Garci Transcript

Transcript of ABS-CBN's Exclusive Interview with former Comelec commissioner Virgilio Garcillano:
Henry Omaga Diaz (H): Sino ang sinasabing out to destroy you?
Virgilio Garciliano (G): I do not know the people out to liquidate me, but I feel that somehow it may be by some people who’d like to destroy me.
H: Sino ang pinaghihinalaan ninyo?
G: I had mentioned two people. (referring to his written statement)
H: On bounty?
G: It’s on the newspaper that they are withdrawing the P1 million bounty so that I will resurface because actually the bounty even made my life so much more in danger because of people who may be interested in getting that money.
H: Was it a plot?
G: I think so. Tingin ko because sa pag-offer nila ng one million, maraming interesado na makita ako at maisumbong sa kaninumang mga interesadong tao na kumuha sa akin.
H: Kamusta kayo ngayon? Papaano po ang experience niyo habang nagtatago sa media?
G: We had been communicating with each other before when we were in Luzon and again one week or two you had been communicating with some of my allies. It was very difficult for us to keep away from the eyes of those whom I feel are after me.
H: Who are supporting you?
G: There are many people helping me especially when you are in the south. People who have been out of the fence before but are still helpful. They have been very kind in extending support to us.
H: Why did they help you?
G: I don’t know why they are that enthusiastic. Siguro naman nakikita nila. That’s why I’d like to tell the committees when I’ll be there kung they have doubts about my actuations for the last 35 years which I spent almost 35 years here in Mindanao while I was with COMELEC. Sila ang makapagtestigo kung ano ang aking performance, kung ano ang relasyon ko sa mga tao, whether I made irregularities before or even accepted money from among the candidates in Mindanao. I always tell them that we do not ask for any return of whatever help that I have extended to any of the politicians, whether they are Lakas or the opposition. But I said maybe somehow in the future, we would also need you help and probably this is the time.
H: On Congress' warrant of arrest, ano po ang comment niyo?
G: I wanted to question the warrant of arrest because first there was no proper service made to us. Even when I did not withdraw myself from the public eye, we never had the chance of getting or receiving the subpoena that they claim to have served to us because they went to our house in Cagayan de Oro and gave the subpoena to a house helper who is not even our employee anymore because somebody is occupying the house. They went to the farm. They found an opening in one of the windows and they just threw the subpoena there. According to information, which I did not know, they also went to the condo where I used to reside in Manila and served the summon at the counter, which was never sent to our unit.
H: This is the basis for the arrest
G: As if I committed the crime. They should hold me in contempt if there was proper service.
H: Are you willing to face Congress?
G: Yes. In fact just to erase that thinking, we're talking of the rigging of the elections because I can tell you and I swear that there was no rigging of the last elections.
H: Kailan po kayo haarap?
G: Titingnan ko kasi I filed a petition in the Supreme Court questioning the issuance of the warrant of arrest, considering that even the investigation conducted was only based on a privilege speech of one congressman.
H: May mga balita na lumabas kayo sa bansa, sa Canada, America?
G: I will reserve that until after I face the committees.
H: Tungkol po sa so-called Garci tapes.
G: Di ko masasabi that the voice there is mine and the other side is the president because ‘til now, nobody has ever come forward if there was really an authentic tape. Since this is an investigation into wiretapping, the wiretapper should be the one investigated. They should exert effort to find out who was the wiretapper. Why will I be made to suffer when I was the victim of the wiretapping?
H: Gaano kayo nag-suffer?
G: I have suffered so much already. This is the fifth month.
H: Was there a point na muntik na kayong atakihin sa puso?
G: Kung maaari lang lalabas na ko sa gobyerno e. In fact, I almost went to that point kasi I still have friends here. Gusto ko nga if not here, pupunta ako sa other places. We also have friends there, in your place.
H: You mean the mountains?
G: (Nods) Because these people are trying to impute upon me, which, there was nothing that you heard that conversation assuming that the conversation was between us which I do not admit until now. Did you hear anything about it that can make them conclude that there was rigging of the electoral process?
H: Sinasabi ng opposition one million votes daw ang binabanggit ni GMA?
G: The President was asking why her advantage over FPJ had been reduced to 892, 000. That was May 24. We are talking of the votes already counted. So how can you rig the elections? Besides, the result of the elections in almost all the provinces throughout the Philippines had already been submitted to congress, beyond the reach of anybody. It was only at the time when there was special elections, there were places with special elections where the advantage of GMA to FPJ had been reduced to 892, 000 and that was what she was asking.
H: In short, the president was expressing a concern?
G: Concern. And she was not the only one who called me up. There were so many people who called me up.
H: 'Yun din balita, also from the opposition?
G: Yes. But I will reserve that because I’ll make a list of all those who who called me up even not referring to the tape because I did not hear that in the tape that’s why I said I do not believe that was the original because I do not accept that was my voice. They might have spliced itdue to so many tapes into one. We nw have a tape that takes nine hours to play.
H: Sa mga opposition na tumawag, ano ang usually gusto nilang sabihin?
G: Sabihin ko na lang dun.
H: Kamusta si misis?
G: Nagsa-suffer siya. Hirap na kami dito. Hindi ko alam what they are after. Did they want to find out if the elections were rigged? They should have brought this out during the canvassing since that time that the supposed conversation had been taken or tapped, the canvass of votes had not started yet. Why did they not use that during the canvassing sa Senate?
Tape 2 (Continuation)
H: May pagkakataon ba na you were forced by certain people to talk against the administration?
G: Wala naman, mahirap 'yan e. Sa ngayon 'di muna.
H: How about the administration talking to you?
G: There were so many statements or news item na kami nagkita ni Presidente. First, when she was in Cagayan de Oro last June. Then the other she was in Sultan Kudarat. Senator Tatad was saying I was in Zamboanga for more than a year now. Di ko alam kung saan galing 'yang information. I don't understand why Tatad is like that, talking like that. I don't blame him because he does not know the law in evidence. Mahirap magsalita nang ganun na 'di niya ma-prove.
H: Tungkol sa what Lacson and Pimentel said in statement.
G: Pimentel has an axe to grind against me. He was claiming I was one of those who rig the elections when he was running for the Senate and he lost. But there was also news in CDO that bawas-dagdag started in CDO and who was the author? You ask them.
H: Merong balita na nagsulat kayo ng libro?
G: Meron akong ginawa pero 'di pa kumpleto. Mga nangyayari dito sa Pilipinas because I find it very frustrating seeing the maneuvering in Congress. Parang wala atang concern ang ating mga leaders sa kapakanan ng ating bansa. Parang hindi sila interesado na umasenso ang bansa.
H: May pinatatamaan bang pulitiko?
G: Marami.
H: Ano'ng plano n'yo? Willing ba kayong bumalik sa government service?
G: I already wrote the President as early as June. In order not to divide the country, I would ought not to be re-appointed or accept any other position in government. Until now, I still maintain that. I don't know in the future but for now, I have no intention of getting any position.
H: Abroad?
G: 'Di ko masasabi pa. Pwede naman, but I'd like to settle in my farm to live a purely private life.
H: Maraming congressmen who want to help you. Pichay nga wants to put you daw under his custody.
G: 'Di muna. Maraming nag-o-offer. In fact, the other night maraming congressmen who called me up from Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, but I did not even tell them where I am.
H: (Asking the lawyer of Garci) Legally, ano ang plano especially sa warrant of arrest?
L (L): Ang purpose ng petition sa Supreme Court is para sa principle of separation of powers. 'Di pwede makialam ang Congress sa independent body. Checks and balances. Nung mag-issue ng warrant hindi na-observe ang proper procedure. May power ang Supreme Court na sabihing may abuse doon. Bisa ng warrant, natapos na dahil hindi na in session ang Congress.
H: Magdedemanda ba kayo laban sa mga nang-abuso?
L: Hindi na. Magse-set na lang ng example by resolving it through legal activities.
H: Message?
G: I hope the public will be open-minded to listen to the appeals I have made because we have suffered so much and for the politicians to think deeper and find out what is happening to the country right now. Our country is suffering. I have seen the difficultuies of our people and I think this should be the start of rebuilding the nation and not go on political maneuvers without considering the welfare of our country and the people. That is the only wish that I can make to the politicians especially to the members of Congress and Senate.

