Saturday, April 10, 2010

Overseas Absentee Voting starts... happy & proud to have been part of the advocacy for its implementation






The Overseas Absentee Voting and the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Acts of 2003

Today, April 10, 2010, overseas absentee voting started. 589,830 Filipinos abroad are qualified to exercise their right to vote in the 2010 general elections.

It was during the 2004 national elections that overseas Filipinos were able to vote for the very first time. Thanks to the efforts of overseas Filipino organizations and home-based NGOs as well as individuals who campaigned without let-up for the passage into law of the Absentee Voting Bill.

Very little, or none at all, is known of the fact that it was probably The Philippines to the World Entertainment Foundation, Inc. (PWEFI), which I founded, that started the ball rolling when as early as July 2000 it launched a signature drive to urge our lawmakers to act on the Absentee Voting Bill and Dual Citizenship Bill. As early as 1998 this writer had already written then-President Fidel Ramos about the absentee voting bill.

Although calls by different groups and individuals for the passage into law of both bills have already been made since the mid-90s, no sincere effort seemed to have been initiated. It could be said, therefore, that the PWEFI initiative was the first one.

The PWEFI signature campaign – which was started in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia - immediately drew support from kababayans and initially collected 700 signatures. However, it lost momentum and was eventually sidelined when then-President Joseph Estrada’s impeachment proceedings hugged the headlines. Nevertheless, the 700 signatures were submitted to the Senate. 2001 saw the resurgence of a similar but more vigorous campaign, this time under the initiative of other Filipino organizations overseas and at home. Foremost among these groups was the OFWNet Foundation which lobbied unrelentlessly, and individuals - like Ellene Sana, Noel Escuela, Cathy Ledesma, Dr. Chee Garcia, Bert Barriga and Marvin Bionat, to name a few – who lobbied tirelessly for the campaign until the bill’s eventual passage into law on February 13, 2003 as Republic Act 9189 known as the Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003. The Dual Citizenship Bill, on the other hand, was passed into law on August 29, 2003 as Republic Act 9225, known as the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003.

This writer is quite proud of having been part of the initiative that eventually enabled overseas Filipinos to have a say on who should lead our country.

Read the Philippine Star article about the start of absentee voting for the 2010 elections: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=565099&publicationSubCategoryId=63

Monday, April 5, 2010

AFTERTHOUGHTS ON THE 2010 MR. WORLD PHILIPPINES (and Bb. Pilipinas)

I actually wrote this right after the Mr. World Philippines competition on February 27, but I never got around to posting it in my multiply and facebook accounts and here in my blogsite. Not until now when the controversy on 2010 Bb. Pilipinas Universe Venus Raj’s dethronement came to the fore. I guess this is a most opportune time to finally post this. Venus’ dethronement brought to light what seems like irregularities within Bb. Pilipinas and Mr. World Philippines.

I used to be a big pageant fan. In fact, I have these albums of different pageants (Bb. Pilipinas, Miss Universe, Mutya ng Pilipinas, Miss International, etc.) from 1972 to the early 90s when my interest somewhat waned. The Bb. Pilipinas and Miss Universe pageants were something I looked forward to every year. I even watched Miss Universe live at the PICC when it was held here in 1994 (I bought a 2nd-row-seat ticket). Now if that doesn’t prove how much of a pageant fan I am, I don’t know what will.

I have always held Bb. Pilipinas in high esteem and considered it the mother of all local pageants. However, with the dethronement of Anjanette Abayari in 1991, Tisha Silang in 1998 and Janelle Bautista in 1999 I came to realize that there must be something wrong with how the organizer, Bb. Pilipinas Charities, Inc. (BPCI), is running the pageant. The latest controversy involving Venus’ dethronement has further contributed to my suspicion and to the disappointment of hardcore pageant followers. If Facebook messages expressing great disappointment, frustration and anger are anything to go by, then pageant fans seem to have had enough with BPCI. Personally, what seemed to me like irregularities in the recent Mr. World Philippines (MWP) competition only bolstered my mistrust on BPCI.

