Edwin Lacierda should really consider moonlighting as spokesman for Bureau of Corrections chief Ernesto Diokno.
When Antonio Leviste was found freely roaming the city far away from his jail cell, Diokno was quick to assign blame down the ranks. He summoned his underlings and dressed them down. On a quick tour of radio programs, Diokno loudly professed his adherence to “daang matuwid” — the standard incantation of Aquino loyalists — without specifying the reforms he had actually accomplished in his months on the job.
Diokno let it be known that when summoned by the President, he was not at all taken to task for what is an obvious lapse in the handling of prisoners. By means of exemplary spin management, the Bureau of Corrections director impressed on us all he was exculpated by his boss.
Consistent with the administration’s “strategic messaging”, Diokno likewise blamed the previous president for a policy providing more lenient treatment of prisoners aged 70 and older. It was as if he was saying that if Leviste so casually walked out of jail to see his dentist, the former president is to be blamed.
Until the Leviste affair broke out, Diokno managed to remain well under the radar. No controversy happened when the septuagenarian was appointed to the post, notwithstanding standard civil service practice stipulating mandatory retirement at 70. Diokno is 75. Advanced age should not be an issue if we expect the prisons director to be, to use the term now fashionable, laid back.
After the Leviste affair happened, legislators called on Diokno to resign on the principle of command responsibility. In his radio tour, the former police officer indicated he was not ready to give up his job.
If he is so bent on staying on, Diokno should at least tell us what he plans to do (if any) about our sloppy prisons administration system. The Leviste affair simply confirms what we know: that assassins routinely leave prison to undertake grisly projects with the perfect alibi that they were in jail when new murders happen and crime bosses continue managing their syndicates from their jail cells.
The beleaguered prisons boss so desperately needs Lacierda at this time. The presidential spokesman has shown great creativity in the task of assigning blame away from his principal.
After weeks of really hard thinking following poll results showing a drastic drop in the President’s approval ratings, Lacierda arrived at the earthshaking discovery that declining public confidence in their leader is due to columnists writing adverse evaluations of presidential acts and utterances. For this great discovery, Lacierda offers just one piece of evidence: one columnist claiming fights at the airport were delayed an hour because of the President when in fact they were delayed by only 15 minutes.
On the basis of that earthshaking discovery, Lacierda offers an equally earthshaking solution: columnists will be brought into the “information loop” so that they might see the light. Isn’t this the same loop where Lacierda tried to peddle the blatant lie that we did not boycott the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony at China’s behest?
Lacierda’s hard thinking notwithstanding, his earthshaking discovery overlooks a few plain facts. Only one percent of the population reads newspapers. Columnists, like most journalists, routinely log on the websites of the “communications group” to check out the funny things contained therein. Didn’t we spy on the Tweeter exchange between Ricky Carandang and Mai Mislang about how the wine served in Hanoi sucked?
Lacierda gives us usual suspects too much credit for holding hostage the minds of millions.
Recall
There is a flood of e-mail coming from Filipino groups in Kuwait decrying Labor Secretary Rosalinda Baldoz’s recall of the assistant labor attaché to that country, Ofelia Castro-Hudson.
It is not clear what motivated the Labor Secretary to issue the recall order on Hudson. Filipinos in Kuwait are concerned that all the many innovative programs initiated by Hudson to benefit our countrymen there could be left hanging by the recall.
Hudson received many commendations for her work in the Middle East. She transformed the Philippine Overseas Labor Office (POLO) office in Kuwait into a virtual second home for Filipinos there and a sanctuary for distressed OFWs. The transformation of the POLO premises in Kuwait was replicated elsewhere in the Middle East.
Over the past few years, I participated in private sector-funded rescue missions for distressed OFWs in the region. I saw firsthand the work of the POLO in the various Middle Eastern capitals. It was work beyond the call of duty and at great personal sacrifice of our diplomats.
Hudson, no doubt, is well-appreciated by the constituency she serves. Our ambassador to Kuwait Shulan Primavera, who served six presidents as a career diplomat, did not hesitate to lend his voice to the cause of retaining Hudson in her post. Sticking his neck out for a labor officer whose quality of work he knows only too well, Primavera describes the Labor Secretary’s recall order “a grave act of injustice.”
The ambassador attests to the fact that there is no single complaint on file against Hudson. All the letters on file are commendations for her good work. Filipino diplomats in the region are mystified by the recall order.
Perhaps Secretary Baldoz has reasons for ordering the recall of Hudson. She might want to unveil these reasons so that everyone familiar with the work of this particular labor representative may evaluate if they overshadow the arguments for keeping her in her post.