Fulfilling the Dream: Walking the Camino de Santiago even if Virtually

 For years, manang Maria (@Malaya Hagiyo) had talked about walking the Camino de Santiago. The allure of traversing centuries-old trails, passing through picturesque landscapes, and connecting with fellow pilgrims from around the world was irresistible. It is more than a pilgrimage; it’s a journey of self-discovery, endurance, and spiritual awakening. My very good friend Maricel Harris and I share this desire to walk the Camino. We have not yet done this until now, because we are not yet fully prepared with enough resources. One day, we will.

The Camino de Santiago, also known as the Way of St. James, is a network of ancient pilgrimage routes leading to the shrine of the apostle Saint James the Great in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela in Galicia, northwestern Spain. It is one of the most renowned pilgrimage routes in the world and has been traveled for over a thousand years by pilgrims seeking spiritual growth, enlightenment, or simply adventure.

The most famous route, the Camino Francés (French Way), starts in various locations across Europe, including Saint-Jean-Pied-de-Port in France, and spans approximately 800 kilometers (500 miles) to Santiago de Compostela. It takes you 40 days to finish the journey if you walked at least 20 kilometers each day. However, there are multiple other routes originating from different parts of Spain and Europe, such as the Camino Portugués, the Camino del Norte, and the Camino Primitivo, among others.

Pilgrims from all walks of life and religious backgrounds undertake the Camino for various reasons, including religious devotion, cultural exploration, physical challenge, and personal reflection. Along the way, pilgrims pass through diverse landscapes, picturesque villages, historic sites, and encounter fellow travelers from around the world, fostering a sense of community and camaraderie.

The Camino de Santiago holds deep cultural and historical significance, with its origins dating back to the Middle Ages when it was one of the three major Christian pilgrimages, alongside Rome and Jerusalem. Today, it continues to attract hundreds of thousands of pilgrims annually, each embarking on their own unique journey of self-discovery and spiritual growth.

Since we have not yet been able to do this in reality, I did the virtual pilgrimage. It took me 152 days to accummulate the number of kilometers corresponding to the camino.  

I still look forward to doing walking the Camino de Santiago one day, alongside manang Maria, Maricel, and other friends who are up to the challenge. 

The Matriarch Signs Off

As you bid adieu

We celebrate your life

Your womanhood

Your motherhood

 

A woman of strength, patience, kindness

Love unsaid yet overflowing

The beacon and the light 

Yesterday, today, and the future.

 

Your eyes have seen the wrath of life

Your ears have heard its agony 

Yet you had more eyes and ears than us

To commune with the world beyond

 

Your hands, rough from the harsh soil

Bare feet calloused by the earth

Heart pained by the storms

The unshed tears say you took them all.

 

Record says you’re 92

But what do we really know?

We know that you have sired

Generations of your kind

 

Your womb was a spring of life

A spring that flows so far and wide 

Bound in your wisdom

Linked by your blood

 

As you fly to rejoin our ancestors

Fly away with all the ills of this world

Drop them all in the between

Where no one can feel the pain.

 

This is not goodbye, it is not the end

You live in us, among us

Together with those, gone before us

Be our shield, be our guide.

 

Ikaan mo et am-in nan ate.

Danum id todey ya id gedangan ay menlamnin 

Et was-in di menlamlamnin ta maid mangmangwani en ate.

 

Vaya con dios.

(For Maria Maliked Bongdowen Bayang, April 20, 1929 - December 7, 2022)

I AM A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE WHO STANDS UP FOR DIGNITY IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE

 The Joint COMELEC-CSC Advisory on Electioneering & Partisan Political Activity summarizes the prohibitions against and allowances for partisan political activities among government employees in general. 

 

However, in enforcing this Advisory, consistent with its role as indicated by its title Advisory (i.e., a set of guidelines or food for thought), the prohibitions are to be interpreted and enforced according to the purposes for which they have been imposed and the exclusions that have been crafted to temper the otherwise overbroad language of these prohibitions.

 

The general prohibition against partisan political activity is meant to insulate the government from activities that will spend government resources for particular candidates; allow government employees to discriminate against others who support opposing political candidates; and enfeeble the provision of government service. 

 

Hence, the expression of political beliefs and the support for the candidacy of political candidates that will not result in these adverse consequences should not be covered by the prohibition. The prohibition cannot be enforced without first considering the purposes for why the prohibition has been imposed. 

 

The reason for this is the inclusive right to free expression in the Constitution that does not discriminate between government and non-government employees. So long as the purposes of the prohibition are met, government employees enjoy the right to freely express the contents of their right to believe and right to have a conscience.

 

The general prohibition must also be understood in the context of the express exclusions from the prohibition. Notably, these exclusions were the products of a case-by-case analysis of the prohibition by the Supreme Court – proof that indeed the prohibitions are not meant to be implemented blindly and bluntly but contextually. 

