The Trillanes Caper

[This came from a reader. Slightly edited]

There was really a planned mammoth rebellion scheduled for Nov. 30, 2007, to culminate in the toppling of GMA and take over of the government. It was supposed to comprise of ERAP minions, Bayan etc., Trillanes and other opposition groups. The inevitable church personalities were to put the church’s stamp on the attempted coup — Bishops Labayen and Antonio Tobias and running priest Robert Reyes. But then Trillanes with his messianic complex and believe sa sarili ego, feeling that on Nov. 30 he would be only one of those in the coup d'etat, decided to preempt his cohorts and staged that walk out [para sya lang ang hero] on Thursday. That's why nag iisa lang sya. The Philippine National Police was prepared for the Nov. 30 mass rally but was caught flatfooted by Trillanes' walkathon to Manila Peninsula. But ABS-CBN was tipped off, which explains the presence of Ces Drilon at the Regional Trial Court and Pinky Webb at the hotel.

Trillanes assumed that there would be negotiations again while he was holed out there but GMA gave orders to DILG Puno to finish this standoff. Thus the tear gas and the tank that rammed the door of Manila Pen [for impact].

Trillanes surrendered to tear gas!

Mini-Revolt

Thursday, Nov. 29, 2007

As this is being written, Gen. Lim and Sen. Trillanes, walked out of the Makati trial court with their armed military escorts to Manila Peninsula Hotel in Makati. Gen. Lim and Sen. Trillanes are under trial for rebellion.

Gen. Lim read a prepared statement calling for the overthrow of the duly constituted government under President Gloria M. Arroyo while ex-Vice President T. Guingona listened intently. Two Catholic bishops are reportedly on their way to lend support to the malcontents.

This “stunt” is insulting to the taxpaying public who pays their salaries. We have had enough of people like them trying to put our country in chaos and who think they know all the answers. We are for a healthy opposition but this is ridiculous.

Indecent Haste

“HLURB takes over BF homeowners’ group… based on the complaint of a former president who alleged that “there were missing funds and equipment and other anomalies during the current term of the current United BF Homeowners’ Association President Celso Reyes.” [PhilStar, Sunday, Nov. 4, 2007].

You have just read a big problem with media. What was reported, whether right or wrong, could not be taken back.

The media can inform or entertain but they can also shape your opinions. And they can be used by powerful people to seduce, persuade and often lie to you. That’s dishonest, to paraphrase a respected journalist.

Journalism is a business, and the business of business is to make money and those who can best do that are the charlatans and opportunists. Come across or nothing gets printed or broadcasted, that’s “envelopemental” journalism.

Let’s get the story straight.

The sanction against the board of directors and the forcible takeover of the United BF Homeowners’ Association clubhouse was effected by a sheriff, several Parañaque policemen, about 50 civilian security units from the office of the Mayor, and a bunch of Barangay tanods. The word “overkill” is not even appropriate for this outrageous incident.

It is unusual to observe law enforcers in record numbers; hindi na kailangan sunduin pa [no need to pick them up] by homeowners calling for assistance. Law enforcers are blind to frequent broad daylight robbery-holdups and break-ins in the commercial areas and residential enclaves.

Homeowners are learning to leave at home their wallets, credit cards, expensive jewelries and cell phones when dining out or going to hair salons, a risky proposition at this time. This deplorable situation is the consequence of the mayor’s action of opening the main gates of the subdivision to the general public and prohibiting the posting of security guards at the main gates. It is ironic that his own brother and sister-in-law were victims of motorcycle-riding criminals in broad daylight robbery-holdup while having lunch in a restaurant.

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that the HLURB directive appointing a management committee over a duly elected board of directors was flawed. The disqualification of the complainant during the recent election precipitated the filing of the suit. The case against the Election Committee was an election controversy, pure and simple. How can the HLURB Arbiter issue any directive, let alone bind the Association and its Board of Directors, who are not even impleaded parties to the case?

