Wednesday, November 12, 2014

Republic Act No. 9994 | Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines

See - Republic Act No. 9994 | Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines





REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9994
AN ACT GRANTING ADDITIONAL BENEFITS AND PRIVILEGES TO SENIOR CITIZENS, FURTHER AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7432, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “AN ACT TO MAXIMIZE THE CONTRIBUTION OF SENIOR CITIZENS TO NATION BUILDING, GRANT BENEFITS AND SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:
Section 1. Title. – This Act Shall be known as the “Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2010.”
Sec. 2. Section 1 of Republic Act No. 7432, as amended by Republic Act No. 9257, otherwise known as the “Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2003″, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
“SECTION 1. Declaration of Policies and Objectives. – As provided in the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, it is the declared policy of the State to promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living and an improved quality of life. In the Declaration of Principles and State Policies in Article II, Sections 10 and 11, it is further declared that the State shall provide social justice in all phases of national development and that the State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights.
“Article XIII, Section 11 of the Constitution provides that the Sate shall adopt an integrated and comprehensive approach to health development which shall endeavor to make essential goods, health and other social services available to all the people at affordable cost. There shall be priority for the needs of the underprivileged, sick, elderly, disabled, women and children. Article XV, Section 4 of the Constitution Further declares that it is the duty of the family to take care of its elderly members while the State may design programs of social security for them.
“Consistent with these constitutional principles, this Act shall serve the following objectives:
“(a) To recognize the rights of senior citizens to take their proper place in society and make it a concern of the family, community, and government;
“(b) To give full support to the improvement of the total well-being of the elderly and their full participation in society, considering that senior citizens are integral part of Philippine society;
“(c) To motivate and encourage the senior citizens to contribute to nation building;
“(d) To encourage their families and the communities they live with to reaffirm the valued Filipino tradition of caring for the senior citizens;
“(e) To provide a comprehensive health care and rehabilitation system for disabled senior citizens to foster their capacity to attain a more meaningful and productive ageing; and
“(f) To recognize the important role of the private sector in the improvement of the welfare of senior citizens and to actively seek their partnership.
“In accordance with these objectives, this Act shall:
“(1) establish mechanisms whereby the contributions of the senior citizens are maximized;
“(2) adopt measures whereby our senior citizens are assisted and appreciated by the community as a whole;
“(3) establish a program beneficial to the senior citizens, their families and the rest of the community they serve: and
“(4) establish community-based health and rehabilitation programs for senior citizens in every political unit of society.”
Sec. 3. Section 2 of Republic Act No. 7432, as amended by Republic Act No. 9257, otherwise known as the Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2003″, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
SEC. 2. Definition of terms. – For purposes of this Act, these terms are defined as follows:
“(a) Senior citizen or elderly refers to any resident citizen of the Philippines at least sixty (60) years old;
“(b) Geriatrics refer to the branch of medical science devoted to the study of the biological and physical changes and the diseases of old age;
“(c) Lodging establishment refers to a building, edifice, structure, apartment or house including tourist inn, apartelle, motorist hotel, and pension house engaged in catering, leasing or providing facilities to transients, tourists or travelers;
“(d) Medical Services refer to hospital services, professional services of physicians and other health care professionals and diagnostics and laboratory tests that the necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of an illness or injury;
“(e) Dental services to oral examination, cleaning, permanent and temporary filling, extractions and gum treatments, restoration, replacement or repositioning of teeth, or alteration of the alveolar or periodontium process of the maxilla and the mandible that are necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of an illness or injury;
“(f) Nearest surviving relative refers to the legal spouse who survives the deceased senior citizen: Provided, That where no spouse survives the decedent, this shall be limited to relatives in the following order of degree of kinship: children, parents, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, uncles and aunts;
“(g) Home health care service refers to health or supportive care provided to the senior citizen patient at home by licensed health care professionals to include, but not limited to, physicians, nurses, midwives, physical therapist and caregivers; and
“(h) Indigent senior citizen, refers to any elderly who is frail, sickly or with disability, and without pension or permanent source of income, compensation or financial assistance from his/her relatives to support his/her basic needs, as determined by the Department of Social Welfare and development (DSWD) in consultation with the National Coordinating and Monitoring Board.”
Sec. 4 Section 4 of Republic Act No. 7432, as amended by Republic Act No. 9257, otherwise known as the “Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2003″, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
“SEC. 4. Privileges for the Senior Citizens. -
The senior citizens shall be entitled to the following:
“(a) the grant of twenty percent (20%) discount and exemption from the value -added tax (VAT), if applicable, on the sale of the following goods and services from all establishments, for the exclusive use and enjoyment or availment of the senior citizen
“(1) on the purchase of medicines, including the purchase of influenza and pnuemococcal vaccines, and such other essential medical supplies, accessories and equipment to be determined by the Department of Health (DOH).
