Remembering Jose Rizal

December 30, 1896 saw Jose Rizal executed in Bagumbayan. It is a public holiday when Filipinos recall one of a number of defining events in history that make Filipinos proud. We Filipinos fondly call it “Rizal Day.”

Traditionally, the Philippine president honors the day by laying a wreath on Jose Rizal’s memorial statue at the Rizal Park. Speeches are delivered on how Rizal defined Filipino nationalism and how we should be proud to be Filipino.

Indeed, the Rizal Day celebration in 2006 will be a defining moment that all Filipinos should be “proud” when on the eve of Rizal Day, we again bowed our heads, caved in to U.S. pressure and surrendered our sovereignty. THE CONVICTED U.S. MARINES IS STOLEN FROM THE PHILIPPINE JUSTICE SYSTEM AND TAKEN INTO U.S. CUSTODY.

A CONVICTED U.S. MARINE RAPIST CELEBRATES HIS COUNTRY’S MIGHT … TO THEM “MIGHT IS RIGHT”.

THE U.S. PUPPETS IN GOVERNMENT CELEBRATE THEIR VICTORY IN ASSURING THEIR OWN POLITICAL ENDS THROUGH CONTINUED U.S. BACKING. THEY ARE NO LESS THAN TRAITORS.

A VAST NUMBER OF FILIPINOS WILL REINFORCE THEIR LACK OF FAITH IN THEIR GOVERNMENT … AND COUNTRY.

… AND JOSE RIZAL WILL TURN IN HIS GRAVE WITH SHAME AND DESPAIR. HE MAY HAVE DIED FOR NOTHING.


TO FILIPINOS ALL OVER THE WORLD … MAY THE MEMORY OF RIZAL STRENGTHEN THE LITTLE FILIPINO PRIDE LEFT IN US THESE DAYS.

-------

SMITH TRANSFER TO US CUSTODY

Nicole: ‘A stab in the back by Arroyo’

