Panaghoy

Homily at the Supreme Court

2012-01-16T22:24:00.001+08:00

I am here not because I am pro-Supreme Court. In fact I have my own deep misgivings towards the Supreme Court, such as the flip-flopping in the FASAP case, the non-action in the Dusit case, and the long wait on coco-levy case.

So I’m here not because I am ok with the Supreme Court.
I am here as a bishop because as a shepherd I have to serve all, to pray with and to pray for those who request my services. And I am requested to offer this mass here.

I am here as a Filipino. I am very concerned that we should have good governance in the country. Part of good governance in a democratic system is to have proper check and balance in the different branches of government. The independence of each branch is to be safeguarded. It is for this intention that we pray together. It is very unfortunate that the independence of the lower house is no longer there because of the pork barrel, not only in this administration but also in the last. We pray in this mass that the senate will be more independent. May this impeachment be not just a political exercise determined by political alliances but an exercise of searching for the truth, for what is right and just. We all owe this to our people. We pray too for the judiciary branch, not so much that it may win but that it may not be intimidated, but be courageous to fight for justice and its independence.

In our first reading we heard of Saul being rejected as king of Israel because he was not obedient to the Lord. He went around the will of God, even giving ritual as the reason. There is also danger in our government to go around what is right by using the technicalities of the law, and now, by succumbing to public pressure and media sensationalism.

Our gospel reading is a call to complete renewal, hindi patagpi-tagping solusyon. New wine needs new wineskins. This is precisely what we need. Our concern should not only to overcome this crisis or to win over this impeachment case. We should be concerned about a complete revamp of our ways. Yamang nasimulan na ang hangaring magbago, talagang buohin na natin. Let us all – in the legislative, in the executive and in the judiciary, be governed by conscience, by what is right and just for the good of our people, and not by technicalities of the law, by political alliances, by media pressure, and much, much less by the lure of money and power! May God help us all!

Bishop Broderick S. Pabillo
Jan 16, 2012

Letter of Appeal for the Calamity Victims of the Archdiocese of Cagayan de Oro and Diocese of Iligan

2011-12-29T16:02:00.000+08:00

Our dear Bishops, SAC Directors, Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

As we celebrate the coming of the Lord during this Advent season, we are challenged all the more to be in solidarity with the needy, to enkindle hope and to share God’s loving presence among us.

We find ourselves again in the middle of another tragic calamity in the eastern province of Agusan del Sur and northern Mindanao. Typhoon Washi (local name “Sendong”) made landfall on Friday evening causing severe flash floods on Friday night and early Saturday particularly in Cagayan de Oro City in Misamis Oriental and Iligan City in Lanao del Norte province.

As of today, December 19, 2011, 23 barangays in Cagayan de Oro are still flooded. The city still had no potable water. According to DSWD’s data, some 3,500 families are being assisted in 7 evacuation centers. The Red Cross reported that the death toll from the floods was now at 652 with 808 others missing.

In Iligan City, at least 24 villages are flooded according to NDRRMC report and more than 200 people are still missing. There are other affected communities in CARAGA region. The Diocese of Dumaguete is also asking for help for the 2nd District of Negros Oriental was declared under the state of calamity.
NASSA is working to complete the ground assessment in view of submitting the EA (Emergency Appeal) to Caritas Internationalis hopefully before Christmas. We can raise considerable amount given the scale of the calamity. But it may take some days. That's why we need to mobilize our local support to immediately respond.

This is a distress call to our network. We urgently solicit your support and contributions so we can help save lives and respond to the emergency needs of the calamity victims in eastern province of Agusan del Sur and northern Mindanao and in other dioceses as well.

For those who may wish to channel their donation to NASSA, you may send your check payable to CBCP Caritas Filipinas Foundation, Inc., and please deposit to Bank of the Philippine Island (BPI), Account Number: 4951-0071-08.

You can also deposit your donations directly to the Diocesan Social Action Centers, with the details below:

For the Archdiocese of Cagayan de Oro:
Bank Acct: Bank of the Philippine Island (BPI) - CDO
Acct. Name: Roman Catholic Archbishop of CDO Inc.
Acct. Number: 9330-001442
Contact Person: Fr. Nathan Lerio
Mobile Phone Number: 09177195626
Email: adextra_saccdo@yahoo.com.ph

For the Diocese of Iligan:
Bank: Philippine National Bank (PNB)
Acct. Name: Social Action Center
Acct. Number: 418290500013
Contact Person: Fr. Albert Mendez
Mobile Phone Number: 0918-7194847
Email: socialactioncenter2007@yahoo.com.ph

We continue praying for the affected individuals and families as we carry out our Christian duty to comfort and give hope to those who need it most.

In the service of the poor and the needy,

+BRODERICK S. PABILLO, D.D
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chairman of the CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Social Action – Justice and Peace
December 19, 2011

When will the killings stop?

2011-10-18T21:02:00.006+08:00

The Church has offered once again another precious life in its service to God’s people and the poor.

The CBCP-National Secretariat for Social Action, Justice and Peace expresses deep anguish and condemnation over the horrific murder of Fr. Fausto Tentorio. He was shot eight times by an assassin as he was getting into his pick-up truck parked at the Mother of Perpetual Help Church compound in Arakan, North Cotabato.

Fr. Pops was a staunch advocate against mining and other extractive operations that threaten the indigenous people. He had been an inspiration to his parishioners as wells as the lumads who have been opposing activities that are harmful to the environment.

We join Fr. Pops’ brothers at the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions (PIME), the Diocese of Kidapawan, and the hundreds of human rights activists that demand justice for our slain priest.

No peace workers and human rights defenders should ever live in fear or shed blood because of what they believe in and what they stand for.

Fr. Pops’ murder reveals a culture of impunity that has prevailed in our society because of the lack of protection and justice that our government affords to human rights defenders.

Beyond the usual expressions of “condolences” and “condemnation”, the government and state authorities have not really done anything that will reverse the trend of senseless killings in the country.

But the victims, their families and friends don’t need these futile words.

Rather, we desire to see these killings stop than be consoled by the platitudes they give in exchange of our grief.

+ BRODERICK S. PABILLO, D.D.
Director
National Secretariat for Social Action

People first before profit

2011-08-19T01:27:00.001+08:00

“The points raised by PALEA in its motion for reconsideration are mere rehash of those considered, discussed and ruled upon by the Secretary of Labor…” declared Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa as he endeavored to justify Malacanang’s approval of PAL’s plan to terminate and outsource approximately 2,600 employees.

Ochoa’s pronouncements dashed the hope of thousands of workers who had appealed to Malacanang to end the labor row by way of harmonizing the interests of both the workers and the PAL management. Instead, his statement suggests the government’s insensitivity to the predicament of the workers.

The repetitive points raised by PALEA, which failed to impress Malacanang, only reflect the apprehensions felt by its members in the face of impending job loss. They failed to recognize the fact that the “rehash” merely indicates PALEA’s persistence to appeal for the reversal of the flawed and unfair decision issued by former labor secretary Rosalinda Baldoz, and which Malacanang now sanctions. By calling the spinoff program a management prerogative, the government precariously confers license to contractualization and random termination that could set precedence to other violators of labor laws.

In the midst of this turmoil, the CBCP-National Secretariat for Social Action, Justice and Peace expresses solidarity with the members of PALEA, especially the 2,600 workers, who face unemployment. At the same time, we express grave disappointment over the government’s manifest partiality towards PAL, whose recent financial report belies claims of “massive losses”.

We believe that the outsourcing and spinoff program was conceived mainly to dismantle the union and abolish its collective bargaining powers. Such a move by the management is a poor recompense to the very same people who worked hard for nine years to pull PAL out of fiscal insolvency in 1998. We fail to grasp the extent of their thirst for profit especially in the wake of their anticipation to rake in P1.6B in annual revenues.

The government has done a grave disservice to the people. While it has responsibility to recognize the rights of employers to protect their business interest, it has equal responsibility to ensure that they do so within the bounds of labor law. Any action to the contrary already borders on political favors and unjust concessions.

The Church maintains its appeal for a just resolution of this case. Government decisions must be conducted within the prescriptions of labor’s primacy over capital – people first over profit. We continue praying that the government may finally find the wisdom to render pro-people decisions and provide opportunities for the workers and the management to work tirelessly for the common good.

In this we remind President Aquino’s promise to the people: Kayo ang Boss ko!

“Proclaim liberty to the captives… Set free the Oppressed”

2011-08-12T18:19:00.002+08:00

A Statement of Concern on the Plight of Political Prisoners in the Country

Nearly three weeks ago, July 25, hundreds of political detainees around the country began a synchronized hunger strike to protest the government’s inadequate agenda on human rights protection and its seeming disregard of the conditions of political prisoners.

Since the early ‘80s, more than 300 political prisoners have been languishing in prison cells throughout the country without explicit assurance of judicial remedy or executive clemency. Some of whom have already died or gotten ill in custody as a direct result of the government’s inability to provide for their medical treatment. The circumstances of neglect and eventual demise of some of these prisoners qualify as violations against human dignity and protection.

The National Secretariat for Social Action – Justice and Peace expresses deep concern over the condition of the political detainees, especially those on hunger strike. Three weeks without food will have surely and rapidly deteriorated their conditions. We wish to solicit the immediate action of the government to prevent unnecessary deaths.

We also denounce the underhanded conduct of law enforcement agencies that oftentimes criminalize the legitimate struggle of some groups and individuals.

We call on the judiciary to expedite the process of review of the detainees’ cases and grant the immediate and unconditional release of those whose arrests are deemed to be politically-motivated.

President Aquino abstractedly speaks about improvements in human rights situation in the country. The call for a clear human rights framework by the political detainees is a judicious opportunity for him to demonstrate his sincerity to uphold peace and national reconciliation.

We appeal to the President to grant executive clemency on political detainees who have already served long and completely unjust sentences. May he accede to the humanitarian character of this appeal and make progress towards the full respect of human rights in the Philippines.

Meanwhile, we express solidarity to the struggle of our political prisoners. We wish to assure them that the Church, as it has always done so in the past, will always defend human rights and the sacredness of life as stated in the Gospel.

+ BRODERICK S. PABILLO

“STOLEN LAND”

2011-06-13T15:05:00.003+08:00

CBCP-NASSA’s Statement on Hacienda Luisita

"The joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the men of this age, especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted, these too are the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the followers of Christ." --(Opening line of The Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes, of VC II).

The CBCP-National Secretariat for Social Action, Justice and Peace (CBCP-NASSA JP), lobbying for the proper implementation of agrarian reform, expresses solidarity with the landless farmers and farm workers of Hacienda Luisita.

In exercising our prophetic ministry, we pursue the calls (1) to revoke the stock distribution option (SDO) - a scheme that runs contrary to the spirit of the Constitution, and (2) to lift the TRO on the compulsory acquisition of Hacienda Luisita.

Cries for justice reach the ears of the Lord; we are one with our small farmers. NASSA recognizes that the most fundamental pillar of agrarian reform is the enforcement of the “land to the tiller principle”. Land distribution, with sufficient support services, holds promise as a means to stem rural poverty and the wave of rural-urban migration. History shows that the redistribution of land to landless and poor farmers can be a very effective way to improve rural welfare. Thus, it is disappointing to note that the Cojuangcos have managed to evade agrarian reform for more than five decades, even as the legitimate beneficiaries of the land continue to live in grinding, abject poverty.

