What a Joke!

courtesy of Jacob Mentz
The future of our country depends on each election.

As our nation inches ever so closely to the 2013 midterm elections, I dread the choices our countrymen must face. There are a lot of familiar faces, to be sure, but it's almost like there is no choice. It does seem that a lot of things are changing for the better. 

COMELEC Chair Sixto Brilliantes hit the nail on the head when he called the party-list system "a joke." It really is, seeing as many of these groups do not represent the marginalized in our society. Since when are the people from entire regions in the Philippines "marginalized?" Only in many politicians' heads, I assume. 

The whole point of the party-list system is pretty noble. It aims to give the truly marginalized of society (the disabled, the poor, etc.) a voice in Congress. The problem is, many of those who are elected into position do not really represent the marginalized. How can they, when some of them have millions of pesos in net worth? The notion that they represent the poor is simply misguided. 

This misused system is sometimes used as a loophole to get around the constitutional ban on dynasties (yes, if you know how to read, you'll find out that the concept of dynasties is unconstitutional). Indeed, the Philippine government is treated as a business by some families, many of whom have more than 10 members in elective offices across the country. 

I guess that there's nothing we citizens can do about this, at least by way of legal strategy. Congress simply has refused to enact an enabling law that would really punish dynasties. The only reason these families flourish is that they know they can get away with it. 

We can, however, be wise with whom we choose on that 2013 ballot. We can choose to be smart and avoid those who try to represent people whom they could not be more different from. We can choose to avoid people whose entire families are already in position. 

Otherwise, let's not kid ourselves into calling this country a democracy. Because we really don't have a choice. Unless there are valid choices, there really is no democracy in this country. 

The Death of Freedom

Freedom of speech is one of the most sacred freedoms we have in the Philippines. It has toppled dictators, exposed wrongdoing, and spread a lot of good. 

On September 12, 2012, freedom of speech -- over the internet, at least -- died in the Philippines. 

The Online Cybercrime Prevention Act, Republic Act 10175, was signed into law on that day. Now, most provisions in this law I agree with. We do need to ban child pornography, among others, and stiff penalties must be given to those who patronize such things. 

However, a late insertion to this bill made online speech LIBEL. What happened to freedom of expression? It is currently being stifled by the people themselves who do not wish to go to jail. 

You say that it makes sense? It is not logical at all to impose harsh penalties on those who express themselves on social networking sites -- the same penalties meted out to professional journalists. Surely a rant cannot be called a crime, now can it? Well, apparently, now it can. 

Unless the Supreme Court steps up and declares this provision UNCONSTITUTIONAL. 

Here's Article III, Section 4 of the Philippine Constitution: 

No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.

How then can people say that the law in its entirety is constitutional? It isn't. When you threaten the masses with jail time if they say that a certain person has a certain negative quality or has the appearance of wrongdoing (even if it may be true), you are stifling freedom of expression. 

We are being told to trust the government to do its job and to protect civil liberties. REALLY. Do you really expect us to trust the government? With everything happening in the government, it simply isn't realistic. 

Without online freedom, we cannot share many articles we find online. We cannot comment on those articles without the risk of landing in jail. We cannot expose those who try to get away with a lot of wrongdoing -- simply because we citizens who want our country to be better than it is do not want to go to jail or pay stiff penalties. Our country is important, but we love our families too much to go to jail. 

If someone incited rebellion online, then that may be completely different. That's subversion. That's one step below direct armed rebellion, and in fact might lead to that. Now people who say THAT should be put in jail. 

Aside from this, though, people should not be prevented from expressing their disgust for different public officials and powerful rich people. People should be allowed to praise the positive and despise the negative. This is how change happens. 

Without freedom of speech, we are just like repressive regimes in China, Iran, and North Korea. We would be reviving something that existed when we were under martial law, when those who spoke out mysteriously disappeared, never to be seen again. 

Do we really want that distinction for our country?