This is a reaction to the news item titled “Filipinos urged to fight for socioeconomic rights” (Inquirer.net, 7/7/13). According to the report, retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno, speaking at the general assembly of the National Union of Peoples Lawyers, said that everybody should take part in the endeavor to help the “roofless, the shirtless, and the shoeless in our society,” and the Philippine lawyers could do this by battling the traditional mindset on the enforcement of socioeconomic rights. It quoted Puno as saying that “One way is to exert all efforts to change our existing laws and decisions of the court still clinging to the traditional concept that the socioeconomic rights of our people cannot be demanded from the government as a matter of right.”
Based on my personal experience and information gathered from the Internet, to which only three out of 10 Filipinos have access, it is not only change but also fairness and justness in the implementation of existing laws and decisions of the court, or any concerned government agency, that are needed in order to ensure the enforcement of socioeconomic rights. One of these rights is the government retirees’ social security, which is being protected under retirement laws administered by the Government Service Insurance System.
The GSIS was established under Commonwealth Act No. 186 of 1936. This law has been subjected to several amendments—Republic Act 660 of 1951, RA 1616 of 1957, RA 4968 of 1967, Presidential Decree 1146 of 1977 and RA 8291 of 1997.
The existence of several amended retirement laws and related policies could lead to certain oversight in their implementation. Therefore, the lack of information on the part of retirees and the absence of omnibus implementation guidelines could make aggrieved retirees, who petition the GSIS for the grant of the full benefits under the law, vulnerable to unfair decisions. This could happen if the GSIS lawyers who are directly involved in the adjudication of claims on retirement and other social insurance benefits have the mindset that once payment has been made, although prejudicial to the socioeconomic rights of the retirees, the GSIS is no longer obligated to grant the balance between what was received and the expected full benefit.
It would be good if the Committee on Claims and Legal Service Group’s recommendation, before it is acted on by the GSIS Board of Trustees (BOT), pass through the BOT’s Legal Oversight Committee, whose function is to “further strengthen the pursuit for just and equitable decision-making processes and protect the interest of members and stakeholders of the state pension fund, particularly those relating to legal matters.”
—EDMUNDO ENDEREZ,
eenderez@gmail.com