become almost a routine—or, to his critics, a running joke—that the president's controversial statements will be explained away the next day as the president's "playful character," a use of "hyperbole," or a "joke" to lighten the mood.

Harsh words for bishops

The chief executive has not made his disdain for the Catholic Church a secret. In his nearly three years in office, his verbal attacks against the church and its leaders have only intensified.

Last year, Duterte suggested bystanders to rob and kill "useless" Catholic bishops. He said in a speech of mix English and Filipino: "These bishops, kill them. They are useless fools. All they do is criticize." He made similar comments at the birthday celebration of a provincial governor in January.

The threats reportedly came after Duterte said in speeches in December and January to kill and rob bishops, whom he said were useless but have a lot of money.

Coronacion said there is a possibility that those who hear the rhetoric "would think that they would be doing this country a great service by carrying out the president's orders, such as killing the drug users and harming the bishops."

Duterte's strong stance, and words, against drugs and crime narrative won him the 2016 presidential elections. Speeches in the years since the polls have featured similarly controversial remarks, curses, and "jokes" as those that endeared him to his supporters during the campaign.

"If it is too ridiculous, it must be a joke," Duterte said in December 2018 during the awarding ceremonies for the 2017 Presidential Award for Child-Friendly Municipalities and Cities. This was after the president said he used marijuana to keep himself awake

Gag orders: When Duterte's 'jokes' are no laughing matter

Kristine Joy Patag (philstar.com)
February 27, 2019

MANILA, Philippines — President Rodrigo Duterte's "jokes", expressions and his tendency for hyperbole may just be part of his style, but they are not just words, a political analyst said.

"The words of the president may be interpreted by the people, particularly the Duterte supporters, as a government policy," Dennis Coronacion, chairperson of the Department of Political Science at the University of Santo Tomas told Philstar.com.

Duterte's quips, particularly against the Catholic Church and its priests, have been in the headlines after Manila Archbishop Luis Antonio Cardinal Tagle told the president that a bishop and some priests have received death threats from people who claimed to be working for the president's family.

That these two Marcos scions can so blithely fake their college records explains why they can also lie through their teeth about so many other things — from the unreturned ill-gotten wealth of their family to the unacknowledged abuses of the martial law period their power-drunk parents had inflicted on the country.

Living a fact-free life bleeds into public service; look at how Imee refused to face a congressional inquiry on the allegedly anomalous use of tobacco funds during her gubernatorial tenure — corruption suffered by her own Ilocano constituency.

"As far as I know, I graduated..."?

https://opinion.inquirer.net/

Doubts cast on the Marcoses' school records, however, point to a bigger issue than just scholastic standing. Fudging grades, degrees and diplomas should be seen as troubling character flaws in a candidate, not least of them indolence, a sense of entitlement and a lack of integrity.

Why did the Marcos children, for instance — so privileged they could afford to be sent to such prestigious universities abroad — fritter away their chance to shine, or, for heaven's sake, even the bare minimum of finishing their studies?

Revising one's academic records to spruce up one's image speaks of the bigger issue of integrity and transparency in public service.

Imee's picture appears nowhere in the 1983 Philippinensian, the University of the Philippines yearbook. And UP executive vice president Dr. Teodoro Herbosa said the UP registrar has no record of Imee graduating from UP, only of her taking nondegree courses from 1976 to 1977.

As to why she was admitted to the College of Law despite not having presented an undergraduate diploma, UP College of Law dean Froilan Bacungan admitted: "It was a little bit [of] PR that, strictly speaking, we should not have participated in."

But just how important is a college degree to crafting laws anyway? Isn't that why lawmakers have a budget for research staff, to help with the spade work that fleshes out proposed legislation?

What kind of mental process does that — construct an entirely make-believe scenario about one of those defining moments in a young person's life, and then cling to that cockamamie yarn, wholly unembarrassed, in the face of facts?

When Imee says "sa pagkakaalam ko," does she mean she remembers having participated in some solemn Princeton graduation rite, dressed in toga, surrounded by school dignitaries and beaming batchmates? (Perhaps even her mother Imelda — would Imelda pass up the chance to sashay in Princeton?) Where are the pictures?

About her so-called UP law degree, on the other hand, she did provide pictures: Imee in graduation robes, her cum laude medal being pinned on her by no less than the First Couple, in a ceremony in Meralco Theater. Unfortunately, this, too, was a sham — her purported graduation from the UP College of Law in 1983 was a special production cooked up by her parents.

Then it was the Marcos son and namesake, Imee's brother and losing vice presidential contender in the 2016 elections, who said he had earned a degree from Oxford University. Fake, too — his "special diploma" was actually for a two-year masteral coursework, and not for a completed degree.

And now here's Imee, bizarrely insisting on name-dropping an institution that has unambiguously disavowed her claims.

"As far as I know, I graduated from Princeton," she said; the original Filipino statement sounds even more daft: "Pumasok ako sa Princeton at sa pagkakaalam ko, nag-graduate ako." (I entered Princeton and, as far as I know, I graduated.)

This after her campaign website uploaded an official biography that claims she "is one of the first female graduates from an Ivy League School — Princeton University, graduating with honors."

But she did not — graduate from Princeton, that is, much less with honors. Princeton deputy university spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss himself confirmed they have no record showing "that Ms Marcos was awarded a degree."

One may very well see this as a family trait. The father, after all, had claimed to have earned a trunkful of medals for extraordinary valor in World War II. Fake, every one of them, according to a US government study.

Editorial

#Imeekwento

Philippine Daily Inquirer
February 28, 2019

What sort of person forgets whether she graduated from college or not (one of those bona fide landmark events in life, ask anyone) — and then mightily push the fiction that she did?

We should ask Imee Marcos.

