February 14, 2008

back to list

'KAMTIN ANG PAGBABAGONG TOTOO! MAGSANIB-LAKAS, PILIPINAS!'

SanibLakas ng Taongbayan Foundation

NAGAGALAK kaming papabilis pa ang pagdami ng mga lumalahok sa pagsuporta sa mga taong may lakas-loob na ibunyag ang katotohanan. Nagagalak kaming sa kabila ng mga kai-kaibhan ng dumaraming mga Pilipinong ito -- sa pinagmumulang mga saray ng lipunan, sa mga klase ng samahang kinapapalooban, sa mga panawagang pinagtu¬tuunan, at sa mga anyo ng pamamahayag na ginagamit -- ay malinaw pa rin ang pagkakaisa ng lahat sa mga prinsipyong itinataguyod: katapatan sa katotohanan at pananagutan sa kapakanan ng ating bayan.

       Sa paglahok sa lumalakas na kilusan para sa katotohanan at katarungan ay dapat nga lamang tiyakin na isakatuparan at isabuhay ang wastong sama-samang kamalayan, na ang mga Pilipino sa kani-kanilang pamilya, lungsod, lalawigan, sektor, samahan at iba pa, ay nagpapalakas ng kakayahang ganap na magpakatao at makipagkapwa-tao. Kailangan ito upang mapangalagaan at mapaunlad pa ang ating materyal at spiritwal na kakayahang tumugon sa bagong hamong ito ng pambansang krisis.

            Kaya nga dapat itanong sa sarili: Paano bang nagkokonsultahan ang mga Pilipino sa mga usaping pang-araw-araw na pahahantungin sa pagbubuo ng mga kapasyahang sama-samang ipapatupad ng lahat? Ang mga masasamang gawi ba ng mga pulitikong kinokondena natin ay wala sa ating sari-sariling mga pag-uugali? Ang mga pagpapahayag ba natin nang paninindigan at ang ating mga pangangako sa isa’t isa ay makatotohanan, katumbas ng sumpa sa ngalan ng ating karangalan?

            Ganap na ba tayong mapagtiwala sa isa’t isa, at karapat-dapat na nga ba tayong pagtiwalaan ng kapwa? Paano ang pagiging palaasa sa pagsisikap ng iba? Paano ang tukso na magdahilan na lang kaysa magpursigi kapag nahihirapan sa pagsasakatuparan? di ba’t marami pa rin sa atin ang madaling mainip at tumamlay sa pagsusulong ng mga adhikaing nangangailangan ng mahaba at mahirap na pagsisikap?

            Kailangan ngang magpakatatag tayong mga Pilipino sa pagsandig sa makatu¬wiran at makatotohanan, magkaroon ng lakas ng loob at makayanang tumaya ng pagod, panahon at sariling mga rekwerso. Kailangan ito upang makapagsanib-sanib tayo sa pagsusulong ng ating kasaysayan tungo sa pagkakaroon ng isang lipunan at isang pamahalaang malaya, mapagkalinga at marangal.

            Hindi pa tayo magiging karapat-dapat magkaroon ng ganoong pamahalaan kung ang ating pag-aasam ay idinadaan lamang natin sa tindi ng pagdaing at haba ng paghihintay. Ang kailangan ay magsimula agad ang bawat isa sa pagdadalisay ng kanyang sariling kalooban, at batay dito’y sama-sama tayong kumilos. Ang kailanga’y ganap nating maisabuhay ang ating Karangalan at ang ating Kaisahan.

            Tayo nang kumilos at kamtin ang minimithing pagbabago. Huwag mangamba. Tayong lahat ay nagtataglay naman, sa kaibuturan, ng magandang loob at lakas ng loob na bigay sa atin ng Bathalang Maykapal at sumasalamin sa Kanyang sariling diwa!

            Tayo na! Magsanib-lakas, Pilipinas!

SANIBLAKAS NG TAONGBAYAN FOUNDATION

Makati, Pilipinas Pebrero 25, 2008

(ika-12 anibersaryo ng tinaguriang “People Power Revolution”)

Reperensiya: Jun Mendoza, Pangulo, SanibLakas Foundation

back to list

'ISANG BAGONG LIHAM SA KABABAIHAN NG MALOLOS'

Ni Prof. Ed Aurelio C. Reyes

Pasimuno at Tagapagsalita, Kaisahan sa Kamalayan sa Kasaysayan (Kamalaysayan) May-Akda, The Philippines, A Century Thence, at On the Altered Indolence of the Filipinos

NITONG nakalipas na mga taon, marami sa aking mga sulatin ay itinuon ko sa pangangailangang ang mga Pilipino ay maging mga aktibong may-taya (AkMa) sa sama-sama nating kapakanan, kalayaan, at kaginhawahan. Ngunit hindi magiging kumpleto ang pagtatalakay ko ukol sa mga AkMa kung hindi ko babanggitin at papupurihan ang ilang kababayan nating naging mga bayani sa ating pagiging dakilang lahi mahigit isang siglo na ngayon ang nakalilipas. Ang kalagayang pinangahasan nilang wakasan ay tatlong siglo na noon ang itinatagal.

May-taya sila sa pagwawasto sa isang malaking kamalian, isang malaking paglabag sa karapatan nilang mga bumubuo ng kalahati ng ating populasyon. Mahigit tatlong daang taong ang kababaihan sa Pilipinas ay pinagkakaitan ng kolonyal na pamahalaang Espanyol ng anumang pangkalahatang edukasyon sa paaralan, kahit man lamang sa kaalaman sa wikang Espanyol.

Bago nagsimula ang paghahari ng mga dayuhang iyon ay may umiiral na edukasyon sa mga pamayanan at pami-pamilya at ang nabibiyayaan ay lahat – lalaki, babae, bata at matanda – ayon sa pananaliksik na sinimulan nina Andres Bonifacio. Noon ay mayroon tayong ‘universal literacy’ at ang karaniwang tao ay nakababasa at nakasusulat sa tunay nating paraan, na tinatawag ngayong “alibata,” “baybayin” o “pantigan.” Nang mahawakan tayo ng mga mananakop, ang mga babae na lamang na binigyan ng pag-aaral ay ang mga ipinasok sa kumbento at ang direksiyon ay gawin silang mga mongha o madre na hindi inaasahang mag-isip para sa sarili kundi sumunod na lang sa mga kapasyahan at utos ng mga pari.

