Philippine education in crisis
The turnout of 9 million surpassed the expectations of Education Secretary Leonor Briones. Presumably because DepEd was aware of the technological, financial, and other differences among the millions of Filipino families with school-age children, Secretary Briones expected many of them to forego their enrollment during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Some 5 million children will most probably not enroll precisely because of those issues.
As Bishop Roberto Mallari, who chairs the Episcopal Commission on Catechesis and Catholic Education of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines pointed out during a May interview with media, many families “are not prepared financially [and] technologically” for online learning. Some can’t afford the computers or even smart phones needed, or to subscribe to Wi-Fi providers and master the use of the technology involved within a short two months. As some news reports have noted, some teachers are similarly unprepared, either because they don’t have the devices needed and can’t afford them, and/or are also as technologically challenged as their students.
There is also the problem of connectivity. Despite the Department of Information and Communication Technology’s (DICT) pledge to make Wi-Fi available throughout the country, the connections are still either too weak or nonexistent not only in those remote localities from where students have had to walk for kilometers and cross rivers to the nearest school during pre-pandemic times, but even in some urban areas.
The economic and class divide of Philippine society has long been a fundamental issue in Philippine education. Students from rich families based in the cities and some highly urbanized municipalities have more access to usually private and expensive schools, while those from poor families are plagued by a lack of classrooms and teachers, and almost inaccessible public schools with limited resources that teachers themselves are often forced to provide.
But it seems that even the former have not really benefited as much as expected from their privileged status. A 2018 study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) tested a representative population of 15-year-old Filipino students and found them last in reading comprehension among 79 countries. The students surveyed, in a country that claims 98% literacy, hardly fared any better in science and mathematics either: they were a poor second to the last at 78th place.
It has been argued that the PISA findings are the results of the fact that those tested mostly came from public schools and therefore do not provide any indication of the alleged superiority of private institutions. But they nevertheless confirm the reality of the perennial crisis of Philippine education evident in the quality of its products. Many Filipinos can’t really read or even do simple arithmetic. Science is alien territory for the superstitious many, and mathematics a much despised subject.
A 2017 study by an international news website also found that Filipinos aged 16 to 64 are the third most ignorant of key public issues among the citizens of 36 countries. That finding is validated by, among other indicators, the epidemic of fact- and logic-challenged posts that appear in social media, and by the popularity rather than issue-based results of Philippine elections.
There is, indeed, an education class divide between poor and rich students in the Philippines. There is also the same divide between poor and rich countries. But even a less developed country can still invest heavily on education if it is its first priority. The 2018 PISA results were dominated by Chinese students from four less affluent regions of China, who bested their counterparts in the Western countries.
The Philippines just doesn’t invest as much on education as its neighbors Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei, Singapore, Indonesia and even Laos. The biggest share of the annual budget goes to education as mandated by the 1987 Constitution, but the 3.4% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) appropriated for it is still much less than the United Nations standard of at least 6%. In 2019, Congress even cut the DepEd’s proposed 2020 budget despite the need for more classrooms and teachers.
It need hardly be said that how much a country spends on education helps decide the quality of school facilities and its teachers, and therefore the quality of its students. Despite the digital age, many public schools still lack not only computers but even books, desks and blackboards. There is also a shortfall in the supply of public school teachers, due in part to their being among the lowest-paid among government employees despite their qualifications and many responsibilities.
It need hardly be said that the dismal showing of Filipino students in reading comprehension, mathematics, and science has to be addressed. The ignorance and contempt for learning evident in many sectors of the population are in conflict with the imperatives of national development and the democratization of Philippine society and politics. Citizens who know little or nothing, or are misinformed about the most pressing issues, cannot intelligently make the decisions on which democratic, honest and effective governance depends.
The sorry state of education helps explain the fragility of what passes for democracy in the Philippines. It is of course possible, although never explicitly stated, that keeping much of the population ignorant best serves the interests of the political oligarchy that rules the country. A dumb constituency is after all the surest guarantee of keeping ineffectual and corrupt governments in power.
This is the already troubled and troubling context in which the COVID-19 pandemic has forced the entire educational system to shift from traditional face-to-face classroom learning to online, “blended,” and “flexible” methods.
