Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago filed Senate Bill 3483 which intends to penalize persons or entities encroaching on waterways like rivers and canals and who cause eventual flooding. The bill proposes a stiff penalty of some P50 million, as well as cancellation of the business and other permits of those violating the measure.

Among the issues she raised was that many of our waterways, especially in the cities, have disappeared due to uncontrolled encroachments by land and subdivision developers. Clearly, many of these subdivisions are located in areas which should have been marshes or spillways that could have absorbed excess water caused by heavy rains, storms and typhoons, cascading down mountains into streams and rivers and which these waterways guide its flow toward the sea.

I agree with Senator Santiago on this issue. Without doubt, we can attribute part of the recent calamity to unscrupulous businessmen who wantonly destroy our rivers and watersheds in pursuit of profit, and more wealth. This scenario is common nationwide where massive construction activities are being undertaken without regard for the ecological balance critical to our environment and the safety of the citizenry living in areas easily affected by floods and landslides.

For example, in Iloilo City, a giant broadcast conglomerate built its towering building over a creek right in the heart of the city. But nothing has been done about it by city authorities. The overflowing of the Laguna de Bay is likewise partly blamed on the mesh-like network of illegal fish pens proliferating in the lake. In the face of these blatant violations of our environmental laws, we are reminded that the Supreme Court recently ruled that the public-works department, the Metro Manila Development Authority and all local government units are under a continuing mandamus to clean Manila Bay and all other obstructions along our waterways. Even under RA 7279, the “Lina law” on squatters and relocation, obstructions along riverbanks are prohibited but, obviously, local officials have ignored the enforcement of this law for political reasons.

This Defensor measure and the Supreme Court’s continuing mandamus give local authorities more reasons, if the experience of the recent calamity is not enough, to properly implement the laws against degradation of the environment. Advocacy may give more than just lip service, but the penalty for violation as proposed by the Defensor measure will be more than enough persuasion to save your business, and your own skin.

****

The heist at a pricey watch store in Greenbelt 5 in Makati City is another illustration that there is an urgent need to strengthen laws against the illegal use of police and military uniforms as provided for under Article 179 of the Revised Penal Code. This bold daytime robbery was carried out by men wearing bomb- squad police uniforms and openly carrying high-powered firearms which easily misled the security guards of the mall. I believe the security personnel of Greenbelt were not alert or properly trained. Otherwise, they would have noticed that the fake “bomb-squad policemen” were carrying grenade launchers, which could have warned them of the fact that such heavy weaponry is incompatible with the mission of the group that was supposed to be looking for a bomb. Certainly, you don’t need a grenade launcher to look for and disarm a bomb. And besides, if there was a bomb threat, why was the building not evacuated?

My point here is that when I was still a congressman a few years ago, I filed a bill seeking to increase the penalty for the illegal use of police and military uniforms or insignias, especially when used to commit a crime. The bill failed to pass during my term and my son, Rep. Raul Gonzalez Jr., refiled that bill during his first term. He is now on his second term and he has still to see that bill reported out by the committee. Now we have criminals who went to town violating blatantly Article 179, as if daring the Senate committee to reconsider this particular bill. This is not the first time this happened. In fact this has been a modus operandi among robbers, hijackers, kidnappers, and other criminals.

Last Monday, in a morning TV- show interview, C/Supt. Conrado Laza, commander of Task Force Bantay Bihis of the Philippine National Police (PNP), expressed his support for the proposal to increase the penalty more severely in order to check this modus operandi so effectively used by criminals. Increasing the penalty for violation of Article 179 will, hopefully, deter criminals from employing the same evil plan in the future, and hopefully make them easily recognizable. We have to respond to this challenge and act decisively. And the time to act is now.

****

Speaking of the police, a few days ago I read an article written by one of the known columnists of a leading daily who was complaining about police harassment. He described in detail how a group of policemen chased his car and accosted him close to his residence in a plush subdivision, and who tried to interrogate him, but he refused to cooperate. It was not mentioned whether this columnist filed a formal complaint with the PNP because I believe that this kind of deportment of police officers should not be tolerated. We must remember that such police posturing is what caused the citizens of this country to lose confidence in the police establishment. It is true that not all policemen are rotten, but some clearly need to be booted out of the service posthaste. Many, too, deserve our respect—those who honor their oath to serve the people faithfully and with dedication.

Just a week ago, Diego, my masseur, together with a friend, were walking along Quezon Boulevard near the corner of Recto Avenue in Quiapo, when policemen in plain clothes accosted them for no apparent reason at around 9:30 in the evening, and tried to take them to the precinct for “routine investigation.” Frantically, Diego called this writer and although I was in Iloilo City at the time, I was able to talk to the policeman who told me that it was “routine investigation” only. I asked him what prompted him to make this “routine investigation” when the two were merely walking to a jeepney stop in a well-lighted street. I advised the policeman not to make an abusive arrest of innocent people without incident, and if there was no reason to detain them, to release them right away. After five minutes, Diego informed me that they were released and were now on their way home. The question really is, what if I was not able to intercede for Diego and his friend? Would there have been a shakedown based on some trumped- up charges, or even a planting of evidence to justify an arrest which could have culminated in a “negotiation” for their eventual freedom?

I mention these two incidents which should be reason enough for the PNP hierarchy to look deeply into the activities of some policemen. The sense of machismo and supremacy of a police officer with a gun and a badge over the common man is sometimes a temptation to flex that ego for economic and often crooked reasons. And precisely such acts destroy what credibility the PNP has built under this administration’s leadership. But this enhanced image of the policeman will come to naught when these rotten apples are mixed in a basket with good ones.