The sheriff effected the takeover of the clubhouse without a writ of execution and the HLURB Arbiter practically re-wrote the rule in ordering his decision executory despite the perfection of an appeal. Section 4 Rule XVI of the HLURB Rules provide that the “filing of an appeal in accordance with these rules shall have the effect of automatically staying the execution of any decision or order of the Arbiter or Executive Committee, unless otherwise provided in these rules.”

Such indecent haste and “garapalan” [bare-faced] violation of the rule of law merits congressional investigation.

Like the soldiers in the Ninoy Aquino slay case who were criminally convicted, the classic defense of these modern Pontius Pilates is that they were “just following orders.” When will our law enforcers learn that following unjust or unlawful order is not a defense for a criminal act or an excuse for wrong doing?

A Sad Commentary On American Justice

The U.S. Supreme Court slammed the door on Filipino-Americans born in the Philippines. By its denial to review the appellate court’s decision, the Court closed the window of opportunity to address a wider issue of national importance which cuts to the very core of America, its loyalties and the allegiance of its citizens.

The case arose when the [former] Immigration and Naturalization Service [“INS”] decided after 2 years that they committed an “error” in issuing the certificate, and after protracted proceedings, cancelled James’s [not his real name] certificate of citizenship. After exhausting administrative remedies, James brought an action for declaratory judgment and the district court declared him a U.S. citizen.

James, a “natural” son [his parents married in 1958] of a U.S. citizen father and a U.S. national mother, was born in the Philippines in 1931 during the territorial period [1898-1946]. After his father died in 1966, James sought to establish claim to U.S. citizenship, being frustrated by the interpretation given by the Department of State. He finally prevailed and was issued a certificate of citizenship in 1992 and thereafter his U.S. citizenship passport. His wife was admitted as a lawful permanent resident and resides with him, as well as his youngest children who immigrated as minors.

On appeal, the appellate court ruled that “residence in the Philippines during the territorial period does not qualify as residence ‘in the United States’ and ‘the rights of citizenship shall not descend to children whose fathers never resided in the United States’ under Revised Statutes §1993,” effectively reversing the decision of the district court.

Revised Statutes §1993, originally enacted in 1855 when the U.S. was not yet a colonial power provides that “All children heretofore born or hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were or may be at the time of their birth citizens thereof, are declared to be citizens of the United States, but the rights of citizenship shall not descend to children whose fathers never resided in the United States.”

Under strict interpretation of the statute, children of U.S. citizens born in the Philippines during the territorial period were not born outside the “jurisdiction” of the United States, and therefore, the statute does not apply. Yet they were not born “in the United States” under Article XIV, and could not gain citizenship in that manner. In other words, the absurd situation arises that these children, disenfranchised of their citizenship, could be considered to have fallen through a “statutory crack,” an aberration in law.

While children falling in the “statutory crack” may have been disqualified under the literal reading of the statute, the agency [INS] did not engage in the literal practice of disqualification for many years. Instead, U.S. agencies applied or interpreted or “constructed” Revised Statutes §1993 provisions to include those children as citizens. Likewise, residence in the outlying possessions was deemed sufficient to transmit citizenship to a child. James’s father, born and lived all his life in the Philippines, derived his U.S. citizenship at birth from his father [James’s grandfather] despite not being born outside the “jurisdiction” of the United States. R.W. Flournoy, Assistant to the Legal Adviser, Department of State, at the hearings before the House of Representatives, Subcommittee of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 76^th Congress, H1073-6, Nationality Act of 1940, testified:

“We have been holding in the State Department for years that, notwithstanding the peculiar language of section 1993 of the Revised Statutes, which relates to a child born outside the territory and jurisdiction of the United States, we have been holding that that is applicable to a child born in one of the outlying possessions; otherwise those children would be aliens.” [Revise And Codify Nationality Laws, pp. 55-56].

James’s entire life has been literally turned upside down by this event – cancellation or revocation of citizenship – when in truth and in fact the sole basis of the upheaval is a purported “error” that INS freely admitted in the application or “construction” of Revised Statutes §1993 which, if taken strictly, does not even apply to him. The liberties taken by INS in reading into the Statute a “construction” which excludes James from his citizenship is not only inequitable and unfair under the circumstances, but is at cross purposes with the substance and intent of the law itself. James in truth has no chance under the Statute, not because he is disqualified by it, but because it does not apply to him. What the INS asked the court to uphold is the application, interpretation or “construction” the INS itself gives to the Statute, which unfairly disqualifies James.

