July 8, 2013
Bishop Soc Villegas heads CBCP
Villegas to pursue fight against RH law
The protégé of the late Jaime Cardinal Sin, Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Socrates “Soc” Villegas, was elected president of the influential Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) on Sunday amid a continuing conflict between the Church and the Aquino administration on the controversial reproductive health (RH) law.
At 52, Villegas will lead the 96 active and 40 honorary members of the bishops’ collegial body when Cebu Archbishop Jose Palma ends his term on Dec. 1. To succeed Villegas as vice president is Davao Archbishop Romulo Valles.
While Villegas is known to have had strong ties with the late President Corazon Aquino, the mother of the incumbent Chief Executive, he is perceived as one who will not give in to the whims of the current administration.
“One thing is certain, the archbishop will talk as needed. He will not keep quiet,” Archbishop Emeritus Oscar Cruz told the Inquirer over the phone on Sunday.
“This man is intelligent and courageous. He will exercise his [pastoral duties] and will put into action his qualifications.” Cruz said.
Cruz cited a pronouncement that Villegas made amid the debate on the RH bill last year, which he noted “had angered the Palace.”
“My dear youth, contraception is corruption. The use of government money, taxpayers’ money to give out contraceptive pills is corruption. Contraceptive pills teach us it is all right to have sex with someone provided you are safe from babies,” Villegas said then.
Villegas’ statement denouncing President Aquino for supporting the RH measure was proof that he would continue to lead the Church in fighting other measures that would compromise Catholic values, Cruz said.
“This means that he will speak when needed. He will speak his mind according to Church teachings,” he said. “I know what I am talking about because when he was appointed the secretary of Cardinal Sin, we were already [working] together.”
Cruz, likewise a former CBCP president and ex-archbishop of Lingayen-Dagupan, said he had seen how Villegas worked and he was confident that the prelate would do a great job.
Ball in Palace court
Fr. Francis Lucas, executive secretary of the CBCP’s Episcopal Commission on Social Communication and Mass Media, also has the same expectations of Villegas.
“He will surely stand by the Church teachings no matter what,” he said in a text message to the Inquirer. “I suppose the ball is in the Palace’s court since Archbishop Socrates was close to the late President Cory Aquino.”
But he added that the Church was always open to listen and dialogue to try to understand if certain issues were truly for the common good.
The CBCP announced the results of the election on the second day of its three-day annual plenary assembly at the Pope Pius XII Catholic Center in Paco, Manila.
Palma was still eligible for another two-year term as the head of the Church body but prior to the assembly, he declared his intention of giving up his post so that he could attend to his pastoral duties in the Cebu archdiocese, which would host the International Eucharistic Congress in 2016.
Villegas, who was ordained priest by Sin in 1985 and auxiliary bishop of Manila in 2001, will have a two-year tenure. Valles will also serve for two years. But by tradition, incumbent officials may be reelected to a second term.
The assembly also elected Sunday Fr. Marvin Mejia as secretary general, succeeding Msgr. Joselito Asis.
Election welcomed “We extend our congratulations to Archbishop Villegas and wish him well as he faces new challenges as president of the CBCP,” said deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte.
Valte said the Palace looked forward to “future engagements under his leadership.”
The election of Villegas came two days before the Supreme Court opens oral arguments on petitions seeking to nullify the controversial Republic Act No. 10354, or the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act.
The 12 petitions against the law included one filed by the son of CBCP legal counsel Jo Aurea Imbong. Ranged against them are six petitions backing the law, filed by Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, Sen. Pia Cayetano and three former health secretaries, among others.
RA 10354, which mandates the state to provide the poor with reproductive health services, including access to contraceptives, and sex education to schoolchildren, was signed by President Aquino on Dec. 21 last year.

July 9, 2013
Showdown on RH law
High court hears arguments on Tuesday
Archbishop Socrates Villegas has resurrected the late Jaime Cardinal Sin’s policy of “critical collaboration,” saying prelates will attend as “conscience troublemakers” in Tuesday’s opening hearing in the Supreme Court on the controversial reproductive health (RH) law.
“We want to trouble consciences so every conscience listens to the voice of God,” said Villegas, Sin’s protégé who was elected president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) on Sunday.
“You must understand and accept that the Church is not a lobby group. The Church is not an NGO. The mission of the Church is truly spiritual so if we get involved in bills like the reproductive health, which is now a law, it is because our spiritual mission mandates us to do that,” Villegas told reporters on Monday at the close of the bishops’ three-day annual plenary.