As a talent agent I look up to the Mr. World Philippines contest as the most prestigious and respectable male pageant in the country and I have always wanted to enter a talent in the contest, which I did in its 2010 edition. I made sure that the talent I was to enter in the competition not only had above-average looks and proportionate physique but also possessed a nice personality and a reasonable degree of intelligence. Since I am aware of BPCI’s aversion towards potential candidates who have less-than-wholesome image, I also made sure that the talent I would enter had unsullied background. And so I entered one who fit the bill, someone that I believed was at par with their supposedly high and clean standard.

Sadly, the Mr. World Philippines 2010 competition was a big frustration, to say the least, in terms of how the pageant was organized, among many other things.

First, there wasn’t much publicity about it. Thus, the lack of interest among agents, potential candidates and male pageant enthusiasts. Methinks it didn’t generate interest because, like I said, it was not promoted well. Secondly, agents were wary to send their talents because of BPCI’s reputation for snobbing agents (except for a favored one or two perhaps). Thirdly, talents themselves shy away from this pageant because of BPCI’s self-righteous view that individuals with dubious background (by their own definition) have no place in this supposedly wholesome, clean and morally upright competition. Fourth, the many requirements (birth certificate, diploma, certificate of good moral character, medical certificate, etc.) asked of them at initial screening discouraged many potential applicants.

The posthaste manner by which MWP 2010 was organized and staged was also a great disappointment.

Regarding BPCI’s treatment of talent agents and managers, whereas at the onset the guy-in-charge was nice, asking us to bring in more candidates, later (when the official line-up was completed) he was the exact opposite. We could feel the hostility. Every time we needed to speak with our talents for some tips and advice he would order them to return inside at once.

The final screening process which took place at the Gateway Suites on February 16 went smoothly. We were told that out of the 30+ applicants 20 official candidates would be announced immediately after the final screening. Honestly, having seen the line-up of applicants I didn’t think they would be able to come up with twenty or even ten. After waiting several minutes we were told that no results would be announced that night and that the final tally sheet would have to be brought to Madame Stella Araneta. That drew suspicion.

One of my two talents luckily made it as one of the seventeen official candidates. Of course we were both ecstatic that he made it. But soon enough I began feeling the opposite.

The night they were asked to sign a contract I instructed my talent to ask for a copy so we can go through it (he had already signed it and as his manager I wanted to see what was in the contract). Knowing how aversed BPCI people are to agents, I told him to tell them that it was his father who wanted to see the contract (which wasn’t necessarily a lie since we really intended to show it to his father). To which the BPCI lawyers said no. Now, it doesn’t take a genius to see a legal flaw here. Anyone who signs a contract has the right to have a copy. And I, being the talent manager, and for that matter, his father, had every right to review it. So why wouldn’t they give a copy? Beats me.

Because of that, which I thought was a big irregularity, I wanted to pull my talent out of the contest. But since he had already exerted effort attending the workshops and other activities, I decided against it.

Anyway, sad that I was when my talent failed to even make the final five, a part of me was also rejoicing. At least I didn’t get to lose the right (because of certain stipulations in the BPCI contract) to give projects to the talent that I myself discovered, groomed and honed and manage.

At this point I would like to enumerate some general observations about the pageant. I hope the organization and people concerned would have the humility to accept these as constructive criticisms and, hopefully, avoid making these mistakes in the next Mr. World Philippines or even in Bb. Pilipinas for that matter:

As I intimated earlier, BPCI is not agents-friendly. For them the role of agents begins with bringing their talents to apply, and ends there. They don’t want agents to have anything to do with their talents especially when the latter make it as official candidates. Obviously, the BPCI people don’t know anything about dealing with and treating talent agents. They don’t know or downright refuse to accept the fact that agents generally have to be there – maybe not at all times but from time to time – to check on their talents and see to it that they have everything they need and that nothing untoward is happening to them. BPCI should learn how to develop goodwill with talent agents. These agents are a big help. If treated well and fairly, they could bring in the best discoveries around. Properly motivated they would search in every nook and cranny, so to speak, in search of “hidden gems.” This is where Bb. Pilipinas is beaten by Mutya ng Pilipinas (and in a sense also by Miss Earth Philippines) which treats agents and designers justly and in return generate a lot of goodwill.

