Offending Feelings.

Today, Pro-RH Bill advocate and famous Intramuros tour guide Carlos Celdran was charged guilty for “offending religious feelings” after staging his Damaso commotion at Manila Cathedral several months ago. As said in the article, Celdran will be facing anywhere between two months to a year in bars.

One may probably wonder what do you really mean by “offending religious feelings,” a term that seems atrocious to the normal person (myself included), but my friend sent me this link, and it states “offending religious feelings” as:

committed when anyone, while in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony, performs acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.

A short trivia about the crime is that it is similar to the crime that was filed against our National Hero, Dr. Jose Rizal, when he was battling against the friars during the Spanish era. This means that, although it is not as common as murder, estafa, or theft, the law has been long existing.

Sad to say, laws like this attribute to the living proof that the Philippines have laws that are outdated and needed to be reviewed upon. While I do agree (being a Pro-RH bill AND a Catholic) that the penalty given to Celdran (that is being in bars from a few months to years), I find it sometimes appalling that there are those who say that he deserved it.

Some of my friends (particularly those who are in law school) do think that the punishment given to Celdran was deserving as he made a disturbance during the mass, I do think there is something wrong with this. Not that I am condoning Celdran’s actions, but I find it a little strange why the verdict to his case was given to him after two years, while the Maguindanao Massacre case has been ongoing for almost four years and yet there has been no progress with the case.

In addition, while what Celdran has done is indeed offensive for the religious, I think there are more important issues that this country has to talk about. One of them is the issue of guns and crimes, especially in light of the recent robbery incident in SM Megamall, and the two shooting incidents in Mandaluyong and San Juan, in which the three events happened in a span of three days.

Again, by now I have sort of accepted the penalty given to Celdran, but I still believe that getting shot dead is far more dangerous than offending one’s feelings.

The master politician.

Yesterday’s resumption of Senate’s session started with a drama, beginning with Sen. Antonio Trillanes’ overconfidence that “Enrile will be ousted within 3 weeks.” And this announcement was made all throughout media, showing the utter arrogance and unpreparedness of the young senator.

Unfortunately for him, he has been once again outclassed by the master politician, Senate Pres. Juan Ponce Enrile, as he offered to resign only to have the strong support from the majority of the senators to retain his seat. And Trillanes’ overconfident prediction early that morning simply backfired (even if he would belittle the veteran’s “calculated” moves).

Well, let me say this Sen. Trillanes: sure Sen. Enrile may be corrupt and all, but it is so stupid of you (more since you were a former soldier) to announce to the public your plans of beating an enemy who has survived multiple administrations (from Macapagal, Marcos, Cory Aquino, Ramos, Estrada, Arroyo, and up to the present administration of Noynoy Aquino). I can’t believe too how you, Sen. Trillanes, have not learned your lesson in the past two coup attempts you made against then-Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

In addition, I don’t think you even know how to play Game of the Generals, where you mind play and manipulate your enemy through making unpredictable moves in order to capture the flag (here’s a link on how the game is played). 

The score for Trillanes? 0-3.

And the lesson to learn from yesterday’s drama? Never ever announce your plans to the public on how you would want to topple down your enemy. Never bring out your ace card. Learn to be sly against your enemy. Calculate your moves first before launching an attack.

Have you ever wonder why the impeachment of Chief Justice Renato Corona was successful? Because it was well planned before the case was brought into trial.

After Trillanes’ first move, Enrile made his move and outclassed the neophyte senator.

Your turn, Trillanes.

On internet freedom.

While this week the Supreme Court has resumed talks on the controversial Cybercrime law, I do think there is a real need to talk about why this bill, as much as it will help prevent crimes committed by the use of the internet, is also a law that promotes “E-martial law.”

*If you want to get updated on what happened during the oral arguments, this article will help you get a grasp of what is happening, including the protests.

But before I am going to talk about the Cybercrime law, I do feel sad with the justice system of America following the suicide of Reddit editor Aaron Swartz after being accused of stealing thousands of academic papers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which he said he would like to publish publicly for everyone’s benefit.

If you would think about it, Swartz’ intentions are good as he promotes people’s right to information. Sadly, this is not what the justice system of America thinks. Sadly speaking, America thinks that Swartz’ alleged stealing of information for the public to freely use it is a crime, compared to what greedy corporate bigwigs such as Bernard Madoff did back in 2008 that led to the Financial crisis. Quoting from the Huffington Post article Will Bunch wrote,

On one level, this might be a time for Americans to ask ourselves why the full hammer of the government was coming down on this brilliant young activist whose alleged crime was so dubious, when the same Justice Department has all but ignored the double-dealing and financial chicanery that crashed the world economy that erased billions of dollars in 2008, and it has completely looked the other way when it comes to the torture practices that reversed decades of established law and which have been so harmful to America’s reputation.

To be honest, the issue of freedom of information being a crime is not limited to America alone. Even in the Philippines, it is an issue as well. While I do applaud Pres. Noynoy Aquino for certifying the also-controversial Reproductive Health Bill as urgent, I do feel sad when the government thinks that the Freedom of Information bill, another bill of heated debate, is not certified to be urgent.

