False Transparency

By admin | September 3, 2013

Written for Bulatlat

Beware of politicians who like to insert the keywords ‘transparency’ and ‘good governance’ in their speeches. They are the same people who also use deceptive slogans such as ‘sustainable economy’ and ‘inclusive growth’ to justify the imposition of anti-poor economic policies. These are agreeable political concepts – who would openly oppose them? – but politicians have already distorted their substantial meanings.

It’s obscene how politicians who are neither transparent nor good shamelessly invoke the idea of transparency to preach about good governance.

Transparency is supposed to be the powerful weapon of the weak against the scourge of bad governance. However, its radical potential has been undermined by narrow interpretations. For example, the creation of government websites is quickly cited as proof of transparency. Then, the posting or uploading of government records is hailed as a key reform in the campaign for good governance. But the most applauded gesture is the alleged transformation of the traditional politician into a tech-savvy politician who has learned to maximize various social media tools in interacting with his constituents.

These are misleading definitions of transparency. A government website does not necessarily empower or enlighten the citizens. In fact, it could be easily used to confuse the public by stuffing it with redundant information. The new tactic in the propaganda rule book involves the releasing of voluminous but contradictory data to hide the truth. Bombard the Internet users with meaningless numbers, manipulated records, archaic laws, and other superfluous materials from the library archives. Digitize the reports of all bureaucratic agencies and upload them online.

The Wikileaks expose reminded us not to be satisfied with information that the government is willing to publish for public scrutiny. Instead, we should also aggressively search for information that the government is withholding from us. Despite their low reputations, politicians and their subordinates are not dumb enough who would willingly incriminate themselves with documentary evidence of their misdeeds. They can easily destroy records or declare the minutes of a meeting to be covered by executive privilege. Worse, they can always manufacture ‘clean’ documents and insert them into the records. We are free to access the online files of the government only after the censors and legal advisers have given their approval. The search for truth should not begin in government webpages but in the paper baskets of shredded documents.

The other popular version of transparency is facilitated by social media. Politicians are described to be transparent if they are open, interactive, and kind to Internet trolls. They participate in online discussions to prove their readiness to listen to diverse views. Meanwhile, government campaigns are deemed successful if they are crowdsourced. Nothing wrong so far. The problem begins when this political interaction is elevated as the essential component to achieve good governance. Citizenship is reduced into an infinite conversation between leaders and the people. Good governance is equated with the free exchange of bits and bytes of online information.

But this kind of politics ultimately benefits the politician in power. If everybody is talking (or tweeting), who is doing the fighting in the real world? The conversations (and the chatting) must end at one point so that people can resume their political organizing.

But politicians, being politicians, have already understood and realized the benefits of redirecting politics from the streets into the so-called virtual communities. Their political loss is minimal if what people do is rant online, even incessantly. Thus, they seduce and distract netizens with PR memes and state-sponsored hashtags.

This is transparency that briefly blinds the people about their political duties. The healthy exchange of views between leaders and citizens is necessary; but the non-stop micro debates on national and parochial issues are already unnecessary and politically disempowering. The latter is a form of transparency that is being pursued to prevent the people from properly engaging in politics.

The solution offered by Philippine President Noynoy Aquino to eliminate corruption in the pork barrel system is to institute more transparency measures. But he neglected to mention that the Congress and budget websites are already replete with information about pork barrel fund distribution. His budget chief has repeatedly claimed since 2010 that all disbursements are immediately posted online for public review. He has not stopped reminding us that the government has established numerous mechanisms to democratize the budget process. Yet, corruption persists. And it seems to be worse than ever. The problem is not the absence of information but too much wrong information. The bigger problem is the apparent insincerity of Aquino and his ilk in promoting genuine transparency and good governance

Posted in media | Tagged | Leave a comment

Decree 72: Vietnam’s Confusing Internet Law

By admin | August 31, 2013

written for The Diplomat

Vietnam is often accused of being an enemy of media freedom because of its notorious record of jailing dissident bloggers and blocking social networks. Its new Internet decree, which purportedly contains several provisions that ban the sharing of online news stories, could be added to the list of its crimes against the online community.

Decree 72, or the “Management, Provision, Use of Internet Services and Information Content Online”, was signed by Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung on July 15 but was only made public last week. It immediately became controversial because of its confusing provisions that seem to ban the sharing of news stories on various social networks.

For example, clause 20.4 states that a personal information webpage is not allowed to provide aggregated information. But what exactly is “aggregated information?” Tuổi Trẻ newspaper quoted Vietnam’s Broadcast and Electronic Information Department which interpreted it as a reminder for individuals not to “quote or share information from press agencies or websites of government agencies.”

The report added that Deputy Minister of Information and Communications Le Nam Thang said the new decree is intended to prevent the spread of false information online. Thang said Decree 72 will help users “find correct and clean information on the internet.”

He added, “Personal webpage owners are only allowed to provide their own information, and are prohibited from taking news from media agencies and using that information as if it were their own.”

Is this an instruction and a warning to Vietnamese Internet users not to write, retweet, or share news articles culled from public sources? Exchanging of public information on social media is now deemed a criminal act?

For Reporters Without Borders, the decree is simply “the harshest offensive against freedom of information.” The media watchdog also described it as “nonsensical and extremely dangerous” because “its implementation will require massive and constant government surveillance of the entire Internet.”

For its part, Human Rights Watch is worried that the decree will be used for “selective persecution.”

According to Phil Robertson of Human Rights Group, “This is a law that will be used against certain people who have become a thorn in the side of the authorities in Hanoi.”

Meanwhile, the Vietnam Committee on Human Rights rejected the decree as “fatally flawed and inconsistent with international human rights law and standards.”

But the government dismissed the criticisms and claimed that as usual these “unfriendly” groups have misunderstood the provisions of the law. During a press conference, Vietnamese authorities explained that the decree, once implemented, would actually generate conditions for the development of internet standards in the country. They also insisted that the decree has no provision prohibiting individuals from sharing information on social networks.

According to the government, the primary intent of the decree – which has six chapters and 46 articles – is to protect intellectual property rights and the copyrights of press agencies. Indeed, a rising number of copyright infringement cases have recently alarmed many companies and businesses. But Steven Millward of Tech in Asia thinks that Vietnam’s new Internet decree is not fixing the problem.

“Vietnam seems to be striking at social media and individual sharing rather than fixing the cause of the problem: content piracy by lazy news sites. Surely media industry regulation would be a better move than this kind of ban,” he wrote.