Groups challenging the law will have the floor first in the Supreme Court hearing on the measure, which mandates the state to provide the poor access to contraceptive devices in a bid to control the country’s runaway growth rate.
The first five speakers include former Senators Francisco Tatad and Aquilino Pimentel Jr.
Tatad will make a five-minute opening statement. Pimentel will argue why the law violates the autonomy of local governments and the equal protection clause of the Constitution. Lawyers Ma. Concepcion Noche will discuss the right to life, Luistro Liban will tackle freedom of religion and Luis Gil Gana will touch on implications of the measure in Muslim Mindanao.
Villegas, the incumbent CBCP vice president who will take over from Cebu Archbishop Jose Palma in December, disclosed that some bishops and priests would observe the opening hearing in the high tribunal on the petitions seeking to nullify the RH law not as a lobby group but as moral leaders.
To show the Church’s support for anti-RH advocates, Villegas said a Mass and a prayer vigil would be held Tuesday at Nuestra Señora de Guia Parish in Ermita, Manila, to be led by Antipolo Bishop Gabriel Reyes.
“That’s our first support for the Supreme Court process … our first priority, our first contribution for social change is to show to the world that prayer has the power to change the world. We believe that one Mass, one sacrifice of Christ can change the entire cosmos and if it can change the entire cosmos, it can touch many consciences as well,” Villegas said.
The archbishop of Lingayen and Dagupan said that a blessing of the lay people who will argue the anti-RH position in the court would also be held following the Mass.
‘Critical collaboration’
The people should expect the Church to always speak up, Villegas said, when the rights of men and women are endangered, human dignities are violated or when the family is attacked, the poor suffer unjustly or the children at risk or abused.
“We are not against any political party, we are not against Gabriela. We are against anyone who would destroy the stability, solidity, integrity, and sanctity of the family,” he said.

Villegas said that the stand of the Catholic bishops was always to be in “critical collaboration” with the government, a kind of cooperation they have maintained even as early as the Marcos administration, although there were times they were more critical than collaborative and vice versa.
The Church will only be critical if it needs to be, he said, referring to the policy of Cardinal Sin, the late archbishop of Manila, during the martial law years under the dictator Ferdinand Marcos.
“When common good is served by the government, you can count on the bishops to be in full collaboration [but] when [it] is compromised or when moral norms are violated, human dignity compromised, family attacked and human life becomes cheap, then necessarily and understandably you expect the bishops to be more critical,” Villegas stressed.
Not social troublemakers
Saying that the Church was sustaining its critical collaboration with the present administration, he said these things were not unique to the Philippines but was also happening worldwide.
This is the reason the Vatican has called on Christians across the world to ensure the protection of human dignity, he said.
“We are not a political group. We are neither the opposition nor administration. Our position is always the position of Christ,” Villegas added.
“Our work as Churchmen is not to be social troublemakers. We are conscience troublemakers because we want to trouble consciences so every conscience listens to the voice of God,” Villegas said.
“So please respect our identity as a Church and it is consciences we appeal to and it is morality that we stand on. So I hope this clarifies the position of the CBCP with regard to the RH law with the Supreme Court,” he added.
The Church becomes critical depending on the issue and not because it liked or disliked those sitting in government, said Manila Auxilliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo, who appeared at the CBCP press conference along with Palma and Reyes.
“Our actions are guided not by what we like or what we don’t like but by social teachings of the Church,” Pabillo said.
No pass, no entry
Aware of the big interest in the suspended RH law, the Supreme Court is making sure it would be able to accommodate those who wish to listen to the oral arguments.
The court said it would strictly enforce a “no pass, no entry” policy in certain areas that it had designated for public viewing of the debates.
The oral arguments will be held in the main session hall, while monitors will be placed in three areas—the division hearing room and the main lobby, both in the main grounds, and the training room of the Centennial building.
The high court was supposed to hold the oral arguments on June 18 but reset it for Tuesday because it had acted on several other petitions for and against the law.
There are 15 petitions challenging the RH law while six intervenors are seeking to uphold its legality.
The six include Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, former Health Secretaries Esperanza Cabral, Jaime Galvez Tan and Alberto Romualdez, Joanne de Venecia et al., Sen. Pia Cayetano, the Filipino Catholic Voices for Reproductive Health Inc. and the Interfaith Partnership for Responsible Parenthood Inc.

