• Marcos won’t pick full-time DA chief soon: You’ll just have to put up with me

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. isn’t saying goodbye to the Department of Agriculture any time soon. In a chance interview, Marcos says he won’t be leaving the department unless there are already ‘systems in place to guarantee the food supply’ of the country.

• Judge handling De Lima’s remaining drug charge inhibits from case

The judge handling former senator Leila de Lima’s remaining drug case voluntarily inhibits himself from the case in an order made public on Friday, June 16.

• PH media landscape remains ‘largely grim’ despite change in leadership, says report

The annual Digital News Report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism or RISJ finds, the Philippines media landscape, despite the change in leadership in 2022, remains ‘largely grim.’

• Cebu Pacific passengers decry ‘arbitrary’ flight cancellations, Senate probe set

With the increasing complaints about Cebu Pacific in viral posts, the Senate committees on tourism and on public services will begin an investigation on Wednesday, June 21.

• Carlos Yulo nails all-around silver in Asian Gymnastics Championships, earns spot in worlds

Filipino gymnastics star Carlos Yulo claims the men’s individual all-around silver in the Asian Artistic Gymnastics Championships in Singapore securing his place in the World Championships in Belgium in September.

• ‘LOONA is free’: All 12 members leave BlockBerry Creative after winning lawsuits

All 12 members of K-pop group LOONA have left their agency BlockBerry Creative. This, after Haseul, Yeojin, Yves, Go Won, and Olivia Hye win their respective injunctions to suspend their exclusive contracts with BlockBerry.

• Dylan Sprouse and Barbara Palvin are engaged

Disney child actor Dylan Sprouse and Victoria’s Secret model Barbara Palvin are getting married after almost five years of dating. — Rappler.com

More than two weeks have passed since both houses of Congress passed the final version of the Maharlika bill. But until now, it has not been sent to the President yet, ostensibly due to last-minute corrections that are, by themselves, proving quite controversial. (To what extent can congressional staff still edit the bill without flouting legislative processes and stepping on the powers of lawmakers?)

Meanwhile, apparently in response to the discussion paper penned by UP School of Economics faculty members (myself included), Marcos Jr.’s economic team came out on June 13 with a new, short statement affirming their support for Maharlika, calling it a “necessary” “vehicle for growth.”

But instead of being a point-by-point answer to the issues raised in the UPSE paper, the new statement is more of a reiteration of the support of the economic managers, using assertions that are not really data- or evidence-based. 

Let us examine their statements here.

Afterthought

In the UPSE paper, we said that the MIF bill has “amorphous developmental goals and speaks of development only in the broadest possible terms.” Also, “it does not even make any reference to the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2023-2028.”

In reply, the economic managers said that Maharlika “operationalizes” the PDP, citing a part of the document that says the government will “diversify and explore alternative sources of financing,” and that “new instrument formats will also be explored to reach new markets and investors.”

The PDP doesn’t even mention anything about a sovereign wealth fund. If Maharlika were truly necessary, one would think it should be embedded in the PDP itself, which is the development plan that the government ought to follow from 2023 to 2028. 

Instead, Maharlika seems to be an afterthought.

The economic managers also claimed that MIF is “aligned” with the 2022-2028 Medium-Term Fiscal Framework (MTFF). But the MTFF mentions nothing about Maharlika – a pretty big omission considering the huge impact Maharlika will have on the public coffers, as well as the risks it will pose on the government’s deficit and debt. 

For instance, the government wishes to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio from 61.8% in 2022 to 51.1% in 2028. But does this projection already include the possible macroeconomic impacts of Maharlika? Who knows? Again, Maharlika is an afterthought here.

Identity crisis

The UPSE paper also explained that Maharlika has “confused goals” because, in the first place, it does not know if it’s a sovereign wealth fund in the traditional sense (which seeks only financial returns) or a strategic investment fund (which seeks both financial as well as economic returns).

The economic managers replied that, “The objectives [of Maharlika] are clear: to invest funds that are available in government instrumentalities and utilize them for investment purposes on the basis of their individual mandates.” 

But the objectives aren’t clear. Maharlika will “invest funds” and “utilize them for investment purposes.” What does that mean? 

They also cited a World Bank publication (“Strategic Investment Funds: Establishment and Operations” by Shanthi Divakaran et al. 2022), specifically this passage: “Unlike public capital Specialized Investments Funds (SIFs), mixed capital SIFs are typically insulated from macrofiscal interdependence, especially when their anchor is a quasi-sovereign entity, because they are not considered part of the sovereign balance sheet and are usually not directly responsible for economic policy.”

So is Maharlika now a “mixed capital strategic investment fund,” and not a sovereign wealth fund? What is it, really? (Note that this is the first time they cited the relevant World Bank publication, after we mentioned it several times in the UPSE paper.)

Wishful thinking

The economic managers also said that, “The purpose of the MIC’s investments is to generate high returns so that national wealth is expanded and profitable socio-economic projects are financed and implemented.” 