On behalf of our small farmers, we appeal for truth, equity, dignity and justice. The SDO not only allowed the HLI to retain its ownership of the land but also “legitimized” the giving out of paltry shares of stocks to the farmers. NASSA’s opposition to SDO is grounded on the social teachings of the Church, which explicitly condemn exploitation of human labor, especially when rewarded with wages or other forms of payment that are unworthy of human dignity, such as in the case of the farmers in Hacienda Luisita.

We rely on the integrity of the Supreme Court to exercise its intrinsic political independence and resolve the case according to the spirit of distributive justice of the Constitution. The High Court, we are certain, knows full well the fact that political “issues” impede the implementation of agrarian reform. Hence, we call on the Supreme Court to facilitate the birth of institutional reforms capable of activating all factors that

will seriously implement agrarian reform. This is best done through the speedy dispensation justice that is devoid of political color and solely based on the merits of the case.

We call on the government to activate an efficient agrarian reform program which is respectful of the people’s needs for justice and answers in an adequate way their needs for integral development. Both former President Cory Aquino and President Benigno Aquino III promised the distribution of the land during their election campaigns. But now, PNoy is taking a hands-off stance on the issue on the account of his owning only “insignificant” share in the HLI. If the so-called compromise agreements hold out, the farmers will end up, after five decades without land, without jobs and in deep poverty, with only 1,400 hectares out of the original 6,443, while the Cojuangcos get to keep 4,227 hectares (about 800 hectares having been sold or used by HLI). This, certainly, is not what agrarian justice is about.

As president of the people, PNoy can no longer stay neutral on this issue. We call upon him to intervene on the side of the farmers. Whatever decision he arrives at will have huge moral and political implications particularly on the current peace process with National Democratic Front (NDF) in which agrarian reform is a central issue, and on the poor’s reception of his affirmations that he is for the poor. As President, he “swore to preserve and defend (the) Constitution and execute its laws.” The Constitution categorically states that the farmers should get the land based on their “right to own directly or collectively the lands they till.”

The resolution of the Hacienda Luisita case is a test of the administration’s political will. It will send a strong signal for the successful, or failed, implementation of agrarian reform. The administration will have moral high ground in distributing the remaining 1 million hectares of agricultural lands if the President’s own landholding will be given back to its rightful beneficiaries.

Finally, we recognize the important role of the civil societies and lay faithful in the promotion and delivery of social justice. We call on the people to support the farmers and take up their campaign against SDO and the lifting of the TRO on compulsory acquisition of Hacienda Luista. We bid everyone to recognize the divine presence in each other, particularly in those who are without "voices or choices" in their lives. We continue to pray that there will be peaceful resolution to the issue of Hacienda Luisita and that the farmer may finally be able to enjoy the fruits of the land. Let us face the future bound together by the faith, hope and charity that is our legacy as children of God.

For the Social Action Network,

BRODERICK S. PABILLO, D.D.
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
National Director of CBCP-NASSA
June 11, 2011

CARP 23rd anniversary

2011-06-10T21:30:00.000+08:00

Today CARP (Comprehensive Land Reform Program) celebrates its 23rd anniversary. I celebrated mass outside of the DAR office this afternoon. We were only a handful – some 40 persons, but the variety of the groups present well made up for the small number. There were people from DAR (Department of Agrarian Reform), farmers from Pampanga, Tarlac, Aurora, Quezon and southern Tagalog. There was a group of Aetas from Porac. Present too were workers from many support NGOs, seminarians, a religious sister, two priests and some media people. All were gathered, decrying the slow implementation of Land Reform in the country, yet hoping that with enough mix of goodwill and political will many more will benefit from this asset reform. CARP is not a failure. Many have benefited from it but its implementation has much to be desired due to corruption, political maneuverings of landed political families and the greed of big business. It is sad though that there is not enough support from the public at present for the proper implementation of this program, which has still 3 years of life with the passage of the CARPER (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program with Extension and Reform) two years ago.

Our main concern this afternoon was the Hacienda Luisita case. It has been in the Supreme Court since 2005. It had been decided both by the DAR and the PARC (Presidential Agrarian Reform Council) that the stock distribution option of the Hacienda Luisita was a failure and the land should be physically subdivided to the farmer beneficiaries according to the real intention of CARP. However at the behest of the Cojuangcos the Supreme Court issued a TRO (Temporary Restraining Order). All this time, for almost 6 years, more than 10,000 farmers suffer want and even hunger while the Conjuancos continue to benefit from the land. And the Supreme Court is taking its sweet time with the TRO! There is talk that it will issue its decision – at last! But will the decision be for justice for the poor or be a political concession in legal jargon for the powers that be? The resolution of the Hacienda Luisita case will give the tenor on the seriousness of the government, the whole government mechanism, to fulfill the mandate of CARP or not. Agrarian reform had been the centerpiece of the program of the late President Cory – and the Hacienda Luisita has been a glaring taint on her seriousness to implement this centerpiece program. Will Hacienda Luisita continue to taint the seriousness of PNOY to serve the poor? This we are eager to see!!!

We prayed in the mass this afternoon that the Supreme Court will uphold its integrity and not compromise itself and offer the poor as collateral damage in the political games being played!

STATEMENT ON THE EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLING, HARASSMENT, LAND GRABBING, AND OTHER RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN CASIGURAN, AURORA

2011-06-10T16:07:00.000+08:00

With local Church of the Apostolic Vicariate of Infanta, we in the National Secretariat for Social Action (NASSA), strongly condemn the murder of one of our advocates for indigenous peoples’ rights in Casiguran, Aurora. Armando Maximino, Chieftain of the Agtas in Sitio Delebsong, Barangay Nipoo was shot dead last May 17.

The suspected perpetrators belonged to the security personnel enlisted by the contesting party that falsely claims ownership of the ancestral domain, even with the reported knowledge of the city mayor, local police, and other officials. Denied burial at his property among departed kin, Armando was instead laid to rest at the site where he took not one but several bullets.
When the Agtas briefly left their vigil at the grave, they returned to find six of their houses burned. Previously, barbed-wire fences were installed around their property by the suspects. When they questioned the move, five members of their tribe were arrested, with some women wounded from the resulting scuffle, but eventually released because there were no grounds to file charges against them.

Despite longstanding and rightful ownership of 49 hectares of the disputed land, supported by official documents and upheld by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), Armando, members of his family and community, have endured threats, harassment, and outright violence. Against powerful enemies, the Agtas have retreated out of fear and left the area.

The Church, in its prophetic ministry of promoting social justice, stands in solidarity with the indigenous people’s in their struggle for their rightful claim for the land. We condemn the senseless killing of the Agta Chieftain, Armando Maximino, and the continuing suppression to silence the protest of the community against the impending development aggression.

We enjoin all Filipinos to do the same and demand the impartial and comprehensive investigation of the incident, and its swift and just resolution.

We appeal to President Benigno Aquino III and concerned government agencies to uphold our laws on indigenous peoples’ rights and agrarian reform, in order to safeguard the welfare of our local communities, as well as the fundamental freedoms violated by Armando’s adversaries.

His death exemplifies a recurring cautionary tale, when equal access to resources and justice by vulnerable sectors is continually denied. It underscores the need to address the absence of truly participatory and people-centered development programs, in order to bridge the social, political, and economic divide that bring about conflict in areas like Aurora.

And in fulfillment of our mission we believe that “before today’s forms of exploitation of the poor, the Church cannot remain silent . . . she condemns many injustices which unfortunately, even today are committed to the detriment of the poor” (Pope Jouh Paul II, quoted in PCP II, Acts No. 131).

† BRODERICK S. PABILLO, D.D
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chairman of the CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Social Action – Justice and Peace
9 May 2011

Do we need this RH Bill HB 4244?

2011-05-24T18:29:00.000+08:00

THE Philippine Constitution states:
“The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the government”. (Sec 12, Art II)
“The State shall defend the right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions and the demands of responsible parenthood”. (Sec 3(1) Art XV)
The State shall defend “the right of families or family associations to participate in the planning and implementation of policies and programs that affect them.” (Sec 3 Art XV)

1. Due commendation is to be given to the authors of the bill 4244 when they made several amendments to it on March 15, 2011. The amendments take away some of its objectionable features. The amendments are:
a. The wording on Sec 13 asking the barangay health workers and volunteers to “be capacitated to give priority to family planning work” was changed. The phrase “give priority to family planning work” is deleted. Barangay health workers are not there to prioritize reproductive health. There are so many health issues to be addressed, and very grave and basic ones too, in our barangays.
b. In Sec 15 the Mobile Health Care Service that each congressional district are mandated to have will no longer be funded from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), popularly known as the Pork Barrel, but instead “the procurement and operation of which shall be funded by the National Government”. This may be a way to get the support of some congress men and women who do not want their Pork Barrel to be reduced. This is more of a political ploy.
c. The controversial Sec 16 which deals with sex education entitled: “Mandatory age-appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education” has been diluted with the addition of another paragraph which reads: “Parents shall exercise the option of not allowing their minor children to attend classes pertaining to reproductive health and sexuality education.” This may be a concession but how many parents will exercise this option, and whether their option will be respected in our public schools.
d. Sec 20 on the “Ideal Family Size” has been totally deleted, and rightly so. While this section recognized the rights of parents on how many children they may have, still it is suggested that two children is the ideal. A law, if it is a law, is mandatory and not exhortatory.
e. Sec 21 on “Employers’ Responsibilities” has been entirely deleted on the reason that “this provision is a restatement and amplification of the existing Art 134 of the Labor Code.”
f. Another contentious section is on the Prohibited Acts, Sec 28 (e). One of the prohibited acts is “any person who maliciously engages in the disinformation about the intent and provisions of this act.” This infringes on the freedom of expression. This part is deleted.

2. With these amendments, can we say that the bill 4244 is now acceptable? I say no! The some basic objectionable elements are still there.

3. Reproductive Health is now seen by its international promoters as including the control of population, the provision of abortion, the promotion of contraception (including agents and methods known to be abortifacient), promotion of a particular form of sexuality education, and the promotion of an ethic with regard to sexuality that separates it from life and self-giving love. Though the present bill says that it does not promote abortion yet it cannot detached itself from the ideology espoused by the language of reproductive health. The elements of the reproductive health ideology are in the present bill.

4. There is no mention of the sexual act. Mention is made of pregnancies and HIV and STI, which are results of sexual actions. The bill wants to prevent the results but do not attack the root. Results are to be controlled but not the sexual actions. In a way it brings the message: any sexual activity is alright, just prevent its undesirable consequences, which are sexuality transmitted deceases and pregnancy!

5. There is no mention of the value of life of the unborn, the value of family, and the value of the sexual act. However, by promoting contraception devices a value is being subtly put forward without even mentioning it: one can engage in sex as long as one does not get unwanted pregnancy or one does not get sick. In truth if one does not want to get unwanted pregnant and sexual disease the solution that is and without cost and complication is to abstain from any inappropriate sexual behavior. But proper sexual values are not promoted. There is even no mention of abstinence and fidelity in marriage in the bill.

6. There are many provisions that say that devices, commodities, and supplies are to be promoted, made available and provided. This already shows the bias towards artificial family planning methods which would have need of these supplies. Money is to be given for these supplies and commodities to make them available while no mention of money being spent on teaching people, which natural planning methods require. The mention of the natural family planning is just a palliative in the bill with no real intention of promoting it. Instead there is great intent to promote the “devices”.