In toto, the competition was very poorly organized. The haste in producing a winner because of the purported pressure from Miss World Organization (MWO) President Julia Morley to come up with a Philippine representative in time for the March 27 finals in Korea should have never be an excuse for a line-up of candidates where only barely half deserved to be there. What the organizers should have done was an all-out promotion of the screening of potential candidates. The main problem was their lack of goodwill among talent agents and managers who, as I’ve said earlier, shy away from BPCI. They could have also done away with some of the activities (like playing basketball with less fortunate youth just to show some socio-civic relevance or the games at the La Mesa Eco Park just to show some sports-related activities in the AVP during Finals Night). They could have devoted more time looking for quality candidates. They could have also put a little more class by holding the finals in, say, the Gateway Atrium and not on a very-late night show that is kitschy at best.

As to the judging procedure, if I remember right the criteria were 50% (beauty of) face, 30% physique, 10% personality and 10% intelligence. So if comeliness of face accounted for 50%, how come… oh well, forget it. And how did the judges score them on personality and intelligence when the twelve candidates weren’t even interviewed, not on finals night nor in any pre-finals activity?


SELECTIVE DISQUALIFICATION

Regarding the issue on morality, BPCI is so hung up on it, a false sense of morality anyway. Their holier than thou attitude is a total turn-off. A day before the finals five candidates were disqualified on grounds that they have previously joined or won less prestigious male pageants or bikini contests with dubious reputation. It’s funny because while they were disqualified for that reason, at least two others escaped BPCI’s prying eyes. One is the lead star of a gay indie film several photos from which were posted in an unabashedly gay website. The photos showed the contestant in very compromising acts like having another guy (they’re both nude) sitting on him, another photo showed him semi-nude with some pubic hair showing. Now I don’t know about you but that should be more disturbing (to the BPCI people that is) than a bikini contestant romping in skimpy trunks. The other contestant, unknown to BPCI, has several raunchy photos being kept by a photographer. So what gives, really?

I spoke with one of the disqualified candidates - the more intelligent, smart and vocal among them. According to him on the eve of Finals Night while they were rehearsing at GMA 7, the five of them were asked to return to the BPCI office at Araneta Coliseum where they were told that upon checking they found out that the five of them had joined “other” male pageants before. By “other” they meant bikini contests with not-so-wholesome reputation. He argued that every contest they have participated in was enumerated in the application form, so why were they accepted in the first place if BPCI thought those contests were of the dubious kind? Why were they being disqualified on the eve of the competition’s finals? Why only then after taking a leave from work (at least for him) and losing several days’ worth of salary just to be able to attend all the activities? Why only then after exerting effort and spending for transportation?

Probably sensing trouble and realizing that they were up against someone who knew his rights and would fight for them, they asked the five candidates to leave. They were then advised by someone to go to ABS CBN to air their grievances, which they did. They were interviewed by reporters but the News Department couldn’t air it without getting the side of BPCI. Upon learning about this, BPCI ordered them to return to the Araneta office so that matters could be straightened out. Upon returning there, however, they were driven out of the compound. I understand their names have also been posted at the entrance banning them from entering the BPCI premises.

I heard that on the day of the finals one of the disqualified candidates went to GMA 7 to watch the taping but he was prevented by security from entering the studio. Again, I don’t know about you but isn’t a court order necessary for implementing such ban? Talk about one’s rights being infringed upon.