 

The Advisory itself understood the exclusions in a general and loose manner, to protect the fundamental right of every person to believe and express this belief, especially on matters of elemental importance, such as the manner by which society will be governed and the persons who will be governing.

 

The exclusions, as summarized in the Advisory, are –

 

a)        Casting one's vote - Quinto v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 189698, 22 February 2010. 

 

b)        Expressing one's views on current political problems or issues - Quinto v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 189698, 22 February 2010; People v De Venecia (1965)  

 

c)         Mentioning the names of candidates or parties whom one supports; -  Quinto v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 189698, 22 February 2010; People v De Venecia (1965)  

 

d)        Letters (a) to (e) of Paragraph 8 of this Joint Circular, when performed for the purpose of enhancing the chances of aspirants for nomination for candidacy to public office by a political party or coalition; 

 

e)        Public expressions, opinions, or discussions of probable issues in a forthcoming election, or on attributes of or criticisms against probable candidates to be nominated in a forthcoming political party convention;  

 

f)          Social media functions such as "liking," commenting, "sharing," re-posting, or following a candidate's or party's account, unless these are resorted as a means to solicit support for or against a candidate or party during the campaign period - Disini v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 203335, 11 February 2014

 

For advocates of free expression, especially where none of the purposes for which the prohibition has been imposed, government employees may justify their partisan political activities by grounding these within the obvious parameters of the exclusions.

 

For instance, do not solicit support expressly. Mention the names through favorite media, but do not say vote for. Implied support, or incidental solicitation of support, is not punishable; it is not covered by the prohibition - Quinto v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 189698, 22 February 2010; People v De Venecia (1965). Comment on a social or political or moral issue, and say why this or that candidate does not stand for the issue. This is excluded from the prohibition.    

 

To stress, the idea is to resolve whether the prohibition has been breached contextually. Anything done in good faith and as a result of a government employee’s conscientious beliefs would not fall within the prohibition. Government employees are stakeholders as anyone else. It does not hurt to be a government employee who stands for dignity in government service, especially from those echeloned at the highest levels.  

(name of author withheld for anonymity)

Proud Igorots, Discrimination and Philippine Education

 This “proud to be an Igorot” has been going around in social media for a few days 

Photo Source: A Brief Introcution to Igorot Culture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmfUGvWZr1o

now, and thousands responded to the call to use it in their posts. You see, the Igorotlandia unite against an unjust treatment to their kind, or rather, a bigoted perception of their identity. However, it is unfortunate that we do not see a similar united movement when big corporate interests want to plunder their resources. Sometimes we ask - where is the Igorot pride when machines are boring holes into their mountains? 

Anyway, these information in different 

educational modules approved by DepEd should be taken and understood on the context on which these are used. 

We do not just pick a small portion of the information and cry discrimination. We have gone a long way from when we were treated as sub-humans. The 1987 recognizes the rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) consolidated into a national law, these rights that are recognized by the Constitution and by international law. Anti-discrimination policies are being adopted, albeit with so much challenges in relation to Indigenous Peoples rights. We continue to combat misinformation about Indigenous Peoples that sadly persist to these days, but we must do so without becoming bigots in the process.

 

For instance, the information says that “Igorots are short, dark-skinned and have kinky hair”. We should counter by saying, no, that is a wrong information, because that describes our brothers and sisters along the Sierra Madre mountain ranges. We do not say that it is a wrong statement because Igorots are good-looking. Taking this line of argument discriminates our Aeta/Agta brethren as it implies that being short and dark-skinned and having kinky hair is not good looking. That is stereotyping against other Indigenous Peoples.

 

On another hand, when a question in a book asks if it is right to bully an Igorot because of his appearance or clothing, does this immediately equate to discrimination? What is the context of this question? If it was asked to teach a person how to act rightfully or wrongfully in a situation, I would understand this to teach the students what is right and wrong, and teaching them that it is wrong for anyone to bully an Igorot for whatever reasons, is a positive action to address the historical stereotyping in the educational system.

 

What I am saying is, I am against any form of discrimination and I am a staunch advocate for the full respect of Indigenous Peoples rights. But I would be circumspect in assessing what are intended or have the result of discriminating, and what are actions that are well-meaning. 

 

These educational modules should be criticized objectively. We denounce those that are obvious misinformation, but we acclaim what are intended or could result to addressing the historical discrimination.

 

The craze on Duterte and why I did not go crazy on him

[Caveat: This is my opinion and personal position, and I do not claim to be right (because I am left J ). Everyone is entitled to her own thoughts. “I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” (Voltaire) Cyber bullies be damned! Those who bully others just don’t have a better argument.]

