Metro Infanta Foundation, Inc.

Contact us … Please send your email to: editor@infanta.org

Taranaki Filipino Society

Rex Crisostomo sent this notice from Efren Coralde, of Batch '83. Efren, now residing in New Zealand, is very active in the above society, which sponsors underprivileged children.

Evanne Hull, one of the main organizers, said the project was launched to give needy children a chance for a better life. Although their contribution represents only one starfish in the ocean of the needy, she hopes that their efforts will make a difference.

She also encourages others to take part on this special project.

In this way, she said, "The Taranaki Filipino Society will help to build better and more secure lives for the child and the community he lives in."

Metro Infanta Foundation will receive another $2,500 grant if we can raise the same amount by the end of November. This is in addition to the $6,000 grant we will receive if we raise the same amount by the end of December. We'll calling all our kababayans to make an all out effort to encourage others to help us reach these two challenge grants. Remember, our goal for the year 2005 is $21,978. 74, of which we have received $18,941.07,which we distribute according towards causes -- education, religious, humanitarian -- designated by donors. In addition, we are raising $20,000 to help rebuild Mt. Carmel School of Infanta. I hope there are more than three batches (1970, 1973 and 1984) willing to help us raise this amount, so we can send the total amount collected by the end of the year or the beginning of next year (depending on our collection). We can raise this money if we all do our share.

Below is a message that Rex Crisostomo sent us recently, with email from Joy Azores de Castro, who reported that Jun Diestro ($100) and Meo Alteza ($50)gave their contribution towards the Batch of 1984 directly to MCHS. She also said, "Talagang kailangan ng cash ng school natin....marami nagbibigay dito sa Infanta kaya lng hindi mismo sa school napupunta lahat. Sana makalikom pa tayo ng pera kasi humihingi talaga sila ng tulong financial. Paki-extend mo pa sa iba pa natin kabatch na magdonate sila para sa school. I know they are generouse people like you."

Maraming salamat po Dra. Joy sa confirmation ng tulong nila Jun at Meo. I, Vener and Venchi Gucon(husband of Julieta) send our love gift thru the Metro-Infanta Foundation. The only question is when they are going to send it to Mt. Carmel School of Infanta. I think they are going to wait 'til the projected amount has been accomplished or received. Anyway, naka-cc dito ang iba pa nating ka-batch ganoon din si Maam Mila ng Metro-Infanta Foundation for their information.

A QUESTION OF BALANCING SECURITY AND LIBERTY

By Rudy A. Arizala*

I. Introduction
There is no doubt in the light of present peace and order situation when thousands are being killed all over the world due to terrorist acts, there is an urgent need for vigilance that the rule of law predominates by enacting legislation to effectively prevent or eradicate terrorism. There is a clamor for more teeth to local laws to combat terrorism. Some even opined that in this globalized world we should not talk more about how much freedom we have but if antiterrorism law is necessary.

There are those, however, who expressed the view that fighting terrorism should be balanced with respect for human rights and the Bill of Rights guaranteed under democratic Constitutions. As our Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Lauro L. Baja, Jr. said before the Sixth (Legal) Committee of the 60th General Assembly on 11 October 2005:

"We also believe that it is important to win the hearts and minds of peoples in support of any measure designed to combat terrorism. Protecting liberties and safeguarding fundamental human rights will ensure that such measures will not have the unintended consequence of playing into the aims and methods of terrorism." (DFA Press Release SFA-AGR-743- 11 October 2005, RP Urges UN: "Walk the Talk Against Terrorism.")

II. Proposed RP Bill, Analyzed
Now let us examine the proposed "antiterrorism Act of 2005" as presently worded. Itt defines terrorism as "the premeditated, threatened and actual use of violence or force or by any other means of destruction perpetrated against persons, properties, or the environment, with the intention of creating or sowing a state of danger, panic, fear, or chaos in the general public, group of persons, or segment thereof, or coercing or intimidating the government to do or abstain from doing an act."

Under the bill, acts of terrorism include: "threatening, or causing, serious unlawful interference with or serious unlawful disruption of an essential service, facility or system; hijacking any kind of aircraft or any means of mass transportation; threatening to kidnap or deprive a person of his liberty."

The bill likewise contains clauses on conspiracy to commit terrorism. It says: "There is conspiracy to commit terrorism when two or more persons come to an agreement to commit any act of terrorism as defined herein. There is a proposal to commit terrorism when any person who had decided to commit an act of terrorism proposes its execution to some other person or persons."

Acts that aid terrorism under the bill include: "harboring or concealing any person whom one has reasonable ground to believe has committed an act of terrorism," and "failure to disclose acts of terrorism." Which is when "any person who having personal knowledge or information of any acts of terrorism conceals or does not make known the same."

