A few years back a giant broadcasting network prohibited its news anchors from endorsing products outside their network time. So most of the anchors, who probably made a killing endorsing canned tuna, brandy, and the like, grudgingly obliged. A popular couple left the network, moved to the rival network, and sued the old network for illegal dismissal. Last I heard, they lost the case. But I thought for a while that this entire episode in Philippine television was a triumph of ethics. Advertising is advertising, and news is news. If you have news anchors doing advertisement, it blurs the divide, and you run the risk of the public being led to believe that their product endorsements are news.
Of course, I was dead wrong. It was a triumph of network business bullies, instead. It appears that what they are doing now is worse. They are injecting advertisement directly into the news. This morning this lady reporter doing the traffic news tried to sell skin protection products while appearing to be doing a feature on traffic reporting. Before her segment went on air, the studio anchor introduced the traffic girl, and said that the reporter had something important to say. I popped up the volume a little, because I wanted to know if the number coding system was suspended today (it is). Then she went on air, telling us how she starts her report, where she stays during her Edsa Kamuning report, the difficulties in doing the traffic report, and concluded that, because of the heat, she had to use this skin protection lotion. I asked myself what the ...?
Another segment was introduced by the news anchor about a reporter who was in the bus terminal in Araneta Center Cubao, Quezon City. She started with the report on the people in the terminal and concluded with the PLDT Goldmine promo, which gave a chance for people who recruit PLDT subscribers to earn cash commissions and PHP 1 Million in a raffle. I shook my head, and decided it was time to blog this.
Last night, I was watching the early evening news of the same network, and I overheard an entire segment about what was happening in the telenovela being aired by the network. Since when has telenovela plotlines been news? Of course, that's an advertisement of the telenovela (which is probably heavy with advertisement itelf).
So indeed what might be happening now is that the network is cornering the endorsement business from the advertisers with such a clever scheme: putting the advertisement directly into the news. Too bad for the anchors, and too bad for the public.
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Thursday, March 10, 2005
Where is the telco price war leading us? To ruin, of course.
I had a meeting this afternoon with a friend who operates a telephone company in my home province of Mindoro. He is complaining, because the recent PLDT response to the Sun 24/7 gimmick is killing traffic to our province.
The telco price war began when John Gokongwei's Sun cellular offered a service at a flat rate for all calls within the Sun network. Apparently, the pricing scheme worked as Sun was able to entice three million subscribers -- something which took Globe and Smart longer to achieve in the early years of the cellular phone in the Philippines.
PLDT responded with a month-long promo, which introduced a flat rate of PHP 10 per call within the PLDT network nationwide, and PLDT across the SMART and Talk n Text networks. Naturally, it may have stopped the turn-over of people from Smart and Talk n Text to Sun, but the other immediate effect is to congest the PLDT lines. According to my friend, PLDT landline calls to Naujan, Mindoro are having a hard time connecting, because the PLDT Batangas exchange, where Naujan's traffic passess through, is clogged up. As a result, Naujan's residents with landlines are isolated from the country, and even the world -- because international calls to Naujan, Mindoro also pass through Batangas. According to my friend, if this continues, he may have to close his small telephone company, and watch as his subscribers switch to Smart and Talk N' Text.
The main problem with this price war is that it is really going to generate a lot of useless chatter. People are going to call each other regardless if the call is necessary to relay important information or just loose talk. Worse, as usual, we can expect more loose talk to occupy phone bandwidth, which will make it hard for inportant information to pass through our phone lines. The telebabad's will take over. As a result, we are going to ruin the greatest thing which happened to Philippine communications since the invention of the telephone. What's the use of having a cellular phone if you can't connect because people are abusing it?
I used to think that Sun's John Gokongwei and PLDT's Manny Pangilinan were in a certain class of businessmen -- the types who will not think only of short term profits but also of long term benefits to their companies and their patrons, as well. But this telco price has proven me wrong. They all appear to be in the same league as this movie producer, back in those days when she produced those stupid movies with her so-called babies that made a lot of money for her movie company, but ruined an entire generation's value system.
I wonder what are we going to ruin next?
The telco price war began when John Gokongwei's Sun cellular offered a service at a flat rate for all calls within the Sun network. Apparently, the pricing scheme worked as Sun was able to entice three million subscribers -- something which took Globe and Smart longer to achieve in the early years of the cellular phone in the Philippines.
PLDT responded with a month-long promo, which introduced a flat rate of PHP 10 per call within the PLDT network nationwide, and PLDT across the SMART and Talk n Text networks. Naturally, it may have stopped the turn-over of people from Smart and Talk n Text to Sun, but the other immediate effect is to congest the PLDT lines. According to my friend, PLDT landline calls to Naujan, Mindoro are having a hard time connecting, because the PLDT Batangas exchange, where Naujan's traffic passess through, is clogged up. As a result, Naujan's residents with landlines are isolated from the country, and even the world -- because international calls to Naujan, Mindoro also pass through Batangas. According to my friend, if this continues, he may have to close his small telephone company, and watch as his subscribers switch to Smart and Talk N' Text.
The main problem with this price war is that it is really going to generate a lot of useless chatter. People are going to call each other regardless if the call is necessary to relay important information or just loose talk. Worse, as usual, we can expect more loose talk to occupy phone bandwidth, which will make it hard for inportant information to pass through our phone lines. The telebabad's will take over. As a result, we are going to ruin the greatest thing which happened to Philippine communications since the invention of the telephone. What's the use of having a cellular phone if you can't connect because people are abusing it?
I used to think that Sun's John Gokongwei and PLDT's Manny Pangilinan were in a certain class of businessmen -- the types who will not think only of short term profits but also of long term benefits to their companies and their patrons, as well. But this telco price has proven me wrong. They all appear to be in the same league as this movie producer, back in those days when she produced those stupid movies with her so-called babies that made a lot of money for her movie company, but ruined an entire generation's value system.
I wonder what are we going to ruin next?
Friday, February 25, 2005
The Five People You Meet in Heaven: A Review
When we die, we meet five people whom we might have known in life. They give us a tour of different places where we might have encountered or met them. And then, they explain to us five different memories of our lives and aid us to have our questions answered – why we lived and what we lived for. This is the fictional frame where Mitch Ablom paints the story of Eddie, an 83-year old circus maintenance man, who died in a freak accident when a cable snapped in a carnival ride called Freddy’s Free Fall, and a cart fell on Eddie as he tried to save a girl from it. More details here.
I have to admit when I read about the initial success of this book, I scoffed at it (and wrongly so) as an artistic flop. Ever since I read Da Vinci Code, I vowed never to believe that those books in the New York Times bestseller list are worth my while. But my personal encounters with the metaphysical world have got me itching to read this book for weeks, until one day, with a prospect of another business trip to Cagayan de Oro City, which left me with plenty of reading time, I decided to suspend all artistic judgment on this book, and plunge on it regardless of my past disappointments.
And this time, I was not disappointed. I have always thought of heaven myself as a place where things get explained to us about this life. Reading about Eddie and his five people brings me back memories of people I know who have died when I was too young or too busy to understand their stories. There are days, for instance, that I wished I could have coffee with my late grandfather in Starbucks, and talk about life issues and how he handled them in his time. Had he lived through this day, my grandfather, I’m sure, would have been a Starbucks regular himself. Sadly, it is not possible now, and those conversations will not happen in this life. But Five People consoles me with the thought that maybe, in the next life, that conversation over Starbucks coffee might take place. And with Five People, I could almost imagine how my encounters in heaven might be when my time comes with other friends and relatives that I have already lost.
Of course with this metaphysical premise, Five People might bring tears and wax sentimental in certain places. But never mind that. True and good literature is expected to do that once in a while. Besides, Mitch Albom’s goals are high or should I say, heavy on the sentiment, but he handles it pretty well, carefully treading on the narrow path between artistic detachment and emotion, which prevents it from being a Danielle Steele melodrama that would have caused me to throw it straight to the trash can. Indeed, Mitch Albom manages pretty well, so I'm marking this book "for keeps".
My professor on the modern novel once said in class that all artistic merits being equal, what makes a book outstanding is its vision. And this is why she said Faulkner stands taller than Hemingway. Faulkner had a vision of order and hope, while Hemingway’s vision is of stoic darkness. While Mitch Albom is not in the league of these late giants of modern literature, surely the Five People You Meet in Heaven, with its vision of hope, stands proud out there with the best that modern fiction has to offer.
I have to admit when I read about the initial success of this book, I scoffed at it (and wrongly so) as an artistic flop. Ever since I read Da Vinci Code, I vowed never to believe that those books in the New York Times bestseller list are worth my while. But my personal encounters with the metaphysical world have got me itching to read this book for weeks, until one day, with a prospect of another business trip to Cagayan de Oro City, which left me with plenty of reading time, I decided to suspend all artistic judgment on this book, and plunge on it regardless of my past disappointments.
And this time, I was not disappointed. I have always thought of heaven myself as a place where things get explained to us about this life. Reading about Eddie and his five people brings me back memories of people I know who have died when I was too young or too busy to understand their stories. There are days, for instance, that I wished I could have coffee with my late grandfather in Starbucks, and talk about life issues and how he handled them in his time. Had he lived through this day, my grandfather, I’m sure, would have been a Starbucks regular himself. Sadly, it is not possible now, and those conversations will not happen in this life. But Five People consoles me with the thought that maybe, in the next life, that conversation over Starbucks coffee might take place. And with Five People, I could almost imagine how my encounters in heaven might be when my time comes with other friends and relatives that I have already lost.
Of course with this metaphysical premise, Five People might bring tears and wax sentimental in certain places. But never mind that. True and good literature is expected to do that once in a while. Besides, Mitch Albom’s goals are high or should I say, heavy on the sentiment, but he handles it pretty well, carefully treading on the narrow path between artistic detachment and emotion, which prevents it from being a Danielle Steele melodrama that would have caused me to throw it straight to the trash can. Indeed, Mitch Albom manages pretty well, so I'm marking this book "for keeps".
My professor on the modern novel once said in class that all artistic merits being equal, what makes a book outstanding is its vision. And this is why she said Faulkner stands taller than Hemingway. Faulkner had a vision of order and hope, while Hemingway’s vision is of stoic darkness. While Mitch Albom is not in the league of these late giants of modern literature, surely the Five People You Meet in Heaven, with its vision of hope, stands proud out there with the best that modern fiction has to offer.
Friday, February 11, 2005
Retrospective: The Eraserheads and Circus
I bought a CD of the Eraserheads' Circus album last Monday. I got my first copy of this album on tape back in the summer of 1995 when I was preparing for the bar exams. I mentioned somewhere here that my musical taste took a side trip to the classical genre in my law school days, because of the myth that baroque music enhances brain power. Thus, for the four years of law school, my daily staple was Bach's Brandenburg concertos, some Mozarts, and some Vivaldis. In the summer of 1995, I decided I was going to take a musical adventure, and try some Original Pilipino Music (OPM) with the Eraserheads.
The first time I listened to Circus, it felt like being with friends I haven't met for years. Funny thing is, I never met the Eraserheads at all. But the music that they made was the music that felt real. It was the music that members of the Voltes V generation like me had in their collective subsconcious, awaiting creative expression. And it would take Ely Buendia and the boys to unearth them from the deepest recesses of our hearts and minds. They sang about the life and struggles of college students in a manner unique to us: boredom, insomnia, semestral breaks, alcoholism, and love -- lost, unrequited, and otherwise. There was a Senate investigation on whether the song, "Alapaap" was endorsing drugs. Ely and the boys, however, claimed it was about freedom, until their erstwhile band manager, Jessica Zafra blurted that there was a line in the song that goes, "Hanggang sa Dulo ng mundo, hanggang maubos ang ubo." Wasn't that about cough syrups? The most biting song of the album is "Hey Jay", about a homosexual struggling for acceptance in the homophobic Philippines. Its bouncy upbeat and fancy guitar riffs sugarcoat the underlying story of deviants and their pains in a conservative society. I listened to it again, and have one conclusion, the Eraserheads are geniuses. The song "Kailan", especially the lounge version, will eternally be my generation's best song about unrequited love. How many times have I sung this? Same song different loves. Ha -- the story of my life, and probably the rest of us too.
I was bit of a musician myself back in high school. I learned to play the piano and guitar with the Jingle Chordbook Magazine, especially dedicated to the Beatles. I think I have bought at least five re-issues of that magazine, because I kept wearing out my copies. That's why I could recognize that the chord progression in "With a Smile" came from "Here, There and Everywhere". I made songs on the same progression myself, songs mushier than "With a Smile". Some of my compositions were being sung in school functions in San Beda High School. Nothing special though, and at no point did I imagine making a career out of my amateur musician days.
After high school, I had a choice of going to UP or the Ateneo. I chose the Ateneo, because I was forewarned that philosophy in UP was dominated by teachers from the "Philosophical Analysis" school of thought. But had I gone to UP, I know I would have shifted to film, played with a band on the side, and met up with the members of Eraserheads, who were going to college at the same time that I was.
In the Ateneo, my passion for creating music waned, because of my discovery of the wonders of poetry and fiction, and my uncanny ability for getting myself in school politics, without meaning to. Eventually, I decided to go to law school, and put aside for the meantime all artistic inclinations for the sake of a law diploma and a crack at the bar exams. Listening to Circus in the summer after graduating from law school, I felt like saying, "You guys can die now. This album is a masterpiece to last a long time. As for me I have nothing to show yet, but a medal in bootleg silver." Of course, the Eraserheads will go on writing better songs after Circus, one of which ("Ang Huling El Bimbo") even got them the MTV Music Awards for Best Asian Video.
Today, I'm listening to them again, on my way to board meetings and court hearings. And they bring me back to all those lost chapters of my life. My high school, college and law school days seem like yesterday, and they're all carried in one CD of the Eraserheads' Circus. Indeed, the power of music is in its ability to stir up our lost memories, dreams, and emotions to make us whole again. And I realize that the boy who used to write songs for school functions and dabble with poetry and fiction is the same blogger that I have become today, flirting with the creative muse once again on this corner of the world wide web.
The first time I listened to Circus, it felt like being with friends I haven't met for years. Funny thing is, I never met the Eraserheads at all. But the music that they made was the music that felt real. It was the music that members of the Voltes V generation like me had in their collective subsconcious, awaiting creative expression. And it would take Ely Buendia and the boys to unearth them from the deepest recesses of our hearts and minds. They sang about the life and struggles of college students in a manner unique to us: boredom, insomnia, semestral breaks, alcoholism, and love -- lost, unrequited, and otherwise. There was a Senate investigation on whether the song, "Alapaap" was endorsing drugs. Ely and the boys, however, claimed it was about freedom, until their erstwhile band manager, Jessica Zafra blurted that there was a line in the song that goes, "Hanggang sa Dulo ng mundo, hanggang maubos ang ubo." Wasn't that about cough syrups? The most biting song of the album is "Hey Jay", about a homosexual struggling for acceptance in the homophobic Philippines. Its bouncy upbeat and fancy guitar riffs sugarcoat the underlying story of deviants and their pains in a conservative society. I listened to it again, and have one conclusion, the Eraserheads are geniuses. The song "Kailan", especially the lounge version, will eternally be my generation's best song about unrequited love. How many times have I sung this? Same song different loves. Ha -- the story of my life, and probably the rest of us too.
