P800M AFP bond paper, P25M gov’t fund spent in wedding

COA EXEC BARES MORE FUND SCAMS

By Jun Medina
INQUIRER.net
First Posted 15:44:00 04/30/2011

WASHINGTON, DC—Bond paper purchases worth P800 million at the Armed Forces of the Philippines, Mongol pencils overpriced 5,000 times at a city hospital and P25 million in government funds diverted for the wedding expenses of a governor's child that took 16 years to prosecute.

These are some of the unbelievable facets of corruption in the Philippines that whistleblower Heidi Mendoza encountered in the course of her job as a no-nonsense state auditor.

Speaking before a World Bank-sponsored forum on "Effective Auditing as the Bane of Grand Corruption: A Tale from the Front Lines," Mendoza highlighted how corruption deprives people of their rightful share of scarce public resources.

Joining her in the panel was former journalist Sheila Coronel, Columbia University professor on investigative journalism, and former executive director of the Philippine Center of Investigative Journalism; and Rick Messick, a senior operations officer of the WB Department of Institutional Integrity, which assists corruption fighters in the bank's client countries.

Mendoza lamented how the AFP allotted more than P800 million on dubious procurement of bond paper, while an ordinary soldier gets only P12.50 in daily subsistence allowance and makes do with substandard combat boots and uniform and bullets that fail to fire.

Mendoza, who was recently appointed commissioner of the Philippine Commission on Audit by President Benigno Aquino III, narrated how it took more than 16 years for the government to prosecute a governor of the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao for misusing some P25 million funds intended for rural infrastructure.

"When I started my audit, I was pregnant, and by the time the Supreme Court rendered a decision on the case, my child was more than 16 years old already," she said.

Mendoza related her experience of being slapped flimsy charges in court by powerful politicians to derail her investigative work.

"The hard part is when an auditor is charged in court because he or she does not get any support from the agency, and then left to fend for himself or herself," she said.

In her case, Mendoza said she was forced to go on leave and to hire a private lawyer to clear her name, using money she took on a salary loan.

Stressing that fighting corruption is not the sole responsibility of government, Mendoza said the people should be involved not only by exposing the corrupt, but also by refusing to be part of any dishonest transaction.
She said the public apathy and the oft-dysfunctional system of prosecution in the country contributes to corruption in society.

Mendoza observes that even a person's excessive focus on the welfare of the family could lead to corruption, because some people in public office tend to fail to draw the distinction between what is public and what is private.

"Love for family should be tempered by an even greater love for country and love of God," said Mendoza, who said it was the prayers and support of so many Filipinos that spurred her to pursue the truth and go after the grafters, even when it entailed grave personal risks.

Mendoza thinks the Aquino administration is determined to weed out corruption by appointing known graft fighters in sensitive positions like the Department of Justice, the Bureau of Internal Revenue, and COA, among others.

As new COA commissioner, Mendoza will have the actual chance to introduce the much-needed reforms she has studied during her long years as an auditor.

For instance, she said there are proposals to subject to auditing all "pork barrel"—funds appropriated from the national budget to finance local or district projects in order to promote the reelection of politicians.

These projects become a source of corruption in the form of overpricing or even "ghost" or non-existent projects.

Some progressive-minded senators and congressmen are clamoring for the abolition of this so-called “pork politics” because it perpetuates political patronage.

She also said that organizations like the World Bank and civil society should support the work of corruption fighters, in terms of providing training and creating the environment conducive to honesty and transparency in public transactions.

Mendoza shot to national prominence this year after she resigned her job at the Asian Development Bank to pursue massive corruption charges involving former AFP comptroller Carlos Garcia, who admitted to laundering more than P300 million in public funds.

As head of a special audit team assigned by then Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo, Mendoza helped prosecute retired Major General Garcia in his plunder case in the Sandiganbayan. Mendoza blew the whistle on how Garcia stashed away millions of military funds in his personal accounts.

Mendoza said it was a lonely fight when she testified in the Sandiganbayan, with only her and her husband attending, during which time she was called a liar by Garcia, along with a threat, “there is a time for reckoning."

After Marcelo resigned, the case hit a wall, and Mendoza decided to resign after she failed to get the support of her superiors at the COA.

But things turned around when Garcia’s plunder case was reduced to bribery and money laundering as a result of a questionable plea bargain deal with the Office of the Ombudsman last year.

Mendoza resurfaced and testified before congressional hearings on the plea bargain deal.

The Garcia investigation was actually triggered by events on December 18, 2003, when US Customs agents at the San Francisco International Airport seized $100,000 in cash from Garcia's two sons—Filipino Americans Juan Carlo and Ian Carl—who hid the money in their carry-on luggage.

