Gloria: Hello Obama!

Nagka-usap nga raw si Gloria Macapagal Arroyo at si Barrack Obama. Ipinagmalaki ng Malacanang ang pagtawag ni Obama kay Gloria sa wakas, pagkatapos ng medyo effort na paghahabol ni Gloria sa presidente ng Amerika. We could only imagine how their conversation went despite the media releases. Marami ang bumatikos sa nangyaring pag-uusap. Sabi ng ilan sa mga anti-VFA politicians and critics ay isang magandang oportunidad sana yun para sa isulong ang pambansang interes ng bansa. Pero ano ang maaasahan natin kay Gloria? Ilan nga raw sa mga pinag-usapan ng dalawa ay ang tungkol sa VFA. Ini-imadyin ko pa rin kung ano ang sinabi nila sa isa't-isa. Iniimadyin ko kung paano nangako si Gloria ng patuloy na pagsuporta sa Amerika at sa VFA at malamang hiniling nito ang pagpapatuloy ng nasabing kasunduan sa kabila ng mga pagtuligsa at clamor na ibasura na ito. Napag-usapan din nila ang tunkol kay Daniel Smith. Ano kaya ang inimungkahi niya para sa convicted rapist ng isang Filipina? Siguro in-assure niya na mananatili si Smith sa custody ng US kahit na malakas na binabatikos ito ng kanyang sariling mamamayan.

Kung susuportahan ni Obama ang pananatili ng VFA at ang kasalukuyang Foreign relation policy ng US sa Pilipinas tiyak ko maraming madidismaya kay Obama.

Para sa kaunting kaalaman natin sa isyu ng VFA, ito ang link mula sa League of Filipino Students click here.

Right to Reply Bill

I'm reposting this primer on the right to reply bill prepared by CEGP:

Prepared by the College Editors Guild of the Philippines (CEGP)
February 2009

This primer seeks to shed analysis and explain in detail why the College Editors Guild of the Philippines is steadfastly rejecting the Right of Reply Bill.

What is the Right of Reply Bill?

In June 2004, Senate Bill (SB) 1178 was filed by Senator Aquilino Pimentel during the 13th Congress. The said bill, however, passed the third reading but failed to get approved due to lack of time. When Congress resumed sessions in June 2007, Pimentel immediately re-filed his bill and gained Senate approval by June 2008. SB 1178 was then effectively substituted by SB 2150.

On July 29, 2008, the Senate passed SB 2150, otherwise known as: “An Act Granting the Right of Reply and Providing Penalties for Violation Thereof,” on its third reading. It was supported by Senators Ramon Bong Revilla Jr., Francis “Chiz” Escudero, Mar Roxas, Loren Legarda and Pimentel, among others.

Meanwhile, Bacolod City Representative Monico Puentevella filed House Bill (HB) 1001 and Aurora Congressman Juan Edgardo Angara filed HB 162 as counterparts of SB 2150 in the Lower House. These two bills were combined and were substituted by HB 3306. HB 3306 is currently being heard in the Lower House, with Congressmen Bienvenido Abante, Angara and Puentevella as main sponsors.

It is interesting to note that although SB 2150 and HB 3306 were filed in different houses, they bear identical titles and has a hair strand difference.

The Right of Reply Bill would mandate media companies, outfits and entities to provide “equal space or airtime” to anyone who is a subject of critical reports, to reply or react as form of the latter’s freedom of expression, thus, the right to reply. The bill, furthermore, stipulates that this be done within three (3) days of a news item’s publication or airing.

The House measure furthermore seeks to punish the publisher and editor-in-chief of a publication or the owner and station manager of a broadcast outfit if they fail to comply or give “equal treatment” to a complainant’s reply to a specific report.

The Senate approved the passage of the bill by a vote of 21-0. Congress, on the other hand, has delayed the hearing of the bill following strong opposition from media organizations and civil society groups. Supporters of the bill in the House of Representatives, however, are preparing a so-called ‘watered down’ version of the said bill following strong opposition from various media organizations.

Senators Escudero, Legarda and Roxas have also retracted their signatures on the Senate version, while Malacanang has vowed to veto the bill if and when Congress approves it.

This initial triumph of exposing the Right of Reply Bill can only be attributed to the overwhelming unity of campus press, media practitioners and concerned groups over the bill’s threat to press freedom and freedom of expression.

