Writ of Kalayaan proposed

WRIT OF KALAYAAN PROPOSED.

"Through Fides M. Lim, spokesperson of KAPATID – a support group of families and friends of political prisoners – and wife of detained National Democratic Front consultant Vicente Ladlad, the relatives told Peralta:

 “The WRIT OF KALAYAAN PROPOSED BY JUSTICE MARVIN LEONEN provides an EXTRAORDINARY LEGAL REMEDY grounded on SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMANITY to address the problems of JAIL CONGESTION, SUBHUMAN PRISONERS CONDITIONS amid the continuing pandemic and violations of the RIGHTS OF PEOPLE DEPRIVED OF LIBERTY.

“We only seek justice and we appeal to your SENSE OF COMPASSION and sensitivity to urgently address the SUBHUMAN CONDITIONS IN PHILIPPINE JAILS that have become a systemic problem. The High Court under your leadership can well flesh out the key pointers of Justice Marvic Leonen on the proposed Writ of Kalayaan."

SOURCE - https://mb.com.ph/2020/12/03/relatives-of-political-detainees-press-sc-for-writ-of-kalayaan/

Duterte's economic mismanagement

DUTERTE'S ECONOMIC MISMANAGEMENT IMPOVERISHES THE NATION.

1. The November 2020 inflation was slightly higher than BSP’s forecast range of 2.4-3.2 percent, driven mainly by higher food inflation, particularly for vegetables, fish, fruits and meat.

2.  The national government's debt reached P10.03 TRILLION at the end of OCTOBER, the Bureau of Treasury said on Friday. This grew by P658.81 billion or 7.03 percent from last month primarily due to external and domestic loan availment.

3. The economy shrank by an average of 10 PERCENT during the FIRST NINE MONTHS OF 2020.

4. DEBT-TO-GDP had been projected to jump to 53.9 PERCENT BY END-2020 —poised to be the HIGHEST SINCE 2006’s 58.8 PERCENT —from a record-low of 39.6 percent in 2019. (INQUIRER)

5. Roy A. Endriga:
"This is the breakdown of the Phil debt of P10Trillion as of Oct 2020. 70% is domestic debt 30% is foreign debt. End of Aquino's term the accumulated debt over the years was P5.948Trillion or an increase of 68% over the 4.5-years period of the Duterte admin. The way things look, the loan might double to P12Trillion by end of his term. Kawawa talaga tayo. Di pa nga naubos ang loan ni Marcos(sa 2025 pa matatapos), heto na naman tayo sa panibagong kalbaryo." 

26. "Among emerging markets, the PHILIPPINES scored the HIGHEST —a seven out of 10 in the think tank’s VULNERABILITY SCORE across 31 metrics, which measured policy offsets, economic and financial imbalances, health-related belief scarring, structure of economy, labor market vulnerability and decline in gross domestic product (GDP) growth in 2020.

Economic managers on Thursday estimated 2020 GDP WOULD SHRINK BY 8.5 to 9.5 PERCENT THIS YEAR in what would be the Philippines’ STEEPEST POST-WAR RECESSION. (Read more: https://business.inquirer.net/313132/ph-among-countries-with-weak-medium-term-growth-outlook#ixzz6fjZqIcRU).

Three Tokhang principals

The three (3) TOKHANG CRIMINAL PRINCIPALS: 

* DUTERTE = principal by INDUCEMENT. 

* PNP SUPERIORS = principal by INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION. 

* KILLER POLICE = principal by DIRECT PARTICIPATION. 

LAHAT KAYO KULONG, MGA KRIMINAL NA ANIMAL.

HINDI HABANG BUHAY nakaupo si Duterte sa Malacanang. WALANG FOREVER, so to speak. 

Darating ang panahon, the entire JUDICIARY and LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES will undergo a PAINFUL OVERHAUL.

Tandaan ninyo, in political philosophy, the RIGHT TO REBEL AGAINST A TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT and the RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION are INHERENT, NATURAL and DIVINE RIGHTS of the SOVEREIGN PEOPLE.

ChinaTel, a national security risk in the Philippines

RED FLAGS VS. DITO TELECOM (DITO) AND CHINA TELECOM (CHINATEL), as per Sen..HONTIVEROS:

1. China Telecom (ChinaTel), which has a 40-percent stake in Dito, is 100-percent owned by the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

2. Dito’s reporting line is under the State Council of the PRC.

3.  China continues her adventurism in contested territories in the West Philippine Sea.

4. ChinaTel’s partnership with Dito was based on the “imprimatur of President Rodrigo Duterte” who, in 2017, requested China’s Prime Minister Li Keqiang for a Chinese company to run the country’s third telecom operator.

5. China Telecom was predestined to win the license for the third telco in the Philippines.

6. Future administration may overturn the decision that granted Dito its franchise, due to irregularities in the license process.

7. ChinaTel reports directly to the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology.

8.  ChinaTel had close ties with China’s Armed Forces.

Read more: https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1367916/risa-presses-senate-probe-of-ditos-china-links#ixzz6fcrrtOFj
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

PDP-Laban, naligaw ng landas

 ANONG NANGYARI SA PRINSIPYO NG PDP-LABAN?

ROY A. ENDRIGA:

"ANONG NANGYAYARI SA PDP-LABAN? Sa totoo lang member  ako ng PDP-Laban for quite sometime. Maganda ang platform ng partidong yan, may pagka-reformist ang agenda kaya nagustuhan ko. Halos kadikit ng LP ang programs nila although mas left of center ang PDP-Laban kaysa LP maybe because of Nene Pimentel. Umatend pa ako ng series of orientation lead by Nene Pimentel. For a time hinawakan yan ni Pepeng Cojuangco kaya umalis na ako. Hinawakan din yan ni Jojo Binay kaya lang umalis siya in 2010 dahil tumakbo si Koko Pimentel sa tiket ni Pinoy kaya binuo niya ang UNA. Tapos ngayon ang presidente, si Manny Pacquiao? Sa mga hindi alam ang PDP-Laban ay binubuo ng dalawang partido, Ang Partido Demokratiko ng Pilipinas (PDP) ni Nene Pimentel at Lakas ng Bayan (LABAN) ni Ninoy Aquino.  Isa ang PDP-Laban, kasama ang LP(headed by Jovy Salonga, NP (headed by Doy Laurel) at iba pang civil society groups ang nagpanalo ng UNIDO team na nagdala kay Cory sa Malacanang. Tapos ngayon ang PDP-Laban president ay si Manny Pacquiao? O come on!"

BCDA-MTD BERHAD SEAGAMES ANOMALY.

 WALANG KAMATAYANG KORAPSYON SA GOBYERNO NI DUTERTE. - BCDA-MTD BERHAD SEAGAMES ANOMALY.

SEN. RISA HONTIVEROS:

"Ang project cost sa pagpapatayo ng #SEAGAMES facilities na dumaan sa SWISS CHALLENGE ay 8.5 BILYONG PISO. At sa KONTRATANG siniyasat ng OGCC, 8.5 BILYONG PISO dapat ang ibabalik sa MTD Berhad. 

Ngunit sa kontratang PINIRMAHAN NG BCDA AT MTD BERHAD biglang NADAGDAGAN NG 2.4 BILYONG PISO ang IBABAYAD SA CONTRACTOR. BINIGYAN pa ng 25 TAONG PROFIT-SHARING. 

Ang KORTE SUPREMA na ang nagsabi, ang APPROVED BUDGET FOR THE CONTRACT or ABC na dumaan sa PUBLIC BIDDING o SWISS CHALLENGE ay dapat HINDI BEGIN o DAGDAGAN PAGDATING SA PINIRMAHANG KONTRATA.

Sabi ng Korte sa kaso ng PIATCO: a PUBLIC BIDDING would indeed be a FARCE IF AFTER THE CONTRACT IS AWARDED, THE WINNING BIDDER MAY MODIFY THE CONTRACT and include provisions which are FAVORABLE TO ITS that were NOT PREVIOUSLY MADE AVAILABLE TO THE OTHER BIDDERS."

Sharing is not cyberlibel

ONLY THE AUTHOR OF A DEFAMATORY STATEMENT — NOT THE PEOPLE WHO SHARED IT ONLINE — IS LIABLE FOR CYBER LIBEL.

"RESSA has asked the Makati court TO DISMISS THE SECOND CASE.

Her lawyers cited the SUPREME COURT'S RULING on the cybercrime law which said ONLY THE AUTHOR of a defamatory statement — NOT THE PEOPLE WHO SHARED it online — is liable for cyber libel.

They said there is NO DEFAMATORY STATEMENT in Ressa's own TWEET which reads: “Here’s the 2002 article on the ‘private businessman’ who filed the cyberlibel case, which was thrown out by the NBI then revived by the DOJ. #HoldTheLine."

"As a CITIZEN and as a JOURNALIST, accused enjoys the protection of the CONSTITUTION which guarantees her FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, FREEDOM OF OPINION, and as a journalist, FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. The only limitations are those imposed by law and the decisions of the Supreme Court," said the FREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP, which represents Ressa.

"Keeping people informed, using any platform at her disposal (in this case, Twitter), is PART OF HER DUTY AS A JOURNALIST; certainly, the NON-DEFAMATORY statement she wrote TO INFORM people following her on Twitter falls under the exercise of her right under ARTICLE III, SECTION 4 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION and cannot form the basis for this charge," the lawyers said in their MOTION TO QUASH.—AOL, GMA News."

Source  - https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/766636/maria-ressa-charged-with-cyber-libel-for-2nd-time/story/

Duterte umamin na walang pakialam sa human rights ng Pilipino.