July 10, 2013
SC: When does life begin?
Question dominates hearing on RH law
The age-old debate on when life begins unfolded in the Supreme Court on Tuesday at the start of a hearing on the constitutionality of the reproductive health (RH) law.
Justices asked petitioners against the now suspended law to explain their position that life begins with the union of the egg and the sperm and that this was why they wanted the court to stop the implementation of the measure that would allow the distribution of contraceptives.
The petitioners held that hormonal contraceptives specifically were abortifacients.
Lawyer Concepcion Noche found herself defending the position of the anti-RH petitioners that conception began in fertilization as against the contention of pro-RH advocates that life began when the fertilized egg embeded itself in the uterus of a woman.
But this early, some justices led by Antonio Carpio and Marvic Leonen expressed skepticism on the competence of the court to rule on the constitutionality of the RH law.
“It is now a question of when does conception occur—the time of fertilization or upon the implantation from the walls of the uterus. So, you are asking the 15 members of this court, none of whom are doctors, to decide when conception happens?” Carpio asked Noche, the first speaker in Tuesday’s proceedings.
Leonen said that the petitioners were giving an “awesome” responsibility to the magistrates to make such a determination, and not the 24 senators, the 200 members of Congress and the President who were elected, and in the process “making us a super-agency.”
Theological questions
Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno said the high court was not there to answer “metaphysical” and “theological” questions but to balance the interests of the unborn child with other Constitutional values and objectives.
Sereno said the petitioners had put the high court whose members were not elected in a difficult position, especially because the Constitution did not define conception as fertilization.
Sereno, Carpio and Leonen were among five justices who voted against the issuance of the status quo ante order on the law’s implementation for 120 days on March 19.
The first hearing lasted five hours and heard mainly those opposing the legislation. The proceedings will resume on July 23.
Population control
As proponents and opponents of the RH law noisily held their separate programs outside the Supreme Court, the oral arguments kicked off with former Sen. Francisco Tatad contending that the RH law had not only divided the nation but threatened to divide the nation further.
Tatad is one of 15 petitioners challenging the law, which mandates the state to provide the poor with reproductive health services, including access to contraceptives and sex education to schoolchildren.
“The RH law is neither a responsible parenthood nor health measure but a planned parenthood and population control measure,” said Tatad, who was tasked to give the opening statement of the anti-RH petitioners.
The law imposes population control through government-mandated contraception and, among others, redefines the purpose of marriage and denies the basic right of couples to procreate on their own free will, he said.
By being a provider of contraceptives, Tatad said, the Aquino administration has violated not only the Constitution but also international laws such as the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, which the country ratified in 1950.
When life begins
Noche maintained that life began with the union of the sperm and the egg and that preventing this union through contraceptives violates the right of the unborn to life.
“The fertilized ovum has life and is human,” she said. IUDs and hormonal contraceptives are abortifacient and vasectomy is mutilation, she added.
Likewise, she noted that Section 12 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution guaranteed that Congress and the Supreme Court would not pass any proabortion legislation and decisions.
“Let the voice of the unborn be heard in the august halls of the tribunal. Let their voice be you,” Noche said.
On Carpio’s questioning, Noche maintained that records of the 1986 Constitutional Commission were very clear that conception meant fertilization.
She also held that the intent of the commission was not to leave to Congress the question of when life begins.
Both Leonen and Sereno pointed out to Noche that the Constitution did not mention fertilized ovum but conception and what it meant, but Noche said the definition of conception was settled by the constitutional commission.
Protection of life
Leonen said the court was “not a political organ but a court of law.”
“We read what is produced, look at facts and the law and make it harmonious with the law,” he said.
Leonen asked Noche what was wrong if the state made available contraceptives to the public. Noche replied that her primary focus was “preserving and protecting the life of the unborn from the moment it exists.”
She said the state failed to provide “informed consent” to the people on available choices, adding that it was the government, not the people, who was making the choices for them.
Leonen also asked whether the issue on the RH law was “justiceable” when there was no actual controversy on the law. But Noche cited two rulings where she said that the mere enactment of a bill was a subject of court action.

July 11, 2013
Cojuangco loses UCPB case
The Supreme Court has ruled with finality that the government owns the shares of businessman Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco Jr. in United Coconut Planter’s Bank (UCPB) and that these should be used for the benefit of the coconut farmers.