The senatorial candidate and daughter of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos has spent the last weeks dodging questions and/or giving the most fantastically weird answers to questions about her academic qualifications.

In the absence of a committed constitutional and ideological opposition, the idea of great numbers massing on EDSA to oust the dictator may now be a pipe dream. For the same reason that no serious senatorial candidate would dare to debate any of DU30's minions on any national or international important issue during this campaign, no one would dare entertain the idea of challenging DU30's right to continue in office, even in poor imitation of the Venezuelan Juan Guiado who declared himself interim president without any constitutional process, even while President Nicolas Maduro reigns.

Today's street marchers probably know this only too well. That's why the best they can do is to proclaim "Tayo ang EDSA, tayo ang pagasa, laban ang diktadura." They have to assert that the actors, no matter how few, have now become the first and ultimate venue of the "revolution."

https://www.manilatimes.net/

Delayed countermoves

Estrada tried to reclaim the presidency by pointing out he never resigned and that Arroyo was merely sworn in as "Acting President." But the Supreme Court, through the former Chief Justice Reynato Puno, ruled that Estrada resigned "constructively" when he vacated Malacañang. Normally, a President loses the presidency when he dies, is permanently incapacitated, is removed upon conviction in an impeachment trial, or resigns. In each of these instances, a formal document attests to what happened. Estrada's resignation was the only such resignation, from the presidency at that, without the necessary supporting document.

EDSA under GMA

There were several moves to mount a counter-coup to recover Malacañang for Estrada, all without avail. The Oakwood mutiny was the biggest such project, but it proved to be an utter failure. Some people may still be hoping that one big EDSA push could remove DU30 from power, even without a suitable successor. But with the military and the police eating out of his hands, DU30 may be the only one who could remove himself from his constitutional office, through a military junta or a revolutionary government.

In the course of the trial, the prosecution threatened to walk out every time it moved for anything and feared its motion would not be granted. The walkout finally came after the court refused to admit and open an envelope which had been volunteered by a bank, without the need of a subpoena, and whose contents were totally unknown to the court. Not getting what they wanted, the prosecution walked out, and instead of recalling them back to court, the presiding Chief Justice joined them at EDSA, together with the other Supreme Court justices, the members of the Cabinet and the commanding generals of the Armed Forces, and swore in Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo as "president" of the Philippines.

This was the second time EDSA became the venue of regime change after 15 years.

The military installed Mrs. Corazon Aquino as revolutionary president, even though she had failed to overcome Marcos in the snap presidential election of Feb. 7, 1986 and had gone into hiding with the Pink Sisters in Cebu as the EDSA revolt broke out in Manila. Despite the props provided by external actors, Cory's government could hardly mute nor mask its inherent dysfunctions. Lacking an authentic constitutional mandate, Cory had to face an EDSA-type revolt from the same forces that had installed her in power, for at least seven times during her six-and-a-half years. The deadliest of these nearly toppled her, were it not for the timely flyover of US jet fighters at the height of the coup attempt.

Ousting Estrada

Fifteen years later, under then-President Joseph Ejercito Estrada, EDSA made a dramatic reappearance. Led by then-Speaker Manuel Villar, the rich property developer from Las Piñas, the House of Representatives impeached Estrada for bribery and corruption without much of a fight, and the Articles of Impeachment promptly went up to the Senate for trial. Estrada was represented by some of the best lawyers in the profession—Andres Narvasa, former chief justice of the Supreme Court, Estelito Mendoza, former solicitor-general and secretary of justice, Raul Daza, former deputy speaker of the House where he had served three consecutive terms as congressman for the first district of Northern Samar. Then Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. presided over the trial. But the case was to be decided not on legal merits alone.

 
Some of the perpetrators ultimately confirmed Marcos' claim; this was documented by Gregg Jones' Red Revolution: Inside the Philippine Guerrilla Movement, among others. The late former Senate President Salonga, one of the most, if not the most, seriously wounded of the victims, said he had come to the conclusion that the real architect and author of the crime was not Marcos, but the founding chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines Jose Maria Sison, with "the possible knowledge of 'Ninoy' Aquino."

Mutating to EDSA

This was the last time Plaza Miranda was described in political texts as the place where political ideas were validated by the Filipino people. On Feb. 25, 1986, a military mutiny, supported by the civilian population that poured out on EDSA, and the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines, which issued a powerful pastoral statement that set the moral basis for the move against Marcos, forced the strongman out of Malacañang after 20 years in power. It was a bloodless uprising that ended with the strongman and his family being flown by the US Air Force to Hawaii.

Instantly, EDSA became a household word for changing an unwanted government.

Plaza Miranda

It was in Plaza Miranda where national candidates spoke to the nation to sell themselves and their programs of government. And it was here where the most brutal attack on free speech and the democratic electoral process was inflicted on Aug. 21, 1971, when communist agents bombed a senatorial campaign rally of the opposition Liberal Party, killing nine and wounding 95 others, including the party's most prominent LP personalities like Gerry Roxas, Sergio Osmeña Jr., Jovito Salonga, and Ramon Bagatsing, who was running for mayor of Manila. Then-Sen. Benigno S. Aquino, the most important party official who was absent during the explosions, automatically accused Marcos of having ordered the bombing.

But Marcos rejected the accusation and rapped the communists instead as the actual perpetrators. He suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus throughout the country to round up the suspects. One year later, he proclaimed martial law to turn back the rebellion, which had spilled out into the streets and threatened to overrun the government.

A street no more

This gave a significant twist to the meaning of "EDSA." From the street which in 1986 and 2001 saw a successful uprising against the government, EDSA, according to this new language, now means the people rising in protest against the government. Although their small number still obstructed the traffic, they were saying they did not have to physically occupy EDSA in great numbers anymore; all they had to do was simply march against the government. EDSA had become a noun, if not a verb, of resistance, if not revolt.

