Corruption in the peace department (3)

Philippine Daily Inquirer/OPINION/by Ma. Ceres P. Doyo

THIS PIECE ENDS THE THREE-PART SERIES ON my interview with former Presidential Assistant for the Peace Process (PAPP) Annabelle Abaya and her disclosures on the alleged corruption that she discovered in the OPAPP.

Abaya served for eight months as the sixth PAPP. I don’t know Abaya personally. She is not a personal friend or acquaintance. I have no reason to promote her agenda. What I know about her is that she is experienced in conflict resolution. She finished her master’s degree in public administration at the Kennedy School at Harvard University and also has a master’s degree in dispute resolution from the University of Massachusetts. She did her doctoral program in conflict resolution at the Fletcher School of Diplomacy.

Abaya is considered to be a person of integrity and courage by those who know her personally. She is also an experienced communicator, having served as spokesperson of the Ramos administration.

I received quite a number of revealing and even emotional reactions from readers (shock, tears, anger, more disclosures) to Abaya’s revelations. Only one questioned her motives (making “pa-guapa” to newly sworn in President Noynoy Aquino, as in, why only now?). Whatever Abaya’s motives were, what is better, that she revealed what she knew or just kept quiet? Aren’t we better off that we know?

I received a letter of explanation from her predecessor, retired Gen. Hermogenes C. Esperon Jr. which I will forward to the Letters section. Teresita “Ging” Quintos Deles, PAPP during the Arroyo administration who resigned in 2005, is coming back as PAPP in the Aquino administration.

But I will say it again, I have heard of corruption in the OPAPP, not yesterday but way back. I know of a few who had resigned in disgust. Talk of peacemakers transmogrifying into moneymakers. There are those who say the office should be disbanded and the funds be instead poured into poverty alleviation projects that could help bring about peace.

Here is the rest of the Abaya interview (compressed):

Q. How did people take the shake-up?

A. People were relieved that those associated with the difficulties of OPAPP were out. I was careful not to put a stamp of judgment on them since I think that as human beings, they deserve dignity and have a right to defend themselves. The directors and officers spent time to talk to those whom we had to let go because they did not fit the bill. Separating people is always painful and excruciating. We tried to handle this with maximum compassion.

Q. Looks like OPAPP had been in a cancerous state.

A. I assure you OPAPP is in remission. Reforms are needed so it does not slide back. In my short stint, I couldn’t “inflict” more reforms without creating unbearable instability. But OPAPP is now poised for transformation. It will be a progressive, strong and highly effective team. I can see it already.

Q. You revived relations with peace partners.

A. When I first called for a meeting of peace partners, only 14 people showed up. I was told that they had not been actively engaged since the time of Chair Haydee Yorac in the 1990s. We campaigned hard for forums not just to inform them about what was going on but to ask for proposals for peace projects. About 500 people from 250 organizations came, including non-traditional peace partners.

Q. Are people basically suspicious of peace efforts?

A. People were suspicious of the sincerity on both sides living up to agreements, the appropriateness of Malaysia as mediator because of our unresolved border dispute with them, and initially the timing of dialogues. Skeptics imagined that the dialogues were election related.

Q. Any advice for the new government?

A. I am uncomfortable giving unsolicited advice but the transition process requires us to give recommendations. First, on the Mindanao challenge. It will be most helpful to encourage the OIC on its initiative to help unify the MNLF and MILF and other Islamic groups in Mindanao. Then ask Indonesia to continue the splendid job of mediating the peace. Second, relentlessly pursue dialogues and civic engagements until a consensus emerges on the critical issues on the table. While people want a definitive end state, the reality, given our polarized and emotional views at this time, requires that we shape the future as we go along depending on what the people are prepared for. Peace is a journey, not a destination.

Q. Will peace ever reign in Mindanao?

A. Peace is inevitable. Everyone wants it, especially the ordinary people who simply want to exercise their livelihood, go to school, live normal lives. It requires a lot of patience. Anyone who knows peace understands that it is for the courageous and for the long haul. Thus we must act with dispatch today and visualize that peace is almost here. In reality, peace and security are already on the ground. With ceasefire agreements in place, we only need to stabilize this with a political settlement-whether interim or comprehensive and provide greater capacity for our Bangsamoro brothers to lead and govern, bring development and growth to their highly deprived areas, and give them control over their culture and destiny as Filipinos.

