Month: June 2019

What has happened to the PMA Honor Code of NOT TO LIE, NOT TO STEAL, NOT TO CHEAT nor TOLERATE THOSE WHO DO

By DR. DANTE SIMBULAN
Philippine Military Academy ’52

TO:
President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, (Adopted Member)……….. PMA Alumni Association
Ret. Maj. Gen. Delfin Lorenzana (PMA ’73)…………. Secretary, DND
Ret. AFP Gen. Hermogenes Esperon, J. (PMA ’74)…… National Security Adviser
Gen. Benjamin Madrigal, Jr. (PMA ’85)……………………. Chief of Staff, AFP
Brig. Gen. Fernando T. Trinidad (PMA ’87)………….. Dep. Comdr, AFP Intel
Maj. Gen. Erwin Neri (PMA ’88)……………………… Chief, ISAFP
Lt. Gen. Macairog Sabiniano Alberto (PMA ’86) ……… Commanding General, PA
Ret. PNP Sr. Supt. Alex Paul Monteagudo (PMA ’81) … Director General, NICA
Ret, PN Commo. Vicente Agdamag (PMA ’77)……….. Deputy Director General, NSC
PNP Sr. Supt. Omega Jireh Fidel (PMA ’89)…………… PNP DIGM, Member, NTF
Maj. Gen. Antonio Parlade, Jr. (PMA ’87)……………. . Asst. Dep. Chief of Staff, CMO
Cavaliers,

Let me ask fellow PMAers, the generals of the AFP and PNP mentioned above, what has happened to the PMA Honor Code of NOT TO LIE, NOT TO STEAL, NOT TO CHEAT nor TOLERATE THOSE WHO DO? Is the PMA Honor Code only observed in Fort Del Pilar?

Like you, I am a graduate of PMA (Cl. ’52) and a member of the PMAAA. As graduates of PMA and members of the PMAAA, we call each other “cavaliers.” Even President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, although not a PMA graduate, could be considered a cavalier because he was an adopted member of PMA Class 1967 and later, by the PMAAA.

It may interest you to know that PMA Class 1967 had members who became activists who joined the Kabataang Makabayan while still cadets. It was the class in which then PC Lt. Victor N. Corpuz who raided the PMA Armory in Fort Del Pilar and joined the New People’s Army in 1970. For six years, Victor Corpuz was with the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP)-NPA and he even reportedly became a member of the Central Committee of the CPP. In 1976, his PMA classmates arranged for his surrender. Instead of being released, he was detained for 10 long years. He was tried by a military tribunal, and together with Bernabe Buscayno a.k.a. Commander Dante of the NPA and Prof. Jose Maria Sison, was sentenced to die by firing squad. The sentence was not carried out because of the EDSA uprising against the Marcos Dictatorship. Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino, the widow of Benigno Aquino, Jr. became the president who pardoned both Buscayno and Victor Corpuz and were both released in 1986. Corpuz was “rehabilitated” by the AFP. He was assigned to the Office of Chief of Staff Gen. Angelo Reyes, and had agreed to work against his former comrades in the NPA. He was promoted from his former rank of 1st Lt. to Brigadier General (!) when he was designated as Chief of the Intelligence Service of the AFP.

***

Pres. Rodrigo Roa Duterte, a.ka. “Digong” and “Rody,” like Victor Corpuz, was also a self-declared Leftist. He was an activist since his student days at Lyceum. He was a student of Jose Maria Sison who later became the chairperson of the CPP-NPA. Like Corpuz, he became a member of Kabataang Makabayan. When Duterte was mayor of Davao City, he became friends with NPA Commander Leoncio Pitao (a.k.a. Ka Parago). Duterte allowed a hero’s burial of commander Parago of thousands in the streets of Davao City. Duterte publicly admitted that he “was not against the NPA and its quest for social inequality.” I suppose it is this similarity of views of Duterte and Corpuz why PMA Cl ’67 adopted him as a “mistah.”

---

This background of President Duterte who was once an activist and a self-declared leftist and “socialist” may surprise the present crop of AFP and PNP generals who are now engaged in a smear and red-tagging campaign, not only against activists and leftists but also against human rights defenders such as Karapatan, Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, Mindanao Interfaith Service Foundation, Ibon Foundation, National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers and other critics of the Duterte regime. Karapatan is a non-profit NGO that is conducting human rights advocacy by monitoring and documenting human rights violations in the Philippines since 1995. It is a national alliance of organizations, groups and individuals working for the promotion and defense of human rights and people’s rights in the Philippines. The Rural Missionaries of the Philippines, founded in 1969, is a non-profit NGO composed of men and women religious, priest and lay persons belonging to different denominations and congregations. It acts as mission partners of the Association of Major Religious Superiors in the Philippines (AMRSP). The Mindanao Interfaith Service Foundation, founded in 1983, is a non-profit religious institution serving the marginalized Lumad, Muslim and Christians in Mindanao. IBON Foundation is a non-profit development organization conducting research and education since 1978.