“The DOH shall establish guidelines and mechanism of compulsory rebates in the sharing of burden of discounts among retailers, manufacturers and distributors, taking into consideration their respective margins;
“(2) on the professional fees of attending physician/s in all private hospitals, medical facilities, outpatient clinics and home health care services;
“(3) on the professional fees of licensed professional health providing home health care services as endorsed by private hospitals or employed through home health care employment agencies;
“(4) on medical and dental services, diagnostic and laboratory fees in all private hospitals, medical facilities, outpatient clinics, and home health care services, in accordance with the rules and regulations to be issued by the DOH, in coordination with the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth);
“(5) in actual fare for land transportation travel in public utility buses (PUBs), public utility jeepneys (PUJs), taxis, Asian utility vehicles (AUVs), shuttle services and public railways, including Light Rail Transit (LRT), Mass Rail Transit (MRT), and Philippine National Railways (PNR);
“(6) in actual transportation fare for domestic air transport services and sea shipping vessels and the like, based on the actual fare and advanced booking;
“(7) on the utilization of services in hotels and similar lodging establishments, restaurants and recreation centers;
“(8) on admission fees charged by theaters, cinema houses and concert halls, circuses, leisure and amusement; and
“(9) on funeral and burial services for the death of senior citizens;
“(b) exemption from the payment of individual income taxes of senior citizens who are considered to be minimum wage earners in accordance with Republic Act No. 9504;
“(c) the grant of a minimum of five percent (5%) discount relative to the monthly utilization of water and electricity supplied by the public utilities: Provided, That the individual meters for the foregoing utilities are registered in the name of the senior citizen residing therein: Provided, further, That the monthly consumption does not exceed one hundred kilowatt hours (100 kWh) of electricity and thirty cubic meters (30 m3) of water: Provided, furthermore, That the privilege is granted per household regardless of the number of senior citizens residing therein;
“(d) exemption from training fees for socioeconomic programs;
“(e) free medical and dental services, diagnostic and laboratory fees such as, but not limited to, x-rays, computerized tomography scans and blood tests, in all government facilities, subject to the guidelines to be issued by the DOH in coordination with the PhilHealth;
“(f) the DOH shall administer free vaccination against the influenza virus and pneumococcal disease for indigent senior citizen patients;
“(g) educational assistance to senior citizens to pursue pot secondary, tertiary, post tertiary, vocational and technical education, as well as short-term courses for retooling in both public and private schools through provision of scholarships, grants, financial aids, subsides and other incentives to qualified senior citizens, including support for books, learning materials, and uniform allowances, to the extent feasible: Provided, That senior citizens shall meet minimum admission requirements;
“(h) to the extent practicable and feasible, the continuance of the same benefits and privileges given by the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), the Social Security System (SSS) and the PAG-IBIG, as the case may be, as are enjoyed by those in actual service;
“(i) retirement benefits of retirees from both the government and the private sector shall be regularly reviewed to ensure their continuing responsiveness and sustainability, and to the extent practicable and feasible, shall be upgraded to be at par with the current scale enjoyed by those in actual service;
“(j) to the extent possible, the government may grant special discounts in special programs for senior citizens on purchase of basic commodities, subject to the guidelines to be issued for the purpose by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the Department of Agriculture (DA);
“(k) provision of express lanes for senior citizens in all commercial and government establishments; in the absence thereof, priority shall be given to them; and
“(l) death benefit assistance of a minimum of Two thousand pesos (Php2, 000.00) shall be given to the nearest surviving relative of a deceased senior citizen which amount shall be subject to adjustments due to inflation in accordance with the guidelines to be issued by the DSWD.cralaw
“In the availment of the privileges mentioned above, the senior citizen, or his/her duly authorized representative, may submit as proof of his/her entitled thereto any of the following:
“(1) an identification card issued by the Office of the Senior Citizen Affairs (OSCA) of the place where the senior citizen resides: Provided, That the identification card issued by the particular OSCA shall be honored nationwide;
“(2) the passport of the senior citizen concerned; and
“(3) other documents that establish that the senior citizen is a citizen of the Republic and is at least sixty (60) years of age as further provided in the implementing rules and regulations.
“In the purchase of goods and services which are on promotional discount, the senior citizen can avail of the promotional discount or the discount provided herein, whichever is higher.cralaw
“The establishment may claim the discounts granted under subsections (a) and (c) of this section as tax deduction based on the cost of the goods sold or services rendered: Provided, That the cost of the discount shall be allowed as deduction from gross income for the same taxable year that the discount is granted: Provided, further, That the total amount of the claimed tax deduction net of VAT, if applicable, shall be included in their gross sales receipts for tax purposes and shall be subject to proper documentation and to the provisions of the National Internal Revenue Code (NICR), as amended.”
Sec. 5. Section 5 of the same Act, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
“SEC. 5. Government Assistance. – The government shall provide the following:
“(a) Employment
“Senior citizens who have the capacity and desire to work, or be re-employed, shall be provided information and matching services to enable them to be productive members of society. Terms of employment shall conform with the provisions of the Labor Code, as amended, and other laws, rules and regulations.
