Marawi Leaders:

ISIS -

National Democratic Front-Communist Party of the Philippines-New People's Army (NDF-CPP-NPA)

NPA was tagged as terrorist group.

Martial law in Mindanao: Declared on May 23, 2017 – Proclamation 216- extended twice.
Martial law will remain in effect for one more year, until the end of 2018.

Extrajudicial killings happened –police operation reached 4ooo killed- according to government-released data.

17-year-old Kian delos Santos and 19-year-old Carl Arnaiz

Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno - impeachment complaint filed by lawyer Larry Gadon.

The Office of the Ombudsman- Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales.

Gilas Team coach for Asian Games: Yeng Guiao

Rappler, the Philippine Daily Inquirer, and ABS-CBN became the targets of Duterte's public tirades.

Mocha Uson – PCCO

China Telecom Corporation Ltd vs China Mobile Limited.
Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, only companies with at least 60% Philippine ownership can operate as a public
utility.
Chinese Premier Li Keqiang,
The offer was made to China, the Palace said, because of its proven capability to provide telecom services to millions of
users.

The last time the Philippine government entered into a communications deal with a Chinese company was in 2007
when the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed a multimillion-dollar deal with Chinese firm ZTE
for a national broadband network.

DHAKA, Bangladesh – Myanmar has asked Bangladesh to stop providing aid to 6,000 Rohingya stranded on the border
between the two countries since a military crackdown prompted a mass exodus of the Muslim minority last year, the
foreign ministry in Dhaka said.
Bangladeshi Foreign Minister A.H. Mahmood Ali and Myanmar's top diplomatic envoy, Kyaw Tint Swe, in Myanmar's
capital Napyidaw
Dil Mohammad, a Rohingya community leader
Kyaw Tint Swe, a minister in the office of Myanmar's de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi,

PRRD’s visible fruits: the resumption of Philippine fishing, though partial and limited to the fringes, around Bajo de
Masinloc (Scarborough Shoal); the opening of a communication hotline and officer exchange between the Philippine
and Chinese Coast Guards under a Memorandum of Agreement, the easing of Chinese harassment activities against
Philippine vessels venturing into the West Philippine Sea, and the establishment of a bilateral consultative mechanism
on maritime issues that form the means for formal and informal discussions of the disputes. These are tangible
improvements over the veritable cold war between the Philippines and China under the Aquino Administration.
From a regional perspective, observers have viewed PRRD’s actions as shrewd and game-changing moves that upended
the regional geopolitical balance formerly dominated by the US (itself unfortunately thrown into uncertainty under
President Donald Trump).
PRRD’s seeding and cultivation of economic and military ties with the competing major powers China and Russia are
seen as calculated actions to counter historically ingrained ties with the West and move the Philippines toward non-
alignment. PRRD’s fiery rhetoric against the Philippines’ longtime security and development partners like the US,
Australia, and EU have been enough to cast doubt on Philippine intentions. This is what allow to PRRD to leverage
against one against the other, and provides them with incentives to offer concessions.
Some have likened the Philippines’ position to a maiden with many suitors seeking to curry favor, and equate this with
an “independent foreign policy” unlike any other in its history as an independent State. By doing so, PRRD has also
relieved ASEAN of pressure to unify its position on the maritime disputes that all too frequently rock its central core and
turn its attention fully to less controversial regional economic integration.
Permanent interest
But while PRRD’s tactics seem to make sense, one must not lose sight of the Philippines’ strategic and permanent
maritime interest: the need to ensure that its exclusive sovereign rights to maritime resources in the West Philippine
Sea, which pertain to it as a matter of law, are not surrendered in the face of naked power.
Peaceful relations and resolution of disputes based on justice and fairness are far more resilient and stable than if they
were simply imposed by sheer power in whatever form.
Beneath the calm that has settled in the past 12 months, China’s expansion and activities into the West Philippine Sea
has continued unabated. Its fishing vessels, painted in the now familiar blue and white scheme of its maritime militia,
regularly operate fish inside the Philippine EEZ in and around the Kalayaan Islands and Scarborough Shoal.
These operations continue to include destructive practices to extract giant claims and corals, destroying the precious
marine habitats necessary for the regeneration of fish stocks upon which thousands depend for livelihood and
subsistence, as well as the targeting of endangered species like marine turtles and sharks to supply consumers in the
mainland.
Philippine fishing vessels, in contrast, find themselves reduced to furtively fishing when the CCG isn’t looking, or being
forced to “share” their catch, lest they be shooed away from their former fishing grounds. Some have even been
threatened and shot at, especially in areas near China’s artificial islands in the Union Banks.
China's dominance
China’s maritime forces, both military and civilian, similarly dominate the West Philippine Sea, their continuous presence
supported by the artificial islands hastily built to pre-empt the arbitral award.
Together with the blue maritime militia, the PLA Navy’s grey and CCG’s white ships color the seascape, playing cat-and-
mouse or chicken games with US, Japanese, Indian and other naval powers. Sometimes, they freely do so just outside
the 12nm from the Philippine coast; one PLA Navy vessel shadowed a US research vessel and seized its underwater
drone off Zambales last year.
Another was seen apparently shadowing another US vessel into the waters off Mindoro. CCG vessels constantly
challenge Philippine Navy and CG patrols approaching Bajo de Masinloc and the Kalayaan Islands to demonstrate their
superior authority, and reportedly still occasionally harass them with dangerous maneuvers that have already been
declared as contrary to accepted maritime law and practices.
It is not only in the sea; China’s assertions continue to take to the air, with regular warnings and veiled threats issued to
PAF aircraft conducting patrols or resupplying Philippine positions anywhere near the Chinese artificial islands.
PAF airmen in Kalayaan Islands airspace can only respond with curt denials of Chinese demands to “go away,” keenly
aware that their unarmed cargo planes are no match for Chinese positions already armed with short-range anti-aircraft
cannons soon to be upgraded with surface-to-air missiles systems. Should China move fighter aircraft into its three new
airstrips on Fiery Cross, Subi, and Mischief Reef, they would also have to contend with the possibility of “hot-dogging”
and over-confident Chinese pilots performing dangerous maneuvers during aerial intercepts, as frequently encountered
elsewhere by US aircraft.
PAF pilots flying over Scarborough Shoal, on the other hand, have to keep their eyes out for the Chinese combat air
patrols that regularly orbit the shoal; the danger was demonstrated early this year when a Chinese plane had an
“unintended encounter” (a euphemism for near collision) with a US aircraft.
'Scientific projects'
In addition to paramilitary, military, and law enforcement ships, China has also deployed a new instrument of maritime
power in the form of large, new and modern marine scientific research (MSR) vessels carrying out all kinds of scientific
projects.
Several of China’s newest MSR vessels have been officially announced or were actually spotted conducting research
around and through the Kalayaan Islands, around Reed Bank, west of Scarborough Shoal, or along the coasts of Palawan,
Mindoro and Luzon. These research activities all have potential resource implications, but are being conducted within
the West Philippine Sea in the face of Philippine disapproval.
In contrast, Philippine resource survey activities have practically stopped. Petroleum survey and development activities
are all on hold under a moratorium pending discussions of joint development options.
The appointment of former Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr, the original promoter of the ill-fated Trilateral Joint Marine
Seismic Undertaking between the Philippines, China and Vietnam, as a special envoy raised eyebrows as it seemed to
signal a revival of that problematic project that allowed China and Vietnam to explore the uncontested Philippine
continental shelf, but not the other way around.
This has been exacerbated by PRRD’s view that China would go to war if the Philippines were to start exploiting its own
petroleum resources in the West Philippine Sea.
The intense research activity already spills over into the eastern flank of the Philippines, as confirmed by reported
Chinese surveys within the EEZ east of Cagayan, Bicol, Samar, and Surigao. Chinese researchers even published locations
of instrument platforms anchored within the EEZ off Surigao and Cagayan. These prompted concerns over Benham (now
Philippine) Rise, and led the Philippines to mount its own MSR cruises this summer in order to show the flag.
Where's the assurance?
When seen in the context of China’s overwhelming presence in the West Philippine Sea and increasing activities on its
Pacific seaboard, all these paint a dismaying picture.
Although PRRD insists that he will raise the arbitral tribunal award “later in his term”, it is clear that at present China is
not restraining its maritime reach and has fully deployed them into Philippine waters. It is actually appropriating these
waters and their resources, in addition to flexing its jurisdictional muscles at a scale never before seen. The Philippines
can only respond with muted protests through its bilateral consultative mechanism.
Some react to this situation with fatalism, arguing that anyway there is nothing that can be done to oppose Chinese
expansion.
PRRD himself seems to reflect this view, but touts the promises of China’s financial assistance and infrastructure projects
that he has been able to receive from China. The trouble is that such assistance and infrastructure also come at a cost,
whether in accommodation of exaggerated maritime claims, or payment of relatively higher interest rates, or the need
to always be in the creditor’s good graces. PRRD himself has publicly questioned why he should raise the maritime
disputes with China and risk being cussed out “when the money is coming in.”
It also does not bode well that the government’s infrastructure policy has turned away from public-private partnerships
that would have placed infrastructure development firmly under joint control of the Philippine public and private sector,
and gone back to government-to-government arrangements that may effectively turn over control and influence to
foreign government partners.

Here then is the problem with PRRD’s foreign policy with China.
1. Despite its apparent benefits, it has not generated any assurance that China will not impose itself and its pre-
emptive claim over waters and resources that legally pertain to the Philippines.
2. It has effectively submitted to Chinese expansion into the West Philippine Sea, to the point that Filipinos are
now slowly being elbowed out of their legal rights and prerogatives in their own waters.
3. It has chosen to accept the promises of future Chinese largesse, not minding the inevitable constraints it will
certainly place on future decisions and policies of government.
4. While improved bilateral relations with China, now presented as a new “golden age” have indeed come with
tangible benefits in the form infrastructure, finance, and armaments, it is not difficult to see that the Philippines
has in turn incurred intangible costs. Thus, in the days ahead, the administration will always tread dangerous
waters insofar as the West Philippine Sea is concerned.
One hopes that, “later in his term,” PRRD would actually still have anything useful to discuss with China. A delayed
dialogue presumes that both parties maintain the status quo and will still be able to compromise and give concessions.
Government agencies tasked with the nation’s maritime security are already hard-pressed to maintain whatever
autonomy of decision and action remains in face of China’s advance.
From the situation at sea, the Philippines has conceded most of what matters in the West Philippine Sea, save for the
literal “4 corners of that piece of paper.” But then, that is likewise completely in line with the politics of Dutertismo:
never mind the facts, just keep up the rhetoric.
Under PRRD’s leadership, the current generation appears to be comfortable with the transactionalist approach to
geopolitics, especially since it seems to be in keeping with an emerging trend in global geopolitics. The problem with the
Philippines becoming too used to transactionalism, however, is that in practice there may be a very thin line between
being a maiden with many suitors and a courtesan with many clients. One can only hope that we will able to clearly
discern what we might become. –

Environment and climate change: Duterte owns the problems now

President Duterte has inherited problems from past administrations. He must lead us away from ecological apocalypse
by being bold and visionary.

It has been an exciting year for the environment and for climate change under President Duterte. Whether change for
the better has come and progress will be finally made in these two important areas of our national life is, however, still
uncertain.

Choosing Gina Lopez as environment secretary was certainly a stroke of genius by President Duterte. For the first time,
we had a top environmental official who saw her mandate as the protector of nature and people first and did not bother
to balance other considerations. In the past, others in her position, while as committed to the environment as her,
always saw their role as forging a balance between environment and development and thus weighing always the needs
and interests of the business community.

Gina Lopez would not have any of that and rushed into a head-on collision with the mining industry. That turned out to
be her undoing because the industry actively lobbied to have her rejected by the Commission on Appointments (CA).
They were successful and, because of that, we have been deprived the opportunity of seeing whether the Lopez
approach would work better for the planet and people.

Now we must wait and see as the new secretary, former Armed Forces chief Roy Cimatu takes over the department. He
is still adjusting to the role and we must wait until he makes major decisions before we can lay judgment on his
performance. Personally, I am optimistic that Secretary Cimatu will do well in the DENR. He seems to be a technically
competent person and a good manager, certainly very personable. I suspect he has more support from the career
officials of DENR than Secretary Lopez had.

The good thing is that there are good officials in the DENR, people like Undersecretary Anna Teh and Biodiversity
Management Bureau Director Mundita Lim who can help Secretary Cimatu do his job. I am also glad that Undersecretary
Ipat Luna, a top environmental lawyer appointed by Lopez, has so far stayed in the DENR. She is brilliant, wise, and
passionate; Cimatu will benefit gratefully from her advice.
We saw also an important change in top officials in the Climate Change Commission (CCC), with Vice Chair Manny de
Guzman replaced by Commissioner Vernice Victorio, who is from Davao City. Secretary Victorio is the 4th person in 7
years to head the CCC, tasked with leading and coordinating Philippine government efforts to address climate change. I
have worked with all of them, including Victorio, and I can attest that they are all competent and good public servants.

Something is, however, dysfunctional in the concept and structure of the CCC that it has never seen stability since its
creation. Every CCC vice chair has been criticized unfairly, and that will continue until changes in our climate change law
is done. I would urge the climate change community to be patient and to work with the incumbent CCC to iron out the
organizational gaps so that the agency can effectively play the role it was given. I would certainly endorse without
qualification Secretary Victorio. She knows climate change issues very well, has integrity, and is close to the Palace. The
latter is a must because the President is, in fact, the chair of the CCC.

As for the President, he has left environment and climate change mainly in the hands of his chosen officials and, except
for a few times, have not spoken about these. He did weigh in on the mining debate and consistently sided with
Secretary Lopez. In that debate, though, Finance Secretary Sonny Dominguez argued for more balance and was
supported by Executive Secretary Medialdea in the specific disputes that went to the Office of the President. And while
vocal in his support for Lopez, the President did not intervene with his congressional allies to have her confirmed by the
CA. Some have accused the President of insincerity for such omission.

On climate change, the President clearly understands the issue. In fact, he highlighted it in his first Cabinet meeting,
emphasizing its impacts and how we must prepare for it. He did, however, take the climate change community by
surprise when he initially trash talked the Paris Agreement, describing it as unfair. Eventually, however, the President
was convinced by his Cabinet to ratify the Paris Agreement, with which the Senate concurred last March. That was the
right decision from a climate point of view, as the Philippines would have been isolated if we chose to remain outside
that agreement.

Beyond the personalities and the controversies of the agencies tasked with dealing with them, the environment and
climate change cannot wait. Our environment continues to deteriorate even as climate change impacts accelerates.
Conversion of forests continues unabated and biodiversity consistently diminishes. Pollution incidents have grown, with
mining and coal power plants, among others, loading pollutants into our air and water. Our cities are choked by
emissions from vehicles and unregulated factories. Above all, land use continues to be irrational, making environmental
planning a futile exercise. In the meantime, climate related disasters from El Niños to floods increase in frequency and
ferocity.

For mining, that means strict implementation of the law so that only the companies that are committed to responsible
mining can operate. Only a few companies would meet that criteria.
For pollution, that means higher standards on emissions and rigorous implementation so that offenders are punished
and not allowed again to operate.
To conserve nature, a land conversion moratorium could be very helpful.
For energy, capping coal power plants and hastening the transition to renewable energy is imperative.
For fisheries, the creation of a separate department could be helpful.
For climate change, localizing climate change adaptation effectively in all our islands is a priority.
For Congress, it would be good to pass an amended climate change law that fixes the CCC and implements our Paris
Agreement commitments, a disaster risk reduction and management law that creates an independent disaster agency, a
good land use act, a new energy law that establishes an energy mix heavy on renewables, a new mining law that has a
better revenue sharing system in favor of government and communities, and a corporate environmental liability act.

Much work needs to be done by the Duterte government to address environmental concerns and the challenges
brought by climate change. Doing the normal things expected from government is not enough. The problems are
growing exponentially; we must go ahead of the curve to catch up. That’s what is needed and how this administration
will be measured at the end of its term.

Duterte foreign policy: Independent but isolated

In disregarding the international ruling on South China Sea, 'We allow ourselves to be bullied, but we call it an
independent foreign policy,' an analyst says

MANILA, Philippines – Upon returning from his first foreign trip as chief executive, President Rodrigo Duterte announced
on September 10, 2016, that the Philippines will pursue an "independent foreign policy.
The Duterte administration, however, gave it currency when it made previously unthinkable moves, such as declaring an
economic and military split from the United States and rejecting new grants from the European Union.
Shock and awe from "The Punisher" forced powerful countries to pay attention to the Philippines during Duterte's first
year in office.
Foreign Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano
While striving to become independent, however, the Philippines ended up isolated from its traditional ally, the US, and
from other countries that emphasize human rights.

Quick rundown of issues and events in foreign policy:

On the West Philippine Sea
 Duterte downplays the Philippines' legal victory against China over the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea), as
he aims to boost economic ties with Beijing.
 Duterte also claims that China warned of war if the Philippines asserts the tribunal ruling.
 Duterte says, however, that "there will come a time" when he will have to raise this historic ruling.
On the US, China, and Russia
 Duterte in September 2016 says he is ending military exercises with the US. He later allows the war games,
except for exercises involving the West Philippine Sea.
 Duterte on October 20, 2016, announces his economic and military "separation" from the US.
 Duterte forges closer ties with China and Russia.
On human rights
 Duterte repeatedly curses at the US, the United Nations, and the EU for criticizing his bloody war on drugs.
 Duterte approves a recommendation "not to accept" new EU grants worth around P13.85 billion (250 million
euros), in exchange for adherence to the rule of law.
 At the UN in May, at least 45 countries hit extrajudicial killings in the Philippines, but China hails its newfound
ally for its "relentless efforts" to promote human rights.
Contradictions in foreign policy
In the name of an independent foreign policy, for instance, Duterte wants to break free from the US. His hands are tied,
however, when it comes to China.
On human rights, Duterte lambasts countries hitting his war on drugs, but has not given the same dose of "putang ina"
(son of a bitch) to what he considers a source of drug traffickers: China.
He is also rarely, if ever, heard cursing at China for its island-building activities in the West Philippine Sea.
Victor Andres Manhit, the Philippine managing director of international think tank BowerGroupAsia, that Duterte's push
for an independent foreign policy seems "to be really more of independence from the United States."
On disregarding the South China Sea ruling, Manhit said, "We allow ourselves to be bullied, but we call it an independent
foreign policy."
University of the Philippines-based political analyst Aries Arugay said he believes "there is a hedging strategy being
employed by the President.
Arugay explained that hedging is like opening oneself to many suitors. "So you're not committing to anyone. You are
spreading yourself or you are taking offers from everyone," he said.
'Confusing' policy
With all these, where is Duterte leading the Philippines in terms of foreign policy?
In a recent forum organized by the Ateneo School of Government (ASOG), its former dean Antonio La Viña said "it's a
confusing execution of what this independent foreign policy is."
On top of all these is Duterte's personalized way of handling foreign policy, which, according to sociologist Randy David,
"has acquired an emotional dimension" under the long-time mayor.
Recent events, however, can serve as eye-openers for him.
On the eve of Independence Day this year, Duterte had to acknowledge US assistance to Philippine troops battling ISIS-
linked terrorists in Marawi City.
Months after announcing his separation from the US, Duterte grudgingly said of American aid, "Nagpapasalamat na rin
ako. Nandiyan na 'yan .This is the same President who, in October 2016, told the US and the EU in the face of their
supposed meddling in local affairs: "Go away, bring your money to somewhere else. We will survive as a nation."
As Duterte marks his first year in office, the threat of terror reminds The Punisher: countries need each other. –

Fighting climate change: What is the Paris Agreement?

UNFCCC's Christiana Figueres,

UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon,
President of COP21 Laurent Fabius, and France's President Francois Hollande raise hands together after adoption of a
historic global warming pact at the COP21 Climate Conference in Le Bourget on December 12, 2015. (Conference of
Parties)

PARIS, France – On December 12, 2015, 195 countries gathered in the French capital to conclude the first truly universal
climate treaty, the Paris Agreement, aimed at preventing the worst-case scenarios of global warming.
On Wednesday, US media reported that President Donald Trump was poised to announce the United States' withdrawal
from the pact, which took nearly two decades of often-acrimonious bartering and much give-and-take to conclude.
The Palestinian authorities have since also signed the agreement, which has now been officially ratified by 147 parties
and entered into force in record time on November 4, 2016, when it crossed the threshold of 55 ratifying parties
representing 55 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Even without the US, which ratified the pact under Barack Obama in September 2016, the 55/55 threshold is met.
The goal
Nations agreed to hold global warming to "well below" two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-Industrial
Revolution levels, and to strive for a limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius.
The lower goal was a demand of poor countries and island states at high risk of climate change effects such as rising sea
levels.
But experts say even the two-degree ceiling is a tall order, requiring an immediate and deep reduction in planet-
warming emissions from burning fossil fuels – an industry with major influence in Washington.
Based on voluntary emissions-cutting pledged by countries so far, the planet is on track for warming of about three
degrees, many scientists say -- a recipe for possibly catastrophic floods, storms, drought and ocean-level increases.
Without the US administration on board, the goal may move even further out of reach.
Getting there
The signatories will aim for emissions to peak "as soon as possible", with "rapid reductions" thereafter.
By the second half of this century, according to the pact, there must be a balance between emissions from human
activities such as energy production and farming, and the amount that can be absorbed by carbon-absorbing "sinks"
such as forests or storage technology.
Burden-sharing
Developed countries, which have polluted for longer, must take the lead with absolute emissions cuts.
Developing nations, which still burn coal and oil to power growing populations and economies, are encouraged to
"continue enhancing" their efforts and "move over time" towards absolute cuts.
Tracking progress
In 2018, and every 5 years thereafter, countries will take stock of the overall impact of their efforts to rein in global
warming, according to the text.
It "urges" and "requests" countries to update their pledges by 2020.
Some nations, including the United States, set emissions-curbing targets for 2025, others for 2030. Both categories are
meant to be updated every five years.
Financing
Rich countries are expected to provide funding to help developing countries make the costly shift to cleaner energy
sources and to shore up defenses against the impacts of climate change.
Donor nations must report every two years on their financing levels -- current and intended.
In a nonbinding "decision" that accompanies the agreement but is not included in it, the $100 billion (89 billion euros)
per year that rich countries have pledged to muster by 2020 is referred to as a "floor" -- meaning it can only go up.
The amount must be updated by 2025.
According to an OECD report, pledges made in 2015 alone would boost public climate financing (excluding private
money) to $67 billion in 2020.
But Trump has hinted the United States, which had pledged $3 billion towards the Green Climate Fund, of which it
delivered $1 billion under Barack Obama, will not honor its financing commitments.
Bindingness
The agreement makes provision for parties to withdraw, but notice can be given only 3 years after its entry into force in
2016. The actual withdrawal would take effect a year later – meaning 2020 if the Trump administration uses this option.
A country can also withdraw from the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, under whose auspices the
deal was negotiated. Withdrawal would take effect a year after notification.
ENVIRONMENT
Will the Paris Agreement work?
The Bonn conference will highlight the Talanoa Dialogue which, for the first time, will gather country negotiators,
business leaders, and civil society groups in a face-to-face meeting to discuss what is a fair and adequate – but scaled up
–contribution from different countries to reduce emissions

BONN, Germany – From April 30 to May 10, delegates from governments around the world are once again meeting in
Bonn for the climate change conference. The negotiations are expected to facilitate the delivery of two outcomes
viewed as critical to the implementation of the Paris Agreement.
These two outcomes include the
1. implementation rulebook, and
2. revised country pledges to reduce more emissions than previous targets stated in each
country's Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
Known as the 48 session of the subsidiary bodies (SB48), the Bonn Climate Change Conference has 3 simulateous
meetings.
- Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) oversees the drafting of the implementation rulebook for
the Paris Agreement.
- Subsidiary Body for Science and Technology (SBSTA) reports and advises on the science and
technology advancements necessary to lower emissions.
- Ad Hoc Working Group (APA), which prepares for the Paris Agreement implementation, ensures that
the text of the rulebook presents the final outcomes of negotiations and agreements.
During the 22nd Conference of Parties (COP22) in Marrakech, parties decided to finalize the rulebook this year. The
implementation rules are shaped around 6 key issues that government negotiators will need to agree on: transparency
of implementation, mitigation, adaptation, technology, capacity-building, and financing.
Li Shuo, Greenpeace senior global policy advisor, said that countries need to agree fast on this range of technical issues,
amid a widening gap between current pledges and what climate experts are indicating as necessary action to limit
global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Dharini Pharthasarathy, senior communications coordinator for non-profit Climate Action Network, said that some
countries want to follow a universal approach in implementing the Paris Agreement, where one rule applies to all.
Others are proposing an approach based on equity and flexibility, where lesser developed countries are given “leeway
on the implementation" of their NDCs.
Aside from hastening the creation of the rulebook, experts and observers in Bonn are also calling on governments to
radically step up climate ambition amid analysis that the window to avoid breaching the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 degrees
threshold is closing fast. By some estimates, less than 4 years remain, and current pledges are projected to result in 3
degrees Celsius warming if unchanged.
This makes the original NDCs “woefully inadequate to reach the Paris goals,” Pharthasarathy said.
“All the countries’ pledges to lower emissions put together will fail to deliver on the ambition of the Paris Agreement.
It’s been almost three years since they first wrote their pledges and climate change has only gotten worse within this
period of the time,” she added.

Talanoa: 3 questions that will make Paris work

To facilitate scaling up the countries' ambitions, the Bonn conference will highlight the Talanoa Dialogue which, for the
first time, will gather country negotiators, business leaders, and civil society groups in a face-to-face meeting to discuss
what is a fair and adequate – but scaled up –contribution from different countries to reduce emissions.
The Talanoa Dialogue will take place on Sunday, May 6, and is organized around 3 questions: where are we, where do
we want to go, and how do we get there?
Aside from the face-to-face meeting, parties and civil society members can also submit their inputs to the Talanoa via an
online portal, which the UNFCCC secretariat will compile into materials to be used in the intersessional.
Pharthasarathy cautioned that the dialogue should not only be a talk shop, but should encourage the countries to revise
their NDCs by 2020 – the year emissions must peak and then start to decline.
“It really needs to serve that purpose because otherwise, it’s just a sharing of ideas. Countries will need to look at which
sector of the economy they can start looking to reduce emissions and put those in their NDCs,” she said.
2017 went down as the costliest year as well as the third hottest on record. Large tracts of the world's oceans are being
suffocated. Acording to World Bank estimates, hundreds of millions of people are at riskof being displaced in the coming
decades.
Mark Lutes, senior global climate policy advisor for climate and energy at Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF), said that
current climate talks in Bonn must pave the way to the Paris Agreement outcomes at COP24 at the end of the year.
“Even the best rules in the world won’t save us if countries aren’t willing to commit to stronger action,” Lutes said. –
THOUGHT LEADERS
Ramos, Duterte, and the Paris Agreement
While I agree mostly with President Ramos, I actually understand where President Duterte is coming from. He is asking
the right and good questions.

In recent days, we have read about President Fidel V. Ramos upset at President Rodrigo Duterte on the latter’s apparent
rejection of the Paris Agreement because of concern that it would limit our industrialization. Commenting on Duterte’s
latest statement in Cagayan about not honoring the climate change agreement adopted in Paris last December, Ramos
does not mince wrote in his Manila Bulletincolumn: “In his consistently frequent insulting diatribes against the US, EU,
and the UN, in which President Du30 also keeps complaining against the December, 2015, Paris Agreement on Climate
Change (crafted by 195 nations, the Philippines included), he is unwittingly shooting himself in the mouth, and also all of
us, 101.5 million Filipinos. He may claim that to be more “insulting than friendly” to our long-established allies is part of
his God-given “destiny.” But, this is obviously wrong. President Ramos, in the same column, continues: “Ratifying the
Paris Agreement will allow the Philippines to participate in the global effort to address climate change and advance
the interests of our country and our people, as one of the most vulnerable to climate change. It will also enable us to
secure more investments towards our climate goals and gain access to the financial, technological, and capacity-
building support to be provided to parties of the Agreement. Not ratifying the Paris Agreement, on the other hand,
will force us to continue on our own without having to consider or report on our contributions to the global response
to climate change. Note, however, that our country has spent an average of 0.5% of its GDP per year for the past 25
years for “Losses and Damages;” so we are, in effect, already paying for the impacts of climate change to which we
have contributed very little.

FVR correctly observed that by not ratifying the Paris agreement, we can only be observers in the first meeting of the
Parties that will be held in Marrakesh, Morocco two weeks from now. He called on President Duterte to immediately
approve the Paris Agreement and certify it for Senate ratification to promote our country’s interests and fight for
climate justice.
While I agree mostly with President Ramos, I actually understand where President Duterte is coming from. He is asking
the right and good questions. As a veteran climate change negotiator, I am a witness to how all of Duterte’s
predecessors have asked similar questions and how they eventually came around to do the right thing for the country on
climate change. I am confident that President Duterte, with the right legal, policy and technical advice, will eventually do
the same. Hopefully, he will listen to the experts and to the people in his Cabinet that knows the issue well.
It is not too late to ratify the Paris Agreement in time for the first meeting of the Parties. If the President decides this
week to endorse the agreement to the Senate, the Senate can concur by middle of next week, in time for the first
Meeting of the Parties of the Paris Agreement which will be held in Marrakesh the week of November 14 (the climate
change meeting begins November 7 but the first week will be mainly a meeting of the climate change convention which
we are a party too). Being a non-party in the first meeting means we will not be listened to as we are going to be mere
observers. That would be unfortunate. If there is time, we should ratify by next week but if that’s not possible, our next
window is from January-May 2017 so we can participate fully in next climate meeting in June of that year,
What Duterte should know about the Paris Agreement
The first thing Duterte’s people should tell him is that the Paris Agreement is not just a carbon emissions agreement
but a comprehensive sustainable development agreement. It is an adaptation, loss and damage, finance, technology
and capacity building agreement – all of which are essential to our survival. We cannot cherry-pick but have to accept
the whole package. But we can do so our own terms.
To opt out of the Paris Agreement is to allow developed countries to escape from their responsibility to compensate
us for causing climate change. The Paris Agreement is the only process where we can get developed countries to be
accountable for their emissions through a loss and damage mechanism and through provisions that require them as a
matter of climate justice to provide support to us so we can adapt to and mitigate climate change. Indeed, the Paris
Agreement has good provisions on finance, technology transfer, and capacity building. Our delegation worked hard in
Paris to get the best text possible for these provisions.
The Paris Agreement does not impose emissions reduction limitations on us. We can determine our own targets based
on our development needs. We can adopt targets but we can make that conditional on support by developed
countries. That’s what we did in Paris – we did offer 70% but we said we will do it only if support was given. If the
Duterte administration wishes, it can lower the number to maybe 30-40% and perhaps commit to do 10-15% of that as
unconditional since we are already doing many things on our own. Such a decision would be credible and acceptable.
Climate justice is enshrined in the Preamble of the Paris Agreement. This is the first time that the term has been
included in a legally binding, multilateral document. Such a mention, even if it is qualified, strengthens the ultimate
objective of the agreement and the Convention. By recognizing the inextricable link between moral obligation and
historical responsibility, the Paris Agreement is given more credibility. The explicit inclusion of climate justice is certainly
a good start for the next era of climate action.
These elements, among the many that make up the Paris Agreement, is what makes this legally binding document
historic and revolutionary. While no one is under the illusion that what states achieved in COP21 will solve the climate
crisis, its outcome is certainly a strong and unified signal to the world that the all countries are ready to move forward
with their climate commitments, and in the future increase ambition to achieve the goals and the objectives of both
the Paris Agreement and the climate change Convention.
Philippine influence in Paris
The Philippines was crucial in creating the strongest possible outcome for Paris. In Article 8 on loss and damage, the
Philippines led by its adaptation team was essential in getting crucial wording into the agreement, particularly on the
reference to the Warsaw International Mechanism. Although some limiting language regarding liability and
compensation in loss and damage can be found in the decision text, the inclusion of a separate article on loss and
damage in the Paris Agreement is no small matter—it lives to fight another day. And without a doubt, the adaptation
team and the rest of the Philippine delegation are ready to fight for its survival.
The Philippines, as chair of the Climate Vulnerable Forum, an advocacy alliance of 43 developing, middle-economy and
small island states, has campaigned for the temperature cap of 1.5 degree-Celsius goal since COP20 in Lima, Peru. In
Paris, we did Herculean work to achieve this goal and our efforts paid off as 112 countries eventually supported it, with
France and Germany joining the call by the penultimate day of the conference.
It is true that the current commitments will still lead to a 2.7 degrees Celsius increase in temperature. That is not
acceptable. But the review mechanism agreed to in Paris and built regularly into the agreement is its saving grace. If we
do it right, by the second or third cycle, we could be on track to the 1.5 degrees goal.
We need funds not only to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, but also to adapt to the effects of climate change,
which could range from longer, drier spells to intense, more frequent rainfall. These events have potential pronounced
impacts on the income of farmers and fisher folk as the former would have a more difficult time growing their crops,
while it would be dangerous and too risky for the latter to brave stormy seas. Their decreased production could then
harm food security and aggravate poverty.
In Paris, our adaptation team worked hard to make sure that the funds would be grants-based. Complementing their
efforts was the work of the finance team, which supported the inclusion of a provision in the climate change deal that
aims to achieve a balance between mitigation and adaptation in the allotment of climate finance. The technology
transfer team, on the other hand, pushed for the provision of funds for all stages of technology cycle so as to guarantee
that the support will not just be given for research and development but also implementation.
Not all challenges posed by climate change could be adapted to, however. This is why we need to address loss and
damage separately. It is one big win for us and other vulnerable countries that the Paris agreement contained a whole
article (Article 8) about it.
What Aquino committed in Paris
The Paris Agreement is the most differentiated climate and environmental agreement and thus allows countries to join
based on their own interests. The differentiation in the agreement is flawed because it means developed countries
and big developing countries like China and India cannot be pressured to do more on reducing their emissions; but
this kind of differentiation is good for countries like the Philippines so we can choose our own path to low-emission
development.
The previous administration decided to offer an ambitious INDC but it made it contingent on support by developed
countries. That was a strategic decision and it was done with care. It’s a no-harm commitment because we said we are
bound only to the target to the extent that developed countries provided finance and technology for us to achieve it.
We have already been spending money on climate change and will continue to do that; but if we need to do more, it
must come from our partners.
The 70 percent emission reduction we committed to is a reduction from business as usual (BAU) emissions by 2030,
meaning from the increase we would have had if we didn’t do anything. If we did nothing, our emissions would
double or even triple. What we have offered is to reduce what that doubled or tripled amount would be by 70%. And
as I said, we also made our commitment contingent on support - finance and technology - provided by developed
countries and if no money or technology were forthcoming, we cannot be held to account for that target.. So there is
little risk for us and a lot to gain. And the timeframe allows us to plan properly. We can also choose to modify that
commitment to something less ambitious. One possibility is to offer a 40% reduction target, with10-15%
unconditional (those we are already doing with our own resources)
In the climate negotiations, we have been pushing all countries to reduce emissions but especially developed countries
which are historically responsible for the early emissions and majority of current emissions and big developing
countries who are increasing their contribution (China is now the number one country in terms of annual contributions).
We belong to neither group – as a middle-income country, we are in the group of countries that contribute less than 1
percent each of the total emissions (we contribute .34%, similar to the Czech Republic’s contribution). Majority of
countries actually emit even less than us - small island states, least developed countries, etc. – with many of them
already having zero net emissions or contributing less than .01%. 34 countries emit more than us but 160 countries emit
less than us.
Added together, those of us who are in the 1% or less emissions still would total a fifth or a sixth of total global
emissions. That’s why even the lesser emitters also have to reduce emissions because if they don't, the problem
won't be solved. For a country that suffers climate change, that is not acceptable. And a country that suffers climate
change should also not contribute to the problem even if very little. That’s like suicide – contributing to your own
destruction. This explains why many vulnerable countries offered ambitious NDCs.
As to the reduction goal preventing us from being industrialized, it should not. From a practical point of view, it simply
means we need to transform our energy system to rely more on renewables rather than on coal. There are many
other reasons we should do that - economic, environmental, health – other than climate reasons. It also means we also
have to take care of our forests and land better so that it does not emit carbon and become a better sink. Other
sectors can also help – waste, transportation and industry, and eventually agriculture.
All these are consistent with our sustainable development; all the measures we should take must be no-regrets and
good for us.
The Paris Agreement can actually give us the means to do all of these and more. If we were smart, we would use the
agreement to transition to a clean energy system, protect our forests and improve land use, make our cities more
sustainable, and support environmentally friendly industrialization.
Marrakesh and beyond
The agreement adopted in Paris last year was a long time coming. Six years after the disastrous Copenhagen climate
conference, the world finally has a strong climate agreement that can serve as a foundation for effective climate action.
While Paris is the maximum and limit of what governments as a collective can agree on right now, the Agreement is still
not adequate to address climate change effectively.
But while it is imperfect, the Paris Agreement is not bad and although, certainly flawed from a climate justice point of
view, the Agreement is the only one possible at this time if we want global cooperation. Thankfully it is not the least
common denominator agreement but the optimum possible with an opening for improving it in the years to come. For
sure, it is the only multilateral game in town for the next 10, perhaps 20 years.
If the Philippines decide not to do ratify the Paris Agreement, we have to be ready to address climate change on our
own. Isolation is the result of not ratifying what is likely going to be a universal agreement.
If we ratify the agreement, it is important to consider very carefully our Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). As
pointed out, there is nothing to stop us from lowering our ambition even as it will mean diminished leadership in the
climate negotiations. The important thing is to commit to something we can really implement and which is good for us.
The Paris Agreement is a good document whose consequences will last generations. While this legally binding
agreement in itself is not enough to solve the climate crisis, it as strong, ambitious, and as equitable as it can be for an
agreement that required consensus by 195 countries—a positive beginning to a long and hard journey towards climate
justice.
For the Philippines, this is an important agreement, as climate change is more than just an environmental, social,
political, and economic issue for our country – it is an issue of survival. It is an issue of the very existence of the Filipino
people. And while the world has finally agreed to act together on climate change, the actual work to reach the goals that
have been set in the Paris Agreement has only just begun. Everyone must do their part, and efforts must increase in
the coming years if actors are to effect real change. The buck does not stop in Paris.
The show of force, commitment, cooperation, and solidarity to adopt this agreement in Paris is impressive and inspiring,
but this document’s worth on paper cannot be measured by its words alone. Only the genuine effort, ambition, and
successful climate action that the agreement inspires can the world truly say that the Paris Agreement has fulfilled what
it set out to do. But until then, there is much work to be done.
The Paris Agreement has a life of its own, regardless of what we do. We can certainly decide to isolate ourselves and be
the only country in the world that does not ratify the Paris Agreement. If we decide to do that, we must be ready to
address climate change on our own with our resources and with no one to help us. Among others, we will not be able to
take advantage of the Loss and Damage mechanism that the Paris Agreement establishes.
Climate change is real and will continue to grow in intensity regardless of us. That’s why principled engagement with the
government and continuous cooperation with the international community is the only option. –

2017 Events
Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters
January 4 –Kidapawan JAILBREAK -158 inmates- biggest in the history of North Cotabato
Mohammad Jaafar Maguid, the leader of the Ansar Al-Khilafah Philippines
President Duterte signed an executive order mandating universal access to modern family planning tools.
President Rodrigo Duterte deportation of Indian nationals, especially Punjabis, involved in the 5-6 money lending
scheme.
January 16–20 – The 4th World Apostolic Congress on Mercy commenced with a Mass at the Manila Cathedral.
January 17:
The city government of Cagayan de Oro declared a state of calamity in response to flooding
The National Bureau of Investigation confirmed the death of Jee Ick Joo, a South Korean businessman who was
abducted in Angeles on October 18, 2016
February 1 – The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), New People's Army (NPA), and National Democratic Front
(NDF) ended their unilateral ceasefire with the Philippine government.
February 21 – A tour bus carrying college students bound for a camping site in Tanay, Rizal, lost brakes and crashed into
a roadside electricity pole, killing 15 and injuring 40 on board.[16] The accident uncovered lax regulations on safety of
students on educational trips in the Philippines and prompted the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and
Department of Education (DepEd) to issue moratoriums on field trips for the 2016–17 school year
February 24 – Senator Leila de Lima was arrested for violations of Republic Act 9165, or the Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, related to her alleged involvement in the New Bilibid Prison drug trafficking scandal.
February 27 – Jeepney drivers, mostly belonging to the transport groups, PISTON and Stop and Go Coalition, led a
nationwide strike against the planned modernization of jeepneys, that caused suspension of classes and stranding
passengers at major metropolitan areas nationwide.
February 28 – President Rodrigo Duterte signed the Paris Agreement on Climate Change
March 2 – Angel Manalo, brother of Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) Executive Minister Eduardo Manalo, and 31 others were
arrested for illegal possession of firearms for the alleged shooting incident at Manalo's compound in Quezon City
March 9 – Members of Kadamay (Kalipunan ng Damayan Mahihirap) occupied 4,000 houses inside government housing
projects in Pandi and San Jose del Monte in Bulacan.[25]
March 15 – Magdalo representative Gary Alejano filed the first impeachment complaint against Rodrigo Duterte
resulting from extrajudicial killings in the Philippine war on drugs.[26]
April
April 4:
Rodrigo Duterte ordered the resignation of Department of Interior and Local Government secretary Ismael Sueño amidst
corruption allegations.[27]
A magnitude 5.5 earthquake, that occurred northwest of Tingloy, hit Batangas, causing damage to buildings.[28] The
province soon declared a state of calamity after the quake.[29]
April 11 – A clash between the Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National Police Special Action Force and Abu
Sayyaf in Inabanga, Bohol kills 6, including the notorious Muammar Askali, also known as "Abu Rami".[30]
April 17 – A bus traveling from Isabela into Ilocos region fell off a ravine in Carranglan, Nueva Ecija, killing 31 on board.
The accident, resulting from poor vehicle maintenance, is one of the most deadliest road accidents in the
Philippines.[31]
April 26–29 – The 30th ASEAN Summit was held at the Philippine International Convention Center in Pasay.[32]
April 27 – The Philippine National Police discovered a secret jail cell inside a Manila Police District precinct, that raised
possibilities of police abuses in Rodrigo Duterte's campaign against illegal drugs.[33]
April 28 – The bombings were a series of blasts which took place in the Manila district of Quiapo in the Philippines.[34]
May
May 5 – United Nations special rapporteur Agnes Callamard made a controversial visit on a drug policy forum in the
University of the Philippines. The Philippine government complained about her unannounced visit, that shown lack of
understanding on the human rights situation in Rodrigo Duterte's ongoing war on drugs.[35]
May 6 – just one week since the first blast, twin bombings took place about two and a half hours apart in the same
district in Quiapo, Manila.[36]
May 15 – The majority of the House of Representatives justice committee rejected the impeachment complaint filed by
Magdalo representative Gary Alejano against Rodrigo Duterte for lack of substance.[37]
May 16:
President Rodrigo Duterte signed Executive Order No. 25, that renamed Benham Rise to Philippine Rise.[38]
President Rodrigo Duterte signed Executive Order No. 26, that ordered a nationwide smoking ban.[39]
May 18:
Implementation of Republic Act No. 10913, or the "Anti-Distracted Driving Act", started.[40]
Ferdinand Marcelino, along with his Chinese asset, Yan Yi Shou, were released after their drug-related case was
dropped.[41]
May 19 – Implementation of Republic Act No. 10666, or the "Children on Motorcycle Safety Act of 2015", started.[42]
May 23 – President Rodrigo Duterte signed Proclamation No. 216 declaring a 60-day martial law in Mindanao following
clashes between government forces and the Maute group in Marawi.[43]