By Tarra Quismundo, Norman Bordadora, Cynthia Balana

InquirerLast updated 01:39am (Mla time) 12/31/2006

ARROGANT TREACHERY. AN UTTERLY shameless act by people who are like “thieves in the night.”
A raw deal against the Filipino people. A stab in the back by no less than President Macapagal-Arroyo.
These were some of the virulent reactions provoked by the middle-of-the-night transfer on Friday of US Marine Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith from a Makati jail back to the custody of the US Embassy despite his conviction on charges of raping a Filipino woman.
“Nicole,” the rape victim, said she heard about the transfer on midnight of Friday and it brought her to tears.
“Talagang bastusan na ito ng harap-harapan (This is now really in your face shamelessness.). All that they would defend was the relationship between the US and Philippines... Is this really how the Philippine government is? Only in the Philippines. I am so dismayed,” said Nicole, spilling out her anger in a mix of English and Filipino.
For the 23-year-old Filipino woman who won a historic rape case against Smith, getting up yesterday morning after hearing the news the night before was like waking up from a nightmare.
Former Senate President Jovito Salonga branded the government move to hand Smith back to the Americans as “a raw deal and a midnight transaction.”
Salonga, one of the country’s most respected lawyers, said the victims of the government’s giving in to US pressure were Nicole and the country’s justice system.
“The raw deal was done against Nicole and the judicial process... against Judge Benjamin Pozon, also against the Court of Appeals,” Salonga said. “It is largely against the Supreme Court, where there is a pending case filed by Nicole and her lawyer Evalyn Ursua,” Salonga told the Inquirer.
Binay alerted
Nicole has questioned the constitutionality of the US-Philippines Visiting Forces Agreement, which the US invokes in claiming custody over Smith.
The women’s group Gabriela also slammed the transfer move.
“Like thieves in the night, the Arroyo administration and its cohorts from the foreign affairs and justice departments, as well as the Filipino lawyers for Smith, have again done this cunning move,” said Emmi de Jesus, Gabriela secretary general.
“Of course I cried, as in I really cried after hearing about it... They (the Philippine authorities) have no respect for the courts and the government just decided to take its own step so that Smith could return to the US Embassy,” Nicole said by phone, her voice trembling.
Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno told the Inquirer it was his office that made the decision to allow the return of Smith to US custody—despite the absence of a Court of Appeals ruling on the Smith custody issue. (Story on Page A8.)
US takes care of its own
Nicole said this violated the ruling of Judge Benjamin Pozon, who had ordered Smith confined at the Makati City Jail pending an agreement between the two governments on the facility where he was to be incarcerated.
“If I had the choice, I would like to be a US citizen now because they (the US) would defend a citizen, even if he is a convicted criminal, while the Philippines would not defend someone who is fighting for her rights,” said the Zamboanga native.
Knowing that Smith’s transfer was a decision by the executive branch, Nicole had strong words for Ms Arroyo.
“She’s stabbing us in the back, I know, for the Americans. In 2007, we’ll have elections again and I hope the people will vote for those who can defend them from these Americans,” Nicole said.
End won’t justify means
Even administration ally Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago sounded aghast at what happened.
“I’m afraid that the end does not justify the means... The means used is questionable because this is under the jurisdiction of the judicial branch and, hence, the executive cannot take any step concerning physical custody of the accused without judicial authority.”
Santiago added: “Secretary Puno should have not acted on his own. And I’m afraid that strictly speaking, he’s now in contempt of court. Assuming for the sake of argument that Puno’s action will need the approval of President Arroyo, the President cannot be sued because she enjoys immunity from suit.”
Puno should be fired
Santiago said the judge should give Puno 24 hours to explain why he caused the transfer without court authority.
Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. said that if it was Puno who ordered Smith transferred to US custody, “the guy should be fired.”
“It is also a raw deal against our oppressed people,” added Salonga, who in 1991 led the Senate in voting down an extension of the RP-US bases treaty.
Salonga said that he was informed of the plan to transfer Smith to the embassy as early as a week or two ago.
“I alerted Makati Mayor (Jejomar) Binay against the possibility that (Smith) may possibly be taken out by the American Embassy in connivance with the Philippine government,” he said.
Told of the government’s legal opinion that Smith was transferred in accord with Pozon’s decision that he be transferred to a mutually agreed upon place of detention, Salonga said the government lawyers failed to read the latter part of Pozon’s decision.
“It said ‘until further orders of this court,’” Salonga said.
The militant group Sanlakas said the move was tantamount to treason on the part of the President.
“(Ms Arroyo), who authorized the transfer of Smith to US custody, must be held responsible for this. She already has betrayed Rizal and the Filipino people,” Sanlakas president Wilson Fortaleza said. He was referring to Ms Arroyo’s speech on Rizal Day Dec. 30, 2002 that she was not running for office to unite the nation.
“The surreptitious release of US Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith, in the middle of the night at that, to the custody of the US, despite pending litigation in Philippine courts, is not only a violation of the Constitution, but also a complete disregard and disrespect for the judicial branch including the Supreme Court,” said the lawyers group Counsels for the Defense of Liberties.
“It is not only a contempt of court, but treachery that signals the complete breakdown of the rule of law,” it added in a statement.
US flag burned
Angered by the removal of Smith from Philippine custody, scores of Filipino leftists burned a US flag and condemned Ms Arroyo as a traitor who should be impeached.
About 80 militants set the American flag on fire near the heavily guarded US Embassy, yelling “Oust GMA, junk VFA.” Some carried placards that read: “Stop rape of our women, stop rape of the justice system.”
Riot police pushed the protesters back and unsuccessfully tried to arrest some in a brief scuffle. The protesters left without further incident.
Migrante International, an alliance of militant overseas Filipinos and their families, called on the Senate to conduct a full investigation into Smith’s transfer as well as on the VFA to pave the way for its abrogation.
‘Arrogant treachery’
“Clearly the move was upon Arroyo’s orders. Her arrogant treachery against the Filipino people knows no bounds. She is guilty of violating the Constitution, trampling on our sovereignty and desecrating our dignity as a people,” said Connie Bragas-Regalado, Migrante International chair.
Along with the President, Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo and Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez and all others responsible for the “diabolical move” should be held criminally liable, Regalado said.
“They expose themselves anew as little more than puppets and mouthpieces of the US,” she added.
Washington has demanded custody of Smith, saying his detention violated the VFA, which governs the conduct of US troops in the Philippines.
Smith has appealed his rape conviction and the accord provides that any accused US serviceman shall remain in US custody until all judicial proceedings are exhausted.
Judge Pozon argued he should remain at the Makati jail because the provision in the bilateral accord did not apply after a conviction.
The Philippine departments of foreign affairs and justice have backed the US position. Still, the United States canceled next year’s annual joint military exercise with the Philippines because of the custody dispute.

