Claimants 1081's prize: So near, so far

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

MANILA, Philippines—They have won but where’s the prize? It is a breath away. So near and yet so far.

Despite victory in the courts, some 10,000 victims of human rights violations during the Ferdinand E. Marcos dictatorship remain empty-handed.

Four administrations after Marcos have not helped in dispensing justice to the victims and have instead stood in the way. For the final hurdle, lawmakers have only to sign the Human Rights Compensation Bill, but why the long delay?

“The Republic of the Philippines has succeeded in blocking the Marcos victims from the partial enforcement of a judgment they had won in US courts,” said former party-list Rep. Loretta Ann Rosales.

Rosales is chair of Claimants 1081, an organization of victims of abuses under the dictatorship. The figure referred to Marcos’ martial law proclamation.

Herself a victim-claimant, she was detained twice during the martial law years, tortured and sexually molested.

Tortured and waiting

Dead, dying, aging, sickly, poor. Many had waited for so long until time overcame them. Many of them are now senior citizens.

Hilda Narciso, 63, was mistakenly arrested and detained, tortured and raped repeatedly by soldiers in Davao City in 1983. Her case was nationally and internationally known.

Inday Olayer, 60, was detained in 1981 along with her husband Joseph Olayer. Soldiers put bullets between her fingers and pressed them hard in order to exact information from her. “For two years I could not use my hands and sign my name in front of authorities,” she recalls. “I was so traumatized.”

Her husband also took the blows. His head was dunked in a toilet bowl, he was made to lie on blocks of ice, electrocuted and was hit in the balls.

Peter Villaseñor, 50, a peasant organizer, was arrested in Bataan in 1982. He remembers: “I was tortured for nine days and nine nights. I was stripped naked and given the water torture. I was made to lie down and a wet cloth was placed over my face. They hung a bucket of water above my face and let the water drip on my face whenever I refused to answer. I would gasp for air, like I was drowning.”

Daisy Valerio, 58, and two sons, are among the families under Claimants 1081. Her husband, former priest Nilo Valerio, was killed by the military in Benguet in 1985. His body was never recovered.

Class action suit

Two months after Marcos fled to Hawaii in 1986, victims of human rights violations filed a class action suit against Marcos.

The move was based on a 200-year-old US Alien Tort Law that provides victims of despotic leaders the right to seek redress against these leaders in US courts as long as these leaders reside in US territory and are found guilty by US courts.

The suit was filed in the Hawaii Federal District Court on behalf of 9,539 victims of martial rule. In 1995, the victims won a final judgment from the court and were awarded $1.9 billion comprising $1.2 billion in exemplary damages and $700 million in compensatory damages.

In 1997, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court ruled to transfer $540 million in Marcos Swiss dummy deposits. These were to be placed in an escrow account in the Philippines and released on two conditions:

• That the Philippine government must obtain a final judgment in its own courts entitling it to the money.

• The government should compensate the victims who obtained the US judgment.

P472-M docket fee

To seek enforcement of the judgment in Philippine courts, the claimants filed a case in a Makati district court in 1997. They were shocked when they were asked to pay an exorbitant docket fee of P472 million.

They asked the Supreme Court to rule against this filing fee. Sadly, the tribunal sat on it for six years. The court moved only when the claimants elevated the matter to the United Nations Committee on Civil and Political Rights.

After six years, the court decided on a mere P410 filing fee instead of the P472 million. It was a long, long wait.

The UN Human Rights Committee issued a decision declaring the long wait “unreasonable, resulting in a violation of the authors’ rights.”

In 2007, the claimants’ counsel wrote the Philippine solicitor general attaching the UN decision and asking how the solicitor general could assist the victims in enforcing their judgment in Philippine courts. Again, a long delay.

Arelma case

Meanwhile, after nine appeals, the Hawaii court conducted a trial of a complaint against Merrill Lynch for allegedly holding Marcos assets in the name of Panamanian corporation Arelma Inc. In 2006, the court awarded the Arelma assets of $35 million to the claimants.

The Hawaii court ruled that while the $35-million Arelma assets would scarcely satisfy the $1.9 billion judgment, it had a symbolic significance.