 INAAMIN NI DUTERTE NA WALA.SIYANG PAKIALAM SA HUMAN RIGHTS NG MGA PILIPINO (ARTICLE III, BILL OF RIGHTS, 1987 CONSTITUTION). ANG HEAD OF STATE NG PILIPINAS AY ISANG TALAMAK NA KRIMINAL.

"It's been made clear countless times in the past: THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT CARE ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS, despite claiming to abide by the 1987 CONSTITUTION. 

At a speech in Cavite on Thursday at an event celebrating the destruction of P7 billion worth of narcotics, President Rodrigo DUTERTE made the statement as explicitly as he could, URGING OFFICERS OF THE LAW TO SHOOT FIRST, AND WORRY ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS LATER. 

"All addicts have guns. If there's even a hint of wrongdoing, any overt act, EVEN IF YOU DON'T SEE A GUN, JUST GO AHEAD AND SHOOT HIM," he said in Filipino. "YOU SHOULD GO FIRST, because you might be shot. SHOOT HIM FIRST, because he will really draw his gun on you, and you will die."

"Human rights, you are preoccupied with the lives of the criminals and drug pushers. As mayor and as president, I have to protect every man, woma, and child from the dangers of drugs. THE GAME IS KILLING...I SAY TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS, I DON'T GIVE A SHIT WITH YOU. MY ORDER IS STILL THE SAME. BECAUSE I AM ANGRY," he added. 

SOURCE - https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2020/12/03/2061268/i-dont-care-about-human-rights-duterte-says-urging-cops-shoot-first?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebooku

DUTERTE'S abusive and undemocratic WEAPONIZATION OF THE law against MARIA RESSA.

DUTERTE'S abusive and undemocratic WEAPONIZATION OF THE law against MARIA RESSA. 

"INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYERS AMAL CLOONEY called "absurd" the latest cyber libel charge against RAPPLER CEO MARIA RESSA, which stemmed from the SECOND COMPLAINT of WILFREDO KENG, the same businessman who had already gotten the journalist CONVICTED  months before.

“This absurd case threatens to send a journalist to prison for a SINGLE TWEET that simply REPOSTS AN OLD NEWSPAPER ARTICLE," Clooney said in a statement on Thursday, December 3.

Clooney and fellow UK lawyer Caoilfhionn Gallagher lead Ressa's international legal team.

"THREATENING a journalist with CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND IMPRISONMENT for an INNOCUOUS TWEET AND SCREENGRAB is the behavior of a DESPOTIC REGIME, not a proud democracy with a long constitutional tradition of respect for FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION," Gallagher said.

Ressa was charged and ordered arrested last week for CYBER LIBEL, over a TWEET she made in 2019 where the journalist posted SCREENSHOTS OF AN OLD ARTICLE LINKING BUSINESSMAN KENG TO AN ALLEGED MURDER.

Ressa posted SCREENSHOTS of the article because the news website that published it, PHILSTAR.COM, DELETED THE STORY that day after KENG raised the possibility of LEGAL ACTION.

Charging over SCREENSHOTS is uncharted territory in the young Philippine cybercrime law because the SUPREME COURT has ALREADY RULED that SHARING a supposedly libelous post is NOT A CRIME."

SOURCE -  https://www.rappler.com/nation/amal-clooney-calls-maria-ressa-second-cyber-libel-charge-absurd?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

The Truth About Yolanda-Ding Velasco

 TRUTH ABOUT YOLANDA

By Ding C. Velasco

Dear Friends:

On the day after Yolanda, Kringkring Gonzales, Mayor husband Alfred Romualdez and their two kids were seen walking towards Tacloban City center because they were caught by the onslaught of Typhoon Yolanda at their seaside resort - where they almost lost their lives when the "daluyong" or storm surge flooded their resort. They appeared dirty and bedraggled having survived Yolanda by the skin of their teeth at their beach resort.

A week later, Kringkring was interviewed by ABSCBN in Manila where she, in tears, narrated how she and her family escaped death by crawling into the "kisame" of their house in their beach resort, because the storm surge flooded their resort.

Kringkring did not publicly disclose that two days prior to the arrival of Typhoon Yolanda, she and husband Alfred were on an overnight hiking trip with close friends, and that they only arrived at their beach resort on the afternoon of November 7, 2013.

So, having just arrived and tired from a hiking excursion, they were physically spent, so they rested and slept. Mayor Alfred wasn't able to even report to Tacloban City Hall the day before the typhoon.

While the Tacloban City DRRMC did open up evacuation centers in many Tacloban City public schools without their City Mayor - the biggest mistake of Mayor Romualdez was his failure to understand the effect of a thirty to forty foot storm surge that would be generated by the 335 kph Typhoon. And this "daluyong" will crawl from the beach to the higher grounds and will engulf everything with 40 feet of seawater.

So, when Yolanda hit in late evening of November 07, the unadvised citizens of Tacloban City along the shorelines were the first to die of drowning. Then when the surge flooded the low lying City, the thousand evacuated to the public schools inside the city, died of drowning too. This was evident because thousands of bodies were recovered in the vicinities of the schools. This in itself was a clear case of "nonfeasance" on preparedness on the part of Alfred Romualdez.

In the interest of fairness, it was the 180 man Albay contingent led by then Albay Governor Joey Salceda who arrived first in Tacloban City, not Duterte and his Davao contingent. Salceda brought with him a dozen doctors, some nurses, medicines and two ten wheeler water tankers we call here in Albay as "WatSan" tankers, which combined, can convert twenty thousand gallons of river water per day to clean, potable  drinking water - that they can  distribute to communities because the majority of the water pipes of the Tacloban Water District were damaged.

Salceda also brought two teams of divers with their own motor boats which helped to collect the bloated bodies along the beaches and shoreline.

Only the US Navy arrived earlier than Albay in Tacloban City.

The most covered incompetency in the entire  Typhoon Yolanda mess was the failure of Mayor Alfred Romualdez to  understand storm surge. Had he understood it, he wouldn't have allowed himself and his family to sleep in their beach resort and he would surely have ordered the mandatory evacuation of all vulnerable citizens on the low lying areas to higher grounds and therefore - could have avoided thousands of casualties.

To cover up for his stupidity, the entire Romualdez and Marcos clan started the Fake News angle that the  deaths and succeeding controversies around Yolanda were because of the mishandling of PNoy and Mar Roxas. And because PNoy, who was still President just ignored how he was wrongly pilloried, the fake news of Yolanda being his fault started to take root.

Today, no DDS will believe that in all of what transpired since November 2013; and despite the international acclaim that PNoy did better at Typhoon Yolanda than Bush did with Hurricane Katrina - PNoy and Mar Roxas were made out as the bad guys when the truth was the contrary.

Typhoon Yolanda was the strongest Typhoon or Hurricane to ever hit land on recorded history and PNoy did very well - considering the Pope was able to say Holy Mass in Tacloban City fourteen months later, in January 2014.

Militarization is Good Business

 ANLENG VILLANUEVA:

"AYAW ng gobyerno ng PEACE TALK kasi wala na silang pagkakitaan kapag nangyari yan. For me, armed struggle is BUSINESS."

Addendum:

MANUEL LASERNA JR.:

1. Habang ang mentality ng AFP at ni Duterte ay dugo, baril at punglo, at hindi AMICABLE PEACE NEGOTIATION, walang katapusan ang  communist rebellion sa Pilipinas.

2.  Hanggang may inequality, social injustice, elitist democracy, feudal landlordism and warlordism, government corruption, bureaucratic capitalism, oligarchic cronyism, extreme poverty, homelessness and joblessness, weak and corrupt institutions, political oppression vs democratic dissent, gross human rights violations, absence of rule of law,  disrespect for the Constitution, etc., the frustrations of the poor and hopeless citizens and victims of social injustice will compel them to look for alternative modes of struggle for reforms, including protracted Marxist or Islamic  revolution.

The entire social, political and economic system that governs our lives as a nation needs fundamental change and cultural  paradigm shift.

AFP's insincere press releases of sympathy are useless. Its corrupt and tyrannical generals, like the rest of the government bureaucrats, technocrats and functionaries, have sold their souls and principles to the populist authoritarian Duterte and his clique. The sovereign Filipino people condemn these unpatriotic cowards.

VP Leni Robredo as a Leader

 "WHY  VP ROBREDO IS BRILLIANT. She leads with science, not politics. She  speaks with candor and respect, not excuse and abuse. She plans ahead  for success rather than justifying past failures. She raises Filipinos  up rather than cursing, tagging, and bringing them down."

~ JOE AMERICA

#LabanVPLeni
#Protect VPLeni

ADDENDA:

1.  VICE PRESIDENT LENI ROBREDO, who recently drew the ire of President Rodrigo Duterte, warns against "the cosmetic courage of bluster, or power, or brute strength." #BonifacioDay

2.  “MAS DAPAT PAKINGGAN IYONG MGA LOCAL OFFICIALS kasi sila iyong nakakaalam kung ano iyong sitwasyon on the ground—hindi puwedeng one-size-fits-all,” Vice President Leni Robredo said.

“Iyong mga local officials na palagay nila mataas pa iyong community transmission, para sa akin kailangan silang pakinggan, eh, kasi sila rin iyong mahihirapan kapag hindi sila pinakinggan.”

3.  "DAPAT YUNG BOSS NI SECRETARY BRIONES AY 'YUNG MGA BATAS NA KAILANGAN MATUTO, ‘yung mga TEACHER na kailangan ng tulong, HINDI SI PRESIDENTE."

Ito ang mensahe ni Vice President Leni Robredo kay DepEd Sec. Leonor Briones matapos idistansya ni Briones ang DepEd mula sa Community Learning Hubs na proyekto ni Robredo.