The Department of State since 1912 has held that Revised Statutes §1993 apply as of the date of birth, to child born out of wedlock in the outlying possessions of the United States, provided paternity is established. The Attorney General sustained the “construction” in an opinion of April 7, 1920. [32 Op. Atty. Gen. 162]. Ironically, the same Attorney General now holds that residence in the Philippines during the territorial period does not satisfy the residence of the Statute. Since the appellate court has sustained a new statutory “construction”, will the Attorney General cancel the certificate of citizenship “illegally” issued to illegitimate children born in the Philippines since 1912?

Within In re Mendiola [647 F. Supp. 839 (S.D.N.Y 1986)], the originator of the chain of citizenship was a U.S. born great grandfather. All subsequent generations lived only in the Philippines, and all were granted certificates of citizenship. Will the Attorney General now apply the court-sanctioned “construction” and cancel certificates issued to the generations of Meniola’s?

Acquisition of birthright citizenship is retroactive to birth – the citizen is considered to have acquired citizenship at birth and to have always maintained that status, even if that status is not confirmed until adulthood. While there are conditions precedent, for some categories, conditions subsequent or concurrent such as the modern retention requirements, once granted, there is no second class citizenship status recognized either under the constitution or in the statute.

Here, James was determined by the INS to be a citizen of the United States at the time of his birth. He was administered and voluntarily took an oath of allegiance to the United States at the time of that determination, effectively renouncing his Philippines citizenship. He applied for and obtained a U.S. passport. Upon his last entry to the U.S., he was admitted as a U.S. citizen. The Court’s decision has rendered him stateless, a cruel and unusual punishment, unable to obtain passport to travel and has been deprived peace of mind from fears of deportation and separation from loved ones.

Current statute provides for the cancellation of a certificate of citizenship for those who “illegally” acquired citizenship at birth, but clearly states that cancellation of the certificate des not affect the underlying citizenship status of the person in whose name it was issued. There is absolutely no process for the removal of the citizenship, the nullification of the oath taken, or a return to former status, since from birth the status of the individual was that of the citizen.

The absence of a de-citizenship process and the express inclusion of the provision that cancellation of the certificates does not alter the underlying status is powerful evidence that James’s case should have been accorded the absolute scrutiny by the Supreme Court. Congress has had ample opportunity to correct this situation if it deemed it to be a defect. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1966 was a comprehensive overhaul of the Immigration and Nationality Act, but did not include a provision to correct this alleged “defect.” James contends that this is because it is no defect in law, but rather a clear message that birthright citizenship, once granted, is not to be taken away.

It is clear that the court-sanctioned “construction” of Revised Statutes §1993 is flawed. Yet, the Supreme Court has declined to exercise its power of judicial review and takes issue with the narrow and myopic reading the appellate court gave to Revised Statutes §1993 in its adoption of the position of the Attorney General. As a result, the agency can now rightly lay claim to the enviable power to wield the unrestrained sword of bias and prejudice – today to interpret in favor, tomorrow, to interpret against. The many-horned hydra of arbitrariness, capriciousness and unbridled discretion shall rear its ugly head.

Water Blues

Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) provides water from the Umiray, Angat and Ipo river basins to Metro Manila’s private concessionaires Manila Water Co. Inc. and Maynilad Water Services Inc. for distribution. However, these water sources can barely meet current demand, let alone connect additional customers.

The proposed P47.93-billion Laiban Dam project is intended to supply 1,900 million liters a day (MLD), or 22 cubic meters a second, of water and address an existing gap of 1,122 MLD in the Metro Manila water supply.

The dam will be built at the Kaliwa River in Tanay, in Rizal province, in the central and southwestern parts of the Sierra Madre mountain range. It is to be an alternative to the Angat and the Ipo dams, and is expected to operate in 2016.