I was bit of a musician myself back in high school. I learned to play the piano and guitar with the Jingle Chordbook Magazine, especially dedicated to the Beatles. I think I have bought at least five re-issues of that magazine, because I kept wearing out my copies. That's why I could recognize that the chord progression in "With a Smile" came from "Here, There and Everywhere". I made songs on the same progression myself, songs mushier than "With a Smile". Some of my compositions were being sung in school functions in San Beda High School. Nothing special though, and at no point did I imagine making a career out of my amateur musician days.
After high school, I had a choice of going to UP or the Ateneo. I chose the Ateneo, because I was forewarned that philosophy in UP was dominated by teachers from the "Philosophical Analysis" school of thought. But had I gone to UP, I know I would have shifted to film, played with a band on the side, and met up with the members of Eraserheads, who were going to college at the same time that I was.
In the Ateneo, my passion for creating music waned, because of my discovery of the wonders of poetry and fiction, and my uncanny ability for getting myself in school politics, without meaning to. Eventually, I decided to go to law school, and put aside for the meantime all artistic inclinations for the sake of a law diploma and a crack at the bar exams. Listening to Circus in the summer after graduating from law school, I felt like saying, "You guys can die now. This album is a masterpiece to last a long time. As for me I have nothing to show yet, but a medal in bootleg silver." Of course, the Eraserheads will go on writing better songs after Circus, one of which ("Ang Huling El Bimbo") even got them the MTV Music Awards for Best Asian Video.
Today, I'm listening to them again, on my way to board meetings and court hearings. And they bring me back to all those lost chapters of my life. My high school, college and law school days seem like yesterday, and they're all carried in one CD of the Eraserheads' Circus. Indeed, the power of music is in its ability to stir up our lost memories, dreams, and emotions to make us whole again. And I realize that the boy who used to write songs for school functions and dabble with poetry and fiction is the same blogger that I have become today, flirting with the creative muse once again on this corner of the world wide web.
Monday, February 07, 2005
Letters to a Young Poet - Rainer Maria Rilke
There is only one thing you should do. Go into yourself. Find out the reason that commands you to write; see whether it has spread its roots into the very depths of your heart; confess to yourself whether you would have to die if you were forbidden to write. This most of all: ask yourself in the most silent hour of your night: must I write? Dig into yourself for a deep answer. And if this answer rings out in assent, if you meet this solemn question with a strong, simple "I must," then build your life in accordance with this necessity; your whole life, even into its humblest and most indifferent hour, must become a sign and witness to this impulse.
Rilke's ten letters have been the boundless resource of creative energy and inspiration for this blogger. In times of crisis, I often go back to these passages of Rilke, and ask myself, "Must I blog?" Then I know that I'm in blogging for the long term.
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
KEEP THE LAWYERS OFF THE BASKETBALL COURT.
The controversy on the citizenship of Asi Taulava is turning the PBA into a big joke. I have to admit, I’ve lost interest in the PBA the very moment those so-called “Fil-Shams” started dominating the league. Might as well go for the NBA, where the world’s best are playing. The local league is only good, if it’s just local. Sure, Billy Ray Bates and Jim Hackett were fun to watch way back when they were imports, and they played as imports. But to pass off the American and Tongan outsiders as Filipinos? Come on. Is there anything else here we can do without bending the rules? My goodness, we can’t even run a decent basketball league.
My friend Atty. Egay Francisco, Asi’s lawyer, has a point when he says that only the courts have the right to strip off Asi of his alleged Filipino citizenship, not the DOJ and surely not the PBA.
But my quarrel with him is why is he pressing the PBA on this? If the PBA is not convinced that Asi is not a Filipino, that’s the PBA’s prerogative. The PBA basketball court is its private domain. If it doesn’t want Asi on it, Asi cannot play on it. Asi should go play on the side streets, basketball is always played better there. That’s where I play.
What is at stake here is the integrity of the PBA. The league should be allowed to interpret its own rules of play. For if we let the T.R.O.-totting lawyers meddle with its rules, watching PBA basketball will never be fun again. And this is what it is all about: fun. Lawyers on the basketball court? That’s not fun. That’s annoying. So Pareng Egay, please keep off the basketball court.
As for Asi, he is the only guy I know who wants to have a Filipino citizenship. Maybe he deserves one. And as a punishment for all this trouble he is giving us, once he truly gets it, he should not be allowed to lose it. Meanwhile, I’m not watching him play and disgrace the PBA with his TRO.
UPDATE:
PBA Commissioner Noli Eala has stood pat on his decision to stand by the rules of the PBA prohibiting non-Filipinos to play as Filipinos. Thus, in spite of handily winning the first game with Taulava on board, Tualava's team Talk 'n Text, forfeited Game one and thereafter refused to field Taulava on Game Two, which Talk N' Text lost. Meanwhile Atty. Francisco filed contempt charges against Noli Eala for his actions which allegedly disobeyed the TRO mandating the PBA to allow Taulava to play.
My friend Atty. Egay Francisco, Asi’s lawyer, has a point when he says that only the courts have the right to strip off Asi of his alleged Filipino citizenship, not the DOJ and surely not the PBA.
But my quarrel with him is why is he pressing the PBA on this? If the PBA is not convinced that Asi is not a Filipino, that’s the PBA’s prerogative. The PBA basketball court is its private domain. If it doesn’t want Asi on it, Asi cannot play on it. Asi should go play on the side streets, basketball is always played better there. That’s where I play.
What is at stake here is the integrity of the PBA. The league should be allowed to interpret its own rules of play. For if we let the T.R.O.-totting lawyers meddle with its rules, watching PBA basketball will never be fun again. And this is what it is all about: fun. Lawyers on the basketball court? That’s not fun. That’s annoying. So Pareng Egay, please keep off the basketball court.
As for Asi, he is the only guy I know who wants to have a Filipino citizenship. Maybe he deserves one. And as a punishment for all this trouble he is giving us, once he truly gets it, he should not be allowed to lose it. Meanwhile, I’m not watching him play and disgrace the PBA with his TRO.
UPDATE:
PBA Commissioner Noli Eala has stood pat on his decision to stand by the rules of the PBA prohibiting non-Filipinos to play as Filipinos. Thus, in spite of handily winning the first game with Taulava on board, Tualava's team Talk 'n Text, forfeited Game one and thereafter refused to field Taulava on Game Two, which Talk N' Text lost. Meanwhile Atty. Francisco filed contempt charges against Noli Eala for his actions which allegedly disobeyed the TRO mandating the PBA to allow Taulava to play.
Saturday, January 29, 2005
A Challenge to the New Breed
In my Special Proceedings class today, I interrupted regular programming, as it were, and spent fifteen (15) minutes of my class time to discuss the editorial of the Establishment yesterday, entitled "Judical Underworld". I've heard a lot of insults against lawyers before, but none was as biting as yesterday's editorial, which declared in one line the state of the legal profession in this country, "Our lawyers have run off with the law."
After reading the editorial yesterday, my instinctive reaction was to fight back with a blog title that goes,"Who do you think you are, you lie peddlers?" That would have been fun, but that would have missed the point. I told the class, this is the paper with the widest circulation in this country, speaking. It has the best opinion makers, and the greatest power to move people. It has sent two presidents packing. Now, it has judged our profession, and you know what? It may be right. So what are we going to do about it?
I have a theory. We could have corrupt presidents, corrupt senators, corrupt congressmen, but we should never have corrupt judges. For if our judiciary were clean, we could be sure that none of the corrupt officials would get away. We could always say, we would take them to court. But if we have a corrupt judiciary, then where could we take them? The entire system would fall. We would have chaos, lawlessness, and disorder. Everyman for himself. As if World War II did not end.
What are we going to do about it?
Red, my law partner, and I have taken on two cases against erring judges before the Court Administrator. I think that's a start. We would be doing what the big Makati law firms have been avoiding all this time, which is cross swords, as it were, with the men in robes.
Of course, I did an analysis. Assuming the judges we are prosecuting issue a death edict among their corrupt colleagues in the judiciary to ensure that we won't win any case in their salas, our office would still survive. My associate told me one judge whom I criticized for the bad writing of his law clerk already did. Our Firm, he said, would never win in Makati. I am the least worried. The damage could be contained, because we have more corporate accounts than cases. Besides, our practice has always been focused on how to help clients avoid litigation. Of course, we would get hurt. But we would take the damage for whatever its worth. Never mind if we never become a big law firm one day. In times like this, a little Sun Tzu analysis is all we need to get by.
And to my class, I left this threat. Don't you ever end up like the corrupt lawyers and judges of today, for I will have you disbarred. I don't wake up at 4:00 am every Saturday and drive all the way to Cabanatuan City just to end up teaching what the Establishment calls legal lemons. I will have you disbarred, if that is the last thing I have to do.
I hope the rest of the legal profession heeds the call.
After reading the editorial yesterday, my instinctive reaction was to fight back with a blog title that goes,"Who do you think you are, you lie peddlers?" That would have been fun, but that would have missed the point. I told the class, this is the paper with the widest circulation in this country, speaking. It has the best opinion makers, and the greatest power to move people. It has sent two presidents packing. Now, it has judged our profession, and you know what? It may be right. So what are we going to do about it?
I have a theory. We could have corrupt presidents, corrupt senators, corrupt congressmen, but we should never have corrupt judges. For if our judiciary were clean, we could be sure that none of the corrupt officials would get away. We could always say, we would take them to court. But if we have a corrupt judiciary, then where could we take them? The entire system would fall. We would have chaos, lawlessness, and disorder. Everyman for himself. As if World War II did not end.
What are we going to do about it?
Red, my law partner, and I have taken on two cases against erring judges before the Court Administrator. I think that's a start. We would be doing what the big Makati law firms have been avoiding all this time, which is cross swords, as it were, with the men in robes.
Of course, I did an analysis. Assuming the judges we are prosecuting issue a death edict among their corrupt colleagues in the judiciary to ensure that we won't win any case in their salas, our office would still survive. My associate told me one judge whom I criticized for the bad writing of his law clerk already did. Our Firm, he said, would never win in Makati. I am the least worried. The damage could be contained, because we have more corporate accounts than cases. Besides, our practice has always been focused on how to help clients avoid litigation. Of course, we would get hurt. But we would take the damage for whatever its worth. Never mind if we never become a big law firm one day. In times like this, a little Sun Tzu analysis is all we need to get by.
And to my class, I left this threat. Don't you ever end up like the corrupt lawyers and judges of today, for I will have you disbarred. I don't wake up at 4:00 am every Saturday and drive all the way to Cabanatuan City just to end up teaching what the Establishment calls legal lemons. I will have you disbarred, if that is the last thing I have to do.
I hope the rest of the legal profession heeds the call.
Friday, January 21, 2005
I'm done with Twelve.
Don't get me wrong, I loved Ocean's Eleven. Never mind that it is about a robbery, and the heroes are the robbers. But the sequel "Ocean's Twelve" really put me to sleep. Roger Ebert liked it. He writes, "Now, with 'Ocean's Twelve,' (they ) are doing a jazz riff. This isn't a caper movie at all, it's an improvisation on caper themes. If at times it seems like a caper, well, as the fellow said when he got up from the piano, it might not be Beethoven, but it has a lot of the same notes."
This is one of the rare times I have to disagree with Ebert. It's like how the Filipino movie scribes justify a mess of a Regal film, the kind where they put the Regal Babies together to pack in the crowds, and the script was written at the back of cigarrette case. Fine, the allusion to a jazz riff might be an explanation. But, this is not a song. This is a movie. At the end of the film, I felt like having emerged from watching an animated film from the seventies. The figures are stick-like, shallow, and the plot is something a twelve year old would have in his mind for a home movie with an all-star cast. Really, I was waiting for the song and dance part that usually accompanied the end of a Mother Lily film in the old days. The result, a bored lawyer. Frankly, I think Hollywood has ran out of ideas. I'm going back to the classics.
This is one of the rare times I have to disagree with Ebert. It's like how the Filipino movie scribes justify a mess of a Regal film, the kind where they put the Regal Babies together to pack in the crowds, and the script was written at the back of cigarrette case. Fine, the allusion to a jazz riff might be an explanation. But, this is not a song. This is a movie. At the end of the film, I felt like having emerged from watching an animated film from the seventies. The figures are stick-like, shallow, and the plot is something a twelve year old would have in his mind for a home movie with an all-star cast. Really, I was waiting for the song and dance part that usually accompanied the end of a Mother Lily film in the old days. The result, a bored lawyer. Frankly, I think Hollywood has ran out of ideas. I'm going back to the classics.
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Is Justice Sandoval telling us something?
Sun Tzu says,
Those who are skilled in warfare will always bring the enemy where they want to fight and are not brought there by the enemy.
There is a joke among Filipino lawyers that to win a case, you don't need to know the law, you only need to know the judge. So if you apply Sun Tzu in trial practice, the first principle is to bring the case to a judge who will make you win. And if the other side brings it to its judge, find a way to convert the judge or try to get the judge to resign.
Today, the Establishment carries the story of the resignation of Sandiganyan Justice Edilberto Sandoval, who is part of the special division trying former President Erap Estrada. It appears that Justice Sandoval is the only justice who dissented from the controverial rulings of the Court, which rulings granted Estrada special concessions while in jail, including the grant for a trip to Hongkong for a knee operation. Officially, Justice Sandoval cited health reasons for his resignation, but unofficially, the Establishment says it's because of the "flip-flopping of (his) colleagues".
I'm trying to read between the lines. Is he saying that he could not trust his colleagues anymore, and that he wouldn't want to continue lending his name to this process? Is he saying that the three-man special body is already Estrada's battleground? Is he saying that this three-man special body is disposed on letting Erap free?
Or is he saying that the division is doing its job well and that they should carry on with what they're doing -- he he he like one plus one equals three.
Well, the law is the law but Sun Tzu rules.
UPDATE: 1-12-05
The Establishment reports that the Supreme Court has rejected the resignation of Justice Sandoval, citing the fact that Sandoval did not adequately show that his medical condition will prevent him from pursuing his role as member of the special division. The story is found here.
UPDATE 1-13-05
Erap is coming home on Saturday to, ehem, lead the opposition. The story is found here. He is unfazed by threats to sanction him for violating his "hospital arrest" while in Hongkong. Ha ha ha what can they do, jail him?
UPDATE 1-14-05
Justice Sandoval said he will comply with the Supreme Court resolution rejecting his resignation from the Sandiganbayan Special Division. He also said he will submit proof that he is suffering from vertigo and asthma. Full story here. Just imagine how these justices will act when they huddle back in the chambers. I wonder what Justice Sandoval is thinking. Does he have regrets for starting this whole thing? And the fellow justices (frankly, I don't remember their names) what are they thinking?
Justice Sandoval could pretend that nothing happened, and go about his business as usual, or he could call the whole thing off and give up his robes for good. This is what I call the Sun Tzu moment, akin to that precise moment when the archer has stretched the bow to its maximum potential. The aim is good. He should release the arrow now to hit its target. If Justice Sandoval wants a lasting place in history, he should know what to do now. If he bungles it or tarries too long, he will become another Erap joke.
Think Legolas.
Those who are skilled in warfare will always bring the enemy where they want to fight and are not brought there by the enemy.