So will Maharlika invest first in financial instruments, wait for returns (possibly after many years), and use earnings to invest in economic projects like infrastructure? Or will it invest in infrastructure from the get-go? 

Later in their statement, they attempted to clarify: “In principle, even if the MIC initially focuses on capital market investments which emphasize financial returns, this still has a tangible benefit through generation of financial income to the National Government which would ultimately redound to the benefit of the nation’s future socio-economic agenda.” 

But when might Maharlika earn from its financial investments: 5 or 8 years from now? Possibly near the end of the term of the President? And how large will be the returns? When will those be translated into tangible, useful public projects? 

The economic managers reiterated in their statement that “the expected return of Maharlika is estimated to be around 8.6% on average,” supposedly higher than the 10-year average return from Land Bank’s investments (4.23%) and the Development Bank of the Philippines’ investments (3.59%). 

Till now, the 8.6% return on Maharlika is just wishful thinking. Where did this magical figure come from? Nobody really knows.

Redundant

The UPSE paper also pointed out that Maharlika’s proponents failed to prove its “additionality” or value-added vis-à-vis other financing schemes and existing agencies of government. 

In their rebuttal, the economic managers merely asserted that Maharlika “does not overlap with the mandate of the [National Development Corporation]” – without any elaboration whatsoever.

They added that Maharlika “reduces heavy reliance on local funds and development assistance as the main financing mechanisms for infrastructure projects. By providing an alternative source to public infrastructure spending, there would be a bigger budgetary allowance for other priority expenditures.”

But until now they haven’t proven that infrastructure and other developmental projects will proceed faster and more efficiently with Maharlika than with, say, public-private partnerships or concessional loans. 

Incidentally, on June 14, the President certified as urgent a bill that will strengthen PPPs. If this can be done, what’s the point of Maharlika?

Also, the Palace is quite proud of the fact that President Marcos was able to get P3.48 trillion worth of investment pledges from his multiple foreign trips. Why not just work to follow up all those pledges? Or is that number just for show?

Threat to public coffers

The UPSE paper said that the preoccupation with Maharlika has “diverted attention from more vital and urgent national agenda,” including the reform of the military and uniformed personnel (MUP) pension system. 

In reply, the economic managers said MUP pension reform and Maharlika both “symbolize the Administration’s recognition that nations should begin finding ways to gradually close the gap in the budget deficit, and reflect the concerted efforts to promote continued fiscal sustainability.”

But will Maharlika indeed close the gap in the budget deficit and promote fiscal sustainability? There’s no assurance at all. In fact, it poses huge risks to the public coffers by endangering the health of state-owned banks and even the integrity of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP).

The economic managers said that “The public can remain confident in the stability of the LBP and the DBP even given their investment in the MIC. Limitations have also been established, i.e. investments should not exceed 25% of their net worth.” 

But forcibly taking P75 billion of seed capital from these banks already endangers these banks’ capitalization and financial health, as pointed out by UP Los Baños economics senior lecturer Enrico Villanueva.

The lack of Maharlika’s bankruptcy provisions also means that the government will implicitly shoulder any losses from, say, risky investments. This will not “improve the country’s fiscal resilience” – as claimed by the economic managers.

Maharlika also stands to eat away budget allocations from education, health, etc. by taking P50 billion directly from the Treasury as seed capital – more so if the government ends up shouldering Maharlika’s losses later on. 

The economic managers tried to allay fears by saying that “the founding GFIs, the National Government, and the BSP were consulted on their financial viability to support the capitalization of the MIC in its initial years.”

However, this is no assurance at all that the heads of these agencies are acting in the public’s best interest. 

According to Senator Risa Hontiveros, Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) President Wick Veloso is allegedly the mastermind behind Maharlika, the one who pitched this to President Marcos Jr. in the first place. Meanwhile, the use of BSP’s declared dividends for Maharlika will invariably delay the BSP’s own capital-raising efforts.

Little to no safeguards

The economic managers assert that the Maharlika bill “imposes enough safeguards to minimize risks” and cited some provisions like putative adherence to the Santiago Principles, the risk management committee, and accountability, transparency, and oversight measures. 

On the contrary, fatal flaws and omissions in the bill betray the fact that safeguards are sorely lacking. 

For example, how can Maharlika abide by the Santiago Principles if the Board of the Maharlika Investment Corporation is not insulated from political interference (note: all its members are presidential appointees)? 

How can accountability be ensured if the politically susceptible Board is overpowered (having the authority to oversee Maharlika’s investment processes, asset allocation, monitoring, and even risk management)? 

How can accountability be ensured if there are there are no repercussions for bad investment decisions, and if oversight is relegated to the Advisory Body (which also comprises presidential appointees) and Congress (most members of which also tend to be allied to the President)?

The economic managers mentioned that another safeguard is the Senate provision “absolutely prohibiting pension and social funds from contributing to the MIC and MIF.” 

But note that this is more of an afterthought. Recall that the original bill intended to rope in pension funds from the GSIS and the Social Security System or SSS.