7. Sec. 10 entitled “Family Planning Supplies as Essential Medicines” is totally unacceptable! Medicines are for the sick. What sickness do “Family Planning Supplies” cure? These supplies are surely contraceptive pills, IUDs and condoms. Except in particular cases contraceptives do not treat any medical condition. On the contrary they are used upon perfectly healthy women to restrict a natural function. The government cannot even procure real basic medicines as paracetamols, anti-biotics and other basic medicines, and we will stretch out our meager resources to buy commodities that can be done away with with enough information and responsible self-control. By labeling these agents as essential medicines, the bill promotes inaccuracy. They place matters within the province of choice alongside those which are largely outside of it. That is to say, healthy people can choose whether to use contraceptives or not, unhealthy peoples’ choices are seriously limited and their need for genuinely essential medicines is realistic and warranted.

8. The money to be spent to provide for this “essential medicine” will be taxpayers’ money. Most of the taxpayers are Catholics in this country and their money will be spent on something that they believe to be wrong and immoral. (Will you allow your money to be used to buy condoms and pills to be given to the people?) Let the people who believe in the good of these devices provide them freely to others. No one is hindering them from doing it. They have freedom of choice. These devices are already available in the market in the first place. If the government wants to help the poor let it give them the basic necessities: light, water, truly basic medicine, free hospitalization, basic education, and the like.

9. The basic presupposition of this bill is that the number of children and consequently the number of population is a hindrance to sustainable development. This has already been debunked by many studies. This fallacy is so prevailing that great responsibility to execute this bill, if it becomes a law, is given to the Commission on Population both in the LGU and the national level. For the authors of this bill reproductive health is an issue of population and not of health. All the talks about “reproduction” and “health” are misnomers or may even be an intent to deceive. Yes, it is true that the PopCom is under DOH, but why should it be? Is population a disease?

10. It is known in the medical field that the artificial planning devices that are in use are not 100% sure both in protecting oneself from STI and “protecting” oneself from pregnancy. This makes the idea of “protection” dangerous. With the confidence given by this “protection” as advertised by the proponents, people will engage more, and not less, in inappropriate sexual activities. With more frequent sexual activities the effectivity of their “protection” lowers down. They put themselves all the more at risk.

11. The artificial devices also have medical side-effects and are shown to lead to certain diseases, such as cancer, high blood and cardiovascular diseases. Naturally so! One is putting something in the body that should not be there! There is no mention in the bill that the women who are victims of these devices will be provided with free health care afterwards. The bill claims to champion the health of women but in truth and in the long run it does harm to them. Besides, with the claim of men that they are now “protected” they will easily deal with the women as objects to be used and not as persons to be respected.

12. Other countries have the reproductive health services in place for many years already but they still have the problems that our law makers claim will be solved by this bill:
a. Even more abortions. In fact they have to legalize abortion in these countries. In international circles abortion is part of the reproductive right! Either the promoters of HB 4244 are naïve or they are cunningly deceptive when they say that they are not for abortion. All those who promote contraception end up upholding abortion, if they are consistent with their position of contra-ception!
b. Even more teen-age pregnancies, so more unwanted pregnancies. This is the result of more promiscuity and less respect which stems from the ideology of contraception. By the way, there is no mention the word ‘contraception’ in the bill but its ideology is all over in the language of ‘Reproductive Health’.
c. Their poor people are not improved by the availability of these devices. The poor do not get a better chance in life even if they have fewer children if basic services are not given to them and if the perspective of governance is pro-foreign investment rather than harnessing local resources, pro-investor rather than pro-labor, increased GDP rather than equity.

13. There is the concern that many people die because of unwanted pregnancies. Many of these devices, IUDs and Pills among them, are contraceptives and abortifacients. They really kill the life that is already there. The bill and the contraceptive mentality behind it do not recognize the equal dignity of life of all—preferring that of the woman than that of the child that she had engendered. It is killing the ones who are innocent and defenseless. No wonder insensitivity to life in contraception eventually leads to abortion.

14. In is noteworthy that the bill speaks both of the youth and the adolescent. It defines who the adolescent is but not who the youth is. It really targets the adolescent, both for its sex education and for the services of its “devices.”

15. There are several good provisions in the bill. Among them are Sec 5 “Midwives for skilled attendance” and Sec 6 “Emergency Obstetric and Neonatal Care”. Both demand that there beenough personnel and hospital facilities to address maternal care. Both end with this sentence: “Provided that people in geographically isolated and depressed areas shall be provided the same level of access.” Beautiful words, but will the government do this? The bill does not provide where the money shall come from for these services, and this is indeed a very basic need which can really address a lot of deaths and sufferings among women and children. Are these then just dressings to the real intent of the bill, not to really help the poor and the women but to put forward the contraceptive mentality?

Calling evil good

2011-02-11T22:40:00.001+08:00

IN the headline of Philippine Daily Inquirer last February 10, retired Philippine Navy chief Mateo Mayuga was quoted as saying that Angelo Reyes’ act of taking his life by shooting himself in the chest showed “extreme courage” and that it was an honorable thing to do.

I am not a military man so most probably I do not understand what exactly are the ‘extreme act of courage’ and the ‘honorable thing’ in taking one’s life. In plain language that is suicide, and every act of suicide is wrong. I do not and cannot judge the state of mind of General Angelo Reyes when he committed suicide. In this, he renders personal account with his Creator. What I am referring to is the act itself of taking one’s life. Yes, we condole with the family, the loved ones and friends of General Reyes. I personally felt extreme sadness at his action and prayed for his soul. But sympathizing with him should not induce us to saying what he did was right. Let us not send a wrong message to the people, especially the young, that suicide is alright. No, it is all wrong! Whatever troubles we find in life, we should be brave enough to face them. We are not owners even of our lives. We are but stewards. Taking one’s life is an act of escapism. It does not even serve the country in this case. The country, especially the foot soldiers who are struggling it out on the ground, need to know how the military spends its moneys. I hope that this very unfortunate and sad end of General Angelo Reyes will not make the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Ombudsman and the Aquino Administration soften its commitment to root out corruption in our country. The corrupt people in government do not care at all at the grave sufferings they inflict on the nation and on the nameless people who are deprived of what is rightfully theirs. Let us not also be soft in the quest to right this wrong!

The Sacred Book warns us: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil, who change darkness into light, and light into darkness” (Isaiah 5,20)

+MOST REV. BRODERICK S. PABILLO
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chair, Episcopal Commission on Social Action, Justice and Peace

A Call to Conversion for the Philippine Church

2011-01-26T22:42:00.002+08:00

THERE are many dramatic conversions in church history, like the conversion of St. Augustine, that of St. Francis of Assissi, of St. Ignatius of Loyola, of St. Camilo de Lelis. These conversion stories have great impacts in Church History, but none is as dramatic and as far-reaching for the life of the Church than that of St. Paul. The 14 letters of the New Testament that are attributed to him attest to this, 14 out of 21 letters, 14 out of 27 books of the New Testament! Not only the sheer number of the writings of Paul, but also the themes that they deal with show his greatness. They deal with important themes of the Bible like, how we are made acceptable to God or the question of justification, the role of the Holy Spirit in Christian life, the Church as the body of Christ, baptism as participation in the life of God, Christian and Jewish relations, Christian worship, the importance of faith and love, just to name a few. What would our New Testament be without Paul? The significance of Paul is also highlighted by the fact that his writings are the earliest written witnesses to the Lord Jesus and the situation of the early church among the New Testament writings. The first 10 years when New Testament writings came, years 50 to 60 AD, all have the genuine letters of Paul—Thessalonians, Romans, Corinthians, Philippians, Philemon. Yes, Paul has a unique importance in the New Testament, and consequently, a great impact on our Christian faith. This is why the whole Church celebrates his conversion as a great feast.

We have to accept that Paul deserve his fame for he did exert great sacrifices in carrying out his mission. Yet, Paul’s place in the history of salvation is set by God. It was God’s choice. When Ananias complained that this Saul to whom he was asked by the Lord to anoint was a known persecutor of those who follow Jesus, he was told "Go, for this man is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before Gentiles, kings, and Israelites.” (Acts 9, 15) Paul’s conversion, and subsequently, his mission, was grace, and he recognized this. Thus he wrote to the Corinthians: “Last of all, as to one born abnormally, Jesus appeared to me. For I am the least of the apostles, not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me has not been ineffective. Indeed, I have toiled harder than all of them; not I, however, but the grace of God (that is) with me.” ( 1 Cor 15, 8-10)
Paul’s conversion is grace, as all conversions are. This is why the sacrament of reconciliation is called in popular parlance as confession, not so much though as a telling of sins, but as a confession, a proclamation, of the Lord’s goodness to give us the grace of conversion. We go to this sacrament because we are already graced with conversion. What is admirable in Paul is that, as he wrote, “By the grace of God I am what I am, and this grace to me has not been ineffective. I have toiled all the harder!” He really fulfilled the great mandate of the Lord after the resurrection to go out to all the world and to proclaim the good news to all creation.

We see the conversion of Paul not just as a turning away from persecuting the Christians, but the start of his mission to preach Christ to all. So he came to Damascus no longer as a persecutor but as a proclaimer of the faith. Once he came to know Jesus, nothing could stop him from announcing him.

Pope Benedict XVI in his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini, wrote: “In no way can the Church restrict her pastoral work to the ‘ordinary maintenance’ of those who already know the Gospel of Christ. Missionary outreach is a clear sign of the maturity of an ecclesial community… The Church must continue her prophetic defense of people’s right and freedom to hear the word of God, while constantly seeking out the most effective ways of proclaiming that word, even at the risk of persecution. The Church feels duty-bound to proclaim to every man and woman the word that saves.” (VD 95)

In our context here in the Philippines, let us aim our sight at 2021, 10 years from now. In 2021 we will celebrate the 500th anniversary of the coming of the Christian faith in our shores. What can we present to the universal Church after 500 years of our Christianity? Should we still remain a receiving Church? We are still dependent on foreign aid for our apostolic programs. If we examine the amount of money the Philippines receives from Propaganda Fide, with the amount we are giving to it, we are indeed a receiving Church. Our Alay Kapwa, the Lenten program of the Philippine Church pales in comparison to the Lenten program of Germany, of small Switzerland, and even of not so Catholic Australia. They have more vigorous Lenten programs that enable them to help our country, while we, with our more than 80 million Catholics, we cannot even answer the calamity calls of our own people from our Alay Kapwa. On the average, 0.017 centavos is donated by every Catholic Filipino to the Alay Kapwa, our nationally endorsed Lenten campaign program!

But let us not just look at our finances whether we are still a receiving church or a giving church. What about our missionary outreach? We can readily point out to our 10 million OFWs who gain the praise of many bishops in other lands since they fill up their Churches. But this is not a program of our Philippine church. This is a phenomenon that we as church did not and do no intend and, sad so say, not even support. We do not have, as church, any vigorous, coordinated effort to be a missionary church, not even just to accompany our OFW Catholics. The Episcopal Commission on Migrants and Itinerant Peoples and a few religious congregations are left to fend for themselves to answer this great need.