From the foregoing, it could be seen that under the proposed bill, the following are punishable acts:

The key word in the Antiterrorism bill is "FEAR" And mere intent, threat, concealment or failure to disclose act of terrorism as defined above are punishable. Acts of terrorism could not only be committed against person or persons but also against properties, environment provided it create or tend to create "state of danger, panic, fear or chaos".

Under the bill, a person caught in possession of explosives or dynamite which he intends to use in catching fish, is likely now to be prosecuted not for "illegal possession of explosives" or for using dynamite in fishing but for "Terrorism." A person or group of persons who hijacked a passenger bus to rob its passengers would not now be charged with "highway robbery or robbery in band" but with act of "terrorism." And if a bystander fail to report or disclose that an act of terrorism has been committed could now also be prosecuted for terrorism.

The definition of terrorism under the bill is an "all-embracing definition" which covers practically everything. To catch a shark, it appears the government has decided under the bill to use a "lambat" or big net which will catch all marine species, big or small. Or using dynamite which will kill all marine species at a given area.

In other words, to fight terrorism, it appears we are also using terror or fear. Terror versus terror.

It is, therefore, relevant to ask if the following Bill of Rights are likely to be affected or amended by the Antiterrorism Bill , and if so, to what extent:

Likewise, if also the following provisions of the Philippine Revised Penal Code are likely to be affected or amended, and if so, to what extent:

III. Conclusion
In drafting a law on antiterrorism, there should be not a "balance of terror", but a balance between "Security and Liberty". To quote again our Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York Ambassador Lauro L. Baja, Jr., "We believe that it is important to win the hearts and minds of peoples in support of any measure to combat terrorism." And this could be done, according to him, by: "protecting liberties and safeguarding fundamental human rights."

In conclusion, while national security is essential in the maintenance and protection of freedom, it is equally essential that in so doing, the rights of the citizens should be held inviolable. As eloquently stated in the dissenting opinion of U.S. Justice Black in the Wilkinson case:

"True Americanism is to be protected not by committees that prosecute unorthodox minorities, but by strict adherence to basic principles of freedom that are responsible for this nation´s greatness." [Wilkison v. U.S. 365 U.S. 399 (1960)].

October's light in a penumbra

By Rodolfo A. Arizala*

Santiago, Chile

I. Introduction

At this stage in our history, when we are confronted with multifarious problems of economic, social and political &endash; 60% of our people are on poverty level; declining standard of educational system; alleged failure to hold clean, honest and peaceful elections; and constant "tug-of-war" between the executive and legislative - and when most people seem to be at a loss or confused on what to do, the question foremost in the minds of our people is: "What happened to Philippine Democracy?" And what are we supposed to do?

According to one columnist, "They want to remove Ms. Arroyo because she did not win the election, only to replace her with a group of people who did not win the election who will govern indefinitely." ("What happened to democracy?" by Conrado de Quiros, PDI, 06 October 2005). The question to most people, is: "Who do we put in her place?"

Another writer columnist pointed out that the ills of our country could be traced to "elite democracy which has held sway in the Philippines for nearly 100 years." And added it culminated "in the century-old struggle for power among the factions of the elite, which helps to explain the poor´s lack of passion or concern regarding the controversy." According to him elite democracy was responsible for "the concentration of economic and political power in the hands of a few." His suggested solution is to put an end to elite democracy "by organizing discussions and action groups at the local level. Every school, church or chapel, parents-teachers´association, cooperatives and credit union, labor or peasant organization could become a venue for discussing local issues." From such local discussion groups the movement could develop into national level. ("Life from the dead," by John J. Carroll, S.J., PDI, 06 October 2005).

A third columnist speak of the need of a viable "vision" from the seat of power -- Malacañan Palace -- which is the "pulpit and stage" for the exercise of presidential power. He observed that each President since we became a nation had their respective visions from "Independence", to "Social Justice," "Man of the Masses," culminating to "People Power," "Philippine 2000," and finally, "Strong Republic." He noted, however, that the "Fear Factor" is showing its ugly head. According to him: "But then comes a back-to-back performance of the Philippine National Police -- trying to imitate the legions of Rome or the phalanxes of ancient Greece -- running after hardheaded but unarmed socialists, and the result is, well, the ´brutality´ vision thing. Which is never inspiring." ("The ´vision thing´", by Manuel L. Quezon lll, PDI, 06 October 2005).

II. Best Form of Government

What then is the best form of government? The late Dr. Jose P. Laurel used to tell his class in Constitutional Law that the best from of government is a "monarchy with an angel on the throne." But because it is impossible to find an angel to govern us, democracy where the leaders are chosen by freewill or vote of the people, despite its defects, is the best alternative. Democracy, according to him is a system of government where the doctrine of separation of powers among the three branches of government -- legislative, executive and judicial -- is observed thus, having "checks and balances". What is the doctrine of "separation of powers" and principle of "checks and balances" which is the very essence of Constitutionalism?