Resorts World Manila immediately following the shooting. The complex was shrouded in smoke from fires started by the
suspect. Also picture is Maxims Tower, where the attacker committed suicide.
June
June 1 – Philippine Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana announces the deaths of ten soldiers in Marawi as a result of a
"friendly fire" airstrike.[44]
June 2 – A gunman attacked Resorts World Manila in Pasay around midnight, caused a major panic within the complex.
Around 38 people were dead, due to smoke inhalation from the fire while injuring 70 people.[45]
June 4:
In Marawi, Philippines, a ceasefire organised by Moro separatists is broken, leaving locals hungry for nearly two
weeks.[46]
Philippine police identified the attacker at Resorts World Manila as Jessie Javier Carlos, an ex-employee of the
Department of Finance who was deeply in debt.[47][48]
July
July 6:
a 6.5 magnitude earthquake hit Leyte, causing at least 4 deaths and 100 injuries. The quake also caused power
interruptions in the whole of Eastern Visayas and nearby Bohol.[49]
The Supreme Court says President Rodrigo Duterte can declare martial law in the whole Philippines. Two days prior, the
Supreme Court had ruled in favor of the constitutionality of Proclamation No. 216 which declared Martial Law and
suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the whole of Mindanao, in response to the Marawi crisis.[50]
July 22 – In a special joint session requested by President Rodrigo Duterte, the Congress of the Philippines voted 261–18
to extend the martial law in Mindanao until December 31, 2017.[51][52][53]
July 23 – The nationwide ban on public smoking is implemented.[54][55]
July 30 – Sixteen people, including Mayor Reynaldo Parojinog Sr. and his wife, are killed in a police drug raid in Ozamiz,
Misamis Occidental. The Parojinog family had been previously identified with their ties to the illegal drug trade, as well
as the organized crime group Kuratong Baleleng.[56][57]
August
August 8 – The Supreme Court of the Philippines has junked all petitions against the burial of former President of the
Philippines Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, re-affirming its earlier ruling on 8 November 2016.[58]
August 9 – President Rodrigo Duterte abolishes the Negros Island Region (first created in 2015 by his predecessor)
through Executive Order no. 38, citing lack of funds to fully establish the region. Negros Occidental reverts to the
Western Visayas region, Negros Oriental back to the Central Visayas region.[59]
August 11 – The Department of Agriculture confirms an avian influenza outbreak in the province of Pampanga.[60][61]
August 16 – A 17-year-old Kian Loyd delos Santos was fatally shot by police officers conducting an anti-drug operation in
Caloocan, Metro Manila. The case became controversial when the official police reports differed from witness accounts
and CCTV footage.[62][63][64] This would cause a thousands of marchers to protest in EDSA heeding calls from the
Philippine Catholic Church to criticize the drug war[65] and the Senate to investigate the killing.[66] Hundreds attend the
funeral procession of delos Santos on August 26.[67]
August 20 – The Court of Appeals of the Philippines has junked U.S. Marine Joseph Scott Pemberton's motion for
reconsideration, re-affirming its decision last April upholding the 2015 homicide ruling of the Olongapo City Regional
Trial Court; citing the defendant's arguments as mere "rehash of issues". The Court of Appeals also upheld the payment
of ₱ 4.32 million to Jennifer Laude's family for "loss of earning capacity". Pemberton faces 10 years in prison.[68]
September
September 7 – The Senate investigates Paolo Duterte, the son of current Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, in an
alleged methamphetamine smuggling scandal.[69]
September 12 – The House of Representatives of the Philippines approves a bill that limits the budget of the Commission
on Human Rights to only ₱1,000 (US$20).[70][71]
September 14 – The Communist-aligned Makabayan bloc leaves the majority of the Philippine lower House over
disagreements due to the ongoing drug crackdown.[72]
September 15 – Around 1,200 members of the Philippine National Police in Caloocan are fired over allegations of crimes
attributed to the police.[73]
September 21 – Coinciding with the 45th anniversary of the declaration of martial law in 1972 by the late President and
dictator Ferdinand Marcos, nationwide protests — also known as "National Day of Protest" — are conducted by various
groups against the government's implementation of war on drugs and the ongoing martial law in the whole of Mindanao
under the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte.[74]
October
October 16–17 – Armed group leaders, Isnilon Hapilon of Abu Sayyaf and Omar Maute of Maute Group, leaders of ISIL-
linked militants fighting the government in the Battle of Marawi were reportedly killed on October 16 during the
operation of rescuing the hostages, according to the statement released by Defense Secretary Delfin
Lorenzana.[75][76][77] The following day President Rodrigo Duterte declared the liberation of Marawi.[78][79][80]
While the armed forces says this meant that the conflict is substantially it pointed out that there are still skirmishes.[81]
October 23 – the Battle of Marawi was declared officially over by the military[82][83][84]
November
November 5 – Dubbed as "Lord, Heal Our Land", led by Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Socrates Villegas, about
thousands of mourners of extrajudicial killing victims attend a mass held in EDSA shrine.[85][86]
November 10–12 – The Philippines hosted the 31st ASEAN Summit Clark Freeport Zone in Angeles, Pampanga.[32]
November 13–14 – The hosted the Twelfth East Asia Summit at the Clark Freeport Zone in Angeles, Pampanga.[87]
December
December 19 — President Rodrigo Duterte signed the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion Act (TRAIN) Act
December 21 — A ferry sinks off the coast of Luzon in the Philippines with 251 passengers on board. At least four people
are reported to have died. The toll is expected to rise, as many are still missing.[89]
December 22 – The Philippine Coast Guard reports that 252 passengers and crew have been rescued while five people
were killed when a ferry capsized Thursday east of Manila.[90]
December 23
More than 200 people are dead in the southern Philippines as a result of floods and mudslides caused by Severe Tropical
Storm Vinta
December 28 – In Mandaluyong, law enforcers mistakenly fired at a Mitsubishi Adventure, which they thought carried
suspects in a previous shooting incident, resulting in two people dead and two others injured. As a result, 10 police
officers were relieved from the post
Business and economy
August 22 – Viacom International Media Networks has announced it will no longer pursue a Nickelodeon underwater
theme park and resort in Palawan, Philippines.
Health
August 11 – Cases of H5N6 in poultry farms in Pampanga were detected; this was the first time the avian virus was
detected in the country.
December 1 – The Department of Health (DOH) temporarily suspends a school-based dengue vaccination program after
Dengvaxia vaccine maker Sanofi Pasteur made a statement that its product poses higher risks to people without prior
dengue infection.
Sports
For the full list of events related to Philippine sports in 2017, see 2017 in Philippine sports.
May 6, Football – The first match of the inaugural season of the Philippines Football League, the country's first
nationwide professional football league was played.[100][101]
May 12–18, Basketball – The Philippines hosted the 2017 SEABA Championship.
August 1–7, Boxing – The Asian Junior Boxing Championship was hosted in Puerto Princesa, Palawan.
August 9–17, Volleyball – Metro Manila hosted the 2017 Asian Women's Volleyball Championship
August 19–30 – The Philippines competed at the 29th Southeast Asian Games held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The
Philippines finished the 29th SEA Games in 6th place with a medal haul of 24 Golds, 33 Silvers and 64 Bronze which is the
country's worst finish in 18 years. The next edition of the Southeast Asian Games will be hosted by the Philippines in
2019.
October 13 – TV5 Network Inc. re-brands its sporting division to ESPN 5 as part of a partnership with The Walt Disney
Company and Hearst Corporation, the co-owners of ESPN Inc.; the re-branding was held to coinciding with the start of
the 2017 PBA Governors' Cup Finals. Prior to the TV5-ESPN partnership, the ESPN branding was formerly used by Fox
Networks Group Asia before re-branded to Fox Sports Asia in 2014.[108]
Entertainment and culture
For the events related to Philippine television in 2017, see 2017 in Philippine television; for films, see List of Philippine
films of 2017; and for music, see 2017 in Philippine music.
January
January 9:
President Duterte issued Proclamation No. 124 declaring the month of January as the National Bible Month.[109]
President Duterte declared Yabing Masalon Dulo, Ambalang Ausalin, and Estelita Tumandan Bantilan, the three female
Mindanaoan weavers as National Living Treasures for 2016.[110]
January 30 – The coronation event of the Miss Universe 2016 pageant takes place at the Mall of Asia Arena in Pasay. It is
the third time that the Philippines hosted the event.[111] Iris Mittenaere of France was crowned as Miss Universe
2016.[112][113]
March
March 5 – Maymay Entrata of Cagayan de Oro was hailed as the Big Winner of Pinoy Big Brother Lucky Season 7.[citation
needed]
March 11 – Noven Belleza of Victorias, Negros Occidental was hailed as It's Showtime's Tawag ng Tanghalan Grand
Champion.[citation needed]
March 31 – Michelle Arceo of Mandaluyong was crowned as the first ever Gandang Filipina of Wowowin.[citation
needed]
April
April 30 – Rachel Peters, a Filipino-British model, was crowned as Miss Universe Philippines 2017 during the coronation
night of the Binibining Pilipinas 2017 at the Smart Araneta Coliseum in Quezon City.[citation needed]
May
May 27 – JC Teves, Debbie Then, Kim Cruz and Arturo Daza was named as the four new MYX VJs at the end of MYX VJ
Search 2017.[citation needed]
May 30 – Angela Lehmann from Bicol was declared as the grand winner of Philippines' Next Top Model: High Street
competition.[citation needed]
June
June 4 – Wacky Kiray was crowned as the first Greatest Entertainer of I Can Do That!
June 28 – Maureen Wroblewitz, representing the Philippines, was declared as the grand winner of Asia's Next Top Model
(cycle 5).
July
July 15 – Karen Ibasco, was crowned as Miss Philippines Earth 2017 during the coronation night at the Mall of Asia
Arena, Pasay City, Philippines
July 30 – Jona Soquite of Davao City won as the first The Voice Teens grand champion.
August
August 25-27 - The third edition of Asia Pop Comic Convention was held with international stars Ray Fisher, Tyler
Hoechlin, Joe Keery, Noah Schnapp, Dacre Montgomery and Sadie Sink serving as guests.[114][115]
September
September 3 – Former UAAP Courtside Reporter Laura Victoria Lehmann was crowned as the Miss World Philippines
2017 on the Coronation night held at the Mall of Asia Arena in Pasay. She will represent the Philippines at Miss World
2017 pageant to be held in China.
November
November 4 – Karen Ibasco, was crowned Miss Earth 2017 held at the Mall of Asia Arena, Pasay.
November 5 – Wynwyn Marquez was crowned as Reina Hispanoamericana-Filipinas 2017 Held in Santa Cruz, Bolivia.
2018 events
January[edit]
• January 1 – Republic Act No. 10963, widely known as the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) Act,
takes effect.[1]
• January 5 – Former Palawan Governor Joel Reyes has been released from detention after the Court of Appeals
resolved in his favor a petition in connection with his murder case for the killing of broadcaster Dr. Gerry Ortega in
2011.[2]
• January 22 – The Mayon Volcano’s alert status was raised to Alert Level 4 due to intensified volcanic activities.
The day before, the volcano shot 200 m (660 ft) to 500 m (1,600 ft) to the air and generated ash plumes that reached 1.3
km (0.81 mi) above the summit.[3][4] The province of Albay has declared a state of calamity days earlier on January 16,
due to continuous volcanic activity.

• January 23 – The Supreme Court (SC) has declared, the funding for the P3.8-billion Motor Vehicle License Plate
Standardization Program (MVPSP), that clearing the way for the release to motorists of 700,000 license plates turned
over by the Bureau of Customs (BOC) to the Land Transportation Office (LTO) as constitutional.[6]
• January 29 – The Office of the President has ordered a 90-day preventive suspension order against Overall
Deputy Ombudsman Melchor Arthur Carandang for alleged grave misconduct and grave dishonesty for the unauthorized
disclosures of the alleged bank transactions of President Rodrigo Duterte and his family.[7]
• January 31:
• A total lunar eclipse coinciding with a super moon and blue moon phenomenon was witnessed by many
astronomers and skywatchers throughout the country.[8]
• Rafael Baylosis, a peace consultant of the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP), together with his
companion were arrested in Quezon City.[9]
February[edit]
• February 2 – President Rodrigo Duterte has signed Republic Act No. 10969 or the Free Irrigation Service Act, a
law that waives irrigation fees for farmers who own 8 hectares of land or less.[10]
• February 6: The Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of the year-long extension of martial law in
Mindanao on December 2017.[11]
• February 7 – The Supreme Court has ordered a halt on court proceedings on graft and usurpation of authority
cases filed against former President Benigno Aquino III at the Sandiganbayan for his alleged role in the 2015 bloody
Mamasapano anti-terror raid that killed the 44 SAF Troopers.[12]
• February 12:
• The Philippine Government has signed the administrative order to completely ban the deployment of all workers
to Kuwait.[13] Following the February 9 confirmation of the death of a Filipina domestic worker in the gulf country
allegedly due to abuse.[14]

• Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales ordered the dismissal from service of former Cebu governor and current
3rd District Representative Gwendolyn Garcia for grave misconduct in connection with the purchase of a sprawling
property for close to P100 million.[15]
• February 19 – The Senate committee on national defense and security has begins its probe on the P15.5 billion-
Frigate Acquisition Project (FAP) of the Philippine Navy with Special Assistant to the President Christopher “Bong” Go in
attendance and several Cabinet members present to support him.[16]
• February 26:
• The Senate has ordered the arrest of former Commission on Elections (COMELEC) chairman Andres Bautista
over his non-attendance of the probe into his alleged ill-gotten wealth.[17]
• Former president Benigno Aquino III and former budget secretary Butch Abad were faced a House investigation
into their administration's deployment of DengVaxia, a dengue vaccine, that is now at the center of a health scare.[18]
• February 28 – The U.S. Department of State has added seven organizations, including local terror group Maute,
to its list of foreign terrorists and terrorist organizations due to their connection to the Islamic State (ISIS).[19]
March[edit]
• March 1 – President Rodrigo Duterte has signed Republic Act No. 10973, that restored the power of select
officials of the Philippine National Police (PNP) to issue subpoenas on cases under investigation.[20]
• March 8:
• Voted 38-2, the House Committee on Justice has found probable cause in the impeachment complaint against
Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.[21]
• The Department of Justice (DOJ) has indicted 11 members of the Aegis Juris fraternity over the fatal hazing of
University of Santo Tomas (UST) law freshman student Horacio "Atio" Castillo III in September last year.[22]
• March 9 – Former Vice President Jejomar Binay Sr. and his son, former Makati City mayor Jejomar Erwin
"Junjun" Binay Jr., have been charged at the Sandiganbayan over the alleged anomalous procurement process in the
construction of the Makati Science Building.[23]
• March 12:
• The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee has ordered the release of former Customs commissioner Nicanor Faeldon
after he promised to Senator Richard Gordon that he will no longer engage in backtalking and will heed Senate
summons.[24]
• The Department of Justice has cleared alleged drug lords Kerwin Espinosa, Peter Lim and 20 others of charges
related to the narcotics trade due to lack of evidence.[25]
• March 14 – President Rodrigo Duterte has announced that the Philippines is withdrawing from the International
Criminal Court (ICC), which is currently looking into whether it has jurisdiction to probe allegations of state sanctioned
killings in his war on drugs.[26]The Philippines issued a formal notification of its withdrawal from the Roman Statute
which was received by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on March 17. The effective date of the withdrawal
shall be exactly one year from receipt of the notification.[27][28]
• March 17 — A Piper PA-23 passenger aircraft bound for Laoag International Airport in Ilocos Norte, Philippines,
crashes upon take off from Plaridel Airport in Bulacan, killing all five people onboard as well as five on the ground. [29]
• March 26 — The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (Central Bank of the Philippines) announced the release of the rest
of the new peso coins and presented their new design.[30]
April[edit]
• April 2 – The Supreme Court (SC), sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) has started the manual
recount of votes for the election protest of former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr. against Vice President Leni
Robredo. The recount to validate the results of the 2016 vice presidential election commenced with the counting of
votes cast in Marcos' pilot provinces of Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental.[31]
• April 26 – Boracay was closed to tourists for six months and will undergo rehabilitation. The closure was officially
announced on April 4.[32] Checkpoints manned by police officers and soldiers would be set up at piers in Boracay to turn
away visitors from the island. Passes would be given to residents of Boracay.[33]
May[edit]
• May 11 – The Supreme Court of the Philippines votes 8–6 to grant the quo warranto petition by the Solicitor
General against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, removing her from office for violating requirements on the
Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth.[34]
• May 14 – The Barangay and Sangguiang Kabataan elections were held.[35][36]
• May 18 – The National Museum of Natural History was opened to the public.[37]
• May 30 — President Rodrigo Duterte declared his plan to make the entire island of Boracay a land reform area,
saying that he wants to prioritize Boracay's first inhabitants. President Duterte added that his Cabinet and the Congress
may conduct study on the possibility of putting up “only a small area for tourism” in Boracay and the majority of the
island for land reform.[38][39]
June[edit]
June 10 — A priest, Richmond Nilo of the Diocese of Cabanatuan, was gunned down by unknown assailant as he was
preparing for evening mass at a small chapel in Zaragoza, Nueva Ecija at 6:05 pm.[40][41]
June 23 – Diwata-2, the second microsatellite under the Philippine Scientific Earth Observation Microsatellite (PHL-
Microsat) program will be deployed to space.[42]
July[edit]
July 2
The controversial Tanauan, Batangas mayor Antonio Halili is assassinated by an unknown sniper during an flag-raising
ceremony, and becomes the 11th local government official to be killed in the War on Drugs.[43]
The Bataan Coast Guard detains cruise ship MV Forever Lucky on suspicion of involvement in human trafficking. The
National Bureau of Investigation rescues 139 alleged victims from the vessel and charges Johnny Cabrera, the alleged
lessor of the ship
July 4 — Philippine soldiers clash with militants from the ISIL-affiliated Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF), in
the southern province of Maguindanao. The fighting began when BIFF militants attempted to occupy a town center, and
lasted for 12 hours until the BIFF militants withdrew to the hills. Four militants were killed, while two militants, a
Philippine soldier and a local militiaman were wounded. [45]
July 7 — Alexander Lubigan, Vice Mayor of Trece Martires, Philippines, is assassinated in an ambush.
October–December – A plebiscite will be held sometime between October and December to decide on the ratification of
the Bangsamoro Organic Law which seeks to establish the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region.[47]
TBA – The Peace Talks between the Government and the Moro National Liberation Front will be re-opened
On July 17, 2017, the government announced at least 18 Philippine holidays for 2018 as declared by virtue of
Proclamation No. 269, series of 2017.[50] Note that in the list, holidays in italics are "special non-working holidays,"
those in bold are "regular holidays," and those in non-italics and non-bold are "special holidays for schools."
Sports[edit]
January 25, Basketball – The inauguration of the Maharlika Pilipinas Basketball League were held at the Smart Araneta
Coliseum in Quezon City.[52]
February 3, Boxing – The Philippines’ Jerwin Ancajas made a huge splash in his much-awaited US debut by knocking out
Mexico’s Israel “Jiga” Gonzalez in the 10th round to retain the IBF junior bantamweight crown at the American Bank
Center in Corpus Christi, Texas.[53]
• February 9–25, Olympic Games – Two athletes represented the Philippines at the 2018 Winter Olympics held in
Pyeongchang, South Korea. Asa Miller competed at Alpine skiing – Men' giant slalom event while Michael Christian
Martinez competed at Figure skating – Men' singles event. [54]
• February 23, Multi-sport – The Philippine Olympic Committee held elections for the post of President and
Chairman after the 2016 elections results were declared null and void by the Pasig Regional Trial Court. The court
required Ricky Vargas and Abraham Tolentino to be candidates for the post of President and Chairman respectively.[55]
Vargas and Tolentino won over incumbents Peping Cojuangco and Ting Ledesma.[56]
• April 3–8, Ice hockey – The Philippines hosts its first International Ice Hockey Federation-sanctioned event, the
Top Division of the 2018 IIHF Challenge Cup of Asia at the SM Mall of Asia Ice Skating Rink in Pasay, Metro
Manila.[57]Mongolia emerged as champions with Thailand finishing in second place. The host third in the tournament
despite tying in points with Mongolia and Thailand due to head-to-head results.
• April 6, Basketball – The San Miguel Beermen claims the 2017–18 PBA Philippine Cup title after beating the
Magnolia Hotshots in 2OT, 4-1 in the Finals. and June Mar Fajardo named as PBA Finals MVP.
• May 3
• Volleyball — The De La Salle University's (DLSU) De La Salle Lady Spikers won their 11th championship title, 3rd
consecutive title in the season 80 of the UAAP Women's Volleyball Tournament against Far Eastern University's (FEU)
FEU Lady Tamaraws in three straight sets: 26-24, 25-20, and 26-24. and Dawn Macandili, is now on UAAP year in DLSU,
was named as the season's MVP, best scorer, best server, and the finals' MVP of the season.[58]
• Basketball — The San Miguel Alab Pilipinas pulled off a rare five-game sweep after outclassing Mono Vampire,
102-92, in the 2018 ABL Finals at Sta. Rosa Multi-Purpose Complex, Santa Rosa, Laguna.[59]
• May 19–21, Multi-sport Event – The 2018 Philippine National Games It will be co-hosted by the City of Cebu and
the Province of Cebu, Philippines from May 19 to 25, 2018.[60]
• June 8–12, 3x3 basketball – The 2018 FIBA 3x3 World Cup was hosted at the Philippine Arena in Bocaue,
Bulacan.[61]
• July 2 - Basketball - A bench-clearing brawl broke out between the Australia and Philippines men's national
basketball teams during the 2019 FIBA Basketball World Cup qualifier in Bocaue. With Australia leading by over 30 points
with just over 4:00 left in the third quarter, play was halted for a foul. Australia's Daniel Kickert then swung his elbow at
Roger Pogoy, immediately leading to both benches clearing and a melee spreading from the bench to one of the
baskets. When order was restored and game officials reviewed video of the incident, a total of 13 players were
ejected—four from Australia (including Kickert) and nine from the Philippines. This left the hosts with only three players
to resume the game; after two of the remaining Philippines players fouled out, leaving that team with only one player,
the officials called the game, with Australia winning 89–53.
January 11 – The Securities and Exchange Commission revokes the certification of incorporation it issued to Rappler,
Inc. after it found the issuance of the media firm of Philippine Depositary Receipts to Omidyar Network to be in violation
of the Constitution's provisions on foreign ownership saying that Rappler "sold control" to foreigners.
January 17 – Following the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Philippines' revocation of Rappler's license, the
National Bureau of Investigation of the Philippines launches a probe into Rappler
January 24 – Miss Philippines Katarina Rodriguez - 1st runner-up in the Miss Intercontinental 2017 - SUNRISE Garden
Beach Resort in Hurghada, Egypt
February 24 – The Philippines has breached the world record for the largest art lesson conducted in a single day, with a
total of 16,692 participants in a 45-minute art lesson held at the Quezon Memorial Circle in Diliman, Quezon City
February 26 – Miss Philippines Sophia Senoron - Miss Multinational 2018 in New Delhi, India
February 27 – The La Purisima Concepcion de la Virgen Maria or the Baclayon Church, which is among the heritage
churches were destroyed after the magnitude 7.2 earthquake in 2013, was reopened to the public with a fully restored
interior
March 3 – The 3 letters of Andrés Bonifacio to Emilio Jacinto, that narrating the massive cheating in the Philippines’ first
election, known as the Tejeros Convention held on March 22, 1897, together with the paintings of Jose T. Joya, Fernando
Zobel, Vicente Manansala and Fernando Amorsolo were sold in an auction which was held in León Gallery in Makati
March 8 – The Asian Institute of Management (AIM) has launched ACCeSs@AIM, the first data science corporate
laboratory in the Philippines
March 18 – Catriona Gray, a Filipino-Australian model, was crowned as Miss Universe Philippines 2018 during the
coronation night of the Binibining Pilipinas 2018 at the Smart Araneta Coliseum in Quezon City.
April 26 — Eagle Broadcasting Corporation celebrates its 50th Golden Anniversary of the Philippine Radio and Television
Broadcasting
April 30 – The Department of Tourism receives their P 60,000,000 ad placement given to government-owned People's
Television Network for airing it on Ben Tulfo's program Kilos Pronto produced by Bitag Media Unilimted, Inc. (in which
the blocktimer sells its production time to the network); the contract was not supported with proper documents such as
the Memorandum of Agreement and Certificate of Performance contrary to Section 4 of Presidential Decree 1445 and
COA Circular No. 2012-001. An investigation on the alleged advertisement anomaly is being conducted by Malacanang,
Tourism secretary Wanda Tulfo Teo said that Ben along with his brother Erwin Tulfo will return its P 60 million ad
placement from DOT to prove there was no anomaly in the advertisement deal and there was no conflict on the deal
because it was a government-to-government deal between the DOT and PTV. Teo was later resigned on May 8 because
of the controversy.
May 6 – More than 1.5 million members join the Iglesia ni Cristo's (INC) Worldwide Walk to Fight Poverty along Roxas
Boulevard and in selected sites around the Philippines and abroad to successfully break the Guinness World Records for
the largest human sentence, largest charity walk in a single venue and largest charity walk in multiple venues in 24
hours.
July 27-29 - The fourth installment of Asia Pop Comic Convention was held on SMX Convention Center, Pasay, Manila
March 17 – The Philippines formally withdraws from the International Criminal Court after the country's withdrawal
notification was received by the Secretary-General of the United Nations last year. The court earlier launched a
preliminary investigation whether it has jurisdiction to tackle on allegations of state-sanctioned human rights
violations in the Philippine Drug War.
May 13 – Philippine general elections will be held. New members of the House of Representatives as well as elect 12
members of the Senate
November 30 – December 9- Philippines - 30th Southeast Asian Games.

Senate puts 2019 budget hearings on hold

This is amid the clash over the proposed cash-based budgeting system between the House of Representatives and the
Department of Budget and Management
2019 BUDGET. The Senate decides to defer its hearings on the proposed 2019 national budget. Photo by Angie de
Silva/Rappler
MANILA, Philippines – The Senate decided to defer its hearings on the proposed 2019 budget, following a caucus of
majority senators on Monday, August 13.
This came after the House of Representatives also suspended its hearings "until further notice," citing as reason its
opposition to the proposed cash-based budgeting system.
Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri said it was finance committee chairperson Loren Legarda who ordered the
suspension.
The chamber will decided on Tuesday, August 14, whether or not to continue the rest of the budget hearings scheduled
for the week.
Senator Joel Villanueva, for his part, said the senators are just anticipating a continued standoff between the House and
the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).
The DBM and Congress are set to meet on Tuesday.
"GAB (General appropriations bill) comes from the House. We are just anticipating what would happen with the standoff
between House and DBM. There will be more clarity tomorrow," Villanueva said in a text message.
Technically, the general appropriations bill or the national budget has to be first passed by the House before it gets
transmitted to the Senate. But in practice, the Senate holds parallel hearings on the agencies' allocations while waiting
for the measure's passage in the House to ensure an efficient process.
Since the start of budget hearings last July 31, lawmakers have already expressed confusion over the proposed change in
the budgeting system.
Supposedly the first cash-based budget of the government, the proposed 2019 budget amounts to P3.757 trillion,
representing 19.3% of the projected gross domestic product (GDP) for next year.
This amount is slightly lower compared to the P3.767-trillion 2018 budget. (READ: Education, infra get a third of
proposed P3.757-T 2019 nat'l budget)
In response to the House, Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno earlier said they are prepared to reenact this year's
allocation if Congress rejects the proposed 2019 budget. – Rappler.com
What is cash-based budgeting?
The shift to cash-based budgeting is seen to instill fiscal discipline among agencies, by limiting contractual obligations to
projects completed within the year

MANILA, Philippines – A proposed shift in budgeting systems that would improve the delivery of services could happen
in 2019.
But the House of Representatives suspendeddeliberations on the 2019 national budget, in what seemed to be
a "clash" between the executive and the legislative branches.
Lawmakers are opposed to the shift to cash-based budgeting, arguing that huge cuts will be implemented should they
pass the proposed expenditure program.
However, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) maintained that the shift would "force the agencies" to
speed up completion projects and actually utilize their funds within the year.
So what's the fuss about the issue? Here's what you need to know:
What is cash-based budgeting?
A cash-based budgeting system limits contractual obligations and disbursing payments to goods delivered and services
rendered within the fiscal year.
This means implementing agencies need to complete their contracts by the end of 2019, regardless of possible delays.
Projects that are "not implementation-ready" will be removed from the proposed budget.
In other words, the system promotes fiscal discipline and better planning among agencies in spending or using their
resources.
Under the system, an extended payment period of 3 months after the fiscal year would be provided to give more time
for government agencies to make their payments.
If a certain project has an implementation period that goes beyond 12 months, they may apply for a multi-year
obligation authority before entering into a contract.
The implementing agency is required to show the schedule of annual cash requirements for a multi-year project.
How is it different from an obligation-based budget?
For the longest time, agencies' budgets have followed two-year, obligation-based budgeting, which disburses payments
as obligations or commitments that may not necessarily be delivered within the same year.
Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno said that the problem with this set-up is that agencies tend to enter into contracts
before the year ends – just so they can commit to projects – even if they will not be completed within the same year.
This also means that inspection, verification, and payment for the said projects are done even after the fiscal year when
the contracts were awarded.
An example of this would be obligations for a school building being made in late 2017, with the actual project being
finished in 2018 yet.
Diokno also said that tracking agency spending is difficult in obligation-based budgeting. In some cases, budgets for 3
fiscal years are being tracked given the multi-year budgeting set-up.
More challenging?
The budget chief said that the cash-based set-up would dramatically reduce underspending – a perennial problem in the
Philippines that he once described as "epic incompetence" during the Aquino administration.
But agencies – especially those that receive the lion's share of funds – see the shift in budgeting systems
as "challenging." (READ: Education, infra get a third of proposed P3.757-T 2019 nat'l budget)
For instance, the Department of Public Works and Highways had an appropriation of P662.69 billion in 2017, but it was
able to disburse only roughly a third of its budget or P230 billion within the year, according to the Commission on Audit
(COA).
State auditors also found that the Department of Transportation spent only 25.6% of its P71.2-billion budget, leading to
delay of implementation of most of its projects.
Diokno said that shifting to a cash-based system is needed to accomplish the government's centerpiece infrastructure
program Build, Build, Build.
"Given the size of our budget because of the Build, Build, Build, we have to change the way we use our budget.
Otherwise, we will not be able to complete all the projects," he said.
According to the DBM, this system would double expenditures for infrastructure services and expand social services
from 30% in 2017 to 40% in 2022.
Will the shift be approved?
The budget department has since been appealing to lawmakers to pass the Budget Reform Bill which institutionalizes
cash-based budgeting system.
In March, House Bill No. 7302 was approved on third and final reading, but a movement within the House now wants it
recalled after they found the system confusing.
Lawmakers in the House also want the DBM to revert to obligation-based budgeting.
At the Senate, the counterpart measure remains pending. Budget deliberations were also postponed.
Diokno maintained that Congress cannot "return" the submitted 2019 proposed budget. He said they may approve or
reject it, risking a possible reenacted budget.
The worst case scenario is that government expenditures next year will be funded by the same amount and within the
same allocations as provided in the 2018 approved budget. – Rappler.com
Leave a comment PHILIPPINES
DBM to wait for a 'friendlier' Congress to pass cash-based budget
'But [not passing the bill] is not a problem, we will just wait for a friendlier Congress. Remember there's an election in
2019? That's near,' says Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno

CLASH. The House of Representatives and the Department of Budget and Management clash over the proposed 2019
national budget. Diokno photo by Angie de Silva/Rappler, House by Martin San Diego/Rappler, Senate PRIB Photo
MANILA, Philippines – Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno on Monday, August 13, said they will wait for a "friendlier"
Congress to pass the measure that would reform the Philippine budget system.
In a chance interview, Diokno said "it boggles him" that lawmakers withdrew their support for a cash-based budgeting
system.
"I don't know why they don't want it. It boggles my mind. A few months ago, it's the best law, according to Karlo
[Nograles] and the House. After the leadership in the House changed, it's now a bad [measure]," Diokno said in a mix of
English and Filipino.
"But [not passing the bill] is not a problem, we will just wait for a friendlier Congress. Remember there's an election in
2019? That's near," Diokno added.
Should the Congress reject the 2019 National Expenditure Program (NEP), Diokno said agencies would have to reenact
the 2018 national budget.
Deemed corruption-prone, a reenacted budget means that government expenditures for 2019 will be funded by the
same amount and within the same allocations as those provided in the 2018 approved budget.
But Diokno said the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) will not allow funds to be misspent in the event of
the worst case scenario.
"If a certain project has been completed, they cannot use the funds allocated for that. Under a different administration,
they can do that. But we will not allow that," Diokno said.
'Best practice': Under a cash-based system, agencies have to spend their funds and accomplish their projects within the
fiscal year. Diokno said it would reduce underspending among agencies.
But the supposed "best practice" in budgeting systems had earned the ire of lawmakers at the House, arguing that it
would lead to "huge cuts." Both the House and the Senate had postponed budget deliberations.
Supposedly the first cash-based budget of the government, the 2019 NEP amounts to P3.757 trillion, representing 19.3%
of the projected gross domestic product (GDP) for 2019.
This amount is slightly lower compared to the P3.767-trillion 2018 budget.
Diokno has since advocated for the passage of House Bill No. 7302 or the Budget Reform Bill, which institutionalizes the
cash-based budgeting system.
In March, HB 7032 was approved on third and final reading, but a movement within the House wants it recalled.
The counterpart measure in the Senate is still pending. –
Pimentel downplays Hugpong alliance with political parties
'Congrats to them all. No implication on us,' says Senator Aquilino Pimentel III, PDP-Laban president

ALLIANCE. Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte Carpio's regional party, Hugpong ng Pagbabago, inks an alliance with three
national political parties ahead of the 2019 polls. Photo by Angie de Silva/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – “No implication” on the Partido Demokratiko Pilipino-Lakas ng Bayan (PDP-Laban).

Senator Aquilino Pimentel III said the signing of alliance between presidential daughter Sara Duterte-Carpio’s Hugpong
ng Pagbabago and 3 other national political parties has no effect on the ruling party.

On Monday, August 13, HNP, the Davao regional party of Carpio, inked an alliance with the Nacionalista Party (NP),
National People’s Coalition (NPC), and National Unity Party (NUP) for the 2019 elections.

“Congrats to them all. No implication on us,” said Pimentel, PDP-Laban president, after the alliance was formalized in
Parañaque. (READ: PDP-Laban struggles for unity, survival ahead of 2019 polls)
HNP vs PDP-Laban? Pimentel has repeatedly downplayed the effect of HNP on the political landscape and on the ruling
party itself.

But there are reports many PDP-Laban members are jumping ship.

Pimentel insisted that HNP is a new regional party and is still “expanding its network." The PDP-Laban also did the same
alliance-building in the House of Representatives – in what was called a “supermajority” – during the term of former
speaker and Davao del Norte 1st district Representative Pantaleon Alvarez.

“HNP is a new entity hence it is still expanding its network. During the speakership of Alvarez, PDP-Laban also signed
agreements with all known political parties and organizations at that time,” he said.

Carpio said her father, President Rodrigo Duterte, has “nothing” to do with her HNP since he remains chairman of PDP-
Laban. The President, however, is set to grace the oath-taking of HNP members in Davao City on August 17.

It remains confusing to some, as President Duterte earlier met with PDP-Laban leaders and its factions to "unify" them.
In the meeting, Duterte vowed to campaign for the party's candidates. (READ: Duterte 'unites' PDP-Laban factions, vows
help in 2019)

Another meeting would be held in September, ahead of the filing fo the Certificates of Candidacy and the Certificates of
Nomination and Acceptance (CONA).

PDP-Laban, HNP coalition? Pimentel earlier said PDP-Laban is open to an alliance with HNP. He had also said there is no
issue with his party mates joining HNP, as it is only a regional party.

However, he had admitted that there could be a problem with HNP’s endorsement of national or senatorial candidates.

Carpio, for her part, said HNP party leaders have decided to wait for PDP-Laban to resolve its internal conflicts before
signing an alliance with them.

“We would like to have an alliance with PDP-Laban but our governors and officers said in our discussions ayusin muna
nila yung internal problem nila (they should fix their internal problem first),” said Carpio.

Pimentel denied that there is an internal problem in PDP-Laban.

"The so-called internal problem is a figment of the imagination of some people. An image they want to keep alive in the
media," Pimentel said when asked for comment.

"We know it's political season already. Hence, PDP-Laban should not allow itself to be distracted by all these noise
maneuverings and psy war tactics," he added.

What now? There is also another reason why the prospect of an alliance between HNP and the ruling party remains dim:
the public feud between Carpio and Alvarez, who is set on running for reelection and is sure to face opposition from
HNP.

With Carpio and Ilocos Norte Governor Imee Marcos in the coalition, it's difficult to see an alliance with Alvarez's party.
(READ: The women behind the fall of Alvarez)

Alvarez was ousted as leader in a dramatic move widely believed to be backed by Carpio herself. He was replaced by
another PDP-Laban member, former president and now House Speaker Gloria Arroyo, whom Carpio called a “strong”
leader.

Things are heating up and a lot of things and surprises could still happen, as President Duterte has been entertaining all
camps. After all, it is only less than a year to go before the May 2019 elections. – Rappler.com
Major corruption cases crumble as Ombudsman Morales races against time
(UPDATED) Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales, with 12 months left in office, steps on the gas as Arroyo-time scam
cases are being dismissed by the anti-graft court

LAST YEAR. Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales retires in June 2018.

MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – It's been a tough year for Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales and her band of anti-
corruption prosecutors. Set to retire in 2018, Morales is seeing major corruption cases being dismissed, even as
information about where the money went or who stole it remains unknown.
It's robbery with a nameless thief – mind-boggling to the ordinary taxpayer, but painful for the Office of the
Ombudsman, which investigated and prosecuted these cases for years, only to see the suspects walk free in the last 12
months.