The brothers explained in identical letters that they brought the money at the request of their parents to pay the tuition and registration fees of their New York-based brother, Timothy Mark, who was accepted at Parsons School, and to pay the initial down payment of a condominium unit near the school. FilAm Star

 

How to turn failure into victory

By Armin Adina
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 18:26:00 04/28/2011

WHEN Angelee Claudett de los Reyes failed to make the grade as 2011 Binibining Pilipinas official candidate, she did not lose hope. Instead, she saw it as a challenge to improve her chances next time.

After all, her goal was to bag a national beauty title. She had previously been crowned Binibining Zambales (2007) and Binibining Olongapo (2008). Then she tried her luck at the national tilts Mutya ng Pilipinas (she was a semifinalist) and Miss Philippines-Earth, where she emerged Miss Talent.

“My Binibini experience put me on this new level in my pageant career,” the 23-year-old nurse told Inquirer Entertainment. “When I failed there, I reviewed the videos and photos to see which aspects I need to work on.”

Optimistic
The 5’6” charmer describes herself as a positive and optimistic person. “I consider every failure as a chance to work harder and get better,” she said.

Claudett was crowned Miss Bikini Philippines at the Newport Performing Arts Theater in Pasay City on April 12, besting 26 competitors and taking home more than P500,000 worth of cash and prizes. She will represent the country in the Miss Bikini International contest set in China.

Her winning formula? Being herself.

“I used to be too technical. I didn’t enjoy my self because my focus was on getting the crown,” she revealed. “This time around I just showed my real self.”

Bottom line
She added: “But the bottom line is faith in God. Whenever I join beauty tilts, I bring a small rosary that I loop around my finger like a ring. It makes me feel God is with me when I’m alone on stage.”

For this last tilt, Claudett said, she fervently prayed a novena to the Nuestra Señora in Orani, Bataan.

“The ninth day of my prayers fell on pageant day. Instead of rehearsing the numbers I was to perform, I just prayed. I think that was also one of the keys to my victory,” Claudett said.

Aquino’s search for good news may lead to DTI

Signing of Madrid Protocol for entrepreneurs

By Winston A. Marbella
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 21:37:00 04/28/2011

MANILA, Philippines—Saying his 13-point drop in net satisfaction rating was caused by media’s bias for bad news, President Benigno Aquino III challenged his propaganda staff to be more “thick-skinned” and “aggressive” in purveying the good news.

There would be no need for breast thumping if they just spent less time dueling daily with Malacañang reporters like a “Dead Poets’ Society” debating club and more time looking for good news.

Here’s one right under their noses, at the Department of Trade and Industry, to be precise.

With just a single application, local entrepreneurs can have their trademarks protected in 85 countries—including the United States, Japan, China, and members of the European Union—if we join the Madrid Protocol, a 1995 international agreement on intellectual property.

If we sign in, it will facilitate the registration of trademarks and patents in all signatory countries.

The initiative to have the Philippines sign the agreement was re-launched last month. It was originally launched in 2009 by the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines, headed by Director General Adrian Cristobal Jr. The new IPOPHL Director General is Ricardo Blancaflor.

He says: “Through the Madrid system, Filipino individuals and corporations will have a golden opportunity to expand outside the Philippines in a new, simple, cheap, and effective way.”

Because “trademark protection is territorial,” businesses must file applications—and periodically renew them—in every country where they seek protection for their intellectual property.

The Madrid system “will make life easier for business owners who will now have to file only one application with IPOPHL.”

Looking ahead
When the typical entrepreneur starts a business, he rarely thinks of legally protecting his trade and service marks in overseas markets. It is expensive. But, without legal protection for his trademarks, brand names, logos, and other service marks, the business owner can be prey to third-party opportunists.

When the business succeeds and expands abroad, these parties can prevent the owner from using his own marks. He will then be forced to compensate those opportunists for the right to use his own trademarks, brand names, and logos in those markets.

The Madrid Protocol, of course, is reciprocal. Multinationals of countries belonging to the agreement will also enjoy legal protection in this country.

World Intellectual Property Organization (Wipo) Deputy Director General Wang Binying is providing technical assistance to IPOPHL in the implementation of the Madrid system of trademark registration.

Wipo is the agency of the United Nations that administers the international registrations under the Madrid Protocol.

No lawyers, lower cost
Through the protocol’s central intellectual property registration system, IP owners can file a single international application for each trademark or patent owned.

It removes the need to hire foreign lawyers and produce additional documents in different languages.

The international application requires that the applicant has registered the subject trademark or brand in the “country of origin.”