Q. Will there be peace when an agreement is signed?

A. People attach so much to a peace agreement. Will signing a marriage contract guarantee that you will live happily ever after? A peace agreement, like marriage, is something you negotiate for the rest of your life. You keep working at it to make it better every day.

Corruption in the peace department (2)

Philippine Daily Inquirer/OPINION/by Ma. Ceres P. Doyo

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.” —One of the eight Beatitudes in Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount.

From Tibet, the United Arab Emirates and here at home came e-mailed reactions from Filipinos who were outraged and shocked at the disclosures of Secretary Annabelle Abaya, outgoing head of the Office of the Presidential Assistant on the Peace Process (OPAPP). Abaya who has headed the agency for barely a year discovered a nest of corruption inside the august department mandated to help bring about peace in strife-torn areas in the country.

As I said last week, that situation was not entirely unknown. There had been stories from insiders who knew about what was going on. Someone I knew who had worked with the OPAPP and left in disgust years ago once told a group of us that someone in the office had asked her if she wanted to participate in a ghost project. She replied in jest that she didn’t need the money as she had enough. She also described the power to corrupt of the Commission on Audit personnel assigned to the OPAPP at that time. Speaking of bantay-salakay.

Some readers said they were bitin (in suspense) with last week’s column piece (we dwelt on Abaya’s discoveries on her first and second days in OPAPP) and asked to have more of our interview with her. So here is more.

Q. Did things clear up on your third day?

A. Not really. I went straight to the room of the person feeding me all this fund nonsense. Even before I could speak, I was told that there was a big mistake. The amounts given to me earlier were wrong. It was just P3 million for me, P1 million for my assistant, and P1 million for this and that. I said, “Whoa, stop! This is illegitimate and illegal.” The person went into panic and seemed to be taking orders by cell phone from someone. By this time, I was so determined to get to the bottom of all this. By some luck, the President asked me to go with her on a provincial trip the next day.

Q. Did you discuss it with her?

A. I said, “Ma’am, it’s been three days and I feel like it’s been three weeks.” I said the job was right up my alley but I have reforms to deal with that I cannot do without her help in the next eight months. So she annexed my finance and admin services to hers. Fantastic. I had Ching Vargas and her team to swoop down on my office.

Q. Did you discover anything more?

A. Yes. Money in allowances, bonuses and perks were liberally given but not in accordance with law. Funds, assets, office property and equipment were unaccounted for. Documentation was missing or defective. We couldn’t even find the registration papers of 14 new cars. Of these, two cars were missing for months but then suddenly appeared in our parking lot, without keys or papers… I found out we had more than 60 cars in various parts of the country, some in various stages of decay.

Q, You were a killjoy.

A. You can say that. I was the sixth presidential assistant for the peace process (PAPP) and the people were probably tired of adjusting to a new PAPP every few months. I didn’t feel welcome. I was assigned an eight-year-old car, while lower ranking officials and their staff were using brand new vehicles.

Q. What were your other discoveries?

A. I felt strong pressure to immediately bring out the second half of a special fund. I was determined to be careful because I was tipped by Palace people when I was appointed that a large amount of money was coming and they needed someone they could trust to guard it. I insisted that a review be presented so I could be made comfortable to authorize disbursements. I found out that the first half of the budget was finished in one year. Only 36 percent went to the intended recipients. The rest went to unauthorized purchase of cars, set-up and beautification of offices, representation, travel, supplies and expenditures still being figured out to this day. I really saw red after this. I ordered the creation of a review team to give me a better picture of the situation, recommend how to improve the program and ensure that the fund is spent judiciously henceforth.

Q. What helped you fight corruption?

A. Three C’s: courage, compassion and collaboration.

Q. Weren’t you afraid?

A. It was more of apprehension while treading the unknown. But I woke up every day with a sense of excitement and purpose. Like many times in my life, I sensed so acutely that I was being guided. It was almost a spiritual experience for me. I was advised to beef up my security. I was told that other PAPPs had as many as 20 security aides. “Whoa,” I said. Compromise, they said, and that I should have at least eight and should not be foolhardy. I realized I didn’t have to be afraid because I did not antagonize people. I spoke to their understanding and connected to their values.