This indeed is a significant development in our language of politics. Before the 1986 EDSA revolt, the government was obliged to validate its claims before the fiercely adversarial press and the even more adversarial interaction with the masses. Plaza Miranda, the public square in front of the famous Quiapo Catholic Church in Manila, became the nation's most popular testing ground for political ideas—it was there, even more than in the halls of Congress, where the most important national questions could be debated before the electorate. For Ramon Magsaysay, the popular seventh president of the Philippines (Dec 30, 1953 to March 17, 1957), the litmus test of any government idea was whether "one could defend it in Plaza Miranda."

After 33 years, is EDSA no longer just a place?

BY FRANCISCO S. TATAD

FEBRUARY 25, 2019

ON Saturday morning last week, several hundred left-leaning demonstrators took over a religious group's march to the Marian Shrine on Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA), and set the tone for this year's celebration of the military revolt that ousted the strongman Ferdinand Marcos on Feb. 25, 1986.

However, instead of chanting slogans against Marcos, who had been the Left's rabid enemy for 20 years, the marchers turned to the President Rodrigo Duterte, with their new mantra: "Tayo ang EDSA, tayo ang pagasa, labanan ang diktadura." —" We are EDSA, we are the hope, fight the dictatorship."

Panelo also discourses minutely on judicial procedures and, in particular, on how supposedly these were observed faithfully and painstakingly in Rappler's and Ressa's cases. And, again, he skips an all-important point – the all-important point: quality of judicial decision-making; in other words, fairness.

That should rank, I must say, among the most serviceable side-stepping tricks Panelo has performed for Duterte and his courts and their beneficiaries – the Marcoses, the Arroyos, the Enriles, the Estradas, and the Revillas, to name only the most deserving. – Rappler.com

https://www.rappler.com/

Those earlier suits having been brought by state agencies directly, Duterte's apologists are able to do little to dispel suspicions of harassment and intimidation.

Carefully choosing what battles to fight, as does anyone else who knows rudimentary lawyering, Duterte's main spokesman, Sal Panelo, now makes a big thing of the absence, although only on the face of it, of any such ties as may suggest collusion between his boss and the libel accuser, "a private citizen," he makes sure to point out, conveniently leaving out one compelling element – common cause: both President Duterte and this private citizen are not fond of Rappler or Ressa.

The flimsy circumstances surrounding Ressa's arrest have raised speculations that Duterte is desperate to accelerate his drive toward despotism. Indeed, libel – or some pretext of it – does seem a device too well-worn to use for the purpose.

But, having proved effective for them, not to mention being handy, libel has been long favored by people in power, people of wealth and influence, and people who like to keep up pretensions to a ruinable reputation. If it works for the lesser of them how could it not work for Duterte? Not only is he, after all, Chief Executive and Commander in Chief; judging by the vote he gets from Congress and the Supreme Court for his espousals, he has them co-opted. Anyway, I'm not sure about him being desperate. Impatient? Vicious? Mad even? Absolutely, but that's all in the nature of his pathology.

Unable to accommodate a free and adversarial press in his autocratic mindset, he has held Rappler in particular contempt, in fact voicing his sentiment publicly and all too often, lest his enforcers fall out of alignment to his wishes. Sure enough, even before they were slapped with libel, Rappler and Ressa had already been taken to court – Rappler for a Securities offense, Ressa for tax evasion, both cases concocted, too, she says.

Doubtless she intended her warning to carry beyond the news profession. She knows the price of her own stature, and she also knows Duterte. Being a press-freedom champion of world renown – she was among the journalists honored in Time magazine's "Person of the Year" for 2018 – has made her a prime target for him: show her up to be vulnerable, subdue her, and a chill probably goes around enough to help ease the way for the authoritarian rule he has been itching to impose. Well, knowing Maria Ressa, she's not one easily subdued.

But neither is Duterte one easily dissuaded, not by reason, not by conscience, not by the polls. Authoritarianism is for him a narcissistic fixation.

In fact, he began dragging the nation down that road upon taking power and has succeeded completely with Mindanao, his own home island, the largest of the archipelago's 3 main ones. Mindanao came under martial rule when a war broke out in Marawi City nearly two years ago between government forces and a band of outlaws, separatists, and terrorists; it has remained so to this day, amid the ever-so-slow cleanup and rehabilitation of that bombed-out city.

THOUGHT LEADERS
[OPINION | NEWSPOINT]

The ambush of Maria Ressa

Show her up to be vulnerable, subdue her, and a chill probably goes around enough to help ease the way for the authoritarian rule he has been itching to impose. Well, knowing Maria Ressa, she's not one easily subdued.

Vergel O. Santos
February 16, 2019
             
The arrest of Rappler CEO Maria Ressa was very much in keeping with the high-handed ways of the Duterte presidency: it looked more like an ambush. By being served the warrant past court-business hours, she was denied her prompt right to bail and made to spend the night in detention. She went free on bail the next day.

It's an old trick that appears to have become a reflex show of police power, a sort of institutional habit, as such free of malice and viciousness, relatively. It is certainly not the case with Ressa, however. She has been picked on and cast in a larger and darker scheme.

As she herself warned at the very moment of her arrest, "We are going to new lows...we should be worried."

Rappler has always argued that the prescription for cyber libel should still be one year, because the cybercrime law only increased the penalty of cyber libel, with the Supreme Court saying in its decision that "cyber libel is not a new crme."

"Indeed, cyber libel is actually not a new crime since Article 353, in relation to Article 355 of the penal code, already punishes it. In effect, Section 4 (c) (4) above merely affirms that online defamation constitutes 'similar means' for 'committing libel,'" said the motion. – Rappler.com

https://www.rappler.com/

The DOJ dismissed complaints against other editors and directors of Rappler and proceeded to charge only Ressa, who was not involved in the editing or handling of Santos' article.

