Bato: A hard rock to crack

 

July 15, 2016

PerryScope
By Perry Diaz 

(File photo)

 

It must have been fate that brought President Rodrigo “Rody” Duterte and Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief Ronald dela Rosa together 30 years ago in the aftermath of the EDSA People Power Revolution that toppled the Marcos dictatorship.  Duterte was appointed acting vice-mayor of Davao City by then President Cory Aquino.   Dela Rosa, then a fresh graduate of the Philippine Military Academy (PMA) Class of 1986, was commissioned Lieutenant and assigned to the now-defunct Philippine Constabulary (PC) in Davao City.   Their paths crossed and their lives have since been intertwined.   Their personal relationship was also enhanced when Duterte stood as a principal sponsor at Dela Rosa’s wedding.   

 

Over the years, they remained loyal to one another.  In his Facebook account, Dela Rosa posted a greeting on Duterte’s birthday: “I never feared to enforce the law and prevent crimes because you are always there watching my back. To the greatest leader on Earth, Mayor RRD, happy birthday Sir!”  Indeed, “Bato” – Dela Rosa’s moniker, which means “stone” – had nothing but warm words for hismentor and ninong.  And when Rody ran for president, Bato posted, “Those who will cheat and will manipulate this May 9 elections, be warned! We will crush you!”

 

Born on January 21, 1962 in Barangay Bato, Sta. Cruz, Davao del Sur, Ronald Marapon dela Rosa earned his moniker “Bato” not because of where he was born but because of his rock-like persona.  It’s a reputation that he lived by.  And when Duterte won the presidency last May 9, he picked his loyal friend Bato to become Chief of the 160,000-strong PNP, bypassing more senior police officers who were Bato’s upperclassmen at the PMA.  Traditionally, they are the ones on the “short list” for promotion to the top police job.  Yep, one-star police general Dela Rosa’s promotion earned him the four stars reserved for PNP Chiefs; thus, bypassing several two-star and three-star police generals on the PNP hierarchy. 

 

Bounty

 

He took over the top PNP job on July 1, 2016, a day after his boss, “The Punisher” – Duterte’s street moniker – was sworn in as president of the country.   On his first day on the job, Bato warned the policemen involved in illegal drugs that “they have 48 hours to surrender to him.”  He didn’t waste any time going after them.  Calling him “Bato” would be kinder than what I’d call him – a pit bull… on the loose.

 

On the second day, it was rumored that 20 imprisoned drug lords have put a P1-billion contract on his and Duterte’s heads. But instead of cowering in fear from the jailed drug lords’ threat to assassinate them, Duterte and Dela Rosa went on the offensive.  

To put an end to the corrupt culture inside the New Bilibid Prison, where the drug lords are given VIP privileges, Duterte ordered the replacement of the correctional officers with commandos from the PNP’s elite Special Action Force (SAF), the equivalent of the SWAT teams in the U.S.

Face the music

 

A few days later, during his speech at the 69th anniversary of the Philippine Air Force, Duterte named and relieved five high-ranking police generals from their posts whom he said were allegedly involved in illegal drugs.   

 

The following day, three of the five named police generals,who are still in active duty, reported to Dela Rosa in his office at Camp Crame.  They professed innocence and sought due process. “They were very sad. I want to cry with them,” Dela Rosa said of the three officers. “My advice to them is face the music,” he said.  

 

While it might take some time to investigate and prosecute the erring generals, one immediate result of exposing their alleged illegal activity is that it will serve as a warning to all police officers that coddling with drug lords will not be tolerated under the Duterte administration and Dela Rosa will see to it that nobody – regardless of rank – is spared.

 

Drug pushers surrender  

 

In Camp Tolentino in Limay, Bataan, Dela Rosa was on hand to witness about 600 drug pushers who surrendered to the PNP.  In a press conference that followed, he said that the PNP was ready to wage war against politicians involved in the illegal drug trade.  In particular, he mentioned “local chief executives” with links to drug lords. He said they’re part of the Duterte administration’s goal, which is to stop – or suppress – corruption, criminality, and illegal drugs within six months.  According to Dela Rosa, there are at least 23 local chief executives on the list that Duterte provided him.  However, he said that it’s up to the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) to “handle” the erring mayors. 