Also, even Finance Secretary Benjamin Diokno himself said that GSIS and SSS can still choose to “subscribe” to Maharlika’s projects. So they’re not totally off the hook. The President also broached this possibility: “If the pension fund decides the Maharlika Fund is a good investment, it’s up to them if they want to invest in it.”

Mere assertions

Many of the economic managers’ counterarguments are just assertions.

For instance, the UPSE paper said that Maharlika “violates fundamental principles of economics and finance and poses serious risks to the economy and the public sector.” 

The economic managers replied that, “The legal framework provided by Senate Bill No. 2020…follows fundamental principles of economic policy and financial market participation in favor of and for the ultimate benefit of the Philippine economy and the Filipino people.” How exactly? There’s no elaboration.

Finally, the economic managers said, “The MIF is not only beneficial but necessary at this point in time… It is an ideal vehicle and well-positioned to bring in investments as the Philippine economic outlook remains robust amid the global economic slowdown.”

“Necessary,” “ideal,” and “well-positioned” are strong words, especially since they still haven’t proven the additionality or value-added of Maharlika. The global economic environment is not so promising either.

Most importantly, the extremely poor governance structure of Maharlika means that instead of being a “vehicle of growth,” as repeatedly touted by the economic managers, the fund could very well be a “vehicle for corruption.” 

Just look at what happened to Malaysia’s 1MDB, from which at least $4.5 billion was embezzled and channeled through shell companies and offshore accounts.

What’s the surname again of the former president who infamously used shell companies and offshore accounts to spirit away several billions of dollars of ill-gotten wealth? – Rappler.com

JC Punongbayan, PhD is an assistant professor at the UP School of Economics and the author of False Nostalgia: The Marcos “Golden Age” Myths and How to Debunk Them. JC’s views are independent of his affiliations. Follow him on Twitter (@jcpunongbayan) and Usapang Econ Podcast. 

The chief executive, who has been holding the post concurrently since he took office on June 30, 2022, said on Friday, June 16, that he won’t be leaving the department unless there are already “systems in place… [to] guarantee the food supply” of the country. 

“Tinatanong ko sa kanilang lahat, inaatay ko mag-volunteer sila mag secretary, ayaw akong paalisin eh,” said Marcos in a chance interview with media on the sidelines of a ceremony in Valenzuela City where China turned over around 20,000 metric tons of urea fertilizer to the Philippines. Marcos was flanked by officials of the DA and the Chinese embassy during the door-stop interview. 

(I asked all of them and I’ve been waiting for them to volunteer to be secretary but they don’t want me to go.) 

The president has said before that he would not step down as DA chief following calls that he should already appoint a full-time secretary instead. He’s used various arguments in the past, including the assertion that some people in the agriculture sector would only listen to a chief executive, and that they were still “fixing” the DA.

But even though he’s been the concurrent president and DA chief, the past year has seen dramatic increases in the cost of some food commodities such as onions and sugar. The latest macroeconomic data, however, show that the Philippines’ inflation rate declined in May 2023, fueled by a slowdown in the cost of transportation and food.

Controversies also hounded agencies connected to the DA, including a sugar importing mess that eventually led to the exit of his first executive secretary, Victor Rodriguez.  

Marcos said that a year into his administration, he wants to introduce “structural changes” to the DA to help enhance food security.  

Without providing a timeline, Marcos said he wants to “guarantee” steady food supply, affordable food prices, and a “good living” for farmers.  

“So, hanggat matapos natin ‘yun [until we’re done with that], I suppose you will just have to put up with me as the DA secretary,” said Marcos. 

Both allies and critics have called on Marcos to finally appoint a full-time agriculture chief.

The fertilizers donated by China will be distributed in Ilocos Region, Cagayan Valley region, Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog region, and Bicol region “to help boost productivity,” according to the DA. The donation was first pledged in September 2022 and delivered in early June 2023. 

Chinese Ambassador to the Philippines Huang Xilian said the donation speaks of the “action and sincerity and demonstrates the friendship of the Chinese people for the people of the Philippines.” – Rappler.com 

Alarmed over smuggling, sorry state of agriculture, senators call for full-time DA secretary

Addressing farmers at a pilot rice farm in Barangay Liwanay, Banga town, South Cotabato, Marcos, who is also the country’s agriculture secretary, said the new program would address the country’s problems in rice and food sufficiency.

The CRPMP is a pet project of South Cotabato governor Reynaldo Tamayo Jr, the president of the Partido Federal ng Pilipinas (PFP), Marcos’s political party in the 2022 presidential elections.

The project’s pilot farm in barangay Dajay in Surallah town involves 94 farmers and 210 hectares of rice land.

This will then expand to 1,400 hectares in the towns of Tantangan, Norala, Sto. Niño, Banga, and in Koronadal City, the governor said.

The Marcos program represents land re-consolidation for economic scale, grouping local rice farmers to form compact rice areas of at least 1000 hectares.