With a report from Jerome Aning

Honest Opinions. Their words ... not mine.

I didn't say it ... an American did. Need I say more?

___________________________
If rape happened in the US
First posted 01:30:43 (Mla time) 2006-12-27 Inquirer

I READ in the financial times of London that the United States is pressuring the Philippine government to release a recently convicted American rapist into US custody, otherwise the US government will withhold its military aid for the Philippines.

As an American, I can say unequivocally that had the incident--where an incoherent, drugged or drunk, sexually abused young woman was flung in a state of degrading undress on to a street filled with horrified citizen witnesses--occurred in the United States, the criminals (even if they were a group of foreign soldiers) would all be facing long prison sentences. There would be no spiritual advisers like Fr. James Reuter, no "We Love The Rapist" female fan clubs in Makati and, certainly, no overt or covert pressure from any foreign government to "go easy on the lads."

Where on earth can such things happen except, it seems, in the Philippines, where a significant sector of the population still indulges in a self-hating colonial mentality, which gives a disgusting, foreign rapist higher importance than the rights and honor of an abused local citizen?

May those multitudes of good Filipinos who uphold justice and respect human dignity demand that their government refuse to cave in to US blackmail. After all, it is more likely that the Bush administration will ultimately decide to sacrifice one dumb rapist rather than risk its strategic position in the Pacific area.

--ROBIN EASTMAN-ABAYA, via e-mail

Copyright 2006 INQ7.net and content partners.. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Sovereignty or War Games ... a Question of Priorities

The custody saga for the convicted US Marine rapist continues as Filipinos celebrate their Christmas.

As all world leaders publicly declare their desire for world peace ... it is perhaps my wish for the Filipinos to find their deserved respectable place in the world. Yielding Philippine sovereignty would not be the best way to do that.

When one looks back at his own past ... you get to realize that many good blessings come from seemingly bad circumstances. Philippine militant leaders seem to present a good point ... are the annual Philippine-U.S. war games really critical to Filipino aspirations?

A few months ago while I was in Singapore, an Australian national was sentenced to death by the Singapore courts for drug dealing. Drug dealing as you know, is punishable by death under Singaporean laws. Despite pressures by no less than the Prime Minister of Australia, Singaporean authorities kept their ground and stuck to their laws. THEY EXERCISED THEIR RIGHT TO SOVEREIGNTY. A tiny nation who's only real resource is their people clearly delivered a message that said ... "While you're in my turf ... you need to follow my rules." Singaporeans are proud to be Singaporeans.

I am wondering ... can Filipinos be truly as proud if we get pushed around in our own turf?

TO ALL FILIPINOS ALL OVER THE WORLD ... MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR STANDING PROUD AS FILIPINOS
_____________________________




Militants cheer cancellation of RP-US military exercises

By Michael Lim Ubac
InquirerLast updated 10:35pm (Mla time) 12/25/2006

MANILA -- The cancellation of next year's RP-US war games was not a "setback" to the US-Philippines' relations but the "only good thing to have come out" of the Subic rape case, militant lawmakers said on Monday.

Bayan Muna Rep. Teddy Casino said it was in fact "good news." "Nicole is the David that has (slain) the Goliath of US military intervention in the Philippines. I hope this causes the total withdrawal of US troops from the country, so our sovereignty is not compromised," said Casino.

In separate interviews, Representatives Crispin Beltran and Rafael Mariano of Anakpawis party-list lauded the cancellation of 2007 RP-US war games as an offshoot of the Philippine courts' refusal to return rape convict Lance Corporal Daniel Smith to US custody.

Mariano called on Malacañang to stop pressuring Makati Judge Benjamin Pozon, who had convicted Smith for the rape of Filipino woman "Nicole," and the appellate court that rejected issuing a temporary restraining order on Pozon's decision to commit Smith to the Makati City Jail pending his appeal.

