December 14, 2007 · Posted in: Governance, In the News

Not ‘entirely’ without basis

EXCEPT for outranking Ferdinand Marcos, it should hardly come as a surprise that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was named the country’s “most corrupt” president in the Pulse Asia’s October 2007 Ulat ng Bayan survey. After all, notwithstanding valid questions being raised regarding its limited scope historically, it merely confirms what previous corruption surveys and reports done by independent groups have been finding out about her scandal-plagued government.

Of course, Malacañang’s reaction to such a survey is also no longer surprising, with Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye shrugging this one off yet again as having “too few” respondents and the results possibly “skewed and not balanced.” Never mind that his remarks betray an ignorance of surveys as scientific opinion polling. What is evident though is an attempt to render people’s opinions on a public issue like corruption inconsequential in the whole discourse on governance.

The survey results do find credence for them to be dismissed outright, magnified particularly in the context of recent events, including Arroyo’s state visit to Spain and the United Kingdom last week, tagging along what the Inquirer editorial the other day called an “indecently big” presidential entourage of close to 200 people — family members (complete with household helps), Cabinet officials, legislators and other hangers-on.

And before that, there was the junking of the impeachment complaint against Arroyo, albeit deemed weak, the third in as many years. The congressional hatchet job was preceded by the handing out of “cash gifts” to congressmen and provincial governors right in Malacañang, generating an orgy of denials and finger-pointing only to be followed by dubious admissions as to who the source of the money bags actually was. Even the filing of the impeachment complaint was tainted with attempts to bribe congressmen into endorsing it, allegedly perpetrated by an official of Arroyo’s political party, the Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino (Kampi).

What started all this, of course, were the allegations of massive bribery that sealed the now cancelled National Broadband Network deal with the Chinese firm, Zhong Xing Telecommunication Equipment Company Limited (ZTE). Arroyo and her husband, Jose Miguel ‘Mike’ Arroyo were among those implicated in the controversial project. The President has been accused of allowing the project to push through despite her knowledge of the onerous nature of the ZTE proposal and the P200-million bribe allegedly offered by then Commission on Elections Chairman Benjamin Abalos Sr., who was said to be fronting for ZTE, to then socioeconomic planning secretary Romulo Neri. The First Gentleman, meanwhile, was tagged by the House Speaker’s son and namesake, Jose de Venecia III, as the “mystery man” who pressured him and his company, Amsterdam Holdings Inc., to back out of the national broadband project.

So here you have the highest official of the land, ironically swept to the presidency by the raging tide of an anti-corruption movement, only to end in the public’s view a far worse government official than those they deposed in 1986 and 2001.

But come to think of it, the first steps the Arroyo government took were actually along the road to corruption. Only four days after coming to power in 2001, Arroyo gave the go-signal to the most controversial power plant contract in the country by awarding the $470-million hydroelectric power contract to the Argentine firm IMPSA (Industrias Metalurgicas Pescarmona Sociedad Anonima). This was on the strength of a legal opinion by then justice secretary Hernando Perez, rendered in exchange for an alleged $2-million bribe, that removed all legal obstacles to the turnover of the 750-megawatt Caliraya-Botocan-Kalayaan power complex in Laguna to IMPSA.

The IMPSA deal initiated this government on a six-year journey (and counting) of more of the same kind of governance, which has led it from one corruption scandal to another. Some of the more publicized ones include:

the allegedly overpriced P1.1-billion President Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard at the Manila Bay reclamation area;

the P728-million fertilizer funds allegedly diverted by then agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn ‘Joc-joc’ Bolante to buy the support of local officials for Arroyo’s presidential bid in the 2004 elections;

PhilHealth funds allegedly spent to enroll families for one year to induce them to vote for Arroyo in the 2004 elections;

