|
For the past 17 years, The Filipino Express has provided the Filipino American community the best news, arts and entertainment coverage from around the United States and the Philippines.
|
|
This website includes selected articles from this week's edition of the Filipino Express. Not all the stories published in the printed version appear on this site.
|
|
|
|
To tell us what you think about Filipino Express Online or to comment on the stories published here, E-mail us at Filexpress@aol.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
Squandering Marcos’ millions
|
|
|
|
THE Arroyo Government seems to be in a mad rush to use up the recovered Marcos millions.
In just two years, the Arroyo Administration, through the Department of Agrarian Reform, has already spent P27 billion of the P35-billion ($718 million) ill-gotten wealth of the late President Ferdinand Marcos stashed in Swiss deposits that was recovered by the government.
It boggles the mind to try to figure how a government can spend that much in so short a time. The bewilderment grows manifold when seen in the light of the current rut the Philippines is in. One would imagine that with all that money to spend, the Arroyo Government would have made life a little bit better for the average Juan dela Cruz and his family.
It took Marcos 21 years to raise that amount and stash it away in secret Swiss accounts. It took Arroyo only two years to spend three-quarters of it.
Budget Secretary Romulo Neri and DAR Undersecretary Jeffrey Galan defended the spending spree, saying the Marcos funds were used “in accordance with the law”. Twenty-seven billion pesos, they said, were allocated by law to fund the government’s agrarian reform program.
Of course, it is legal. It is easy to make everything legal. But what is legal is not always just, nor moral. The question here is whether it is moral to spend that much an amount in just two, three years? Can Mrs. Arroyo and her subalterns honestly say that the splurge really benefitted the farmer tenants in particular, and the Philippine economy in general?
This unbridled spending takes on a much grander immoral proportion when we remind ourselves that the $718 million was awarded as compensatory damages by a Hawaii court to the victims of the human rights abuses of Marcos during his two decades of dictatorial rule.
But the Arroyo government passed a law stating that of the P37 billion, only P10 billion shall be awarded to human rights victims, who were actually the ones who filed the case and labored to have the funds recovered.
But with the conscience-free, guilt-free spending of the Marcos millions by the Arroyo Administration, soon there may be nothing left for Marcos victims, the supposed beneficiaries of the recovered wealth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEW YORK --- Of all the victory speeches I’ve heard on Tuesday night’s elections in New Jersey and New York, I like what governor-elect Jim Corzine said. Flanked by his three children and relatives, he said, “Together we will restore the simple truth that public service is about serving the public – nothing else, nothing more, not our party, not our friends, not our contributors, just the people of the state of New Jersey.”
Equally modest was the concession speech of Doug Forrester, Corzine's opponent. He told supporters he was prepared “to help in any way he sees fit to carry out what I believe is an important public task of bringing New Jersey together, of healing New Jersey, and of giving us a brighter future that we each have spoke about during this campaign.”
Their statements were a far cry from what we’ve witnessed in the Philippine Independence Day Council, Inc. (PIDCI) election. In PIDCI, both victors and losers said none; if anyone had said something it was not even about unity and healing but about an ominous event that was yet to happen. This was because the election process was marked with intrigue, threats, bitterness, spiteful attacks and a lawsuit.
And there seems to be no end in sight. While Justice Jane Solomon has ruled in favor of the defendants, Ludi Hughes' camp seems bent on pressing their case to the appellate court.
The rage from the losing side goes on. No one seems to have cooled off and allowed healing to set in. Is anyone willing to restore the simple truth about community service, which to paraphrase Corzine, is about serving the public – nothing more, not our party, not our friends, just the future of our community?
Is anyone willing to believe that we are all in this together to keep our community united? Shouldn’t everyone, to paraphrase Forrester, help in any way to carry out an important task of bringing our community together, of healing, and of giving our best to hold an independence celebration that each side spoke about during their campaign?
In hindsight, I can see that in everything that happened in this election; everyone has a responsibility to bear. Let any person from either side who has clean hands and a pure heart stand up and declare his innocence. The simple truth is: No one would admit to be free from guilt.