“Private entities that will employ senior citizens as employees, upon the effectivity of this Act, shall be entitled to an additional deduction from their gross income, equivalent to fifteen percent (15%) of the total amount paid as salaries and wages to senior citizens, subject to the provision of Section 34 of the NIRC, as amended: Provided, however, That such employment shall continue for a period of at least six (6) months: Provided, further, That the annual income of the senior citizen does not exceed the latest poverty threshold as determined by the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) for that year.
“The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), in coordination with other government agencies such as, but not limited to, the Technology and Livelihood Resource Center (TLRC) and the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), shall assess, design and implement training programs that will provide skills and welfare or livelihood support for senior citizens.
“(b) Education
“The Department of Education (DepED), the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), in consultation with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and people’s organizations (POs) for senior citizens, shall institute programs that will ensure access to formal and nonformal education.
“(c) Health
“The DOH, in coordination with local government units (LGUs), NGOs and POs for senior citizens, shall institute a national health program and shall provide an integrated health service for senior citizens. It shall train community-based health workers among senior citizens and health personnel to specialize in the geriatric care and health problems of senior citizens.
“The national health program for senior citizens shall, among others, be harmonized with the National Prevention of Blindness Program of the DOH.
“Throughout the country, there shall be established a “senior citizens’ ward” in every government hospital. This geriatric ward shall be for the exclusive use of senior citizens who are in need of hospital confinement by reason of their health conditions. However, when urgency of public necessity purposes so require, such geriatric ward may be used for emergency purposes, after which, such “senior citizens’ ward” shall be reverted to its nature as geriatric ward.
“(d) Social Services
“At least fifty percent (50%) discount shall be granted on the consumption of electricity, water, and telephone by the senior citizens center and residential care/group homes that are government-run or non-stock, non-profit domestic corporation organized and operated primarily for the purpose of promoting the well-being of abandoned, neglected, unattached, or homeless senior citizens, subject to the guidelines formulated by the DSWD.
“(1) “self and social enhancement services” which provide senior citizens opportunities for socializing, organizing, creative expression, and self-improvement;
“(2) “after care and follow-up services” for citizens who are discharged from the homes or institutions for the aged, especially those who have problems of reintegration with family and community, wherein both the senior citizens and their families are provided with counseling;
“(3) “neighborhood support services” wherein the community or family members provide caregiving services to their frail, sick, or bedridden senior citizens; and
“(4) “substitute family care ” in the form of residential care or group homes for the abandoned, neglected, unattached or homeless senior citizens and those incapable of self-care.
“(e) Housing
“The national government shall include in its national shelter program the special housing needs of senior citizens, such as establishment of housing units for the elderly.
“(f) Access to Public Transport
“The Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) shall develop a program to assist senior citizens to fully gain access to public transport facilities.
“(g) Incentive for Foster Care
“The government shall provide incentives to individuals or nongovernmental institution caring for or establishing homes, residential communities or retirement villages solely for, senior citizens, as follows:
“(1) realty tax holiday for the first five (5) years starting from the first year of operation; and
“(2) priority in the construction or maintenance of provincial or municipal roads leading to the aforesaid home, residential community or retirement village.
“(h) Additional Government Assistance
“(1) Social Pension
“Indigent senior citizens shall be entitled to a monthly stipend amounting to Five hundred pesos (Php500.00) to augment the daily subsistence and other medical needs of senior citizens, subject to a review every two (2) years by Congress, in consultation with the DSWD.
“(2) Mandatory PhilHealth Coverage
“All indigent senior citizens shall be covered by the national health insurance program of PhilHealth. The LGUs where the indigent senior citizens resides shall allocate the necessary funds to ensure the enrollment of their indigent senior citizens in accordance with the pertinent laws and regulations.
“(3) Social Safety Nets
“Social safety assistance intended to cushion the effects of economics shocks, disasters and calamities shall be available for senior citizens. The social safety assistance which shall include, but not limited to, food, medicines, and financial assistance for domicile repair, shall be sourced from the disaster/calamity funds of LGUs where the senior citizens reside, subject to the guidelimes to be issued by the DSWD.”
Sec. 6. Section 6 of the same Act, as amended, is heeby further amended to read as follows:
SEC. 6. The Office for Senior Citizens Affairs (OSCA). – There shall be established in all cities and municipalities an OSCA to be headed by a senior citizen who shall be appointed by the mayor for a term of three (3) years without reappointment but without prejudice to an extension if exigency so requires. Said appointee shall be chosen from a list of three (3) nominees as recommended by a general assembly of senior citizens organizations in the city or municipality.
“The head of the OSCA shall be appointed to serve the interest of senior citizens and shall not be removed or replaced except for reasons of death permanent disability or ineffective performance of his duties to the detriment of fellow senior citizens.
“The head of the OSCA shall be entitled to receive an honorarium of an amount at least equivalent to Salary Grade 10 to be approved by the LGU concerned.