Quite a number of close friends and relatives are in the craze, actively campaigning and spending their own money to campaign for Duterte. I have always been wary since day 1, but I continue to respect the position taken by these friends and relatives, and will never let electoral politics get in the way of my relationships with them.

I do not refute the reality that in Davao City, where Duterte has been mayor for several years, is more peaceful than other major cities in the country. Being a non-smoker, I love Davao’s rule on banning smoking in public places, and the political will to ensure its implementation. I acknowledge the fact that criminality is at a minimum, and I could easily report a tax-driver overcharging the fare and be assured of an immediate action. Yet I shudder at the thought that Duterte maintains a “death squad” at his beck and call.

Duterte and the Davao Death Squad

The existence of the “Davao death squad” has always been a public knowledge, talked about in whispers and behind doors, yet widely known to be true. Even as Duterte double-talked on its existence, the operations of this “death squad” persisted with impunity under his administration. There were times when he denied the existence of this vigilante group, and there were times when he admitted it. Duterte made a denial before the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Philip Alston during his visit in 2007. Even with this denial, the investigation of Alston showed the clear existence of the death squad as he met with survivors and families of victims.

According to Alston:

“A death squad operates in Davao City, with men routinely killing street children and others in broad daylight…….It is a commonplace that a death squad known as the “Davao Death Squad” (DDS)  operates in Davao City. However, it has become a polite euphemism to refer vaguely to “vigilante groups” when accounting for the shocking predictability with which criminals, gang members, and street children are extrajudicially executed. One fact points very strongly to the officially-sanctioned character of these killings: No one involved covers his face. The men who warn mothers that their children will be the next to die unless they make themselves scarce turn up on doorsteps undisguised. The men who gun down or, and this is becoming more common, knife children in the streets almost never cover their faces. In fact, for these killers to wear “bonnets” is so nearly unheard of that the witnesses I interviewed did not think to mention the fact until I asked. None of those with whom I spoke had witnessed such persons covering their faces, and one knowledgeable advocate informed me that they do so in no more than two cases out of one hundred.

The human cost is very high. Since 1998, when civil society organizations began keeping careful records, over 500 people have been killed by the death squad. Up until 2006, these victims were generally shot; since then, stabbings have become more common. I spoke with witnesses and family members of 8 victims and 1 survivor, and I reviewed the case files of an additional 6 victims and 3 survivors. These interviews gave some insights into how these killings take place and the enormous emotional damage they inflict on family and friends. The executions generally respond to suspicions of petty crimes, are preceded by warnings or notifications that clarify their significance, and are carried out publicly and with methodical indifference.”[1]

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) conducted its own investigation. In a statement released in 2012, the CHR said that “It is axiomatic in human rights law that where there are human rights violations, there must be accountability. This case of the so-called Davao Death Squad (DDS) is about more than 200 killings, 206 to be exact, committed in Davao City in the period from 2005 to 2009, and about the search for accountability for those many lives arbitrarily taken. These figures are just what came from the records of the Commission on Human Rights. Figures from other agencies showed more.”[2] “Reliable information indicates that, in 2008, such killings were almost a daily occurrence in Davao City, jumping from a reported 116 in 2007 to 269 in 2008. The killings have clear patterns – similarly described perpetrators, victims and methods – and are rarely the subject of successful police investigations.”[3] In an interview with ABS-CBN a year ago, Duterte admitted his links to the Davao Death Squad and even vowed to kill 100,000 criminals when he is elected president.[4]

All these information about the existence of a death squad, their wanton operations with clear impunity and Duterte’s admission of his connection to this group and his rhetorical declaration of perpetuating the killings, is very chilling. This is an anathema to anyone who respects the rule of law and who recognizes that each one is entitled to his rights and fundamental freedoms, without discrimination.

Duterte’s “friendship” with Quiboloy

I know that we should not judge a person based on the kind of friends that he keeps. But Duterte’s admitted special friendship with Apollo Quiboloy sends an extremely cold chill down my spine. Quiboloy is the head of the religious sect “Jesus Christ: A Name Above Every Name” and claims to be the anointed Son of God. With due respect to his followers, my opinion is not in any way intended to disrespect your religion.

On August 25, 2005, Spouses Aurelio and Erlinda Rillion of Baguio City were arrested and jailed after Quiboloy filed libel cases against them for calling his religious group a “cult”. The Spouses Rillion were not guilty of libel. But they were guilty of fighting so hard for Quiboloy to release their only daughter who was then a minor, from his power and custody. The Spouses Rillion claimed that Quiboloy bamboozled and brain washed their only daughter – a beautiful child – into giving “religious” services at his mansion in Davao City. The Rillions never saw their daughter since then. Aurelio passed away without ever seeing her daughter. Erlinda continues to hope for her daughter to return. (You can find numerous resources about this on the web.)

