People's Draft: Magkaiba man tayo ng kabihasnan, iisa ang ating pinagmulan. Magkaisa tayo para sa Inang Bayan.

 

WAYS THE “PEOPLE’S DRAFT” ADDRESSES CORRUPTION

1. LESS POLITICIANS. Only City & Municipal Councilors elected by voters. Councilors choose Mayor. Mayors comprise Provincial Board. Board chooses Governor. Mayors appoint Barangay Kagawad. Sanggunian chooses Pinuno. City & Municipality as basic LGU. Posts ex-officio. Less officials. Less elections. Less tong-pats. Less pork barrel. Less red tape.

2. LESS POLITICIANS. Mayors & Congressmen comprise regional assembly, if any. Posts ex-officio. Less officials. Less elections. Less tong-pats. Less pork barrel. Less red tape.

3. EASY ELECTIONS. City & Municipal Councilors elected in multiple but small single-member districts, equivalent to congressional sub-districts. Small voting area. Less campaign expenses. Voters, candidates, their families, likely know each other. Less influence by corrupt media. Less effective vote-buying.

4. EASY REMOVAL. City & Municipal Councilors, from small single-member districts, removed by stronger modes of recall. Petition by voters, or by Barangay Kagawad. No need to wait for next elections. Mid-term accountability.

5. EASY REMOVAL. City & Municipal Mayors, Provincial Governors, Barangay Pinuno & Regional 

Chief, if any, removed by vote of no-confidence. No need for criminal or administrative cases. Loss of trust enough to remove. Immediate accountability.

6. EASY REMOVAL. President removed by vote of no-confidence. No more impeachment. Although immune from suit, loss of trust by Congress enough to remove. Immediate accountability.

7. EASY REMOVAL. Congressmen removed by strong modes of recall. Petition by voters, or by City & Municipal Councilors. No need to wait for next elections. Mid-term accountability.

8. EASY REMOVAL. COA, CSC, Comelec & Ombudsman downgraded to statutory bodies. Can be removed like any public official by admin or criminal cases. No more impeachment. Only SC protected by impeachment process, to preserve independence of judiciary.

9. LESS LOBBYING. Legislature set as single body. Only 1 approval needed to pass law. Presently needs 3 approvals to pass law (i.e. Congress, Senate, Bicam). Less expenses. Less red tape. Faster approval.

10. SHARED RESPONSIBILITY. Mandate given to party/coalition, not to single person. Congress & Councils set policy. They also choose implementors of policy. Congress hires-and-fires President. Council hires-and-fires Mayor, Governor, Pinuno & Regional Chief, if any. 

https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesDraft/posts/1104645523596803

Image by Wikimedia Commons, derived from Nodollarhandshake by Mark Miller, Herostratus and Masur

People's Draft: Palakasin ang mga rehiyon, upang lahat kayang maka ahon

Bakit ang mga probinsya, palaging dumudulog sa Maynila, hindi lang sa mga mahalagang programa, pati na rin sa mga sakuna, bagyo, baha, lindol, bulkan, at pandemya? Wala bang marunong at matino sa mga rehiyon, sa Maynila lang talaga merong ganoon? Diba maraming nasa Maynila, galing din naman sa probinsya? Kaya nagsisikipan nang marami duon, mga negosyante at manggagawa kaunti lang sa rehiyon. Mga malalaking programa, plano at proyekto sa rehiyon, aprubado ng mga taong ‘di pa naka punta duon. Kapag may kuro-kuro o reklamo ang mga taga-kanayunan, kinikimkim at tinitiis na lamang. Baguhin at ayusin na natin ang sistema sa mga rehiyon, nang umayos ang pamamalakad at kabuhayan duon. Bigyan sila ng sapat na kapangyarihan, nang makatulong sa kaunlaran ng bayan. Palakasin ang mga rehiyon, upang lahat ay kayang maka-ahon. #PeoplesDraft

10-Point Agenda of LMPF

 

LUMAD MINDANAW respectfully submits this 10-Point Statement of Issues and Concerns for consideration by the candidates for President, who seek to govern and unify the Nation composed of Tri-People, namely the Christians, the Muslims and the Indigenous People.

1. Restructure the Legal Framework by adopting the “People’s Draft” Constitution. Kini lang paglaum nga adunay pagbabago. Kung walay pagbag’o sa Batakang Balaod, walay katumanan ang giingon nga “pagbabago”. Ang tanan estorya sa mga politicos aron lang makuha o mapadayon ang poder.

