SAP Bong Go rather than Senator Bong Go

As a staunch Duterte supporter, the people I follow, my friends and followings fill my timeline with the idea of pushing SAP Bong Go for a senatorial position. What is my stand in this idea? I don’t support it. 

SAP Bong Go at APEC Meeting

Don’t get me wrong. I support President Duterte and I’ve witnessed how loyal and firm Bong Go is with him. I raise my hands up to Bong Go for that. If the president trusts and believes in him, so do I. But then, why am I not in favor of him being on the senate?

Senators are more of legislative. The commonly known function of the senators is to review the bills passed from the congress and be one of the seated senators to decide whether to have the bills passed as a law. It’s like the congress is the first filter or level and the senate is the second filter/level. The senators should have a wide span of knowledge in laws, regulations, the constitution and so many other aspects. 

I am not underestimating SAP Bong Go, he graduated from De La Salle University with a management degree. I think that foundation of education and knowledge is better for an executive position (like mayors, governors) rather than a legislative position (senators, congressmen). 

Remember when President Duterte once said how he prefers to be a mayor than a congressman? He once had a congress term and he admitted that legislative tasks isn’t really his forte so he went back to being a mayor. I think that applies for Bong Go as well. That’s my reason number one.

Reason number two. The president trusts and believes in Bong Go, he even appointed him as his special assistant, right? This only shows that the president needs him more than the senate does. I’ll just leave it that way. 

Reason number three. Don’t get back at me with “Bakit si Sotto wala namang background sa law pero senator? Bakit si Pacquiao—” my response to that would be “Are they effective? Do you really think they deserve the senatorial seat?” If yes is your answer, I might need to ask you to reevaluate your grounds and basis in life, if no is your answer then it’s settled. Being a senator doesn’t appear to be Bong Go’s forte especially if we’ll look at his educational background and the field he is exposed to (Duterte’s personal aide and assistant). 

Sabi ko nga, kung executive position ang ipupush niyo kay Bong Go, susuportahan ko pa pero kung legislative, pass ako diyan. 

In summary, if you are from the left, you probably agree with me of not being im favor of the idea of SAP Bong Go running for the senate. 

If you are from the pro-admin/Duterte/DDS, you should accept that I am one of you who stands for Duterte and the admin but you should also understand my point. All these are not about our president but the Philippines, our country. President Duterte once said that he doesn’t need our loyalty, he needs us to put our loyalty to the country and the constitution.

If you are a centrist like me who supports the admin but criticizes it when needed or if you are apolitical, I believe we share the same sentiment and view on this. 

SOURCE:

WIKIPEDIA: SAP Bong Go’s Wikipedia Page
INQUIRER: Duterte: Be loyal to flag, Constitution

For Press Freedom but not for Rappler

I tend to see a lot of people online showing their support for press freedom and then following it with some random statement in support with Rappler. Sure, I don’t think there is anything wrong with supporting press freedom. We don’t want another flawed type of Marcos dictatorship in the country again, do we?

Some staunch supporters of president Rodrigo Duterte probably hates me right now because I support this press freedom campaign and idea but I assume they only hate the idea of it because they think it’s mainly to support Rappler after SEC sued them regarding their alleged violation of the constituitional and statutory Foreign Equity Restriction in Mass Media enforceable through rules and laws within the mandate of the Commission.

Sorry I had to copy paste that part but in a less lawyer definition, it means that a mass media such as Rappler, by the constituition, isn’t allowed to be funded by a foreign company or to give commission or owe a foreign body. The mass media should 100% be owned by a Filipino. However, according to an investigation of the SEC, (which I don’t think was detailed out on public yet) Rappler was partly owned by this foreign company called Omidyar Network leading the government body to revoke Rappler’s license to operate. This has also been the basis of SEC’s order to investigate on Rappler’s Philippine Depository Receipts (PDR) for further proofs. 

What is a PDR even? A PDR is an investment in a local company where the holder has the right to earn without having an equity stake.  

The first time I heard about this issue, I’m in favor of the idea of giving Rappler a chance to prove themselves and that they didn’t violate any law as to what SEC is accusing them of. I was also further in favor of Rappler when the breaking news appeared saying that Rappler’s license to operate gets revoked by the SEC after this unexpected investigation. As an initial reaction, I thought “Why aren’t there any warning? Why did they just jump into the worst punishment of closing and revocation of license instead of giving a warning?” 

I was on Rappler’s side for a moment but after reading more articles and seeing the way they respond to this issue, I started to change my mind. 

