War vs Corruption Needs Guts, Not Promises 
(Second of two parts)

The facts bear out that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has a lot of explaining to do with regard to the major scandals that have hounded her administration. As alleged, individuals close to the President were connected one way or the other with alleged corruption in the IMPSA, PEA and PIATCO issues.

By John Paul E. Andaquig  
PMC Reports
Reposted by Bulatlat.com

At press time, the NAIA-3 case is still pending in the Supreme Court. If, based on its lawyers’ petition, government takes over the new terminal and Lucio Tan through AEDC suddenly comes into the picture, then Piatco’s cliams will be vindicated. The connection of Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo and Presidential Adviser Avelino Cruz into the issue has given some credence to speculations that Malacañang has been supporting tha “game plan” allegedly hatched by Tan to take NAIA-3 into his own corporate domain.

The same goes for the Macapagal Boulevard. Tagud and his lawyers appear to have a strong case against the members of the PEA Board and Management, especially since the issue involves the diversion of public money. Tagud’s allegationsa and paper trail point to a possible link of the presidential office particularly with the name of adviser Cruz being dragged into the alleged overprice of JDLC’s contract.

In an interview with PMC Reports, lawyer Rachel Pastores said that her group, the Public Interest Law Center (PILC), is gathering more evidence to pin down the still unidentified players who may have benefited from the P631-million overprice. PILC is involved in the plunder case filed by the Plunder Watch against government.

As for resigned Justice Secretary Hernani Perez, the issue whether or not he received bribe from IMPSA or Rep. Mark Jimenez, will be settled in due time. But in the meantime, public perception on him as a state official has been clouded by the allegations of corruption. Many Filipinos are asking: if the office of the justice secretary — an office that supposedly epitomizes the government’s crusade against corruption — has been accused of corruption, how much public trust is left in the government?

All these controversies — and many more other cases — point to the fact that corruption has not abated even after EDSA II.

 Political Power and Corruption

In the Philippines, corruption involves the embezzlement of public funds for personal gain, nepotism, electoral bribes, abuse in legislative perks and priveleges and anomalous tax assessments and collections. Especially in both the Marcos and Estrada regimes, corruption involved the highest offices where political power was used to plunder public funds, amass private wealth through illicit connections and allocate illegally-obtained wealth to favor cronies and associates.

Corruption saps government resources, denies the poor of basic services and undermines public confidence in the state’s will and capacity to serve the public. A report by Teresita N. Angeles (“An Anti-Corruption Strategy for the Philippines,” Australian National University, 1999) reveals that corruption cost the Philippine economy 10 percent of GNP or P8 billion. This worsened five years later with an NGO, Gising Bayan, estimating that P100 million was being lost daily and with Transparency International (TI) citing the Philippines as the eighth most corrupt nation in the world.

In 1996, the Ombudsman disclosed thet the government had lost P1.4 billion annually in the previous six years. Although this showed a slight improvement anti-corruption efforts, the country was still ranked 11th by TI. “unofficial estimates,” Angeles reports, “are that corruption now adds roughly 30 percent to the cost of major infrastracture projects.”

Often cited as the most corruption-riddled agencies in government are the Bureaus of Internal Revenue (BIR), Customs (BoC) and Immigration (BI); the Departments of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Education (DepEd), Health (DoH) and Interior and Local Government (DILG), National Irrigation Administration (NIA) and Land Transportation Office (LTO).

So endemic has corruption become that two years ago surveys by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) revealed 60 percent of Filipinos believed that there were significant levels of corruption within the judiciary itself.

That reports of corruption continue to pile up two years after Edsa II may have eroded public faith in government. Further eroding public trust is the snail-pace by which the trial of Estrada for plunder charges is moving. There are in fact growing perceptions among many Filipinos that the presidential office will remain tarnished and that whoever occupies it will have the same notoriety.

Still after two years of ousting a president who had been accused with plunder and with the first ever impeachment in the nation’s history to booth, outspoken Filipinos and advocacy groups may not be ready to kick our another. Besides, presidential election is just one year away.

Failed Promises

At the second anniversary of the Edsa II uprising last January, the president reiterated her “war against corruption” as she urged fellow Filipinos to join in a national movement against corrupt practices. Ironically, her campaign would make use of over P3-billion fund, despite a staggering budget crisis.

As part of her anti-corruption campaign, President Arroyo asked the Ombudsman to “observe” major procurement deals and release the statements of assets and liabilities of all public officials, including presidential consultants and advisers. She even ordered the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission to conduct intensive lifestyle checks on public officials.

But considering how the same promises that were echoed during the Edsa II were buried two years later by allegations of corruption, it is doubtful whether the president’s declarations would make any difference at all. For one, lifestyle checks should have been done a long time ago, immediately after Arroyo’s rise to power. And if indeed such examinations are needed to regain public trust in government, she should start with her own husband, Mike, and Nani Perez.

Even the aspect of not running for 2004 is still met with public skepticism, as moves to amend the Constitution are resurrected both by administration and opposition congressmen. Arroyo may need more than just pledges to weed out graft and corruption. She still needs to make an impression that she means business by translating her declarations into genuine political will. Before any grandstanding, Malacañang must first settle the controversies it left in 2002.

More importantly, any fight against corruption would not be complete without the vigilance and activism of citizens in monitoring and publicly opposing every perceived corrupt act by their leaders. Reposted by Bulatlat.com

 References:

“IMPSA is a showcase of all that is wrong with IPPs,” Luz Rimban, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ), August 2002. www.ti.org/cpi.pressrelease.en

“Macapagal Bouleveard: Who’s accountable?,” Miriam Grace Go, Newsbreak, Nov. 11, 2002.

“Tempers flare as PEA execs meet,” Nikko Dizon and Jose Aravilla, Philippine Star, Nov. 7, 2002.

Documents from the Office of the Ombudsman, the Office of Government Corporate Counsel, and Philippine International Air Terminals, Co.

Interviews with Atty. Rachel Pastores, Public Interest Law Center, Nov. 14, 2002; with Mr. Moises Tolentino, Piatco vice-president and Atty. Francisco Chavez, Jan. 13, 2003.  

We want to know what you think of this article.