2. Restructure the NCIP and establish Service Centers per tribe. Paphaon ang Provincial Offices, ug NCIP Service Center per tribe ang ipuli. Provide ample budget for implementation. NCIP Central Office> NCIP Regional Offices> NCIP Tribal/People Service Center. Ang employees sa maong service centers gikan sa tribo mismo nga giserbisyohan, aron nga malikayan ang language ug cultural gaps sa NCIP SC ug sa mga komunidad. Malikayan dinhi ang graft and corruption, kay nagkailhanay man ang taga-service center ug ang komunidad.

3. Establish IP/Lumad Peace Sanctuaries in Mindanao to sustain the move to end local communist terrorism, particularly in the countryside.

4. Conduct demographic study on IP populations in the entire country, i.e. Luzon, Visayas & Mindanao.

5. Establish/Implement creation of IP barangays based on provisions of RA 8371 and RA 7160.

6. Allocate adequate funds for CADT and ADSDPPs, para mapadali ang pag-isyu sa mga CADT ug plano.

7. Provide IPMR in Congress (1-Luzon, 1-Visayas ug 1-Mindanao) and Regional Bodies. Revise for this purpose DILG Memo. Cir. No. 2010-119, and/or other relevant regulation.

8. Amend RA 10591 and/or IRR para ang mga tribal leaders ug mga bagani adunay katungod nga maka-armas agi og depensa sa ilang kaugalingon, komunidad, sa tibuok nga kayutaan sakop sa CADT. Ang “ancestral lands” nga gipanag-iya sa tribo o “private property”, mao sab ni ilahang “place of residence”.

9. I-implementar ang pag-amuma sa kinaiyahan, ilabi na ang kalasangan nga gikinahanglan ang pagpatuman sa reforestation sa mga CADT, pinaagi sa pagpananum sa endemic species. Protektahan ang mga tubdanan sa tubig nga nagsupply sa dakung kasyudaran.

10. Tangtangon ang NCIP sa 2012 JAO with LRA, DAR, DENR, kay “private property” ang “ancestral lands” sukad pa sa karaang panahon, bisan sa wala pa ang Republika. Cariño v. Insular Govt. (1909).

03 Pebrero 2022. Mindanaw, Pilipinas.

http://www.katawhanglumad.blogspot.com

People's Draft: Poder ng gobyerno, dapat sa mga delegado, hindi sa iisang tao

 

People's Draft primer v30

 

KTB INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR SENATORIAL CANDIDATES

 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR SENATORIAL CANDIDATES

 

Introduction:

During the past 35 years after the 1987 Constitution, charter change has been proposed many times under 4 presidents (i.e. Ramos, Estrada, Arroyo, Duterte). However, none of these proposals ever reached the plebiscite stage.

Recently, the Bayanihan Draft Constitution was proposed by a Consultative Committee created under the Duterte Administration. At about the same time, the People’s Draft, a crowd-sourced constitution, was framed and proposed by concerned citizens and people’s organizations, led by Tanggulang Demokrasya and Publicus Asia.

The main topic of the interview is constitutional reform, which many believe is of primary importance. Nonetheless, the guest may raise other concerns, which he/she believes is of equal importance.

 

1.      Regarding economic policy, both the Bayanihan Draft and the People’s Draft seek to promote foreign investments for job creation, price reduction and tax generation. However, their approach to achieve the same objective, differs from each other.

The Bayanihan Draft grants to Congress the power to lift the limitations on foreign investments provided in the Constitution. In other words, liberalization of foreign investments is not self-executory. It will need implementing laws from Congress.

 

On the other hand, the People’s Draft immediately lifts the limitations on foreign investments provided in the Constitution, except for land, small-scale mining and micro-enterprises. In other words, liberalization of foreign investments is immediately executory. Congress is then empowered to liberalize further, or otherwise impose new limitations. A foreign investment council is created to protect national security. Either the President or Congress may impose reciprocity.

 

Question: What do you think about these proposals, and alternative approaches, regarding the liberalization of foreign investments?

2.      Regarding the form of government, the Bayanihan Draft retains the Presidential form with a Bicameral legislature. On the other hand, the People’s Draft shifts to the Parliamentary form with a Unicameral legislature.

 

In the Bayanihan Draft, the President, the Senate, and the House, are separate from, and independent of, each other. The Senators are increased from 24 to 36, elected from the regions, rather than at large nationwide. The Representatives are increased from 304 to 400.

 

In the People’s Draft, the President and the Senate are merged into the House. The 24 Senators become regional Representatives. The district/sectoral/people Representatives are retained at 304. Congress, the merged body, is vested with both legislative powers, and the power to hire-and-fire the President, along with the Cabinet.

 

Question: What do you think about these proposals, and alternative structures, regarding the form of government?