 

The question is: Why did Dela Rosa say it’s up to the DILG to “handle” the mayors involved in the illegal drug trade?  Is it not a police matter?  Or is it best handled politically by the DILG, which is a “political” body?  

 

But going after the local chief executives would be like fishing in small ponds.  More than likely all you’d be catching are the butete -- tadpoles.  Why not go fishing in larger bodies of water where bigger fish abound?  And who are these “bigger fish” in the illegal drug trade?  And who is the “biggest fish” among them?   Could it be that there exist powerful politicians or political dynasties that condone – nay, protect – the drug lords in their political turfs, which makes one wonder:  Are they untouchable?  Is someone protecting the “protectors” of the drug lords?   

 

Biggest challenge

 

This would certainly be Duterte’s – and Bato’s – biggest challenge.  And this could be the root of corruption that Duterte detested so much.  Surmise it to say, the bigger the amount of “dirty money” generated in illegal activities, the larger corruption becomes.  And what could generate more “dirty money” than the illegal drug trade?

 

Needless to say, Duterte and Dela Rosa, working in tandem, are off to a good start.  They have a goal and a timeframe… six months.  All they need now is a plan that works.   And this is where they can fail miserably or succeed modestly.  I said “modestly” because I don’t think they can achieve their goal within six months. But it would definitely be a great start because the alternative is unthinkable. 

 

We all know what Duterte wants.  But what we don’t know is if he has the political will to go after the corrupt politicians who are involved in the illegal drug trade, some of whom might be his friends and political allies.   It would clearly be a test of his leadership.

 

We also know that Dela Rosa has the ability to fight the illegal drug lords.  He’s proven it when he was with the Davao City police force under the guidance of his mentor and ninong.  But what we don’t know is if he has the gumption to fight them in a much larger arena where there are no rules of engagement, and where only those who are tempered with fire and hard as the Rock of Gibraltar survive.   If there is one such crime-fighter that fits the mold, Bato is the man.  He is a hard rock to crack, indeed.

 

(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)

Duterte’s honeymoon with China begins

Like all relationships and marriages, both parties will try to work, or live, harmoniously and reconcile their differences, if any.  This is called the “honeymoon” period and it could last for a long time or it can be abbreviated depending on how they relate to each other.  It may sound simplistic, but they hope that by the time the honeymoon is over, they’d remain married, partners, allies or friends.  Nobody could predict the denouement of their relationships, but as someone once said, “There are no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent interests.”

It did not then come as a surprise that America’s enemies during World War II – Germany, Japan, Italy – became her allies, and her allies USSR and China became her enemies during the Cold War that followed World War II.  And these alliances – North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and U.S.-Japan Security Treaty – have endured for more than 65 years.  And today, NATO has become the bulwark in the defense the 28 NATO countries against enemy invasion, which is crucial to the U.S. national interests.

And in Asia-Pacific, the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty has become a formidable deterrence against Chinese expansionism.  Other treaty allies of the U.S. in Asia-Pacific are South Korea, Australia, Taiwan, Thailand, and the Philippines.   These alliances form a line of defense along the First Island Chain – linking Japan, Taiwan, Philippines, and Borneo -- which would deter China from breaking out into the Western Pacific.

Choke points

To prevent China from breaking out, the U.S. has to have a strong military presence in Japan and the Philippines, where she can control two major choke points to the Western Pacific.  These are the Miyako Strait between Okinawa (Japan) and Taiwan, and the Bashi Channel between Taiwan and the Batanes Islands (Philippines).  With several air force bases, a naval base, and 50,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan, the U.S. maintains strategic dominance over the Miiyako Strait.  But it is a different situation in the Bashi Channel, which is wide open and defenseless.  However, the U.S. had shown interest in deploying her forces to the Batanes Island and the Laoag City airport in northern Luzon.  If the Philippines agrees to this proposal, it would shut off the Bashi Channel from Chinese intrusion… and effectively makes the First Island Chain impenetrable.