At its first board meeting held on Nov. 7, new PIDCI officers were elected. They are: Dr. Emmanuel "Boy" Pangan, vice president; Sevilla Belen Castillo, secretary; and Sofia Abad, treasurer.
But what is this I hear that Dr. Baby Bleza and Lita Pena were told not to run for office or chair a committee? After all that was said and done, I thought the politics of inclusion was the only right thing to do. If we were to restore the simple truth of public service, as duly elected directors, Bleza and Pena should not have been denied of their right to serve in a position where they could best perform.
Let’s face it. PIDCI has been so politicized that even well-meaning individuals are sometimes taken for granted for what they can do for the cause. And I think this is a sad reality which started since PIDCI’s incorporation. As president, Gani Puertollano should take steps to change that.
One of the other issues I heard discussed at their meeting was the board seat being vacated by Puertollano. According to inside sources, Rev. Gaudy Soriano, who received 77 votes in last year's election, was told to fill the vacancy.
This is an area of contention which may only distract the new administration from planning their year. If this is not resolved quickly, the board may be discussing this issue endlessly.
Under Article III, Section 4, Paragraph D of the PIDCI by-laws, it stipulates that: "Unless otherwise prohibited by the Articles of Incorporation, these By-Laws or provisions of law, vacancies on the Board may be filled by those candidates who got the next highest vote based on the ranking at the last election, with the approval of the majority of the existing entire Board of Directors. No proxy vote will be accepted."
The problem is how this particular provision is interpreted and applied. Every one seems to have a version of it, which only leads to more confusion.
In the meeting, Pena argued that Edgar Buenconsejo who received 88 votes last October 2005 should be the person to fill the vacant seat. According to her, she says the term “last,” refers to the most recent election. In which case, she says, Buenconsejo, who received the next highest vote based on ranking, should serve as board member.
However, her argument was turned down by another board member who said the term “last” meant the previous year. If that was the case, Pena argued, based on ranking, Dr. Ben Ileto should fill the vacancy. Again, her argument was not accepted.
In the 2004 PIDCI election, the by-laws stipulated seven board members to serve a two-year term and the next six to serve for one year. At that time, the following board members (ranked by votes) were elected: Wilson Versoza (124 votes), Lolita Compas (117), Emmanuel Pangan (113), Raul Estrellado (112), Gani Puertollano (106), Arnie Rosario (101), Sofia Abad (101), Dr. Ben Ileto (98), Dr. Baby Bleza (96), Dr. Rommel Rivera (94), Philip Carreon (89), Angie Cruz (87), and Tambi Wycoco (79).
Next to Wycoco was Rev. Gaudy Soriano who received 77 votes. Even though Rosario and Abad were tied for the sixth spot, both were considered to serve a two-year term. Ileto, on the other hand, was considered to serve a one-year term even though he garnered the seventh spot in rank.
Whose interpretation is correct? Who is the rightful successor to Puertollano? Is it Buenconsejo, Soriano or Ileto? And who or which body within PIDCI is authorized to render a decision about this succession issue?
It has been said that Hughes’ lawsuit could have been prevented if her complaint was addressed by the board appropriately. If Puertollano were to learn a lesson from the past, how quickly would he act on this problem?
Is another lawsuit brewing just to have a clear interpretation of the by-laws? Would Ileto take the same route Hughes had taken? Everyone seems to be in lawsuit frenzy and I wonder where this is leading our community into.
Anyone wishing to be called a community leader should restore the simple truth about public service. You win some elections, you lose some. If they keep public service in mind the way Corzine had described it and remember how a candidate like Forrester humbly accepted his loss, we can achieve our life-long dream of unity for the good of our community.
That’s the simple truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“FISH is the last wild dish in the human diet.” But overfishing has resulted in two-thirds of major species slump. Virtually, all additional fish on our dinner tables today come from ponds. But aquaculture is faltering as vital habitats like mangroves are wrecked.
“Aquaculture is a phenomenal success story,” notes Science magazine’s current issue. But the boom-and-bust track record, etched by shoddily managed fish farms, sapped what some had hoped would be a “Blue Revolution.”