As expected, the better-endowed and equipped schools are adopting various ways to address the problems involved. In higher education, the leading universities, such as the University of the Philippines, Ateneo de Manila University, and De La Salle University are also developing their respective versions of remote learning methods to best serve their students and to train their faculty in them. But at both the K-12 and much of the tertiary level, there are still the differences in capability, resources and training between such institutions and the majority.
To the longstanding problems of Philippine education have thus been added the difficulties posed by the shift to online teaching. These difficulties boil down to the possibility that the schools may not effectively impart the literacy and numeracy skills required at the basic level, and, at the collegiate level, the respect for and commitment to knowledge and the critical outlook that authentic tertiary education is supposed to impart to the citizens of a democracy. As things now stand, the crisis of Philippine education is likely to reach its most acute stage in these extraordinary times because of the public health crisis generated by the COVID-19 pandemic, as a less than capable system flounders in the sea of troubles unleashed by the necessary shift to remote learning.
Luis V. Teodoro is on Facebook and Twitter (@luisteodoro).
www.luisteodoro.com
Published in the Business World
July 9, 2020
The post Philippine education in crisis appeared first on Bulatlat.
Ambivalence toward the Left and peace talks
This happened again last Tuesday during his weekly late-night televised address to the nation on updates about the Covid-19 pandemic. After defending his signing into law of the widely assailed and legally challenged Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 (RA 11479), the President blurted out (in mixed Filipino and English):
“Ito kasing mga Left, pati itong komunista [these people from the Left, even the communists], they think that we are always thinking of them. I don’t – I know that we are also thinking of other matters; as a matter of fact they are the least that we are spending our time [on].”
“They think that they are a different breed,” he went on. “They would like to be treated with another set of law[s], when as a matter of fact, they are terrorists. They are terrorists because we – I finally declared them to be one.”
Then he added: “Why? Because we – I – spent most of my days as a President trying to figure out and connect with them on how we can arrive at a peaceful solution.” He was referring to the 50-year-plus ongoing armed conflict, over which he expressed exasperation.
For sure “most of my days as a President” – over four years – couldn’t have been the least time Duterte has spent thinking about the Left: how to relate with them and endeavor to seek a peaceful resolution of the armed conflict. It seems more like an obsession. Unless, of course, he’s engaging in hyperbole again, as his previous spokesperson used to explain away many a careless Duterte utterance.
Recalling his previously friendly interactions with the Left before being elected president in 2016, Duterte stressed that he didn’t want to engage them in war:
“Wala namang gustong may gyera eh. Ako ayaw ko, lalo na ako. Kilala ko sila, kilala [nila] ako [Nobody wants war. Not me, especially me. We know each other] and it was a good rapport while it lasted” (for 20 years or more, as he has reminisced countless times).
However, he said a big change in the relationship occurred when he became president, explaining it this way:
“… [S]imply because in the ladder of priority, the highest…would be the security of the state.” He did not elaborate, but he spoke inscrutably about there being always “a time to be friendly and a time to be firm…”
“I did my very best,” Duterte claimed, “to produce something for the country.” He was probably referring to his decision – soon after being proclaimed president in May 2016 – to pursue the long-suspended GRP-NDFP peace negotiations toward their logical, positive conclusion; he had campaigned for the presidency promising to do so.
Indeed, he enabled the auspicious and euphoric resumption of the peace talks in August 2016: committed to address the root causes of the armed conflict; upheld all previously signed agreements; and agreed to accelerate the pace of the negotiations, so that he could have ample time, before his six-year term ended, to implement the substantive agreements on social, economic, and political/constitutional reforms that would be hammered out and formally signed by the two parties.
Yet, he complained, all these efforts came to naught:
“But unfortunately I would not be blaming anybody now, unless they [referring to the Left] would start to blame me again so that I can also blame them. Eh wala talagang nangyari [Nothing really was accomplished].”
About his claim that nothing was achieved in the resumed peace talks, President Duterte might be happy to correct himself if he reviews the records of the four rounds of formal negotiations held in Oslo, in Rome, and the Netherlands from August 2016 to April 2017.
The joint public statements, signed by the members of the two panels and the third-party facilitator from the Royal Norwegian Government at the conclusion of each round of formal negotiations, reflect significant, even “unprecedented” advances in the negotiations.