There is a joke among Filipino lawyers that to win a case, you don't need to know the law, you only need to know the judge. So if you apply Sun Tzu in trial practice, the first principle is to bring the case to a judge who will make you win. And if the other side brings it to its judge, find a way to convert the judge or try to get the judge to resign.
Today, the Establishment carries the story of the resignation of Sandiganyan Justice Edilberto Sandoval, who is part of the special division trying former President Erap Estrada. It appears that Justice Sandoval is the only justice who dissented from the controverial rulings of the Court, which rulings granted Estrada special concessions while in jail, including the grant for a trip to Hongkong for a knee operation. Officially, Justice Sandoval cited health reasons for his resignation, but unofficially, the Establishment says it's because of the "flip-flopping of (his) colleagues".
I'm trying to read between the lines. Is he saying that he could not trust his colleagues anymore, and that he wouldn't want to continue lending his name to this process? Is he saying that the three-man special body is already Estrada's battleground? Is he saying that this three-man special body is disposed on letting Erap free?
Or is he saying that the division is doing its job well and that they should carry on with what they're doing -- he he he like one plus one equals three.
Well, the law is the law but Sun Tzu rules.
UPDATE: 1-12-05
The Establishment reports that the Supreme Court has rejected the resignation of Justice Sandoval, citing the fact that Sandoval did not adequately show that his medical condition will prevent him from pursuing his role as member of the special division. The story is found here.
UPDATE 1-13-05
Erap is coming home on Saturday to, ehem, lead the opposition. The story is found here. He is unfazed by threats to sanction him for violating his "hospital arrest" while in Hongkong. Ha ha ha what can they do, jail him?
UPDATE 1-14-05
Justice Sandoval said he will comply with the Supreme Court resolution rejecting his resignation from the Sandiganbayan Special Division. He also said he will submit proof that he is suffering from vertigo and asthma. Full story here. Just imagine how these justices will act when they huddle back in the chambers. I wonder what Justice Sandoval is thinking. Does he have regrets for starting this whole thing? And the fellow justices (frankly, I don't remember their names) what are they thinking?
Justice Sandoval could pretend that nothing happened, and go about his business as usual, or he could call the whole thing off and give up his robes for good. This is what I call the Sun Tzu moment, akin to that precise moment when the archer has stretched the bow to its maximum potential. The aim is good. He should release the arrow now to hit its target. If Justice Sandoval wants a lasting place in history, he should know what to do now. If he bungles it or tarries too long, he will become another Erap joke.
Think Legolas.
Sunday, January 09, 2005
THE SEC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CAP'S FAILURE
Of course, the current problem of College Assurance Plan (CAP) meeting tuition fee obligations of its planholders is largely the fault of its managers. They were too aggressive on property investments, and the MRT investment is still a losing proposition. People say CAP's actuarials failed to realize the tremendous increase in tuition fees across time, which unfortunately could not be matched by returns on sour placements.
But that's the risk every planholder should have known. I knew that from the beginning. That's why I ran away as fast as I could every time those persistent pre-need salesmen knocked on my door. And I managed to keep my money away from these people, in spite of their tactics, which at times were similar to boiler room operatins. Those who managed to land an appointment with me got an hour's doze of lawyerly cross-examination, and walked away vowing to sell nothing to me ever again.
Yet, at the end of the day, if CAP eventually shuts down (look at what happened to industry pioneer PAMANA), CAP shareholders and managers can walk away, and say, "Sorry guys, it didn't work," while their insolvency lawyers take charge. And the poor planholders will have nothing but the proverbial empty bag. Whoever said that you should save money for your child's future education and put it on pre-need plans should be shot.
Is that all there is to it? I think the accusing finger should also point to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC is the single government agency tasked to monitor and supervise CAP's operations. Why did they fail to check CAP's over exposure on the property sector? Why did they allow CAP to move its money to the MRT project? When CAP's investments didn't return with the projected numbers, why didn't the SEC do something about it?
A few years back, I noticed CAP suddenly becoming very aggressive in advertising its products. They were all over the radio, tv and print media. They even had a full page ad with the names and pictures of their directors and officers who were prominent businessmen. Some were even esteemed lawyers. Sun Tzu guy that I was, I knew CAP was in trouble. (Take a tip: when financial institutions are suddenly all over you, on the radio, tv, and newspaper with big promises, it's often a last grasp of breathe. That's the Sun Tzu principle of deception. "When you are strong, pretend to be weak. When you are weak, pretend to be strong"). Unfortunately, blogging wasn't popular then, and I could not warn any one about the possible dangers. Alas, I was right. Last year, CAP check payments for planholder tutition fees bounced. Why did the SEC allow this to happen?If it had known that CAP's investments were not kicking in, why did it allow CAP to indulge in that expensive campaign, which I surmised was initiated to generate new revenues from new planholders to allow CAP to meet maturing obligations?
CAP is run by businessmen with revenue targets to meet. They are expected to take risks. If they just got the money and put it in the bank, the whole thing would have crumbled easily. And as in all business endeavors, the bigger the risks the higher the returns. They took the risks, big and small, but they didn't pay-off. That's why the CAP managers could simply say, we did our jobs, but it didn't work. Pasensya na.
Next to CAP's Board of Directors, the only other people who could have known CAP's situation (and who had the power to prevent the fall-out) are the people in the SEC. When CAP's managers pushed, the SEC regulators were expected to pull. The SEC is the last bastion of protection for planholders. That was how the system was designed to protect the investing public from the businessmen, and the businessmen from themselves.
So who did not do their job?
People in the SEC -- YOU, yes, you, you deserve every curse from the parents of the kids whose tuition fee check payments have bounced.
Please hand in your resignations before the next pre-need company "bites the dust", as Freddie Mercury would put it.
(revised post)
But that's the risk every planholder should have known. I knew that from the beginning. That's why I ran away as fast as I could every time those persistent pre-need salesmen knocked on my door. And I managed to keep my money away from these people, in spite of their tactics, which at times were similar to boiler room operatins. Those who managed to land an appointment with me got an hour's doze of lawyerly cross-examination, and walked away vowing to sell nothing to me ever again.
Yet, at the end of the day, if CAP eventually shuts down (look at what happened to industry pioneer PAMANA), CAP shareholders and managers can walk away, and say, "Sorry guys, it didn't work," while their insolvency lawyers take charge. And the poor planholders will have nothing but the proverbial empty bag. Whoever said that you should save money for your child's future education and put it on pre-need plans should be shot.
Is that all there is to it? I think the accusing finger should also point to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC is the single government agency tasked to monitor and supervise CAP's operations. Why did they fail to check CAP's over exposure on the property sector? Why did they allow CAP to move its money to the MRT project? When CAP's investments didn't return with the projected numbers, why didn't the SEC do something about it?
A few years back, I noticed CAP suddenly becoming very aggressive in advertising its products. They were all over the radio, tv and print media. They even had a full page ad with the names and pictures of their directors and officers who were prominent businessmen. Some were even esteemed lawyers. Sun Tzu guy that I was, I knew CAP was in trouble. (Take a tip: when financial institutions are suddenly all over you, on the radio, tv, and newspaper with big promises, it's often a last grasp of breathe. That's the Sun Tzu principle of deception. "When you are strong, pretend to be weak. When you are weak, pretend to be strong"). Unfortunately, blogging wasn't popular then, and I could not warn any one about the possible dangers. Alas, I was right. Last year, CAP check payments for planholder tutition fees bounced. Why did the SEC allow this to happen?If it had known that CAP's investments were not kicking in, why did it allow CAP to indulge in that expensive campaign, which I surmised was initiated to generate new revenues from new planholders to allow CAP to meet maturing obligations?
CAP is run by businessmen with revenue targets to meet. They are expected to take risks. If they just got the money and put it in the bank, the whole thing would have crumbled easily. And as in all business endeavors, the bigger the risks the higher the returns. They took the risks, big and small, but they didn't pay-off. That's why the CAP managers could simply say, we did our jobs, but it didn't work. Pasensya na.
Next to CAP's Board of Directors, the only other people who could have known CAP's situation (and who had the power to prevent the fall-out) are the people in the SEC. When CAP's managers pushed, the SEC regulators were expected to pull. The SEC is the last bastion of protection for planholders. That was how the system was designed to protect the investing public from the businessmen, and the businessmen from themselves.
So who did not do their job?
People in the SEC -- YOU, yes, you, you deserve every curse from the parents of the kids whose tuition fee check payments have bounced.
Please hand in your resignations before the next pre-need company "bites the dust", as Freddie Mercury would put it.
(revised post)
Wednesday, January 05, 2005
Here's to RVA
One afternoon in the big firm where I used to work, I took a break from writing a pleading, and went to the pantry. As is common with all big firms, the pantry was the lawyers' haven. We had a fridge, cold water dispenser, microwave, toaster, and comfortabe dining tables and chairs. It's not much, but our pantry was where the lawyers could turn to their old selves again at the end or in the middle of a long lawyerly day. It's the place where we gossip about movie stars, and wonder whether we actually missed a career in basketball.
Ramonito V. Abarico or RVA (by tradition, lawyers call each other by their initials in law firms) was a pantry regular. He had a fellow young associate with him then, but his name escapes me now. RVA, a little overweight for his five foot four frame, had boundless energy. He was doing litigation in the firm, and was working days and nights because of a major case involving some of our bosses. He was the designated foot soldier, and he bore a big brunt of the work. But RVA knew when to relax, and that moment he was actually doing that. I noticed they were having bacon and pandesal for snacks. Nothing extra-ordinary there, except that between them they had about 400 grams of bacon. They cooked it on the microwave oven, and it smelled really good. It was soaked in its own oil (about four cups of it). It looked delicious, and the boys appeared to be enjoying it.
Flash forward to another day, same setting and time of day, but in this instance, the boys were introducing me to the wonders of Palm chili-flavored corned beef. The great thing about it? -- the chunks of beef (not minced) that it offered, and the chili flavor that makes you beg for more. I introduced it to my family, and since then, our breakfast was never the same gain.
Over these snacks, RVA and I talked about work and life strategies. He said he wanted to build a house for his young family. He had a daughter then while I still had two boys (I now have three boys and a girl). Partnership was not in our minds. It was just how to increase our take home pay. I told him I was making extra cash by referring clients to the Firm. We got fifteen percent (15%)for each referral. Not bad, if you're billing in the hundreds of thousands. He tried out the strategy for a while, and started to refer work to the firm. But he had other plans. Eventually, he moved to a firm, which reportedly paid bonuses in dollars. As for me, I decided to work for myself, and put up my own firm.
Two years ago, we visited him in his room in his new Firm. He said he was still doing litigation, and he had to travel back and forth to Mindanao. He looked as if was having a better time.
Last month, I blogged about December being the hardest month for a lawyer. Just thinking about it makes the hair at the back of my head stand. Why?
Yesterday, I got a text message that RVA died that morning from a stroke. He's barely in his 30s. I'm speculating how it might have been for RVA last month. Did he stress himself too much? Did he have too much of the holiday food? I guess, it does not really matter now.
Four months ago, I shifted to a low fat diet, lots of vegetables and fruits and only up to three ounces of lean meat a day. No bacons. No Palm chili flavored corned beef. It might be the best decision I made for now.
As for RVA, I've been thinking about him all day. He was a good lawyer -- a good man with good skills in the law. May he find peace in heaven.
(original post)
Ramonito V. Abarico or RVA (by tradition, lawyers call each other by their initials in law firms) was a pantry regular. He had a fellow young associate with him then, but his name escapes me now. RVA, a little overweight for his five foot four frame, had boundless energy. He was doing litigation in the firm, and was working days and nights because of a major case involving some of our bosses. He was the designated foot soldier, and he bore a big brunt of the work. But RVA knew when to relax, and that moment he was actually doing that. I noticed they were having bacon and pandesal for snacks. Nothing extra-ordinary there, except that between them they had about 400 grams of bacon. They cooked it on the microwave oven, and it smelled really good. It was soaked in its own oil (about four cups of it). It looked delicious, and the boys appeared to be enjoying it.
Flash forward to another day, same setting and time of day, but in this instance, the boys were introducing me to the wonders of Palm chili-flavored corned beef. The great thing about it? -- the chunks of beef (not minced) that it offered, and the chili flavor that makes you beg for more. I introduced it to my family, and since then, our breakfast was never the same gain.
Over these snacks, RVA and I talked about work and life strategies. He said he wanted to build a house for his young family. He had a daughter then while I still had two boys (I now have three boys and a girl). Partnership was not in our minds. It was just how to increase our take home pay. I told him I was making extra cash by referring clients to the Firm. We got fifteen percent (15%)for each referral. Not bad, if you're billing in the hundreds of thousands. He tried out the strategy for a while, and started to refer work to the firm. But he had other plans. Eventually, he moved to a firm, which reportedly paid bonuses in dollars. As for me, I decided to work for myself, and put up my own firm.
Two years ago, we visited him in his room in his new Firm. He said he was still doing litigation, and he had to travel back and forth to Mindanao. He looked as if was having a better time.
Last month, I blogged about December being the hardest month for a lawyer. Just thinking about it makes the hair at the back of my head stand. Why?
Yesterday, I got a text message that RVA died that morning from a stroke. He's barely in his 30s. I'm speculating how it might have been for RVA last month. Did he stress himself too much? Did he have too much of the holiday food? I guess, it does not really matter now.
Four months ago, I shifted to a low fat diet, lots of vegetables and fruits and only up to three ounces of lean meat a day. No bacons. No Palm chili flavored corned beef. It might be the best decision I made for now.
As for RVA, I've been thinking about him all day. He was a good lawyer -- a good man with good skills in the law. May he find peace in heaven.
(original post)
Sunday, January 02, 2005
Thoughts for the New Year
My Agenda for 2005: Retire from the law practice.
That is -- if I could bag a major deal, which can ensure the education of my four kids, the youngest of which is four-month old Julian Agustin. Hah, maybe not this year, but who knows? Don't get me wrong. I am enjoying my work. And if I were to live my life again, I will make sure to repeat this detour to the legal profession. But more exciting and less strenous lives beckon -- like professional blogging and teaching, albeit low-paying. That's why I need that deal this year while I'm only hitting 35, so I can live the remainder of my years on this earth in more interesting terms. As my law professor and now Ateneo Law School Dean Atty. Cesar L. Villanueva used to say, the greatest tragedy that can happen to you in this world is to be born a baby and to die only a lawyer.
Things I'd like to see in 2005: Bloggers outscooping the Establishment
One of these days it is bound to happen. The pinoybloggers are arming themselves. They are writing better stuff in substance and form. And they have the built in advantage against the Establishment: no payolas, no envelopes, and no corrupt desk editors, how can it not happen this year?
Still hunting: The New Paradigm of Power
I mentioned it before: democracy sucks. The masses are easily fooled. From where should political power emanate? So far history has placed the X mark on the divine right of kings, the tyrants who got power from military conquests, and the politburo who wielded the communist revolution in the USSR. I am writing off democracy, but I have nothing better to replace it with. That's why I'm still hunting for the new paradigm of power. In the meantime, we all have to bear its mistakes, like Time Magazine's Man of the Year George W. Bush.
By the way, I have stopped my Time subscription two years ago. And I am not renewing for as long as they keep making this mistake over and over.