Q. You got people to work with you?

A. Yes. It was painful for people to give up monetary emoluments they were used to, but when they understood the circumstances and assessed their options, they gave them up. I know they want those responsible for the problem to be made accountable. The COA and Ombudsman are helping us.

Q. Is it true that you downsized the OPAPP from 350 to 270 people?

A. We call it “right-size.” First, those who were into questionable activities had to go. Second, those who didn’t have the qualifications for positions available also had to go. We realized we were doing them a disservice if we kept them and not contributing to their personal growth.

More next week. Let me say here that I don’t know Abaya personally. Her initial disclosures at a peace forum several weeks ago intrigued me so I sought her out to make her reveal more.

Corruption in the peace department

Philippine Daily Inquirer/OPINION/by Ma. Ceres P. Doyo

“Ah, it was an exciting novel. It was action-packed from Day 1.”

Thus started Secretary Annabelle Abaya, head of the Office of the Presidential Assistant on the Peace Process (OPAPP), when she recounted to the Inquirer the unraveling of the web of corruption in the peace office. Abaya headed the agency for less than a year, succeeding Avelino Razon who ran for Manila mayor and lost in the last elections. Soon she will leave her post when the newly elected president, Noynoy Aquino, assumes office and appoints a new head.

Abaya’s non-fiction “novel” deserves serialization. For now, here’s a teaser from the interview she gave the Inquirer. Hold your breath.

“Yes, no one warned me. At 9 a.m., on my first day on the job, I was briefed that I would get several millions on the first five days of each month, and was presented with a list of whom to pay. I pretended to act normal. I didn’t know if this was legitimate. I thought I was only being tested. But by mid-day, someone else came along with another list of persons we supposedly need to pay monthly.

“When I asked if the people on the list were the same people on the other list given to me in the morning, I was told, ‘Wala ho akong pakialam sa listahan ninyo. Ito lang yung sa akin.’ (I have nothing to do with your list. This one is mine.)

“Still I acted normally, not wanting to show alarm bells ringing in my head. I wanted them to think I was cool about it so they will tell me more. But by the end of the day, the same person came to me and said that a new release was made to my office for a specific project. I was given a list of people to be paid off for the release: “P10 million to this, P3 million to that, P1 million to this and that. I couldn’t hide my shock this time, so I asked what this was for. I was told, ‘Ganyan ho talaga ang kalakaran dito’ (That’s how business is conducted here.) I had to catch my breath and take hold of my panic. That night I couldn’t sleep till 3 a.m.”

That is just the prologue. Take a deep breath. There is more to the P170-million fund scam that Abaya brought to the open. The amount may be peanuts to big-time plunderers and highwaymen but this is not the Department of Public Works and Highways, this is the peace office, supposedly hallowed ground for peacemakers whom Jesus Christ extolled in the Beatitudes.

People are used to knowing about corruption in high places especially in government agencies involved in high finance projects, contracts, bidding, procurement, revenue collection and the like. But learning about corruption in an agency tasked to delve into the roots of unrest and discontent that lead to armed resistance of the citizenry, in an office mandated to find permanent solutions to decades of strife is so, so shocking.

What a letdown. Not that no one had suspected this all these years. I had heard horror stories from someone who used to work in the OPAPP and left in disgust, something about the resident auditor wielding power in liquidations and sowing fear in the hearts of those who did things straight. “Iipitin ka (You’d be in a tight spot) if you didn’t play along and your legitimate expenses and liquidations would be questioned,” an insider said then.

Now it is the head of OPAPP herself that has revealed what she discovered during her short stint. Abaya recently announced in a peace forum in Mindanao that she was “proud of breaking the back of corruption” in the government body directly tasked to facilitate peace negotiations with the secessionist Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the communist New People’s Army. The OPAPP is, of course, expected to go beyond table talks and negotiations, and find ways to bring lasting peace to in strife-torn communities.

In the brief news report last Monday by Jeffrey M. Tupas of Inquirer Mindanao, Abaya did say she talked to her three predecessors, retired Gen. Hermogenes Esperon, Razon and Jesus Dureza, chair of the Mindanao Development Authority.