But in 2006, the court granted the Presidential Commission on Good Government’s (PCGG) motion for a stay of the distribution of the $35 million to the victims.

The Supreme Court would later rule that neither the PCGG nor the Philippine republic could have access to the $35 million in Arelma. The Sandiganbayan must first prove that this is part of the forfeiture of a case which was finally ruled by the Supreme Court as ill-gotten.

The Arelma money, Rosales argues, cannot be considered a part of the Swiss deposits. It could go straight to the claimants, but the Philippine government has put so many blocks along the way.

The last hurdle is the passing of Human Rights Compensation Bill. Part of the Marcos ill-gotten wealth, or $1.9 billion, should go to the claimants.

Not all the recovered ill-gotten wealth should go to agrarian reform and therefore the agrarian reform law has to be amended.

The Philippine Senate has passed the bill. The House of Representatives has stalled and is sitting on it. The long wait is far from over.

‘Droits de l'homme’: World’s best kept secret

Yesterday was Human Rights Day, also the 60th anniversary of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The fervor for HR should not last for only one day. In the coming days, let us act, commemorate, celebrate. The Inquirer is starting a series today.

If, as an Amnesty International official once said, the UDHR is one of the world's best kept secrets, then human rights defenders are indeed an endangered species. “Best kept secret” because despite the 60-year-old declaration, rights are continuously being violated all over the world by those who either are not in on the “secret” or choose to pretend they know nothing about it.

I was at the 50th anniversary celebration in Paris 10 years ago in 1998. Allow me to wax nostalgic.

There we were, at the grand Palais de Chaillot, together with some 500 people from all over the world, attending the Human Rights Defenders Summit. It was there that the UDHR was unanimously adopted on a chilly December day in 1948.

There we were, at the same historic place, near the banks of the River Seine, across from the Eiffel Tower. Same time, same place, same near-zero degrees weather as it was in 1948. But the mood was far from somber. There was our 1998 generation, a generation that did not see the horrors of a world war but saw horrors of a different kind.

The biggies were there. Nobel Peace Prize winners: Tibet's Dalai Lama, Guatemala's Rigoberta Menchu, Argentina's Adolfo Esquievel, East Timor's Jose Ramos Horta and Bishop Ximenes Belo. Even Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi came out bigger than life on the video screen to deliver her message.

UN secretary general Kofi Annan and France's president Jacques Chirac delivered messages. Annan later received 10 million pledges for human rights collected by summit main convenor Amnesty International (itself a Nobel winner).

On the fun side there were the likes of Bruce Springsteen, Tracy Chapman, Alanis Morisette, Axelle Red, Peter Gabriel and other groups rocking for droits de l'homme (human rights) at the huge Bercy stadium. The ever smiling Dalai Lama was the concert's curtain raiser and exhorter of the youthful audience who gave him a thunderous applause.

But most of all, there were the 500 or so not-so-famous human rights defenders who had long been deeply and quietly immersed amongst their people, who had suffered and paid the price for raising their voices to defend the voiceless. Mothers and widows, women's rights advocates, so many lawyers, a few journalists, NGO workers, academicians, social workers, grassroots leaders.

The Palais de Chaillot, venue of the Human Rights Defenders Summit was bursting with people of different colors, nationalities, faiths, professions and painful experiences.

(I have kept Air France's in-flight magazine which had, for its cover, the logo of the 50th anniversary and devoted many pages of its December issue to human rights. It's a collector's item that should be among the exhibits in 2048.)

The 50th anniversary gathering was actually a summit called “The Human Rights Defenders Summit” not “The Human Rights Victims Summit.”

But why were the defenders, and not the victims, the ones coming together? But who is victim, who is defender? Defenders end up as victims too. And many victims have risen up to become defenders themselves. I like the word defender because it projects energy and strength. Continuously projecting victimhood is projecting defeat and weakness.

What is a human rights defender? It is “any person, well-known or not, who acts alone, in a group or in an association to promote, implement, apply and conform with all the fundamental rights guaranteed under the UN Declaration of Human Rights.”