Noong 1888, ipinasya ng may dalawampung kababaihan ng Malolos na magtayo ng isang panggabing paaralan para sa kababaihan kahit man lamang sa sarili nilang bayang Malolos, para mag-aral ng wikang Espanyol bilang tulay sa pagbabasa ng maraming aklat na inaasahang nilang kapupulutan ng maraming kaalaman. Ihinarap nila ang panukala sa may-kapangyarihan ng Malolos, ngunit mariing tumanggi agad ang mga prayle. Naglakas-loob nilang silang iharap ang petisyon sa mismong gobernador-heneral na kataas-taasang opisyal ng pamahalaang kolonyal sa Pilipinas. Nagtagumpay sila. At pinadalhan pa sila ng isang liham ni Rizal na pinapupuri at ipinagdiriwang kapwa ang kanilang matatag na tapang at ang kanilang pagtatagumpay.

Tatlong siglo na ang usapin ng pagkakait sa kanila ng edukasyon at lehitimo naman ng kahilingan, bakit noong 1888 na lamang naganap ang pagpepetisyon? Malamang na sa itinagal-tagal ng tatlong siglo ay may una nang nakaisip ng ganoong proyekto. Ngunit marahil ay karamihan sa mga nakaisip ay nahadlangan na agad ng sariling mga agam-agam, pagkabalisa at tahasang takot na di papayag ang mga lokal na awtoridad laluna ang mga prayle na noo’y tunay na napakamakapangyarihan sa bayan-bayan (“naku, mahirap ‘yan, huwag na lang!” o “naku, baka maparusahan pa tayo!”)

Sila’y may-taya at mulat pa ngang mga may-taya (mga “MuMa”) ngunit tila pinigil ng sariling kahinaan kaya’t di na lang nangahas na maging mga aktibong may-taya (“Akma”). Marahil din na mayroon namang nakapangibabaw sa sariling mga kahinaan at nangahas na kumilos, at tulad ng inaasahan ay hinadlangan ng prayle sa lugar kaya’t isinuko na lamang ang pagsisikap.

Mas mahusay naman na iyon kaysa sa mga nagpapigil na agad sa sariling takot. Ngunit kinapos pa rin ng determinasyon, nang maharangan, na ihanap ng ibang landas ang pagsisikap. Daig sila ng mga kababaihan ng Malolos na kumilos noong 1888, na lumagpas na nga sa unang balakid (sariling mga dahilan para umatras na bago pa man makapagsimula) ay lumagpas pa rin sa ikalawang balakid (ang pagtutol ng makapangyarihang prayle).

May matingkad na mga aral na iniwan sa atin ng kababaihan ng Malolos. Sa kalagayan noon, na malalimang sinuri sa liham-pagbati ni Rizal, ay di pa nakapagsisimula ang kababaihan na mapalaya ang sarili sa mga kahong pinagkulungan sa kanilang pagkatao, na sila diumano ay mahinang kasarian, na di raw kagulat-gulat kung sila ay maduwag sa mga pagsisikap at pakikipagharap sa makapangyarihang awtoridad, at nararapat lamang sa bahay upang magpalaki ng pamilya at magpalaki ng mga anak at sumunod lamang sa mga kapasyahan at utos na asawa at iba pang kalalakihan.

Hindi pa natutukasan noon ng diskursong intelektwal sa daigdig ang napakalaking halaga ng pagsasanib-lakas ng buu-buong pagkatao ng mga kasarian (paradigm of gender harmony, na lagpas pa sa pagiging magkapantay ng babae’t lalaki). Sa daan-daang taong umiral ang mga sistemang monarkya at kolonyalismo sa daigdig ay pinagharian at “kinolonya” ang maraming bahagi ng daigdig ng kaisipang dapat nakapangingibabaw sa kababaihan ang mga kaisipan at mga kapasyahan ng mga lalaki.

Sumunod dito ang mahigit kalahating siglo na bumalikwas na sa ganoong kaapihan ang kababaihan. Mayroon ngang mga lumagpas na sa pag-aasam lamang ng pagkapatas at pagsasanib-lakas ng mga kasarian — itinuturing na nilang likas na kaaway ng kababaihan ang kalalakihan, at ang huli’y dapat paghigantihan at parusahan sa pamamagitan ng pagbabaligtad ng maling ugnayan – upang babae naman ngayon ang mangibabaw sa lipunan at pasunurin na lamang ang kalalakihan.

Nalimutan nilang ang pinakamahalaga ay ang pagpapakatao at pakikipagkapwa-tao ng bawat isa ayon sa kanyang kalooban at di ayon sa kanyang katawan, anuman ang kasarian, sapagkat tunay na iisa lamang ang pagkatao ng lahat.

Ang ginawa ng kababaihan ng Malolos noong 1888 ay isang lantad at mapangahas na pagwasak sa ganoong kahon noong kanilang panahon – na ang mga babae ay pinipilit, at pumapayag, na maging sunud-sunuran lamang sa dominasyon ng kalalakihan.

Ang aksyon ng mga kababaihan ng Malolos noong 1888 ay mensahe sa kapwa nila kababaihan na kung talagang gugustuhin ay kaya nilang lahat ang ganoong tapang at determinasyong magtagumpay; mensahe ito sa kalakakihan na walang katwiran ang ilusyong macho na diumano’y mas matapang at mas matatag kaysa kababaihan.

Hindi lamang si Rizal ang may dahilang pumalakpak (na ginawa niya sa pamamagitan pagpapadala ng sulat mula sa kinaroroonan niya sa Europa). Tayong lahat! At lagpas sa pagpalakpak, gawin natin silang huwaran lalo na sa kasalukuyan at sa mahabang hinaharap.

Sa taunang mga anibersaryo ng aksyon ng Kababaihan ng Malolos noong 1888 at ng pagliham sa kanila ni Rizal paglipas ng dalawang buwan, hindi lamang ang mga kababaihan ng Malolos, hindi lamang ang lahat ng taga-Malolos at lahat ng taga-Bulakan ang dapat na nagbubunyi. Ang karapatdapat magbunyi sa pagkilos at tagumpay, at magtaguyod ng mga aral na kaloob, ng Kababaihan ng Malolos noong 1888, ay ang lahat ng kababaihan at lahat ng mamamayan sa Pilipinas at sa buong daigdig! Dapat itong umalingawngaw, sa Pilipinas man lamang, sa nalalapit na Pandaigdigang Araw ng Kababaihan sa Marso Ocho!

Batay sa paninindigang ito, at sa paglingon sa mga konteksto at paglingon din sa mga aral na mahuhugot sa aksyon ng Kababaihan ng Malolos noong 1888, iniaalay ko ngayong Pebrero 22, 2008, ika-119 anibersaryo ng orihinal na liham ni Rizal, ang isang “Bagong Liham sa Kababaihan ng Malolos.”

