TRUE to his campaign pledge to push the Freedom of Information (FOI) bill past the legislative mill, President Duterte even jumped the gun on lawmakers by issuing an executive order (EO) to this effect, but covering only the Executive branch of government. This was among his first official acts after assuming office on June 30.
Initial public approval of the EO soon turned to consternation, however, as it was soon revealed that it contained a total of 166 exceptions. This renders the EO on freedom of information practically useless, as the government would only release to public the information that it wants us to get.
Here’s what our Constitution says on this issue: “The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.”
The troublesome portion here is the part that says, “subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.”
Can we expect Congress to pass a bill that would allow citizens access to government documents that would expose the under-the-table deals, indiscretions or perhaps even outright criminal activities of some of its members?
A genuine FOI would be a powerful tool against graft and corruption, as it would expose the wrongdoing of leaders. But that could be asking for the impossible.
Sen. Grace Poe is tasked with pushing the FOI bill in the Senate. Last week, she said an ideal FOI should have five essential characteristics. First, it should have blanket coverage for all public information and that all official documents are assumed to be open to the public, unless expressly prohibited by the law. Second, it should have clearly defined exceptions. Third, it should create implementing mechanisms and agencies. Fourth, it should allow citizens access to actionable data, or data that is immediately usable or which can be used to intervene on an urgent concern. And fifth, it should impose a penalty on those who violate the law.
If the EO on freedom of information would be the template for what Congress would eventually pass, our worry is that it might contain even more exceptions than the 166 in the EO.
If that’s the case, we need an emasculated, feeble and toothless FOI like we need a hole in the head.
What do the Reds really want?
Definitely, it will not be smooth sailing in the resumed peace talks between the government and the communist rebels.
I’m worried about the outcome of the peace talks because of the latest statement of the chief negotiator of the National Democratic Front (NDF), Luis Jalandoni, regarding the status of the New People’s Army (NPA).
As quoted in a news report, here’s what he said: “It is essential for us that the integrity and unity of the NPA remain under the command of the Communist Party of the Philippines [CPP].” The NPA could “cooperate” with the military “in the service of the Filipino people…. We are firm on that. No disbandment, no disarmament because the NPA has been serving the people in so many ways.”
Jalandoni said negotiators could consider “different possibilities of integration” by NPA combatants into the military. He cited cases of “discrimination” against former Moro fighters absorbed by the military after the 1996 peace agreement with the Moro National Liberation Front.
My question is: What kind of a peace agreement would it be if the NPA would insist on keeping their weapons after a negotiated political settlement has been reached?
If the NPA will refuse to surrender their weapons to a third party after a comprehensive peace agreement, doesn’t that defeat the purpose of peace talks in the first place?
Another possible sticking point in the peace talks is the frequent mention by the NDF side that it wants a “coalition government” where presumably its top leaders would be given high government positions after a peace agreement has been reached.
President Duterte has dismissed outright the notion of a “coalition government” with the NDF, precisely because the rebels are not negotiating from a position of strength. In fact, the CPP/NPA/NDF forces are concentrated in only a few areas in the country and cannot claim a huge political mass base, nor armed strength on a par with those of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police, which can easily reach more than 320,000. The NPA? No more than 4,000 guerrilla fighters, according to military estimates.
Will the NDF insist that top communist leaders sit in the highest reaches of the bureaucracy as their reward in a “coalition government”?
If they will do that, I see the peace talks withering on the vine sooner than expected, even if they agree on social and economic, as well as political and constitutional, reforms.
E-mail: ernhil@yahoo.com.