If media groups really misunderstood the provisions of the decree, then the Vietnamese government has no one to blame but itself for using vague terms. Or perhaps the use of broad categories was deliberate to sow confusion and discourage Internet users from supporting online activities that could be categorized as belonging to the prohibited acts of the decree.

Since the law will take effect on September 1, the government still has enough time to scrap this confusing Internet decree and draft a new one. But if they do so, maybe for a change the government should consider consulting the local Internet community and other media stakeholders which would be affected by the new regulation.

Oil Spill Disasters Strike Thailand and the Philippines

written for The Diplomat

First, the forest fires in Indonesia that caused a deadly haze to descend on Singapore and Malaysia. And now an oil spill disaster in Thailand and the Philippines. This is turning out to be a bad year for the environment.

About 50,000 liters of crude oil spilled into the Gulf of Thailand on July 27 from a pipeline operated by PTT Global Chemical Plc. The oil slick reached Samet island off Rayong province which is a popular tourist destination. PTT immediately apologized and vowed to help in the rehabilitation of the area.

Local fishing families said that their livelihoods were gravely affected by the disaster because restaurants operating in the famous tourist island have refused to buy fish products from them. Motorbike and taxi rental shops have also suffered because of dwindling tourist arrivals.

PTT claimed that the “emergency situation” has been “terminated” already through a clean-up operation that removed 99 percent of the oil slick. But civil society groups are not convinced and have accused the company of disclosing insufficient information about the real impact of the oil spill on the environment.

“Since the incidence has occurred, PTT GC has insisted that the situation is not worrying and is containable. The lack of disclosure as to potential impacts on the environment and people has left public in the dark as far as the harmful situation is concerned,” the groups said in a joint statement.

They wanted PTT to explain the real reasons for the pipeline leakage and in particular discuss the chemical dispersants they used to remove the oil sludge. They also urged the government “to enforce applicable criminal and civil provisions to bring the perpetrators to justice and to ensure that such incidence shall not happen again.”

According to environmental groups, there have been more than 200 oil spill disasters in Thailand in the past three decades.

Less than two weeks after the bursting of an oil pipeline in Thailand, another oil spill disaster hit the region when a leak in an underwater pipeline of Petron Corp. poured 500,000 liters of diesel into the waters of Manila Bay. It affected four towns in Cavite, the most populous province in the Philippines located south of Manila.

It took Petron several days before it apologized and claimed responsibility for the disaster.

“We sincerely apologize and assure all the communities affected that we will strive to resolve the situation at the soonest possible time. We will pursue proper remediation and clean-up of the areas affected, aiming to restore the means of livelihood of the local communities,” said Petron President Lubin B. Nepomuceno.

But for green groups, the Cavite oil spill is a grim reminder of Petron’s dirty record. According to reports, Petron also caused an oil spill in the same area three years ago. The company also caused the worst oil spill disaster in the country’s history seven years ago:

“Exactly seven years after the worst maritime oil disaster in the Philippines caused by Petron in the province of Guimaras, the same oil giant has caused a repeat performance in Manila Bay with yet another oil spill affecting several towns in Cavite province. It’s the same story over again: fish and shellfish kills, affected coral reefs, and immediate impacts on the health and livelihood of coastal communities,” said Kalikasan PNE, a local environmental group.

Indeed, Southeast Asia is vulnerable to the harsh impact of climate change, but this year’s environmental disasters in the region – the deadly haze and oil spill – are primarily and directly caused by irresponsibility.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Rallies and timezones

By admin | August 25, 2013

Written for Bulatlat

Because of varying time zones, it is almost impossible to organize synchronized global protests. Realtime uprisings in the global village are actually done in a continuum.

Let us assume for example that today is the Global Day of Action Against Evil. It is 12 noon in Manila and 1pm in Tokyo but it is still 12 midnight in New York and 1am in Rio de Jainero. East Asian protesters are already unfurling banners in freedom parks while their counterparts in London are still preparing for the early morning activities. By the time Istanbul activists have started gathering for the lunch time protest, the Mumbai rally is already dispersing.

In other words, an international day of protest is staged repeatedly in the so-called flat world; and each act is relentlessly performed as if it is the only political intervention that matters in the world. This is the reason why protests are always localized and globalized at the same time.

When activists march in the streets, they also inevitably link arms with global allies and comrades. And what unites them is the shared belief in a particular cause or issue on one hand, and the strong commitment to claim the future by correcting the wrongs of the present on the other. But this solidarity is initially in the realm of symbolic because activists around the world cannot physically assemble at once, they cannot hold banners and clinch fists side by side, and they cannot hug one another no matter how much they are passionately involved in the same movement. Even virtual rallies cannot easily smash the time and space barriers.

In fact, protesters are often unaware that their imagined brothers and sisters in the struggle are still probably sleeping in the other side of the world while they on the other hand are already about to finish their protest program. While Cairo is burning, San Francisco is sleeping. Later, as Cairo prepares to sleep, San Francisco is already roaring with anger over the bloodbath in Egypt. As activists pause to rest, the fight is briefly taken over by their friends in other continents and time zones. Time disparity does not obliterate global solidarity.

Globalization is not just about the dizzying spread of Capital, the ultimate non-object which is able to seamlessly cross boundaries and time differentials. More importantly, it is also about the fantastic building of coalitions and networks to create a better world. The message of the anti-globalization movement is quite simple: Stop privileging Capital as the all-encompassing value that determines how life should be organized in this planet. The International is a reminder that the proper response to the violent outbursts of Capital is to mount a more militant form of resistance.

Popular struggles organized in multiple time zones are concrete alternatives to the dehumanizing impact of Capital. They are aggressively pursued to reject the persuasive appeal of sameness (profitability) in favor of a more egalitarian standard in organizing our societies. They seek to undermine the influence of agents and apologists of Capital who are needlessly glorified everywhere despite their notorious record of bringing preventable famines, endless wars, and cheap entertainment in all corners of the world.

Thus, support for a local struggle is part of the global fight against the tyranny of Capital. Fortunately, there are warriors and activists in the world who are ready to cross borders and time zones so that they can immerse themselves in various people’s movements. Their solidarity ceases to be symbolic and becomes a more genuine display of radical love. They are living and walking proofs that the cause of humanity is not lost. They are one of the reasons why the idea of globalization is worth fighting for.

Unfortunately for Thomas van Beersum, the Dutch activist who was ‘deported’ for joining a rally in Manila, he is neither a sweatshop investor nor a drone specialist which made him an undesirable alien in the eyes of the Philippine authorities. Something is fundamentally wrong in our priorities when we kick out a foreigner for speaking truth to power while we are generous in welcoming the so-called poverty experts whose ‘shock and awe’ solutions have only brought more miseries to our people. But political partisanship aside, what happened to democracy?