Iniaalay ko ito sa lahat ng dapat magbunyi, laluna ang lahat ng ating mga kababayan, babae at lalaki, dito man sa Pilipinas o sa ibayong-dagat. Iminumungkahi kong paghandaan nating lahat, sa pangunguna ng Women of Malolos Foundation Inc. (WOMFI) at iba pang lokal at mga pambansang samahang pangkasaysayan at mga samahan ng kababaihan, at laluna ang mga samahan at indibidwal na nagtataguyod sa pagsasanib-lakas ng mga kasarian, ang masigabo, makabuluhan at malawakang pagbubunyi sa darating na ika-120 anibersaryo ng aksyon ng ating mga bayaning Kababaihan ng Malolos ng 1888 sa darating na Disyembre 12.

Sa paghahanda at sa mismong pagbubunyi ay marapatin sanang isaalang-alang ang mga nilalaman ng liham kong ito, gaya ng sumusunod na mga punto:

Unahin natin ang pitong mahahalagang punto ni Rizal na ihinanay niya sa dulong bahagi ng kanyang liham noong Pebrero 22, 1889:

“Ang unang-una. Ang ipinagiging taksil ng ilan ay nasa kaduwagan at kapabayaan ng iba.

“Ang ikalawa. Ang inaalipusta ng isa ay nasa (kakulangan) ng pagmamahal sa sarili at nasa labis na pagkasilaw sa umaalipusta.

“Ang ikatlo. Ang kamangmanga’y kaalipinan, sapagkat kung ano ang isip ay ganoon ang tao: taong walang sariling isip ay taong walang pagkatao; ang bulag na tagasunod sa isip ng iba ay parang hayop na susunod sa tali.

“Ang ika-apat. Ang ibig magtago ng sarili ay tumutulong sa ibang magtago ng kanila, sapagkat kung pabayaan mo ang iyong kapwa ay pababayaan ka rin naman: ang isa-isang tinting ay madaling baliin, ngunit mahirap (baliin) ang isang bigkis na walis.

“Ang ika-lima. Kung ang babaing Tagalog ay di magbabago, hindi dapat magpalaki ng anak, kundi gawing pasibulan (tagapagsilang) lamang; dapat alisin sa kanya ang kapangyarihan sa bahay, kung hindi’y ipagkakanulo nang walang malay ang asawa, anak, bayan at lahat.

“Ang ika-anim. Ang tao’y inianak na paris-paris (magkakatulad), hubad at walang tali, di linalang ng Diyos upang maalipin, di binigyan ng isip para mabulag, at di hiniyasan ng katuwiran (upang) maulol ng iba. Hindi kapalaluan ang di pagsamba sa kapwa-tao, ang pagpapaliwanag ng isip at ang paggamit ng matuwid sa anumang bagay. Ang palalo ay ang nagpapasamba, ang bumubulag sa iba, at ang ibig papaniigin ang kanyang ibig sa matuwid at karampatan.

“Ang ikapito, Liningin ninyong magaling kung ano ang relihiyong itinuturo sa atin. Tingnan ninyong mabuti kung iyan ang utos ng Diyos o ang pangaral ni Kristong panlunas sa lahat ng mahirap, pang-aliw sa dusa ng nagdurusa. Alalahanin ninyo ang lahat ng sa inyo’y itinuturo, ang pinapatunguhan ng lahat ng sermon, ang nasa ilalim ng lahat ng misa, novena, cuitas, kalmen, larawan, milagro, kandila, correa at iba’t iba pang iginigiit, inihihiaw, isinusurot araw-araw sa inyong loob, tenga at mata, at hanapin ninyo ang puno’t dulo, at iparis ninyo ang relihiyong iyan sa malinis na relihiyon ni Kristo, at tingnan ninyo kung hindi ang inyong pagka-Kristiyano ay paris ng inaalagaang gatasáng hayop o paris ng pinatatabang baboy kaya, na di pinatataba alang-alang sa pagmamahal sa kanya, kundi (upang) maipagbili nang lalong mahal at nang lalong masalapian (lalo silang magkapera).”

May mga babasa nito na sasalungat sa ilang punto ni Rizal, laluna ukol sa relihiyon, dahil baka makasakit sa damdamin ng mga taong-simbahan na nagbago naman na ng ugali at gawi kung ihahambing sa mga prayle, madre, at manang sa kapanahunan ni Rizal. Sa palagay ko’y may sapat na kakayahan ang mga taong-simbahang ito na pabulaanan ang mga sinabi ni Rizal, at patunayan sa aktwal nilang mga gawi at gawa, na hindi iyon aplikable sa kanila. Mas marami naman ang mabilis na sasang-ayon sa karamihan ng nilalaman ng pitong punto ni Rizal, ngunit mabilis ding iiwas na ang mga iyon ay titigan.

Mabilis nilang ipagpapalagay, kahit maling ipagpalagay, na ang mga pagpapaalala ni Rizal ay hindi aplikable sa kanila at hindi aplikable sa kasalukuyang mga krisis sa lipunan, gaya ng talamak na pagnanakaw, mga pagsisinungaling at mga pagkukubli na ginagawa sa halos lahat ng opisina at ahensya ng pamahalaan. Nakapagpapatuloy ang maliliit at malalaking krimen kapag ipinipikit natin ang ating mga mata at hinahayaan nating mamihasa sila, kung ikinikibit lamang natin ang ating balikat, ihinahalukipkip lamang natin ang ating mga bisig, at nagtutulug-tulugan lamang tayo sa mga kasamaang lumalalim at lumalawak, dahil takot tayong tumaya ng pagsisikap na baka lamang mabale-wala, dahil takot tayong mapag-initan at maparusahan, dahil tayo’y may “labis na pagkasilaw sa umaalipusta” sa ating kapakanan, sa ating mga karapatan at sa ating karangalan. Hindi nga ba’t “ang ipinagiging taksil ng ilan ay nasa kaduwagan at kapabayaan ng iba”?

Paano ba tayong nagkaroon ng populasyong ang karamihan ay ganito? Bahagi ng kadahilanan ay nasa sistema ng edukasyon. Ang pormal na pag-iiskwela ay nakabatay sa motibong makapagtapos upang humanap ng trabaho. Kung nasasaling man ang usapin ng pagpapakatao at pakikipagkapwa-tao, ito’y nakakulong lamang sa naglalaho na ring mga subject na “Good Manners and Right Conduct,” “values” at “Ethics.” Di pa halos naiuugnay ang mga ito sa personal na galaw at ugali ng mga nagtuturo at ng mga superbisor ng mga nagtuturo, at lalong malayo sa mga ugali at gawi ng mga opisyal at matataas na kawani sa pamahalaan.