Allegations of monthly payoffs ranging from P500,000 to P1 million from jueteng operators received by Arroyo’s husband Mike, her son Juan Miguel (Mikey), and her brother-in-law Ignacio (Iggy);

the “Hello, Garci” scandal involving taped conversations allegedly between Arroyo and former poll commissioner Virgilio Garcillano showing evidence of election-results manipulation in her favor;

the P1.3-billion computerization contract that the Commission on Elections then headed by Benjamin Abalos Sr. awarded to a Korean firm-led consortium which the Supreme Court invalidated for the glaring irregularities that attended the bidding process (The Ombudsman, however, exonerated Abalos et al.);

the multi-million dollar secret lobbying contracts with Venable to push for charter change and other U.S.-based lobby firms;

the allegedly anomalous and onerous $510-million North Rail contract awarded to a Chinese contractor to rehabilitate the 80-kilometer railway from Caloocan to Clark.

All this should tell us why the Transparency International‘s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) for the Philippines only slightly improved in 2001 and has since gone downhill from there. The CPI score relates to perceptions of the degree of public sector corruption as seen by business people and country analysts and ranges between 10 (indicating low levels of perceived corruption) and zero (indicating high levels of perceived corruption).

Under Arroyo, the country has been steadily slipping in the TI Index, with the country’s CPI score unable to improve beyond 2.6. For this year, the Philippines slipped further to 131 among 179 countries with a CPI score of 2.5 — just like last year and in 2003 and 2005 — the lowest it has attained since the index was introduced in 1995.

PHILIPPINES CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX 1995-2006
YEAR	RANK	CPI SCORE	ADMINISTRATION
1995	36	2.77	Fidel V. Ramos
1996	44	2.69
1997	40	3.5
1998	55	3.3	Joseph E. Estrada
1999	54	3.6
2000	69	2.8
2001	65	2.6	Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
2002	77	2.6
2003	92	2.5
2004	102	2.6
2005	117	2.5
2006	121	2.5
2007	131	2.5

Source: Transparency International

And what of the 2007 survey of the Hong Kong-based Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC), of which the government created much stir because of the “erroneous” reporting that named the Philippines as the most corrupt Asian economy? The country got a rating of 9.40 from almost 1,500 expatriate business executives in 13 countries and territories across the region in January and February this year polled by PERC to assess corruption trends in the region. Grades range from zero to 10, with zero being the best grade possible and 10 the worst.

After dismissing the survey results as based on “old data,” government officials had the risk consultancy group vouching against “any significant deterioration in corruption in the Philippines despite its lower rating.”

Indeed, it was not wise for the media to have done country comparisons with secretive communist China and Vietnam among the roster. But even taking only the Philippines’s scores to see how perceptions of corruption in the country are changing over time, it is easy to see that the problem is not being licked as the government would want the public to believe.

TREND OF CORRUPTION IN THE PHILIPPINES 1997-2006
YEAR	GRADE	ADMINISTRATION
1997	6.50	Fidel V. Ramos
1998	7.17	Joseph E. Estrada
1999	6.71
2000	8.67
2001	9.00	Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
2002	8.00
2003	7.67
2004	8.33
2005	8.80
2006	7.80
2007	9.40

Source: PERC

PERC’s remarks concerning the Philippines in its 2006 report, when the country even enjoyed a marked improvement in its rating, should help enlighten us why we are performing poorly in our anti-corruption efforts:

The problem of vested political and business interests is even more entrenched in the Philippines, where anti-corruption campaigns seem to be designed more as a tactic in political brinksmanship than as a serious attempt to actually tackle the problem at its core. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo came to power in 2001 when her predecessor, Joseph Estrada, was swept from office on charges of corruption. Now Mrs. Arroyo herself is facing allegations of corruption and poll cheating…
In our previous reports on corruption, the Philippines is usually the only country where we regularly receive complaints from people in the private and public sector that we are too harsh in our assessment of corruption. They point to the existence of an Ombudsman responsible for investigating and prosecuting corruption, and they claim this office does an excellent job. These are not views that we share, nor, it seems, do the vast majority of the respondents to our survey. Their scores for the problem of corruption in the Philippines were, without exception, highly critical. The official Ombudsman might indeed be a person of high integrity and fighting the problem of graft as hard as he can, but the resources of his office are limited relative to the scale of the job.