"Dahil sa statement nila, siyempre kahit ako naman teacher, kahit ako principal, kahit ako DepEd official na lokal, kahit alam kong mabuti iyong programa, mag-aalala ako na baka pag-initan ako o baka ma-sanction ako kasi nagsabi si Secretary Briones na ayaw nila iyan," Robredo said. #UnangHirit

READ: https://bit.ly/37gSnxT
WATCH: https://bit.ly/2JlK5fQ

A Governor Speaks Against Duterte

 From Gov. Lito Coscolluela...

To Digong DuDirty: When you insult women with your vile behaviour, I think of my loving mother, my only daughter, my caring wife, and my many decent women relatives and friends. I know they are insulted, and I AM INSULTED TOO.

When you insult gays by your demeaning reference to "bayot", I FEEL JUST AS INSULTED as my brother-in-law who is gay and decent.

When you insult maids with your dirty venial sin joke, you insult not only the kasam-bahay we try to dignify through higher pay and respect for their personhood, you insult an entire nation, INCLUDING ME, because our sense of and desire for decency is violated.

The truth is, your demeanor is an insult to the Code of Ethics for Public Servants.

I AM THUS TAKING YOUR INSULTS PERSONALLY, AND I AM TELLING YOU I HAVE HAD ENOUGH.

With all due respect to your followers, I am calling on every decent Filipino to say ENOUGH! I

I ask them to keep you away from our children, away from our women, and away from Malacañang.

If you have a problem with that, tell me where we can meet and settle our differences. Man to Man.

- Gov Rafael Lito Coscolluela

E N O U G H 😡

Next Target: 2022 Election

 Next target ni Duterte...2022 presidential election manipulation to ensure victory for Sara w/o H and BungGu. A la May  2019 senatorial election smartmagic feat. 

SEN. LEILA DE LIMA:

"Anyone who seeks to steal our elections is an enemy to our people and our democracy. They should be treated as such.

I was told that last night, it circulated over the social media that someone from the Senate is attempting to insert a provision in the national budget to give COMELEC the authority to waive the safeguards for the procurement of equipment and materials under Sec. 12 of the Automated Election Law, as amended.

There is NO EXCUSE for COMELEC not to undergo regular procurement.

If they cannot do their job, they have no business running a most crucial institution. They better just resign. Any attempts at negotiated procurement for election equipment can only be seen as negotiating the elections itself.

I urge my colleagues in the bicameral panel to be vigilant against any dangerous amendments like this. I pray for my colleagues’ success for the sake of our country.

Our elections are sacrosanct to our democracy. And COMELEC should resist any attempts by anyone to undermine its credibility, NO MATTER WHO APPOINTED THEM."

(Twitter posts of De Lima)

Sen. Bong Go, Duterte's Caregiver and Senator

 "Sukang-suka na ang bayan kay BUNGGU. Ang image at behavior niya, as a public servant, ay nakakainsulto sa Konstitusyon at Senado. SENATONG siyang naturingan at  tumatanggap ng milyon-milyon taon-taon mula sa kaban ng bayan pero ang tunay mong trabaho ay maging PRESIDENTIAL CAREGIVER, MUCHACHO, ALALAY, UTUSAN, MESSENGER at FIXER. 

NAKAKAHIYA si BungGu. Makapal ang mukha. Walang delicadeza. Walang respeto sa constitutional doctrines of SEPARATION OF POWERS at CHECK AND BALANCE in government. KASUKLAM-SUKLAM din ang kawalang bayag ng buong  SENADO. Hindi ito  kumikilos upang imbestigahan at parusahan ang UNETHICAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL BEHAVIOR ni BungGu as a member of the Senate."

~ Manuel Laserna Jr.

#SmartMagicTSINAtor

VP Leni Robredo

NENE GUEVARRA’s article on VP LENI  ROBREDO: 

The Gospel about the widow who gave out of her poverty reminded me of Vice President Leni Robredo.

The Office of the Vice President gets the smallest appropriation in the entire bureaucracy. Her office proposed a budget of P720 million for 2020, but the DBM only approved P679 million.

The office has no access to the perks that government officials enjoy. She was heavily criticized for using a military aircraft for her relief operations in Catanduanes—which eventually turned out to be a false information.

She is not invited at all to official functions to which her office is entitled to. Her office is bereft of all the trimmings that the 2nd highest office in the land deserves—and yet she gives, out of her poverty.

The Gospel says that this is the highest form of giving—“The poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. They gave out of their wealth, but she out of poverty, put everything, all she had to live on.”

I did not know VP Leni. Mayor Jesse kept his personal life private.

I only got to meet her in the inauguration of the Jesse Robredo Institute of Governance in Bicol University. I spoke before her and drenched the podium with tears.

When she spoke next, she did so with calmness, composure and courage. I thought that she must be made of steel.

The only time I saw her shed a tear was when she received a posthumous award that was given to Mayor Jesse by the Ateneo University.

The VP must really be a special creature. She embodies tenacity, fortitude and audacity. A normal human being would crumble with all the insults, insinuations, crass jokes, allegations, innuendoes, and criticisms that are thrown at her.

And yet, she bears them with head high and great dignity.

The Vice President works silently and without any fanfare. The morning after the storm, she is already out in the streets showing people that government cares.

She brings help to show that her promises are not empty and that she means what she says. While everyone is curled up on his/her bed and watching people suffer through their TV screens, she rides motor boats, treks muddy roads, fulfilling her mission to seek those in the periphery and give them hope.

I am convinced that she is powered not by ambition. She was a reluctant candidate and had to answer a despondent call to ensure that her district was represented in Congress. 

Perhaps, circumstances pushed her into running for the Vice President post. But she made the best of what was destined for her. 

After being stripped of what should have been her official post in government as head of the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC), she wasted no time to sulk, complain and criticize.

She launched “Angat Buhay” with the support of the private sector and raised P353 million worth of resources that benefitted 224,336 families in the poorest localities in the country.

Without any government funding, schools, health centers and housing units were constructed. Capital and livelihood training were given to farmers. 

Today, the Marawi housing project of the VP stands out as being the most organized and admired.

But make no mistake about the humility with which she carries out her mission. The VP is intelligent and resolute.

As a homemaker, she set out rules that even the most outstanding mayor in the Philippines followed. He had to take out the garbage and tutor the daughters in the evening.

As Vice President she speaks her mind out, bravely fighting for what she thinks is right, even if her stand is diametrically opposed to government’s.

She thinks federalism is not the way to go. She opposes the imposition of the death penalty. She repeatedly raises the grave violation of human rights in the extrajudicial killings.

She is a gracious listener in meetings, but firmly raises better alternatives that need to be considered. She is sharp, logical, and studies hard. And of course, she has had the best mentor in governance.

VP Leni shows us how to give without counting the cost; to fight and not to heed the wounds; to labor and ask not for reward. She must have been a Jesuit in her other life.

Dr. Milwida M. Guevara is the Chief Executive Officer of Synergeia Foundation, an NGO that aims to improve the quality of basic education in the country.

Mabuhay ang NPA! - Duterte

 DUTERTE, KOMUNISTANG HILAW NG DAVAO. -  

"MABUHAY ANG NPA, AND I WILL NOT TAKE THAT BACK,” DUTERTE REPEATED during his Sunday television program “Gikan sa Masa, Para sa Masa.”

SOURCE - https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/738022/duterte-cheers-rebels-mabuhay-ang-npa. 

Xi Jinping is Duterte's Defender

 DUTERTE, AHENTE AT TUTA NG KOMUNISTANG TSINA:

“The assurances of [President] XI JINPING were very encouraging… ‘WE WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO BE TAKEN OUT FROM YOUR OFFICE, and we will not allow the Philippines to go to the dogs,’” DUTERTE quoted Xi as saying during a send-off ceremony to Filipino scientists who will study Benham Rise (Philippine Rise) in Casiguran, Aurora.

SOURCE -  https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/05/15/18/duterte-china-wont-let-me-get-ousted 

Hallucination: Duterte-Xi Jinping-Putin Triumvirate?

 DUTERTE, ITINAKWIL ANG AMERIKA. PINAGMALAKI NA SIYA AY TUTA NG KOMUNISTANG TSINA AT RUSSIA.

"AMERICA HAS LOST NOW. I'VE REALIGNED MYSELF IN YOUR IDEOLOGICAL FLOW," he told business leaders in BEIJING on Thursday. "And maybe I WILL ALSO GO TO RUSSIA TO TALK TO PUTIN and tell him that THERE ARE THREE OF US AGAINST THE WORLD: CHINA, PHILIPPINES AND RUSSIA. It's the only way."

SOURCE - https://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/20/asia/china-philippines-duterte-visit/

Tabogo DDS Dutertards

 The TABOGO DDS DUTERTARDS know that DUTERTE IS A LOST CAUSE. Their problem is how to find the COURAGE to admit their stupid mistake and the WISDOM to  change. Mabuburo sila sa loob ng DDS ECHO CHAMBERS nila.

Addendum:

DING C. VELASCO:

"The Philippine Communist insurgency should have ended in the time of CORAZON AQUINO when she genuinely believed that the only way forward was DIALOGUE and allowing the Left to be part of Government so they can help effect the changes they longed for. There was only one problem - Corazon Aquino wasn't greedy and power hungry enough to seek the second term she was entitled to under the new 1987 Constitution because her first six years wasn't enough to permanently cast the changes necessary to stop the Insurgency.

The new confrontational tack being pursued now by RODRIGO DUTERTE will only produce MORE DEADLY BODIES AND SWELL THE RANKS OF THE INSURGENTS just like in the 70s when the GREATEST NPA RECRUITER was MARCOS himself.

He never learns from History because Rodrigo has never been a student of History; he is this way because what guides him is his EGO. Not history, and certainly not the  lessons of those who came before him."