The registered brands will be protected for 10 years in as many member countries as the applicant wishes.

International protection under the Madrid Protocol is available only to individuals or legal entities that are nationals of a country that is a signatory to the protocol. The international application is filed with the trademark office in the country of origin. That office is responsible for determining whether all the requirements for international registration are met. It then transmits the completed application to the Wipo.

The Wipo examines the application and, if everything is in order, will inform the trademark offices in the member countries where the applicant has applied for protection. Those trademark offices are required to scrutinize the Wipo-referred applications according to the same standards and procedures as individually filed applications.

Speak now or keep quiet
Under the protocol, if those trademark offices do not issue an objection to the application within 12 months—18 months in some countries—the application is considered granted.

The Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry, says IP committee chair Jesus Varela, passed a resolution in the 36th Philippine Business Conference in October 2010 that urges “the Senate to ratify the Philippines’ membership in the Madrid Protocol.”

Philippine Retailers Association president Bernard Liu agrees.

The next move is the Senate’s—or the President’s, through an executive agreement. But maybe we should request Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa to touch base first with the Senate, so we don’t ruffle sensitive feathers and get into more trouble with executive orders.

(The author is chief executive of a think tank specializing in transforming social and political trends into public policy and business strategy. For comments, email mibc2006@gmail.com.)

TV, Willing Willie, the public sphere

Posted on April 26, 2011 09:08:37 PM

Commentary -- By Melinda Quintos De Jesus

The controversy hounding the television show Willing Willie does not begin and end with the boy, Janjan, and his tearful macho dancing. If we focused only on the episode, we would miss the lesson we need to learn about media and its role in society.

The courts are now in the picture, and there are few quicker ways to quash discussion and debate in this country. TV5’s president and CEO announced that the company will file libel cases against critics of the network and the show’s host, Willie Revillame. The parents of the boy sued the psychologist who reportedly stated that his dancing on the show resulted in his abuse. I doubt whether the courts can put an end to the contradictory claims about child abuse, but the decision on this would not necessarily resolve the larger questions.


Whatever moves to silence criticism, the public should not shirk from grappling with the profoundly difficult problem that Philippine television has become, nor from continuing the public exchange which could help us all to review how television shapes our public sphere -- that realm in time or space which serves metaphorically as the public square, the plaza if you will, where we have traditionally taken our shared concerns so we can talk about it, hearing out the arguments and counter arguments about what we are to do when confronted with difficult issues affecting all.


But this show is entertainment. It does not fall under journalistic review. It does not take up public issues. It is about having fun and getting free money.


The questions raised have to do with the role that television plays in society. And television combines both journalism and entertainment in the same medium, albeit in separate segments. Unfortunately, what happens in one part of the programmatic spectrum affects all other aspects with total impact.


Television in countries where commercial advertising determines what stays on the air has muddled the line between entertainment and news and public affairs. The result is a public sphere where it is difficult to have coherent conversation.


There are harsh critics who have early on charged television with the decline of intelligence. These refer to the wasteland created by mass media where the lowlife can be king or queen. Mass media cater to that audience at the bottom of the pyramid. Its offerings are designed for popular appeal, but in effect target the least common denominator. It is like feeding one kind of food, the easiest to digest, yes, baby food, to adults with teeth.


If we had all been more alive to our responsibilities as an audience then we would have noticed the wholesale surrender of the public sphere to the so-called demands of the mass audience -- so-called, because really, no one in the mass audience actually demands anything from television. Often, it is just that box that is turned on mindlessly, operating on autopilot to provide sights and sounds to fill vacuum and emptiness.


Only a few will ever take the time to question what is being offered. Those who have better ways of spending their time, tune out. Those who have nothing better to do, keep it on, to be engaged, perhaps, or entertained momentarily.


In this country, television is free. Media rely on advertising. Except for cable channels, network television needs those commercials. We surrendered network programming to the executives who watch the bottom line and to advertisers who want to sell their products to as many who will tune in. We have not had too many critics point to the weaknesses and lapses, the sameness and lack of alternatives in television programming, in a time when television has grown so much that it has become the main source of news and information in this country.


It has taken this shameful incident to stir the public to react.


Angry criticism rocked the public square in cyberspace, with so many people deeply offended by the sight of a young boy, barely 10, miming sexual moves.


The audience applauded on cue, the relative was overjoyed at being called onstage, getting to hug a celebrity host for a quick 3,000 pesos, and then to take home more cash for the boy’s performance. Government and religious officials, artists, experts, and civil society leaders have voiced what has been a long-standing disgust over not just this show but also the general model of many daytime shows, the banality of which has long been accepted as a standard for winning mass audiences.