DYAB Olango Correspondent

DYAB volunteer correspondent Tereso Bahag of Olango Island, Lapulapu City (center) attends the 2nd Kumbira sa Kapamilya. With him are (l-r) Leo Lastimosa, Jun Berongan and Tisha "Inday Tikay" Ylaya.

DYAB Abante Bisaya: Soon on taxi tops

iNTouch Ad Features Leo Lastimosa

Early mornings and Leo

If his salt-and-pepper hair gave way to his seniority, Leo Lastimosa is a mere 21 years old, as a media man that is.

And it is this power suit of a veteran broadcast journalist that he wears with ease?the uncompromising Mr. Arangkada in the mornings of ABS-CBN radio, DYAB and the primetime news anchor of TV Patrol Central Visayas (CMMA 2005 Best TV News Program) later in the evenings. Besides being a prominent on-air presence, Leo also continues to manage the DYAB radio news department.

Huge Crowd

Despite the rains, Cebuanos flock to the Halad sa Kapamilya held in Plaza Independencia, Cebu City Nov. 6, 2005.

Wowowee's motorcade was mobbed inside the ABS-CBN Regional Broadcast Complex in Jagobiao, Mandaue City.

The Local and International Job Fair in the Cebu City Sports Center was participated in by close to 10,000 job applicants from Cebu and neighboring provinces.

The two-day pre-registration and pre-screening of the Local and International Job Fair were held inside the ABS-CBN Regional Broadcast Complex in Jagobiao, Mandaue City.

Applicants wishing for jobs and dreams come true.

DYAB Anchors Pictures

DYAB Anchors testing the brand new computers with Linux Operating System in Jungle Rose Internet Cafe (2nd Flr., Forum bldg., beside Grand Convention Center): Juve Villar, Dave Tumulak, June Perez, Thads Bentulan, Ahmed Cuizon (seated), Edgar Gutierrez and Leo Lastimosa.


DYAB Anchors with TV Patrol Central Visayas Anchor Haide Acuña inside the ABS-CBN Cebu mini TV Barn: June Perez, Juve Villar, Thads Bentulan, Jun Berongan and Randy Jainar.