Recently, the Philippines and the U.S. agreed on the locations for four American air force units and one army base under the U.S.-Philippines Enhanced Defense Cooperative Agreement (EDCA), which was signed in April 2014.  In addition, the former U.S. Subic Bay Naval Base is a frequent destination for U.S. warships while the former Clark Air Base is used to host American surveillance planes that keep an eye over the South China Sea.

It’s interesting to note that EDCA was signed as an executive order under the Aquino administration.  As such, it can be terminated by the incoming administration of presumptive president Rodrigo Duterte, who considers himself as a left-of-center politician.  However, he admits that he had been on friendly terms with the communist New People’s Army (NPA), which makes one wonder: How is he going to deal with China in regard to the territorial disputes in the South China Sea?

Bilateral talks

It is no wonder then that a week after Duterte’s landslide victory last May 9, China’s ambassador to the Philippines Zhao Jianhua paid him a courtesy call in Davao City. Zhao congratulated him on his victory and expressed his country’s expectation of working with his administration to “properly deal with the differences, deepen traditional friendship, and promote mutually beneficial cooperation, so as to bring the ‘bilateral ties’ forward.” 

Obviously, Zhao was referring to “differences” on the South China Sea territorial disputes, which the Philippines under the Aquino administration had submitted to the United Nations’ Permanent Court of Arbitration.  It challenged the legality of China’s “nine-dash line” claim over the South China Sea under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).  However, China refused to recognize the authority of the Permanent Court of Arbitration and indicated that she will reject its decision on the matter.                                    

As Duterte’s “honeymoon” with China begins, there would be a lot of posturing by both sides.  But the crux of the dispute is China’s iron-clad claim to her indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea demarcated by the “nine-dash line,” which has no fixed coordinates simply because it was arbitrarily drawn on a map in 1947 by China’s Nationalist government under Chiang Kai Shek.  China considers the South China Sea as one of her national core values, which are “non-negotiable.”

If Duterte were to initiate bilateral talks with China, he’d be faced with a dilemma. China had in the past offered joint development in the Spratlys.  However, she has one pre-condition: That the Philippines concedes to China indisputable sovereignty over the Spratlys.  If China sticks to this pre-condition and Duterte accepts it, the Philippines must vacate all the islands she occupies in the Spratlys including the populated Kalayan Island Group (KIG), which is part of Philippine national territory as defined in the Philippine Baselines Law (R.A. No. 3046, as amended by R.A. No. 5446 and R.A. No. 9522) and in Article I of the 1987 Constitution.  This would be a violation of the Constitution, which is an impeachable act.  Either way, the honeymoon would be over before it started, which begs the question: What would be Duterte’s next step?

Junk EDCA?

Faced with pressures from militants to scrap EDCA, Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT), Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), and Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), Duterte will be confronted with the problem of national security.  While he had said during the campaign that he was willing to junk EDCA, he is now saying that his administration will continue EDCA since the external defense of the country is weak.  Indeed, with no warships and no warplanes to defend her territory, the Philippines would be at the mercy of China.     

And once American forces are out of the Philippines – again – what do you expect China would do next?  One needs to remember that when the Philippine Senate removed the American bases from Philippine soil in 1992, China took possession of the Panganiban (Mischief) Reef within two years, without firing a shot.   With the Spratlys and Scarborough Shoal completely controlled by China, the province of Palawan -- which is less than 100 miles from the Spratlys -- would be an easy target. China could then claim that the Chinese had been in Palawan since ancient times.  And like what she did with the Spratlys, Scarborough Shoal, Paracel Islands (claimed by Vietnam), and Senkaku Islands (claimed by Japan), she would probably come up with another “ancient map” showing Palawan as part of her territories.   And pretty soon, the Philippines could become a vassal or client state of China, which would effectively deprive the Filipinos of their sovereignty.