“The head of the OSCA shall be assisted by the City Social Welfare and Development officer or by the Municipal Social Welfare and Development Officer, in coordination with the Social Welfare and Development Office.
“The Office of the Mayor shall exercise supervision over the OSCA relative to their plans, activities and programs for senior citizens. The OSCA shall work together and establish linkages with accredited NGOs Pos and the barangays in their respective areas.
“The OSCA shall have the following functions:
“(a) To plan, implement and monitor yearly work programs in pursuance of the objectives of this Act;
“(b) To draw up a list of available and required services which can be provided by the senior citizens;
“(c) To maintain and regularly update on a quarterly basis the list of senior citizens and to issue national individual identification cards, free of charge, which shall be valid anywhere in the country;
“(d) To serve as a general information and liason center for senior citizens;
“(e) To monitor compliance of the provisions of this Act particularly the grant of special discounts and privileges to senior citizens;
“(f) To report to the mayor, any individual, establishments, business entity, institutions or agency found violating any provision of this Act; and
“(g) To assist the senior citizens in filing complaints or charges against any individual, establishments, business entity, institution, or agency refusing to comply with the privileges under this Act before the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Provincial Prosecutor’s Office, the regional or the municipal trial court, the municipal trial court in cities, or the municipal circuit trial court.”
Sec. 7. Section 10 of the same Act, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
“SEC. 10. Penalties. – Any person who refuses to honor the senior citizen card issued by this the government or violates any provision of this Act shall suffer the following penalties:
“(a) For the first violation, imprisonment of not less than two (2) years but not more than six (6) years and a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (Php50,000.00) but not exceeding One hundred thousand pesos (Php100,000.00);
“(b) For any subsequent violation, imprisonment of not less than two (2) years but not more than six (6) years and a fine of not less than One Hundred thousand pesos (Php100,000.00) but not exceeding Two hundred thousand pesos (Php200,000.00); and
“(c) Any person who abuses the privileges granted herein shall be punished with imprisonment of not less than six (6) months and a fine of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (Php50,000.00) but not more than One hundred thousand pesos (Php100,000.00).
“If the offender is a corporation, partnership, organization or any similar entity, the officials thereof directly involved such as the president, general manager, managing partner, or such other officer charged with the management of the business affairs shall be liable therefor.
“If the offender is an alien or a foreigner, he/she shall be deported immediately after service of sentence.
“Upon filing of an appropriate complaint, and after due notice and hearing, the proper authorities may also cause the cancellation or revocation of the business permit, permit to operate, franchise and other similar privileges granted to any person, establishment or business entity that fails to abide by the provisions of this Act.”
Sec. 8. Section 11 of the same Act, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
“SEC. 11. Monitoring and Coordinating Mechanism. – A National Coordinating and Monitoring Board shall be established which shall be composed of the following:
“(a) Chairperson – the Secretary of the DSWD or an authorized representative;
“(b) Vice Chairperson – the Secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) or an authorized representative; and
“(c) Members:
“(1) the Secretary of the DOJ or an authorized representative;
“(2) the Secretary of the DOH or an authorized representative;
“(3) the Secretary of the DTI or an authorized representative; and
(4) representatives from five (5) NGOs for senior citizens which are duly accredited by the DSWD and have service primarily for senior citizens. Representatives of NGOs shall serve a period of tree (3) years.
“The Board may call on other government agencies, NGOs and Pos to serve as resource persons as the need arises. Resource person have no right to vote in the National Coordinating and Monitoring Board.”
Sec. 9. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – Within sixty (60) days from theeffectivity of this Act, the Secretary of the DSWD shall formulate and adopt amendments to the existing rules and regulations implementing Republic Act No. 7432, as amended by Republic Act No. 9257, to carry out the objectives of this Act, in consultation with the Department of Finance, the Department of Tourism, the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC), the DOLE, the DOJ, the DILG, the DTI, the DOH, the DOTC, the NEDA, the DepED, the TESDA, the CHED, and five (5) NGOs or POs for the senior citizens duly accredited by the DSWD. The guidelines pursuant to Section 4(a)(i) shall be established by the DOH within sixty (60) days upon the effectivity of this Act.
Sec. 10. Appropriations. – The Necessary appropriations for the operation and maintenance of the OSCA shall be appropriated and approved by the LGUs concerned. For national government agencies, the requirements to implement the provisions of this Act shall be included in their respective budgets: Provided, That the funds to be used for the national health program and for the vaccination of senior citizens in the first year of the DOH and thereafter, as a line item under the under the DOH budget in the subsequent General Appropriations Act (GAA): Provided, further, That the monthly social pension for indigent senior citizens in the first year of implementation shall be added to the regular appropriations of the DSWD budget in the subsequent GAA.
Sec. 11. Repealing Clause. – All law, executive orders, rules and regulations or any part hereof inconsistent herewith are deemed repealed or modified accordingly.
Sec. 12. Separability Clause. – If any part or provision of this Act shall be declared unconstitutional and invalid, such 18 declaration shall not invalidate other parts thereof which shall remain in full force and effect.
Sec. 13. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days its complete publication n the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation, whichever comes earlier.

