Strategic Perspective--by Rene B. Azurin

BusinessWorld http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Opinion&title=Forcing-through&id=31531

Thursday, May 19, 2011 | MANILA, PHILIPPINES

Strategic Perspective -- by René B. Azurin

Forcing through

In basketball, the offense used to be descriptively called "forcing through." This was a foul on the charging player. No referee, however, is expected to call a foul on the six Comelec commissioners who’ve rammed through a lone blocker (Commissioner Gus Lagman) to satisfy an ardent desire to buy Smartmatic’s PCOS machines for the ARMM elections in August. They doubtless intend to get away with sweeping aside prescribed procedures and the warnings of IT experts on the serious flaws of the Smartmatic system.

The referee here should be the Joint Congressional Oversight Committee. According to the Poll Automation Law (R.A. 9369), it is the JCOC that should finally decide whether "[a] particular AES [automated election system] technology is already appropriate and should be utilized fully for subsequent election [sic]." R.A. 9369 also provides that it is the JCOC that should determine whether "[a] particular AES technology should no longer be utilized for being obsolete, inapplicable, inaccurate or with a defect which cannot be remedied." The 6-to-1 vote in the en banc session of the Commission on Elections probably means that the six charging commissioners -- lawyers all -- believe that they can just ignore the JCOC in this matter and dispense with such minor legal details.

The six commissioners also presumably feel more knowledgeable about information technology issues than the top IT experts in the country (including the dissenting Mr. Lagman). Ateneo computer science professor Dr. Pablo Manalastas, for example, said that he "found the Smartmatic-supplied PCOS technology... full of bugs and errors... (and) not fit for use in any election." Clearly perplexed, he continued, "Yet it defies human logic and common sense that despite public concerns about the AES -- including from the country’s key IT organizations and academics -- the Comelec is hell-bent on re-using the discredited Smartmatic PCOS in the coming elections."

The Comelec’s behavior actually has IT industry practitioners and computer science experts in an uproar. In a letter last month to the Senate Committee on Local Governments, Dr. Manalastas, De La Salle Dean of Computer Science Dr. Rachel Roxas, Philippine Computer Society Foundation President Nelson Celis, Philippine Computer Emergency Response Team President Angel Averia, Philippine Computer Society’s Edmundo Casiño, and others, unequivocally said that "we are against the use of the defective PCOS machines/AES used in the May 2010 elections."

AES Watch is a nonpartisan, independent coalition of citizens’ groups that closely monitored the conduct of the May 2010 elections. This election watchdog includes some 40 organizations like Namfrel, CBCP-Nassa, the National Council of Churches of the Philippines, Transparency International-Philippines, the Center for People Empowerment in Governance, the UP Alumni Association, the Philippine Computer Society Foundation, the Computing Society of the Philippines, the Computer Professionals Union, the Philippine Computer Emergency Response Team, CAUCUS-Philippine Computer Society, and the deans and faculty of the computer science departments of UP, De La Salle, and Ateneo. In a released formal statement, AES Watch said that "the Smartmatic-provided PCOS technology is non-transparent, dismally lacks security safeguards, is non-auditable, and is full of inaccuracies." Of the conduct of the May 2010 elections, AES Watch categorically stated that "the election technology was critically defective not only in terms of software and infrastructures but also in election management and legal implementation."

Notably, the Comelec’s own technical advisory council, chaired (then) by Mr. Anthony Roxas-Chua, recommended (in a post-election report dated June 20, 2010) that Comelec not lease or buy the Smartmatic PCOS machines for future elections.

In ignoring all these independent experts and observers, one surely has to be impressed by the confidence exhibited by the six Comelec commissioners in their own IT knowledge and abilities.

For the ARMM elections, reliable sources report that Comelec is preparing to negotiate a contract amounting to some P 1.95 billion. That amount is broken down as follows: hardware (PCOS machines), P130.9 million; ballot boxes, P17.0 million; election consumables, P50.3 million; technology related services, P756.0 million, and non-technology related services, P1,000.0 million. In a letter to the Senate’s Joint Congressional Oversight Committee for Elections, IT industry guru Manuel Alcuaz Jr. declared, "The proposed contract is definitely bloated."