Abaya’s revelations were a shocker. So the Inquirer did a follow-up interview with Abaya who responded to our questions with a blow-by-blow account which reads like a whodunit novel on the deadly game of corruption.

What Abaya revealed during that recent Mindanao forum was just the scum on the surface of a deep, filthy pool. She said, “I didn’t know now long these things had been going on.”

Abaya said she did not want to be unfair to her predecessors. She did not want to go into the blame game. But she needed help. Most of all, she did not want to shame people. But she made it known to all that there was “something very wrong, something that we could not accept.”

Abaya zeroed in on the illegal disbursements. As a result of the investigation and to make a long story short, Abaya ended up dismissing some 70 OPAPP employees.

And how was Abaya’s second day?

“I walked into Deputy Executive Secretary Ching Vargas’ office unannounced and without an appointment. I told her my problem and asked her if the amount I am supposedly to be given month was legitimate. She looked puzzled as she reviewed the budget and said, ‘No.’ Now I really panicked. Ching is a good friend. I’ve known her to be upright and candid. She advised me not to sign anything and promised to look into the situation. She said, ‘Kawawa ka naman.’ (You are to be pitied.) Exactly the same comment from my close friends to whom I intimated my situation. But I couldn’t dwell on that. I had a problem and I was determined to do something about it. Inevitably, it was another sleepless night.”

A fuller story on Abaya’s revelations will come out another time in another space in this newspaper.#

A verdict 25 years after Bhopal tragedy

Philippine Daily Inquirer/OPINION/by Ma. Ceres P. Doyo

IN THIS DECADE of disasters, both natural and man-made, it behooves us to remember the 1984 Bhopal tragedy in India which killed more than 20,000 people and whose aftereffects continue to destroy the health of thousands. In terms of human lives lost, it is considered the world’s deadliest industrial catastrophe, and it could have been prevented. It was one of the worst ecological disasters in history, rivaling Chernobyl in Russia.

Now, 25 years after that lethal gas leak, an Indian court has sentenced seven former top managers of the US-owned Union Carbide pesticide factory to two years in prison. According to an Agence France Presse report, the company executives were originally charged with culpable homicide but, to the outrage of survivors and victims, the Supreme Court in 1996 reduced the charges to death by negligence with maximum imprisonment of just two years.

There is little to rejoice over in this verdict.

The Bhopal local government had also charged Union Carbide’s CEO Warren Anderson with manslaughter and, if convicted, he could serve 10 years in prison. Warren evaded international arrest and a summons to appear before a US court. Extradition moves were unsuccessful. In Aug. 2002, Greenpeace found Warren living a life of luxury in the Hamptons. He was not included in the recent verdict because he was considered an absconder.

Many of the youth of today and the future might not know about Bhopal because the tragedy is not likely going to make it to the textbooks. Does it not qualify as a historical entry like the 79 A.D. Mt. Vesuvius eruption that buried Pompeii? Will our own 1991 Ormoc mudslide that killed thousands in a blink of an eye make it to our error-ridden textbooks (which are a huge disaster in themselves)? And didn’t we see a likeness of Ormoc in last year’s “Ondoy” and “Pepeng” disasters? And not to forget the Marcopper mine disaster that poisoned the province of Marinduque.

I wrote about Bhopal years ago. Here’s a flashback. On the night of Dec. 2 and early morning of Dec. 3, 1984, a Union Carbide plant began leaking some 27 tons of methyl isocynate (MIC), a deadly gas. According to The Bhopal Medical Appeal and Sambhavna Trust that espouses the cause of victims, none of the six safety systems designed to contain that kind of a leak was operational and soon the gas began to spread throughout the city.

An estimated half a million people were exposed to the gas and 20,000 have so far died as a result of this. More than 120,000 continue to suffer ailments such as blindness, breathing problems, and reproductive disorders.

In 1999, Greenpeace reported that chemicals causing cancer, brain damage and brain defects were found in the water at the accident site. These were in extremely high levels, that is, several million times higher. Trichloroethene, known to impair fetal development, was found at levels 50 times more than the accepted safe limits.

A 2002 testing report revealed that poisons such as 1, 3, 5 trichlorobenzene, dichloromethane, chloroform, lead and mercury were present in the breast milk of nursing women.

