"The stage of life is yours for the taking"

It is with fondness and delight that we anticipate to watch our sons, Joaquin and Enrique, together with their classmates and schoolmates, perform today.

We were initially wondering what could our kids be doing in school after class as their lips were tightly sealed. They kept saying it was a “top secret,” as instructed by their teachers. Then gradually, as weeks went by, bits and pieces of the play were being teasingly revealed to us - some dance steps, dialogues, and the roles they’re about to play. Until, finally, we found out about “The Lost Treasure.”

Of course, we appreciate the fact that Joaquin and Enrique are enjoying themselves and having pure fun rehearsing and playing with their friends. My husband and I are firm believers of learning beyond textbooks and formal lessons, about people and about life.

This exemplary example of the vaunted multiple-intelligence approach of Juventus definitely helps the kids understand certain situations and empathize with some characters. We know this is another step for them to gain confidence and just be themselves in public even as it teaches the value of cooperation, hard work, and plain friendship.

We are happy and excited to know that, finally, the product of the kids’ and their teachers’ months-long efforts will be shared with us - their parents and relatives – today. Nothing can warm the heart more.

And no matter the role, regardless of their exposure, I’d like to say that we should be proud of our kids. It is through their individual contributions that the whole play is built; without any of them it would be incomplete. Together, they constitute the sum of all parts of what we’re about to enjoy today.

At this point, for Joaquin and Enrique, permit me to say, “break a leg!” For all the kids, just go and have fun. The stage of life is yours for the taking.    

(This is the speech delivered by my better half for our kids' school play as the parents' message.)   

Does SCTEx now mean "Stone Casting and Throwing Expressway"?

It may sound corny. But I am posing this query because we have been recently victimized in the Subic Clark Tarlac Expressway (SCTEx) by nefarious individuals who seemed to have no scruples if they harmed or hurt innocent people.

On the evening of 19 February 2012, my brother-in-law was driving our 2012 Hyundai Santa Fe and cruising at a speed of not more than 100kph along the SCTEx - coming from the South Clark Interchange and bound for the Subic Bay Freeport. With us were my wife and two kids. At about 8:45 to 9:00 in the evening of said date, while traversing the Floridablanca-Dinalupihan segment of the SCTEx, and as my brother-in-law slowed down to avoid some rocks scattered on the road, we suddenly heard a loud “bang!” from the right side part of the Santa Fe.

Owing to the isolation of the place, and as said portion of the SCTex was dark - there were no lampposts there - and in consideration of the safety and security of my family, we decided not to stop to check whatever it was that seemed to have hit the vehicle. The car behind us, was apparently hit, too - it even momentarily stopped and blinked its hazard lights. We proceeded instead to the Tipo toll plaza. Upon reaching the toll plaza, I alighted from the Santa Fe to see and check what caused the loud bang. I noticed an ugly depression on the top front, right side of the vehicle, still bearing a dusty, dirty white color, most likely, of the rock that hit it. By all indications, someone with malicious intentions threw a rock at it. Luckily, it did not hit the glass.

We told the toll collector and the guard on duty to report to their mobile patrol the incident and for the patrol to proceed to the said portion of SCTEx to deter further rock throwing by some evildoers who seemed to have no qualms destroying properties and/or harming innocent people. As it was getting late and our kids were tired, we couldn't wait for another mobile patrol to arrive in the toll plaza anymore, so we decided to head home.

Now, this incident was scary and dangerous especially for regular users of the SCTEx such as ourselves. Unfortunately, this was by no means an isolated incident, as another blogger previously reported the same. Please check: http://baldrunner.com/2010/05/19/travel-advisory/.

To date, despite notice, we have yet to hear from SCTEx officials, including those of the BCDA's, on the steps they plan to undertake to address this serious concern, considering that this has been going on for years. 

(Disclosure: Our law office previously represented MNTC in a criminal case. However, public interest demands that it is not a sufficient justification to withhold reporting this incident.) 

The coal-fired thermal power plant, the Subic Watershed Forest Reserve and the Writ of Kalikasan

In 1992, then President CORAZON C. AQUINO, issued Proclamation No. 926 to “withdraw from sale, entry, settlement, exploitation, exploration and other forms of disposition, subject to private rights, if any there be, and set aside and declare Subic Watershed Forest Reserve to protect and preserve the rare biological diversity of the flora and fauna therein and keep intact the productive capacity of the hydrologic unit supplying the developable portions of the Subic Bay Military Reservation…”

The initiative of the present administration of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) to “institutionalize public consultations for environmentally sensitive projects to give stakeholders a voice in determining development directions and ensure transparency in the Subic Bay Freeport,” is legally sound, duly commendable and must be fully supported by all stakeholders.