Republic Act No. 10645 | Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines

See - Republic Act No. 10645 | Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines





[REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10645]
AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE MANDATORY PHILHEALTH COVERAGE FOR ALL SENIOR CITIZENS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7432, AS AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9994, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “EXPANDED SENIOR CITIZENS ACT OF 2010″
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Section 5, sub-paragraph h(2) of Republic Act No. 7432, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
“SEC. 5. Government Assistance. – The government shall provide the following:
“x x x
“(h) Additional Government Assistance
“(1) xxx
“(2) Mandatory PhilHealth Coverage
“All senior citizens shall be covered by the national health insurance program of PhilHealth. Funds necessary to ensure the enrollment of all senior citizens not currently covered by any existing category shall be sourced from the National Health Insurance Fund of PhilHealth from proceeds of Republic Act No. 10351, in accordance with the pertinent laws and regulations.
“(3) x x x.”
SEC. 2. Repealing Clause. – All laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and regulations, or parts thereof which are inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly.
SEC. 3. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Aquino signs law giving health insurance to all seniors

See - Aquino signs law giving health insurance to all seniors





"x x x.

MANILA, Philippines – Under a new law, over 6 million senior citizens in the country can avail of health benefits enjoyed by Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) members just by presenting their valid identification cards to hospitals, the main author of the measure said on Tuesday, November 11.
President Benigno Aquino III signed Republic Act (RA) 10645 on November 5, amending RA 9994 or the Expanded Senior Citizens' Act of 2010 by removing the qualification that a senior citizen has to be an indigent before being covered by PhilHealth.
About 6.1 million senior citizens, or those 60 years old and above, will benefit from the law, said Senate President Pro Tempore Ralph Recto. (READ: Senate OKs giving insurance to all senior citizens)
“Magpakita lang sila ng ID bilang patunay na sila’y senior citizen at matatanggap na nila mula sa ospital ang karampatang benepisyong laan sa mga miyembro ng PhilHealth,” Recto said.
(They only have to show an ID that will prove they are senior citizens, and they can receive from the hospital the corresponding benefits due PhilHealth members.)
In his sponsorship speech on the measure, Recto had said that the ideal situation "is that the minute [senior citizens] blow out the candles on their 60th birthday cake to the moment they breathe their last – they should be PhilHealth members."
To ensure implementation, the necessary funds will be sourced from the National Health Insurance Fund of PhilHealth, which is from proceeds of RA 10351 or the Sin Tax Reform Act of 2012.
PhilHealth is the government's national health insurance program aimed at providing affordable health care to Filipinos,
Recto said that as of December 2013, PhilHealth has 31.27 million registered members and 45.63 million dependents. For 2014, the target of PhilHealth is to provide health insurance coverage to more than 90% of Filipinos.
He said PhilHealth earned P62 billion ($1.38 billion*) from premium contributions in 2013, on top of the government's P12.612-billion ($280.44 million) subsidy. In the same year, PhilHealth paid P55.559 billion ($1.24 billion) in benefits payment. (READ: Bulk of DOH's DAP fund went to PhilHealth subsidy)
Also on Tuesday, Senator Teofisto Guingona III said the passage of the bill is “an early Christmas gift to the country’s elders.”
Guingona sponsored the measure as chair of the Senate Committee on Health and Demography.
To date, Guingona said only 3.94 million senior citizens are covered by PhilHealth, either as indigent, sponsored, lifetime member, or dependent. The law guarantees sufficient access to medical and health care to all senior citizens.
“It is high time that we give back to our country’s elders. In our culture, the condition and situation of a person in his or her advanced age is the reflection of the character of his or her children. How we take care of our senior citizens is also a mirror of our character as a nation,” he added. – Rappler.com."

“I am a lawyer! I will sue this hospital! You will all lose your jobs!”


This morning while undergoing my yearly heart tests (ECG and 2D-Echo) inside an air-conditioned and peaceful cubicle of the cardio-vascular diagnostic center of a prominent hospital in Las Pinas City, my restful concentration was disturbed by a man angrily shouting at the staff of the center stationed at the reception area.

His angry voice reverberated all over the dignified corridors and penetrated the serene cubicles of the pristine center, causing serious concern, if not panic, on the part of other heart patients, like me, who could not take a peek at the commotion from their cubicles because all kinds of cardio-vascular electro-magnetic gadgets and wirings were attached to and immobilized their hands, arms, feet, and chests.

I later learned from the two lady staff who were administering my ECG and 2D-Echo heart tests that the man had previously undergone an open-heart bypass operation at the hospital; that he was at the center for follow-up tests; and that there was an honest and inadvertent miscommunication with the staff on the exact date and time of his appointment.

After completing my heart test, I prepared to leave my cubicle and proceeded to the reception area, where the angry voice emanated, to observe the scene of the commotion.

There he was, with his supporting wife. His hair was dyed black. At mid-60s and having undergone an open-heart surgery, he surprisingly looked fresh, young and active for his age.

His angry and loud tirades continued, as I walked past him, his silent wife and the humble staff of the center.

The humiliated staff had no choice but to simply keep quiet and listen to him angrily and publicly berating and insulting them for fear that any counter-arguments from them might aggravate his precarious heart condition.

As I left the center, perhaps at 10 meters away from the embarrassing scene, I could still hear him boisterously and egotistically threatening the staff: “I am a lawyer! I will sue this hospital! You will all lose your jobs!”

To say that he was suicidal in his hate was a gross understatement.

As I walked away, I was in deep thought.

That experience gave me an opportunity to refresh in my mind what has been selflessly and wisely taught by enlightened men and women for the past 2,500 years, that is, that unless one liberates himself from greed, hate and ignorance, his impure mind will continue to generate the negativities and impurities that will chain him to an endless cycle of perdition and suffering.

I pray for that man, a brother lawyer in the Bar.

The Bar and the Bench are noble institutions reserved for men and women of wisdom, intelligence and exemplary moral character.

With humility and submission, may he find inner peace.

May he be liberated from suffering.