Jurgenne H. Primavera is a Pew Fellow in marine conservation. She sketches this analysis in “Mangroves, Fishponds and the Quest for Sustainability,” published in the influential world journal.
Only 8 percent of fish landed in 1975 came from ponds. Today, farmed fish account for more than one-third, writes this Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center scientist. Nine out of every 10 tons come from Asia.
Brackish water pond culture dates back to Java in the year 1400. But today’s over-extended farms are wrecking mangroves, the linchpin for this vital industry.
Thriving where sea meets the land, mangroves produce food, wood and medicine. They also offer forested buffer zones in a country clobbered by 20 or more typhoons yearly.
Indonesia and the Philippines carved out culture ponds from mangrove swamps. They’re ideal for growing milkfish (“Chanos chanos”) that command premium prices.
But at what cost?
At the 20th century’s turn, the Philippines had only 500,000 hectares of mangroves left. Half of that number disappeared between 1951 and 1988, converted into ponds mainly for milkfish and shrimp. Thus, brackish water ponds quadrupled from 61,000 hectares in 1940 to today’s 230,000 hectares.
This downward skid is worldwide. In 1990, mangroves extended over 18 million hectares. By 2000, they covered only 15 million hectares. “The losses were particularly heavy in Southeast Asia, which hosts a third of total mangrove area.”
Growing populations, conversion into salt beds or farms, the urban sprawl with its factories, jacked up the pressure on mangroves. “Asphalt is often the last harvest” in these areas.
To redress “the present imbalance,” ways must be crafted so aquaculture complements, rather than competes with, traditional open-sea fisheries, Primavera writes. At the same time, vital habitats like mangroves must be conserved.
“Today, an aerial view of the Philippine coastline will show a monotonous succession of ponds,” Primavera writes. “(There’s) hardly any green signs of mangroves.”
The already weak implementation of laws is further hobbled by inadequate manpower and resources. National forestry and fishery agencies rarely get their act together. Above all, there’s lack of political will.
“We must not make a scarecrow of the law / Setting it up to fear the birds of prey, and let it keep one shape / Till custom make it their perch, and not their terror,” Shakespeare counseled.
Many fish farms operate on expired or “pending applications.” All too often, a single family corners hundreds of hectares of pond area.
“Twenty hectares is the most that a Filipino pond operator can realistically manage by himself,” she points out. “Many ponds are underutilized or abandoned. And productivity is low compared to that of Thai shrimp farms, which average two hectares or less.”
In the Science article, Primavera recommends reduction of farm sizes. Aquaculturists can increase pond yields and pay the still modest lease fees. There’s a scope for new technology, too.
Then, there’s an example. In 28 case studies of exemplary forest management in Asia, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization cited Aklan province’s innovative mangrove reforestation program.
The FAO’s new book, titled “In Search of Excellence,” documents how the Kalibo Save the Mangroves Association coaxed a mangrove forest into life from a bare mudflat in the village of New Buswang. “Illegal cutting is down and the area is being promoted as an alternative tourism site alongside Boracay and the Ati-Atihan festival.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State Department issues cable on student visas
|
|
|
|
WHEN applying for certain visas (such as visitor/tourist or student visas), the law requires that the applicant cannot have any “immigrant intent”, meaning the applicant:
1. Has a residence abroad (in their home country);
2. Has no immediate intention of abandoning that residence; and
3. Intends to depart from the United States upon the completion of the non-immigrant activity (such as visiting or studying).
Most visa denials are because the applicant was unable to satisfactorily prove to the Consul that they did not have “immigrant intent”.
Recently, the U.S. State Department issued a cable, instructing U.S. Embassies and consulates around the world on how Consuls should evaluate the “intent” issue in connection with student visas. These instructions might also be of value to those who are applying for other types visas, such as visitor visa, which also involves the same issues of intent.
The cable made the following points in connection with student visas:
1. Consuls should focus on the person’s immediate and near-term intent to “maintain a residence abroad”. Consuls should not speculate on “what might happen in the future”, during the student’s lengthy period of study in the U.S.