Books I'd like to see in 2005
1. Sassy Lawyer's houseonahill
2. Batjay's blog book.
3. Mona Veluz's Renaissance Girl
4. The Inquirer's book on blogs (ha ha ha for my friendly neighborhood bote dyaryo dealer)
Crisis to prepare for: the power crisis.
If you are building a house this year, make sure you allot about 160K for solar power generation. I have confirmed from friends in the power industry that it is certainly going to happen. Our government is not going to meet the power demands and pretty soon we are going to experience a similar power crisis (probably worse)that the country experienced in the early 1990s. As for me, I'm postponing the Ipod in favor of a diesel run household generator -- urg!
Happy New Year to all!
That is -- if I could bag a major deal, which can ensure the education of my four kids, the youngest of which is four-month old Julian Agustin. Hah, maybe not this year, but who knows? Don't get me wrong. I am enjoying my work. And if I were to live my life again, I will make sure to repeat this detour to the legal profession. But more exciting and less strenous lives beckon -- like professional blogging and teaching, albeit low-paying. That's why I need that deal this year while I'm only hitting 35, so I can live the remainder of my years on this earth in more interesting terms. As my law professor and now Ateneo Law School Dean Atty. Cesar L. Villanueva used to say, the greatest tragedy that can happen to you in this world is to be born a baby and to die only a lawyer.
Things I'd like to see in 2005: Bloggers outscooping the Establishment
One of these days it is bound to happen. The pinoybloggers are arming themselves. They are writing better stuff in substance and form. And they have the built in advantage against the Establishment: no payolas, no envelopes, and no corrupt desk editors, how can it not happen this year?
Still hunting: The New Paradigm of Power
I mentioned it before: democracy sucks. The masses are easily fooled. From where should political power emanate? So far history has placed the X mark on the divine right of kings, the tyrants who got power from military conquests, and the politburo who wielded the communist revolution in the USSR. I am writing off democracy, but I have nothing better to replace it with. That's why I'm still hunting for the new paradigm of power. In the meantime, we all have to bear its mistakes, like Time Magazine's Man of the Year George W. Bush.
By the way, I have stopped my Time subscription two years ago. And I am not renewing for as long as they keep making this mistake over and over.
Books I'd like to see in 2005
1. Sassy Lawyer's houseonahill
2. Batjay's blog book.
3. Mona Veluz's Renaissance Girl
4. The Inquirer's book on blogs (ha ha ha for my friendly neighborhood bote dyaryo dealer)
Crisis to prepare for: the power crisis.
If you are building a house this year, make sure you allot about 160K for solar power generation. I have confirmed from friends in the power industry that it is certainly going to happen. Our government is not going to meet the power demands and pretty soon we are going to experience a similar power crisis (probably worse)that the country experienced in the early 1990s. As for me, I'm postponing the Ipod in favor of a diesel run household generator -- urg!
Happy New Year to all!
Monday, December 20, 2004
One Entry Before Christmas
I have discovered the lawyer's "Blog-Work Theory". The number of entries I have on this blog is inversely proportional to the amount of work I have in the office. Since I have not posted since November, you can tell the office work has been tough. I'm running 18 hour days, travelling to Central Luzon and Mindanao in a week on top of a daily grind of an average of three meetings a day. It has always been like this every December. Last year, my driver suffered a stroke after going through a gruelling December day. He is still alive, but I had to let him go take a less strenous office job somewhere. December is a hazardous month for a lawyer and his staff, just as it is for this blog.
Lest we get buried by more work, let this blogger go for one final blow:
Merry Christmas everybody!
Lest we get buried by more work, let this blogger go for one final blow:
Merry Christmas everybody!
Sunday, November 28, 2004
Of creation, evolution, and monks arguing over angels doing the cha-cha
My old friend Mike Quijano, a contemporary at the Ateneo Law, once chided me for theologizing on air. And for a long time, I have refrained from making comments on theology, because it is not "my battlegound." But Sassy Lawyer has enlivened my interests on this field with a discussion on the history of man. And in spite of the risk of getting berated by Mike Q., straight from Mt. Fiji where he is based, I will indulge a bit to find out if I still have my bearings.
On the Creation-Evolution Debate
Did man get here by evolution or by creation?
If this question were asked in a courtroom, my instincts will immediately get me at my feet:
Objection, the question is misleading. It falsely assumes that the theory of creation makes the theory of evolution impossible, in the same manner, that it falsely assumes that the theory of evolution makes the theory of creation impossible.
Creation is not an event of the past. It is unfolding at this very moment in space and time. Thus, if we assume that evolution is true, it is consistent with the theory of creation, because creation posits that God created us, and is continuing to create us, just as evolution may have happened, and is continuing to happen.
Fr. Roche, S.J. my theology professor, once asked our class, when did God create the world? One classmate said, “Father, ... in the beginning.” Then Fr. Roche said,"Are you saying that God is not creating you now?”
Then he got a notebook and said, “Class, do you understand? If God decides not to create this notebook any more at this very moment, this notebook is not going to drop to the floor. This notebook is going to vanish.”
In other words, it’s not as if God created man in the beginning, and left him alone on his own. Rather, it is a creation that is happening at this very moment. It is the sustenance that has allowed us to exist since the beginning of time, until this very moment, perhaps even until tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, and so on
Micketymoc comments, "according to biochemist Peter Atkins, the given physical conditions of the universe allow for an infinitely lazy Creator - a God with absolutely nothing to do! The natural processes of the cosmos take care of making the stars, the plants, and us."
My take, if God were lazy, Mr. Atkins, would not exist.
Thus, creation and evolution are not diametrically opposed concepts. Both could be true. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's Phenomemon of Man attempted to reconcile the two. I would leave this debate on this point, and proceed to be what is the heart of the matter: Whether true knowledge springs from faith, science, or both.
What's wrong with faith?
I can remember only three significant philosphical attempts to arrive at a logical proof of God.
1. St. Anselm said "God is something that which nothing greater can be thought." If this were so, then God must exist, because if God existed only in thought, then you could think of something greater than God--namely, God existing in reality, not just in thought. But you can't think of anything greater than God. So God can't exist only in thought, but must exist in reality, too. It takes a while to sink in. But check out this site for further explanation.
2. St Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica offers five proofs of God
A. The Prime Mover Argument
The argument states that all things have a prime mover who we understand to be God.
"...Whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.?
B. The Efficient Cause Argument
The argument states that God is the efficient cause which gave effect to our existence.
"In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God."
C. The Ex-contingencia Argument
Here St. Thomas goes on a reductio an aburdum argument, as he argues if nothing existed before, then nothing would have ever existed at all. Thus, something must have existed by itself to make other's existence not just possible but a reality, and that something must be God.
"We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence--which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God."
The fourth and fifth, I cannot understand. Look it up yourself here.
3. Pascal's Wager
The last one is not a proof but rather an encouragement for us to believe that there is a God. For if God doesn't exist, we lose nothing if you believe or not. But if God does exist, and you believe, then you gain all. But if you don't, then you lose all. More here.
Given that humanity is finite, as is human perception, the scientific and logical inquiry towards finding the infinite God appears to be doomed from the start. But the three propositions above are the best that humanity can come up with. I would say, they are not bad at all.
Ultimately, enlightenment comes with faith. If faith becomes the jump off point from which all inquiry about God begins, then everything appears to fall into place. I would not pretend that faith is error-free. What with all those people they executed for believing that the world is round? I would say, however, that faith seeks understanding, and with understanding comes knowledge and wisdom.
Faith as a method of knowing appears to be belittled by most thinkers. Indeed, it is not the method by which we can determine whether one plus one equals two or whather the sun is the center of the solar system. It is, however, the method by which we can know the answer to the questions that ultimately matter: What is happiness? What is death? What is life? After all, these questions have answers that no other mode of knowing can find.
What's right with science?
Can we say that the scientific method can lead us to the truth? The scientific method is not exactly bug-free, as it were.
Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"
argues that science does not evolve gradually toward truth, but instead undergoes periodic revolutions which he calls "paradigm shifts." And through out the history of science, we find our scientists hopping from one paradigm to another, never quite getting “it” until a new paradigm comes a long. This is the reason why Newton’s Laws of Physics are completely incompatible with Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. And you can bet, one day, our scientists will be ready to say that Einstein is out of fashion — just like Newton after Einstein posited his famous e=mc2 equation. The raging debate within the scientific community between proponents of quantum physics on one hand and believers of Einstein's Theory of Relativity, on the other, is a demonstration that that day is about to come.
Indeed, the scientific method has not brought us to the point where we can truly claim that the scientific theories of the day are standing on firm ground. The fact that Newton’s Law of Physics stands inconsistent with the Theory of Relativity in the same manner that the Theory of Relativity is incompatible with quantum physics, makes me wonder: Will science ever give us the answer once and for all?
I am not saying that science is useless. The advances in technology that we are enjoying today are all products of good scientific work. But that begs the question: Can science lead us to the truth? Can we break out of our paradigms and find being?
Well, our understanding of paradigms is a good start -- but what if it is in itself a paradigm? Who can possibly tell?
Which way is better?
Micketymoc asks, "How does “faith” approach the truth in any way that’s significantly different from monks arguing on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"
To which I answer with the same question, "How does “the scientific method” approach the truth in any way that’s significantly different from monks arguing on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"
Micketymoc, answers my question, "The difference between monks arguing over angels doing the cha-cha, and scientists working to understand natural processes is, scientists get results!"
What results? Ptolemy's sun theory? Newton's out of style Laws of Physics? Einstein's soon to be discarded Theory of Relativity?
Sassy Lawyer inquires, "So, are we saying that truth is a matter of faith?
I am glad she asked that question, because now we are brought to the ultimate inquiry: What is the truth about death? Corrolarily, what is the truth about life? I am willing to let go of all scientific knowledge (if there be any) and technological advancements of this world if someone could give me a certain answer on the truth about death. For ultimately, man’s mortality makes all things seem but trivial, and I believe that at some point in any person’s life, he/she would find no knowledge more important than the truth about death. Where could man turn to? Science? Logic?
And to go back to Micketymoc's question comparing the monks with the scientists, the difference is this: the monks will ask only questions that ultimately matter. While scientists study what happens when an apple hits your head, monks inquire about what happens when you die. And after scientists have created their towers in the sky, monks declare, all things must pass. "What profits a man...?"
Well, that leads me to the “R” word.
The parting shot
Micketymoc asks, "Perhaps you see the goals of science differently from those who actually pursue science themselves.
The whole goal of science is understanding - but it’s a goal that will never end. Because humanity cannot claim absolute knowledge - the best we can do is to asymptotically approach it, but never attain it."
And I have exactly the same thoughts about faith -- the whole goal of faith is understanding, a goal that may never end. And as stated earlier, given that humanity is finite, as is human perception, the scientific and logical inquiry towards finding the infinite God appears to be doomed from the start. And here is where faith scores the winning points:
Faith is open to the possibility of the divine revelation of the absolute truth. Faith prays for the absolute truth. And with God's grace, some people have been able to see the absolute truth.
So I don’t belittle those monks arguing over angels doing the cha-cha. For indeed, they may have the answer once and for all.
(second revised post)
Thanks to Sassy Lawyer and Micketymoc.
On the Creation-Evolution Debate
Did man get here by evolution or by creation?
If this question were asked in a courtroom, my instincts will immediately get me at my feet:
Objection, the question is misleading. It falsely assumes that the theory of creation makes the theory of evolution impossible, in the same manner, that it falsely assumes that the theory of evolution makes the theory of creation impossible.
Creation is not an event of the past. It is unfolding at this very moment in space and time. Thus, if we assume that evolution is true, it is consistent with the theory of creation, because creation posits that God created us, and is continuing to create us, just as evolution may have happened, and is continuing to happen.
Fr. Roche, S.J. my theology professor, once asked our class, when did God create the world? One classmate said, “Father, ... in the beginning.” Then Fr. Roche said,"Are you saying that God is not creating you now?”
Then he got a notebook and said, “Class, do you understand? If God decides not to create this notebook any more at this very moment, this notebook is not going to drop to the floor. This notebook is going to vanish.”
In other words, it’s not as if God created man in the beginning, and left him alone on his own. Rather, it is a creation that is happening at this very moment. It is the sustenance that has allowed us to exist since the beginning of time, until this very moment, perhaps even until tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, and so on
Micketymoc comments, "according to biochemist Peter Atkins, the given physical conditions of the universe allow for an infinitely lazy Creator - a God with absolutely nothing to do! The natural processes of the cosmos take care of making the stars, the plants, and us."
My take, if God were lazy, Mr. Atkins, would not exist.
Thus, creation and evolution are not diametrically opposed concepts. Both could be true. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's Phenomemon of Man attempted to reconcile the two. I would leave this debate on this point, and proceed to be what is the heart of the matter: Whether true knowledge springs from faith, science, or both.
What's wrong with faith?
I can remember only three significant philosphical attempts to arrive at a logical proof of God.
1. St. Anselm said "God is something that which nothing greater can be thought." If this were so, then God must exist, because if God existed only in thought, then you could think of something greater than God--namely, God existing in reality, not just in thought. But you can't think of anything greater than God. So God can't exist only in thought, but must exist in reality, too. It takes a while to sink in. But check out this site for further explanation.
2. St Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica offers five proofs of God
A. The Prime Mover Argument
The argument states that all things have a prime mover who we understand to be God.
"...Whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.?
B. The Efficient Cause Argument
The argument states that God is the efficient cause which gave effect to our existence.
"In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God."
C. The Ex-contingencia Argument
Here St. Thomas goes on a reductio an aburdum argument, as he argues if nothing existed before, then nothing would have ever existed at all. Thus, something must have existed by itself to make other's existence not just possible but a reality, and that something must be God.
"We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence--which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God."
The fourth and fifth, I cannot understand. Look it up yourself here.
3. Pascal's Wager
The last one is not a proof but rather an encouragement for us to believe that there is a God. For if God doesn't exist, we lose nothing if you believe or not. But if God does exist, and you believe, then you gain all. But if you don't, then you lose all. More here.
Given that humanity is finite, as is human perception, the scientific and logical inquiry towards finding the infinite God appears to be doomed from the start. But the three propositions above are the best that humanity can come up with. I would say, they are not bad at all.
Ultimately, enlightenment comes with faith. If faith becomes the jump off point from which all inquiry about God begins, then everything appears to fall into place. I would not pretend that faith is error-free. What with all those people they executed for believing that the world is round? I would say, however, that faith seeks understanding, and with understanding comes knowledge and wisdom.
Faith as a method of knowing appears to be belittled by most thinkers. Indeed, it is not the method by which we can determine whether one plus one equals two or whather the sun is the center of the solar system. It is, however, the method by which we can know the answer to the questions that ultimately matter: What is happiness? What is death? What is life? After all, these questions have answers that no other mode of knowing can find.
What's right with science?
Can we say that the scientific method can lead us to the truth? The scientific method is not exactly bug-free, as it were.
Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"
argues that science does not evolve gradually toward truth, but instead undergoes periodic revolutions which he calls "paradigm shifts." And through out the history of science, we find our scientists hopping from one paradigm to another, never quite getting “it” until a new paradigm comes a long. This is the reason why Newton’s Laws of Physics are completely incompatible with Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. And you can bet, one day, our scientists will be ready to say that Einstein is out of fashion — just like Newton after Einstein posited his famous e=mc2 equation. The raging debate within the scientific community between proponents of quantum physics on one hand and believers of Einstein's Theory of Relativity, on the other, is a demonstration that that day is about to come.