Smith has been held at the Makati City Jail since Dec. 4, when Pozon convicted him of raping "Nicole" at the Subic Bay Freeport on Nov. 1, 2005.

Hailing the cancellation of the annual RP-US war games, Beltran said: "This is the only good thing to have come out of this entire ordeal Nicole went through. Nicole was raped by US military servicemen, and the Philippines' sovereignty was also being continually abused and raped because of the continued holding of the RP-US war games."

He said the cancellation of the Balikatan exercises was "something to rejoice over."
Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye, the spokesperson of President Macapagal-Arroyo, had said US authorities "surely understood" that the custody case of the American Marine convicted of raping a Filipino woman was now running its course through the Philippine judicial system.
Bunye said the Arroyo administration remained committed to the Philippines-US Visiting Forces Agreement. He pointed out that Smith's case had been elevated to the Court of Appeals.
"What is important is to have an early resolution. We leave that to the sound judgment of the [appellate court], but [it] should consider our international commitment," he said.

Beltran said that Malacañang and its agencies should stop putting pressure on Pozon and the Court of Appeals to reconsider their stand on the rape issue. He said that Malacañang was lobbying for US military interests and by doing so, "it further exposes where its true loyalty lies."

The militant leader, currently detained because of alleged involvement in the foiled power grab in February, said that the custody battle over Smith was swiftly developing into a test case for US-RP relations.

"The US cannot even respect RP (Philippine) law and insists on the superiority of a highly unpopular military agreement. The US is trying to bully the Philippine government yet again into doing its bidding," he said.

Surrendering Smith to the US Embassy would negate justice for Nicole, said Beltran.
He said Malacañang was falling all over itself trying to placate US authorities on the one hand, while browbeating the Court of Appeals and Pozon into turning Smith over to US custody on the other.

"Malacañang should cease and desist, and instead respect the decision of both Pozon and the CA. It does not matter if the US cancels all its military agreements with the Philippines--these are exercises that have done nothing but prove that the Philippines remains a massive landing and launching pad for US military forces," he said.

Copyright 2006 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Subic Base Rape Case - Bad Teachers Make Bad Students

If it looks like I can't get over this issue ... its only because I can't.

Now I'm beginning to understand why we've gotten to the mess we're in with both the Subic Base Rape Case (custody issue of the convicted U.S. marine) and the perpetual issue of Charter Change and it is simply this ... WE HAVE A GOOD SET OF RULES (THE CONSTITUTION) BUT WE NEVER SEEM TO FOLLOW IT.

Again, I've spotted the perfect news item published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer website to illustrate how we can't seem to understand the separation and inherent check and balance in the EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIARY branches of government.

The U.S.A. gave us a good system of government but like the high-tech weapons we buy from them ... they never teach us to use it properly. You'd think that the authors of democracy would be more careful in setting a good example.

Then again, maybe I'm wrong ... I think the French invented democracy. LIBERTY ... EQUALITY ... FRATERNITY.

___________________________________
Palace to CA: Turn over Smith to US

First posted 23:11:28 (Mla time) 2006-12-24
Christine Avendaño TJ Burgonio
Inquirer

AS US officials announced on Friday the scrapping of next year’s RP-US war games as a result of the custody dispute over Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith, Malacañang was again moving to convince the Court of Appeals why it should allow the Marine’s return to American custody.

But the “very urgent manifestation and motion” of the Office of the Solicitor General, which was representing the Department of Foreign Affairs, was filed shortly before the close of office hours at the appellate court, and officials there merely “noted” its filing.

This means that the court will deliberate on the latest OSG motion only on Dec. 27, when it resumes sessions, Solicitor General Antonio Eduardo Nachura said yesterday in a phone interview.

This also means that Smith will spend Christmas Day today at the Makati City Jail, where he has been held since he was convicted on Dec. 4 of raping “Nicole,” a Filipino woman, at the Subic Bay Freeport on Nov. 1, 2005.

Nachura said the new motion was a result of another agreement forged between Manila and Washington regarding their Dec. 19 manifestation before the appellate court seeking Smith’s transfer to US custody.

Place of detention

The new agreement was signed by Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo and US Ambassador Kristie Kenney on Friday morning, or hours before the US Embassy confirmed the announcement of Adm. William Fallon, chief of the US Pacific Command, that the annual RP-US Balikatan military exercises had been canceled.