Higher yield

When Marcos asked Tamayo what yields the CRPMP offers, the governor said eight metric tons (MT) per hectare.

That figure is 179% of the Philippine Rice Research Institute‘s 2022 average national rice yield of 4.47MT/hectare.

Marcos seemed impress by Tamayo’s response. “Balitaan mo ako kapag nagharvest na kayo at babalik ako para makamayan kayo,” he told the governor.

Marcos handed to Tamayo a check worth P115.3 million to jumpstart the program, which sets up a facility with an array of equipment needed from production, processing, and all the way to bringing products to market centers.

Soccsksargen region agriculture director John Pascual said the funds would be earmarked for a warehouse and a rice processing center, the procurement of trucks, farm machineries, hybrid seeds, fertilizers, and other farm inputs.

Challenge

The president said the Philippines needs to improve rice yields due to the tight imports supply in Southeast Asia, which the country experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Thailand and Vietnam, two major rice suppliers, refused to export to us because they want to give priority to their domestic requirements,” he said in his speech.

Tight supply sent food prices spiking, a situation worsened by the rising cost of farm inputs, he added.

The president said the consolidated program is part of his thrust to pool together resources and functions to help farmers, by reducing the cost of inputs and processing.

He noted that the new program would plug the production losses from the traditional method of drying rice harvests on roadsides.

Marcos said he hoped farmers in South Cotabato would do away with the traditional method of drying their rice harvests on roadsides.

“Kahit basa iyong palay, puwede nang dalhin dito sa malaking complex,” said the President. (Even when the palay is yet, we can bring it to this big complex.)

He also claimed the CRPMP would break the old model of middlemen getting the better of farmers, as the the government program would set up a corporation to market the rice.

“This will allow global competitiveness among the province’s rice growers through practices of climate resilience, good agriculture, low-cost production, efficient farm mechanization and value adding strategies,” Tamayo said. – Rappler.com

Rating: FALSE

Why we fact-checked this: The Facebook video containing the claim has 120,000 views, 4,400 reactions, 1,300 comments, and 110 shares as of writing. 

In the video, a narrator says: “Sa naging panayam kay National Commission of Senior Citizens o NCSC Chairperson Atty. Franklin Quijano, ipinaliwanag ng chairman na dapat nang i-avail ng mga senior citizen ang bagong benepisyo na ibinigay ng ating Pangulo.”

(In an interview with the National Commission of Senior Citizens or NCSC Chairperson Atty. Franklin Quijano, the chairman explained that senior citizens should take advantage of the new benefits given by our President.)

The facts: In Quijano’s interview on Radyo Pilipinas last June 6, the NCSC chairperson did not say that health insurance benefits for senior citizens is a new program. Since 2014, all senior citizens aged 60 and above have been automatically covered under the national health insurance program of the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth).

Quijano mentioned the health insurance coverage in the interview when he discussed the commission’s efforts to build up a nationwide database of senior citizens in the country. Quijano said that this will help them profile senior citizens for various government programs that include the provision of health benefits. 

He also brought up the recent P42.9-billion budget released to PhilHealth to cover the one-year health insurance premiums of senior citizens. 

Free since 2014: The national government has been covering the PhilHealth contribution of senior citizens since the enactment of Republic Act 10645 in 2014. The said law amended and expanded the Senior Citizens Act of 2010, which previously provided free health insurance coverage only to indigent senior citizens. – Ailla Dela Cruz/Rappler.com

Keep us aware of suspicious Facebook pages, groups, accounts, websites, articles, or photos in your network by contacting us at factcheck@rappler.com. You may also report dubious claims to #FactsFirstPH tipline by messaging Rappler on Facebook or Newsbreak via Twitter direct message. You may also report through our Viber fact check chatbot. Let us battle disinformation one Fact Check at a time.

• SWS survey puts Sara Duterte, Raffy Tulfo as 2028 presidential front-runners

A commissioned survey shows Vice President Sara Duterte is the ‘best leader to succeed President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in 2028.’

• Marcos tells Filipinos to ‘assert liberty day by day’

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., in a message on Monday, June 12, tells Filipinos to ‘assert our liberty day by day,’ in an ‘age where battles remain but occur in places the eyes cannot see.’

• Ex-senator Rodolfo Biazon dies at 88

Former senator Rodolfo ‘Pong’ Biazon dies at the age of 88 on Monday, June 12. The Biazon family says it is ‘perfectly fitting’ that Biazon passed on Independence Day, adding he ‘dedicated his life and laid it on the line in defending freedom and democracy.’

• NLEX to hike toll rates starting June 15

The North Luzon Expressway Corporation (NLEX) will implement higher toll rates starting June 15. Rates will be hiked by an additional P7 in the open system, and P0.36 per kilometer in the closed system.

• Eldrew Yulo vaults way to junior silver in Asian Gymnastics Championships

Rising gymnast Eldrew Yulo bags the vault silver in the men’s junior division of the Asian Artistic Gymnastics Championships in Singapore on Monday, June 12.