Why reject the Right of Reply Bill?

1. The Bill is unconstitutional. It violates Article III, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution, “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances,” as well as several principles of criminal law.

National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL) secretary general Neri Colmenares cited the overly broad and vague provision in the bill mandating the right of reply of all persons “who are criticized by innuendo, suggestion, or rumor for any lapse in behavior in public or private life” in saying that the elements of a supposed crime are “not clear.” “Who decides what is ‘innuendo, suggestion, rumor or lapse in behavior’?” Colmenares said.

Moreover, once the bill is signed into law, Filipinos will also, directly or indirectly, be denied of their right to information which is the building block of any sound judgment that will lead to actions meant to preserve the rights and welfare of the citizenry.

2. The Bill is repressive. Should the bill pass into law, many journalists and/or media outfits will be hindered from performing their prime tasks as watchdogs of society out of fear of paying sums of pesos as punishment for not printing the reply of a “ridiculed or maligned” person.

The Guild believes the bill, which requires or mandates media outfits to publish or air replies in the same space, be it front page or inside story, encroaches on the right of the editorial board to determine the content of publications according to the relevance of issues.

With this bill, the prerogative of the press to determine what to publish or broadcast is undermined for it compels the media to print or air the reply of the “aggrieved” person who does not even have the burden to prove that he has been affected by a report.

Prof. Danilo Arao of the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communications states, “As it is, the bill has negative repercussions on the workings of the press. Editors, normally referred to as the gatekeepers of information, should be allowed to choose which stories get published, aired or uploaded and which stories are given due prominence based on the time-tested elements of news. Instead of coming up with bills that seek to legislate how the media should function, it would do well for legislators to help strengthen self-regulation in media by creating an environment conducive for the effective practice of the media profession.”

Consequently, Section 3 of the Right of Reply Bill is sure to undermine especially the campus press. Due to lack of resources and its common operations, it is impossible for majority of campus publications to comply “not later than one day” as prescribed by HB 3306 or “not later than three days” according to SB 2150. Never has there been a daily student publication in the entire history of campus press.

Also, advocacy press, which includes student gazettes, would certainly fall victim to this bill due to the nature of their writings. It does not appease at all that the status quo of politics and press freedom in the country has been known to favor politicians and other prominent individuals in legal venues. Suffice to say, under such conditions that press people are working in, the Right of Reply Bill is not democratic at all, it is ultra democracy at the expense of press freedom and freedom of expression.

3. The Bill is pointless. There is no need for the Right of Reply Bill at all. The “aggrieved” person/s that the bill claims to protect has long been valued by the media in its practice of always getting two sides of the story.

While the Guild relents that media’s record is not entirely spotless, it echoes the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) sentiment that “we cannot allow the sins of the few to be an excuse for the wholesale muzzling of a free press and the suppression of free expression. To do so would to allow bad governance to triumph.”

There are, also, inevitable reasons why sometimes only one side is aired or published: the person either refuses interview and/or the person is out-of-reach.

Moreover, as a practice, the media accommodates not just replies but even criticisms and statements through spaces such as the letter to the editor and opinion sections.

Furthermore, if the claim that this bill seeks to mitigate journalist killings in the country is to be believed, there is no reason, still, to discuss the bill at all. In resolving the culture of impunity, what the Philippine press needs is political will, not a mere bill.

What can we do?

1. Publish opposition to the Right of Reply Bill in campus papers, blogs and websites, emails and forum threads, or you may re-post this material. Write letters to the editors and opinion columns.

2. Organize fora and/or small group discussions in campus publication offices and other venues on the Right of Reply Bill. This primer may be reproduced or reprinted.

3. Email or send a letter rejecting the bill to offices of congressmen and senators, especially the bill’s sponsors.

4. Sign the petition against the Right of Reply Bill. (will update link soon).

5. Join protest actions against the Right of Reply Bill.

Gag us NOT! Reject the Right of Reply Bill! Defend Press Freedom! Uphold Campus Press Freedom!

Justice for Rachelle!

The College Editors Guild of the Philippines, in behalf of its National Office, regional formations and chapters, all member publications and affiliate organizations nationwide and across the globe, expresses its most heartfelt condolences to the family, friends and colleagues of Rachelle Mae Palang (1986-2008).