In Verbum Domini Pope Benedict tells us: “Following the example of the great Apostle to the nations, who changed the course of his life after hearing the voice of the Lord, let us too hear God’s word as it speaks to us, ever personally, here and now.” (VD 122) We cannot afford to just continue what we are doing now. We have to provide leadership to the whole Philippine Church in these 10 coming years so that 2021 can find us more of a giving than a receiving Church, a more mature ecclesial community, that is.

How are we to prepare to 2021? I do not aim to pre-empt our forthcoming discussions in the plenary sessions, if we ever talk about this. My humble take on this is not to discuss again what we have to do, but to simply seriously put into practice PCP II. This year is PCP II’s 20th anniversary. It was meant to help us be a more integrally evangelized nation by the turn of the new millennium. The new millennium has come and we are now 10 years into it, yet when I read PCP II again a month ago, it is as if I was reading a document written this year. Most of the things have not changed. What have we done in these 20 years? Many of us believe that PCP II was Spirit-led. It shows us the right path to take. But have we taken it seriously?

Allow me to point out just a few of the decrees to show how far-reaching the council was and how we have not serious acted on it:

Very few maverick people spoke of climate change and care of environment back in 1991, but article 31 states:

“The Church, through the initiatives of the CBCP, should develop a comprehensive theology of stewardship and, in the light of this theology, should make ecology a special concern of the social action apostolate down to the parochial level, with the end in view of making everyone a true steward of God’s creation.”

We are saddled with the Reproductive Health issue now. We should have not been if in these 20 years we have acted on Art 29:

“The Church, faithful to her teachings, should call on the responsibility of all concerned to help present the notion of responsible Christian parenthood as contained in Gaudium et Spes, Humanae Vitae and Familiaris Consortio. In this sense, a broader, more decisive and more systematic effort should be undertaken to make the natural methods of regulating fertility known, respected and applied.”
Presently our response to the RH issue is to lobby not to allow the bill to be passed but, I wonder how many of our dioceses have serious programs to promote natural family planning methods? Art 115 section 6 states:

“Tithing, after a good pastoral catechesis, shall be introduced with the end in view of the gradual abolition of the Arancel System.”

I wonder how many dioceses have moved away from the Arancel System since 1991? Art 25 #3 mandates:

“As an urgent solution to the problem of poverty in the country, and following the example of the early Church, all dioceses and parishes must set aside a collection or fund specifically for the poor and needy to be disposed of without red tape.”

Is helping the poor part of our diocesan and parochial budget, or does it come only as an afterthought when calamities strike, and so we resort to appealing to the people because the Church of the people has no funds for it?

I just gleaned through 4 articles to illustrate that PCP II as a document is still valid. We just need to seriously execute it. And if we do, we will be a renewed Church, self-sustained and missionary, able to engage the world in spreading the faith by 2021.

As Church we need a conversion similar to that of Paul. We need to be thrown to the ground, blinded by searing light of the Word of God. Let us pray for this grace, since every conversion is a grace. But in a way, we are already graced by PCP II. Let us work all the harder then, so that the grace may not be in vain, pushing forward, not minding what is past and be lost in finger pointing, not running aimlessly, not wasting our punches in shadowboxing, but running in order to attain the prize of victory.

(This is a homily delivered January 25, 2011, feast of the conversion of St. Paul, by Bishop Broderick Pabillo, Auxiliary bishop of Manila and Chair of the Episcopal Commission on Social Action, Justice and Peace, to the bishops who were gathered at the Pope Pius XII Catholic Center in Manila in preparation for the January 2011 Plenary Assembly)

Bishop Pabillo's homily at the Solidarity Mass for hostage victims

2010-09-01T11:46:00.002+08:00

1 Cor 2, 10-16 Luke 4, 31-37
August 31, 2010, 8AM
Quirino Grandstand

IN the well-loved song THE PRAYER popularized by Josh Groban, we have this line, sang in Italian and not translated at all in English. It runs thus: Sogniamo un mondo senza piu’ violenza, un mondo di justitia e di speranza, ognuno viva con il suo vicino, symbolo di pace, di fraternita’. Yes, we dream of a world without any violence, a world of justice and of hope, each one living with his neighbor—a sign of peace and of fraternity! This indeed is the world that we dream precisely in this place where violence and senseless carnage took place 9 days ago. In front of this very bad event seen all over the world as the tragic drama unfolded before the eyes of cameras for 11 hours, we dream all the more of a world without violence, a world of justice and hope. We hold on to this dream. This is why we are gathered here today. We do not want our dream to be blown away by that nightmare!

Is this dream a make-believe? No. Our gathering in prayer, in solidarity and in fraternity – from different walks of life, different ethnic groups and even different faiths, shout together: No! our dream is not a make-believe. It is real, and its reality is not based on human possibilities but on our faith in God who is beyond our human wickedness and weakness. We affirm with the Scriptures: where sin increase, grace increase all the more! Our hope then is borne by our faith. The song THE PRAYER makes this appeal to God: Lead us to a place, with your grace, give us faith so we’ll be safe. The phrase is very touching: GIVE US FAITH SO WE’LL BE SAFE! It does not say, give us arms, so we’ll be safe; nor, give us security gadgets so we’ll be safe. It says, give us faith, so we’ll be safe. Yes, faith in a God who loves us, in a God who cares for us.

It is difficult to believe in a God who loves in moments like this. This is why we look at Jesus on the cross. On the cross—expression of human senseless cruelty—Jesus, the love of God for us is found. This Jesus was powerful enough to drive away evil by his words. We hear in our gospel reading how people of his time marveled at Jesus not only for the wisdom of his teachings but also for the power of his words. “With authority and power he commands unclean spirits and they come out!” But Jesus did not only drive evil away by his words. He definitively drove out evil once and for all by himself being subjected to suffering and death—because of his love. Such is the love of Jesus manifested in suffering that “by his wounds we are healed… by his death we are given new life”

It is indeed new life that we are praying and asking for in this occasion. New life for those unjustly killed. We pray that our heavenly Father may receive them and give them fullness of life among our saints and ancestors. New life for those who survive yet are deeply wounded physically, emotionally and psychologically. We pray for their healing. New life for our officials—the judiciary, the police, the politicians, the media, new life for us!

New life for our judiciary. Let justice be done! Justice delayed in justice denied. Here we have witnessed how justice delayed can have dire consequences for the entire nation. Captain Rolando Mendoza is not the only one who had been deeply wounded by the slow grind of our justice system. There are still so many who are crying for justice. Let those who dispense justice do their job well, and soon! This terrible case is also calling out to heaven for justice. Not only the Chinese are calling for a just and swift investigation of this case. We Filipinos demand the same from our officials. Bring out the truth; let those responsible, whoever they maybe, be held accountable. No whitewash! No scapegoats! Let there be new life now for our justice system.

We are asking for new life too from our police and for our armed forces in general. Let them be true keepers of peace, and to be keepers of peace they should respect life and human rights to the utmost. The fact that Captain Mendoza had to violate the rights of others and ultimately violate their lives to air his grievances does not speak well of his police work. He had been long in this career. Did this service not ingrain in him respect for others and respect for life? The big question that should confront all in the armed forces is: Are they trained to protect and respect life and human rights? New life for our police and the armed forces is not just to get more sophisticated arms or to get more training. It is above all to have deep love and respect for human rights and life itself.

New life for our politicians. We are asking for more concern, mas malalim na malasakit, for the people they are serving. It is very sad that this concern was not manifested enough during the 11-hour drama. Oh, may there be really new life from our government officials – looking for the good of the people and not for their own self-interest. Let not this issue be politicized, that is, let it not be dealt with in a self-seeking or self-protecting way. Let real service and real concern be given.

We are also asking for new life from our media people. Media is not measured by its “live” and “exclusive” coverage. Respect for authority, respect for life and the protection of basic rights are also to be considered.

New life is also called forth from us, the Church and the faithful. This atmosphere of violence is a call to us to be more assiduous in working for peace, for forgiveness and for justice. Our message is not heard enough, or is it not proclaimed enough? We cannot just do the usual practices while this culture of violence is inundating our culture. We need to be more creative and self-sacrificing in our evangelizing work.

We are challenged by last week’s terrible event. As we are challenged to act and to do, we are also challenged to hope more and to trust in God. Our God is not just looking at what is happening to us. He is also working among us and in us. We are reminded by St. Paul that we have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God. So in this Eucharist we thank and praise the all powerful Father for his presence and action in the world. He is at work in the Spirit of Jesus among us. We affirm in our Eucharistic Prayer that the Holy Spirit is at work when understanding puts an end to strife, when hatred is quenched by mercy, and vengeance gives way to forgiveness.

In these highly tensed moments there is great danger that strife, hatred and vengeance may get lose. We need the Spirit of God to pour down on all of us his gifts of understanding, mercy and forgiveness. We offer therefore this sacrifice of God’s love for the eternal repose of those who lost their lives, to beg for understanding, mercy and forgiveness from God and from those who have been grieved, and to call for new life from all of us. May those who have suffered and died not been so in vain. May their sacrifice, made holy by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, bring healing and new life to us. So in this nightmare, we continue to dream. Sogniamo un mondo senza piu’ violenza: we dream of a world without anymore violence, un mondo di justitia e speranza: a world of justice and hope; ognuno viva con il suo vicino: each one living with his neighbor; symbolo di pace e di fraternita’: a sign of peace and of fraternity. Yes, let us dream the dream of God!

Statement on HaciendaLuisita Compromise Agreement

2010-08-12T23:10:00.000+08:00

THE Church in the Philippines acknowledges that "agrarianreform is still the one big issue that touches our rural poor most directly."The agenda for social justice and the realization of our preferential love forthe poor are seriously tested in our resolve to address the problem of inequityand rural poverty through our commitment to implement genuine land reform (Actsand Decrees of the Second Plenary Council, No. 391).

The case of the reported compromise deal in the 21-yeardispute in Hacienda Luisita was taunted as a breakthrough in the effort to endthe long-standing agrarian issue over the 6,500-hectare land owned by theCojuangcos, the family of President Benigno Aquino III. The deal could havebeen a cause for celebration if not for a number of questionable processes andhighly inequitable terms contained in the said agreement whose reportedapproval of the farmers was brokered by the company itself, the HaciendaLuisita Inc. (HLI).

We will laud and support any initiative to immediatelyresolve the two-decade land dispute, but it should be in a manner that is fairand would uphold the farmers' rightful claim to the land. The unusual haste that characterizes thewhole process of arriving at a compromise makes the deal all the morequestionable and suspicious. Hence, we raise the following issues below toquestion the supposed terms of agreements and the process by which thecompromise was crafted.

In 2005, the directive from the Presidential Agrarian ReformCouncil and the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) explicitly called for theredistribution of 4,415 hectares of the 6,500 hectarage under the ComprehensiveAgrarian Reform Program. Implementationof this order was stalled by the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) granted bythe Supreme Court. But the present compromised agreement totally disregardedthe DAR order and made the farmers accept the lopsided sharing scheme - withthe farmer-beneficiaries being offered only 33% of the land or only 1,400hectares out of the 6,500-hectare property. Clearly, this arrangement isdisproportionately in favor of the HLI and totally contradicting the socialjustice intent of the law. In effect, the farmers will end up owning very smallparcel of the land for the sprawling land estate would be divided among 10,502 CARPbeneficiaries, based on the list submitted by Hacienda Luisita management. Andthe list itself actually needs meticulous scrutiny and verification.