The second agreement specifies a room at the US Embassy in Manila where Smith will be detained while his rape conviction is being appealed, the solicitor general said.

It also states that the Philippine government, police and interior secretary will be given “inspection rights,” he said.

According to Nachura, the new agreement is also meant to allay fears that US authorities will “spirit Smith away” if he is returned to American custody.

The cancelation of Balikatan 2007 was a result of the legal dispute over how the RP-US Visiting Forces Agreement, a 1999 document governing the conduct of the joint military exercises, should apply to Smith, particularly on whether he should be returned to US custody while his conviction is on appeal.

Makati Judge Benjamin Pozon, who heard the rape case and eventually convicted Smith, had ordered that the soldier be detained at the Makati City Jail.

Smith’s lawyers questioned the decision and took the case to the appellate court. And in keeping with VFA commitments, Malacañang, through the DFA, filed a motion in intervention and asked the appellate court to return Smith to US custody.

But the court said it must review Pozon’s commitment order before making a decision.

The US Embassy contends that Smith’s continued incarceration at the Makati City Jail is in violation of the VFA—a position in which the Philippine departments of justice and of foreign affairs concur.

Nachura said he hoped the appellate court would favorably consider the latest motion of the executive branch.

He said the custody case was now in the court’s hands, the executive branch having exerted efforts to have Smith transferred to US custody in keeping with VFA commitments.

Don’t bamboozle court

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. cautioned Malacañang against pressuring the Court of Appeals on the custody case.

Pimentel said the Philippine government was “well within its right” to voice its position on the case in view of the cancelation of Balikatan 2007. But he said the issue “should be taken within the ambit of the case” now pending before the court.

“To allow the executive branch to bamboozle the court, that is something else,” the senator told the Inquirer.

If at all, he said, the executive branch should argue its case before the court of law, not before “the bar of public opinion.”

“They should push their arguments through the judicial process. In other words, any pressure should be subsumed by arguments presented to the court. They should make their arguments, not before the court of public opinion, but before the court of law,” Pimentel said.

On Saturday, Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye said that the cancelation of Balikatan 2007 was a “setback” to the Philippine military’s modernization program, and that the appellate court should consider the VFA.

“What is important is to have an early resolution. We leave that to the sound judgment of the appellate court, but it should consider our international commitment,” Bunye said.

Divisive pressure

Pimentel also advised the appellate court not to “yield to “external pressure” and to “decide on the case on its legal merits.”

“Only in that way will the issue be laid to rest,” he said, adding:

“Like extrajudicial killings, extrajudicial pressure is divisive.”

Pimentel also said the Philippine government had no reason to complain if the US government canceled the war games and, eventually, stopped giving aid to the country.

“If the United States, the only superpower in the world, believes that the Balikatan exercises are not that vital for its security and ours, who are we to complain?” he said.


Copyright 2006 INQ7.net and content partners.. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

US Marines protect Iraqis but need protection in the Philippines

Unbelievable!!!

The United States has suspended joint Philippine-US wargames ... the annual practice of grown men suppressing make believe threats in make believe dangerous places. They have also suspended all aid to Filipinos ravaged by recent typhoons.

“The custody issue is at the heart of this,” embassy spokesman Matt Lussenhop told INQUIRER.net. "Due to the current custody issue (over the US Marine), the usual protection provided to US servicemembers is in doubt."

While aid to typhoon victims is a charity that is much appreciated ... I didn't think a charitable act had a price. Well ... so much for the kindness of their hearts ... no custody of the convicted US marine means no more charitable acts. Fine ... now it's clear ... aid to typhoon victims isn't charity then ... it demands something in exchange. At least that clears that.

As to the war games ... it really provides our Filipino soldiers the training in the use of high-tech weaponry to eliminate other Filipinos with diffent ideologies. Really ... that sounds more like Iraqi pro-Saddams and anti-Saddams to me. High-tech weaponry? Is this something the Philippines has already bought? Or is it something we'll have to buy? Are we going to buy this high-tech weaponry from the U.S.? Or will it again be "aid"? I wonder what this "aid" costs.

Just as well. When the Philippine Defence Budget is spent, we do get high-tech weaponry ... but we get more big mansions built in the Fort Bonifacio. No wonder a lot of Filipinos want to be generals.

