Saturday, August 14, 2010

SALN—a weapon of good governance


CALIFORNIA, United States—Soon after the dictator Ferdinand Marcos and his family fled to the US in the aftermath of the 1986 People Power uprising, the Philippine comedic duo of Noel Trinidad and Subas Herrera (“Champoy”) embarked on a comedy tour of the US.

One line that always drew howls of laughter was Subas’s comment about how much he felt right at home in the US "because this is where our taxes have been spent."

Subas was referring to the widespread news in the US press that Imelda Marcos had purchased five prime Manhattan properties such as the Crown Building as well as the vast Lindenmere estate in Long Island. It was also reported that she had bought about 200 choice properties in California including at least 30 holdings in Los Angeles.

How much did Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos plunder during their two decades of rule from 1966 to 1986? Estimates may vary from $20B to $50B but suffice to say that when they began, the Philippines was one of the top economies of Asia and when their kleptocratic reign ended, the country was reduced to one of the region’s most impoverished. Despite massive evidence of their brazen plunder, none of the Marcoses have ever been convicted of corruption.

Even the $310M worth of jewelry seized from Imelda Marcos by the Cory Aquino government in 1986 was ordered returned back to Imelda by Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales on June 13, 2009 because he concluded that the government could not prove that it was illegally obtained.

This was not the intent of the forfeiture law (Republic Act 1379) that was enacted on June 18, 1955. Although it has been ignored, especially during the Marcos era, the law allows the Philippine government to forfeit any property found to have been unlawfully acquired by any public officer or employee. This means that "property acquired by any public officer or employee during his/her incumbency which is manifestly out of proportion to his/her salary" can be seized by the government.
To implement this 1955 law, Congress passed the SALN law, Republic Act 3019, popularly known as the Statement of Assets and Liabilities and Net worth law on August 17, 1960 requiring "every public officer, within thirty days after assuming office and, thereafter, on or before the fifteenth day of April following the close of every calendar year (to submit) a statement of the amounts and sources of his income, the amounts of his personal and family expenses and the amount of income taxes paid for the next preceding calendar year."

Half a century later, the SALN law lies moribund because there has been no mechanism to verify the SALNs and no penalty for committing perjury in the SALNs.

An example of the weakness of this law was presented on national TV on September 3, 2009 when GMA son Representative Mikey Arroyo was asked by Winnie Monsod to explain how his SALN could show a net worth of P5 million ($100,000) in 2002 and P99 million ($2.2M) in 2008. Mikey’s answer: “You know, first of all, I got married. I received lots of gifts. Then in the election campaign, somehow, many people helped me.” Is it legal to pocket the money given by campaign donors?
In that TV interview, Mikey reluctantly acknowledged that he partly owned the property at 1655 Beach Park Boulevard in Foster City in the San Francisco Bay Area in California. Although the $1.32M residential property was listed in San Mateo County records in 2009 as owned by his wife, Angela Montenegro Macapagal, it was not listed in the 2008 and 2009 SALNs of Mikey Arroyo.


Despite his admission, Mikey still asserted that there was no proof that he violated the SALN law.
Winnie responded: “You know what, the law is very clear. If there is a problem, when there is a question of unexplained wealth here, the burden of proof is with you, with the government employee. It can’t be that (we) have to prove that (you) are guilty. No, the government employee should prove that he is innocent. That’s precisely the whole objective of having a statement of assets and liabilities.”
Representative Mikey Arroyo, who returns to Congress as the representative of the Ang Galing party list of the marginalized tricycle drivers, technically complied with the law when he filled out his SALN forms and submitted them. But how is the veracity of his SALN verified? And what happens once it is established that he has other undisclosed (Foster City) assets?
Responsibility for the enforcement of the SALN law rests with the Office of the Ombudsman headed by Merceditas Gutierrez, a GMA appointee who was the Ateneo Law School classmate of former First Gentleman Mike Arroyo. Understandably, she has shown no desire to investigate the Arroyos.

The Ombudsman would have to be compelled by a court order to enforce the SALN. Unfortunately, the Philippine Supreme Court—all GMA appointees—has exempted itself and the entire judicial branch from having to comply with the SALN law, a clear violation of a law enacted on February 20, 1989 (RA 6713) that expressly includes members of the judiciary as among those required to submit SALNs.