Enough water by 2016? Don’t get your hopes up.

Current census projection shows there will be 88.7 million Filipinos by year’s end. That number can double in less than 20 years. We’re back to square one by 2016.

Presently, there is water rationing in Parañaque. When Maynilad says that they are ready to supply water to 10,000 households in BF Homes, this means further rationing. Equal sufferance?

The developer allowed the village’s Maynilad connection to be cut off by refusing to pay its bills amounting to P5 million and also by refusing to allow the homeowners direct connection to Maynilad which would have been a cheaper option for homeowners instead of buying water in bulk and reselling it to the homeowners at a profit.

The wells in the subdivision have dried up when the United BF Homeowners’ Associations, Inc. (UBFHAI) filed a case asking, among others, the Housing & Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) to order the developer to provide 24-hour water supply to homeowners. Jurisdictional resolution took all of nine (9) years from the time the case was filed on July 5, 1995.

On September 27, 2005, the HLURB ordered “respondents BF Homes, Inc. and Philippine Waterworks Construction Corporation (PWCC) to provide a 24-hour water supply to the entire subdivision failing which to turn over the operation of the water system in the subdivision to the United BF Homeowners’ Associations, Inc.”

Unfortunately, the developer has taken steps to appeal that decision. With or without the foregoing decision, the provisions of Presidential Decree 1345 can be properly applied, the Association wrote the MWSS last February 28, 2006. The decree provides:

“MWSS, shall upon petition of the Homeowners Association … take over the operation and maintenance of centralized water systems of residential subdivisions within its territorial jurisdiction …” and “shall thereafter cause the system to operate at the desired level … The cost to render the system operable shall be chargeable to the subdivision owner/developer provided that the provision of adequate water supply has been specified or implied in the contract of sale or other forms used in offering the housing units within the project for sale. Otherwise, the cost to make the system operational shall be chargeable to the homeowners of the subdivision.”

By choice, Maynilad prefers to supply to PWCC instead of direct connection to homeowners so that it can charge the higher commercial rate instead of the cheaper residential rate and avoid system maintenance services. On the other hand, PWCC profits by reselling the water above its acquisition costs and operating expenses without the expense of drilling more water wells.

Obviously, the direct connection option by the enclaves suggested by Maynilad and city hall officials will not prosper at all. Why the empowered MWSS does not “take over the operation and maintenance” of BF Homes water system under the circumstances is anybody’s guess.

In the last election, subdivisions homeowners, comprising the majority of electorate in Parañaque, had the opportunity to elect a non-politician candidate who promised to provide water within his term of office if elected. He was willing to put his money where his mouth is, so to speak, by posting a P50 million performance bond once elected. If we are in this mess, it’s because the majority elected those who, like Pontius Pilate, wash their hands of the responsibility of providing basic necessities of their constituents.

When will water become available to BF homeowners on “equal sufferance” basis is best summed up by Maynilad’s demand to BF Homes water administrator: Pay up.

BF Homes Holdup, Break-in

About two weeks ago, there was another daylight holdup in BF Homes. Carlo Reyes, a hair saloon beside Union Bank, near Bacolod Chicken House (where the brother’s mayor was earlier held up) along President’s Avenue, BF Homes, was held up by 2 men on a motor cycle. They stuffed in a sack the hand bags and goodies of the ladies and took off in one motor cycle. How about that!

The present dispensation has destroyed the residential character of our neighborhood, forcibly opened our gates to horrendous outsider traffic and exposed residents to criminal elements, and illegally constructed government facilities using government funds on a private property (Aguirre Park), including a covered tennis court.

The commercialization of the subdivision, we are told, is progress, and instead of tossing the blame to the local government for the destruction of the residential character of the subdivision, residents should be grateful.

And why not, considering that even within BF Homes, residents cannot seem to put their acts together on the subject of keeping the subdivision safe for their families whose welfare has been shoved aside by a persistent minority.

Let me put it this way: When a storm is coming, you close all your windows. After the storm and you see the mess, you don’t ask why. You ask who opened windows.