Mr. Alcuaz noted that "ARMM’s 3,379 PCOS precincts represent only 4.42% of the national total of 76,347 PCOS precincts." He pointed out that 4.42% of the amount of P1,900 million spent for technology services in the May 2010 elections is only P83.9 million, not P756.0 million. Ah, that’s an overprice of 800%! Mr. Alcuaz also observed that, in the 2010 elections, Comelec rented the 82,200 PCOS machines for P30,600 per machine and, now, proposes to buy 4,000 machines for the same amount per machine. He then pointed to Comelec’s oft-repeated justification for buying the Smartmatic machines as the Smartmatic contract’s stipulation that Comelec had the right to buy the machines at only 30% of their rental price. That being so, the correct price for the machines is P9,185 each, which translates to a total of P36 million for 4,000 machines, not P130.9 million. The overprice here is around 300%! Mr. Alcuaz also wondered what a whopping P1000.0 million of non-technology-related services could include and why this should be negotiated with a technology contractor like Smartmatic.

The incentives for forcing through this new deal with Smartmatic are becoming clear.

For a European Union-funded project, the UP-based research group Center for People Empowerment in Governance studied the automation of the 2010 elections from its beginnings (in 2008). CenPEG executive director Evita Jimenez and policy studies director Bobby Tuazon said in a recent press conference, "As in the first automated elections of May 10, 2010, the Comelec, now headed by former election lawyer Sixto Brillantes, is again short-cutting the procedure and is making decisions under a shroud of secrecy."

Neither Comelec nor the Venezuelan company Smartmatic and its Philippine partner TIM have been able to rebut the criticisms of groups like AES Watch and CenPEG.

In a joint statement, AES Watch and CenPEG stated, "There should be no illusion that modern technology will guarantee a free election. Who controls the machine controls the votes. There are more daunting tasks that should be addressed to make our elections democratic and these include a thorough reform of the Comelec to make it a credible and independent election manager. The cheating machineries of traditional political parties and oligarchs should be effectively checked. Until these issues are effectively answered, the people’s right to equalize the election playing field and their freedom to choose a government that truly represents their sovereign voice will remain on paper only."

Very well said.

PDSP on RH Bill, from Political Tidbits of Bel Cunanan

Sunday, April 17, 2011

P-Noy has little room for maneuver on ‘Libingan’ issue

Definitely an issue that threatens to wrench the nation in coming weeks, much more than the Senate trial of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, is the move by pro-Marcos elements to have the late President Ferdinand Marcos accorded a hero’s burial at the Libingan ng Mga Bayani, which was established as the "Rizal Memorial Cemetery" by presidential edict in 1947. Various groups are coming out against this move being pushed by some 200 or so members of the House of Representatives.

President Aquino has to come out openly on where he stands on this issue, as otherwise he will disillusion---as he already is with his pregnant silence---his horde of followers whose loyalty to his family dates back to EDSA and what the Aquino legacy stands for. At this point P-Noy may truly be searching for the “politically correct” position on the proposed Marcos burial in Libingan, particularly since the Marcoses have staged an incredible comeback and appear to be targetting the re-capture of Malacanang in 2016. But I’m afraid P-Noy has little room for maneuver here. He has to tell the Filipino people where he stands.

Noynoy the child of Edsa

The fact is that his illustrious parents found their niche in history because of their courageous stand against Marcos, with Ninoy paying the ultimate price. Noynoy himself is the child of Edsa, and he won the presidency not on any other merit but that. P-Noy has to join the big number of Filipinos who are resolutely against a Marcos burial in the nation's most hallowed ground, as allowing it is to make a mockery of Edsa and all that it has stood for in this country and in the world for the past 25 years.


By the way, I have it on good authority that his sister, Ballsy Aquino-Cruz, is against a Marcos burial in Libingan, but she has kept this sentiment close to her chest so far. Hope she speaks out.