Indeed, the scientific method has not brought us to the point where we can truly claim that the scientific theories of the day are standing on firm ground. The fact that Newton’s Law of Physics stands inconsistent with the Theory of Relativity in the same manner that the Theory of Relativity is incompatible with quantum physics, makes me wonder: Will science ever give us the answer once and for all?
I am not saying that science is useless. The advances in technology that we are enjoying today are all products of good scientific work. But that begs the question: Can science lead us to the truth? Can we break out of our paradigms and find being?
Well, our understanding of paradigms is a good start -- but what if it is in itself a paradigm? Who can possibly tell?
Which way is better?
Micketymoc asks, "How does “faith” approach the truth in any way that’s significantly different from monks arguing on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"
To which I answer with the same question, "How does “the scientific method” approach the truth in any way that’s significantly different from monks arguing on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"
Micketymoc, answers my question, "The difference between monks arguing over angels doing the cha-cha, and scientists working to understand natural processes is, scientists get results!"
What results? Ptolemy's sun theory? Newton's out of style Laws of Physics? Einstein's soon to be discarded Theory of Relativity?
Sassy Lawyer inquires, "So, are we saying that truth is a matter of faith?
I am glad she asked that question, because now we are brought to the ultimate inquiry: What is the truth about death? Corrolarily, what is the truth about life? I am willing to let go of all scientific knowledge (if there be any) and technological advancements of this world if someone could give me a certain answer on the truth about death. For ultimately, man’s mortality makes all things seem but trivial, and I believe that at some point in any person’s life, he/she would find no knowledge more important than the truth about death. Where could man turn to? Science? Logic?
And to go back to Micketymoc's question comparing the monks with the scientists, the difference is this: the monks will ask only questions that ultimately matter. While scientists study what happens when an apple hits your head, monks inquire about what happens when you die. And after scientists have created their towers in the sky, monks declare, all things must pass. "What profits a man...?"
Well, that leads me to the “R” word.
The parting shot
Micketymoc asks, "Perhaps you see the goals of science differently from those who actually pursue science themselves.
The whole goal of science is understanding - but it’s a goal that will never end. Because humanity cannot claim absolute knowledge - the best we can do is to asymptotically approach it, but never attain it."
And I have exactly the same thoughts about faith -- the whole goal of faith is understanding, a goal that may never end. And as stated earlier, given that humanity is finite, as is human perception, the scientific and logical inquiry towards finding the infinite God appears to be doomed from the start. And here is where faith scores the winning points:
Faith is open to the possibility of the divine revelation of the absolute truth. Faith prays for the absolute truth. And with God's grace, some people have been able to see the absolute truth.
So I don’t belittle those monks arguing over angels doing the cha-cha. For indeed, they may have the answer once and for all.
(second revised post)
Thanks to Sassy Lawyer and Micketymoc.
Friday, November 19, 2004
Small Drugstores to Close for Giving Tax Creditable Discounts? You Gotta Be Kidding
The Establishment has a story about the possible closure of small drugstores if the Department of Health implements the full 20 percent discount to senior citizens as mandated by law. The story is obviously a press release masquerading as news. While the story banners a cause and effect slant, it doesn't explain enough how it arrived at that conclusion. The report said that the average spread of small drugstores per drug is only about 5 to 10 percent. It didn't report, however, what percent do the senior citizens' discounts take out of the total sales of these drugstores. Or are we supposed to believe that small drugstores sell only to senior citizens? Ha -- what a joke. The drugstore receipts of my four kids can belie that claim. Besides, the discounts are tax creditable, and taxes take about 30 percent of income. This means the discounts that they give to senior citizens may be applied as tax payments. So there is no loss there at all. They have to pay taxes, don't they? These are details that were left hanging by the press release. What makes them think they can fool us? Pray these people don't grow old.
(Revised post)
(Revised post)
Sunday, November 14, 2004
Bro. Mike's Big Loan
Most recently, the Establishment bannered the story of the PHP 353 Million loan granted by the PAG-IBIG Fund, a government controlled mutual fund intended for housing loans, to the El Shaddai Group. Why a story like this deserved a banner headline complete with a three column picture is beyond me. Perhaps, the spin doctors have intended to produce the effect of a jovial atmosphere to welcome this big loan. But they’re stupid to think that we can’t see through this façade.
Who brokered this deal, and how much money did he or she make? In the banking sector, a loan is deemed a sale. Sales have brokers, and brokers earn commissions. Whoever brokered this deal is now a very rich man or woman, for that matter. I don’t have any problem with that really. Commissions are part of the transaction cost shouldered by the borrower, which the borrower ultimately has to pay. So nothing lost there yet. Besides, we all are entitled to earn our livelihood. But my problem lies with the process through which this loan was subject. A huge loan like this should have been subjected to the most rigid standards of credit investigation and financial analysis. Trouble is, when you dangle a huge pile of money on the face of a decision-maker, it is very likely that the decision is corrupt. And in the banking sector, corrupted decisions do not manifest themselves until it’s time to pay back, and the borrower cannot pay back.
Further, how much of the entire net worth of the PAGIBIG FUND is this PHP 353 Million? If the El Shaddai Group defaults, will our precious PAGIBIG FUND be able to survive? In the banking sector, they have what they call the single borrower's limit, which is the limit that any single borrower can loan in proportion to the bank's net worth. The Bangko Sentral has set this at 25% of the bank's net worth. Of course, the rule doesn't apply to the PAGIBIG FUND, but prudence dictates that the handlers of the FUND should have taken this into consideration. Otherwise, they should not be sitting there playing with our hard-earned cash.
Indeed, all this is worthless speculation at this moment. Although, I’m really itching to send my associates to get a first hand account of the procedure that this loan went through were it not for the fact that this can take a huge amount of manhours, and it might not be welcomed by the big bosses who approved this loan who happens to include my Kabayan from Pola, Or. Mindoro Vice President Noli Boy De Castro . But it is something you cannot take away from a PAG-IBIG FUND contributor for the last nine years who has not earned any dividends on the fund or secured any of its loans.
So in the end, this is what I can tell Big Brother Mike: I've blogged this day so I won't forget. You owe us. PAY. EVERY. PESO. ON. TIME.
(revised post)
Sassy Lawyer's blog on the same topic here.
Who brokered this deal, and how much money did he or she make? In the banking sector, a loan is deemed a sale. Sales have brokers, and brokers earn commissions. Whoever brokered this deal is now a very rich man or woman, for that matter. I don’t have any problem with that really. Commissions are part of the transaction cost shouldered by the borrower, which the borrower ultimately has to pay. So nothing lost there yet. Besides, we all are entitled to earn our livelihood. But my problem lies with the process through which this loan was subject. A huge loan like this should have been subjected to the most rigid standards of credit investigation and financial analysis. Trouble is, when you dangle a huge pile of money on the face of a decision-maker, it is very likely that the decision is corrupt. And in the banking sector, corrupted decisions do not manifest themselves until it’s time to pay back, and the borrower cannot pay back.
Further, how much of the entire net worth of the PAGIBIG FUND is this PHP 353 Million? If the El Shaddai Group defaults, will our precious PAGIBIG FUND be able to survive? In the banking sector, they have what they call the single borrower's limit, which is the limit that any single borrower can loan in proportion to the bank's net worth. The Bangko Sentral has set this at 25% of the bank's net worth. Of course, the rule doesn't apply to the PAGIBIG FUND, but prudence dictates that the handlers of the FUND should have taken this into consideration. Otherwise, they should not be sitting there playing with our hard-earned cash.
Indeed, all this is worthless speculation at this moment. Although, I’m really itching to send my associates to get a first hand account of the procedure that this loan went through were it not for the fact that this can take a huge amount of manhours, and it might not be welcomed by the big bosses who approved this loan who happens to include my Kabayan from Pola, Or. Mindoro Vice President Noli Boy De Castro . But it is something you cannot take away from a PAG-IBIG FUND contributor for the last nine years who has not earned any dividends on the fund or secured any of its loans.
So in the end, this is what I can tell Big Brother Mike: I've blogged this day so I won't forget. You owe us. PAY. EVERY. PESO. ON. TIME.
(revised post)
Sassy Lawyer's blog on the same topic here.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
Church and Taxes
In his column today published by the Establishment, Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J. writes that "...the constitutional exemption (from payment of taxes) of churches covers only property used exclusively, actually and directly for religious purposes. It does not cover property not so used. Nor does it cover income from legitimate business operations of churches..." Full article here.
The power to tax includes the power to destroy. This is the logic that emboldens the government to impose high taxes on liquor and tobacco. Of course, the clerics were jesuitic enough to maneuver the constitutional provision exempting religious property from taxation. And Fr. Bernas claims that the "...tax exemptions for religious property are given in order to ensure religious liberty..." This means that the government will not be able to destroy the church through the power of taxation.
This leads me to the point: what about religions that advocate the destruction of government? Does this mean the government will be helpless to tax the same entities which advocate its overthrow?
I have an uncle who swears that his religion is San Miguel Beer and Philip Morris. He is a dutiful believer, and in fact, he worships them everyday. Can he invoke the constitutional provision that Fr. Bernas explained?
It's really very tricky. Nobody regulates churches. That would be unconstitutional, wouldn't it? Nobody even has a legal definition of a church. If I put up a church of my own -- say the "Sun Tzu Church of War" -- does that mean all my properties, if any, are exempt from tax? The answer is Y - E - S. Indeed, by the very nature of religious freedom, any legal challenge to my Sun Tzu Church of War is likely to be repelled. For the state has no business meddling with the affairs of the spirit, it has no choice but to tolerate it and give it tax exemptions.
Time was a person could be executed for believing that the world is round. Our forefathers have made a very significant achievement in the recognition of religious freedom and the separation of church and state. It is significant enough as to make the state helpless to tax church properties in perpetuity.
Well, the wealth witch hunt is on. Whoever brandishes wealth is suspect. Not even the church can escape from the heat. This is the reason why the church itself had to make an announcement to clarify its tax exempt privileges. But methinks, the church has done its homework (what's this centuries-old church and state relationship for?).And the government should poke it nose elsewhere -- unless, of course, we are ready to challenge the logic of exempting religions from taxes. And by doing so, are we regressing to the days when religious freedom was a dream?
By the way, you might be wondering, are there any people who will risk eternal damnation in order to save taxes? Ha -- you might be surprised, but my answer is privileged.
(second revision)
Read the Sassy Lawyer's reaction here.
The power to tax includes the power to destroy. This is the logic that emboldens the government to impose high taxes on liquor and tobacco. Of course, the clerics were jesuitic enough to maneuver the constitutional provision exempting religious property from taxation. And Fr. Bernas claims that the "...tax exemptions for religious property are given in order to ensure religious liberty..." This means that the government will not be able to destroy the church through the power of taxation.
This leads me to the point: what about religions that advocate the destruction of government? Does this mean the government will be helpless to tax the same entities which advocate its overthrow?
I have an uncle who swears that his religion is San Miguel Beer and Philip Morris. He is a dutiful believer, and in fact, he worships them everyday. Can he invoke the constitutional provision that Fr. Bernas explained?
It's really very tricky. Nobody regulates churches. That would be unconstitutional, wouldn't it? Nobody even has a legal definition of a church. If I put up a church of my own -- say the "Sun Tzu Church of War" -- does that mean all my properties, if any, are exempt from tax? The answer is Y - E - S. Indeed, by the very nature of religious freedom, any legal challenge to my Sun Tzu Church of War is likely to be repelled. For the state has no business meddling with the affairs of the spirit, it has no choice but to tolerate it and give it tax exemptions.
Time was a person could be executed for believing that the world is round. Our forefathers have made a very significant achievement in the recognition of religious freedom and the separation of church and state. It is significant enough as to make the state helpless to tax church properties in perpetuity.
Well, the wealth witch hunt is on. Whoever brandishes wealth is suspect. Not even the church can escape from the heat. This is the reason why the church itself had to make an announcement to clarify its tax exempt privileges. But methinks, the church has done its homework (what's this centuries-old church and state relationship for?).And the government should poke it nose elsewhere -- unless, of course, we are ready to challenge the logic of exempting religions from taxes. And by doing so, are we regressing to the days when religious freedom was a dream?
By the way, you might be wondering, are there any people who will risk eternal damnation in order to save taxes? Ha -- you might be surprised, but my answer is privileged.
(second revision)
Read the Sassy Lawyer's reaction here.
Thursday, November 04, 2004
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Statement of Assets and Liabilities for Private Employees
The Establishment has noted a draft bill that proposes to require private employees to file their statement of assets and liabilities. Please see Lifestyle checks up for private workers (Philstar.com - The Filipino Global Community) The bill proposes to require all private sector workers, professionals and other civilians with an annual income of at least P100,000 to file their statement of assets and liabilities (SAL)in the same manner as that of public sector workers.
The idea is to force everyone to state for the record what they own and what they owe, and match this with their declared annual income. If they don't match, then the BIR can build a potential case for tax evasion. It sounds pretty good in theory, but the question is -- can the government be trusted with that data?
If you have an enemy, for example (who may be like a fomer boss, former wife, business and political rival, etc.), and this enemy gets elected into office, which allows her access to these data, you're toast. You are never going to sleep peacefully without a call from the BIR everyday of your life. Maybe if you are clean and are able to match your SAL with your income, your enemy can leak your SAL to the kidnappers and extortionists, in which case, your family is toast. You may not even be able to trust your security guard, even if you can afford one.
Even assuming that this enemy does not get herself elected to office, she can easily link with somebody in government to do that for her. And who in this country does not have a link to a government official? Even your friendly neighborhood squatter can have direct access to a corrupt congressman.
Clearly, this disclosure requirement will make private individuals vulnerable to a lot of attacks, legitimate and illegitimate. Sadly, government's record in protecting private data is poor -- and not just this government. While the proposed bill may be an efficient way to address the problem of tax evasion, the inefficiency in government, which is inherent in any organization particularly in the area of security, will bring prejudice to the individual that will outweigh the benefits of this proposed measure. We may be able to increase revenue collection, but our citizens will live in a state of anxiety -- what with their unexplained wealth (or unexplained poverty, for that matter) resting in a public database for all their enemies to see. Bottomline: we can't trust the government with our private data. Just look at how the SSS and GSIS manage to release loans to tampered accounts. The possibilities are frigthening.
What if you don't have enemies? Maybe you are already dead.
(second revision)
The idea is to force everyone to state for the record what they own and what they owe, and match this with their declared annual income. If they don't match, then the BIR can build a potential case for tax evasion. It sounds pretty good in theory, but the question is -- can the government be trusted with that data?
If you have an enemy, for example (who may be like a fomer boss, former wife, business and political rival, etc.), and this enemy gets elected into office, which allows her access to these data, you're toast. You are never going to sleep peacefully without a call from the BIR everyday of your life. Maybe if you are clean and are able to match your SAL with your income, your enemy can leak your SAL to the kidnappers and extortionists, in which case, your family is toast. You may not even be able to trust your security guard, even if you can afford one.