Duterte Used the CPP NPA NDF in 2016 to Become President

 ANG PAGMAMAHAL, PAG-AALAGA AT SUPORTANG PINANSYAL NI DUTERTE SA CPP NPA NDF SA DAVAO SA MATAGAL NA PANAHON AY BUKAS NA LIHIM SA AFP, PNP, DILG AT MALACANANG. GINAMIT NIYA ANG CPP NPA NDF UPANG SAKUPIN ANG MALACANANG NOON 2015 ELECTION. - 

(1) “(DUTERTE) said as mayor of a city in Mindanao dealing with “REVOLUTIONARY ” and “IDEOLOGICAL ” groups such as the COMMUNIST PARTY of the Philippines and MORO revolutionary groups, THE WAY TO DEAL WITH THEM IS TO TALK TO THEM.

(2) "December last year, DUTERTE DREW FLAK when his pronouncement during a VISIT at the COMMUNIST PARTY of the Philippines quoted him as saying that HE PAYS REVOLUTIONARY TAXES. A YOUTUBE video later circulated accusing him of GIVING P125 MILLION AS ANNUAL REVOLUTIONARY TAXES."

(3) DUTERTE: “I can talk, but I can’t talk them out of their ideology. You have to realize the Communist Party is entering its 45th year here. YOU HAVE TO ADMIT THERE’s BEEN HISTORICAL INJUSTICE COMMITTED ON THE PEOPLE.”

(5) "DUTERTE said the NATIONAL GOVERNMENT should deal with the revolutionary groups BY TALKING PEACE."

(6) “Crimes I can deal with it. But with the revolutionary (groups), I give it to the (national) government, but here, I ADVISED GOVERNMENT NOT TO MAKE ARRESTS OF REVOLUTIONARIES ” (DUTERTE) said.

(7) DUTERTE ON NPA's REVOLUTIONARY TAXES :
“I CANNOT PUT IT TO A STOP. SO FACTOR THAT IN YOUR INVESTMENTS. IF YOU PAY TO THE BIR (Bureau of Internal Revenue), YOU PREPARE ALSO FOR THE NPA.”

(8) DUTERTE:  “YOU GIVE CREDIT TO THESE REVOLUTIONARIES, you can exchange words and deal with them." 

SOURCE - http://davaotoday.com/main/politics/new-peoples-army/npa-taxation-a-reality-just-pay-them-says-duterte/

Duterte and his Officials Should be Covid-19 Response Models

MGA OPISYAL NG GOBYERNO NI DUTERTE PINARINGGAN NG WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION -

"The World Health Organization (WHO) has urged government officials to ensure that they observe the exact guidelines they expect their constituents to follow as not doing so would only confuse the public and make it harder for them to effectively control the spread of the new coronavirus.

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus pointed out that time and again they have reminded that to reduce the number of infections, it’s important to wear masks, practice hand hygiene and observe physical distancing.

“We expect leaders to be examples. We want leaders to be models. We want influencers to be models … [T]hey have to set the example,” Tedros said at a briefing in WHO’s headquarters in Geneva on Tuesday.

Xxx.

Incidentally, in the PHILIPPINES, presidential spokesperson HARRY ROQUE and Sen. MANNY PACQUIAO were assailed over the weekend as photos circulated online showing packed crowds in their respective events, IN VIOLATION OF THE  GOVERNMENT’s DISTANCING PROTOCOL."

Read more: https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1367026/who-tells-govt-execs-to-become-role-models#ixzz6fRHcmqKI
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

RA 1700, Anti-Subversion Law, Already Repealed in 1992 Yet

"Digong is ignorant of the law. RA 1700 or the Anti-Subversion Law was already REPEALED by Congress in 1992, hence any membership in any subversive organization or association like the Communist Party of the Phil ( CPP) is no longer punishable.

With the passage of the PARTY LIST LAW in accordance with the 1987 Constitution, all progressive group like BAYAN MUNA, MAKABAYAN , GABRIELA, ANAKPAWIS , etc joined and registered with the COMELEC and participated during the National Elections and are now in CONGRESS as Party List Representatives."

~ ATTY. MANUEL TEOXON

ADDENDUM:

ATTY. MANUEL LASERNA JR.:

(1) HABANG ang mentality ng AFP at ni Duterte ay dugo, baril at punglo, at hindi AMICABLE PEACE NEGOTIATION, walang katapusan ang  communist rebellion sa Pilipinas.

(2) HANGGANG may
* inequality,
* social injustice,
* elitist democracy,
* feudal landlordism and warlordism,
* government corruption,
* bureaucratic capitalism,
*oligarchic cronyism,
* extreme poverty, homelessness and joblessness,
* weak and corrupt institutions,
* political oppression vs democratic dissent,
* gross human rights violations,
* absence of rule of law,
* disrespect for the Constitution,
* etc.,

the frustrations of the poor and hopeless citizens and victims of social injustice will compel them to look for ALTERNATIVE MODES OF STRUGGLE FOR REFORMS, including protracted Marxist or Islamic revolution.

The entire social, political and economic system that governs our lives as a nation NEEDS FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE AND CULTURAL PARADIGM SHIFT.

AFP's insincere press releases of sympathy are useless. ITS CORRUPT AND TYRANNICAL GENERALS, like the rest of the government bureaucrats, technocrats and functionaries, HAVE SOLD THEIR SOULS AND PRINCIPLES to the populist authoritarian DUTERTE and his clique. The sovereign Filipino people CONDEMN these UNPATRIOTIC COWARDS.

Lifeless Body as AFP's Trophy

"Elements of the MILITARY whose faces have been blurred in a photograph triumphantly preening over the obviously posed lifeless body of the young rebel with a cause whom they have slain in an encounter are the terrorists of the oppressed and beleaguered indigenous peoples of Mindanao, like the LONG-SUFFERING LUMAD. 

The PROPAGANDA PHOTO with the DEAD 22-YEAR OLD JEVILYN CULLAMAT cradling a PLANTED FIREARMS speaks a thousand words of the TERRORISM AND DEPRAVITY OF STATE AGENTS, and the CULPABLE NEGLECT AND DISCRIMINATION OF GOVERNMENT which impel people to resist the errant and ABUSIVE POLICIES OF THE AUTHORITIES.

Cullamat was a member of the LUMAD PEOPLE who was identified by the military as a MEDIC, NOT A COMBATANT, in an NPA outfit.

Also evidently PLANTED was the array of assorted FIREARMS reportedly recovered from the encounter WHEN NO ONE ELSE WAS KILLED except Cullamat.

- REP. EDCEL C. LAGMAN
01 December 2020

ADDENDUM:

BAYAN MUNA REP. EUFEMIA C. CULLAMAT:

“Mahal ko ang anak ko na nagmahal sa bayan. Ipinagmamalaki ko siya.  Bayani siya ng mga Lumad at ng buong bayan.”

Bilang isang ina, basag ang puso ko ngayon sa balitang nasawi ang anak kong si Jevilyn sa isang insidente sa Marihatag, Surigao del Sur. Matindi ang aking pagdadalamhati sa pagkapaslang ng aking bunsong anak.

Mariin kong kinokondena ang ginawang PAMBABASTOS AT PAMBABABOY SA LABI NG AKING ANAK. Hindi siya bagay, hindi siya isang TROPEO NA IPAPARADA PARA LAMANG SA PROPAGANDA NG MILITARY. HINDI NIYO NA GINALANG ANG PATAY, BINABASTOS PA NINYO ANG NAGLULUKSA NAMING PAMILYA. Hinihiling ko sa militar na huwag gamiting tropeo ang bangkay ng aking anak. Hayaan ninyo ang aming pamilya na makapagluksa at makapagbigay ng parangal sa kabayanihan niya.

Mahal na mahal ko si Jevilyn. Isa siyang tahimik at mabait na anak. Pinalaki namin siya na maging makabayan, matapang, at may sariling pag-iisip at paninindigan. Sa aming mga Lumad, bawat bata ay inaaruga para maging kapaki-pakinabang at mag-ambag sa komunidad. 

Ang desisyon niyang lumahok sa armadong pakikibaka ay hindi simpleng bagay, at BUNGA NA RIN NG PANG-AABUSONG DINANAS NAMING MGA LUMAD AT ANG MATINONG KAHIRAPAN NA NASAKSIHAN NIYA.  Nakita ng kanyang dalawang mata kung paano PINASLANG NG MGA PARAMILITARY ang aming mga lider na si Dionel Campos, Datu Bello Sinzo, at Executive Director ng ALCADEV na si Emerito Samarca noong September 1, 2015.

Bagamat bilang isang ina ay nag-alala rin ako at masakit ang mawalan ng isang anak, nanaig pa rin ang respeto ko sa naging desisyon ni Jev.

Anupaman ang sabihin ng mga buwitreng pumapaligid ngayon sa bangkay ng aking anak, ito ang tanging masasabi ko: HINDI NASAYANG ANG KANYANG BUHAY NA INALAY NIYA PARA SA BAYAN AT PARA SA PAGDEPENSA NG AMING LUPANG NINUNO.  Malaking karangalan sa akin na nagkaroon ng isang anak na naging martir at mandirigma.  Mahal na mahal ko ang aking anak na buong buhay na naglingkod at nagmahal sa bayan.

Walang pag-alinlangan kong sasabihin ito: IPINAGMAMALAKI ko si Jevilyn dahil LUMABAN SIYA sa isang SISTEMANG MAPANG-API lalo na sa aming mga LUMAD. Walang nanay na magtatakwil sa anak na nagsantabi ng pansariling interes at nag-alay ng kanyang buhay para sa bayan at  para sa pagdepensa sa aming lupang ninuno.