Arroyo defenders will make the most of the argument that surveys deal only with people’s perceptions and are therefore “far from reality.” It’s as if the disconnect between perception and reality is absolute. Take Arroyo’s consistent low levels of satisfaction and trust from the public, registering even record lows following the wiretapping scandal, from which she has not fully recovered to this day. Why is this so when she used to enjoy average overall approval ratings of 46 to 56 percent and average overall trust ratings of 40 to 51 percent during her first term as president from 2001 to 2004?

DISAPPROVAL AND DISTRUST RATINGS OF GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO June 2004 to October 2007
SURVEY PERIOD	DISAPPROVAL	APPROVAL	DISTRUST	TRUST
October 2007	39	30	46	22
July 2007	34	30	37	26
April 2007	35	29	41	26
November 2006	48	26	50	22
July 2006	44	27	47	23
March 2006	50	26	50	22
October 2005	52	24	55	20
July 2005	58	20	59	17
June 2005	46	26	53	20
March 2005	34	39	33	35
October 2004	34	41	30	37
June 2004	22	55	20	52

Source: Pulse Asia

The reality here is that, ever since the “Hello, Garci” scandal erupted in June 2005 and almost toppled her government, Arroyo has been governing with less and less transparency and accountability. With Executive Order 464, Arroyo has effectively blocked efforts by the Senate to investigate allegations of wrongdoing in her government, from the “Hello, Garci” controversy all the way to the ZTE-NBN deal. With her minions at the House of Representatives, attempts to call her to account for allegations of electoral cheating, corruption, and human rights violations have all been done away with, though not without the persuasive power of patronage, of which Arroyo is the biggest dispenser.

15 Responses to Not ‘entirely’ without basis

jcc

December 15th, 2007 at 11:48 pm

Do not believe in survyes. It is like one which says that John Kerry will win over G. W. Bush in the last US presidential elections, or FPJ will win against GMA in the last Presidential Philippine elections. While it is true that election sometimes are flawed, so are the surveys.

But there is some legitimacy in the claim of the government that the respondents may not be representative of the cross section of the country and assuming they are, they may not be the well enlightened ones. Surveys could have targetted respondents witk known bias and high political agenda.

The GMA, Marcos, Cory, Ramos, Erap administrations are corrupt, but I disagree that the GMA administration is more corrupt than the Marcos administration. I have not heard yet that GMA has deposited millions of money in Swiss Bank or US Banks. Nor does she authorized anyone the confiscation of Golden Buddha and the treasures inside the figure from treasure hunter, Mr. Roxas.

Bob Malit

December 17th, 2007 at 4:15 am

Alecks,

We appreciate your blog on graft and corruption; the Surveys whose results are of questionable in nature. However, you fail to investigate what the Legislative Branch (Congressmen and Senators) is doing as far as drafting, legislating and enacting meaningful laws, rules and regulations are being proposed or passed and implemented to solve the graft and corruption problems.

According to my last review as of today, none of the Senators and Congressmen, in fact none of the past Presidents mentioned in the survey has enacted any laws to solve graft and corruption problems.

In fact the outcome of the Surveys reflect the cummulative cause and effect of non-legislation since the Aquino Administration, now President gma is absorbing all the blame. FILIPINOS ARE VERY GOOD IN THE BLAME GAME, AND MEDIOCRE AT BEST IN SOLVING THESE AND OTHER PROBLEMS.

The problems you expose in your blog are problems that affect all Filipinos. As such, ONLY in working as teammates could Filipinos, you PCIJ included could solve.