Even after Duterte initially “cancelled” the peace talks on Feb. 4, 2017, when the mutually declared unilateral ceasefires were withdrawn and the government declared an “all-out war” against the CPP-NPA, the two negotiating parties managed to engage in a series of formal and informal discussions on the agreed-upon agenda.
Those discussions manifested the sustained rapport and enthusiasm of the negotiating parties – encouraged and supported by various peace advocacy groups – to push further the gains attained towards forging substantive agreements addressing the root causes of conflict.
President Duterte’s ambivalent – love-hate – stance towards the Left (consequently the peace negotiations) have since put in peril the attainment of his campaign promise to pursue and attain just and lasting peace. His rational side (of heart and mind) urges him to go back to the negotiations table, but his feral side drives him away from it and thrusts him into ordering war and killings.
His militarist advisers pushed him to sign, unthinkingly, three successive issuances toward the end of 2017: Proclamation 360 on Nov. 23, declaring the GRP’s official termination of the peace negotiations; Proclamation 374 on Dec. 5, designating the CPP and the NPA as terrorist organizations followed by asking a Manila trial court to so declare them, as required by law; and Executive Order 70 on Dec. 4, creating the National Task Force to End the Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), which has since engaged across the country in vilification, red-tagging, raids, questionable arrests, detention and filing of trumped-up nonbailable criminal charges, and killings.
Nonetheless, the series of on-and-off formal and informal talks between the two negotiating panels (in 2017 and 2018) have produced a number of significant agreements that were bilaterally signed or initialled. But because of Duterte’s ambivalence – he gave the go-ahead signal, then postponed, then cancelled, the agreed-on formal signing of the accords. Thus, remaining in limbo are the ground-breaking common drafts of agreements on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development, on National Industrialization and Economic Development, and an Interim Peace Agreement.
One can only hope that President Duterte’s rational side asserts itself, resolutely, to transform these fruits of serious and painstaking negotiations into implementable agreements – for our people’s benefit – as he had wished, within his two remaining years in Malacañang.
* * *
Email: satur.ocampo@gmail.com
Published in Philippine Star
July 11, 2020
The post Ambivalence toward the Left and peace talks appeared first on Bulatlat.
From the Fire of Prometheus
By WILLIAM SAUNDERS, JR.*
Hold fast to the gift of fire!
I am rage! I am wrath! I am ire!
The vulture sits on my rock,
Licks at the chains that mock
Emancipation’s breath,
Reeks of death, death, death
– Prometheus Unbound, Ruben Cuevas
Drenched in the blood of her sons,
Under the moon’s lone light.
To every tear she weeps,
Enrage, is the heaven’s incite.
Resting in her arms,
Tis a heart that shall never fight.
Engulfed with death, shall she pass?
Tongues are slayed,
Along with freedoms shown.
Kneeling shall make you saved —
Solely for yourself alone.
Infidels they are, to human creed,
Leeches to our land of home.
Dying of the light,
Under the shadow of the might.
Wailing and grinding of teeth,
Across the mortal world of our feet.
Gift of fire is blazing weak.
Treacherous deeds shall we defy.
Until our last breath shall we sigh.
To lands of high and waters deep,
Against the fist, love must we keep.
William Saunders, Jr. is the pseudonym of a poet and campus journalist from Pampanga.
The post From the Fire of Prometheus appeared first on Bulatlat.
Bulatlatan Q & A | Of rights and wrongs: Free speech and ‘Terror Law’
In this Bulatlatan episode, Nonoy Espina, chairperson of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines and Maria…
Posted by Bulatlat on Tuesday, July 7, 2020
In this Bulatlatan episode, theater artist and writer Maria Victoria Beltran who was recently detained for her satirical post and veteran journalist, chairperson of National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, Nonoy Espina talk about the implications on free speech and expression of the newly-signed Terror Law.
acebook.com/Bulatlat.Online/”>Bulatlat on Tuesday, July 7, 2020
Rein Tarinay (RN): Mapagpalayang araw sa ating lahat! Welcome sa panibagong episode ng Bulatlatan. Bulatlatan is Bulatlat’s weekly podcast on pressing Philippine issues.
Noong nakaraang episode, tinalakay natin ang pagsubok na hinaharap ng ating mga kasamang photojournalists as frontliners in the fight against COVID-19.
Ngayong araw tatalakayin naman natin ang Anti-Terror Law at ang kalayaan sa pamamahayag at pagpapahayag.