The tough year began on July 19, 2016, when the Supreme Court (SC) acquitted the Ombudsman's biggest fish at the
time – former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
PCSO fund scam
Arroyo and 9 others were accused in 2012 of plundering more than P365 million in Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office
(PCSO) funds, but each of the accused got away as years passed that, by this time, only two were facing charges, with
one of them managing to have his alleged offense downgraded to the bailable malversation.
The Arroyo acquittal was controversial, although it wasn't so much of a split for the magistrates of the High Court with
only 4 justices dissenting: Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, Associate Justice
Benjamin Caguioa, and Arroyo appointee, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio.
Why did this scam case fail? As in all dismissed cases, the blame is on the prosecution – the Ombudsman prosecution.
The issue was that, from 2008 to 2010, PCSO officials diverted a total of P365 million to their intelligence fund, which
can be accessed and withdrawn anytime with minimal restrictions.
It was former PCSO General Manager Rosario Uriartewho asked additional intel funds from Arroyo, who approved them.
The approval was supported by resolutions, which were passed by the board members who would later be accused as
well.
According to lawyer and accountant Aleta Tolentino, chair of the PCSO audit committee who was used as witness by the
Ombudsman, the cash advances made by Uriarte exceeded the allowable amount. Citing PCSO charter, Tolentino said
the operating funds were the only allowable source of intel funds. In this instance, however, it was impossible to have
gotten the intel funds from there because PCSO's operating funds were already on the negative at the time.
Uriarte and others took the money from the prize and charity funds – the funds used to pay sweepstakes winners and
provide for the agency's charity work, which is its core purpose.
Ombudsman investigators found more irregularities: these cash advances were not properly liquidated and they didn't
specify projects and beneficiaries. Worst – at least for Arroyo – the approval was sought directly from the President
without going through the layers of the social welfare and health departments, which have direct control and
supervision over the PCSO by virtue of a 2005 executive order.
PCSO FUND SCAM. Only two remain as plunder defendants in the P365 million PCSO fund scam.
What the SC ruling says
Arroyo's implication in all of this is that she wrote "OK" on the margin of Uriarte's letter-requests for additional intel
funds. But the High Court said it was not an overt act of plunder because it is a "common legal and valid practice of
signifying approval of a fund release."
The SC also asked: where is the money? If prosecutors couldn't produce physical evidence that at least P50 million, the
treshold for plunder, went into Arroyo's hands, then she's not a plunderer.
The SC, in fact, also doubted that the case was one of plunder. For the magistrates, a conspiracy must have a
mastermind, a main plunderer. Because the prosecutors did not name a main plunderer, it could therefore be assumed
they all benefitted equally. So if you divide P365 million by 10 – the number of accused – that would mean each of them
only got P36 million each and that is lower than the plunder treshold of P50 million.
The SC also dismissed the prosecutors' argument of command responsibility – the fault of subordinates, the fault of their
boss. The tribunal said it is "legally unacceptable" to apply the doctrine of command responsibility to Arroyo because it
only pertained "to the armed forces or other persons subject to their control in international wars or domestic conflict."
The scam was not a case of war, the SC pointed out.
The PCSO board members issuing resolutions that certified the cash advances was not enough for the anti-graft court
Sandiganbayan to say there was conspiracy among them.
Dissenters in the SC took issue with the majority decision. Sereno said the need to identify a main plunderer was not
contemplated by the plunder law, effectively saying the High Court introduced a new legal principle.
Associate Justice Estela Perlas Bernabe, who concurred in part and dissented in part, warned that the SC decision would
now require proof of the money although thieves are very likely to hide them well.
Leonen had biting words: "The scheme is plain except to those who refuse to see."
Uriarte, who evaded her charges for 4 years, had been described as the missing link who supposedly could pin down the
former president. That did not happen. Uriarte is the remaining PCSO official facing plunder, and she has a tough road
ahead because she was the one who asked for the cash advances.
It remains to be seen if the SC decision on Arroyo would help Uriarte's case, but there are windows of opportunities for
her in the ruling.
For example, the SC said "Uriarte's requests indicate their compliance with the Letter of Instruction (LOI) 1282." LOI
1282 is a memorandum from the Marcos years which laid down rules for intelligence funds, and which prosecutors said
Uriarte violated when she sent her letter-requests to Arroyo.
The SC said: "According to its terms, LOI 1282 did not detail any qualification as to how specific the requests should be
made. Hence, we should not make any other pronouncement than to rule that Uriarte's requests were compliant with
LOI 1282."
Fertilizer fund scam
Then there is the fertilizer fund scam: P723 million was allegedly misused in a scheme that involved officials of the
Department of Agriculture (DA) and local executives. The speculation was, the funds were used to help finance the
political allies of Arroyo in the 2004 elections.
In 2011, the Ombudsman accused former DA Undersecretary Jocelyn "Joc-Joc" Bolante of orchestrating the scam, which
involved buying overpriced fertilizers and implementing ghost projects in connivance with foundations – a scheme
similar to the now familiar pork barrel scam.
The Sandiganbayan cleared Bolante twice, as well as his co-accused former DA Secretary Luis Ramon "Cito" Lorenzo Jr
and former Assistant Secretary Ibarra Poliquit. The court handed the acquittals without even issuing any warrant of
arrest.
Bolante was accused as mastermind because he requested the funds from the budget department on behalf of the DA.
He also submitted the list of project proponents, which were found to be unqualified.Ombudsman investigators said
Bolante was not diligent in monitoring his projects, "which resulted in the misappropriation, re-alignment and diversion
of fertilizer fund to other purposes."
The Ombudsman calculated P56 million in fertilizer funds that it could no longer find now. This became its basis for
charging him with plunder, but for Sandiganbayan, the evidence was too weak.
"Contrary to the musings of the prosecution, we find nothing substantial therein that would change our view as to the
lack of probable cause for plunder in this case.... No material participation, other than the release of the funds, could be
shown to be attributable to accused Bolante," said the anti-graft court.
Ombudsman Morales is not backing down, however. She has elevated this case to the SC, and called the Sandiganbayan
decision "unreasonable" and "erroneous."
FERTILIZER FUND SCAM. Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales takes the fertilizer fund scam to the Supreme Court after
anti-graft court Sandiganbayan dismissed cases against former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn "Joc-Joc" Bolante.
Inordinate delay
The P723-million fertilizer fund scam is made up of separate cases involving the same scheme. But they are only graft
cases against local officials because the amounts involved, taken individually, do not reach the P50 million plunder
treshold.
Even as graft cases, they are still being dismissed one by one. Introducing: the doctrine of "inordinate delay."
At least 4 other fertilizer fund scam cases have been dismissed since 2016 because, the Sandiganbayan says, the
Ombudsman took too long investigating and prosecuting them. This violated the rights of the accused to a speedy
disposition of cases, it said.
This issue has been the subject of conflict between the Ombudsman and its supposed partner in fighting corruption, the
Sandiganbayan. Morales questioned the anti-graft court justices before the SC, with a prayer of striking down the
doctrine, or at least amending it so that the Ombudsman's cases are not dismissed just because there are delays in the
investigations.
INORDINATE DELAY. Fertilizer fund scam in local units are among the cases dismissed by Sandiganbayan due to
inordinate delay on the part of the Ombudsman.
Morales also sent a letter to Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang to seek her consideration – but the
anti-graft court continues to heed the inordinate delay doctrine.
The most recent case to fall apart due to inordinate delay was the P6-billion debt deal between Philippine National
Construction Corporation (PNCC) and British lending firm Radstock. The debt agreement was ruled unconstitutional by
the SC in 2009, and subsequent graft complaints were filed with the Ombudsman in 2010.
Using the delay doctrine, 12 officials were acquitted in April 2017, inspiring one of the accused, former government
corporate counsel Agnes Devanadera to use the same argument. She had previously challenged evidence, but when her
co-accused were acquitted because of the delay doctrine, she dropped her earlier argument and used this.
First Division Justice Geraldine Faith Econg even asked Devanadera in open court: “Are you a Johnny-come lately?” but
still proceeded to acquit her barely a month after.
This may just be the biggest problem of the Office of Ombudsman today. Based on its own data, from January 2016 to
May 2017, a total of 79 cases were dismissed because of inordinate delay. (Cases against different individuals and
different counts from the same incident were counted separately.)
A total of P7 billion is involved in all these dismissed cases, although the Ombudsman's office clarifies it does not
necessarily mean it is the same amount it could have recovered as civil indemnity. In some cases, investigators explain,
the issue is the shortcut in the process: the projects are there, they see where the money went, but there was anomaly
in the transactions, most of which have something to do with skipping public bidding.
Morales: 10 lawyers vs 100
The Office of the Ombudsman has taken its battle with the Sandiganbayan to the High Tribunal, accusing the anti-graft
court of being inconsistent with their rulings.
“With all due respect, the refusal of Sandiganbayan to acknowledge the Ombudsman’s limitations is bordering on the
unfair and unjust.... We continue to file informations under a cloud of uncertainty because of lack of clear and firm
guidelines as to how Sandiganbayan interprets and appreciates the legal concept of inordinate delay," the Ombudsman
said in its SC petition.
Morales, who does not freely give media interviews, felt compelled in April to call a press conference – with two
executives in tow – to lengthily discuss this issue with the media. Corruption is a hard crime to prove, they said, so the
fact-finding phase should not be included when counting delay. This is also what they're asking the SC to consider.
The office also grapples with the lack of manpower, with some prosecutors being recruited to be trial court judges.
Hiring is continuous, according to the office, but Morales said in April she would stay picky: "It's difficult to hire lawyers
because we're very strict. I'd rather have 10 lawyers who are competent than 100 lawyers who are insufficient and lazy."
In that press conference, Morales defended her prosecutors, and said their cases were not weak. "We cannot be
reckless, we see to it that when we file a case, we see to it we are loaded with ammunitions to defend our case," she
said.
While it may appear now that they are running out of ammunition, Morales is stepping on the gas for her last 12 months
as Ombudsman – despite the threat of an impeachment case. "Good luck!" she tells her critics.
"We are in our penultimate race," said Morales, this time referring to the pork barrel scam, now the Ombudsman's
biggest case, perhaps the biggest in the history of the agency.
But movements, especially in the Department of Justice (DOJ), seem to attempt to shake even this. Justice Secretary
Vitaliano Aguirre II himself has expressed leanings toward making alleged mastermind Janet Lim Napoles a state witness.
Aguirre has called for a reinvestigation and has even made statements to the effect of wanting to take over the
prosecution, although he admits it's Morales who has jurisdiction.
Morales is fierce as always. In May, she said: "I'm not bothered at all. We are confident of our position. Whatever they
say, let them say." – Rappler.com

Ombudsman Morales on big losses: I don’t quantify success

‘The lesson to learn is to never think that you are infallible,’ says retiring Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales
LEGACY. Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales says her legacy is restoring the credibility of the Office of the
Ombudsman.
MANILA, Philippines – Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales will be remembered in history for her big fish indictments
that include two former presidents and a vice president.
This feat, however, will be seen side by side with an unflattering losing record.
Morales' biggest loss as Ombudsman are the cases stemming from the P366-million Philippine Charity Sweepstakes
Office (PCSO) fund scam. In 2016, the Supreme Court acquitted former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo of plunder in
connection with the scam, and soon after, all other accused walked free.
There is no one now to hold accountable for the questionable use of PCSO funds. But Morales is not counting her losses.
“I don't quantify success. Success to me is the respect you elicit from people. If people like what you did, that to me is
success,” Morales said in an interview with Rappler.
High profile
Morales has always admitted that she prioritizes high-profile cases – she said such cases were her sources of excitement
in her 7 years in office.
“The more challenging the case is, the more satisfaction you derive. Like in the PDAF cases, the PCSO case of Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, the cases of former Vice President [Jejomar] Binay. If your case is bland, you don't derive any
satisfaction. But if they are a bit complicated and they involve a lot of evidence, then you feel satisfied. Right or wrong,
you arrive at a conclusion,” Morales said.
Their conclusions, however, did not always fly. For example, former senator Jinggoy Estrada was granted bail because
the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan said he was not the main plunderer in his multi-million peso Priority Development
Assistance Fund (PDAF) scam case. Morales’ prosecutors cannot push the plunder case of former senator Juan Ponce
Enrile forward; it has been stuck at the pre-trial phase for years.
Jocelyn “Joc-Joc” Bolante, agriculture undersecretary during the Arroyo administration, has also been acquitted in the
fertilizer fund scam, while other local officials involved were cleared because of investigation delays at the Office of the
Ombudsman.
“You see, what we do is to find probable cause. Now, when the case reaches the court, our prosecutor prosecutes the
case. But it is the justices or judges who come up with the verdict whether guilty or not guilty. It's no longer within the
control of the Ombudsman although of course, we see to it that our prosecutors prosecute in earnest,” Morales said in
defense of her office.
Morales said that she is contented with the legacy she will leave behind. She also boasts of an all-time high conviction
rate of 77% in 2017, a dramatic increase from a mere 41% when she took over in 2011.
“People keep saying they now find the office credible, they find that I restored credibility,” she said.
Hands tied
Morales has charged former president Benigno Aquino III twice, but there is one president that wouldn’t be on her
indictment list: President Rodrigo Duterte.
The Office of the Ombudsman terminated the investigation into the alleged hidden wealth of the Duterte family because
of the supposed non-cooperation of the Anti-Money Laundering Council(AMLC).
This is unusual because AMLC has always worked hand-in-hand with the Office of the Ombudsman on the pork barrel
scam cases, and even in the impeachment of former chief justice Renato Corona that led to Morales filing a forfeiture
case before the Sandiganbayan.
“In the case of Corona, I was very active. I was prompted to ask for records of then chief justice Corona on account of
the complaints filed against him. On the case of the President, I inhibited from participating in that case even when he
was still mayor, I already inhibited,” Morales said.
Morales inihibited in the case because she is the aunt of presidential son-in-law Manases Carpio, husband of Davao City
Mayor Sara Duterte-Carpio.
The losses and setbacks will now just serve as lessons for the woman wrapping up nearly 5 decades of public service as a
judge, justice (at the Court of Appeals, then the High Court) and the nation’s graft buster.
“The lesson to learn is to never think that you are infallible because if you do think that you're infallible, you will be
dejected. That should be the case. That should be a lesson that we should all know,” she sa
Ombudsman Morales on big losses: I don’t quantify success
DBM ready for reenacted budget if Congress rejects 2019 proposal
(UPDATED) Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno says the President has submitted the proposed 2019 budget, leaving to
Congress to pass or reject
WORST CASE. Budget Secretary Diokno says they are ready for the worst case scenario – a reenacted 2018 budget. File
photo by Angie de Silva/Rappler
MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – Should Congress reject the proposed 2019 national budget, Department of Budget
and Management (DBM) Secretary Benjamin Diokno said they are prepared to reenact this year's fiscal program.
In a media interview on Sunday, August 12, Diokno said they are studying all other options, but maintained that the
Congress "cannot return" the budget.
"We are studying all our options, including a reenacted 2018 budget. We are ready," Diokno told reporters on the
sidelines of the Build, Build, Build job fair on Sunday.
"If the President has submitted the budget as provided by the Constitution. The role of Congress now is to pass it or
reject it or not act on it. But they don't have the right to return the budget," the budget chief added.
A reenacted budget means government expenditures for 2019 will be funded by the same amount and within the same
allocations as those provided in the 2018 approved budget.
The House committee on appropriations suspended all budget hearings until the DBM has "reverted the proposed 2019
cash-based budget to an obligation-based one." On Monday afternoon, the Senate also announced it would suspend
budget deliberations.
But Diokno said it would be impossible because President Rodrigo Duterte had already submitted the proposal after his
3rd State of the Nation Address.
Intentions vs accomplishments
Under a cash-based system, agencies have to spend their funds and implement their projects within the fiscal year.
Implementing government agencies are obliged to complete their project contracts by the end of 2019 regardless of
obstacles, like natural calamities, which may cause delays. Projects whose completion a government agency cannot
guarantee will be removed from its proposed budget.
Supposedly the first cash-based budget of the government, the 2019 NEP amounts to P3.757 trillion, representing 19.3%
of the projected gross domestic product (GDP) for 2019.
This amount is "slightly lower" compared to the P3.767-trillion 2018 budget.
Diokno said that the shift to a cash-based budget is still the "best practice" as compared to the previous practice of a
multi-year obligation-based budget that allows funds to be used in several years.
"Obligations are intentions but there are no projects completed. You have until, say, next year to obligate. That means
you will only have to look for a contractor but no projects are completed right away," Diokno said.
"In cash-based budgeting, your school buildings and farm-to-market roads are built within the year. Given the size of our
budget because of Build, Build, Build, we have to change our budget [systems] otherwise we won't be able to see
finished projects," he added.
The shift to cash-based budgeting is seen to reduce underspending among agencies.
Diokno has advocated for the passage of House Bill No. 7302 or the Budget Reform Bill which institutionalizes cash-
based budgeting system.
HB 7032 was approved on third and final reading in March, but a movement within the House wants it recalled after
being "confused with the system."
Congressmen seek audience with Duterte
House Majority Leader Roland Andaya gave the assurance lawmakers are not seeking to reenact this year’s fiscal
program in 2019.
“There will be no reenacted budget scenario. We are not moving towards that. We will avoid having a reenacted budget
like leptospirosis,” said Andaya.
“What we are doing now is merely trying to understand what DBM (Department of Budget and Management) has
submitted to us, what the economic managers have submitted to us,” added Andaya, who used to be the budget chief
during the presidency of Speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
According to Andaya, even Cabinet members themselves are confused on how to properly implement the cash-based
budgeting system.
"When we ask questions, the usual answer is DBM made the cut. They do not know how to answer the question. How it
will be implemented or how cash-budgeting would affect their operations, still they cannot give a clear answer. Where is
the transparency there? Where is the let me say predictability of the budget once cash budgeting is given the go signal
to proceed?" said Andaya.
He said lawmakers plan to meet with Duterte and other Cabinet members during Congress' two-week break this month
to address the concerns over the cash-based budgeting system. –

DOCUMENT: Final version of Consultative Committee draft constitution

The final draft incorporates changes President Rodrigo Duterte asked for: that he be prohibited from running for
president in the 2022 elections, and the election of a Transition President

CHA-CHA STEPS. President Rodrigo Duterte receives the copy of the proposed Federal Constitution of the Philippines
from former chief justice and Consultative Committee chairman Reynato Puno. Malacañang photo
MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – The Consultative Committee released the final version of its draft constitution on
Tuesday, July 17.
The complete copy, found below in downloadable form, incorporates the changes President Rodrigo Duterte asked for
during his meeting with the 22-member committee on July 9.
The major changes are the transitory provisions in Article 22 which now includes a section that explicitly prohibits the
incumbent president, Duterte, from running in the May 2022 elections, the first regular elections under the new
constitution if it is ratified.
It also calls for the election of a Transition President and Vice President, another change in the draft constitution that
Duterte wanted.
Below the downloadable copy of the document, Rappler listed highlights to aid readers.
Here is the final draft constitution:
HIGHLIGHTS
Preamble
 Mentions "permanent and indissoluble nation" as a safeguard against secession by a region.
Article I - National Territory
 Has two sections, declares sovereign rights over Philippine Rise and sovereignty over territories belonging to the
Philippines "by historic right or legal title," thus covering Sabah.
 It also mentions international law and decisions by international tribunals, thus firming up the country's stance
on the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea).
Article II - Declaration of Principles and State Policies
 The Philippines pursues a policy of "freedom from weapons of mass destruction," not just from nuclear weapons
as provided in the 1987 Constitution.
 There is no longer any mention that the Federal Republic "guarantees full respect for human rights," as in
Section 11 of the current Constitution. The section that most corresponds to Section 11 states that the Federal
Republic "values the dignity of every person and guarantees full respect for the person and the right of all
citizens to participate in all government processes."
 Recognizes that information communication technology plays a vital role in nation-building.
 New phrase that says the Federal Republic "shall promote the autonomy of local government units in accord
with federalism."
Article III - Bill of Rights
 Under a new section of Civil and Political Rights is the right to privacy in which interference in correspondence
and data is illegal. Unreasonable surveillance, not just unreasonable searches, will only be allowed if authorities
 obtain both a search warrant and surveillance warrant. Individuals can demand that government agencies delete
illegally obtained information related to them.
 "Lawless violence" is added to the grounds for suspending the writ of habeas corpus.
 A new section on Social and Economic Rights states that every person has a right to adequate food; universal
and comprehensive healthcare; complete, quality education; adequate and decent housing; and livelihood and
employment opportunity.
 A new section on Environmental and Ecological Rights states that every person has the right to a healthful
environment, clean air, clean water, clean soil, and clean surroundings; to seek compensation for damage to the
environment; and to seek "immediate relief" from courts through the writ of kalikasan and other protective
writs.
Article IV - Citizenship
 No changes
Article V - Suffrage and Political Rights
 The Federal Republic is responsible for "strengthening of political parties as mechanisms of citizen
representation and democratic governance."
 Political parties are required to register with the Federal Commission on Elections and submit documents like
constitution and by-laws, platform, list of national officials, and heads of local chapters.
 States that political parties must ensure the democratic process of making decisions and selecting candidates for
public office. There should be equal representation of women candidates in every election "as far as
practicable."
 Creates a Democracy Fund where citizens or groups and corporations can donate to, to be distributed to
political parties and presidential candidates.
Article VI - People's Initiative, Plebiscite, and Referendum
 This entirely new article allows citizens to file a petition to amend the Constitution or enact, amend, or reject a
federal law with the Federal Commission on Elections.
Article VII - Legislative Department
 Senators are elected per region, not nationwide. Regions elect two senators each.
 Members of the House of Representatives will number 400. Of this, 60% are elected by electoral districts, while
the remaining 40% will be elected nationwide through a system of proportional reprsentation.
 Senators and representatives are required to hold a college degree or its equivalent.
 Senators and representatives are to serve a term of 4 years with one reelection.
Article VIII - Executive Department
 The president and vice president are elected as a team. The president must appoint the vice president to a
Cabinet position.
 Both serve a term of 4 years with one reelection.
 Both must hold a college degree or its equivalent.
 "Lawless violence" added as one of the grounds for a president to suspend the writ of habeas corpus or declare
martial law.
 The section on Senate concurrence on treaties and international agreements is still not clear on whether Senate
concurrence is also necessary for pulling out of such agreements.
Article IX - Judicial Department
 4 High Courts created – Federal Supreme Court, Federal Constitutional Court, Federal Administrative Court, and
Federal Electoral Court.
 Justices of these courts are to serve a term of 12 years or until the age of 70, whichever comes first.
 The President, another court, and Congress' Commission on Appointments get to appoint an equal number of
members to each court.
Article X - Constitutional Commissions
 6 Constitutional Commissions: Federal Civil Service Commission, the Federal Commission on Elections, the
Federal Commission on Audit, the Federal Commission on Human Rights, the Federal Ombudsman Commission,
and the Federal Competition Commission.
 The CHR is elevated to a constitutional commission with the responsibility to investigate human rights violations
both by state and non-state actors.
 Definition of a human rights violation as "any violation of the rights guaranteed by this Constitution and by
international human rights covenants and treaties to which the Philippines is a party, perpetrated by the State
or non-state actors."
 Office of the Ombudsman now a constitutional commission composed of a Chief Ombudsman as Chairperson,
and 4 Associate Ombudsmen representing Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao, and the Metropolitan Manila Region.
 The Federal Competition Commission is to probe and decide on cases of violation of competition laws and
review proposed mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, and other business combinations that could lessen
competition.
Article XI - Federated Regions and the Federated Regions of Bangsamoro and the Cordilleras
 There will be 18 federated regions – 16 federated regions (including the new Negrosanon region) and the
federated regions of Bangsamoro and Cordillera.
  Except for the last two, each region will have a Regional Assembly, half representing each province, highly
urbanized city, and independent chartered city; and half representing political parties through proportional
representation. Members must hold a college degree or its equivalent.
 Regions will be led by a Regional Governor and Deputy Regional Governor elected as a team. They are to be
elected by majority of the Regional Assembly from among its members. The deputy governor will serve as the
assembly's presiding officer.
 Each region will have a Regional Supreme Court; Regional Appellate Court; Regional Trial Courts in component
provinces, cities, and municipalities; lower courts; and special courts.
 Bangsamoro and Cordillera regions - The two are recognized as assymetrical regions due to their identity-based
demands.
o The signed "Bangsamoro Organic Act" is to be appended to the Federal Constitution.
o The Federated Region of the Cordilleras will be composed of the provinces of Abra, Apayao, Benguet,
Ifugao, Kalinga, Mountain Province, the City of Baguio, and the component city of Tabuk. It shall be
entitled to 75% share of all net revenues in the exploration, development, and utilization of natural
resources in the region.
o The constitution calls for an Organic Act for the Federated Region of the Cordilleras.
Article XII - Distribution of Powers of the Government
 Exclusive powers of the Federated Government:
o Defense, security of land, sea, and air territory
o Foreign affairs
o International trade
o Customs and tariffs
o Citizenship, immigration, and naturalization
o National socioeconomic planning
o Monetary policy and federal fiscal policy, banks, currency
o Competition and competition regulation bodies
o Inter-regional infrastructure and public utilities, including telecommunications and broadband networks
o Postal service
o Time regulation, standards of weights and measures
o Promotion and protection of human rights
o Basic education
o Science and technology
o Regulation and licensing of professions
o Social security benefits
o Federal crimes and justice system
o Law and order
o Civil, family, property, and commercial laws, except as may otherwise be provided for in the
Constitution
o Prosecution of graft and corruption cases
o Intellectual property
o Elections
Exclusive powers of the Federal Regional Governments:
o Socioeconomic development planning
o Creation of sources of revenue
o Financial administration and management
o Tourism, investment, and trade development
o Infrastructure, public utilities, and public works
o Economic zones
o Land use and housing
o Justice system
o Local government units
o Business permits and licenses
o Municipal waters
o Indigenous peoples' rights and welfare
o Culture and language development
o Sports development
o Parks and recreation
Article XII - Fiscal Powers and Financial Administration
 Taxes and fees to be collected by Federal Regions:
o Real property tax
o Estate tax
o Donor's tax
o Documentary stamp tax
o Professional tax
 o Franchise tax
o Environmental tax, pollution tax, and similar taxes
o Road users' tax
o Vehicle registration fees
o Transport franchise fees
o Local taxes and other taxes which may be granted by federal law
 Federated Regions to be given at least 50% of all the collected taxes on income, excise, VAT, and customs duties;
and 50% of all net revenues derived from the exploration, development, and utilization of all natural resources
within their territory.
 A 16-member Federal Intergovernmental Commission administers an Equalization Fund which will go to regions
that need financial assistance. The fund will be 3% of the General Appropriations Act.
Article XIV - Accountability of Public Officers
 The President, Vice President, members of the High Courts, and constitutional commissions may be removed by
impeachment.
 Congress will form a Joint Impeachment Committee upon its convening composed of the Senate President as
presiding officer and 12 members from each chamber. Impeachment complaints are to be filed with this
committee.
 The indictment resolution and Articles of Impeachment are to be filed before the Federal Constitutional Court or
the Federal Administrative Court, depending on the case. The courts will then rule on the matter.
Article XV - National Economy and Patrimony
 Filipinos or corporations with 60% ownership and control of Filipinos can lease a maximum of 1,000 hectares of
alienable lands of the public domain for a maximum of 25 years, renewable for another 25 years. Congress given
power to change requirements for lease of alienable lands through law.
 Exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources is a power shared by Federal Government and
Federated Regions.
 Ownership and control of mass media limited to Filipino citizens while corporations with 70% of voting capital
with Filipinos can engage in the advertising industry. Congress given power to change the voting capital
requirements by law.
 Congress given power to change requirement that corporations engaged in public utilities must have at least
60% of its voting capitol stocks with Filipinos.
 Educational institutions limited to Filipinos and corporations of which 60% of capital is owned by Filipinos.
Congress also given power to change this by law.
Article XVI - Social Justice
 States that no person shall be denied employment by reason of age, gender, political or religious belief,
ethnicity, status, physical appearance or disability, and other conditions that amount to discrimination.
 States explicitly that the Federal Republic must protect overseas Filipinos from "inhumane treatment by their
employers."
 Private sector to be given incentives for providing employment for disabled persons.
Article XIX - National Security and Public Order
 This entirely new article defines the Armed Forces of the Philippines and its responsibilities, and measures to
insulate it from partisan politics, which in the 1987 Constitution are to be found in the General Provisions.
 States that the AFP must protect the republic's sovereignty and territory including its land, air, sea, space, and
"cyberspace."
 "Adequate remuneration and benefits" for AFP personnel is "a prime concern of the Federal Republic."
 The tour of duty of the AFP Chief of Staff, Chief of the Philippine Federal Police, and the Commandant of the
Philippine Coast Guard, shall not be less than two years and not more than 3 years from the time of
appointment, unless sooner removed by the President for loss of trust and confidence.
 Creates a federal police force civilian in character and an armed and uniformed Philippine Coast Guard
"responsible for maritime search and rescue, maritime law enforcement, maritime safety, maritime
environmental protection, maritime security," among other functions.
 Recognizes a cyberattack as a threat to national security and orders the establishment of a "cyber security
infrastructure" to protect the republic from "unauthorized domestic or foreign intrusion such as cyberattacks
and cyber warfare on its public utilities, cyber installations, and private entities."
Article XX - General Provisions
 Allows the President to "intervene" and "take all measures necessary" to address a region's failure to "comply
with its obligation as provided for in the Constitution which seriously undermines the sovereignty, territorial
integrity, economy, or the unity of the Federal Republic."
Article XXI - Amendments or Revision
 Clearly states that, in the case of amending the Constitution via Constituent Assembly, the Senate and House of
Representatives are to vote separately.
 The proposed amendment will only be valid if there is a majority vote in all federated regions in a plebiscite.
 No amendment of the Constitution is allowed within 5 years from its ratification. Same prohibition will be at
work when it is amended again.
Article XXII - Transitory Provisions
  Explicitly states that the terms of President Rodrigo Duterte and Vice President Leni Robredo will not be
extended. They will end on June 30, 2022.
 Explicitly states that the President Duterte can not run for President in the May 2022 elections.
 Calls for elections of a Transition President and Transition Vice President 6 months after the constitution's
ratification in a plebiscite. The two leaders are to be elected as a tandem.
 Creates a Federal Transition Commission, to be headed by the Transition President. It will have 10 members plus
the Transition Vice President, Senate President, House Speaker, and all living former presidents as ex-officio
members. The 10 members are to be appointed by the Transition President.
 The Transition Commission formulates its own rules of procedure and creates a "transition plan" for the "orderly
shift to the new system of government." To implement this plan, the commission can promulgate rules,
regulations, orders, decrees, proclamations, and other issuances.
 The Commission should ensure "people's participation" in the transition, referring to non-governmental
organizations, faith-based groups, indigenous peoples, and other civil society organizations.
 All laws, proclamations executive orders, judicial issuances "not inconsistent with the Federal Constitution"
remain valid until amended or repealed.
 All officials of the government under the 1987 Constitution shall continue to hold their office and exercise their
respective powers and duties unless removed by reason of reorganization in accordance with the transition
plan..
– Rappler.com

Business groups support economic managers over federalism risks

The groups 'echo the concerns of fiscal and economic experts about the ambiguous provisions on the division of revenue
and expenditure responsibilities' under federalism

MANILA, Philippines – Seven business groups urged lawmakers to carefully weigh the costs and risks associated with the
proposed shift to a federal system of government.
The Cebu Business Club (CBC), Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP), Financial Executives Institute of the
Philippines (FINEX), Makati Business Club (MBC), Management Association of the Philippines (MAP), Philippine Chamber
of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), and Philippine Exporters Confederation (Philexport) came out with a joint statement
to express their concerns over how the government would implement and fund the proposed shift.
"We echo the concerns of fiscal and economic experts about the ambiguous provisions on the division of revenue and
expenditure responsibilities between the proposed federal government and its federated regions," the groups said.
(READ: Businessmen see upside in federalism, but wary of pesky politics)
The business groups pointed out the "alarming cost" estimated by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies
(PIDS) amounting to P72 billion and the P130-billion projection of the National Economic and Development Authority
(NEDA).
"The fiscal deficit is estimated to reach 6.7% of the gross domestic product, which is way beyond the sustainable 3%
target of our fiscal managers – a prudential limit also observed by the European Union for its member-countries," they
said. (READ: Federalism might lead to hyperinflation – economists)
The groups are also worried about "the dire consequences" the shift could have on the economy and the government's
Build Build Build program.
"We commend the economic managers in the Department of Finance, the Department of Budget and Management,
National Economic and Development Authority, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, as well as the researchers in the Philippine
Institute for Development Studies for their transparency in openly sharing their analysis and airing their concerns to the
public. We support and join their call for a more detailed analysis of the fiscal impact of federalism to serve as basis for
the deliberations in Congress," the groups said.
They also called for dialogues regarding federalism "keeping in mind its long-term impacts on future generations of
Filipinos."
Consultative Committee member and San Beda Graduate School of Law dean Father Ranhilio Aquinocalled on President
Rodrigo Duterte to fire Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez III and Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia
over their statements regarding federalism.
Pernia previously said the proposal would "wreak havoc" on the economy. Dominguez said interest rates "will go to hell"
if the shift is implemented.
Dominguez later on clarified that the economic managers are open to discussing the draft constitution. –

TIMELINE: The Dengvaxia controversy

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines) — A vaccine aimed at protecting hundreds of thousands of school children from dengue
may have put their lives at risk.

Around 10 percent of over 800,000 students who were immunized with Dengvaxia, but did not have a prior dengue
infection, now face contracting a "severe disease," according to the vaccine's manufacturer Sanofi Pasteur.
Following the announcement, the Department of Health (DOH) halted its nationwide dengue immunization program
and has demanded billions in pesos as a refund for the vaccines.

Meanwhile, both Congress and the Justice Department are digging deeper into the controversy, with officials from the
current and previous administrations pointing fingers at each other.

Here's how it happened:

2014
Dengvaxia successfully completes its two parallel Phase 3 clinical studies, which compare the safety and effectiveness of
the new treatment.

The Philippines was among the 10 countries that took part in the study.

November 9, 2014
Then-President Benigno Aquino III meets Sanofi Senior Vice President in Asia Region Jean-Luc Lowinski at the Philippine
Embassy in Beijing, China.

June 9, 2015
Then-Health Secretary Janette Garin negotiates with Sanofi to reduce the cost of buying the vaccines.

October 29, 2015

Sanofi Pasteur applies at the DOH for Dengvaxia to be included in the Philippine National Formulary, a list of drugs that
all pharmacies in the Philippines must carry, pending approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

December 1, 2015
Aquino and Garin meet Sanofi officials during the UN Conference on Climate Change in Paris, France.

December 10, 2015

Garin submits a proposal to the Budget Department to buy three million doses of Dengvaxia.

December 22, 2015

The Philippines grants marketing approval to Dengvaxia, making it the first vaccine to be licensed for the prevention of
dengue in Asia.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves the drug for the prevention of disease caused by all four dengue
types in individuals from nine to 45 years old living in high-risk areas.

December 28, 2015

The DOH-Family Health Office submits a request to Garin to exempt Dengvaxia from being included in the Philippine
National Formulary. This excludes it from review by the Formulary Executive Council (FEC), which determines what drugs
are included on the list.

December 29, 2015

The Budget Department issues a ₱3.5-billion Special Allotment Release Order to Garin's office to purchase the vaccines.

January 21, 2016

The Philippine Children's Medical Center (PCMC) makes a ₱3-billion purchase order for the vaccines without approval
from the FEC.

February 3, 2016
Garin issues a Certificate of Exemption for Dengvaxia vaccines to be utilized in the pilot implementation in the National
Capital Region, Region III, and Region IV-A.

February 11, 2016

The Philippines, under Health Secretary Janette Garin, hosts the nationwide launch of Dengvaxia.

March 2016
The World Health Organization (WHO) releases a paper saying Dengvaxia "may be ineffective or may even increase that
risk in those who are seronegative at the time of first vaccination."

Seronegative pertains to people who have not yet had dengue.

The WHO calls for more studies into the vaccine.

March 8, 2016
Garin issues a ₱3-billion disbursement voucher to the PCMC to fund the purchase of the vaccines.

March 9, 2016
The PCMC issues its purchase order to Zuellig Pharma, the distributor of Dengvaxia.

April 4, 2016
The government kicks off its ₱3.5-billion, school-based dengue immunization program. The health department says
students would be given three doses, which would be administered every six months.

July 2016
The WHO releases another paper, saying Dengvaxia "may act as a silent natural infection that primes seronegative
vaccinees to experience a secondary-like infection upon their first exposure to dengue virus."

In other words, the body says the vaccine "may be ineffective or may theoretically even increase the future risk of
hospitalized or severe dengue illness in those who are seronegative at the time of first vaccination regardless of age."

That same month, former Health Secretary Paulyn Ubial issues a Resolution temporarily suspending the school-based
dengue immunization program.

Only the 489,003 pupils who received the first dose would take the second and third doses.

September 2016
The health department moves to continue the vaccination program.

That same month, the Medical Research Council Center FOR Outbreak Analysis and Modelling at Imperial College
London releases a study saying Dengvaxia could lead to an increase in the number of cases of the disease if not
implemented correctly.

"Unlike most diseases, the second time you get dengue, it's much more likely to be severe than the first time you get it,"
said the center's director Neil Ferguson.

October 2016
The Singapore Health Sciences Authority flags "postulated risk" of Dengvaxia.

"As the vaccine is more effective in those who had previous dengue infection, and that there is a postulated risk of
severe dengue in those who do not have past dengue infections when they become infected," it said.

November 2016
The House of Representatives probes the allegedly anomalous purchase of the Dengvaxia vaccines.

Its draft report of the Committee on Health, the DOH reported there were 30 cases from March 18 to August 20, 2016
that were "considered as serious cases that needed hospitalization."

Of the three deaths it monitored, two were not related to the immunization program.

The panel directed the DOH to check the medical records of Christine de Guzman who died months after taking the
vaccine.

It also recommended that the DOH temporarily suspend the expansion of the vaccination program, pending completion
of data collection, evaluation, and analyses on "adverse effects."

December 2016
The Senate launches its own investigation into the vaccines, saying the project cost was too big and was approved
without congressional approval.

November 29, 2017

Sanofi Pasteur announces the results of new clinical data analysis, which found that Dengvaxia is more risky for people
not previously infected by the virus.

"For those not previously infected by dengue virus, however, the analysis found that in the longer term, more cases of
severe disease could occur following vaccination upon a subsequent dengue infection," it said.
"For individuals who have not been previously infected by dengue virus, vaccination should not be recommended," it
added.

December 1, 2017
Following Sanofi Pasteur's announcement, Health Secretary Francisco Duque III orders the temporary suspension of the
dengue vaccination program.

Duque says 733,713 children from Central Luzon, the region of Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, Rizal, and Quezon, and Metro
Manila were administered Dengvaxia. Eight to 10 percent or about 70,000 children have not had dengue yet, the DOH
added.

December 4, 2017
The Justice Department orders the National Bureau of Investigation to look into the dengue vaccination program.

Read: DOJ orders probe of dengue vaccine program

December 5, 2017
The FDA suspends the sale and distribution of Dengvaxia.

The WHO says it never recommended to countries the use Dengvaxia in their national immunization programs.

December 6, 2017
The health department says more than 800,000 students received the vaccine, up from the 733,713 figure mentioned by
Duque.

It is now monitoring 40 cases of children who fell seriously ill, up from 30 in 2016, and nine deaths.

December 7, 2017
The Health Department says it will return around 800,000 leftover Dengvaxia vaccines, worth P1.4-billion, to Sanofi.

December 8, 2017
The health department calls for a refund of the P3.5 billion it paid for the vaccines, adding it has created a task force to
look into the program.

That same day, the House and the Senate announce they will again investigate the dengue vaccination program. It
begins on Monday, December 11.

Read: Senate to open probe on dengue vaccine scare

December 11, 2017

The Senate starts its probe into the Dengvaxia issue. Former Health Secretaries Janette Garin and Paulyn Ubial, as well
as Health Secretary Francisco Duque III and Sanofi officials, are among those present.

Before the start of the hearing, former Health Secretary Enrique said Garin, his successor, was "solely responsible" for
the Dengvaxia issue.

Meanwhile, Garin says the purchase of the vaccines was "above board."

December 14, 2017

Aquino, under whose administration the deal was approved, attends the Senate hearing on the vaccine program.

Aquino claims no one advised him against procuring Dengvaxia, with health reform advocate Dr. Anthony Leachon
saying that the former President cannot be faulted if he was given "misleading" information on Dengvaxia.

Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque says that President Rodrigo Duterte believes the program was done "in good
faith," adding that Duterte would have done the same.

Meanwhile, Ubial reveals that Garin's husband, Rep. Oscar Garin Jr., pressured her to continue the roll out of the vaccine
program.

January 19, 2018

At an event in San Fernando, Pampanga, Health Secretary Francisco Duque III confirmed Sanofi Pasteur has refunded
P1.16 billion worth of unused Dengvaxia vaccines.
However, Duque clarified the reimbursement does not put the French pharmaceutical company off the hook, adding the
investigation continues on whether Sanofi withheld significant information on possible risks.

January 4, 2018
Sanofi Pasteur says it has complied with international and local laws and regulations when it launched Dengvaxia, saying
it will continue to cooperate with the country's FDA.

January 10, 2018

The Public Attorney's Office (PAO) conducts an autopsy on five vaccinated children who died.

Dr. Erwin Erfe, director of the PAO Forensic Laboratory, says while the findings are inconclusive, signs and symptoms - as
well as the death - occurred within six months after the last Dengvaxia injection.

January 10, 2018

A former DOH official claims 19 officials, including former Health Secretary Garin, were part of a "mafia" in the
department. The "mafia" allegedly benefited from the Dengvaxia purchase, saying that 90 percent of the funds goes
back to the DOH, while 10 percent is given to a supposed "financier."

Garin denies the allegations.

January 19, 2018

At an event in San Fernando, Pampanga, Health Secretary Francisco Duque III confirms Sanofi Pasteur has refunded
P1.16 billion worth of unused Dengvaxia vaccines.

However, Duque clarifies the reimbursement does not put the French pharmaceutical company off the hook, adding the
investigation continues whether Sanofi withheld significant information on possible risks.

January 26, 2018

Duque reveals health officials did not wait for the results of clinical trials of the Research Institute for Tropical Medicine
(RITM) on Dengvaxia to know its risks before launching the nationwide immunization program.

He also suggests Executive Order 674, which establishes the RITM, should be reviewed to include possible conflicts of
interest in its research activities in partnership with pharmaceutical companies.

The Health Chief also sends a letter to Sanofi Pasteur formally requesting for a full refund of all the used and unused
vaccines.

January 31, 2018

Some parents in Zamboanga refuse the DOH's deworming program due to the Dengvaxia scare.

During Duque's confirmation hearing before the Commission on Appointments, committee members question him over
the existence of the DOH "mafia." Duque denies the claims, along with two other health officials who were supposedly
involved.
Health officials add the unused budget for the dengue vaccination program, worth P556 million, is still with the PCMC.

February 2, 2018
The University of the Philippines - Philippine General Hospital (UP-PGH) experts' panel reports that out of 14 autopsies
they conducted, three died due to complications of dengue. Two of those three dengue deaths could possibly be related
to Dengvaxia failure, they say.

However, the panel members suggest to have more tissue analyses on the bodies to come up with conclusive findings.
They also call on parents of dengue victims to have the remains of their children to be examined only by legitimate
forensic pathologists.

A group of doctors from the East Avenue Medical Center also points out a decline in children's vaccinations against other
diseases such as flu, polio, and measles.

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines, August 7) — The Supreme Court (SC) upheld a Manila court's ruling to imprison
Reproductive Health Law advocate Carlos Celdran over "offending religious feelings" after his activist stunt at the Manila
Cathedral in 2010.
Celdran posted the four-page SC decision on Monday on his Facebook page, which penalized him for interrupting an
ecumenical service on September 30, 2010 by going up to the altar and brought out a placard reading "Damaso." The
"Damaso" referred to the villanous friar in Jose Rizal's novel "Noli Me Tangere."
"It's come to pass. My appeal in the Supreme Court has been denied and my sentence is upheld. Three months
minimum to a year and a month maximum," Celdran said.
Celdran had appealed the ruling to the Metropolitan Trial Court, the Regional Trial Court, and the Court Appeals. All
three courts denied his petition.
The SC agreed with the Court of Appeals that Celdran's actions were "meant to mock, insult, and ridicule those clergy
whose beliefs and principles were diametrically opposed to his own."
However, in another post, the activist said he will appeal the SC decision.
"This case isn't just about me anymore. It's about all of us protecting our freedom of expression," he said.

8 most talked about issues on PH social media in 2017

Mocha Uson, fake news, and the killing of Kian delos Santos are among the most talked about issues on social media in
the Philippines in 2017

MANILA, Philippines – From Mocha Uson’s government appointment, to messages of support for soldiers and cops who
fought with terrorists in Marawi, Filipinos on social media didn't hold back on theirs views on the major political and
social issues of 2017.

Mocha Uson’s appointment as Malacañang communicator

It was a tough 2017 for sex blogger-turned-government official Mocha Uson as she faced criticism over her appointment
as an official of the Duterte administration.

Uson, a staunch supporter of President Rodrigo Duterte, was first appointed as Movie and Television Review and
Classification Board (MTRCB) board member in January.
Some netizens questioned her qualifications for the position while her followers asked that Uson be given a chance and
the benefit of the doubt. (READ: Board member Mocha Uson? Netizens weigh in)

Months later, social media was again abuzz when Uson was appointed as assistant secretary of the Presidential
Communications Operations Office (PCOO) in charge of social media.

Some netizens said it was regrettable that an environmentalist like Gina Lopez was denied a government post because
the Commission on Appointments rejected her appointment as environment secretary while someone like Uson,
accused of sharing fake information through her Facebook blog, earned a post in the government's primary
communication arm. (READ: 'Let that sink in': Filipinos react to Mocha Uson appointment)

Fake news

Social media has made spreading lies and propaganda – and therefore manipulating public opinion – so much easier.

Despite being caught several times peddling wrong or misleading information, Uson maintained in a Senate hearing that
she herself was a "victim of fake news."

Netizens lambasted Uson's statement. They said that Uson, as a government official, should be more careful with what
she posted on her Facebook page. Some expressed disgust that their taxes were being used to pay for Uson's salary.
(READ: Mocha Uson: fake news victim or fake news peddler?)

A veteran newspaper columnist even fell victim to "fake news." Netizens criticized Manila Times' Yen Makabenta after
he used a quote from a fake news website in his opinion piece. Makabenta claimed that US Ambassador to the United
Nations Nikki Haley said that Duterte should be "given space to run his nation." The US embassy, however, denied that
Haley made such a statement. (READ: Manila Times columnist falls for fake news)

Philippine News Agency blunders

State-run media Philippine News Agency (PNA) drew criticism for a string of mistakes in its articles.

PNA used the Dole pineapple logo for a Department of Labor and Employment story on 2018 pay rules for holidays. It
also erroneously published on its website several articles with editor's notes and instructions.

Netizens slammed the state news agency for mistakes that had been "happening too often." (READ: 'Puro Nalang
Aberya': Netizens react to Philippine News Agency's latest blunder)
Following the blunders, the Presidential Communications Operations Office assigned a new undersecretary to supervise
the PNA.

Sotto's 'sexist' comment on single mother Taguiwalo

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III got flak for his sexist comments during the confirmation hearing of then Social
Welfare Secretary Judy Taguiwalo.

After grilling Taguiwalo on her qualifications as social welfare chief, Sotto asked about her personal life.

"Just on the lighter side, Senator Drilon and I were looking at the personal information about you. You have two children
– daughters or sons?" Sotto asked Taguiwalo.

Taguiwalo replied she has two daughters.

Sotto went on to ask Taguiwalo, "But you're single?" He then said that single mothers are "na-ano lang" (just got
knocked up).

Netizens criticized the senator, calling him "basura" (trash) and "misogynist." Sotto then appologized to the public and
promised a measure to amend the Solo Parents' Welfare Act, which would give more benefits to solo parents could be
passed by December 2017. (READ: After gaffe, Sotto vows to seek more benefits for solo parents)

P1,000 budget for CHR

The House of Representatives sparked public outrage when it voted to allocate a P1,000-budget to the Commission on
Human Rights (CHR) for 2018.

#CHRBudgetCheaper became one of the trending topics on Twitter as netizens started comparing the measly budget to
buying 3 buckets of fried chicken from a fastfood chain, a general admission ticket for a concert, and a pair of sneakers.
(READ: P1,000 budget for CHR? Netizens react on House decision with #CHRBudgetCheaper)

Amid the public outrcy, the House restored the CHR budget. This was also included in the P3.8 trillion-budget signed into
law on December 19.

Uber suspension

Netizens hit the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) for suspending ride-hailing company
Uber.

Uber was suspended for defying the LTFRB's order for all transport network companies (TNCs) to stop accrediting drivers
starting July 26, 2017.

Commuters took to social media to express their anger over the LTFRB decision, saying the suspension would be a
"hassle" to them, while others asked for a good alternative for the commuting public.

After paying the P190-million fine, the LTFRB lifted the suspension.

#SalamatSaSerbisyo Marawi soldiers

Netizens remembered the fallen soldiers and cops who fought with terrorists in Marawi by using the hashtag
#SalamatSaSerbisyo.

Messages of support flooded social media on June 12 as the Philippines celebrated its 119th Independence Day.

Kaya ibinibigay ko po ang buo kong pagsaludo sa lahat ng sundalong Pilipino na lumalaban para sa bansa. Maraming
salamat.#SalamatSaSerbisyo

— August; (@ryeegonzales) June 12, 2017

The President honored the fallen men who were killed in action.

Duterte declared martial law in Mindanao following the attack of local terrorists in Marawi City on May 23. Despite the
liberation of the war-torn Marawi on October 17, martial law has not yet been lifted in the region, and was even
extended until the end of 2018.