"The dismissal of the complaint as against all corporate officers, except accused Ressa, is telling," said the motion.

Ressa and Santos are scheduled to be arraigned on March 1.

In charging Rappler, the DOJ's interpretation of the cybercrime law has now made it possible for online publications to be sued within 12 years of a story's publication. The ordinary libel charge under the Revised Penal Code prescribes in one year and not 12.

Charging Rappler as a company

The DOJ did not only charge Ressa and Santos, it also charged Rappler as a company.

The motion said that Section 9 of the Cybercrime Law laid down rules for a corporation to be held liable, such as when the crime was committed by a natural person for the benefit of the juridical person or the company.

"The instant Information may be scoured at length for any of the relevant elements of liability for a corporate entity under section 9 and none will be found," the motion said.

The motion also argued that the typographical corrections did not constitute republication, based on several decisions from the United States, one of which said: "to treat the changes as republications would be inappropriate and defeat the beneficial purposes of the single publication rule."

In Atkinson v. McLaughlin, for example, the District Court of North Dakota employed the "test of substantial modification" in the context of republication. Quoting from the ruling, the motion said: "However, even under the single publication rule, the courts have recognized that a website may be republished and create a new cause of action for defamation if the website is substantially modified. Republication triggers the start of a new statute of limitations and occurs upon a separate aggregate publication from the original, on a different occasion, which is not merely a delayed circulation of the original edition..."

"In the absence of controlling Philippine jurisprudence, American case law is persuasive and provides guidance for this court in addressing this specific issue of first impression," said the motion.

MOTION TO QUASH. On February 26, 2019, the Manila RTC Branch 46 receives a Motion to Quash from the lawyers of Maria Ressa and Reynaldo Santos for the cyberlibel case filed by William Keng. Photo by LeAnne Jazul/Rappler

The motion also argued that the Supreme Court actually struck out as unconstitutional the part of the Cybercrime Law that punishes "aiding and abetting" in a case of cyber libel. The en banc struck it out for infringing too much on the freedom of speech.

The motion argued that the act of sharing on the internet and the act of republishing are similar in some ways.

"This is a repudiation of the 'multiple republication' principle for online media and cyber libel because otherwise each act of 'sharing' a defamatory statement would then constitute a separate and distinct act of libel, a proposition which the Court rejected by its striking down of section 5 of RA 10175," the motion said.

The DOJ used an SC decision from 1988 where the High Court had to rule which lower court has jurisdiction over a newspaper article, and in so doing, adopted the multiple publication rule.

Te, however, noted that the said decision came from the SC Third Division and not the en banc.

"It is a Third Division decision that binds only the parties thereto. It is canonical that only decisions of the Supreme Court En Banc are vested with authoritativeness or precedential character," the motion said.

Temporary Restraining Order. The SC, however, issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against the law on October 9, 2012, and held oral arguments. The SC came out with a decision on February 11, 2014, or 8 days before the supposed republication, but motions for reconsideration were filed, which the High Court resolved with finality only on April 22, 2014, Te pointed out.

"During the duration of this TRO – October 9, 2012 continuously until April 22, 2014 – there was effectively no RA 10175. That is the legal, practical, and actual effect of the Supreme Court's TRO. The alleged republication was done on February 19, 2014, when the TRO was still in effect," said the motion.

Republication rule. In its charge sheet, the DOJ highlights the word "republish" in order to apply the Cybercrime Law which the justice department assumed to have been in effect on February 19, 2014, the supposed republication date.

Dismiss cyber libel case vs Maria Ressa, Rappler – Te, FLAG

Te says the Supreme Court finalized the Cybercrime Law only on April 22, 2014, which means that in February 2014 when the article was supposedly republished, there was no applicable law

Lian Buan
February 26, 2019


CYBER LIBEL. Rappler CEO Maria Ressa speaks to the media. File photo by Martin San Diego/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – Human rights lawyer and former Supreme Court (SC) spokesman Theodore Te, along with lawyers of the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), filed a Motion to Quash before the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 46 on Tuesday, February 26, seeking a dismissal of the cyber libel case against Rappler, CEO Maria Ressa, and former researcher Reynaldo Santos Jr.

Te, who is now handling the cyber libel case, will take on the Department of Justice (DOJ) in its charge against the news company.

The article in question, written by Santos, was published in May 2012 or 4 months before the cybercrime law was enacted in September 2012. However, because of a typographical error ("evasion" was misspelled as "evation"), a correction was made on February 19, 2014. The updated article in 2014, according to the DOJ, is covered by the republication rule – meaning, the cybercrime law had already taken effect and was applicable.

This could come in the form of Charter change; enactment of draconian laws such as the reduction of the age of criminal liability among minors; and the institutionalization of Beijing-friendly policies, which has unleashed an influx of Chinese workers and major companies into our strategic sectors.

Above all, this election is about whether we want to stand by our liberal constitutional values or seek to become an "illiberal democracy," where a popular imperial presidency rules by fiat.

No matter where you're perched on the political spectrum, you should vote in the upcoming elections, because, at the very least, it's our chance to be part of history.

rheydarian@inquirer.com.ph
https://opinion.inquirer.net/

The second reason is that our upcoming elections will be the biggest, most polarized and arguably the most consequential elections in generations, if not our entire history.

As Commission on Elections spokesperson James Jimenez told me a few days earlier, we should expect more than 50 million voters to decide the fate of as many as 18,000 posts.

The most important one is the Senate race; what's at stake there is no less than the soul of our nation. Were President Duterte's henchmen to dominate the race, the administration will be in a unique position to upend our political system for generations to come.

The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act (1883) laid down the foundation for a competent and professionalized civil service, dramatically reducing nepotism and political appointments, which served as a major source of corruption.