Anyway, it all seems so odd. The U.S. Marine really is the ultimate fighting machine ... at least that's what the U.S. Marine ad in America presents. They're shipped off to Iraq exposed to real guns, real bullets and real bombs. They won't be sent to the Philippines for any more war games ... with make believe threats and make believe dangerous situations. No more US military personnel sent to the Philippines for the very dangerous assignment of handing out aid. It's all too dangerous for the mighty U.S. marine.

Subic Base Rape Case - Tug of War Continues

It is unfortunate. Good parents teach their children that "Right is Might" but we find out later in life that "Life is full of compromises" and "You never argue with the man with the gun." In the dispute on the custody of Lance Corporal Daniel Smith (the convicted rapist), we learn one final lesson ... "There's always an exception to the rule ... American US Military personnel."

In the continuing tug of war for custody ... America gets back with a "carrot on a stick" and "a whip in the ass." (Posted in www.abs-cbnnews.com - December 22 - Mla time)

If they use to think that all our women are prostitutes ... now they're going to think all Filipinos are prostitutes.

FILIPINO - WHICH WOULD YOU RATHER LOSE ... AID OR SOVEREIGNTY AND NATIONAL PRIDE ?





US cancels Balikatan exercises over Smith custody issue
(photo of US Ambassador to the Philippies Kristie Kenney in article)

The United States military on Thursday (Friday in Manila) said it has canceled joint war games with the Philippine military after a dispute with Philippine authorities over custody of a US serviceman convicted of raping a Filipina.

A report on the New York Times said Admiral William J. Fallon, commander of US forces in the Pacific, said he also will halt aid and reconstruction programs carried out by the American military in the Philippines until he is confident the troops’ legal rights will be protected under the Visiting Forces Agreement.

Under the VFA, US authorities would retain custody of American servicemen accused of violating Philippine laws until the end of all judicial proceedings.

Last Monday, Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo and US ambassador to the Philippines Kirstie Kenney signed an agreement for Subic rape convict Daniel Smith to be turned over to the US embassy after a local judge ordered him incarcerated at the Makati City Jail.

According to the New York Times article, Fallon said he already had ordered the withdrawal of an aid team in the Philippines that was assessing needs of a typhoon-ravaged area and that he also had canceled a number of visits by American ships.

He said he also canceled the field exercise portions of the Balikatan exercises, which was to open in coming weeks and involve 4,700 American and 3,000 Philippine military personnel.

He told the Times that smaller segments of the exercise that involve computer simulations and classroom work may be allowed to proceed if the custody dispute is resolved.

“The last thing we want is to undo all the good work that has been done between the Armed Forces of the Philippines and ourselves, but this puts me in a real dilemma because I need to guarantee the safety of our forces,” Admiral Fallon said.

“I’m not the judge of the guilt or innocence of the individual. The issue is only one of custody. I am responsible to our people in uniform. I have to have guarantees that I can trust their safety to an international agreement," he added.

Kenney earlier said a court verdict ordering Smith detained at the Makati City Jail violates a VFA provision regarding custody of US military personnel accused of violating Philippine laws.

"Washington was disappointed because it wasn't consistent with the Visiting Forces Agreement. This isn't about the verdict. The verdict is an issue for the judges and the lawyers. That's not within the range of those of us in the embassy or the other government officials," she told DZMM.

"The [VFA] calls for Smith to remain in US custody until the determination of the case and of all the judicial proceedings. That is defined through the completion of an appeals process," she added.

She said that she is hoping the US embassy and the Philippine government would be able to sort out the issue of custody.

"We're working on this issue. As you know this is an agreement between our two nations [that was] signed years ago. We are not yet in compliance with that issue. It’s important to both of our countries. It's important to international credibility that both our countries show how well we can live up to an agreement like this," she said.

Kenney also clarified that the signed agreement between the US embassy and the Department of Foreign Affairs that was passed to the Court of Appeals last December 19 was not a new agreement or a petition.

She said the document was just a clarification about the specific provisions of the VFA.

"Judicial authorities all over the world ask for clarification and additional information. We try to provide that," she said.

Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita said Solicitor General Antonio Eduardo Nachura submitted the manifestation to the Court of Appeals to show that the Philippines and the US have agreed on the custody of Smith based on the VFA.