Makakasama natin sina Ms. Maria Victoria ‘Bambi’ Beltran isang Cebuana artist at manunulat. Makakasama rin natin ang beteranong journalist at Chairperson ng National Union of Journalists of the Philippines na si Ginoong Nonoy Espina.
Sa paglagda ni Duterte ng Anti Terrow Law, kasama ang kalayaan sa pamamahayag at pagpapahayag sa maraming karapatang maisasawalang bahala ng batas. Bilang artista, manunulat at peryodista ano nga ba ang implikasyon ng batas na ito?
Bago tayo dumako dyan.. Gusto ko munang kumustahin ang ating mga panauhin.
Kumusta po kayo Ms. Bambi at Sir Nonoy?
MVB: Dito sa Cebu medyo ano kami kasi nag spike ang pandemic tapos mukhang hindi manganda ang management pero sulong pa rin, laban lang. Okay lang.
NE: Okay naman, Rein. Maraming salamat sa paanyaya. Dito sa amin sa Negros ay bagamat hindi pa ganoon kalala, mataas pa rin ang number of cases ng covid at patuloy pa rin naman ang human rights violations.
Maraming salamat po. Ngayon naman po dahil nagkaroon na tayo ng maikling kumustahan, dumako na po tayo sa ating usapin ngayong araw na ito. Ngayon po pag-uusapan natin ang freedom of expression at press freedom sa panahon ng pagkakapasa ng Anti-Terror Law. Kamakailan lamang ay nilagdaan na ni Pangulong Duterte ang Anti-Terror Law. ngayon po ang una nating bibigyan ng pansin ay Paano niyo isasalarawan ang kalagayan ng kalayaan sa pagpapahayag at kalayaan sa pamamahayag sa Pilipinas?
RT: Paano niyo isasalarawan ang kalagayan ng kalayaan sa pagpapahayag at kalayaan sa pamamahayag sa Pilipinas?
Nonoy Espina (NE): Well, kung titingnan natin ano, mahilig tayong magyabang na may demokrasya tayo at mahilig din tayong magyabang na ang media, ang press dito ang pinakamalaya sa bahaging ito ng Asya. Subalit kung titingnan natin, magmula noong 1986 ay 186 na ang mamamahayag ang pinapaslang sa bansa. So mapapatanong ka, anong klaseng demokrasya ang hahayaang patayin ang mamamahayag na itinuturing bahagi ng fourth estate, without which there would be no democracy. And as far as ano, under this current administration especially, mas lalong under threat hindi lamang yung freedom of the press kundi pati yung freedom of expression. Kung titingnan na lang natin ‘yung pinagdadaanan ng Rappler, at ngayon ‘yung pinagdadaanan ng ABS-CBN na naipasara na ‘yong broadcast e pati ‘yung digital hinarang pa. Eh ‘di natin alam, ‘pag natuloy ‘to baka pati ‘yung online nila, ‘yung YouTube at saka Facebook baka harangin pa. So nakakabahala. Nakakabahala talaga ang sitwasyon ngayon. Hindi lamang sa media kundi para sa ordinaryong mamamayan din at lalong lalo na sa mga alagad ng sining.
Maria Victoria Beltran (MVB): Ang ano ko naman, kasi, dahil sa pandemic, parang ano sila nagiging paranoid. Na pati yung kaliit-liit na mga comments sa social media ay tine-trace na nila ang mga tao pero ang daming gaya ni Mocha Uson na tinagurian na nga nating queen of fake news, ay okay lang. Eh katulad ko, dahil sa isang satirical post ay tatlong araw ako sa bilangguan. Marami pang ibang examples. So ano bang gusto nila? Yung freedom of expression ng mga tao parang gusto ba nilang? Tinatakot tayo dahil sa anti-teror bill mas lalo tayong matatakot magsalita.
RT: Ano ang masasabi n’yo sa kapapasa pa lamang na Anti-Terror Law? Paano nito naaapektuhan ang ating mga batayang karapatan?
MVB: Ang masasabi ko lang, with good intention kasi anti terror nga daw pero niyayapakan ang freedom of speech ng mga tao. Marami pang niyayapakan na freedom, yung warantless arrest. Yung instead of three days lang nagiging 24 days. Nakakatakot talaga ang anti terror bill at maraming mga taong kahit wala pa ang anti-terror bill natatakot na sila. Nagiging private na lahat ng message, posts sa social media wala pang anti terror bill. Ang laki-laki ng epekto ng bill na ito sa demokrasya ng Pilipinas.