At that time Michigan-based Dow Chemical which purchased Union Carbide and acquired its assets in 2001 was said to have steadfastly refused to clean up the site, provide safe drinking water, compensate the victims or disclose the composition of the gas leak which doctors need to know in order to treat the victims. It was supposed to be a “trade secret.”

Union Carbide had stuck to the figure of 3,800 victims. But according to reports, “municipal workers who picked up bodies with their own hands, loading them onto trucks for burial in mass graves or to be burned on mass pyres, reckon they shifted at least 15,000 bodies. Survivors, basing their estimates on the number of shrouds sold in the city, conservatively claim about 8,000 died in the first week. Such body counts become meaningless when you know that the dying has never stopped.”

The Bhopal Union Carbide pesticide factory seemed problematic since the time it was built in the 1970s. India seemed, at first, a huge market for pest control products. It did not turn out that way. The poor farmers, who constantly battled with droughts and floods, could not afford them. The plant never reached its full capacity and ceased active production in the early 1980s.

As reports went, a great quantity of chemicals remained there while the plant’s safety system was allowed to deteriorate. Management thought that since the plant had ceased production, there was no threat. They were wrong.

Here was how it started: “Regular maintenance had fallen into such disrepair that on the night of Dec. 2, when an employee was flushing a corroded pipe, multiple stopcocks failed and allowed water to flow freely into the largest tack of MIC. Exposure to this water soon led to an uncontrolled reaction; the tank was blown out of its concrete sarcophagus and spewed a deadly cloud of MIC, hydrogen cyanide, mono methyl amine and other chemicals that hugged the ground. Blown by the prevailing winds, this cloud settled over much of Bhopal. Soon, thereafter, people began to die.”

In 1989, Union Carbide, in a partial settlement with the Indian government, paid some $470 million in compensation. The victims were not part of the negotiations and many felt cheated by the $300 to $500 each received. It could not cover many years’ of medical treatment.

About 50,000 injured Bhopalis could no longer return to work or move freely about. Many have no one to look after them because their next of kin had all died.

Bhopal should never happen again.

D-Day for FOIA

Philippine Daily Inquirer/OPINION/by Ma. Ceres P. Doyo

Friday is D-Day for the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Will it be passed in the House of Representatives on the last session day? Just one more nudge, isang pindot na lang, and if it gets passed (as it had been in the Senate) we will become more enabled and empowered citizens of this nation. What a great day it would be.

What previously have been kept in the dark can now be brought easily into the light. Many things that have been hidden can be easily laid bare. Without fear and trepidation, the Juans and Juanas of this country, journalists among them, can demand easy access to information. It will also be time for those perennially hiding their shady deeds to give up old practices and start living honorable lives. (As if giving up an addiction would be that easy.)

We can also stand tall and proudly tell some of our Asian neighbors that like them, we have this empowering law.

What is FOIA if not simply the hows of our right to information as enshrined in the Constitution? This right is already etched in stone, we just need the mechanics on how to exercise that right and yet…

 As they say, while it has been easy for us to speak and speak out loud, it has not been easy for us to know. Indeed it has not been easy for the FOIA to get to where it is. One day before D-Day and the FOIA is still precariously perched on the edge of a cliff.

All the multi-media and civil society efforts by way of editorials, live discussions, talk shows and forums have resulted in people’s heightened awareness of its importance. But Congress has chosen to procrastinate till the last day or the end of time, so to speak. If the FOIA falls down the cliff on Friday, it will have to again start from the bottom in the next Congress. All the efforts to get it to where it is now will be for naught. It will be back to the salt mines for us.

“All it needs tomorrow is two minutes,” says Malou Mangahas, executive director of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism and one of the movers of Right to Know Right Now! Coalition. Two minutes or longer is not too much to ask for this added pillar for our democracy. The ongoing canvassing of presidential and vice-presidential votes should not be a reason to ignore the FOIA.

There are some worrisome developments. Here is an update from Malou:

“Speaker Prospero Nograles spurned us the second time yesterday (May 31). Our reporters and representatives all saw what happened. Rep. Benny Abante and the other authors of the bill were ready to move for its ratification. They were virtually gagged—the microphones on the floor were turned off.

“Nograles promises again that on Friday the FOI Act would be on the agenda of the House. He might fall again on his words, a third time. Yet still, thanks to everyone, all our efforts are not lost.