Legal Leftist Partylists

ARMED COMMUNIST REBELS VS.. LEGAL LEFTIST PARTYLISTS (MAKABAYAN BLOC), CONTRADISTINGUISHED - 

CHR SPOKESPERSON JAQUELINE DE GUIA:

1. "De Guia said there must be DELINEATION between people WHO HAVE TAKEN UP ARMS or joined the armed combat and those WHO HAVE NOT."

2. “We DO NOT SUPPORT ARMED VIOLENCE and we have also CAUTIONED THE GOVERNMENT AGAINST RED TAGGING INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE NOT TAKEN UP ARMS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT. There has been NO EXPRESSED DECLARATION FROM OUR COURTS OF WHO THE TERRORISTS ARE,” de Guia said in an ANC interview.

3. “For those who have not taken up arms, if they are exercising their CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOMS, THEY CAN DO SO FREELY. The DANGER OF RED TAGGING is this is a blanket, a SWEEPING GENERALIZATION, regardless if you have TAKEN ARMS OR NOT. That PUTS LIVES IN DANGER,” de Guia added.

4. "De Guia was referring to the ARTICLE 3 Section 4 of the PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION which states that “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of SPEECH, of EXPRESSION, or of the PRESS, or the right of the people peaceably to ASSEMBLE and PETITION THE GOVERNMENT for REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES.”

SOURCE - https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/766315/chr-non-armed-groups-aren-t-communists/story/?utm_source=GMANews&utm_medium=Facebook 

Endless Rebellion

 HANGGANG may 

* inequality,
* social injustice,
* elitist democracy,
* feudal landlordism and warlordism,
* government corruption,
* bureaucratic capitalism,
*oligarchic cronyism,
* extreme poverty, homelessness and joblessness,
* weak and corrupt institutions,
* political oppression vs democratic dissent,
* gross human rights violations,
* absence of rule of law,
* disrespect for the Constitution,
* etc.,

the frustrations of the poor and hopeless citizens and victims of social injustice will compel them to look for ALTERNATIVE MODES OF STRUGGLE FOR REFORMS, including protracted Marxist or Islamic revolution.

The entire social, political and economic system that governs our lives as a nation NEEDS FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE AND CULTURAL PARADIGM SHIFT.

AFP's insincere press releases of sympathy are useless. ITS CORRUPT AND TYRANNICAL GENERALS, like the rest of the government bureaucrats, technocrats and functionaries, HAVE SOLD THEIR SOULS AND PRINCIPLES to the populist authoritarian DUTERTE and his clique. The sovereign Filipino people CONDEMN these UNPATRIOTIC COWARDS.

Peace Talk

Habang ang mentality ng AFP at ni Duterte ay dugo, baril at punglo, at hindi AMICABLE PEACE NEGOTIATION, walang katapusan ang  communist rebellion sa Pilipinas.

Addendum:

Hanggang may inequality, social injustice, elitist democracy, feudal landlordism and warlordism, government corruption, bureaucratic capitalism, oligarchic cronyism, extreme poverty, homelessness and joblessness, weak and corrupt institutions, political oppression vs democratic dissent, gross human rights violations, absence of rule of law,  disrespect for the Constitution, etc., the frustrations of the poor and hopeless citizens and victims of social injustice will compel them to look for alternative modes of struggle for reforms, including protracted Marxist or Islamic  revolution.

The entire social, political and economic system that governs our lives as a nation needs fundamental change and cultural  paradigm shift.

AFP's insincere press releases of sympathy are useless. Its corrupt and tyrannical generals, like the rest of the government bureaucrats, technocrats and functionaries, have sold their souls and principles to the populist authoritarian Duterte and his clique. The sovereign Filipino people condemn these unpatriotic cowards.

Corruption at Duterte's PITC

Walang kamatayang korapsyon sa gobyerno.

News:

"The Commission on Audit (COA) earlier found that part of the P33 billion held by the PITC included OCD funds for the purchase of relief supplies in the last five years as well as the procurement of fire trucks for the Bureau of Fire Protection that have not yet materialized.

The state auditing agency earlier warned the PITC to “stop the practice of utilizing the unused balances from completed projects for other purposes, unless authorized in accordance with the provisions of the General Appropriations Act.”

The COA said PITC’s earnings from interest income on fund transfers from various source agencies for the period 2016 to 2019 had reached P1,406,727,544."

Note that the police cannot search a vehicle and the occupants thereof on the sole basis of an anonymous tip or a verbal statement by an informant. The tip, text, or verbal statement must first be verified by the policemen through his/her own personal knowledge (not hearsay) prior to the search that there is probable cause to believe that (1) a crime had been committed, and (2) the evidence of the crime, like the prohibited drugs, are in the vehicle to be searched. To repeat, a tip, standing alone, is not sufficient to constitute probable cause.

See - https://opinion.inquirer.net/133740/searches-at-police-checkpoints?fbclid=IwAR37kEoRdNRG84pF2iNrlWW-UPFc-DYL6pYFSPcrP-cVonx_kow_rCm5WZA#ixzz6YX3QD3Gt


"x x x.

Searches at police checkpoints

By: Artemio V. Panganiban - @inquirerdotnet

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:20 AM September 20, 2020

How should police and military officers conduct, and how should the people regard, the checkpoints that are set up (especially during the current pandemic) to safeguard the security, safety, and health of citizens?

The Supreme Court in People v. Sapla (Aug. 19, 2020, ably penned by Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa)—featured in this space last Sunday—taught us valuable answers. To be understood by lay persons, let me try to summarize them, together with those found in other decisions, thus:

To begin with, the Constitution deems “inviolable” the right of the people against UNREASONABLE searches and/or seizures. On the other hand, a search and/or seizure cease to be unreasonable and become reasonable, as a rule, when ordered by a judge through a written search warrant.

In turn, a judge may issue a search warrant only after (1) the judge determines the existence of PROBABLE CAUSE (2) via the judge’s PERSONAL examination (3) of the complainant and other witnesses presented under oath or affirmation before the judge, (4) with the place to be searched and (5) persons or things to be seized (6) particularly described in the search warrant. To be valid, the search warrant must satisfy all these six elements. A judge who does not follow them may be sued in, and administratively sanctioned, by the Court.

Probable cause is not determined by a fixed formula. In general, it exists when there are “facts and circumstances which could lead a reasonably discreet and prudent person to believe (1) that an offense had been committed and (2) that the items, articles or objects sought in connection with the said offense are in the place to be searched.”

Seven exceptions to this general rule have been allowed by jurisprudence over the years. Thus, a search warrant is not required when the search (1) is incidental to a lawful arrest; (2) involves an article to be seized in the “plain view” of the police officer; (3) is to be conducted in a vehicle; (4) is consented to by the accused; (5) is done by the customs authorities in ports of entry or exit; (6) is characterized as a “stop and frisk” operation; or (7) is a part of “exigent and emergency circumstances.”

Today, let us focus on the third exception. Normally and routinely, the search of a vehicle (boat, car, bus, truck, or tricycle) is done through “visual inspections” only. Here, police officers may (1) draw aside the curtain of a vacant vehicle stopped or parked in a public place; (2) look at or around the vehicle without touching it; (3) use a flashlight without opening any vehicle door; but (4) should not subject the vehicle’s occupants, if any, to physical or body search.

To subject a vehicle to “extensive and intrusive search” beyond the normal and routine visual inspection, the policemen (like judges) must have PROBABLE CAUSE to believe PRIOR TO THE SEARCH that (1) a crime had been committed and (2) the article or object (usually prohibited drugs) pertaining to the crime that had just been committed can be found in the vehicle to be searched.

Note that the police cannot search a vehicle and the occupants thereof on the sole basis of an anonymous tip or a verbal statement by an informant. The tip, text, or verbal statement must first be verified by the policemen through his/her own personal knowledge (not hearsay) prior to the search that there is probable cause to believe that (1) a crime had been committed, and (2) the evidence of the crime, like the prohibited drugs, are in the vehicle to be searched. To repeat, a tip, standing alone, is not sufficient to constitute probable cause.

In short, to avoid being victimized by unscrupulous law officers at checkpoints, citizens may bring a hard copy of this and last Sunday’s columns to guide them (and the law-abiding policemen); they should assert their rights firmly but peacefully (not forcefully). Otherwise, they may be deemed to have waived them and to have consented to the search; and, if they do so, courts will not be able to help them per exception number 4 above.

Without search warrants issued by judges, police and military officers are allowed by law to conduct only visual inspections at checkpoints. Should they conduct an “extensive search” by searching for or seizing articles or persons without first determining probable cause, they can be held criminally, civilly, and administratively liable now or in the future.

Comments to chiefjusticepanganiban@hotmail.com

x x x."

Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/133740/searches-at-police-checkpoints#ixzz6e2ukUUEB
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

Republic Act No. 110557, otherwise known as the Personal Property Security Act (PPSA).

See - https://mb.com.ph/2020/09/16/chattel-mortgages-pledges-now-obsolete/


"x x x.

Chattel mortgages, pledges now obsolete

Published September 16, 2020, 10:00 PM

by Atty. Jun De Zuñiga

Credit transactions secured by personal or movable properties used to be documented either through chattel mortgage or pledge instruments and these are the security documents with which the lending industry has been very familiar with, until the enactment on August 17, 2018 of Republic Act No. 110557, otherwise known as the Personal Property Security Act (PPSA).

This law was passed to boost access to credit, especially by micro, small and medium enterprises and by farmers and fisherfolk. It was conceived to strengthen the secured transaction legal framework and provided for the creation, perfection, determination of priority and enforcement of security interests in personal property. It also seeks to have a unified and centralized national collateral registry that will be lodged in the Land Registration Authority (LRA)j to reduce the risks involved in accepting movable collaterals.