TV Times, a weekly television magazine, which I edited in the seventies, featured critical articles to accompany the guides for TV programs and the notes of the week’s highlights.


Even then, we noted how the dynamic medium was set back by the dependence on advertising revenues and the insistence of advertisers on the sole criterion, ratings.


Ratings measured the viewers of the program, and the monitoring of these audiences has become a thriving separate industry.


The dependence on this measurement, above all else, has kept programming fixed on the level presumed to appeal to the many. With no other objective than to get as many people registered for viewership, television programming necessarily declines.


Unless networks and advertisers themselves decide to provide an alternative, to provide as in a diet, a better menu, this state of affairs will remain.


All the other questions about the abuse of the child and his rights may be resolved. But it will not address the central question: How badly or how low do we allow television to take the mass audience?


We know now how low things can get. WW, like its predecessor in ABS-CBN, Wowowee, succeeded in the ratings because it was giving away money, not as a prize for winning a game or talent show, but just by being there, for doing nothing. A few are asked to enter into whatever silly activities have been cooked up for the day.


It started with expat workers and foreign guests giving money to members of the audience on camera, all from good intention of sharing their largesse with the poor.


The show packaged the doling out of money with the host now giving away what the audience presumes as his money.


And the audience continued to grow. In a poor country, getting into the show is a chance at winning daily lotto. Advertising followed him and the insulting concept from one channel to another. How dumb can that be?


The "dumbing down" of network television audiences goes on even in the non-entertainment programs. News shows no longer have one segment for news about entertainment and show business. These splice entertainment fillers into a news program, like a clubhouse sandwich. News production has taken on the zing and punch of shows designed more to keep children’s attention.


A critic of television news coined the word "info-tainment," describing how the news product also had to be entertaining.


The spectrum of TV offerings demonstrates the media dynamics which employs factors involved in popular appeal (pretty faces, attractive sets, zingers) which also affects the choice of how much and what kind of news and information gets into the program. The stream of sound, images, words, and gestures all contribute to the making of news as entertainment and entertainment as news.


Channel 5, in an attempt to lead WW’s audience for their news show, placed the news program at an earlier slot, a move to cut down the news audience of other channels. But the effect could be a general reduction of the news audience. Another huge dumbing down.


Television, more than any other media, determines the character of our public forums and the level of engagement in the public square. We draw from television an understanding of ourselves, our aspirations, our desires and preferences, our ideas and insights -- or the lack of these. There was a time when the word press referred to all media, because at its earliest history, all publications were about ideas. In the progressive cycle of everything that matters, we could have also tried to inform television with ideas and insights.


But this could not happen in a system that is designed mainly for business profit. And television business is big business. For television to serve the higher purpose of education and learning, of upliftment and genuinely great laughs, those engaged in television need to get their faces out of the money trough.


And since the advertisers have pronounced themselves as wanting TV quality, we should force them to continue the withdrawal of support until they have seen real improvement. In fact, we should ask them to lead the way out of this wasteland.


Mass media can be many things. The huge leaps in communication technology have not been matched with the kind of thought that such developments deserve. We move willy-nilly from one new gadget to another. This kind of thoughtlessness has brought us to this sorry state.


It is time to review our options, because we have them. Because our system prevents government from interfering with the media, the advertisers should take this cue from the public, not just to appease the critics, but to engage them in raising the standards for television for the masses.


The Constitution protects the media from government interference. Unfortunately, after some 25 years of press and media freedom, we have so very little to show for it.


It may mean that the media have not been deserving of such protection.


Melinda Quintos de Jesus is the executive director of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility.

 

LGUs warned: Skip posh out-of-town seminars

By Marlon Ramos
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 03:53:00 04/28/2011

 MANILA, Philippines—Take it from Interior Secretary Jesse Robredo: Seminars for local government officials are not intended to be summer escapades.

In fact, officials and employees of local government units (LGUs) are “strongly discouraged” from conducting training sessions, seminars and meetings “outside of their territorial jurisdictions,” according to a memorandum that Robredo issued Wednesday to governors and mayors, as well as barangay captains and presiding officers of provincial and town councils.

He issued the directive following reports that a number of officials of three cities in Metro Manila recently conducted what appeared to be junkets in expensive hotels in the resort island of Boracay, Baguio City and Subic.

Robredo, a former mayor of Naga City and recipient of a Ramon Magsaysay Award for government service, pointed out that the Commission on Audit had issued a memorandum circular urging government agencies to avoid incurring “irregular, unnecessary, excessive or extravagant expenditures or uses of government funds and property.”

