From the Tribune:
To solve the utterly dismal corruption perceptions rating of the country under President Arroyo’s administration, the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) had proposed to the global corruption watchdog Transparency International (TI) to drop the Philippines from its annual listing.
PAGC chairman Constancia de Guzman wrote TI chairman Huguette Labelle to complain about the perenially low ranking that the Philippines gets from TI on its annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), in which the country was ranked a lowly 121st of 163 countries in the 2006 list.
De Guzman, also questioned the integrity of the local TI chapter chairman Dolores Español.
“May we take the opportunity to bring to your attention and request for your position on the propriety of your TI chairperson for the Philippine Chapter, Retired Judge Dolores Español, acting as counsel to one of the top officials of the Philippines who was ordered dismissed by the Office of the President, per PAGC’s recommendations, for malversation charges,” according to De Guzman.
I guess Arroyo's PAGC is referring to this case:
In a press release, PAGC identified lawyer Dolores Español as the chairperson of Transparency International-Philippines and said she served as legal counsel of Jaime Dilag, chairman of the Philippine Racing Commission who was fired by Malacañang on PAGC's recommendation due to alleged malversation and misappropriation of public funds.
Asked if the PAGC was insinuating that the survey was questionable because Dilag's counsel was the head of Transparency International-Philippines, PAGC commissioner James Jacob said the information in their press release was simply a “statement of fact.”
So kung naging lawyer ka ng isang corrupt na official, corrupt o untrustworthy ka rin? is that the best that they can dig up against dolores espanol? yawn...
i guess if you don't like the survey, you shoot the messenger.
Anyway, back to the main story:
“We would like to be clarified if there are standards set by TI in Berlin, as regards how you could, in all honesty maintain objectivity, transparency and fairness, if your country representatives are not given clear mandates on what they should or should not do,” De Guzman wrote.
De Guzman also wrote a long-winded discussion of the supposed progress of the Arroyo administration in the fight against corruption claiming that the TI’s role in increasing awareness on the anti-corruption concerns for the Philippines has long been achieved.
“What we need now, is an honest to goodness assessment of how our anti-corruption programs are faring, and not the kind that is based on perception,” De Guzman added.
She inquired on the processes that the country can take to have it “de listed” from the CPI country coverage.
“We do acknowledge the influence that your reporting commands, but, we are of the belief that the process upon which such was prepared was devoid of an acceptable manner and accurate inputs,” she said.
De Guzman said the PAGC, an agency directly under the Office of the President, cannot allow “such work to tarnish our country’s image and dampen the spirits of our citizenry, thus, it would be best for the country to be de listed or omitted from your country coverage.”
Labelle in response to De Guzman’s letter, defended the objectivity of the method by which TI comes up with the annual CPI.
Labelle said the CPI does not reflect TI opinion but the expert opinion from the business and analyst communities.
“The findings of (TI’s) Global Corruption Barometer 2006 suggest that the general public in the Philippines has not yet begun to feel the positive impact of the PAGC’s work to curb corruption,” the letter said.
“In 2006, one question asked: ‘How would you assess your current government’s actions in the fight against corruption?’ In the Philippines, respondents answered: very effective, eight percent; effective, 13 percent; not effective, 31 percent; does not fight is at all, 23 percent; the government does not fight but actually encourages corruption, 25 percent. Further, three in 10 respondents who had contact with public institutions said that they had to pay a bribe for services,” Labelle added. Chito Lozada
Posts
1 comment:
John, let's throw the question back to them. So the administration allies who continue to lawyer for Esposo Barako and Esposa Emeperatriz are in fact corrupt. I'm stating this as a matter of fact, a fact that the entire nation knows that they continue to hide.
Post a Comment