Continuing indignation

Recall that a few weeks back the purported illegitimate child of President Marcos in Australia with a former model was removed from her job in Sydney when the producers of her show learned about her alleged paternity. It’s indication of the continuing indignation some sectors of the world still feel about the former strongman who was driven out of Malacanang in 1986 by people power and who died in exile in Hawaii in 1989. Contrast the Aussies' reaction to how some of our countrymen, led by the 200 infamous representatives, have developed what Cecile Alvarez likes to call Alzheimer's disease on Marcos. 


Recall too, how Marcos’ so-called war exploits were torn to shreds first by former Rep. Bonifacio Gillego and later by foreign authors, led by Alfred McCoy, in a series of damaging articles published by the New York Times.

The Marcos era has been judged by history of human rights violations,  crony capitalism, corruption, destroying democratic institutions and other misdeed against the Filipino people. If Marcos, deemed a fake hero, is accorded a hero’s burial in the nation’s cemetery of heroes, martyrs and prominent leaders, we Filipinos would become the laughing stock of the world. It's something we cannot recover from easily.

Binay's office---E for efficiency 

News reports say President Noynoy has delegated to Vice President Jejomar Binay the resolution of this issue;  I hope the delegation is just for VP Binay to study the matter and get a sense of how the people and various groups and institutions feel about it. 


Text messages going around from Binay’s office to people’s cell phones, however, (how does his office manage to get everyone’s cell numbers? One has to hand it to the VP’s office for efficiency---how his people have such access not only to the air lanes but the internet as well! Shades of Big Brother, as some observers have put it) are asking citizens to text back their stand on this issue, purportedly before he “resolves” it.

But the resolution of the Marcos burial in Libingan cannot be left in the hands of the VP (who is likely to exploit it to his political advantage in his drive toward Malacanang, with the help of P-Noy officials who want to ensure their place in a Binay presidency) nor even of P-Noy. The Marcos burial is a highly symbolic but most crucial national issue that has to involve the entire Filipino people; each and every Filipino has to come out and express his sentiments on it---most especially our President. The world will watch how we resolve it. 

Irreconcilable parting of ways among SocDems?

News from the political grapevine is that in the world of the “Social Democrats” (Socdems) there may be an irreconcilable parting of the ways between the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP), led by chair Norberto Gonzalez and Fr. Archie Intengan, chief of the education committee, and the Democratic Socialist Women of the Philippines (DSWP) led by Chair Beth Angsiongco. Apparently the trigger factor in this “final” split is the issue of "Reproductive Health" or RH bills being discussed in Congress, including consolidated House Bill 4244.

Differences on various issues, especially on RH 

It is interesting to note that in earlier times the DSWP constituted the women’s group of PDSP, but two groups began drifting away from each other in 2009, when DSWP decided to withdraw and form itself into a party---a move that PDSP accepted.

One of the reasons for this withdrawal by DSWP from the PDSP and the latter’s acceptance of that move was precisely the support of the DSWP for the previous versions of the RH bills, first introduced in the 13^th Congress. But now that lines are drawn more firmly on this controversial issue, the parting between the two Socdem groups has become irreconcilable. There were other differences, such as the fact that in the last elections, the DSWP reportedly went all out for candidate Noynoy Aquino, while most PDSP members supported Gilbert “Gibo” Teodoro. But the most serious difference centered on the RH issue.

It’s also significant to stress that majority of the female members of the PDSP were not in DSWP and have remained with PDSP to date.

PDSP: let's understand various nuances of RH issue

From what I gather, the PDSP is opposed to the RH bills especially in various aspects, whereas the DSWP has been strongly supportive of these bills, and vehement in criticizing those who oppose or have reservations about them. I can see where the irreconcilable parting would come in.  

From all indications, PDSP is committed to women's and children's health and to gender equality and justice, and in fact it sides with the citizenry in deciding freely on the basis of correct and adequate information.  PDSP is also convinced of the need to understand the demographic situation and prospects of our nation, with its nuances in terms of socio-economic class, and also the need to address this demographic situation and prospects in manner both ethical and effective and in conformity with the law, especially the Constitution.