Posted in places | Tagged , | Leave a comment

LGBT Politics in Southeast Asia

By admin | August 23, 2013

Written for The Diplomat

Is Southeast Asia becoming more tolerant towards its LGBT community?

Consider these recent developments in the region: A Singaporean politician admitted on Facebook that he is gay. A Malaysian transgendered person was appointed political secretary in Penang State. Two government ministries in Vietnam and some legislators in Thailand have publicly endorsed legislation that would permit same-sex marriage if passed. And in the Philippines an LGBT political party was able to participate in the party list elections.

Singapore’s annual Pink Dot celebration became more memorable this year not only because it gathered more than 21,000 people, but also because an opposition leader bravely admitted in public that he is gay. Through a simple Facebook status update of “I am going to Pink Dot tomorrow. And yes, I am gay,” Dr. Vincent Wijeysingh of the Singapore Democratic Party suddenly became Singapore’s first openly gay politician.

Wijeysingh’s decision to come out could mean that there is a new breed of leaders in Singapore who are not afraid anymore of conservative backlash; and that the LGBT network has grown considerably in recent years – something local political forces can no longer afford to ignore.

Meanwhile, in Malaysia former NGO worker Hazreen Shaik Daud became Malaysia’s first transgendered politician after being appointed political secretary to Tanjung Bungah state assemblyman Teh Yee Cheu of the Democratic Action Party. The appointment instantly divided the nation, with some praising it as a courageous and respectable initiative while others denounced it as disrespectful to the values cherished by most Malaysians.

Curiously, many detractors of Hazreen never questioned her competency, instead only focusing on her gender. This further validated the campaign to fight discrimination based on sexuality and gender.

Speaking of equal rights, the prospect of legalizing same-sex marriage got a boost this year in Vietnam when the Health Ministry and Justice Ministry offered no objection to the proposal. In July, the Justice Ministry even suggested the repeal of Clause 5, Article 10 in Vietnam’s Law on Family and Marriage which bans same-sex marriage.

Another country where discussions on same sex-marriage are gaining ground is Thailand. The initiative is led by Wiratana Kalayasiri, a Democrat parliamentarian from the southern Thai city of Songkhla, who drafted a bill that would legalize same sex unions. Perhaps Thai legislators can derive inspiration from the fact that they were able to pass a law which decriminalized sodomy in 1957. Maybe it can beat Vietnam to the punch and earn the distinction of being the first Asian country to institutionalize same-sex marriage.

But asserting LGBT concerns is extremely difficult, especially in conservative parliaments. Aside from soliciting the support of policymakers and legislators, the LGBT community must strive to have a voice of its own inside the government. This means organizing its own ranks to wield greater political influence. In the Philippines, an LGBT political party known as Ang Ladlad was able to get government accreditation and even participated in the recent party list elections. Here is a party whose founding leaders, members, and core constituency belong to the LGBT community.

So back to the question at the start of this article: Is Southeast Asia becoming more tolerant towards lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgendered people? While there are encouraging developments in several countries in the region, it would be wrong to claim that Southeast Asia has become a semi-paradise for the community. On the contrary, it is still a bastion of homophobia and feudal culture.

Singapore continues to enforce the notorious Section 377A of the Penal Code which criminalizes sex between mutually consenting adult men. When Dr. Vincent Wijeysingh ran for parliament, he was forced by his political rivals to deny that he had a hidden gay agenda, as if it is immoral or wrong to fight for LGBT issues.

Meanwhile, homosexuality is still outlawed in Malaysia, Thailand’s draft legislation on same sex marriage was initially rejected by older members of parliament, and the Ang Ladlad Party failed to get enough votes to win a seat in the Philippine Congress.

Vietnam leaders may be supportive of the idea of same sex marriage, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that LGBT issues are being properly addressed. Writing for TuoiTreNews, Valentine Vu explains why he is inclined to reject the legalization of same-sex marriage in Vietnam: “The nation’s conservative base still recognizes homosexuality as a taboo act and not as a personal identity, more disparities between the people would happen resulting in further isolation of gay families if gay marriage is recognized without any foundation to properly support it.”

The pink dot used as a marker for the community in Singapore is an apt symbol for the general state of LGBT politics in Southeast Asia. It remains a pink dot amid the black plague of feudalism which dominates the region.

Posted in gender | Tagged | Leave a comment

Are Myanmar and the Philippines Guilty of Genocide?

By admin | August 20, 2013

Written for The Diplomat

It is common for unpopular governments to be accused by their enemies of committing serious human rights violations such as murder and kidnapping, but it is not often that genocide is included in the charge sheet. Even notorious dictators who are assumed to be guilty of committing the most heinous crimes against humanity are rarely accused of genocide.

When various groups denounce a government’s action or program as being genocidal, it immediately gets global and media attention. Something evil must be really happening to warrant the use of the term.

Two Southeast Asian governments are currently facing such accusations. Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the ethnic Muslim Rohingya minority. Meanwhile, in the Philippines, a former senator and the influential Catholic Church hierarchy have warned the government that it could be held liable for genocide if it implements the controversial reproductive health law. Really?

Fortunately, there exists an international convention that can help us identify specific acts of genocide. The convention states that genocide involves “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” through 1) Killing members of the group; 2) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; 3) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; 4) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and 5) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

So, using this definition, in the case of Myanmar, the genocide accusation seems solid. Rohingyas have no citizenship rights because the government has still refused to recognize them as a distinct ethnic group in the country. Rohingyas have no government-issued identification cards, they cannot own land, and they are barred from government employment.

In recent years, riots between Rohingyas and other ethnic groups in the state of Rakhine have displaced thousands of villagers, especially the Muslim Rohingyas who are further discriminated against due to their religion. State forces are accused of doing nothing when a mob attacks a Rohingya settlement. An estimated 125,000 Rohingyas are living in refugee camps in Myanmar in dire need of aid.

Recently, the government imposed a two-child policy on the group in a bid to defuse ethnic tension. This controversial measure finally elicited a response from opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who until then was criticized by many human rights groups for her silence on the persecution of the Rohingya minority.

Almost all major human rights groups in the world have already issued an alarm over the growing repression of the Rohingyas. They are one in urging the Myanmar government to review its laws and programs that curtail the basic rights of Rohingyas.

