As the shareholders of Meralco meet tomorrow for their annual meeting, I think it is time to put Winston Garcia in his proper place.

Weeks before, Garcia went on a rampage, complaining a lot of things about Meralco – from high power rates to failure of management to show him documents to Meralco purchasing power from Lopez-owned independent power producers (IPPs). When asked what he wanted to happen, he said that he just wanted a change in management, not a government takeover of Meralco.

His complaints led to the Joint Congressional Power Commission to convene and hear the side of Garcia and Meralco. The Power Commission, like most congressional investigations, led to nowhere, but a few curious facts were uncovered, like systems loss and imposing VAT on systems loss.

Earlier, I had posted that this issue, like the rice crisis, is a diversion. Let me expound further why it is so.

One: Garcia is barking up the wrong tree. Meralco cannot impose rate increases unless it is approved by the Energy Regulatory Commission, which is headed by a Gloria Arroyo ally, Rodolfo Albano. Garcia should instead petition ERC to reduce Meralco’s rates. This regime keeps on asking us to follow the rule of law, yet one of its lackeys keeps on ventilating on the wrong forum. “Bring it to the courts” is a favorite line by this regime, and it should walk the talk.

Two: Garcia’s allegation that the Meralco management is withholding important documents. As a board director, he should know what is happening to the company. And if he thinks the Meralco management is indeed withholding the documents that he needs, he should ask the courts to compel Meralco to produce these documents.

Three: The issue on systems loss is actually not a legal issue, but a moral one. The law allows Meralco to pass to its customers up to 9.5% its system losses. So if Meralco charges us 9.5%, it is not illegal. It can be immoral, but rule of law prevails.

Four: Meralco passing on to its customers its electricity expense. This is allowed by the law; heck, all businesses factor in electricity expense in the pricing of their products and services. Singling out Meralco is unfair, I think.

Five: Knowing that it can actually lower rates by petitioning ERC and removing/reducing VAT on electricity, this regime has chosen to do what it says the opposition does – trial by publicity. Why? I can think of several reasons:

1. The regime is trying to bury us with seemingly-real issues, which is a clear attempt to bury the real issues. It takes the initiative to set the issue and muddle the waters.
2. If you notice, the regime is trying to be populist nowadays. First, the rice crisis, then Meralco, and now text messaging. I question its populist sincerity since this regime could have brought up these issues way back in 2001, but it only did so now.

Both of these point to the same thing: the regime is trying to divert our attention from the real issues.

If this regime, through its lackey Winston Garcia, is serious about reducing Meralco’s rates, it should do so via ERC, not through the Power Commission, and certainly not through the media. Yet it has not done so, and I cannot help but think that this regime is insincere in this issue, and that leads me to conclude that this is just a diversion.

PS: I suggest that Garcia should instead attend to the problems of GSIS. He keeps on hitting Meralco’s management, while GSIS pensioners are crying havoc. Clean up your backyard first, Winston.

There are a few things we can learn from the Fortress’ reactions to the pictures and the new witness-of-sorts in the NBN-ZTE deal. There are two deputy spokespersons who goes by the names Anthony Golez and Lorelei Fajardo, and their shenanigans always show a semblance of truth, even if that word is not in the official Fortress dictionary.

As a background, this supposed witness supposedly saw Gloria Arroyo, her husband Mike, and her Comelec chair Ben Abalos playing golf with officials of ZTE at a golf club in Szenzhen, China. The said golf course was near the ZTE headquarters, and the trio went there after a golf game.

The first salvo came from Golez, who said that the witness should charge Gloria Arroyo in the courts. Of course, let us pardon Golez’ ignorance of the law (even if ignorance is not an excuse, as per Civil Code), and tell him gently that we cannot sue Gloria criminally since his amo enjoys immunity from any suit. And to remove that immunity, she has to be impeached first. But, the House of Reprehensibles will never do that, however substantial the impeachment complaint is. Golez tries to be cute, but he instead insults every consciously-thinking (there are those who chose not to think) Filipinos.

Oh, he continued trying to be cute, first by stating that the meeting with ZTE officials were official. Mr. Golez, if it was official, how come it was not reported in the media? How come there was no press release? Second, he said that the picture hasn’t prove anything malicious, that there was nothing wrong with Gloria playing golf with her husband. Well, this proves that delicadeza is dead, a Filipino value that is left forgotten, for it hinders corruption. Mr. Golez, there is nothing wrong with a president of a country courting foreign investors. But to do so in secret is not right. And who paid for the golf game? Can you show us some receipts, please?

The second salvo came from Fajardo, the most effective spokeswoman that Gloria has ever hired. First, she admitted that her amo met with ZTE officials, confirming part of what that witness had said: that Gloria did had a meeting with ZTE officials, and insisted that it was not a secret. Ms. Fajardo, please read my comments to your colleague’s failed attempts to be cute, you might learn a thing or two.