And here we have this Cybercrime law, which is under the first set of oral arguments as of this writing, that has dangerous clauses such as the online libel and takedown clauses, dangerous parts of the law that will bring us back to martial law.

As much as the Cybercrime law has, to an extent, good intentions of protecting us from frauds, scams, and the like, the law is not perfect especially when it has intentions of shutting down internet freedom a la China.

While the team of Atty. Harry Roque go to court to contest these dangerous provisions of the Cybercrime law, the justices, on the other hand, did made some points on the provisions being contested with the Cybercrime law.

One of these is on the libel clause, with the citation of the cyberbullying suffered by (now) Atty. Christopher Lao, who rose to infamy when he drove his car through flooded waters, and was defamed by various people through various social media channels (remember that there was a Facebook page calling him stupid).

In relation to cyberbullying, I do agree with Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno when she said that there is the need for the State to protect the interests of individuals, as cyberbullying can lead to suicides (and it is no joke . . . it IS a problem with most teenagers these days).

So am I saying that Sen. Tito Sotto’s allegation that he is being cyberbullied be an acceptable case similar to Lao’s case? Hold your horses; the case with Sotto is totally different, and I do not think he is being cyberbullied – he did a lot of wrong things, and one of them is plagiarism.

I do agree that as much as the #notoCybercrimeLaw legal panel did their best in presenting their protest against certain clauses of the law, the justices, on the other hand, did provide some interesting questions.

While the arguments is ongoing, I do pray that the law be given an extended TRO, especially since the TRO issued for this law ends on February 6. I just hope that with all the arguments being done, the Supreme Court could be convinced at how the Cybercrime law is unconstitutional in terms of violating internet freedom.

Gunning through 2013 in bad light

2013 has just barely started, yet there have been reports of killings, people going amok and shooting everyone in his sight, stray bullet victims, rape, alleged bribery, and devotees flooding the procession of the Black Nazarene, praying and hoping for a new miracle. If you would ask me, as much as I would believe that news at this time of the year is slow (as my officemate pointed out to me a few days ago), this upsurge of killings involving guns and drugs are alarming in terms of being confident that our country is safe.

But mind you, it is not only in the Philippines where we face problems with guns. In America as well, the tragedy brought about by the Sandy Hook shooting incident and a more recent shooting in Aurora, Colorado has sparked debates on gun ownership.

To be honest, the debate on gun ownership is indeed a heated one, and probably even more controversial than the RH bill since in this debate, it is hard to choose sides.

On one side, you would call for a total gun ban since guns always result into violence, and can be very dangerous in the hands of children or even any person who suddenly goes amok, is drunk, or high on drugs.

On the other hand, as Pres. Noynoy Aquino reasoned out, imposing a total gun ban would not necessarily solve all crimes, and by doing so can cause a great increase in loose or unlicensed firearms. Also, with the outside world being dangerous (even at your own home), people do need to defend themselves with firearms.

As much as I do agree with PNoy’s suggestion to focus on dismantling private armed groups, controlling gun use is not exactly easy, especially in cases where people do not license all of their guns, leading to the existence of loose firearms. However, I do believe that PNoy’s proposal is the more logical one, no matter how hard it would be.

This is the challenge that PNoy should resolve immediately after the RH Bill and the (soon-to-be-ratified) FOI bill. I do want to be sure that I am safe anywhere I go.

Power play.

Remember that time when there was a suspension order against then-Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay for allegedly paying ghost employees at the city hall, as posted by the administration of then-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo months before the 2007 elections? It seems that the circumstances of events during the ordeal is similar to that of what Cebu Gov. Gwen Garcia is facing.

However, as much as I have this tendency to think that Garcia’s suspension is politically-motivated, given the fact that the suspension order is served just before the 2013 elections, and that Cebu is a vote-rich city, I do have hesitations about the Garcias just as how I have hesitations with the Binays in Makati.

Both families are well known for holding political positions on their respective cities for years, even passing on their positions to their kin and children. In short, both the Binays and the Garcias share the common fact that they are indeed political dynasties reigning for years, or even decades, to their respective cities.

However, despite of their similarities in terms of their reputations, there are still differences in their cases. For Binay, the accusations made against him is still not proven up to now, and that as far as I know of, the Binays do live an honest life. The Garcias, on the other hand, have been involved in controversies, with former GSIS Sec. Winston Garcia, Gov. Gwen’s younger brother, being dragged to the GSIS plunder controversy.

(*this article by Bulatlat here sparked some interest for me on the controversy Winston has been involved with)

Given the situation of both families, trying to take sides on the case of Gov. Gwen is more challenging than with the case of Vice Pres. Binay since reputation-wise, the family of Gov. Gwen is more tainted compared to the cleaner record of Binay. To be honest, I do see Binay’s efforts in improving Makati compared to Garcia’s efforts in improving Cebu.

Still, both their cases of being suspended before elections have political colors in mind. Why would you try to suspend a government official a few  months before elections if you do not have any motivation in mind?

But with the case of Gov. Gwen, it is hard to assume such a motive. Choosing sides for her case is indeed a double-edged sword, giving one a lose-lose scenario. I do hope that this case gets resolved peacefully, and not by forcing her out of the capitol.