A Second Look

This is actually a comment I posted on Ricky Carandang's blog http://www.rickycarandang.com/ (one of my favorite websites, and about the only one I read regularly). I thought it would make a good comeback article:

Here it is...

Just to toss something out there, I might be changing my opinion about Neri. I haven’t quite decided yet.

In the paper today, Pimentel said “Neri is now an object of pity and scorn. He can resign, but I think he is more worried about his physical safety.”

Ricky, would you say it’s true that Neri was actually so afraid that it made him physically sick? Maybe we have been a little too quick to judge him. Clearly Neri is battling some personal demons. First, I’m pretty sure he is struggling with his own convictions about right and wrong. From the little I know about him, he seems to be a good and honest man with strong moral convictions. But he also seems to be a man strongly driven by loyalty.

Secondly, he seems to be a pretty smart guy, and I think he may be influenced by his own predictions of the chaos which may result from his testimony. People have been predicting all manner of terrible outcomes, including the ouster of GMA. The thought of people marching in the street again as a result of his words may be a little intimidating for Neri.

Finally, of course, there is the fear of retribution, both physically and legally. If it’s true that the police set up operations around his house, entirely without request, that was clearly meant to send him a message. And legally, the judicial system in this country clearly favors the subject of allegedly libelous comments, rather than the utterer (is that a word?). The truth never seems to be a defense in such cases here. If you say something unflattering about someone in the Philippines, it doesn’t seem to matter whether you can prove your statements or not.

I don’t know if any or all of these are factors influencing Neri’s recent actions. I’m just tossing it out for discussion. But I do intend to hold final judgment about the man until after his next appearance before the Senate.

I also think he needs continued encouragement and moral support. It shouldn’t matter whether his president falls or not. Some things just have to be done because they are right.

One more comment: It was reported in the Inquirer that Neri was about to talk in closed session, but Joker intervened. Joker of course has denied this. But once again, his choice of words are cause for suspicion:

Asked if he had tried to prevent Neri from talking, Arroyo said: “That’s terrible backbiting.” Notice that Joker did not say “no”.

Do loyalty and personal gain always have to win in the Philippines? How bad would a situation have to be before leaders like Joker, and even functionaries like Bunye and Saludo say “Enough is enough. I can’t be a party to this”?

Do these people have no honor?

Gonna Give It Another Try!

I'm back! I haven't actually gone anywhere. Just kind of lost the motivation to put my thoughts on paper (figuratively speaking). I guess I ran into the "what's the use?" wall.

But enough of that. I've been posting quite a few comments on other people's blogs, and I got to thinking that I should start putting them on my own again. So here goes... (by the way...I think I'll try to write shorter essays this time. Some of my previous entries got kind of wordy.

Journalist Killings: A Suggestion (Revised)

The rampant murder of journalists in the Philippines continues. Just today, one day after the New York based Committee to Protect Journalists identified the Philippines as the world's most murderous country for journalists, an attempt was made on the life of another reporter, this time in Dipolog City. Appropriately, we look to the police to solve these crimes, and we complain loudly that they are not doing enough to bring the killers to justice. But, as I see it from the outside, I'm not sure that journalists themselves are doing all they can in this battle.

Although there are sometimes other motives for the killings, it seems pretty clear that many of these journalists are murdered to kill a story. Obviously, the people behind these attacks believe that killing the reporter will also stop the exposure of wrongdoings attributed to them by that reporter. And, unfortunately, it does seem to work that way. For a little while after a reporter is assassinated, we hear a lot about what a hard-hitting journalist he was, and how he was always working to expose this or that corrupt official. But we don't seem to hear any followup on the stories the journalist was working on when he died. So in that sense, it may be true that you can kill the story by killing the reporter. But would a corrupt government official be as quick to consider murder if he knew that the story he wanted to bury would not only continue, but would actually gain wider exposure after he murders a reporter? It seems to me that the best way to deter journalist killings might be to ensure that the story that prompted a murder does not die along with the reporter.