Netizens were outraged over the killing of 17-year-old Kian delos Santos, whom the Caloocan police tagged as a drug
runner though he was not included in any drug list.

According to authorities, Delos Santos fired a gun at the cops during a drug raid. However, CCTV footage showed that he
was dragged to a dark alley. Forensic experts at the Philippine National Police and the Public Attorney's Office had the
same finding: Delos Santos was executed – he was shot in the back of his head while kneeling down.
Delos Santos was among the minors killed in the Duterte administration's bloody drug war.

#JusticeForKian trended on social media as netizens expressed their condemnation of human rights abuses in the drug
war.

TRAIN’s next stations: Package 1B and 2

Package 1B of the TRAIN law (House Bill 7105) was filed on Feb. 5, 2018 with the House of Representatives and
referred to the committee on ways and means on Feb. 6, 2018.
Package 1B constitutes a general and estate tax amnesty, and relaxation of our Bank Secrecy Law.
- estate tax amnesty will help our farmers maintain their lands
- general tax amnesty can help our micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs).
In giving these small businesses a fresh start, we will be fostering economic growth from the ground up.
The root cause of the waived fines needs to be addressed as well, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), in
partnership with the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the Center for Strategic Reforms of the Philippines,
has launched a certification program that aims to promote honesty and integrity in paying taxes to complement a
general tax amnesty.
Revenue Memorandum Circular 60-2017 officially announced the launch of the Seal Of Honesty (SOH) Certification
Program on July 2017.
- benefits such as issuance of annual tax clearance without prejudice to information not available at the time
of the issuance, last priority audit and other privileges
To supplement the “economic growth from the ground up” of Package 1B, the government has also taken steps to
foster economic growth from outside.
corporate tax reform bill, filed on March 21, 2018 as House Bill 7458, was formally referred to the committee on
ways and means on May 15, 2018. This bill constitutes Package 2 of the TRAIN law.
Already, we have one of the highest income tax rates in Asia Pacific, and this tax reform aims to address just that.
The proposed bill will provide a rate that is more competitive than that charged in our neighboring countries,
complemented further by the lowered personal income taxes as implemented in Package 1 of the TRAIN Law.
We can expect this bill to result in more foreign direct investments and therefore spur economic development.
It is important to make sure that this reform will bring about equitable benefits to the currently promoted industries
and economic zones.
Although there are dissenting opinions, I agree with the DOF on “the need to rationalize and modernize the tax
incentive system to make incentives time-bound, performance-based and not excessively complex with far too many
different, even overlapping laws, rules and regulations.”
TRAIN 2 on lowering corporate income tax to 25 percent or even lower has to be immediate and not “contingent on
the modernization of the fiscal incentives regime toward one that rewards those who truly deserve it.”

TRAIN threatens poor, president's popularity

May, inflation spiked to a fresh five-year high of 4.6 percent, putting the year-to-date figure to 4.1 percent or above
the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas’ 2-4 percent target range
BSP has responded by jacking up interest rates for a second consecutive month.

People have blamed soaring prices on the Duterte administration’s Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion law,
which lowers personal income taxes while raising excise levies on fuel and “sin” products, among others. Supply-
side factors like higher global oil prices—worsened by the continuing depreciation of the peso—are also pushing up
commodity prices.

TRAIN’s Impact
The TRAIN law was crafted based on macroeconomic assumptions. The TRAIN law has one goal: to make the tax
system simpler and more fair while shifting the burden off lower-income segments toward the “ultra-rich.”
But based on the Department of Finance’s estimates, which were used in crafting the TRAIN law, poor families will
feel the sting of inflation more than the rich will. To note, economic assumptions are not always correct so these are
reviewed and revised regularly.

The DOF’s projections also show the richest 10 percent will pay more for higher excise taxes on fuel—which
contributes to the price of other goods and services—given their greater oil consumption than the poor.

Inflation ‘spoils’ growth

Data from the Philippine Statistics Authority show consumer spending, which accounts for about seven-tenths of the
Philippine economy, grew at a slower pace of 5.6 percent in the first quarter of 2018 from 5.9 percent a year ago.

This was despite the higher take-home pay granted by the personal income tax cuts under the TRAIN law that took
effect last January 1, although analysts at ANZ Research had said the easing in consumer spending “is likely
temporary with some expenditures front-loaded ahead of the tax reform in early 2018.”

Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia said inflation “spoiled” the country’s economic growth in the
first three months of the year. The economy grew below the government’s target in the first quarter.

“Higher inflation tends to deter or soften demand for goods that are experiencing price increases,” Pernia said in a
press conference last May 10. “We need to really focus on inflation especially because it is the number one concern
expressed by Filipinos in surveys.”

The government will release subsidies of P200 a month to help the poorest Filipinos cope with rising prices. Critics
say this is not enough and the release of the aid has been delayed.

TRAIN’s inflationary effects have been hitting the poor. Policymakers saw this coming while the TRAIN act was being
crafted, thus the law has earmarked as much as 30 percent of its revenues for “social protection” programs.

These include:

Unconditional cash transfer amounting to P200 a month for the first year and P300 a month for the second and third
year
Fuel vouchers for PUJs, fare discount for all public utility vehicles, discounted purchase of NFA rice, free skills
training under TESDA
Programs for sugar farmers to increase productivity
The DOF earlier said the TRAIN law will rescue 21 million Filipinos in the long run. It also expects everyone, except the
richest, to be better off due to the combined effects of the tax reform and targeted transfers program.

Last February, the DOF said it would start handing out cash support to some 7.4 million households out of 10 million
targeted beneficiaries by March. But as inflation heats up, the DOF said the remaining 2.6 million families will have to
wait until August.

Problems with logistics have slowed down the distribution of subsidies, casting doubt on whether help will reach all
recipients this year. Some lawmakers have already urged the government to bump up the amount of monthly
stipend, which is fixed by law regardless of the size of the family.

At a Senate hearing last February, Claire Dennis Mapa—dean of the University of the Philippines School of
Statistics—pointed out that the TRAIN law’s safety nets for the poor are not enough to help them weather inflation,
adding that the poorest Filipino families spend more on food, especially rice, which was one of the drivers of
inflation.

The Makabayan bloc at the House has filed a proposal to raise the national minimum wage to P750. Boy Santos, file
Meanwhile, the central bank has admitted it might miss its target as inflation is projected to average 4.5 percent in
2018, amid risks posed by “second-round” pressures from expected higher minimum wages and public transport
fares. But policy makers have vowed to bring inflation back on target next year.

A bloc at the House of Representatives consisting of seven party-list lawmakers has filed a bill to raise the national
minimum wage to P750 so workers can cope with rising prices of commodities.

The Trade Union Congress of the Philippines, the country’s largest labor group, is pushing for a P320 across-the-
board increase in the daily take-home pay of workers in Metro Manila.

But Trade Secretary Ramon Lopez had warned that a wage increase that is more than necessary is “dangerous” as it
could create “strong pressure” on inflation. For its part, the BSP sees a modest P18 to P20 wage hike.
“In case there are additional adjustments in minimum wage, maliit na lang ‘yun (it will be a small amount),” BSP
Deputy Governor Diwa Guinigundo said in May.

Duterte’s problem
Aside from revamping the country’s tax system, the TRAIN law also aims to partly fund the Duterte administration’s
“Dutertenomics” economic agenda, which is anchored on stronger law enforcement and massive infrastructure
spending, as captured by the slogan, “Build, Build, Build.”

In fact, the Philippines is expected to bag rating upgrades soon due to the implementation of the TRAIN law, which
debt watcher S&P dubbed the “cornerstone” of the Philippines’ fiscal strategy.

A higher rating can lower the cost of borrowing in foreign currencies and can increase the country’s ability to attract
foreign investment.

But according to a first quarter Social Weather Stations poll released last month, public satisfaction with the Duterte
administration’s handling of inflation has seen a sharp 18-point decline to 6 percent.

An April survey by pollster Pulse Asia, meanwhile, showed wages and inflation remain to the top national concerns
among Filipinos.

Duterte has acknowledged that the TRAIN act is fanning inflation, adding he is leaving it up to Congress to decide
whether to “amend or suspend or modify” the law.

“The inflation surge will definitely affect President Duterte’s survey ratings for the second quarter. I expect to see a
drop in his popularity,” University of Santo Tomas Political Science Professor Dennis Coronacion said in an interview.

“Past survey data show that the ratings of a president can drop significantly due to economy difficulties. A fine
example is former President Estrada, whose survey ratings began to drop significantly when our country’s economy
registered a negative growth in 1998,” Coronacion added. — with Philstar.com intern Ali Ian Marcelino Biong
Businesses warn ill effects of TRAIN Law package 2
The Philippine Association of Multinational Companies Regional Headquarters Inc. warns legislators that the removal
of tax incentives may scare away foreign investors

MANILA, Philippines— Some businesses aired their concerns over the proposed package 2 of the Tax Reform
Acceleration and Inclusion or TRAIN Law.

During the House Committee on Ways and Means’ second hearing on the proposed measure, the Philippine
Association of Multinational Companies Regional Headquarters Inc. (PAMURI) warned legislators that thousands of
employees in the Regional Operating Headquarters (ROHQ) sector will be displaced because of the proposal.

PAMURI also said that the removal of incentives would scare away potential foreign investors. The association
warned that some companies would migrate their operations to India, Malaysia, Vietnam and Hong Kong.

The group previously slammed the first tranche of the tax reform law, particularly the removal of the 15%
preferential tax rate for workers of the Business Process Outsourcing sector.

The Department of Finance (DOF) proposed in package 2 to gradually cut corporate income tax to 25% from 30,
subject to a streamlining of tax holidays. The agency also proposed to modify incentives for companies to make
these performance-based, targeted, time-bound and transparent.

TRAIN 2 also called for the repeal of at least 30 laws that grant incentives to investors.

Meanwhile, the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) reported that the total investments in PEZA enterprises
stood at a strong P1.99 trillion as of 2015, 78% of which are foreign capital. (READ: Philippines aims to identify 300
new eco zones in January 2018)

“They would not have come [in the Philippines] if it weren’t for the incentives, as they are efficiency-seeking
enterprises,” PEZA deputy director general Mary Harriet Abordo said.

Representative Dakila Cua, chair of the committee, acknowledged the points raised during the hearing.

“Ayaw nating pumatay ng industriya, especially if lumabas doon sa cost benefit analysis ay nakakapagdulot ng
benepisyo [ang incentives] sa ekonomiya,” Cua said.
(We do not want to kill any industry, especially if the cost benefit analysis revealed that the economy benefited from
the incentives.)

Meanwhile, Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno said that foreign companies will still invest in the country despite the
proposal.

“In 2015 alone, we gave up P350 billion for tax incentives. Some firms will invest anyway with or without incentives,”
Diokno said.
ataan investors defend need for incentives
The investors raise concerns in a meeting with House officials and the Department of Finance to tackle the tax
reforms under the Trabaho bill

TRABAHO BILL. Speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and other officials meet with investors in Bataan on August 16,
2018.

BATAAN, Philippines – The Department of Finance (DOF) said the second batch of tax reforms that hurdled a House
committee was already amended to cater to the concerns of both foreign and local investors in the Philippines.

This was Finance Undersecretary Karl Chua's message to investors and locators of the Freeport Area of Bataan (FAB)
on Thursday, August 16.

He joined the closed-door meeting of Speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and House committee on ways and means
chairperson Dakila Cua with FAB investors held in Mariveles, Bataan.

"I told them the bill we have in Congress have undergone several amendments precisely to cater to some of their
concerns, but we also have national interest to promote beyond the locators because there are also thousands of
Filipinos and small and medium enterprises paying the regular rates and contributing also jobs and investments,"
said Chua.

"So we are trying to strike a balance," he added.

The meeting was called so the House leaders and DOF could clarify some provisions of the Tax Reform for Attracting
Better and Higher Quality Opportunities (Trabaho) bill that FAB investors were "worried" about.

The Trabaho bill was already approved by the ways and means committee on August 7.

The bill will now go through its 2nd and 3rd readings at the House plenary before being transmitted to the Senate,
where it will have to go through another 3 readings before President Rodrigo Duterte may sign it into law.

Trabaho bill at a glance: The measure aims to cut corporate income taxes by 2 percentage points per year starting
2021, eventually bringing down the current 30% to 20% by 2029.

Trabaho also seeks to rationalize fiscal incentives or remove certain perks. The bill retains the current incentives for
two years, for investors to have enough time to adjust to the new tax scheme.

The DOF estimated that the government lost some P178 billion in potential revenue in 2016 due to redundant tax
incentives. (READ: EXPLAINER: Why the government is pushing for 2nd TRAIN package)

What were the FAB investors' concerns? Cua said one major question was whether or not investors would have to
pay value-added tax (VAT) should Trabaho become a law.

He told them that under the bill, companies are exempt from paying VAT when they are "90% exporters."

"I also updated them on the longer years of incentive availment if they are investing in poor areas or relocating
outside Manila," Cua said.

Arroyo also said the investors pointed out their incentives granted by the FAB are good for 20 years, yet the
timeframe is longer in other investment promotion agencies in the country.

"And then they were discussing this one, for further study, they said that in the Freeport of Bataan, their incentives
are 20 years. So it is time-bound, whereas in the others, it's forever. So that's something that the DOF will look at,"
said Arroyo.
Patrick Martinet, president of the Freeport Area of Bataan and Investors Association, said they seek incentives due
to the rising costs of utilities and even manpower.

He then urged the Philippine government to address corruption first before focusing on the Trabaho bill.

"[The government should] try to address corruption, bribery, and try also to increase the capacity of the
government to increase tax collection. This means oblige people who don't pay tax to pay tax," he said.

What's next? Chua said he will be relaying to his superiors at the DOF the concerns of the Bataan investors for now.

But no promises were made during the meeting regarding changes to the Trabaho bill. These may be introduced
during the bill's period of amendments at the House plenary.

"Well, we didn't agree on anything.... So this is more of a listening [time] and I will bring back to my bosses the
concerns and see if we can address them," said Chua.

EXPLAINER: Why the government is pushing for 2nd TRAIN package

Economic managers aim to cut corporate taxes and push for a simpler fiscal incentive scheme, so what's stopping
them? Two Goliaths: politics and money.

MANILA, Philippines– President Rodrigo Duterte's economic team is pushing hard for the approval of the 2nd
tranche of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) law amid strong opposition.

The Department of Finance (DOF) is proposing to cut corporate income tax and modernize fiscal incentives. These
reforms, said economic managers, are necessary.

But the 2nd TRAIN package has very few champions and many opponents.

While the deliberations at the House of Representatives are moving, the Senate is wary. Senate President Vicente
Sotto III said his colleagues fear the proposal would bring another wave of inflation.

Two of the country's top promotion investment agencies have spoken out against the measure as well. Several
businesses have raised concerns, too.

Corporate income tax

The Philippines has the highest corporate income tax (CIT) in Southeast Asia at 30%. Neighboring Indonesia and
Malaysia have 25% and 24%, respectively. Singapore has the lowest CIT in the region at 17%.

The goal is to reduce the CIT rate from 30% to 25% by 2022.

This is perhaps the least contentious feature of the 2nd TRAIN package.

At least 6 big businesses and civil society organizations have expressed their support for the proposed reforms,
according to the DOF.

The Management Association of the Philippines (MAP), in a letter to Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez III, said,
"We agree with the need to rationalize and modernize the tax incentive system to make incentives time-bound,
performance-based, and not excessively complex with far too many different, even overlapping laws, rules, and
regulations."

Dominguez said the measure is "pro-business, pro-investments, and pro-incentives."

While the country has the highest CIT in the region, it doesn't mean there's no sweet spot for businesses here.

Fiscal incentives

There are 14 investment promotion agencies in the Philippines which are authorized to grant tax incentives under
their respective charters.

The biggest among them are the Board of Investments (BOI) and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA).

The 12 others are the Cagayan Economic Zone Authority (CEZA), Freeport Area of Bataan (FAB), Phividec Industrial
Authority (PIA), Clark Freeport and Special Economic Zone (CFEZ), John Hay Management Corporation (JHMC),
Aurora Pacific Economic Zone and Freeport Authority (APECO), Bases Conversion and Development Authority
(BCDA), Poro Point Management Corporation (PPMC), Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA), Zamboanga
Freeport Authority (ZFA), Bataan Technological Park Incorporated (BTPI), and Philippine Retirement Authority
(PRA).

On top of these, the Philippines also has 123 investment laws and 192 non-investment laws that provide tax
incentives. Communication and postal services seem to enjoy the most perks, with 43 related investment laws.
Energy and oil, economic zones, and agri-related industries have 14, 11, and 8 investment laws, respectively.

The income tax holiday (ITH) is the centerpiece among all the incentives, followed by the 5% gross income earned
(GIE) tax and customs duty exemption. The GIE is given indefinitely and is in lieu of income, value-added tax (VAT),
and local taxes.

Other incentives enjoyed by select industries include tax investment allowances; higher deductions for research and
development, training, and labor; net operating loss carryover; customs duty exemptions; and export subsidies.

Businesses and legislators are worried that cutting and rationalizing these perks would scare away investors. But the
DOF said its analysis shows investors are not taking the bait to begin with.

Reforms needed

According to the DOF, there is huge inequity under the current incentive system. Firms with no incentives pay the
regular rate of 30% of the net taxable income, while firms with incentives pay only 6% to 13%.

Out of the 915,000 registered firms in 2015, 2,844 firms were granted incentives. The government estimated P301
billion in foregone revenues due to the tax exemptions.

The government admitted that incentives are needed to attract investments that support the country's industries.
These investments must create better jobs, promote research and development, encourage innovation, stimulate
local industries, and diversify product space.

But economic managers insist that incentives must be performance-based, targeted, time-bound, and transparent.

The DOF said the government has been supporting over 600 firms unnecessarily for at least 15 years, and it's time for
these firms to help the government.

Economic managers also pointed out that these perks have not really boosted the Philippines' foreign direct
investments (FDI). The country's FDI has been growing, but not as much as those of its regional peers.

Since 2000, the Philippines has been overtaken by Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand in terms of FDI inflows.

Graph from the Department of Finance

Graph from the Department of Finance

Total foreign investment pledges during the 1st quarter of 2018 fell sharply by 37.9% compared to the same period
last year, according to the latest data of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).

The total foreign investment pledges approved by the 7 biggest investment promotion agencies stood at P14.2
billion. Only CEZA posted year-on-year growth.

Foreign investment commitments plummeted by 51.8% to P105.6 billion in 2017 from P219 billion in 2016.

Export competitiveness has also declined and domestic industries have weak linkages to the export industry. The
country has also relied too much on imported parts, which in turn resulted in weak domestic output.

The agency conducted a cost-benefit analysis of the current tax incentive regime as well, and found that it costs
taxpayers at least P257,281 just to create one job.

The DOF also found that registered firms and non-registered firms have the same employment relative to size,
wages, level of exports relative to sales, and fixed assets. Both types of firms showed no difference in terms of
productivity.
On average, the DOF found that for every peso granted as incentive, the government collected 32 centavos in taxes.
But if taxes from unnecessary incentives are accounted for, the government would have been able to collect 86
centavos.

"For every peso spent on incentive, between P0.60 [and] P1.15 comes back in benefits, even after accounting for
employment generated and spillovers, both direct and indirect," the DOF said.

Investment agencies react

PEZA and the BOI, which both oppose the DOF's proposal to trim fiscal incentives, presented their own analyses.

The BOI asserted that for every peso on tax expenditure, the government generates P2.02 additional tax revenue,
P13 worth of domestic sales, and another P16.56 worth of export sales.

The agency added that the tax revenue from firms under the BOI was 31% higher than the remittances of 54
government owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) and 92% higher than the net financing position of
government financial institutions.

The BOI reported some P489.76 billion in CIT collections in 2015 alone.

Meanwhile, PEZA questioned the legality of the measure and cited Section 10 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution,
which states that "no law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed."

"This constitutional provision prohibits the enactment of any law that would impair the performance of contractual
obligation," PEZA said.

PEZA also reminded the DOF that the government invited both local and foreign investors to locate in economic
zones with the promise that they would enjoy incentives provided by law.

"Since the incentives in the registration agreement are obligatory on the part of the government, it cannot be
revoked by a subsequent law for it will result in the violation of the non-impairment clause which is guaranteed by
the Constitution," PEZA said, adding that its officials would be at risk of being sued.

In a nutshell, promotion investment agencies are wary that taking away fiscal perks would drive away both potential
and current investors.

But economic managers said granting tax incentives is not the only way to directly help firms. The DOF said the
government can use efficient and targeted subsidies as well as address infrastructure gaps and complex business
regulations.

No steam

While economic managers can confidently defend the proposal through data and graphs, the political realm would
be the true battleground for the 2nd package of the TRAIN law.

Senate President Sotto was previously quoted as saying that no senator wanted to sponsor the measure. He then
said on Tuesday, July 31, that he was willing to sponsor it as long as the DOF can assure him it will not lead to new or
higher taxes.

Senate ways and means committee chairman Sonny Angara, who supported the 1st TRAIN package, was coy on the
matter.

"[As the 2019 elections near], you cannot have hearings, no one goes to Congress, we don't have session," Angara
said in an ABS-CBN interview.

Taxes have always been a touchy matter for politicians, as it does not get them votes during the campaign period.

The 1st TRAIN package, which imposed higher taxes on sugary drinks and oil, was timed carefully by the government
so as not to coincide with elections.

What would it cost the government if the 2nd TRAIN package failed to materialize?
Recall that the government initially aimed to generate around P1 trillion in the next 5 years for the government's
Build, Build, Build program through the TRAIN law. The infrastructure push is estimated to cost around P7 to P8
trillion and will be funded mostly by loans. (READ: Hits and misses of Duterte's infrastructure push)

But since the 1st TRAIN package was watered down in its final form, the government had to manage expectations. It
is now searching for other ways to raise funds.

Then again, the infrastructure push has not been as aggressive as expected. This sluggish pace could just buy the
government more time to generate funds amid the upcoming political circus – election season.

PEZA, Board of Investments challenge 2nd TRAIN package

The agencies warn that the 2nd tranche of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion law might spook
investors and may even be unconstitutional
MANILA, Philippines – The country's top investment promotion agencies challenged proposals included in
the 2nd tranche of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) law being pushed by
the Department of Finance (DOF).
During the 3rd hearing of the House committee on ways and means on the matter, the Philippine
Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) and the Board of Investments (BOI) argued against the removal of tax
incentives and other administrative matters being proposed under TRAIN Package 2.
The measure aims to repeal at least 120 special laws on investment incentives and consolidate them under
one omnibus incentive code. It would also lower corporate income tax (CIT) rates.
PEZA questioned the legality of the measure and cited Section 10 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution,
which states that "no law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed."
"This constitutional provision prohibits the enactment of any law that would impair the performance of
contractual obligation," PEZA said.
PEZA also reminded the DOF that the government invited both local and foreign investors to locate in
economic zones with the promise that they would enjoy incentives provided by law.
"Since the incentives in the registration agreement are obligatory on the part of the government, it cannot
be revoked by a subsequent law for it will result in the violation of the non-impairment clause which is
guaranteed by the Constitution," PEZA said, adding that its officials would be at risk of being sued.
PEZA also urged the DOF to implement a grandfather rule – a provision in which an old rule continues to
apply to some existing situations while a new rule would apply to all future cases.
While PEZA ventured into the legal roadblocks, the BOI highlighted the benefits of granting incentives to
investors. (READ: Foreign investment pledges down 51.8% in 2017)
The BOI said more than two million jobs have been created since the agency's inception in 1968.
It also presented a cost-benefit analysis, in which it asserted that for every peso tax expenditure, the
government gains P2.02 in additional tax revenue, P13 worth of domestic deals, and P16.56 worth of
export sales.
Finance Undersecretary Karl Kendrick Chua also presented a cost-benefit analysis on tax incentives as well,
but with glaringly different results from the BOI.
"On average, we find that for every P1 incentive we give, only 60 centavos come back, so on average, there
are many redundant or unnecessary incentives," Chua said.
Chua assured the investment promotion agencies and companies that the DOF does not intend to
completely remove incentives. He said some would be retained, so long as they are "performance-based,
targeted, transparent, and time-bound."
President Rodrigo Duterte specified in his 3rd State of the Nation Address that Congress should
pass TRAIN Package 2 by year-end. – Rappler.com

SC upholds Arroyo's acquittal in PCSO plunder case

(UPDATED) The High Court's affirmation is the latest blow to the Ombudsman's bid to hold accountable
personalities in the PCSO fund scam
BELATED BIRTHDAY GIFT. The SC's affirmation comes two weeks after Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's
70th birthday where she is photographed here, on April 5, 2017, happily welcoming supporters. File photo by Mara
Cepeda/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – The Supreme Court (SC) en banc upheld the acquittal of former president Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo in her plunder case that stemmed from the controversial P366-million Philippine Charity
Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) fund scam.
SC Spokesman Theodore Te announced in a press briefing on Tuesday, April 18, that the en banc denied the motion
for reconsideration filed by the Office of the Ombudsman seeking the reversal of the July 2016 decision.

"The court noted that its decision had granted petitioners' respective demurrers of evidence which resulted in their
acquittal and thus any attempt to reconsider the decision would amount to double jeopardy," Te said in the briefing
held in Baguio City where the SC is having its annual summer session.
Te added that the same voting was observed in upholding the acquittal, or 11-4 with dissents from Chief Justice
Maria Lourdes Sereno, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, and Associate Justices Marvic Leonen and Benjamin
Caguioa. This means that President Rodrigo Duterte's appointees Associate Justices Noel Tijam and Samuel Martires
voted in favor of Arroyo.

When the SC acquitted Arroyo in July 2016, the same 4 justices also dissented. Of the 4, only Carpio is an appointee
of Arroyo; the rest were appointed by former president Benigno Aquino III.

"We thank the Supreme Court for putting an end to this case," said Arroyo's lawyer Laurence Arroyo in a statement
on Tuesday. "PGMA was actually acquitted way back in July [2016] when the SC granted her demurrer to evidence.
That should have been the end of the story. The Ombudsman's filing of a motion for reconsideration clearly placed
the former president in double jeopardy."

The principle of double jeopardy prevents an accused person from being tried again on similar charges, following an
acquittal or conviction.

Meanwhile, the SC also acquitted former PCSO budget and accounts manager Benigno Aguas. In its affirmation on
Tuesday, Te said that Associate Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe also dissented, resulting in a 10-5 vote.

The High Court's affirmation is the latest blow to the Ombudsman's bid to hold accountable personalities in the
PCSO fund scam.

Earlier this month, the Sandiganbayan acquitted former PCSO director Maria Fatima Valdes due to insufficient
evidence.

What used to be 10 defendants in the plunder case, have been reduced to only two: former PCSO general manager
Rosario Uriarte and COA intelligence fund unit head Nilda Plaras.

TIMELINE: Gloria Arroyo – from plunder to acquittal

Here's what happened since a plunder case was filed against the former president in 2012 in relation to the alleged
misuse of PCSO funds
WHEELCHAIR. Former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo enters the Sandiganbayan court in a wheelchair during a
2012 hearing. File photo by Rolex dela Pena/EPA

MANILA, Philippines – Former president and 3-term Pampanga Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo got the
plunder case acquittal she was wishing for.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday, July 19, acquitted Arroyo of the plunder charge filed against her in relation to the
alleged misuse of P366 million in Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) intelligence funds from 2008 to 2010.

It is a scenario that observers have been fearing since lawyer and former Solicitor General Estelito Mendoza entered
the picture as her lead counsel. It was Mendoza who raised Arroyo's plunder case to the Supreme Court in 2015.
(READ: What has happened to the Arroyo plunder case?)

While the case was brought to the High Court only last year, a lot has already happened since the case was filed in
2012.

Below is a short timeline of what happened since the filing of the plunder case.

2012
July 16 - The Ombudsman filed before the Sandiganbayan a P366-M plunder suit against Arroyo in connection with
the alleged misuse of PCSO intelligence funds during the latter years of her administration.

October 4 - The Sandiganbayan First Division issued an arrest warrant against Arroyo. Her camp asked the court in
the morning to suspend the issuance of the warrant, but the court denied the plea.

October 24 - Arroyo asked the SC to stop the plunder trial before the Sandiganbayan. She also asked the High Court
to dismiss the plunder charges filed against her by the Ombudsman.
October 29 - Arroyo refused to enter any plea to the plunder case, prompting the Sandiganbayan to enter a "not
guilty" plea on her behalf.

2013
April 24 - In a pre-trial brief given by the Arroyo camp to the Sandiganbayan, she asked that "she be allowed to
present evidence last so that she may adopt the testimonies of her co-accused who may testify in their behalf or of
such witness as they may present during trial.”

June 30 - Arroyo was sworn into office as reelected Pampanga representative by a notary public inside the Veterans
Memorial Medical Center in Quezon City.

November 6 - The Sandiganbayan junked Arroyo's petition for bail.

2014
January 2 - Arroyo lawyer Anacleto Diaz pulled out his law firm Diaz Del Rosario & Associates from representing her
in the case. Replacing Diaz as lead defense lawyer was Modesto Ticman Jr of Gilera & Ticman Law Firm.

May 14 - The prosecution expressed its intention to rest its case after it presented to the Sandiganbayan all evidence
against Arroyo.

August 27 - The Arroyo camp filed a demurrer to evidence before the Sandiganbayan for her acquittal from plunder
charges. Arroyo said the evidence against her presented by the prosecution failed to prove her guilt beyond
reasonable doubt.

2015
April 6 - The Sandiganbayan denied the Arroyo camp's demurrer to evidence. This means Arroyo's camp now has the
burden to present counter-evidence to argue for her acquittal.

October 14 - Arroyo's son Mikey filed on her behalf her certificate of candidacy (COC) for re-election for a third and
last term as Pampanga representative in 2016.

October 15 - In a petition for certiorari, the Arroyo camp asked the SC to dismiss the plunder case. Through her new
lawyer, Estelito Mendoza, Arroyo asked the High Court to suspend proceedings before the Sandiganbayan.

October 20 - The SC granted Arroyo's appeal for a status ante quo order (SQAO), which temporarily stopped the
plunder trial for 30 days.

November 24 - The SC extended the SQAO to February 19, 2016.

2016
March 11 - The SC extended for another 60 days – or until April 20 – the suspension of Arroyo’s trial for plunder after
denying the motion of the Solicitor General opposing Arroyo’s renewed bid to extend the SQAO.

May 3 - For the third time, the SC extended the SQAO, this time for another 60 days until June 20.

July 19 - The Supreme Court, voting 11-4 ruled to acquit Arroyo.

Grab/Uber or Taxis: Which do you prefer?

HOMEBlogGrab/Uber or Taxis: Which do you prefer?
There has been a lot of buzz about taxis, the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB), and
transportation network companies (TNCs) Uber and Grab. In particular, it’s about how there will be fewer vehicles
available from Uber and Grab by July 26 because of unlicensed Uber and Grab vehicles, known as transport network
vehicle services (TNVS).

People have been talking amongst themselves both online and in real life about which is actually better, and TNVS
are usually bringing home the bacon. Instead of deciding which one is better, let’s look at what you get when you go
either-or:

Taxis: The Old Staple

Taxis have been around for as long as, well, I’ve been around. They were the go-to option for anyone looking to go
from one place to another without thinking of where to stop and how many rides were needed.

IMAGE Wikimedia Commons

They might have been the most efficient form of transport in the country at one point… until there were simply too
many of them going around. More taxis meant more drivers, which also meant you had more people competing for
a growing group of commuters. Add to that the rise of gas prices, and you see what taxi drivers have to resort to.

They haggle for your fare, try to “cheat” you from what’s shown on the meter by tinkering with it (often referred to
as batingting), or outright refuse to take a passenger, especially when it’s raining too hard or traffic is too heavy.

What I’ve noticed is that they do it more to keep their jobs as it’s the only thing they usually have to feed their
families and send their kids to school. It’s an honest job, but a very cutthroat and difficult one.

Most people don’t know of such plights of the humble taxi driver, and while there are those who don’t resort to
such forms of deceit, their image has been scarred by the first few bad eggs to dabble in such dishonest ways of
serving the public.

TNVS: New Kids on the Block

Transport Network Vehicle Services like Uber and Grab had a bit of a hard time gaining ground in the country, but
they’ve since ballooned like crazy.

They’re wickedly efficient: imagine getting a guaranteed ride to where you want to go from where you’re at without
so much as getting up from your chair. All you need is a few taps and you’re good to go.

You’ll know the price beforehand, plot exactly where you want to go and have the assurance of knowing exactly
who your driver is, how they look, what they’re driving, and how they’ve treated other passengers.

The only catch: price surge. At certain points in the day, prices for these TNVS go up because of congestion, demand,
and other conditions beyond the control of the driver. There was even a time when prices surged so high that they
went into five digits (remember the Christmas Day fiasco?)!

Similarities

Both forms of transport operate pretty much the same way: there’s a set price for the first few kilometers, with
each kilometer beyond the first few being charged a certain amount. The difference: Grab and Uber passengers
know how much that is up front; those who ride taxis don’t.

Both can also refuse to take a passenger. Don’t believe me? Check your Grab and Uber app the next time you book a
ride during rush hour. At times, it doesn’t matter how many drivers are available; you can’t seem to get a ride.

This is because they can refuse to pick you up without you knowing it with a simple touch on their screen. Taxis do
the same, but the impact is greater. Since it’s done in broad daylight, other people will see you get refused by a taxi
driver.

Then there’s the matter of safety. Both do their checks and balances for the car and the driver, but that hardly
matters when there are cases of both TNVS drivers and taxi drivers either robbing you or taking advantage of you
during your ride.

Technology seems to be the only difference between the two, as its leagues easier to get a ride from Grab or Uber
than it is to flag down a regular taxi.

‘Which is better?’ More like ‘Which do you prefer?’

Even with all the similarities, people still lean towards Grab and Uber, and with good reason: there’s an easy way of
reporting any erring drivers because of the app. Taxis, on the other hand, aren’t that easy to report.

There are times when Grab and Uber cars aren’t available, or the prices are exponentially high compared to a single
taxi ride. Taxis come to the rescue, but people aren’t as willing to ride a taxi as they used to be when Grab and Uber
first got here.
Still, both services have their patrons, but TNVS have gotten hold of a chunk of the population because of the
convenience they offer despite similar pricing.

THEY HAVE THE FINAL SAY. Since the business of public transportation is regulated by the LTFRB, they have the final
word.

Regulation seems to be the biggest problem, and the LTFRB holds all the aces in that regard. Taxis feel like they’re
being thrown to the wayside because of TNVS, yet the public seems to want TNVS more because of what they offer.

I can’t say which is better or which you prefer because as far as I’m concerned, both have their pros and cons. Both
have their stories of why they are what they are, and we can’t change that.

We at Philippine Primer would like to know what you think. Hit us up in the comments section and give us your view
on the matter. Oh, and please no harsh words for either side.

As Uber gives up Philippine operations to Grab, what now for commuters?

'Obviously, it is not good. From a duopoly, it becomes a monopoly,' warns an economist

Chrisee Dela Paz

Published 7:50 PM, March 26, 2018
Updated 7:50 PM, March 26, 2018
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Email
ACQUISITION. Uber drivers must migrate to the Grab platform by April 8, 2018. File photo by Rob Reyes/Rappler

ACQUISITION. Uber drivers must migrate to the Grab platform by April 8, 2018. File photo by Rob Reyes/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – An economist warned that Filipino commuters could face higher fares and fewer incentives,
after California-based Uber decided to sell its entire Southeast Asian business to its rival Grab.

Ending stiff competition between the ride-hailing behemoths, Uber on Monday, March 26, sold its operations in
Southeast Asia to Grab. In turn, Uber will receive a 27.5% stake in the business.

"Obviously, it is not good. From a duopoly, it becomes a monopoly," Fernando Aldaba, dean and professor of
economics at the Ateneo de Manila University and a senior fellow of Eagle Watch, told Rappler.

"Without competition, prices may go up and quality of service might deteriorate," Aldaba added.

Uber drivers in the Philippines on Monday started receiving emails from the transport network company, asking
them to transition to the Grab platform by April 8 – or two weeks from now. (READ: Uber drivers in Southeast Asia
moving to Grab in 2 weeks)

Pola del Monte, a 28-year-old editor in Quezon City, said this gives her no choice but to rely on Grab for ride-hailing
services.

"I'm an Uber loyalist – largely by force of habit, but also because I prefer its sleeker interface, have had too many
pleasant riding experiences, plus I find their customer service impeccable. I can count only one terrible experience
but the response was über quick," she said in a Facebook post.

Pipay Gonzales, a 26-year-old public relations manager in Makati City, said she was dismayed.

"Those who use ride-hailing apps, like Uber and Grab, will be the losers in this deal. Commuters like me won't be able
to compare prices now. We won't know if we are being priced unfairly. The government should do something about
it," she told Rappler in an interview.
Del Monte and Gonzales are just a couple of the ride-hailing app users in the Philippines who have expressed
disappointment over the Uber-Grab deal.

In the Philippines, 3 companies – Uber, Grab, and U-Hop – are accredited to operate as transport network
companies. But with the deal, the local competition will just be between Grab and U-Hop.

Up for review?

Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) Chairman Arsenio Balisacan said in a statement that no notification has
been filed at the agency by Grab or Uber to date.

"If the parties meet the new threshold, they should notify the PCC within 30 days after signing of their definitive
agreement," Balisacan said.

Early this month, the PCC doubled the threshold for reviewing merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions in the
country.

The PCC on March 5 published a memorandum, raising the thresholds to P5 billion for the value of assets or
revenues of the parent entity, and P2 billion for the size of the transaction as defined in the implementing rules and
regulations.

"If the transaction meets the new [thresholds], the parties do have to notify us and we have to review the
transaction," PCC Commissioner Johannes Bernabe said, echoing Balisacan's statement.

Fare structure regulation

For its part, the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) said it will continue to regulate and
monitor the fare structure for the benefit of the riding public.

A hearing is set for April 3 to tackle the proposed fare hike of Uber and Grab.

"As [for] trust issues, we have [the] PCC whose mandate is to check the same. We will be awaiting [the]
manifestation to be filed by Uber to address the issues pending before the LTFRB," the transport regulator said in a
statement.

Grab earlier said a "dynamic surcharge" would continue to be applied based on several factors, including demand
and supply at that particular point in time, traffic conditions, and estimated time for the journey.

Customers who pick the taxi option, meanwhile, will continue to pay metered fares.

With Uber moving out of the picture, the LTFRB said it would welcome new transport network companies as long as
these are accredited.

"With the new guidelines right now, any new TNC is welcome as long as they are accredited by the LTFRB and they
pass the necessary documents for their respective accounts," the agency said. – Rappler.com

Commuters ask: What does Grab's takeover of Uber mean for us?
110
SHARES
58
1
0
Catalina Ricci S. Madarang (philstar.com) - March 28, 2018 - 9:55am
MANILA, Philippines — Starting next month, Filipinos will only have Singapore-based Grab to use for ride-sharing as
it acquires the operations of longtime rival Uber.

Grab and Uber were seen as an alternative to the many inconveniences on the road. But some commuters are
worried about the impending takeover, citing differences in services of the two companies.

Will fares be fair?

Therese Carillo, an Uber rider, said she finds Grab rides more expensive than Uber's, particularly during peak hours.
When in a hurry, Carillo opens both apps to compare prices before booking.
image: https://video.unrulymedia.com/native/images/in-art-close-icon-128x128-
16481b937f87b244a645cdbef0d930f8.png
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

image: https://video.unrulymedia.com/native/images/unmiss-sound-button-muted-
e74d67a0c85c3548f07d7564782a269c.svg

"Without competition, Grab drivers can now increase their prices because they know they're now the last resort of
consumers... The quality of their service may also lessen," she told Philstar.com.

In 2016, however, the LTFRB put a limit on the transport apps' surge prices. This lowered the maximum fare to twice
the rates for time covered and distance traveled. Before this order, surge prices could climb up to four times.

The prices were then affected by the LTFRB's imposition of a cap of 66,750 combined units for both the companies.

Grab Philippines said the calculation of fare upon its complete takeover on April 8 will not change and will still
depend on supply and demand.

Since Uber units will eventually expand Grab's supply, there is reason to look forward to lower rates. The rates after
all are based on the availability of drivers and the number of app users in an area.

What about the experience?

Other commuters who prefer one service over another are optimistic about the change.

Angelica Gorospe, a Grab user, uses both apps almost weekly especially if she has to go home late at night.

Gorospe said she's happy with the transition. While she also found that the services of Uber drivers were more
affordable, she would still use Grab.

"When I booked Uber last time, the driver accidentally went for the wrong route. The fare was only supposed to be
P94. But when we got to my house, the fare got higher because he took a longer route. It was not my fault, it was
his fault," she said.

Gorospe added that she approves of the combined Grab and Uber "as long as the policies of Grab will prevail,"
referring to its fixed rate upon booking.

Other riders, meanwhile, preferred Uber's service wherein drivers accept requests for rides without seeing the
destination. Grab, in contrast, takes the concept "ride-sharing" more literally in allowing drivers to choose requests
and routes.
In the past, both services adjusted its policies in response to complaints and concerns reported on the app. They also
rewarded drivers favored by riders the most.
"The most important thing is the same—you can book your daily rides easily, on-demand and choose the transport
service you prefer, whether car or taxi," Grab Philippines' statement read.

TRAIN’s next stations: Package 1B and 2

Package 1B of the TRAIN law (House Bill 7105) was filed on Feb. 5, 2018 with the House of Representatives and referred
to the committee on ways and means on Feb. 6, 2018. The Department of Finance (DOF) expects the bill to be passed
this month.
Package 1B constitutes a general and estate tax amnesty, and relaxation of our Bank Secrecy Law.
I am personally looking forward to the passage of this bill. This will not only benefit the government and the Filipino
taxpayers, but also enable us to promote honesty in paying taxes.
The estate tax amnesty will help our farmers maintain their lands, while the general tax amnesty can help our micro,
small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs).
In giving these small businesses a fresh start, we will be fostering economic growth from the ground up. However, we
cannot simply stop there.
The root cause of the waived fines needs to be addressed as well, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), in
partnership with the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the Center for Strategic Reforms of the Philippines, has
launched a certification program that aims to promote honesty and integrity in paying taxes to complement a general
tax amnesty.
Revenue Memorandum Circular 60-2017 officially announced the launch of the Seal Of Honesty (SOH) Certification
Program on July 2017.
Duly certified/awarded SOH taxpayers shall be entitled to benefits such as issuance of annual tax clearance without
prejudice to information not available at the time of the issuance, last priority audit and other privileges which DTI and
other government agencies may also extend to certified honest taxpayers.
You may visit www.sealofhonesty.ph or e-mail info@sealofhonesty.ph for more details about the certification.
To supplement the “economic growth from the ground up” of Package 1B, the government has also taken steps to foster
economic growth from outside.
The long overdue corporate tax reform bill, filed on March 21, 2018 as House Bill 7458, was formally referred to the
committee on ways and means on May 15, 2018. This bill constitutes Package 2 of the TRAIN law.
ADVERTISEMENT
Already, we have one of the highest income tax rates in Asia Pacific, and this tax reform aims to address just that.
The proposed bill will provide a rate that is more competitive than that charged in our neighboring countries,
complemented further by the lowered personal income taxes as implemented in Package 1 of the TRAIN lLaw.
We can expect this bill to result in more foreign direct investments and therefore spur economic development.
It is important to make sure that this reform will bring about equitable benefits to the currently promoted industries and
economic zones.
Although there are dissenting opinions, I agree with the DOF on “the need to rationalize and modernize the tax incentive
system to make incentives time-bound, performance-based and not excessively complex with far too many different,
even overlapping laws, rules and regulations.”
While I fully support TRAIN 2 on lowering corporate income tax to 25 percent or even lower as our fellow members of
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are planning to further lower their corporate income tax to remain
competitive, it has to be immediate and not “contingent on the modernization of the fiscal incentives regime toward
one that rewards those who truly deserve it.”