"The Philippine government is doing this to abide by treaty commitments," Ermita said.

Last Tuesday the Court of Appeals denied Smith’s petition for a temporary restraining order on the judge's decision to detain him at the Makati City Jail until the Philippine and US governments agree on a facility where he will serve his sentence.

On December 4, Smith was convicted of raping a woman now known only as "Nicole" inside a moving van at Subic Bay Free Port on the night of November 1 last year.

Subic Base Rape Case Tug of War

"When in Rome ... do as the Americans (Marines, that is)."

There's a really good editorial I came across in the Philippine Daily Inquirer website which I wish I wrote myself. It was simple but brilliantly explained by the author. I know that the space in www.inq7.net where I found it would probably disappear in a few days or weeks so I quote it here verbatim.

I thank the author for his simplicity, brilliance, boldness and honesty. Here goes ...

EDITORIAL
Lackeys

Inquirer
Last updated 00:15am (Mla time) 12/22/2006

Published on page A12 of the December 22, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

IN the tug if war over Daniel Smith, which has the Philippine government joining hands with the United States against our judiciary, the issues are only two: First, when can legal proceedings be said to have been completed? Was it when Smith was convicted, and sentenced, or is it when all appeals have been exhausted? Second, can someone convicted by our courts be held under US custody? Everything else, as President Macapagal-Arroyo’s allies in the House of Representatives like to say, is immaterial and irrelevant. Particularly in the face of what we’ve pointed out to be the quite reasonable legal opinions of Judge Benjamin Pozon with regard to the Visiting Forces Agreement.

It doesn’t take a legal genius to realize a trial has a beginning, and an end. And that the end of a trial comes when the defendant is asked to rise, and the presiding judge reads the verdict and hands down a sentence. At that moment, the defendant becomes a convict; if sentenced to jail, even a defendant out on bail is immediately taken into custody and imprisoned.

The law affords the convict ample opportunities to appeal the verdict. In that manner, the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court can either overturn or modify the sentence or order a retrial. But until such time as a superior court either confirms or overturns a verdict, the verdict stands.

Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith of the US Marines didn’t lose a civil case. He was found guilty of a criminal act: rape. Rape is a non-bailable offense in the Philippines and a convicted rapist certainly cannot be allowed to stay out of jail, which is what is going to happen if Smith is put under the custody of the US government. Giving him that privilege would accord him a privilege that is not open to Filipino citizens.

As we’ve pointed out in the past, Pozon hasn’t tried to read the VFA in an arbitrary or whimsical way, but rather, with the fullest appreciation for the special circumstances the agreement spells out for American servicemen convicted by our courts.

Which begs the second question: Is the US Embassy correct in insisting that Smith be held on its premises? Was the Philippine government correct in agreeing with, and trying to uphold, the American position? We think not.

Pozon interprets the VFA as saying that a convicted American must be held in a Philippine facility, but one mutually agreed upon by both the American and Philippine governments. Logic dictates such a reading. If an American facility on US soil was the intention of the agreement, then the Philippines might as well have abandoned all efforts to negotiate such an agreement. Or put another way, the Philippine government might as well have agreed that crimes committed by American servicemen be prosecuted in American courts, tried according to US law, and sentences handed out and served in the United States.

The agreement is meant to uphold the concept of accountability under our laws and according to our legal system, with punishment being a Philippine responsibility, subject to America being accorded the chance to meet its own obligations to its citizens to ensure their safety. But that is as far as American privileges are meant to extend.

To our mind, this would mean that the US government would be within its rights to insist on a level of comfort for Smith that matches federal or US military facilities an American serviceman convicted of a similar crime would get in the United States. But it doesn’t mean Smith should be detained on US soil, which is what the American Embassy is.

That there is no clear agreement between our government and the Americans as to what and where such a facility might be is not the fault of the courts. Pozon has merely opted for what is equally logically the default position for any self-respecting Filipino: until such a facility has been identified, a standard Philippine jail must do.

Our government, however, has spent its time trying to be the lackey of the US Embassy instead of upholding a reasonable and dignified interpretation of the VFA. It could have constructed a special facility by now. But it seems to be more interested in fighting our own legal system than upholding it.