Thads Bentulan and staff took a breather in front of the Jungle Rose Internet Cafe during the Halad sa Kapamilya in Plaza Independencia, Cebu City, Philippines.

Anchors All (L-R): Leo Lastimosa, Dave Tumulak, Edgar Gutierrez, Juve Villar, Thads Bentulan, Ahmed Cuizon and June Perez.

Surveying the Plaza Independencia hours before the phenomenal Halad sa Kapamilya of DYAB Abante Bisaya and ABS-CBN Cebu (l-r): Gino Aquino (ABS-CBN Cebu's IT Chief), June Perez, Norissa Kho (she volunteered to teach Halapd participants English for Call Centers), Thads Bentulan and Leo Lastimosa.

DYAB Anchors Thank Halad sa Kapamilya Volunteers

These are some of the Halad sa Kapamilya volunteers feted by DYAB anchors with a simple cocktail party in Jungle Rose Internet Cafe Saturday night.


Some of the DYAB anchors who initiated the Pasalamat sa Kapamilya cocktails in Jungle Rose Internet Cafe: (Seated, L-R) Juve Villar, Ahmed Cuizon and Thads Bentulan; (Standing, L-R) Leo Lastimosa, Dave Tumulak, Edgar Gutierrez and June Perez.

Halad sa Kapamilya A Huge Success

TV Patrol Central Visayas anchor Haide Acuna leads the Free Legal Clinic during the Halad sa Kapamilya of DYAB Abante Bisaya and ABS-CBN Cebu last Nov. 6, 2005.

Seminar/Workshops and Livelihood Skills Training sessions were also held during the Halad sa Kapamilya in Plaza Independencia, Cebu City.

Halad sa Kapamilya participants queue up for free medical services.

IBP Cebu City Pres. alex Tolentino attends to his Kapamilyas' legal woes.

You Can Call DYAB Absolutely FREE

Call DYAB Absolutely FREE

DYAB AM is the only radio station in the Philippines which you can call from anywhere in the world absolutely free.  Thanks to DB Edwards' VOIP technology through iNTouch, you can call us from 4 a.m. to 12 midnight (Philippine time), Mondays to Fridays.  All you need is a headset.

 

You can greet your Kapamilyas in Cebu and the Visayas and Mindanao over the AM radio station of ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. in Cebu Philippines .  You can also use our Internet Phone to air public service announcements for your families and friends in the Philippines.

 

Or you can tell us situationers/updates/comments about major news events in your place of work or urgent concerns of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs).  Let DYAB AM serve as your bridge to government agencies which can help you or your loved ones, like the Dept. of Foreign Affairs (DFA), Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA), Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA), the Office of the President, local government units (LGUs) and private employment and placement agencies.

 

Bawat Pinoy Kapamilya.

 

Tawag Na!

Congress Powers Clipped

Posted by Luz Rimban 
PCIJ

PRESIDENT Gloria Arroyo today issued Executive Order 464 clipping the powers of Congress to conduct hearings and to summon officials of the executive department to testify before congressional inquiries.

The order requires cabinet members, police and military generals, senior national security officials, and "such other officers as may be determined by the President" to first seek her approval before appearing before any inquiry of the Senate or the House of Representatives.  

The President invoked "the constitutional guarantees of the separation of  powers of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government" to justify her decree. She also cited Article VI Section 22 of the Constitution which allows cabinet members and other officials to testify at congressional hearings with the permission of the President.

The order was issued as two military officers appeared before the Senate Committee on National Defense which began hearings on the "Hello, Garci" scandal and allegations the President committed fraud  in the May 2004 elections. 

It also comes a week after National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales faced a Senate inquiry on the issue surrounding the government contract with Washington-based law firm Venable LLP.

Read the full text of Executive Order 464 here.  

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : Empty doctrine

THE CONCEPT of a national security doctrine owes to initiatives undertaken by US President Harry S. Truman in 1947. There were profound changes in the American defense structure (Department of National Defense replaced the Department of War), foreign policy and intelligence agencies (particularly the creation of the Central Intelligence Agency), with the National Security Council made as the vehicle for coordinating national security policy. The American concept of national security and the apparatus to sustain it were rapidly copied by other governments all over the world. President Carlos P. Garcia became the first Philippine president to establish a National Security Council. We have had an NSC ever since.

Executive Order No. 292, otherwise known as "The Administrative Code of 1987," was enacted during the time of President Corazon Aquino, while she was yet vested with sweeping powers, prior to the ratification of the 1987 Constitution. It retained and formalized the National Security Council (Title VII, Chapter 2), assigning to that agency the following responsibilities: "The formulation of integrated and rationalized national, foreign, military, political, economic, social and educational policies, programs, and procedures vital to the security of the state." Its members include the President, Vice President, the Executive Secretary, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, the Secretary of Justice, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Interior and Local Government, the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the National Security Adviser, and such other government officers or private individuals that the President may appoint. Traditionally, beginning with President Carlos Garcia's invitation to former President Sergio Osmeña to be a member, former presidents have sat in the National Security Council.

Going back to the United States, which started the national security apparatus idea, it has periodically revised its national security doctrines, publishing these for the guidance of the American officials and the public, and the rest of the world.