NE: Sa tingin ko, totoo yan. Wala pa nga yung anti terrow law na ‘to ay talamak na ang paglabag sa karapatang pantao. Walang tigil yan, e. Nakakalungkot ay sinasabi nating restoration of democracy pagkatapos naaapakan pa rin ang karapatang pantao lalo ng pinakamahirap na mamamayan, na kababayan natin. At ito ngayong anti-terror law on its face nakakatakot na siya e. Kasi tingnan natin, especially yung Section 9 kung titingnan natin sa implications on freedom of expression and press freedom. Yung inciting to commit terrorism nakakatakot na offense yan kasi nakalagay do’n halos kahit anong gawin mo p’wede nilang kabigin na inciting to commit terrorism. Ehemplo na lang, ipalagay natin na mamamahayag ka trabaho mo ay kumuha ng kabi-kabilang panig para mabuo ‘yong accurate na larawan. Eh ngayon pag nag interbyu ka ng tao na kinakabig na terorista ng estado at ito’y ibinalita mo siyempre lalabas do’n kung ano yung pinagsasabi n’ya baka pwede kang akusahan ngayon na inciting to terrorism or to commit terrorism dahil yung mga sinabi niya ay inilatag mo doon sa balita mo. Kahit through banners, through ano. Eh alam naman natin ngayon yung mga red-tagging. Alam natin pati mga legal organizations kinakabig nila bilang front organizations na wala naman silang aktwal na pruwebang inilalabas basta na lang sasabihin nila e front ka ng terrorist. Ito’y naisabatas na. Ngayon, ang magpo-proscribe, ang magsasabing terorista ka hindi nga yong korte e. It is an executive committee. Itong Anti Terrorism Council. Ito ay nabubuo ng mga miyembro ng gabinete. So nakakatakot dahil sa constitution natin ‘yung maaari lang mag-utos na hulihin ka, arestuhin ka ay ang judge. At sa constitution natin, kahit martial law at nasuspend ang privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the longest you can be detained without warrant is only three days. Ibig sabihin, itong batas ay binalewala yung saligang batas natin. Doon ako kinakabahan talaga. It leaves us unprotected tapos wala man lamang provision to penalize them kung sakaling magkamali sila ng paghuli sa’yo at pagkulong sa’yo so dehado talaga ‘yung mamamayan. Wala tayong kalaban-laban.
MVB: Kaming mga artists, nagpopoetry reading, kung ano anong mga ginagawa namin. Eh siyempre minsan may mga tula na nagcocomplain about the situation ngayon. Pag sabihin nilang mga terorista kayo, kaming lahat pwede nilang ilagay sa bilangguan. Very subjective kasi, ang ATC ang magsasabi na terorista ka. Wala ka ng chance, tagged ka na. Anong klaseng demokrasya ‘yan?
RT: Sinasabi nilang parang martial law ang nangyayari?
NE: Sa totoo lang sa tingin ko mas malala pa to sa martial law. Kasi nag martial law dinedeklara. Ito permanente. Tama ‘yung sinabi ni Senate President Tito Sotto na pag naisabatas ito hindi na kailangang magdeklara ng martial law. Totoo ‘yan. Hindi na nga kailangang magdeklara ng martial law. Dahil itong Anti-Terrorism Law, this is permanent martial law and in fact, its provisions are far worse than what the consititution provides for martial law.
Similarities of press freedom on martial law and duterte administration
NE: Katulad nga ng sinabi ko.. di lang similarities. I think, it could even be worse today. Dahil nga ang anti-terrorism law ay napakalupit na batas. It’s permanent and it’s worse than martial law. Kasi ‘yung ngang sinasabi natin ‘yung warantless arrest and detention sa constitution under martial law na suspendido ang writ of habeas corpus, tatlong araw ka lang pwedeng i-detine, ito up to 24 days. So mas malabo, mas masahol ito. Mas nakakatakot.