On April 29, 2008, armed men riddled with bullets the house of Lumad leader Dominador Diarog after he refused to sell to Quiboloy his 2-hectare land adjacent to the latter’s prayer mountain in Tamayong, Calinan, Davao City. Diarog was killed and his wife and four children, three of whom were still minors, were injured. Diarog died and his family will suffer the trauma of this incident, because of their assertion of their right to their property, which was the primary source of their livelihood. (You can find resources about this incident on the web)

I personally heard from Lumads of Calinan, Davao City, their personal stories and experiences about how their lands were taken away from them, their kin killed, tortured or threatened, and how many were forced to give up their lands for a song for fear of Quiboloy and his men. I have heard from some of the Lumads that the Davao death squad is sheltered in Quiboloy’s mansion. Repeatedly, Lumads around the mansion recounted that every time they heard the sounds of motor bikes whirring out of the mansion’s gates, the next time they hear about is about a person killed by the death squad.

Having a public official with clear connections and special friendship to, and connivance with Quiboloy is a horrifying phenomena. I need not elaborate.

Duterte admitted that he received extravagant gifts and millions of pesos from Quiboloy. He admitted using Quiboloy’s private jet and helicopter for his campaign. He never raised a finger to deliver justice to the death of Lumad leader Diarog. Neither did he protect the helpless Lumads who were allegedly forcibly disposed of their lands to build this prayer mountain and mansion of Quiboloy.

I have been repeatedly asked why I am not joining the bandwagon for Duterte. I have my reasons, and these reasons come from the depth of my soul. I may agree with the visions of Duterte for the country, but I will never agree to his means of achieving these.

---

[1] Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, A/HRC/8/3/Add.2, 16 April 2008.)

[2] Statement of the CHR Chairperson, 14 August 2012, http://www.chr.gov.ph/MAIN%20PAGES/speeches/lapr_spch14Aug2012_DDS.htm

[3] Alston, Supra.

[4] Duterte admits links to Davao Death Squad, 25 May 2015, http://news.abs-cbn.com/halalan2016/nation/regions/05/25/15/duterte-admits-links-davao-death-squad-says-hell-kill-100000-criminals.

PEOPLES' LAWYERING: A TIME FOR NEW CHALLENGES, A PROPER TIME FOR RENEWAL

PEOPLES' LAWYERING:

A TIME FOR NEW CHALLENGES,

A PROPER TIME FOR RENEWAL

Keynote Speech on the Occasion of the 10th Founding Anniversary of the

Union of Peoples' Lawyers of Mindanao (UPLM)

12 September 2015

Cagayan de Oro, Philippines

by:

Edre U. Olalia

Secretary General

National Union of Peoples' Lawyers (NUPL)

I. LOOKING BACK

Ten years ago, we had the distinct honor and privilege of attending and witnessing the birth of the Union of Peoples' Lawyers in Mindanao (UPLM). UPLM trailblazed and preceded the formalization of the largest and, we may immodestly say, very respected and highly credible nationwide voluntary association of human rights lawyers, law students, paralegals and legal workers under the National Union of People's Lawyers (NUPL) which will be celebrating its 8th Founding Anniversary on September 16.

We were so inspired, envious even, of UPLM that when we founded the NUPL, we were naturally infected by the outstanding and emotional issue of the crucial position of the apostrophe in the term and concept "peoples," debating passionately whether to place it before the "s" or after the "s".

We were all very small, young and idealistic ten years ago. Now we are not so small, not so young but the idealism and the fire in the belly is still there, perhaps tempered now by challenges and realizations.

Ten years ago, the UPLM was trailblazing. Ten years ago, the UPLM in many senses had also started passing on the baton to new, young lawyers as well.

Since its formation, the UPLM has established itself as a respected and formidable human rights

lawyers' organization, taking on important cases and lending its voice and credibility to promote and advance the people’s agenda.

It has for its membership of course the illustrious and legendary Atty. Frederico Gapuz. We fondly remember his great contribution to the advancement and defense of human rights, and the articulation through his life of what it is to be a people’s lawyer. He has inspired a generations of people’s lawyers who will carry on what he has started.

It is time to congratulate the UPLM for its numerous successes and contributions through the years. We share our collective efforts, challenges, victories and even frustrations over various cases and issues.

Among many others, it was UPLM that first successfully tested the much-hyped writ of amparo. It was also UPLM lawyers themselves that were the first objects of attack of vilification. It was and is UPLM that was and is at the forefront of the search for justice for the Maguindanao massacre, the Mamasapano incident, and of the likes of Rebelyn (Pitao).

It was UPLM lawyers that helped or facilitated in the release of prisoners-of-war or POWs and actively engaged in the peace process through its principled positions. It was - and is - UPLM that joined the people in opposing militarization, in defeating trumped up charges and Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation or SLAPP, in standing by human rights defenders under attack, in filing countercharges against rights perpetrators, in conducting useful fact-finding missions on various rights violations, and in thoroughly documenting the same.