One of the aims of the summit then was “to defend the human rights defenders because, despite the efforts of the UN and governments over the last 50 years, the protection and support for defenders is still weak.” Defend the defenders, because their situation has never been as grave as it is today, draw attention to their isolation and the danger they face every day.

Taken up were six urgent topics, human rights in relation to: impunity, armed conflict, extreme poverty, women's rights, racism, protection and promotion of children's rights and racism, xenophobia and religious intolerance.

Ten years later, I ask, where are we now? I think of the scores of Filipino journalists who’ve been murdered in the past few years.

If you read the account by David Pitts on how the UN Declaration was drafted and signed 60 years ago, you'd be amazed that it saw the light of day. Eleanor Roosevelt chaired the drafting committee that included, among others, Charles Malik of Lebanon, P.C. Chang of China, John Humphrey of Canada and Rene Cassin of France. Chang had wanted something that “incorporate(d) the ideas of Confucius as well as Thomas Aquinas.”

UN member states at that time could not easily form a consensus on the rights of women and racial minorities, religious liberty, the point at which human life began, the extent to which freedom of speech should be protected, the right to dissent and economic and social rights. We're still at it, aren't we?

And the most serious disagreements, Pitts wrote, stemmed from the entirely different concepts of the West and the Soviet bloc of such human rights principles as freedom and democracy.

The Declaration, by the way, has no force of law, but it has inspired so many legally binding international covenants and agreements. It has survived. We must celebrate, and we must worker harder. I hope the next 40 years will be much better than the 60 that have passed.

Filipinos in Obama’s America

On the night of Nov. 4 when Barack Hussein Obama was elected president of the United States, journalist and book author Benjamin “Boying” Pimentel took his eldest son to downtown Oakland where thousands of people were waiting for the officials results. They found people celebrating with cheers and tears. After more than 200 years, Americans had chosen a person of color to lead them forward.

“Pareng Barack: Filipinos in Obama’s America”, (Anvil) Pimentel’s latest book, is about Obama’s amazing rise to the presidency and, more importantly, about how Filipinos responded to his campaign and victory. “Often with excitement, sometimes with fear and dread,” Pimentel writes.

“Pareng Barack” is also about the Filipino journey in America, “how it has intersected, sometimes collided, with those of other communities, and how it has taken a dramatic turn as America enters a new era of anxiety and hope.”



This book came out a few weeks after Obama was elected but it didn’t take just a few weeks for Pimentel to write it. He had been pounding the streets and watching the groundswell. With or without Obama’s win or defeat this book could still stand alone to show those intersections and collisions that Pimentel describes. But Obama’s win provides Pimentel a starting point, and for Filipinos who chose America to be their home, it also offers landmarks on a cultural and historical landscape, that is, from there to here. Also a timeline from then to now.

This gem of a book is easy to read. It is an engaging journalistic read because there are real human faces, voices, names and places in it as only a seasoned journalist knows the importance of if one is to show proof of one’s point or analysis. This book is not the result of a survey but of a journalist’s walking the streets where stories unfold, where lives are lived.

“For Filipinos in America, it is a time of celebration and pride. For others, of concern, even fear.” This is how Pimentel describes the aftermath of the Nov. 4 elections that saw Democrat Obama win and Republican John McCain lose.

“Nevada had become a battleground state and Fran joined other Filipinos in the ground war to rally support for Obana. This meant going from house to house…It was while knocking on doors on one part of Reno that he came across one Pinoy…A Philippine flag was displayed in his garage…The young man was a registered Republican, and had never voted Democrat. But he said he was voting for Obama. ‘He speaks to everyone, and seems that he can reach across the aisle,’ he told Fran. ‘Obama is different from the rest.’

“But then there was a woman in her 30s whom Fran met on a Philippine Airlines flight during a short visit to the Philippines before the election. She had lived in the United States for about eight years, had been married, and had just become an American citizen…The woman had just mailed in her ballot—she voted for John McCain…Now that her daughters were about to join her in the United States, she wanted a ‘strong leader.’ But eventually she also admitted to Fran, she simply could not vote for a black man. ‘I just don’t trust them. Di ba sila yung laging nanggugulo? Aren’t they troublemakers? They’re so violent.’”