He said the apparent penchant of local officials to hold seminars out of town “impacts on the ability of a local government to finance desirable development programs or projects.”

He added that spending public funds for such events “delimits actions to bring about the constitutional mandate to provide quality of life for all.”

Prudent use of resources
In an earlier interview, Robredo said training seminars for local officials should be conducted only within their regional territory.

He said LGUs could hold workshops and related activities outside their jurisdiction only “when there is no available training facility” in their area.

“Local execs should take full cognizance of their principal responsibility and accountability relative to the prudent use of scarce financial resources and strict compliance with existing budgeting, accounting and auditing rules and regulations,” the interior secretary said.

He said LGUs could still conduct study tours, but only in places and institutions recognized by the Galing Pook Foundation.

Recently, barangay officials of Pasig City came under fire for conducting a training seminar in a posh resort in Boracay.

Barangay officials in the cities of Mandaluyong and San Juan also conducted similar seminars in Baguio and Subic, respectively, Robredo said.

A weak, poor and suffering God!

Jun Mercado, OMI

Wednesday, April 20. 2011

I have been in turmoil questioning over and over again why the poor continue to suffer, not only of man-made disasters, but also natural ones. Why the poor are often the victims of endless calamities? In the Congo, Sudan, the Middle East, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, India, Latin America and in Japan post earthquakes and tsunami. The list is endless and the anguish and the cry of the poor DO NOT reach God!

In a mysterious way, this season of Holy Week, we are invited to turn to the reality of the CROSS. Isn’t the message of Holy Week, that is, Jesus Crucified is a disclosure that God is NOT the all powerful one that we were taught from catechism to the liturgies that we celebrate the whole year round.

The God revealed to us on the cross is so weak, so helpless and so poor. Except for a few women and a disciple, he was all alone, abandoned and betrayed by his friends. Yes, this is the message of the cross. Our God is not only so poor and weak but also a suffering one and dying on the cross.

This is a shock! Indeed, a real scandal! How can we reconcile this radical message of the cross with the history of power, victory (often military ones) and wealth that have been the dominant traditions from the time that Emperor Constantine claimed that by the sign of the cross he killed his opponents at the Battle of Ponte Milvio?

Purveyors of power and wealth both in the sacred and the profane world have since engaged in a big cover up of the real meaning of the Crucified Lord. Tragically, they go to the extent of crafting new myths and symbol including regal titles, throne complete with Triple Crown, miters and scepter for the Lord who died on the cross.

Jesus, the Son of God, and died in the Cross, revolutionized our understanding of God and upset the religious and political institutions. The Crucified Lord yesterday, today and forever, continues to hound us even today. Our God is NOT the all-powerful one! Much less is He the all TRANSCENDENT One. Definitely, God - revealed by Jesus in the Cross is NOT a sort of a SUPERNATURAL DEITY!

The message of the Crucified Lord tells us a different story line that the world is used to hear. In the mouth of Caiphas, the High Priest, the world’s story line is ‘redemptive violence’, that is, to kill one man to save the nation. The story line of the Crucified Christ is a ‘redemptive suffering’, that is, to offer one’ s life, suffer and die that others may live.

The story line of the cross is a radically different life from what the world tells us. It invites all believers to live a life of simplicity and at the service of the poor and all who were on the fringes of society. These so called unclean, unwanted, unacceptable people, the pagans, the sinners, the prisoners, and the lepers are now the number one in the roll call of Jesus of Golgotha. These were the people through whom God chooses to reveal Himself.

The Jesus of Golgotha was branded as a troublemaker, a blasphemer, a scandal to all. He had the audacity and the RAGE to question the entire teaching of established religion about God, the Temple and the Law. It is a revelation that has rocked the world ever since. This has been the uncomfortable truth that the experts and religious leaders want to deny, cover up and reject.

Yet, to find the deepest experience of God, we have to retrieve the real meaning of the cross that is at the heart of the mission and the following of Jesus.

For centuries, pilgrims, knights and ‘seekers’ have all been looking for the so-called ‘Holy Grail’. I never understood the real meaning of the ‘Holy Grail’ until I was confronted by the cruel killings of OMI Martyrs - Bishop Ben de Jesus in front of the Jolo Cathedral in 1997; Fr. Benjamin Inocencio at the back of the Cathedral in the year 2000; and Fr. Reynaldo Jesus Roda in his mission station in Tabawan, Tawi Tawi in 2008. Then I begin to surmise… Is not the cross the real ‘Holy Grail’ of human and divine encounter?