The following is a slightly edited email, with a request for dissemination to residents and visitors of BF Homes Subdivision in Parañaque:

At around 9pm last night, we (well, our car) were the victims of “glass breakers”.

We were parked along the main street of BF Homes (President’s Avenue) -- a parking lot in front of a closed luxury car shop right beside the entrance to Tahanan Village. A lamp post illuminated the area and it was only a few steps to the guard house. And at 9pm, it was still a very busy street. So without giving it another thought, we locked the car and crossed the street to where we were having dinner.

We came back an hour later to find our left rear window open—at least, that’s what I thought. At closer inspection we found that the window had actually been smashed. And they did a pretty good job of it—the whole glass lay inside the car unbroken, with only shattered bits around it. Maybe that’s why they didn’t trip the alarm. They knew what they were doing, as we were later told by the police that it wasn’t the first time this happened in the area.

Anyway, we realized that a bag in the back seat caught their attention. It wasn’t a flashy one, and we thought our car was darkly tinted enough to hide what was inside. Apparently we were wrong. The bag contained some cash, credit cards, atm cards, a phone, and house keys. So we immediately got on the phone to have the cards and phone line cut, and all that. We put a makeshift window made of dark plastic so that we could at least drive home without inhaling the polluted air of South Super Highway.

And we thanked God that it was just a bag that was stolen, not our entire car...that it was just a window that was smashed, and not us. We’ve all heard these stories before and have been warned, especially about leaving your laptops in cars, or when going to particularly dangerous areas. But when it happens to you, inside a busy, well-lit area inside a private subdivision, with only a simple bag as the trigger, you can’t help but think, what’s the world coming to? Hay.”

Bottom line—please, please be extra careful, guys. No matter where you go, or what you have, these people will always find a way to get what they want (or need—I keep telling myself that I hope whoever did it was really in dire need na lang). Otherwise, sana kainin sila ng mga malalaking pulang langgam. Don’t give them the opportunity.

Priestly Vestments

The Archdiocese of Manila reminded the faithful that there is a proper dress code for attending Mass. Wearing the proper attire when attending Mass, said the archdiocese’s Ministry of Liturgical Affairs, is an important part of showing respect to the sanctity of the house of God.

Well and good. However, if there is a dress code for the faithful for attending Mass, there are also priestly vestments for celebrating Mass.

Priests in our parish do not follow the General Instructions of the Roman Missal (“GIRM”) with regards to the proper vestment that all the priests should wear at Mass. Most of the time, the priest celebrant wears an oversized stole over what appears to be a plain white “chasu-alb.” The chasuble is supposed to be a robe of color suitable to the liturgy of the day and worn on top of the alb and stole. It’s usually green (for ordinary times), although it could be white, violet, red, rose or black depending on the occasion. What does the 1975 edition of the GIRM say?

“The vestment common to ministers of every rank is the alb, tied at the waist with a cincture, unless it is made to fit without a cincture. An amice should be put on first if the alb does not completely cover the street clothing. A surplice may not be substituted for the alb when the chasuble or dalmatic is to be worn or when a stole is used instead of the chasuble or dalmatic.” [GIRM 298]

The priest who is celebrating Mass normally is to wear an alb and a chasuble:

“Unless otherwise indicated, the chasuble, worn over the alb and stole, is the vestment proper to the priest celebrant at Mass and other rites immediately connected with Mass.” [GIRM 299]

The Ceremonial of Bishops [CB] also describes the priest’s vestment in this way:

“Unless otherwise indicated, the chasuble, worn over the alb and stole, is the vestment proper to the priest celebrant at Mass and other rites immediately connected with Mass. [CB 66]

Wearing the alb and stole only when celebrating Mass has been permitted in limited circumstances (such as during concelebrations when there is a limited number of chasubles available), and when celebrated outside a church or oratory. It is clear from the above that the minimum vestments for celebrating Mass are the “chasuble, worn over the alb and stole.” These vestments are obligatory vestments envisaged in Canon 929, which states:

“In celebrating and administering the Eucharist, priests ad deacons are to wear the liturgical vestments prescribed by the rubrics.”