Even assuming that this enemy does not get herself elected to office, she can easily link with somebody in government to do that for her. And who in this country does not have a link to a government official? Even your friendly neighborhood squatter can have direct access to a corrupt congressman.
Clearly, this disclosure requirement will make private individuals vulnerable to a lot of attacks, legitimate and illegitimate. Sadly, government's record in protecting private data is poor -- and not just this government. While the proposed bill may be an efficient way to address the problem of tax evasion, the inefficiency in government, which is inherent in any organization particularly in the area of security, will bring prejudice to the individual that will outweigh the benefits of this proposed measure. We may be able to increase revenue collection, but our citizens will live in a state of anxiety -- what with their unexplained wealth (or unexplained poverty, for that matter) resting in a public database for all their enemies to see. Bottomline: we can't trust the government with our private data. Just look at how the SSS and GSIS manage to release loans to tampered accounts. The possibilities are frigthening.
What if you don't have enemies? Maybe you are already dead.
(second revision)
Tuesday, October 26, 2004
My Experience as an Exorcist: The Case of the Canadian Stowaway
I have a cousin who began seeing spirits about four years ago. Let's call her KING then a teenager when these events happened. Her third eye was opened when my grandparents, who died about five years ago, tried to convey a message to us, and she was the only willing medium. They have tried to convey a message to me too through a dream, but I was too frightened to talk to them. My cousin who appeared to have been fascinated by her abilities talked to them in her dreams. As she persisted, she soon could see their spirits even in broad daylight.
Thereafter, my cousin allowed herself to be a channel for my grandparents to touch and feel the world again. This is a long story that will be subject of another post. Meanwhile, let's proceed from this premise that after that incident in which my cousin allowed herself to be the channel of my dead grandparents, things were never the same again. Spirits from everywhere have spotted her and have attempted and succeeded to take over her body. It was only through the help of a professional exorcist and her father, an enthusiast of the occult, that she was able to drive them away eventually but not until after they have conveyed the stories of how they died and what they wished for in the physical world.
In the summer of 2001, I brought my family to our hometown in Pola, Or. Mindoro. I had only two kids then. My sister and my cousins joined us in the trip. Pola (also the hometown of the Vice President) rests on the eastern part of Mindoro with vast beaches. Check out the map here. It's primarily an agricultural town, and people often come there to take a vacation after working on the big city. In the first afternoon since we got there, we went for a swim in Aguada Beach.
My cousin King joined us. We had a grand time enjoying the warm and clean water, blue sky and the fine-grained sand. We were the only ones in the beach then, and we were horsing around as if the beach belonged to us. At about 5:00 pm, we decided it was time to go. Our house was about one kilometer away from the beach, so it was a long walk.
On our way home while walking on the beach, the spirit manifested herself to King. The spirit was in distress, and she wanted to talk to King. But due to her previous encounters with restless spirits, King ignored the spirit and continued to walk home with us as if nothing was happening. Apparently, the spirit would not give up and she would follow us all the way home. We were all still clueless about King's encounter with this spirit from the beach.
King's main weapon against these spirits have always been a medal that was given to her by a professional exorcist. I don't have the details of this medal but it has proven very potent as no spirit has succeded taking over her body whenever she wore it. Meanwhile, the spirit decided to stop bothering King as my cousin went inside our house and washed up. This caused King to be a little lax on her defenses as she changed clothes and forgot about the medal that was pinned on her wet clothes. She failed to get it and pin it on her fresh clothes.
Soon after washing up, she felt dizzy and decided to go to sleep. In her sleep, the spirit started bothering her again. The spirit was begging her for help. While King was struggling with the spirit, we were all having a little snack downstairs, and were not aware of what King was going through.
Just then King ran down the stairs and cried out for her Dad. Unfortunately, her Dad was not around.
The household was terrified as we saw King get into a trance as the spirit tried to take over her body while she put up a resistance. My cousins, sisters and my wife took out their rosaries and prayed as we had been accustomed to do on these occasions. While everyone prayed, we all held King by her feet and hand to stop her from hurting anyone. King's eyes were piercing and red. She growled and scratched like crazy as we went on praying.
About thirty minutes later, a village exorcist arrived. She uttered prayers on King and spoke to the spirit in various languages. Meanwhile, King was throwing up. Based on our experience, everytime King was throwing up, it meant that the incantations were working, and the spirit was being expelled. I was beside King while all this was happening and held on to the her hand.
Alas, for thirty minutes, it appeared that the spirit was still around. The exorcist was being hostile to the spirit as she wanted the spirit to be driven away. Yet, the spirit appeared to be saying something important. But the exorcist didn't seem like she wanted to talk with the spirit, as the exorcist continued to speak to her in tongues.
Then, the spirit took over King's voice and began to speak in English. The village exorcist decided to let me speak to her. And this was how I managed a conversation with her:
Spirit: Have you seen Nancy?
MBA: What do you mean?
Spirit:Do you know Raul?
MBA: What do you mean?
Spirit: Raul, he raped me and killed me.
MBA: What's your name?
Spirit: I am Jamila Miller.
MBA: What happened?
Spirit: I am from Canada. I stowed away from my parents and went to Puerto Galera with my friend Nancy. There I met Raul who raped me and killed me and dumped me on the sea. You have to find Raul.
MBA: Do your parents know about this? How can we get in touch with them?
Spirit: There is no way to contact them. You have to find Raul.
At this point, the exorcist told me that it was time to ask the spirit to leave.
MBA: Jamila, you have to let King's body go.
Spirit: No. I will kill her. She refused to help me.
MBA: Jamila you're dead. You have to move on. Move on. We will pray for you. In heaven, you will find the justice that eluded you in this world. Move on. You will find God the Father and Mother Mary there. They will take care of you.
And the spirit left, as King was revived unto herself. King said Jamila was a caucasian teen-ager. She had long hair and a big red mark on her face apparently the result of being hit by a blunt weapon.
We wondered how a spirit whose body was apparently dumped in Puerto Galera could get to the beaches of Pola, Or. Mindoro. She may have taken a ride with the bancas and boats plying the route. But the great mystery which until now is unsolved is who is this Raul? Where did he dump Jamila's body? When? Where are Jamila's parents and relatives? Who is Nancy? Where is she?
Next post: The Return of Jamila Miller's Spirit
Thereafter, my cousin allowed herself to be a channel for my grandparents to touch and feel the world again. This is a long story that will be subject of another post. Meanwhile, let's proceed from this premise that after that incident in which my cousin allowed herself to be the channel of my dead grandparents, things were never the same again. Spirits from everywhere have spotted her and have attempted and succeeded to take over her body. It was only through the help of a professional exorcist and her father, an enthusiast of the occult, that she was able to drive them away eventually but not until after they have conveyed the stories of how they died and what they wished for in the physical world.
In the summer of 2001, I brought my family to our hometown in Pola, Or. Mindoro. I had only two kids then. My sister and my cousins joined us in the trip. Pola (also the hometown of the Vice President) rests on the eastern part of Mindoro with vast beaches. Check out the map here. It's primarily an agricultural town, and people often come there to take a vacation after working on the big city. In the first afternoon since we got there, we went for a swim in Aguada Beach.
My cousin King joined us. We had a grand time enjoying the warm and clean water, blue sky and the fine-grained sand. We were the only ones in the beach then, and we were horsing around as if the beach belonged to us. At about 5:00 pm, we decided it was time to go. Our house was about one kilometer away from the beach, so it was a long walk.
On our way home while walking on the beach, the spirit manifested herself to King. The spirit was in distress, and she wanted to talk to King. But due to her previous encounters with restless spirits, King ignored the spirit and continued to walk home with us as if nothing was happening. Apparently, the spirit would not give up and she would follow us all the way home. We were all still clueless about King's encounter with this spirit from the beach.
King's main weapon against these spirits have always been a medal that was given to her by a professional exorcist. I don't have the details of this medal but it has proven very potent as no spirit has succeded taking over her body whenever she wore it. Meanwhile, the spirit decided to stop bothering King as my cousin went inside our house and washed up. This caused King to be a little lax on her defenses as she changed clothes and forgot about the medal that was pinned on her wet clothes. She failed to get it and pin it on her fresh clothes.
Soon after washing up, she felt dizzy and decided to go to sleep. In her sleep, the spirit started bothering her again. The spirit was begging her for help. While King was struggling with the spirit, we were all having a little snack downstairs, and were not aware of what King was going through.
Just then King ran down the stairs and cried out for her Dad. Unfortunately, her Dad was not around.
The household was terrified as we saw King get into a trance as the spirit tried to take over her body while she put up a resistance. My cousins, sisters and my wife took out their rosaries and prayed as we had been accustomed to do on these occasions. While everyone prayed, we all held King by her feet and hand to stop her from hurting anyone. King's eyes were piercing and red. She growled and scratched like crazy as we went on praying.
About thirty minutes later, a village exorcist arrived. She uttered prayers on King and spoke to the spirit in various languages. Meanwhile, King was throwing up. Based on our experience, everytime King was throwing up, it meant that the incantations were working, and the spirit was being expelled. I was beside King while all this was happening and held on to the her hand.
Alas, for thirty minutes, it appeared that the spirit was still around. The exorcist was being hostile to the spirit as she wanted the spirit to be driven away. Yet, the spirit appeared to be saying something important. But the exorcist didn't seem like she wanted to talk with the spirit, as the exorcist continued to speak to her in tongues.
Then, the spirit took over King's voice and began to speak in English. The village exorcist decided to let me speak to her. And this was how I managed a conversation with her:
Spirit: Have you seen Nancy?
MBA: What do you mean?
Spirit:Do you know Raul?
MBA: What do you mean?
Spirit: Raul, he raped me and killed me.
MBA: What's your name?
Spirit: I am Jamila Miller.
MBA: What happened?
Spirit: I am from Canada. I stowed away from my parents and went to Puerto Galera with my friend Nancy. There I met Raul who raped me and killed me and dumped me on the sea. You have to find Raul.
MBA: Do your parents know about this? How can we get in touch with them?
Spirit: There is no way to contact them. You have to find Raul.
At this point, the exorcist told me that it was time to ask the spirit to leave.
MBA: Jamila, you have to let King's body go.
Spirit: No. I will kill her. She refused to help me.
MBA: Jamila you're dead. You have to move on. Move on. We will pray for you. In heaven, you will find the justice that eluded you in this world. Move on. You will find God the Father and Mother Mary there. They will take care of you.
And the spirit left, as King was revived unto herself. King said Jamila was a caucasian teen-ager. She had long hair and a big red mark on her face apparently the result of being hit by a blunt weapon.
We wondered how a spirit whose body was apparently dumped in Puerto Galera could get to the beaches of Pola, Or. Mindoro. She may have taken a ride with the bancas and boats plying the route. But the great mystery which until now is unsolved is who is this Raul? Where did he dump Jamila's body? When? Where are Jamila's parents and relatives? Who is Nancy? Where is she?
Next post: The Return of Jamila Miller's Spirit
Friday, October 22, 2004
Singing with the Enemy
The Establishment (ABS-CBN News Magandang Umaga) carried an amusing story this morning about the lawyers prosecuting and defending the killer of Arbet Sta. Ana-Yongco.
Ms. Yongco was the prosecutor of Ruben Ecleo, Jr., a cult leader accused of murdering his wife in Cebu. She was killed on October 11, 2004 as witnessed by a ten-year old girl. The girl identified a certain Michael Favila as the killer. Mr. Favila was charged yesterday.
In the news, the Establshment showed us that after the charges were levied, and Favila was placed in custody, the lawyers prosecuting and defending Michael Favila got into a light mood, and turned the courtroom into a karaoke bar. The cameras showed Favila's lawyer belting out "Bato sa Buhangin" and thereater, the prosecutor started singing with him. And then, the prosecutor nudged the accused Michael Favila to sing along with them, and the man obliged. After the scene, the camera cuts to news anchor Erwin Tulfo, who couldn't keep himself from editorializing by saying something like, the Chief Justice shouldn't allow this to happen, because it gives the public the impression tha lawyers are not serious about their jobs.
Well, it is really absurd that things like this happen. Erwin Tulfo is right when he says that the scene gives the public a bad impression on the justice system. As regards to the defender of Favila who led everyone in the singing, it could be a ploy, a Sun Tzu technique to disarm the prosecutor and see through her weaknesses as a person (boy, did it work.) But for this prosecutor, I can't find any possible way to defend her actions. Somebody got killed. That somebody is a fellow lawyer who died on active duty, and what does the prosecutor do? Sing "Bato sa Buhangin" with the lawyer of the accused, and even nudge the accused to sing along. Talk about sleeping with the enemy, or should we say singing with the enemy.
I'm sure that prosecutor violated a rule in the book. At the very least, I think it's conduct unbecoming of a prosecutor. The question is do we have time to bother with these things when bigger injustices are left unsolved?
Ms. Yongco was the prosecutor of Ruben Ecleo, Jr., a cult leader accused of murdering his wife in Cebu. She was killed on October 11, 2004 as witnessed by a ten-year old girl. The girl identified a certain Michael Favila as the killer. Mr. Favila was charged yesterday.
In the news, the Establshment showed us that after the charges were levied, and Favila was placed in custody, the lawyers prosecuting and defending Michael Favila got into a light mood, and turned the courtroom into a karaoke bar. The cameras showed Favila's lawyer belting out "Bato sa Buhangin" and thereater, the prosecutor started singing with him. And then, the prosecutor nudged the accused Michael Favila to sing along with them, and the man obliged. After the scene, the camera cuts to news anchor Erwin Tulfo, who couldn't keep himself from editorializing by saying something like, the Chief Justice shouldn't allow this to happen, because it gives the public the impression tha lawyers are not serious about their jobs.
Well, it is really absurd that things like this happen. Erwin Tulfo is right when he says that the scene gives the public a bad impression on the justice system. As regards to the defender of Favila who led everyone in the singing, it could be a ploy, a Sun Tzu technique to disarm the prosecutor and see through her weaknesses as a person (boy, did it work.) But for this prosecutor, I can't find any possible way to defend her actions. Somebody got killed. That somebody is a fellow lawyer who died on active duty, and what does the prosecutor do? Sing "Bato sa Buhangin" with the lawyer of the accused, and even nudge the accused to sing along. Talk about sleeping with the enemy, or should we say singing with the enemy.
I'm sure that prosecutor violated a rule in the book. At the very least, I think it's conduct unbecoming of a prosecutor. The question is do we have time to bother with these things when bigger injustices are left unsolved?
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Super Shock Me
I've been waiting for Super Size Me to get shown in Philippine theaters, and guess what? It got shown in Rockwell for a few days, and before my wife and I could get there it was gone. Curious too is the fact that the Establishment appears to have ignored it, probably because they think it's not a good movie or some editors were paid to kill the story.
Morgan Spurlock , the film's director and narrator, shows us an experiment. which he does on himself. For thirty days, he eats nothing but Mcdonald's fast food. He imposes the rule that if they ask him to super-size his orders, he has to oblige. And, to best approximate the average American lifestyle, he doesn't exercise. He hires three doctors to establish his health status before, during and after the experiment. He shows us that when he started, he was in perfect health as certifed by his doctors. But after his experiment, the findings are shocking: His weight balloons by 30 pounds, his cholesterol goes up 65 points, his blood pressure increases, he develops a liver disease that often afflicted only alcoholics, his gets into mood swings, his energy drops, he has chest pains, and yes, his girlfriend complains that he couldn't get his thing up longer than he used to.