The compromised agreement also made provision for theimplementation of the Stock Distribution Option (SDO), which is in fact,already revoked by DAR in the same order in 2005. The SDO scheme isunacceptable for it is an outright circumvention of the agrarian provision forland distribution. And it is worth mentioning that in the twenty one years ofimplementing the SDO, it had not lifted the farmers out of their impoverishedand vulnerable state. The SDO scheme facilitated the virtual surrender of thefarmers of their rightful claims to the agricultural lands of the hacienda inexchange for a pittance or meager shares of capital stock and productionshares.

The much-ballyhooed compromised agreement on HaciendaLuisita's estate was also tainted with anomalous processes in the way thecompany chose representatives for the farmer sector. The present leadershipboth of ULWU (United Luisita Workers' Union) and AMBALA (Alyansa ngManggagawang Bukid ng Asyenda Luisita), question the authority of the company-designatedleaders, namely Noel Mallari and Eldifonso Pingol, to represent theorganizations that had already disowned and expelled them a long time ago.

Moreover, the manner of obtaining farmers and workerssignatures was also dubious in view of the allegation of bribe-offers disguisedas "financial package" or "monetary benefits." We acknowledge the fact thatdestitution in Hacienda Luisita would drive the farmers to seek immediate andtemporary relief from their economic woes, hence making the compensationpackage of the SDO an enticing option. Butthe strategy of capitalizing on peoples' poverty to trick them into acceptingthe disadvantageous compromise is another form of grave injustice committed againstthe farmers.

In the light of the foregoing, we denounce the compromisedeal in Hacienda Luisita as a grand scheme to thwart the implementation of theagrarian reform law and a pre-emptive strategy to influence the Supreme Courtdecision on the TRO case pending for resolution soon.

To serve the interest of justice, we appeal to PresidentBenigno Aquino III to fulfill his pro-poor platform of governance by implementingthe agrarian law and by not honoring the compromise deal that ran counter tothe constitutional mandate that the entire 4,415 hectares of land should bedistributed to the plantation farmers. The President cannot feign neutrality inthis issue, for his silence and inaction will mean an implicit endorsement ofthe unjust compromise deal orchestrated by Cojuangco-owned HLI. If land reform cannot be implemented inHacienda Luisita, we see no possibility of implementing it in any place at all.Hindina kami pwedeng mangarap . . . sa pagpapatupad ng tunay na katarungan para samga mahihirap!

Concretely, we appeal that the compromise deal be set asideand allow a genuine and transparent process of consultation with the farmers beconducted, allowing them to understand the full range of options available andthe advantageous counter-proposal that will truly benefit their sector. Thisinitiative should be carried out by DAR, in partnership with the legitimatefarmers' and workers' organizations.

We believe that the social justice agenda of the Aquinoadministration will be loudly spelled by the decisive intervention of thePresident to push for the rights of the farmers over and above the sinisterattempt of the Cojuangcos to retain ownership of the CARP-able hacienda.

We affirm the social teaching of the Church that explicitlyunderlines that "the right to private property is subordinated to the right tocommon use, to the fact that the goods are meant for everyone" (Laborem Exercens, No. 14).

We will continue to pray and work for the resolution ofagrarian conflicts so that so that justice and the Lord's peace may be truly realized.

+Broderick Pabillo, DD
August 12, 2010

The fight for transparency and truth moves on!

2010-06-07T14:12:00.001+08:00

Last Friday, June 4, was an unfortunate day for the House of Representatives in particular, and for the Arroyo administration in general. The ending scenario of the Lower House just confirms the belief of many in the country. This administration is hiding a lot of things and it is afraid of the truth. Who would oppose the Freedom Of Information (FOI) bill in a democracy? It is very basic that people can participate responsibly in a democratic process when nothing is hidden from them. It is very basic in a democratic process that those who govern are but representatives of the people on whom real power resides. How can representatives hide from the people who elect them information that is meant for the common good? What makes people doubt and even “hate” this administration are its efforts to hide the truth of many issues in governance from the people. The FOI bill is supposed to make this process of transparency , and hence accountability, clearer and easier for the people. It is meant to bolster our democratic processes. Why is congress so afraid of this? If it had passed the FOI the 14th congress could have given the country a contribution toward a stronger democracy. It could have been a strong message to all that all the talks about corruption and hiding the truth are not true. But now the opposite is stands. The present Arroyo administration is all the more held suspect.

What happened last Friday showed also showed us make kind of leader Speaker Nograles is. He is not trustworthy. All his protestations that he is for the FOI bill, which he even co-authored, are sham. In the first place why should he have waited for the last day of congress to put to the floor ratification of the bicameral conference? It also shows his weak leadership. He cannot even have his bill, so he claimed, passed. Or is he just a stooge for someone else?

The Arroyo administration cannot wash its hands on this fiasco. There is a strong suspicion that it has a hand in this. We shall see this hand in the 15th congress when the bill will be filed again. We shall see who shall delay or kill it? The absence of the three Arroyo representatives in the house last Friday is very revealing. They were out to kill it!
They killed it but FOI will not die! It will rise again in the next congress—and stronger! What happened in the last two weeks when the Lower House was dilly-dallying with FOI made more people aware of it. More will lobby and support it. It will become a law of the land! Unfortunately for the 14th congress, it will not have the honor of bringing it to life. The truth will come to light! The fight moves on!

Challenges to the Church in Philippine Politics Today!

2010-06-04T11:47:00.000+08:00

On May 21 of this year Pope Benedict XVI met the participants of the 24th Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Council for the Laity who were meeting in Rome to discuss on the theme: “Witnesses to Christ in the political community.” In his talk he told them, among other things…"It is up to the lay faithful to show - in their personal and family life, in social cultural and political life - that the faith enables them to read reality in a new and profound way, and to transform it....It is also the duty of the laity to participate actively in political life, in a manner coherent with the teaching of the Church, bringing their well-founded reasoning and great ideals into the democratic debate, and into the search for a broad consensus among everyone who cares about the defence of life and freedom, the protection of truth and the good of the family, solidarity with the needy, and the vital search for the common good". He also said that although the "technical formation of politicians" is not part of the Church's mission, she reserves the right to "pass moral judgment in those matters which regard public order when the fundamental rights of the person or the salvation of souls require it".

What the Holy Father said remains a great challenge to the Philippine Church. We are challenged to have lay people who actively participate in political life. In a way this is already being done. In the last elections of May 10 we have seen the fielding of church volunteers in the hundreds of thousands all over the country. They contributed in no small degree to the “success” of the elections in spite of the poor organization and limitations of the COMELEC. Church volunteers directed the people to their precincts, helped monitor the conduct of the elections, and even assisted and taught the members of the Board of Election Inspectors (BEIs) their duties. Without the Church volunteers we can just imagine the chaos that could have resulted.

Our lay people are good in non-partisan election duties during elections. This is already good, but not yet enough. We also need non-partisan volunteers to monitor the performance of the elected officials after the elections. In general this is not yet being done. Many fora were organized before elections during which the candidates were asked what their programs would be. Many covenant signings were inked with different groups to ensure that the candidates would their election promises to the people. But after the elections nobody follows these up. So the elected candidates are not exacted the accountabilities that they have promised. We need lay people who are as aggressive in asking for accountabilities as they were in monitoring the elections.

Christians as good citizens are called not only for non-partisan duties though. Partisan politics is also a call of the faith. We need good Christians who bear witness to Christ as good politicians. There are already attempts of good Christians who join the electoral contests because of their faith. Unfortunately though their efforts are not supported enough by the electorate who up to now are still not wise enough to go beyond name-recall, and worse, not good enough not to have their votes bought. So while we call on people to be active in partisan politics we too should do more as Church to educate our people on their political duties. No good people will be elected unless the general population exercises their votes in a moral manner. Yes, in a moral manner, since to vote for a bad or incompetent person is to do harm to the common good, and to sell one’s vote is to sell the country!

The educated middle class cannot understand why people cannot understand the simple logic that to sell one’s vote is to sell one’s dignity. Indeed it is a great crime to the country, but for people who barely survive, 500 pesos is 500 pesos, how much more a thousand, or even three thousand pesos! Who can resist his amount of money when it means a meal for a week, and even a month for the family? The point is, we can never have a good and wise electorate unless we bring people out of dire poverty! It is poverty, in fact, simple survival, not ignorance much less moral depravity, that push people to sell their votes. So it is pointless to rant why people sell their votes when we do not do anything to reduce and eradicate poverty! Poverty eradication does not only mean handing money to the poor. It means creating structures and setting up and implementing laws that uplift the poor and fight corruption! In a way, consciously or unconsciously, there is a grand scheme to keep people poor from our traditional politicians. They do not really exert the political will to uplift the people from poverty since people of their kind – traditional politicians - flourish when people are held captive by poverty. They cannot easily buy and fool people when the people are free enough to choose.

This is the challenge for the Church in the political sphere. Yes, we continue to give political education. We continue to recruit people to do non-partisan monitoring of politicians during and outside of elections. We continue to encourage good and upright Christians to serve God and country as good politicians. But most of all, we do our best to influence Philippine politics to exert the political will to craft and execute pro-poor laws and to create a structure in Philippine society that can lift people out of the captivity of poverty, which is the fertile ground of political manipulation.

All of the above challenges are challenges to the Church. When we speak of Church, we speak of the People of God. Among the People of God there are different roles. The Popes remind us time and again that it is the role of the lay faithful to bear witness to Christ in politics and to transform politics. In the country at the moment the expectation is that the hierarchy should do this. Yes indeed, the hierarchy has its role to play in political transformation. Its role though is indirect, not by directly entering into the political arena but in inspiring, teaching, enabling the lay faithful to do this. Here, we priests and bishops, have our own culpability. We have not done enough to encourage and support our lay faithful in this mission. In fact we have not educated our people that they cannot be good Christians unless they are good citizens, and to be a good citizen in a democracy is to participate actively in the affairs of society. Democracy is a participative form of government, hence we cannot be good citizens in a democratic form of government if we do not participate in it.

People are hopeful now that we have a new government. Let us not just be watchers at a distance what this new government can do. Let us participate closely in the renewal of society. Some do this by being part of the government. Others by direct support while still others as vigilant critics. There is a role for all in a democracy. What we should avoid is the I-don’t-care-less attitude, which the Church, both as clergy and lay, should fight against. Hope is not a wait-and- see outlook. Hope is a call to action, that we do what we hope for!

Musing on Elections – 3

2010-05-16T16:08:00.000+08:00

It is 6 days ago that we had the elections. After the dust of the euphoria, or dismay, over the political exercise, now is the time to look at a proper perspective over the process of our Automated Election System (AES). There is a public consensus being formed that the automated election was a success. Everybody was stunned at the speed of the results. The worse scenarios projected, such as military take=-over, total failure of the system, general mayhem, did not occur, thanks be to God! What contributed to the success? Is everything alright now?