 

 

3.      Regarding the form of government, the Bayanihan Draft and the People’s Draft differ in the manner of election of the President.

 

In the Bayanihan Draft, the present process is retained where the President is elected directly by the people voting at large nationwide. The ballot shows the individual candidates running for President.

 

In the People’s Draft, the President is elected indirectly by the people voting by district, region and sector/people. The ballot shows not only the names of the individual candidates for Congress, but also the names of their respective nominees for President. This is like the election of pledged electors in an electoral college (i.e. US Presidential form of government). The nominee of the party or coalition that wins a majority of the seats in Congress, is then formally elected by Congress as the President.

 

Question: What do you think about these alternative modes of electing the President?

4.      Regarding the form of government, the Bayanihan Draft and the People’s Draft differs in the manner of removal of the President.

In the Bayanihan Draft, the present process is retained where the President may be removed only by impeachment for, and conviction of, high crimes. 1/3 vote of the House is required for impeachment. 2/3 vote of the Senate is required for conviction.

On the other hand, in the People’s Draft, the President may be removed for loss of confidence. This process does not have to be based on high crimes. It can based on simple crimes, or even non-crimes, like failure of performance or questionable conduct. 2/3 vote of Congress is required for removal.

Question: What do you about these alternative modes of removing the President?

 

 

5.      Regarding the system of government, the Bayanihan Draft retains the Unitary system of government. On the other hand, while the People’s Draft also retains the Unitary system of government at the beginning. However, it also provides for a process of transition to the Federal system.

The Bayanihan Draft adopts the top-down approach. 18 autonomous regions are pre-determined, subject to approval by the voters in one national plebiscite. Each autonomous region will have its own set of regional legislators and regional executives. They will be separate and distinct from the elective officials of the local government units.

On the other hand, the People’s Draft adopts the bottom-up approach. The regions are given the option to choose either a regional authority, an autonomous region, or a substate. A regional authority is a national government formed by the integration of the regional offices of selected line departments. An autonomous region is a large local government unit. A substate is a component of a federal state. The formation of either an autonomous region or substate requires the approval of the voters in a regional plebiscite. There will be no separate set of elective officials for the autonomous region or substate. The Mayors and District Representatives in the territory of the autonomous region or substate, will be the ex-officio regional legislators and regional executives.

Question: What do you think about these proposals, and alternative structures, regarding the system of government?

 

6.      Regarding the local government, the Bayanihan Draft impliedly retains the mayor-type LGU, while the People’s Draft shifts to the council-type LGU.

 

In the mayor-type LGU, the mayor is elected separately, and functions independently from the council. This is like the presidential form of government but at the local level.

 

In the council-type LGU, the mayor is elected by the council from among themselves. The council has the power to hire-and-fire the mayor. This is like the parliamentary form of government but at the local level.

 

Furthermore, under the People’s Draft, the voters elect only the city and municipal councilors; the city and municipal councils elect the mayor from among themselves; the city and municipal mayors serve as ex-officio members of the provincial council; the provincial councils elect the governor from among themselves; the city and municipal mayors appoint the members of the barangay council, from nominees of community associations; barangay councils elect the punong barangay from among themselves.

 

Question: What do you think about these alternative structures regarding the form of local government?

 

 

7.      Regarding the local government, the Bayanihan Draft impliedly retains the multi-member local district, while the People’s Draft shifts to the single-member local district.

 

In a multi-member local district, the candidates for Local Councilor run in the same large geographic area and constituency as the candidates for District Representatives.

 

In a single-member local district, the candidates for Local Councilor run in a much smaller geographic area and constituency. The congressional district is divided into such number of local subdistricts as there are local councilor seats allocated for the district.

 

Question: What do you think of these alternative modes electing local councilors?

 

 

8.      Regarding accountability, the Bayanihan Draft protects the tenure of high public officials, namely the members of constitutional commissions and the ombudsman, by requiring impeachment for their removal. On the other hand, People’s Draft removes the requirement of impeachment for these officials.

 

In the Bayanihan Draft, aside from the CSC, Comelec and COA, the CHR, Ombudsman Commission and the Competition Commission, are also constituted as independent constitutional commissions. Accordingly, all their members cannot be removed, except by impeachment.

 

In the People’s Draft, the CSC, Comelec, COA and the Ombudsman, are downgraded to ordinary statutory bodies. Accordingly, all their members may be removed from office, or otherwise disciplined, suspended or terminated, just like any other public official, without need for impeachment.

Question: What do you think about these alternative approaches regarding the tenure of high officials?

 

 

9.      Regarding the historical rights of the Muslim People, the Bayanihan Draft and the People’s Draft differ in approach.