Duterte Year 2: TRAIN threatens poor, president's popularity

This piece is part of a news analysis series on the second year of the Duterte administration.

MANILA, Philippines — When he assumed the presidency two years ago, Rodrigo Duterte promised to bring inclusive
growth and pluck 9 million Filipinos from poverty.

But he has a problem: rising prices in the Philippines—partly stoked by his new tax law—continue to hit his political
base, and some say help from the government is likely to be delayed and inadequate.

In May, inflation spiked to a fresh five-year high of 4.6 percent, putting the year-to-date figure to 4.1 percent or above
the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas’ 2-4 percent target range
The BSP has responded by jacking up interest rates for a second consecutive month.

“Some of our customers get surprised whenever we abruptly raise the prices of goods due to higher costs,” said
Jeunesse Valerio, 29, who runs a general merchandise business in the province of Cavite in the CALABARZON Region,
where inflation accelerated to 4.0 percent in May from 3.9 percent a year ago.

“Passing on our costs drives away our customers,” Valerio added.

People have blamed soaring prices on the Duterte administration’s Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion law, which
lowers personal income taxes while raising excise levies on fuel and “sin” products, among others. Supply-side factors
like higher global oil prices—worsened by the continuing depreciation of the peso—are also pushing up commodity
prices.

Some lawmakers have called for a review of the TRAIN law, and have challenged the tax reform’s constitutionality
before the Supreme Court.

TRAIN’s impact
The TRAIN law, like other policies, was crafted based on macroeconomic assumptions by state economists led by
Duterte’s economic managers. According to the country’s policymakers, the TRAIN law has one goal: to make the tax
system simpler and more fair while shifting the burden off lower-income segments toward the “ultra-rich.”

But based on the Department of Finance’s estimates, which were used in crafting the TRAIN law, poor families will feel
the sting of inflation more than the rich will. To note, economic assumptions are not always correct so these are
reviewed and revised regularly.

The DOF’s projections also show the richest 10 percent will pay more for higher excise taxes on fuel—which contributes
to the price of other goods and services—given their greater oil consumption than the poor.
Inflation ‘spoils’ growth
Data from the Philippine Statistics Authority show consumer spending, which accounts for about seven-tenths of the
Philippine economy, grew at a slower pace of 5.6 percent in the first quarter of 2018 from 5.9 percent a year ago.

This was despite the higher take-home pay granted by the personal income tax cuts under the TRAIN law that took
effect last January 1, although analysts at ANZ Research had said the easing in consumer spending “is likely temporary
with some expenditures front-loaded ahead of the tax reform in early 2018.”

Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia said inflation “spoiled” the country’s economic growth in the first
three months of the year. The economy grew below the government’s target in the first quarter.

“Higher inflation tends to deter or soften demand for goods that are experiencing price increases,” Pernia said in a press
conference last May 10. “We need to really focus on inflation especially because it is the number one concern expressed
by Filipinos in surveys.”

The government will release subsidies of P200 a month to help the poorest Filipinos cope with rising prices. Critics say
this is not enough and the release of the aid has been delayed. Edd Gumban, file
Cash transfers and fuel vouchers
TRAIN’s inflationary effects have been hitting the poor. Policymakers saw this coming while the TRAIN act was being
crafted, thus the law has earmarked as much as 30 percent of its revenues for “social protection” programs.

These include:

Unconditional cash transfer amounting to P200 a month for the first year and P300 a month for the second and third
year
Fuel vouchers for PUJs, fare discount for all public utility vehicles, discounted purchase of NFA rice, free skills training
under TESDA
Programs for sugar farmers to increase productivity
The DOF earlier said the TRAIN law will rescue 21 million Filipinos in the long run. It also expects everyone, except the
richest, to be better off due to the combined effects of the tax reform and targeted transfers program.

Last February, the DOF said it would start handing out cash support to some 7.4 million households out of 10 million
targeted beneficiaries by March. But as inflation heats up, the DOF said the remaining 2.6 million families will have to
wait until August.

Problems with logistics have slowed down the distribution of subsidies, casting doubt on whether help will reach all
recipients this year. Some lawmakers have already urged the government to bump up the amount of monthly stipend,
which is fixed by law regardless of the size of the family.

At a Senate hearing last February, Claire Dennis Mapa—dean of the University of the Philippines School of Statistics—
pointed out that the TRAIN law’s safety nets for the poor are not enough to help them weather inflation, adding that the
poorest Filipino families spend more on food, especially rice, which was one of the drivers of inflation.

The Makabayan bloc at the House has filed a proposal to raise the national minimum wage to P750. Boy Santos, file
Meanwhile, the central bank has admitted it might miss its target as inflation is projected to average 4.5 percent in
2018, amid risks posed by “second-round” pressures from expected higher minimum wages and public transport fares.
But policy makers have vowed to bring inflation back on target next year.

A bloc at the House of Representatives consisting of seven party-list lawmakers has filed a bill to raise the national
minimum wage to P750 so workers can cope with rising prices of commodities.

The Trade Union Congress of the Philippines, the country’s largest labor group, is pushing for a P320 across-the-board
increase in the daily take-home pay of workers in Metro Manila.

But Trade Secretary Ramon Lopez had warned that a wage increase that is more than necessary is “dangerous” as it
could create “strong pressure” on inflation. For its part, the BSP sees a modest P18 to P20 wage hike.

“In case there are additional adjustments in minimum wage, maliit na lang ‘yun (it will be a small amount),” BSP Deputy
Governor Diwa Guinigundo said in May.

Duterte’s problem
Aside from revamping the country’s tax system, the TRAIN law also aims to partly fund the Duterte administration’s
“Dutertenomics” economic agenda, which is anchored on stronger law enforcement and massive infrastructure
spending, as captured by the slogan, “Build, Build, Build.”

In fact, the Philippines is expected to bag rating upgrades soon due to the implementation of the TRAIN law, which debt
watcher S&P dubbed the “cornerstone” of the Philippines’ fiscal strategy.

A higher rating can lower the cost of borrowing in foreign currencies and can increase the country’s ability to attract
foreign investment.

But according to a first quarter Social Weather Stations poll released last month, public satisfaction with the Duterte
administration’s handling of inflation has seen a sharp 18-point decline to 6 percent.

An April survey by pollster Pulse Asia, meanwhile, showed wages and inflation remain to the top national concerns
among Filipinos.

Duterte has acknowledged that the TRAIN act is fanning inflation, adding he is leaving it up to Congress to decide
whether to “amend or suspend or modify” the law.

“The inflation surge will definitely affect President Duterte’s survey ratings for the second quarter. I expect to see a drop
in his popularity,” University of Santo Tomas Political Science Professor Dennis Coronacion said in an interview.

“Past survey data show that the ratings of a president can drop significantly due to economy difficulties. A fine example
is former President Estrada, whose survey ratings began to drop significantly when our country’s economy registered a
negative growth in 1998,” Coronacion added. — with Philstar.com intern Ali Ian Marcelino Biong
Businesses warn ill effects of TRAIN Law package 2
The Philippine Association of Multinational Companies Regional Headquarters Inc. warns legislators that the removal of
tax incentives may scare away foreign investors

MANILA, Philippines— Some businesses aired their concerns over the proposed package 2 of the Tax Reform
Acceleration and Inclusion or TRAIN Law.

During the House Committee on Ways and Means’ second hearing on the proposed measure, the Philippine Association
of Multinational Companies Regional Headquarters Inc. (PAMURI) warned legislators that thousands of employees in the
Regional Operating Headquarters (ROHQ) sector will be displaced because of the proposal.

PAMURI also said that the removal of incentives would scare away potential foreign investors. The association warned
that some companies would migrate their operations to India, Malaysia, Vietnam and Hong Kong.

The group previously slammed the first tranche of the tax reform law, particularly the removal of the 15% preferential
tax rate for workers of the Business Process Outsourcing sector.

The Department of Finance (DOF) proposed in package 2 to gradually cut corporate income tax to 25% from 30, subject
to a streamlining of tax holidays. The agency also proposed to modify incentives for companies to make these
performance-based, targeted, time-bound and transparent.

TRAIN 2 also called for the repeal of at least 30 laws that grant incentives to investors.

Meanwhile, the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) reported that the total investments in PEZA enterprises
stood at a strong P1.99 trillion as of 2015, 78% of which are foreign capital. (READ: Philippines aims to identify 300 new
eco zones in January 2018)

“They would not have come [in the Philippines] if it weren’t for the incentives, as they are efficiency-seeking
enterprises,” PEZA deputy director general Mary Harriet Abordo said.

Representative Dakila Cua, chair of the committee, acknowledged the points raised during the hearing.

“Ayaw nating pumatay ng industriya, especially if lumabas doon sa cost benefit analysis ay nakakapagdulot ng benepisyo
[ang incentives] sa ekonomiya,” Cua said.

(We do not want to kill any industry, especially if the cost benefit analysis revealed that the economy benefited from the
incentives.)
Meanwhile, Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno said that foreign companies will still invest in the country despite the
proposal.

“In 2015 alone, we gave up P350 billion for tax incentives. Some firms will invest anyway with or without incentives,”
Diokno said.
ataan investors defend need for incentives
The investors raise concerns in a meeting with House officials and the Department of Finance to tackle the tax reforms
under the Trabaho bill

TRABAHO BILL. Speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and other officials meet with investors in Bataan on August 16, 2018.

BATAAN, Philippines – The Department of Finance (DOF) said the second batch of tax reforms that hurdled a House
committee was already amended to cater to the concerns of both foreign and local investors in the Philippines.

This was Finance Undersecretary Karl Chua's message to investors and locators of the Freeport Area of Bataan (FAB) on
Thursday, August 16.

He joined the closed-door meeting of Speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and House committee on ways and means
chairperson Dakila Cua with FAB investors held in Mariveles, Bataan.

"I told them the bill we have in Congress have undergone several amendments precisely to cater to some of their
concerns, but we also have national interest to promote beyond the locators because there are also thousands of
Filipinos and small and medium enterprises paying the regular rates and contributing also jobs and investments," said
Chua.

"So we are trying to strike a balance," he added.

The meeting was called so the House leaders and DOF could clarify some provisions of the Tax Reform for Attracting
Better and Higher Quality Opportunities (Trabaho) bill that FAB investors were "worried" about.

The Trabaho bill was already approved by the ways and means committee on August 7.

The bill will now go through its 2nd and 3rd readings at the House plenary before being transmitted to the Senate,
where it will have to go through another 3 readings before President Rodrigo Duterte may sign it into law.

Trabaho bill at a glance: The measure aims to cut corporate income taxes by 2 percentage points per year starting 2021,
eventually bringing down the current 30% to 20% by 2029.

Trabaho also seeks to rationalize fiscal incentives or remove certain perks. The bill retains the current incentives for two
years, for investors to have enough time to adjust to the new tax scheme.

The DOF estimated that the government lost some P178 billion in potential revenue in 2016 due to redundant tax
incentives. (READ: EXPLAINER: Why the government is pushing for 2nd TRAIN package)

What were the FAB investors' concerns? Cua said one major question was whether or not investors would have to pay
value-added tax (VAT) should Trabaho become a law.

He told them that under the bill, companies are exempt from paying VAT when they are "90% exporters."

"I also updated them on the longer years of incentive availment if they are investing in poor areas or relocating outside
Manila," Cua said.

Arroyo also said the investors pointed out their incentives granted by the FAB are good for 20 years, yet the timeframe is
longer in other investment promotion agencies in the country.

"And then they were discussing this one, for further study, they said that in the Freeport of Bataan, their incentives are
20 years. So it is time-bound, whereas in the others, it's forever. So that's something that the DOF will look at," said
Arroyo.

Patrick Martinet, president of the Freeport Area of Bataan and Investors Association, said they seek incentives due to
the rising costs of utilities and even manpower.

He then urged the Philippine government to address corruption first before focusing on the Trabaho bill.
"[The government should] try to address corruption, bribery, and try also to increase the capacity of the government to
increase tax collection. This means oblige people who don't pay tax to pay tax," he said.

What's next? Chua said he will be relaying to his superiors at the DOF the concerns of the Bataan investors for now.

But no promises were made during the meeting regarding changes to the Trabaho bill. These may be introduced during
the bill's period of amendments at the House plenary.

"Well, we didn't agree on anything.... So this is more of a listening [time] and I will bring back to my bosses the concerns
and see if we can address them," said Chua.

EXPLAINER: Why the government is pushing for 2nd TRAIN package

Economic managers aim to cut corporate taxes and push for a simpler fiscal incentive scheme, so what's stopping them?
Two Goliaths: politics and money.

MANILA, Philippines– President Rodrigo Duterte's economic team is pushing hard for the approval of the 2nd tranche of
the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) law amid strong opposition.

The Department of Finance (DOF) is proposing to cut corporate income tax and modernize fiscal incentives. These
reforms, said economic managers, are necessary.

But the 2nd TRAIN package has very few champions and many opponents.

While the deliberations at the House of Representatives are moving, the Senate is wary. Senate President Vicente Sotto
III said his colleagues fear the proposal would bring another wave of inflation.

Two of the country's top promotion investment agencies have spoken out against the measure as well. Several
businesses have raised concerns, too.

Corporate income tax

The Philippines has the highest corporate income tax (CIT) in Southeast Asia at 30%. Neighboring Indonesia and Malaysia
have 25% and 24%, respectively. Singapore has the lowest CIT in the region at 17%.

The goal is to reduce the CIT rate from 30% to 25% by 2022.

This is perhaps the least contentious feature of the 2nd TRAIN package.

At least 6 big businesses and civil society organizations have expressed their support for the proposed reforms,
according to the DOF.

The Management Association of the Philippines (MAP), in a letter to Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez III, said, "We
agree with the need to rationalize and modernize the tax incentive system to make incentives time-bound,
performance-based, and not excessively complex with far too many different, even overlapping laws, rules, and
regulations."

Dominguez said the measure is "pro-business, pro-investments, and pro-incentives."

While the country has the highest CIT in the region, it doesn't mean there's no sweet spot for businesses here.

Fiscal incentives

There are 14 investment promotion agencies in the Philippines which are authorized to grant tax incentives under their
respective charters.

The biggest among them are the Board of Investments (BOI) and the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA).

The 12 others are the Cagayan Economic Zone Authority (CEZA), Freeport Area of Bataan (FAB), Phividec Industrial
Authority (PIA), Clark Freeport and Special Economic Zone (CFEZ), John Hay Management Corporation (JHMC), Aurora
Pacific Economic Zone and Freeport Authority (APECO), Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA), Poro
Point Management Corporation (PPMC), Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA), Zamboanga Freeport Authority
(ZFA), Bataan Technological Park Incorporated (BTPI), and Philippine Retirement Authority (PRA).
On top of these, the Philippines also has 123 investment laws and 192 non-investment laws that provide tax incentives.
Communication and postal services seem to enjoy the most perks, with 43 related investment laws. Energy and oil,
economic zones, and agri-related industries have 14, 11, and 8 investment laws, respectively.

The income tax holiday (ITH) is the centerpiece among all the incentives, followed by the 5% gross income earned (GIE)
tax and customs duty exemption. The GIE is given indefinitely and is in lieu of income, value-added tax (VAT), and local
taxes.

Other incentives enjoyed by select industries include tax investment allowances; higher deductions for research and
development, training, and labor; net operating loss carryover; customs duty exemptions; and export subsidies.

Businesses and legislators are worried that cutting and rationalizing these perks would scare away investors. But the
DOF said its analysis shows investors are not taking the bait to begin with.

Reforms needed

According to the DOF, there is huge inequity under the current incentive system. Firms with no incentives pay the
regular rate of 30% of the net taxable income, while firms with incentives pay only 6% to 13%.

Out of the 915,000 registered firms in 2015, 2,844 firms were granted incentives. The government estimated P301
billion in foregone revenues due to the tax exemptions.

The government admitted that incentives are needed to attract investments that support the country's industries. These
investments must create better jobs, promote research and development, encourage innovation, stimulate local
industries, and diversify product space.

But economic managers insist that incentives must be performance-based, targeted, time-bound, and transparent.

The DOF said the government has been supporting over 600 firms unnecessarily for at least 15 years, and it's time for
these firms to help the government.

Economic managers also pointed out that these perks have not really boosted the Philippines' foreign direct investments
(FDI). The country's FDI has been growing, but not as much as those of its regional peers.

Since 2000, the Philippines has been overtaken by Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand in terms of FDI inflows.

Graph from the Department of Finance

Graph from the Department of Finance

Total foreign investment pledges during the 1st quarter of 2018 fell sharply by 37.9% compared to the same period last
year, according to the latest data of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).

The total foreign investment pledges approved by the 7 biggest investment promotion agencies stood at P14.2 billion.
Only CEZA posted year-on-year growth.

Foreign investment commitments plummeted by 51.8% to P105.6 billion in 2017 from P219 billion in 2016.

Export competitiveness has also declined and domestic industries have weak linkages to the export industry. The
country has also relied too much on imported parts, which in turn resulted in weak domestic output.

The agency conducted a cost-benefit analysis of the current tax incentive regime as well, and found that it costs
taxpayers at least P257,281 just to create one job.

The DOF also found that registered firms and non-registered firms have the same employment relative to size, wages,
level of exports relative to sales, and fixed assets. Both types of firms showed no difference in terms of productivity.

On average, the DOF found that for every peso granted as incentive, the government collected 32 centavos in taxes. But
if taxes from unnecessary incentives are accounted for, the government would have been able to collect 86 centavos.

"For every peso spent on incentive, between P0.60 [and] P1.15 comes back in benefits, even after accounting for
employment generated and spillovers, both direct and indirect," the DOF said.

Investment agencies react

PEZA and the BOI, which both oppose the DOF's proposal to trim fiscal incentives, presented their own analyses.

The BOI asserted that for every peso on tax expenditure, the government generates P2.02 additional tax revenue, P13
worth of domestic sales, and another P16.56 worth of export sales.

The agency added that the tax revenue from firms under the BOI was 31% higher than the remittances of 54
government owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) and 92% higher than the net financing position of government
financial institutions.

The BOI reported some P489.76 billion in CIT collections in 2015 alone.

Meanwhile, PEZA questioned the legality of the measure and cited Section 10 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution,
which states that "no law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed."

"This constitutional provision prohibits the enactment of any law that would impair the performance of contractual
obligation," PEZA said.

PEZA also reminded the DOF that the government invited both local and foreign investors to locate in economic zones
with the promise that they would enjoy incentives provided by law.

"Since the incentives in the registration agreement are obligatory on the part of the government, it cannot be revoked
by a subsequent law for it will result in the violation of the non-impairment clause which is guaranteed by the
Constitution," PEZA said, adding that its officials would be at risk of being sued.

In a nutshell, promotion investment agencies are wary that taking away fiscal perks would drive away both potential and
current investors.

But economic managers said granting tax incentives is not the only way to directly help firms. The DOF said the
government can use efficient and targeted subsidies as well as address infrastructure gaps and complex business
regulations.

No steam

While economic managers can confidently defend the proposal through data and graphs, the political realm would be
the true battleground for the 2nd package of the TRAIN law.

Senate President Sotto was previously quoted as saying that no senator wanted to sponsor the measure. He then said
on Tuesday, July 31, that he was willing to sponsor it as long as the DOF can assure him it will not lead to new or higher
taxes.

Senate ways and means committee chairman Sonny Angara, who supported the 1st TRAIN package, was coy on the
matter.

"[As the 2019 elections near], you cannot have hearings, no one goes to Congress, we don't have session," Angara said in
an ABS-CBN interview.

Taxes have always been a touchy matter for politicians, as it does not get them votes during the campaign period.

The 1st TRAIN package, which imposed higher taxes on sugary drinks and oil, was timed carefully by the government so
as not to coincide with elections.

What would it cost the government if the 2nd TRAIN package failed to materialize?

Recall that the government initially aimed to generate around P1 trillion in the next 5 years for the government's Build,
Build, Build program through the TRAIN law. The infrastructure push is estimated to cost around P7 to P8 trillion and will
be funded mostly by loans. (READ: Hits and misses of Duterte's infrastructure push)

But since the 1st TRAIN package was watered down in its final form, the government had to manage expectations. It is
now searching for other ways to raise funds.

Then again, the infrastructure push has not been as aggressive as expected. This sluggish pace could just buy the
government more time to generate funds amid the upcoming political circus – election season.
PEZA, Board of Investments challenge 2nd TRAIN package
The agencies warn that the 2nd tranche of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion law might spook investors and
may even be unconstitutional
MANILA, Philippines – The country's top investment promotion agencies challenged proposals included in the 2nd
tranche of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) law being pushed by the Department of Finance (DOF).
During the 3rd hearing of the House committee on ways and means on the matter, the Philippine Economic Zone
Authority (PEZA) and the Board of Investments (BOI) argued against the removal of tax incentives and other
administrative matters being proposed under TRAIN Package 2.
The measure aims to repeal at least 120 special laws on investment incentives and consolidate them under one omnibus
incentive code. It would also lower corporate income tax (CIT) rates.
PEZA questioned the legality of the measure and cited Section 10 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution, which states that
"no law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed."
"This constitutional provision prohibits the enactment of any law that would impair the performance of contractual
obligation," PEZA said.
PEZA also reminded the DOF that the government invited both local and foreign investors to locate in economic zones
with the promise that they would enjoy incentives provided by law.
"Since the incentives in the registration agreement are obligatory on the part of the government, it cannot be revoked
by a subsequent law for it will result in the violation of the non-impairment clause which is guaranteed by the
Constitution," PEZA said, adding that its officials would be at risk of being sued.
PEZA also urged the DOF to implement a grandfather rule – a provision in which an old rule continues to apply to some
existing situations while a new rule would apply to all future cases.
While PEZA ventured into the legal roadblocks, the BOI highlighted the benefits of granting incentives to investors.
(READ: Foreign investment pledges down 51.8% in 2017)
The BOI said more than two million jobs have been created since the agency's inception in 1968.
It also presented a cost-benefit analysis, in which it asserted that for every peso tax expenditure, the government gains
P2.02 in additional tax revenue, P13 worth of domestic deals, and P16.56 worth of export sales.
Finance Undersecretary Karl Kendrick Chua also presented a cost-benefit analysis on tax incentives as well, but with
glaringly different results from the BOI.
"On average, we find that for every P1 incentive we give, only 60 centavos come back, so on average, there are many
redundant or unnecessary incentives," Chua said.
Chua assured the investment promotion agencies and companies that the DOF does not intend to completely remove
incentives. He said some would be retained, so long as they are "performance-based, targeted, transparent, and time-
bound."
President Rodrigo Duterte specified in his 3rd State of the Nation Address that Congress should pass TRAIN Package 2 by
year-end. – Rappler.com

SC upholds Arroyo's acquittal in PCSO plunder case

(UPDATED) The High Court's affirmation is the latest blow to the Ombudsman's bid to hold accountable personalities in
the PCSO fund scam
BELATED BIRTHDAY GIFT. The SC's affirmation comes two weeks after Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's 70th
birthday where she is photographed here, on April 5, 2017, happily welcoming supporters. File photo by Mara
Cepeda/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – The Supreme Court (SC) en banc upheld the acquittal of former president Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo in her plunder case that stemmed from the controversial P366-million Philippine Charity Sweepstakes
Office (PCSO) fund scam.

SC Spokesman Theodore Te announced in a press briefing on Tuesday, April 18, that the en banc denied the motion for
reconsideration filed by the Office of the Ombudsman seeking the reversal of the July 2016 decision.

"The court noted that its decision had granted petitioners' respective demurrers of evidence which resulted in their
acquittal and thus any attempt to reconsider the decision would amount to double jeopardy," Te said in the briefing
held in Baguio City where the SC is having its annual summer session.
Te added that the same voting was observed in upholding the acquittal, or 11-4 with dissents from Chief Justice Maria
Lourdes Sereno, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, and Associate Justices Marvic Leonen and Benjamin Caguioa.
This means that President Rodrigo Duterte's appointees Associate Justices Noel Tijam and Samuel Martires voted in
favor of Arroyo.

When the SC acquitted Arroyo in July 2016, the same 4 justices also dissented. Of the 4, only Carpio is an appointee of
Arroyo; the rest were appointed by former president Benigno Aquino III.

"We thank the Supreme Court for putting an end to this case," said Arroyo's lawyer Laurence Arroyo in a statement on
Tuesday. "PGMA was actually acquitted way back in July [2016] when the SC granted her demurrer to evidence. That
should have been the end of the story. The Ombudsman's filing of a motion for reconsideration clearly placed the
former president in double jeopardy."

The principle of double jeopardy prevents an accused person from being tried again on similar charges, following an
acquittal or conviction.

Meanwhile, the SC also acquitted former PCSO budget and accounts manager Benigno Aguas. In its affirmation on
Tuesday, Te said that Associate Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe also dissented, resulting in a 10-5 vote.

The High Court's affirmation is the latest blow to the Ombudsman's bid to hold accountable personalities in the PCSO
fund scam.

Earlier this month, the Sandiganbayan acquitted former PCSO director Maria Fatima Valdes due to insufficient evidence.

What used to be 10 defendants in the plunder case, have been reduced to only two: former PCSO general manager
Rosario Uriarte and COA intelligence fund unit head Nilda Plaras.

TIMELINE: Gloria Arroyo – from plunder to acquittal

Here's what happened since a plunder case was filed against the former president in 2012 in relation to the alleged
misuse of PCSO funds
WHEELCHAIR. Former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo enters the Sandiganbayan court in a wheelchair during a 2012
hearing. File photo by Rolex dela Pena/EPA

MANILA, Philippines – Former president and 3-term Pampanga Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo got the plunder
case acquittal she was wishing for.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday, July 19, acquitted Arroyo of the plunder charge filed against her in relation to the
alleged misuse of P366 million in Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) intelligence funds from 2008 to 2010.

It is a scenario that observers have been fearing since lawyer and former Solicitor General Estelito Mendoza entered the
picture as her lead counsel. It was Mendoza who raised Arroyo's plunder case to the Supreme Court in 2015. (READ:
What has happened to the Arroyo plunder case?)

While the case was brought to the High Court only last year, a lot has already happened since the case was filed in 2012.

Below is a short timeline of what happened since the filing of the plunder case.

2012
July 16 - The Ombudsman filed before the Sandiganbayan a P366-M plunder suit against Arroyo in connection with the
alleged misuse of PCSO intelligence funds during the latter years of her administration.

October 4 - The Sandiganbayan First Division issued an arrest warrant against Arroyo. Her camp asked the court in the
morning to suspend the issuance of the warrant, but the court denied the plea.

October 24 - Arroyo asked the SC to stop the plunder trial before the Sandiganbayan. She also asked the High Court to
dismiss the plunder charges filed against her by the Ombudsman.

October 29 - Arroyo refused to enter any plea to the plunder case, prompting the Sandiganbayan to enter a "not guilty"
plea on her behalf.

2013
April 24 - In a pre-trial brief given by the Arroyo camp to the Sandiganbayan, she asked that "she be allowed to present
evidence last so that she may adopt the testimonies of her co-accused who may testify in their behalf or of such witness
as they may present during trial.”

June 30 - Arroyo was sworn into office as reelected Pampanga representative by a notary public inside the Veterans
Memorial Medical Center in Quezon City.

November 6 - The Sandiganbayan junked Arroyo's petition for bail.

2014
January 2 - Arroyo lawyer Anacleto Diaz pulled out his law firm Diaz Del Rosario & Associates from representing her in
the case. Replacing Diaz as lead defense lawyer was Modesto Ticman Jr of Gilera & Ticman Law Firm.
May 14 - The prosecution expressed its intention to rest its case after it presented to the Sandiganbayan all evidence
against Arroyo.

August 27 - The Arroyo camp filed a demurrer to evidence before the Sandiganbayan for her acquittal from plunder
charges. Arroyo said the evidence against her presented by the prosecution failed to prove her guilt beyond reasonable
doubt.

2015
April 6 - The Sandiganbayan denied the Arroyo camp's demurrer to evidence. This means Arroyo's camp now has the
burden to present counter-evidence to argue for her acquittal.

October 14 - Arroyo's son Mikey filed on her behalf her certificate of candidacy (COC) for re-election for a third and last
term as Pampanga representative in 2016.

October 15 - In a petition for certiorari, the Arroyo camp asked the SC to dismiss the plunder case. Through her new
lawyer, Estelito Mendoza, Arroyo asked the High Court to suspend proceedings before the Sandiganbayan.

October 20 - The SC granted Arroyo's appeal for a status ante quo order (SQAO), which temporarily stopped the plunder
trial for 30 days.

November 24 - The SC extended the SQAO to February 19, 2016.

2016
March 11 - The SC extended for another 60 days – or until April 20 – the suspension of Arroyo’s trial for plunder after
denying the motion of the Solicitor General opposing Arroyo’s renewed bid to extend the SQAO.

May 3 - For the third time, the SC extended the SQAO, this time for another 60 days until June 20.

July 19 - The Supreme Court, voting 11-4 ruled to acquit Arroyo.

Primer: The Office of the Solicitor General quo warranto plea.

“The Constitution does not include ineligibility to public position as a ground for impeachment. No one can be convicted
for ineligibility. The sole purpose of impeachment proceedings is to hold a public officer accountable for wrongdoings
committed in office. On the other hand, the quo warranto proceedings instituted by the Solicitor General seeks to oust
respondent because she is ineligible to be the Chief Justice.” — OSG
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a petition for quo warranto dated March 2, 2018, questioning Chief Justice
Ma. Lourdes Sereno’s qualifications for the top judicial post.
“This is a petition for quo warranto under Section 5(1), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution and Rule 66 of the Rules of
Court seeking the ouster of Respondent as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines.
“The suit is being filed with this Honorable Court as an exception to the application of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts
because the issues raised are of transcendental importance.
“This is a case of first impression: it is unprecedented, involving as it does the highest position in the Judiciary. Plainly, no
tribunal can best resolve it than the Court,” the OSG said as it began its 34-page petition.
Solicitor General Jose Calida maintained that while Section 2, Article XI (ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS) of the
1987 Constitution provides that impeachable officers may be removed on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable
violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust, these
impeachable officers may also be ousted from office through quo warranto proceedings because they are not excluded
from such proceedings under Section 5(1), Article VIII (JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT) of the Constitution.
“In other words, the Solicitor General is not asking the court (SC) to remove respondent for impeachable offenses: it is
not the concern of the petition. Instead, the Solicitor General has good reason to believe that respondent has no
authority to occupy the esteemed office of the Chief Justice of the Republic of the Philippines: she had not shown that
she possessed proven integrity, an indispensable qualification for appointment to the Judiciary pursuant to Section 7(3),
Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution,” the OSG said.
The OSG filed the petition due to Sereno’s non-compliance of the mandatory requirement of submission of Statements
of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs) set forth by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), the body that screens
applicants for posts in the judiciary, when she applied for the top judicial post in 2012.
Sereno submitted only 3 SALNs when she applied for the chief justice post: 2009, 2010, and 2011. The JBC required the
submission of all SALNs of an applicant in government service; later the substantial compliance was set at 10 years prior
to application to the top judicial post or from 2002 to 2011.
The reason for this minimum 10-year requirement is Section 8 of Republic Act No. 6713 (February 20, 1989. AN ACT
ESTABLISHING A CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES), which states,
“Any statement (SALN) filed under this Act shall be available to the public for a period of ten (10) years after receipt of
the statement. After such period, the statement may be destroyed unless needed in an ongoing investigation. ”
IMPEACHMENT NOT MANDATORY MEANS TO REMOVE IMPEACHABLE OFFICER
While Section 2, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution provides that impeachable officers “may be removed from office on
impeachment for, and conviction of…” the OSG said this “cannot be construed as having mandatory effect,” unlike its
counterpart provision in the 1973 Constitution.
“Unlike the wordings of Section 1, Article IX of the 1935 Constitution and Section 2 of Article XIII of the 1973
Constitution, which both state, ‘shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of,’ the present
phraseology of Section 2, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution provides ‘may be removed from office on impeachment for,
and conviction of.’
“The use of the word ‘may’ in the provision is construed as permissive and operating to confer discretion. It cannot be
construed as having mandatory effect. Where the words of a statute (or the Constitution, for that matter) are clear,
plain, and free from ambiguity, they must be given their literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation,”
the OSG said.
In cases of ineligibility, the proper means is through quo warranto proceedings, the OSG explained.
GROSS MISREPRESENTATION
The OSG further accused Sereno of committing “gross misrepresentation before the JBC when she wrote to explain she
could not produce her other SALNs because she could ‘no longer retrieve them.’”
“Truth, however, is that she failed to file her SALN eleven times from 1986 to 2006,” Calida said.
Sereno’s submitted SALN’s committed falsehoods and “perjurious act,” said Calida:
Sereno’s SALN dated December 31, 1998 was filed only in 2003, or five years beyond the period required by law; her
2009 SALN reflects she was holding the SC Associate Justice post, when it fact she was appointed to the high court only
in August 2010’ when she resigned in June 2006 as a UP professor, she should have submitted a SALN as of the same
year, however, her 2006 SALN bears no stamp receipt from UP, was only signed on July 27, 2010, the same day she
submitted it to the JBC.
“It appears that she fabricated her 2006 SALN in an attempt to submit a SALN to the JBC during her application for
Associate Justice in 2010. These are perjurious acts further bolster Sereno’s utter lack of integrity,” Calida said.
“Surely, the Solicitor General cannot just sit idly by and allow an unqualified person such as Respondent to continue
occupying the highest seat in the highest court of the land: that would be a dereliction of his duty under the
Constitution.”
Calida reiterated his position that Sereno’s failure to file and submit her SALNs prove she “is not a person of proven
integrity,” and “failed to prove her integrity before the JBC.”
He stressed faithfully complying with the requirement of filing of SALNs is not an additional qualification to establish the
integrity of magistrates of the judiciary, rather it is an “implied” requirement.
STATE NOT BOUND BY ONE-YEAR PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD
Section 11, Rule 66 of the Rules of Court provides that “a petition for quo warranto against a public officer or employee
shall be filed within one year after the cause of his ouster, or the right of the petitioner to hold such office or position,
arose.”
The OSG, however, argued that under the maxim nullum tempus occurs regi (‘no time runs against the king’),
prescription does not apply to the state, does not apply in cases initiated by the Republic/government. In the Sereno
quo warranto case, the OSG, as an entity of the state, is not bound by the rule on prescription.
“This limitation… does not apply to the petitioner. It (OSG) has an imprescriptible right to bring a quo warranto
petition….” the OSG said.
Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the one-year bar applies to the Republic, the OSG insisted the petition was
filed within the reglementary period, which it insists, began at the time of discovery of Sereno’s non-filing of SALNs
during the House impeachment hearings.

Cayetano tells Aquino: Answer my questions instead of 'trivializing' sea dispute issue
MANILA, Philippines — The word war between former President Benigno Aquino III and Foreign Affairs Secretary Alan
Peter Cayetano continues to rage after the latter urged the former leader to answer his questions about the previous
government's approach to the South China Sea dispute.
In his second open letter to Aquino, Cayetano accused Aquino of failing to provide information on the events and his
decisions that led to the "extremely complex" situation in the West Philippine Sea.
The West Philippine Sea is the part of the South China Sea claimed by the Philippines as part of its exclusive economic
zone.
Cayetano said Aquino should answer the questions he posed on Friday instead of "trivializing the issue."
"Merely unleashing your attack dog, Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, or asking the public to just Google are not helping the
situation for our people and our government," Cayetano said in his open letter.
Responding last week to the former leader's call for more transparency, Cayetano said that Manila lost control over the
Scarborough Shoal under Aquino.
The foreign affairs secretary also posed several questions to the former leader such as about the role of Trillanes in
backchannel talks and details of Aquino's meeting with the US and its commitment on the disputed waters.
Cayetano also wanted Aquino to propose alternatives to the current policy track of the administration of President
Rodrigo Duterte, who has since pursued closer ties to Beijing.
Hours later, Aquino responded and said that Cayetano's questions could be answered by a quick online search.
He added that Cayetano also had access to files and people who could shed light on the issue
The former Philippine leader said answering Cayetano's questions would expose the country's "playbook and
intelligence" to China, which could make the current government's life more difficult.
Cayetano, in his latest open letter, said that searching for the answers to his questions online yielded more questions
than answers.
"It revealed far more serious problems that emanated from an unclear chain of command, serious miscalculations, and
the absence of an end game for the country," Cayetano said.
The foreign secretary asked Aquino to explain the need for a backroom negotiator and if the efforts of former Foreign
Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario were not enough.
He also urged Aquino to disclose his instructions to Trillanes and the reports he had on his trips to China.
"Is it true, as Senator Trillanes claims, that you considered his secret mission in back-channeling, a success? Did you
consider surrendering Scarborough Shoal a success?" Cayetano asked.
The country's top diplomat also urged Aquino to be transparent about the agreement for the simultaneous withdrawal
of Philippine and Chinese vessels in the Scarborough Shoal.
Cayetano inquired: "Senator Trillanes reportedly told you that Secretary del Rosario had been giving you false
information about Chinese actions. What were these supposedly false information? Were these information indeed
proven to be false?"
He also asked about the contents of the message he waited from Trillanes during the crucial moments of the standoff
between Manila and Beijing.
He also reiterated the need for Aquino to disclose Washington's commitment to helping Manila in the sea dispute and
the reason why he failed to order Philippine ships to return to the Scarborough Shoal when China reneged on its
commitment.
"This is not about our present playbook but yours. Your playbook is something already known to the Chinese
Government and yet you refuse to share this and other facts with our people who knew nothing about it," the foreign
chief said.
"Our current playbook is what we have to guard closely, not yours. Yet you and your allies continue to undermine the
present approach that is called for in our current playbook. Do you or don’t you want to protect our country’s
interests?" he added.
Cayetano also called Trillanes as Aquino's attack dog after the senator called him a political snake on Sunday.
"Senator Trillanes is again trying to confuse our people. I was neither your close ally nor your enemy. I was the Minority
Leader, not a member of the majority at the height of the controversy on the West Philippine Sea," he said.
The Philippines and China, as well as a handful of neighboring nations, are currently locked in a dispute in the South
China Sea, which is believed to hold vast reserves of natural resources and oil.
The Philippines won in the arbitral case it filed under Aquino, and the decision invalidated much of China's claim to the
waters.
MARAWI CITY, Philippines – At least a decade ago, in 2007, the intelligence community in the Philippines was already
watching Marawi City residents Cayamora Maute and his wife Farhana.
The parents of the now notorious "Maute Brothers", who are responsible for the ongoing clashes in their homeland,
were coddling visiting operatives of Indonesian terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), according to an intelligence report
obtained by Rappler.
The well-connected couple who has homes and businesses in Marawi City and Butig town in Lanao del Sur and Quezon
City helped the terrorists move personnel, funds, and supplies. They used as front Farhana’s commodity trading business
in Surabaya, Indonesia.
Back in those days, Al Qaeda was the world’s biggest terrorist network and JI was a member. It was notorious for the
worst act of terror in the world’s biggest Muslim country, the 2002 Bali bombing that killed more than 200.
The military used the Maute couple as tracers, according to a military officer privy to the operations, to detect activities
of the JI operatives here.