The martyrs like them give a name to the crucified peoples. Here we speak of the deaths of millions of people, especially of children, in what used to be called Third World countries, in the form of poverty, illnesses, exclusion, wars, massacres, particularly those of children, who are in no way to blame. What is happening is undeniable, but society and government do not even give these victims a name, let alone grant any sort of dignity to these deaths.

My uncle Johnny Mercado quoted in his latest Inquirer Column the Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel who was able to capture this ‘absence of God’ in his book “Night.” At Auschwitz, 14-year-old Wiesel and other Holocaust prisoners watched the Gestapo execute a child.

“‘Where is God?’ someone behind me asked,” Wiesel recalls. And I heard a voice within me, answer: “Here He is, hanging on this gallow.”

Though the cross remains the most powerful expression of the Christian story line. The story ends not on Good Friday! We do know that on the third day, God raises him up. And this Jesus whom they crucified is now RISEN from the dead and has become the LIGHT of the world. By his resurrection, he has conquered death and has restored the fullness of life. EASTER proclaims that ‘Jesus Christ, yesterday and today, the beginning and the end, the Alpha and the Omega, all the time belongs to him and all the ages, to him the glory and power through every age forever. Amen.’

Doing good, doing right

Posted on April 18, 2011 09:03:35 PM

To Take A Stand -- By Gus Lagman

No matter how one says it -- doing good, being generous, paying forward, giving back, helping others, volunteering one’s time for a good cause -- it’s always nice to hear and, assuredly, very inspiring.

In developing countries like the Philippines, one will never run out of examples to cite, because, by definition, there are just so many things that are left undone. Governments in these countries cannot afford to provide for all necessities -- not even the minimum services that the citizenry expects -- until such time that they become economically capable, until such time that they become, well ... developed.


Given this situation, one will always find people -- there must be tens of thousands of Filipinos -- who have the wherewithal, whether in terms of funds and/or time, and, more important, who have the heart, to help others more wanting in life.


Let me cite some examples of outreach programs in the Philippines -- at least those I’m quite familiar with, having been personally involved with most of them: community projects of Rotary clubs nationwide -- they are far too many to name; specifically, Rotary Club of Makati-North’s feeding program in a barangay in Makati; its medical missions to a community of Aetas in Botolan, Zambales; Childhope’s informal training sessions for streetchildren; ATRIEV’s PC classes for the blind and visually-impaired; NOVA Foundation’s livelihood programs for PWDs; Efren Peñaflorida’s kariton classes; and of course, the most widespread and perhaps the project with the most impact on the poor -- Tony Meloto’s Gawad Kalinga.


People admire those who spend time, and even money, helping others. More than earning the admiration of others, those who help acquire a great sense of fulfillment -- such feeling having no monetary equivalent. Just watching those one has helped break into smiles is more than enough payment for one’s efforts.


Truly, doing good things is very rewarding and heart-warming.


But how is doing good things different from "doing the right things"?


The latter is not your usual good Samaritan act. Rather, it is correcting, or at least, exposing what one sees as wrong things. While doing that may gain the respect, even admiration of others, it can, on the other hand, be very hazardous. Let’s look at some examples:


Jun Lozada did the right thing when he exposed the anomalies in the NBN-ZTE deal and for that, he and his family had to live under constant threat and had to submit themselves under the care and security of the religious for some four years.


Ensign Philip Pestaño did the right thing when he planned to expose the illegal cargo (illegally cut bakawan logs, shabu, and military weapons for sale to the Abu Sayyaf) that their logistics ship transported and for that, he was slain.


Namfrel volunteers did the right thing by protecting the ballot during the snap presidential elections and succeeding elections after, and for that, four of them were killed by still unknown perpetrators.


Clarissa Ocampo did the right thing when she told the truth about the Jose Velarde bank account and for that, she had to make herself scarce for some time.


Acsa Ramirez exposed the corruption in a government agency and for that, it was she who was incarcerated for several months. (Such irony!)


Dinky Soliman and Enteng Romano did the right thing in protesting Arroyo’s alleged involvement in the "Hello Garci" scandal and for that, they were hauled to the police station and had to defend themselves in court for a number of years.


Heidi Mendoza has been doing the right things and, as we all know, she put her life and those of her family at risk. What’s even more admirable is that she quit a well-paying job at ADB to be a truth-teller.


Journalists, especially radio commentatiors, have been doing the right thing in exposing anomalies being committed by government officials, and for regularly doing that, scores of them have paid with their lives.


We did the right thing when we exposed the anomalies in the Comelec bidding process for Automated Counting Machines, and resulting from that, I have been attending court hearings for almost four years now on two libel cases filed against me by the supplier, Mega Pacific.