Atty. Manuel J. Laserna Jr.
November 12, 2014
Las Pinas City


Saturday, November 8, 2014

The Origin and Meaning of the Miranda Warnings | David J. Shestokas

See - The Origin and Meaning of the Miranda Warnings | David J. Shestokas





"x x x.

The Miranda warnings are part of American criminal justice and American popular culture.  Where do they come from? What do they mean?
Ernesto Miranda was the name of a 23 year old Mexican immigrant.  The United States Supreme Court in 1966 announced a constitutional rule of criminal procedure requiring that police must advise a suspect of several constitutional rights prior to nterrogation.  If the police do not, any statements made by the suspect may not be used against him in prosecuting a crime. The title of the case was Miranda v. Arizona.
The warnings became known as “Miranda warnings”.  Ernesto Miranda’s name has even become a verb: to Mirandize.

The Standard Miranda Warning (Miranda Rights)
Law enforcement officers carry with them a form to advise an individual being arrested:

“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to have an attorney present during questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.”

The Arrest and Trial of Ernesto Miranda
In 1963 Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix as a suspect for kidnapping and rape. Police questioned him in a special interrogation room, “Interrogation Room No. 2″ of the detective bureau.  After two hours, the officers came out of the interrogation room with a written confession.  Miranda had signed the confession and typed at the top document a paragraph stated the confession was made voluntarily, without threats or promises of immunity and “with full knowledge of my legal rights, understanding any statement I make may be used against me.” The victim identified him in a lineup.
Two weeks later at a preliminary hearing, Miranda again was denied counsel.
At Miranda’s trial the officers admitted at that Miranda was not advised that he had a right to have an attorney present. Miranda’s trial attorney objected to the use of the statements.  The trial judge overruled the objection and the confession was used against him.
Miranda was convicted. He was sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison. His conviction was appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, which affirmed.

The Supreme Court Decision in Miranda v. Arizona
In 1966 his case reached the United States Supreme Court.  There had been protections in place for the Fifth Amendment right to self-incrimination when the case reached the Court.  The major protection of that right had been that a statement, to be used in court against a defendant, had to be voluntary.[1] The Court determined there was no way to be sure a statement was voluntary unless there was certainty a suspect was aware of his rights.  The only way to be sure he knew was to tell him.
The Supreme Court found that Miranda’s rights derived from the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Bill of Rights  had been violated overturning his conviction. In doing that, the Court announced the rule that suspects needed to know their rights in order to waive them, leading to the warnings that bear Ernesto Miranda’s name.

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fifth Amendment covers many subjects: Grand Juries, double jeopardy and the protection of private property. A clause of the Amendment gives rise to the right against self-incrimination. The relevant portion follows:

“No person shall… be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Miranda Warnings come not only from the Fifth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment addresses many subjects including: speedy trial, jury trial, location of trial and cross examination of witnesses. The Sixth Amendment also includes the right to an attorney:

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right … to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

Combining the Amendments: The Miranda Warnings
The US Supreme Court decided that if someone was not aware of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, then the right may as well not exist. The Court also relied upon a 1963 case, Gideon v. Wainwright  which recognized the right to counsel[2] as critical to a person’s defense. Unless someone knows that they are entitled to have an attorney that right is practically non-existent as well. The knowledge that there is a right to an appointed attorney is as critical as simply the right to consult an attorney.  Combining the two, the Miranda Warnings were born.

How the Miranda Warnings Work in Criminal Prosecutions
The Warnings are not needed for a criminal prosecution.  TV police have the time and script writers to see to it that the warnings are integral to the arrest process.  In real life arrests the luxury of a script does not exist and an arrest may take place without the delivery of the warnings.
There is an impression from entertainment arrests that failure to give warnings makes a real life arrest illegal.  The lack of warnings does not make an arrest invalid.  The consequence of failing to give an arrestee Miranda warnings is that if the subject makes any statements prior to being warned, those statements may not be used in a criminal prosecution.

The Warning Process to Obtain Admissible Statements
The warning process consists of three steps before statements of the accused can be used against him:
  • The warnings must be given
  • The suspect must acknowledge they were given
  • The suspect must freely waive his rights
Once these conditions are met, statements made and evidence[3] gathered as a result of the statements can be used against him. If these three things do not happen, the evidence is excluded, and cannot be used by the state at trial.
For statements and other evidence to be excluded the defense must make a request of the court.  Procedurally, this happens by way of motions to suppress statements or evidence. The timing of these motions is addressed in the Felony Process.xc
Following the Boston Marathon Bombing, there was much discussion about the Public Safety Exception to Miranda Warnings.  Much reporting gave the public misinformation.  It is critical to remember that “warnings” are given, but the “rights” to Remain Silent and Counsel come from the Constitution and belong to a suspect.

What Happened to Ernesto Miranda?
The Supreme Court overturned his conviction. He did not go free. He was tried again. At the new trial he was found guilty, without his statements as evidence. He was sentenced to eleven years in prison, and released in 1972. In 1976 he was killed in a Phoenix bar. A suspect was arrested in his killing. The suspect was advised of his right to remain silent and did so. No one was ever convicted in the killing of Ernesto Miranda.
x x x."

- See more at: http://www.shestokas.com/constitution-and-its-people/the-origin-and-meaning-of-the-miranda-warnings/#sthash.CPbQx3RH.dpuf

Pope sacked Church official for selling annulments of marriages

See - Pope sacked Church official for selling annulments





"x x x.

