Stupid PNP Antics

Cops around the world engage in stupid antics as a way to connect with the public and relieve stress. The Philippine National Police as well as the Department of Justice is no exception. Here are a few of their latest stupid antics.

K-9's are an important part of policing. Recenlty one dog was promoted to corporal. 

https://mb.com.ph/2025/2/7/fur-tastic-promotion-shih-tzu-police-dog-gets-promoted-with-200-cops-in-rizal

"Tiger at your service!”

A Shih Tzu-Poodle mix police dog named "Tiger" stole the spotlight as netizens were amused by its promotion together with more than 200 police personnel during the simultaneous oath-taking in Taytay, Rizal, on Thursday, Feb. 6.

The Rizal Police Provincial Office (Rizal PPO) said the event was part of the nationwide oath-taking, donning, and pinning of ranks for 2nd-level uniformed personnel for the 2024 calendar year, with local ceremonies held at the Parade Ground of the Rizal PPO.

Tiger was promoted to corporal and has been courageously serving alongside the Rizal PPO in their field responses.

“Tiger brought joy and excitement to the newly promoted personnel and their families,” it said.

According to PNP, the event is part of the regular promotion cycle for Calendar Year 2024, recognizing the dedication and exemplary service of personnel who have shown outstanding commitment to law enforcement.

We are not told exactly what this dog did to earn a promotion. From the sound of it he did nothing except exist and make people happy. Why is the PNP taking a shih-tzu on patrol? Is he sniffing for drugs? That does not seem likely or it would have been reported. 

Prank calls to 911 are such a nuisance that DILG Secretary Jonvic Remulla is recommending LGUs purchase motorcycles so PNP officers can investigate if a call is legitimate before sending in the calvary.  

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1243645

Provincial governors must acquire motorcycles for local police to ensure immediate response to reports through the country’s 911 emergency hotline, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) said.

In a news release on Saturday, DILG Secretary Jonvic Remulla said the purchase of new motorcycles would allow the police to quickly verify the legitimacy of reported incidents, considering that 60 percent of total reports to 911 were prank calls.

“I ask you for only one thing: Buy motorcycles. Give that to the police and let them verify if the call is legitimate or not,” he was quoted as saying during the 7th General Assembly of the League of Provinces of the Philippines in Pasig City on Friday.

Remulla said it is a small investment for the governors to ensure that government resources will not be wasted.

During his four terms as Cavite governor, he acquired 800 police cars as logistical support to respond quickly to calls for assistance.

He said the national government would shoulder all expenses for the launching of the nationwide integrated 911 system, adding that President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. ordered adjustments to the national budget to support the initiative.

“The only investment of LGUs is I ask you to give policemen access to motorcycles para (for) first response, laging pulis, para madetermine talaga ang nangyayari (it’s always the police, to determine what’s really happening),” Remulla said.

He said towns will be provided with firetrucks and ambulances for quick response during emergencies.

"The 911 is worthless if you only call but there is no response. It’s just like you’re only complaining. So, we have to capacitate LGUs to be able to respond,” Remulla said.

The DILG is eyeing the launch of the integrated 911 emergency response system by June in the Greater Manila area, Cebu and Mindanao.

The 911 replaced the old Philippine emergency hotline117 in 2016.

Calls coursed through 911 include those that require police assistance, fire reports, emergency medical assistance, search and rescue, and even those that concern chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive materials.

One has to wonder why the PNP does not have a supply of motorcycles or cars or trucks on hand. These vehicles are necessary for patrolling the road and enforcing traffic laws. Sadly the roads are full of dangerous drivers because the PNP do not enforce traffic laws. But isn't it sad that so many Filipinos are prank calling 911 the this suggestion has to be made? Are prank callers being charged with a crime?

The whole world knows Filipinos love to dance. That explains why the Irish embassy is teaching Irish dancing to female prisoners. 

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1244026

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has partnered with the Irish Embassy in the Philippines to facilitate a dance workshop for female persons deprived of liberty (PDLs).

In a news release on Thursday, the DOJ said the workshop was held at the Correctional Institution for Women compound in Mandaluyong City on Wednesday with Irish Ambassador to the Philippines Emma Hickey and Embassy of Ireland in the Philippines Head of Consular Naomi McElroy in attendance.