The court referred to what critics of Cojuangco called the “commission,” or shares of stock, the uncle of President Aquino received after negotiating the acquisition by the Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) of First United Bank (FUB), which was later renamed UCPB and which became the depository of coconut levy funds.
The value of the contested shares was not immediately clear, but a former UCPB director said it was a “pittance” compared to the 27 percent of the sequestered shares of stock in San Miguel Corp., worth P70 billion, that the court ruled last year belonged to coconut farmers because it was acquired with the coconut levy and should be used for their benefit and the development of the coconut industry.
The levy was imposed from 1973 to 1982 on coconut farmers whose families constituted the Philippines’ poorest sector.
In its en banc meeting on Tuesday, the high court denied with finality the motion for reconsideration sought by Cojuangco of its previous ruling declaring that these shares of stock were bought with public funds and, thus, were considered public property.
“Considering that the motion for reconsideration contains a mere reiteration of the arguments that have already been previously pleaded, submitted and resolved by the Court in its Nov. 27, 2012, decision, and that the arguments in the motion are too unsubstantial to warrant reconsideration or modification, we find no reason to modify or abandon the challenged decision,” the high court said, according to a summary of the case prepared by its public information office.
Unanimous vote
The court said that it would no longer entertain any further pleadings on the case.
Except for Associate Justice Arturo Brion, who was on sick leave, the high court voted unanimously on the ruling penned by Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr.
Cojuangco in his motion said the court had erred in affirming with modification the Sandiganbayan’s decision on his case. He also said that the ruling violated his constitutional right to due process and non-impairment of contract and, thus, sought for the dismissal of the complaint against him in the Sandiganbayan case.
In the Nov. 27, 2012, ruling, the high court upheld but made modifications on a Sandiganbayan ruling issued on July 11, 2003, and amended on June 5, 2007, in connection with Cojuangco’s UCPB shares.
The high tribunal declared as unconstitutional provisions in the agreement between Cojuangco and the PCA on May 25, 1975, which allowed the businessman, known to be a crony of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, “to personally and exclusively own public funds or property.”
Commission
The agreement provided for the transfer to Cojuangco “by way of compensation,” of 10 percent of the 72.2 percent shares of stock that PCA purchased using the coconut levy funds.
“In sum, Cojuangco received public assets—in the form of UCPB shares with a value of P10.88 million in 1975, paid by coconut levy funds,” the court had said. It had also noted that Cojuangco had admitted that the PCA paid the entire acquisition price for the 72.2-percent option shares.
“We, therefore, affirm, on this ground, that decision of the Sandiganbayan nullifying the shares of stock transfer to Cojuangco. Accordingly, the UCPB shares of stock representing the 72.2-percent fully paid shares subject of the instant petition, with all dividends declared, paid or issued upon thereon, as well as any increments thereto arising from, but not limited to, the exercise of preemptive right, shall be reconveyed to the government of the Republic of the Philippines, which as we previously clarified, shall be used ‘only for the benefit of all coconut farmers and for the development of the coconut industry.’”
The high court added that Cojuangco “cannot stand to benefit by receiving, in his private capacity, 7.22 percent of the FUB shares without violating the constitutional caveat that public funds can only be used for public purpose.”
The disposition of the P70 billion in San Miguel Corp. shares that reverted to the government last year has not been outlined. Militant groups in the industry are protesting a move by the Aquino administration to transfer the amount to the general appropriation fund to finance antipoverty programs.
The militant groups said that the money should be used specifically for the amelioration of the coconut farmers who paid the levy, as directed by the Supreme Court, and that any antipoverty measure should come from the national budget.
Last year, the court likewise ruled that a separate 20-percent block of SMC shares, which farmers claimed was also acquired with the levy money, belonged to Cojuangco. It was worth at least P85 billion.

July 12, 2013
NBI probes P10-B scam
Pork, gov’t funds used in ghost projects (First of a series)
The National Bureau of Investigation is looking into allegations that the government has been defrauded of some P10 billion over the past 10 years by a syndicate using funds from the pork barrel of lawmakers and various government agencies for scores of ghost projects.
Described by an NBI investigator as the “mother of all scams,” the con game came to light in March following the kidnapping—and subsequent rescue—of an employee of a trading company, JLN Corp., which was purportedly behind the scheme, according to sworn affidavits and interviews conducted by the Inquirer.
JLN stands for Janet Lim Napoles, who has been identified as the alleged brains behind the racket. She runs the company with her brother, Reynald “Jojo” Lim.