Rachelle, or Mae-Mae to her closest friends and colleagues, was beloved to the Guild for her bubbly, tongue-in-cheek demeanor. She graced the Guild's gatherings with her easy banter and infectious smile, but was always brisk and business-like in her leadership. She has served as a valuable pillar and driving force in all of the conventions and gatherings she has attended and helped organize. To most Guilders, she was not only a colleague but a precious friend and confidante.

Shock for her untimely demise is evident in her Friendster and Multiply accounts, riddled with comments ranging from disbelief, grief, and even anger – all directed at her, as if to attest that even at the time of her death her friends and colleagues still go to her for conciliation.

Such was Mae-Mae's legacy and brand of leadership. She has always been easy to approach, a rational adviser and generous in her time and efforts.

Mae-Mae was also an outstanding student at the Velez College in Cebu City where she took up and finished her nursing degree. She became editor-in-chief of Vital Signs, the official campus publication. As campus journalist and student leader, she exemplified deep commitment to uphold press freedom, freedom of speech and students' democratic rights and welfare. She is respected by her fellow campus journalists nationwide for her wit, intelligence and sharp grasp of issues.

She was elected as Vice President for the Visayas during CEGP's 67th National Student Press Convention and 33rd Biennial Student Press Congress held in Albay, Bicol in 2005. She served her term for three consecutive years before she finally relinquished her post May of this year. The CEGP will without end be honored and grateful to have had someone as dedicated as Mae-Mae as one of its leading officers.

Mae-Mae worked hard to help re-open closed campus publications, establish student papers in universities who had none, and expose and fight campus press freedom violations as well as other forms of campus repression nationwide. She led, organized and participated in countless poetry readings, cultural nights, Writers' Trips, journalist skills workshops and protest actions and activities. Even after her stint as VP for the Visayas, she proved instrumental in gathering and collating cases of campus press freedom violations in the region for CEGP's quarterly digest.

Mae-Mae had to cut short her attendance in CEGPs' 68th National Student Press Convention and 34th Biennial Student Press Congress in Davao City for her scheduled nursing licensure exams in May 2008. She passed with flying colors and eventually became a registered nurse. Even before she left, she announced to the Guild her desire to pursue an alternative medical career, one that she would devote to the less-privileged. Mae-Mae also took and passed the National Medical Admission Test. She dreamt of becoming a doctor.

It therefore did not come as a surprise to the Guild to learn that upon achieving her nursing license Mae-Mae immediately volunteered for a three-month medical mission to the hinterlands of Negros. Mae-Mae barely finished her volunteer work in Negros when her dreams died with her.

Mae-Mae was killed by elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines on September 18, 2008 in an alleged encounter with New People's Army rebels. Her face was barely recognizable; she was shot at point-blank range. Her feet and legs were black and bruised, signs of torture evident elsewhere in her beaten body.

Mae-Mae's untimely demise reminds the Guild all too painfully of the same fate that another CEGP alumna suffered under the hands of the AFP.

In April 2002, Benjaline 'Beng' Hernandez, former CEGP Vice-President for Mindanao and a human rights volunteer, was murdered by the military while conducting a fact-finding mission in Cotabato province. Investigations revealed that the AFP, after wounding Beng, raped and shot her at close range. The AFP later on insisted that Beng was an NPA rebel.

Beng, like Mae-Mae, was also only 22 years old when she died.

The CEGP condemns in strongest terms accusations and insinuations by the AFP that Mae-Mae was armed and a combatant. She was in Negros in her capacity as a registered nurse and circumstances surrounding her brutal killing should be independently investigated.

The CEGP, in this regard, welcomes initiatives by the Commission on Human Rights Regional Office to conduct an investigation on Mae-Mae's case.

The CEGP is also reviled at the AFP's gall to celebrate Mae-Mae's death by bestowing incentives and acclaim to her killers. It is an awful and terrible reminder of the state and characteristic of our security forces. They who are supposed to protect civilians are the main enemies of human rights defenders and social workers.

The CEGP also condemns in strongest terms the AFP's malicious attempts to malign the Guild's name through red-tagging and nasty insinuations. It is precisely this kind of twisted mentality that gives license to the military to repress, harass, silence and kill with impunity. Journalists are easily treated and branded as rebels simply because they are exposed to the ills of society.

The CEGP calls on all its member publications and fellow journalist organizations nationwide and abroad to collectively wield their pens and raise their voices to denounce Mae-Mae's killers.

