research on monetary stats on the corruption in the philippines (transparency internationAL) tag how does a bill become a law?

art 6
By Sarah Freitas (http://www.financialtaskforce.org/2011/12/12/philippines-lost-142-billion-in-illicit-

financial-flows-between-2000-and-2009-global-financial-integrity-finds/)

According to an upcoming report that estimates the magnitude of illicit money leaving developing countries, the Philippines lost US$142 billion between 2000 and 2009. The amount of illicit money that left the economy puts the Philippines in the top 15 countries in outflows during the period. The report, titled Illicit Financial Flows from Developing Countries Over the Decade ending 2009, will be published by Washington, DC-based research group Global Financial Integrity on December 15.

http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Nation&title=Congress-sees-approval-of-FoI-billbefore-Holy-Week-break&id=46243

y Congress sees approval of FoI bill before Holy Week break

by Karl Allan Barlaan and Christian Cardient (http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/insideOpinion.htm?f=2011/january/17/feature1.isx&d=2011/ja nuary/17)

On any given weekday, Customs officials and employees in the busiest collection district, which includes the Port of Manila, literally harvest money like it were growing on trees - in outlandishly abundant quantities. The figures range from a low of P2 million per day as very conservative estimates by insiders allege, to a staggering P100 million daily if Bureau of Customs Angelito Alvarezs figures are to be taken seriously. These amounts constitute what is known as coffee money or smiling money for somedefined by Commissioner Alvarez as the sum that is voluntarily given to a Customs employee or official as sign of appreciation for a job well done, for trade facilitation earmarked by importers to fast track the release of their goods.

Wrong as it is, the culture of corruption has long been institutionalized within the BIR. Insiders confirm that the same practice that was first exposed by retired senior examiner Socrates Aguinaldo in 1999 is still the normexercised with the same impunity as in the past, only with greater caution under Henares watch: Thirty percent goes to the examiners of the group assigned to audit a taxpayer while the supervisors share is 15 percent. The division chief and the assistant chief each get 20 percent. The rest of (the money) goes to the higher officials such as the commissioner, the assistant commissioner, and deputy commissioner in charge of the group doing the assessment. (PCIJs The Taxmen Share their Loot)

y y

According to lawyer Noel Villaroman, author of Laws and Jurisprudence on Graft and Corruption (CentralBooks), the public is as just as blameworthy for corruption and its prevalence. Aside from thieves in government, the general publics overall indifference is to be blamed why corruption is rampant in this country. Our collective indifference emboldens corrupt officials to steal with impunity...the sad reality is this: if we are not personally and directly injured by corrupt acts, we usually do not take positive actions to combat corruption, says Villaroman. We have two competing viewpoints about corruption in the Philippines. The first is our formal condemnation of corrupt behavior; and second is the reality that we tolerate, condone and let it pass. Indeed, it is a great paradox. The first is embodied in our formal laws and institutions created to fight corruption. Our leaders also formally condemn corruption when they speak in public. In stark contrast, the second embodies our societys general leniency and tolerance of corruption. It is also the theme of our leaders private conversations that are purposely hidden from the public. Hypocrisy has not been better illustrated than this.

A Paper Prepared by Transparency and Accountability Network for GTZ Philippines March 2011

Corruption and Anti-Corruption in the Philippines Transparency and Accountability Network, March 2011 Corruption has taken its toll on the countrys development. The World Bank (2001) estimated that more than 20 per cent of the national budget is annually lost to corruption. In money terms, this is an estimated US$12 billion from the period 1995-2000. The Ombudsman adds that an estimated 30 per cent of government contracts are diverted to corruption annually.

BUSINESS ANTI-CORRUPTION PORTALhttp://www.business-anticorruption.com/country-profiles/east-asia-the-pacific/philippines/show-all/

According to a March 2011 news article by The Peninsula, the former chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippine (AFP), Angelo Reyes, was alleged to have amassed approximately PHP 100 million during his 20-month period as military chief. The former AFP budget officer also alleges that two former military chiefs, Villanueva and Cimatu, received PHP 10 million respectively as welcome gifts when they assumed their posts. The case is currently being investigated, and the AFP is said to aid the panel formed by the Department of Justice to probe the alleged corruption.

TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL http://www.transparency.org.uk/corruption-data

Estimates of alleged embezzlement (Jones. S, Measuring Corruption, OPM Briefing Notes, January 2007): Leader Suharto Marcos Mobutu Abacha Milosevic Fujimori Duvalier Lazarenko Aleman Estrada Country Indonesia Philippines Zaire Nigeria Yugoslavia Peru Haiti Ukraine Nicaragua Philippines Period 1967-98 1972-86 1965-97 1993-98 1989-2000 1990-1999 1971-86 1996-97 1997-2002 1998-2001 Range of estimates $15 $35 billion $5 - $10 billion $5 billion $2 - $5 billion $1 billion1 $600 million $800 million $114 - 200 million $100 million $78 - $80 million

Implantation Mechanism system

Information y y y y y y y y We need it in our daily lives Public opinion, since we are a democratic nations, it help invigorate discussions Participation in policy making, sovereignty resides in the people Freedom of the press Freedom to redress government of grievances Accountability (why do we need this when each agency has a COA) Monitoring (best to prevent than) Transparency

Jurisprudence is not law! Chavez vs PCGG mentions that the law does not provide the limitations Whether this limitations are reasonable? Defense is balancing of interest test. Right, restrictions, qualifications for the restrictions (which is the balancing of interests) Restrictions can be overided by public interest. Why need law for restriction? We are adhering to the rule of law. If there are no restrictions, it is up to the individual to arbitrarily withhold information. Akbayan vs Aquino 558 scra 468 july 16, 2008 if the information is already there. There is no need to show purpose. Subido vs Ozetea there is no duty of the officer to inquire as of the motive.

Guingona vs comelec may 6, 2010