The rules on formalities on these transactions have been simplified and harmonized in the new law, eliminating distinctions between a pledge and a mortgage, such as the ability of the mortgagee in a chattel mortgage to recover any deficiency from the debtor if the collateral does not fully satisfy the debt; a remedy which is not allowed in a pledge since the foreclosure of the pledge completely extinguishes the debt.

What is notable is that R.A. 10157 covers all transactions in any form that secure an obligation with movable collateral, except interests in aircrafts and in ships which are governed by other special laws. With its superimposing coverage, this law then declares as repealed the Chattel Mortgage Law and the Civil Code provisions on pledge. As a consequence of the repeal, the chattel mortgage and pledge laws are deemed effectively abrogated from the statute books, meaning, that contracting parties would no longer have any legal basis to document their security transactions within the ambit of a pledge or chattel mortgage; otherwise, there will be an incongruous situation in which the repealed laws will still continue to remain in force.

Questions have been raised however on the effectivity and implementation of said law since the electronic registry contemplated in said law has not yet been established as of this writing. Related thereto, Section 67 of said law provides that “this Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation. The subsequent section, Section 68, states as follows: “Notwithstanding the entry into force of this Act under Section 67, the implementation of the Act shall be conditioned upon the Registry being established and operational under Section 26. Similarly, the implementing Rules and Regulations of said law provides in Section 10.03 thereof as follows: “Notwithstanding the entry into force of these Rules under Section 10.02, the implementation of the Act shall be conditioned upon the Registry being established and operational made Rule IV.”

The next question, therefore, is whether credit transactions may still utilize chattel mortgage and pledge instruments in the meantime that the electronic registry has not yet been set up in the LRA. The issue remains unsettled at this point and the answer can be argued from both sides. As may be noted, the law and its implementing regulations say that implementation shall be conditioned on the setting up of the electronic registry. On the other hand, it can be argued that implementation is different from effectivity and that what is suspended is the implementation but not the effectivity of the law. The LRA, as the principal implementing agency, may thus see it fit to provide clarification on the matter.

The above comments are the personal views of the writer. His email address is dezunigajuan@gmail.com

x x x."

Southeast Asia's evolving security dynamics

National security risks of pro-China and anti-Filipino economic policy

[Oringally posted on Facebook on October 30, 2020]

Duterte's House of Representatives and his Cabinet illegally attempt to ignore, reject and dishonor the 1987 Constitution in their despicable desire to accommodate Chinese investors, despite the serious national security risks that such a pro-China and anti-Filipino policy engenders.

A few months ago, the House adopted an unconstitutional bill on public utilities that contradicted the pro-Filipino provisions of the Constitution.

This week, according to news reports, Duterte's Department of Energy opened the geothermal industry to corporations with one hundred percent (100%) foreign ownership, notwithstanding the provisions of the Constitution to the contrary.

By way of review, it should be noted that Section 2, Article XII (National Economy and Patrimony), of the 1987 Constitution, inter alia, provides, as follows:

1. All LANDS OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, WATERS, MINERALS, coal, PETROLEUM, AND OTHER MINERAL OILS, ALL FORCES OF POTENTIAL ENERGY, FISHERIES, FORESTS OR TIMBER, WILDLIFE, FLORA AND FAUNA, AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES ARE OWNED BY THE STATE.

2. With the exception of AGRICULTURAL LANDS, ALL OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES SHALL NOT BE ALIENATED.

3. The EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT, AND UTILIZATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES shall be under the FULL CONTROL AND SUPERVISION OF THE STATE.

4. The State may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into CO-PRODUCTION, JOINT VENTURE, OR PRODUCTION-SHARING AGREEMENTS with FILIPINO CITIZENS, OR CORPORATIONS OR ASSOCIATIONS AT LEAST 60 PER CENTRUM OF WHOSE CAPITAL IS OWNED BY SUCH CITIZENS.

5. Such agreements may be for a period not exceeding TWENTY-FIVE YEARS, RENEWABLE FOR NOT MORE THAN TWENTY-FIVE YEARS, and under such terms and conditions AS MAY PROVIDED BY LAW.

6. In cases of WATER RIGHTS FOR IRRIGATION, WATER SUPPLY, FISHERIES, OR INDUSTRIAL USES other than the development of waterpower, BENEFICIAL USE may be the measure and limit of the grant.

7. The State shall PROTECT the nations MARINE WEALTH in its ARCHIPELAGIC WATERS, TERRITORIAL SEA, AND EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE, and RESERVE its use and enjoyment EXCLUSIVELY TO FILIPINO CITIZENS.

8. The Congress may, by law, allow SMALL-SCALE UTILIZATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES BY FILIPINO CITIZENS, as well as cooperative fish farming, with PRIORITY TO SUBSISTENCE FISHERMEN AND FISH WORKERS in rivers, lakes, bays, and lagoons.

9. The President may enter into AGREEMENTS WITH FOREIGN-OWNED CORPORATIONS involving either TECHNICAL OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR LARGE-SCALE EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT, AND UTILIZATION OF MINERALS, PETROLEUM, AND OTHER MINERAL OILS according to the general terms and conditions PROVIDED BY LAW, based on REAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE COUNTRY.

10. In such agreements, the State shall promote the development and use of LOCAL SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL RESOURCES.

11. The President shall SHALL NOTIFY CONGRESS OF EVERY CONTRACT entered into in accordance with this provision, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS FROM ITS EXECUTION.

We all know that the Constitution provides that only Filipino citizens or Filipino corporations (sixty percent Filipino ownership) may own lands in the Philippines.

The exceptions are land ownership via heriditary succession (inheritance) and land ownership by former natural-born Filipinos who have lost their Filipino citizenship because they have been naturalized citizens abroad (subject to the limitations and conditions fixed by law).

Further, it should be noted that Section 3 of the same Article XII, inter alia, provides, as follows:

1. ALIENABLE lands of the public domain shall be limited to AGRICULTURAL LANDS.

2. PRIVATE CORPORATIONS OR ASSOCIATIONS may NOT HOLD such alienable lands of the public domain EXCEPT BY LEASE, for a period not exceeding TWENTY-FIVE YEARS, RENEWABLE FOR NOT MORE THAN TWENTY-FIVE YEARS, and not to exceed ONE THOUSAND HECTARES in area.

3. CITIZENS of the Philippines may LEASE not more than FIVE HUNDRED HECTARES, or ACQUIRE not more than TWELVE HECTARES thereof, by PURCHASE, HOMESTEAD, OR GRANT.

4. Taking into account the requirements of conservation, ecology, and development, and subject to the requirements of agrarian reform, the CONGRESS shall DETERMINE, BY LAW, the SIZE OF LAND OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN which may be ACQUIRED, DEVELOPED, HELD, OR LEASED and the CONDITIONS THEREFOR.

In closing, the sworn constitutional duty of the heads and members of the three independent branches of the government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) is to honor, uphold and enforce the letter and spirit of the Constitution and the laws implementing its provisions.

The Constitution represents the soul and the very identity of the nation.

The Executive who violates the Constitution must be impeached.

He and his co-conspirators in his Cabinet must be criminally prosecuted and punished by the sovereign Filipino people.

The members of the Judiciary (Supreme Court), which is supposed to be the last institutional bulwark of the rule of law in the country, who violate the Constitution by promulgating grossly unjust, illegal and unconstitutional doctrines, pronoucmenets, decisions and resolutions must likewise be impeached and criminally prosecuted and punished by the sovereign Filipino people.

The members of the pork barrel-fed and dynasties-infested Legislative (aka the congress of crocodiles) who violate the Constitution by adopting clearly unjust, corrupt and unconstitutional laws and resolutions must be condemned and rejected in the elections and criminally prosecuted and punished by the sovereign Filipino people.

Towards an international data protection regime

Human Rights in the Age of AI: Impacts and Safeguards

The Impact of Emerging Technologies on the Law of Armed Conflict

When Authoritarians Make International Law

The application of international law to state cyber attacks

Age of Accountability for International Crimes

Technology and Public Policy

The Nuts and Bolts of Multilateral Treaty-Making

International human rights system

UN Human Rights Legal framework

Domestic implementation of int'l human rights judgments

Cyber Issues in International Law [2018]

International Law and the South China Sea [2017]

Emerging Accountability Mechanisms: Innovative or Ineffective?

Policing in the developing world

Anatomy of a Trade War

President's Treaty Withdrawal Powers

Migratory & Refugee Crises

International Courts as a Counterweight to Power/Politics

Eyewitness Testimony Part 1

Eyewitness Testimony Part 2

Scott Fraser: The problem with eyewitness testimony

The Essentials of Investigative Interviewing presented by Dean Benard

Conducting Investigation Virtually

Conducting Workplace Investigations in a Virtual World

10 Police Interrogation Techniques

Don't Talk to the Police

PBS - China: Power and Prosperity

Policing the Police 2020 | FRONTLINE

Rethinking the Role of the Prosecutor

Politics of the United States Supreme Court

Geopolitics of the South China Sea

Geopolitics of Southeast Asia

How to Think About Southeast Asia

Money laundering, oligarchs, terrorists: How corrupt are the banks?

Torture – psychological interrogation techniques | DW Documentary

Analysing the 2020 US Presidential Election | LSE

Democracy and the Supreme Court: judges and the politicians | LSE Online...

Occupying the Pedestal: cultural heritage, protest, and the law | LSE

Racism, Imperialism and Decolonization in International Relations | LSE ...

The Active Ingredient of Inequality | LSE Online Event

Denying Asylum Without a Hearing Violates Due Process

See - https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/07/fatma-marouf-denying-asylum-violates-due-process/#


"x x x.