The latest revision was undertaken by the present Bush administration. The principles behind the new doctrine boil down to the following salient points: an "Overview of America's International Strategy"; "Champion Aspirations for Human Dignity"; "Strengthen Alliances to Defeat Global Terrorism and Work to Prevent Attacks Against Us and Our Friends"; "Work With Others to Defuse Regional Conflicts"; "Prevent Our Enemies from Threatening Us, Our Allies, and Our Friends with Weapons of Mass Destruction"; "Ignite a New Era of Global Economic Growth through Free Markets and Free Trade"; "Expand the Circle of Development by Opening Societies and Building the Infrastructure of Democracy"; "Develop Agendas for Cooperative Action with the Other Main Centers of Global Power"; and "Transform America's National Security Institutions to Meet the Challenges and Opportunities of the Twenty-First Century."

These headings by themselves give a rather thorough overview of American strategic interests, available to friend or foe alike. Which leads us to ask: Where is the Philippine equivalent? The Philippine concept of national security seems to be more obsessed with cloak-and-dagger operations rather than with genuine policy-making. We have been subjected to the workings of a national security adviser; Norberto Gonzales is the latest in a line of advisers who seem to think they should simply dispense advice on a case-to-case basis, rather than according to the thought-out and spelled-out security interests of the country.

If, for example, the rescinded Venable contract was a matter of national security (which presumably it was, since the national security adviser signed it), why, then, did Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo, Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez, all of whom are members of the National Security Council, all claim not to know about the contract? There are many questions that still need answering; but the most fundamental question of all is: Does the Philippines have a national security policy? If so, where is it? Even in broad strokes, the public has not been informed of one; neither has it been given access to such policy. Whichever, both cases are definitely wrong.

Book For Bloggers

Bloggers' handbook released to help dissidents

Agence France-Presse

PARIS--A bloggers' handbook aimed at helping dissidents in repressive countries avoid detection when they publish on the Internet was released Thursday in Paris with the support of the French government.

The press rights group Reporters without Borders (RSF) said the 86-page book -- which is also available at its website -- offers "handy tips and technical advice on how to to remain anonymous and to get round censorship, by choosing the most suitable method for each situation."

"Bloggers are often the only real journalists in countries where the mainstream media is censored or under pressure. Only they provide independent news, at the risk of displeasing the government and sometimes courting arrest," RSF said.

The handbook offers advice on the best ways to get blogs picked up by search-engines and how to "establish credibility through observing basic ethical and journalistic principles."

It also includes personal acounts from bloggers in countries such as Iran, China and Nepal, and a list of states judged to be the "champions of Internet censorship."

The book was produced with help from the French foreign ministry.

Reporters without Borders

Tipping Factor

Human Face : Why isn't it tipping?

Ma. Ceres P. Doyo
Inquirer News Service

I RECEIVED varied feedback via e-mail on my Sept. 15 column, "Why isn't it tipping?" That piece was on Malcolm Gladwell's bestseller and page-turner, "The Tipping Point"; and on why the eagerly awaited or much-dreaded (depending on which side you are) tipping point that would lead to the Arroyo administration's fall was not happening. Gladwell's book presents events in history, real-life examples and studies that show how the tipping point phenomenon works.

I'm sharing portions of some letters:

From "Xcathedra":

"Social cybernetics is one specialized field of discipline that might give other interesting leads on why there still is a prevailing 'social feedback stasis' before and following the 'oust Arroyo' initiatives.

"In mathematics (fractals and Chaos Theory) and physics, that 'tipping' point is known as the advent of entropy/chaos. You might want to read James Gleick's book (it's old in today's standards, but still grippingly enlightening) titled 'Chaos.' You can have a whiff of an analytical framework for dissecting social change.

"I suspect the stasis has something to do (partly) with the current state of equilibrium of the 'system' (public reaction and feedback). To explain: For every introduction of a (change) variable that would induce disequilibrium (or 'chaos') leading to an adjustment or total change of a system, the adjusted or changed system will always emerge stronger than before (whether in the negative or positive sense).

"Having been exposed to several 'Edsa events' and propaganda of agitation, the usual recipe to induce the tipping point/entropy/chaos will not work. It has to have something more potent, something that can weaken the 'inured' (or stronger) new state of equilibrium of the ordinary people's collective response. The pond has endured too many small stones that another one will just create small ripples. You need a bigger stone or a new object that can induce the pond's waters to roil.

"Truth with a capital T matters. But the collective response system of ordinary people is in a stronger state of equilibrium in the different versions of truth-tired as they are of the long, wasteful string of investigations, accusations, and lawsuits (all of which led to more lies) that characterize how their leaders run the country."

From Ronald Cagape, IT professional:

"It, the bid to remove Pres. Arroyo, is not moving because it doesn't have all three elements in place.

"First, there are no people who fit the Law of the Few. Now it can be said that former President Aquino and Susan Roces actually have minimal impact. Whoever is backing them ought to notice that by now. With the passing of Cardinal Sin, the influence of the Catholic Church has diminished. The Church is currently being led by committee... Sadly, there is no one in the opposition who could proclaim himself a Connector, Maven or Salesman.

"Actually, there are people who fit the Law of the Few but they work for the President. Speaker De Venecia is a potent Connector and Salesman in political circles. So is former President Ramos. I'm sure, the Mavens in the presidential think-tank worked tirelessly to ensure the impeachment vote didn't go the other way. This is the team that has to be overcome if you want to tip the movement to the other side.