In the chapter “American in Living Color” Pimentel writes about how Nobel Prize winner for literature, Toni Morrison, a black woman, noted that many newcomers readily embraced American society’s long-held prejudices against blacks. He also shares what Asian American civil rights attorney Bill Lee told him: “Immigrant communities generally tend not to know the history and to buy into the biases and prejudices of the dominant group. Unfortunately, becoming American often means buying into the prejudices. They want to identify upward. They don’t want to identify with those at the bottom.”

Something like that fable about the fly that alights on a carabao and suddenly thinks he’s a carabao. (It’s better told in Filipino.)

But it’s not that way all the time. Pimentel digs into the “racial wedge” that Asian Americans occupy, that uncomfortable in-between mezzanine position where they are expected to be loyal to their superiors and demanding on those below.

Pimentel’s book also deals with other racial and ethnic groups as well. He writes, “Obama’s victory is significant for another important reason. With the steady growth of Latino and Asian communities, there will no longer be a racial or ethnic majority in the United States in less than 50 years. A biracial leader with a deep personal experience of life in the Third World, Obama, many hope, could prepare the nation for that coming change.”

“Lessons in Patriotism and Forgiveness” is a poignant chapter. Here Pimentel explores his experience as a Filipino whose father endured suffering during the Japanese occupation of the Philippines, and then reflects on his own encounter with Japanese-Americans who suffered ostracism and internment in the U.S.

In “From the I-Hotel to Powell Street” Pimentel revisits the bygone milieu of Carlos Bulosan (“America is in the Heart”) and enters into the world of the aging WW II Filipino veterans. Powell St. in San Francisco is where these veterans spend their winter years. I have been there myself and it’s really a tearjerker.

Toward the end Pimentel writes about his family and waxes sentimental. He muses: “In the end there were more people who were ready to move on, to break ground, to reimagine the United States, to redefine America. It will be Obama’s face and voice that my sons will see and hear on television and on the Internet over the next four years, maybe longer. It will be Pareng Barack who will play a critical role in defining my sons’ future in America.”

Fishers and fish

Nov. 21, Friday last week, was World Fishers Day. How many people in this country, fishers included, knew that? This nation of islands floating between azure skies and azure sea is home to fishers and fish. Yet, among the poorest of the poor among us are the small fishers who subsist on their daily catch that are dwindling by the day.

Those of us who try to live a meatless life or with little meat in our diet extol the greatness of the fish. The gourmets among us know the different flavors and textures in a fish head which non-Asians miss out on because they have a horror for detached body parts.

Fishers and fish were often mentioned and given symbolic meaning in biblical times. Several of Jesus’ disciples were fishermen, Peter among them. Jesus sent them off to the world with the words, “I will make you fishers of men.”

There are more instances when fish, fishers and fishing were in the heart of the bible stories—the multiplication of the loaves and fishes; the coin in a fish’s mouth that Jesus said should be sufficient for tax, and which Peter went to look for as he was told; the resurrected Jesus standing on the shore asking, “Friends, haven’t you any fish?”; then the casting of the nets and the drawing in of a huge catch. So many fishing scenes. Peter, the first Pope, was a fisherman.



The fish became the underground sign of the persecuted early Christians. The Greek word ichthys (fish) is still very much on the scene today. You see it on bumper stickers and pendants. I have a bronze pendant with the Greek letters on it to remind me of the weekly underground (or underwater) Church publication “Ichthys” where I was involved. (Okay, I was often driver and courier.) And my elders in the editorial board at that time were all women—brave nuns who never ran out of subversive stuff to publish.

Their names I reveal: Sr. Emelina Villegas ICM, Sr. Teresita Agustines ICM, Sr. Clare Samonte SFIC, Sr. Helen Graham MM, Sr. Pat Startup MM and the late Sr. Christine Tan RGS whose name is now etched on the Bantayog ng mga Bayani (Monument of Heroes).

So, you see, there is something great about fish and fishing. And there is a lot, aside from climate change and environmental destruction, that plague the fisherfolk today.