What followed was a three-decade-long set of reforms that ended the oligopolistic grip of conglomerates such as Standard Oil, and ushered in an era of more widely shared prosperity and equitable democratic participation.

Genuine transformation is often the upshot of stubborn hopefulness, cautious idealism, and anger for justice.

In light of our upcoming midterm elections, I have two fundamental disagreements with such pervasive cynicism.

First of all, as in love and life, cynicism is a recipe for stagnation, if not self-fulfilling disaster. As Theodore Roosevelt eloquently remarked, "The poorest way to face life is to face it with a sneer. There are many men who feel a kind of twister pride in cynicism; there are many who confine themselves to criticism of the way others do what they themselves dare not even attempt."

America eventually became the world's superpower (it still is) precisely because there was enough number of citizens who discarded self-defeating cynicism in favor of transformative reform. In particular, the American middle class was behind the so-called Progressive Era reforms, which upended American politics.and political appointments, which served as a major source of corruption.

A cursory look at American films, from "Gangs of New York" (starring Leonardo DiCaprio) to "Boardwalk Empire" (starring Steve Buscemi), reveals the utter corruptibility of late 19th-century American democracy, with political office essentially auctioned off among Mafia groups.

This is relevant to us, precisely because the foundations of Philippine democracy were laid down by this kind of America, and brutally imposed by marooned soldiers from largely hillbilly backgrounds. (Thanks to "Goyo" and "Heneral Luna," we have a glimpse of this side of our largely forgotten history).

Thus, it's unsurprising to see ubiquitous expressions of hopeless cynicism among many Filipinos, who often dismiss elections as a pointless ritual or an unnecessary hassle. Over the years, I have repeatedly heard the same refrain: "Pare-parehas lang naman silang lahat, kahit sino ang mananalo, ganun pa rin ang politika natin (They're all the same; whoever wins, our politics remains the same)."

HORIZONS

Our most important elections yet

By: Richard Heydarian
Philippine Daily Inquirer
February 26, 2019

If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal," the feminist-anarchist Emma Goldman once said. Her semi-contemporary Mark Twain was said to have made an almost identical observation: "If voting made any difference, they wouldn't let us do it."

Both of them had ample reasons to be skeptical about the democratic process back then. Goldman, an avowed opponent of centralized authority and oppressive patriarchy, saw in the American electoral process the perpetuation of the same patterns of exploitation, where white, privileged men, who were inextricably wed to the logic of retail politics within the framework of Darwinian capitalism, controlled the levers of power.

As the coauthor of "The Gilded Age" (1873), Twain was an eloquent chronicler of American oligarchy, where a few conglomerates viciously exploited the working classes and dominated a hopelessly corrupt political system.

When watching "Bohemian Rhapsody," it was as if Freddie Mercury himself possessed Malek for this movie. Image courtesy of Smoothradio.com

Rami Malek's Oscar speech: Watch as Bohemian Rhapsody actor pays tribute to Freddie Mercury

SEAN MORRISON
25 February 2019

Rami Malek has won the best actor award at the Oscars for his role as singer Freddie Mercury in Bohemian Rhapsody.


Best actor: Rami Malek (REUTERS)

Bohemian Rhapsody is a biopic of British rock act Queen, with a focus on its lead singer, Mercury, who died in 1991 from Aids-related illness.

A Los Angeles native of Egyptian descent, Malek took on the role of Mercury, who was born to ethnic Parsi parents from India who moved their family to England when he was in his late teens.

more at https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/oscars-2019-rami-malek-takes-home-best-actor-award-for-his-role-in-bohemian-rhapsody-a4075361.html

this is great news.

Sumaya Hisham/Reuters

Pigcasso, a rescued pig, paints on a canvas at the Farm Sanctuary outside Cape Town.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/

now i know nga ig-agaw mo magtagsa ni arnie, twice removed, sa ikapitong tuhod sa anay nga manghod sa butakal.

wow!

Forgetting to lock the garage door


RonTech3000/Shutterstock

Be sure to lock each garage door, including the one that leads to the backyard because thieves will use any entry point to gain access.

https://www.rd.com/

Leaving expensive stuff in sight


Mtsyri/Shutterstock

It should go without saying but anything of value shouldn't be left in view from the outside. Burglars will often case a house before breaking in and if your home has valuable items out, the likelihood of it getting ribbed just went up.

Keeping a window A/C unit


Dewitt/Shutterstock

Window units are great at cooling smaller spaces but they're also great for thieves to knock out of the way and grab any loot inside a home.

Having a wide open backyard


pockethifi/Shutterstock

A backyard without a fence or one that opens up to a wooded area is prime for burglars to target. It's relatively easy to move in and out of, plus the woods will make an escape easier.

Leaving a window cracked


Scott Latham/Shutterstock

You might want to keep the house cool and save some money by not running the air conditioning but you're setting your home up as a target even if the window is left open a crack.

Not locking the door


Karen Grigoryan/Shutterstock

According to SafeGuardTheWorld, a professional preventative security company, around 30 percent of burglaries involve a burglar entering through an unlocked door. It seems silly to have to say it but people forget to lock the door sometimes and it becomes ripe for the picking.

Letting newspapers and flyers build up


Larry Powell/Shutterstock

Yes, burglars really do look for newspapers piled up on the driveway. And they might leave a pizza flyer in your front door to see how long it takes you to remove it.

Your yard gives a lot of clues


JV Matthew/Shutterstock

Love those flowers. That says you have taste...and taste means there are nice things inside. Those yard toys your kids leave out always make me wonder what type of gaming system they have.

Mailbox


Andrey_Popov/Shutterstock

It takes two minutes online or on the phone to put a hold on your mail while you're gone and subvert the number one signal burglars look for: an overflowing porch or mailbox.