No to birth regulation means that are abortifacient 

Given this background, it’s easy to see that PDSP cannot support the RH bills because, according to its thinking, even in their present amended and attenuated versions, these bills still leave room for the use of means of birth regulation that are abortifacient at least some of the time.  These means include intrauterine devices, low-dose progestins, and "emergency contraceptives" widely referred to as "morning-after pills."  


This posture is founded on its belief that scientific data and the correct philosophical interpretation thereof would indicate that human life begins at fertilization, and that any attribution of personhood and proportionate attribution of personal rights to the product of conception beyond contraception is arbitrary and indefensible.

Not sufficiently protective of freedom of conscience

Moreover, to many people, including the PDSP membership, the present versions of the RH bill remain problematic in terms of freedom of conscience, because it requires the use of the same curriculum for sexuality education in both public and private basic education schools or units, in which the use of contraceptives such as condoms will be proposed, and probably even the abortifacients mentioned above. PDSP notes that the only way to avoid having one's child taught such modules, under the proposed bill is to apply for individual exemption, which it says it cannot support. 

Whether they agree with the teaching of the Catholic Christian Church (and other like-minded religious groups who joined the 25 March rally at the Luneta) on contraceptives, PDSP members I’ve spoken to have stressed that requiring Catholic Christian and other dissenting schools to teach such a curriculum and only allowing individual rather than corporate exemption is violative of freedom of conscience, or at least it’s not sufficiently protective of freedom of conscience.


I agree with the PDSP stand on the various aspects of the RH controversy, most especially on the aspect of the violation of the freedom of conscience.

For comments/reactions pls. email:

polbits@yahoo.com

Fr. Romeo J. Intengan, SJ

Romeo J. Intengan, SJ


THE FIRST time Fr. Romeo J. Intengan, SJ, was summoned by a woman who lived in Malacañang, he had to flee the country to avoid her wrath. The woman was Imelda Marcos; the year was 1980. More recently, in November 2005, he came under fire for supposedly presenting exit scenarios to President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. He admits she has sought his advice in the past regarding religious matters, but denies bringing up exit plans with her.



Perhaps Someone Up There has been trying to tell Intengan to stay away from the Palace. Or from women in politics. It could well be both. But then the separation of Church and state has never stopped Intengan from seeking to influence politics. As an exile in Sabah, he trained cadres belonging to the political party he helped found. More recently, he has recommended the abolition of the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.



Intengan is a man who embodies many seeming contradictions. While he endorsed the need for armed struggle after the declaration of martial law, he also had a moral dilemma because he was a priest and a doctor. He told his fellow activists, “Ok, I can be your chaplain, but I will not shoot to kill or to maim.”



But after he sought refuge in Sabah in 1980, following his brush with an angry Imelda, who was probably miffed at being told pointblank that corruption and cronyism existed during her husband’s rule, Intengan had to learn how to handle a gun because the camp where he stayed needed to be defended against wild monkeys. (Thankfully, he never had to kill any.)



Here is more interesting Intengan trivia: that Sabah camp was run by the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF). There the Jesuit priest served for more than a year as physician in residence, chaplain, and political officer. In 1982, when the Malaysian government could no longer ignore accusations from the Marcos government that it was harboring Filipino rebels, Intengan had to leave, eventually ending up in Spain, where he pursued further studies in theology. He was still there when the first people power revolt kicked out Ferdinand Marcos and installed Corazon Aquino as president.



In a heartbeat, Intengan hurried home, just like other so-called Marcos exiles who returned to the Philippines almost as soon as the Marcoses landed in Hawaii.Over the last 20 years, many of these ex-exiles have worked their way up — in some cases, literally from scratch — to positions of power and influence in their chosen fields. But there are those who came back and merely took up where they had left off, such as Eugenio Lopez III, heir to the Lopez family fortune and now chair of the ABS-CBN group of companies; radio station owner Ramon ‘RJ’ Jacinto, another rich man’s son who has since expanded his own businesses; and politician Sergio Osmeña III, now on his third term as a senator.