"Second, the Stickiness Factor in the movement is not compelling enough. All they have is 'Hello, Garci.' It doesn't evoke an image repugnant enough to move people to action. All I remember is a disgruntled former NBI man with personal grudges proclaiming he has the 'mother of all tapes.' He could be a Maven, if he could be called Maven, but he did not stand for anything. He was not an embodiment of principle, integrity or honor. He had no credibility...I couldn't even remember his name.

"If (they) want the President removed, they should find something despicable and make it sticky, such as the dancing Tessie Oreta-Aquino in Edsa 2. Now THAT was sticky. Or 'Tama na, sobra na' of the original People Power movement. These sticky factors riled people enough that they vented their anger in the streets ...Is cheating really all that bad? Which leads me to the last point.

"The Context has no Power. In an environment where everyone knows that all politicians cheat anyway, finding out your President cheated is not powerful enough to generate anger. So what if she cheated to be President? Every senator and congressman bidding to remove her also cheated...

"I don't see this tipping anytime soon."

From Ernie Adaya:

"Why isn't it tipping? The answer is very simple: 'Because (President Arroyo) is tipping' and tipping generously for survival. In the Philippines, politicians, the influence peddlers, etc. are always on the lookout for the tipping point, because, like the waiters and waitresses in restaurants, they know that at the tipping point, the 'tips' will start flowing generously.

"Gladwell fails to realize that in the Philippines, there is a fourth rule of the Tipping Point, that is the Power of the 'tip' or the 'Tipping' Factor."

From a hard-up reader named Jori, for bleeding hearts out there:

"ma'am, where can i possibly find the book you're referring to in your column... i found it interesting... nabasa ko rin mga reviews about the book sa net. kaya lang baka di ko kaya ang price (in the red kc ako sa ngayon). i'm only good at second-hand books right now. can i possibly borrow one from you? sorry po... wala kc ako kilala mahiraman. thank you po.''

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : Fuel of the future

AS THE PRICE of international crude oil inched closer to $70 a barrel last month, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo announced a number energy conservation measures to soften the impact of a developing oil crisis. "This is not a simple test of our resiliency but a real challenge to economic survival," she said.

Yet the crisis should not have come as a great surprise. Everyone who cared enough to give it a thought would have realize that the world's supply of fossil fuels could not last forever.

Neither was the crisis completely unpreventable. Conservation measures and environment-friendly, renewable, indigenous, alternative energy sources have been there for the tapping and the taking. Since the 1970s, there have been intermittent calls to lessen the country's dependence on oil. But no administration gave them serious consideration.

Even today, there still seems to be no real serious or orchestrated, high-impact program to address the crisis. For instance, while the administration has announced reductions in energy consumption in government offices and the fielding of a team to ensure compliance, the fleets of gas-guzzling cars that congressmen and other public officials ride to work or to ferry their families to malls and vacation resorts have not diminished.

The country has to come up with more than stopgap measures to address the crisis. And such an enterprise will entail the resolve and cooperation of all sectors, Congress not the least among them.

Car and planes in Brazil are now running on ethanol -- 100 percent or mixed with gasoline or diesel. Other fuel-hungry economies are following in Brazil's footsteps. According to Newsweek, the United States now uses 2 percent ethanol and wants to expand its use. The European Union is eyeing biofuels for 6 percent of its fuel needs. South Korea and Japan are importing ethanol from Brazil. Thailand is constructing over a dozen facilities to extract ethanol from sugar cane and rice husks. And China has joined more than 30 countries building ethanol facilities and growing crops from which ethanol can be extracted.

It is not just the dwindling reserves and the increasing prices of oil that have made the use of alternative fuels imperative and urgent. There are also environmental concerns over the extensive use of the highly polluting oil. Not only that, biofuels, which are extracted from plant oils or animal fats, can be produced by almost every country in the world (unlike oil which can only be produced by the few countries where it can be found), and thus can create jobs in economically lethargic agricultural areas. Brazil, the No. 1 producer of ethanol -- definitely a cleaner, renewable alternative fuel -- "is revolutionizing both the countryside and the auto industry," Newsweek says.

But as usual we are lagging behind, both in terms of promoting the use of ethanol and other biofuels and their local production. True, a couple of small oil companies have announced plans to import ethanol and market it locally. Also, one local company is setting up an ethanol plant in Negros. But these attempts to include biofuels in our energy mix amount to little more than a drop in the bucket.

The country consumes 345,000 barrels of oil per day. It has been estimated that for transportation alone, which accounts for 58 percent of our oil consumption, our annual oil bill amounts to P170 billion. That amount is nothing to sneeze at. If local ethanol producers can be assured of just 10 percent of that market, there may be a lot more interest in investing in ethanol plants and the crops that would supply their needs.

Bukidnon Rep. Miguel Zubiri is looking in that direction. Last month, he filed a bill that seeks to jump-start the ethanol develop program. He has been quoted as saying the program would seek to expand the use of ethanol to 10 percent of the transportation sector's fuel requirements within five years. He has also been talking about establishing at least 27 ethanol factories in different sites across the country, at a cost of P1 billion each.

The details of the Zubiri plan still need to be fleshed out. For instance: What incentives or assistance will an ethanol producer get? Will he be assured of a market even if oil prices go down? How can the welfare of consumers be balanced against the need to make investments in biofuels attractive? But at least someone in Congress is thinking about the oil crisis and proposing one very promising solution. It's time others contributed to the effort.