At dahil ang trabahong hinahanap ngayon ay hindi kayang likhain ng ekonomiyang Pilipino na nakahandusay dahil kinokontrol at hinuhuthot ng dayuhang mga interes, programa at patakaran, at ang inaasahan ay ang nililikha ng mga dayuhang ito sa pamamagitan ng pamumuhunan nila dito o sa sari-sariling bayan, ang tuon ang edukasyon ay ang maintindihan natin ang mga iuutos ng mga banyagang iyon at maintindihan nila ang mga iuulat natin, di bale nang tayong ilampung milyong Pilipino ay halos di na nagkakaintindihan nang totohanan! Paanong mapapanday ang malalim na malasakit sa kapakanan ng bayan kung mas malapit ang ating mga kababayan sa mga palakad, kultura at salaping dayuhan?

Ang dapat sanang nakasasaló sa malaking kakulangan ng pormal na edukasyon ay ang impormal, ang unang edukasyon na dapat sanang nakakamit ng mga bata sa kandungan ng kanilang mga magulang! Ngunit kung siglo-siglo’t deka-dekada na ngang nasanay ang mga magulang sa kultura ng pagtitiis, pagsasawalang-kibo, at pag-iwas na masangkot sa mga sama-samang pagsisikap na “baka naman mabigo lamang,” ang naituturo ng mga magulang sa kanilang mga anak sa natitira pa nilang panahon sa paghuhubog ng pagkatao ng mga ito ay ang sariling depektibo na ring mga pag-iisip at pag-uugali, at ang pagpapalaki sa mga bata ay limitado na lamang sa paghahanapbuhay para sila’y mapakain at mapag-aral, upang kapag makatapos ay makahanap ng trabaho at di rin magkapanahong maghubog ng pagkatao ng sari-sarili naman nilang mga anak. Ganito lamang nang ganito ang pag-ikot ng “gulong ng palad.” Mas masama pa, lumulubha pa nga nang lumulubha ang ganitong kalakaran sa lipunang Pilipino.

Ang paghuhubog sa pagkatao ng anak, ng bagong salinlahi, ay karugtong ng pagsisilang at pagpapasuso ng mga ina sa kanilang mga sanggol. Laluna sa kasalukuyang mga balangkas ng ugnayan ng babae’t lalaki sa lipunan, lubhang mas malapit sa ina ang ganitong pagsasaalang-alang sa kapakanan ng anak, na lumalagpas sa kanyang sikmura at sa kanyang pag-eeskwela.

Kailangang igiit ng mga ina, at nararapat silang dinggin ng mga ama, na pag-ibayuhin ang pagharap ng mga magulang, bilang magkatuwang, sa paghuhubog ng isang bagong henerasyon ng mga Pilipino na mas akma bilang mga supling ng ating lahing dakila, mga supling ng mga ninunong libu-libong taóng namuhay nang marangal, mabunga at mapayapa. Kailangang pakitahan ng mga magulang ang kanilang mga anak, at maging ang isa’t isa, ng magagandang halimbawa ng paninindigan sa wastong gawain, katapatan sa katotohanan, pagmamalasakitan, pagdadamayan at pagtatangkilikan. Kailangang pakitahan ng mga magulang ang kanilang mga anak, at maging ang isa’t isa, ng magagandang halimbawa ng kung paano ang maging mga aktibong maytaya.

Hamon ko ngayon sa kasalukuyang henerasyon ng mga kababaihan ng Malolos, sa kasalukuyang mga mamamayan ng Malolos, at ng Bulakan, at ng buong kapuluang bayan, hamon sa mga Pilipinong narito man o nasa ibayong-dagat, na pagtulungan nating hubugin sa marapat at matuwid ang ating sarili at ang kasunod na mga henerasyon ng ating mga kababayan, at buuin nang malawakan ang bagong bayanihan ng tunay na pagbabago sa pulitika, ekonomiya at lipunang Pilipino.

Dinggin natin at ipasa-pasa sa maraming iba pa ang hudyat ng tambuli, ang ugong ng panawagan upang kumilos na tayo nang matatag at sama-sama laban sa tunay na mga ugat ng ating kahirapan at ugat ng pagbagsak ng ating moralidad at tiwalaan bilang bayan. Magpakatatag, magparami at magbuklod tayo sa pagiging mga aktibong may-taya sa kapakanan, kalayaan, karangalan at kaginhawahan ng ating lahing dakila.

Magsanib-lakas, Pilipinas!
 

Lungsod ng Makati, Pebrero 22, 2008
Si Ginoong Reyes ay mapadadalhan ng komentaryo sa: dingreyes@yahoo.com
Basahin din ang kanyang mga kolum na pangkasaysayan sa: http://filipinos4life.faithweb.com/regcols.htm
Maging pamilyar sa kanyang mga aklat na ipinakikilala sa: http://bookmakers-phils.8m.net
Kilalanin ang Women of Malolos Foundation, Inc. (WOMFI) upang itaguyod ang mga proyekto nito.

Buksan ang website na:  http://womenofmalolos.org

back to list

AN OPEN LETTER TO CHURCH LEADERS

KAALAGAD Katipunang Kristiyano

AN OPEN LETTER TO CHURCH LEADERS To Our Dear Church leaders:

WHAT DO SOME OF OUR CHURCH LEADERS DO WHEN A PRESIDENT AND HER CABINET CONSPIRE AGAINST THE CITIZENS?
They tell the people what the people already know:

*They talk about the moral fabric of society being assailed.

*They urge everybody to be vigilant and to seek the truth.

*They say the government reeks of corruption and opportunism.

*They suggest it is time for a concerted and collective action.

*They merely recite the mantras of order, constitution and democracy.

Yes, for the most part, some of our church leaders are inclined to tell the people what the people already know.

How do the people know, certainly not primarily by reading books or listening to sermons or lectures. The people know because they have eyes and ears that see and hear beyond the legalese and technicalities of court hearings. They know because God has endowed them with the magnificent gift of discernment. The religious calls it the Sensus Fidelium, the voice of the Spirit within them; the people simply call it obvious

Christ precisely became one of us - to make the Will of God obvious to the faithful. "Whoever believes in me, believes not only in me but also in him who sent me. Whoever sees me, also sees him who sent me. I have come into the world that everyone who believes in me should not remain in the darkness...Yes, because I have not spoken on my own but the Father who sent me has commanded me what I must say and speak." (Jn.12: 44-49)

Christ dwells in his people. And He makes known God's Will to the people who believe and accept his Word. And when he wants to make known the Father's will to the world, he speaks also through the people, as indeed we all understand by the phrase Vox Populi, Vox Dei. This is not to deny the authority and mandate of our church leaders to proclaim the Will of God to the people. Rather, it is to stress that since God speaks also through the people, our church leaders likewise have a similar duty to listen to God in his people.