It will be recalled that in last year’s Bb. Pilipinas finals at Araneta Coliseum, BPCI staff tried very hard to prevent Bb. Pilipinas-Universe 1982 Maria Isabel Lopez from attending. This despite the fact that Lopez has been diligently attending the event since 2003 as one of the past winners. Lopez insisted on her right to be there so, the BPCI staff’s unrelenting determination to “drive her out” of Araneta Coliseum notwithstanding, she finished the showed. Read Lopez’ complete account of the incident at http://telebisyon.net/balita/Exbeauty-queen-Isabel-Lopez-airs-side-on-Bb-Pilipinas-snub/source/56032/

Like the disqualification of the five Mr. World Philippines candidates on grounds of having joined other pageants that BPCI found too sexy for (their) comfort while, at the same time, overlooking – deliberately or otherwise – another candidate’s more morally unacceptable background and Lopez’ virtual ban from attending the Bb. Pilipinas finals while Bb. Pilipinas World 2005 Carlene Aguilar who bore a child out of wedlock is allowed in is really something that makes one wonder. How does BPCI gauge a candidate’s morality or lack of it? Do they have a set of standard for some and a different one for others?


QUO VADIS BPCI?

It would do BPCI well if they clean their act in as far as Bb. Pilipinas is concerned. As to Mr. World Philippines, they should ensure that this ugly chapter in the short history of MWP will not be repeated. Otherwise, BPCI will continue losing its credibility. The dethronement of Venus Raj is another blow to their supposedly impeccable reputation. In fact, it might even spell their doom as pageant fans are really going up in arms against them, so to speak, as seen in facebook messages. They are appalled by BPCI’s brazen disregard for the simplest rules of courtesy like doing a very thorough background check on the candidates so that grounds of disqualification are determined even before they start participating in the pageant activities or that dethronements don’t have to happen.

Venus’ interview in The Buzz proved once and for all that there is definitely something wrong with BPCI. Venus emphasized that they knew all along – right from the start, during the screening of potential candidates – that she was born in Qatar. So if they did, and they also had a copy of Venus’ birth certificate the data in which contradicted with Venus’ pronouncements, then why didn’t they question it before accepting Venus as an official candidate? Why expose it after she has been crowned?

Either BPCI is that stupid not to see something which was right there staring at their faces, or they deliberately ignored possible grounds for disqualification which they later revealed if the candidate in question won and she wasn’t exactly to their liking. Maybe, just maybe.

One question that has been lingering on in the minds of pageant fans – is it really Madame Stella Marquez Araneta who has the final say on everything in Bb. Pilipinas (and Mr. World Philippines)? Are the judges there just for the sake of having them? In other words, are they just used as some sort of a front?

Also, isn’t it an affront to Filipinos that the one who chooses the Philippine representatives to pageants abroad is not Filipino but Colombian? Isn’t it an insult to Filipino designers that the evening gowns and even national costumes that Philippine representatives to Miss Universe wear are creations of a Colombian designer? The Philippines is not wanting in world-class fashion designers and I personally don’t see the need to utilize the services of foreign designers, especially when designing our national costume in concerned. As an advocate of anything and everything that has to do with Filipino dignity, pride and honor, I am appalled by this blatant disregard for the creative talent of Filipino designers.

In conclusion, I hope no one among the five young men will think of making a political issue out of this. The Aranetas, after all, are related to the Roxases, as in Mar Roxas. Come to think of it, Mr. Palengke is doing his best to endear himself to the masses and that seemingly trivial MWP incident involving five ordinary young Filipino men being treated unjustly by an organization owned by his mother’s relatives does not bode well for a possible Mar Roxas vice presidency. The small incident could actually be blown out of proportion.

2010 as Year of the Thomasian: In the face of inaction from Malacanang, let's declare it ourselves

2010 AS YEAR OF THE THOMASIAN:
IN THE FACE OF INACTION FROM MALACANANG, LET’S DECLARE IT OURSELVES

AND THE NEED TO MAKE NOISE ABOUT UST’S QUADRICENTENNIAL

When the Film Development Council of the Philippines (FDCP) launched its historical scriptwriting contest recently in line with the year 2011 being a marker for several important events in Philippine history, it mentioned our national hero’s 150th birthday, the country’s 65th year of independence from America and the People Power Revolution’s 25th anniversary. Quite surprisingly it failed to mention the Quadricentennial of the University of Santo Tomas (UST) which, I personally believe, is the most important of those anniversaries.