It is therefore small wonder that many would rather look the other way and pretend that nothing bad is happening. Taking steps to expose anomalies is fraught with risks, putting in danger not only one’s life, but also those of his family.


But unfortunately, as Burke said, "The best way for evil to triumph is for enough good men to do nothing." This is exactly how our country attained our ranking as one of the most corrupt countries in Asia, if not the world.


Unchecked, corruption will continue to thrive, as it has in the Philippines.


But there is a way of reducing the risks, perhaps even eliminating them ... and that is, through collective action. We are the pioneers in peaceful revolutions. EDSA I and II. But, for some reason, we got tired during the Arroyo administration and so things got worse. "Let’s just move on" became the popular by-word.


Doing good, doing right.


What many do not realize is that if doing the right things could correct the pathetic situation we’re in, then there might be very little need for us to have to do good things. If the money lost to corruption could be channeled to the alleviation of poverty, to housing the poor, for instance, then we may not even need projects like Gawad Kalinga.


"Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap."

‘Nobody home’ President on the ‘war’ path

ANALYSIS
By Amando Doronila
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:06:00 04/18/2011

EACH TIME President Benigno Aquino III’s public opinion ratings dive, he emerges from hibernation inside Malacañang, attempts to raise his profile and goes on a rampage against persons he has singled out as obstructing his campaign to stamp out corruption in the government.

On April 11, the President gave a speech at the 10th Student Catholic Action of the Philippines national conference at St. Paul University in Manila. His speech confirmed for the first time that his sanctimonious government was in a “fight” with Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.

Gutierrez faces trial in the Senate in May after she was impeached in a lynch-mob style vote by the House of Representatives on charges of “betrayal of public trust” for failing to act on several corruption allegations against former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, her family and associates.

“We have a fight with the Ombudsman,” he said, referring to the case which, he claimed, was bungled by the Office of the Ombudsman when it entered into a plea bargain agreement in a plunder charge against former military comptroller Carlos F. Garcia, downgrading it to a less serious offense.

Evidently outraged by the deal, the President said, “General Garcia offered to return over P130 million to the government because he was accused of plunder of over P300 million. They (the Ombudsman’s office) attempted to have a plea bargain, and they weren’t even asking for half of what he stole, and they expected the government to say, thank you?”

In taking the case to the students, Mr. Aquino appeared to have preempted the trial at the Senate, where House prosecutors are expected to present their evidence to back their case accusing Gutierrez of “betrayal of public trust.”

Gunslinger as mentor
The President took another high-pressure tactic to infuse animo to his anticorruption drive when he urged government prosecutors to carry firearms to protect them from threats and harassment.

He told the prosecutors at their convention in General Santos City, “If you need a (shooting) instructor, I am willing to volunteer.” He offered to teach them how to fire a gun.

The President is a gun fancier, with undaunted competence, as well as an authority of vintage racing cars. He said, “We are concerned about the dangers you face, especially when taking on high-profile cases … and we cannot allow mere intimidation from doing our job.”

With that pep talk, the prosecution arm of the government might yet turn out, with the mentorship of an expert gunslinger, as better sharpshooters than effective crime fighters, i.e., crimes related to corruption.

Businessmen grumbling
Mr. Aquino took these high-profile approaches to show he is doing something after his public opinion ratings received a battering in the first week of March.

The moves came amid increasing grumbling in the business community as businessmen had started to call him the “nobody home” president and ask what he had accomplished during his first 100 hundred days other than wage a vendetta against the intensely reviled and disgraced Arroyo administration with the impeachment case against Gutierrez serving as the lightning rod.

First signs of decay
The first signs of decay in the President’s popularity appeared in the opinion survey of March 4 to 7—a period that may now be considered the beginning of the downhill slide of the Aquino administration.
Two findings stood out from this survey of Social Weather Stations.

The first was the steep drop of the net satisfaction rating of the President to plus-51 from plus-64 points in November 2010—a 13-point plunge in just five months of his presidency. This plunge was blamed on nothing more profound than the issue that bothered the public a lot, the issue that stuck in the public mind, involving his capriciousness in acquiring a second-hand Porsche sport car, and revealing his priorities as president.

The other disturbing finding was that the President’s net rating of plus-51 was two points inferior to that of his mother, the late President Cory Aquino, whose first net rating in May 1986, four months after the People Power Revolution, was plus-53.

Less optimism
In the March survey, respondents were found to have become less optimistic in their outlook on how the economy would fare in the year ahead. The survey found 35 percent of respondents claiming that their lives would improve in the next 12 months, more than three times the 11 percent who said otherwise.

