33.4 C
Manila
Saturday, May 4, 2024
Home Blog Page 188

Balik-pasada at ayuda, hiling ng mga tsuper

0

Ginanap ngayong araw, Hunyo 27, ang Araw ng Pakikiisa para sa mga Jeepney Driver. Nagkaroon ng magkakahiwalay na pagbibigay ng ayuda sa iba’t ibang pondohan ng mga tsuper sa Metro Manila.

Pangunahing tinulungan ng Bayang Matulungin, isang proyekto ng Bayan Muna at PagAsa, ang mga tsuper sa Project 3, Quezon City, Samson Road, Caloocan City, at Rizal Ave., Manila. Nasa mahigit isang daan ang kanilang natulungan.

The post Balik-pasada at ayuda, hiling ng mga tsuper appeared first on Kodao Productions.

Calls of distress, Voices of Hope

0

“Hay Salamat!” exclaimed Pinky (not her true name) after hearing the words, “Good morning ma’am? Unsay among ikatabang nimo mam?” from the other side of the line. Pinky was calling the numbers she chanced upon while browsing a social media platform that offers free online consultation.

UN expert expresses concern on anti-terror bill

“The advancement of broad, vague and overly abrasive definition and legislation relating to terrorism can have the opposite of the intended effect which is that by silencing voices, by cracking down on civil society, by weakening the due process and protections offered by the criminal justice system that doesn’t strengthen the States by rather weakening the due process protections offered by the criminal justice system — that doesn’t strengthen the States but rather weakens it in the long run.”

By ANNE MARXZE D. UMIL
Bulatlat.com

MANILA – A United Nations expert expressed concern on anti-terrorism bill, which now awaits President Duterte’s signature.

In a webinar on June 26 organized by Ecumenical Voice for Peace and Human Rights in the Philippines and other international human rights groups, Fionnuala D. Ni Aolain, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism expressed concern on the proposed law and cited specific provisions that she said go beyond the ambit of international law.

The Philippines is a signatory to the international laws protecting human rights such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, among others.

Aolain finds it concerning that an anti-terrorism legislation has emerged in the Philippines amid the present health crisis when, she said, “the regular process, oversight engagement, scrutiny and accountability are often limited and the capacity of the people to engage with the making of the legislation that have serious human rights implications is obviously limited.”

Aolain said globally, there is what she called as an “epidemic” of counter terrorism measures. These measures that are supposed to counter terrorism, she said, have been abused by many governments.

“My mandate has made clear that terrorism is a real and a challenging problem for many States. But advancing and responding to terrorism cannot be done in a way which is not human rights compliant because neither is efficient nor effective in the long run,” she said.

“Security and human rights are not at odds with each other. In fact they are bound together and only when we fully observed human rights will we be capable of fully making society secure in a way that respects the inherent dignity of each single person,” she added.

‘Definition of terrorism is broad’

Aolain cited her concerns on the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 which, only two weeks from now, will lapse into law should Duterte not decide on it anytime soon.

She said that specifically the bill is a concern for civil society and civil society actors, for humanitarian action and humanitarian actors, for privacy and freedom of expression and assembly.

For Aolain, the definition of terrorism under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 is “broad vague, lacks legal certainty and precision creating a challenge for individuals to understand precisely what kinds of actions would be designated as terrorism.”

She added that it is susceptible to abuse and compromise a number of fundamental rights under the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

She also found it concerning that the law will be implemented by the Anti-Terrorism Council which consists of members of the Cabinet appointed by the President, will be given the authority to enforce, arrest and designation of individuals as terrorist without the judicial warrant. “This is a fundamental encroachment on the most primordial of due process rights,” she said.

“It is also clear that persons who will be designated and arrested under the bill may face lengthy period of time in detention without due process. Such arrest gives rise to the concerns of arbitrary detention,” she added.

She also specifically mentioned Sections 12 and 13  which she said will affect the people’s access to humanitarian assistance, “which is an indispensable mechanism to protect other fundamental rights including social, economic and political rights.”

Section 12 of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 states that “Any person who provides material support to any terrorist individuals or terrorist organization, association or group of persons committing any the acts under Section 4, hereof, or knowing that such individual or organization, association or group of persons is committing or planning to commit such acts, shall be liable as principal to any and all terrorist activities committed by said individuals or organizations, in addition to other criminal liabilities he/she or they may have incurred in relation thereto.