Unless the government revamps its discriminatory and repressive policies against the group, it will have a tough time convincing the international community that it is resolving the communal riots and ethnic tensions involving the Rohingya with utmost transparency and fairness.

While the Rohingyas’ plight in Myanmar seems to warrant claims of genocide, in the Philippines’ case the accusation seems flimsy. Early this month, Former Senator Francisco Tatad appeared before the Supreme Court and petitioned for the scrapping of the reproductive health law, which he rejected as an unconstitutional assault against God and family. He argued that the government will commit genocide because the law prescribes “state-mandated birth control” that would lead to the slaughter of innocent souls.

The law, hailed by women’s groups and health advocates as a landmark legislation, lays down the framework for comprehensive reproductive healthcare in the country, principally to prevent maternal deaths. It allows local health centers to provide birth control services to the population in the face of fierce opposition from the Catholic Church. The Philippines is the only Catholic-dominated nation in Southeast Asia.

“That is not freedom of choice at all. That is not protecting the family as foundation of the nation,” Tatad said of the birth control provisions provided under the law.

He added, “That is not equally protecting the right of the mother and right of the unborn and this is simply putting the family under state supervision and control…Have we become a democracy only to submit to state supervision and control?”

But Tatad conveniently forgot to mention that the law doesn’t force individuals or couples to use artificial birth control measures. Filipino Catholics are still free to practice natural birth control methods or other options approved by the Vatican. The law simply provides for freedom of choice and consent.

For highlighting the population control agenda of the government, Tatad’s critique deserves to be studied. But for dismissing the law as an instrument of genocide, Tatad’s petition should be outright ignored.

Posted in east asia, nation | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Beyond Internet Activism

By admin | August 17, 2013

My first column for Bulatlat

The opposite of internet activism is not street activism but no-activism. Online petitions and political hashtags are indispensable in the campaign for change while non-action is a convenient option that only serves the interest of status quo.

Internet activism is sometimes equated with impotence but at least it exists. There are no TV activists and newspaper activists but there are internet activists. Why is this so? Because corporate ownership of mainstream media has made it impossible for the people to dictate the agenda in major media networks. Meanwhile, the internet has become truly social by allowing the people to create and exchange cyber tools that can be used for political purposes.

We are still in the stage of experimentation on how the internet can be redirected and reshaped to serve the community. Various forces are still competing for dominance in the online world at a time when corporate conglomerates and government bodies are not yet able to impose an absolute hegemony on how we use and practice the potential of the internet technology.

Indeed, because of intensified militarization and commodification, the internet has become a more dangerous place than ever where the space for independent thought and practice is under threat. But since total government regulation is still unenforceable at the moment, this technology should not be easily surrendered to the enemy. The internet-plus-activism equation must be continually pursued.

And the undeniable fact is that among the most resolute and creative practitioners of internet activism in the country are the militant activists of the parliament of the streets. They have been consistently maximizing the most effective social media tools to promote their causes and recruit members. They have successfully initiated several campaigns that combine the offline and online to make a greater political impact such as the text jokes at the height of Edsa Dos, Hello Garci ringtones, and disappearing Facebook profiles. Activists are as tech-savvy as they are often caricatured to be grim and determined. Connecting, networking, collaborating, crowdsourcing – these are actually popular keywords of traditional activism.

Internet activism became a real reality not because activists have stopped shouting and marching in the streets in order to join the so-called virtual rallies in wired world. On the contrary, activists continued to ‘occupy’ the streets while they actively shared apps and status updates online. In other words, offline activism is inevitably online as well. This is internet activism. This is activism in the 21st century.

But what separates activists from internet worshippers is the belief of the former that what really matters in the end is the political empowerment of the people. And to do this, the grassroots must learn to struggle and fight for broader political goals. They must organize not just their inbox but the whole society.

Unfortunately, there are self-proclaimed internet activists who also claim to empower the citizens but emphatically reject politics. They simply want the magic of IT to deliver the message minus the radical threat of politics. They aim to restrict the scope of internet activism by focusing on issues that can be accommodated by mainstream media. Their political strategy consists of dismissing street politics and depoliticizing the content of internet activism, or what is left of it. They engage in infinite conversations about peripheral social issues, or political concerns that do not address the roots of injustice and inequality in society. They gossip about the lifestyle of the rich, they ridicule the poor, and they assuage their guilt by lampooning corrupt politicians and shady public characters.
This brand of internet activism is embraced by closet conservatives, pseudo-reformists, and even by politicians who pretend to be social media enthusiasts.

Politics-less internet activism, not internet activism, is the problem that must be dealt with decisively. The challenge should not be simply about exhorting the netizens to support the masses but to restore politics proper in online activism.

What’s the use of persuading a Twitter user to attend an offline event organized by the state to distract the attention of the public and weaken the fighting enthusiasm of the online citizens? There is little to celebrate if netizens turned off their gadgets and integrated in the communities just so that they can spread the doctrine of cash transfers and self-demolition. This is activism that disempowers the poor and it should be outrightly rejected.

Internet activism must remain political, subversive or revolutionary even. If necessary, it must not be afraid to cut links with corporate sponsors, state functionaries, and knowledge-producing institutions to promote digital democracy. It must aggressively espouse the truth even if it would disrupt the comforts of the networks and even if it would contradict popular opinion. Otherwise, it would degenerate into a useless but arrogant drone.

Posted in media | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Will ASEAN Countries Move Their Capitals?

By admin | August 15, 2013

Written for The Diplomat

If things fall apart and the center cannot hold, will anarchy be unleashed upon the world, as the poet William Butler Yeats famously wrote? Maybe. But there is a less chaotic alternative: Move the center.

Several Southeast Asian governments have seriously contemplated the idea of relocating their respective political centers for many years. Indeed, some already have. Malaysia partly moved its federal center from Kuala Lumpur to Putrajaya in 1999, while Myanmar transferred its capital from Yangon to Naypyidaw in 2005.

Meanwhile, officials in Thailand, Indonesia, and the Philippines are discussing proposals to move their national capitals elsewhere due to worsening urban problems, such as congestion, traffic jams and flooding. Moving the seat of power could be crucial if leaders don’t take bold actions to prevent the collapses of Bangkok, Jakarta and Manila. Yes, these cities are literally and figuratively in danger of collapsing.

The three-month Bangkok flooding in 2011 reminded everyone of scientific studies warning that the city has been sinking by 3 centimeters every year. In Jakarta, the disastrous floods in January that paralyzed the city proved that the five-year flood cycle is bound to get worse. On the other hand, Metro Manila is not only flood-prone but also lies along several earthquake fault lines.