Denying Asylum Without a Hearing Violates Due Process

JULY 17, 2020 09:30:01 AM

By Fatma Marouf 

Professor of Law and Director 

of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at Texas A&M School of Law
www.jurist.org

One of the most devastating parts of the proposed regulations overhauling asylum law issued on June 15 is a new rule allowing immigration judges to deny asylum applications without an evidentiary hearing. The regulation states that the judge can “pretermit” legally insufficient applications, meaning deny them without even giving the asylum seeker a chance to testify. This rule defies the most basic notions of fairness.

Most asylum seekers do not have legal counsel and must navigate complex immigration laws alone. If an asylum seeker does not know how to frame his or her claim in exactly the right way, a judge could reject it as legally inadequate under the new rule.

This concern is especially relevant for asylum claims based on “membership in a particular social group,” which is the most complicated ground for asylum. It is extremely difficult for attorneys, and nearly impossible for a layperson, to understand the convoluted requirements for establishing a “particular social group.” For example, if a group is defined too broadly, it is rejected as not being “particular,” but if it is defined too narrowly, it is rejected for not being “socially distinct.”

Some asylum seekers are lucky enough to have an attorney who can submit a detailed legal brief addressing such complex issues, and fewer still will be able to hire an expert who can opine on a social group. But most will be left to their own devices. It is unreasonable to expect an unrepresented individual, especially one who may not speak English, or may not be literate in any language, or may be a child, to navigate the complexities of the “particular social group” definition alone.

Additionally, whether an asylum application is legally adequate is often inextricably intertwined with an evaluation of the facts. For example, whether a proposed social group is cognizable is a legal question, but underlying it are factual questions about the group. An immigration judge has a statutory duty to help develop the record by asking the applicant questions, which can help draw out the facts needed to establish eligibility for asylum. But if the asylum application is denied without a hearing, important facts may be overlooked.

The new regulation has clearly been in the works for some time, as Attorney General Sessions helped cleared the way for it in 2018 by vacating a 2014 decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals called Matter of E-F-H-L-, which confirmed that immigration judges must provide asylum seekers with “an opportunity to provide oral testimony.”

In an extraordinary move, the Attorney General directed the Board to refer the case to himself several years later, after the respondent had withdrawn his asylum application to proceed with a family-based petition. Even more bizarre was the Attorney General’s decision to do this after the Department of Homeland Security had already agreed to administratively close the case, taking it off the judge’s docket. The Attorney General then asserted that because the asylum application had been withdrawn, the Board’s decision was “effectively mooted.” These legal gymnastics were clearly a pretext to vacate a decision protecting an asylum seeker’s right to testify.

Not only does the new regulation defy common-sense notions of fairness, but it tramples roughshod over another decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals called Matter of Fefe that has existed for over 30 years. That decision recognizes an asylum’s seekers right, “at a minimum,” to “take the stand.” There, the Board found that a full oral examination of the applicant is “an essential aspect of the asylum adjudication process for reasons related to fairness to the parties and to the integrity of the asylum process itself.” The immigration judge had rejected a proposed social group and then denied asylum without a hearing. The Board held that was impermissible.

In justifying the new regulation, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice note that Matter of Fefe relied on regulations that no longer exist. What they neglect to mention, however, is that the current regulations contain language that is materially the same, requiring a decision to be made “after an evidentiary hearing,” as the Board pointed out in Matter of E-F-H-L-.

No doubt, the proposed regulation will be challenged in federal court as violating not only the Immigration and Nationality Act, which guarantees a reasonable opportunity to present evidence, but also constitutional due process, which requires fundamental fairness. Summary judgment must be kept out of immigration court, where life-or-death decisions are already made with minimal protections.


Fatma Marouf is a Professor of Law and Director of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at Texas A&M School of Law.

Suggested citation: Fatma Marouf, Denying Asylum Without a Hearing Violates Due Process, JURIST – Academic Commentary, July 17, 2020, https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/07/fatma-marouf-denying-asylum-violates-due-process/.

This article was prepared for publication by Matthew Fischer, JURIST’s Associate Editor. Please direct any questions or comments to him at commentary@jurist.org

x x x."

WHEN PERMIT TO RALLY NOT REQUIRED.

"Section 4. PERMIT when required and when not required - A WRITTEN PERMIT shall be REQUIRED for any person or persons to organize and hold a public assembly in a PUBLIC PLACE. HOWEVER, NO PERMIT shall be required if the public assembly shall be done or made IN A FREEDOM PARK DULY ESTABLISHED BY LAW OR ORDINANCE or IN PRIVATE PROPERTY, in which case only the CONSENT OF THE OWNER or the one entitled to its legal possession is required, or IN THE CAMPUSES OF A GOVERNMENT-OWNED AND OPERATED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION which shall be subject to the rules and regulations of said educational institution. Political meetings or rallies held during any election campaign period as provided for by law are not covered by this Act."

BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 880

AN ACT ENSURING THE FREE EXERCISE BY THE PEOPLE OF THEIR RIGHT PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

THE PUBLIC ASSEMBLY ACT OF 1985 - BP Blg. 880

BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 880

AN ACT ENSURING THE FREE EXERCISE BY THE PEOPLE OF THEIR RIGHT PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Section 1. Title - This Act shall be known as "THE PUBLIC ASSEMBLY ACT OF 1985."

Section 2. Declaration of policy - THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS of the people peaceably TO ASSEMBLE AND PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES is ESSENTIAL AND VITAL to the strength and stability of the State. To this end, THE STATE SHALL ENSURE THE FREE EXERCISE of such right without prejudice to the rights of others to life, liberty and equal protection of the law.

Section 3. Definition of terms - For purposes of this Act:

(a) "Public assembly" means any rally, demonstration, march, parade, procession or any other form of mass or concerted action held in a public place for the purpose of presenting a lawful cause; or expressing an opinion to the general public on any particular issue; or protesting or influencing any state of affairs whether political, economic or social; or petitioning the government for redress of grievances.

The processions, rallies, parades, demonstrations, public meetings and assemblages for religious purposes shall be governed by local ordinances: Provided, however, That the declaration of policy as provided in Section 2 of this Act shall be faithfully observed.

The definition herein contained shall not include picketing and other concerted action in strike areas by workers and employees resulting from a labor dispute as defined by the Labor Code, its implementing rules and regulations, and by the Batas Pambansa Bilang 227.

(b) "Public place" shall include any highway, boulevard, avenue, road, street, bridge or other thoroughfare, park, plaza, square, and/or any open space of public ownership where the people are allowed access.

(c) "MAXIMUM TOLERANCE" means the HIGHEST DEGREE OF RESTRAINT THAT THE MILITARY, POLICE AND OTHER PEACE KEEPING AUTHORITIES SHALL OBSERVE during a public assembly or in the dispersal of the same.

(d) "Modification of permit" shall include the change of the place and time of the public assembly, rerouting of the parade or street march, the volume of loud-speakers or sound system and similar changes.

Section 4. PERMIT when required and when not required - A WRITTEN PERMIT shall be REQUIRED for any person or persons to organize and hold a public assembly in a PUBLIC PLACE. HOWEVER, NO PERMIT shall be required if the public assembly shall be done or made IN A FREEDOM PARK DULY ESTABLISHED BY LAW OR ORDINANCE or IN PRIVATE PROPERTY, in which case only the CONSENT OF THE OWNER or the one entitled to its legal possession is required, or IN THE CAMPUSES OF A GOVERNMENT-OWNED AND OPERATED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION which shall be subject to the rules and regulations of said educational institution. Political meetings or rallies held during any election campaign period as provided for by law are not covered by this Act.

Section 5. APPLICATION requirements - All applications for a permit shall comply with the following guidelines:

(a) The applications shall be IN WRITING and shall include the names of the LEADERS or organizers; the PURPOSE of such public assembly; the DATE, TIME AND DURATION thereof, and PLACE OR STREETS to be used for the intended activity; and the PROBABLE NUMBER OF PERSONS PARTICIPATING, the TRANSPORT and the PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEMS to be used.

(b) The application shall incorporate the DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY OF APPLICANT UNDER SECTION 8 hereof.

(c) The application shall be filed with the OFFICE OF THE MAYOR of the city or municipality in whose jurisdiction the intended activity is to be held, AT LEAST FIVE (5) WORKING DAYS BEFORE the scheduled public assembly.

(d) Upon receipt of the application, which must be DULY ACKNOWLEDGED IN WRITING, the office of the city or municipal mayor shall cause the same to immediately be POSTED at a conspicuous place in the city or municipal building.

Section 6. ACTION to be taken on the application -

(a) It shall be the DUTY of the mayor or any official acting in his behalf TO ISSUE OR GRANT A PERMIT UNLESS there is CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE that the public assembly will create a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER to public order, public safety, public convenience, public morals or public health.

(b) The MAYOR or any official acting in his behalf SHALL ACT on the application WITHIN TWO (2) WORKING DAYS from the date the application was FILED, failing which, the permit shall be DEEMED GRANTED. Should for any reason the MAYOR or any official acting in his behalf REFUSE TO ACCEPT THE APPLICATION for a permit, said application shall be POSTED by the applicant on the PREMISES OF THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR and shall be DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN FILED.

(c) If the MAYOR is of the view that there is IMMINENT AND GRAVE DANGER OF A SUBSTANTIVE EVIL warranting the DENIAL OR MODIFICATION OF THE PERMIT, he shall IMMEDIATELY INFORM THE APPLICANT WHO MUST BE HEARD ON THE MATTER.

(d) The ACTION on the permit shall be IN WRITING and SERVED on the applicant within TWENTY-FOUR HOURS.