“There are grave concerns about the breadth and the scope of the terms ‘terrorism,’ ‘terrorist’ and ‘terrorist activities’ as used in the legislation. They are certainly broader than the model definition of terrorism that has been advanced by my mandate through my predecessors over almost 20 years. The definition also seem inconsistent with UN Security Council resolution 1566 which provides a narrow and degrade definition of terrorism,” Aolain said.

Aolain also cited Section 9 of the proposed law, which punishes a person with 12 years imprisonment, even without taking any direct part of the supposed terrorism. She said the acts under this section which prohibit inciting others to commit terrorism by means of speeches, proclamations, writing, emblems, banners or other representations will have an implication on the freedom of expression.

Aolain stressed that this has nothing to do with the exhortation of terrorism.

“May I remind the government that the HRC has made clear that prohibitions on things like encouragement, praising and glorification have to adhere to the requirements of Article 19.3 of the ICCPR. I am concerned that provisions in this law go far beyond that and will have a negative effect on freedom of expression in the Philippines,” she said.

She said that freedom of expression in a democracy is one of the most substantial and meaningful of rights. “It is what distinguishes the democracy from all other forms of governments allowing people to speak even speech that we may disagree with,” she added.

Aolain also underscored the detention without judicial warrant as against the requirements of Article 9 of the ICCPR which, for one, states that “everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law.”

Under Section 29 of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, a person who is only suspected of committing terrorist act will be detained up to a maximum of 24 days.

She emphasized that the “advancement of broad, vague and overly abrasive definition and legislation relating to terrorism can have the opposite of the intended effect which is that by silencing voices, by cracking down on civil society, by weakening the due process and protections offered by the criminal justice system that doesn’t strengthen the States by rather weakening the due process protections offered by the criminal justice system — that doesn’t strengthen the States but rather weakens it in the long run.”

Aolain pointed out that people are not more secure and more free with coming up with a legislation which impinges human rights in the name of countering terrorism. She said that governments should advance human rights and ensure that any security legislation is “consistent with the States’ obligations on international law and seek to do the best to promote those values rather than undermine them.” (https://www.bulatlat.com)

The post UN expert expresses concern on anti-terror bill appeared first on Bulatlat.

UN experts remind Duterte administration of responsibility in upholding human rights

“Whether they like it or not, the government is responsible for human rights. Not the UN Special Rapporteurs, the civil society. This is the responsibility that they all (States) have signed.”

By ANNE MARXZE D. UMIL
Bulatlat.com

MANILA – The Philippine government has an obligation to protect and uphold the human rights of its citizen, the United Nations experts on Friday, June 26.

Mary Lawlor, UN Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, and Clement Voule, Special Rapporteur on freedom of assembly and association underscored that the Philippines as a signatory to treaties protecting human rights, is obliged to abide by these treaties.

In webinar organized by the Ecumenical Voice for Peace and Human Rights in the Philippines (EcuVoice) and other international rights groups, both Lawlor and Voule dismissed Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque’s accusation that the UN experts are biased against President Duterte’s government.

Roque made the statement after the 31 UN independent experts issued their call for member States of the Human Rights Council (HRC) to sanction the Philippine government officials who “committed, incited, or failed to prevent human rights abuses.”

Voule said that part of their job as Special Rapporteur is to inform the HRC of their findings on the ground and to ensure that the State is aware of it.

He said that the government can better use their expertise if they would only invite these experts in the country to see and implement some of the recommendations that they are putting forward.

“I don’t think the situation will improve in the context where all we are seeing is completely rejected without the proper investigation from the government to know what is going on on the ground, he said.

The Special Rapporteurs are independent experts appointed by the by the United Nations Human Rights Council with the “mandate to monitor, advise and publicly report on human rights situations in specific countries and on human rights violations worldwide.”

Several Special Rapporteurs have conducted country visits to the Philippines to gather information about the human rights situation in the country. Then Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial summary or arbitrary executions Philip Alston visited the Philippines and looked into the human rights abuses under the administration of then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

The recent comprehensive report of the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights has found serious rights abuses committed with “near impunity.” Part of its recommendation is to conduct “prompt, impartial, thorough, transparent investigations into all killings, and into alleged violations of international humanitarian law.”

For Lawlor, the role of the Special Rapporteurs as well as the civil society actors and human rights defenders is to “try to let not the government not to get away (from accountability).”

“Whether they like it or not, the government is responsible for human rights. Not the UN Special Rapporteurs, the civil society. This is the responsibility that they all (States) have signed,” she said.

Voule also said that the Philippines, as a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, has responsibility to protect its citizens, to guarantee and uphold their rights.

