To Be Identified or Not

Circulating in various email groups today is a joke about a man who, ordering pizza by phone, is refused the flavor he wanted because his ID, which the pizza man demanded, showed he has high blood pressure and cholesterol. He was also advised to pay cash since his ID number also showed he has overdrawn his credit card. When the customer cursed in exasperation, the man advised him to keep his cool since his ID number said he already has a police record. Although the story brings out smiles, it also underlines the public’s anxiety over the National Identification System which the government is raring to implement.

BY RONALD B. ESCANLAR and AILEEN T. ESTOQUIA
Bulatlat

Part 2: The Legal Issues

On Dec.12, 1996, former President Fidel Ramos issued Administrative order No. 308, which pushed for the adoption of a national ID, the purpose of which was to provide the people with the facility to conveniently transact business with the government. 

However, then Sen. Blas Ople filed a petition against the AO 308 in the Supreme Court, which ruled in Ople’s favor. The order was declared unconstitutional on the primary ground that the president has no power to make laws. The court considered the national ID a law because it would force the people to comply. Otherwise, they would be barred access from government services. 

Second, the court said the order would violate the people’s right to privacy. Granting that the computer data file will be limited to basic personal information, the court said the order did not provide “in clear and categorical terms how the information will be handled, who shall have control and access to data, under what circumstances and for what purpose.”

Arroyo’s EO 420 is in no way different. While Palace officials said that the national ID was aimed at protecting the people from terrorism, there is no mention of that in EO 420. The order only said that it is to streamline government to increase the bureaucracy’s efficiency.

There is no mention, however, as to why Arroyo is pushing the ID even with the knowledge of AO 308’s unconstitutionality.

In an interview with Bulatlat, lawyer Harry Roque, director of the Institute of International Legal Studies at the University of the Philippines Law Center, said that the Supreme Court cannot contradict itself. Thus, the decision it gave years ago will stand.

However, in an interview with Strictly Politics in ABS-CBN News Channel, Bayan Muna (People First) Party-list Representative Satur Ocampo expressed doubts that the EO, might still push through because eight out of 13 Supreme Court justices are Arroyo appointees.

When asked about this, Roque said he does not think it will happen: “I have full faith and trust in the justices of the court, regardless of who appointed them,” he said.

Temporary

Malacañang said that EO 420 was not released immediately because President Arroyo wanted to iron out all legal questions.

Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales, however, said the EO is temporary, pending possible congressional approval.

“It’s a test project or a pilot project that if successful will make it easier for us to make it into law on a national scale, if that is what is needed,” said Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye in an interview over radio station dzBB.

However, as early as first week of March, Interior and Local Government Secretary Angelo Reyes already urged city and municipal mayors nationwide to update records of barangay residents.

Reyes said this is pursuant to Section 394 d (6) of the Local Government Code, which mandates barangay secretaries to maintain and update records of all inhabitants containing information on their name, address, place and date of birth, sex, civil status, citizenship and occupation. However, the updated records, he said, could also serve as a basis for the establishment of the ID system.

Reyes said a directive was already being drafted, but employees at DILG said no such directive was issued to them as of April 27.

Learning from others’ experiences

So far, around a hundred countries have national IDs for a variety of purposes. These countries include Germany, France, Belgium, Greece, Luxembourg, Portugal and Spain.

Many developed countries, however, still do not have a card. Among these are the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, and Sweden.

But not all of the people who have IDs are happy.

In South Korea, a professor reported that “many government employees make a lot of money selling information in cards to politicians during election season.” Police could also ask anyone to show this card and check whether their identity number is on the wanted list or not.”

In Singapore, a man who was about to serve in the army service was surprised when he discovered that the army actually knew what his occupation and salary was.

There is also the issue of increase in power of the police. In Brazil, violent police beatings occurred in Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paolo because people didn’t have their cards with them.

A Brazilian said, “The police can ask for my identity card with or without a valid motive, it's an intimidation act that happens in Brazil very, very often. The problem is not confined to the police. Everybody asks for your ID when you are for example shopping, and this is after you have shown your cheque guarantee card. We also have other similar cards. Nobody trusts anybody basically.”

In China, the card had to be used even in petty transactions such as renting a hotel room, getting legal service from lawyers, contacting government agencies, buying a plane tickets and train tickets, applying for a job, or getting permit to live with one’s parents. Otherwise, one’s residence becomes illegal.

In Vietnam, the card differentiates citizens and non-citizens. People without it “are considered as being denied of citizenship and all the rights that come with it… They cannot get legal employment, get a business license, travel, and even go to school.”

The power of the card is so immense in many countries that the national ID campaign in Australia referred to the card as a license to live.

The real mission

In an April 2 statement, Congressman Ocampo said of the national ID: “It will no less set the stage and give rise to a police state where citizens are spied upon and their movements controlled. Such a policy is prone to abuse both by military and civilian authorities as it may be manipulated to harass, arbitrarily arrest, and detain political dissenters, oppositionists and ordinary citizens.”

A study by Privacy International revealed that race, politics, and religion were at the heart of older ID systems. The threat of insurgents and the exercise for religious discrimination have been common motivation to force possible enemies of the state into registration and to make them vulnerable in the open, the study said.

Talk of the national ID began to intensify in the wake of the Sept 11 attacks. The system was part of the ways and means to combat terrorism. Countries, including the Philippines whose government is a staunch supporter of Bush’s anti-terrorism campaign, began seriously considering having one.

Even people who conceptualized the idea of national IDs admit that it may violate the people’ right to privacy, but the threat of terrorism is still uppermost in their minds.

In a meeting last February, Reyes mobilized officials of the Metro Manila peace and order Council and Metro Manila mayors in the fight against terrorism and urged residents to monitor suspicious-looking elements. In the same meeting, Reyes and the mayors agreed to adopt the national ID system.

Rep. Mary Bono of California said: "When we consider ourselves to be at war, people are going to have to recognize that some of their freedoms are going to be gone.."

Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales added: “An individual’s rights are bounded by the rights of others. Not everyone can be allowed entry into a public or private property, transact business or other activities without his identification to guarantee protection and safety.”

Bono recanted her remark, however.

Nevertheless, this talk of terrorism may all be just paranoia. Simon Davies, a visiting fellow in the department of information systems at the London School of Economics and director of Privacy International, said: “No one has been able to identify any country where cards have deterred terrorists.” Bulatlat