In the Bayanihan Draft, the usual prohibition against the legal recognition of royalty has been deleted. However, the draft is silent about the legal recognition of the Southern Sultanates.

In the People’s Draft, Congress is expressly mandated to provide for the legal recognition of the Southern Sultanates. However, this is without prejudice to the sovereignty of the people, the powers of the government, the establishment of the State, the patrimony of the nation, and the integrity of the national territory.

 

Question: What do you think about these proposals, and alternative approaches, in relation to the historical rights of the Musim People?

 

 

10.  Regarding the traditional rights of the Indigenous People, both the Bayanihan Draft and the People’s Draft uphold these rights, particularly the right to their ancestral lands, found in the present 1987 Constitution. They both impliedly adopt the principles embodied in the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA).

 

Question: What do you think about these laws, and their implementation, in relation to the traditional rights of the Indigenous People?

 

 

KILUSAN NG MGA TAGAPAGTANGGOL NG BAYAN (KTB)

Metro Manila, Philippines. 08 February 2022

 

KTB GUIDELINES IN CHOOSING SENATORIAL CANDIDATES

GUIDELINES IN CHOOSING SENATORIAL CANDIDATES 

QUALIFICATIONS

1. Those who support the immediate lifting of legal restrictions on foreign investments, to strengthen free and open competition, and promote job creation, price reduction and tax generation, subject to safeguards to protect national security, and to reciprocity to promote national interest.

2. Those who support the scheduled shift to a parliamentary form of government, coupled with a council-type LGU, to institute collegial rule (by an assembly of people’s representatives elected from single-member districts), instead of one-man rule (by one chief executive elected at large), and promote political democracy.

3. Those who support the gradual decentralization of the national government to empower the regions, by supporting the growth and enabling the development of regional centers, under either a regional authority, autonomous region or substate.

 

DISQUALIFICATIONS

1. Those who voted for the impeachment and conviction of the late CJ Renato Corona, amidst charges of bribery by the Aquino administration, using public funds sourced from the unconstitutional DAP, for apparent political considerations; this anomaly shook to the core the entire judicial branch of government, a major pillar of our democracy.

2. Those who support, aid and abet the communist rebels of the CPP-NPA-NDF, a declared terrorist organization, like those from KABAG (Kabataan-Anakbayan-Bayan Muna-ACT-Gabriela); they aim to take power through violence, intimidation, deceit, and class war among fellow Filipinos.

3. Those who support religious extremists (like the Abu Sayyaf, Maute, etc.) that terrorize and wage war against peoples of different beliefs; religious intolerance of other beliefs, like those of Christians, moderate Islam, and Animists (i.e. Indigenous People), has no place in our democracy.

4. Those who defend the COMELEC and its technology supplier, SMARTMATIC, in their brazen disablement of techno-legal safeguards, and obstinate refusal to undergo digital forensic examination; the lack of transparency in the counting of the votes casts a dark cloud of doubt over the integrity of automated elections.

5. Those who engage in excessive propaganda using tri-media (i.e. ABS-CBN, GMA7, ABC5, Inquirer, Philstar, etc.) and social media (i.e. Facebook, Twitter, etc.), but have nothing show in actual hard projects on the ground. 

6. Those who resist constitutional reform, and defend the existing monopolies and oligopolies of the local elite in industries indispensable to national interest (i.e. telecommunication, transportation, power, water, natural resources, mass media, education, etc.), using the law to protect their vested interests, and bar competition from otherwise legitimate industry players. 

7. Those who resist constitutional reform, and hold on to the present presidential form, that institutionalizes one-man rule, where a single individual controls the entire executive branch, and appoints all the justices, who cannot be sued, and cannot be removed except by impeachment, without regard to the sentiment of the assembly of people’s representatives. 

8. Those who resist constitutional reform, and hold on to the present unitary system, that institutionalizes highly centralized governance, where all the major decision makers (i.e. President & Cabinet Members) are clustered in the national capital region, while the regional offices are given only recommendatory functions.

CONSIDERATIONS

1. Those publicly accused of CRIMES (like Human Rights violations, and Graft & Corruption) are NOT necessarily disqualified. To be fair, we should let the courts decide who are guilty and not guilty, based on evidence.

2. Those publicly accused of being EVIL are NOT necessarily disqualified. To be honest, people in general cannot read into the heart and conscience of an individual, except the very few who are gifted. In the end, only God can make the final judgment on who are good and evil.

KILUSAN NG MGA TAGAPAGTANGGOL NG BAYAN (KTB)
 Metro Manila, Philippines. 24 January 2022.

People's Draft: Tanggal agad sa puwesto, pag ayaw na ng mga tao