Posting vacation pics


Jirapong Manustrong/Shutterstock

Forty percent of people admit to posting pics while out of town, according to Nationwide. And while putting your vacation pictures online might get you a lot of likes, it also notifies your friends and acquaintances that you're now far from home, making your house a prime target for anyone with ill intentions or just an opportunistic streak. Instead, make sure your social media profiles aren't public and wait to post your beautiful beach selfies until you get home.

Sometimes just living on your street


Brian Goodman/Shutterstock

Homes in high-visibility places, like on corner lots, are far less likely to be broken into. There are simply too many potential ways to be seen. But townhomes, houses in the middle of the block, or houses in a cul-de-sac are much better targets. This is especially true if your property backs up to a forest, open lot, or another unguarded area. The trick, according to Secure Life, is to make your house as difficult as possible to access. This means installing high fences and lots of lighting.

35 Things You're Doing That Make Your House a Target for Burglars

Nick Gerhardt

These not-so-obvious indicators will make your home a target for thieves.

Leaving trash visible in garbage cans


Peter Gudella/Shutterstock

Setting out the box from your new 60-inch HDTV or high-end gaming console on the curb is basically advertising the fact that those items are in your home. As electronics are the second thing burglars go for (cash is number one), this makes your home an attractive target, according to the study. So buy a cheap box cutter and invest the 30 seconds it takes to break down large boxes and bundle them together so their labels can't be seen. Plus, your garbage man will thank you!

— With research by Vino Lucero and infographics by Arnel Rival, PCIJ, February 2019

http://pcij.org/

The top adspenders among the candidates for senator, by order of value of TV ads only for the 13-month period ending January 2019, are:

• Bong Go, PhP422,498,647;
• Imee Marcos, PhP413,160,423;
• Mar Roxas, PhP401,264,380;
• Harry Roque, PhP174,013,944;
• Sonny Angara, PhP156,739,657;
• Bam Aquino, PhP136,490,982;
• Grace Poe, PhP99,385,184;
• Francis Tolentino, PhP92,479,821;
• Cynthia Villar, PhP80,838,942;
• Gary Alejano, PhP76,403,080;
• Friends of JPE (Juan Ponce Enrile), PhP72,552,000;
• Bong Revilla, PhP51,213,850;
• Pia Cayetano, PhP46,027,000;
• Nancy Binay, PhP37,131,740;
• JV Estrada, PhP26,387,900;
• Koko Pimentel, PhP22,798,000;
• Jinggoy Estrada, PhP21,945,000;
• Zajid Mangudadatu, PhP21,357,000;
• Bong Revilla Family, PhP13,257,000; and
• Jiggy Manicad, PhP11,919,03.

Started in 2018

In 2018, on various television channels, Go was featured in 519 ad spots, compared with 185 for Roque, 166 for Marcos, and 62 for Tolentino. TV networks require a "pay before broadcast" rule on political ads to compel candidates to pay up before their ads could air.

Also in 2018, out of 21,268 ad spots aired in various radio stations under the "social concerns" subcategory, nearly half or 9,278 ad spots featured "Bong Go" as brand, product, and advertiser.

Roque was featured in 3,324 radio ads, Marcos in 2,401 radio ads, and Tolentino in 651 radio ads. LP's Roxas was featured in 2,299 radio ad spots.

Monitoring reports by Nielsen Media showed that these "social concerns" and "policacy" or political advocacy ads started airing in January 2018, but hit steadily rising charts in June 2018, led by a flurry of ads placed by Go, Roque, and Marcos.

For the whole of 2018, Nielsen Media monitored the adspend of the candidates under the "social concerns" subcategory of ads on TV, radio, print, and outdoor platforms.

In January 2019, Nielsen Media's monitoring report focused on TV only.

Must post tarps?

Too, some civil servants have exposed on social-media posts that certain government agencies have been required to post tarpaulins bearing the image of Go.

"Unfortunately," says former Election Commissioner Lim, "due to a Supreme Court ruling and as restated by the Civil Service Commission in its Memorandum Circular No. 02, Series of 1992," the President, the Vice President, Cabinet members, all other elective officials, and their personal and confidential staff "are deemed to be holding political offices and are not covered by the prohibition on electioneering or partisan political activity."

Nonetheless, Lim says, "While it may be legal, the same remains to be morally reprehensible as our expectations of government officials who are using official time of the government are best spent on resolving the multitude of problems besetting our country rather than campaigning."

He adds that such patently partisan actions by the President and senior executive and elective officials set "a bad precedent to create a distinction that the highest officials are exempt from this prohibition while the rest of them have to abide."

And yet, despite all of Duterte's special assist for his ex-special assistant, Go seems to still have found it necessary to go on what can be described as an aggressive ad campaign for his senatorial bid.

Malasakit Center ads

As early as June 2018, or four months before he filed his certificate of candidacy, paid ads featuring taped voice and video clips of Go had begun airing on TV and radio stations in Manila, Davao City, Cagayan de Oro, and Zamboanga.

At the time, Go was still Duterte's special assistant. Yet in December 2018, after he was supposed to have resigned when he filed his candidacy for senator, at least 30 ads about the Malasakit Center program of the Department of Health (DOH) and Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) featured Go as its supposed chief sponsor. The ads aired during the Christmas holidays on television.

Except for promoting Go's run for the Senate, nothing much is new about the Malasakit Centers. These are actually a refurbished one-stop-shop for indigents seeking medical assistance under the same, usual program that the DOH, DSWD, Philippine Health Insurance Corp., Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office, and Philippine Amusement Gaming Corp. have been supporting for years now, even before Duterte became president. At present, 21 Malasakit Centers have opened across the nation; in all but one, the pilot site in the Visayas, Go had attended events as guest speaker.

