Manolo Quezon is #TheExplainer Newsletter - Issue #65
It was years in the making, but in one respect the present administration in its sunset months, accomplished what it set out to do.
Reflections on #EDSA36
Above is one of the slides in the deck linked to below, and it made me reflect on a curious irony of history. Reflecting on this: the biggest political threat to Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is the one conviction he had to accept --for failing to pay his taxes-- rather than risk the even greater penalty of imprisonment, but it continues to represent the biggest threat to his political future. Like Al Capone, it's a tax case that got FM Jr. A good rundown of the case was penned by former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban in his column:
In Republic v. Marcos II (Aug. 4, 2009), the Supreme Court (Third Division) held that the CA’s conviction of BBM for his failure to file his income tax returns (ITR) for four years (1982-1985) did not disqualify him to be “the executor of the will of his father” because such failure “is not a crime involving moral turpitude.” Under the Rules of Court (Rule 78, Section 1), a person convicted “of an offense involving moral turpitude” cannot serve as an executor or administrator of a decedent’s estate.
The Court said that three different violations are relevant to ITRs namely, “(1) false return, (2) fraudulent return with intent to evade tax, (3) failure to file a return.” It stressed that the first two “entail willfulness and fraudulent intent on the part of the individual and thus fall” under the category of “everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty, or good morals”—the accepted judicial definition of moral turpitude.
However, the Court explained that the third—failure to file ITRs—“is not a crime involving moral turpitude as the mere omission is already a violation regardless of the fraudulent intent or willfulness of the individual.”
Some may disagree with, even rage against, this cryptic explanation but as long as it is not reversed, or modified, or clarified to be merely an obiter dictum (or a side comment) by the Supreme Court en banc, lower courts and quasi-judicial agencies like the Comelec are duty-bound to follow it.
Reflections on #EDSA36 – Manuel L. Quezon III — www.quezon.ph Every February, a month heavy with memories for some, but a remote era for many others, I share slides with readings. I decided to redo them this year, and share them as a PDF taken from a deck.
The link above will take you to my blog and an embedded PDF.
This week's The Long View
How to castrate a Constitution | Inquirer Opinion — opinion.inquirer.net
By: Manuel L. Quezon III - @inquirerdotnet
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:07 AM February 16, 2022
I’ve heard lawyers mention a kind of maxim which says what isn’t expressly forbidden is allowed. This, in a nutshell, is the approach taken by lawmakers in amending Commonwealth Act No. 146, the Public Service Act of 1936 which basically said public services and public utilities are the same, required certification by the Public Service Commission to operate, and ownership by Filipinos since the public relied on them. The law in turn derived its basis on the 60 percent Filipino ownership on public utilities, our current and previous constitutions since 1935 have all required. This is why the CA 146 has remained relevant, not least because it underscores that public utilities cannot be divorced from the concept of public service. Businesses of course, prefer that profit should be unimpeded by ideas of public service; and that ownership shouldn’t be determined by passports.
What can now be 100 percent foreign-owned: telecommunications, domestic shipping, railways and subways, airlines, expressways and tollways, and airports. What remains restricted to a maximum of 40 percent foreign ownership: distribution and transmission of electricity; petroleum and petroleum products pipeline transmission systems; water pipeline distribution systems and wastewater pipeline systems, including sewerage pipeline systems; seaports; public utility vehicles.
For companies engaged in the operation and management of critical infrastructure, foreign ownership is limited to 50 percent (unless Filipinos enjoy reciprocal rights in that country). It’s the National Security Council that will determine what falls under the definition of critical infrastructure.
The national chameleon, Joey Salceda, grandly proclaimed the amendments an “Oligarchy-busting reform,” ignoring of course, that it’s the oligarchy that has long wanted to liberalize the economy so they can sell out to foreign capital. Sen. Grace Poe for her part claims “Adequate safeguards and security provisions are in place, including giving authority to the President to suspend or prohibit any proposed merger or acquisition transaction, or any investment in a public service that will grant control to a foreigner or a foreign corporation,” which only underscores what even moderate supporters of the law point out as one of its shortcomings: the presidential discretion.
For one thing, what the President can do, he or she can choose not to do; for another, as the retired investment banker Leo Alejandrino bluntly puts it in his blog (and Ferdinand Marcos showed), “Executive discretion is the mother of corruption.” Alejandrino is equally blunt about some so-called safeguards being nothing of the sort, or actually counterproductive. For example, the amended law forbids investments by foreign state-owned enterprises. Administration proponents objected to this, saying it was obviously an anti-China move. But as Alejandrino convincingly argues, this is meaningless when it comes to China where all enterprises, even the biggest and officially non-state-owned, is under the control of Beijing as Alibaba and Tencent proved. On the other hand, the provision forbids sovereign wealth funds such as Singapore’s Temasek from becoming owners.
Or take the law’s reciprocity clause: in the first place, no Filipino company is in a position to compete abroad in industries where, precisely, those industries have been liberalized to welcome foreign capital to make up for a lack of domestic capital. But what it could open up is competition by foreign firms that enjoy subsidies from their own governments: here Alejandrino points to airlines from the Middle East or China.
Rep. Edcel Lagman has pointed out the Constitution can’t be amended by merely amending a law. This is the clincher. The President can reply this is one law he managed to push through: and a Supreme Court molded in his image will surely uphold it.
In previous Congresses, the straightforward path to liberalizing ownership through a simple one-phrase amendment (“as may be provided by law”) was proposed. But a cleverer solution was proposed in 2017: leave the Constitution alone but render its provisions inoperative by amending existing legislation. It finally came to pass earlier this month. It betrays a Marcosian contempt for the law. Prior to 1972, President Marcos’ battling with Meralco had frustratingly found the Public Service Commission established by the Public Service Law to be independent. So, in his first presidential decree, he abolished it, eliminating institutional resistance to him while investing himself with what had formerly been independent powers.
#ProyektoPilipino Episode 3
“Madaling maging tamad kung ikaw ang bise presidente. Dahil ang posisyon ng bise presidente ay ang posisyon ng sariling sikap.”
The vice president may be regarded as the second highest position in the land but in reality, its office is always underfunded, undermanned, and underappreciated. In this episode, join Fr. Tito Caluag and his friendly trio of distinguished thinkers—Dr. Leloy Claudio, Manolo Quezon, and Carlo Santiago—as they talk to Joey Salgado, who worked for the office of the vice president. Salgado walks us through his experiences under the OVP so we may better understand the challenges of this position, some of the best practices that we’ve seen from previous VPs, and the real powers and responsibilities of the land’s “second-in-command.”
Watch the third episode of Proyekto Pilipino on the following channels and timeslots:
The Conscience Collective Youtube channel: Thursdays, 7 p.m.
Sky Cable Channel Ch 955 HD, Ch 155 SD: Fridays, 7 p.m. | Saturdays and Sundays, 3 p.m.
Jeepney TV: Sundays, 6 p.m. | Mondays, 6:30 a.m. Click the link below to watch it!
Si Vice | Proyekto Pilipino Episode 3 — www.youtube.com “Madaling maging tamad kung ikaw ang bise president. Dahil ang posisyon ng bise president ay ang posisyon ng sariling sikap.”The vice president may be regard...