Others include the likes of Heherson Alvarez, who fled the Philippines as a political activist, came back to join the Aquino government, and later became senator; and his wife Cecile Guidote Alvarez, founder of the Philippine Educational Theatre Association (PETA) and now executive director of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts. Then of course there are Intengan and his friend National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales, with whom he co-founded the Philippine Democratic Socialist Party (PDSP) in 1973. Both would be thrown in jail in 1978 for leading a march protesting the fraudulent elections held in April that year. Two years later, Imelda Marcos, suspicious that the PDSP was involved in bombings attributed to the April 6 movement (it wasn’t), would summon Intengan to the Palace — and have him worried enough to make him hie off to Sabah by way of Jolo.



GONZALES ONCE told Intengan, “You provide the theory, I’ll provide the action.” The reference was to the priest’s role as head of the PDSP’s Education Commission — a position the latter has held from the 1970s until today. Intengan’s main contribution to PDSP, as he sees it, was to “understand and develop and adapt to the Philippine situation the democratic-socialist and social-democratic… ideological continuum or spectrum.” During its early years, PDSP’s most important contribution to the Philippine political scene was to present a third alternative to the ones presented by Marcos and the communists. And so, it was not just the Marcos dictatorship that PDSP opposed, but the communist movement as well.



To this day, there is no love lost between the PDSP and the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). In a recent article posted on its website, the PDSP said the CPP and its political and military wings deserve the terrorist tag because they refuse to give up arms. “The CPP/NPA/NDF (do) not want the terror and the violence to cease,” it said. “(They) mean to grab power at all costs, even at the cost of peace.”



Intengan himself explains the position taken by the PDSP in the 1970s: “Our activism was really a provision of an alternative, a progressive one, which goes for radical social change but a democratic one, not a vanguardist party claiming to have a monopoly of wisdom and aiming for a monopoly of power.”



That was in an era when the growing political and societal crises led some priests and nuns to became either supporters of the CPP or its full-fledged members. Luis Jalandoni of the CPP’s political wing, the National Democratic Front (NDF), for instance, was a former priest. His wife and fellow NDF member Coni Ledesma was a former nun, as well as one of the founders of the Christians for National Liberation, the underground organization for subversive priests and nuns.



Many of these radical religious supported liberation theology, which interprets the Catholic faith through the eyes of the poor and sees Jesus as a “liberator.” In fact, the Society of Jesus’s 28th superior general in the Philippines, Fr. Pedro Arrupe, was himself a champion of liberation theology and the Jesuits themselves became identified with the movement, which promotes the active participation of the Church in bringing about social justice.



But Popes John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) frowned on it because of its perceived Marxist leanings. Intengan himself belonged to a less radical tradition, as did many of his fellow Jesuits in the Philippines, who were kept under the watchful eye of the Marcos regime.



UPON HIS return to the Philippines, Intengan proceeded to conduct training sessions for cadres of the now-legal PDSP. He rejoiced at the “restoration of democratic space, where groups which were within the democratic-political spectrum… could now operate freely.” He also appreciated the dismantling of the communications and transport monopolies, which allowed the economy to flourish. But he did have a few regrets.



Recalls Intengan, who eventually became the provincial superior of the Jesuits in the Philippines from 1998 to 2004: “There was this relapse to reliance on traditional politics… I (did) not like it on the level of heart or gut, but I understood the reason.” Intengan allows that President Corazon Aquino needed the support of the military and politicians to survive. But it was unfortunate, he says, that the social revolution he was hoping for — “where the livelihood of the poor would have been uplifted, where basic equality would have been established, where the political system would have matured to a politics of ideas, of worldview, of real societal models… where culture in the high sense would have been available to all the people” — did not take place.