The idea of transferring the capital is not totally absurd or even particularly radical. Quezon City was the Philippine capital from 1948 to 1976. A few years ago, former President Gloria Arroyo hinted that she was amenable to the suggestion of moving the capital to Cebu City. In 1957, Indonesian President Sukarno proposed the transfer of the country’s capital from Jakarta to Palangkaraya in Central Kalimantan.

But the decision to relocate won’t be an easy one to make today. The cost alone would probably cause politicians to baulk. Myanmar reportedly spent $4 billion to build a new government center and housing facilities in Naypyidaw. Then there is no assurance that transferring to a new capital would spur progress or that it would ease the woes of the old capital.

Instead of relocating the capital, the other alternative is to improve the current infrastructure of Southeast Asia’s megacities and make them more resilient to the harsh impact of climate change. The building of an 80-kilometer flood prevention wall and a mangrove swamp 300 meters offshore are being proposed to protect Bangkok from rising sea levels. Meanwhile, Indonesian House of Representatives Speaker Marzuki Alie floated the idea of reclaiming 2,000 hectares of land from the sea in North Jakarta and transforming it into the country`s new capital city.

Building a second capital that would complement the current capital is actually worth considering. This is actually the role undertaken by Putrajaya, Malaysia’s other capital city. Kuala Lumpur remains the national capital, as well as the commercial and cultural hub of Malaysia, but federal administrative offices are located in the planned city of Putrajaya. Malaysia’s king and prime minister rule and govern from Kuala Lumpur but the country’s federal officials work and live in Putrajaya, 25 kilometers south of the capital.

The push to build alternative capital cities is expected to continue as long as the deterioration in quality of life in Southeast Asia’s premier urban centers is not reversed or addressed adequately. Just last week Philippine senator Antonio Trillanes has proposed the formation of a commission that would study the feasibility of transferring the country’s capital.

“Metro Manila is a capital which could hardly stand proud in the ranks of national capitals throughout the world,” Trillanes argued.

The next floods or earthquake disaster to hit the region will definitely revive and intensify the discussion about transferring or creating a new capital in the affected country. But what should be emphasized in these debates is not just the nomination of a second capital but the need to implement a development model that would lead to the holistic progress of cities and rural towns as well. In other words, the challenge is not just building a grand capital adorned with majestic buildings and palaces but the creation of livable habitats.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Bad Neighbors and Evil Foreigners in Southeast Asia

By admin | August 8, 2013

Written for The Diplomat

Some say a specter is haunting Southeast Asia today: bad neighbors and evil foreigners. For many people in the region, it was the non-locals who caused the biggest tragedies of the year – deadly haze, communal riots, even the problem of rising unemployment. This fear or hatred of the unknown, real or imagined, is the single biggest threat to the grand plan of building a cohesive Southeast Asian community.

When great disasters happen, it seems that the initial reaction of nearly everyone is to blame other people, whether from another race, religion, or nationality. Perhaps it is easier to accuse other countries or foreigners of committing criminal acts instead of digging deeper into issues close to home. Worse, Southeast Asian governments are doing almost nothing to correct the irrational reaction of their citizens.

The plight of the Muslim Rohingya is a perfect example of the obscene lack of camaraderie in the region. In Myanmar, members of the Muslim minority are viewed as violent neighbors and unwanted foreigners. Further, their religion makes their integration into the Buddhist-majority country more complicated. In other words, they are unfairly treated as illegal immigrants who are plotting to dominate Buddhist Myanmar.

Since last year, several riots have erupted in western Myanmar between the Rohingya and Rakhine locals, displacing thousands of people and sending more Rohingyas into refugee camps. But despite the well-documented plight of the Rohingyas, they have received only scant domestic support and a lukewarm response even from so-called opposition and democracy groups.

Elsewhere in Myanmar, the recent clashes between Muslims and Buddhists who have peacefully co-existed for several centuries highlights the spread of the plague of fanaticism which mysteriously turns religious multitudes into violent intolerant mobs.

Another example of “bad neighbors” creating mayhem is the Great Haze of 2013. Singaporeans and Malaysians were correct to blame Indonesia for its failure to stop the forest fires that cause the annual haze in their countries. But aside from demanding accountability from the Indonesian government, they could have also inquired about the role of their homegrown companies with timber concessions in Indonesia.

For its part, the Indonesian government initially refused to accept blame for the haze and even chided Singapore for complaining too much. What could be a more glaring proof of the widespread distrust and blame currently sweeping the region than the remark made by an Indonesian minister, who called Singapore childish at the height of the haze onslaught?

Luckily, the transboundary haze is not something that can trigger war mongering because Southeast Asians are known for being alert and ready to fight over illegal border crossings. This was attested to earlier this year when most Malaysians supported the military offensive against the armed Filipinos who invaded parts of Lahad Datu in Sabah, a territory which is also being claimed by the Sultan of Sulu.

Meanwhile, the Philippines is vehemently protesting the alleged illegal incursion of Chinese patrol boats into its territorial waters. But while partly successful in protecting its sovereignty against Chinese “aggression” in the South China Sea, also known as the West Philippine Sea, it was unable to prevent a U.S. Navy minesweeper and an oversized Chinese fishing boat from damaging its world-famous Tubbataha Reef.

More recently, in May it was the Philippines’ turn to become a “bad neighbor” to the Taiwanese when the Philippine Coast Guard shot and killed a Taiwanese fisherman in the Balintang Channel.

If there’s a country where foreign labor is both welcomed and despised, it must be Singapore. Earlier this year, the government published a population policy paper which discussed the plan to hire more foreign workers to preempt the looming manpower shortage brought about by its aging population and falling birth rates. It angered many citizens, especially those who believe that the influx of foreigners caused a deterioration of life in Singapore, as indicated by rising prices, falling wages, and even traffic congestion.

Anti-foreign worker sentiment is in fact growing in Singapore, reflected in well-attended public rallies organized by citizens who want to keep Singapore for Singapore nationals. This is quite troubling since the patriotic campaign to define Singapore identity has the potential to mutate and explode into something more xenophobic.