The Duterte regime and his generals in the AFP and PNP are not only smearing and harassing those organizations they have red-tagged as “communists” but have also engaged in the killing of some of their members. It is becoming clear that the red-tagging is not only the license to harass, to arrest with manufactured evidence, but also to kill. The regime has also decided to wage an international campaign so countries abroad will stop supporting human rights organizations in the Philippines.

---

In a gathering of human rights and democracy advocates held in Washington, DC. on April 6 to 8, 2019, I was asked to share my views on the developing political crisis under the Duterte regime and what we can do about it.

First of all, let us look briefly at the situation which propelled Rodrigo Duterte’s rise to power. When he was campaigning for the presidency, he pledged to address the following social problems and promised to solve them:

• The struggle for land of millions of landless peasants, the widening gap between the wealthy few and the masses of the people, the exploitation and oppressive relations between the owners of capital and their workers;

• The lack of jobs which forced millions of Filipino workers to leave their families and seek jobs in the US, in the Middle East, in Europe, in Canada and elsewhere;

• The neo-colonial relations which made us dependent on the US and other foreign powers;

• Elimination of the widespread graft and corruption by bureaucrat-capitalists in government; and

• In Davao City, Mayor Rodrigo Duterte used the military and police in getting rid of drug users, suspected dealers and petty criminals. He claimed he will do these to the rest of the country.

When Mayor Rodrigo Duterte ran as candidate to the Presidency, he promised to address all the above and said “Change is coming.”

He courted the support of the common people, proclaiming populist slogans, even setting up a radio program called “Gikan sa Masa, Para sa Masa” (from the masses to the masses” (which he borrowed from the activists of the left).

He announced that he was a leftist, even a “socialist.” He befriended NPA communist guerillas operating in Davao where he was a mayor for 22 years. He was a friend of the late NPA guerilla commander Leoncio Pitao (a.k.a. Commander Parago).

Perhaps to convince people of his being a Leftist, he even appointed several leftist personalities in government—(a) Judy Taguiwalo as secretary of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), (b) Rafael Mariano as secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform, (c) Liza Maza as head of the National Anti-Poverty Commission, (d) Joel Maglungsod as undersecretary of the Department of Labor and Employment, and (e) Terry Ridon as chair of the Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor.

Continue reading

FAO and IFAD Global Action Plan highlights family farmers as key drivers of sustainable development

29 May 2019, Rome – The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) today launched the United Nations’ Decade of Family Farming and a Global Action Plan to boost support for family farmers, particularly those in developing countries.

The two UN agencies lead the implementation of the Decade of Family Farming declared by the United Nations at the end of 2017.

Family farms represent over 90 per cent of all farms globally, and produce 80 percent of the world’s food in value terms. They are key drivers of sustainable development, including ending hunger and all forms of malnutrition.

The Decade of Family Farming aims to create a conducive environment that strengthens their position, and maximizes their contributions to global food security and nutrition, and a healthy, resilient and sustainable future.

The Global Action Plan provides detailed guidance for the international community on collective and coherent actions that can be taken during 2019-2028.

It highlights the need to increase, among other things, family farmers’ access to social protection systems, finance, markets, training and income-generating opportunities.

“We don’t have only the problem of hunger, which is on this rise, but also the problem of growing obesity. We need to pay attention to obesity. We know what we have to do to combat hunger, but not enough about combating obesity. Family farmers are the ones who produce local, fresh food, and produce food in a sustainable way. This is their contribution,” said José Graziano da Silva, FAO Director-General at the launch of the Decade in Rome.

“To meet the Sustainable Development Goals of zero hunger and no poverty, we must invest in the world’s small-scale family farmers and help them leverage their assets, knowledge and energy, and empower them to transform their lives and communities,” said Gilbert F. Houngbo, IFAD President. “The choices we make now will determine whether our future food systems are healthy, nutritious, inclusive, resilient and sustainable.”

And in letter read out at the launch, Pope Francis said: “The employment of young people in agriculture, in addition to combatting unemployment, can bring new energies to a sector that is proving to be of strategic importance to the national interests of many countries. The goals of the 2030 Agenda cannot ignore the contribution of young people and their capacity for innovation.”

Family farmers are important drivers of sustainable development

Family farming encompasses the production of all food – be that plant-based, meat, including fish, other animal products such as eggs or dairy, and food grown on agricultural lands, in forests, in the mountains, or on fish farms – that is managed and operated by a family, and is predominantly reliant on the family labour of both women and men.