“On May 24, the Speaker declared it to be dead in the 14th Congress. Yesterday, he yielded a lot more ground; he was compelled to promise that its ratification will be taken up on June 4, Friday, supposedly the last session day of Congress. Too, the people are now more aware of the values to democracy this measure offers. If the Speaker reneges again on his promise, he would have been so shamed and has only himself to blame.

“On Friday, we might still have a last stand, a la Masada of sorts, for the Freedom of Information Act. The 130 organizations in the Right to Know Right Now! Coalition plan to send as many people as they could to the gallery to watch, maybe the death, or we wish, the resurrection of the FOI Act. May I please personally appeal to everyone’s patience and relentless support. You have all served as the wind beneath the wings of the effort to ratify the FOI Act.”

The Right to Know Right Now! Coalition lined up some activities to prepare for the House session on June 4, Friday. On Wednesday Rep. Benny Abante called for a caucus of the FOI lawmakers and the Right to Know Right Now! advocates.

On Friday, June 4, FOI advocates will assemble starting 12 noon, at the House to attend the session. Right to Know Right Now! Coalition’s call: “Let us try to fill up the gallery. Let us wear black—to evoke authority and power, symbolize potential and possibility.”

Another worrisome scenario is someone in Congress declaring a lack of quorum. Quorum is not always invoked but someone might just make it a convenient reason to kill the FOIA. And what if, in fact, there is a quorum?

The Indian example. In 2000, Indian social worker Aruna Roy won the prestigious Ramon Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership because of her work “(to empower) Indian villagers to claim what is rightfully theirs by upholding and exercising the people’s right to information.” A former civil servant, she founded Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sanghathan (Organization for the Empowerment of Workers and Peasants).

I listened to her 2000 lecture and kept the monograph “Information, Democracy and Ethics” where she wrote: “Despite the astonishment repeatedly aired by outside observers, it has not surprised us that the radical postulates of the Right to Information movement in Rajasthan have been formulated and worked out by a group of poor, largely illiterate rural Rajasthani workers. It is they who have, for the first time, defined the right to information not only as part of the freedom of expression but also as part of the right to livelihood and survival.”

Roy was here last month to speak on the Right to Information. Be inspired. You can read more about Roy in “Great Men and Women of Asia” published by the RM Award Foundation. We need idols like her.#

The right to know
Philippine Daily Inquirer Research
The Freedom of Information Act seeks to promote the people’s right to know by laying down specific procedures in obtaining official documents from public agencies.

On May 12, 2008, House Bill No. 3732 (An Act implementing the Right of Access to information on matters of public concern guaranteed under Section VII, Article III of the 1987 Constitution and for other purposes), with Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. and Quezon Rep. Lorenzo Tañada III as principal sponsors, was passed.

On Dec. 14, 2009, Senate Bill No. 3308 (Freedom of Information Act), authored principally by Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, was approved.

In January, the act was approved by a bicameral panel composed of eight House members (Representatives Abante, Tañada, Eduardo Zialcita of Parañaque, Rodolfo Antonino of Nueva Ecija, Emmanuel Joel Villanueva and Cinchona Cruz Gonzales of the party-list group Cibac, Jesus Crispin Remulla of Cavite, and Rodante Marcoleta of Alagad) and their Senate counterparts (Senators Juan Miguel Zubiri and Alan Peter and Pia Cayetano).

If signed into law, the proposed act will make available to the people all public records in print, sound or visual form.

It mandates government agencies to make available to the public “scrutiny, copying and reproduction, all information pertaining to official acts, transactions as well as government research data used as basis for policy development regardless of the physical form or format in which they are contained and by whom they were made.”

If the government agency decides to deny a request for information, wholly or partly, it shall within seven days from the receipt of the request state the denial in writing or through electronic means.

Denial of access to information shall be appealable to the agency concerned 15 days from the notice of denial, but the Office of the Ombudsman may be asked to resolve the appeal in 60 days.

There are exceptions to what can be readily disclosed to the public, such as matters pertaining to national and internal defense, foreign affairs (but only if revealing the data would jeopardize the government’s position in negotiations or diplomatic relations), commercial secrets, personal information that would lead to unwarranted invasion of privacy, and information obtained in executive sessions of the legislature.