Of course, this experiment has limitations. But really, the thesis statement is very clear: If you eat nothing but fastfood for thirty days, you accept everything they offer you in the fastfood, including supersize otions, and you don't exercise, you will get sick, and pretty soon you will die.
Now is that a relevant statement? You bet it is. For one, that was how I managed through the months leading to my bar exams, when I lived in my own apartment, and the priority of my daily existence was to hurdle the daily reading list. I drank lots of coffee, coke, and I even tried out Jolt cola for that extra kick in caffein. My apartment was near the Tropical Hut food mart at the corner of Ayala Avenue and Puyat Avenue in Makati. My daily staple was Tropical Hut burger for lunch and Tropical Hut stir-fried beef and rice with egg for dinner. No wonder, I couldn't sleep on the eve of the first Sunday bar exams, and by the third week, I was dead tired. I even fell asleep while taking the commercial law exams. Now, that was just the diet of a bar reviewee. What about the law student, the college, high school and grade school student? They comprise a vast majority of this republic. How can the Establishment miss this movie?
After watching the DVD of this film, my wife and I made a resolution to take the fastfood out of the diet of our four kids. They will probably hate us for it, but I know someday, they are going to thank us.
Morgan Spurlock , the film's director and narrator, shows us an experiment. which he does on himself. For thirty days, he eats nothing but Mcdonald's fast food. He imposes the rule that if they ask him to super-size his orders, he has to oblige. And, to best approximate the average American lifestyle, he doesn't exercise. He hires three doctors to establish his health status before, during and after the experiment. He shows us that when he started, he was in perfect health as certifed by his doctors. But after his experiment, the findings are shocking: His weight balloons by 30 pounds, his cholesterol goes up 65 points, his blood pressure increases, he develops a liver disease that often afflicted only alcoholics, his gets into mood swings, his energy drops, he has chest pains, and yes, his girlfriend complains that he couldn't get his thing up longer than he used to.
Of course, this experiment has limitations. But really, the thesis statement is very clear: If you eat nothing but fastfood for thirty days, you accept everything they offer you in the fastfood, including supersize otions, and you don't exercise, you will get sick, and pretty soon you will die.
Now is that a relevant statement? You bet it is. For one, that was how I managed through the months leading to my bar exams, when I lived in my own apartment, and the priority of my daily existence was to hurdle the daily reading list. I drank lots of coffee, coke, and I even tried out Jolt cola for that extra kick in caffein. My apartment was near the Tropical Hut food mart at the corner of Ayala Avenue and Puyat Avenue in Makati. My daily staple was Tropical Hut burger for lunch and Tropical Hut stir-fried beef and rice with egg for dinner. No wonder, I couldn't sleep on the eve of the first Sunday bar exams, and by the third week, I was dead tired. I even fell asleep while taking the commercial law exams. Now, that was just the diet of a bar reviewee. What about the law student, the college, high school and grade school student? They comprise a vast majority of this republic. How can the Establishment miss this movie?
After watching the DVD of this film, my wife and I made a resolution to take the fastfood out of the diet of our four kids. They will probably hate us for it, but I know someday, they are going to thank us.
Monday, October 18, 2004
An experience of the divine
Ryan Cayabyab's affair with San Miguel Corporation bears fruit.
The San Miguel Foundation for the Performing Arts has recently released "Great Original Pilipino Music by Ryan Cayabyab" on compact disc. The disc contains Ryan Cayabyab's choral arrangement of his Filipino hit songs as performed by the San Miguel Master Chorale and the San Miguel Philharmonic Orchestra. At PHP 300, this is a bargain.
The first six songs were all originally performed by Basil Valdez, and prior to this recording had been often imitated by singing contest participants and new recording artists. These were the songs that defined the quality of Original Pilipino Music (OPM) back in the 70's and the early 80's. After hearing these new arrangements, I have come to the conclusion that these were never the songs of Basil Valdez, although he interpreted them well and everyone tried to imitate his version. These songs have always been the songs of Ryan Cayabyab, and he shows them why in this album. With the San Miguel Master Choral and Philharmonic, Ryan gives the songs the spin that transforms these songs into true classics for all Filipino generations to enjoy.
One song "Tunay na Ligaya" was our staple "harana" fare back in college when a group of my friends decided to do a favor for another friend who was wooing a beauty title-holder. We practised for days, and when the moment came as planned, the guy brought the lady to the back of the Pollock Center where the Ateneo campus overlooks Marikina Valley, wine and roses awaited them, as we sung "Tunay na Ligaya". Of course, the lady was tickled pink. The experience was to be repeated for all members of the group, except for me because we realized it was bad luck, the lovers often broke off after some time. Eric Yaptangco wrote a song about it, which became a gold record hit. Now hearing Ryan Cayabyab's fresh arrangement of "Tunay na Ligaya", I can't help but remember those days. In this version, two soloists, a lady and a gentleman, perform the sweetest arrangement of this love song ever heard on this planet. This is an experience worth every peso of it.
"Tsismis", originally from Ryan's ground-breaking "One" album, best exemplifies Ryan's command of the chorale music genre as he imitates the sound dynamics of gossip Phlippine style. This is an art song that has no counter-part in Billboard.
The mood turns to light and bouncy with "Da Coconut Nut", a take off from Ryan's Smokey Mountain project. My friend, poet Jim A. (now based in South Africa) once wrote in the defunct, Midweek Magazine, that Ryan's Smokey Mountain group was singing cliches. Until now I still cannot understand what he meant, because more than ten years have passed since Smokey Mountain, the singing group, was launched, and "Da Coconut Nut" is still as vibrant and as fresh as a newly-picked "buko". And, as the real cliche goes, "it's good to the last drop."
"Paraiso" is my favorite of this Smokey Mountain set. It starts off with the plucked strings on C dominant 9, and then enter the sopranos with that familiar line, "Return to a land called Paraiso.." After the first verse, the tenors come in, and then the entire ensemble syncopates to "Pa-ra-i-so". I swear I heard the sound of angels. And their voices fly off to the heights of the bridge and coda up and down the G clef and finally rest with a grand note. The experience can best be described as ecstatic. That's no cliche Jim -- never was and never will be.
The best song of the album is hands down "Awit ng Pagsinta (Epithalamium)" from the pop-ballet, Rama Hari. The material simply lends itself beatifully to the chorale music genre. Harmony, dynamics, and clarity, all qualities of good chorale music, were rendered perfectly by Ryan and the San Miguel Chorale and Philharmonic on this cut.
I have one reason to stop saying Danding should return his San Miguel shares to the people.
The San Miguel Foundation for the Performing Arts has recently released "Great Original Pilipino Music by Ryan Cayabyab" on compact disc. The disc contains Ryan Cayabyab's choral arrangement of his Filipino hit songs as performed by the San Miguel Master Chorale and the San Miguel Philharmonic Orchestra. At PHP 300, this is a bargain.
The first six songs were all originally performed by Basil Valdez, and prior to this recording had been often imitated by singing contest participants and new recording artists. These were the songs that defined the quality of Original Pilipino Music (OPM) back in the 70's and the early 80's. After hearing these new arrangements, I have come to the conclusion that these were never the songs of Basil Valdez, although he interpreted them well and everyone tried to imitate his version. These songs have always been the songs of Ryan Cayabyab, and he shows them why in this album. With the San Miguel Master Choral and Philharmonic, Ryan gives the songs the spin that transforms these songs into true classics for all Filipino generations to enjoy.
One song "Tunay na Ligaya" was our staple "harana" fare back in college when a group of my friends decided to do a favor for another friend who was wooing a beauty title-holder. We practised for days, and when the moment came as planned, the guy brought the lady to the back of the Pollock Center where the Ateneo campus overlooks Marikina Valley, wine and roses awaited them, as we sung "Tunay na Ligaya". Of course, the lady was tickled pink. The experience was to be repeated for all members of the group, except for me because we realized it was bad luck, the lovers often broke off after some time. Eric Yaptangco wrote a song about it, which became a gold record hit. Now hearing Ryan Cayabyab's fresh arrangement of "Tunay na Ligaya", I can't help but remember those days. In this version, two soloists, a lady and a gentleman, perform the sweetest arrangement of this love song ever heard on this planet. This is an experience worth every peso of it.
"Tsismis", originally from Ryan's ground-breaking "One" album, best exemplifies Ryan's command of the chorale music genre as he imitates the sound dynamics of gossip Phlippine style. This is an art song that has no counter-part in Billboard.
The mood turns to light and bouncy with "Da Coconut Nut", a take off from Ryan's Smokey Mountain project. My friend, poet Jim A. (now based in South Africa) once wrote in the defunct, Midweek Magazine, that Ryan's Smokey Mountain group was singing cliches. Until now I still cannot understand what he meant, because more than ten years have passed since Smokey Mountain, the singing group, was launched, and "Da Coconut Nut" is still as vibrant and as fresh as a newly-picked "buko". And, as the real cliche goes, "it's good to the last drop."
"Paraiso" is my favorite of this Smokey Mountain set. It starts off with the plucked strings on C dominant 9, and then enter the sopranos with that familiar line, "Return to a land called Paraiso.." After the first verse, the tenors come in, and then the entire ensemble syncopates to "Pa-ra-i-so". I swear I heard the sound of angels. And their voices fly off to the heights of the bridge and coda up and down the G clef and finally rest with a grand note. The experience can best be described as ecstatic. That's no cliche Jim -- never was and never will be.
The best song of the album is hands down "Awit ng Pagsinta (Epithalamium)" from the pop-ballet, Rama Hari. The material simply lends itself beatifully to the chorale music genre. Harmony, dynamics, and clarity, all qualities of good chorale music, were rendered perfectly by Ryan and the San Miguel Chorale and Philharmonic on this cut.
I have one reason to stop saying Danding should return his San Miguel shares to the people.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Wake up INQ7.net! You are the establishment.
And we, bloggers, are the alternative.
Don't pretend to be us. We won't pretend to be you.
Live. With. It.
Don't pretend to be us. We won't pretend to be you.
Live. With. It.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Hollywood becomes us
With all this talk about the Filipino General who was found to have stashed hundreds of millions in kickbacks, I think it's absolutely stupid for people to think that all will be well after this "big fish" has been caught. Why? First, because we know it's not just one Filipino General. Some people say the corruption is embedded in the entire chain of command. Second, because these Filipino general and his ilk are the people who have the gun in this country. They are the ones who keep the peace. It's naive to think that we can put them in jail. What do I mean? Well, here is a variation of the monologue of Colonel Nathan Jessup in the movie "A Few Good Men" .
Great movie -- the shock of recognition still gives me the shivers.
Imagine an AFP general speaking:
And imagine him on cross-examination by Simeon Marcelo:
Philippine society cannot turn against the excesses of its warrior class without risking the peace. Please tell me I'm wrong.
Great movie -- the shock of recognition still gives me the shivers.
Imagine an AFP general speaking:
Take caution in your tone, Mr. Ombudsman. I'm a fair guy but this fucking heat is making me absolutely crazy. You wanna ask me about kickbacks? On the record, I tell you I discourage the practice in acordance with the Commanders directives; off the record, I tell you it`s an invaluable part of close military operations. And if it happens to go on without my knowledge, so be it. I run my unit how I run my unit. You wanna investigate me? Roll the dice and take your chances. I eat breakfast 300 yards from 4,000 communists that are trained to kill me, so don`t think for one second that you can come down here, flash your badge and make me nervous.
And imagine him on cross-examination by Simeon Marcelo:
General: You want answers?
Ombudsman: I think I'm entitled to them.
General: You want answers?
Ombudsman: I want the truth!
General: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Atty. Marcelo? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for the foot soldiers and you curse corruption in the military. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that kickbacks, while reprehensible, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!
Ombudsman: Did you order the whitewash?
General: (quietly) I did the job you sent me to do.
Ombudsman: Did you order the whitewash?
General: You're goddamn right I did!!
Philippine society cannot turn against the excesses of its warrior class without risking the peace. Please tell me I'm wrong.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
The Legal Profession's Agenda No. 1: Open up
I think the solution to the inefficient justice system has been found: It's called the "Big G". Globalization --yes, it's the G word. Let the foreign lawyers come in.
Right now, the profession is loaded with corruptors: lawyers who bribe judges to win cases for clients. You can find them everywhere, ambulance chasing on seafarers, TRO buying on videoke bars, passing on loads of cash to prosecutors and arbiters in exchange for favorable rulings, and practically almost in every place except the courts where ideally the real action should be. You read their pleadings, and you wonder if your kid in kindergarten can do better. You hear them speak, and you try to decide whether it's better to argue on the rules of procedure or on the rules of grammar.
How do you get rid of these guys? Send them out of business. Bring in the competition who can deliver better services and who will not think twice about questioning improprieties committed by members of the bar and the bench. Bring in the Clarence Darrow types who can take us back into the time when being a lawyer meant something more than being rich (that's a myth, by the way). It's time we put our legal system back in the map.
Then, with the foreign lawyers, more business will come in. Investors will be more enthusiastic about doing business here if they have their lawyers around to draw them the legal roadmaps, instead of thugs who will just tell them who to bribe. More importantly, our own countrymen will get what they deserve: an efficient and graft-free justice system.
There are many other things that foreign lawyers can do for this country, which unfortunately our lawyers will not and cannot do. Roll out the carpet. I say bring them in.
Right now, the profession is loaded with corruptors: lawyers who bribe judges to win cases for clients. You can find them everywhere, ambulance chasing on seafarers, TRO buying on videoke bars, passing on loads of cash to prosecutors and arbiters in exchange for favorable rulings, and practically almost in every place except the courts where ideally the real action should be. You read their pleadings, and you wonder if your kid in kindergarten can do better. You hear them speak, and you try to decide whether it's better to argue on the rules of procedure or on the rules of grammar.
How do you get rid of these guys? Send them out of business. Bring in the competition who can deliver better services and who will not think twice about questioning improprieties committed by members of the bar and the bench. Bring in the Clarence Darrow types who can take us back into the time when being a lawyer meant something more than being rich (that's a myth, by the way). It's time we put our legal system back in the map.
Then, with the foreign lawyers, more business will come in. Investors will be more enthusiastic about doing business here if they have their lawyers around to draw them the legal roadmaps, instead of thugs who will just tell them who to bribe. More importantly, our own countrymen will get what they deserve: an efficient and graft-free justice system.
There are many other things that foreign lawyers can do for this country, which unfortunately our lawyers will not and cannot do. Roll out the carpet. I say bring them in.