The words from the musical 'Les Miserables' expresses this in a most poignant way:

          Do you hear the people sing, Singing a song of angry men?
          It is the music of a people who will not be slaves again!
          When the beating of your heart, echoes the beating of the drums
          There is a life about to start when tomorrow comes!
          Will you join in our crusade? Who will be strong and stand with me?
          Beyond the barricade, is there a world you long to see?
          Then join in the fight that will give you the right to be free!

And the Scriptures are even more urgent and more challenging:

          "Is it time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses while this house lies desolate?"

          Now therefore, thus says the LORD of hosts, "Consider your ways!

          "You have sown much, but harvest little; you eat, but there is not enough to be satisfied; you drink, but there is not enough to become drunk; you put on clothing, but no one is warm enough; and he who earns, earns wages to put into a purse with holes."

          Thus says the LORD of hosts, "Consider your ways!

          "Go up to the mountains, bring wood and rebuild the temple, that I may be pleased with it and be glorified," says the LORD. [Haggai 1:4-8]

We discern at least three basic questions that might concern our church leaders, as they concern all believers in these most difficult and critical times:

          • How courageously and faithfully are you hearing to the Will of God in his people?

        • Where/how do you see yourselves in relation to the 'barricade' that has for so long denied our people a life of peace, freedom and dignity. • What more are you willing to offer/give up so that the God's Will might be heard faithfully and proclaimed fully?

          In concrete, we understand this to mean for our church leaders not to be content with the good things they are already doing in service to our people; But rather to become more active and committed towards being part of the people's present challenge:

          Rebuild the nation!

          Replace the corrupt usurper and her cabinet!

          Install a transitional council of leaders!

          Elect a new leadership through a snap election!

          Establish a working democracy!
 

KAALAGAD Katipunang Kristiyano / February 20, 2008

back to list

A CALL TO INFORMED ACTIONS: LETTER FROM THE DEAN

Dean Antonio G. M. La Viña, Ateneo School of Government

Dear colleagues,
          I write this letter to all of you - our Faculty, the core research and administrative staff of the school, our partners, and to our students - to share with you my thoughts on how we in the Ateneo School of Government (ASoG) should respond to the events that are rapidly unfolding in our country. This letter is intended principally to the immediate ASoG community although it will be posted in our website to facilitate its circulation.

          At the outset, let me be very clear that I cannot and do not speak for the whole Ateneo de Manila University. I cannot and do not also speak for all of the faculty and staff of the ASoG. Because we are an academic community, I respect and encourage the diversity of views in the university and the school. The present political crisis is not an excuse to abandon this best practice. However, as a leader of a school that sees and brands itself as a Graduate School of Leadership and Public Service, I also cannot be silent. As a school that prides itself with its framework of ethical leadership and as an institution that is spreading the gospel of transparency and social accountability in the country and our region, we cannot afford to stay in the sidelines as the events related to the ZTE-NBN controversy play out in the halls of the Senate, the Office of the Ombudsman, the streets of Manila and other cities, and in our very own campuses.

          My principal call to the members of our community is this: it is time to act decisively based on informed analysis of what is happening. I will not prescribe the actions that each of you should take. But I urge you to listen to the testimonies in the Senate, observe the hearings in the Office of the Ombudsman and Department of Justice, and listen to the debates in media and in other public forums. I encourage you to talk to each other and to many others outside our community, to share thoughts and insights, to make collective judgments where possible and convince each other on what actions we should be taking. And I encourage you to take peaceful and nonviolent actions that will lead to the strengthening and not destruction of our democratic institutions.

          For your information, I have already taken an initial personal step. Yesterday, the 17th of February 2008, I signed a statement issued by over 70 former government officials who have held high positions in the current and previous administrations. (For the full text of the statement, see the annex to this letter.)

          The school itself will not take a political stand because we are not organized for that. I am also conscious that we do not necessarily have the same appreciation of the facts, including on the credibility of Mr. Lozada or the veracity of his claims. There is probably disagreement in the school on the record of the Macapagal-Arroyo administration especially with respect to corruption and human rights. We will continue to respect these differences of opinion and I encourage everyone to be respectful of each other's views.

          While not taking explicitly political positions, I would like however to suggest concrete ways that the Ateneo School of Government, as an institution, could contribute constructively to deal with this political crisis:

          First, we should take a leadership role in our larger university community as it addresses this political crisis. Nothing less is expected of our unit which is considered a principal extension arm of the university and its link to the world of governance and politics. For this reason, I have encouraged colleagues in the school to be active in the formation and activities of different alliances within the Ateneo. Limited as our resources are, we will contribute whatever we can so that the University can respond better to the unfolding events. We will pay particular attention to what our students and other youth need to understand the events better so that they can also take informed actions

          Second, I would like to encourage our senior faculty and our core staff with political and/or legal expertise to become available to media and other public forums (including those hosted by the school and in the university). You may identify yourself as coming from the Ateneo School of Government but do mention that you do not speak for the school or the university. I ask you to provide analysis, contribute your insights, and most of all suggest solutions on how we can move forward. Let us influence the national conversation and help direct it towards political and governance outcomes that truly transform the country for the better. An example of what we could do is to participate in the debate on three issues that are critical so that the current controversy result in long term gains for our democratic institutions:

          * The positive role of the Senate in ensuring accountability and instituting policy reforms. The Senate must be commended for serving as a forum in knowing the facts and circumstances about this issue. It must however not waste this opportunity by not putting a clear and appropriate closure to its investigation. Ultimately, the upper chamber of the Congress should provide clear policy directions and proposed concrete actions.

          * Creating an Independent Counsel with investigation and prosecutorial powers. While recognizing that the country sees the Senate as one of the few places where the truth can be brought out, it is ultimately not the place where legal accountability will be realized. That will happen only when the right charges are filed, prosecuted and ultimately judicially determined. Consistent with this need to ensure legal accountability, I think it is time to create, by law, an Independent Counsel that will investigate and prosecute those liable for criminal acts in this controversy and similar high-profile cases.

          * Reforming the loan procurement, BOT and other development project approval systems. A major gap or flaw that has emerged in the investigation of the controversy is an apparent lack of transparency and accountability in the loan procurement and BOT negotiations that make the existing processes vulnerable to influence peddling and backdoor negotiations. The ASoG should assert the need for transparency and accountability mechanisms in the different stages of loan procurement and BOT negotiations. One tested approach in fighting bureaucratic corruption is civil society monitoring and evaluation of government processes and programs. We are willing to work with government agencies to expand this approach to the area of loan procurement, BOT and other development project approval systems.

          Third, and finally, I am encouraging our faculty, staff and students to take part in public actions and demonstrations to show our support to Mr. Lozada and more importantly for the search for the truth. I do not know whether everything that Lozada said and will say is true. Nonetheless, his decision to step forward and face the Senate was, in itself, an act of courage that deserves our full support. As a sanctuary for leaders, we have the duty to assist whistle blowers so that others may also be emboldened and take a stand for what is right. I also encourage all of you to participate in public actions that demand accountability from the government and its officials for the actions that have been taken not only to suppress the truth but also for the crime of graft and corruption from where this controversy all began.