Many quarters attribute the successful May 10 election more to the people than to the automated system itself. In fact the system was not in place as claimed. Many machines malfunctioned. The clustering of the precincts brought long queues. Many voters do not know their precincts or lost their names. Transmission problems abounded. Even up to now some 5 million votes are not yet counted. But in spite of all these the voters turned up – 80% some calculated although only 75% were able to vote. This is already a high turn out when compared to more “mature” democracies. This just tells us that most of our people want to be heard. They are participative. This is also augmented by the fact that many did not mind lining up from 2 to 5 hours just to cast their votes. With the heat of that day and the inconveniences of many of our polling places, that is truly admirable! In spite of the long wait, the confusion and the heat, in general people kept their cool. The teachers who manned the polls were truly admirable too. They did not receive the proper training for AES as planned but their made use of their own creativity to make the system work. Admirable too were the election monitoring volunteers. They helped a lot in assisting people. Their presence too was a great assurance to the public that their votes would be properly counted. They stayed on together with the teachers until the results were transmitted. For many that meant a sleepless night. All these people made the election a success! We should not discount the fact that many people offered prayers and made vigils several weeks before May 10 to make this election succeed. This contributed not in a small degree to the patience and resilience of people on the election day itself. Congratulations to the Filipino people!

This does not mean though that everything was alright. Now is the time to call for accountability. I commend the COMELEC officials for a great work, so too the Smartmatic people. They were really on their toes the whole time, what with so many critics around them. However there are nagging questions begging for answers. Things could have been better, and the results more reassuring of these have been taken cared of.

1. What happened to the education budget of the COMELEC? Most of the election education received by the public came from initiatives of NGOs and Church groups. Except for a few TV and radio ads the public did not benefit from election education by the COMELEC when they have big budget for this.
2. Where were the extra 6000 PCOS machines stored? Why were they not used to replace malfunctioning machines?
3. In many cases the ultra-violet scanners which cost the COMELEC millions of pesos were not found in the precincts. Why?
4. What are the results of the Random Manual Audit?
5. Why even up to now – 6 days after election day – not all the results are in if the system was fully automated? If not fully automated, then how many percent were done manually?
6. Smartmatic promised that there would be enough modem to transmit the results. There seems not to be enough. In one school in Tondo there were 3 modems for 27 PCOS machines. Is this the proper proportion?
7. There were not enough IT technicians from the Smartmatic to attend to various technical problems and many report that many technicians do not know what to do. They were not properly trained.
8. Many machines malfunctioned. What is the allowable margin of defects in the contract with Smartmatic?
9. Why were the safeguards provided in the law not followed, such as the source-code review, the electronic signature of the BEIs, voters’ verifiability of their votes, machine verification of authentic ballots among others? These concerns be attend to. The great danger is that because the election was a “success” we may be complacent and leave things as they are. With these safeguards not put in place in the future somebody will bound to come up with ways of electronically cheating our elections.
10. The clustering of the precincts should be reviewed. So many were disenfranchised because it was not properly done and the public was not sufficiently informed.

These questions are not to dampen the celebratory mood of the public. Vigilance is the price of democracy and we continue to be vigilant - to make the system better for the sake of the future. If not, our “success” today will spell our doom tomorrow. People with evil intent will soon be devising means to out-do the AES. COMELEC should take a hard look at what happened and already find solutions to the shortcomings so that its gains now can lead to further gains. To do this COMELEC and Smarmatic should listen to their critics. Many times we learn more from our enemies than we do from our friends.

Bishop Broderick Pabillo
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chair, NASSA

Musings on Elections 2010 – 2

2010-05-11T18:05:00.000+08:00

These musings are more of questions and observations based on experiences.

After having voted, I went to visit several centers that monitor the elections. CBCP World has a monitoring center set up at the top floor of the CBCP office in Intramuros. It is manned by many religious men and women. The PPCRV has theirs in Pope Pius XII Center while NAMFREL has it in La Salle Greenhills. All these centers have lines of computers and phones set up and they are receiving updates from their people in the ground. The common comment that I hear is that of long lines of people in the voting centers and of people not finding their names because of the clustering of their precincts. At the rate things were moving at mid afternoon, many would not be able to vote as people are getting fed up waiting and in many places the voting process is so slow. In one school in Novaliches for example 300 service numbers were distributed in the morning but by 3 pm only 80 have cast their votes! Not that few voted, but the process was so slow! I also heard of several places in the country where elections were not conducted for a variety of reasons, like the ballots were switched between a town in Iloilo and another town in Eastern Samar. Two towns in Lanao did not have the elections because no BEI personnel could be found since the teachers there are relatives of the local candidates. Some towns are so far inland that the PCOS machines cannot get to their places. There were also many reports of breakdowns of PCOS machines. I wonder where the extra 6000 PCOS machines meant to replace malfunctioning ones are kept. It is said that they are kept in reserve in hub centers. Where are these hub centers and who and how can they be accessed? There seems to be a lack in information and there is no point person to ask.

Another question came. I observed that when I voted in the morning my ballot was not scanned. Each precinct is supposed to have an ultra-violet scanner to scan each ballot to know whether it is an authentic ballot or not. This was a solution made when the automatic scanners in the PCOS machines were decommissioned because of miscalculations in the printing of the ballots. The COMELEC spent millions to acquire these scanners and there was even a controversy over this. I asked others who voted. Their ballots too were not scanned. To verify further, I went to a public school in Makati and observe the last hour of voting there. In all the precincts there were no ultra-violet scanners. We spent millions acquiring them and they are not used!

Another observation. Many of our public schools have 3 or 4 stories with no elevators at all. There were complains coming from the elderly that they could not make it up the stairs! Perhaps considerations should be made for the elderly and the handicapped so that they need not go up the flights of stairs in order to exercise their right to vote.

Finally, we are now in the counting and canvassing stage. I write this around 10 pm. Most of the precincts have finished the voting. There are problems in sending the results to the central servers. One problem is that there are not enough modems. In one school in Tondo with 27 PCOS machines there are only 3 modems! To compound this situation is the fact that it is not easy to transmit the results. Probably the system is overloaded at the central servers. I wonder up to when will the BEIs, the PPCRV volunteers and the watchers wait till all the results will be transmitted. Ah… there is so much to improve! Yes we need to learn from experience, but could not the painful learning experiences have been lessened if more planning and foresight had been done by the COMELEC?

Bishop Broderick Pabillo
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chair, NASSA

Musings on Elections 2010 – 1

2010-05-10T16:04:00.000+08:00

Success! I was able to cast my vote, and successfully! This was a victory but a hard-won one. I came to the voting center at 10 am and was able to cast my vote at 12:30 pm! The voting center was the Isabelo de los Reyes School in Tondo. It was full of people. The heat was terrible, heat not only coming from the sun but also from the thousands of bodies gathered there! It is a wonder that up to now there is no news of anyone being a victim of heat stroke! Fortunately, ours is a patient people. We Filipinos are known for patience. There were squabbles here and there but in general the atmosphere was peaceful – people lining up and waiting patiently for their turn. I was not that patient. Good for me that the voting center is near the convent where I stay. Upon getting my service number which was 350 and knowing that the one being served was number 230, I went back to my room to do some reading. Two hours later I came up and I still had to line up for 30 minutes more.

Voting started at 7 am. By 12:30 I cast my vote, number 350. I surmise not all the 349 before me voted. I was right. There were only 280 votes cast before me, and that at 12:30 pm! Each precinct has 1000 voters. I wonder how many of those 1000 in my precinct would be able to vote. But this is not just the situation in my precinct. I went around asking the other polling places in the same school. All have similar situations. I wonder how many percent of the electorate will line up to vote. Worse scenario: I wonder how many will not be able to vote even if they want to because there is not time left.

We continue to call on voters to please take the time to vote, in spite of all the hassle. This is a small act of heroism that the nation asks from each of us today. I congratulate the so many volunteer groups involved in this election – PPCRV, NAMFREL, LENTE and many others. I salute them for their great sense of sacrifice especially staying in these over heated ovens! Many of these volunteers are young people. Their sense of volunteerism is truly heroic. I salute too our many prayer warriors, hidden in churches and adoration chapels, interceding for a clean, peaceful and orderly election. May their prayers and petitions touch our leaders and candidates to respect and accept the will of the people so that the election results will be credible and peace will be the end result of this political exercise.

Bishop Broderick Pabillo
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chair, NASSA

An Open Letter to DENR Secretary Jose L. Atienza

2009-11-23T13:11:00.002+08:00

November 23, 2009

HON. JOSE L. ATIENZA

Secretary Department of Environment and Natural Resources

Secretary Jose Atienza:

It was with great joy that we ended our meeting last Wednesday, November 18, 2009, when, after finding out that the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) for the mining company, Intex Resources, in Mindoro was acquired with grave irregularity – that it was given without the required genuine consultations and endorsements of the affected local government units, as attested by the mayors of the two directly affected towns and the governors and congressmen of the two provinces of Mindoro – you promised to suspend the ECC. We admired then your sense of justice and your commitment to stand by the truth. All the hunger strikers and their supporters happily celebrated a thanksgiving mass outside the DENR compound. But alas, the rejoicing was short-lived when your order came out a couple of hours later! It was just a mere 90-day suspension order. Your letter did not reflect accurately the discussions and agreements of the meeting, among which (1) the recognition of the LGU’s moratorium on mining; (2) the failure of the Intex Resources to conduct a genuine consultation in the communities; (3) the steadfast refusal of LGUs to allow the entry of the Intex Resources in the area, and (4) the sustained rejection and withholding of consent of the legitimate indigenous people to be affected by the mining operation. We all felt betrayed. If the ECC was acquired with irregularity, why should it be just suspended for 90 days? Is it not invalid, and being so, must be revoked? Other thoughts then came to my mind. In the said dialogue, in front of two provincial governors, several mayors, congressmen, priests, two bishops, DENR officials and several Mangyan leaders, you were empathic about your allegiance to the law and your assurance to punish anyone in your office who does not abide by the law. In our spontaneous joy at your declaration of withdrawal of the ECC, we were not able to follow up the name of the person who recommended to you its issuance without the proper procedure. Who had been at fault in issuing the ECC? Is anyone accountable for it?

We also discussed about the area covered being a watershed. You were once again emphatic that no mining company will ever be allowed to operate in a watershed area. Despite DENR’s failure to formally declare part of the contested location a watershed, all of the representatives from Mindoro present in the dialogue confirmed that some 11,000 hectares covered by the ECC definitely includes the watershed that feeds the two Mindoro provinces.

The fact that the area is a watershed has long been established and explains why former DENR Secretary Alvarez cancelled the company’s mining permit in July 2001. Even the technical descriptions of the place bear this out. Why then was the ECC merely suspended, and not cancelled as logic demands? Will a mere suspension order correct this mistake? Take note that the mining concession is not only a catchment for the critical watershed of the island, but the area also overlaps with the ancestral domains of the indigenous peoples – Alangan and Tadyawan Mangyans, whose leaders and representatives are continually holding the hunger strike in front of your DENR office. They categorically declare that a genuine Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) was never granted and that the Intex Resources resorted to deception and indirect bribery to get a pseudo-support from a number of indigenous leaders. I do not know what manner of advice you received to issue this suspension. But it is not too late to correct the error – and soon! The 25 hunger strikers, most of them Mangyans, are now in the 7th day of their hunger strike. Don’t you care at all for their situation? Is this not part of your pro-life stance? We hear that in a matter of days you will submit your resignation from office to run for elections. Is the delay a tactic to wash your hands from your responsibility? You issued the defective ECC; have the courage to revoke it! Allow me to remind you that your responsibility is more towards the care of the Philippine environment and the Filipinos who mostly depend on a well-balanced ecosystem than towards foreign investors who are here not to help our country – in spite of all their protestations – but to exploit us and our natural resources. If you would have to make a mistake, better err defending the lives of the Filipino people, than err defending money and foreigners! Better to lose your face in front of foreigners than to lose it in front of your countrymen and women! Mindoro, blessed by God with rich natural resources, is a food basket of the southern Tagalog provinces, including Metro Manila. Thousands of small farmers depend on the rivers flowing from the mountains for their irrigation. All these would be lost due to mining operation. It is because of this delicate balance of nature in the island that the provinces of Oriental and Occidental Mindoro and the Municipality of Sablayan, where the mining site is located, have issued a moratorium of mining for 25 years. In our dialogue, you have repeatedly challenged the local officials of the island to stand their ground not to allow mining operation in the two provinces. And indeed, they have stood their ground! They have issued the moratorium. But why is this not being respected by your national office? The ECC you issued is for mining. The provinces have clearly stated that they do not want mining. Why have you even entertained the application for its issuance, and much more, issued it?