Despite these challenges, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is moving forward with its integration plan. Laws and other technical matters are already being readied to formalize the building of a united ASEAN community in the next few years. But are we really nearing the integration phase when Southeast Asians continue to blame neighbors for their everyday woes? Yes, there is cause for hope and optimism, but there is also much more to be done.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Congress Lobbying

By admin | August 2, 2013

Based on my presentation during the Emerging Youth Leaders training at the Asian Institute of Management, July 20, 2013

1. There are lobbyists and there are registered lobbyists. But in the Philippines, there are only lobbyists. Unknown to many, a law was signed in 1957 which was supposed to regulate lobbying in Congress and in the Commission on Appointments. Under the law, lobbyists are required to get a license from the government. They are also ordered to submit regular financial reports. But according to the records of the House of Representatives and the Senate, no lobbyist has applied for registration. It is odd because lobbyists of all stripes – professional, in-house, foreign think-tanks, NGOs – have always played an important role in the legislation process. Is it time to implement the law? Registration is already impractical but the provision reminding lobby groups to renounce corruption and other unethical practices should be strictly enforced.

2. There are already more than one thousand bills and resolutions in the records of the 16th Congress but only several dozens will be officially adopted by the plenary. Then, a smaller number of these measures will be signed into law by the president. Who identifies the legislative agenda? Who decides which bills will pass the legislative mill? The Malacanang. Institutionalized meddling of the Executive in the affairs of Congress is provided courtesy of the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council and the Presidential Legislative Liaison Office. The fastest way to promote or reject a Congress measure is through these offices. Well-funded lobbyists are notoriously spending a huge amount of their time, energy, and resources to be visible and close to the politicians in these offices.

Ah and yes, the speaker’s speech is sometimes useful to track the progress of key legislative measures.

3. A lobbyist who plans to meet the 300 legislators is a false lobbyist. He is also not a human being. Why talk to absentee solons? Why waste effort on OJT legislators? (Apologies to OJT students). A real lobbyist will prioritize the committee chairperson because the latter decides which measures will be tackled in committee hearings. If the chair is missing in action or watching a game in Nevada, the next important person to contact is the committee secretary or comsec. The comsec can directly approach the chair, he can also draft the initial agenda of the committee, and he is always present in Batasan. Persuade the comsec to include your group in the committee directory of resource persons.

There is only one committee chair but there are several vice chairpersons. For example, in the 15th Congress, Rep Unico was chairman of the Youth and Sports Committee but he has four vice chairpersons: Pacquiao, Cojuangco, Sambar, and this author. What is the role of the vice chairpersons in the committee? Practically nothing. One of them can preside the committee meeting but only if the chair delegated that task to him which rarely happens. If lobbyists can’t get close to the committee chair, they can ask the vice chairpersons to do the lobbying for them. The power tripping chair can ignore lobbyists by placing many layers or barriers between his office and the public but he can’t easily dismiss a colleague and officer of the committee. (Why appoint so many vice chairpersons? Because there are few committees while there are so many members of the majority coalition. To preserve the alliance, House majority members are usually appointed to a nominal position in the committees). *Same principle applies to Deputy Speakers.

It is also essential to be friends with the chiefs-of-staff of House leaders. They are often the real decision makers in the offices of legislators. And they can actually represent their principal in committee hearings although this is seldom done.

Oh yes, set up also a dialogue with the speaker. But are you sure he will remember you and your lobbying agenda?

4. The professional and veteran tacticians will probably advice to tap the power of mainstream and corporate-controlled media to generate public support for a particular advocacy. It is a correct and crucial tactic. But there are alternative activities and equally effective approaches on how to impress legislators. For example, hold an exhibit in the south wing or north wing lobby where legislators pass through to enter the plenary hall or their offices. Legislators are most likely to remember something from the visual and thematic appeal of the exhibit. In addition, organize roundtable discussions inside Batasan, ask the committee to co-sponsor the event, and invite legislators to participate in the forum. The legislator will definitely attend if he has a speaking part in the program. So ask him to give a reaction, deliver the opening or concluding remarks, moderate the open forum, and maybe he can host the program so that he will be forced to stay the whole time.

Bombarding the offices with primers, letters, petitions, leaflets, and other printed materials is not a guarantee that legislators will remember a specific issue or problem. To be safe, assume that legislators are not able to read or appreciate your letters, especially the hate letters. There are also legislators who do not micromanage the transactions inside his Batasan office. An effective tactic to get the attention of many legislators is to leave something on his desk in the plenary such as a postcard, a one-page petition, a flower, ribbon, newspaper clipping. It is possible, it is allowed, and it is memorable.

Another persuasive activity is the holding of creative and militant mass actions inside and outside Batasan. Disrupting the session is newsworthy especially if it coincided with a boring session day.

Conduct training activities for the legislative staff since they do all the paperwork and research for legislators. The impact of lobbying, successful or not, is embedded in their draft measures. Half of the lobby work is done if the legislator’s core team is converted to the cause.

5. Lobby work is not and should not be an everyday duty. Therefore, it is important to synchronize the lobby plan with the legislative calendar. Where to find lawmakers? In the plenary sessions, committee hearings, scheduled press forums (regular press forums of minority and the speaker), but rarely in district offices. Set a formal appointment but if this won’t work, conduct a personal interview in the plenary. Will a congressman allow an interview in the plenary? Yes, especially if the interviewer is a constituent. Save a lot of time by checking the Twitter of legislators to confirm their schedule for the day. Ask the security personnel if they saw the legislator inside the Batasan premises.

An accurate political mapping will also guide the lobby work. Identify the third termers especially those with senate ambitions. Study the profile of first termers who can be enthusiastic partners and articulate champions of specific people’s issues. Try to recruit young political dynasts who have no other advocacy aside from their family. Make lobbying more efficient by talking to the point persons of party blocs and informal groupings. For example, the Makabayan’s leading figure is Rep Colmenares. Other political parties also have their respective spokespersons and official representatives. Sometimes it is also worthwhile to speak to self-appointed leaders of small group coalitions such as the neophyte bloc, lady legislators, Mindanao bloc and other regional or provincial alliances. If it is a Monday, some are playing basketball in the gym.

Congressional spouses are organized, they have funds, they are active, and they can be reliable allies and effective lobbyists. They can always offer something that their legislator spouses can’t refuse.

Don’t forget to send SMS to select legislators. They all have cell phones and they read every SMS because it can be from the DBM informing them of fund releases. Even sending hate SMS can be an act of lobbying.

6. There are bills, resolutions, joint resolutions, and concurrent resolutions. Legislation takes time and the tyranny of numbers is controlled by the Palace purse. But there is another legislative measure which has an immediate effect: privilege speech. The speech can be highlighted by the media and it can also instantly generate a reply or action from Executive agencies, LGUs, or private interest groups. Once delivered, the speech becomes part of congressional records. The Palace attack dogs can only interpellate but they can’t block the referral of the speech to an appropriate committee.