          This political crisis challenges us as a people. It challenges us to stand up for the truth, to understand and critically analyze the issues, and act on it with resolve and conviction for the benefit of the country. Poverty continues to be the major problem of our people and the Ateneo School of Government is fully committed to a vision of building a prosperous and just society. Nation building requires helping build the country community by community with responsive local governments. But nation building also requires that we strengthen our democratic and governance institutions. Together, let us transform this national crisis into a solid opportunity for long lasting reforms.
         

Dean Antonio G. M. La Viña
Ateneo School of Government
18 February 2008

back to list

TIME TO GO-- A Call to Our Colleagues in Government!

By 54 Former High-level Government Officials

Time to Go A Call to Our Colleagues in Government! WE ARE FORMER government officials who have held high positions in The current and previous administrations. Having participated in the Highest level of governance up close and personal, we now feel compelled to speak up for our demoralized public servants and arrest the decline of our institutions of governance. In the past, many of us kept quiet, going on about our daily chores, attending to business as usual.

      However, over the last few days, we, together with the rest of the country, have seen one man -- Jun Lozada -- finally decide that he can no longer be part of the massive graft and corruption that permeates this government. His testimony exposed that the corruption in the project he dealt with -- the NBN-ZTE project -- is standard in what he called "dysfunctional government procurement processes."

      Clearly, what Jun Lozada knew so terrified the powers-that-be that they unwittingly exposed what Jun called "the dark side of the state" -- state-sponsored terrorism that had been rearing its ugly head in the various disappearances and extrajudicial killings in the past six years

-- and which almost took him as a victim in a botched kidnapping That the administration has been trying, with little success, to cover up.

      In a sense, all Jun Lozada did was to confirm what we already know: Our country is sliding into moral decadence. He also confirmed the systematic destruction of our democratic institutions and the systemic nature of our problems. We have seen this in the wanton disregard of checks-and-balances; abuse of the powers of the President; the cooptation through patronage and outright bribery of the other branches of government; politically sponsored corruption, facilitated, not thwarted, by bureaucratic procedures; the naked us of power and authority through the PNP (Philippine National Police), PSG (Presidential Security Group), NAIA (Ninoy Aquino International Airport), among others, to strangle the truth; and the deployment of cabinet, sub-cabinet officials, and the military to obstruct justice and cover up illegal orders and acts.

      In the past, for too many times that we were confronted with threats to our democracy and moral values, our response was: "What can we do about it? What is our choice" who will lead us?"

      These questions persist but, today, we can no longer stay silent. We can no longer ignore the reality of a government gone wild, wreaking Havoc on our rights and institutions in a climate of impunity. We can no longer console ourselves in the strength of the peso, narrowing deficits, and an expanding economy. Even these ephemeral gains have not translated into a better life for the majority of our people, especially the poor.

      The future of our country is at stake. Our democratic institutions Are under attack. What we stand to lost is the moral fabric of our society.

      We call on all government officials -- Cabinet secretaries, undersecretaries, heads of agencies -- who know about these anomalous transactions to join the heroic stand of Jun Lozada to come forward and speak out.

      We call on all those who know about the extrajudicial killings and disappearances to go public and tell the truth.

      We call on all those who can no longer endure this wrongful governance, with its structures of evil and unmoderated greed:

IT IS TIME TO CUT CLEAN! IT IS TIME TO GO!

Tama na! Sobra na! Panahon na!
1. Florencio Abad (Former Secretary, Department of Education)
2. Tomas Africa (Former Administrator, National Statistics Office)
3. Tomas Apacible (Former Undersecretary, Department of Finance OR commissioner, bureau of Customs)
4. Senon Bacani (Former Secretary, Department of Agriculture)
5. Gerardo Bulatao (Former Undersecretary, Department of Agrarian Reform)
6. Clifford Burkley (Former Undersecretary, Department of Social Work and Development)
7. Jose Cuisia (Former Governor, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas)
8. Sostenes Campillo (Former Undersecretary, Department of Tourism)
9. Karina Constatino-David (Former Chair, Civil Service Commission)
10. Elfren Cruz (Former Head, Presidential Management Staff)
11. Teresita Quintos-Deles (Former Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process)
12. Benjamin Diokno (Former Secretary-General, National Economic Development Authority)
13. Franklin Drilon (Former Executive Secretary)
14. Jesus Estanislao (Former Secretary, Department of Finance)
15. Fulgencio Factoran Jr. (Former Secretary, Department of Environment and Natural Resources)
16. Victoria Garchitorena (Former Head, presidential Management Staff)
17. Ernesto Garilao (Former Secretary, Department of Agrarian Reform)
18. Jose Luis Gascon (Former Undersecretary, Department of Education)
19. Marietta Goco (Former Chair, Presidential Commission to Fight Poverty)
20. Jose Antonio Gonzalez (Former Minister, Ministry of Tourism)
21. Milwilda Guevarra (Former Undersecretary, Department of Finance)
22. Cielito Habito (Former Secretary-General, National Economic Development Authority)
23. Edilberto de Jesus, Jr. (Former Secretary, Department of Education)
24. Antonio La Vina (Former Undersecretary, Department of Environment and Natural Resources)
25. Benjamin Laguesma (Former Secretary, Department of Labor and Employment)
26. Lina Laigo (Former Secretary, Department of Social Welfare and Development)
WHY ARE WE SELLING OUR BEAUTIFUL LAND?rmer Secretary, Department of Finance)
28. Josefina Lichauco (Former Secretary, Department of Transportation and Communications)
29. Narzalina Lim (Former Secretary, Department of Tourism)
30. Juan Miguel Luz (Former Undersecretary, Department of Education)
31. Felipe Medalla (Former Secretary-General, National Economic Development Authority)
32. Vitaliano Naagas (Former President, Development Bank of the Philippines)
33. Imelda Nicolas (Former Lead Convenor, National Anti-Poverty Commission)
34. Ernesto Ordonez (Former Undersecretary, Presidential Flagship Programs and Projects)
35. Victor Ordoñez (Former Undersecretary, Department of Education)
36. Vicente Paterno (Former Minister, Ministry of Trade and Industry)
37. Jose Pardo (Former Secretary, Department of Finance)
38. Cesar Purisima (Former Secretary, Department of Finance)
39. Victor Ramos (Former Secretary, Department of Environment and Natural Resources)
40. Amina Rasul (Former Chair, National Youth Commission)
41. Albert Del Rosario (Former Ambassador to United States of America)
42. Francisco Del Rosario (Former Chair, Development Bank of the Philippines)
43. Ramon Del Rosario (Former Secretary, Department of Finance)
44. Melito Salazar (Former member of the Monetary Board, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas)
45. Leticia Ramos-Shahani (Former Undersecretary, Department of Foreign Affairs)
46. Cesar Sarino (Former Secretary, Department of Interior and Local Government)
47. Juan Santos (Former Secretary, Department of Trade and Industry)
48. Corazon Juliano-Soliman (Former Secretary, Department of Social Welfare and Development)
49. Hector Soliman (Former Undersecretary, Department of Agrarian Reform)
50. Mario Taguiwalo (Former Undersecretary, Department of Health)
51. Wigberto Tanada (Former Commissioner, Bureau of Customs)
52. Rene de Villa (Former Secretary, Department of Agrarian Reform)
53. Veronica F. Villavicencio (Former Lead Convenor, National Anti-Poverty Commission)
54. Deogracias Vistan (Former President, Land Bank of the Philippines)