(e) If the MAYOR or any official acting in his behalf DENIES THE APPLICATION OR MODIFIES the terms thereof in his permit, the APPLICANT MAY CONTEST THE DECISION in an appropriate COURT OF LAW.

(f) In case suit is brought before the Metropolitan Trial Court, the Municipal Trial Court, the Municipal Circuit Trial Court, the Regional Trial Court, or the Intermediate Appellate Court, its decisions may be APPEALED to the appropriate court within FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS after receipt of the same. No appeal bond and record on appeal shall be required. A DECISION GRANTING SUCH PERMITS OR MODIFYING it in terms satisfactory to the applicant shall, be IMMEDIATELY EXECUTORY.

(g) ALL CASES FILED IN COURT under this Section shall be DECIDED WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR (24) HOURS from date of filing. Cases filed hereunder shall be immediately endorsed to the EXECUTIVE JUDGE FOR DISPOSITION or, in his absence, to the next in rank.

(h) IN ALL CASES, any decision may be APPEALED TO THE SUPREME COURT.

(i) Telegraphic appeals to be followed by formal appeals are hereby allowed.

Section 7. Use of public thoroughfare - Should the proposed public assembly involve the use, for an appreciable length of time, of any public highway, boulevard, avenue, road or street, the MAYOR or any official acting in his behalf may, to prevent grave public inconvenience, DESIGNATE THE ROUTE thereof which is CONVENIENT TO THE PARTICIPANTS OR REROUTE THE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC to another direction so that there will be no serious or undue interference with the free flow of commerce and trade.

Section 8. RESPONSIBILITY of APPLICANT - It shall be the duty and responsibility of the LEADERS AND ORGANIZERS of a public assembly to take all reasonable measures and steps to the end that the intended public assembly shall be CONDUCTED PEACEFULLY in accordance with the terms of the permit. These shall include but not be limited to the following:

(a) To inform the participants of their responsibility under the permit;

(b) To police the ranks of the demonstrators in order to prevent non-demonstrators from disrupting the lawful activities of the public assembly;

(c) To confer with local government officials concerned and law enforcers to the end that the public assembly may be held peacefully;

(d) To see to it that the public assembly undertaken shall not go beyond the time stated in the permit; and

(e) To take positive steps that demonstrators do not molest any person or do any act unduly interfering with the rights of other persons not participating in the public assembly.

Section 9. NON-INTERFERENCE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES - Law enforcement agencies SHALL NOT INTERFERE with the holding of a public assembly. However, to adequately ensure public safety, a law enforcement contingent under the command of a responsible police officer may be detailed and stationed in a place at least ONE HUNDRED (100) METERS AWAY from the area of activity ready to maintain peace and order at all times.

Section 10. Police assistance when requested - It shall be imperative for law enforcement agencies, when their assistance is requested by the leaders or organizers, to perform their duties ALWAYS MINDFUL THAT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE PROPER PROTECTION TO THOSE EXERCISING THEIR RIGHTS PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE AND THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IS PRIMORDIAL. Towards this end, law enforcement agencies shall observe the following GUIDELINES:

(a) Members of the law enforcement contingent who deal with the demonstrators shall be in COMPLETE UNIFORM WITH THEIR NAMEPLATES AND UNITS to which they belong DISPLAYED PROMINENTLY on the FRONT AND DORSAL PARTS OF THEIR UNIFORMS and must OBSERVE THE POLICY OF "MAXIMUM TOLERANCE" as herein defined;

(b) The members of the law enforcement contingent SHALL NOT CARRY ANY KIND OF FIREARMS BUT MAY BE EQUIPPED WITH BATON OR RIOT STICKS, SHIELDS, CRASH HELMETS WITH VISOR, GAS MASKS, BOOTS OR ANKLE HIGH SHOES WITH SHIN GUARDS;

(c) TEAR GAS, SMOKE GRENADES, WATER CANNONS, or ANY SIMILAR ANTI-RIOT DEVICE SHALL NOT BE USED UNLESS THE PUBLIC ASSEMBLY IS ATTENDED BY ACTUAL VIOLENCE OR SERIOUS THREATS OF VIOLENCE, OR DELIBERATE DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY.

Section 11. DISPERSAL of public assembly with permit - NO PUBLIC ASSEMBLY WITH A PERMIT SHALL BE DISPERSED. However, when an assembly becomes VIOLENT, the police may disperse such public assembly AS FOLLOWS:

(a) At the first sign of impending violence, the ranking officer of the law enforcement contingent SHALL CALL THE ATTENTION OF THE LEADERS of the public assembly and ASK THE LATTER TO PREVENT ANY POSSIBLE DISTURBANCE;

(b) If actual violence starts to a point where rocks or other harmful objects from the participants are thrown at the police or at the non-participants, or at any property causing damage to such property, the ranking officer of the law enforcement contingent SHALL AUDIBLY WARN THE PARTICIPANTS that if the disturbance persists, the public assembly will be dispersed;

(c) If the violence or disturbances prevailing as stated in the preceding subparagraph should not stop or abate, the ranking officer of the law enforcement contingent SHALL AUDIBLY ISSUE A WARNING TO THE PARTICIPANTS of the public assembly, and AFTER ALLOWING A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME TO LAPSE, shall immediately ORDER IT TO FORTHWITH DISPERSE;

(d) NO ARREST OF ANY LEADERSHIP, ORGANIZER OR PARTICIPANT shall also be made during the public assembly UNLESS HE VIOLATES during the assembly a law, statute, ordinance or any provision of this Act. Such arrest shall be GOVERNED BY ARTICLE 125 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE, as amended:

(e) ISOLATED ACTS OR INCIDENTS OF DISORDER or bresch of the peace during the public assembly SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE A GROUP FOR DISPERSAL.

Section 12. DISPERSAL of public assembly WITHOUT PERMIT - When the public assembly is HELD WITHOUT A PERMIT where a permit is required, the said public assembly MAY BE PEACEFULLY DISPERSED.

Section 13. PROHIBITED ACTS - The following shall constitute VIOLATIONS of this Act:

(a) The holding of any public assembly as defined in this Act by any LEADER OR ORGANIZER WITHOUT having first secured that WRITTEN PERMIT where a permit is required from the office concerned, or the use of such permit for such purposes in any place OTHER THAN THOSE SET OUT IN SAID PERMITS: Provided, however, That NO PERSON CAN BE PUNISHED OR HELD CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR PARTICIPATING IN OR ATTENDING AN OTHERWISE PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY;

(b) ARBITRARY AND UNJUSTIFIED DENIAL OR MODIFICATION OF A PERMIT in violation of the provisions of this Act BY THE MAYOR or any other official acting in his behalf.

(c) The UNJUSTIFIED AND ARBITRARY REFUSAL TOWARD ACCEPT OR ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THE APPLICATION for a permit by the MAYOR or any official acting in his behalf;

(d) OBSTRUCTING, IMPEDING, DISRUPTING or otherwise DENYING the EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT TO PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY;

(e) The UNNECCESSARY FIRING OF FIREARMS by a member of any law enforcement agency or any person TO DISPERSE the public assembly;

(f) Acts in violation of SECTION 10 hereof;

(g) Acts described hereunder if committed WITHIN ONE HUNDRED (100) METERS from the area of activity of the public assembly or on the occasion thereof;

1. the CARRYING OF A DEADLY OR OFFENSIVE WEAPON OR DEVICE such as firearm, pillbox, bomb, and the like;

2. the CARRYING OF A BLADED WEAPON and the like;

3 the MALICIOUS BURNING of any object in the streets or thoroughfares;

4. the CARRYING OF FIREARMS BY MEMBERS OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT UNIT;

5. the INTERFERING WITH OR INTENTIONALLY DISTURBING the holding of a public assembly BY THE USE OF A MOTORCYCLE VEHICLE, ITS HORNS AND LOUDSPEAKERS SOUND SYSTEMS.

Section 14. PENALTIES - Any person found guilty and convicted of any of the prohibited acts defined in the immediately preceding Section shall be punished as follows:

(a) violation of subparagraph (a) shall be punished by imprisonment of ONE MONTH AND ONE DAY TO SIX MONTHS;

(b) violations of subparagraphs (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and item 4, subparagraph (g) shall be punished by imprisonment of SIX MONTHS AND ONE DAY TO SIX YEARS;

(c) violation of item 1, subparagraph (g) shall be punished by imprisonment of SIX MONTHS AND ONE DAY TO SIX YEARS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO PROSECUTION UNDER PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1866;

(d) violations of item 2, item 3, or item 5 of subparagraph (g) shall be punished by imprisonment of ONE DAY TO THIRTY DAYS.

Section 15. FREEDOM PARKS - EVERY CITY AND MUNICIPALITY in the country shall WITHIN SIX MONTHS AFTER THE REFLECTIVITY of this Act ESTABLISHED OR DESIGNATED AT LEAST ONE SUITABLE "FREEDOM PARK" OR MALL in their respective jurisdictions which, as far as practicable, shall be centrally located within the POBLACION WHERE DEMONSTRATIONS AND MEETINGS MAY BE HELD AT ANY TIME WITHOUT THE NEED OF ANY PRIOR PERMIT.

In the cities and municipalities of METROPOLITAN MANILA, the respective MAYORS shall establish the FREEDOM PARKS within the period of SIX MONTHS FROM THE REFLECTIVITY of this Act.

Section 16. Constitutionality - Should any provision of this Act be declared invalid or unconstitutional, the validity or constitutionality of the other provisions shall not be affected thereby.

Section 17. Repealing clause - All laws, decrees, letters of instructions, resolutions, orders, ordinances or parts thereof which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended, or modified accordingly.

Section 18. Effectivity - This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

Approved, OCTOBER 22, 1985.