And while Intengan agrees that there was no one who could have taken the place of Jaime Cardinal Sin in 1986, he observes, “It might also be a mistake to adulate Cardinal Sin.” He believes Sin may have erred in endorsing the candidacies of Ramon Mitra and Alfredo Lim in the presidential elections held in 1992 and 1998, respectively, because, he argues, it wasn’t made clear to the people why there was a need for such “drastic Church intervention.” Intengan also says, “Cardinal Sin’s way of doing things was extraordinary in… at least many senses.” Filipinos, however, have come to expect the kind of leadership the late Sin provided. That may be why many were surprised when, in July 2005, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines did not ask for Arroyo’s resignation and instead called for discernment.



The 63-year-old Intengan says neither Arroyo nor Gonzales had asked him to “influence” the bishops. “The more you try to influence (the bishops), the more resentment you will get,” he says. “That might have been part of the reason why they decided not to call for resignation.” He also doesn’t believe Pope Benedict XVI had anything to do with the bishops’ pronouncement. The present pontiff, he says, is actually “much more tolerant of dissent and pluralism than the previous pope.” Besides, Intengan believes the Church should not get into “a habit of making very detailed and specific and peremptory political orders to Her people. That’s the role of the lay people to discern.”



The difficulty at this point, according to Intengan, is that in 1986, “the immediate problem was clear: to restore democracy and respect for human rights… Now the problematic is much different. The lines are not clearly drawn.”



“Ethics has at least two aspects,” he explains. “You have the ethics of principle and the ethics of responsibility, which considers consequences. And that’s where people are divided now. We all know how flawed our ruling class is. But what do you do after? Who will take over?”



He says the Church hierarchy is right in not advocating a position for Catholics to follow in the current political impasse. Yet he doubts the Church’s ability to shepherd its flock in the future, noting that the proliferation of Catholic and non-Catholic groups such as El Shaddai and Iglesia ni Kristo is proof that “the Catholic Church has not been effective in handling or responding to very concrete needs of Her flock.”



The Church, he says, has failed to communicate effectively with the faithful. As for the government, Intengan cannot help but be amused by charges that the current administration has all but imposed martial law. He says that under Marcos, “running priest” Fr. Robert Reyes would have been arrested and detained a long time ago.



Intengan, though, doesn’t believe people power is a viable means for change at this point. “People power practiced too often sends a message abroad that you’re a very unstable country,” he says. He prefers that institutions are strengthened, “so that even in an emergency they can take care of transitions more effectively than in the past.”



Click here to view source





Note: Father Intengan is from Barrio Obrero, Lapuz. He attended high school at the defunct Lincoln School along Ledesma Street in Iloilo City before moving to Manila.

Unravelling Bert Gonzales

Unraveling Bert Gonzales


Written by Chay Florentino Hofileña

Sunday, 23 June 2002

He’s divisive. He’s a shrewd tactician. He’s a sleek operator.



He’s fast. He’s glib. He’s a dynamo. He can deliver.



He goes by the name of Norberto “Bert” Gonzales Jr.—presidential adviser for special concerns.





Armed with the gift of gab, he’s managed to worm his way into the circles of two former presidents, three past presidential candidates, and now, the incumbent president.







He almost succeeded in mediating a deal between coconut farmers and Marcos associate Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco Jr. on the controversial coconut levy issue and, more recently, sealed an interim agreement with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. He also facilitated the ouster of Nur Misuari as governor of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao by bridging government, disgruntled MNLF members, and the Organization of Islamic Conference.



And if his critics are to be believed, he derives pleasure from sheer power play.





Early Activism



Born to a poor Aglipayan family in Turtugas in Balanga, Bataan, Bert obtained his pre-med degree from the Ateneo de Davao, where he took additional courses in chemistry and biology. It was there, too, where he became Catholic. Sent to school by siblings who were based in Mindanao, he later moved to Manila and enrolled at the University of the Philippines for a master’s degree in chemistry in late 1968—a period of great political ferment.





Sucked into the vortex of activism, Bert organized the urban poor in San Andres in Malate, Manila, and in Bagong Barrio, Caloocan City, with the help of the St. Paul sisters. Jesuit provincial and activist Romeo “Archie” Intengan, then a senior resident at the Philippine General Hospital, says he found Bert to be “very enthusiastic, somewhat disorganized, someone who had to learn the ropes of maintaining an organization.” Undoubtedly, however, Gonzales had a lot of determination and energy.