And of course, it was the UPLM that has defended with inimitable zeal and competence the continuous stream of political prisoners in Mindanao.

Now Mindanao is again in the national and even global radar with the Haran attacks, the practically genocidal attacks on our brothers and sisters Lumads, the cold-blooded murders of Tatay Emok (Samarca), Dionel (Campos) and Bello (Sinzo), the attacks on schools, and the massive and vicious forced evacuations and dislocations of communities in Talaingod (Davao del Norte), Lianga (Surigao del Sur) and Pangantucan (Bukidnon). It was and is UPLM that is also helping fight the toxic aerial spraying in Sarangani.

At the national level in NUPL, we have kinship over cases and issues of common concern and interest. We sought that the marauders of our heritage on Tubbataha be made accountable. In EDCA, we stood tall defending our sovereignty and dignity. 

We protested when pregnant Andrea (Rosal) was thrown in jail and then we wept and raged when her baby daughter died, even as as this soulless government deprived her of basic human compassion just as it let plunderers go on silly furloughs and medical tourism escapades. Andrea is rightfully and finally free now after disentangling herself from the legal harassment she suffered.

Such double standard happens everywhere, even in the improvident grant of bail to Col. Kapunan, fingered for the ghastly 

torture and brutal murder of Ka Lando (Olalia) and Ka Leonor. And of course the release of irrepressibly maleficent yet powerful and influential characters like Martial Law implementor Sen. Enrile.

We tried to impeach the President for betrayal of the public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution on substantial grounds for the pork barrel outrage even as pretentious sycophants in Congress massacred us through sheer tyranny of numbers .

At great risk, we ran again and again and again to heed the call for succor of political prisoners like the Tiamzons and many others politically persecuted through legal hocus pocus even as we objected to the insult of appointing a woman in uniform to head a compensation body which should make amends to victims by her kind.

With mixed feelings, the poster boy of impunity Gen. Palparan was a sort of victory for his victims and rights defenders but the special treatment he relishes and condoned by this government aggravates the intense, furious & tortuous legal battle ahead. We also saw how the search for justice for Jonas Burgos remains protracted and a long arduous fight of grit and wills.

But we share in the humbling reward of political and legal victories as well, false charges dismissed, clients set free, unscrupulous reptiles donning titles of prosecutors brazenly bilking money from litigants jailed, and power rate hikes stalled despite a battalion of hotshot lawyers and law firms that money can buy called by big industry not to budge an inch.

Yet not at no cost. We lost our beloved Coni (Brizuela) in the Maguindanao massacre and we all miss her. We lost Rudy (Felicio) who was peppered with bullets while amidst his urban poor clients in Antipolo. Cathy (Salucon) still faces serious threats for being a "thorn in the neck" of the military for defending political prisoners in Isabela.

Looking back, we may say we fought the good fight.

And we fought for the right reasons.

And we fought in a fair and honorable manner.

II. HOW IS IT OUT THERE?

Ten years after UPLM was formed and eight years after NUPL was convened, is people's lawyering still relevant? Are we still needed?

How is it out there?

We can cull from the findings in the Verdict of the recently concluded International Peoples' Tribunal (IPT) held in Washington D.C. last July.

According to Karapatan, From July 2010 to June 2015 under the administration of President Aquino, there were 262 victims of extrajudicial killings (EJKs), 27 victims of enforced disappearances (EDs), 125 caes of torture, 293 illegal arrests without detention, 723 with detention, 537 political prisoners (at least 29 of whom are ailing and 44 are elderly), 135, 599 victims of threats, harassments and intimidation, 29,684 victims of restriction and violent dispersal of public assemblies, and 60, 155 of forced evacuation.

Among others, two datus or local tribe leaders (Datus Mansimuy-at and Mansuladlad) and a minor (Bandam Dumanglay) testified at the IPT upon the harassment and atrocities committed against their communities.

According to IBON International, these are the facts and figures:

• 66 million Filipinos are poor. They live on just Php125 (US$2.80) or less per day. They are the Filipino farmers, fisherfolk, workers, small-scale traders, vendors, domestic workers and other informal sector workers;

• 4.3 Filipinos are million unemployed and 7.9 million underemployed;

• 4 out of 10 or 44% of the workers are non-regular or agency-hired workers, over six out of ten or 63% do not even have written contracts; four out of ten or 40% employed Filipinos are in just part-time work with very low pay and no benefits;

• the average daily basic pay of millions of Filipino workers nationwide increased by less than Php5 (Php4.50) or just 1.7% between 2005 and 2014;

• there are 10.2 million overseas Filipinos in 2013;

• 4,508 overseas Filipino workers were deployed every day because only 2,800 jobs were generated at home.