As a reputable investigative journalist, you should and must investigate these matters to truly claim advocate for progress for Filipinos.

jcc

December 17th, 2007 at 6:31 am

Randy David always sees the big picture but it is the smaller pictures that are best understood best by the masses. In the case of which government is more corrupt you do not need to see the big picture, just let ke know if you have some Swiss Bank Accounts in the name of GMA, then I will agree with you that her administration is more corrupt than Mr. Marcos’s.

And why concentrate on the alleged graft of GMA? Look around and find out that the two other branches of government, Judiciary and Congress are also corrupt.

I am not a GMA apologist though my wife’s name is Gloria too, but I do not see from the present crop of our politicians someone with a vision, honorable and dignified who can inspire an entire nation to toward prosperity and progress.

Alecks P. Pabico

December 17th, 2007 at 12:26 pm

Bob,

We already have a lot of laws dealing with corruption. In fact, the Philippines has one of the most stringent anti-graft and corrupt practices law. That is why U.P. Professor Leonor Briones is saying that more than basic corrective legislative measures, what’s urgently needed are government’s earnestness and honesty.

As she wrote in the NCPAG website particularly on the Second National Roads Improvement and Management Program (NRIMP2) loans which the World Bank recently put on hold:

“An official once proclaimed that even an angel will find it impossible to comply with our anti-corruption laws. We claim that our procurement law is much stricter than procurement procedures of multilateral and bilateral partners.

“If at all, what is probably needed is militant monitoring, stronger sanctions and provisions for swift and immediate action whenever problems arise. The measures jointly developed by the government and the WB team are sensible, e.g. independent procurement assessment and technical audit; enhanced processes for procurement, financial management, internal controls and audits; and inclusion of a new and innovative coalition of citizens and road user groups called ‘Road Watch’ in the project management setup.

“In particular, we recommend favorably the proposal to include civil society participation in monitoring the project.

“It will be in the interest of the Senate and the public whom it represents, to expect reports on the progress of these corrective measures. By themselves, the measures are sensible, but it is said that ‘the devil is in the details.’ The devil is also in actual implementation.”

jcc

December 17th, 2007 at 10:56 pm

r. Alecks,

Prof. David, Prof. Briones. Shows your bias in favor of anything that is UP-based opinion. Your argument is more important than these professors. Argue your case without the added weight of whatever those heavyweights have to say.

Everybody knows that we have good laws and you do not have to quote Prof. Briones, a professor of law that she had said so. She was just quoting people before her. Claro M. Recto has said this once: “Our laws is as good only as the people implementing them”.

The reason why despite good laws we have corruption in our government because we have lost our sense of dignity and honor and men are basically evil.

To quote a heavyweight which will make your heavyweight professors “lightweight” in comparisison, here is Professor Albert Einstein has said:

“It is easier to denature plutonium than the evil spririt of men”.

Bob Malit

December 18th, 2007 at 9:30 am

Alecks,

Your claim that the Philippines have enough laws to solve graft and corruption is “totally false” based on what Prof. Briones words.

Have you screen all the laws (proposed, pending, passed, and enacted)? If you have not done so, Please do so – since you’re technology savvy, check the website of the Senate.

For your information, I have screened them all. NONE, ZERO LAWS, IMPLEMENTING RULES AND REGULATIONS, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS is to be found.

May we suggest that we reflect on the following:

In the Philippine Democracy and 1987 Constitution, there are 3 Branches of the Philippine Gov’t namely:

1. Executive Branch – President GMA, Cabinet Members- tasks/duties: To execute Philippine Laws design to maintain peace and order; the protection of life, liberty, and prosperity; and promotion of general welfare of all Filipinos;

2. Legislative Branch – consisting of 234 Congressmen and 24 Senators: tasks/duties = to draft, pass, legislate, and enact laws design to maintain peace and order; the protection of life, liberty, and prosperity; and promotion of general welfare of Filipinos;

3. Judiciary Branch – consist of the Court Systems of the Philippines – Tasks/duties : to ensure proper, fair execution/implementation of Philippine Laws ( Rule of Law) highest priority is to maintain peace and order; protection of life, liberty, and prosperity; and promotion of general welfare of Filipinos.