back to list

RECLAIMING OUR HUMANITY

By Fr. Manoling Francisco, SJ

LA SALLE GYMNASIUM, GREENHILLS

17 FEBRUARY 2008

           On this Second Sunday of Lent, during which we are asked to reflect on the Transfiguration of Jesus Christ, I wish to touch on three themes that have to do with our moral transformation as a people: first, Ascertaining Credibility; second, Rediscovering our Humanity; and third, Witnessing to the Truth. In so doing, I hope to invite all of you to reflect more deeply on how we, as a nation, might respond to the present political crisis in which our identity and ethos, our convictions and integrity, in fact, who we are as a people, are at stake.

I. ASCERTAINING CREDIBILITY

          Jun, as Sen.Miriam Santiago has grilled you to ascertain your credibility (or was it to undermine your credibility? ), allow me to raise some important questions to consider in the very process of discerning your credibility. Allow me to do so by drawing on my own counseling experience.

          Very often, a young rape victim initially suppresses his or her awful and painful story, indeed wills to forget it, in the hope that by forgetting, he or she can pretend it never happened. But very often, too, there comes a point when concealing the truth becomes unbearable, and the desperate attempts to supposedly preserve life and sanity become increasingly untenable.

          At this point the victim of abuse decides to seek help. But even after having taken this step, the victim, devastated and confused, will tell his or her story with much hesitation and trepidation. It should be easy to imagine why. In telling the truth, one risks casting shame on himself or herself, subjecting oneself to intense scrutiny and skepticism, and jeopardizing one's safety and those of his or her loved ones, especially when one dares to go up against an older or more powerful person.

          Similarly, it is easy to imagine why Jun would initially refuse to challenge the might of Malacanang. Who in his or her right mind would accuse Malacanang of crimes against our people and implicate the First Family in a sordid tale of greed and corruption, knowing that by doing so, one endangers one's life and the lives of his or her loved ones? We are, after all, living in dangerous times, where the government has not hesitated to use everything in its power to keep itself in power, where it has yet to explain and solve the numerous cases of extra-judicial killings.

          But Jun is in his right mind. His story rings true especially in the face of the perils that he has had to face. And by his courage, Jun has also shown that it is not only that he is in his right mind; his heart is also in the right place.

          Hence, my personal verdict: Jun, I believe that you are a credible witness. And if hundreds have gathered here this morning, it is probably because they also believe in you. Mga kapatid, naniniwala ba kayo kay Jun Lozada? Naniniwala ba kayo sa kanyang testimonya? Kung gayon, palakpakan po natin ang Probinsyanong Intsik, si Mr. Jun Lozada.

          Jun, we hope that by our presence here, you may find some consolation. Pope Benedict XVI writes that "con-solatio" or consolation means "being with the other in his or her solitude, so that it ceases to be solitude." Jun, be assured that your solitude is no longer isolation as we profess our solidarity with you. Hindi ka nag-iisa. We are committed to stay the course and to do our best to protect you and your family and the truth you have proclaimed.

II. REDISCOVERING OUR HUMANITY

          What makes Jun a credible witness to us?

          I think Jun is credible not simply by virtue of his being an eyewitness to the unmitigated greed of some of our public officials. Perhaps more importantly, Jun is credible because he has witnessed to us what it means to be truly human.

          Which leads me to my second theme: What does it mean to be human? How might we rediscover our humanity?

          Allow me to quote Pope Benedict XVI, who in his latest encyclical, Spe Salvi, has written: "the capacity to accept suffering for the sake of goodness, truth and justice is an essential criterion of humanity, because if my own well-being and safety are ultimately more important than truth and justice, then the power of the stronger prevails, then violence and untruth reign supreme. Truth and justice must stand above my comfort and physical well-being, or else my life becomes a lie. . . For this ... we need witnesses--martyrs .... We need them if we are to prefer goodness to comfort, even in the little choices we face each day."

          Our Holy Father concludes, "the capacity to suffer for the sake of the truth is the measure of humanity."

          Isn't this the reason we emulate our martyrs: Jose Rizal, Gomburza, Evelio Javier, Macli-ing Dulag, Cesar Climaco and Ninoy Aquino? They have borne witness for us what it means to be truly human--to be able to suffer for the sake of others and for the sake of the truth.

          I remember Cory recalling a conversation she had with Ninoy while they were in exile in Boston . Cory asked Ninoy what he thought might happen to him once he set foot in Manila . Ninoy said there were three possibilities: one, that he would be rearrested and detained once more in Fort Bonifacio ; two, that he would be held under house arrest; and three, that he would be assassinated.

          "Then why go home?" Cory asked.

          To which Ninoy answered: "Because I cannot allow myself to die a senseless death, such as being run over by a taxi cab in New York . I have to go home and convince Ferdinand Marcos to set our people free."

          Witnessing to one's deepest convictions, notwithstanding the consequences, is the measure of our humanity. Proclaiming the truth to others, whatever the cost, is the mark of authentic humanity.

          Jun, we know you have feared for your life and continue to do so. But in transcending your fears for yourself and your family, you have reclaimed your humanity. And your courage and humility, despite harassment and calumniation by government forces, embolden us to retrieve and reclaim our humanity tarnished by our cowardice and complicity with sin in the world. You have inspired us to be true to ourselves and to submit to and serve the truth that transcends all of us.

III. WITNESSING TO THE TRUTH

          This leads us to our third and last theme: witnessing to the truth. In his encyclical, Pacem in Terris, Pope John XXIII exhorts that it is the fundamental duty of the government to uphold the truth: "A political society is to be considered well-ordered, beneficial and in keeping with human dignity if it grounded on truth." Moreover, the encyclical explains that unless a society is anchored on the truth, there can be no authentic justice, charity and freedom.