The survey showed that the “high” net personal optimism score of plus-24 in March plunged from the “very high” 35 of the November 2010 survey—a drop of 11 points. The respondents’ outlook plunged 26 points to just plus-4 from plus-30 last November. Asked about how their lives had changed in the past 12 months, 36 percent said it had worsened and 26 percent said it improved, resulting in a net gainers-losers score of minus-13, eight points lower than November’s.

Sloganeering not enough
These results send a warning to the administration that it had to deliver concrete results to improve the economic conditions of the people beyond blaming external factors, manufacturing empty slogans on good governance, and looking for convenient local scapegoats, including minor officials at the Ombudsman office and the media, which he has berated for their obsession on his private life rather than on the “good news”—i.e., the alleged accomplishments of his nearly invisible presidency.

This goes to show that P-Noy cannot keep on banking on the reservoir of goodwill of his mother, and must show something more than just proclaiming his honesty, must deliver results, more than the capacity to bash Gutierrez in the effort. In a few weeks, the impeachment trial will provide circuses to the public to distract their attention from the scant performance of the Aquino administration.

There is no sign that the personal back-seat driving by the President of the impeachment case against the Ombudsman will reverse the slide of his ratings—no matter how many more scalps he takes in his “war” against corruption.

Pride comes before the fall

By John C. Maxwell
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 19:47:00 04/09/2011

MANILA, Philippines—An ancient Hebrew proverb warns, “Pride comes before the fall,” and sometimes the adage is swiftly fulfilled. As a case in point, consider the story of American snowboarder, Lindsey Jacobellis.

Cruising toward victory in the gold medal race of the snowboard cross, Jacobellis immodestly attempted to showboat on the second to last jump. She lost her balance maneuvering in mid-air and crashed to the snow. By the time she recovered and glided to the finish line, she had to settle for the silver medal.

Jacobellis paid a penalty for pride, yet other people appear to ooze arrogance while thriving professionally. Muhammad Ali’s brash egotism did not prevent him from triumphing in the boxing ring. Charlie Sheen’s sickening smugness may have burned relationships at CBS, but he has never been more popular, selling out several nationwide tour dates in a matter of minutes. The conceit of Oracle CEO Larry Ellison has been noted by competitors, colleagues, and friends alike, yet he ranks among the world’s wealthiest men.

What can be said, then, about pride? Is arrogance really as dangerous to leadership as some people would insist? On the surface, it seems that pride does not necessarily hinder success. However, I maintain that pride is every bit as destructive to the welfare of a leader as the ancient proverb forewarns.

Along with the propensity to see themselves as superior to others, Muhammad Ali, Charlie Sheen, and Larry Ellison share in common the attainment of enormous “success.” However, each also appears to have left a wake of destruction relationally. While their pride may not have cost them professionally, privately it seems to have taken a toll.

In its truest sense, success involves more than material wealth and career accomplishments. When considering the implications of pride, we must remember to see the whole picture. An individual may be standing atop the world with respect to a career, yet still “fall” to the deepest depths. In my estimation, success happens when the people who know you the best, love and respect you the most. In light of this definition, arrogance is utterly incompatible with success.

Many people with talent make it into the limelight, but those who have neglected to develop humility rarely experience satisfaction that endures. An excess of pride alienates them from connecting with others.
 Consequently, they bounce from relationship to relationship until the star of their celebrity finally burns out.

(Reprinted with permission from the John Maxwell Co. and Inspire Leadership Consultancy. For your training needs on leadership as well as organizational and personal effectiveness, please do call Inspire Leadership Consultancy at 687-2614/706-4853 and look for Kriselle. Visit us also at www.inspireleaders.com.ph for details on our workshops.)

The Speed of Trust

Posted on March 31, 2011 by Maria Ressa

Everything we do in our world today depends on trust. The credit card you use to buy your clothes is a small example. The store trusts the credit card company will pay them, and the company trusts you will pay them. You trust the quality of the clothes you bought.

If we choose to do something with people we trust, it normally gets done faster. Trust greases all successful endeavors. Without it, everything can grind to a stop – with people who are supposed to act paying lip service but doing little else.

It seems like for the first time in a long time, problems of public trust of security forces have been – or are being – addressed; and on the political side, trust in a government administration has never been so high. These key factors reset the stage for dealing with terrorism in the Philippines.

The fight against terrorism is a battle for the trust of the public – what military officers refer to as “the battle for hearts and minds.” In order to fight terrorism, authorities have to “drain the swamp” – minimize public support because that’s the oxygen that breathes life into terrorism.

Sometimes the terrorists are more trusted by the public. That’s when they get more recruits and create more safe havens. Other times, the military and government wins the trust of the people. That’s the prize.

Read More ...