One. In a blink, the rebuttal of Rappler to this news was “It was a politically motivated.” I was hoping for a rebuttal proving that you didn’t violate the law but instead, you chose to point that out first. Two. Rappler immediately launched campaigns about press freedom, anti dictatorship and similar issues — sure, we are all up for all of that but what is the sudden calling out for? To favor you? To earn support? If you didn’t violate anything then you don’t have to work on gathering supporters anymore; all you have to do is prove that the accusers are wrong. Three. All other press and media freely operate, what do you actually mean with the #PressFreedom hashtag? Four. You said SEC is unreliable and bias to the government. Let me just point out that SEC is a regulating body of all the largest firms and companies in the Philippines, you can’t say that they are unreliable just because you had an issue with their scheme. Also, the officers in position on that government body were appointed by former President Aquino, do you really expect them to favor the current admin instead of being neutral? Try harder with the propaganda. 

I’ll say it again. I am for press freedom but let me lay this short letter for Rappler. 

Dear Rappler,

Just because your licensed got revoked by the SEC doesn’t mean that the freedom of the press are being oppressed already. It’s just YOUR COMPANY and that is not because the government doesn’t like you but because YOU VIOLATED THE LAW. If you really didn’t defy any rule then prove it instead of whining and discrediting the administration and the SEC like it’s wrong for them to confront violators like your firm. 

Just recently, Omidyar Network donated P78 million ($1.5 million) to Rappler in form of PDR. Why would they do that in such sudden time? What’s the purpose of that? 

It just pushes me to lean to the opposite side as it gives me doubts to their press firm. Once again, I am for the press freedom but don’t make this about Rappler. They have their right to fight against the SEC and prove them wrong about this foreign investment violation, I give them that but for now, I don’t think there is any oppression of the mass media as all press firms can still freely broadcast and Rappler can still actually operate (right?). 

With this said, I don’t mean that we should be oblivious of things. I think we should still be wary but just because Rappler is struggling right now doesn’t mean there is media oppression already. Just think about the fact that they allegedly disobeyed the law and they just have to face the confrontation now, plus, SEC wouldn’t serve an order if the evidences and case doesn’t have any strong grounds. 

I trust the justice system with regards to this issue. If Rappler proves themselves innocent then that’s good, if not, they have to be ready for the consequences that awaits for them.  

SOURCES:
CNN PHILIPPINES: Rappler foreign investor's move an 'admission' of Constitution violation
INQUIRER: SEC orders Rappler to shut down
ABS-CBN NEWS: Omidyar donation 'an admission' of Rappler's violation
CNN PHILIPPINES: Omidyar Network donates investment to Rappler's Filipino managers

Thoughts on Marcos and Robredo's Electoral Protest

Let me just discuss information and express my thoughts about the motion/manifestation that VP Leni Robredo's camp and former senator Bongbong Marcos' signed last February 6, 2018.

Former senator Bongbong Marcos challenged VP Leni Robredo and her camp to sign a joint motion in order to hasten and withdraw all motions to clear the way to the recount of votes last 2016 elections after the former senator accused the duly elect vice president of cheating. “I’ve done everything possible to speed up this election protest,” Marcos said in a statement. “At this point, the only thing left is for Mrs. Robredo to sign the document. We are waiting.”

February 6, Tuesday — Atty. Romulo Macalintal, VP Leni Robredo's election lawyer, responded to Mr. Marcos' dare. "I am inviting Mr Marcos and his lawyer tomorrow (February 7, 2018) at 9 am to sign a joint motion," he said. "This is to confirm that we are not causing the delay in the recount of ballots. It is Mr Marcos' raising of baseless allegations and irrelevant issues that is causing the delay in the recount."

February 7, 2018, Wednesday — Atty. Romulo Macalintal showed up and presented VP Robredo's camp's prepared joint motion to withdraw all motions and acts that may hamper or delay the recount proceedings. The media and people witnessed him sign the motion, however, ex-senator Bongbong Marcos' camp didn't show up on the said venue.

BUT don't you dare think I am not going to mention in this blog post about what Mr. Marcos did that day.

Mr. Marcos showed up earlier that day with a complete set of media. In front of the media, cameras and live videos, he signed a joint manifestation himself. Yes, himself, not his election lawyer, not any representative but himself. If you would remember, VP Robredo's camp earlier told Marcos to meet them in a restaurant so both camps could sign the joint motion. But the former senator was a no-show on the said venue, hence, he went on another place and on an earlier time.

Moving further, the surprising part here is that Mr. Marcos signed a joint manifestation instead of a joint motion. It's planting so much questions in my head because to think of it, it was his camp and him who challenged VP Robredo's camp to sign a motion (not a manifestation) and it would be too farfetch to think they just accidentally filed a manifestation or made a mistake by filing a manifestation instead of a motion. It's like challenging someone into a boxing fight and you appear to the meeting place with a pair of basketball shoes instead of some boxing gloves, you know what I mean?