The CEGP regards the likes of Beng and Mae-Mae as heroes of the present generation, young martyrs who have chosen to exchange their lives of comfort for their noble convictions.

Highest tribute to Rachelle Mae Palang!
Justice for Beng and Mae-Mae!

Check Up

Noong nakaraang Huwebes sinamahan namin si Kuya Ric sa ospital upang magpa-check-up.Hapon na kami nakaalis mula sa aming tinitirhan. Akala ko sasakay kami ng jeep pero kinailangan pala naming sumakay sa tricycle papunta sa ospital dahil hindi makasakay ng jeep si Kuya at hindi siya makalakad ng malayo. Kinailangan ko tuloy na mag-abang tricycle sa labasan upang maihatid sa ospital.

Dumating kami dun mga 2pm. Akala ko saglit lang kami. nakalimutan ko ang totoong kalagayang pangkalusugan natin sa Pinas. Pinaalala lang ng itsura ng OPD ward ang masalimuot na katotohanang ito.

Noon lang ako nakarating doon sa tanang buhay ko. Siksikan ang mga taong nakaupo at naghihintay ng kanilang pagkakataon na matingnan ng mga nurse at doktor.

Inisip ko kung gaano kami katagal na maghihintay. Sakto naman na naisip ko na dalhin ang aking libro sa Special Contracts ni Paras para basahin habang naghihintay. Iniisip ko rin iyong appointment namin sa isang kaibigan ng alas-tres.

May isinagaw na numero iyong tao sa likod ng mikropono. "30-35".

"Kailangan nating kumuha ng numero", sabi ni Kuya Ric. 53 ata iyong nakuha namin. Nalaman ko na medyo matatagalan kami. Okay lang naman.

Minasdan ko iyong mga tao at mga nurse habang abala sila sa mistulang mga pang-araw-araw na ritwal. Iniisip ko habang pinagmamasdan ang pila ng mga nakaupo, "lahat na ng importante sa Pinas kelangang pilahan tulad ng bigas, tulad ng serbisyong medikal".
.
O 'di kaya ang pagpatingin sa doktor ay para na ring pagpila sa lotto, hindi sigurado ngunit nagbibigay ng kakaunting pag-asa ng kaginhawaan.

At katulad ng lahat ng importante at kailangan sa Pilipinas ang serbisyong medikal ay kailangang bayaran. 100 ata iyong kailangang bayaran ni Kuya Ric para makapila, para mabigyan ng pagkakataong matingnan ng doktor. Para ano? Para marinig iyong mga gamot na kailangang bilhin, iyong totoong kalagayan niya, para maalala niya na tinaningan na siya ng kalagayan niya sa katawan at ng kanyang kalagayang pang-ekonomiya.

"Quality service does not come cheap" ayon sa isang kaibigang estudyante habang nagdidiskusyon kami sa sitawasyong pangkalusugan.

Lagi naman ganito iyong excuse ng mga kapitalista. Dahil kailangan nilang protektahan ang kanilang interes. Dahil kumukita sila. Iniisip ko tuloy sa set-up ng mga ospital natinngayon, pinagkakakitaan lang ng mga kapitalista ang mga sakit ng tao. Biruin mo iyon may sakit ka nga nga, pagkakakitaan ka pa.

Naisip ko rin habang nasa ospital na sa kalagayan ng ospital na siksikan, maaaring mas lumala pa ang may sakit kaysa sa gumaling. Ako nga halos hindi na ako huminga dahil itsura ng ospital.

Ang ospital na ito ay isa sa mga pinaka-maunlad na pampublikong ospital sa rehiyon. Kung ganun, ano na itsura nung iba?

Nagtataka tuloy ako kung paano naiisip ng mga student nurse ang umalis pa papunta sa ibang bansa habang sila mismo ang halos araw-arw na nakakasaksi kung gaano karami sa mga kababayan natin ang nangangailangan ng serbisyong medikal.

Nakakabahala, ngunit ang aking pagsama sa check-up ni Kuya Ric ay isang exposure din sa akin sa tunay na kalagayang pangkalusugan ng ating bayan.

Kagaya ng check-up na ginagawa ng mga doktor sa mga pasyenteng nagtitiyagang pumila kailangan na rin sigurong i-check-up ang pangkabuuuang kalagayang pangkalusugan sa Pilipinas.