Once a measure is filed in the House of Representatives, the next task is to file counterpart measures in the senate. If a bill or resolution is not included in the priority agenda, request friendly LGUs to adopt the measure. Localization of Congress measures is an alternative approach. For example, the Quezon City council has already adopted some proposals of Kabataan partylist such as the Bonifacio Bill, Philippine Games, and the Cinema Appreciation Bill.

Speaking of local bills, maybe it is better to approach the president and ask his team to issue executive orders or administrative orders instead of waiting for Congress to act on these measures.

7. Budget deliberations take place from July to October which force Congress to scale down on some of its legislation-related activities. But it doesn’t mean that lobbying opportunities are diminished. On the contrary, this is the right time to convince legislators to raise policy issues during budget hearings in the pre-plenary and plenary sessions. Legislators can get instant response and commitment from executive officials. More importantly, they can (theoretically) realign funds from one agency to another or they can question the budget priorities of the administration. Some resourceful legislators look forward to the budget sessions to ask for some funds for their districts. Lobbying takes the form of insertions and double insertions at this stage.

8. Stakeholders and constituents are the most credible lobbyists. They should be at the forefront of any lobbying campaign. They can help draft the legislative measure, they can witness the filing of the measure or the delivery of the speech (Make sure the measure is referred to only one committee. Otherwise, oppositors can easily raise the question of quorum during joint hearings), they can serve as expert speakers during committee hearings or on-site hearings, they can join public consultations and media events, and they can give an extra lobby push during plenary proceedings. If quorum is an issue, they can persuade their district or sectoral representatives to represent the absent committee members and the members of the Rules committee.

Unfortunately, lobbyists and citizens are not allowed to witness the secretive bicameral sessions – the third and most powerful chamber of Congress. Some professional lobbyists devote greater attention to the bicameral work since they only need to influence (or bribe) a handful of legislators. The Bicam is simply not transparent and grossly undemocratic.

For symbolic purposes, stakeholders can meet the Speaker in a major public gathering.

9. Lobby aggressively, loudly, responsibly. Lobby because there is an issue or a problem that needs to be addressed. Lobby to seek reforms, to enact new policies and laws. Lobby to implement new programs or to demand greater fund allocation. Lobby to probe abuses, identify policy gaps, resolve a dispute that politicians are unwilling to undertake. Lobby as empowered citizens, Filipinos asserting their democratic rights. But there’s the rub: The future is too precious to be left in the hands of the 300.

Posted in congress | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Youth Empowerment

By admin | July 27, 2013

Talumpating binigkas sa regional student leaders assembly ng University of Assumption, San Fernando, Pampanga

World Youth Day. Nagtitipon ang maraming kabataan ngayon sa Brazil para sa World Youth Day (Bahagi ako ng WYD 1995). Isa itong selebrasyon na pinangungunahan ng simbahang Katoliko subalit ang kabuluhan nito ay hindi lamang para sa mga Romano Katoliko tulad ng maraming Pilipino. Ito ay pagkilala sa spesyal na papel ng kabataan sa mundo; ito ay nagsisilbing hamon sa maraming kabataan na harapin at lumahok sa paghahanap ng solusyon sa mga suliraning bumabagabag sa ating mga komunidad. Nasa mga bata ang panahon, lakas, at oportunidad upang aktibong buuin ang isang bukas na mas payapa, malinis, at masagana. Sa ating bansa, bata ang populasyon. Babymaking is more fun in the Philippines. Dahil maraming kabataan, dapat adbantahe sa atin ito. Yaman ang kabataan, mga taong mag-aangat sa ating ekonomiya at balon ng talino at ideyalismo. Subalit bakit tayo nasasadlak sa hirap?

40 families own 76 percent of economy. Ito ang balita ilang buwan na ang nakakaraan. Para sa akin, nananatili itong natatanging balita ng taon. Hindi ang panalo ni Nancy Binay, hindi ang pag coming out ni Charice, at lalong hindi ang bagong silang na miyembro ng royal family ng England. Kundi ang kumpirmasyon ng isang katotohanan na matagal na natin alam subalit hindi masyadong binibigyang pansin. Na sa perlas ng silangan, dito sa mayamang arkipelago ay naghahari ang iilan samantalang ang karamihan ay nabubuhay sa kumunoy ng kahirapan. Paano nangyari ito, paano nating hinayaan na 40 pamilya lamang ang nagmamay-ari, kumukuntrol, at nagdidikta sa ating buhay at kabuhayan? Hindi ba ito’y malinaw na patunay na may malaking mali sa ating lipunan? Hindi naman pwedeng sabihin at huwag nating tanggapin ang argumento na may monopolyo sila ng katalinuhan, kabaitan (at swerte) kung bakit sila yumaman nang husto. Ito ay isyu ng panlipunang katarungan o kung paano ang akumulasyon ng yaman ng iilan ay naganap habang may pagdurusa sa lahatang panig ng bayan. O kung paano ang nakaw na yaman ay naging lehitimo o legal sa pagdaan ng panahon.

Bonifacio@150. Kung kaliluhan ang siyang naghahari sa loob at labas ng ating bayang sawi (Balagtas), ano ang dapat gawin? Ano ang alternatibo? Dalawa ang mahalagang pampulitikang kaganapan ngayong taon: Ang halalang midterm noong Mayo at Bonifacio@150 o ang 150th kapanganakan ng ama at bayani ng himagsikang Pilipino. Napapanahon na paghalawan ng aral ang buhay ni Bonifacio, sariwain ang kanyang alaala sa pagtutuloy ng kanyang sinimulang laban. Ang kaaway ni Bonifacio ay hindi si Rizal kundi ang mga mapang-api at elitistang walang puso para sa masa. Kumilos siya upang wakasan ang kadilimang bumabalot sa lipunan noon; itinatag niya ang Katipunan upang palayain ang bansa mula sa kuko ng kolonyalismo; higit sa lahat, malaki ang kanyang tiwala sa mga Pilipino na sama-samang pababagsakin ang sistemang mapang-api. Namatay si Bonifacio subalit hindi ang kanyang diwa. Buhay siya sa katauhan ng mga Pilipinong nakidigma sa Philippine-American War, sa mga lumaban sa pananakop ng Hapon, sa mga Huk na nakibaka para sa repormang agraryo, sa mga kabataang aktibista ng dekada sisenta, sa mga nangahas na tumindig laban sa diktaturya noong Batas Militar, sa mga bayani ng Edsa Uno, Edsa Dos, sa mga naghanap ng katotohanan noong panahon ni Arroyo. Ngayong taon, nagisnan natin ang matapang na paggigiit ng mga biktima ng bagyong Pablo sa Davao na makuha ang tulong pinansiyal at relief goods na tinatago sa mga warehouse ng gobyerno. Buhay, buhay na buhay si Bonifacio sa mga lugar na kung saan may kolektibong aksiyon para sa radikal na pagbabago. Sa kasalukuyan ay laganap ang korupsiyon, kahirapan, at kaapihan. Hindi ba’t makatwiran ang maghimagsik? At hindi ba’t ang buhay ni Bonifacio at ang dakilang hangarin na kanyang iniwan ang tamang inspirasyon na pwedeng gumabay sa atin?