Tony Asper, head of the Federation of Free Workers and a bosom friend of Bert, recalls, “Siya iyong kiti-kiti, di nakakatagal sa meetings (he was restless and couldn’t stay put in meetings).”





Bert went through seminars organized by Jesuit priests Jose Blanco and Horacio de la Costa that sought to instill a nationalist spirit in the youth, and to counter the drift toward communism. On Dec. 26, 1968, Jose Maria Sison founded the Communist Party of the Philippines, which advocated armed struggle and aggressively pushed the Maoist ideology as an alternative to capitalism. Moderates, who were anti-communist and pro-democracy, were searching for an alternative to the national democratic framework, and teach-ins among students, the religious, and labor forces were in vogue.





“I first met him in 1969. I was 26 and he was 22. We met in one teach-in for St. Paul sisters. He had organized the urban poor then,” recalls Intengan, a long-time friend and supporter of Bert.





An ideas man, Bert has a gift for quick insight. “They come in batches and he needs a team to ground them in an orderly and systematic way. He is strategically sharp, moves very far ahead of his associates and has a ‘seize-the-moment’ orientation,” adds Intengan. Because he is fast, he finds processes and structures constricting.



This impatience with procedure got him into trouble with party mates at the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP), which he chairs until today.





The Party Man



First launched as a movement in 1971 with 15 member-organizations, PDSP officially became a party espousing social democratic ideals on May 1, 1973, eight months after martial law was declared. Shunning armed struggle except in extreme cases, the social democrats pushed for social equity and opposed liberal capitalism and foreign domination.





Intengan, who entered the Society of Jesus in 1970 and was one of PDSP’s founders, was recognized as the party’s ideologue since, ironically, Gonzales, the party chairman, was not.



The two leaders found a comfortable arrangement. Intengan says Bert told him, “You provide the theory, I’ll provide the action.”





The party chairman was short on theory but was quick to maneuver in and out of sticky situations. He anticipated scenarios, mapped out the roles of players, and was a good tactician who translated tactical programs to electoral strategy, says Asper. Often, however, the party got left behind.





During the April 1978 Interim Batasang Pambansa elections, for instance, he offered the PDSP machinery to the opposition when all it had was 80 cadres. “In January he was given charge of the election machinery and we needed 7,400 poll watchers for that. I was vice chair then and I was told one week after the decision was made,” says Intengan, recalling how unprepared they were for the task.





Bert’s decision was one major point of difference between the two, but Intengan says, “he is very well meaning and there is no treachery.” Former cadres who have left the party disagree.





No Accountability



As an operator Bert is comfortable with “back channeling,” say his critics, because he need not abide by procedures. He has little sense of accountability even to the party, they add.



He did not account for party funds. In one meeting when the party treasurer was supposed to give a report, he (the treasurer) handed out blank sheets of paper. He made a point: no money passed through his hands and he did not know how much and to whom funds were being disbursed.





Yet even today Bert always manages to raise funds for the party, ensuring its survival.



“He uses patronage on the mass base,” says another critic who has left the party. This includes Filipino-Muslims who come to him asking for help and members of people’s organizations. He disburses cash amounting to as much as P10,000, sometimes P20,000. “Ang problema sa kanya wala siyang financial procedures (The problem with him is that he does not have financial procedures).”





Bert says that because he was born poor he is prone to help anyone who approaches him. “Natural ko lang iyon. I’m probably the biggest fool in town. I help not because I’m buying loyalty.”





Another time, during a march to protest the results of the 1978 elections in which then opposition leader Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr. lost, he allegedly withheld money from other party coordinators who had mobilized marchers from various sectors.





“It was the final blow which led to my disillusionment. After the march, maraming nakulong (many were arrested) and there was no contingency plan. Merong pera pero hindi pinamudmod (There was money, but it was not disbursed) and lives were at stake,” says another former party member. The money was supposed to help families of those arrested and those who were wanted by the authorities and had to remain in hiding.