There is a difference between the two but let me explain that in a less lawyer way and in a more layman's term way.

Manifestations are usually made merely for the information of the court with generally nothing to contest or argue. It's a pleading which does not carry weight since the party merely makes a statement, chich the court may take not of and not take any action at all.

Basically, a manifestation is just like informing the court that you'll do something. It's just like you're saying something but it doesn't really demand any actions or response at all.

Motion is a pleading where a party asks the court to grant him the relief or remedies or what he wants from the court.

As for motion, it's like demanding (let me use a better term for that) asking the court to grant the request of the filing party to withdraw all the filed motion and acts that slows down the proceedings to the recounting of the ballots. In this case, the court is required to respond as it is a request.

__

Now let's get into the part of this post where I integrate my thoughts and opinions regarding this issue. It was brave of Mr. Marcos to challenge VP Robredo's camp to sign a joint motion to hasten the progress of the electoral protest he filed. I could feel his eagerness to see if cheating really happened or if it didn't, I give him that. Every Filipino wants the recount to happen as well — the pro-Leni Robredo, the pro-BBM, the Filipinos, so that for once, this issue of election results can be resolved.


Yet then, I started to get confused when his camp signed a manifestation rather than motion. "I thought you want this protest to progress swiftly? I thought it was VP Robredo's camp who's causing all the delays?" I asked myself but neither did I can answer so I was left with no choice but to read articles, hear the thoughts of the election lawyers, the left, the right and other centrists around.


The evidences presented by Mr. Marcos since day one were weak, not enough to prove the alleged cheating during the 2016 elections. He has been observed to be fishing for evidences and loopholes to keep his protest going after the inauguration of the president and the vice president. With that at the back of my head, it appears to me that all these noise he's making with his election protest are just a part of his tactic to keep himself relevant. If he'll slow down the progress of the protest, questions will remain in every Filipinos' mind and if he's running for the senate 2019 or the presidency on 2022, this whole protest idea can push him up to the top of the surveys but the sad part here is that VP Leni Robredo has to take all the burden (a sadder case here is that if VP Leni Robredo is really innocent and she doesn't deserve all these mess).

Now I'm kinda expecting this protest to continue until 2019 or maybe even until 2022. Who can tell?


How did I come up with that bias assumption? NO. It's not bias. Come to think of it.

One: He challenged VP Robredo's camp to sign a motion. He signed a manifestation. Come on. He's a lawyer, he's got his own lawyer for this case, they should know about motion and manifestation.


Two: He appeared on air, on-cam, in public earlier than Atty. Macalintal last February 7, 2018. Is this a tactic to say like "IM SO EAGER FOR THE RECOUNT! LOOK, I'M HERE SUPER EARLY AND VP ROBREDO'S CAMP IS LATE. THEY'RE REALLY THE ONES CAUSING THE DELAY. SIDE WITH ME PEOPLE."


Three: Don't the former senator Bongbong Marcos trust his election lawyer, Atty. Vic Rodriguez, that he had to really come up there and be the one to sign the manifestation (even if it should actually be a motion)? What is that? A stunt? "Look, I'm here on my own signing this document by myself while VP Leni Robredo is a no-show and he only sent her election lawyer to sign the motion." Please. The point here is that she signed the motion whether she's there or not, as long as she signed it, it's still the same.


Four: Atty. Macalintal mentioned the venue and time for him to meet with Atty. Rodriguez and ex-senator Bongbong Marcos so that they can sign the joint motion to hasten the progress of the case altogether in front of the media and public as the witness. If Marcos' camp is really into the idea of removing all the motion and acts delaying and impeding the ballot recount, they would have appeared there but they didn't.

__

That's basically my thoughts about this issue. I would be open to your thoughts and sensible responses regarding this issue after reading this post below on the comments section. I do hope I enlightened the readers out there. I would like to apologize if ever there are grammatical errors along this post, english isn't really my first language (Filipino is my first language) and I am no professional writer. Thank you for your time to read.




SOURCES:

ABS-CBN NEWS: Robredo camp signs motion to withdraw all motions before PET
INQUIRER: Bongbong Marcos signs document to withdraw all motions from PET
INQUIRER: Bongbong skeptical about Leni’s joint motion offer
RAPPLER: Marcos signs document withdrawing motions that delay VP vote recount
TWITTER NETIZEN: MANIFESTATION VS MOTION
THE MANILA TIMES: Robredo camp turns tables on Marcos: Sign ‘motion’ not ‘manifestation’ over ballot recount