As already noted above, the rubrics are found in GIRM nos. 298-300, and in CB no. 66. As pointed out above, the exception to these requirements for Eucharistic celebrations are limited to concelebrations and celebrations outside a church. Nowhere does it allow the principal celebrant in any Mass held inside a church building to vest only with an oversized stole over a “chasu-alb.” What happened to the alb, the symbol of purity? Without it, the priest’s street clothes and bare arms can clearly be seen. Isn’t the alb worn precisely for the purpose of hiding the priest’s ordinary wear? How can the laity be expected to dress appropriately for Mass when the ordained minister himself is dressed inappropriately? I have also seen instances of priests wearing an alb but with a plain white or cream-colored “chasu-alb” over it, and an oversized stole over the “chasu-alb.” Both practices are not in accord with the established norms.

This casual mentality towards vesting diminishes the solemnity of the Mass. If people can afford to expend time to dress correctly to attend formal affairs hosted by mere mortals, surely, our Lord deserves no less.

Robbers struck in BF Homes Parañaque

Three armed men robbed the elder brother of Parañaque Mayor Florencio Bernabe at a restaurant in Parañaque City Wednesday afternoon.

Senior Superintendent Ronald Estilles said Dr. Renato “Boy” Bernabe and his wife Baby were among those who fell prey to the group of robbers who struck at the Bacolod Chicken House at President’s Avenue in Barangay BF Homes Parañaque.

Police said the robbers who were armed with handguns barged at the restaurant at around 1 p.m. and immediately announced the holdup.

Two of the suspects immediately went to the table occupied by the Bernabe family and divested them of their jewelry and cellular phones.

The suspects also took the valuables from about a dozen customers who were dining at the time. Taking advantage of the fact that there was no security guard posted at the restaurant, the heist took only about a few minutes to complete.

The suspects escaped without taking anything from the cash register of the restaurant, police said.

Surprisingly, members of the Parañaque police headquarters arrived at the crime scene ahead of the police personnel from a nearby police community precinct beside the Barangay BF Homes which is just a stone’s throw away from the restaurant.

Estilles said his men is now conducting follow up operation for the immediate capture of the suspects, who reportedly belongs to the FX Robbery Gang who are responsible for the series of robberies on public utility vehicles.

Police said they are now hunting down one of the alleged leaders of the gang identified as Bobby Baliber, whose picture, along with his other cohorts, are now posted in various business establishments BF Homes.

Baliber, a resident of Purok 5, Sampaloc, Site 2, Barangay BF Homes, had been arrested in November 26, 2006, along with two other accused Joel Lazarito and Cris Dadibas, on charges of robbery.

The subdivision residents had resented the move of Mayor Bernabe who ordered the force-opening of the gates of the BF Homes to public traffic, which has reportedly sparked a rash of crimes in the village, including pick-pockets, snatchers, car theft, and cellular phone robbers.

[Daily Tribune by Ben Gines, Jr.]

Face The Issue

1. Allegation: Romeo G. Roxas of Green Circle Properties and Resources, Inc. logged and cleared their area at Umiray-Dingalan wantonly.

The Facts: The 28,000 hectare Umiray-Dingalan area is a titled property bought from a former owner who have the area logged under an SPLTL (Special Private Land Timber License). The area as far back as the mid of the 18^th century was claimed and cleared by Inspeccion General de Montes and later, during the American Regime was titled under the Torrens System.

Since Roxas’ Green Circle is not a logging company but on realty and development, logging was stopped. The former operator applied for salvage and retrieval operations with the DENR and was the one responsible for logs coming out of the area.

Also, as the area is an alienable and disposable having been a titled property, Green Circle therefore has all the rights to develop their area subject to limitations and provisions of an Environmental Compliance Certificate issued by DENR re: development activities. Hence, for al intents and purposes and as deemed required, Green Circle can cut-down all trees without any violations as per P.D. 705 – the Forestry Reform Code.