On creative freedom
MVB: Ang masasabi ko lang, if you look at art histoory, some great works are created during the worst of times. So kahit anong gagawin nila, we should continue expressing ourselves. Baka makagawa kami ng… It should not stop the artists from expressing themselves. Instead gawin nilang inspirasyon ang mga pangyayari. Masyadong malala kasi may pandemya pa. It’s wrong timing talaga. Wrong na wrong timing na nag-anti terror bill sila. Ang gulo gulo gulo ng isip ng mga tao lalo na rito sa Cebu kasi nga malala ang pandemya sa amin. Palagi kong sinasabi sa mga artist friends ko, go lang nang go. Laban lang.
On Beltran’s arrest
MVB: Gaya ng sinabi ko ang daming mas malala pang mga posts sa social media, eh bakit ako. Why single me out? Subjective yung ginagawa nila. Interpertration…They just apply the law whenever they like it. So, imbes na matakot ako, lalo akong naging inspirado to exercise my freedom of speech.
RT: Paano mapangingibabawan ang takot? Saan huhugot ng lakas ang karaniwang mamamayan?
MVB: Ang ano ko, kahit takot ka, sige lang. Hindi puwedeng pabayaan sila. Mas mabuti nga we should speak louder. We should express ourselves at hindi natin ipapakita sa kanila na takot tayo. Gaya ng sinasabi ko palagi, laban lang. Kapit lang. Hoping against hope na mag-iimprove din ang sitwasyon. Kasi kung hindi na tayo lalaban, ano na ang mangyayari sa atin? There is no choice but to continue fighting for our basic rights. Freedom of speech is a very basic right. We should not allow them to take it away from us.
NE: We have no choice sa totoo lang. Naalala ko nung panahon ng diktadurang Marcos. Ganon din. Wala kang choice. Mananahimik ka? Kawawa ka. Eh ‘di lumaban ka na lang. Dahil sa implikasyon nito sa malayang pamamahayag at pagpapahayag. Sinasabi namin, lalo na sa media. Just continue to serve the people’s right to know. Dahil yun naman ang misyon ng media. Ihatid sa mamamayan, sa taumbayan ang impormasyong kinakailangan nila upang buuin ang kinabukasan. Halata naman yung isang purpose nito (anti terror law) ay isusupress yun. Kung babalikan ko ang aral ng kasaysayan noong panahon ng diktadura. Isa sa unang ginawa talaga ni Marcos ay ipasara ang media. Pinayagan lang mag-operate ay mga pro-government at medyo bantay sarado pa ‘yan. Di nagtagal, lumitaw itong tinatawag na mosquito press, maliliit na grupo nagkakasya lang sa coupon bond na back to back, ipamimigay sa kanto, kung saan-saan at hanggang lumabas ang matatapang na pahayagan gaya ng We Forum, Malaya. Bandang huli yung pang-lifestyle na gaya ng Mr. & Ms naging political publication, naging opposition paper.Itong paglitaw uli ng malayang pamamahayag ay tumulong sa pagpukaw sa taumbayan sa totoong nagaganap kaya ang laki ng papel ng media sa pagpapatalsik ng diktador. At yun ang sinasabi ko palaging dapat panghawakan ‘yung aral ng kasaysayan. Dumaan na tayo dito at tayo’y nagwagi. Wala akong dahilan para maniwalang hindi natin mauulit ‘yan. Lakas ng tao ‘yan, lakas ng bayan ‘yan. Lakas ng sambayanan.
MVB: Kami naman napag-uusapan na namin ang protest art. Let’s be creative in expressing ourselves but we should not be quiet. Sa mga kabataan, dapat mas matakot kayo kung wala nang nagsasalita, kung lahat tayo bow na lang nang bow, mas nakakatakot ‘yun. Patuloy lang. Noong nag-martial law, college pa ata ako, parang ganun din ka-hopeless ang sitwasyon pero nung nag-People Power, parang darating at darating din ang liwanag. Yun ang gusto kong sabihin sa kanila. Basta fight lang for your rights, for your basic, constitutional human rights. Don’t let them take it away from you. And of course, they have to know their rights. Because if they know their rights, nobody can take it away from them.
