Lack of FOI bill only adds to the confusion

Last Thursday, we attended the 50th anniversary of the Cebu Citizens-Press Council (CCPC) at the Marcelo Fernan Press Center where Cebu City Councilor Edu Rama appraised us that he has filed an ordinance that seeks to apply locally the provisions of President Duterte’s Executive Order #2 of July 23, 2016. It is an initiative encouraged by Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) in a joint memorandum-circular of Oct. 11, 2018, which PCOO pushed anew in its 2019 Campus Caravan-Cebu leg. Also with us were a team pushing for a Press Council from Timor-Leste, near Indonesia who wanted to know more about the happenings of media in the Philippines.

It was then that we were told about a public hearing held on a similar FOI proposal filed by then Councilor Jose “Joey” Daluz III. The Council passed Councilor Daluz’s ordinance but then Mayor Tomas Osmeña vetoed it, saying he would wait for the FOI bill to be approved by Congress. CCPC shares the belief that a local FOI ordinance now will improve public and media access to, and sharing by the government of, information of public interest. The ordinance may be easily adjusted to the law, which, given the pace of legislation, may take Congress many more years to pass.

Lately we read in the Philippine STAR news that the chief of the government’s lead communication arm Presidential Communications Operations Office Secretary Martin Andanar has reiterated his call for the passage of a freedom of information (FOI) law as some sectors are criticizing the failure of the Office of the Ombudsman and the Office of the President to release a copy of President Duterte’s statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN). 

Secretary Andanar said the exercise of state powers “can be placed under the lens of strict scrutiny through transparency and Freedom of Information, as meaningfully espoused by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, in order to be an effective tool for governance, must be implemented across the bureaucracy the executive, legislature, judiciary, including the local government units.” This was said during the FOI Awards 2019 in Makati last Wednesday. Call it a coincidence that the CCPC also discussed the very same thing last Thursday in Cebu. So is something cooking to finally have the FOI bill approved as promised by Pres. Duterte during the Presidential campaign? Abangan!

Apparently we learned that the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) reported about the failure of the Office of the Ombudsman and the Office of the President to provide the media a copy of the President’s SALN. PCIJ said it was the first time in the last 30 years that a President has not released his or her SALN.

However Presidential Spokesman Salvador Panelo insisted that President Rodrigo Duterte is not mandated to release a copy of his Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) to the public. The law only requires the President to file his SALN, which is under the custody of the Office of the Ombudsman. He added, “If he is hiding anything, he would have not filed any SALN, as it is the job of the Ombudsman to release the President’s SALN.” Sec. Panelo added that the Palace would not interfere with the work of the Ombudsman, which is an independent body. It was reported in the past that Pres. Duterte’s net worth stood at P28.540 million in 2017, up P1.1 million from P27.428 million in 2016 when he assumed the presidency. Now who can verify this report? The Ombudsman?

*      *      *

We read that the House of Representatives may convene as a constituent assembly (con-ass) next month to consider four Charter change (Cha-cha) proposals endorsed by its committee on constitutional amendments. Truth to tell, I never trusted the House of Representatives who are all politicians fooling around with our Constitution especially using the constituent assembly provisions in the Constitution.

Cagayan de Oro City Rep. Rufus Rodriguez, committee chairman, said that he would ask the House rules committee and the chamber’s leadership to schedule plenary deliberations on his panel’s recommendations.

He said, “I will suggest that we should already tackle our committee’s proposals as a constituent assembly upon resuming sessions on Jan. 20 after our month-long Christmas recess.” He added that the Constitution does not require the House and the Senate to convene together in a joint session as a con-ass to consider proposed constitutional amendments and that the Charter only requires separate voting and each chamber must obtain the three-fourths vote of all its members to approve any proposed amendments.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]