Saturday, October 02, 2004
Fahrenheit 9/11
Fahrenheit 9/11 is Bush-bashing through and through, but how come I like it? 1. Because I've always hated Bush (the guy looks like Alfred E. Neuman of Mad Magazine), and 2. It affirms my opinion (and of many others)that Bush took us all for a ride in Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush is the kind of President that America should not have in the post-Cold War era when no single nation can challenge it, especially when it wants to violate International Law. The single principle that made the United Nations a reality is Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which proscribes aggressive war. But look at what Bush did -- he used the events of 9/11 to create fear among his countrymen and rally them to war against the wrong guys. In the process, he ignored the United Nations and formed what he called was the Coalition of the Willing ("Weaklings" is more like it.) After Afghanistan and Iraq, the United Nations can only be labeled at best as America's lap dogs. Fahrenheit 9/11 explains very well the opinion that Bush should not have been America's President in 2000 and 2004, not just for the sake of Americans but also for the sake of the rest of us whose lives are hopelessly tied down to Amercia's fortunes. Great -- so how come I have my reservations about this film? Well, because it is clearly propaganda, and a well-made propaganda at that. I've always been suspicious of propaganda, because they mix truth with falsehoods, and also, propaganda lose their value in due time when the politics of the day has changed. This film measures up to the best propaganda film documentary as each frame of this film appears to be authentic, that is why it's very good. Yet, clearly it doesn't aspire for truth. It limits its point of view to Michael Moore's political persuasion. No problem with that really, but for the fact that I normally don't pay PHP 130 for an hour or so of political propaganda.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
INQ reads a Supreme Court decision on Work and Love
The Inquirer reports a recent Supreme Court decision upholding a pharmaceutical company's rule that prohibits its employees from marrying employees of a competitior. The Inquirer slants the lead of the story in a manner that makes the Supreme Court sound very anti-labor -- quite irresponsible of the Inquirer, I believe -- but the decision is consistent with law and jurisprudence.
The Labor Code provides that "(a)n employer may terminate an employment for any of the following causes: (a) ... willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work..." (Art. 282)
If you break it down to its elements, these elements are the following: 1) an employee disobeys the rule; 2) the disobedience is something that the employee desired and not by some other third party cause; and 3) the rule is reasonably connected with the employee's work.
No problem with elements 1 and 2. The issue is number 3. The essence of the rule has to do with the time-honored value of preventing "conflicts-of-interest" between the personal and the professional lives of an employee. If an employee marries somebody from a competitor, chances are he will be exchanging trade secrets with his spouse over breakfast. Further, the employee's loyalty will surely be in question, especially so that the success of the competitor will bring him indirect benefits through the spouse who works for the other side. In the case of the couple employed with competing pharmaceutical companies, they could even get into debates such as which cough syrup will they give their son. The situation is awkard for all concerned. That's why the rule is reasonable, and no doubt it is relevant to employment.
But what does my favorite newspaper do? Spin off the story as if it were an epic battle between love and economic interest, to which the mighty Supreme Court decides in favor of economic interest. Geez, to me it's really just a story about a man, who after marrying the girl of his dreams, still wants to keep his job.
The Labor Code provides that "(a)n employer may terminate an employment for any of the following causes: (a) ... willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work..." (Art. 282)
If you break it down to its elements, these elements are the following: 1) an employee disobeys the rule; 2) the disobedience is something that the employee desired and not by some other third party cause; and 3) the rule is reasonably connected with the employee's work.
No problem with elements 1 and 2. The issue is number 3. The essence of the rule has to do with the time-honored value of preventing "conflicts-of-interest" between the personal and the professional lives of an employee. If an employee marries somebody from a competitor, chances are he will be exchanging trade secrets with his spouse over breakfast. Further, the employee's loyalty will surely be in question, especially so that the success of the competitor will bring him indirect benefits through the spouse who works for the other side. In the case of the couple employed with competing pharmaceutical companies, they could even get into debates such as which cough syrup will they give their son. The situation is awkard for all concerned. That's why the rule is reasonable, and no doubt it is relevant to employment.
But what does my favorite newspaper do? Spin off the story as if it were an epic battle between love and economic interest, to which the mighty Supreme Court decides in favor of economic interest. Geez, to me it's really just a story about a man, who after marrying the girl of his dreams, still wants to keep his job.
Monday, September 20, 2004
LIfe of Pi: A Review
What would happen if you put a sixteen-year old Indian boy and a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker on a lifeboat adrift across the Pacific for 227 days? I'm sure Butch Dalisay, the Phlippines's best living short story writer, would approve. Stephen King might not even forgive himself for not thinking about that silly premise himself. Stephen King wrote, "the story is in the situation." And Yann Martel's situation in "Life of Pi" would have flopped were it not for his masterful rendering of the piece. Thus, what we have in "Life of Pi" is not just a premise for a story but a metaphor of the human condition: man and beast lost in the vast sea of being and nothingness, and it would be up to man to tame the beast and draw from it the spiritual strength to move on and find God. Great story. I would rate it one notch higher than Hemingway's "Old Man and the Sea" chiefly because Hemingway has no God and Yann Martel can match word for word Hemingway's style.
The main character Pi (as in 3.14 the irrational number) short for Piscine (French for swimming pool) spends his adolescence studying zoology and three unique religions. He lives with a family of zookeepers who soon decides to emigrate to Canada on a Japanese freighter, named Tsimtsum. But halfway through their voyage the ship sinks. The disaster strands Pi in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, on a lifeboat with an orangutan, a zebra, a hyena and a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker. Soon, Richard Parker has disposed of everyone except Pi and what follows is the story of the castway with an oversized perpetually hungry feline companion. It is in this threshhold between life and death that "Life of Pi" manages to shake its reader, grab him, and take him to metaphysical heights.
You have to credit Yann Martel for managing to keep it intact for 319 pages. And as he moves it from page one to page 319, he transgresses subjects ranging from sloths, zookeeping, Hinduism, Christianity, marine life and even constipation in the high seas. Scene after scene Yann Martel's prose builds up with such realism that at the end of book, I wondered, is this true? Well, all good art is true. And this book, "Life of Pi" is definitely good art -- a great diversion from the lawyer's pre-occupation with the here and now.
The main character Pi (as in 3.14 the irrational number) short for Piscine (French for swimming pool) spends his adolescence studying zoology and three unique religions. He lives with a family of zookeepers who soon decides to emigrate to Canada on a Japanese freighter, named Tsimtsum. But halfway through their voyage the ship sinks. The disaster strands Pi in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, on a lifeboat with an orangutan, a zebra, a hyena and a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker. Soon, Richard Parker has disposed of everyone except Pi and what follows is the story of the castway with an oversized perpetually hungry feline companion. It is in this threshhold between life and death that "Life of Pi" manages to shake its reader, grab him, and take him to metaphysical heights.
You have to credit Yann Martel for managing to keep it intact for 319 pages. And as he moves it from page one to page 319, he transgresses subjects ranging from sloths, zookeeping, Hinduism, Christianity, marine life and even constipation in the high seas. Scene after scene Yann Martel's prose builds up with such realism that at the end of book, I wondered, is this true? Well, all good art is true. And this book, "Life of Pi" is definitely good art -- a great diversion from the lawyer's pre-occupation with the here and now.
Saturday, September 04, 2004
Kafkaesque in the Philippines
I once received a text message from a friend asking if I could him assist him in posting bail. After having the records checked, I learned that he had been charged with Estafa, and the judge set his bail at PHP 40,000.
The following day my friend came to my office. He said he had been arrested a few days before but the police decided to set him free without posting bail. He had many visitors who came to see him, and the police had difficulty receiving them. Apparently, most of these visitors were government people and big businessmen, and the jail didn't have enough chairs to accommodate them. Embarrassed at their inability to make my friend's rich and powerful visitors at ease, the police set my friend free.
I advised my friend that we should post bail for his own peace of mind. After all, the case still had to be dismissed, and unless he posted bail, the risk of getting arrested again is great. After gathering all the requirements for posting bail, I learned that out of hundreds of licensed bonding companies in the Philippines, only one could be accepted by the court. The rest were black-listed. The bonding industry and the court system were in a crisis. The bonding firms had issued bonds to the court which subsequently forfeited them. But the bonding firms did not pay. Thus, unless the bonding companies paid their obligations, their bonds would not be honored. This meant that there were hundreds of criminals on the loose who have jumped bail, the sheer number of which is enough to cause the break-down the bonding system altogether. This left my friend with only one bonding company to assist him in his need for a bail bond.
Worse, this bonding company refused to accommodate his application.The agents of the bonding company said that the lowest bond denomination they could issue was PHP 300,000. Anything below PHP 300,000 to the bonding company was a losing proposition.
Thus, my friend had no choice but to raise a cash bond. I then applied for a reduction of the bond to allow my friend to post a cash bond. Fortunately, the court granted the request and reduced the bond. Long out of job, my friend begged his relatives to help him raise PHP 22,000 for his temporary liberty.
When the day of the arraignment came, my friend appeared, entered a plea of not guilty, and prepared for our defense. The judge set the pre-trial date in December last year. My friend was righteous about his case. He said he was just a fall guy. He merely witnessed the transaction. He could not have been involved with the fraud.
Yet, the complainant never appeared. On the first day of the pre-trial and upon learning of the absence of the complainant, I moved for the dismissal of the case. The court denied my motion because the notice of pre-trial sent to the complainants had no registry return. According to the court, it had no proof that the complainant received the notice. The court claimed that the mail was sent too late and it may not have reached the complainant on time. This happened thrice: every time the complainant was absent, every time I moved for dismissal, and every time the court said it did not have a registry return. I decided to ask the court to send the notice by personal service. For this, my poor friend had to shell out PHP 500 for the process server's transportation expenses: the only reason why I did not ask for a personal service much earlier. Alas, the court finally learned that the complainant no longer resided in the address indicated in the records. The complainant had moved out and left with no forwarding address. Yet, it was not the end of it.
The prosecutor claimed that she had another address and thus requested the court to serve the notice on the other address. I objected vigorously to the request, but the judge refused to hear me.
In the meantime, my friend's health began to deteriorate. He never told me what was wrong with him. But he appeared more sickly each time we attended his hearing only to be told that the hearing was going to be reset.
Due to increasing back pains, my friend did not attend the next four hearings. In the same four hearings, the court determined that the complainant could not be reached. The prosecutor's new address was likewise no longer valid. I argued that clearly the complainant had lost interest in the case, and thus the case may now be dismissed. Yet, the court refused to dismiss the case due to the absence of my friend. The court did not honor the medical certificate attesting to my friend's poor health and warned that it would not dismiss the case unless my friend appeared.
To settle the matter once and for all, I asked my friend to come, even if he had to be carried in a stretcher. My friend, who all the while accepted his predicament with stoic dignity, broke down and expressed disgust and disappointment at the unreasonable strictness and grand scale mediocrity of the court. I couldn't tell him anything. It was settled that a provisional dismissal needs the consent of the accused, and the judge merely wanted to see the accused personally express his consent to the dismissal. And so gathering whatever was left of his resources and strength, my friend attended his last hearing on a stretcher. The judge, who probably had long lost her faith in medical certificates casually signed by doctors to absolve lawyers and litigants from absence in hearings, looked shocked to see my friend in his medical state. Sure enough, the complainant did not come, the court asked my friend whether he consented to a provisional dismissal to which my friend answerd yes, and then the court dismissed the case.
A few weeks later, my friend died of cancer in the spinal column.
Today, his widow is wondering how to encash the PHP 22,000 check issued by the Clerk of Court in the name of his late husband whose cash bond was cancelled as a result of the dismissal of the case. Apparently, bank regulations prohibit her from encashing it.
The following day my friend came to my office. He said he had been arrested a few days before but the police decided to set him free without posting bail. He had many visitors who came to see him, and the police had difficulty receiving them. Apparently, most of these visitors were government people and big businessmen, and the jail didn't have enough chairs to accommodate them. Embarrassed at their inability to make my friend's rich and powerful visitors at ease, the police set my friend free.
I advised my friend that we should post bail for his own peace of mind. After all, the case still had to be dismissed, and unless he posted bail, the risk of getting arrested again is great. After gathering all the requirements for posting bail, I learned that out of hundreds of licensed bonding companies in the Philippines, only one could be accepted by the court. The rest were black-listed. The bonding industry and the court system were in a crisis. The bonding firms had issued bonds to the court which subsequently forfeited them. But the bonding firms did not pay. Thus, unless the bonding companies paid their obligations, their bonds would not be honored. This meant that there were hundreds of criminals on the loose who have jumped bail, the sheer number of which is enough to cause the break-down the bonding system altogether. This left my friend with only one bonding company to assist him in his need for a bail bond.
Worse, this bonding company refused to accommodate his application.The agents of the bonding company said that the lowest bond denomination they could issue was PHP 300,000. Anything below PHP 300,000 to the bonding company was a losing proposition.
Thus, my friend had no choice but to raise a cash bond. I then applied for a reduction of the bond to allow my friend to post a cash bond. Fortunately, the court granted the request and reduced the bond. Long out of job, my friend begged his relatives to help him raise PHP 22,000 for his temporary liberty.
When the day of the arraignment came, my friend appeared, entered a plea of not guilty, and prepared for our defense. The judge set the pre-trial date in December last year. My friend was righteous about his case. He said he was just a fall guy. He merely witnessed the transaction. He could not have been involved with the fraud.
Yet, the complainant never appeared. On the first day of the pre-trial and upon learning of the absence of the complainant, I moved for the dismissal of the case. The court denied my motion because the notice of pre-trial sent to the complainants had no registry return. According to the court, it had no proof that the complainant received the notice. The court claimed that the mail was sent too late and it may not have reached the complainant on time. This happened thrice: every time the complainant was absent, every time I moved for dismissal, and every time the court said it did not have a registry return. I decided to ask the court to send the notice by personal service. For this, my poor friend had to shell out PHP 500 for the process server's transportation expenses: the only reason why I did not ask for a personal service much earlier. Alas, the court finally learned that the complainant no longer resided in the address indicated in the records. The complainant had moved out and left with no forwarding address. Yet, it was not the end of it.
The prosecutor claimed that she had another address and thus requested the court to serve the notice on the other address. I objected vigorously to the request, but the judge refused to hear me.
In the meantime, my friend's health began to deteriorate. He never told me what was wrong with him. But he appeared more sickly each time we attended his hearing only to be told that the hearing was going to be reset.
Due to increasing back pains, my friend did not attend the next four hearings. In the same four hearings, the court determined that the complainant could not be reached. The prosecutor's new address was likewise no longer valid. I argued that clearly the complainant had lost interest in the case, and thus the case may now be dismissed. Yet, the court refused to dismiss the case due to the absence of my friend. The court did not honor the medical certificate attesting to my friend's poor health and warned that it would not dismiss the case unless my friend appeared.
To settle the matter once and for all, I asked my friend to come, even if he had to be carried in a stretcher. My friend, who all the while accepted his predicament with stoic dignity, broke down and expressed disgust and disappointment at the unreasonable strictness and grand scale mediocrity of the court. I couldn't tell him anything. It was settled that a provisional dismissal needs the consent of the accused, and the judge merely wanted to see the accused personally express his consent to the dismissal. And so gathering whatever was left of his resources and strength, my friend attended his last hearing on a stretcher. The judge, who probably had long lost her faith in medical certificates casually signed by doctors to absolve lawyers and litigants from absence in hearings, looked shocked to see my friend in his medical state. Sure enough, the complainant did not come, the court asked my friend whether he consented to a provisional dismissal to which my friend answerd yes, and then the court dismissed the case.
A few weeks later, my friend died of cancer in the spinal column.
Today, his widow is wondering how to encash the PHP 22,000 check issued by the Clerk of Court in the name of his late husband whose cash bond was cancelled as a result of the dismissal of the case. Apparently, bank regulations prohibit her from encashing it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)