The activity intends to promote health and wellness through the art of Irish dance and introduce the Irish culture to female inmates, serving as an avenue to strengthen Filipino-Irish international relations.

This is in line with the Marcos administration’s commitment to upgrading human rights in the country and improving the lot of the country’s inmates, including their reintegration into mainstream society.

"This Dance Workshop is a symbol of our collective commitment to rehabilitation and reintegration, and a celebration of second chances," Justice Undersecretary Margarita Gutierrez said.

The Irish envoy, meanwhile, expressed elation for being part of the activity.

"I’m delighted to be here with you as I have heard great things about the programs underway at CIW. Thank you for the wonderful welcome you have given my team and I," she said.

Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla thanked the Irish ambassador for the “noble event” for the “reforming sisters behind bars.”

“Your diplomacy speaks volumes, we look forward to more partnerships with Ireland in the near future," he said.

The dance workshop was supported by the Samahan ng mga Pilipina para sa Reporma at Kaunlaran (SPARK) Philippines Inc., a non-profit organization that champions the development of women and youth as full partners in gender equality.

How exactly does teaching Irish dance to female prisoners improve their lives? Will female ex-cons be forming Irish dancing troupes and touring the nation? And who was teaching the dancing? Did the Irish embassy fly in a group to teach these ladies to do the River Dance? 

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is alive and well in the Philippines. 20% of the PNP force is female and the PNP Chief says this reflects an improvement in law enforcement.

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1244007

The rising number of female police officers reflects the significant improvement in the country’s law enforcement service formerly dominated by male officials, Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Gen. Rommel Francisco Marbil said on Thursday.

Marbil said the PNP is now composed of 42,757 female officers serving in various capacities, or 20 percent of more than 200,000 personnel.

“This is a testament to the PNP’s commitment to gender equality and professional excellence. No longer are women just part of the PNP—they are driving its transformation,” Marbil said in a statement.

Based on existing recruitment rules emphasized by the National Police Commission (Napolcom) in its memorandum issued in 2021, the PNP should allocate 10 percent of its annual recruitment quota to women.

There is a pending bill before the House of Representatives to increase the annual recruitment quota to at least 20 percent.

Marbil said 151 female officers hold key command and operational positions.

“These women are not just making history—they are shaping the future of policing. They have shattered ceilings, proven their mettle, and are leading from the frontlines. Leadership is not about gender; it is about competence, vision, and the unwavering commitment to serve,” Marbil said.

One of them is Brig. Gen. Jean Fajardo, the first female PNP spokesperson who now also holds the record of being the first-ever female Regional Director. She is the concurrent director of the Police Regional Office in Region 3 (Central Luzon).

Brig. Gen. Jezebel D. Medina also holds the top post of the PNP Health Service while Police Brig. Gen Portia Manalad heads the Women and Children Protection Center.

Brig. Gen. Maria Leonora Camarao is now also the Regional Director of the Internal Affairs Service (IAS) in the National Capital Region while Col. Vina Guzman, the current PNP Academy Commandant of Cadets is expected to be promoted to one-star general as she holds a Brigadier General-equivalent position.

Across various leadership levels, Marbil said a total of 103 police colonels and 35 police lieutenant colonels hold strategic positions.

Marbil said two women now serve as chiefs of police in Makati City and Mandaluyong City while five female police officers currently hold the top PNP post in five provinces— Aurora, Guimaras, Antique, Siquijor, and Leyte Sur.

Zamboanga City, a critical urban hub, is under the command of a female City Director — Col. Kimberly Molitas.

Marbil also reaffirmed the PNP’s steadfast commitment to empowering female officers by ensuring equal opportunities for career advancement, leadership training, and professional growth.

He emphasized that the organization will continue to foster a culture where excellence and not gender defines success.

You know, come to think of it, I don't recall ever hearing about a female cop shooting a drug user. That's a good thing right? But note that the PNP Chief says they want "to foster a culture where excellence and not gender defines success" after lauding the hiring and promotion of female cops! 