Elaborating on the doctrine of "separation of powers," Justice Holmes of the United States said: "The great ordinances of the Constitution do not establish and divide fields of black and white. Even the more specific of them are found to terminate in penumbra shading gradually from one extreme to another."

With respect to "checks and balances", the great French political scientist Montesquieu had this to say:

"When the legislative and executive are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehension may arise lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, and execute them in a tyrannical manner. Again there is no liberty if the judicial power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control; for the judge would then be legislator. Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression. There would be an end of everything, were the same man or the same body. . to execute those three powers, that of enacting laws, that of executing the public resolutions, and of trying the causes of individuals."

In short, "separation of powers" and principle of "checks and balances" enable any of the three branches of government to protect its independence by preventing encroachments on its jurisdiction and to ensure proper respect for the rule of law by correcting mistakes or abuses committed by the other departments in excess of their lawful authority.

III. Conclusion

In the light of all the foregoing and that in a democracy there should be separation of powers to ensure "checks and balances," perhaps it is worthwhile to recall the light of a "Penumbra" bestowed to the Filipino people more than half a century ago. On 14 October 1943, during those dark years of the second world war, Dr. Jose P. Laurel assumed the Presidency of the Republic and said:

". . the dream and aspiration of Filipino heroes and patriots have always been complete and absolute political freedom for the Philippines and that all true Filipinos are pledged to the realization of that ideal. I therefore stood for a Government of the Filipinos, by the Filipinos and for the Filipinos exclusively and alone without the interference of, or injunction, or dictation from a foreign power. I announced that my moral philosophy -- the deeper foundation of my administration was that of righteousness which is divine and is common to all religions worthy of the name; that man lives in the triple world, physical, intellectual and moral; that physical and mental vigor (mens sana in corpore sano) is not enough, but that man´s life must be dominated by moral principles. . ." ("Days of Courage, The Legacy of Dr. Jose P. Laurel," by Rose Laurel Avanceña / Ileana Maramag, 1980, p. 109).

There is, indeed, a need for a government and leadership based on righteousness and moral principles. But good government like good vintage wine should not be poured into the old container or bottle for it may also become stale. We need to have a new container where to keep that good priceless vintage wine.

IRS Report for Fiscal Year 2004-2005

Total Revenues: $64,091

Total Expenses: $56,051

Excess for year: $8,040

Fund Balance at beginning of year: $10,530

Net assets at end of year: $18,570

The above summary, which was reported to the Internal Revenue Services in September, was prepared for Metro Infanta Foundation by MIF accountant and auditor Romy Coronacion.

The catastrophic typhoons that hit Infanta, Real, General Nakar and other neighboring towns moved many of our kababayans to solicit funds for Metro Infanta Foundation. Thus our total revenues more than doubled last year's total of $29,768.

Most of our total expenses went to grants for various causes including scholarships, Carmelite Seminary, the Prelature of Infanta for a total of $25,650 and $30,000 for the disaster relief typhoon victims. These grants were designated by donors to specific causes.

Bishop Rolando Tria Tirona, OCD, is currently in Denver to do a mission appeal on behalf of the Prelature of Infanta at St. Francis Cabrini Parish in Littleton, CO. During his visit the bishop met with the Stewardship Committee of St. Thomas More Parish which recently approved a $4,000 donation towards the purchase of much needed reference books for the St. Joseph Formation House of the prelature. Bishop Tirona will also meet with Denver's Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, OFM Cap., whose diocese regularly support missionary efforts around the world. This is the second time the Prelature of Infanta was accepted to join the Mission Coop Appeal.

With the devastation suffered by the prelature because of the typhoons of 2004, this mission appeal is a welcome activity for the bishop who has taken the leadership role in the emergency relief and the rehabilitation phase of the disaster in the prelature.

Bishop Tirona reports that he just blessed 400 homes in Barangay Agus-Agus in Infanta for those left homeless by the typhoons. The National Secretariat for Scoial Action of the Catholic Bishop's Catholic conference sponsored the above mentioned village for the typhoon victims. The housing project will be called John Paul II Village in memory of the late Holy Father John Paul II.The Prelature's Social Action Center has been coordinating all relief efforts and livelihood creation in the prelature. For more information on the rehabilitation efforts for click here.

Meanwhile, Bishop Tirona's predecessor, Bishop Julio X. Labayen, OCD, also visited Denver a couple of months ago (we were unable to report this in a timely manner because of some technical difficulties) to extend his thanks to the parishioners of St. Thomas More Parish for its mission to promote stewardship as a way of life in the Philippines. Bishop Labayen, along with Father Nonong Pili, presented the the Rev. Andrew Kemberling, pastor, and Mila Glodava, director of communications and stewardship, with a plaque of appreciation each, on behalf of the parish.

Mark and Mila Glodava and Sim and Vimin Rivera hosted the bishop while in Denver.