It’s easy, fruitful for graft convicts to resume office

An urgent note from reader Hector of Panay: “Boracay, the most fun in the Philippines, earns billions of pesos for government and tourist businesses. Yet it does not have a single pedestrian lane, no CCTV camera on the major streets. Its lone hospital is without first-class facilities and sufficiently trained personnel. Thousands of utility vehicle and motorcycle owners dump used oil on the ground when changed.”

*      *      *

They always return to the scene of the crime. So 271 convicted grafters ran last May for elective posts in the government they once scammed. And 244 of them won, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism says. How can such happen, at a 90-percent win rate at that?

Is it because of weak laws? Election commissioner Christian Robert Lim says felons, even grafters, are not automatically stripped of suffrage. They may run for President, VP, senator, or congressman five years after sentencing. For provincial, city, municipal, or barangay posts, two years after. That’s how Romeo Jalosjos, in prison for rape, was able to win again and again as congressman – each time running from behind bars.

Is there no exception? Well, some laws, like on plunder, do mete perpetual bar from public office. But then, the heinous criminal can be pardoned. Convicted for plunder, ex-President Joseph Estrada was granted clemency by President Gloria Arroyo. That allowed him to run and win last May as Manila city mayor.

Is it fair? One isn’t considered a convict till the Supreme Court’s final judgment. So indictees, even in no-bail heinous offenses, can run. Case in point: Arroyo, detained while on trial for plunder and election sabotage, has run and won twice for Congress, also from jail. Not guilty unless proven otherwise, 504 winners in last May’s election are under trial in the Sandiganbayan anti-graft court, the PCIJ notes.

So, what will it take for heinous criminals and indictees to not sit? There’s the Election Code that governs poll candidacies. Non-submission of campaign contribution-expense reports within a month from election means forfeiture of the post. So murder, rape, kidnapping, robbery, arson, plunder, or poll sabotage may not bar them from elective office, but missing the report-filing deadline can. The law is soft, but it is the law.

Maybe Congress should enact a prohibition on convicted grafters from ever holding office. Then again, will lawmakers do that? If they defy the constitutional ban on their political dynasties, more so they will reject any ban on their return from conviction.

There are two sides to the coin: the voter and the voted. Sorry grafters return to the government maybe because they want to make it up to the electorate. But that’s romanticizing the felons. Actually they return for personal gain: to retake political influence and old rackets. It’s so easy to do; spouses, siblings, or offspring kept the seats warm, for their resumption of kickbacks from government contracts.

Voters, meantime, don’t ostracize returning grafters; they adore them. Remember the five M’s that Filipino voters look for in their officials, in this order, with the first three alike: malalapitan (approachable), mabait (generous), matulungin (helpful), matalino (wise), malinis (honest). Right on Election Day voters demand to see such traits – in the form of cash for their votes. Returnees are more likely than first-timers to comply.

Ousted in 1986, three Marcoses and two Romualdezes are back in power: one a senator, two Congress reps, one the Ilocos Norte governor, and one the Tacloban city mayor. One Ryan Luna was able to run for mayor in Abra while hiding from murder raps. A Cipriano Violago ran for mayor in Bulacan although indicted for killing a cop. A Jose Rodriguez ran in San Marcelino while on trial for rape of a 12-year-old. Ronald Singson of Ilocos Sur is returning to Congress after jail time in Hong Kong for drugs. At least six wives of detained Ampatuan massacrer-brothers and -cousins won again as mayors in Maguindanao.

*      *      *

Can’t the government do something to ease the burden on overseas workers and their medical screeners?

Last month Malaysia imposed a new rule on Filipinos who wish to work there: biometrics, specifically online fingerprinting. The Malaysian ambassador to Manila called for a meeting of the screeners, to introduce the Malaysian systems supplier Bestinet.

Screeners must buy Bestinet’s software for $8,000 (P344,000), even though they have nothing to do with Malaysian biometrics testing at airports. Job applicants must pay Bestinet’s processing fee, $15 (P645).

The forced selling will drive the screeners to the poorhouse, for they (170 or so clinics) process only about 11,000 workers to Malaysia per year. They cannot just pass on the cost to the recruits, because of strict rules of the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration.

Incidentally only 15 of those clinics are accredited to process the million or so applicants to Saudi Arabia. Why such monopoly; who in the labor and health departments is making money out of it?

*      *      *

Reader Joy R. reacts to my piece about “freeloader legislating” (7 June 2012): “The Kasambahay (Housemaid) Law is an example, earning the authors brownie points, but encumbering the helpers. Because of the additional expenses and stiff conditions on employers, many in our (lower-middle-class) subdivision are letting go of stay-in maids, opting for live-outs. That way they won’t need to pay for government social security, health care, and housing. Pity the maids who as live-outs now would have to pay for house rent, food, utilities, toiletries, etc., that they used to get for free.”

*      *      *

Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m., DWIZ, (882-AM).

E-mail: [email protected]

Archives: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jarius-Bondoc/1376602159218459