Just recently, SBMA conducted a stakeholders’ consultation process to understand and consolidate the opinions of various concerned sectors on the coal-fired thermal power plant being proposed for construction at the Redondo Peninsula. At the moment, according to SBMA, only a site preparation permit has been issued to the consortium that owns the proposed coal-fired thermal power plant.

Hopefully, the residents, fisher-folks, businesses such as resorts, hotels, amusement parks and water utilities, contiguous to and within the Subic Bay Freeport Zone (SBFZ), wouldn’t have to resort to legal relief and remedies - such as the “Writ of Kalikasan” - to save and protect the pristine forest, coast and waters of Subic Bay, consistent with and pursuant to Proclamation 926, Republic Act No. 7227 and other pertinent environmental laws.

No matter how one looks at it, a coal-fired thermal power plant appears anathema to SBFZ’s thrust as a prime eco-tourism destination and health and retirement haven. According to news reports, Subic already surpassed Baguio in terms of numbers of visitors. With its vision of becoming a part of cruise ship itineraries, a world-class leisure- and resort-type residences, and preferred meetings, incentives, conventions and exhibitions (MICE) venue, a coal-fired thermal power plant ominously jutting out across the bay would be a huge turn-off and disappointment. The equally important protection of several endangered species such as fruit bats and marine turtles ought not to be discounted.

Should the threat of a coal-fired thermal power plant persist, the effectivity of the Supreme Court-sanctioned “The Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases” would be tested.

There it provides for the extraordinary remedy called “Writ of Kalikasan.” The writ is a remedy available to a natural or juridical person, entity authorized by law, people’s organization, non-governmental organization, or any public interest group accredited by or registered with any government agency, on behalf of persons whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated, or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or private individual or entity, involving environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.” (Section 1, Rule 7)

According to the Supreme Court (SC), “the underlying emphasis in the Writ of Kalikasan is magnitude as it deals with damage that transcends political and territorial boundaries. Magnitude is thus measured according to the qualification set forth in this Rule — when there is environmental damage that prejudices the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.”

“The petition for the issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan can be filed by any of the following: (1) a natural or juridical person; (2) entity authorized by law; or (3) people’s organization, non-governmental organization, or any public interest group accredited by or registered with any government agency “on behalf of persons whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated… involving environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.”  Those who may file for this remedy must represent the inhabitants prejudiced by the environmental damage subject of the writ. The requirement of accreditation of a group or organization is for the purpose of verifying its existence. The accreditation is a mechanism to prevent “fly by night” groups from abusing the writ.”

“The Writ of Kalikasan is a special remedy available against an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or private individual or entity, involving environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces,” adds the SC.

Happy New Year!

I barely noticed it: 50 posts and 4,629 pageviews later, we're ushering another year – the Dragon year, according to the Chinese calendar. Let me pause to thank those who have supported this humble blog: Gina, my loving and lovely wife; my brother Joel; Tiara, my sis in the PSD sorority; brod Gilbeys; JTA, my classmate; Elma, friend and staff; and fellow blogger, Bay of 1k4tribike.

Thank you, fellow netizens around the world who have stumbled into my blog; I hope the articles have helped you understand or led you to discover whatever it was that you were looking for, particularly on matters involving Philippine law. Should there be some mistakes, I apologize – the responsibility is purely mine.

Thanks for bearing with my personal and random musings about family life, travels, literature and whatnot. I hope you somehow found them useful, amusing, even both.

I wish you all the best of this Season! Have a safe and happy new year. Cheers for a better year ahead!         

Of natural calamities, laws and political will: The typhoon Sendong story

The typhoon “Sendong” story in Cagayan de Oro -- that tragically claimed, as of last count, at least a thousand lives -- has become a cyclical phenomenon throughout the country for the past decade: Ormoc, Aurora, even Marikina, to name a few. 

Most of the victims were squatters living along the Cagayan de Oro riverbanks. According to Antonio Montalvan II, a Cagayanon born and bred:

“The alluvial plains—huge swaths of land that lie on the riverbanks—became a magnet for informal settlers over the last 20 years. And what started as a small delta has grown over the years from continuous siltation.

That is the island now known as Isla de Oro, heavily populated for the last 20 years but nothing but a bar of silt and sand.

xxx

And yet the city government allowed the informal settlers to mushroom.” (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/116425/we-had-been-warned-of-cagayan-rivers-fury)

On the other hand, reacting to such tragedies, Senator Manny Villar filed recently a bill banning the construction of houses along the waterways, including riverbanks. (Villar files bill banning houses along waterways. Philippine Star, December 23, 2011.)

I suggest that Republic Act (RA) No. 7279, or the “Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992,” be revisited by the good Senator and the concerned local government officials.