• Kaladkaren becomes first transgender Philippine news anchor

Actress and comedian Kaladkaren joins TV5’s Frontline Pilipinas, becoming the first transgender news anchor in the Philippines. She will present the latest entertainment news and trivia for Frontline Pilipinas. 

• ‘Holy grail’: Juan Luna’s lost masterpiece revealed after 132 years

After 132 years, Juan Luna’s missing masterpiece Hymen, oh Hyménée! has been found and returned to the Philippines for the first time.

• Coldplay headed to PH in 2024; EXO drops teaser for ‘EXIST’

British rock band Coldplay is coming back to the Philippines. Meanwhile, K-pop boy group EXO is set to make its highly-anticipated comeback on July 10 with the release of its new album EXIST. — Rappler.com

Last of 2 parts

AT A GLANCE

• Drug-related killings continue under the administration of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. but obtaining official numbers from the government remains difficult.
• In a response to Rappler’s freedom of information request, the Philippine National Police said “seven (7) people [were] killed for illegal drugs from June 2022″ to April 2023. But the Dahas project monitored at least 100 killed in anti-illegal drug operations as of May 31, 2023, while then-PNP chief Rodolfo Azurin Jr. in November 2022 said that 46 people were already killed by police.
• While the violence de-escalated under Marcos, political scientist Sol Iglesias said the administration’s biggest complicity is institutionalizing impunity by continuing to shield the crimes committed under Duterte.

MANILA, Philippines – Silence was golden for President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. when it came to the bloody legacy of his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte – at least for the most part of the 2022 presidential campaign and the eventual first few months of his presidency. 

The second Marcos president, after all, benefited from the political power of the foul-mouthed former Davao City mayor who ordered the slaughter of thousands of Filipinos in the name of his anti-illegal drugs campaign. He also ran, and won, with then-presidential daughter Sara Duterte as his vice president. 

But in May 2023, in an event thousands of kilometers away from the Philippines, Marcos acknowledged the killings during the Duterte administration. Speaking before the Center for Strategic and International Studies, he said that a “focus on enforcement” resulted in “abuses by certain elements in the government.” 

It was the most explicit statement Marcos has made on the widespread killings committed during Duterte’s war on drugs, even as he refused to assess the campaign’s entirety. In previous instances, like in September 2022, he had only talked about taking on a different approach because enforcement “only gets you so far.”

In contrast, Marcos’ Interior Secretary Benjamin “Benhur” Abalos Jr. said during the early days of the administration that the “war against drugs will be as intensive as before on the basis of my oath as a public official in accordance with the Constitution.”

Almost one year into the Marcos administration, how does the situation compare to the violence under Duterte? There are different ways to look into this. First is to assess the landscape using data. 

There have been no consistent data releases under the Marcos administration covering drug-related killings, unlike during his predecessor’s time when the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) publicly uploaded numbers online, specifically through the #RealNumbersPH platform on Facebook.

It is because of this “transparency” that we know that police claimed to have killed at least 6,252 people during anti-illegal drug operations between July 2022 and May 31, 2022. The death toll is estimated to rise to between 27,000 to 30,000 if victims of extrajudicial killings are included, according to independent monitoring by human rights groups.

Getting official government data on drug-related killings under Marcos has so far been difficult. The numbers provided by the PNP in the scant times that requests were successful are also significantly lower than those documented by other groups. 

Rappler has submitted two freedom of information (FOI) requests to the PNP for the number of individuals killed in anti-illegal drug operations. The PNP responded to the April 27 request on May 2. The information provided was in the form of a powerpoint presentation created by the PNP Drug Enforcement Group, the unit that leads the anti-illegal drug efforts of the national police. 

The file contained only specific cases of “drug personalities [who] died in police operations (DIPO)” and killed from January 2022 to April 2023. Subtracting the number of those killed before Marcos took office, the PNP presentation shows only two incidents.

Rappler again submitted another FOI request on May 5, this time to PDEA. But the agency referred our request to PNP, which responded on May 9 with a similar powerpoint presentation. 

This time, however, the last slide included plain text that said “seven (7) people killed for illegal drugs from June 2022 to present.” PNP DEG, in a response to a separate email, reiterated the same number. 

Rappler reached out to the PNP’s Public Information Office through both email and a text message to spokesperson Police Colonel Jean Fajardo on Tuesday, June 6, to confirm this information. We have yet to receive a response as of publication. 

If we go by the “seven people killed for illegal drugs,” this death toll is lower than what was provided by the same agency in November 2022. In a forum organized by the Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines, then-PNP chief Rodolfo Azurin Jr. said that 46 people were killed in anti-illegal drug operations – 32 killed by police and 14 by PDEA agents.

This number is also significantly lower than the death toll monitored by Dahas, a project of the University of the Philippines Diliman’s Third World Studies Center. 

