Perspectives

“An Open Letter to  the  Filipino People” was  how  Carmen L. Puertollano titled her message  to President Benigno Aquino III. A US  agriculture department staff member for 35 years, she retired here in 2006.

We  have never met Puertollano, now of  Barangay  Kapitolyo,  Pasig  City.  But a  former neighbor during our Bangkok stint  with  the United  Nations forwarded  a  copy of her letter.  Sorry  if  the English translation below  does not do  justice to her  eloquent  Tagalog.

“We  Filipinos are  like the Israelites of Moses’ time,  after  their flight from Egypt. Did  they  thank  God?  No. Reklamo nang reklamo.

“The same thing is now  happening to us.  We should be grateful for having a President of integrity. P-Noy  is not a thief.  He will clean up the government and hold  accountable those who robbed us blind in the last decade.

“When  we voted for him, we knew what kind of a congressman and senator he was.   We voted for him because there was no one else  we could pick.  We also  saw he meant to uproot graft.

Remember, he was a  reluctant candidate.

“Now, some people complain incessantly. It’s been a year since P-Noy’s election, they bleat,  and ‘nothing has been done.’ Scores remain jobless.  Mahal ang presyo ng bilihin at iba’t iba pa.

“That’s not  Aquino’s fault.  Price inflation is worldwide and cuts across borders.  He has been at this job for just over a year. Give him time.

“Media  reported  crackdowns on graft in the Armed Forces,  Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office and the  recovery of funds from thieves in the previous regime.  Are these not achievements?  Who among our previous presidents did this?  No one!

“Thus, succeeding administrations turned to thievery with little hesitation. They tried to outdo  each other in fraud.  My impression is that P-Noy wants to uproot this curse.

“Are you not concerned that the  life and well-being of our President is threatened by the people whose interests he has affected.  Let us not fan this danger. God forbid that what  happened to his father could strike him down too.

“He is laying  his life on the line. We should pray that he will be given  wisdom by God, as Solomon was. If there is any way we can help him, let’s help him.

“Nakakaawa na ngang tingnan si  P-Noy.  Dati poging-pogi.  Ngayon?  Pogi  pa rin, pero nangayayat na,  at talagang kalbo  na  …

“But don’t fret,  Mr. President.  We believe in your integrity.  Filipinos who make reklamo nang reklamo can learn from their Bible what happened to carping Israelites.”

“Partial redemption” (Inquirer, 12/3/11)  spoke of  Rep. Mark Cojuangco  going  “ballistic on live TV,” Marco Antonio Luisito V. Sardillo III  e-mailed. Thanks to ABS-CBN’s  Karen Davila’s  invitation, he heard Cojuangco’s  apologia  for  his father Eduardo getting  16.2 million San Miguel Corp. shares, courtesy of  a Supreme Court majority.

“Earlier we  marched with protesting coco farmers from  San Pablo,” Sardillo wrote. “We  helped  draft the PCGG’s bid  for  reconsideration. That backdrop explains why we rebutted  Mark Cojuangco  saying, ‘The only question remaining is what good has Danding Cojuangco done for these farmers?’  Mark mocked  beggared farmers by saying his father  deserved a medal.  That was repulsive.

“There are  noteworthy points in  Justice Ma. Lourdes  Sereno’s dissent the interview did not have time to address. Some justices, for instance, claim  there was no ‘explicit definition of ill-gotten wealth.’

“Contrary to what the ponencia wrote, there is a definition of ill-gotten wealth. Justice  Sereno  reminded  the Court  it  adopted  a  definition of ill-gotten wealth in Republic vs Estate of Hans Menzi, penned by Justice Presbitero  Velasco. Section 1 of the PCGG rules also  defines ill-gotten wealth.

“Robbery  through  the coco levy  ‘is no longer just a mere question of law or of fact, but a simple and demonstrable truth.’  The farmers  had enough of us lawyers. If this fight is to succeed,  our farmers  must  reach out to the nation and the people.”

“Local  government officials  keep  demanding   ever larger  Internal Revenue Allotments,”  e-mailed lawyer Carmen  Montemayor of  Danao  City. Yet the  LGUs  failed to use P876.8 million  available in 2010 from the  20 Percent Local Development Fund, as  the  column  “Withered  hopes”  (Inquirer, 12/10/11) pointed out.

The year before, 102  LGUs  idled  P650.6 million. This fund is  precisely   designed as a safety net  for the poor. That Viewpoint commentary  noted:  “Quick to junket or crib allowances for themselves, many local officials  prove inept—or indifferent—to projects that relieve penury.”

“To cross-check, I leafed through the latest Commission on Audit  annual report (Vol. III ) on local   governments,” Montemayor said. “I paid special attention to the what Local Government  Secretary Jesse Robredo calls  the ‘most abused item in  the budget,’ namely,  the 20 Percent  Local Development  Fund.

“Expenditures  for personal  services and regular maintenance expenses  continued to be charged to this fund despite rules to the contrary, the COA found. Talisay  City, for example, billed this fund for P27.8 million of unimplemented  projects.  Marikina  funneled  15 percent  of its  P135.6-million fund  in violation of  rules. The COA  rapped  Davao Oriental’s knuckles earlier for misuse of  the fund LDF last year.  It  doled out P1.98 million, again  in violation of guidelines. So did Cabanatuan,  Cotabato,  Agusan del  Sur, Sulu, etc., etc.

“This is en-masse violation. And it  calls for tougher measures because the poor are the victims. Specifically,   I propose mandatory  cuts  from salaries of  local officials who  plunder  this fund.