The President himself has lent Go's candidacy a special push, more than any of the other administration candidates. Duterte's photo appears as 'Tatay Digong' side by side with Go as 'Kuya Bong' in tarpaulins on the façade of the Malasakit Centers, government agencies, and barangay halls, as well as on posters and billboards all over the country's towns and cities. Duterte has also appeared in pre-campaign ads featuring Go as someone whose supposed only vice – bisyo — is "serbisyo" or service.

Independents spent, too

Five other candidates running under other political parties or as independents had a combined adspend of PhP216,941,524 from January 2018 to January 2019.

They are re-electionist Senator Grace Poe, with an adspend of PhP99,385,184; "Friends of JPE" or apparently returning senator Juan Ponce Enrile of Pwersa ng Masang Pilipino, PhP72,552,000; re-electionist Senator Nancy Binay of the United Nationalist Alliance, PhP37,131,740; Rafael 'Raffy' Alunan of the Bagumbayan Volunteers for a New Philippines, PhP5,573,880; and Neri Colmenares of the Makabayang Koalisyon ng Mamamayan, PhP2,298,720.

Alejano, Tolentino, and re-electionists Poe, Ejercito, and Pimentel have all spent more monies on pre-campaign ads than the net worth they declared in their latest SALNs.

Still, it is the case of Bong Go, the candidate with the lowest net worth among the top 20 adspenders, that remains the most intriguing. After all, the poorest managed to buy the most ad spots.

By their latest available SALN, Roxas and Aquino are also in deficit spending, in terms of their pre-campaign ad buys.

In his 2014 SALN, the latest available, Roxas declared a net worth of PhP202,080,452.71. His adspend of PhP401,264,380 by January 2019 put him in deficit spending by PhP199,183,928. Roxas thus splurged on ads 198 percent more money than all that he declared he owns.

Aquino, for his part, declared his net worth as of December 2017 at PhP39,192,743.62, but spent thrice more or PhP136,490,982 on pre-campaign ads until last month. His adspend is 328 percent of his wealth, for a deficit spending of PhP97,298,239.

Roxas, Aquino and two more of Otso Diretso!'s eight candidates incurred a combined adspend of PhP752,301,442 in 13 months ending January 2019. Contributing to this total were Magdalo Party-list Rep. Gary Alejano (10th among the top adspenders) and election lawyer Romy Macalintal who incurred ad buys of P76,403,080 and P5,887,000, respectively during the same period.

Otso Diretso: PhP132-M bill

The opposition Otso-Diretso! team of the Liberal Party also had no ads at all in 2018. In January 2019, however, it bought 107 TV ad spots that ran for a total of 2,910 seconds on ABS-CBN and GMA-7 Network. Its adspend bill: PhP132,256,000.

Three of its candidates are also among the top 20 pre-campaign adspenders, including two of LP's frontrunners, former Interior and Local Government Secretary Manuel 'Mar' Roxas II and re-electionist Senator Paolo Benigno 'Bam' Aquino IV. Roxas ranks third with an adspend of PhP401,264,380, while Aquino is sixth with an adspend of PhP136,490,982, according to Nielsen Media's monitoring reports from January 2018 to January 2019.

Roxas's adspend actually shot up sharply in January 2019, during which he bought 570 TV ad spots lasting 16,125 seconds in total. He paid a total of PhP349.5 million for his mostly 30-second ad spots for that month alone. Aquino's adspending last month also increased significantly from his total in the entire 2018, reaching nearly PhP89 million just for TV-ad placements.

The other Hugpong candidates who have also incurred pre-campaign ads are re-electionist senators Cynthia Villar, Joseph Victor 'JV' Estrada Ejercito, Juan Edgardo 'Sonny' Angara, and Aquilino 'Koko' Pimentel III; former senators Jose 'Jinggoy' Estrada, Ramon 'Bong' Revilla Jr., and Pia Cayetano (currently 2nd District Representative of Taguig City-Pateros); Maguindanao 2nd District Rep. Zajid Mangudadatu, former Duterte adviser Francis Tolentino, and former TV journalist Jiggy Manicad.

Yet while all of them are among the top 20 pre-campaign adspenders, these candidates' combined adspend in the last 13 months comes to only a third of the administration slate's total of more than PhP1.5 billion, or over PhP518 million. The bigger two-thirds balance represents the pre-campaign adspend of Go, Marcos, and Roque.

Two other pro-Duterte candidates had not incurred ad buys as of January 2019: former police chief Ronald 'Bato' de la Rosa and medical practitioner Willie Ong.

Marcos, Roque, too

Another Hugpong candidate, Ma. Imelda 'Imee' Marcos, the second biggest adspender, repeats Go's strange story. Marcos, currently the third-term governor of Ilocos Norte, has acquired PhP413,160,423 worth of ads from January 2018 to January 2019, but has declared a net worth of only PhP24.49 million and cash on hand of only PhP2.45 million in her December 2017 SALN. Her adspend comes up to 1,687 percent of her net worth; her adspend deficit, minus all her declared wealth, amounts to PhP388,666,931.

The fourth placer among the big ad buyers is Harry Roque, a Hugpong-endorsed candidate who quit the Senate race last February 1, reportedly for health reasons.

As of last January 31, however, Roque's adspend had reached PhP174,013,944, or PhP75.1 million more than his declared net worth of PhP98.87 million, as of December 2017. The former Presidential Spokesman's adspend amounts to 176 percent of his net worth, and even his PhP54.6 million cash on hand and in bank that he reported in his latest SALN.

Put another way, he bought political ads 32.9 times in value compared to his total personal wealth. Minus all that he owns, PhP409.6 million was the unfunded balance of his ad buys that Go might have paid using money from either public or private sources.