          Every government is therefore obliged to serve the truth if it is to truly serve the people. Its moral credibility and authority over a people is based on the extent of its defense of and submission to the truth. Insofar as a government is remiss in upholding the truth, insofar as a government actively suppresses the truth, it loses its authority vested upon it by the people.

          At this juncture, allow me to raise a delicate question: At what point does an administration lose its moral authority over its constituents?

          First, a clear tipping point is the surfacing of hard evidence signifying undeniable complicity of certain government officials in corruption and injustice, evidence that can be substantiated in court.

          Hence, during the Marcos Regime, the manipulation of Snap Election results as attested to by the tabulators who walked out of the PICC was clear evidence of the administration' s disregard for and manipulation of the collective will of the people in order to remain in power.

          During the Erap Administration, the testimony of Clarissa Ocampo, claiming that Pres. Erap had falsified Equitable Bank documents by signing as Jose Velarde, was the smoking gun that triggered the rage of our people.

          Allow me to respond to the same question by pursue an alternative track of argument: an administration loses it moral authority over its people when it fails in its fundamental duty to uphold the truth, when it is constituted by an ethos of falsehood. When a pattern of negligence in investigating the truth, suppressing the truth and harassing those who proclaim the truth is reasonably established, then a government, in principle, loses its right to rule over and represent the people.

          Regarding negligence: Do the unresolved cases, such as the failed automation of the national elections, the fertilizer scam, the extra-judicial killings, and the "Hello, Garci" scandal, constitute negligence on the part of the GMA Administration to probe and ferret out the truth?

          Regarding covering-up the truth: Does the abduction of Jun Lozada and the twisting and manipulation of his narrative by Malacanang's minions constitute concealment of the truth? Was the padlocking of the office of Asst. Gov't Counsel Gonzales who testified before the Senate regarding the North Rail project anomaly an instance of covering-up the truth?

          Regarding the suppression of the truth: Does the issuance and implementation of E.O. 464, which prevents government officials from testifying in Senate hearings without Malacanang's permission, constitute suppression of the truth? Was the prevention of AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Senga and six other officers from testifying before the Senate with regard the "Hello, Garci" scandal tantamount to a suppression of the truth? Was disallowing Brig. Gen. Quevedo, Lt. Col Capuyan and Lt. Col. Sumayo from appearing before the Lower House an instance of hindering the truth from surfacing?

          And regarding harassment of those who proclaim the truth: Are the abduction of Jun Lozada and the decision to court-marshal Gen. Gudani and Col. Balutan for disregarding Malacanang's order not to testify before the Senate examples of punishing those who come forth to tell the truth?

          By conflating one's responses to all these questions does one arrive not at hard evidence showing culpability on the part of some government officials, but a gestalt, an image which nonetheless demands our assessment and judgment. I invite all of you then to consider these two methods of evaluating and judging the moral credibility of any government, the moral credibility of our present government.

          Allow me to end with a few words about an Ignatian virtue, familiaritas cum Deo. To become familiar with God involves the illumination of the intellect, coming to know who God is and what God wills. But it also involves the conversion of the affect, the reconfiguration of the heart. Becoming familiar with God entails transforming and conforming my thinking, my feeling and my doing in accordance to the Lord's, which can only be the work of grace.

          Familiarity with God thus entails rejoicing in what God delights--the truth; abhorring what God detests--falsehood; being pained by what breaks the heart of God--the persecution of truth-seekers. Familiarity with God means sharing the passion of God for the truth and the pathos of God whenever the truth and the bearers of truth are overcome by the forces of the lie.

          On this Second Sunday of Lent, as we contemplate the transfiguration of Jesus Christ on Mount Horeb , we pray that our hearts and minds be so transfigured and so conformed to the mind, heart and will of the Jesus, our way, our life, and our truth.

          May the Lord bless and protect you, Jun, and your family. May the Lord bless and guide us all into the way of truth. Amen.
 

LA SALLE GYMNASIUM, GREENHILLS

17 FEBRUARY 2008

back to list

TRANSITION GOVERNMENT AFTER G.M.A.

By Renato Magtubo
Chairperson,   Partido ng Manggagawa
 

JUN LOZADA, the reluctant witness, is now an accidental propagandist for social change with his testimony at today's Senate hearing about the social truth that oligarchs like Alcantara and Aboitiz maintaining and advancing their domination of economic wealth through control of the political system.

          That is the very reason why the workers and poor do not agree with the call for "Gloria Resign" or even "Oust GMA" for such slogans simply mean "Kabayan for President." Constitutional succession plainly translates into a change in faces and not into a reform of the system. Kabayan may be the lesser evil to GMA but why would the masses fight and die just to settle for a continuation of control by the oligarchs. Replacing the Razons with the Lopezes will not mean a moderation in greed. Let us not repeat the tragedy of Edsa Dos by again accepting a farce as constitutional successor.

          The workers and poor demand reforms not just the ouster of GMA and therefore we call for a "transition government" to replace the "evil president." The agenda of such a transition government is not a vague "moral revolution" but radical social reform. The most urgent demands for social justice must be the agenda of the transition government and it principal task must be to draft a new constitution embodying the ideals of reform.

February 18, 2008

back to list

GMA IS RIPE FOR OUSTER BY THE BROAD MASS MOVEMENT

By Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Chief Political Consultant
National Democratic Front of the Philippines

      GLORIA M. ARROYO, the fake president, is ripe for ouster by the broad mass movement of the Filipino people as a result of her record of moral bankruptcy, subservience to foreign interests, brazen corruption and systematic human rights violations.

          The flagrant use of bribery to remove Rep. Jose de Venecia from the speakership and the use of kidnapping in an attempt to silence Rodolfo Jun Lozada have served to underscore the issue of corruption and to outrage the broad masses of the people.

          The Arroyo regime has become so isolated and so desperate that it has directed its military and police minions to concoct tales about anti-Arroyo assassination plots and spread fears about possible violence in mass actions in order to intimidate the people and the legal democratic forces.

          The regime is seeking to justify the state violence that the military and police are poised to unleash in order to disrupt and stop the growth of the mass actions. In this regard, the regime and its military and police henchmen are being called upon to respect the right of the people to speak and assemble.

          As far as I know from the official pronouncements of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), the New People's Army (NPA) is sympathizing with and encouraging the legal and peaceful mass actions in the urban areas and is directing its military tactical offensives against the people's enemies in the countryside in consonance with the strategic line of protracted people's war.

          The sheer growth of the legal and peaceful mass actions in the national capital region and on a national scale in the coming days, weeks and months can encourage the military and police to withdraw support from the Arroyo ruling clique and can suffice to cause the resignation, impeachment or outright ouster of the illegitimate and morally bankrupt president.

15 February 2008

back to list