PATRIARCH AND MATRIARCH. Cayamora (L) and Farhana (R) Maute, parents of the notorious Maute Brothers. Sourced
photo
The year 2012 was significant. The Mautes led the military to Ustadz Sanusi, one of 7 JI members who sought refuge in
Mindanao. The terrorist allegedly involved in the 2005 beheading of 3 Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia was killed inside
the compound of the Mindanao State University (MSU) in Marawi. (READ: PH military says Indonesian terrorist killed)
An intelligence report said Sanusi was found in a house there owned by Mohammad Khayyam Maute, one of the many
sons of Cayamora and Farhana who would 5 years later wreak havoc in the city they grew up in.
It seemed the military had relaxed on the Maute family after Sanusi’s death in 2012. Little did they know that the sons
would soon bring into the country the ideology of a terrorist group even more radical than Al Qaeda.
Omar Khayyam and Abdullah are the known leaders of the so-called “Maute Brothers” of the “Maute Group”, although
they prefer the name Dawla Islamiyah. Both are believed to have been radicalized in the Middle East. Omar Khayyam
completed Islamic Studies at Al-azhar University in Egypt. Abdullah also finished his Islamic Studies in Jordan, according
to intelligence reports.
Omar is believed to be the brains behind the group while Abdullah serves as the commander of its military operations,
athough a video shows even Mohammad contributed to this role.
We tell the story of a well-connected family behind a homegrown terrorist group that most effectively spread the ISIS
ideology in the Philippines. This account is based on information from the intelligence community and multiple
interviews with security officers, local officials, and residents of the two communities they sought to seize – Butig and
Marawi City.
Beginnings of the 'Maute Brothers'

LEADERS. Omar and Abdullah Maute are the known leaders of the so-called Maute Brothers.
It was also about the year 2012 when the Maute brothers began to display their extemist ideology and tendency for
violence, according to Marawi residents interviewed by Rappler.
They were believed to be members of a violent clique that started out attacking gays in the city, warning them to “stop
what you are doing." Later, the group progressed to killing soldiers.
Samira Gutoc, back then an Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) assemblywoman and MSU regent, told
Rappler how she asked the local police and military to investigate violence in the university. She said she was horrified to
see pictures of “young men in turbans” responsible for attacks against victims who were all Christians.
Residents now say that these were the beginnings of the Maute Group. But the military had relegated them to the
sidelines, it appeared, as the following year would become one of the most challenging times for the country.
In between the May 2013 midterm elections, Filipinos attacked Sabah in February, followers of Moro National Liberation
Front (MNLF) founder Nur Misuari seized villages in Zamboanga City in September, a massive earthquake hit Bohol in
October, and a super typhoon hit Eastern Visayas in November.
Raising the ISIS black flag in Butig
The sons of Cayamora and Farhana regained the attention of the country’s security apparatus in 2014 when they
pledged allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS), the more violent incarnate of Al Qaeda.
But it was in 2016 when they earned their now notorious name "Maute Brothers" after they attacked a military
detachment and killed two soldiers in nearby Butig, the hometown of Farhana.
________________________________________
'For me, this is not jihad. They are after power and wealth by destroying the community,' says Mayor Jimmy Pansar of
Butig, Lanao del Sur.
________________________________________
At least 4 military operations – Haribon 1, 2, 3 – were launched in Butig against the Maute Brothers in 2016. In April,
they mimicked ISIS executions when they beheaded two Christian sawmill workers whom they dressed with orange
clothes. In November, they flew the ISIS black flag at the town hall.
The Maute Group would also be blamed for the September 2, 2016 Davao City bombing that killed at least 15 people.
It was in Butig where Abu Sayyaf senior leader Isnilon Hapilon, the so-called prince of ISIS in Southeast Asia, would join
the Maute Group in December 2016 to supposedly hatch a plan to establish a caliphate in Central Mindanao, according
to the government.
The military demonstrated its force against their combined forces, deploying the brand new fighter jets of the air force
for the first time to conduct surgical air strikes.
In the middle of military operations, President Rodrigo Duterte traveled to a town adjacent to Butig to plead to local
leaders to shun the ISIS ideology. "Alam ninyo ‘yung Maute, if they are inspired doon sa ISIS, magkaleche-leche ang
buhay natin (You know, if the Maute is inspired by ISIS, we will all be in trouble)," Duterte said in a speech there.
But his emissaries to the Maute Group failed to talk them out of their plans.
When the clashes started in Marawi, Duterte immediately declared martial law in Mindanao.
TROOP VISIT. President Rodrigo Duterte visits troops running after the Maute Group in Butig, Lanao del Sur in November
2016. Photo by Carmela Fonbuena/Rappler
ISIS 'grand plan'
The military thought Hapilon was severely wounded in Butig and perhaps dead. But he would show up in Marawi City on
May 23. They raided the safe house in Barangay Basak Malutlut, where they found him, but failed yet again to snare
him.
What surprised them was the reaction of Marawi residents. The recruits of the Maute Brothers – supposed ISIS cells in
the city – sprung out of the streets to conduct simultaneous attacks in the city.
While the military ran after the leaders, local politicians and their families took their guns to defend city hall and the
capitol from the terrorists who wanted to raise the ISIS black flag there.
A video seized from a safe house in Basak Malutlut shows Hapilon and the Maute Brothers planning an attack on
Marawi. Armed Forces chief General Eduardo Año said they wanted to seize the city and declare it an Islamic caliphate
on the 1st day of Ramadan. The grand plan, he said, is to replicate how ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al Bhagdadi took the Iraqi
city of Mosul in 2014.
PLANNING THE ATTACK. Screenshot of a video the military recovered from a Maute safe house showing them planning
an attack in Marawi City.
The video also shows, according to Año, that the Maute Brothers were on top of the operations even as they recognized
Hapilon as the ISIS emir.
Año said that while the military raid failed to snag Hapilon on May 23, it succeeded in foiling their plan to seize Marawi
City.
The Marawi crisis has entered its 2nd month. On May 25, the Islamic city celebrated its saddest Eid celebration with
most of its 200,000 residents away from their homes, some living in squalid evacuation centers.
“This fighting brought by the local militant group robbed us of the chance to observe Ramadan peacefully and stole from
us the opportunity to celebrate Eid’l Fitr and to be with our loved ones on the religious occasion,” said Zia Alonto
Adiong, the spokesman of the crisis management committee.
As of Saturday, June 24, the clashes have killed at least 69 soldiers, 280 terrorists, and 26 civilians. Many houses have
been bombed or burned.
Connected but opposed to the MILF
After Sanusi’s death, the Maute family went into hiding in Butig because they were supposedly afraid they would be
arrested for coddling the foreign terrorist, according to an intelligence report prepared after the Butig attacks.
The mountainous hometown of Farhana is where Camp Bushra is located, one of the biggest camps of the Moro Islamic
Liberation Front (MILF), the country’s dominant Muslim rebel group that has been fighting for self-rule in Mindanao.
________________________________________
'At the core of the Maute Group is the radical ideology supporting ISIS. They will not kill themselves for money or power
alone,' a local official tells Rappler.
________________________________________
Butig saw massive military operations in the 2000 all-out war waged by then president Joseph Estrada. It would enjoy
relative quiet since the MILF began talks with the government to create a new Bangsamoro region envisioned to replace,
and have more powers than, the existing ARMM.
The Maute Brothers would disturb this peace when they brought the war to Butig. The military offensives also destroyed
houses, buildings, and government offices, as well as displaced thousands of residents.
The Maute family is well connected to the MILF hierarchy, but they have long opposed its leadership and the peace
process it pushed.
Cayamora Maute, an engineer, previously served the MILF engineering bureau, according to an intelligence report. But
it’s Farhana who is practically royalty. She belongs to the distinguished political Romato clan, which intermarried with
the Mimbantas who ruled the MILF for decades.
The Maute brothers are the first cousins of Azisa Romato, the wife of the late MILF vice chairman for military affairs
Abdulaziz Mimbantas. Mohammad Khayyam is also married to a Mimbantas daughter – it was in their house where
Sanusi was killed, according to an intelligence report.
In Marawi, son Abdullah Maute is married to a sister of former mayor Pre Salic. Salic and his brother Omar "Solitario" Ali,
also a former mayor, are among the politicians the government singled out for helping the Maute Brothers. They are
facing charges of rebellion.
The links to influential families grew through marriages with families not only in Butig and Marawi but also in nearby
Masiu, where Farhana sought refuge and was arrested at the height of the clashes.
These relations have triggered suspicions against the MILF despite the rebel group having cooperated with the military
in its offensives.
But the positions are clear. The MILF has categorically opposed the ISIS ideology that the Maute Group promoted.
The blood ties, however, have allowed the Maute Group to recruit among MILF clans, especially among the “second
generation MILF” or the children of its members “do not listen to their elders.”
Recruitment
The Maute Group exploited the growing weariness of young Muslims over the continued failure of government to
deliver on its promises pertaining to the peace process.
There were many of them in Butig, Marawi, and other places in Mindanao. Successive disappointments with
government made them susceptible to the radical ideology of ISIS and the need to take their own territory where they
could establish a caliphate in Mindanao.
In Butig and in Marawi, Rappler interviews showed that the recruitment strategy was almost the same. They spoke with
residents about their ideology. Those who appeared open to the teachings were invited to discuss the ideology further.
At a certain stage they were made to swear on the Koran and vow secrecy.
"Swearing on the Koran is sacred. You can't take your word back," said a Butig resident.
In Marawi, a lot of the recruitment was done on social media. In Butig, where there is no internet, it was face-to-face
engagement. It was also in Butig where they brought fighters for training.
They also recruited children based on the promise that they would allow them to study the Koran. They turned them
into fighters instead.
Butig Mayor Jimmy Pansar said most of the fighters in Butig were not residents. “Karamihan ng recruits from Marawi,
Maguindanao, at Balik Islam.” (Most of the recruits were from Marawi, Maguindanao, and Islam converts.)
In Marawi, the fighters of the Maute Group were given a boost by Abu Sayyaf fighters and foreign fighters who took
advantage of a Tabligh convention of Sunni Islamic missionaries to fly to Marawi City. Tabligh Jamaat is said to be a
movement that calls on Muslims to return to Sunni Islam, the world's largest religious denomination.
The military said the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters and the Ansarul Khalifa Philippines of Sarangani, the two
other ISIS-linked terrorist groups, planned to reinforce the fighters in Marawi.
War for wealth and power?
When Pansar was elected after two Maute attacks in 2016, among the first things he did was meet with the residents of
Butig to discourage them from joining the terrorist group.
“After my assumption, I met with religious leaders and stakeholders – in addition to municipal officials and barangay
chairman – to explain to the population that what they are doing is wrong. Most of the residents understood that. It’s
not jihad, 101% it’s really wrong,” Pansar told Rappler in an interview back in December.
He was 5 months into his term, in November 2016, when the Maute Group succeeded in raising the ISIS black flag in
Butig. It’s what the terrorist group also wanted to do in Marawi City.

MOST WANTED. These photos of the Mautes are displayed in checkpoints in Lanao provinces.
A common denominator between the group’s biggest attack in Butig and the siege of Marawi City, according to
residents, is this: the sitting mayors are not Maute allies.
“For me, this is not jihad. They are after power and wealth by destroying the community,” said Pansar.
The Maute has received foreign funding, mostly believed to have been coursed through Farhana. Malaysia's most
wanted terrorist Mahmud Ahmad also channeled at least P30 million ($600,000) to finance the attack, according to Año.
Duterte himself had claimed that narco-politics helped fund the Maute Group, fitting the conflict into the narrative of his
war on drugs. Residents are not dismissing this.
Here lies a truth about conflicts in Mindanao. Families join and support armed groups for various reasons – religion,
pride, power, and wealth to name a few. It is dangerous to oversimplify the cause of conflict as one or another to fit a
narrative that government wants to push.
Even the "emir" of ISIS in Southeast Asia, Isnilon Hapilon of the Abu Sayyaf Group, belongs to an organization that
kidnaps foreign hostages to rake in millions of ransom money. Occasionally, it uses the ISIS black flag to up the group's
international profile. But the Abu Sayyaf itself has too many factions and Hapilon is known to have kept some ideology
despite the banditry of his group.
________________________________________
Peace advocates argue that the Marawi crisis underscores the need to complete the peace process with the MILF to
prevent more young Muslims from taking matters into their own hands.
________________________________________
"At the core of the Maute Group is the radical ideology supporting ISIS. They will not kill themselves for money or power
alone," a local official told Rappler.
Urgency of peace talks with MILF
Like the young Muslims tired of war, the MILF leadership itself has expressed disappointment over the slow progress of
the peace talks under Duterte. But their actions showed commitment to the peace process.
In Butig, the MILF ordered its fighters to give way and not intervene with military operations.
In Marawi, the MILF created "peace corridors" to assist trapped civilians trying to escape the war zone and help secure
adjacent towns where the conflict could spill over.
As the battle rages in Marawi City, a new draft for a law that will create the Bangsamoro region has been submitted to
Duterte. He is expected to endorse this to Congress when it resumes session in July
Peace advocates argue that the Marawi crisis underscores the need to complete the peace process with the MILF to
prevent more young Muslims from taking matters into their own hands.
And while the military is confident they have defeated the terrorists in Marawi, the ISIS threat will not be obliterated
even when the fighting in Marawi stops. As ISIS faces defeat and loses territory in the Middle East, the Asian fighters are
expected to return and seek refuge back home.
A political solution to the Mindanao problem is urgent. There is no time to waste. – Rappler.com
DUTERTE DECLARES MARTIAL LAW IN MINDANAO
(4th UPDATE) President Rodrigo Duterte cuts short his trip to Russia, as Maute Group members attack Marawi City in
Mindanao
MARAWI BURNING. At least 3 separate fires broke out in the city on May 23, 2017, as the gun battle rages between the
military and the Maute Group. Photo from @attysamina
MOSCOW, Russia (4th UPDATE) – President Rodrigo Duterte declared martial law in the island of Mindanao following
the attack of the Maute Group in Marawi City.
"As of 10 pm Manila time, he has already declared martial law for the entire island of Mindanao," said Presidential
Spokesman Ernesto Abella.

"This is possible on the grounds of existence of rebellion because of what is happening in Mindanao," he added. (READ:
Martial Law 101: Things you should know)
Abella made this announcement on Tuesday, May 23, in Moscow, Russia at around 6:30 pm (11:30 pm Manila time).
Martial law will last 60 days, Abella pointed out. Asked if there is already an official document of the declaration,
Duterte's spokesman said "details to follow."
"He has full confidence in the AFP and PNP's management of the situation," Abella also said. (READ: Timeline of Marawi
clashes)
Because of the situation in Marawi and his declaration of martial law, Abella added that Duterte is cutting short his trip
to Russia. The Presidential Communications Operations Office said the President will leave Russia at 5 am on
Wednesday, May 24, Manila time. He is expected to arrive in Manila at 5 pm on Wednesday.
Foreign Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano will stay behind to witness the signing of agreements with Russian ministers.

"The President does not take lightly the declaration of martial law in any part of the Philippines," Cayetano said. "The
President doesn't take it lightly because he knows and his Cabinet knows that there are implications, for example in
tourism."
"But the priority of the President is the safety, the lives and property of people of Mindanao. So he cannot sacrifice the
lives of people for any amount of money or any economic reason," he added.

In the same press conference on Tuesday, Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana was asked whether there was a lapse in
intelligence that allowed the Maute Group to enter Marawi.
Lorenzana said the group's presence in the mountainous areas of Marawi City was not unknown to government forces.
"I don't think there is a lack of intelligence, just appreciation of intelligence that was lacking there. Baka akala nila
kayang kaya (They might have thought it's easy), but... there's just intelligence there, it's just the appreciation of what
the intelligence means that medyo nagkamali sila (they made a mistake)," he said.
TIMELINE: Marawi clashes prompt martial law in all of Mindanao
(UPDATED) Clashes erupt in Marawi City Tuesday afternoon, May 23. At the end of the day, President Rodrigo Duterte
declares martial law in all of Mindanao.
POLICE CAR? An ISIS black flag is seen atop what appears to be a police car taken by the Maute Group. Photo by Chico
Dimaro Usman
MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – Residents of Marawi City were jolted by loud explosions Tuesday afternoon, May 23,
when clashes erupted between the military and local terrorist groups.
The situation worsened as fires broke out, power was cut, and clashes continued. At the end of the night, President
Rodrigo Duterte declared martial law in all of Mindanao.
The military said it is running after "high value targets" who are contained in the military's area of operations in the
vicinity of Barangay Malutlut, a commercial and residential area between the Mindanao State University and the city
center.
Incidents in the vicinity of the city center are supposedly perpetrated by sympathizers of the terrorists the military is
hunting down.
Here's a timeline of events that happened since Tuesday. The military said they are deploying more troops to control the
situation on the ground.
Tuesday, May 23
2 pm The military launches a surgical strike in Barangay Basak Malutlut against "high value targets" belonging to the Abu
Sayyaf Group and the Maute Group after receiving reports from the community about the presence of up to 15
suspicious armed men in the village.
Clashes erupt while the troops were approaching the target area.
Residents take to social media to report loud explosions and the presence of soldiers and suspected Maute members on
the streets.
5 pm Maute members reportedly occupy Amai Pakpak Medical Center, a public hospital in Marawi City.

6 pm Residents report on social media that Marawi City Jail is under siege. Fire breaks out at the facility early evening on
Tuesday. (READ: 3 fires break out in Marawi as clashes rage)
7 pm The military confirms that at least 5 soldiers were wounded as pursuit operations continue.
8 pm The police confirm one cop was killed in clashes with the Maute Group. (READ: Slain cop 'came to love the people
of Marawi')
8 pm onwards. Two other fires break out in Dansalan College and Saint Mary's Church.
10:30 pm The military tells Rappler that pursuit operations continue against the high value targets. Lieutenant Colonel
Jo-Ar Herrera, spokesman of the 1st Infantry Division, says the targets are contained in the military's area of operations.
He says that the fires were perpetrated by sympathizers.
11:30 pm From Russia, President Rodrigo Duterte declares martial law in the whole of Mindanao. The country's top
security and military officials are with him in his state visit to Russia. (LOOK: Duterte proclamation declaring martial law
in Mindanao)
Not long after, Malacañang announce Duterte is cutting short his Russia trip and is flying back home immediately.
Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana says they need the power to control the movement of threat groups, conduct
searches, and make arrests.
Evening Russian President Vladimir Putin extends his condolences to President Duterte over the Marawi attack during
their last-minute bilateral meeting before Duterte's return to Manila.
Back in the Philippines, ARMM Governor Mujiv Hataman condemns the Maute Group for sowing terror in Marawi City.
Wednesday, May 24
Past midnight Davao City is placed on "lockdown" following the Marawi clash. Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte-Carpio,
daughter of President Duterte, advises residents to stay inside their homes, and urges visitors to cancel their trips to
Davao unless these are very important.
Later on Wednesday, ABS-CBN reports that Duterte-Carpio downgraded the alert to a "hold and secure situation."
1 am Rappler reports that Abu Sayyaf senior leader Isnilon Hapilon was the target of the military operation in Marawi
City, as confirmed by Defense Secretary Lorenzana.
9 am In a TV interview, Marawi City Mayor Majul Usman Gandamra appeals to the government to uphold human rights
of innocent civilians in Mindanao during martial law.
The Commission on Human Rights issues a similar plea the same day. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch
issue a similar call the next day.
Late morning In an interview with radio dZBB, Bishop Edwin dela Peña of the Prelature of Marawi reveals that a priest, a
college professor, and at least 3 others have been taken hostage by the Maute group.
Afternoon The Philippine National Police (PNP) urges the public to be careful about sharing unverified information on
social media, and limit posts to "what they know and what they see."
Meanwhile, AFP Public Affairs Office chief Colonel Edgard Arevalo says they have yet to be given clear specific orders on
how to go about martial law. At this point, the PNP is also still "crafting the guidelines" for the implementation of martial
law.
The next day, it is reported that the Department of National Defense has issued a memorandum dated May 24 to the
AFP and to all DND bureaus and offices reiterating to uphold the rule of law and human rights in Mindanao.
3 pm The military clears the Amai Pakpak Medical Center of Maute presence. 78 civilians were held captive here.
4 pm In an interview with Rappler, Social Welfare Undersecretary Hope Hervilla calls on displaced Marawi residents to
remain calm, heed the warnings of authorities, and organize themselves. (READ: Groups call for donations for crisis-hit
Marawi)
Around 4:45 pm President Duterte arrives in Manila. In a speech, he explains that he declared martial law in Mindanao
because of the threat of the terrorist group Islamic State or ISIS.
Duterte also eyes the expansion of martial law to the Visayas and Luzon if the threat of ISIS persists.
He also announces the designation of AFP chief General Eduardo Año as martial law administrator. Año is supposed to
become the secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) this week, but Duterte extends his
tour of duty to 6 more months after the Marawi clash.
9:50 pm Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III receives a certified copy of Proclamation No. 216 from Malacañang.
Evening The DILG confirms that two jailbreaks have taken place in Marawi during the clash, resulting in 107 inmates
being freed.
Meanwhile, the AFP reports that at least 5 soldiers have been killed and 31 others wounded in clashes with local errorist
groups in Marawi.
Thursday, May 25
Morning Fire and loud explosions rock Marawi on the 3rd day of the clash. (IN PHOTOS: Explosions, fire, trapped
residents on Day 3 of Marawi siege)
The majority leaders of both Senate and the House say that Congress is "unlikely" to revoke the declaration of martial
law in Mindanao.
It is also reported that President Duterte will meet with top PNP officials in Davao City to discuss the implementation of
martial law.
Afternoon An army official says a spillover of the Maute Group to the Visayas is "unlikely" since the terrorists have no
bases nor sympathizers in the Visayas.
Meanwhile, Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II tells critics of Duterte's declaration of martial law in Mindanao to
challenge it before the Supreme Court.
Former Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada suggests that President Duterte declare an all-out war against the terrorists.
9:55 pm Senate President Pimentel and House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez separately receive the President's report on
the declaration of martial law in Mindanao.
Evening The AFP reports that at least 6 soldiers have been killed on Thursday, bringing the casualty among government
forces to 11 soldiers and 2 policemen since May 23. Another 7 soldiers are injured.
On the side of the Maute Group, 31 members have been killed since military operations began.
It is also reported that terrorist groups have harassed the military camp in Marawi City on Thursday. – Rappler.com
MARTIAL LAW 101: THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW
(UPDATED) Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, a declaration of Martial Law can be revoked or extended by
Congress and reviewed by the Supreme Court
MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – Martial law in Mindanao will last for another year as the Senate and House of
Representatives approved in a joint session on Wednesday, December 13, President Rodrigo Duterte’s request to extend
the effectivity of his proclamation until December 31, 2018. (READ: Congress extends martial law in Mindanao to end of
2018)
In a letter, Duterte explained to Congress that the extension is needed "primarily to ensure total eradication of Daesh-
inspired Da'awatul Islamiyah Waliyatul Masriq (DIWM), other like-minded Local/Foreign Terrorist Groups (L/FTGs) and
Armed Lawless Groups (ALGs), and the communist terrorists (CTs) and their coddlers, supporters, and financiers.”
It was the second time martial law was approved after Congress voted on July 22 to extend the rule for another 5
months.
Martial law in Mindanao was initially declared on May 23 through Proclamation 216 after government troops clashed
with homegrown terrorists from the Maute group and Abu Sayyaf Group in Marawi City.
This is the second localized martial law declaration. On December 5, 2009, then president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
declared martial law in Maguindanao through Proclamation 1959, following the massacre of 58 people – mostly
members of the media – in the town of Ampatuan.
She lifted it 7 days later on December 12, 2009 upon the recommendation of the Cabinet.
Duterte is the 3rd president to declare martial law since after the war.
Why was the whole Philippines placed under Martial Law in 1972?
Proclamation 1081 which placed the entire Philippines under Martial Law was signed by former president Ferdinand
Marcos on September 21, 1972. On September 23, at exactly 7:15 pm, he appeared on television to formally announce
it.
Marcos cited the increasing threat of communism to justify the declaration.
Meanwhile, according to Marcos’ diary entry for September 22, 1972, the alleged ambush of then defense secretary
Juan Ponce Enrile made the “martial law proclamation a necessity.”
There were reports that the ambush was staged, as claimed by Oscar Lopez and his family who lived near the area
where it happened. Enrile, in his 2014 memoir and documentary, insisted that it was all real. Yet the Official Gazette says
that in 1986, Enrile himself disclosed that the supposed ambush was staged to justify Martial Law. (READ: Enrile's tale:
Hypocrisy and contradictions)
It was the start of almost 10 years of martial rule in the country.
What were Marcos’ general orders under Martial Law?
Aside from Proclamation 1081, Marcos also released general orders (GO) that guided his martial rule. (READ: Marcos’
Martial Law orders)

Included were orders to transfer all powers to the president, authorizing the military to arrest individuals conspiring to
take over the government, the enforcement of curfew hours, and the banning of group assemblies.
Letters of instruction were also released in the following days, ordering the closure and seizure of private media and
public utilities, among others.
Marcos formally ended Martial Law through Proclamation No. 2045 on January 17, 1981.
What changed under the 1987 Philippine Constitution pertinent to Martial Law?
Five years after ending Martial Law, Marcos was toppled from power through the 1986 People Power Revolution.
Corazon Aquino, the widow of Marcos critic Benigno Aquino Jr, ascended to the presidency.
In April 1986, through Proclamation No. 9, Aquino created the 1986 Constitutional Commission (Con-Com) which was
responsible for drafting a replacement for the 1973 constitution. (FAST FACTS: The 1987 Philippine Constitution)
The new constitution, she said, should be “truly reflective of the aspirations and ideals of the Filipino people.”
Unlike the 1935 Constitution which Marcos based his proclamation on, the 1987 Philippine Constitution was more
explicit on when Martial Law can be declared.
Section 18, Article VII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution says that the President, as commander-in-chief, may “in case
of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it” suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place
the country under martial law.
The martial law period or suspension of the writ of habeas corpus should, however, not exceed 60 days. The writ
safeguards individual freedom against arbitrary state action.
Unlike the previous constitutions, the 1987 Philippine Constitution specifies that a state of martial law cannot override
the function of both the judiciary and legislative branches of the government.
The latest constitution also does not “authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over
civilians where civil courts are able to function."
A state of martial law does not automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
Its suspension shall only apply to "persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected
with the invasion."
During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, those arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within 3 days, or
otherwise released.
What’s the process that should be followed after declaring martial law under 1987 Constitution?
Under the latest constitution, other branches of government have a say in the declaration of martial law to prevent
grave abuse of discretion on the part of the chief executive.
The 1987 Philippine Constitution says that the declaration shall be affirmed by the Congress via a vote and even
reviewed by the Supreme Court.
Within 48 hours after its declaration, the president shall submit a report “in person or in writing” to Congress.
Congress then has the power to revoke the proclamation by a vote of at least a majority of all members of both the
Senate and the House. Congress can also – if requested by the President and if public safety requires it – extend the
period of Martial Law beyond the mandated 60 days. The Supreme Court, meanwhile, may review the “sufficiency of the
factual basis” of the proclamation of Martial Law in an “appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen.”
Dangers of Martial Law
There are people who laud the Martial Law period in the Philippines, claiming that it was the “best years” of the country.
However, the supposed discipline that existed then was accompanied by the numerous abuses people suffered through.
According to Amnesty International, about 70,000 people were imprisoned while 34,000 were tortured, and 3,240 were
killed during Martial Law from 1972 to 1981. People deemed to be subversive were tortured by various means, including
electrocution, water cure, and strangulation.
TRILLANES, TULFOS FACE OFF IN SENATE PROBE INTO P60-M DOT AD DEAL
Heated arguments ensue during the Senate investigation into the questionable advertisement deal between the
Department of Tourism and Bitag Media

PROBE. The Tulfo siblings, former DOT secretary Wanda Tulfo-Teo and brothers Ben and Erwin, attend the Senate probe
into the questionable advertisement deal with PTV4. Photo by Angie de Silva
MANILA, Philippines – Sparks flew between opposition Senator Antonio Trillanes IV and the Tulfo siblings, as they faced
off at the Senate investigation into the P60-million tourism advertisement deal with state-run PTV4 on Tuesday, August
14.
Trillanes began his turn to ask questions by reminding former tourism chief Wanda Teo and her brothers Ben and Erwin
of the definition of “plunder” – which supposedly applies to their case.
Trillanes confronted Teo, who repeatedly claimed she did not know her brothers were the hosts of "Kilos Pronto," the
show where the DOT placed P60 million ($1.15 million) worth of advertisements.
Your assertion, that you disbursed funds for the TV ads without knowing that the money would go to your bother. That's
your assertion. See if that would hold in court),” Trillanes said.
When Teo said the case is already with the Ombudsman, Trillanes said, (You know, the entire Philippines is watching, no
one would believe that you didn't know where the [money] went to.)”
Teo said it was only Trillanes’ assertion but the senator said it was the same observation of the public.
If you handled P120 million that way, how much more the entire budget, discretionary funds of the DOT? It would give
us a glimpse of how reckless you are in disbursing government funds.
Teo, insisting on her innocence, said, "I am not reckless when it comes to disbursement of funds."
Evasion?
After grilling Teo, Trillanes then shifted his focus on Ben Tulfo and asked him how much money he received.
Ben said he did not know because he did not have the records with him in the hearing.
Trillanes accused him of evading the issue, in stark contrast to Ben's very outspoken and upfront broadcast persona.
always dodging [the issue]. In their radio program, he's so fearless, but now you're buckling, having difficulty baring the
truth,” the senator said.
Ben tried to cut Trillanes, saying, “I can look you straight in the eye –” but Trillanes continued and went on to say: “So
swak na swak. Pasok na pasok. Bitag (Perfect fit. Snared)."
"Bitag" is the TV program Ben is best known for, which features entrapment operations targetting scammers.
While Trillanes was still speaking, Ben repeatedly tried to interrupt the senator, saying, “Mawalang galang na po (Excuse
me)," but Trillanes pressed him, “You need to answer this."
Ben again tried to interject but Trillanes dismissed him.
The exchange was cut when Senate blue ribbon chair Richard Gordon told Ben that he should “let the senator finish his
question.”
During the hearing, Erwin claimed he is not part of Bitag Media, the PTV blocktimer which runs the program Kilos
Pronto. Ben, meanwhile, is the chief executive officer of Bitag.
Despite their earlier statement, the Tulfos have not yet returned the P60 million they received from the deal. –
Rappler.com
FACT CHECK: WANDA TEO CLAIMS NO HAND IN P60M ADS, BUT DOT CONTRACT SPECIFIED BITAG
(UPDATED) The audit report says the contract signed by DOT 'specifically required' PTV to air ads on Kilos Pronto, the
show produced by the brother of Tourism Secretary Teo
ADS CONTROVERSY. Tourism Secretary Wanda Teo finds herself in the middle of a controversy after an audit report flags
P60 million worth of ad placements paid to her brother's production company. Photo by Chrisee Dela Paz/Rappler
MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – Tourism Secretary Wanda Teo insisted she had no prior knowledge of the P60-million
worth of advertisements placed in her brother's production company, even though the contract of the Department of
Tourism (DOT) specifically mentioned her brother Ben Tulfo's Bitag Media.
Teo released several statements after news broke out that the Commission on Audit had flagged the lack of supporting
documents for the ad placements. It was state-run PTV that paid for the ad placements in blocktimer Bitag Media.
A blocktimer is an independent production company whose shows and programs are aired over a network or channel. In
this case, PTV is the channel and Bitag’s show, Kilos Pronto, is the blocktimer.
The DOT placed ads on PTV, and the network, in turn, aired them over Kilos Pronto and paid them P60,009,560 for it.
To defend herself, Teo said in a radio interview on April 28 that she did not know PTV was going to tap Tulfo’s Bitag
Media company for the ad placements, and that she was even “surprised” to find out.
Our contract is between DOT and PTV, because the government wanted to help the government station, that was the
mandate of the President, that was what we were told. Beyond that, I didn't know if they gave it to my brother's outift.
Our contract was with PTV, so if PTV gave it to my brother, I didn't know because we had no...in fact I was even
surprised because it was between DOT and PTV4.)
On Monday, April 30, Teo tweaked her statement and said that she knew the ad placements were going to Kilos Pronto,
but only after they signed the contract.
"After the signing of the contract, they told us [they will place ads on] Kilos Pronto because the show's ratings were
high," Teo told reporters in a quick press conference that entertained only a few questions from media. Not long after,
she left for a meeting.
The question is, when did Teo find out that the ad placements were going to Bitag’s Kilos Pronto?
The COA report says that the memorandum of agreement (MOA) of DOT “specifically required” PTV to air the
advertisements on Kilos Pronto.
“The MOA on file was between [PTV] and DOT, specifically requiring [PTV] to air a 6-minute segment buy in PTVs Daily
News-type magazine segment, Kilos Pronto, plus a 3-minute DOT spot within the program. There were no provisions for
the airtime rates per segment/spot and such other terms and conditions of the commercial advertisement specifically as
regards the manner of payment,” state auditors said in their 2017 findings and recommendations on PTV.
The COA said there was no MOA between PTV and Bitag Media. In a statement on April 28, PTV said they have a
contract with Bitag Media, and that they already clarified it with COA “in a recently held exit conference."
Tulfo also accused an official of leaking the COA report, which prompted newly-appointed Tourism Undersecretary Jose
Gabriel "Pompee" La Viña to say it wasn't him who leaked it.
The COA report was not leaked. The government auditor always uploads audit reports on the COA website for everyone
to see and download.
GORDON GRILLS TEO ON DOT ISSUE
PROBE. Senate blue ribbon committee chairperson Richard Gordon grills former tourism secretary Wanda Teo on why
they placed advertisements on PTV blocktimer 'Kilos Pronto'. Photo by Angie de Silva/Rappler
MANILA, Philippines – Senator Richard Gordon questioned the decision of the Department of Tourism (DOT) to place ads
on Kilos Pronto, a blocktimer show on state-run Peoples' Television Network Inc (PTV), "even if it's not rating."
During the Senate probe into the controversial P60-million tourism ad placements from DOT on Tuesday, August 14,
Gordon said that Kilos Pronto did not even top the list of PTV shows with high ratings for it to be considered a good slot
for ad placements.
"Kilos Pronto's rating on PTV4 is number 83. That's already PTV4. Number 1 here is lotto. But even if you remove other
individual shows on that period, it would still show that Kilos Pronto ranks number 37," Gordon, chair of the Senate blue
ribbon committee, said in a mix of English and Filipino.
"Why would you advertise, Wanda, Secretary Teo, [on] a program that is not rating even within its own network?" he
asked.
Kilos Pronto is a blocktimer show on PTV produced by Ben Tulfo's Bitag Media. A blocktimer is an independent
production company whose shows and programs are aired over a network or channel.
The program was supposedly chosen by the DOT for its "high ratings and popularity."
Former tourism secretary Wanda Teo maintained that it was PTV's suggestion to place ads on her brothers' show.
"It was PTV4. They already suggested Kilos Pronto. They made a proposal to us. They didn't give us the ratings. Just like
how we advertise with TV stations ABS-CBN, GMA," Teo said as she answered Gordon's question.
Ben Tulfo later clarified that the ratings cited by Gordon were from May to August this year, when they had already
pulled out Kilos Pronto from PTV.
"Eh wala nang 'Kilos Pronto', pinull-out namin kasi controversial (There's no longer Kilos Pronto, we pulled it out because
it was controversial)," Tulfo said.
PTNI President Dino Apolonio also explained that Kilos Pronto was among the suggestions, given that it is a "news
magazine" type of show.
"When we developed the concept of what to propose, we [included] newscast [and] public affairs shows. That's why
Kilos Pronto was there, because the description is fitting," Apolonio said.
Still, Gordon asked why government would advertise tourism on Kilos Pronto, an "exposé" type of show.
Quantity over quality? According to Tourism Undersecretary Katherine de Castro, they chose Kilos Pronto because "it's
the cheapest deal" they could get.
Teo added that it was the President's directive for government agencies to work with the state-run television station.
But Gordon, a former tourism secretary himself, did not seem to buy this excuse, saying that DOT chose a low rating
show instead of achieving maximum results.
Even if the President said that you should help PTV4, you still need to use your head to advertise on the right shows.)
"That's [in] the Constitution: you have to exercise due diligence. Undersecretary de Castro, you are the bids and awards
[committee], you are pouring funds on a show that did not rate, just so you can place it on PTV4," he added.According to
Teo, they also placed ads on television networks ABS-CBN and GMA, and paid P23 million each. They also contracted the
services of CNN for P20 million.
Less earnings for PTV: State auditor Norma Aquino said they flagged the transaction because 75% of the P120-million
deal went to Bitag Media instead of PTV, given that it was an independent company.
Apolonio said PTV paid some P102 million to Bitag Media. The last tranche of payment to Bitag Media was no longer
processed.
He also said that PTNI only earned P20 million from the deal
Tribunal Issues Landmark Ruling in South China Sea Arbitration
The wait is over: a judgment has been issued in the Philippines v. China South China Sea arbitration. A five-judge tribunal
constituted under the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague has released its much-anticipated Award
concerning the Philippines’ challenge to a number of China’s maritime claims and activities in the region. The Philippines
initiated the arbitration in January 2013 under the dispute settlement procedures of Annex VII to the 1982 United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
Bottom line: A nearly across-the-board win for the Philippines, and a searing verdict on the lawfulness of China’s
artificial island construction and other actions in the South China Sea.
Summary of Key Claims and Holdings
The Philippines’ claims fell into four general categories. The ruling of the Tribunal on each category of claims is
summarized below:
1. The broadest claim was a challenge to China’s “nine-dash line” covering most of the South China Sea. China has never
clarified whether the line represents a claim to the islands within the line and their adjacent waters; a boundary of
national sovereignty over all the enclosed waters (including, but not limited by, the land features inside the line); or a
“historic” claim of sovereignty or some other set of historic rights to the maritime space within the line. The Philippines
sought a declaration that the countries’ respective rights and obligations regarding the waters, seabed, and maritime
features of the South China Sea are governed by UNCLOS. As such, China’s claims based on any “historic rights” to
waters, seabed, and subsoil within the nine-dash line are contrary to UNCLOS and invalid. (See Table: Claims 1 and 2)
Holding: UNCLOS “comprehensively” governs the parties’ respective rights to maritime areas in the South China Sea.
Therefore, to the extent China’s nine-dash line is a claim of “historic rights” to the waters of the South China Sea, it is
invalid.
Reasoning: Whatever historic rights China may have had were extinguished when UNCLOS was adopted, to the extent
those rights were incompatible with UNCLOS.
2. The Philippines sought a determination as to whether certain land features in the Spratly Islands claimed by both
China and the Philippines are properly characterized as islands, rocks, low tide elevations (LTEs), or submerged banks.
Under UNCLOS, an “island” generates both a territorial sea of 12 nautical miles and an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of
up to 200 nautical miles, subject to delimitation of a maritime boundary with any other countries’ overlapping territorial
seas or EEZs. A “rock” is entitled to a territorial sea no greater than 12 nautical miles, but not an EEZ. LTEs and
submerged banks do not generate any such entitlements. (See Table: Claims 3, 4, 6, and 7)
Holding: None of the features in the Spratly Islands generates an EEZ, nor can the Spratly Islands generate an EEZ
collectively as a unit. As such, the Tribunal declared certain areas are within the Philippines’ EEZ and not overlapped by
any possible Chinese entitlement.
Reasoning: The baseline of analysis is what the features can sustain in their “natural condition” (i.e., not after
construction of artificial islands, installation of desalination plants, etc.). Based on historical evidence, none of the
features in the Spratly Islands can sustain either a stable community of people or economic activity that is not
dependent on outside resources or purely extractive in nature. The current presence of personnel on the features is
dependent on outside support and does not reflect the capacity of the features in their natural condition.
3. The Philippines sought a declaration that China violated UNCLOS by interfering with the Philippines’ rights and
freedoms within its EEZs. This includes preventing Philippine fishing around Scarborough Shoal, violating UNCLOS’s
environmental protection provisions through construction and fishing activities that have harmed the marine
environment (including at Scarborough Shoal, Second Thomas Shoal, and Mischief Reef), and by dangerously operating
law enforcement vessels around Scarborough Shoal. (See Table: Claims 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13)
Holding: China violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights in its EEZ. It did so by interfering with Philippine fishing and
hydrocarbon exploration; constructing artificial islands; and failing to prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing in the
Philippines’ EEZ. China also interfered with Philippine fishermen’s traditional fishing rights near Scarborough Shoal
(without prejudice to the question of sovereignty over Scarborough Shoal). China’s construction of artificial islands at
seven features in the Spratly Islands, as well as illegal fishing and harvesting by Chinese nationals, violate UNCLOS
obligations to protect the marine environment. Finally, Chinese law enforcement vessels unlawfully created a serious
risk of collision by physically obstructing Philippine vessels at Scarborough Shoal in 2012.

Reasoning: This set of holdings depended on the Tribunal finding that certain areas are within the Philippines’ EEZ and
not subject to possible overlapping Chinese entitlements. It also depended on finding that activities such as island
construction are, in accordance with China’s own public statements, not “military activities” and therefore not excluded
from jurisdiction under UNCLOS. Once this was established, the Tribunal considered Chinese activities in the relevant
areas and found that China had (a) interfered with Philippine petroleum exploration at Reed Bank, (b) purported to
prohibit fishing by Philippine vessels within the Philippine EEZ, (c) protected and failed to prevent Chinese fishermen
from fishing within the Philippine EEZ at Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal, and (d) constructed artificial
islands/installations at Mischief Reef without the Philippines’ authorization. As for Scarborough Shoal, regardless of who
has sovereignty, both Philippine and Chinese fishermen have “traditional fishing rights” at the Shoal that were not
extinguished by UNCLOS, and China violated the Philippines’ rights by entirely preventing Filipino fishermen from fishing
near Scarborough Shoal after May 2012. In addition, Chinese artificial island construction has caused “severe harm to
the coral reef environment” and China has failed to stop its nationals from engaging in “harmful” and “destructive”
harvesting and fishing of endangered sea turtles, coral, and giant clams in violation of UNCLOS. Finally, Chinese law
enforcement vessels violated maritime safety obligations by creating a serious risk of collision on two occasions in April
and May 2012 during the Scarborough Shoal standoff.
4. The Philippines sought a declaration that China’s recent actions, specifically its land reclamation and construction of
artificial islands in the Spratly Islands after the arbitration was commenced, violated the obligations UNCLOS places on
states to refrain from conduct that “aggravates and extends” a dispute while dispute resolution proceedings are
pending. (See Table: Claim 14)
Holding: China has aggravated and extended the disputes through its dredging, artificial island-building, and
construction activities.
Reasoning: While these proceedings were pending, China has built a large island on Mischief Reed, an LTE within the
Philippines’ EEZ; caused irreparable harm to the marine ecosystem; and permanently destroyed evidence of the natural
condition of the features at issue.

Table of Philippine Claims and Tribunal Rulings*

Submission Number Philippines’ Claim Jurisdictional Ruling Merits Ruling
1 China’s maritime entitlements in South China Sea may not exceed those established by UNCLOS (Deferred to
merits stage)
Jurisdiction granted
Yes: UNCLOS comprehensively allocates rights to maritime areas

Philippines win
2 China’s “nine-dash line” claim is invalid to the extent it exceeds the limits established by UNCLOS
(Deferred to merits stage)

Jurisdiction granted
Yes: There is no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to waters in the South China Sea (so, to the extent
that is what the nine-dash line means, it is invalid)

Philippines win

3 Scarborough Shoal generates no EEZ or continental shelf

Jurisdiction granted Yes: Scarborough Shoal is a rock that generates no EEZ

Philippines win

4 Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and Subi Reef are all LTEs that do not generate territorial seas or EEZs, and
are not subject to appropriation
Jurisdiction granted Yes: Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and Subi Reef are LTEs

Philippines win

5 Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal are part of the Philippines’ EEZ and continental shelf
(Deferred to merits stage)

Jurisdiction granted
Yes: Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal are part of the EEZ and continental shelf of the Philippines

Philippines win

6 Gaven Reef and McKennan Reef (including Hughes Reef) are LTEs that generate no maritime entitlements, but
may be used to determine baselines to measure territorial sea
Jurisdiction granted No: Both Gaven and McKennan Reef are above water at high tide; they are rocks that
generate territorial seas but no EEZ or continental shelf

Philippines loss

7 Johnson Reef, Cuarterton Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef generate no entitlements to EEZ or continental shelf
Jurisdiction granted Yes: Johnson Reef, Cuarterton Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef are rocks that generate no EEZ
or continental shelf

Philippines win

8 China has interfered with the Philippines’ exercise of sovereign rights over living and non-living resources within
its EEZ and continental shelf
(Deferred to merits stage)

Jurisdiction granted
Yes: China has interfered with Philippine sovereign rights to fishing and hydrocarbon exploration within its EEZ

Philippines win

9 China has failed to prevent its nationals and vessels from exploiting the living resources in the Philippines’ EEZ
(Reserved to merits stage)

Jurisdiction granted
Yes: China failed to prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing within the Philippine EEZ

Philippines win
10 China has prevented Philippine fishermen from pursuing their livelihoods through traditional fishing activities
around Scarborough Shoal
Jurisdiction granted Yes: China violated the Philippines’ “traditional fishing rights” at Scarborough Shoal

Philippines win

11 China has violated UNCLOS’s environmental protection obligations at Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas
Shoal
Jurisdiction granted Yes: China engaged in environmentally harmful fishing/harvesting practices at
Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal

Philippines win

12 China’s occupation and construction on Mischief Reef violate UNCLOS provisions on artificial islands and
environmental protection, and are unlawful acts of attempted appropriation
(Deferred to merits stage)

Jurisdiction granted
Yes: Environmental protection provisions were violated at Mischief Reef; artificial island construction violated
Philippine sovereign rights within its EEZ; the “appropriation” claim is moot because Mischief Reef is an LTE not capable
of appropriation

Philippines win

13 China has violated UNCLOS by dangerously operating law enforcement vessels creating serious risk of collision
near Scarborough Shoal
Jurisdiction granted Yes: China violated UNCLOS and other treaty provisions on maritime safety

Philippines win

14 China has unlawfully aggravated and extended the dispute by interfering with the Philippines’ rights of
navigation near Scarborough Shoal, preventing the rotation and resupply of Philippine personnel stationed at Second
Thomas Shoal, and endangering the health of the personnel there
(Deferred to merits stage)

Jurisdiction granted in part, denied in part Yes: Although there is no jurisdiction over disputes involving military
activities such as the Second Thomas Shoal standoff, China has aggravated/extended the disputes through recent large-
scale land reclamation and artificial island construction in the Philippine EEZ

Philippines win

15 Going forward China shall respect the rights and freedoms of the Philippines under UNCLOS and comply with its
duties under UNCLOS
(Deferred to merits stage)

Jurisdiction granted
Qualified yes: This claim simply asks China to do what it is required to do under UNCLOS; therefore, no further
statement is necessary

Initial Takeaways
1. Not many people predicted that the Philippines would all but run the table in this case. It’s hard to imagine a much
more favorable outcome for their legal team.
2. One of the ironies of the Award is that China has vociferously argued in public statements that it is not “militarizing”
the South China Sea and that its actions there are for civilian purposes. Those claims turned out to be crucial to the
Tribunal’s conclusion that it had jurisdiction to consider the legality of certain Chinese actions such as construction of
artificial islands in the South China Sea, because Article 298(1)(b) of UNCLOS excludes disputes concerning “military
activities” from compulsory dispute settlement. Despite China’s non-participation in the proceedings, the Tribunal went
out of its way to review the December 2014 position paper issued by China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs as well as
numerous public statements of Chinese leaders. This was an example of where those public statements worked against
China’s legal interests in the arbitration.
3. The Tribunal rejected the possibility that China could claim the entirety of the Spratly Islands as a single archipelagic
feature, as suggested in recent statements by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as well as a white paper issued last month
by the Chinese Society of International Law. As Julian noted earlier, this was a bit of a preemptory legal strike against
“any Chinese attempt to draw ‘straight baselines’ around the Spratlys and thus treat the whole area as a single entity for
generating maritime rights.”
4. Of all the rulings on the status of features in the Spratly Islands, perhaps none will generate more discussion than the
conclusion that Itu Aba (Taiping Island) is a rock and not an island. Many observers thought that Itu Aba, the largest
naturally occurring land feature in the Spratly Islands, had the strongest claim to being deemed an island entitled to
both a territorial sea and an EEZ. The concepts the Tribunal employed to determine what makes something a “rock[]
which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of [its] own” are likely to guide future legal determinations of
this character.
It will take time to digest this portion of the opinion, but the Tribunal’s “habitability and economic life” factors seem to
include:
• The objective capacity of the feature in its natural condition (i.e., “without external additions or modifications”
and without outside support), to sustain, over an extended period of time, either

o (a) a stable community of people for whom the feature constitutes a home and on which they can remain, or
o (b) economic activity that is not
(i) dependent on outside resources, or
(ii) purely extractive in nature without the involvement of a local population.
• Factors contributing to the natural capacity of a feature to do so “include the presence of water, food, and
shelter in sufficient quantities to enable a group of persons to live on the feature for an indeterminate period of time.”
• In assessing these “capacity” factors, the Tribunal stated, “the most reliable evidence of the capacity of a feature
will usually be the historical use to which it has been put.” Applying that standard here, the Tribunal saw “no indication
that anything fairly resembling a stable human community has ever formed on the Spratly Islands. Rather, the islands
have been a temporary refuge and base of operations for fishermen and a transient residence for labourers engaged in
mining and fishing.”
5. Given its sweeping conclusions favoring the Philippines, the Award may seem to have nothing positive in it for China.
But the Tribunal offered an important qualification to its judgment, and perhaps a bit of an olive branch toward the end
of a decision it knew would not be well received in Beijing. We should not assume, said the Tribunal, that these disputes
are the product of bad faith on the part of the PRC; rather, they are the result of basic disagreements about respective
rights and obligations and the applicability of UNCLOS. From paragraph 1198 of the Award:
“The root of the disputes presented by the Philippines in this arbitration lies not in any intention on the part of China or
the Philippines to infringe on the legal rights of the other, but rather—as has been apparent throughout these
proceedings—in fundamentally different understandings of their respective rights under the Convention in the waters of
the South China Sea. In such circumstances, the purpose of dispute resolution proceedings is to clarify the Parties’
respective rights and obligations and thereby to facilitate their future relations in accordance with the general
obligations of good faith that both governments unequivocally recognise.”
6. Where does this leave us? China’s position all along with respect to these proceedings can be summed up as “no
acceptance, no participation, no recognition, and no implementation.” The PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs predictably
wasted no time releasing a statement declaring that “the award is null and void and has no binding force.” The
Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary welcomed the decision, stating: “The Philippines strongly affirms its respect for this
milestone decision as an important contribution to ongoing efforts in addressing disputes in the South China Sea.” No
surprises here, especially given that the Tribunal resolved virtually all the key issues in favor of the Philippines. For its
part, the U.S. State Department issued a measured statement remarking that “[t]he decision today by the Tribunal in the
Philippines-China arbitration is an important contribution to the shared goal of a peaceful resolution to disputes in the
South China Sea.”
As these statements suggest, the issuance of this Award by no means puts to rest the disputes or the tensions in the
South China Sea. The arbitration was never going to resolve issues of sovereignty over the islands and rocks in the South
China Sea, because disputes over territorial sovereignty are beyond the jurisdiction of an UNCLOS Tribunal. And since
the Tribunal has no power to enforce its nominally binding decision, questions now turn to what any form of
“implementation” might look like and the effect this ruling will have on future negotiations over territorial sovereignty.
China, the Philippines, ASEAN countries, and the United States face a range of strategic questions about the best way
forward. Will Beijing demonstrate its disregard for the decision by engaging in land reclamation at Scarborough Shoal or
declaring an Air Defense Identification Zone in the South China Sea, as some have predicted? Will it continue to insist on
conditioning any future bilateral negotiations with the administration of new Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte on his
government’s rejection of the Tribunal’s Award? Will it worry that some of these behaviors will push the Philippines and
other ASEAN nations closer to the United States? Will we see the U.S. Navy conducting “pure” freedom of navigation
operations (FONOPs) within 12 nautical miles of the Spratly Island features the Tribunal says are not entitled to a
territorial sea?