From July 1, 2022 to May 31, 2023, at least 100 people were killed by state agents in anti-illegal drug operations alone. The number rises to 132 to include victims killed not in anti-illegal drug operations but later found to have links to illegal drugs.  

This is part of a bigger death toll of at least 309 drug-related killings within the same period, to include those killed by non-state agents and unidentified perpetrators, based on the project’s monitoring. At least 134 killings were committed from January 1 to May 31, 2023 alone, with 60 carried out by state agents.

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) was also able to document and investigate 13 cases of killings in government operations. The constitutional body mandated to probe state abuses, however, clarified that this number does not “reflect the total number of alleged drug-related extrajudicial killings” it is investigating, and that CHR regional offices may have more numbers. 

Human rights lawyer Catherine Lopez, research and policy development coordinator at Initiatives for Dialogue and Empowerment through Alternative Legal Services (IDEALS), said the lack of transparency and withholding of information appears to be a “tactic” of the Marcos administration. 

By not releasing data consistently, it’s as if the government is taking on an “out of sight, out of mind” approach where continued killings are not discussed. 

“It’s our right to have these records so why does it seem like we have to beg for them to release these information that we have a right to access in the first place?” she told Rappler. “That’s not acceptable.” 

As an organization, IDEALS has helped document cases of drug war killings under Duterte. Lopez said that there’s not much difference between the two administrations when it comes to challenges faced by families in obtaining documents and reports related to their slain loved ones. 

Marcos’ crime of impunity

Based on the numbers, it is safe to say that there’s a de-escalation of killings. The situation during the first year of Marcos is not as violent as Duterte’s who, by his 6th month in office in January 2017, already saw more than 2,500 deaths in police operations alone.

Still, the killings continue despite rhetoric from Marcos that he will try a less violent approach, unlike his predecessor. In the poorest communities in Metro Manila, families that Rappler spoke with reported not much change. There are still people killed by the police, but they’ve noticed that significantly more are being killed by unidentified individuals. 

Families who have lost loved ones during Duterte’s reign of violence continue to fear that they will lose more under Marcos. And these are on top of existing harassment and intimidation they experience as they try to seek justice. 

Carlos Conde, senior researcher for Human Rights Watch (HRW), tagged the disconnect between Marcos’ statements and the situation on the ground as a “political balancing act” as he tries to appease the international community. These include foreign governments that Duterte has demonized, if not outright insulted, during his term as president. 

“Marcos is doing the barests of bare minimums, because Duterte set the bar so low,” Conde said. “My sense is that the low-level violence serves a purpose within the police, but it is not outrageous enough to put Marcos on the spot.” 

But at the same time, he believes that Marcos will probably not make a “dramatic turn” by either ending the drug war nor even launching a genuine investigation into the killings. 

Is it because Marcos is as hungry for blood as Duterte, the man accused of expanding nationwide the operations and style of the notorious Davao Death Squad (DDS) that killed thousands in his turf, Davao City? Probably not. 

If Marcos has his way, Conde said, he probably would want the violence to stop “because the drug war is not his fight.”

“His main motivation is to rehabilitate the Marcos name and for them to keep their riches, but he doesn’t want to offend Duterte and his base, which Marcos still counts on for support,” Conde said, adding that it’s best to watch out for what happens “nearer to the 2028 elections.” 

Marcos, however, is not at all blameless and is not just caught between a rock and a hard place. 

Sol Iglesias, assistant professor of political science at the University of the Philippines Diliman, said that the biggest issue here is impunity that continues to be promoted under the Marcos administration. 

While there is decreased violence, Marcos is still liable for not ensuring justice for the thousands of victims of Duterte’s war on drugs. 

“When a successive government continues to shield the crimes or potential crimes of the previous administration, that’s already institutionalizing impunity,” she said. “That is the biggest complicity of the Marcos administration [and] it’s something that we just simply can’t ignore because the subsequent president has a duty to the victims.” 

The Marcos government may have taken steps to cleanse the ranks of the PNP, including those alleged to have links to illegal drugs, but it is yet to hold accountable cops, including Duterte himself, who killed, or allowed the killing of, individuals. 

Only a few have been convicted in drug war-related killings, including the police involved in the deaths of 17-year-old Kian delos Santos, Carl Angelo Arnaiz, and Reynaldo “Kulot” de Guzman. 

If Marcos was serious about giving justice, his administration would have launched a “massive expansion of investigations” and also would not oppose developments at the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is presently investigating possible crimes against humanity committed under Duterte.

“We should be very skeptical and wary of [Marcos’] rhetoric and sort of positioning itself as very different from the violence of Duterte because all the underlying root causes of the violence and facilitating factors of the violence are being aided and abetted by the Marcos administration,” Iglesias said. 

Must Read

Under Marcos, can Duterte be held accountable for drug war killings?

Moving forward

As the strategy of Marcos’ anti-illegal drug campaign remains vague at the very least, it is important that there will be no let-up in the monitoring of drug-related killings. 