For example, a consul should not refuse a student visa based on speculation that once the student starts studying, the student may like it in America, and may eventually want to live and work in the U.S. permanently. That is speculating too far into the future, and this cable instructs consuls not to engage in that type of speculation.
2. While the concept of “ties” to the applicant’s home country is very useful in evaluating a person’s non-immigrant intent (i.e. the applicant, whether visitor or student, has strong social, economic, and family ties to the home country), it is relatively less useful in evaluating the present intent of a student. Typically, a student is young, unemployed, has no dependents, and does not have substantial personal assets. Thus, the student is not typically able to establish “strong ties” to the Philippines. However, this should not be held against the student, so long as their immediate intent is to study in the U.S. and return to the Philippines upon graduation.
3. The fact that the alien intends to study a subject for which there is no or little employment opportunity in his home country is not a basis for refusing a student visa, even if the student’s proposed course of study seems to be impractical. For example, if a person from a developing country wants to study nuclear engineering, simply because he enjoys it, he should not be refused a visa because there is no market for nuclear engineer skills in his home country.
4. The fact that the alien’s home country can provide the equivalent quality courses in the same subject matter should also not be a basis for refusing the student visa (i.e. a person wants to study nursing in the U.S. but there are plenty of nursing schools in the Philippines). The State Department noted that “the student has the right to choose where s/he will obtain an education if accepted by the school”.
5. U.S. Embassies and consulates should “facilitate the re-issuance of student visas”, so that students can travel freely back and forth between their home country and the United States. The State Department noted that if students feel that they will encounter difficulties in obtaining a new student visa, or that a student visa will not be issued to them at the Embassy, they may be reluctant to ever leave the United States during the course of their studies, even for a short vacation during summer.
In other words, unless the Embassy finds that there have been significant changes in the student’s circumstance from the time the previous student visa was issued, re-issuance of student visa should be done in the normal course of business, and students should not be given a hard time at the Embassy in getting a new student visa. Of course, if the student dropped out of school, or did not take the required load, that could be a significant change in circumstance.
6. The fact that a school has issued an I-20 (Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status) should be sufficient evidence that the school has accepted the applicant as a student. Consular officer should not “go behind the I-20 to adjudicate the alien’s qualifications as a student for that institution”, unless the Consular officer has a reason to believe that the applicant engaged in fraud or misrepresentation.
Furthermore, the student’s choice of subject matter is not determinative of their scholastic aptitude. For example, if Harvard University accepted someone with an average GPA, that should be sufficient proof that the alien has been accepted, and the Consul should not be making determinations that, “you’re not smart enough for that school, so I am refusing the visa”.
7. All legitimate schools must be accorded the same weight under the law, whether it’s a major university, community college, or lesser-known school. There is no legal difference between community colleges, English language schools, and four-year institutions. The State Department instructs that the “applicant should be adjudicated on their bona fides as a student regardless of institution [or] program of study”. Of course, if the Consul is suspicious about the authenticity of the school, the Consul should contact the DHS in America for verification.
I know how important education is to Filipinos, and many of them want their children to be able to study in the U.S. This recent cable from the State Department now clarifies some of the major issues concerning eligibility for a student visa, and may help legitimate students avoid being refused their student visa.
Michael J. Gurfinkel has been an attorney for over 24 years, and is an active member of the State Bar of California and New York, as well as the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Immigration Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association. He has always excelled in school: Valedictorian in High School; Cum Laude at UCLA; and Law Degree Honors and academic scholar at Loyola Law School, which is one of the top law schools in California.
WEBSITE: www.gurfinkel.com
Four offices to serve you:
LOS ANGELES:
219 North Brand Boulevard, Glendale, California, 91203
Telephone: (818) 543-5800
SAN FRANCISCO:
601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 460, South San Francisco, CA 94080
Telephone: (650) 827-7888
NEW YORK:
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2101, New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 808-0300
PHILIPPINES:
Heart Tower, Unit 701, 108 Valero Street, Salcedo Village, Makati, Philippines 1227
Telephone: 894-0258 or 894-0239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