“I can’t trust him because his point of reference is not clear. He will sacrifice you for the greater cause, but that cause is unclear,” says the same former party member. Bert, the ex-cadre says, “rationalizes everything in terms of pragmatic politics.”





Political Player



“Power now” was how Bert and PDSP justified support for Fidel V. Ramos in the 1992 presidential elections. Some party members who had personal knowledge of the maneuverings say that he brought leaders of mass organizations to then President Corazon Aquino to persuade her to endorse Ramos. Intengan and Bert’s previous association with Ninoy Aquino were his tickets to her circle.





Ramos won, but Bert and his partymates did not get any appointment. “I was tagged a Cory boy and I was never really trusted,” Bert says, adding that was why he was eased out early during the campaign.





In the 1998 presidential elections, he committed what by his own admission was the “biggest crime” against his party: multiple candidate switches. A parallel battle among administration candidates involved bagging a Ramos anointment.





At the start, Bert was friendly with presidential candidate Jose de Venecia Jr., then the House Speaker, because he helped set up the multimillion-peso Peasants’ Fund, but he drifted toward another candidate, retired general Renato de Villa, defense secretary at the time. “I advised him [De Villa] in the beginning to assemble his own loyalists within Lakas, but he was very careful not to displease Ramos,” Bert says.





Meanwhile, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was reported running for president as well, and when columnist Teodoro Benigno introduced Bert to her, he (Bert) advised her to wait because he anticipated that De Villa would not run without Ramos’s endorsement. Late in the game, De Villa decided to go ahead with his candidacy.





Bert was brought into the De Villa camp sometime in May 1997 by Jose “Ping” de Jesus, De Villa’s campaign manager. De Jesus was a former member of the Aquino Cabinet. “Bert was assigned to set up a parallel organization nationwide for De Villa to jump into if he did not get into Lakas,” says a former De Villa campaign insider.





“He would draw huge amounts” that totaled “at least P3 million to P4 million,” says the insider. And when he was being asked by the party comptrollers to account for the money, Bert just disappeared. Days later, he was raising the hand of Arroyo, says the campaign insider.





Money Questions



“That’s not true,” Bert says of the unaccounted-for funds. He says his expenses are recorded in vouchers. Money to pay for stickers, streamers, and posters were allegedly advanced by him because there was no money coming from De Villa so that in the end he was in debt by as much as P5 million to P6 million. The De Villa campaign insider laughs this off.





Former PDSP members say Bert made an impression on Arroyo because he brought her to one of the Scandinavian countries with whom the party had good relations and introduced her to prime ministers who were members of Socialists International, of which PDSP is a member.





But because of his “anybody but Erap” stance, Bert switched candidates once again when Arroyo slid to the vice presidential slot. Survey results convinced him to go for Cebu’s Emilio “Lito” Osmeńa. “It was a desperate attempt to find a candidate to beat Erap. I changed horses midstream not just once or twice,” he admits. And the turncoatism did not even pay off.





Shortcuts to Power



Among socialists and social democrats here, Bert does not seem to be well regarded. Ronald Llamas of the Bukluran ng Sosyalistang Isip at Gawa says Bert gives socialism a “bad name” because he prefers shortcuts to power which smack of opportunism. Bert will even go as far as compromising with elite politicians, he says.





For instance, Bert supported relatives of convicted rapist Romeo Jalosjos who ran in the last elections. His candidate-switching and the talks with Danding Cojuangco on the coconut levy issue indicate the same, Llamas adds. With the upcoming 2004 elections as the fulcrum, getting Cojuangco into the Arroyo camp is part of the political strategy, says Llamas.





“Bert is a risk taker. The higher the gamble the better,” says Asper. He is strong-willed, persistent, and can survive infighting and intrigue—the mark of a seasoned politician.





To Intengan—who social democrats say lends legitimacy to Bert—the presidential adviser for special concerns remains the “most viable for social democrats” because he has the “common touch, a lot of drive, charisma,” and the depth of experience.



To his critics, Bert says, “I’m really trying to serve the country and the people. You may choose to believe it or not.”