He said that while it is true the UN has no enforcement mechanism, the Philippines as part of the international body is bound to implement the treaties it signed.

“It is also important the any State show their willingness to uphold the principle and value that the international community protects,” he said.

The comprehensive report of the OHCHR will be presented on the UNHRC on its 44th regular session this June 30 to July 20 in Geneva, Switzerland.

Meanwhile, Lawlor encouraged the civil society groups like Karapatan to continue advancing human rights and engaging the international community. She also commended Karapatan’s long history of protecting human rights of the Filipinos.

“You have a right to do this work. It is legitimate. It’s in the interest of building civil and just society,” said Lawlor.

Cristina Palabay, secretary general of Karapatan, vowed that they will remain vigilant and will continue to maximize all platforms to seek justice and accountability. (https://www.bulatlat.com)

The post UN experts remind Duterte administration of responsibility in upholding human rights appeared first on Bulatlat.

#PRIDE20: Queer activists, supporters arrested during a Pride Protest

“There is no other way to describe this violent dispersal as a blatant attack on the LGBTQ+ community and its long history of militant resistance against State repression, especially amid the looming passage of the Anti-Terrorism Bill.”

BY AARON MACARAEG
Bulatlat.com

MANILA– LGBTQIA+ activists and their allies came to celebrate on Thursday, June 26 the 51st anniversary of the historic Stonewall Protest and Pride in a form of protest in Mendiola, Manila City, and what happened proves nothing much has changed. They were violently dispersed, physically harassed, and ilegally arrested.

At least 20 members of Bahaghari, Children’s Rehabilitation Center, and Gabriela Women’s Party were arrested, 13 of whom are members of LGBTQIA+.

Rey Salinas, spokesperson of Bahaghari, said they did not violate quarantine protocols during their peaceful protest.

In a video coverage of Altermidya, the protesters were wearing masks and followed physical distancing.

While aboard a police mobile, Salinas tweeted, “Hinuli man kami ngayon, walang pandemiya, walang lockdown, at mas lalong walang mga pasistang baboy ang makapipigil ng pagsinag ng Bahaghari.”

In a video posted by Bahaghari in their Twitter account, Salinas narrated that policemen in full combat riot gear suddenly dispersed their ranks.

“We were asking for their names, they did not give us any. They never read Miranda rights. They are not disclosing our violations,” said Salinas.

She added that the arrest of Pride20 justifies the need for the queers to stand up against the militarist action of the national government in addressing the pandemic as well as the impending passage of Anti-Terrorism Bill.

Pride20 spent the night at the Manila Police District (MPD) headquarters with many of them having to sleep on the floor. As of this writing, they are undergoing inquest at the Manila Prosecutor’s Office.

In a statement, human rights group Karapatan said MPD police has no legal basis citing the Bayanihan to Heal As One Act as a violation of quarantine procedure.

“There is no other way to describe this violent dispersal as a blatant attack on the LGBTQIA+ community and its long history of militant resistance against State repression, especially amid the looming passage of the Anti-Terrorism Bill,” said Cristina Palabay, secretary general of Karapatan.

She assailed that the arrest is an attack on democratic rights, adding, “Police has just been openly shameless arresting LGBTQIA+ in a Pride Month itself.”

A true Queen

Catriona Gray, former Ms. Universe who’s been very vocal in political issues in the country tweeted sympathy for Pride20 and questioned the motive of the police regarding the arrest.

“If proper health guidelines were being followed, (social distancing, mask wearing) why the use of force? Why the withholding of rights (witnesses said they were not read their miranda rights before arrest nor given reason of arrest)? Videos circulating online confirm this,” Gray tweeted.

She ended her Twitter thread urging her followers to speak up and reminded everyone that, “Pride, since the beginning has been a protest.”(https://www.bulatlat.com)

The post #PRIDE20: Queer activists, supporters arrested during a Pride Protest appeared first on Bulatlat.

Karapatan warns terror bill will embolden State forces to commit torture, rights violations

0

As the world marked the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture yesterday, June 26, human rights watchdog Karapatan warned that the passage of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 will “alarmingly enable and worsen the use of torture and other brutal forms of state violence in the government’s counterinsurgency and counterterror campaigns.” 

read more

Part 2: The anomaly of transport modernization

0

Last of a two-part series

Government’s misplaced scheme

In many instances, the
solution to the complex transport problems of Metro Manila lies in the physics
of the problem, in the same way that dealing with COVID-19 requires medical
science. But the Duterte administration has simply picked up its pre-COVID proposal
of “jeepney modernization” and used the pandemic to justify finally pushing for
it, amid protestations by jeepney drivers and the adverse impact on millions of
commuters.