Last Friday, World Fishers Day, members of Kilusang Mangingisda (KM) picketed the Department of Trade and Industry, the Department of Agriculture and the Asian Development Bank to protest against policies promoting fisheries trade liberalization.

Last week’s caravan and protest by the fisherfolk were meant to highlight their disappointed over “the Philippine negotiators’ refusal to sign on to the position of NAMA-11 against mandatory sectoral talks in the World Trade Organization (WTO), even though it is clear that any sectoral talks would likely result in bigger tariff cuts than those prescribed in the NAMA tariff binding formula that developing countries already find unacceptable.”

NAMA stands for non-agricultural market access and NAMA-11 refers to the 11 developing nations, the Philippines included, that are supposed to stand up to the developed nations in the WTO talks.

KM fully agrees with the NAMA-11 statement that eliminating tariffs in a range of sectors would be contrary to the Doha Round’s development mandate which calls for developing countries to have smaller tariff cuts than those of rich nations in accordance with the principles of special and deferential treatment and less than full reciprocity.

KM chair Roland Vibal said that steep tariff cuts under the NAMA-binding formula, as well as further tariff cuts in future sectoral talks on fisheries only validate the position of KM that the fisheries sector should be excluded from the WTO negotiations.

Sadly, the NAMA-11 statement that KM supported was not signed by the Philippines’ negotiators. KM denounced the trade and agriculture departments for their leading roles in the free trade negotiations in the WTO and in the regional and bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) especially with China, Japan and the European Union. Vibal said that these negotiators “are responsible for exposing the fledgling local industries to unfair competition from the heavily subsidized goods of rich countries and for risking the jobs and livelihoods of millions of Filipino workers and small producers.”

KM has stressed that besides the WTO and FTAs, international institutions like the World Bank and ADB have served as instruments of investment liberalization in the fisheries sector. Over the years, KM pointed out, these institutions have promoted investments in intensive shrimp aquaculture for export through massive loans amounting to billions of dollars in the Philippines and other developing countries.

These investments, KM added, have caused the dislocation of artisanal fishers in coastal fishing grounds, and exacted other social and environmental costs, and yet the export profits from shrimp aquaculture have not trickled down to the host coastal communities.

Several weekends ago, I snorkeled in Coron, Palawan and there came face to face with fish of all colors—bright blue, bright yellow, total black, transparent white, name it—and the menacing black sea urchins that guarded the corals. I couldn’t help thinking of the poor subsistence fishers of this country who do not have the luxury to behold such beauty.

KFR in Zambasulta

The kidnapping for ransom (KFR) of veteran development worker Merlie “Milet” Mendoza in Basilan last Sept. 15, and her release on Nov. 14 (after ransom was paid) was the latest in a series of KFR cases in the Zambasulta (Zamboanga, Basilan, Sulu, Tawi-tawi) area.

The kidnappers, believed to be from the Abu Sayyaf Group of bandits, have seized all kinds and any one they fancied. Priests and religious, tourists, media practitioners, businessmen, students, development and humanitarian aid workers. Blood has been shed, lives have been lost. It’s all for the money. Terror and cruelty are their main weapons. Worse, they even gloat about their religious beliefs.

That development workers are not spared, as in the case of Mendoza and her fellow worker Esperancita Hupida, is something not unexpected. The bandits-terrorists spare no one. Now non-government organizations (NGOs) have to think many times about sending their workers to the dangerous places where these evil elements stalk their prey.

These NGOs are focusing on poverty-stricken areas in order to improve people’s lives. Poverty breeds criminality. Addressing the roots is key. But what do well-meaning workers get in return? Mendoza, a veteran development who used to work with Assisi Foundation and Tabang Mindanaw projects, was in Basilan to look into a water project when she and Hupida were seized. Mendoza is a consultant for Mercy Malaysia and the Asian Disaster Relief Network.



And so the time has come for NGOs and POs (people’s organizations) to face their dilemmas and assess the grim landscape.

Even before Mendoza was released, groups and individuals working in Zambasulta had already planned to do something. For starters, they put together data, observations, problems, recommendations and plans of action.