• 7 of 10 peasants are still landless;

• a third of landowners own or control more than 80% of agricultural land;

• the wealth of the 10 richest Filipinos has more than tripled under the Aquino administration from Php630 billion in 2010 to Php2.2 trillion in 2015 (250% increase);

• the net income of the country's some 260 listed firms on the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) rose from Php438 billion in 2010 to Php583 billion in 2014 (33% increase);

• the net income of the country's Top 1000 corporations grew from Php804 billion in 2010 to Php1.0 trillion in 2013 (26% increase);

• two-fifths (40%) of approved investment in the Philippines in the last decade-and-a-half is foreign rather than Filipino, not yet counting the use of dummy corporations;

• the Philippines paid out over US$36 billion in profit remittances since 1980 which is on top of over US$178 billion in debt servicing;

• the Philippines has exported over US$43 billion worth of mineral exports since the 1970s;

• there was 115% increase in profit of mining companies between 2010 and 2014;

• some 98% of Philippine domestic production is exported;

• around 80,000 babies still die of preventable diseases every year;

• 6 out of 10 Filipinos die without seeing a doctor;

• power privatization has made electricity in the Philippines the most expensive in Asia, even more expensive than in Japan or South Korea;

• water privatization has made water in the Philippines the third most expensive after Japan and Singapore;

• rail transport privatization has caused fares to increase from 50-100%;

• 61,000 houses of urban poor families with some 305,000 individuals were demolished and displaced under the Aquino administration;

• over 1.2 million homes were damaged or destroyed by Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda) but the government only built 364 homes; and

• one million families with 5.6 million people was severely affected by Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda) but less than 220,000 families were given livelihood support.

The IPT also found gross violations of the rights of the people to national self-determination and liberation through the imposition of the US war of terror and US military intervention; as well as the perpetration of crimes against humanity and war crimes; misrepresentations of the people's right to national liberation and self-determination as “terrorism” and the baseless “terrorist” listing of individuals, organizations and other entities by the US and other governments.

There will be many more Mary Jane Velosos, Cadapan-Empenos, Raymond Manalos, Jonas Burgoses, Andrea Rosals, persecuted peace consultants, privatizations of government hospitals, rate hikes of public utilities, foreign intervention, counterinsurgency programs and practices, and anti-people laws. There will be the likes of Fr. Pops (Tentorio), Harans and Pangantucans, destructive mining, landgrabbing, forced evacuations, and landlessness.

The list is endless unless exploitation and oppression is not ended.

In other words, as we would greet participants in a fit of levity in gatherings like these as clients, we will always have would-be clients.

There are also so much countersuits that need to be filed to deliver the message and give the perpetrators of human rights a lesson in a language they understand.

Also, there are just so many law students to encourage, so many foot lawyers to invite, and so many paralegals to train.

We have to realize that 90% of Filipinos can avail of services of practically only 1/2 % of the lawyers population who are into people's lawyers. But 10% comprising the political and economic elite can practically avail of the 99.5% who are non-people's lawyers.

III. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE (LEGAL) SYSTEM?

In our own supposed comfort zone, what is really wrong with the legal system, particularly with respect to violations of civil and political rights? From our experience, these are the factors or elements that cause, engender or aggravate rights violations:

1. Framework of violations

The Philippine government's rehashed counterinsurgency programs patterned or inspired by the US government's dirty war against liberation movements and groups engaged in resistance, whether armed/underground or the legal mass movement.

2. Official bias against dissenters

The prevailing government or official mindset or bias against dissent, activism, criticism and proposals by or against progressive activists, the so-called militant organizations and the revolutionary Left.

3. Wrong or corrupted notion of human rights

The mistaken or wrong notion and understanding of the concept of human rights: Who guarantees them, who is responsible for their protection, and who can commit violations?

4. Selective priorities/justice

The present government's priority ostensibly directed against showcase graft and corruption charges but never really so much on issues of human rights and accountability for rights violations.

5. Condonation of violators

Routine promotions of high and top-ranking military and police officials that are facing serious and credible charges of human rights violations despite opposition from victims, families and human rights defenders.

6. Sloppy work and/or complicit acts of police and other investigative arms

Police investigation that is invariably sloppy and unprofessional and which is used for cover-up to pass off the blame to the victims themselves, the progressive organizations or the armed movement. At best, evidence is testimony-dependent and not scientific.

7. Legal Superstructure and milieu engendering violations

a. The judicial system and procedure is tedious, cumbersome, protracted , slow and dirty.

b. At most times, the legal and judicial process and procedure is inaccessible to the poor and exploited, that is why justice is elusive or very much delayed (if at all attained in time) especially in cases of violations of human rights.

c. There are deep-seated problems or bad habits like endemic corruption and use of connections, influence, power and all forms of personal, professional, political, cultural or social ties that bind - palakasan, lakaran and gapangan.

d. Almost always, in cases of charges against the powerful, rich and influential or those who have connections, it is the small fry that gets the axe and the big fish/es get away.