You have always insisted on the observance of the law. But the way you disregarded the decision of the local government units in Mindoro is a gross violation of Section 70 of the Mining Act of 1995, which clearly requires the conduct of a genuine consultation, approval and endorsement through ordinance from the affected municipalities and the provincial government.

Moreover, the basis for issuing the ECC is utterly baseless since you also disregarded the decision of the independent scientists who conducted the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The EIA Review Committee for the Mindoro Nickel Project voted on September 23, 2009 to recommend the denial of the ECC. However, on October 14, 2009, you unilaterally reversed the experts’ decision and issued the ECC, thereby endangering the environmental safety of the island province.

I appeal to you, Mr. Secretary, to revoke the ECC. Do not blame the people for going into hunger strike. They would not have done it if the ECC was not issued in the first place. They want to have their voices heard, and now, many people even out of Mindoro – bishops, priests, religious, lawmakers, students, parishioners and many NGO supporters are hearing it. Now is the chance for you to prove your pro-life stand and the respect you hold out for the primacy of local government. Otherwise, please do not campaign on pro-life issues in the coming election and do not claim that you are for the good of the local government in which you would be running. “If you close your ear to the cry of the poor, you will cry out and not be heard.” (Proverbs 21,13) I pray that you would have courage, humility and compassion.

Yours truly,

BRODERICK S. PABILLO, DD

Auxiliary Bishop of Manila

Chairman of the CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Social Action – Justice and Peace

Pastoral Letter on Urban Planning and Development Policies

2009-11-12T13:17:00.000+08:00

Unless the lord builds the house, those who build it labor
in vain. (PS 127, 1)

AFTER the terrible destructions brought about by typhoon Ondoy in our metropolis, we now embark in rebuilding our lives and our cities. Life must go on. We must move on. We move now to the arduous work of rehabilitation. Let us do this not haphazardly and superficially so that we rebuild on firm foundations and the sufferings of others may not be aggravated. Let us allow ourselves to be guided by the Lord and his teachings.

On October 9, Aling Myrna and her teen-age son, residents of a community living in North Fairview, were shot to death by a private security guard as they protested the location of a fence being put up to keep them and their community “out of danger!”
Why do the thousands of people, people like Aling Myrna, cling to their homesites even in danger areas, and resist relocation to safer sites outside the city? The answer is simple. Their sources of livelihood are in the city, and there are none in far-away relocation areas. Commuting to the city from these areas would take many hours each day and would cost a very substantial part of a day’s income. Better the risks of life as an informal settler in a danger zone, they argue, than death by starvation in nice houses far away.

These, be it noted, are the people who keep the city humming. They are mainly market vendors and small tradespeople, bus and taxi drivers, washwomen and house help, janitors and construction workers, even policemen, firemen and public school teachers. They do not beg in the streets or steal food. Without them the city would come to a halt. Yet there is no legal place for them in the city.
Pope John Paul II in his encyclical “Centesimus Annus” (no. 43) is sharp and to the point on this matter.

“The obligation to earn one’s bread by the sweat of one’s brow also presumes the right to do so. A society in which this right is systematically denied, in which economic policies do not allow workers to reach satisfactory levels of employment, cannot be justified from an ethical point of view, nor can that society attain social peace.”

Behind the killing of Aling Myrna and her son lies a whole “structure of sin,”: land values which are far beyond the reach of our poor and many of the middle class, low taxes on unused land, the use of vast amounts of land for shopping malls, for upscale residential subdivisions and golf courses.

The term “structure of sin” tells us that the evil is pervasive, built into the structures of our society, something of which we are all a part. If the construction workers who build our homes and offices received wages sufficient for legal income, those homes and houses would cost far more than they do. Our newspapers would cost far more if the scavengers in Payatas who collect old paper for recycling were able to live away from the garbage and filth. Indeed, practically all that we buy or the services we use bear the mark of this sin.

It is not enough then, to simply order people off the waterways. A deep restructuring of our society is called for, starting in the present crisis with urban and land policy. To this effort of restructuring, we, the Archbishop and Bishops of Metro Manila pledge our full support. Hence we call for:

1. Urban land reform so that the poor may have the possibility to have security of tenure in our cities where their livelihood is found.

2. A moratorium on demolition of the dwellings of the poor if there is no humane relocation for them as our present laws require. Humane relocation would include accessible places of work for them.

3. A follow through of the processes to allot public lands to the poor in the areas that have been given to them by presidential declarations. Let the public lands declared by the President be developed and effectively be made available to the poor.

4. Legislations to raise taxes on properties that are idle, or to altogether expropriate them. The right to private property should not be given priority but the common good.

“Christian tradition has never recognized the right to property as absolute and untouchable. The right to private property is subordinate to the right to common use, to the fact that goods are meant for everyone. Private property is in its essence only an instrument for respecting the principle of the universal destination of goods; in the final analysis, therefore, it is not an end but a means.” (Compendium on the Social Teachings of the Church #177)

5. The swift implementations of the Clean Air Act and other environmental laws by disallowing heavy and highly pollutive industries within our cities which are densely residential and commercial. The zoning ordinances of the cities should be reviewed. Heavy industries, and not the poor should be relocated outside of our cities. If this is done, more people will move out of our cities to work in these industries.

6. In re-settling the poor and rehabilitating our cities priority should be given to the employment of the people. Informal settlers have grown in number because of lack of employment possibilities in places outside the metropolis. The “squatting” problem is not primarily a problem of housing; it is a problem of employment.

7. Let us not blame the poor in the waterways for the flooding of our cities. Let us look beyond: the unabated logging in Sierra Madre and Mt. Banahaw, mining ventures in our mountains, haphazard collection and unplanned disposal of our garbage, irresponsible city planning and development of subdivisions, just to name a few. Together let us take a hard look at our present practices and have the political will to reform them. In truth we can say that the government officials and the rich have more to do with the destruction of our environment that aggravated the recent flood than the poor!

There are many cries for reform as we experienced the unprecedented calamities of our times. We join our voices as your pastors in this call but we call for much deeper reforms that would really address and better the situation of our cities. Only when the needs of the least in our society are addressed with our society achieve true and lasting development.

Let us not lose courage. Let is heed the voice of God in the recent events. God is telling us something. We have experienced the bayanihan and damayan spirit in a remarkable degree these few weeks. This tells us that if we want to, we can work together and be concerned even to the point of sacrifice. Let us then continue to work together and be concerned to reform our ways that the environment be respected and protected and the poor be given deeper consideration so that they too may have a more generous part in the development of our cities.

Your pastors in the Lord Jesus Christ.

+ GAUDENCIO B. CARDINAL ROSALES, D.D.
Archbishop of Manila

+ BERNARDINO C. CORTEZ, D.D.
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila

+ BRODERICK S. PABILLO
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila

November 11, 2009

Letter of the Roman Catholic Bishops of Manila to President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo on Aerial Spraying

2009-10-29T13:26:00.000+08:00

October 29, 2009

Dear President Arroyo:

Greetings!

For many years now, families living in the surroundings of Cavendish banana plantations in Mindanao have been complaining of getting sick, their crops dying and water resources contaminated because of aerial spraying. The chemicals sprayed from airplanes used for bananas indiscriminately expose the people and the environment to poison.

Various international and local studies point to the hazards of aerial spraying of pesticides on humans and the ecosystems. This was recently proven by the technical review made by the World Health Organization on the DOH commissioned study few years ago.

We are one with all affected people of Mindanao in working for their deliverance from this immoral practice of aerial spraying that infringes upon human health and dignity. We cannot allow their suffering to go on any longer for anything that offends people, especially the least of our brothers and sisters, is an offense to God.

As Pope Benedict XV said in his encyclical Letter “Caritas in Veritate,” “the Church has a responsibility towards creation and she must assert this responsibility in the public sphere. In so doing, she must defend not only earth, water and air as gifts of creation that belong to everyone. She must above all protect mankind from self-destruction.”

We commend the Department of Health (DOH) for standing by and adopting the key recommendations arising from a study prepared for the DOH by the Philippine Society of Clinical and Occupational Toxicology and the University of the Philippines–National Poison Management and Control Center, which recommends among others the banning of aerial spraying. Once more your health department has proven to us and the whole Filipino people that indeed they are for the protection of the health of the people especially the most vulnerable.

We therefore recommend and request that her Excellency help the DOH in strengthening their appeal by issuing an executive order banning permanently aerial spraying everywhere as soon as possible. This executive order will be your very valuable legacy of governance. It will surely be remembered by the next generations as your deep expression of motherly care for them because you have protected them from dangers of incurable diseases and early death. Let us remember that we are duty bound as Christians to value life more than economic gains.

We look forward for your immediate response.

Sincerely,

+GAUDENCIO CARDINAL B. ROSALES, DD
Archbishop of Manila

+BISHOP BERNARDINO C. CORTEZ, DD
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chairman.CBCP-ECMMC

+BISHOP BRODERICK S. PABILLO, DD
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chairman, CBCP-NASSA-JP

+BISHOP HONESTO F.ONGTIOCO, DD
Bishop of Cubao

+BISHOP DEOGRACIAS IŇIGUEZ, DD
Bishop of Kalookan
Chairman, CBCP-Public Affairs Commission

+BISHOP ANTONIO R. TOBIAS, DD
Bishop of Novaliches

+BISHOP FRANCISCO C. SAN DIEGO, DD
Bishop of Pasig

+BISHOP JESSE E. MERCADO, DD
Bishop of Parañaque

Letter of the Roman Catholic Bishops of Manila to President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo on the Laiban Dam Project

2009-09-14T13:24:00.001+08:00

September 14, 2009

Dear Pres. Arroyo:

Greetings of Peace!

As Pastors, we are one with the outrage expressed by our people against the Laiban Dam project of your administration. The project is made worse with SMC’s offer of US $2B government guarantee with “take or pay” provision in a proposed Joint Venture contract with MWSS.

“In these trying times when uniting the people is more urgent, any project that can be a cause of suspicion and division should be avoided.” What may be perceived as common good of the present generation may turn out to be a cause of suffering for the next. Even with the best intention of providing more water to the people can spark protests when it ignores and violates framework for sustainable development, ethical and legal considerations.