The government is a signatory
to the Bangkok Declaration on Sustainable Transport Goals (Bangkok 2020) on
“environmentally-sustainable” transport policy. This is also in relation to the
ADB’s
Sustainable Transport Initiative that is ultimately premised on the
continuation of “free market” and “inclusive” economic growth. The Duterte
government’s accomplishment in fulfilling Bangkok 2020 rests on the jeepney
modernization program. Ultimately, this is important for the Duterte
administration to attract transport infrastructure investments as well as to
push for the sale of brand new, imported, so-called environment-friendly, and
modern jeepneys.

Through the Omnibus
Franchising Guidelines (OFG) that the DOTr issued on 19 June 2017, the
government is requiring the make of the body and engine of the traditional
jeepney to be compliant with the requirements set by the Land Transportation
Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB). These requirements definitely
prioritize electric jeepneys (e-jeep), while pushing away the traditional
jeepneys which need to go through numerous hurdles to get licensed to operate.
These hurdles include: upgrading combustion engines to comply with Euro IV and
similar emissions standards; complying with the LTFRB-set age-limit of oldest
vehicle part; refurbishing and rebuilding that should pass the type approval system
test; and still finally going through the Land Transportation Office (LTO) for
a roadworthiness test to get registration renewal.

Concerned automotive
engineers, scientists and mechanics contest the need to phase out traditional
jeepneys and argue that the government should support locally manufactured environmental
solutions. They also question the availability of the parts of the imported
modern jeepneys in case of repairs, unlike with the traditional jeepneys that
can be replaced easily. They also claim that the body engineering of the modern
jeepneys is not suited to Metro Manila’s narrow roads and more prone to
accidents. Environmentalists have also criticized the government’s going
electric or Euro IV as hypocritical when its own energy program is reliant on
coal and other fossil fuels.

But the OFG just keeps on
narrowing the chances for traditional jeepneys to survive. The OFG also
requires a fleet size of 15 units for any type of PUV for six months for new
routes, which prevents small operators from applying for new franchises.
Actually, even medium-scale operators – if they exist – are constrained and
marginalized under the modernization program. The modern jeepney costs about
Php1.6 million to as high as Php2.5 million, which means that an operator needs
at least Php24 million to get a franchise.

The DOTr has stated that the
government is not phasing out jeepneys but simply modernizing. However, the government
plays with words. The jeepney modernization program will ultimately kill the
livelihoods of thousands of jeepney drivers and complete the corporate capture
of the ‘last-mile’ resort of millions of Filipino commuters.

Still pushing for Build, Build, Build
and foreign ownership

The Duterte administration is
also not compromising its Build, Build,
Build
(BBB) infrastructure projects, despite their questionable viability
even before COVID-19 struck and their diminishing relevance now. Of the 100
infrastructure flagship projects (IFPs) worth Php4.3 trillion, 73 are for
transport and mobility. The government does not have plans to strengthen
economic production so the projects will just end up reinforcing a service
economy dependent on import-export trade, foreign investments and tourism. Much
of the construction materials used are even imported rather than produced
locally.

The transport sector is
reflective of how the government has lost its capacity to govern and manage
public services because of privatization. This raises questions therefore on
government’s absorptive capacity for such a grand infrastructure program. Four
years into the ambitious BBB, there are only two (2) completed and nine (9) ongoing
projects to date. The Duterte administration has even increased the IFPs from
75 to 100 to make BBB “more feasible”. But it appears that only 38 projects will
be finished by the end of its term.

The future of BBB in the time
of COVID-19 is precarious. But like a beaten beast, the Duterte administration
refuses to yield. The pandemic is posing serious challenges to the continuation
of BBB, apart from the program’s innate weakness of simply being aimed at
attracting foreign investments and momentarily stimulating a slowing economy.

The most obvious challenge for
the construction industry is physical distancing because  masses of workers need to gather to finish a
project. The IATF suspended construction at the start of the lockdown but later
allowed it, while passing on to the construction companies the responsibility of
ensuring that workers comply with health protocols.

The next challenge is how
travel restrictions and physical distancing will certainly dampen transport,
travel and tourism businesses, and foreign trade and investment for a long
time. These are the sectors that BBB wishes to be relevant for – but they are less
and less important for the economy’s survival in the time of COVID-19.