Valentine's Day has come and gone and with it the stupidest PNP antic of all, handing out flowers, chocolate, and balloons to the public. 

https://mb.com.ph/2025/2/15/rizal-cops-serenade-hand-out-flowers-chocolates-and-balloons-on-valentine-s-day

Police serenaded the public as they handed out flowers, balloons and chocolates in Taytay, Rizal on Valentine’s Day.

The men and women of the Rizal Police Provincial Office (PPO) gave roses, red balloons, and chocolates to passersby in Taytay, Rizal as the Rizal PPO band members sang love songs on February 14 in Taytay. 

Men, women, and kids alike received the Valentine items from the police during the PPO’s annual activity on Valentine’s Day. 

At the PPO camp, Col. Felipe Maraggun, police director, also serenaded female personnel in the morning before heading out to different police stations for his usual daily routine of activities.

The giving out of Valentine gifts to the public has been an annual tradition of the Rizal PPO men and women during this time of the year.

What a waste of money which would be better spent on motorcycles to check on 911 calls. 

The Philippines' Schizophrenic Attitude Towards The Death Penalty

The reinstatement of the death penalty comes up often in the Congress. This time it's not for high level drug offenders but for corrupt government officials. 

https://cebudailynews.inquirer.net/618845/death-by-firing-squad-for-corrupt-govt-officials-pushed

A bill pushing for the imposition of the death penalty by firing squad for government officials convicted of corruption and other grave cases was filed before the House of Representatives.

Under House Bill No. 11211, or the proposed Death Penalty for Corruption Act, filed by Zamboanga City 1st District Rep. Khymer Adan Olaso, conviction for the following cases will merit the death penalty:

• graft and corruption as defined under Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
• malversation of public funds as defined under the Revised Penal Code.
• plunder as defined under R.A. No. 7080

According to Olaso, he came up with the idea as corruption remains “one of the gravest threats” to the Philippines’ growth.

“Despite the existence of numerous laws aimed at combating graft, malversation, and plunder, the persistence of these crimes suggests that current measures are insufficient to deter public officials from engaging in corrupt practices,” Olaso wrote in the bill’s explanatory note.

“This proposed bill seeks to impose the ultimate penalty of death by firing squad on public officials — from the President to the lowest barangay official — convicted by the Sandiganbayan of graft and corruption, malversation of public funds, and plunder. The bill emphasizes accountability and deterrence, making it clear that public office is a public trust, and any violation of that trust must be met with the severest consequences,” he added.

Under the bill, all public officials — whether elected or appointed, and including members of the military and police forces — will be sentenced to death penalty if the Sandiganbayan convicts them.

To ensure due process, the death penalty would only be carried out if the following circumstances are met:

• the Supreme Court affirms the conviction
• the conviction has undergone the mandatory automatic review process as required by the Constitution and other applicable laws
• the accused has exhausted all legal remedies available under Philippine law, including appeals and motions for reconsideration

“These safeguards aim to uphold the fundamental rights of the accused while ensuring that the imposition of the death penalty is applied only in cases where guilt is conclusively established,” the bill reads.

Olaso filed the bill last December 16, 2024, and was referred to the House committee on justice last December 18.

This is not the first time that a lawmaker pushed for the death penalty for government officials convicted of corruption-related cases.

Last October 2024, Cibac party-list Rep. Eddie Villanueva said he would push for a law imposing the death penalty on corrupt government officials who stole over P100 million.

Senator Ronald dela Rosa also filed a bill reinstating the death penalty, but only for high-level drug trafficking, fearing that including corruption as among the crimes punishable by death would not get support.

Yeah. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, whatever. As if the death penalty will stop Filipinos from being corrupt. It's kind of second nature at this point. But there is something else. Last month the Philippines voted in favor of a global ban on the death penalty. 

https://mb.com.ph/2024/12/20/ph-votes-in-favor-of-global-ban-on-death-penalty

The Philippines has voted in favor of a United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution banning the death penalty across the world.

The Philippines was among the 130 countries that favored the global moratorium on death penalty; while 32 voted against.

Twenty-two countries abstained in the voting.

​The resolution expressed deep concern about the continued application of the death penalty and reaffirmed the sovereign right of all countries to develop their own legal systems, including determining appropriate legal penalties, in accordance with their international law obligations​.