The project will submerge 28,000 hectares of a biodiverse-rich forest-ecosystem, under a 113-meter high Laiban Dam. Moreover this dam is situated on top of a seismic fault line with historical record of 7.6 intensity. It will undermine the integrity of Marikina watershed reservation and violate E. O. 33 given on July 16, 2004, which bans the settlement, entry, sale or disposition of land in Marikina Watershed by relocating 12,728 upland (indigenous) people to Brgy. San Ysidro.

It will destroy the ecosystems of the towns of Gen. Nakar, Real and Infanta, like the more or less 3,000 hectares mangrove fish sanctuary and farm irrigation. Likewise, such actions will endanger Metro Manila of flooding, air pollution and intensify global warming and climate change.

People have the right to be provided with full information concerning the water program of the government, the terms and conditions of the private ventures, the biddings, etc. Unfortunately even NEDA, a government corporation has been in the dark on the arrangements entered into by MWSS and SMC. MWSS and SMC cannot invoke their right to confidentiality on a project imbued with public interest where public funds will be used in the process.

In addition, the project will violate various laws such as the Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) System, the National Integrated Protected Areas System Act (“NIPAS”), the Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act (“Wildlife Protection Act”),E.O. 33, and the Indigenous People’s Rights Act (“IPRA”).

Madam President, in their latest report, both Maynilad and Manila Water publicly declared systems losses of 69% and 20%, respectively, due to leakage problem, thereby, belying claims of water shortage. In the meantime, consider the possibility of rehabilitating Wawa Dam since it has served as the main water supply of Metro Manila for 60 years. With a watershed area of 27,980 hectares, it is capable of continuously discharging millions of liters of fresh water daily.

For the sake of the common good, we are requesting you, Madam President, to scrap the Laiban Dam project. Instead, let the government and its agencies focus their attention on the following:

1. Remedy the leakage problems of Maynilad and Manila Water;

2. Declare Marikina Watershed Reservation as Protected Area under the NIPAS Law;

3. Expedite Reforestation Efforts in Marikina Watershed to increase water capacity, provide carbon sink and mitigate the impacts of global warming and climate change.

4. MWSS to pursue its primary mandate of serving the people, the common good and working closely with environmental groups, LGUs, NGOs and POs. It must also provide avenues for public discussion and debate concerning a wide variety of water management options.

We advocate service for the common good and integrity of creation out of our love for life. We pray that we join our forces together for the sustainable development of our people. God bless you.

Sincerely,

+ GAUDENCIO CARDINAL B. ROSALES, DD
Archdiocese of Manila

+ BISHOP BRODERICK S. PABILLO, DD
Auxiliary Bishop of Manila
Chairman, CBCP-NASSA-JP

+ BISHOP HONESTO F. ONGTIOCO
Diocese of Cubao

+BISHOP FRANCISCO C. SAN DIEGO, DD
Diocese of Pasig

+BISHOP ANTONIO R. TOBIAS, DD
Diocese of Novaliches

+BISHOP DEOGRACIAS S. IÑIGUEZ, JR. DD
Diocese of Kalookan

+BISHOP JESSE E. MERCADO, DD
Diocese of Parañaque

+BISHOP FRANCISCO M. DE LEON, DD
Auxiliary Bishop of Antipolo

+BISHOP JULIO XAVIER LABAYEN, OCD
Bishop- Emeritus, Prelate of Infanta

Time to Become Accountable

2009-05-29T09:12:00.001+08:00

When I, together with some other bishops and members of the urban poor, joined the farmers who went on huger strike in December, 2008, I prayed fervently not so much for strength of body but for elasticity of patience and continuous belief in good faith. It was heart-rending for me to see how everyday the farmers would fight against weakness and call on the congresspersons to give them their due, in so few but sincere words. I fought hard as well, trying not to hate the men and women legislators who would continue to disregard the farmers and pass by them in a hurry to get to their Christmas parties…to enjoy their bounty. Every time I felt discouraged I would close my eyes and assure myself that justice would come, maybe during the six-month period the legislators afforded themselves to study and introduce “perfecting amendments” to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.

It has been more than five months since that day Congress issued that Joint Resolution which to me was a promise made by them to do their job, albeit a little belatedly. But my experience in sessions at the House of Representatives tells me that the people’s representatives have no intention of enacting the CARPER bill. There are but seven session days left and yet they have discussed the bill only once, with several members obviously delaying the bill’s passage and proposing amendments that will water down the program. The House leadership claims that they are merely waiting for the Senate to pass their own version but there is no such luxury of waiting, no luxury of being political lazy and insincerity. Sadly, not only those who are known to be landowners are opposing the bill, even some of those who claim to fight for human rights seem to go out of their way to block this essential social legislative measure.

Time is running out on us, not just on Congress but on all of us who fail to help protect the farmers’ right to be emancipated from their bondage to the soil. We should all work hard and fast towards ensuring that the widespread hopelessness of our farmers will be arrested and will no longer be aggravated. Then, disregard of the farmers’ welfare was met with tranquil and non-violent means of protest. Then and now, our legislators continuously show arrogance and greed which shall later on be met no longer with impunity but justice. Meanwhile, our farmers are back again, united for one purpose: to ask this government for redress, to ask our leaders to treat them reasonably and fairly so they would respond responsibly and soberly as well. Our farmers are telling us NOW is the time to act with definite steps toward social justice. They are telling us that the government’s maybes will no longer suffice in answering their calls. Because all of us, especially those who wield power, will be made accountable for both the wrongdoings we commit and the duties we omit to do.

Protecting Whose Agenda?

2009-05-09T16:57:00.001+08:00

I recently visited the lobby of the House of Representatives session hall. I immediately noticed the newly renovated walls bearing pictures of significant events in Congress’s history. Among those pictures pertaining to the present Congress was a photo of a booklet with the following words printed on its cover:

“Sustaining the Growth, Spreading the Benefits:
A Legislative Reform Agenda for the House of the People.” – House Speaker Prospero Nograles

This made me ponder for a while. Amidst all the seemingly unsound and doubtful legislative proposals and policies cropping up in Congress these days, I could not help but wonder. Whose growth are our national leaders trying to sustain? Are the laws churned out by this body upon which we, as a people, have entrusted our wisdom really for the benefit of the Filipino? There is one House measure which has piqued my concern at the moment. I came across this House Resolution (HR) No. 737 which, essentially, proposes to grant ownership of Philippine land to foreigners.

Under the proposal, alienable lands of the public domain—which are agricultural lands- with a maximum area of one thousand hectares, can now be leased to foreign corporations for a maximum of fifty years. And disturbingly, ownership, not just lease, of agricultural lands measuring up to twenty-five hectares is granted to foreign corporations. This proposal seeks to change the proviso in the 1987 Constitution which restricts ownership of Philippine lands to Filipinos and Filipino corporations.

Under Section 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution, the ownership-in-trust of natural resources is vested with the State and the State may sell, lease, or otherwise alienate the rights to these resources through contracts to Filipinos and Filipino corporations only. Thus, foreign individuals or corporations are clearly excluded.

Under HR 737, the State will do away entirely with the restriction on foreign ownership. The proponents of this Resolution seek to amend the constitution and open our land to foreigners, with the haste and neglect unbecoming of any honorable national leader.

This Resolution is actually another try to resuscitate the failed Cha-Cha attempt by the solons. It becomes apparent that, despite the claim of limiting amendments only to economic provisions (foreign ownership of lands) which will help gear up development, productivity, and efficiency in the country, this pursuit for Charter Change may become a vehicle for other unwanted changes in government. A vehicle highly vulnerable to derailment. This Resolution, dangerous in itself substantially, may also usher in procedural irregularities in amending the Constitution. There is a danger, real as it is grave, that this measure could be used to influence answers to questions of good governance and accountability.

I tried hard to weigh the possible benefits of this Resolution for the Filipino people vis-à-vis the obvious dangers that would come with it. Assuming that HR 737 is indeed merely an economic proposal, would foreign ownership of lands really result in economic development of the country? And if it will, will this economic development trickle down to the people who have remained poor even during times when ownership of land access to land and other natural resources were ensured to Filipinos only?

I shudder at the thought of unfair competition for land between Filipinos, citizens of this country who have made land productive, and foreign entities with nothing but abundant financial resource to offer. I am jolted by the terrible scenario of Filipinos becoming squatters in our own land. I remember that God told us that the earth and all its bounty is for us to share, maybe this measure is not bad after all. But then I realize that the Filipinos who have been gifted with stewardship of this country have not even had their rightful share and yet they will have to give way to those who have the might and wealth to take part of more than they need. Surely, it must not have been God’s intention to encourage excesses when there are those who lack not only as regards land but also dignity.

As it is, the Government already has designated millions of hectares of our lands for the benefit of foreign corporations, without consideration for the farmers, indigenous peoples, and other members of the communities affected by these government exploration and biofuel contracts.

I believe that the Constitutional restriction on foreign ownership of land obviously involves a national security issue. I have been informed that there is no cap to the total area allowable for foreign ownership. If this is true, there might come a time that we will run out of agricultural lands which serve as food sources. And even if these lands continue to be used for food production, there is also a risk that most of the produce of our lands will be exported and yet we will no longer have a say on the matter. This will be an attack not only on our food security but also to our integrity as a people as well.

With the threat of enabling foreign corporations and associations to hold, acquire, and be granted the right to possess, own, utilize and develop land in our country, what will be left for the Filipinos? As we all know, the agrarian reform program is still underway, and thousands of farmers still await emancipation from the land they have tilled for generations. Over one million hectares of land await distribution. Our government cannot feed its own people, and yet we open up all our resources for non-Filipinos, as if without regard for our own people whom it is supposed to serve.

It is said that only fifteen million hectares of alienable and disposable agriculture lands are available to answer for the food security of Filipinos. HR 737 does not help improve this situation. HR 737 poses grave danger to our national security and sustainability. It is also unjust, considering that there are millions of Filipino peasants still not owning the lands their families have tilled for decades. It is unjust that our resources should be used primarily for the benefit of foreigners, and not those who do not have a stake in domestic development and peace.

As I take in the implications and consequences of this measure, I find myself challenged and hopeful at the same time. Though I am saddened by the apparent prioritization of this bill by the House of Representatives, I feel challenged as a Filipino to help protect the rights of my fellow Filipinos, here and in the countryside, who remain landless. I am challenged to continue pushing for laws which will protect the rights of the marginalized Filipino, laws such as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension (CARPER) with Reforms. I feel challenged but I remain hopeful and vigilant. I am hopeful because I see that there are still those leaders in government who work with us, their constituency, to make sure that the government works for national interest instead of the interest of the privilege few.

Together with people from the peasant sector, among others, I remain vigilant and urge Congress to fast track the enactment of socially just bills such as the CARPER bill and call on them to disapprove oppressive and unfair bills like House Resolution No. 737. I am hopeful that amidst underhanded efforts to go against the wisdom of the Constitution, to further deprive the marginalized Filipinos of their basic rights, and to evade laws on accountability, we Filipinos will prevail if we work together and fight with the guidance of our righteous God.

I also find comfort in the pockets of brilliance and statesmanship found in the history of Philippine Congress. I am praying fervently that our national leaders will, true to their promise, Sustain the Growth and Spread the Benefits for the Filipino people. I urge every Filipino to act with vigilance in ensuring that government agenda will reflect that of the people, in calling for accountability in governance and in seeking the just distribution of Philippine land and natural resources.#

+Broderick S. Pabillo
Auxiliary Bishop
Archdiocese of Manila