VATICAN CITY - Pope Francis revealed Wednesday, November 5, that he had sacked a church court official who had been caught offering to facilitate marriage annulments for cash.
The shock revelation came in candid remarks to students attending a course at the Roman Rota tribunal, the equivalent of the Supreme Court for canon law, the body of Church rules.
Telling his audience that he wanted decisions on annulments to be easier, quicker and cheaper to obtain for ordinary people, the pontiff made it clear he regards the current system as deeply flawed. (READ:Church prepares 'pastoral earthquake' on divorce, gays)
"We have to be very careful that the procedure does not become a kind of business - and I am not talking about something we know nothing about," the 78-year-old pope said.
"There have been public scandals. Some time ago, I had to dismiss from a tribunal someone who was saying 'for 10,000 dollars I will do both the civil and the ecclesiastical procedure'."
Francis did not provide any further details of the episode but a Vatican spokesman told Agence France-Presse (AFP) he understood the pontiff to have been referring to an episode which occurred prior to him becoming pope last year.
The conditions under which a marriage can be annulled - effectively declared to have never existed - have been a vexed issue for the Church for centuries.
Most notably, the question triggered the 16th Century clash with King Henry VIII that led to the English reformation and the creation of the Church of England.
Justice and charity
In recent times, many critics have voiced concern that annulment appears to be more readily available to the wealthy - a view likely to be reinforced by Francis's remarks on Wednesday.
Calls for the process to be streamlined were discussed at a recent Vatican synod of bishops on the family and Francis said he supported reform on the grounds of "justice and also charity."
Citing his home city of Buenos Aires as an example, he said it was not right that parishioners had to take unpaid days off work and travel up to 240 kilometres (150 miles) to attend church court hearings, and then wait years before getting an answer to requests for annulment.
"The mother Church has enough generosity to provide justice freely, as we have been freely justified by Jesus Christ," he said. "The Church must be able to say, 'Yes, your marriage is void, or 'No, it is valid."
As things stand, most annulment requests are dealt with by lower church courts with the consent of two hearings required for an annulment to be granted.
The Roman Rota rules in cases where the two courts disagree or are unable to reach a decision and is charged with ensuring that decision-making on the issue is subject to coherent jurisprudence across the world.
Francis has made a crackdown on corruption within the church one of the dominant themes of his papacy, initiating a shake-up of both the Vatican bureaucracy and its bank in a bid to stem the damage caused by a string of scandals in recent years. - Rappler.com. x x x."

Friday, November 7, 2014

SC dismisses petition for habeas data filed by ‘jueteng’ whistleblower | Inquirer News

See - SC dismisses petition for habeas data filed by ‘jueteng’ whistleblower | Inquirer News





"x x x.

MANILA, Philippines—The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for habeas data filed by jueteng (illegal-numbers game) whistleblower and President of the Whistleblowers Association Sandra Cam, which she sought for protect saying she was subject of persistent surveillance activities following her disclosure of a list of personalities involved in the pork barrel fund scam.

In a seven page resolution, the high court en banc said Cam failed to present substantial and credible evidence to back up her allegations.

Supreme court (5)
The Supreme Court. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
“Needless to state, an indispensable requirement before the privilege of writ of habeas data may be extended is the showing, at least by substantial evidence, of an actual or threatened violation of the right to privacy in life, liberty or security of the victim. There must exist a nexus between the right to privacy on the one hand and the right to life, liberty or security on the other. There must also be substantial evidence to support the allegations. And the threat must find rational basis on the surrounding circumstances of the case, it must be supported by independent and credible evidence.

In the case at bar, petitioner failed to carry this onus,” the high court said.
Cam filed a petition for writ of habeas data alleging that her right to privacy in relation to her right to personal security had been threatened.

She said from April 30 to May 3, she had been subjected to surveillance by unidentified men.
On the other hand, she said Agrarian Reform Assistant Secretary Alex Almario, a Liberal Party District chairman visited her at her temporary residence and identified himself as an “unofficial representative.” He left her his business card and requested that they talk about list containing names of politicians implicated in the pork barrel scam.

Almario, together with his driver Marlon Adique Mahilum and several John Does were included as respondents.

Aside from directing the respondents to cease their illegal surveillance activities, Cam also asked the High Court to direct Almario to explain the reason why he had been persistent in trying to talk to her personally.

But the high court said, aside from failure to give evidence to support her allegations, Cam also filed her petition in the wrong venue.

The high court explained that under the rules, a petition may be filed at the Regional Trial Court.

The petition may also be filed with the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals or Sandiganbayan 
when the action concerns public data files of government offices.

“The subject petition was filed directly with this Court. However, there is no allegation to the effect that the subject Petition involves or concerns public data files of government offices. 

Rather, the subject petition principally involves alleged menacing surveillance activities through unidentified and unregistered vehicles,” the high court said.

Also, the high court said, Almario’s act of requesting a face-to-face meeting with Cam even if it is true, “does not causally or reasonably relate to the alleged threat to her right to privacy vis-à-vis her right to life, liberty or security.”

“If petitioner finds respondent Almario’s acts vexatious, then there are sufficient remedies-administrative, civil and criminal-that she may avail of,” it added.