There is a consistent double standard in the treatment of cases and application of the law.

There is no certain and credible arrest, prosecution and conviction of superior military or police officers for human rights violations.

e. There is no immediate, speedy, meaningful and effective justice to all victims of human rights violations including adequate compensation, indemnification, restitution, rehabilitation and mechanisms for this purpose.

f. Many rights are "paper rights," rendering legal remedies inadequate or ineffective.

Elegantly-worded constitutional rights and social justice provisions and pro-human rights provisions in some laws are mere paper rights in reality.

International human rights instruments, to which the Philippine government is a party or signatory to almost all, are given mere lip-service.

Recent pro-human rights laws or instruments like those against torture and disappearances, the Martial Law Compensation law, the remedy of the writ of amparo, as well as the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian law or CARHRIHL are either unimplemented, diluted or circumvented.

The remedies of the privilege of habeas corpus and the writs of amparo and habeas data have proven to be largely ineffective or unutilized to abate rights violations for extrajudicial killings and disappearances as they have many loopholes and are even mocked or corrupted by State security forces.

g. Repressive laws and jurisprudence remain in force, some dating back to the Marcos dictatorship, and legislative, administrative, executive and judicial acts that either:

i. openly violate human rights;

ii. disguise violations of human rights; or

iii. merely formally recognize protection or promotion of human rights but in practice actually contribute to the engenderment of such violations 

(e.g. Public Assembly Act, Ilagan vs. Enrile doctrine, Human Security Act, Cybercrime Law)

f. False or trumped-up charges through legal hocus-pocus are systematically filed and illegal arrests are made through disingenuous means:

i. mere substitution of names of generic John and Jane Does in the charges with the real names of persecuted individuals;

ii. mere naked allegation in the police report of the warrants of arrest that Person A is also Person B;

iii. concocted statements of professional and roving witnesses that are executed or produced after the filing of previous ones ("remembering by installment");

iv. ridiculous assertion that those being charged have unknown addresses to prevent them from receiving notices to be able to defend themselves; and

v. mechanical insertion or intercalation of a real name into a list of names of those previously charged.

All these realities in the legal sphere, among others, perpetuate and engender human rights violations in general, and attacks and impunity for such attacks against members, leaders and organizations or movements seeking fundamental changes in society in particular.

IV. REAFFIRMATION OF PEOPLES' LAWYERING

This is the milieu and context why people's lawyering remains ever relevant, useful and necessary and why people's lawyers never really die, they just live on and multiply in the course of the struggles of the people.

We should ensure consolidation of our ranks. While we are proud of a good number of members, we should ensure that each one of us contributes something, however small, depending on our capacities. Not all members are created equal; thus we are called to exert additional efforts in this task.

It is imperative for our organization to remain relevant, not just inside the courtroom, but also in the court of public opinion. Thus we should ensure that we are up-to-date with respect to national and local issues that greatly affect and impact on the rights of the people, and immediately publish principled and astute, but in accessible language, position papers or press releases.

As lawyers, the masses look up to us to interpret the law for them. But as people’s lawyers, we interpret and apply the law in favor of the people. It is our duty to educate the public as well.

We must affirm our vow and commitment to lawyering for the people. We must revisit and refresh the principles that unite us.

To many of you, there is nothing new with these points as you live by them daily. But we have to look at them with fresher minds, fresher approaches, and with fresher and fiercer vigor.

What are the principles and aspirations that bind us?

As the venerable Romy T. Capulong (RTC) taught us, the people's lawyer renders not only competent professional services. She/he has the commitment to social change as an essential component of such services.

We are also part of the movement for change and are not mere plumbers called upon when there is a problem. Or as RTC said, we are not mere candies placed in the pocket, only to be remembered when needed or desired or useful. We must not be seen as part of a quick fix in a legal fastfood drive-through. We have our grounding in the movement.

We do not limit ourselves to the the usual and generally accepted interpretation and use of the law to protect and uphold the interests of our client/s.

For instance, we do not worship and absolutely believe uncritically the notions of "dura lex sed lex," "sub judice," or the abstract "cold neutrality of an impartial judge."

We know that the law at this point is essentially the expression of the collective interests of the elites that monopolize power and economic resources.

Thus we do not limit ourselves to an absolute acceptance of the law and the prevailing legal system.

We must be creative and take a critical view of the law and what the law should be from the perspective of the poor and exploited client. We are practitioners of the metalegal tactics advocated by the great ka Pepe Diokno. We must turn a bad thing into a good thing by filing string test cases and "outwitting the enemy," as it were.

And though we all have feet of clay, we must strive to have a very high degree of personal integrity and professional commitment because we want to change the many things that are wrong in our society.