It should become standard practice among the journalist community that, whenever a reporter is murdered, the story he was working on would automatically become an item of national interest. His comrades in the media should continue to follow the reporters leads, and make sure the case remains in the national limelight until the issue under investigation has been run to ground. I'm not talking about the investigation of the murder itself. I'm talking about keeping the spotlight on whichever corrupt official the murdered reporter was investigating.

The certain knowledge that a story will not die with its reporter, and will in fact receive even more publicity, may be an effective deterrent to these killings. Obviously reporters are protective of their sources and their information, and it might require quite a bit of uncharacteristic cooperation among journalists, but it would certainly be possible for others to pick up the leads and continue the investigation, even if they have to start from scratch. The bottom line is, the original story must be kept alive. Otherwise, the idea that it is possible to kill a story by killing its reporter will guarantee further assassinations.

New Emporers In The Same Old Clothes?

Since I started writing this blog (only recently, I admit) I've tried hard to avoid making purely negative comments without offering at least some small suggestion for improvement. But today I saw a line in the newspaper, for which I can offer no advice. Just a sad observation. The paper was the Philippine Daily Inquirer, and the article was entitled "Filipino ballet star returns home to culture shock". The article itself is not important. The line that got my attention though, says:

"Marcos, whose regime was marked by massive corruption, was deposed in 1986 following a popular revolt. But successive presidents have failed to solve the country's problems of huge poverty and a gaping rich-poor chasm."

You know, I'm just a poor foreigner who may not really understand the country as well as some, but I have to ask why we continue to use the corruption label to distinguish any one administration from another. Marcos was still president when I first arrived in this country, and the truth is, I don't see any difference today at all. Sure, the thefts may be a little more sophisticated nowadays, but I don't think they are any less common.

And by the way, it's also not accurate to separate the issue of corruption from the issues of poverty and the "rich-poor chasm". The country actually has plenty of money. Poverty and the Grand Canyon which divides the rich and the poor are the direct result of massive corruption. Money, which should be used for building roads and schools and social programs for the whole country, is instead used to buy mansions and cars and vacations abroad for a select few.

Maybe we should find a new label to describe that sad chapter of Philippine history. Maybe we should call it the "stayed in power for 20 years without benefit of an election" regime. But it certainly doesn't make sense to single that administration out as the only "corruption regime".

Misplaced Priorities

Just a little observation today... In today's Philippine Daily Inquirer, the Armed Forces Chief of Staff, General Efren Abu, talked about the AFP budget. In short, he compared the budget to neighboring countries and said that it is too small considering the AFP's responsibilities.

According to the news report, General Abu said that "critics who complained that defense spending ate up funds that could be used for more productive purposes such as education, health, and other basic services, ignore a fundamental axiom that security is a precondition for development. "

He added that "Far from being a luxury, an adequately equipped armed forces is rather a crucial investment for national progress." He then drew a comparison between defense spending and NPA strength, showing that insurgent forces reached their peak in 1985 as a consequence of a drop in defense spending."

I agree 100% that every country needs a strong military, and with one of the world's longest running insurgencies, the Philippines is no different. But I would like to twist the AFP Chief's words a bit, and say that "development is also a precondition for security." It's very possible that, during the period of decreased defense spending, the Philippine Government may have been spending less for basic services as well. Inadequate government support is most likely the more relevant factor which fuels lawlessness and dissatisfaction in the country. In a later post I intend to address the insurgency, and discuss what I think are the root forces that drive farmer's son's to take up arms against their own government. I believe my last statement gets to the heart of the issue. Stay tuned.

One Country. . .One Standard

So, now we've given the speech. We've told the people we will treat them fairly, and that they should trust us to keep our word. If we sounded sincere enough, they may believe us, at least for a little while. That's a great start, but how do we keep that trust, and strengthen it, before they decide that this is just another soundbyte speech, like so many others they have heard throughout their lives?