The sworn affidavits—prepared by six whistle-blowers with the assistance of their lawyer, Levito Baligod, and submitted to the NBI—stated that JLN Corp., with offices on the 25th floor of Discovery Suites in Ortigas Center in Pasig City, had defrauded the government of billions of pesos in ghost projects involving the creation of at least 20 bogus nongovernment organizations. These NGOs were supposedly the ultimate recipients of the state funds, but the money went to Napoles, according to the affidavits of the six whistle-blowers.
All six were interviewed by the Inquirer, which also secured copies of their sworn statements. The extent of the swindling brought tears to one NBI agent in an interview.
The kidnap victim, Benhur K. Luy, the principal witness to the scam, was rescued by a special task force headed by Rolando Argabioso, assistant NBI regional director, on March 22 from a condominium unit in the South Wings Gardens of Pacific Plaza Tower in Bonifacio Global City.
Kidnapping charges were brought by the NBI against Napoles and Lim, but these were subsequently dropped purportedly for “lack of probable cause.” Lim was arrested and briefly detained. Napoles issued an affidavit denying involvement in the abduction.
Since then, the 31-year-old Luy, Napoles’ cousin and personal assistant in JLN Corp., has executed affidavits detailing his abduction and the reasons why he was kidnapped. In one signed statement, he said he was accused by Napoles of striking out on his own concocting illegal deals, without her knowledge, copying schemes from his cousin’s operations.
Five others who had worked in JLN Corp. have come out to corroborate the account of Luy, detailing the activities of Napoles. One of them was a project coordinator and another was a nanny who was made president of a dummy NGO. The rest were clerks and support staff.
Joc-joc scam probe
The 49-year-old Napoles was summoned to the investigation conducted in 2008 by the Senate blue ribbon committee on the P728-million fertilizer scandal involving then Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante. She then testified she had used dummy companies in that scheme but no charges have so far been brought against her in connection with that case.
The sources of funding for the supposed projects, ostensibly meant largely to benefit poor farmers through provisions of fertilizers and farm equipment and implements, came from the priority development assistance funds (PDAF), or pork barrel, of three senators and 11 members of the House of Representatives.
Also tapped by the syndicate were the Malampaya oil fund and allocations by the Department of Budget and Management for the Technology Resource Corp. (formerly the Technology and Livelihood Resource Corp.), National Livelihood Development Corp. and National Agri-Business Corp., Department of Agriculture and Department of Agrarian Reform. Lawmakers’ commissions
The whistle-blowers said JLN Corp. was able to carry on the swindle through Napoles’ vast network and connections.
“JLN offered to lawmakers commissions equivalent to 40 to 60 percent of the amount of PDAF in exchange for the right to determine the implementing agency and fund beneficiary,” according to Luy.
“Apart from senators and congressmen, Madame Janet has also connections in almost all branches of government, friends in the right places, and lawyers who do her bidding,” he told the Inquirer in an interview.
Luy, who has a ready smile and sports a white side wall haircut, said he began working for his cousins in September 2002. Over the past decade, he said he had gained intimate knowledge of their operations, how they manufactured receipts, forged signatures of local government officials, fabricated names of beneficiaries of the state funds.
He said he had planned to put up his own business and establish his own network similar to his cousins’. But before he could go on his own, Napoles learned of his plan and locked him up first in the JLN office on Dec. 19, 2012, before he was later taken to the condominium.
The NBI team rescued Luy on the evening of March 22 on orders of Justice Secretary Leila de Lima and NBI Director Nonnatus Rojas following a complaint for abduction lodged by Baligod in the Department of Justice.
Money in bathtub
In his letter to De Lima, Baligod stated that Luy was detained by the siblings “to ensure that nobody can directly implicate them with the issues on the fertilizer scam, Malampaya scam and anomalies in the implementation of several PDAF-funded projects.”
In his sworn affidavit to the NBI, Luy said he opened accounts in various banks, including the Air Materiel Wing Savings and Loans Association, and deposited and withdrew money for Napoles.
“The accounts and transactions were in the tens of millions of pesos and all of these were remitted to Madame Janet,” Luy told the Inquirer.
He said that cash withdrawn from the banks were placed in luggage strollers and duffel bags and taken to Napoles in her office or her condominium unit in 18-B North Tower of Pacific Plaza in Taguig City
“These bags were piled in the master bedroom and in the bathtub of her bathroom,” he said.