 

Bully vs. bully

 

Duterte, street smart – or “kanto boy” -- as he is, should know that it takes a bully to fight a bully.  He should also be aware that size matters.  In other words, a little boy cannot fight a big bully.  So what the little boy would do is to call his big brother.  In the case of the Philippines, Duterte would turn to big brother America, a bully bigger that China, for help.  And this is where EDCA, MDT, VFA, and LSA would level the playing field.  

 

At the end of the day, one might say that Duterte’s honeymoon with China would just be an exercise in futility.  But the lesson learned would provide him with a clear direction of how – and where -- he should lead the country in the next six years.   

 

(PerryDiaz@gmail.com) 

Is it Grace or ABG?

February 19, 2016

 

PerryScope
By Perry Diaz 

By the looks of it, the May 9, 2016 presidential election could turn out to be a hellishly contentious battle royale.  With five major presidential candidates, the outcome of the elections is predictably unpredictable.  Indeed, recent presidential preference surveys showed see-sawing and criss-crossing ratings among four of the five major candidates, to wit: Vice President Jejomar Binay, Sen. Grace Poe, Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, and former DILG Secretary Mar Roxas.  

 

Trailing far behind them is Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, whose anemic – if not pathetic – ratings, would, under normal circumstances, classify her as a “spoiler.” But the forthcoming presidential election would by no means be under normal circumstances.  There are just too many variables.  Some are known variables, some are unknown, and a few are unknown “unknown,” foremost of which is how the Supreme Court is going to treat Poe’s status as a “foundling” – that is, a person whose parents were unknown.   

 

Judicial voodooism

 

There is nothing wrong with being a foundling except when you want to be president of the Philippines.  However, a foundling under normal circumstances could do anything a natural-born Filipino could do.  But under the Philippine Constitution, a person who is not a natural-born Filipino citizen is not qualified to run for the office of president, vice president, senator or representative.   Is that discriminatory?  Some people – including a few Supreme Court (SC) justices – say it is so.  And that is why the high court is hearing oral arguments to no end, which makes one wonder: Why can’t these supposedly defenders of the Constitution interpret such simple provisions of the law.  Instead, some of them seem to be threading into the realm of “judicial voodooism.”  And after four oral arguments, their number has increased to five justices – known as the Sereno bloc, most of whom are appointees of President Benigno “P-Noy” Aquino III -- who are now reportedly inclined to cut Poe some slack on her status as a “foundling.” All they need now is to convince three more justices into agreeing to their “voodoo” interpretation of the Constitution.  

 

Carpio Doctrine

 

But several justices led by Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio are of the opinion that because Poe is a foundling, she is not a natural-born Filipino citizen but may be considered naturalized Filipino citizen.  He said that the Constitution only allows natural-born Filipino citizens to run for president.   And this is the gist of Poe’s disqualification case.

 

Lots of questions, no answers

 

With the ballots – with Poe included as a presidential candidate – ready to be printed, what do you think would happen if the SC disqualified her after the ballots were already printed?  This would give the voters enough reasons to demand reprinting the ballot without her name on it.  But what if the Commission on Elections (Comelec) rejected their demands and proceeded with the election?  With Poe leading the pack with the highest approval rating, do you think the four other candidates would take it sitting down?  And what do you think would their supporters do?   Indeed, there are lots of questions but no answers, which makes one wonder: Is this the perfect recipe for another EDSA uprising?

 

It’s for this very reason that Chief Justice Sereno should – nay, must! – expedite the disqualification case against Poe.  Failure to do so would be tantamount to grave abuse of power.   And to think that she’ll be the country’s top magistrate until 2030 makes one wonder where is the country heading?  