Lastly, the high court said Cam’s allegation that President Benigno Aquino III is willfully suppressing the right of the people to information on matters of public concern relative to the “list” of government officials involved in the alleged pork barrel scam, the high court said it lie outside the ambit of the writ of the habeas data and that she should pursue her claim in a proper suit.

“Petitioner may pursue such claims in a proper suit, invoking her constitutional right to information under Article III, Section 7 (10) of the Constitution, if she is so minded,” the Court added.
x x x."


Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/649190/sc-dismisses-petition-for-habeas-data-filed-by-jueteng-whistleblower#ixzz3INHoNQui
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

Thursday, November 6, 2014

SC allows ‘dual’ law practice - Manila Standard Today

See - SC allows ‘dual’ law practice - Manila Standard Today





"x x x.

Filipino lawyers who became naturalized American citizen can again practice law in the country upon acquiring dual citizenship, according to the Supreme Court.
In an en banc resolution promulgated September 23, 2014, but released only this week, the Supreme Court granted the petition of Marcos Del Rosario to practice his legal profession in the country after losing his Philippine citizenship by reason of naturalization as US citizen.
“The Court resolved to allow petitioner Del Rosario to resume practice of law in the Philippines, subject to the conditions that he re-takes his lawyer’s oath on a date set by the Court,” the resolution stated.
The high court also required petition to pay “the appropriate fees, and (submit) the original or certified true copy of the proof of payment of the professional tax for 2013.”
The SC cited Article XII, Section 14 of the Constitution, which provides that “the practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens, save in cases prescribed by law.”
Before moving to the US, Del Rosario passed the Philippine Bar exams after finishing his law degree from the University of the Philippine in 1995.
He then obtained his Master of Laws in International Business from Fordham University in New York, NY, U.S.A in 2003 and was admitted to practice law in the State of New York and the US District Courts for the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York after becoming a naturalized American citizen.
Del Rosario filed the petition in the SC, saying he wanted to continue practicing law in the country.
x x x."

Final: 120 minutes pol ads per TV station – SC

See - Final: 120 minutes pol ads per TV station – SC





"x x x.

The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled with finality that the maximum allowable airtime for political ads of national candidates is 120 minutes per television station and 180 minutes per radio station, junking the limits that the Commission of Elections (Comelec) imposed during the 2013 polls.
In the last midterm elections, the poll body limited candidates for national positions to buying only a total of 120 minutes of political ads in all TV stations and 180 minutes in all radio stations.
x x x."

Monday, November 3, 2014

COA orders return of P815M illegal benefits

See - COA orders return of P815M illegal benefits





"x x x.

MANILA, Philippines – A total of P815.42 million in unauthorized incentives should be returned to government coffers by officials and employees of 23 government-owned-and-controlled corporations (GOCCs), the Commission on Audit (COA) said.
The said illegal benefits – including allowances, benefits, and incentives – were disbursed in 2013 by the GOCCs, according to the COA's 2013 Annual Financial Report on GOCCs.
The report said these "personnel allowances, benefits, bonuses, [and] incentives [were] granted or paid without legal basis." Employees and officials are ordered to refund the amounts they received.
The Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) led the list of agencies with illegal benefits, disbursing a total of P436.18 million.
The GOCCs with the biggest unauthorized disbursements are:
  1. Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA), P436.18 million
  2. Duty Free Philippines Corp. (DFPC), P141.27 million
  3. Home Development Mutual Fund (Pag-Ibig Fund), P130.38 million
  4. National Housing Authority (NHA), P48.71 million
  5. Overseas Workers’ Welfare Administration (OWWA), P14.36 million
  6. Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), P11.71 million
  7. Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS), P9.92 million
  8. National Transmission Corp. (TransCo), P5.74 million
  9. National Power Corp. (NPC), P4.70 million
  10. Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA), P2.91 million."

Was SC justice partial in BCDA-SM Land issue?

See - Was SC justice partial in BCDA-SM Land issue?





"x x x.

Red flag: 3 TROs
Something strange, however, happened on the way to this decision. Velasco issued 3 versions of a TRO stopping the BCDA from proceeding with the public bidding. All of these were dated on the same day, January 9, 2013, and received by the BCDA on 3 separate days. We obtained copies of these TROs.
The first version directed the BCDA to carry out the TRO…”until further orders from the Court.” BCDA received this on January 9, 2013.
The next day, another TRO was sent to BCDA, sounding more urgent. It added a new phrase, “effective immediately” and retaining “until further orders from this court.” This time, the process server asked the BCDA if he could pull out the documents he had given them the previous day. In its motion for reconsideration (MR), the BCDA narrated that it refused, finding the whole thing “curious.”
That was not the end of it. On January 11, 2013, a 3rd and final version of the TRO reached the BCDA. It was practically the same as the second version.
“The ruse attempted by the Process Server, coupled with the several variants of the same order, give Respondents cause for concern,” the BCDA said. “…the Process Server’s bid to recall the original order that was served is stealthy and highly irregular, a subterfuge unbecoming of such an august institution.”
We asked lawyers if the issuance of multiple versions of a TRO is common. They say this is unusual, a rarity in the annals of the Philippine Supreme Court.
x x x."