Subic Base Rape Case - No Balls, No Shame and No Sovereignty

Halloween of 2005, a young Filipino woman on a vacation in Subic had party'd a little too hard, drank a little too much and was a little too friendly with 4 US marines on R&R. To make a long story short, she had claimed to be a victim of rape ... one of the 4, Lance Corporal Daniel Smith had allegedly raped her on a moving van driven by a Filipino driver ... the other 3 had cheered him on.


No, she wasn't "for hire". In fact, she was a college graduate with a family business catering to the US military personnel in Zamboanga (a province south of the Philippines). She had a fiance, also a US military personnel she met in Zamboanga ... and was said to have plans of marriage.


Earlier this month (December, 2006), the Regional Trial Court of Makati, where the trial was held, convicted Lance Corporal Daniel Smith of rape beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to 40 years imprisonment.


The case would have been simple enough ... bruises in genitalia, intoxication, credible eye witness accounts of the victim being "unloaded" from the van with her underpants down to her ankles, 4 big marines and 1 fragile woman. In this day and age, a simple "no" constitutes rape ... no need to establish "virtue" ... no need to establish "force" ... Lance Corporal Daniel Smith is GUILTY.


Why then should it be so complicated?


Here's why ...

The Philippine government agreed to a lop-sided treaty with the United States of America, named "Visiting Forces Agreement" which virtually bestows upon U.S. military personnel "extraordinary" treatment at criminal prosecutions. Specifically, there are two provisions in the treaty that require:

1. Decision on criminal cases should be made within a period of one year,


2. U.S. custody of the U.S. military personnel "until final judicial proceedings have been completed."
   

On December 4, 2006, Lance Corporal Daniel Smith WAS convicted of rape and sentenced to 40 years imprisonment.

The treaty did not specify in clear terms what "final judicial proceedings" meant and since this is in doubt, the U.S. claims custody on the convict.

NO BALLS - The heads of the Department of Justice, Department of Foreign Affairs and the Solicitor General are stumbling all over themselves in trying to get the good side of the United States by upholding the rights of a convicted U.S. military personnel.

NO SHAME - The Foreign Affairs Secretary, Justice Secretary and Solicitor General belies the integrity of public office itself by shamelessly disrespects the independence and integrity of Judge Benjamin Pozon.

NO SOVEREIGNTY - The government top brass seems to have buckled and surrendered all our sovereignty to the U.S.

Indeed, SOVEREIGNTY which is defined as complete independence and self-government ... ELUDES THE FILIPINO.

Cha-Cha, a persistently irritating piece of gum stuck in my shoe

CHARTER CHANGE. For as long as I can remember, I have heard debates on how impractical a presidential form of government is for the Philippines. Ferdinand Marcos first "recommended" the idea of a Parliamentary form of government to "improve" governance of the country ... we later found out that his only motive was to extend his "reign". When the "recommended" change was defeated, he proclaimed Martial Law instead and he continued to "reign" as President. The ultimate mission had been achieved ... so much for the "recommendation" ... the true motive did come out ... POWER.

When we inherited the Presidential form of government from the U.S.A., we failed to inherit something else that was inherent to its success ... an understanding of the democratic principles behind our current constitution and the inherent checks and balances that were built into it.

Since childhood, I was taught that to point an accusing finger at someone, I was really pointing 3 fingers my way. When are the "leaders of our nation" going to realize that by pointing an accusing finger at the Presidential form of government, they are actually pointing 3 at themselves?

1. They fail to understand the principles of a democracy,
2. They fail to deliver for the electorate, and
3. They fail to control their greed.

While they debate endlessly about how they propose to prolong their "reign" ... they really should be thinking about:

1. The massive poverty and malnutrition all over the country,
2. The declining quality of education,
3. The declining quality of health and health services,
4. The inadequate and declining infrastructure for general public utilities (peace and order, roads and bridges, garbage collection, water, electricity)
5. The declining quality of business infrastructure (communication facilities, ports, tax incentives)
6. The massive corruption in all level and all sectors of government.

In a nation where people struggle to even survive on a day to day basis ... shouldn't their priorities be changed?

The five year old child scraping fragments of food from some trashed tin can in Smokey Mountain couldn't care less if we had a President or a Prime Minister.