2. Allegation: Romeo G. Roxas is not an heir of a Philippine Veteran.

The Facts: The father of Romeo Roxas is an employee of the Commonwealth and is directly providing services to the US Government as a Teacher/ Superintendent. Hence the father is a veteran and therefore the son is an heir.

3. Allegation: He (Romeo Roxas) burns money and cut down trees

The Facts: Romeo G. Roxas is a monetarist who is well-versed with the Keynesian Theory. He doesn’t burn money but instead creates wealth through his development efforts. He implements or wants to implement theories and practices learned and experienced.

The writers/hackers of the undocumented articles in the internet are “journalist” of the AC-DC genre. Romeo G. Roxas proved he can never kowtow with their “extortions” and hence, earned their ire.

Numbers

30% Proportion of Filipino couples unaware that babies result from having sex, according to a study by the Philippine government.

2.36% Net population growth in the Philippines, among the highest in the world, with 4,000 babies born every day. [Source: Time Magazine, 03/14/05]

Leaders of the Catholic Church, the religion of 81 percent of the Philippine population, condemn birth control.[Source: Pulse Asia]

Ayan!

***

Thousands of Americans were marching on the 4^th year anniversary of the Iraq war, calling the killing of 3,500 American soldiers since the start of the war as “immoral!”

By comparison, since the start of the Iraq war, more than 5,000,000 (five million!) American babies have died by abortion.

It seems to me that the protesters are marching for the wrong reason.

Wake-up Call

A friend telephoned to disagree to my characterization of BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision. The commercialization of the subdivision is progress, and instead of tossing the blame to the local government for the destruction of the residential character of the subdivision, residents should be grateful.

And why not, considering that even within BF Homes, residents cannot seem to put their acts together on the subject of keeping the subdivision safe for their families whose welfare has been shoved aside by a persistent minority. This is eloquently expressed in Mayor Jun Bernabe’s February 15, 2006, letter to Muntinlupa Mayor Jaime Fresnide:

This is just a follow-up to our conversation last Sunday via our cellphones in which we discussed… the increasing number of complaints that my office has been receiving regarding the use of Tirona gate as a two-way access route for residents living in both Parañaque and Alabang, Muntinlupa sides of BF Homes.

To raise revenues for the municipality to qualify for cityhood being pushed by (re-electionist) Congressman Roilo Golez, public opinion was ignored, public preferences were disregarded, and public meetings were rigged!

In water-starved BF Homes, the 1997 re-zoning of subdivision’s main streets converted properties one lot deep along Aquirre and a portion of El Grande Avenues to commercial zones, allowing the construction of multi-storey structures, restaurants, beer houses, super clubs, liquor stores, gasoline service stations, supermarkets, banks, colleges and universities, including funeral parlors, mortuaries and crematory services and memorial chapels. Homeowners are outraged by the prospect of having such establishments as their next door neighbors.

The letter continues: Sometime in August last year, we implemented City Ordinance No. 00-15, Series of 2000 and opened the major roads of BF Homes-Parañaque to the public. In doing so, we effectively took over from UBFHAI the function and responsibility of manning the gates of the subdivision’s major roads in the interest of order and public service…

The local government cannot simply take over private property [the road lots are privately titled] without due process, but [re-electionist] Mayor Jun Bernabe, using SWAT power, forcibly opened the gates of the subdivision. In doing so, as his letter aptly articulated, he effectively let loose a huge influx of outsider traffic that includes commuters, short-cutting motorists, commercial vehicles of all types, and legions of squatters, carjackers, carnappers and even prowlers, thieves, rapists, and all sorts of criminals.

Over the objections of homeowners, and despite the constitutional proscription against the use of public funds for private purposes, the mayor appropriated yet another portion of Aguirre Park for a two-story Barangay Hall. For good measure, the park fronting the Resurrection Parish Church is also designated garbage segregation facility. [Follow your nose, you can’t miss it!]

The commercial area in Phase I has been converted into one big parking area with the “pito” boys, displaying the charms of modern Mafioso’s, licensed to collect “parking fees.” These “volunteers” are sporting “PNP-CVO” uniforms, cap and ID’s costing, I am told, something like PhP1,000. Not far behind are the security guards of the commercial establishments collecting “tips” for illegal parking.