Debt Solutions

Editorial : Conversion

AS IT STANDS, THE AUDACIOUS PROPOSAL TO convert as much as half of the world's external debt into equity in poverty-reduction programs still leaves some important questions unanswered. But as it stands, the proposal may be the last best hope for countries such as the Philippines to pry themselves loose, finally, from the trillion-dollar debt trap.

At the heart of the proposal-first raised by Speaker Jose de Venecia last July, and then again two weeks ago at the World Conference of Speakers of Parliament in New York City, and then reiterated by President Macapagal-Arroyo last week at the UN General Assembly-is the principle of conversion.

The proposal seeks to convert part of the debt payments of a highly or moderately indebted country into equity stakes in Millennium Development Goal-related projects. The proportional stakes will be owned by the lenders, but the projects will be located where they are most needed: inside the indebted country itself.

De Venecia told a UN forum organized to discuss the proposal: "We plead not for debt forgiveness, not for debt cancellation, not for debt moratorium, not for debt discounts. Our proposal requires no new monies from the parliaments and governments of rich nations. Nor do we envision any reduction or loss of face value in the creditors' financial assets. What we propose is a global conversion of debt for MDG projects ... a plowback of up to 50 percent of debt payments received."

The principal Millennium Development Goal is the halving of poverty levels by 2015. But countries like the Philippines set aside as much as 60 to 70 centavos of every peso of the national budget for debt payments; this leaves precious little for poverty-reduction programs.

The fundamental idea behind the conversion proposal is to free up much more of a government's budget for necessary investments, say in new school buildings, or in farm-to-market roads, or in children's nutrition programs. "We can address the problem of poverty if we have the money with which to finance anti-poverty projects," De Venecia said.

But will the lenders-such as the Paris Club, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, and certain commercial banks-accept the proposal? It is easy to see what countries like the Philippines will stand to gain from conversion; in the case of the Philippines, and according to De Venecia's own computations, as much as P112.5 billion in redirected funds. But what will the lenders get for their pains?

The idea of acquiring equity or an ownership stake in certain assets may be financially appealing for some, but it is best to face up to the truth. The real benefit of the conversion proposal is longer-term, and macro-economic. The bottom-line appeal, in other words, is Kennedyesque: a rising tide, the proposal assumes, will lift all boats. A surge in funds available to reduce poverty will raise incomes and improve the quality of life. And that can only be good for everyone concerned.

The Freedom from Debt Coalition has already criticized the proposal, because instead of helping prove that much of the country's foreign debt was illegitimate and therefore condonable, the proposal fudges the issue. Clearly, the loan the country assumed to pay for the useless Bataan Nuclear Power Plant, for example, was legally defective and morally offensive. But that particular debt was securitized almost a decade ago; in other words, the original lenders had already been paid, and government has no choice but to pay the new lenders who had assumed the debt.

It is precisely this stark reality, this reminder of the brutally unforgiving nature of international finance, that recommends the conversion proposal to us. To be sure, other debt-relief initiatives must continue, including some version of the five-year moratorium outlined in the "Blueprint for a Viable Philippines." But think of it: If this conversion proposal actually results in reversing the flow of hundreds of billions of pesos out of the country and back into the countryside, we should all be glad to call ourselves converts.

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : Untenable

THE contract National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales Jr. entered into with a leading American law firm, to secure American support for "the Charter Change initiative of the President of the Philippines," does not become less objectionable merely because, as Gonzales claims, private money and not public funds will pay for it. On the contrary, it makes the transaction an even bigger outrage.

Gonzales sought to defend the P50-million contract with Venable LLP by justifying the need for the government to hire its own lobbyists. "We're looking at certain grants, aids, programs between the two countries, and my own observation is that some of these are not forthcoming when they should be coming [sic] already. I thought that we should look into the situation there and the normal practice in the US is that you get a lobby group."

Then he invoked his own boss, saying that President Macapagal-Arroyo had given him a specific piece of advice. "The government could have a lobby group but we should not spend money for this," he recalled her saying so.

But those cautionary words do not and cannot excuse the very idea of soliciting a foreign power's assistance in changing our Constitution; in fact, they make the notion even more inexcusable.

Getting the private sector to foot the bill for a project of this kind is not a Solomonic decision. It is, instead, Herodian: It involves getting somebody else to do one's dirty work.

Palace initiatives become matters of great public concern when they are blithely explained away as being funded by private money. For one thing, the real reason is government officials do not want to account for the expense, not because the national government is cash-strapped. For another, private donations always come with strings attached.

It was for these same reasons that we objected to the expensive, privately funded refurbishing of the presidential yacht during President Joseph Estrada's time. Our own history teaches us that the generosity of cronies comes at a price.

But Gonzales cannot even name who the Venable contract's cronies-to-be are. He said he does not yet know who they are, because his job was merely to "sign the contract and monitor the specifications of the contract."

This is an explanation that not only does not explain; it undermines the credibility of the explainer himself.

As the original report of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism made clear, none of the senior Cabinet officials who ought to have vetted the contract had even heard of it: not Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, not Presidential Legal Adviser Merceditas Gutierrez, not the highest officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs, not the Ambassador to the United States. Not even his deputy at the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency knew about the lobbying contract Gonzales had entered into.