In January 2019, Nielsen Media's monitoring of TV ads only listed Go as the product, brand, and advertiser in at least 1,016 ad spots equivalent to 29,940 seconds of airtime exposure at a cost of PhP247.9 million.

Nearly one in every three ads (total of 3,261 ad spots) that aired on TV channels last month featured Go. For January 2019 then, Go spent an average of PhP7.99 million every day on TV ads, or two-thirds of his latest worth.

Bong Go net worth: PhP12.8-M

In the runup to the May 2019 polls, the 12 candidates under the Hugpong ng Pagbabago-Partido Demokratikong Pilipino (HNP-PDP-LABAN) banner and endorsed by Duterte, incurred a combined adspend of PhP1.32 billion in the last 13 months ending January 2019.

A third of this total or PhP422,498,647 consists of ads purchased by and for Christopher Lawrence 'Bong' Go, the biggest spender thus far among all 61 candidates for senator.

The mystery is stark: Go – formerly Special Assistant to the President — is the poorest of the top adspenders with a declared net worth of only PhP12.85 million, and cash on hand/in bank of only PhP3.9 million, as of his December 2017 SALN. His PhP422-million total ad buys amount to 3,287 percent of his net worth.declared net

PCIJ has subscribed to Nielsen Media's monitoring reports on the political adspend of the candidates for elective posts since 2010. PCIJ data show that the re-electionist candidates for senator today are in truth repeat offenders — they had also splurged millions on pre-campaign ads in elections past.

In 2010, the combined pre-campaign adspend of six candidates for president and four for vice president from Nov.1, 2009 to Feb. 8, 2010 amounted to PhP1.472 billion.

In 2013, the leading candidates for senator incurred pre-campaign ads worth PhP892 million, from Jan. 1 to February 11, 2013.

From Jan. 1, 2015 to Jan. 21, 2016, about 105,000 pre-campaign ads valued at PhP6.7 billion featured the candidates for president and vice president in the May 2016 elections.

'Policacy' ads

"The fact that the net worth of these candidates could not support the costs of the(ir) adspend necessarily gives rise to the presumption that either the candidate has hidden wealth or that these were donated to the candidate while in public office," remarks lawyer Christian Robert S. Lim, a former Election Commissioner who headed the Campaign Finance Office (CFO) of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) until 2018.

Under the Revised Penal Code, Lim says, it is a criminal offense to receive gifts by reason of their office. "This is called indirect bribery," he says.

By Nielsen Media's monitoring of television, radio, print, and outdoor "social concern" ads from January 2018 to January 2019, easily the most moneyed candidates include 12 of the 14 candidates endorsed by President Rodrigo R. Duterte, those recently resigned from executive positions, and those running for re-election or returning to the Senate. They were featured as the "advertiser," "brand", and "product" in these ads that ran starting June 2018, or while they were still government officials. In advertising circles, these ads also go by the moniker "policacy" or political advocacy ads.

In fact, those with the lowest net worth, the biggest liabilities, and the smallest cash on hand are, as of their latest Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN), among the biggest spenders on pre-campaign ads.

The possible sources of those millions of pesos poured into pre-campaign ads include hidden or unexplained wealth, public funds, and even indirect bribery from private donors.

Competing for only 12 Senate seats are 61 candidates, making for a rather crowded pool. Not surprisingly, based on data from Nielsen Media, the major candidates for senator from the administration and opposition parties and some independents appear to have already turned the May 2019 polls into a virtual marketplace for votes, starting with a circus of pre-campaign ads on air, on ground, and online.

From January 2018 to January 2019, the combined ad spending of 18 candidates on TV, radio, print, and outdoor ads have reached PhP2.4 billion, by the rate card of media agencies monitored by Nielsen Media. Yet, just a few have net worth values bigger than their respective adspend.

TO THE last, they have pledged to fight poverty and corruption, promote health and education, protect the environment, and serve the poor who make up a majority of over 60 million registered voters.

Yet while politics may divide them, money, apparent access to state funds and facilities, and donations from private pockets and public coffers that could have funded their pol ads seem to unite those with the biggest pre-campaign adspend among the senatorial candidates in the upcoming May elections.

MONEY AND THE MAY 2019 ELECTIONS

P2.4-B pre-campaign ads: Bong Go, Marcos, Roxas, Roque top spenders

by Malou Mangahas

because this has become a good source of research materials!

sure ko type ni niya.

Petitioners have challenged the constitutionality of the PDAF before the high court following reports of its widespread and systematic misuse by some members of Congress in cahoots with private individuals. Three incumbent senators and several former members of the House of Representatives have been named respondents in a plunder complaint filed with the Office of the Ombudsman in connection with the alleged ₱10 billion pork barrel scam. Public outrage over the anomaly has resulted in the largest protest gathering under the three-year-old Aquino administration.

On November 19, 2013, the Supreme Court declared the controversial Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), or more commonly known as the pork barrel, as unconstitutional. In a briefing, the high court declared the PDAF Article in 2013 General Appropriations Act and all similar provisions on the pork barrel system as illegal because it "allowed legislators to wield, in varying gradiations, non-oversight, post-enactment authority in vital areas of budget executions (thus violating) the principle of separation of powers". (wikipedia)

During the presidency of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, PDAF became the biggest source of corruption among the legislators. Kickbacks were common and became syndicated—-using pre-identified project implementers including government agencies, contractors and bogus non-profit corporations as well as the government's Commission on Audit.

In August 2013, outrage over the ₱10 billion Priority Development Assistance Fund scam, involving Janet Lim-Napoles and numerous Senators and Representatives, led to widespread calls for abolition of the PDAF system. The so-called Million People March which occurred on August 26, 2013, National Heroes' Day in the Philippines, called for the end of "pork barrel" and was joined by simultaneous protests nationwide and by the Filipino diaspora around the world.