Family farmers provide healthy, diversified and culturally appropriate foods, and grow most of the food in both developing and developed countries.

They generate on- and off-farm employment opportunities, and help rural economies grow.

They preserve and restore biodiversity and ecosystems, and use production methods that can help reduce or avert the risks of climate change.

They ensure the succession of knowledge and tradition from generation to generation, and promote social equity and community well-being.

The Global Action Plan for the Decade of family Farming

Although family farmers produce most of our food they – paradoxically – face poverty, especially in developing countries.

They face challenges because they lack access to resources and services to support their food production and marketing; because their infrastructure is poor; because their voices go unheard in political processes; and because the environmental and climatic conditions on which they rely are under threat.

In general, women farmers face greater constraints. Rural youth are also highly vulnerable due to a lack of incentives for on-and off-farm employment opportunities.

The Global Action Plan of the Decade of Family Farming is a guide to develop policies, programs and regulations to support family farmers, putting forward collective and coherent actions that can be taken during the next ten years.

It details specific activities to address interconnected challenges, and target a range of actors – governments, United Nations agencies, international financial institutions, regional bodies, farmers and producer organizations, academic and research institutes, civil society organizations and the private sector, including small and medium enterprises.

Actions include:

Developing and implementing an enabling policy environment (including comprehensive and coherent policies, investments and institutional frameworks) that support family farming at local, national and international levels;

Supporting rural youth and women by enabling them to access productive assets, natural resources, information, education, markets, and participate in policy making processes;

Strengthening family farmers’ organizations and their capacities to generate knowledgeand link locally specific (traditional) knowledge with new solutions;

Improving family farmers’ livelihoods and enhancing their resilience to multiple hazards though access to basic social and economic services, as well as facilitating and promoting production diversification to reduce risks and increase economic returns;

Promoting sustainability of family farming for climate-resilient food systems, and their access, responsible management and use of land, water and other natural resources.

Facts and figures on family farming:

More than 80 percent of all farms globally are below two hectares.

Family farms occupy around 70-80 percent of farmland and produce more than 80 percent of the world’s food in value terms.

Women perform nearly 50 percent of farm labor but hold only 15 percent of farm land.

90 percent of fishers are small-scale operators, which account for half of the capture fisheries production in developing countries.

Up to 500 million pastoralists rely on livestock rearing to make a living.

Mountain farming is largely family farming.

Family farmers include forest communities. Around 40 percent of the extreme rural poor live in forest and savannah areas.

Traditional indigenous territories encompass up to 22 percent of the world’s land surface and coincide with areas that hold 80 percent of the planet’s biodiversity.

Lorenzo P. Espacio
Program Manager, Legal, Policy and Advocacy Development
Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA) Room 207, Partnership Center, 59 C. Salvador St., Quezon City, the Philippines

The National Citizens’ Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL) calls on the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to heed President Rodrigo Roa Duterte’s advise to “dispose” of Smartmatic.

NAMFREL has taken note that the conduct of the automated elections since 2010 is not without the participation of Smartmatic, a foreign company. The conduct of Philippine elections, automated or not, should be left at the hands of Filipinos.

The President’s pronouncement opens up the opportunity to look for other election technologies. It should be noted, however, that Republic Act No. 9369 (RA9369) or the Automated Election Law prescribes that the automated election system “x x x must have demonstrated capability and been successfully used in a prior electoral exercise here or abroad.” This provision effectively prevents local systems developers from participating in the development and supply of an automated election system. RA9369 needs to be revisited and amended to open up opportunities for local technology providers to supply locally developed election solutions that protects the secrecy of the ballot and ensures transparency of the vote count.

NAMFREL has proposed going back to manual voting and counting. NAMFREL clarifies that it does not mean going back to the old manual vote counting process. The proposed process involves the following:

1) Manual voting using ballots with blank spaces per contest where the voter writes the names of this choices and the ballot to be dropped in a ballot box,

2) Computer assisted vote counting using laptops and LCD projectors to publicly display the progress of the vote tally, thereby doing away with the tally boards pasted on all four walls of school classrooms that served as voting precincts.

3) Electronic generation of the election return based on the computer assisted vote count followed by printing of the election returns. The contents of the printed copy of the election returns may be compared with its electronic counterpart displayed via LCD projector,

4) Electronic transmission of election returns to the corresponding city/municipal canvassing server, and

5) Automated canvassing and consolidation of election results through the ladderized canvassing hierarchy.

It is high time that the Philippines’ IT talents are harnessed for our elections. While our IT community works on the appropriate responsive technology, interested stakeholders should push for the law to be amended.

NAMFREL calls on election lawyers, IT experts, election reform organizations, and other interested groups to come together and work with the COMELEC to look for the appropriate responsive, election technology solution.