​It also called upon all ​states to establish a moratorium on executions, with a view to abolishing the death penalty​, as well as recalled duty of ​states, regardless of their political, economic and​ cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights and fundam​ental freedoms.

How is it the Philippines votes against the United Nations General Assembly for a global ban on the death penalty and a month later some schmuck Congressman introduces a bill to reinstate the death penalty?  It doesn't make any sense. 

As far as international law obligations go the Philippines has signed a treaty that prevents them from reinstating the death penalty. 

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a multilateral treaty that commits states parties to respect the civil and political rights of individuals, including the right to life, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, electoral rights and rights to due process and a fair trial. It was adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) on 16 December 1966 and entered into force 23 March 1976 after its thirty-fifth ratification or accession. As of June 2022, the Covenant has 173 parties and six more signatories without ratification, most notably the People's Republic of China and Cuba; North Korea is the only state that has tried to withdraw.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Covenant_on_Civil_and_Political_Rights

The Philippines signed the treaty in 1966, it was ratified in 1986, and finally entered into force in 1987.

The Second Optional Protocol is an optional subsidiary agreement of the ICCPR.

The Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, is a subsidiary agreement to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It was created on 15 December 1989 and entered into force on 11 July 1991. As of April 2022, the Optional Protocol has 90 state parties. The most recent country to ratify was Kazakhstan, on 24 March 2022.

The Optional Protocol commits its members to the abolition of the death penalty within their borders, though Article 2.1 allows parties to make a reservation allowing execution "in time of war pursuant to a conviction for a most serious crime of a military nature committed during wartime" (Brazil, Chile, El Salvador). Cyprus, Malta and Spain initially made such reservations, and subsequently withdrew them. Azerbaijan and Greece still retain this reservation on their implementation of the protocol, despite both having banned the death penalty in all circumstances. (Greece has also ratified Protocol no.13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which abolishes capital punishment for all crimes).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Optional_Protocol_to_the_International_Covenant_on_Civil_and_Political_Rights

The Philippines signed this agreement in 2006 and it was ratified in 2007.

https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-12&chapter=4

The thing about this agreement, which was optional, is that there is no mechanism for withdrawal. Article 6 of this treaty says the following: 

1. The provisions of the present Protocol shall apply as additional provisions to the Covenant.

2. Without prejudice to the possibility of a reservation under article 2 of the present Protocol, the right guaranteed in article 1, paragraph 1, of the present Protocol shall not be subject to any derogation under article 4 of the Covenant.

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/b5ccprp2.htm

I have already written about this in-depth in a previous article. 

It simply does not make any sense that this Congressman is unaware the Philippines international obligations. Of course maybe it makes perfect sense seeing as there are so many morons in the Philippine government. 

The Philippines Supreme Court Redefines Immorality

What makes an act immoral? According to the Philippine Supreme Court an act is only immoral if it contravenes existing laws or state policy. 

https://www.philstar.com/nation/2024/12/17/2407947/sc-unmarried-teachers-cant-be-suspended-being-pregnant

Consensual sexual relations between unmarried people that result in pregnancy are not immoral and not a valid ground for suspension from work of the pregnant woman, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled.

In an 18-page ruling, the SC First Division said sexual relations between two consenting adults who have no legal impediment to marry is not deemed immoral.

“No law forbids such, and said conduct does not contravene any fundamental state policy enshrined in the Constitution,” the SC decision, penned by Associate Justice Ricardo Rosario, read.

The high tribunal has declared illegal the 2016 suspension by a Christian school in Bohol of a teacher who became pregnant before marrying her boyfriend.

In September 2016, when she was two months pregnant, the teacher informed the school principal about her pregnancy and her scheduled marriage to her boyfriend.

The teacher was “verbally suspended” indefinitely until her marriage to the father of her child for violating the school’s policy.

She also received a written notice, stating that she was suspended indefinitely without pay due to immorality until she gets married.

She filed a complaint for illegal suspension. The labor arbiter held that she was constructively dismissed, but the National Labor Relations Commission reversed the decision.

The Court of Appeals (CA) ruled that there was no constructive dismissal, and found the teacher’s suspension illegal.

The appellate court said it did not find the teacher’s conduct immoral as she did not have sexual relations with a married man and neither was she married at the time.

