Undiplomatic moves

The Department of Foreign Affairs, by its nature, is generally a conservative institution.

It goes by the books starting from the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations adopted in 1961 to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations adopted in 1963. This was further cemented by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or Between International Organizations adopted in 1969.

The operative word in international relations is protocol.

And that is one thing the Department of Foreign Affairs seems to be lacking based on the controversies it had generated of late.

The mess, apparently, had been started by an interpretation of an appointment co-terminus with the appointing authority, which in this case is no less than the President of the Philippines.

The President is assumed to step down on June 30 this year.

If she goes, then all her appointees, except those protected by the Constitution, go down with her. I believe her appointees also assume this eventuality as well.

However, lately, the DFA saw some movements of personnel in major posts of assignment which cast into doubt the logic and rationale of the appointments.

Take for instance China.

Nobody can figure out why Ambassador Sonia Brady will have to be recalled prematurely only to be replaced by Ambassador Francisco Benedicto in less than six months.

Both persons are political appointees – and in the case of Ambassador Benedicto, he had served four Presidents non-stop as ambassador, first to Singapore, then the Republic of Korea, then Canada and later on India.

With Ambassador Benedicto being that popular, I am sure he will still be reappointed ambassador by the next President whoever he is.

Nobody is questioning the capability of the persons appointed or recalled. All of them are good and all of them perhaps deserve to be ambassador.

Take another case, this time Italy.

Although Ambassador Philippe Lhuillier had been in Rome  for the past 11 years, he is also prepared to go home on June 30. What was very surprising though is his immediate recall and the immediate appointment of Rep. Antonio Cuenco.

Cuenco, however, did not make it to the Commission on Appointments and the DFA had to retreat and to cover the hole by appointing in Cuenco’s place Ambassador Romeo Manalo, who is currently serving as Consul General in Frankfurt, Germany.

While Cuenco’s appointment is perceived as a repayment of political debt, one begins to wonder how the administration treats its supporters such as Lhuillier himself. Here is one guy who goes out of his way to help the Filipinos in Italy, and in the process, help project a good image for the administration but in the end finds himself being stabbed in the back 10 times over. In this case, Lhuillier gets an award from the Italian government and a kick from the Philippine government.

Here comes Germany.

Based on newspaper accounts, Ambassador Delia Albert was called back home to be given the “Most Outstanding Filipino Woman in Global Diplomacy” Award by President Arroyo herself.

In the process of receiving the award, Ambassador Delia was informed that she is being replaced by Ambassador Alfonso Yuchengco.

I am very sure, in the ceremony, Ambassador Albert and the President exchanged kisses. I am just wondering what were in their minds at that time. 

Nobody is questioning the prerogative of the President to appoint her ambassadors. That is her privilege.

However, it is a very undiplomatic if the President or Secretary of Foreign Affairs Alberto Romulo does not inform the host country first of their intention to recall their ambassadors in due time and second to propose a replacement to these ambassadors and get their approval.

Recalling an ambassador, and appointing another one, is not like firing your household help or replacing your driver.

There are protocols involved, non-observance of which reflects on the good name of the country.

Since the recallees are not persona non grata, it must be coming as a shock to the host country that their guest is abruptly told to pack his or her bags for no reason at all.

What is worse, the host country is being dumped appointees whom they have not approved in the first place.

For other countries, announcements of ambassadors are made very carefully in order not to ruffle any sensitivity.

The Philippines may be the only country that flaunts its insensitivity to such matters.

VOM executive arrested

Former Rep. Jaime Zarraga was arrested by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) agents last week on the strength of numerous warrants for his arrest in connection with illegal recruitment and estafa charges. 

Based on the tally of criminal cases from NBI records, Zarraga is wanted for 95 counts of estafa, 636 counts of violating recruitment laws of which the bulk was for collecting sums not authorized by law, and 21 large scale and syndicated illegal recruitment. The NBI said Zarraga could not avail of his temporary liberty while his cases for large scale and syndicated illegal recruitment are being heard as the cases are non-bailable in nature. 

NBI records show that before NBI operatives collared him on March 29 right after testifying in a case in one of the Regional Trial Courts of Pasig City as he exited the courtroom. He was the principal witness for his company VOM Broadcasting Corporation in a case he filed against the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) in connection with the agency’s planned assignment of the frequencies earlier assigned to VOM. 

The same NBI records bared that the charges against Zarraga was pending before various courts in Makati, Manila, and Pasig cities as well as in the provincesof Nueva Vizcaya and Iloilo and remained unserved or outstanding before his arrest last week.   

According to the NBI, most of the warrants were issued by the court way back in 1996, or 14 years ago.

The NBI failed to serve the warrant for 14 years because Zarraga had disappeared and was thought to have flown overseas to hide as a fugitive. 

It was only recently that the NBI discovered that Zarraga is, in fact, in Metro Manila after its operatives had come across media reports identifying him as the representative of broadcast entities Voice of Manila (VOM) Broadcasting Corp. and Exodus Broadcasting. VOM claims that NTC cannot take back and reassign the frequencies earlier assigned to it because they still have a provisional authority (PA) and claimed it had rights on the frequencies. NTC, in turn, argued that the frequencies have been reallocated to a different service five years ago and may be assigned to telecommunications companies for broadband wireless access use.

For comments, e-mail at [email protected]