“Kidnap for Ransom: A National Security Issue, Masakit sa Pamilya, Pambansang Problema”, a forum, was planned by families and friends of kidnap victims as well as stakeholders while Mendoza was still in captivity. It was held on the morning after Mendoza was released. (Hupida was released two weeks earlier.) Participants were jubilant Mendoza was free but they were also aware that it was because money changed hands. Who will be the next?

As presented by the stakeholders, kidnapping in Zambasulta has sharply increased in the last few years. This year, 2008, 33 persons were kidnapped. Of these, 29 were freed because ransom was paid. Fr. Rey Roda OMI of the Notre Dame of Tabawan Hish School in Tawi-tawi was tortured and brutally killed when he resisted.

This year, an estimated P50 million in ransom money has been handed over to kidnappers. I believe Brig. Gen Mohammad Nur A. Askalani, chair of the ad hoc joint action group of the Office of the Presidential Assistant on the Peace Process, when he says that all but one of kidnap cases in Zambasulta these many years involved payment of ransom.

Other 2008 KFR victims are a businessman, three media practitioners, five Baselco field employees, two barangay officials, three persons who were on their way to Lamitan, Basilan, nurse Preciosa Feliciano, Hupida, Mendoza and 19-year-old nursing student Joed Pilanga who is still with his captors.

KFR groups have a well-organized network. They prefer to target ordinary civilians to avoid media attention and to get ransom payments fast. But Mendoza’s captors discovered she wasn’t ordinary and upped their demand.

A typical transaction is done through text messages demanding “down payments” and “entrance fee” otherwise the captives would be harmed. Families have no choice but to raise the ransom money.

Some of the ransom calls have been traced to cell cites Metro Manila and some KFR operations have links with local political personalities and could sometimes be related to upcoming elections.

What have families and stakeholders done so far? Victims’ families have organized themselves. They have held dialogues with the military and civil society groups (CSOs). Certain groups have donated high-resolution images of areas where victims might be held. There has been sharing of information among families and the authorities.

But stakeholders have noted “gaps”. Local authorities hesitate to get involved for fear of rido (clan feuds) or retaliation from kidnappers and their relatives. There is lack of coordination among law enforcement agencies in Zambasulta. Rescue operations have become complicated because of the presence of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF). KFR groups tend to bait the military and the MILF to engage in a shooting war.
There are recommendations, both immediate and long-term. A “mapping out” of KFR areas needs to be done in order to determine the community, family and political ties of KFR groups. Respected leaders and elders in the critical areas must be identified so that they could help in prevention and negotiations.

On the part of the NGOs and other stakeholders, they are now coming up with a common stand of no ransom (easier said than followed). But prevention is still an important weapon. Warning systems must be put in place. Gathering of information on kidnappers from released victims could add to the database. Local communities where KFRs were spawned must be empowered prevent the growth of the bad seeds.
Families and victims of KFR need all the support to pursue their cases in court. They have a lot to learn from the Chinese-Filipino community that have banded together to fight KFR in the urban areas in and outside the courts.

Without resorting to vigilante-ism, concerned citizens and likely victims of KFR in critical areas, must let KFR practitioners realize that the end of the road is near.

Going organic, better late than later

What a surprise to learn that the government has gotten serious about pushing organic fertilizers and organic food production. This is indeed a major policy shift. I heard bells ringing and farm animals rejoicing and I imagined the citrusy, earthy smell of composting matter. Yes, all that and suddenly feeling the peace of wild things that Wendell Berry, prophet of rural living, spoke about.

The skeptic may view this government move as turning the public attention away from the raging multi-million fertilizer scam which is one of toxic-est this country has ever seen. One journalist was murdered because of this and the brains have yet to be brought to justice.

Whatever its motives, the Department of Agriculture (DA) could be but right to push organic. Can it sustain the campaign? How far will it go on the long and winding road? Agriculture secretary Arthur Yap who projects himself as a non-nonsense agri-crat should better put organic fertilizer where his press pronouncements are. And we better like this guy.