Continuity requires dedication not just from one group, but a consolidation of efforts across civil society organizations and the media. But what’s more important, according to Lopez of IDEALS, is giving adequate support to monitoring done by communities themselves, especially in the face of intense intimidation from state agents. 

Many human rights groups Rappler spoke with over the years count members of communities as always the first ones to record and report incidents of killings that are happening around them.

“Give [groups] visibility because visibility can secure them,” Lopez said. “Help them be more physically and psychologically secure, they can move freer if they know there’s support from the people.” 

While documentation contributes to history, she cautioned that it unfortunately cannot measure the extent of the damage done. While the death toll is heavily reported on, the impact on children and future generations, including the normalization of violence, has yet to be fully seen.

“What kind of generation is now growing? We are creating a generation of people who are numb to the violence, who think that this is normal,” she said. 

As the human rights situation should be monitored under Marcos, the quest for justice for the thousands killed under Duterte continues. All eyes are on the International Criminal Court as it is expected to decide on the appeal lodged by the Philippine government against the resumption of the probe into the drug war killings. 

As the public awaits the next ICC developments, other steps taken should also ensure that the impunity under Marcos and Duterte are not swept under the rug in the face of renewed or invigorated international relations. 

One of the biggest examples of this is the upcoming expiration of the Generalized Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+), or trade perks enjoyed by the Philippines from the European Union. At the center of this scheme is the obligation to uphold human rights standards. Groups both here and abroad are calling on the EU Commission to not renew the Philippines’ status. 

While there is still no solid indication about the fate of the country’s trade perks with the EU, there are signs that foreign governments are pleased with Marcos. 

“More than castigating Marcos for not doing much as far as human rights is concerned, we should call out the international community for being content with tokenistic approaches, for doing so little and being happy with it,” HRW’s Conde said. 

Ultimately, Duterte’s violent policies and disregard for human rights make it easier for future administrations to unleash their own brand of terror in the Philippines. According to political scientist Iglesias, failing to address the impact of Duterte will just make the cycle go on forever.

“Without the genuine restoration of respect for human rights, including in the form of justice for victims, the risk in our country is that the bloody six years could happen again, whether or not under the Marcos administration, but maybe in the future,” she said. – Rappler.com 

Palatandaan ng isang malayang demokrasya ang kalayaang bumatikos. Pero bakit may mga political prisoner pa rin katulad ng dating justice secretary na si Leila de Lima at ang mamamahayag na si Frenchie Mae Cumpio?

Mahigit anim na taon na sa kulungan si De Lima, at kamakailan ay nabigo ang pakay niyang makamit ang pansamantalang kalayaan nang ibinasura ang petition niya for bail. Ito’y sa kabila ng pagbawi o pag-recant ng mga susing witness laban sa kanya tulad ng dating acting chief ng Bureau of Corrections na si Rafael Ragos at ang umano’y drug lord na si Kerwin Espinosa. 

Sa katunayan, na-acquit na naman si Espinosa sa ikalawang kaso ng drug trafficking charges dahil salat sa ebidensiya. Bakit mailap ang hustisya kay De Lima?

Si Cumpio naman, na tatlong taon na sa kulungan ay humaharap sa terrorism charges na tinaguriang “trumped up” ng kanyang organisasyong Altermidya Network.

May kalayaan ba ang bayang pinaghaharian ng impunity at weaponization ng batas?

Pero maari mo namang sabihin na marami nang nagbago, tulad na lang ng extrajudicial killngs. Wala nang tokhang, di ba? (Ang tokhang ay isang state-sponsored anti-drug trafficking campaign ni Rodrigo Duterte na bumiktima sa mahihirap at umano’y “latak” ng lipunan.)

Mali. Patuloy na nangangamba ang mga pamilyang paboritong target ng drug war ni dating presidente Duterte. Ayon kay Carmen (hindi niya tunay na pangalan), ina ng sinalvage na 21-taong-gulang na si Rolly, akala niya, tapos na ang patayan. Mali ang akala niya.

Habang hindi naman natin puwedeng sabihin na hindi tayo malaya – lalo na ngayon na tapos na ang termino ni Duterte at tila mahaba ang pisi ni Marcos Jr. – hindi rin masasabing lubos tayong malaya.

Ayon sa “Freedom in the World 2023” report ng Freedom House, nag-improve ang kalayaan sa bansa.

Sa report, binigyan ang Pilipinas ng overall global freedom score na 55/100, at binigyan ang bansa ng rating na “partly free.” Nakakuha rin ang Pilipinas ng 25/40 na marka sa political rights at 30/60 para sa civil liberties. 

Pasang-awa, puro borderline. Bahala ka na lang kung malasin ka at mailagay sa cross-hairs ng kinauukulan. At kailan pa naging katanggap-tanggap ang borderline?

Iwan natin ang datos at tanungin ang sarili: panatag ba ang iyong loob kung ang anak o kapatid mo’y sasama sa rally? Hindi, di ba, dahil mabagsik ang anti-terror law.