In that case, it must have been an off-the-books affair, like special operations during elections. But if Gonzales himself does not know who the private donors are, then who would? Is he saying it's the President alone who knows who's donating and by how much?

That can only deepen public concern, about the real costs of the Venable contract.

Gonzales sought to dampen the growing public indignation over the arrangement by saying that Venable was committed to render many other services for the government, and that the Charter Change provision was a mere add-on. The contract, he said, specified "mostly ... defense matters."

But a look at the contract itself, easily available on the Internet, shows that lobbying in the United States for constitutional change in the Philippines is no afterthought; in fact, in the list of "specific tasks" which Venable "will undertake and use best efforts to accomplish," it comes first.

"(1) Secure grants or congressional earmarks for support of the Charter Change initiative of the President of the Philippines, which would reshape the form of government in the Philippines from its current structure into a parliamentary federal system."

The "capability enhancement program for the Armed Forces of the Philippines" only comes in third. So much for defense matters.

Gonzales' latest statements convince us not only that the contract must be scrapped, but also that the circumstances that led to it be thoroughly investigated.

Google Alert - leo lastimosa

Google Alert for: leo lastimosa

Philstar.com - The Filipino Global Community
ARANGKADA By Leo Lastimosa The Freeman 09/12/2005 Kon may uwaw pa silang Dr.
Jose Sal Tan ug ubang mga opisyal sa Cebu State College of Science and ...

---

 This as it happens Google Alert is brought to you by Google.

Remove this alert.
Create another alert.
Manage your alerts.

Cha-Cha Lobby

The PCIJ's latest story, a one-part report by Malou Mangahas, a member of the PCIJ board of editors, uncovers a million-dollar contract signed by the Arroyo government to retain the services of an American law firm to lobby for charter change in the U.S. government.

The contract was signed by National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales Jr. on July 25, the same day that Mrs. Arroyo delivered her State of the Nation Address and announced that "it is time to start the great debate on charter change."

The PCIJ has copies of the contract and other disclosure documents filed with the U.S. Department of Justice by Venable LLP, the U.S. law firm that will get paid $75,000 per month plus expenses for one year.

We got in touch with Venable, who confirmed the contract's existence but declined to give details. None of the government officials we talked to, however, have any knowledge of the contract, which was apparently made in great haste and secrecy.

---

ON THE same day that she delivered her State of the Nation Address and summoned the nation to start "the great debate" on charter change, President Arroyo awarded a million-dollar lobbying consultancy contract to an American law firm to "secure grants and (US) congressional earmarks" for her initiative to "reshape the form of government…into a parliamentary federal system."

On July 25, 2005, Mrs. Arroyo hired the lobbying and representation services of US-based Venable LLP, one of America's top 100 law firms, for a substantial sum of $75,000 a month, or $900,000 (P50.4 million) for 12 months.

The amount excludes "costs for travel, telephone, fax, copying, etc." and "professional services" of up to $720 per hour for Venable's senior associates. These expenses, for which no ceilings were mentioned, could double the contract cost.

The contract was signed at a time when the government is reeling from a gaping budget deficit and calling for belt-tightening measures.

Former President Fidel V. Ramos, who inspired Mrs. Arroyo's charter change initiative on July 8, the day the Hyatt 10 group of secretaries bolted the Cabinet, thinks the idea of getting foreign consultants is not good. "There is no need to spend government money for that purpose because we must do it all ourselves and persuade ourselves genuinely and truly without foreign participation, " he said.

The contract does not state why US support for constitutional change is needed at all. Nor does it say what specific charter amendments the President needs US support for. The contract also includes lobbying for loans and grants from the US government, especially assistance to upgrade the capabilities of the Philippine military and police.

The US law firm confirmed the contract exists but none of the Philippine officials contacted for this report, including Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, whose job is to scrutinize contracts authorized by the President, know about it.

In disclosure documents it filed with the US Department of Justice, Venable listed "Maria Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo" and the "Republic of the Philippines" as "the client" that contracted its services to "represent the interests of the Philippines in the United States." The PCIJ has copies of the contract and other disclosure papers submitted by Venable to U.S. authorities.

National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales Jr. signed the three-page agreement as "the authorized representative of the President of the Philippines," while lawyers James T. Pitts and James George Jatras signed for Venable. Pitts is a transport sector expert, while Jatras' experience is in homeland security and Eastern Europe affairs.

The contract was apparently done in precipitate haste and shrouded in secrecy. Apart from Gonzales and Mrs Arroyo, senior executive officials and legislators did not know about it.

Two months after the contract's signing, these officials have not yet been informed of its existence by either Mrs Arroyo or Gonzales.

The contract does not specify which government agency is footing Venable's bill. For sure, the National Security Council that Gonzales heads could not afford it. The NSC's entire budget for 2005 is just P49 million. The agency's approved confidential, intelligence fund is a measly P2 million.

The contract is a big expense item given Mrs Arroyo's fresh calls for citizens and civil servants to tighten their belts amid surging oil prices. She said she herself has had to make do with using her hair dryer just once a day to save on electricity.

