Duplicitous

This is really strange: the same groups that used public health as justification for sharply raising excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco are now resisting any earmarking of the proceeds for PhilHealth and the public hospitals.

The ill-fated Recto version of the sin tax bill featured earmarks for public health as well as support for the tobacco farmers. Earmarking involved designating specific expenditure programs from whatever revenues raised from the sin taxes.

Those earmarked expenditures were taken off the Drilon version of the bill. The reason Sen. Joker Arroyo voted against that version is that there was no earmarking of the proceeds. There was no indication as to where the new revenues will go. That is a dangerous thing in an election year.

Now the pro-sin tax mob clamors for Sen. Ralph Recto and Sen. Ferdinand Marcos to inhibit from the bicameral conference committee that will iron out the final version of this revenue measure. They say that the two senators might make insertions in the final version. Given that the main contours of the version are already defined according to DOF specifications, the insertions could only be earmarks for public health that Recto wants and appropriations for displaced tobacco farmers that Marcos insists on.

There is some duplicity here. Those who pushed for sharp increases in sin taxes used the public health argument to justify their cause and assured farmers they will be protected from the adverse economic effects of the measure. Now they want to be sure Recto and Marcos will not be able to make the earmarks for hospitals and farmers.

Obviously the pro-sin tax crowd is now aware that the P40 billion additional revenues used as justification for the sharp spike in excise taxes is likely inflated. The BIR would not disclose the formula adopted to make such a dazzling projection. The revenue agency says it cannot disclose the formula (even to lawmakers) because it is covered by the confidentiality clause in the Tax Code.

That is a dumb excuse. What is involved here is not some trade secret but the very public basis for making revenue projections.

In the Recto version, the 1.97% historical increase in consumption over the years 1997 to 2011 was used as the basis for computing projected revenues. There is reason enough to doubt that because a sharp spike in prices will likely dampen demand (which is, in fact, the health excuse used to support higher sin taxes).

In the Drilon version, the BIR replaced the variables, stipulating a 5.5% consumption increase in 2012 and 6% in 2013. There is even less economic reason to make that assumption.

Very likely, the P40 billion additional revenue projection is a hoax. If billions are earmarked for public health and farmer support, the sin tax measure will end up revenue neutral for government. This is why it has suddenly become important to fight off the pro-people Recto/Marcos earmarks.

Injustice

Their lawyer put it rather well: brothers Joel and Mario Reyes are “fugitives from injustice.”

Arrest warrants for murder were issued on the recommendation of a second panel of prosecutors convened by the Secretary of Justice. The original panel found no basis to indict the two for the murder of Puerto Princesa broadcaster Gerry Ortega. Without establishing the first panel erred in its conclusion, the second panel recommended prosecution.

It was as if the second panel was convened precisely to pander to a lynching mob outside the proper judicial process demanding the heads of the brothers Reyes.

 The Court voided the recommendations of the second panel, finding that the DOJ Secretary committed  grave abuse of discretion in issuing Department Order 701 (which created the duplicate panel). The basis for the arrest warrant issued against the brothers Reyes is therefore likewise void — although the DOJ is asking the CA to reconsider its decision.

The first panel convened for the preliminary investigation into the murder of Gerry Ortega recommended charges be filed against alleged gunman Marlon Recamata. That panel found no evidence against the others dragged into the case for allegedly being part of a conspiracy, namely former Palawan governor Joel Reyes, Coron mayor Mario Reyes and former Marinduque governor Jose Carreon.

The only evidence linking the three are records of text messages exchanged. The contents of those text messages, however, could no longer be traced.

Ortega’s wife, Patria, filed a motion reopen the investigation, offering little additional evidence. That motion was denied by the original panel on September 2, 2011. The dates are important here.

On September 7, 2011, the DOJ Secretary issued Department Order 710 creating a new panel of prosecutors to reinvestigate the case. It was only on September 26, 2011 that Mrs. Ortega filed a petition with the DOJ to review the original panel’s recommendations.

When informed of the formation of a new panel, the respondents promptly opposed the move, pointing out that there was “no reversible error” in the recommendations of the original panel warranting the order for a new panel.

On October 28, 2011 the Reyes brothers with a petition for certiorari and for the issuance of a temporary restraining order against the new panel. In that petition, they argued that the additional evidence considered by the new panel was “neither new nor material that would alter the former panel of prosecutors.”

In its ruling, the Court of Appeals agreed with that argument. It is a ruling that strikes a blow for due process against the tide of politically driven prosecutions we saw the past two years.