NE: Ito lang. Yung kalayaan at karapatan ay hindi natin utang kanino man. Nung tayo’y iniluwal sa mundo, tayo’y may karapatan at kalayaan na. Kumbaga that is inherent to man, inherent to being a person. Kaya nga ang tawag ay human rights, e. Kasi sa pagkatao mo, may karapatan ka. Dahil tao ka. Ang karapatan at kalayaan ay kailangang gamitin. We have to enjoy our rights to make them real. Otherwise, mawawala ‘yan. Kailangang panindigan mo ang kalayaan otherwise mawawala ang kalayaan. At madalas ang mga karapatan at kalayaang ito ay pilit aagawin sa atin kaya dapat ipagtanggol din natin at ipaglaban kasi ‘pag pinabayaan natin makuha sa atin mananatili tayong alipin habambuhay at hindi naman ‘yan nararapat sa atin bilang tao at bilang sambayanan dahil tayo ay sinasabing ‘malayang’ bayan, malayang sambayanan. Dapat patunayan nating malaya tayo.
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/1w5FElq0jOhK75Q99WL0qy?si=9gqPZ7euSUqqcTDXOduUXQ
The post Bulatlatan Q & A | Of rights and wrongs: Free speech and ‘Terror Law’ appeared first on Bulatlat.
Gov’t creating pretext to use Anti-Terrorism Law against IBON?
Days before the new Anti-Terrorism Law takes
effect, the Duterte administration continues to spread disinformation about
IBON that suspiciously makes it fit into the law’s definition of terrorism. The
government propaganda outfit Philippine News Agency (PNA) and National Task
Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC) both recently claimed that
an alleged New People’s Army (NPA) fighter killed in Iloilo was an “active
member” of IBON Foundation and insinuated that IBON recruited him into the NPA.
These are obviously false, said the group.
The PNA reported
on July 6, 2020 that an alleged 21-year old NPA fighter killed in Iloilo at the
end of June was an “active member” of IBON Foundation “prior to joining the
rebel movement”. On July 9, 2020, in its official Facebook page, the NTF-ELCAC posted
a graphic saying that the same alleged NPA fighter was an “active member [of]
IBON Foundation-turned-NPA terrorist”. The same claim
was made in the official Facebook page of the 61st Infantry Hunter
Battalion of the Philippine Army.
The allegations are not just a failure of
so-called military intelligence, said IBON, but maliciously fabricated. The
claim is on the face of it implausible. The PNA claims that the alleged NPA
rebel was 17 years old and enrolled in an undergraduate course in Iloilo when
he was “recruited into the communist-terrorist group” during school year
2015-2016.
IBON Foundation does not hire students and much
less a student who is based over 600 kilometers away from its Quezon City
offices, said the group. A diligent search of staffing records and members of
IBON Foundation also did not show the name of, or even a similar name to, the
alleged NPA rebel.
IBON said that the recent allegations are only
the most recent in a pattern of falsehoods intentionally and maliciously
promoted by the Duterte administration. Among others, in February 2019, IBON
was accused of fabricating reports to the United Nations (UN) and European
Union (EU) and producing textbooks to “radicalize” youth. In March, IBON was
accused of funding and being a “legal front” of the Communist Party of the
Philippines – New People’s Army (CPP-NPA).
By February 2020, PCOO undersecretary and
NTF-ELCAC spokesperson Lorraine T. Marie Badoy was implicating IBON in the “rape
and sexual molestation of children” and “[teaching] 5-year-olds to be child
warriors [and] 8-year-old killing machines”.
These were enough for the group to file a
historic first administrative complaint
of red-tagging with the Ombudsman against officials of the Armed Forces of The
Philippines (AFP), Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO, which
the PNA falls under), and National Security Council (NSC).
IBON said that such persistent falsehoods and malicious accusations spread by the PNA and NTF-ELCAC appear to be laying the groundwork for the Anti-Terrorism Law to be used against the institution and its research and education work. These accusations are however baseless and IBON will continue to explain socioeconomic and political issues, uphold the interest of the marginalized majority of Filipinos, and advocate against unjust and inequitable economic structures.
Network employees, celebrities, media groups rail against ABS-CBN franchise denial
ABS-CBN network employees and its celebrities have been joining the call to #VoteYestoABSCBN franchise since it was made known that the vote on the franchise could be taken this week. The “YES” for support became a call for a “NO” vote after the House committee on legislative franchises presented a resolution “denying the franchise application […]
The post Network employees, celebrities, media groups rail against ABS-CBN franchise denial appeared first on Manila Today.