Aguirre and President’s Avenues and Elizalde Street in the commercial district in Phase I are no on-street parking areas. Yet, despite repeated written appeals for enforcement from some 200 residents located at the end of President’s Avenue, the local authorities remain deaf. The commercial establishments continue with impunity to appropriate the roads and sidewalks at President’s corner Aguirre Avenues for parking, double parking and sometimes triple parking, making going and coming home difficult and hazardous for residents.

Obviously, our barangay captain, who is busy campaigning for a seat in the city council, is the problem, not the solution.

We are not against progress, but traffic, efficient garbage disposal and distribution of basic necessities are also primary considerations. Progress should be rational and for the good of the majority, otherwise, it is a brutalization of the quality of our lives.

The present dispensation has destroyed the residential character of our neighborhood, forcibly opened our gates to horrendous outsider traffic and exposed residents to criminal elements, illegally constructed government facilities on the park, including garbage segregation facility. Yet, many of those responsible are shamelessly seeking re-election, while some even have the gall and temerity to aspire for higher public offices.

We are saddled with officials who cannot grasp even the basic fundamentals of urban planning, who lack the creativity to increase the city’s coffers except to increase real estate taxes, and who exhibit total disregard for a healthy environment.

Clearly, our re-electionist congressman, mayor, councilors, and barangay officials are insensitive and unresponsive to the feelings of residents over the demands of outside speculators. THEY DO NOT DESERVE OUR VOTES!

We can make the difference

After having scrimped and saved and then spent our life savings for a house in BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision in order to enjoy a well deserved peace and quiet away from the madding crowd, so to speak, we find that we are to suffer the sad fate of having the same madding crowd practically in our front yards, complete with cars and vans to boot.

Our politicians have shove aside our families’ welfare in the interest of commerce, opening our main gates to a huge influx of outsider traffic that includes squatters, commuters, short-cutting motorists, and even prowlers, thieves, rapists, and all sort of criminals.

Criminals are now roaming free in and out of BF Homes to commit murder, armed robbery, “akyat-bahay,” carjacking, carnapping and snatching. Even our PCJ church parishioners within the confine of the church premises were not spared by the brutality of crime.

We have to queue up to get in and out of the subdivision. BF Homes is now the main artery for traffic to and from Cavite/Las Piñas and Parañaque, Pasay, Makati and points north. Foot traffic has drastically increased and we no longer know the background and number of strangers roaming our neighborhoods.

In a word, we have the distinction of having been chosen by the mayor of Parañaque to be fed to his constituents!

The commercialization cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be described as promotive of the health, safety, peace and order, education, morals, comfort and convenience, or protection of property – in short, the wellbeing and general welfare – of the greater number of residence of BF Homes. For the serenity, peace and quiet have been replaced by the chaos, turmoil and frenzy of commerce. Where there was no crowding, congestion, and air and noise pollution, these banes of the so-called “progress” now pervade and suffocate the environment. To characterize the re-zoning as an exercise of police power would be retrogressive.

To paraphrase a justice of the appellate court, part of the allure of subdivision living is the comparative privacy and exclusivity which the residents enjoy. Otherwise, we might as well have lived along the main road and spared ourselves the expense of paying a premium for our abodes. Perhaps Mayor Jun Bernabe and his obedient cohorts would not would not think too highly of their idea of general access through subdivision roads if it were they whose relaxation would be disturbed by the constant honking of horns and the screeching of tires, or if they had to live in constant fear of a wayward car plowing through their front doors, decimating the entire household, maids, children and all.

We are saddled with officials who cannot seem to grasp even the basic fundamentals of urban planning, who lack the creativity to increase the city’s coffers except by increasing real estate taxes and who exhibit a total disregard for a healthy environment.

We made the difference in the 2004 election with a voter’s turnout of 60% instead of the usual 10%. Let’s all go out in the upcoming May election to express our indignation by voting them out of office.