In many developed countries the national government can be seen and felt, in exactly the same way, no matter which part of the country you are in. In the United States, no one refers to California, or even Alaska or Hawaii, as "outlying states". No one calls Okinawa or Hokkaido the "hinterlands" of Japan. In the Philippines though, government radiates outward from the national capitol, decreasing in visibility and effectiveness the farther one travels from Manila. Although it may be slowly changing, many Filipinos still consider it a fact of life that they have to travel all the way to the capitol to avail of many government services.

To be truly effective the national government must be seen and felt in a standardized form throughout the country. At the very least, each region or province should have a "national government building" in which all major service agencies are represented. No matter where he lives, every citizen must have immediate access to the same services as are available in Manila.

This is the real meaning of "decentralized government". This is a popular subject of discussion, particularly among local leaders, who believe that the answer to the problem of a government centralized in the capitol city is to "devolve" more government functions down to the local level. That is true for some services, but many functions of national government must remain in the hands of national government. The goal should be to increase contact with the public, not to add another layer of bureaucracy. The proper way to decentralize government is to directly and effectively deliver its services and influence in exactly the same way across the entire country.

Along with services, government obligations must be carried out in the provinces with the same vigor as in the capitol. Road repair, education, and most importantly law enforcement must be conducted in exactly the same way in every part of the country. A police station in Patikul, Sulu must be similarly equipped and must follow the same procedures as one in Metro Manila. This means they must wear the same uniform, fill out the same reports, and offer the same services, in accordance with the same laws. A state of lawlessness exists in some parts of the country simply because government operates outwardly rather than in parallel. Like a large room illuminated by a single lamp, the country is filled with shadows and dark spots. And those shadows are usually filled with all sorts of vermin. Much better to evenly distribute rows of lightbulbs which bathe each part of the room with the same amount of light. It is much harder for corruption and lawlessness to prosper when there are no shadows to hide in.

Let's Get Down To Business!

Ok, we've spent enough time talking about the way things are, and the way things should be! It's time to get down to business and start making some changes. I've spent a lot of time watching and asking questions, and I have a few suggestions. Some of my ideas are not new, and this is certainly not the only plan out there, but it is a plan. And as my father always said: "Before you start anything, you gotta have a plan!"

So please stick around. I think you'll find the next few articles interesting. And please spread the word about this site. If we make enough noise, maybe we can make a difference!

The National ID System

I’m going to switch subjects for just a bit, and discuss the idea of a national ID system, which is back in the news again.

Always the subject of heated debate, the national ID system is a controversial and emotional issue for many Filipinos. The fear of abuse, and indeed the potential for it, is high, given this country's history. Nevertheless, government must have the ability to accurately identify its own citizens. This is not only necessary from the standpoint of law enforcement, but more importantly to allow basic social mechanisms to function properly. Medical benefits, social services, even cashing a check all require that a person's identity be verifiable. And of course, it is only possible to know if an arrested person is wanted for a previous offense if his identity can be clearly determined. Without some form of accurate ID system, that is not possible. On a recent television talk show, the host mentioned that he is frequently misidentified as another person with the same name, who happens to be wanted for some sort of offense. The host said that he finds it difficult to travel, since his name triggers an alert at the immigration counter whenever he tries to depart the country. In most cases in the Philippines, the name alone is the sole identifier used to distinguish one person from another.
Many governments around the world use a national ID system. Most developed countries, however, rely on a combination of routine ID cards to cover the majority of their population. In the United States, for example, almost every adult has a driver's license. While it's not a foolproof form of identification, enough care is taken when it is issued that most businesses (and government offices) are satisfied with its validity and accuracy. In most states, the same office that issues driver’s licenses can issue an identification card, similar in style, for those residents who don’t drive.

In the Philippines, there are a variety of widely issued forms of identification that collectively cover most of the adult population. Driver’s licenses, military and government employee ID’s, voter’s ID’s, passports, Philhealth (Philippine Health Insurance Corporation) Cards, and taxpayer ID’s are held by millions of Filipinos. Most of these are high-quality, computer-generated cards, containing enough information to clearly identify the holder. Less sophisticated, but still commonly used, are postal ID cards, issued by the local Post Office, and residence certificates, commonly called cedula, issued by a city government. Between all of these, most adult Filipinos are eligible for some form of reliable, government issued identification card.