Why Gonzales, and not the President or a full-fledged Cabinet member, signed the contract with Venable is a big question. Venable's contract lists the NSC office on V. Luna in Diliman, Quezon City, as the address of its "foreign principal" — "The Republic of the Philippines."

Gonzales could not be reached for comment, even via his mobile phone. He flew last week to an undisclosed country in the Middle East, and for days now has shut off his mobile phone. Even his staff could not contact him. He is expected to return to Manila Tuesday night.

In phone calls and a questionnaire sent by email, Venable lawyers Pitts and Jastra were not forthcoming either.

In a joint mail, they stated: "Thank you for your inquiry. As we have indicated to you by telephone, for reasons of attorney-client privilege, we must decline to answer your questions regarding our representation of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines in its relationship with the United States."

"We suggest that any other inquiries be directed to the appropriate authorities of the Government of the Philippines," they added.

As national security adviser, Gonzales also serves as director-general of the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (NICA). Before the NSC, he was Presidential Adviser for Special Concerns from February 2001 up to January 2004. He chairs the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas, and Kaunlaran ng Magsasaka Inc.

A policy review and staff unit under the Office of the President, the NSC's mandate in law is to coordinate "the formulation of policies relating to or with implications on the national security." Whether such a mandate includes contracting a US law firm to lobby for charter change is questionable.

The NSC has no offices or personnel in the US that could enable it to monitor Venable's work for the Philippine government. It has about 80 personnel, all based in the country.

The scant details of Venable's engagement with the Philippine government come from a copy of the contract it appended to disclosure documents it filed in compliance with the US Foreign Agents Registration Act or FARA.

Apart from Gonzales, few knew about Mrs. Arroyo's deal with Venable.

Those kept in the dark about the contract included the President's legal counsel Merceditas Gutierrez, the most senior foreign affairs officials, the Philippine ambassador to Washington, and even Gonzales's deputies and staff in the NSC.

Ermita was at first incredulous, insisting that all contracts authorized by the President should pass through him, as a matter of course. Told that Venable lawyers had confirmed the authenticity of the contract, Ermita said in jest, " Tatanungin ko si Bert (Gonzales). Sasabihin ko, ikaw pala may tinatago ka, ha!" (I will ask Bert. I will tell him, so you are hiding things from me now.)

Even without reading the contract, Ermita explains that it's normal for governments to seek the assistance of foreign experts, given that Mrs Arroyo has declared charter change as one of her priorities.

All documents and issuances for signing or release by the President must pass the legal scrutiny of Gutierrez. Venable's contract was a singular exception. On her request, PCIJ faxed Gutierrez a copy of the contract that she says she knew nothing about.

"We don't know anything, we have no participation in that contract," says Foreign Affairs Undersecretary for Policy Franklin Ebdalin. DFA Spokesman Gilbert Asuque adds, "I've asked those in charge in the DFA and our records show we have no information about that contract."

Another official in the DFA's Office of American Affairs says even the Philippine ambassador to Washington DC is clearly "out of the loop." Not a single piece of paper has moved from Washington advising head office that such a contract existed, the source says.

Retired General Victor Mayo, NICA deputy-general who keeps house at the NSC during Gonzales's occasional trips in-country and overseas, has not read nor seen the contract with Venable.

"Nobody in the NSC could give you answers. The DG (director-general) could have done it without us," Mayo explains.

Gonzales "sometimes does things by himself, nagugulat na lang kami (we are just taken by surprise)."

Mayo recalls, however, that sometime in July, "he asked me in a very casual tone if there is anything wrong with him signing up a PR firm, and I told him maybe none."

"I did not see anything wrong with it but after that, I was not privy to what he signed, when he signed," Mayo adds.

This is not the first time that Mrs Arroyo acquired the services of expensive foreign consultants.

Since 2002, Burson-Marsteller, a leading global communications firm with expertise in crisis-issues-reputation management and media relations, has helped Malacañang's public-relations team spruce up Mrs. Arroyo's public image.

Secretary Rigoberto Tiglao, Presidential Management Staff chief, had acknowledged that Burson-Marsteller's 12-month contract fee was $800,000, an amount supposedly paid by pro-Arroyo businessmen.

But the contract Mrs Arroyo assigned to Venable goes beyond personal makeover. On top of Venable's multiple tasks for the Philippine government is "securing grants and congressional earmarks for charter change," even before the President could spell out what provisions she wants amended.

In addition, under the contract Venable is also expected to lobby for and represent the Arroyo administration in facilitating the Philippines re-inclusion in the credit facilities of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, secure a Philippine credit ratings upgrade in the US Eximbank, "create a capability enhancement program for the Armed Forces" and acquire up to $800 million in credit under the US Defense Loan Guarantee program, and "achieve a similar upgrade program" for the Philippine National Police.

But before Venable could do this, Mrs Arroyo has to deal with both critics and supporters back home.

Opposition Sen. Sergio Osmeña III deems the contract with Venable flawed for various reasons — "lack of transparency" in the negotiations, "lack of due diligence" in getting the best value for "an unauthorized expenditure," and the questionable capability NSC's Gonzales to monitor Venable's compliance with the contract's provisions.

"Congress has not appropriated funds for this," Osmeña avers. The secrecy surrounding the contract's signing could not be justified because, "charter change does not fall under national security."

In Osmeña's mind, the biggest irony of all is, "the American people know about it but the Filipino people who are paying do not."