As RTC exhorted us, we must have the passion and dedication, and for some of us, even ready 24/7 and willing to forego weekends and holidays if need be.

We must continue to adhere and practice these principles and causes and value them over and above any personal interests and material agenda.

And as our esteemed Dean Gapuz had also articulated, we do not confine ourselves in thecourtroom. "We have to go out and be with the people, to explain to them these issues so that they will know and stand up for their rights."

In this connection, perhaps the current case case of Mary Jane Veloso is illustrative and emblematic of how we practice people's lawyering.

This case demonstrated in the concrete the meaning and practice of people's lawyering, with mass organizations and the clients themselves involved in the process not only of legal tacticizing and popular and broad campaigns but the mutual understanding of the reasons and roots for this social malaise.

Most importantly, the Mary Jane case highlighted the importance of launching mass campaigns along with the legal campaign to save a migrant worker in distress. The protests, appeals and vigils held in Mary Jane’s case ensured that the ensuing public discourse would be elevated to a critique of the very system that has pushed millions of Filipinos to look for greener pastures abroad, no matter the risks involved.

The power of such collective actions in the Philippines, amplified by the calls of local migrants’ rights activists in Indonesia, correctly prompted Indonesia President Widodo to take a second look at the case of Mary Jane. The mass actions successfully demystified the “modern day hero” rhetoric of the government and revealed the ugly face of its labor-export policy, which turned people into commodities to be traded abroad and then abandoned when in distress.

In the end, the crucial question when we handle our cases is "FOR WHOM ARE WE DOING ALL THESE FOR?"

Since "we have brave clients, they deserve brave lawyers" as RTC said with pride.

He said that people's lawyering is a matter of choice out of commitment to serve and help the poor in their struggle. But we have to make it also a viable alternative especially for law students and young lawyers. After all, RTC testified credibly, clearly and convincingly that it will be "a treasured journey of self-fulfillment and rewarding achievements."

The most ethical thing we as lawyers can do is use our education, training, skills, experience and wisdom to be of service to the many who need us.

In our challenge to the new 1,126 lawyers this year and for those taking the Bar in a couple of months, we challenge them to:

"Join us to help seek justice. 

Make all motions to raise the bar of service to society.

Enter your appearance as a lawyer for the many. They are waiting, expecting and in need. You can help change things.

Argue and stand your ground amidst so much impunity and misery.

Object to temptation, compromise, opportunism and hypocrisy.

Pray that you can proudly wear that much-coveted title that you deserve.

Base every move on truth and justice.

Submit more law to those who have less in life.

Welcome to the bar of reality."

Using another apt cliche', take the "road less travelled by".

We must have the competence, discipline, integrity, and commitment. We must have the passion and the rage. Yet we should keep and nurture our sense of humor even as we must be humble and open to be humbled.

Then and only then can we perhaps declare without contradiction that we may not be the best lawyers that money can buy, but we certainly have the best lawyers money can not buy.

V. CHALLENGE AND LOOKING FORWARD

We thus sound the clarion call to engage a legal and judicial system that remains basically an abstraction to many. We yearn for a justice system that is simple, fair, speedy, accessible and consistent. Rights victims in particular should be given concrete and expedient justice, not discombobulated, tedious and cumbersome processes that allow perpetrators to play the fiddle while the poor and exploited are burning.

And of course we had our share of triumphs and defeats, of trials and challenges, of plaudits and even diss. So, why are we doing this? Because oppression and repression are there. And as lawyers for the people, we will help conquer.

We will continue to fight and stand by the poor, the downtrodden, the voiceless. In triumph or defeat, we will keep on knocking and pounding, "pushing the parameters" of the limited and limiting prevailing law and the legal system, despite the frustrations, challenges, contradictions, and conflicts. 

Till we slay the dragons of penury and injustice.

We will not tire. Too many are dependent and depending on us. Will we fail them? And as a favorite client reminded us, the oppressors and exploiters do not get tired oppressing and exploiting, why should the oppressed and exploited get tired fighting? 

As RTC again said, struggling for justice is like pedaling a bike. You need to keep on pedaling or else you fall.

Today is indeed a remarkable milestone for the UPLM (and in a few days for NUPL as well). Let us celebrate and continue our noble duty for the people and produce more people’s lawyers the likes of Attys. Gapuz, Ilagan, Brizuela and other great trailblazing lawyers of Mindanao.

It is really a choice you made. Either be mere passing immaterial specks in the universe in the epoch of time, to be outlived even by styrofoams and plastics and buildings and monuments. Or make your life relevant and be boulders that will build a better society for the many.

Be the Davids of struggle against the Goliaths of oppression and exploitation.

We will fight back. 

We will go against the tide.

In the end, it is worth the choice. 

It is worth the fight.

It is worth the struggle.#

Mabuhay! Padayon!