ALL these elected officials are “public servants” holding “public office” under the 1987 Constitution, “a public trust – which mandates they must at all times be accountable to the Filipino people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.

FILIPINOS – as a whole are the “public”, the “employers”, the “boss/master – which include you.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE SOURCES OF LEGISLATION?

Sources of ideas for legislation are unlimited and proposed drafts of bills originate in many diverse quarters: members of Congress & Senate, President gma & Cabinet Members; industry leaders, chambers of commerce, ordinary Filipinos, civil society groups, academe and research institutions; multitudes of Problems: graft & corruption, traffic, infrastructure like roadway systems, water & power, sewerage systems and management, financial markets – capital formation, intellectual properties, real estate, human resources, educational systems, etc;

HOW ARE WE GOING TO SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS?

Given: Filipinos couldn’t SOLVE their problems by blaming each other, by always fighting amongst themselves, by easily pointing fingers and identifying problems AND NOT participating as “informed electorates” not willing to sell their votes to the highest bidder.

Filipinos can solve their problems VIA THEIR POWER TO LEGISLATE mandated in the 1987 Constitution as follows:

1. Identify a specific problem (one at a time);

2. Then, identify the “cause & effects; costs & benefits” i.e. feasibility study, utilitization of surveys and research; information and feedback from the Filipino people:
a. Local Level = barangays, LGUs
b. Regional Level = provinces
c. National Level = all Filipinos

3. Obtain Feedback/information; perspectives, opinions polls:
a. Labor, Human Resources – Filipino workers
b. Civil Society Groups;
c. Business/Industry Sectors;
d. Academe & Public Research Institutions;
e. Government & NGOs

4. HOW COULD THE ABOVE BE ACCOMPLISHED?

We, the people, (all Filipinos) must demand that elected public servants who hold public office “public trust” must hold “public hearings” where all stakeholders included in item # 2 & 3 must participate and be counted.

5. OBTAIN RECOMMENDATIONS (Glean from these public hearings that identify the “cause & effects” & “problems”, costs & benefits;

6. We as “major stakeholders” – all Filipinos, MUST compell our elected Congressmen & Senators to:

a. Draft Laws = design to address specific “cause & effects”, Costs & Benefits – results of research, feasibility studies, surveys, etc; and recommendations gleaned from public hearings;

b. Create Implementing Rules & Regulations = to mandate exactly how these laws must be implemented, and enforced to their fullest;

c. Establish and set up “Performance Standards or Criteria” for the purpose of:

1. Measuring outcomes – costs and benefits to track down graft and corruption, etc
2. Measure performance and non-performance – to gauge severity and set penalties whereby Philippine Court Systems could properly and justly punish violators.

CURRENTLY, Congressmen & Senators are always blaming and fighting – the bottom line is they are not doing their jobs – Public Office in violation of the 1987 Constitution “public trust”..

IF YOU’RE President GMA, under the present “adversarial culture of the Philippine Legislative Branch” what can you do? IF NO LAWS are being drafted and enacted to solve our problems, the best you can do as President is ISSUE “Executive Orders”…….. Is it not???

So let us stop the blame game, LET US START HELPING EACH OTHER!!!!!!!!!!!!

You, PCIJ colleagues could shed light, knowledge to all Filipinos. Most Filipinos do not know their Constitutional Rights. The way I see it, YOU’RE THE KEY, THE MISSING LINK!!!!!!!

Alecks P. Pabico

December 18th, 2007 at 4:55 pm

jcc,

Professors David and Briones’s affiliation to U.P. is only incidental. As a journalist, I quoted them for their worth as sources who are authoritative and credible in their respective fields. I do not pretend to know everything. And besides, journalism isn’t just about being able to namedrop or quote so-called “heavyweights.”