Arroyo: Cha-cha deliberations won't be done within my term

MANILA - Speaker Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on Thursday said she wants to move the Charter change advocacy as far as
she can during her term, believing it might not be completed within her time in office.
Arroyo, a former president who also sought amendments to the 1987 Constitution, has agreed to a separate voting by
the House of Representatives and the Senate in a constituent assembly.
Arroyo ok with Senate, House separate voting on Cha-cha
Arroyo: House to leave 'substance' debates to Con Ass
"It might not probably be completed in my remaining time in office, especially there will still be a plebiscite. But I hope
to move it forward as far as I can during my time as Speaker and so I hope that those who follow after will pick up from
where we left off in this Congress," she told ABS-CBN News in an exclusive interview.
She added that the best way to engage senators into the discussion is to address the concerns they raised, including the
need for separate voting.
The House of Representatives, then under the leadership of Davao del Norte Rep. Pantaleon Alvarez, adopted in January
a resolution to convene as a constituent assembly to amend the 1987 Charter.
Senators, however, said they would boycott a joint assembly where they would be outnumbered by the 292-strong
House.
NO PRIME MINISTER ROLE
Arroyo rebuffed speculation that she will become prime minister under the new federal system and that incumbent
officials will be given term extensions.
She pointed out that the draft constitution submitted by the Duterte-backed consultative committee kept the
presidential system of government, "so there is no Prime Minister to speak of."
She also underscored that she was not in favor of term extension so she did not support the proposal to postpone next
year's midterm elections.
NBI ordered to probe P6.8-billion drug slip
DOJ orders NBI to investigate latest drug smuggling incidents, including the Aug. 7 seizure of magnetic lifters that
contained 500-kilos of ‘shabu’ at the Manila International Container Port on Aug. 7, & seizure of 4 similar magnetic
lifters in General Mariano Alvarez, Cavite.
MANILA - The Department of Justice on Monday ordered the National Bureau of Investigation to investigate how billions
of pesos worth of shabu may have slipped past the country's ports.
Police first seized 500 kilos of shabu worth P4.3 billion inside magnetic lifters at a Manila port last Tuesday. Four more
magnetic lifters were found in Cavite but they were already empty.
The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) said they are on the hunt for at least 5 more containers containing a
ton of shabu worth at least P6.8 billion.
Customs Commissioner Isidro Lapeña said the shabu slip may have been caused by a gap in intelligence report between
the agency he handles and the PDEA.
But PDEA Director General Aaron Aquino said the information his agency received was "raw" and had to be validated
before sharing it with other concerned agencies.
Aquino said the multi-billion shabu shipment was linked to Vecaba Trading owned by a certain Vedacio Cabral Araquel,
whom he said the PDEA has been hunting for 7 years already.
The PDEA chief said the shipment came from Malaysia but there are doubts if that is the true country of origin.
MANILA - President Rodrigo Duterte on Tuesday branded as “speculation” the report of the Philippine Drug Enforcement
Agency (PDEA) that a ton of shabu worth P6.8 billion supposedly stuffed inside magnetic lifters slipped past the
country’s port.
Authorities on August 8 found four empty magnetic lifters with supposed traces of illegal drugs in Cavite. A day before
this, a 500 kilogram shabu shipment was seized from an unclaimed container at the Manila International Container
Terminal.
Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency Director General Aaron Aquino last Friday suspected that about a ton of shabu
from Taiwan worth P6.8 billion could have been placed in the four missing magnetic lifters.
The Bureau of Customs, however, said the four magnetic lifters tested negative for traces of shabu.
“They opened it, there was none. It was pure speculation,” Duterte said in a speech in Malacañang.
“They suspected and they also presumed it was full of shabu. And they just made an assumption of the price. But there
was really none and I am not convinced.”
The BOC, led by former PDEA chief Isidro Lapeña, and the PDEA, have been trading barbs over the incident.
Lapeña said the PDEA did not inform the Bureau of Customs that there were intelligence reports about the supposed
bulk shipment of shabu to the country.
PDEA Dir. Gen. Aaron Aquino, for his part, said the information his agency received was "raw" and had to be validated
before sharing it with other concerned agencies.
----------
MANILA - A congressional hearing on the alleged smuggling of a ton of shabu in Manila failed to establish if there was
indeed illegal drugs in the magnetic lifters seized in Cavite, the lawmaker leading the investigation said Thursday.
Authorities concluded that there was shabu "because of the indicators, as they say, and the circumstances" around the
warehouse in the town of General Mariano Alvarez, said Surigao del Norte Rep. Robert Ace Barbers, chair of the House
Committee on Dangerous Drugs.
PDEA: 1-ton shabu proof 'only circumstantial'
"It’s possible that there could be none, it's also possible that there could be shabu hidden and concealed in those
metallic lifters because that was the same scenario and circumstances found inside the Bureau of Customs where when
they opened the abandoned container they found shabu," he told ANC's Headstart.
He added: "If there is no body of crime, there is no physical evidence, it’s very hard to conclude and assume."
Barbers declined to divulge many details about the issue because both the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency and the
Bureau of Customs are pursuing leads on the case.
He said the hearing revealed that the owner of Decaba Trading, the consignee of the shipment found in Cavite, was a
traffic enforcer in Mindoro.
The enforcer supposedly told investigators that he spoke with some Chinese individuals who made him sign a document
to register the company.
"I’m not putting him down, pero baka hindi niya naintindihan anong pinirmahan niya," he said.
President Rodrigo Duterte said it was "pure speculation" that there was billions worth of shabu placed in the 4 missing
magnetic lifters found in Cavite a day after a similar shipment was seized from an unclaimed container at the Manila
International Container Terminal.
Duterte says PDEA report on shabu in magnetic lifters 'speculation'
"They suspected and they also presumed it was full of shabu. And they just made an assumption of the price. But there
was really none and I am not convinced," he said on Tuesday, hours after the House hearing.
--------------
Some 3,000 to 5,000 hotel rooms are expected to comply with environmental laws and be available to tourists by
October 26 when Boracay island reopens after its half-year closure, Tourism Secretary Berna Romulo-Puyat said
Tuesday.
Speaking to ABS-CBN News, the tourism chief said many hotels and resorts in Boracay have yet to comply with the new
permits and accreditation set by a multi-agency task force.
Boracay was shuttered to tourists on April 26 to give way to the rehabilitation of its sewerage system and the removal of
illegal structures, after President Rodrigo Duterte branded the world-renowned beach destination as a "cesspool."

How the TRAIN Law Will Affect Everyone

President Duterte on December 19, 2017 signed into law the Tax Reformation for Acceleration and Inclusion (Train) bill,
the first tax reform package, for a fairer and simpler tax system for the Filipinos, allowing it to take effect starting
January 1, 2018. While we celebrated the new year and were excited to start with a clean slate, we were taking the
TRAIN law with us.
But what exactly does the TRAIN law entail? Clue: it’s not just tax exemption for wage-earners.
1. Increased take-home money and bonuses
Via Sahifa
Probably the only thing that delighted citizens: under the TRAIN law, workers with an annual salary of P250,000 is
exempted from tax. Salaries that were once deducted 5% to 32% in tax rate now have 0% tax deduction from 2018 and
beyond.
Tax exemption includes the mandated 13th month bonus and other bonuses. This means every employee can now take
home more than they did the previous years. But since everything is a give-and-take process, some goods will be priced
higher from now on.
2. Excise on sugar-sweetened beverage and cigarettes
Via Unsplash
It might come as a shock to you the next time you buy a bottle of your favorite soft drink that it’s a bit pricey, this is one
effect of TRAIN law. Sugar-sweetened beverages, once without taxes, are now P6/liter while high fructose corn syrup
beverages are at P12/liter.
Exempted from this are milk products, 100% natural fruit and vegetable juices, and ground, instant, and pre-packaged
coffee products.
We felt the blow when S&R announced they are discontinuing their unlimited soda promo. Which other fast foods will
follow suit?

Via Facebook: CNN Philippines

A pack of cigarettes that costs P30 will now cost P32.50 this year and will increase in P2.5 increments until 2022. So if
you buy a pack of cigarettes in 2022, it will damage your wallet to the tune of P40 and it might possibly change your life.
A 4% increase in taxes will be implemented starting 2023.
3. Increase on petroleum and automobile tax
Via Market Watch
Your #TravelGoals might be in danger. The TRAIN law imposes an 8-peso increase in petroleum products per liter this
year. For diesel and kerosene, the once non-existent excise tax will now be at P2.50-P3/liter. Household gas LPG will
have an added P1/liter. Taxes in petroleum and gas will gradually increase until 2020.
If you’re planning on buying a car in the near future, do it as soon as possible because automobiles aren’t exempt from
excise tax. Vehicles worth P600,000 and below will have a 4% tax rate. Vehicles over P600,000 up to P1 Million will have
a 10% increase, a 20% increase for vehicles priced above P1 million to P4 million, and 50% for vehicles above P4 million.
Hybrid cars are taxed half and electric vehicles and pick-ups are exempt from the rates. Taxes will increase by more than
10-20% in 2019.
4. Estate tax, donor tax and Higher Documentary Stamp Tax
Via The Lobbyist
Under the TRAIN law, a flat rate of 6% will be imposed on both estate and donor tax. In the old law, the net estate value
last year went up to 20% if the estate was worth P200,000 and above. With the TRAIN law, estates worth P5 million and
below will have zero tax rate, but P5 million and above will have 6% of the excess over P5 million.
In the previous law, donor’s tax goes up to 15% if the donor and the donee are related and 30% if they’re not. The
donor’s tax is now at 6% regardless of the relationship between donor and donee.
Under the TRAIN law however, almost all Documentary Stamp Taxes have doubled.
5. No more tax exemption in lotto winnings and some cosmetic procedures

Via International Business Times

TRAIN law also removes the tax exemption of Lotto winnings. Beginning 2018, winnings of more than P10,000 will be
subject to 20% tax.
While the first proposal was for a 20% tax increase in some cosmetic procedures that are for aesthetic purposes only, it
was finalized to 5%. Exempted from this tax are surgeries and procedures for correcting dysfunctional body areas and
birth defects.
6. The effect on Value Added Tax
Via Juan Tax
The previous threshold of P1.9 million in Value Added Tax will now be increased to P3 million. Some exemptions from
VAT then would be small businesses with total annual sale of less than P3 million, senior citizens and PWDs, renewable
energy, and drugs and medicines for diabetes, hypertension, and cholesterol (starting 2019). Monthly rentals up to
P15,000 is also now exempted from VAT, a welcome addition to the previous P10,000 below exemption.
This means more Filipinos can have a chance at being entrepreneurs which in turn, if the business thrives, makes way for
more infrastructures and jobs.

7. Tax compliance will become more simple

Via Manila Bulletin

A simplified tax filing and payment process is expected as workers with an annual salary of P250,000 will be exempted
from tax starting this year. This means workers who fall in this bracket will now no longer have to file income tax returns
(ITR). Self-employed and professionals still have to file their ITRs for record and monitoring purposes of the Bureau of
Internal Revenue (BIR). In compliance also to this simplification, BIR will also cut the current 12 pages of the ITR to four
pages.

8. The government promises help

Via Inquirer
The government has promised a P200-a-month conditional cash transfer to poor families to cushion the impact of the
law to the poor. For the next two years this will be increased to P300 a month.
If you’re wondering where the revenue from the TRAIN law will go, 70% of it is going to the Build, Build, Build Program
of the government that aims to spend more for infrastructures until the end of the president’s term in 2022. The other
30% will go to education, social protection, health, and housing among others.

We’re in for one heck of a ride financially; taxes will become even higher as the years go by. You can look at this as
something that will make you want to move abroad and switch nationalities, or you can always look at the bright side:
you can choose what you want to spend your increased take-home money for and you can wait for a full year to see the
TRAIN law’s full impact.
Everything’s a give and take. What did you expect? We can’t have it all.
Train law: What does it change?
As we celebrated the New Year, the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (Train) Law or Republic Act No 10963
took effect on January 1, 2018. Train overhauls the outdated National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) which was adopted
20 years ago.
As a tax lawyer, I noticed that there are a lot of news reports on the changes. But actually, there are much more
significant changes under the Train law which are not being reported.
Train relatively decreases the tax on personal income, estate, and donation. However, it also increases the tax on certain
passive incomes, documents (documentary stamp tax) as well as excise tax on petroleum products, minerals,
automobiles, and cigarettes.
The Train law also imposes new taxes in the form of excise tax on sweetened beverages and non-essential services
(invasive cosmetic procedures) and removes the tax exemption of Lotto and other PCSO winnings amounting to more
than P10,000.
Nonetheless, the new law also contains praiseworthy provisions which aim to simplify tax compliance.
Reduced taxes
Personal Income Tax
The most popular part of the Train law is the reduction of personal income tax of a majority of individual taxpayers. Prior
to the enactment of the new law, an individual employee or self-employed taxpayer would normally have to pay income
tax at the rate of 5% to 32%, depending on one's bracket.
Under Train, an individual with a taxable income of P250,000 or less will now be exempt from income tax. Those with a
taxable income of above P250,000 will be subject to the rate of 20% to 35% effective 2018, and 15% to 35% effective
2023. Moreover, the deductible 13th month pay and other benefits are now higher at P90,000 compared to P82,000
under the old law.
The table shows the comparison of the brackets and tax rates under the NIRC and Train:

Another innovation under Train is the option of self-employed individuals and/or professionals whose gross sales or
receipts do not exceed P3,000,000 to avail of an 8% tax on gross sales or gross receipts in excess of P250,000, in lieu of
the graduated income tax rates.
It is not being highlighted, however, that some items that were previously deducted to arrive at taxable income had
been removed under Train. These are the personal exemption of P50,000, additional exemption of P25,000 per
dependent child, and the premium for health and hospitalization insurance of P2,400 per year.
Estate Tax
The estate tax rate was also changed from 5% to 32% of the net estate to a flat rate of 6%. Additionally, the following
deductions allowed in computing the net estate (to be subjected to estate tax) were increased:

Donor’s tax
The donor’s tax rate was also amended to a single rate of 6% regardless of the relationship between the donor and the
donee. In the old law, the rates of donor’s tax were 2% to 15% if the donor and donee are related, and 30% if otherwise.
However, the donation of real property is now subject to Documentary Stamp Tax of P15 for every P1,000.
Value Added Tax
There are also amendments to VAT which lessen the burden of taxpayers:
1. Increase of VAT threshold from P1,919,500 to P3,000,000
2. Starting 2019, the sale of drugs and medicines for diabetes, high cholesterol, and hypertension will be exempt
from VAT
3. Increase of VAT exemption for lease of a residential unit from P12,800 to P15,000
4. Association dues, membership fees, and other assessments and charges collected by homeowners associations
and condominium corporations are now expressly VAT exempt
Increased taxes
Passive Income
Train imposes higher taxes on some passive incomes, including interest income from dollar and other foreign currency
deposits.

There is also a significant increase in the tax on sale of shares of stocks.

Excise Tax
Train imposes higher excise taxes on cigarettes, manufactured oils (petroleum products), mineral products and
automobiles.
Cigarettes

Manufactured oils and other products

Mineral products

Automobiles

Hybrid vehicles shall be subject to 50% of the applicable excise tax rates. But purely electric vehicles and pick-ups shall
be exempt from excise tax.
Documentary Stamp Tax
Unlike the House of Representatives’ version of Train wherein no change was introduced on the rates of Documentary
Stamp Taxes (DST), Train increases the DST on almost all taxable documents.
New taxes
Aside from increase and decrease of certain taxes, Train also introduces new taxes in the form of excise tax on
sweetened beverages and non-essential services.
Sweetened Beverages

Non-essential services
Invasive cosmetic procedures directed solely towards improving, altering, or enhancing the patient’s appearance is now
subject to excise tax of 5%.
PCSO winnings
Previously, PCSO winnings, regardless of amount, were exempt from tax. Train subjects PCSO winnings to a 20% final
withholding tax if the amount is more than P10,000.
Simplified tax compliance
Apparently, the Philippine tax system is a very complicated one. This was certainly considered by Congress when it
enacted the Train law. Consequently, Train introduces amendments which are geared towards simpler tax compliance.
Some of these amendments are:
1. The Income Tax Returns shall not be more than 4 pages
2. The Tax Return for final and creditable withholding taxes shall be filed quarterly instead of monthly
3. With regard to estate tax, the following measures were adopted to simplify its computation and payment:
o In lieu of actual funeral expenses (up to P200,000) and medical expenses (up to P500,000), Train increases the
standard deduction (wherein no substantiation is required) from P1,000,000 to P5,000,000
o Notice of death is no longer required
o CPA certification is now required only if the gross estate is above P5,000,000 (up from P2,000,000)
o The deadline for filing of estate tax return is now one year from death (before, 6 months from death)
o Bank deposits left by the decedent may be withdrawn by the heirs subject only to 6% withholding tax. Before a
certification from the BIR that estate tax has been paid was required.
4. Beginning January 1, 2023, the filing of VAT Return and payment of tax shall be done quarterly instead of
monthly
5. The BIR is required to act on application for VAT refund within 90 days. Otherwise, the BIR official, agent or
employee will be criminally liable.
6. The Financial Statements of a taxpayer should be audited if the gross annual sales, earnings, receipts or output
exceed P3,000,000 (up from P150,000)
With the enactment of the Train law, the government expects to generate more revenues to fund its "Build, Build, Build"
projects and other programs. At the same time, the labor sector is expected to be freed from the burden of outdated
and inequitable personal income tax. Hopefully, this benefit for the workers can still be achieved despite the increase in
prices of some goods that they consume.
MANILA, Philippines – President Rodrigo Duterte reiterated the need for a comprehensive tax reform program and
echoed his economic managers' sentiments that the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) law cannot be
stopped.
In his 3rd State of the Nation Address (SONA) on Monday, July 23, Duterte went on to applaud the "timely passage of
the TRAIN law."
"Some have incorrectly blamed our efforts toward a fairer tax system for all the price increases in the past months, and
some irresponsibly suggesting to stop TRAIN's implementation. We cannot and should not. We need this for sustainable
growth that leaves no Filipino left behind," the President said.
Duterte wants the remaining 4 out of 5 tax reform packages submitted to Congress before July ends.
He called on lawmakers to pass Package 2 of TRAIN in 2018, saying that he hopes to sign it before the year ends.
Package 2 aims to rationalize or remove certain tax incentives of companies and reduce the corporate income tax from
30% to 25%. The Department of Finance (DOF) proposed to make incentives performance-based, targeted, time-bound,
and transparent.
Business groups earlier warned that the removal of incentives would scare away potential foreign investors.
Duterte also called for reforms in mining taxes and further increasing levies on alcohol and tobacco.He also urged
Congress to work on on real property valuation, capital income and financial taxes, and an amnesty program.
"I urge Congress to take them seriously and pass them in succession, for there is no chance that we can deliver our
promises without an equitable tax system," the President said.

Why the House panel wants to impeach Sereno

The House committee on justice approves 6 articles of impeachment against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno. Here
they are.

Bea Cupin
@beacupin
Published 12:12 PM, March 19, 2018
Updated 12:12 PM, March 19, 2018
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Email
IMPEACHMENT COMMITTEE. Officials, members, and staff of the House justice committee deliberate on the sidelines of
a hearing. File photo by Darren Langit/Rappler

IMPEACHMENT COMMITTEE. Officials, members, and staff of the House justice committee deliberate on the sidelines of
a hearing. File photo by Darren Langit/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – The House justice committee on Monday, March 19, approved the articles of impeachment
against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.
The articles of impeachment are the formal set of charges the House will be presenting against Sereno once it faces the
Senate, sitting as an impeachment court.

In order for Sereno to be impeached, at least one-third of all House members should vote in favor of the committee
report once it is discussed during plenary.

But why does the House committee, voting 33-1, want the Chief Justice impeached?

Here’s a summary of the articles of impeachment as approved by the panel and discussed by its chairman, Reynaldo
Umali, in his opening speech:

FIRST ARTICLE: Sereno committed culpable violation of the Constitution and/or betrayal of public trust by her failure to
file and disclose assets in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN), a document all public officials must
file. The following circumstances were cited:

“Misrepresentation that she is a person of proven integrity and probity” in her application for the post of Associate
Justice in 2010 and Chief Justice in 2012 because she “deceived and/or misled” the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) in
saying she could not submit her SALNs from 1996 to 2006 because the University of the Philippines (UP) had cleared her.
Failure to declare in her 11 filed SALNs a property in Mariveles, Bataan worth over P44 million.
Failure to declare in her 2006 and 2009 SALNs around P13.8 million, part of P32.49 million she earned as a private
lawyer in a government case against Piatco [Philippine International Air Terminals Company Incorporated] from 2004 to
2009.
Commission of tax fraud in failing to truthfully and accurately declare her income through income tax returns from 2007
to 2009 and value-added tax returns for the years 2005-2009; and her failure to pay corresponding taxes.
SECOND ARTICLE: Sereno committed corruption and betrayed public trust in the “misuse” of P18 million in public funds.
The following circumstances were cited:

Purchase of a P5-million Toyota Land Cruiser that is “beyond the norm of the Supreme Court for the Office of the Chief
Justice”.
Hiring and engagement of Helen Macasaet as a consultant who received over P11 million in compensation, in violation
of the procurement law.
Selection of Shangri-La Boracay as the venue for the 3rd ASEAN Chief Justices Meeting without proper canvassing and
arranging for a room upgrade “therein misusing an amount of more of less P3 million of government funds”.
THIRD ARTICLE: Sereno committed “culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust and/or other high
crimes” when she “arrogated unto herself” the powers of the Supreme Court as a collegial, deliberative, and
consultative body in issuing resolutions and orders without the approval of the en banc. The following instances were
cited:

Culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust and other high crimes

Creation of “Judiciary Decentralized Office (JDO) in the guise of reopening the Regional Court Administration Office
(RCAO) in Region 7” and making it appear as if it was approved by the en banc.
Issuing a temporary restraining order (TRO) in the case of the Coalition of Associations of Senior Citizens in the
Philippines (Senior Citizens Party List) vs. the Commission on Elections, contrary to the SC rules; and misrepresenting
that the issuance of the TRO was recommended by member-in-charge Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-de Castro.
“Manipulating” the disposition of Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre III’s request to transfer the venue of the Maute trial
to a venue outside Mindanao by “falsely making it appear” that the matter was raffled to her and that it was decided on
by the en banc.
Culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust

“Deliberately ignoring prior rulings of the Supreme Court en banc” in giving survivorship benefits to the spouses of
deceased judges “by allowing her employees to question said rulings and recommend that these rulings be abandoned
or overturned.” Sereno’s decision allegedly caused “undue delay” in the processing of these documents.
Appointing Geraldine Faith Econg as head of the JDO and Brenda Jay Angeles-Mendoza as chief of the Philippine
Mediation Center Office without the approval of the Supreme Court en banc.
Deliberately failing and refusing to appoint qualified applications to several high-ranking posts in the Supreme Court.
Ordering the release of “erroneous information” about what happened during en banc deliberations on the alleged
involvement of 4 judges in the drug trade, as well as “undermining” the co-equal power of the executive by “directing”
the executive secretary to file cases against the 4.
FOURTH ARTICLE: Sereno committed culpable violation of the Constitution and/or betrayal of public trust in
“deliberately and maliciously” abusing her post as Chief Justice and ex-officio chairperson of the Judicial and Bar Council
(JBC). The following instances were cited:
“Deliberate and malicious manipulation” of the JBC processes to exclude Associate Justice Francis Jardeleza, then
Solicitor General, in the shortlist of nominees, while “illegally acquiring and using a highly confidential document
involving national security in the process”.
Clustering the nominees for 6 vacant posts of Sandiganbayan associate justice without legal basis “thereby impairing the
power of the President to appoint members of the judiciary.”
Misrepresenting to the Supreme Court en banc that there were Justices who wanted to do away with the voting of
recommended applicants to vacant posts in the Supreme Court.
Manipulating the JBC process to exclude Court of Appeals (CA) Associate Justice Fernanda Lampas-Peralta from the
shortlist of nominees for the post of CA Presiding Justice.
FIFTH ARTICLE: Sereno committed corruption and betrayed public trust in “deliberately” undermining and violating the
principles of separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judiciary. The following instances were cited:

“Interfering” in the House of Representatives’ probe into the alleged misuse of Ilocos Norte tobacco funds by issuing a
joint statement with the CA Presiding Justice asking the House to reconsider its issuance of a show case order against 3
CA justices, and directing the CA justices to question issuances from the House and elevate matters to the Supreme
Court
“Deliberately undermining and disrespecting” the House justice committee’s proceedings against her.
ARTICLE SIX: Sereno betrayed public trust in “wilfully and deliberately” failing to comply with her oath of office by
“tyrannical abuse of discretionary power.”
Senators: Impeachment only way to oust Chief Justice Sereno

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines, March 6) — Senators said on Monday that the only way to remove a sitting Chief Justice
is to follow the impeachment procedure stated in the Constitution.

"Under the Constitution, the meaning of the provision literally is that once in position, the following high-ranking
government officials can only be removed from their positions through impeachment, so if you invent some other
proceeding which will result in the removal from office then that should violate that provision in the Constitution,"
Senate President Koko Pimentel said.

Pimentel's statement came after Solicitor General Jose Calida filed on Monday a quo warranto petition at the Supreme
Court, seeking to void the appointment of Maria Lourdes Sereno as Chief Justice.

A quo warranto is a legal proceeding where an individual's right to hold office is challenged.

Calida said Sereno repeatedly failed to file her Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth, which is one of the
requirements for those applying for the Chief Justice post.

The petition was filed as the House Justice Committee is expected to determine this week whether or not the
impeachment complaint filed against Sereno has probable cause.

Sereno faces removal from office for allegedly violating the Constitution, corruption, betrayal of public trust and other
high crimes, which are grounds for impeachment under the Constitution.

She repeatedly denied the allegations and asked for the complaint to be junked.

Under the Constitution, if one-third of the House agrees with the articles of impeachment, the case would be elevated
to the Senate, standing as an impeachment court.

Slippery slope
The Supreme Court (SC) is expected to deliberate on Calida's petition on Tuesday.

But Senate Minority Leader Frank Drilon said if the high court agrees to using other means to remove the Chief Justice,
these could apply to other high officials.

"Let me express the apprehension that the moment the SC entertains and gives rules on this, that it has the power to in
effect to dismiss their Chief Justice, that same rule applies to them and that same rule will apply to all heads of the
various constitutional bodies: COA, COMELEC, etc., and to the Vice President and to the President," he said. "These are
all impeachable officers."

Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV agreed with Drilon's argument.

[Translation: Those quo warranto proceedings are not allowed. For me, if the Supreme Court acts the petition, they are
exposing themselves to a possible impeachment because that can be used as basis because it's unconstitutional.]
Meanwhile, Sen. Bam Aquino said he is likewise not in favor of removing Sereno through means other than what is
stated in the Constitution.

As far as I am concerned and as far as I think a number of us are concerned, the process of removing a Chief Justice is
through impeachment. So this revision of the process is a violation of the Constitution and we need to look at the right
process for this issue. Meanwhile, Sereno's spokespersons said in a Monday press statement that lawmakers should
quickly take the case to the Senate.

"The Chief Justice is ready to face trial and disprove all allegations against her before the Senate, which is the only body
or institution that can remove her from office via two-thirds vote of all its members," they said. "She will not back down
in her fight for truth and justice.

"The most cruel act they can inflict on the Filipino nation is to pressure the Supreme Court to substitute impeachment
with quo warranto," they added. "Why are they afraid of a Senate trial?"

They added that Calida's petition is part of a "grand plan" to malign and harrass Sereno and force her to resign.
OPINION: A lawyer-blogger’s view on the quo warranto petition vs Sereno
Ellen T. Tordesillas
Posted at Apr 23 2018 06:09 AM

Save
Facebook
Twitter
GPlus
LinkedIn
A lawyer-friend who goes by the name of “saxnviolins” in my blog sent me a helpful brief on the petition for quo
warranto filed before the Supreme Court by Solicitor General Jose Calida to oust Chief Justice Maria Lourdes A. Sereno.

Saxnviolins said had he been invited to be amicus curiae (friend of the Court) on quo warranto petition, he would have
submitted the following opinion:

“The petition for quo warrranto seeks the ouster of Professor Maria Lourdes Sereno for being disqualified from
appointment to the Supreme Court. In response to the anticipated issue of whether or not impeachment is the only
means to remove a member of the Supreme Court, the petition states:

The petition for quo warranto against Respondent should be differentiated from the impeachment proceedings against
her at the House of Representatives. The writ of quo warranto is being sought to question the validity of her
appointment; in turn, the impeachment complaint accuses her of committing culpable violation of the Constitution and
betrayal of public trust while in office. Stated differently, the petitioner is seeking her ouster from her office because she
did not prove her integrity as an applicant for the position. The complainant in the impeachment proceedings wants her
removed as the sitting Chief Justice for impeachable offenses. (Page 11, par. 31).

“The petition seeks to distinguish between acts performed before the appointment (quo warranto) and acts performed
after appointment (impeachment). There is no such distinction, however, in the text of the Constitution, which reads:

SECTION 2. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional
Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office, on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable
violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All
other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.

“Note that there is no time frame for the prohibited acts as basis for impeachment. So one may be impeached for said
acts (treason, bribery and betrayal of public trust) even if the acts were committed prior to appointment.

“If impeachment were to be limited to acts committed ‘while in office’, the Constitution would have so stated, like
Section 248 of the Administrative Code of the 50s, which used the phrase “misconduct in office” (Arsenio Lacson v.
Mariano Roque, Executive Secretary G.R. No. L-6225 - January 10, 1953). That phrase was also used in Section 60 of
Batas Pambansa 337 (Francisco Lecaroz v. Hon. Jaime Ferrer G.R. No. 77918 - July 27, 1987).

“Is there precedent for this interpretation? Yes. The case of Federal Judge Thomas Porteus, Jr. who was impeached for
making false statements about his past to obtain the office of United States District Court Judge. Article IV of the
Articles of Impeachment states:
In 1994, in connection with his nomination to be a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Louisiana, G. Thomas Porteous, Jr., knowingly made material false statements about his past to both the United States
Senate and to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in order to obtain the office of United States District Court Judge.

“Judge Porteus was impeached by a unanimous vote of 423 by the House, and removed by a vote of 90-6 by the Senate
of the United States of America.

“The petition also implies a distinction because this petition was filed ‘to question the validity of her appointment’,
while impeachment is for the purpose of removing an impeachable officer for acts committed ‘while in office’. But what
is the purpose of quo warranto proceedings? “The authorities are agreed that quo warranto is the remedy to try the
right to an office or franchise and to oust the holder from its enjoyment…. (Flaviano Lota v. CA G.R. No. L-14803 -June
30, 1961.

“The term oust means ‘to put out; to eject; to remove or deprive.’ (Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd Ed.) So the purpose of
this petition is the same; to remove an occupant from office. But this occupant, as the Constitution states, is removable
by impeachment.

“It may be argued, as was written by Fr. Ranhilo Aquino, that the Constitution did not state that impeachment is the only
means to remove impeachable officers. The reverend scholar fails to remember that the specific prevails over the
general. The provisions on impeachment specify the power of Congress to remove specific officers. The provisions on
quo warranto, however, confer a general power over all officials. The Constitutional provision, therefore, must prevail,
not only because it is specific, but because the Rules of Court, are subordinate to the highest law of the land.

“The Supreme Court, has in fact, declared that impeachment is the only means to remove impeachable officers, when it
held:

The broad power of the New Constitution vests the respondent court [Sandiganbayan] with jurisdiction over ‘public
officers and employees, including those in government-owned or controlled corporations.’ There are exceptions,
however, like constitutional officers, particularly those declared to be removed by impeachment. Section 2, Article XIII of
the 1973 Constitution provides:

Sec. 2 The President, the Members of the Supreme Court, and the Members of the Constitutional Commissions shall be
removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery,
other high crimes, or graft and corruption.

Thus, the above provision proscribes [prohibits] removal from office of the aforementioned constitutional officers by
any other method; otherwise, to allow a public officer who may be removed solely by impeachment to be charged
criminally while holding his office, would be violative of the clear mandate of the fundamental law. (A.M. No. 88-4-5433
- pril 15, 1988).

“The above case was interpreting the 1973 Constitution, which did not employ the term ‘only’, in stating that: ‘The
President, the Members of the Supreme Court, and the Members of the Constitutional Commissions shall be removed
from office….’

“The petition points to the Rules of Court on the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, for the basis for the acquisition of
jurisdiction by the Supreme Court over one of its own members, when it states:

Although the aforecited rules pertain to the President and Vice President, said rules may be applied by analogy. The
Court recognizes the availability of quo warranto against an impeachable officer. Hence, Respondent cannot claim that
as Chief Justice, she can only be removed by impeachment under Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution. (Page 11, par.
34).

“That argument is below the dignity, of even a law student. It is elementary that jurisdiction is conferred by law
(Maricris Dolot v. Hon. Ramon Paje G.R. No. 199199 - August 27, 2013). There is no country where jurisdiction is
conferred ‘by analogy’. In the case of the presidential elections, the Constitution created the Presidential Electoral
Tribunal, and conferred on it, power over ‘all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the
President or Vice- President,’ The Constitution also granted the Supreme Court, as Presidential Electoral Tribunal, the
power to ‘promulgate its rules for the purpose’. (Article VII, Section 4).

“The power to promulgate rules are only ‘for the purpose’ of deciding ‘all contests relating to the election, returns, and
qualifications of the President or Vice- President,’ The Constitution does not confer on the Supreme Court the power to
remove one of its own members. The purpose stated by the Constitution, is fatal to the argument of power by analogy.

“The Rules cited by the Petition also declares what the PET’s implied powers are, as follows:
Rule 7. Express and implied powers. - The Tribunal shall exercise all powers expressly vested in it by the Constitution or
by law, and such other powers as may be inherent, necessary or incidental thereto for the accomplishment of its
purposes and functions. (R6)

“Note that in the title of Rule 7, the Supreme Court declares that it has Express and implied powers. Then in the text of
Rule 7, it states it is has ‘such other powers as may be inherent, necessary or incidental thereto for the accomplishment
of its purposes and functions’, mirroring the purposes stated in the Constitution. So the implied powers stated in the
title of Rule 7 are the inherent powers for the purpose of deciding ‘all contests relating to the election, returns, and
qualifications of the President or Vice- President,’ That does not include the function of determining the validity of the
appointment one of its members.

“It is also axiomatic that what is expressed prevails over what is implied. The express declaration by the Constitution,
and the Rules of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, negate any inference of ‘power by analogy’.

“More damning to the argument of ‘powers by analogy’ is the enumeration of the inherent (implied) powers under Rule
8:

Rule 8. Inherent powers. - The Tribunal shall have the following inherent powers:

(a) Preserve and enforce in proceedings before it or before any of its Divisions or officials acting under its authority;

(b) Administer or cause to be administered oaths in any contest before it, and in any order matter where it may be
necessary in the exercise of its powers;

(c) Compel the attendance of witnesses and production of evidence in any contest before it.

(d) Compel obedience to its decisions, resolutions, orders and processes;

(e) Control its processes and amend its decisions, resolutions or orders to make them conformable to law and justice;

(f) Authorize a copy of a lost or destroyed pleading or other paper to be filed and used instead of the original copy
thereof, and to restore and supply deficiencies in its records and proceedings; and

(g) Promulgate its own rules of procedure and amend or revise the same (R7)

“There is nothing there regarding the determination of the validity of the appointment of one of its own members.
Expressio unius est exclusio alterius.. What is enumerated excludes that which is not enumerated.

“Finally, the issue of appointments is a political question, left to the political branches of government. By political
question here, we do not mean political in the street sense of ‘namumulitika’, signifying partisanship. By political
question is meant the wisdom of making a choice – choosing between one candidate over the other (President and
Congress – Commission on Appointments); choosing between going to war or not (Congress); or choosing between
withdrawing from a treaty or not (President only).

The appointment of members of the Supreme Court is a political question, and that choice is left to the discretion of a
political branch (Office of the President). Were the Supreme Court to invalidate the appointment, it would be
supplanting its judgment for that of the President; a power it has no authority to wield. A political decision must be
exercised by a political branch. It is for that reason that the framers of the Constitution conferred the power to
determine whether the President made a wise choice or not, on another political branch (Congress).

Appointment is an essentially discretionary power and must be performed by the officer in which it is vested according
to his best lights, the only condition being that the appointee should possess the qualifications required by law. If he
does, then the appointment cannot be faulted on the ground that there are others better qualified who should have
been preferred. This is a political question involving considerations of wisdom which only the appointing authority can
decide. (Luego v. Civil Service Commission; G.R. NO. L-69137 - August 5, 1986)

“Another reason for the lack of jurisdiction by the Supreme Court over this petition, is the fact that the Supreme Court
has no power to try (determine) facts. It may rule on findings of fact of trial courts, amending, modifying or reversing
them, in an appeal. But it has no power to make findings of fact in the first instance. The question of whether an
appointee is qualified or not, is a factual question. In other quo warranto cases, the proceedings are commenced at
tribunals with fact-finding power; either trial courts, or the COMELEC. In the case of impeachable officers, the
Constitution confers the fact-finding power on the Senate.
“The Supreme Court may only review the proceedings, when legal questions are concerned, such as the question of the
legality of the subpoena duces tecum issued by the Senate (Enrile as President Officer) in the impeachment case of
Renato Corona. The Supreme Court issued a TRO on the order of Senator Enrile.

“The petition strains to confer on itself, a Constitutional issue by citing Funa v. Villar But Funa ruled on the
Constitutional issue of what constitutes a ‘reappointment’. It was not an issue of qualifications of the appointee. The
Supreme Court held:

A commissioner who resigns after serving in the Commission for less than seven years is eligible for an appointment to
the position of Chairman for the unexpired portion of the term of the departing chairman. …….

The appointment of then Commissioner Reynaldo A. Villar to the position of Chairman of the Commission on Audit to
replace Guillermo N. Carague, whose term of office as such chairman has expired, is hereby declared
UNCONSTITUTIONAL ……

“The petition next cites the case of Nacionalista Party v. De Vera. That case ruled on the Constitutional issue of whether
or not the promotion to Chairman of a sitting COA commissioner, is a ‘reappointment’, which is prohibited by the
Constitution.

“Neither of the above cases questioned the qualifications of the appointee. Here, there is no Constitutional issue being
presented. The substantive basis of the petition questions the qualifications of the appointee.

“Professor Sereno taught full-time, and it is difficult to find a retired RTC judge who remembers her appearance in court.
As a professor, she did not display the intellectual heft of Justice Serafin Cuevas, Justice Vicente Mendoza, or Professor
Haydee Yorac. I believe, therefore, that there were candidates better qualified than her. But that belief must yield to
my fealty to the Constitution; even if the incidental beneficiary is a minimally qualified appointee.

“The Republic has survived Ferdinand Marcos, Gloria Arroyo, and Benigno Aquino III; all Presidents, with almost limitless
power. I am certain that it can survive the term of an unqualified Chief Justice, especially because the Court, en banc,
can effectively check her actions. But the Republic cannot survive the erosion of Constitutional boundaries. This
shortcut will yield greater mischief than the good that irregular removal seeks to achieve. One can only point to the
mischief wrought by the removal of Joseph Estrada, for the then, seeming good of ascension by Gloria Arroyo. That
disaster was also occasioned by a Court with good intentions, but with no fealty to the Constitution.

“For the above reasons, it is respectfully prayed that the petition for quo warranto be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.”
ANILA, Philippines — Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio in April said that the Supreme Court may rule on Solicitor
General Jose Calida’s quo warranto petition against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno this month.

News reports citing unnamed insiders have said that the high tribunal may actually release a decision as early as May 11
in a special en banc session, while the justices are supposedly on their writing break.

Calida’s petition, which challenges the legality of Sereno’s appointment to the high court, was met with at least four
petitions for intervention seeking its dismissal. Echoing Sereno’s defense, the petitioners said that only an impeachment
can oust a chief justice.

Court observers pointed out that the oral arguments on the case—held on April 10—showed that a majority of the
justices seemed inclined to vote for the removal of the head magistrate.