Another challenge is the
commercial viability of the projects on which they are all premised. Instead of
catering to genuine public service, the completed projects are designed to be
run by private transport corporations who will collect user-fees for their
profitability and sustainability. The most expensive BBB projects are mass
commuter railways whose viability depends on expensive fares that will be beyond
the reach of the majority of the poor and working people.

But the greatest challenge is
how BBB’s socially inappropriate orientation can be shifted to support the
proper health response to COVID-19. The pandemic has revealed how weak our
health system is – lacking facilities and equipment, lacking health personnel,
and even lacking the means to transport health personnel. Not a few health
frontliners have had fatal road accidents biking to work due to lack of
transport support from the government. There is not even a single health
infrastructure facility in the IFP lineup. The administration has made
pronouncements that it would reorient BBB to respond to the health crisis but has
yet to release a new IFP list.

Meanwhile, one priority
legislation of the administration is the amendment of the Public Services Act
(PSA). On March 10, just before the lockdown, the House of Representatives
passed on final reading House Bill (HB) 78 to amend the PSA. It is now at the
Senate for deliberation and approval. These amendments include narrowly
defining public utilities to bypass Constitutional restrictions on foreign
ownership. Sectors considered public services, transportation included, can be
opened up to complete foreign ownership. This further undermines public interest
and national development. The PSA amendments will pave the way for the full
foreign ownership of the mass transport system and government’s eventual
surrender to private transport and transport infrastructure corporations.

The right direction

The Duterte government can
address the transport crisis in the time of COVID-19 and in fact can look at
the pandemic as an opportunity to overhaul the system. The health protocols may
be followed indeed if only the government recognizes and addresses the transport
crisis in a scientific manner.

There should be a first-step
long-term modal shift from road to rail. The government can start by upgrading
and adding rolling stock and rails to the train system. The corporations and
officials of government agencies who forged lopsided privatization contracts
should be held liable for poor service including breakdowns and accidents. The
Philippines is among the first countries in Asia to have an urban rail system
and has a long history of government running rail transport systems. These
assets can be nationalized again and returned to public control. Rail transport
can then be central to urban planning as well as to the dispersal of economic
activities to the rural areas.

An efficient rail transport
system, not to mention fully linked and accessible, will be the basis of an
equally efficient route rationalization plan for PUBs and PUVs. The government
should seriously conduct its own study to identify where the mass of commuters
can have the most optimal travel time, including number of stops, from their
workplaces to their homes. This should also include designation of walkways and
bike lanes. It should not rely on self-interested privatization stakeholders to
make such studies.

For a route rationalization
plan to be truly systematic, PUBs and PUVs along with rail should be publicly
run. Government can start by organizing PUBs and PUVs into cooperatives rather
than allowing only single or corporate proprietorship of large fleets. It can
also incentivize cooperatives to improve their service and compliance. Then,
government can move on to careful consolidation of fleets through joint
ventures and eventual nationalization. Such crucial steps will finally make PUB
and PUV modes more economical and fares more affordable.

The DOTr is proposing to
introduce service contract arrangements with private transport operators for
the “new normal”. It also aims to shift from the “boundary system” to daily
fixed wage for drivers and conductors so they can have steady incomes
regardless of reduced ridership. This sounds acceptable, especially if we
consider that transport groups have long been clamoring for government to
abolish the “boundary system” to avoid competition-driven stresses, road
hazards, and transport unpredictability.

However, the DOTr proposal
remains outside the vision of living wages for transport workers, promoting
their welfare and strengthening their unions, subsidizing commuters and
controlling fares, and diminishing competition among the private contractors
with stronger public control. In short, the current proposal should be within
the framework of nationalization, lest it end up being another privatization
contract.

The proposal is welcome if it
is not being done in the context of the government’s jeepney modernization
program. The Duterte administration cannot even give sufficient social
amelioration to displaced drivers and conductors during a pandemic.

Moreover, government should
once and for all restrain the explosive private car sales that defies all
public mass transport logic. These just give the automotive corporations
maximum returns on their businesses.

Finally, the pandemic gives us the vast opportunity to rethink sustainable development perspectives. The need for agrarian development and national industrialization cannot be overemphasized. But the government can start with arresting the anarchic building of offices especially for business process outsourcing and online gambling, shopping malls, hotels and leisure structures, residential and private subdivisions, and condominiums. Metro Manila’s urban development Is geared to increasing real estate profits and the wealth of the country’s economic oligarchs at the expense of public mobility and welfare.

Government can start by planning an economy that genuinely addresses severe inequalities existing pre-COVID-19 that, without corrective steps, will persist even far beyond.

Read the first part of this series