When the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) wanted to investigate reports that certain judges were charging P500,000-P750,000 to issue a restraining order or injunction, it could not obtain the SALNs of the judges because of the Supreme Court's exemption ruling.
After 50 years, the SALN law may be on life support but it isn’t dead yet. Since Congress will not likely pass any law that will put more teeth into SALN, President Noynoy Aquino should just sign an executive order designating officials in each agency of government to compile the SALNs of public officials and to review and verify them and post them online. The Department of Justice should then go after the public officials with unexplained wealth and place the onus on them to prove their innocence as Winnie explained to Mikey. That’s the way the SALN law was envisioned 50 years ago this week. It’s time to finally enforce it and use it as a weapon of good governance.

Send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or mail them to the Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco or call 415.334.7800

Published in Philippine Daily Inquirer August 15, 2010

Friday, August 13, 2010

Survey finds Cebu City 'most honest'

CEBU City was awarded as the most honest and transparent city among metro growth centers outside Metro Manila.
It also fared well in a survey on the quality of life, cost of doing business, dynamism of the local economy, human resources and training, infrastructure, and responsiveness of local government units (LGUs) to business needs.
Cebu City, along with Dagupan and Cagayan de Oro, was named the most competitive city outside Metro Manila in the Philippine Cities Competiveness Ranking Project 2009 (PCCRP) of the Asian Institute of Management (AIM) Policy Center.
Cebu City was also recognized as the Best in Disaster Preparedness, Best in the Dynamism of its Local Economy and Best in Infrastructure.
According to the AIM Policy Center website, Cebu City figured in all the award categories, which included Best Compliance with Government-Mandated Plans, Entrepreneurs’ Award for Most Supportive to MSMEs, Entrepreneurs’ Award for Most Honest and Transparent Cities, Dynamism of Local Economy, Infrastructure, and Quality of Life.
“I’m very proud of this and I’m proud our city government. At least, I have something to show to our critics and I can just laugh at them,” said former Cebu City mayor Tomas OsmeƱa, who received the award last week.
The PCCRP study was based on government data, a perception survey among business owners, and interviews with local chief executives and local business group’s representative.
It also classified the cities into three groups: metropolitan growth centers, growth centers and emergent cities.
According to the summary of findings and a report published by Newsbreak Online, Cebu City bested Davao in the metro growth center category, which refers to cities with an average of P3.05 billion total income and average population of 1.08 million.
The city received the Entrepreneurs’ Award for “Most Honest and Transparent in its Dealings” among metro growth cities.
It was credited for disclosing financial accountability, as well as using participation in its planning and budgeting processes.
Cebu City was also named the top performer in disaster preparedness.
It was commended for its City Disaster Coordinating Council, disaster preparedness plan and documents on tracking of informal settlers. It also met the minimum ratio for the number of firemen for every 100,000 residents.
The city also bested other cities for its dynamic economy, measured in terms of per capita income, number of commercial and universal banks, building construction area, membership in local chambers of commerce and industry, access to finance, level of foreign interest, number of Department of Tourism accredited establishments and historical sites.
It bested Davao City in infrastructure for the reduced travel time to its seaport, reduced travel time for road maintenance, commercial water connections, subscribed telephone lines and reliability of water service.
Cagayan de Oro, meanwhile, topped in the growth centers category, which included the cities of General Santos, Baguio, Lapu-Lapu, Zamboanga, Olongapo, Batangas, Iloilo, Bacolod and Mandaue. These cities have an average income of P1.2 billion and population 421,165.
Dagupan City is the most competitive among the emergent cities.
It bested the cities of Angeles, Butuan, Cotabato, Lucena, Naga, Legaspi, Pagadian, Puerto Princesa, Ormoc, Iligan, Tagum, and San Fernando in La Union, Surigao, Tuguegarao, Tacloban and Santiago.
AIM conducted the study with support from the United States Agency for International Development and the German foundation gtz. (GAC)

Published in the Sun.Star Cebu newspaper on August 14, 2010.