Panatag ba ang loob mo kung ang anak o kapatid ay gagala sa lansangan ng isang maralitang pook? Aba’y hindi rin – dahil kung hindi man siya matokhang, andiyan ang takot mo na makukursunadahan siya ng mga dumidelihensiyang pulis patola.

Ngayong Independence Day, binalikan namin ang interview ng reporter na si Lian Buan sa sociology professor sa University of the Philippines na si Josephine Dionisio. Ang pamagat ng kanilang podcast ay “Love of Country: Is dissent patriotic?”

Sabi ni Dionisio, ang pagmamahal sa bayan ay hind lamang pagbili ng barong tagalog, pagtayo ‘pag tumutugtog ang Lupang Hinirang, at pagmemorya ng Panatang Makabayan.

Sabi niya, ang love of country ay nangangailangan ng isang “shared imagination” ng isang mas mabuting kinabukasan, na bunga ng dayalogo at debate.

Tulad din ‘yan ng sinasabi ng Nobel Peace Prize laureate at Rappler CEO na si Maria Ressa, na kailangan natin ng “shared facts” upang matahak ang “shared truths” upang mapagsikapan ang “shared values.”

Sabi ni Dionisio, sa kasaysayan, ang nasyonalismo ay kakabit ng “acts of defiance” tulad ng pagbatikos at paghingi ng pagbabago. Dagdag pa niya, “Every day that you encounter injustice, call it out.” Pangalanan daw ang kawalan ng hustisya tuwing nakikita at nadarama natin ito.

Ang hirap nga mahalin ng bayan, pero hindi ‘yan excuse para huwag mahalin ang bayan.

Nang tinanong si Dionisio saan huhugutin ng mga Pilipino ang “love of country,” sabi niya, “Hugutin ito sa pagmamahal sa sarili.” Ayon daw sa UP sociology professor na si Randy David, “self-esteem is to national pride.” 

Ipa-paraphrase namin ang sinabi niya: “Hanapin at tanggapin ang mga bagay na gusto mong mahalin at tanggapin sa ating sarili, at mula doon ay humanap ng inspirasyon na mahalin ang mga nameless, faceless na kababayan.”

Meron daw forever, at pagmamahal sa bayan ay puwedeng panghabambuhay. – Rappler.com

MANILA, Philippines – President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on Monday, June 12, spoke of the need for Filipinos to “assert our liberty day by day” amid an “age where battles remain but occur in places the eyes cannot see.”

The President was scheduled to lead the flag-raising and wreath-laying at the Rizal Monument in Luneta Park at 8 am. His attendance there almost did not push through due to bad weather. Almost an hour before this event, organizers at Luneta asked guests to proceed to the Quirino Grandstand. Much later, past the 8 am schedule, guests at the grandstand hurriedly boarded Office of the President buses and were shuttled to the nearby Luneta Park. 

Marcos was joined by the First Family, his wife Liza Araneta-Marcos, and sons, House leader Ilocos Norte Representative Ferdinand Alexander Marcos, Simon Marcos, and Vincent Marcos.  

Marcos’ predecessor, Rodrigo Duterte, only attended an Independence Day flag-raising event at Rizal Park in his last year in office. No grand parades were held at the Quirino Grandstand under Duterte. 

In his message ahead of Monday’s events, Marcos said June 12, the day in which the country commemorates the country’s declaration of independence from over three centuries of Spanish rule, “confirmed what our forebears have religiously kept in their hearts: That we are the inheritors of the glorious heroism and nobility that our ancestors have demonstrated throughout our long and storied history.”

In what seems to be a reference to his first State of the Nation Address, during which he spelled out a policy to be “very jealous of all that is Filipino,” Marcos said that given “new oppressors and challenges, our people remained defiant-affirming that it is in our core to defend what is ours.” 

“And with all that this occasion symbolizes and entails, we understand better now that liberty will not flourish on its own; freedom will not materialize unless it is declared boldly, believed sincerely, and demonstrated passionately,” added the President, whose father once ruled the country for over two decades, 14 years of which were under a dictatorship. 

“Now, in the age where battles remain but occur in places the eyes cannot see, it is more necessary to take to heart the immeasurable courage and loss that came out of our heroes. For this, I challenge each of us: On the 125th year since the declaration of our freedom, let us assert our liberty day by day,” said Marcos. 

The President is scheduled to host the diplomatic corps for a vin d’ honneur at Malacanang Palace later in the day. – Rappler.com 

LIST: Philippine Independence Day 2023 protests, activities

Marcos will be attending two events on Monday, June 12 – a flag-raising and wreath-laying ceremony at the Rizal Monument in Luneta Park, followed by the Araw ng Kalayaan Grand Parade at the Quirino Grandstand.

The President will also be hosting the traditional vin d’honneur with the diplomatic corps at Malacañang later in the day, as part of Independence Day festivities.

Bookmark this page to watch the events at Luneta and the Quirino Grandstand live on Monday, June 12, beginning at 8 am. – Rappler.com