And what she had said next implicitly stated the rationale for the Fortress’ attack against Meralco: it is a diversion, plain and simple. She said that the public should not be diverted from the true issue at hand, which is high power rates. Kaboom! There you go!

Gloria Arroyo must be paying top bucks for these two. She gets what she pays for. We are paying for them? We are f*cked!

Is there a deal or no deal?

Nine former Magdalo soldiers (all of them Philippine Army) recently pleaded guilty to charges of coup d’ etat, and they were handed down prison sentences from 9-40 years. The actions by Gambala and Maestrocampo surprised some people, and some speculated that a deal must have been made between the Arroyo regime and the nine.

The regime isn’t helping in quelching these speculation. Hermogenes Esperon’s reaction to the court sentence was to tell the nine to accept it. He then floated the pardon trial balloon, while members of the House of Representatives play good cop/bad cop.

And then the convicted former Magdalo soldiers asked for pardon days after their conviction; they even said sorry. A Fortress executive says that they will not granted pardon immediately; maybe a month or so?. Anyway, even Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno wants them pardoned. A few days later, the regime is seriously thinking the effects of granting pardon. And finally, the Department of National Defense and the AFP recommended that the nine be pardoned.

Given the regime’s action regarding Joseph Estrada, do you think granting pardon to nine former Magdalo soldiers is remote? Given the Arroyo regime’s actions and words for the past few days, it is not remote. I believe there is a deal, and we’ll know for sure in a few months. The best indication that there is a deal can be best glanced from one of the motives by the nine to do an about-face: they wanted to be with their families. If there is no deal, they won’t be doing an about-face. They were promised a pardon so that they could be with their families.

My only hope now is that history will not repeat itself. During the negotiations between Roy Cimatu (representing the regime) and the Magdalos on July 27, 2003 (to end the Oakwood mutiny), the agreement was for the Magdalos to return to barracks and surrender under the Articles of War. Ramon Farolan wrote about the recollections of former columnist Max Soliven regarding the Oakwood mutiny (he was present in the negotiations). Let me quote Soliven:

What bothers me is that the mutineers or rebels whatever may be tagged on them, are being double-crossed. Nobody intends to glorify them as heroes or justify their deed, certainly not this writer. But since I was in there with the negotiating group, I’ll have to speak out about what was agreed…

Being charged in civilian court was rejected by the mutineers. They surrendered themselves to military justice, under the Articles of War—in sum, court martial…

Military justice is what they were unanimously pledged by the government panelists—not prosecution in the regular justice system. Otherwise, they might not have surrendered. And you know the consequences of a firefight and the detonation of the explosives they had planted all over the place.

Was anything written down? A surrender agreement? Of course not. But we must consider that an individual’s ‘word of honor’ is supposed to be as binding as a piece of paper. Palabra de honor was what was invoked in the end. Gen. Cimatu pledged himself as an officer and a gentleman, and so did the rest of the government panel …

Are rebels, putschists or mutineers ‘scum,’ not worthy of being given such pledges? Nonsense. Word of honor binds those who give them, not the accused or the imprisoned. Cimatu and the government officers and officials involved should honor this deal.

Why is it so important for the President and her government to honor this commitment? Because if it is not upheld, who knows, what real trouble will be provoked among the far bigger number of men ‘outside’ who did not participate in the so-called coup or mutiny? I kid thee not, they are there, waiting to see whether reforms are instituted and whether heads upstairs will roll …

The Chief Executive and Commander in Chief must at least show sincerity under what was stipulated in the final agreement, the Articles of War. What about Lina’s filing of cases? Perhaps, this even falls under double jeopardy, not just a double cross.

I repeat: the Oakwood Five leaders asked for leniency for their men and even full reinstatement for their followers ‘without hitches.’ This was not conceded in the final public announcement. But the deal on the Articles of War was clearly and unequivocally announced to the media and the general public …

– Max Soliven, August 4, 2003

I hope they will not be twice betrayed.

—

Ellen Tordesillas called the nine’s actions as pathetic. As much as I agree with her points, I cannot begrudge the nine if they were willing to support this regime and eat their words just to be with their families. But this point by Ms. Tordesillas will haunt them forever:

Since with his appeal for presidential pardon, he is willing to support a liar, a cheat, and a thief, I’m wondering what is Gambala going to teach his son about truth and honesty.

I’d like to share with him something from the book, “The Kite Runner”. The narrator in the book, Am, tells about the time when he was a boy, the mullahs in Afghanistan said drinking alcohol is a terrible sin. He relayed the lesson to his father, who drinks.

The father made him sit on his lap for serious talk: “No matter what the mullah teaches, there is only one sin, only one. And that is theft. Every other sin is a variation of theft.”

The father continued: “When you kill a man, you steal a life. You steal his wife’s right to a husband, rob his children of a father. When you tell a lie, you steal someone’s right to the truth. When you cheat, you steal the right to fairness.”

What will Gambala and the eight other officers tell their children about Gloria Arroyo?