Regarding your earlier comment, the qualifier “Except for outranking Ferdinand Marcos…” should have made it clear that I also dispute the “most corrupt” tag on Arroyo. Taking all of Philippine history, nothing still beats the thievery during 14 years of the Marcos dictatorship.

Other than that contention, the findings are not surprising, as there is basis for the Arroyo government to rank high up there among post-Marcos dispensations with continuing unresolved allegations of massive corruption in six years of her rule.

Integrity-wise, I don’t think you can easily discredit TI and PERC with your generalization of surveys as not to be believed and flawed.

jcc

December 18th, 2007 at 9:52 pm

Alecks,

We all agree in the proposition that no one knows everything so we quote some people we perceived to be authoritative and credible. But credible from whose point of view?

What is the truth? It is a question with biblical beginning that has stuttered even the Messiah himself.

Individual’s perception is colored by his experiences. What one perceived as truth is another man’s lie.

But you have not disputed the existence of surveys saying that John Kerry will win over George Bush and that FPJ will win over GMA except to say that I should not easily discredit TI and PERC as regards the surveys they have conducted.

By parity of reasoning, if those surveys about elections could be proven wrong by the actual results of the elections, what makes the TI and PERC surveys more credible? Why does it differ from the surveys about John Kerry vs. George Bush and FPJ vs. GMA?

If elections sometimes are flawed, what makes the TI and PERC surveys flawless? Both endeavors were the handiwork of men, men which Einsten said were imbued with basic evil.

jcc

December 19th, 2007 at 9:25 pm

Alecks,

Going over one of PCIJ’s post, UNCOUNTED, UNDERSERVED,
I noticed this:

Prof. Leonor Briones, co-convenor of Social Watch Philippines, called for more government allocation for social services, to provide safety nets for poor Filipinos. Social Watch and 48 civil society groups are currently working with opposition lawmakers in the Senate for an additional budget of P25 billion for education, health, agriculture and the environment.

Thus, the objectivity of Professor Briones is already comprised and yet you quote her with bibilical imperatives and impeccable logic. Though I agree with her observation that we have plenty of good laws and the problem is in the people implementing them my reason of bringing them up is totally different from Prof. Briones’ reason.

Now I know the reason why the attack was concentrated against the President and not against Congress of which Professor Briones has some stake.

Alecks P. Pabico

December 20th, 2007 at 9:39 am

I never said surveys are flawless. But at least they are designed to take into account possibilities for mistakes. That’s why there is such a thing called margin of error.

naykika

December 20th, 2007 at 10:39 pm

I don’t believe any more law is needed to combat grafts and corruptions as they are sufficiently covered under the Criminal Code. Just the enforcement of the law maybe, and the quick and speedy resolution of the case as they are brought to the courts…

Emilio

December 22nd, 2007 at 1:11 am

First, I do not believed that GMA is the most corrupt and after having read several books of U.S. authorships that shows how much money that Marcos stole from the country, it is unthinkable. Yet the family of the former dictator can come back in the country they had plundered and run for political office. By any standard this is insane. this is no democracy, it is outrageous. this reality speaks volume of low moral and low political standard. you people are aware of it, yet you dont do anything about it. and yet when the Media gets in the way of law enforcement, they cry foul! their rights violated?media rights desacrated. media rights is not absolute and everybody must obey the law. must attend seminar on Law and Dsicipline!

Second, the Surveys and data in the Philippines are suspect, from an outsider perspective – the level of credibility is low and probably lower than Arroyo’s rating. Imagine a survey being paid an Administration’s opposition. It is disgusting- corruption is infecting and probably in the air.

Third, we need people with the highest integrity, highest moral principle. we need people that cannot be bought by money, need people who cares about the welfare of people and the coutnry. we need patriots and nationalists!

Not ‘entirely’ without basis

15 Responses to Not ‘entirely’ without basis

Comment Form

Read More