IT. Subalit sa panahon ng smartphone at wifi, uso pa ba si Bonifacio at ang Katipunan? Kailangan pa ba ang pakikibaka samantalang pwede namang itama ang mali sa pamamagitan ng kapangyarihan ng social media, mass media, at palitan ng impormasyon, opinyon at katotohanan sa cyberspace? Kailanman hindi mawawalan ng saysay ang sama-samang pagkilos. Kapag mas mahigpit ang pagkakaisa, mas masaklaw na pagbabago ang magagawa. Ang kasaysayan natin ay hindi lang naratibo ng pagdurusa kundi ng kabayanihan. Ang bagong teknolohiya na gamit natin araw-araw, minu-minuto, bawat segundo, ay hindi dahilan upang talikuran ang ating tungkuling panagutin ang nagkasala sa kasaysayan at ang gumawa ng bagong kasaysayan. Bagkus dapat ang teknolohiya ay nagpapaunlad sa ating praktika ng pakikibaka. Noong panahon nina Rizal, hindi niya simpleng pinuri ang pagpapalimbag ng mga aklat. Gumawa siya ng mga nobela, sumulat ang mga Propagandista ng mga artikulong nagbigay ng kaliwanagan sa sitwasyon ng bansa. Ganito rin dapat ang ating aktitud at gawi: lumikha ng mga subersibong teksto gamit ang Twitter, Facebook, at social media. At higit pa dito, lumahok sa laban ng mamamayan online at offline. Umuunlad ang teknolohiya hindi lang dapat sa dikta ng tubo o komersiyo kundi para mag-ambag sa pangkalahatang kapakinabangan ng lahat. Habang nananatiling bukas ang internet at ang regulasyon ay hindi pa mahigpit, dapat tuluy-tuloy ang ating pag-eeksperimento kung paano ito magiging mabisang instrument para sa kilusang pagbabago. Huwag nating payagang mangyari sa internet ang nangyari sa TV, radyo, pelikula at mainstream media – mga inobasyon sa komunikasyon na may matayog na simulain subalit mabilis ding nilamon ng kapitalistang adhikain.

Student leadership. Himagsikan, pakikibaka, pagbabago. Parang ang bigat naman. Kaya ba natin ito? Mga mag-aaral lang tayo. Tama. Subalit hindi edad ang batayan ng pagkilos para sa bagong bukas. Walang age restriction, bata o matanda pwedeng-pwede, kayang-kaya na maging bayani ng kasalukuyan. Si Jacinto 20 taong gulang lamang nang maging utak ng katipunan. Aasahan ba natin na mga senior citizen ang kumilos para tiyakin na maging mas maliwanag ang ating bukas? Si Enrile 89 years old at aktibo pa rin sa pulitika. Hahayaan ba natin na mga tradisyunal na pulitiko at kanilang mga kamag-anak ang mamumo habambuhay sa ating bayan? Nagsimula ako bilang student leader – may ambisyon, may hangaring makatulong sa komunidad, nais kong maging matagumpay sa isang propesyon na ipagmamalaki ng aking pamilya. Nag-aral ako ng mabuti, naging grade conscious, bookworm, geek, snob. Tapos naging aktibista ako. Di nagtagal natutunan ko na mali pala ang aking konsepto ng isang student leader. Na ang lider mag-aaral ay hindi dapat self-promotion, self-fulfillment ang prayoridad. Na ang student power o youth power ay isang popular subalit sakim na adhikain. Arogante ang kaisipang pwedeng magbunsod ng pagbabago kung ang inihahaing panukala ng mga kabataan ay mga repormang para lamang sa kanyang sektor. Na kayang lumikha ng kasaysayan kung kikilos ang kabataan. Naunawaan ko na ang esensiya ng pagiging isang lider mag-aaral ay hindi katumbas ng pagkamit ng mga medalya o ang mahusay na pamumuno sa mga kapwa estudyante para sa mga usaping limitado lamang sa parokyal na usapin ng kampus o mga isyung aprubado ng mga awtoridad. Ang student o youth power ay mabisang kapangyarihan kung isasanib ang lakas ng kabataan sa lakas ng masa. Ibig sabihin, ang kabataaan ay nakikipagkapit-bisig sa mga aping sektor ng bayan. Binibigyang boses ang mahihirap, inaaral ang kalagayan ng mga inaapi, lumalaban, nagmamartsa kasama sila. Hindi pwedeng umangat ang indibidwal habang naiiwan ang marami. Ang student leader ay responsableng mamamayan, iskolar, at may malasakit sa kapwa.

Aktibismo. Kung gayon, ang imbitasyon ko sa inyo ay maging aktibista ng bayan. Siguro inaasahan ninyo na sabihin ko na tulad ko, lumahok din sa halalan at maging kongresista. Subalit insidental lang ang pagiging congressman ko. Una at huli, ako ay aktibista. At lagi kong ipagtatanggol ang makatwiran kong desisyon na maging aktibista. Habang bata, habang may lakas, panahon, at puno ng ideyalismo, mainam na ialay ito sa aktibistang layunin. Huwag ninyong tanggapin ang makitid na pakahulugan sa aktibismo sa pagsasali lamang sa mga rali, huwag tanggapin ang stereotype na magulo, mabagsik, at hindi rational ang pagrarali. Ang aktibismo ay isang esensiyal na gawain sa isang demokrasya, isang rekisito upang mas mabilis nating maitayo ang isang mas maunlad na hinaharap, isang paggigiit ng ating mga karapatan bilang mamamayan, bilang tao. Sa katunayan, marami sa mga karapatang tinatamasa natin ngayon ay bunga ng matapang na paglaban ng mga nauna sa atin. Tayo, ano ang ating iaalay na tagumpay sa susunod na henerasyon?

Posted in speeches | Tagged , , | Leave a comment