I know many private individuals, non-government organizations (NGOs) and people’s organizations (POs) that have long been practicing organic, sustainable agriculture with absolutely no help from the government. They battled the odds and succeeded, and with great results to show. They are heroes in my book. But it meant double efforts on their part, not to mention unsure yields and markets at the start. Still they kept on and took the risk, because they knew it was good for the people and the planet. The easy way would have been to stick to the toxic.

As one forum on productivity I attended recently stressed, one must always bear in mind the three Ps—people, planet and, not to forget, profit. Something good for the people and the planet should be profitable, sustainable, enduring. And why not?

The latest news in the Inquirer (“’Go Organic’ campaign launched with P20M” by Amy R. Remo, 11/6/08) is that the DA is allocating “an initial P20 million to start a program promoting the extensive use of organic fertilizers and encouraging local farmers to produce safe and healthy food crops.”

That could have been front page news but the Barack Obama presidential triumph pushed aside everything else. The story on organics sure was good news but the P20 million made me gasp. What a pittance, I thought. The fertilizer scam was in the vicinity of P728 million which was supposed to be in fertilizer subsidies for farmers. Here was yet another case of the magsasaka turning into magsasako holding empty bags.
This crime against the farmers is for the books. Ask, why are our food producers among the hungriest? Former agriculture undersecretary Joc-joc Bolante must now spill the beans or he would be fodder for Yap’s organic fertilizer program sooner than he thinks. He must—no matter who gets hurt—release the toxic from his system, or else.

The ‘go organic’ news is not only good news for the farmers, it is also good news for the organic fertilizer producers who took the road less travelled by producing something not mainstream. Many years ago I did a long magazine feature on an amazing organic fertilizer factory in Bulacan, where the organic stuff for composting came mainly from homes and markets, not from farm organic waste.

It was amazing to watch the whole process—from the smelly garbage bins to the hauling to the composting, to the packing to the marketing. I should visit that composting facility again. A concerned balikbayan started it almost single-handedly, with his green-friends cheering him on.

For the organic program, the DA, with its agency Bureau of Soils and Water Management, had a signing ceremony and with local governments and civil society groups like the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement and the La Liga Policy Institute. The program is called Organic Fields Support Program. Pilot sites in Luzon have been identified and 600 farmers are supposed to get hands-on training on System of Rice Intensification (SRI), organic and nature fertilizer production. (I wrote about SRI some years ago and it is indeed worth trying.)

One-hectare learning farms—either government- or privately-owned—will be used for the “Tamang Abono” process which uses rice straws and other farm wastes. On these sites, farmers will go through “experiential learning”.

Organically grown food is now finding a niche in regular markets. But I still go out of my way to patronize the small, brave innovative stores where these are sold at competitive prices.

What is organic? Here are some standards as applied to field crops (source: IRRI website): 1. No synthetic or artificial chemical pesticides and fertilizers have been used, 2. Soil fertility is maintained through natural processes such as growing cover crops and/or the application of composted manure and plant wastes, 3. Crops are rotated in fields to avoid growing the same crop year after year in the same field, 4. Alternate (non-chemical forms) of pest control are used to manage insects, diseases and weeds—that is, beneficial insects to prey on pests, mulches to suppress weeds, etc.

There is also a way to grow pigs the natural and healthy way on soft ground (no smell, little water for washing, only farm-made feeds) which several NGO friends of mine are now practicing. Their pigs grow lean but strong. “Herb-baboy”, they call them. (Send email and I will give you the numbers to contact for learning natural farming.)

Sec. Yap should now produce how-to manuals either on-line or as hard copy with illustrations and in several Filipino languages. A nationwide marketing strategy should also be put in place.
What a happier place on earth we would have.

We’re only hungry

No, we’re not starving to death, we’re only hungry.

The Philippines is again prominent on the hunger map. We landed fifth (or among the top 10) in Gallup International’s survey results on the world’s hungriest. Released on World Food Day last month, the results didn’t hit the news until recently.