I do not understand why such event of great historical significance could be overlooked by the FDCP. On second thought, however, perhaps it’s not their fault. Perhaps we – the Thomasian community – is not doing enough to let the entire Filipino nationhood know that our beloved alma mater is celebrating its 400th year, something that Filipinos of today – Thomasians or not – should be happy about and grateful for if only for the fact that it is happening during our lifetime. It’s like being alive during and being able to witness the apparition of the infamous Halley’s Comet which appears only every 75-76 years, the last of which was in February 1986 (the next one will be in July 2061).

If we are really proud of being UST alumni as we say we are, then we should do our share in promoting the 2011 event in whatever little way we can. I’m sure UST’s Quadricentennial Committee is doing its best to ensure the grandest Thomasian celebration ever, but we Thomasians in “the world out here” cannot, should not, just sit idly doing nothing.

I – a product of the university’s then-College of Architecture & Fine Arts (Fine Arts – Advertising batch ‘81) – have initiated middle of last year a move to have 2010 declared as “Year of the Thomasian”. Unfortunately, my letter to Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (whose father, Pres. Diosdado Macapagal, is one of UST’s most illustrious alumni) has not produced any result except endorsement to Malacanang’s Legislative Office. Follow-ups also proved futile.

The proposed declaration was inspired by a similar move in 1999 to have 2000 declared as “The Year of OFWs” which I likewise initiated (It was eventually realized through Presidential Proclamation No. 243). This time, with Malacanang’s inaction despite the worthiness of the proposal, perhaps it’s up to us to do the declaration ourselves.

Yes, I propose that we, present-day Thomasians, do a symbolic declaration making 2010 “Year of the Thomasian”. No, it’s not a bid for self-aggrandizement, but our tribute to fellow Thomasians of decades and centuries past – great men and women in various fields of endeavor – who have helped in shaping the future of our country and in enriching its history and culture. I don’t see any legal impediment in such a move so why don’t we do it?

We don’t need to do it in an ostentatious manner. In fact, we can do it in a very simple but nonetheless meaningful and significant way. What I have in mind is a gathering of Thomasians at the UST campus on April 28 (Wednesday), the day Archbishop Miguel de Benavides founded UST in 1611.

We can invite famous Thomasians in showbiz, media, the arts, business, government service, fashion, music, etc. for greater impact and wider media coverage. Wearing golden yellow t-shirts or tiger outfits, let’s sing the UST hymn and shout the “Go USTe” cheer as one. We can do this very early in the morning as the sun rises or if we want a finale of fireworks display we can do it instead towards sunset.

Or maybe there are better ideas out there, let’s hear it. Perhaps we can do an online declaration or something.

And lest we forget, we’re in “The Year of the Tiger” which puts more significance if we are to declare 2010 as “Year of the Thomasian”, we are tigers after all. The symbolic declaration would most definitely be a fitting prelude to next year’s Quadricentennial celebrations, the grandest historical event since 1998’s Philippine Centennial. It would also be the perfect way to start making noise about our alma mater’s 400th birthday.

How about it fellow Tomasinos?!


Rhoel Raymundo Mendoza
UST Fine Arts-Advertising Batch ‘81


Internet sites I’ve created in relation to UST’s Quadricentennial:
www.ust400.blogspot.com
www.uste400.multiply.com

My letter to the editor about the proposed declaration:
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/letterstotheeditor/view/20100216-253451/Declare_2010_Year_of_the_Thomasian

My alternative proposal as featured in The Varsitarian:
http://www.varsitarian.net/news/special_news/20100326/year_of_ust_tiger_pushed

PASS THIS ON TO ALL FELLOW THOMASIANS YOU KNOW! GO USTE!