 

Now, here is the stinger.  Ready?  Eleven of the Supreme Court justices will be retiring during the term of the next president, possible Poe.   That would give her or whoever is elected the power to appoint their replacements.   That would give the next president virtual control over the three branches of government.  But one can argue that regardless of who is elected president, he or she would appoint 11 Supreme Court justices.  And this is where character, integrity, honesty, and competence are what voters should be basing their choice for president on May 9.

 

Least evil

 

Given all the issues raised against the five major candidates, it is going to be hard deciding who among them is the best man – or woman – for the job?  But here is the problem with this question:  The candidates are hard to qualify as to who is the “best” because none of them had been a president before.   However, their character, integrity, honesty, and competence can be weighed by quantifying their “excess baggage.”  In other words, it is presumed that they all have excess baggage.  Is it then fair to presume that they are “evil” in varying degrees?  If so, then let me reframe my original question:  Who among the candidates is the least evil?  

 

So, who do you think is the least evil?  I’ll leave it to my readers to decide that.  But to highlight some of the excess baggage that the candidates carry, here are some for your discrimination:  Jejomar Binay is corrupt to the core (kurakot kuno). Grace Poe lacks the experience (and therefore “incompetent”), and she is not natural-born Filipino (kano kuno) and she lied about her citizenship and residency.  In regard to Duterte, the people are divided between those who call him a gangster and those who revere him as a gang-buster or “The Punisher,” and some liken him to the late disciplinarian Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore.  Roxas is honest but some people think he is incompetent (walang alam kuno) and some call him Mr. Palenke, a derogatory moniker.  And while Miriam Defensor Santiago is reputedly incorruptible, her detractors called her “Brenda” (“brain damage” kuno) when she ran for president in 1992.

 

So there you go.  You can now select who you believe is the “least evil” among the five candidates.  Do you prefer an allegedly corrupt politician to someone who allegedly lied about her citizenship and residency?  How about between an allegedly incompetent person and one who is allegedly mentally unstable?  And how about between an allegedly corrupt politician and an honest but allegedly incompetent politician?  And so on.  

 

Birds of a feather

 

Now if you take a look at a different perspective, the danger of electing the most evil of the candidates takes a quantum leap.  Take for instance if the one elected is corrupt to the core: Do you think that he or she would have the character to appoint honest and incorruptible jurists to the Supreme Court?  Could it be that the character of the president would somehow be reflected in the character of the person he or she appoints to the high court?  Does the mantra “Birds of a feather…” apply – perhaps subconsciously -- in the selection process?   Look at former prez Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo who is now detained pending plunder charges against her.  Her appointee as Ombudsman resigned to avoid impeachment.  Her appointee as Chief Justice was impeached and removed from office.  Her appointee as Secretary of National Defense and subsequently Secretary of Energy – a retired four-star general – committed suicide after being accused of corruption while he was the AFP of Staff.  

In regard to Arroyo’s 16 appointees during her two presidential terms, there were at one time 14 of them serving during Aquino’s early years in office, of which – not surprisingly -- about 10 of them voted as a bloc in ruling against most of Aquino’s executive orders.   

 

Suffice it to say, the next president will be in a position to exercise such immense power that would transform the Supreme Court into a body that would reflect the philosophy – and character – of the appointing president.  Given the chance of choosing among Binay, Poe, Duterte, Roxas, and Santiago, the Philippine electorate has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to chart the direction of the Supreme Court by electing the least evil of the presidential candidates.  

 

While some say that corruption is the number one issue against presidential candidates, it hasn’t really stopped a corrupt politician from getting elected.  Take for instance Binay who has several plunder charges filed against him.  Yet his approval ratings have remained high.   However, one can argue that they’re all corrupt!

 

In the case of Poe, she is accused of misrepresenting – some call it lying – her citizenship status and meeting the 10-year residency.   And that smacks right into the issue of character, which begs the question:  Does she deserve to be the leader of more than 100 million Filipino citizens when her own citizenship is mired in controversy?

 

At the end of the day, it comes down to the question:  Should the people vote for Grace or anybody but Grace (ABG)?

 

PerryDiaz@gmail.com