It is said that very few people die of starvation. According to Bread for the World (Brot fur die Welt or BW), a Church-related development agency that has worldwide reach including in the Philippines, only a small percentage of hunger deaths are caused by starvation. Most hunger-related deaths are the result of chronic undernutrition, which weakens the body's ability to ward off diseases prevalent in poor communities. Most hungry people have some food, but not enough food or enough of the right kinds of food.

And so when people actually starve to death—because no food is available—the cause is primarily political, not environment-related. In North Korea, BW notes, untold millions starved because of the government's unwillingness to give up on failed economic policies. In Sudan, millions are threatened with starvation because of an ongoing military conflict that devastated the country's ability to produce food and because the government restricts the flow of emergency relief.


In its survey, Gallup asked over 58,000 people from 55 countries the question: “Have there been times in the last 12 months when you and/or your family have not had enough to eat?” “Have not had enough to eat” means a person needed more but there was no more. That translates into hunger caused by absence of food because there was no money for food, there was no way to produce food, there wasn’t food available or coming from any source, food supply was being blocked, etc.

Four in 10 Filipinos (40%) told the pollsters that in the past year they “often or sometimes” lacked food. (The survey sample in the Philippines was 1,000.) The “top 10” hungriest are Cameroon (55%), Pakistan (53%), Nigeria (48%), Peru (42%), Philippines (40%), Bolivia (35%), Guatemala (35%), Ghana (32%), Russia (23%) and Mexico (23%).

I looked at the Gallup website for more details and I could see that Africa is clearly the place where food was most lacking. Three countries in Africa, four in Latin America, two in Asia and one from Eastern/Central Europe showed up on top of the hunger poll.

Here are some hunger facts from BW: Of the 6.6 billion people of this world, 923 million are hungry. Every day, almost 16,000 children die from hunger-related causes. According to the most recent Food and Agriculture Organization estimates, the number of hungry people in the world has increased by 75 million. Rising food prices have hit Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia/Pacific the hardest. In these two regions the number of hungry people has increased by 24 million and 41 million respectively. The latest FAO report warned that "meeting the internationally agreed hunger-reduction goals in the few years remaining to 2015 is becoming an enormous challenge."

Hunger is often discussed in statistical terms or seen in the global or national context that we sometimes forget how it really feels on the ground. Only the very poor know what hunger is in the most physical sense—as an intense need for food, as weakening of the body because of the lack of it. In the hierarchy of needs of human beings, food is on top. Physical hunger/thirst is the first need that must be addressed.

When hunger is discussed in relation to poverty, it is often used interchangeably with malnutrition, starvation and famine. But these are four different stages and situations. Surely the Philippines is not experiencing massive starvation and famine but prolonged hunger can eventually take its toll. On the young especially.

Experts could discuss hunger till they get hungry but only the truly needy hungry know what it is like. The non-hungry discuss the politics and economics of hunger. The spiritually inclined speak about prayer as a hunger. The health buff watches out for that pang, that wicked craving.

The hunger of the poor is different. It is accompanied by anxiety. It is not simply feeling something in the stomach that’s gone empty or humihilab ang tiyan. Indeed there is some acidic turbulence in a stomach that’s gone empty for long periods but real hunger is more than hilab.

When the poor are constantly feeling physiological hunger in the absence or lack of food, it is not just the glucose level that is sending distress signals, their bodies are also screaming for the wide array of nutrients they have been deprived of for long periods.

And so today I am attending two roundtable forums/workshops on poverty/hunger-related issues. The one organized by the Asia-Europe People’s Forum will tackle the question “What is to be done to protect the people in the midst of crisis: Firming up of proposals”. It will tackle “what’s wrong and what’s right” about subsidies (rice, cash, agricultural production) and pump-priming through infrastructure spending. It will also tackle “employment on demand” and how it could happen, generating public revenues for social protection program, safeguarding the life savings of Filipinos, etc.

The other gathering is organized by the Philippine Social Enterprise Network (a network of 37 NGOs), Initiative for Dialogue and Empowerment through Alternative Legal Services and SharePeople, a Netherlands-based group. The theme “Boosting an Economy Under Pressure”, will deal with how social enterprises could soften the blow on the most vulnerable sectors.

May all this brainstorming bear fruit.