If granted, the SC will have two consecutive ousters of its chief magistrate: Renato Corona, who was impeached by the
Congress, and Sereno whose appointment would be nullified through voting by her colleagues.

Calida’s petition prays that the SC “declare as void [Sereno’s] appointment on Aug. 24 as Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court of the Philippines” and “oust Sereno from the position.”

Here are some of the possible effects should Calida's quo warranto petition be granted:

Duterte will get to appoint more justices

Sereno may be removed from her position as early as May 11—if reports citing unnamed insiders are proven true.

Integrated Bar of the Philippines president Abdiel Fajardo told Philstar.com that the SC may rule the quo warranto
petition immediately executory.
"She has to file a motion for reconsideration with the [SC]" Fajardo said, adding: “In which case, the chief justice will be
out of the court in the meantime that her Motion for Reconsideration is under consideration.”

Should Sereno’s appointment be nullified—and the chief justice ousted from her position—it will open up a new vacancy
at the high court.

Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr. is scheduled to retire in August while Associate Justice Teresita De Castro is due
to retire in October.

Duterte has already appointed four out of the 15 justices of the court: Samuel Maritres, Noel Tijam, Andres Reyes Jr.,
and Alexander Gesmundo.

Although her appointment to the court will be nullified, Sereno’s past decisions will “remain as valid as a matter of
equity,” said Fajardo.

The IBP head however said that should the SC deny Sereno's appeal, "I’m afraid there is no other judicial recourse for
the chief justice."

He said: "All other solutions would have to be political."

Security of tenure under threat

Former SC justice Vicente Mendoza told ANC on April 30 that should Calida’s quo warranto petition—filed beyond a year
since Sereno’s assumption of office—is granted, it will “undermine the security of tenure guaranteed by the constitution
to public officers who are simply removable by impeachment.”

The 1987 Constitution provides that an appointed justice to the SC is allowed to serve until reaching the mandatory
retirement age of 70.

Sereno was appointed chief justice at the age of 52, and, if she hurdles the attempts to unseat her, will hang up her
robes in 2030, giving her 18 years as chief justice.

Mendoza stressed: "You cannot bring a suit for quo warrant to test the validity of the title or right of a person who is
impeachable by quo warranto—except by impeachment."

The retired justice also warned that a quo warranto proceeding against Sereno will “ultimately subvert the
independence of the judiciary."

Precedent for future petitions

Sereno opened the hours-long oral arguments on April 10 with a challenge to Associate Justice Teresita De Castro:
Would she, and the rest of the sitting justices, be willing to also testify under oath should a quo warranto—grounded on
missing SALNs—be filed against them?

The chief justice’s legal counsel, Alex Poblador, in their opening statement stressed: “If allowed to do so, what will stop
the solicitor general from filing similar petitions against any sitting Justice, based on any offense, whether impeachable
or not, on the theory that such offense can somehow reflect on his integrity and probity?”

Poblador stressed that if the quo warranto is granted, jurisprudence will be entered into court that will allow the
bringing forward of a case, based on missing SALNs as indicator of lack of integrity.

“Since according to the petitioner the qualification attached to a member of this court not only when he applies for
appointment but throughout his tenure, and since the petitioner also claims that it is exempt from the prescriptive
period for quo warranto petitions, the solicitor general can file those quo warranto petitions at any time during the
tenure of a sitting justice,” Poblador said.

“What was designed as a procedure to remove impeachable officers that would be used sparingly only by Congress,
because it is so difficult and cumbersome to undertake, can now be undertaken before this Court, the Court of Appeals,
or even the Regional Trial Court, by the Solicitor General at any time,” he added.
etro Manila (CNN Philippines, May 10) — The decision on the quo warranto petition against the country's top judge will
be known Friday, but discussions on how it will turn out continue.

Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) national president Abdiel Fajardo, and Al Vitangcol, the lawyer of impeachment
complainant Larry Gadon, spoke to On the Record Thursday, to give their opinions on the case against Chief Justice
Maria Lourdes Sereno.
Fajardo said the IBP's position is that the court should never have entertained the petition "because of lack of
jurisdiction to remove a co-equal in the court."

"The disciplinary authority and the power to remove from the Supreme Court acting en banc only applies to lower court
judges and justices," he said. "They cannot remove any of their own."

Despite having deliberated on the case, Fajardo said the justices could still decide that they have no jurisdiction over it.

"It happens all the time," he added.

Vitangcol, meanwhile, said the justices could vote in favor of the petition, but not issue the writ of quo warranto –
meaning Sereno will not be removed from office – and let the impeachment proceedings continue.

"Pupuwedeng gano'n [That could happen]. That is a possibility. But I'm not saying that will happen tomorrow," he said.

How will the votes be split?

Both Fajardo and Vitangcol gave their predictions on how the voting could go on Friday.

Vitangcol said, based on information, one or two justices may not be able attend the en banc session – one was on
leave, another was out of the country.

He said a justice "closest" to Sereno would likely vote for her.

Vitangcol did not disclose any names, however.

"So the final count would be 11-1-2," he said.

Fajardo said a vote of 11-1-2 was "alarming."

"Aside from the well-publicized positions of the justices, and five of them went to Congress to testify, you know, just add
to the five, that's how it's going to be," he said. He noted that only three more votes would be needed to swing the
decision against Sereno if the justices are really immovable in their position that she should be removed.

However, both said a vote of 7-7 is still possible.

In that case, Fajardo said, a 7-7 vote would mean the quo warranto petition is dead because it did not get the necessary
majority vote.

"If it becomes a 7-7, it would be a very close tie," he said, but the tie would not be broken as it usually is by the chief
justice in other cases. That's because Sereno has said she would inhibit herself from the proceedings, he added.

Should the vote be against Sereno, Vitangcol added the justices could immediately issue the writ of quo warranto and
move for the ouster of the chief justice.

The issuance of a writ of quo warranto is effective immediately and executory.

However, Sereno could still file a motion of reconsideration within 15 days.

"Judicially, that is her recourse. To file a motion of reconsideration and hope that the justices reevaluate their positions,"
Fajardo said.

Impeachment or quo warranto?

Vitangcol said he could not judge whether Sereno should be removed via the quo warranto or by impeachment.

"I cannot say simply because I believe the quo warranto case is valid. It has merit in it. But then, it would be the Supreme
Court who will be the final arbiter of things," he said.

However, Fajardo said the proper way to decide on Sereno's fate would be through impeachment.

"The proper method of removing an impeachable officer like the chief justice is an impeachment proceeding before the
Senate," he added.

Fajardo said his position was not in defense of one person, but rather of an institution.
"The Supreme Court should be the embodiment of judicial independence," he said.

Highlights: Oral arguments on Sereno ouster

283
SHARES
131
6
5
Kristine Joy Patag (philstar.com) - April 13, 2018 - 2:06pm
MANILA, Philippines — In a historic first, a sitting chief justice faced her colleagues to defend the qualifications and
validity of her appointment.

On April 10, the Supreme Court en banc held almost six hours of oral debates in Baguio City on Solicitor General Jose
Calida’s petition for quo warranto against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

A quo warranto, under Rule 66 of the Rules of Court, is a legal action "for the usurpation of a public office, position or
franchise." It may be initiated by a solicitor general or a public office. The petition challenges a public official’s hold over
a position.

Presentations during the oral arguments were limited to the issues of jurisdiction, the potential outright dismissal of the
petition for filing out of time, the alleged falsehood in connection with the Statements of Assets, Liabilities and
Networth filed by Sereno and questions on whether the Judicial and Bar Council acted with grave abuse of discretion,
among others.

READ: Five justices refuse to inhibit from ouster petition against Sereno

Here is a run-down of some issues deliberated by the SC justices during the nearly six hours of oral debates:

Test of integrity
Calida said Sereno "flunked the test of integrity" when she failed to file the required number of SALNs.

"She was appointed to that position although she was not able to prove that she is a person of proven integrity," Calida
said.

"The constitutional qualification of proven integrity among all judicial officers is not a hollow provision that can be
ignored or waived," the solicitor general added.

Those vying for the chief justice post in 2012 were asked to submit all of their SALNs, according to the JBC.

But it was revealed during the impeachment hearing at the House of Representatives' justice committee that Sereno
only filed three when she applied. A representative from the JBC, however, said in the same House hearing that the
council deemed Sereno’s submission of her 1998, 2002 and 2006 SALNs to be in "substantial compliance" with their
requirement.

Associate Justice Marvic Leonen during his interpellation said that one’s failure to comply with the SALN requirement
does not constitute lack of integrity. He argued that bigger offenses such as theft, graft, corruption or bribery, which the
chief justice said she did not commit, could.

"If our measure of integrity is only a piece of paper, then God help us."

READ: At Sereno ouster hearing, Justice Leonen asks: Can SALN attest to one’s integrity?

SALN issues
Associate Justice Noel Tijam, said to be the ponente of the case, meanwhile, pointed out that the failure to comply with
JBC's SALN requirement was not the only issue. He claimed it was put on record that Sereno admitted to not filing her
SALNs. This was, however, countered by Sereno.

"That's your conclusion, I dispute that," she said. "You want me to admit that. You want to trap me," she added.

"The burden is on the petitioner. The issue of the integrity is with the JBC."
The argument of the two magistrates revolves around the three SALNs filed by Sereno. The chief justice said she was
able to file only her SALNs for 1998, 2002 and 2006 as these were the only ones available online for her to download at
the time of her application for the position.

She said the absence of her SALNs for the other years does not mean that she failed to file.

Tijam also asserted that "integrity" is not founded on jurisprudence. "It is founded on honesty, probity, truthfulness
made by person."

Sereno answered that when she was included on the JBC’s shortlist for the chief justice position in 2012, she was already
deemed by as a candidate with integrity.

More SALN questions

Associate Justice Teresita De Castro's first question to Sereno was if the chief justice “judiciously” filed her SALNs over
the years.

The two justices locked horns for a few minutes, talking over each other as Sereno issued a challenge to her colleagues.
She asked if they would also testify under oath if a quo warranto case, grounded on SALN filing, has been lodged against
them.

Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio had to intervene as the exchange got heated between the two justices.

De Castro asked Sereno why she supposedly filed a false SALN in 2010 and an incomplete one in 2012.

The justice said that Sereno, upon her resignation from the University of the Philippines in 2006, only filed one SALN
instead of two: one for 2005 and another during her resignation. She also pointed out that the lone SALN was filed in
2010.

Sereno argued that under the Doblada doctrine, she "consistently filed by SALNs as required by the law."

The Doblada doctrine was about a case involving a court sheriff who was sued for accumulating properties above his
supposed income. The SC ruled that just because his SALNs could no longer be located, it does not mean that he did not
file them.

Sereno has earlier said that she has recovered some of her supposed "missing" SALNs.

READ: Sereno maintains compliance with SALN submission requirements

The chief justice said that she would present them to the Senate, which is the proper venue to do so since, they argued,
it is the Congress that has jurisdiction over her ouster petition and not the SC.

Sereno case may set precedent

Leonen raised that Sereno’s case might serve as a precedent to future cases. Interpellating Calida, he said: "The court is
also concerned about precedence. In the future, it might be [used] to oust a sitting justice based on the doctrines if we
allow your case."

This is an echo of Sereno’s earlier challenge to her colleagues when she was first quizzed by De Castro.

Associate Justice Alfred Benjamin Caguioa, meanwhile, while interpellating Alex Poblador, Sereno’s lead counsel, raised:
"If I follow the theory... then whoever is the solicitor general would... have the ability to wield a sword over all our
collective heads, over all our individual heads, and on that basis, therefore impair the integrity of the court, as a court."

"The OSG can latch on to any imputation of any crime involving moral turpitude and on that basis, initiate a quo
warranto proceeding against any justice and have him removed," Caguioa said.

Poblador agreed and said that the mere act of filing a quo warranto "would destroy the independence" of the SC.

"Arguably, you can make a case against any sitting justice which to me highlights the danger of allowing [this petition],"
Poblador added.

Sereno’s camp has repeatedly said that the only legal course to oust her from the position is through an impeachment
process that is vested upon the Congress.

The parties were ordered by the SC to file their respective memorandum on or before April 20.
Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno has been ousted from her post after the Supreme Court granted the quo warranto
petition filed against her.

In an 8-6 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that Sereno’s appointment as Chief Justice in 2012 was invalid.

Those who voted to grant the quo warranto petition were Associate Justices Diosdado Peralta, Teresita De Castro, Lucas
Bersamin, Noel Tijam, Francis Jardeleza, Andres Reyes Jr. Alexander Gesmundo and Samuel Martires.

The six magistrates who voted against the quo warranto petition were: Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio, and
Associate Justices Marvic Leonen, Estela Perlas Bernabe, Mariano Del Castillo, Presbitero Velasco and Alfredo Benjamin
Caguioa.

The dispositive portion of the decision stated that it is immediately executory.

Solicitor General Jose Calida, who filed the quo warranto case against Sereno, argued that her appointment as Chief
Justice was void over her supposed failure to submit to the Judicial and Bar Council all of her Statements of Assets,
Liabilities and Net Worth as a professor at the University of the Philippines.

The JBC screens all applicants to the judiciary.

With Sereno out of office, the Supreme Court directed the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) to start the application and
nomination process for Chief Justice.

The tribunal also ordered Sereno to explain within 10 days why she should not be sanctioned for violating the sub judice
rule and “for casting aspersions and ill motives” to her former colleagues.
Partido Demokratiko Pilipino – Lakas ng Bayan’s (PDP-Laban) top officials rallied party members to unite amid still
unresolved issues hounding the ruling party.

At the anniversary of PDP-Laban Cares, the party’s humanitarian arm, party Secretary General Davao del Norte 1st
District Rep. Pantaleon Alvarez said the attendance of over a hundred of their members at the event is “the best exhibit
of our united front” and that the party “remains strong as ever.”

“Together, hand in hand, we march forward with our mission in mind: Help the President and our party Chairman,
President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, succeed in his agenda of change, deliver the services that people rightfully deserve,”
Alvarez said Wednesday evening (August 15) in a speech.

Alvarez, who was ousted before Duterte’s third State of the Nation Address last month, also called on members to
continue supporting the party and PDP Cares.

The President also appealed for unity in the party, stressing that it is “now more important than ever.”

“I therefore ask your continued support of PDP-Laban and its partners in creating practical solutions to address the root
cause of our nation’s problem,” Duterte said in a formal four-minute speech.

He also urged party members to advance PDP-Laban’s “core agenda of federalism, preferential policy for the poor and
the marginalized.”

PDP-Laban is facing twin challenges brought by Alvarez’ ouster as House Speaker and a splinter group claiming
legitimacy headed by Duterte’s former classmate, Rogelio Garcia.

Alvarez’ removal from the rostrum and replacement by former President and Speaker Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo had
prompted some politikos to reconsider their membership and ties with PDP-Laban, with some congressmen allied with
Arroyo saying that they are considering to transfer to other political parties.

Garcia’s group, meanwhile, has replaced Alvarez as secretary general and Senator Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel as president
in a “national assembly” dismissed by party officials as “illegal.”

Duterte met with the two groups last week in an effort to settle the scuffle between them and gave them until
September 1, when they would meet again, to iron out the conflict.

But for Pimentel, there is only one way to resolve the issue: For the Garcia faction to drop its claim of legitimacy.
“Well, maayos lang naman natin one way eh. That for that group to stop thinking that they are the leaders of the party,
because they are not. Sa aming normal leadership, wala akming faction na nakikita,” Pimentel told reporters in a chance
interview after the event.

Amid PDP-Laban’s internal squabble, the Nationalist People’s Coalition and the Nacionalista Party, have signed Monday
(August 13) fresh alliance agreements with Hugpong ng Pagbabago, the regional party of the President’s daughter,
Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte, who is said to be the mastermind behind the House coup against Alvarez.

Mayor Duterte has reportedly said that her father would attend her party’s oathtaking soon, but this does not concern
Pimentel.

“It does not affect us or it does not raise any issue. Because as I have stated time and again, we allow membership in a
national party and a simultaneous membership in a regional party like Hugpong,” he said.

He added, “Some of our members are planning to join Hugpong and they will not lose their party membership kasi it is a
regional party.”

Pimentel wrote off the challenges faced by PDP-Laban, blaming it on the upcoming “political season” heading up to the
2019 polls.

Alvarez acknowledged the ongoing “political upheavals” in his speech, adding that PDP-Cares proves to be a “steady
hand” amid all these.

“Let us converge together to form a national front, supporters and critics alike, the ultimate measure of character as we
navigate through upheavals and lead our people to a place of promise and renewal,” he said.
De Lima finds ally in Carpio in bid to join oral arguments on ICC withdrawal

Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio believes detained Senator Leila de Lima should be allowed to participate in the oral
arguments over the petition which sought to invalidate the country’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Court
(ICC).

In his dissenting opinion, Capio said the Philippine National Police (PNP) should just assign security personnel to guard
de Lima during the oral arguments.

“Senator De Lima’s right to argue her own case on a grave constitutional issue, accompanied by PNP personnel, is surely
a more justifiable reason for a grant of appearance before this Court than to attend birthday celebrations or school
graduations, or enjoy Christmas and New Year furloughs,” read his dissenting opinion.

The magistrate reminded the Supreme Court (SC) that it already allowed de Lima a one-day medical furlough last March
but was denied attendance to her son’s law school graduation in June.

Last August 7, the SC voted 10-2 to deny de Lima’s petition asking she be allowed to join the oral arguments.

De Lima and fellow opposition senators have a pending a motion for reconsideration insisting that she be allowed to
participate in the oral arguments.

De Lima is among opposition senators who filed a petition asking the SC to stop President Rodrigo Duterte’s decision to
have the country withdraw from the Rome Statue.

Apart from De Lima, those who filed the petition included Senators Francis Pangilinan, Franklin Drilon, Paolo Benigno
Aquino IV, Risa Hontiveros and Antonio Trillanes IV.

“As a treaty validly entered into by the Philippines, the Rome Statute has the same status as an enactment of Congress.
In other words, the Rome Statute is a law in the Philippines. As a law, the withdrawal from the Rome Statute requires
the participation of Congress,” read the petition.
Carlos ‘Damaso’ Celdran appeals SC ruling against his right criticize Church
On Aug 16, 2018

0 399
Share
Cultural activist Carlos Celdran on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court (SC) to reverse its ruling that affirmed his
conviction for “offending religious feelings” for barging inside the Manila Cathedral and denouncing the Catholic
Church’s opposition to the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill in 2010.
In a 33-page motion for reconsideration, Celdran asked the SC for his acquittal and reiterated his plea to have Article 133
of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) that penalizes the offense, declared unconstitutional.

He further argued that Article 133 violates the due process and equal protection clauses in the Constitution.

“(B)oth 4b5 the petition for review and the (OSG) manifestation in lieu of comment argue that Article 133 of the Revised
Penal Code is unconstitutional. It is surprising that the 21 March 2018 (SC) resolution did not make any mention of the
constitutional issues raised in the petition and in the Solicitor General’s manifestation in lieu of comment,” his motion
read.

He also asked to refer the case to SC en banc and set it for oral arguments.

In a resolution dated March 21, the High Court’s First Division denied Celdran’s plea seeking to reverse the Court of
Appeals (CA) ruling, which upheld the decision of the Manila Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) Branch 4 and the Manila
Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 32 convicting him for “offending religious feelings” over his stunt.

“We agree with the CA in finding that the acts of petitioner were meant to mock, insult, and ridicule those clergy whose
beliefs and principled were diametrically opposed to his own,” it said.

The SC said Celdran failed to present evidence to show that the trial courts and the appellate court committed error in
its assailed decision.

“The petitioner failed to sufficient f5f ly show any reversible error in the uniform findings of the Metropolitan Trial
Court, the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals, so we resolve to deny the instant petition,” part of the SC ruling
read.

Celdran has asked the SC to reverse the 2015 ruling of the appellate court, which affirmed the Manila MTC and RTC’s
decision convicting him of offending religious feelings under Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code.

He argued that his display of the words “Father Damaso” in his banner inside the cathedral is a political speech and was
his way of conveying to the priests inside that he strongly disagreed with their stand on the RH Law.

In affirming the lower courts’ decision, the CA dismissed Celdran’s arguments, noting that the said provision of the
Revised Penal Code shields religion from criticism.

Celdran then brought the case to the SC.

The Manila MTC Branch 4 handed down its decision on Jan. 28, 2013 while the Manila RTC Branch 32 issued its ruling on
Aug. 12, 2013; 472 and the CA on Dec. 12, 2014 and Aug. 14, 2015.

Celdran was sentenced to serve an indeterminate prison term of two months and 21 days as minimum, to one year, one
month, and 11 days as maximum.

The High Court pointed out that in a petition for review on certiorari, which was the pleading filed by Celdran in October
2015, questions of fact are no longer revisited, and the “findings of fact made by the trial courts are accorded the
highest degree of respect by this Court (SC), especially when the MTC, the RTC and the CA have similar findings.”

The case stemmed from Celdran’s “Padre Damaso” stunt inside the Manila Cathedral Church on Sept. 20, 2010 during an
ecumenical service attended by Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales, the Papal Nuncio, former Philippine Ambassador to Rome
Henrietta de Villa, and leaders of different Christian denominations.

Celdran wore a black suit and bore a placard that read, “Damaso”, to protest the position taken by the Church against
the then Reproductive Health Bill, which has been passed into law.

In 2016, then Solicitor General 2000 Florin Hilbay asked the SC to acquit Celdran of the crime, saying that the case under
Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code is “unconstitutional” and that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable
doubt that Celdran is indeed guilty of the offense for which he was charged. (PNA)
The House leadership is pushing for a “hybrid budgeting system” following the end of the stalemate between
Malacañang and Congress over the implementation of the cash-based budgeting scheme.

House Majority Leader Rolando “Nonoy” Andaya Jr. (Camarines Sur), bared that a compromise has been reached
between the House of Representatives and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) on the budgeting system
issue.
Andaya explained that under the proposed system, government agencies shall be given up to a six-month extension to
accomplish a project and disburse the allocated budget under the cash-based scheme.

“For example Calamity Fund, alangan namang gastusin mo na ‘yan eh wala pa namang bagyong dumarating. If a typhoon
comes in November, you cannot finish a repair job in one month, so this will spill over to the next year,” he said.

The Camarines Sur solon stressed that under a hybrid budgeting system, a combination of cash-based and obligation-
based budgeting systems will be used although only selected departments or projects might implement the obligation-
based system.

Under the system, Andaya said the DBM shall be in charge of creating the internal rules and regulations.

On Tuesday, President Rodrigo Duterte met with House Speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and Andaya to discuss the
proposed Php 3.757 trillion budget for 2019.

Andaya mentioned that the President has opened the lines of communication to discuss the possible agreement on how
the budget for 2019 will be executed.

Andaya, a former DBM Secretary under the Arroyo administration clarified that the proposal provided by the Executive
Branch is not entirely cash-based.

“It’s not a full cash-based system, but it’s the first step to a full cash-based system. ‘Yung one year na window to
implement projects, these are the post-enactment activities, but ‘yung pag-formulate mismo ng budget was still done
under an obligation-based system. In a sense, hybrid talaga siya,” said Andaya.

“Hindi ka naman talaga magkakaroon ng full cash-based system when you have lump sum amounts. And admittedly,
there are still a lot of lump sum amounts,” he added.
Even before House-DBM squabble, 2019 budget was already a ‘hybrid’ — Andaya

However, he also revealed By in a press briefing on Wednesday that the original 2019 budget was already a “hybrid” or
combination of the two systems even before the reported squabbles.

“Actually if you look at the proposal from the executive, it’s not strictly a cash-based (budgeting), it’s moving towards a
cash-based budget […] but ‘yong pag-formulate mismo ng budget, it was still done under an obligation based system,”
Andaya explained.

“In a sense, hybrid talaga siya, it’s not a full cash-based system, it’s a first step towards a cash-based system,” he added.

Lawmakers have been opposed to the idea of an obligation-based budgeting but DBM Secretary Benjamin Diokno and
Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque have been adamant in saying that the executive branch would not bend to the
demands, with both saying that they would just wait for a “friendlier Congress”.

The stalled House budget hearings prompted Roque to remind Congress that they are allies while Diokno even said that
lawmakers may prefer an obligation-based budgeting because they want to implement more projects, as it is an election
year.

Andaya refuted Diokno’s claims, saying that it is because there is a small window to implement projects.

“Not because mag-e-eleksyon gusto natin ng mas malaki. Hindi, it’s because dahil may eleksyon at may election ban,
hindi mo ma-i-implementa ang project na iyan,” he explained.

Earlier, Andaya relayed that President Rodrigo Duterte told him and Speaker Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo that he was not
involved in the statements from officials of the executive.

“Unfortunate statements were uttered by various parties referring to reenacted budget, friendlier Congress, this and
that, were not authorized by the president,” Andaya said.
fter days of dispute, the House of Representatives and Malacanang have agreed on the system that will be used for the
proposed 2019 national budget.

According to House majority leader Rolando Andaya, the 2019 budget will be a hybrid of the cash-based budgeting
system, which is favored by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), and the obligation-based budgeting
system, which is favored by the lawmakers.
Previously, DBM Sec. Benjamin Diokno warned that the 2018 national budget will be reenacted if the House of
Representatives rejects the proposed 2019 cash-based budget.

Under a cash-based budgeting system, projects needed to be implemented and paid within one fiscal year, with a three
month extension.

Meanwhile, an obligation-based budgeting system allows inspection, verification and payment of a project can be done
after the end of the fiscal year it was awarded.

In implementing a hybrid budgeting system, Andaya explained that the type of project will dictate whether a cash-based
or an obligation based budgeting system will be utilized.

While Andaya admitted that a cash-based budgeting system is good, the congressman doubts that it can be fully
implemented in 2019.

After reaching an agreement with Malacanang, Andaya promised that the Lower House of Congress will resume their
deliberations regarding the proposed Php 3.75 billion budget for 2019.

“I personally spoke to him, he did not utter those words. Let’s leave it at that, I think the president has opened the lines
of communication on a possible agreement on the how the budget for 2019 will be executed,” he added.
Andaya also said he will recommend the resumption of hearings once issues are ironed out.

“I think I can suggest […] that we now continue the budget hearings, clear naman yung instructions ng Presidente. So
over the break, we will resume and likewise it is a gesture of a hand of cooperation to the DBM and the Senate,” he said.

“Cooperation has been established and we would like to ask our Members to refrain muna tayo from issuing statements
which might not be in pursuance of cooperation,” he requested.
Prez Duterte submits nat’l budget to Congress; allocates more funds on education, infrastructure
July 24, 2018 12:23 PM by Christhel Cuazon

President Rodrigo Duterte delivers his 3rd State of the Nation Address (SONA) on July 23 at Batasang Pambansa. (Photo
Courtesy of RTVM)
President Rodrigo Roa Duterte had submitted to Congress on Monday, July 23 the first-ever cash-based national budget
for the year 2019.

The 2019 National Expenditure Program (NEP) sums up to Php 3.757- trillion which represents 19.3% of the projected
gross domestic product (GDP) for 2019. According to reports, the proposed budget came higher by 13.2% than the case-
based equivalent in the 2018 budget worth Php 3.318-trillion.

The Department of Budget and Management (DBM) disclosed that the budget was submitted to the Office of the
Speaker of the House at around 6:30 PM on Monday, unlike from last year wherein Duterte failed to submit the budget
right after delivering his SONA. The budget aims to prevent underspending among the agencies since the set-up will
force the government agencies to spend because their budgets are only valid for one year. Those unspent budgets will
be revert to savings instead.

However, obligation-based budgeting allowed agencies up to two years to spend their budgets.

Also written in the proposed 2019 budget are the funding allocations for education, infrastructure, and interior
government departments. The education sector will receive the share of at least Php 659.3 billion while the Department
of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) amounts to Php 555.7-billion for next year.

During his speech, Duterte addressed one of his achievements during the past administration which is to increase the
salaries for the police and military. With that, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) received a
proposed allocation of P225.6 billion due to the said salary increase.

It was on July 10 when Duterte approved the proposed national budget for 2019. On the other hand, the 2019 General
Appropriations Act will be passed into law by November.

-----
Free Tuition Law takes effect on S.Y 2018-2019

The newly signed Free Tuition Law will take effect on school year 2018-2019.
President Rodrigo Duterte signed Republic Act 10931, providing free tuition to state universities and colleges.
According to Budget Sec. Benjamin Diokno, there will be some changes in the proposed 2018 national budget.
Diokno said that the new law is “forward looking” and will be implemented during the first semester of the Academic
Year 2018-2019.
There will also be changes in the Php16 billion fund allocated to different scholarships from the proposed budget of the
President.
Prior to this, Economic managers already stated during the first Congressional hearing that the proposed Php2.767
trillion budget for 2018, the government needs Php100 million to fund the free tuition for SUCs.

Confusion rises over PDP-Laban leadership change

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines, July 27) — PDP-Laban President and Senator Koko Pimentel dismissed the election of
new leaders of the ruling party on Friday, insisting he is still the head.
Thousands of supposed regional party members attended the National Assembly at the Amoranto Stadium in Quezon
City on Friday.
Their National Council elected its chairman Rogelio Garcia as party president. With the elections of new officers,
Pimentel is ousted as party president and former House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez is removed as secretary-general.
But Pimentel shrugged off the event and the election of a new leader.
"As the president of PDP-Laban, this is an unauthorized event... Unofficial, unauthorized, rogue assembly using the name
of PDP-Laban," he told CNN Philippines on Friday.
In an official statement, PDP-Laban called officers of the National Council "usurpers of party authority."
"(They) shall be dealt with in accordance with existing election and criminal laws and party laws," it read.
Pimentel said he is still party president. He added there is no way for the National Assembly attendees to seize power in
the party that counts President Rodrigo Duterte and House Speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo as members.
"Siyempre. We change party leadership the proper way. Ang mga nag-elect sa kanila, paano natin malalaman na PDP-
Laban members nga ang mga iyan? Hindi pwedeng in one day maha-hijack mo ang six-year-old political party. Meron
tayong formality," he said.
He said an investigation will be conducted as to who is behind the unauthorized event. The senator said a rich and
powerful person is behind the event to be able to rent the stadium and bring in hoards of regional leaders to Manila by
tourist buses.
"These are pretenders. Who are these people? Kilala niyo ba sila?" he said. "Sa tingin ko merong malaking tao nasa likod
nito kasi meron pang mga tourist buses na naandon, dinala ang mga tao doon... Somebody is actively coordinating this
event," he said.
Rogelio Garcia talks about being elected as national president of the PDP-Laban party
The supposed newly-elected PDP-Laban President Garcia denied Pimentel's accusations, saying they have no backer and
they are not rogue members because they're legitimate members of the party even before Pimentel became senator.
Garcia said the National Council will file the new list of officers before the Commission on Elections on Monday.
In an interview on CNN Philippines' News Night, Garcia insisted that the event was authorized and that Pimentel is no
longer the leader of the party.
"Nope, as of today, he (Pimentel) was deposed," he stressed, adding that he is open for an investigation.
"We're trying to reach them. Long before this national assembly today nagpapaabot na kami ng aming kamay na kami
po ay mag-uusap, na pag-usapan natin ang mga problemang ito, itong mga sigalot na ito lalong lalo na po sa mass oath
taking," he added.
Despite the turmoils, Garcia asserted that PDP-Laban remains a unified party.
"We're not hijacking the party. There is no faction in the party, we want the party to be united," he said.
The event comes a day after House Deputy Speaker Rolando Andaya said some representatives from PDP-Laban are
considering jumping ship to Lakas-CMD. He said Lakas-CMD may possibly merge with Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte-
Carpio's regional party, Hugpong ng Pagbabago.
Consultative Committee spokesperson Ding Generoso said political turncoats will not be tolerated under the proposed
shift to a federal government.
"The ConCom draft contains strong provisions against political turncoats, political butterflies and "balimbing" that
virtually makes it impossible for politicians to switch parties and political allegiances without facing sanctions," he said in
a statement. "If the ConCom proposals had been in place, more than half of the present members of the House who
have been moving from one party to another would lose their seats and would be barred from running in the next
elections
Pimentel, Alvarez 'unseated' as PDP-Laban leaders
Senator Aquilino Pimentel III, PDP-Laban President, says the 'expelled rogue members' who held the 'unauthorized'
assembly will be dealt with under party rules
FACTION. A group within PDP-Laban is seeking to unseat Senator Aquilino Pimentel III and former Speaker Pantaleon
Alvarez as party leaders.
Rogelio Garcia (R) claims to be the 'new' president.

MANILA, Philippines – A faction in the ruling PDP-Laban held elections for new leaders in what party president Senator
Aquilino Pimentel III called an “unauthorized” national assembly.

Around 300 people joined the “11th National Assembly” on Friday, July 27, at the Amoranto Stadium in Quezon City.
Many of the attendees, however, are not party members and do not know the people on stage.

Around the venue, Rappler saw at least 20 tourist buses that ferried the participants from Bulacan, Laguna, Cavite, and
other parts of Metro Manila.
SHUTTLE. At least 20 tourist buses shuttled attendees from Bulacan, Cavite, Laguna, and other parts of Metro Manila.
Photo by Camille Elemia/Rappeler
Willy Talag, president of PDP-Laban Makati City council and chair of the membership committee of the National Capital
Region chapter, alleged that Pimentel, former Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, and other party leaders committed
“violations” against the PDP-Laban Charter.
These include the conduct of mass oath taking of new members “without proper basic seminar” and officials “involved
in illegal drugs.” They also questioned why there were no assemblies and elections held, when the party constitution
supposedly requires it every two years.
Rogelio Garcia, PDP-Laban national council chair, was elected as president to replace Pimentel. Alvarez was replaced by
Talag, who claimed he had been with the party for at least “4 years” now. It was found, however, that Talag ran for
Makati City 1st District representative in 2016 under the Nationalist People’s Coalition but lost.
Abbin Dalhani is the new executive vice president. Cesar Cuntapay, who said he was a co-founder of the party, also
joined the event and slammed Pimentel and Alvarez for pushing their supposed “selfish interests.”
"He did not listen to the plea of the members and officers of the party. He speaks without listening, answers without
hearing," said Cuntapay, who was earlier expelled from the party last year because of what Pimentel called "disloyalty
and acts inimical to the party."
The faction also elected Special Assistant to the President Bong Go as auditor, a position he held under the Pimentel
leadership. Talag claimed Go submitted his certificate of candidacy last night but Rappler has yet to get a confirmation
from President Rodrigo Duterte's closest aide as of posting.
'Unauthorized'

ASSEMBLY. Senator Aquilino Pimentel III, president of the PDP-Laban, says the national assembly held was
'unauthorized.'
Pimentel strongly disowned the group and the assembly, saying it is led by “expelled rogue members” of the party.

“They are rogue members who will be dealt with in accordance to party rules. We have already expelled some of them
and after a thorough investigation will expel a few more. The others no need to expel because they aren’t legitimate
party members. Because may process and pagsali sa partido, and karamihan diyan di nakumpleto ang proseso (There's a
process to join the party, and most of them did not complete the process),” Pimentel’s PDP-Laban said.

Cuntapay and other members, however, refused to admit they were expelled from the party and insisted they were
looking out for PDP-Laban’s interest.

“Walang expelled dito…..Kagustuhan ito ng taumbayan at mandate sa by-laws,” (There are no expelled members here.
This is the desire of the people and mandated in our by-laws)," Talag told reporters.

“Nagkaisa po ang regional council na ang ating pamunuan po ay ayusin po ng national assembly….Lahat ay notified dito
at napublish sa diyaryo….Kahit po si tatay Nene (Aquilino Pimentel Jr) ay alam niya po na ang magaganap ay ayon sa
constitution at by-laws," he added.

(The regional councils have decided to hold this national assembly. The others were notified about this and tis was also
published in newspapers. Even Senator Nene [Pimentel] knows about this.)
‘There is only one PDP-Laban’ — Pimentel
By: Anthony Q. Esguerra - Reporter / @AEsguerraINQ INQUIRER.net / 02:37 PM August 02, 2018

Sen. Koko Pimentel addresses members of PDP-Laban during their Leadership Meeting in Quezon City. /PHOTO: Lyn
Rillon, Philippine Daily Inquirer

Senator Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III on Thursday stressed that there is only one Partido Demokratiko Pilipino-Lakas ng
Bayan (PDP-Laban) even as a faction held an assembly last week, electing new party leaders.

“Wala kasing ibang grupo ng PDP-Laban, I’m sorry. There is only one PDP-Laban,” he said when asked how the PDP-
Laban would deal with the faction.
Last week, a faction of the ruling party emerged and claimed to be the genuine representatives of the PDP-Laban.

The group held an assembly in Quezon City where they ousted PDP-Laban leaders including Pimentel and retained only
President Rodrigo Duterte as the party’s chairman.

However, PDP-Laban officers said the assembly was illegal and authorized and will be dealt with according to party rules.

Pimentel said he will discuss with President Rodrigo Duterte sometime this August the issues raised by the party
members during Thursday’s gathering.

“I will relay to the President the concerns aired in this consultative meeting at the PDP-Laban opposition or competition
from allied forces,” Pimentel said.

“Sabihin ko sa Presidente, how can we minimize such a situation if you cannot totally avoid it hindi naman sana buong
bansa,” he added

Pimentel: No leadership struggle in PDP-Laban

Disputing statements from the Palace, Sen. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III said the meeting of the Partido Demokratiko ng
Pilipinas-Lakas ng Bayan (PDP-Laban) with President Duterte on Thursday did not go in vain, maintaining that the ruling
party is not facing a leadership struggle.

Senate President Aquilino (Koko)Pimentel III (Photo via Wikimedia/Manila Bulletin)

Senator Aquilino Pimentel III (Senate of the Philippines / MANILA BULLETIN)

In a radio interview, Pimentel, PDP-Laban president, denied that Duterte failed in fixing the dispute between warring
factions in their party, because for him, there is no problem to settle in the first place.

“Bigo yan sa mata ninyo kasi wala naman talaga kaming problema sa loob. Kaya hindi na dapat ito pinag-aaksayahan ng
panahon (It failed in your perception but we actually have no internal problem. So we should not waste our time with
that),” Pimentel told DWIZ Saturday afternoon when asked how the meeting went.

“Medyo sa labas lang binebenta na may problema ang PDP-Laban. Wala po, walang-wala kaming problema,” he
reiterated.

The senator said he not is threatened with the plan of the group led by Atty. Rogelio Garcia to form their own party, if
they insist that he should relinquish his post in the PDP-Laban.

“Kung ‘di kayo makikinig, na wala kayong karapatan, good riddance, maghiwalayan na lang tayo. Kasi sino ba ang
nanggugulo? Saka sino ba sila (If you will not heed, and you have no right, good riddance, let’s just split. Because who is
creating trouble, anyway? And who are they)?” Pimentel asked, referring to Garcia’s group.

Pimentel then hit back at Garcia, who had earlier accused him of being a political butterfly. According to him, it was
Garcia who had transferred to several political parties in various elections.

Pimentel proved this by sending to Senate reporters data that show Garcia, during the 2010 national elections, ran as a
representative of General Santos City under the Liberal Party (LP); and during 2013 midterm polls, for the same position,
under the United Nationalist Alliance (UNA).

In 2016, Willy Talag, who was supposedly elected as the new party secretary-general, meanwhile, ran as a
representative of Makati City’s first district under the Nationalist People’s Coalition, Pimentel also bared.

“If you look at it, how loyal are they to the party? They are running in every election under different parties. While
others raise their hands as if they are members of the (PDP-Laban) party. They are hijacking the party,” Pimentel said in
Filipino.

“I don’t know if this is planned, or they are just lucky that they were given media publicity. Maybe they are enjoying
media attention,” he added.

Sept 1 meet

Pimentel clarified that the PDP-Laban’s meeting on September 1 will focus on the party’s game plan for the 2019
midterm elections, including the candidates whom President Duterte will campaign for.
“So nagdo-double time na ang headquarters ng PDP-Laban para sa campaign setup, machinery, dapat may feedback sa
baba sino mga tatakbo. Dapat ready na, kasi gusto ni President Duterte kung official candidate ng PDP-Laban, kung may
oras at pagkakataon, tutulungan nya sa kampanya,” he said.

He noted that they are also tightening their screening of candidates to make sure that they are not involved in
corruption or illegal drugs.

“So sa September 1, preliminary report kami sa kanya kung sino ang napupusuan kasama na rin ang mga possible
senatorial candidates,” he said.

Pimentel, meanwhile, reiterated that Davao del Norte Rep. Pantaleon Alvarez remains as the PDP-Laban’s secretary-
general, while House Speaker Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is still a member of the administration party.

Confusion rises over PDP-Laban leadership change

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines, July 27) — PDP-Laban President and Senator Koko Pimentel dismissed the election of
new leaders of the ruling party on Friday, insisting he is still the head.
Thousands of supposed regional party members attended the National Assembly at the Amoranto Stadium in Quezon
City on Friday.

Their National Council elected its chairman Rogelio Garcia as party president. With the elections of new officers,
Pimentel is ousted as party president and former House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez is removed as secretary-general.
But Pimentel shrugged off the event and the election of a new leader.

"As the president of PDP-Laban, this is an unauthorized event... Unofficial, unauthorized, rogue assembly using the name
of PDP-Laban," he told CNN Philippines on Friday.

In an official statement, PDP-Laban called officers of the National Council "usurpers of party authority."

"(They) shall be dealt with in accordance with existing election and criminal laws and party laws," it read.

Pimentel said he is still party president. He added there is no way for the National Assembly attendees to seize power in
the party that counts President Rodrigo Duterte and House Speaker Gloria Macapagal Arroyo as members.

"Siyempre. We change party leadership the proper way. Ang mga nag-elect sa kanila, paano natin malalaman na PDP-
Laban members nga ang mga iyan? Hindi pwedeng in one day maha-hijack mo ang six-year-old political party. Meron
tayong formality," he said.

He said an investigation will be conducted as to who is behind the unauthorized event. The senator said a rich and
powerful person is behind the event to be able to rent the stadium and bring in hoards of regional leaders to Manila by
tourist buses.

"These are pretenders. Who are these people? Kilala niyo ba sila?" he said. "Sa tingin ko merong malaking tao nasa likod
nito kasi meron pang mga tourist buses na naandon, dinala ang mga tao doon... Somebody is actively coordinating this
event," he said.

Rogelio Garcia talks about being elected as national president of the PDP-Laban party |

The supposed newly-elected PDP-Laban President Garcia denied Pimentel's accusations, saying they have no backer and
they are not rogue members because they're legitimate members of the party even before Pimentel became senator.

Garcia said the National Council will file the new list of officers before the Commission on Elections on Monday.

In an interview on CNN Philippines' News Night, Garcia insisted that the event was authorized and that Pimentel is no
longer the leader of the party.

"Nope, as of today, he (Pimentel) was deposed," he stressed, adding that he is open for an investigation.

"We're trying to reach them. Long before this national assembly today nagpapaabot na kami ng aming kamay na kami
po ay mag-uusap, na pag-usapan natin ang mga problemang ito, itong mga sigalot na ito lalong lalo na po sa mass oath
taking," he added.

Despite the turmoils, Garcia asserted that PDP-Laban remains a unified party.
"We're not hijacking the party. There is no faction in the party, we want the party to be united," he said.

The event comes a day after House Deputy Speaker Rolando Andaya said some representatives from PDP-Laban are
considering jumping ship to Lakas-CMD. He said Lakas-CMD may possibly merge with Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte-
Carpio's regional party, Hugpong ng Pagbabago.

Consultative Committee spokesperson Ding Generoso said political turncoats will not be tolerated under the proposed
shift to a federal government.

"The ConCom draft contains strong provisions against political turncoats, political butterflies and "balimbing" that
virtually makes it impossible for politicians to switch parties and political allegiances without facing sanctions," he said in
a statement. "If the ConCom proposals had been in place, more than half of the present members of the House who
have been moving from one party to another would lose their seats and would be barred from running in the next
elections.