RA 7279 contains the following provisions:

Sec.  29. Resettlement. — Within two (2) years from the effectivity of this Act, the local government units, in coordination with the National Housing Authority, shall implement the relocation and resettlement of persons living in danger areas such as esteros, railroad tracks, garbage dumps, riverbanks, shorelines, waterways, and in other public places as sidewalks, roads, parks, and playgrounds. The local government unit, in coordination with the National Housing Authority, shall provide relocation or resettlement sites with basic services and facilities and access to employment and livelihood opportunities sufficient to meet the basic needs of the affected families. 

Sec.  30. Prohibition Against New Illegal Structures. — It shall be unlawful for any person to construct any structure in areas mentioned in the preceding section. 

After the effectivity of this Act, the barangay, municipal or city government units shall prevent the construction of any kind of illegal dwelling units of structures within their respective localities. The head of any local government unit concerned who allows, abets or otherwise tolerates the construction of any structure in violation of this section shall be liable to administrative sanctions under existing laws and to penal sanctions provided for in this Act. 

Sec.  45. Penalty Clause. — Any person who violates any provision of this Act shall be imposed the penalty of not more than six (6) years of imprisonment or a fine of not less than Five thousand pesos (P5,000) but not more than One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000), or both, at the discretion of the court: Provided, That, if the offender is a corporation, partnership, association or other juridical entity, the penalty shall be imposed on the officer or officers of said corporation, partnership, association or juridical entity who caused the violation. 

Moreover, Section 2 of the “Implementing Rules and Regulations Governing Summary Eviction” of RA 7279, states:

Section 2. Coverage. – the following shall be subject for summary eviction:

1.0 New squatter families whose structures were built after the effectivity of RA 7279; and

2.0 Squatter families identified by the LGU in cooperation with Presidential Commission of the Urban Poor (PCUP), Philippine National Police (PNP) and accredited Urban Poor Organization as professional squatters or members of squatting syndicates as defined in the Act.

Applying the Implementing Rules, the appellate court, in the case of Hinacay, et. al. vs. Muntinlupa, et. al (CA-G.R. SP No. 80496) -- a case that appears not to have been elevated to the Supreme Court -- held, to wit:

“Petitioners failed to show that they are not “new squatters.” All they say is that they are occupants of the property “for a long period of time,” but fail to state the exact date of the start of their occupation.

Hence, they fall under the category of “new squatters”. As such, they are not entitled to the protection of RA 7279 and in fact should be subjected to summary eviction.

Petitioners’ houses may be demolished and they may be evicted from the land without need of an ejectment case.”

Thus, all it takes, perhaps, is sheer political will coupled with social justice, to prevent the unnecessary loss of lives of the poor and the downtrodden – and not an additional bill.

A comprehensive cyberspace law as an incontrovertible necessity in the Philippines

In 1999, as a law student, I co-authored a legal paper calling for the enactment of a comprehensive cyberspace law in the Philippines. There were just a handful of email services at that time, ICQ was the social networking site aside from the IRC, the bandwidth was inadequate to support fast video streaming, and you had to dial for access using a noisy modem. Despite the explosion on Internet usage and uses and tremendous increase of Web-users in the Philippines since then, such a law has yet to be enacted. The following excerpts serve as the paper's conclusion:

"From the discussion of evolution and continuing development of the Internet and the exponential growth of services and information provided online, this study has shown that there exist compelling reasons for legislative reform and extra-statutory measures.  While in other jurisdictions, especially in technologically advanced countries with heavier dependence on the Internet, “cyberspace law” has gained recognition as a field in itself, in the Philippines, this has yet to happen.

In October 26, 1998, President Joseph Ejercito Estrada signed Executive Orders No. 34 and No. 35, both seeking to commence action on the part of government to keep in step with the information revolution.  Executive Order No. 34 directs the National Computer Center (NCC) to design and build an integrated Government Information Infrastructure (GII), presumably in the same, if not downscaled, mold as the United States’ National Information Infrastructure.  Executive Order No. 35 provides for the restructuring of the National Computer Center, as the central executive agency that will oversee the coordination and integration of government policies, programs and projects relating to the information infrastructure. 

While laudable in intent and principle, these measures may be endangered by the inaction of government in dealing with computer and Internet abuse.  The acts here discussed – hacking, the sending of viruses, and spamming and email overflow – already pose as threats to the GII, even before it is formally set up.  Without decisive and swift action by government, particularly in the field of legislative reform, the technological advancement envisioned may actually be a disastrous step into backwardness.  At present, even without the GII, domestic hacking, creation and sending of viruses, and spamming are prevalent.  With the GII, government records and data, including confidential and sensitive information relating to national security and state programs, are likewise exposed to danger if measures to prevent and respond to abuse are not in place.

