Mikey fails to declare $1-M house in California

**explorer** · September 12th, 2009 07:54 AM

FBI asked to investigate Mikey Arroyo

**vito corleone** · September 12th, 2009 01:32 PM

mabuti pa tao ng ibang nasyon, me pakialam malaman kung paano natustusan ng taong gobyerno ang mga ari-arian nito. . .dapat talaga tanggalin na sa pwesto yang si gutierrez

**explorer** · September 16th, 2009 03:43 AM

from: www.inquirer.net

[SIZE="3"]Access denied[/SIZE]

Editorial
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 00:49:00 09/15/2009

A memorandum circular recently issued by Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez would make it difficult for people to get copies of the Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth of government officials. It is the latest move of the Arroyo administration to hamper access to information on matters of public concern.

The memorandum is unconstitutional and undemocratic. Unconstitutional because the Constitution recognizes “the right of the people to information on matters of public concern.” Undemocratic because information is the oxygen of democracy; the citizens of a democratic nation cannot form intelligent opinions and make wise decisions unless they have the necessary information on which they can base their judgment on matters that affect them.

The Office of the Ombudsman apparently issued the memorandum circular to prevent the further release of damaging information about the property acquisitions of Pampanga Rep. Juan Miguel “Mikey” Arroyo, one of the sons of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The younger Arroyo disclosed on national television on Sept. 1 that his net worth increased from P5.7 million in 2001 to P74.4 million in 2004 and to P99.2 million in 2008 partly because of campaign contributions and wedding gifts.

Many people, including media people who interviewed him on TV, did not find his explanation credible and acceptable. Ferdinand Gaite, president of the Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees, observed that the congressman failed to submit to the Commission on Elections a detailed statement of his campaign contributions and expenditures 30 days after the election as required by law. How much did he receive in campaign contributions, and how much was left after he had paid for campaign expenses? We do not know; he has not given the Comelec and the people a detailed accounting.

The memorandum of the Ombudsman is not the first administration move to hinder and restrict the public’s access to information, nor is it going to be the last. Former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante, the main witness in the Senate inquiry into the P728-million fertilizer scam, disappeared just before the committee on agriculture could open the probe. The commonly held suspicion was that the money was spent mostly to help fund the campaign of many candidates for national and local posts in the 2004 elections. Bolante, who had flown to the United States, was later deported back to the Philippines and appeared at a Senate hearing where he cleared Ms Arroyo of involvement in the fertilizer scandal.

Former Socio-Economic Planning Secretary Romulo Neri, concurrently director of the National Economic and Development Authority, was stopped from giving more details about the controversial $329-million NBN-ZTE deal and was told to plead executive privilege. That prevented the Senate and the people from getting vital information about the project. Up to what level did the attempted bribery reach in this transaction? People have their suspicions, but are not able to know the whole truth because of the plea of “executive privilege.”

People, and even senators, are frustrated at every turn in their attempt to obtain information on matters of public interest. Government officials are required to file Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth every year precisely to allow the people to find out if their officials are enriching themselves while in office. There is the presumption that if the net worth of an official is grossly out of proportion to his or her annual salary, that official must be engaged in some questionable practices. It is up to him to prove that he acquired his new wealth honestly.

In the 1989 case of Valmonte v. Belmonte, the Supreme Court said that in our republican system of government, “government agencies and institutions operate within the limits of the authority conferred by the people. Denied access to information on the inner workings of government, the citizenry can become prey to the whims and caprices of those to whom power has been delegated.”

Gutierrez’s memorandum circular on the SALNs has no place in a free, democratic nation whose citizens should enjoy access to information on matters of public concern. We urge her to withdraw it immediately.