The problem in the Philippines is not the card, but rather the identification process itself. With some exceptions, little care is given to validating the information presented by the applicant before one of these ID cards is issued. In the course of my work in the private security industry, I have handled all manner of ID cards. I have seen a number of postal ID’s for example, issued to transvestites, with a photograph of the man dressed as a woman, and bearing a woman’s name. Even though this is a very basic identification card, the issuing authorities are still supposed to go through a certain verification process before issuing the card. In this case, I doubt that the male applicant’s real name was “Stephanie”, or that his true appearance included earrings, makeup, and false eyelashes. This might be a humorous example, but in reality the card will be the basis for identifying that person when opening a bank account, applying for a job, or notarizing a contract. In those cases, it’s not too much to ask that the information on the card be accurate. A little supervisory oversight can ensure that it is.

The objection that most people have to a national ID system is not really to the card, but rather to the collecting of citizen’s information into some sort of massive database. There is a fear that such a list could be abused by law enforcers in a variety of ways. According to the UK based watchdog group Privacy International:

The threat of insurgents or political extremists, and the exercise of religious discrimination have been all too common as motivation for the establishment of ID systems which would force enemies of the State into registration, or make them vulnerable in the open without proper documents.”

I agree completely that registration systems are potentially dangerous, a statement that history has validated many times over. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that we shouldn’t have a way to identify the man on the street.

A national ID system would involve the issuance of tens of millions of cards to cover the entire adult population of the Philippines. But before that can happen, there must be debate and decisions about what information the cards will carry. The debate itself will be time-consuming and costly. Once those issues are finally decided, a very expensive contract must be awarded. As is typical in the Philippines, this will undoubtedly lead to more debate, and will certainly take a very long time to go from idea to action. And most certainly, the possibility is high that corruption will figure in the process of choosing a supplier. Finally, the logistics and expense of actually issuing an ID card to every adult in the country will be on the scale of a national election. In addition to all that, a database with the names of all adults in the country must be developed and accurately maintained. It’s not enough just to create the list. New registrants must be added quickly, and that means receiving and entering volumes of data from all parts of the country on a continuing basis. This will require staff and equipment in permanent offices.

In the face of that incredible expense, combined with the uncertainty of public acceptance, it does not make sense to consider implementing a whole new national system, especially when there are already several types of ID in widespread use. It is much more practical to spend a fraction of that money, and only a portion of the time, to strengthen those existing systems. Each of the ID's mentioned above serves a legitimate, useful purpose. Cleaning up those systems, by improving the verification process, and automating those databases, will make the ID's more effective for their original purpose, and will fulfill the need for a national system at the same time.

This is a much more efficient use of public money, and it addresses the problem directly, rather than through a workaround solution. The public will almost certainly see the benefits of this approach, and support the idea much more enthusiastically.

Let's Get Started

Well, here we are...I've always had a lot to say, and now I have a place to say it! I've been putting my thoughts on paper for years, but up to now I've only shared those writings with close friends. I always planned to write a book, and I actually have about a hundred pages finished, but it still seems like a never-ending project!

My favorite subject of course, is the Philippines. I've lived here (this time) for almost 7 years, and I feel like I have a pretty good grasp of the way things work. I also think I have a few good ideas to offer. I am a foreigner by the way, an American who first set foot in this country in 1981, assigned to Clark Air Base with the US Air Force. I have now lived here longer than any other place in my life, and I consider it my home. It makes me a little crazy sometimes, but I wouldn't want to live anywhere else!

I'll be the first to admit that some of my observations and conclusions will be wrong, and I will no doubt say some things that offend a few people. But it is not my intention to malign or insult anyone, and I am well aware that Filipinos have the ability to solve their own problems. I don't claim to have all the answers but I do hope that, with an unbiased view from the outside, I might be able to offer a new way to look at old problems.

Please feel free to add your comments, good or bad, at any time. I will appreciate anything you have to say. And please tell all your friends about this forum. We can't have a very lively discussion if I'm the only one talking!

So let's get started...