In the meantime, pending legislative reform, this study has sought to provide alternative means of penalizing hackers and crackers, disseminators of viruses and other malicious code, and spammers, whether criminally or civilly.  It has been shown that these are not traditional crimes and can not thus be adequately analogized and penalized as such.  As to civil actions, substantive law might be adequate, in the sense that the elements of actionable conduct are fulfilled.  However, perhaps an even greater challenge is hurdling problems that may be encountered procedurally, such as the acquisition of jurisdiction, the admissibility of electronic and digital information as evidence, and other considerations, which if unresolved, could ultimately defeat a civil or criminal action or recoverability of damages.

Legislative reform and other domestic measures must also be resorted to alongside trans-border efforts to penalize Internet abuses.  This is a necessary consequence of the “borderless” nature of the Internet itself.  International cooperation will have to be forged to effectively respond to rising incidence of criminality and tortious acts on the Internet.  Such international cooperation will have to include not only governments, but the private sector as well.  Government regulation on the Internet has received much resistance from sectors who believe that regulation will impede further advancements on the Internet.  However, the Internet has proven to be a new arena for conflict, where interests are asserted and threatened – without some form of regulation, how will interests be allocated and rights protected?

The recognition of government that the Internet is such an arena, and that it is in the interest of the State to treat it as such, constitutes the single most important initial step in dealing with Internet abuse."

To date, apart from E-Commerce Law and Cybercrime Prevention Act, no pro-active and up-to-date law on cyberspace and the Internet has been enacted, 17 years since the Philippines became a member of the National Science Foundation Network (NSFNET) -- in 1994. It's about time.  

Our kids abroad: Part I (Macau, HK, Shanghai and Beijing)

We had our first family trip out of the country in 2006 when Vito was 3 years old and Manu was 2 years old. We planned to go to Hong Kong via Macau so Gina and I decided that we might as well try to visit some notable places there that we thought would be interesting to kids, such as the Macau Tower, Macau Grand Prix Museum, St. Paul’s ruins and a nearby museum (that used to be a fort with its old cannons still intact and overlooking Macau), and also such other places beyond the regular tourists’ radar (e.g., a park with huge rocks dotted with literary verses; a fireman’s museum). We varied our meals by eating/buying food among Western restaurants and fast food joints, convenience stores, and local eateries.

On top of the Macau Tower

After 2 nights in Macau, we took a hydrofoil to HK. Carrying 2 toddlers who would fight for a stroller (that I picked up in a store in Macau) owing to long walks, we took the usual “safe” and kid-friendly itineraries, like Disneyland, Ocean Park, Victoria Peak, Aberdeen Harbour, and HK Space Museum; watched the Symphony of Lights, strolled at the Avenue of Stars, and shopped a bit at Harbour City; and simply enjoyed the nippy weather of HK in December.
 

Inside the HK Space Museum

When we went out of the country in 2008, again during another Christmas break, we traveled to Shanghai and Beijing. While in Shanghai, we toured both sides of the Bund, the French Concession/Xintiandi, went to the Shanghai Science and Technology Museum, rode the Maglev train, watched acrobatic shows, among others. After the first day with a free tour, we went around the city by ourselves, either by walking or taking the subway/taxi.

Waking up early in the morning, after celebrating a very silent New Year's eve in Shanghai (not a single fireworks/firecracker was heard), we took a shuttle to the Pudong International Airport for our trip to Beijing.

Onboard the Maglev train hurtling at a maximum speed of 431 km/hr

Again, as we considered these early forays as mere exploratory trips in preparation for, hopefully, more in depth and longer travels in the future, and with due consideration of our modest budget, we had a whirlwind tour of the Forbidden City, the Great Wall, the Olympics stadiums, and Beihai Park. We skated on the frozen Beihai Lake, had the famous roast duck for a late dinner in a restaurant off Wangfujing St. (a street well known for exotic dishes), and bought unusually succulent, sweet boiled corn on the cob sold by an elderly lady in front of Day’s Inn Hotel. We were lucky that Vito’s Ninong (Godfather) Lester, who was then finishing his master of laws at Tsinghua University, gladly served as our guide.

At the Juyongguan section of the Great Wall

In 2009, we were fortunate to visit Singapore (on a whim). There, I met 2 classmates from UP Law, JT and Hazel, who were doing extremely well as expat lawyers. And in March this year, we went back to HK with Nanay and the 2 kids (who have sprung up in heights) in tow -- they both received excellent academic awards during their school’s moving up ceremonies. Allow me to share the details next posting.

Meanwhile, our itinerant feet are getting itchy again...