The CA ordered the school to pay the teacher the salaries and benefits she did not receive during her suspension.

An immoral act is an act that does not conform to accepted standards of morality. Morality is not something that can be enshrined in law but is in large part cultural. According to this ruling fornication is a moral act in the Philippines because there is no law against it. The Supreme Court based their decision on  the distinction between public secular morality and religious morality. The SC's "jurisdiction extends only to public and secular morality."

pg. 10

In the eyes of the law, there is a standard of morality that binds all those who come before it, which is public and secular, not religious. It is important to make this distinction as the Court's jurisdiction extends only to public and secular morality. 

Public and secular morality refers to conduct proscribed because they are detrimental to conditions upon which depend the existence and progress of human society. Otherwise, if government relies upon religious beliefs in formulating public policies and morals, the resulting policies and morals would require conformity to what some might regard as religious program or agenda." 

In this case, respondent was suspended for engaging in premarital sexual relations, resulting in being pregnant out of wedlock. The Court has previously ruled in similar cases that premarital sexual relations resulting in pregnancy out of wedlock cannot be considered disgraceful or immoral when viewed against the prevailing norms of conduct. 

How exactly is fornication an act which is not "detrimental to conditions upon which depend the existence and progress of human society?" Are sexually transmitted diseases not detrimental to society? Are single mothers not detrimental to society? How about when children are abandoned and thrown away like garbage as soon as they are born, is that not detrimental to society? All of those acts are the fruit of fornication. Yet the Supreme Court says fornication is moral and not "detrimental to conditions upon which depend the existence and progress of human society."

Furthermore this lady was a teacher at a Christian school. No doubt she signed a morality clause but even if she didn't surely faculty and students would be expected to uphold Christian values and teachings. The Supreme Court has ruled in two previous cases that upholding Christian values at Christian schools do not matter when it comes to the law. 

pgs.10-11

The Court has previously ruled in similar cases that premarital sexual relations resulting in pregnancy out of wedlock cannot be considered disgraceful or immoral when viewed against the prevailing norms of conduct. In Leus v. St. Scholastica's College Westgrove," We held: 

In stark contrast to Santos, the Court does not find any circumstance in this case which would lead the Court to conclude that the petitioner committed a disgraceful or immoral conduct. It bears stressing that the petitioner and her boyfriend, at the lime they conceived a child, had no legal impediment to marry. Indeed, even prior to her dismissal, the petitioner mended her boyfriend, the father of her child. As the Court held in Radam, there is no law which penalizes an unmarried mother by reason of her sexual conduct or proscribes the consensual sexual activity between two unmarried persons; that neither does such situation contravene any fundamental state policy enshrined in the Constitution. 

Admittedly, the petitioner is employed in an educational institution where the teachings and doctrines of the Catholic Church, including that on pre-marital sexual relations, is strictly upheld and taught to the students. That her indiscretion, which resulted in her pregnancy out of wedlock, is anathema to the doctrines of the Catholic Church. However, viewed against the prevailing norms of conduct, the petitioner's conduct cannot be considered as disgraceful or immoral; such conduct is not denounced by public and-secular morality. It maybe an, unusual arrangement, but it certainly is not disgraceful or immoral within the contemplation of the law. 

And in Inocente v. St. Vincent Foundation for Children and Aging Inc.." 

In this ease, we note that both Zaida and Marlon at all times had no impediments to marry each other. They were adults who met at work, dated, fell in love and became sweethearts. The intimate sexual relations between them were consensual, borne by their love for one another and which they engaged to discreetly and in strict privacy. They continued their relationship even after Marlon left St. Vincent in 2008. They took their marriage vows on after Zelda recovered from her miscarriage, thus validating their union in the eyes of both men and God. All these circumstances show the sincerity and honesty of the relationship between Zaida and Marlon. They also show their genuine regard and love for one another — a natural human emotion that is neither shameless, callous, nor offensive to the opinion of the upright and respectable members of the secular community. While their actions might nor have strictly conformed with the beliefs, ways, and mores of St Vincent which is governed largely by religious morality — or with the personal views of its officials, these actions on not prohibited under any law nor are they contrary to conduct generally accepted by society as respectable or moral.

Sexual intercourse between two consenting adults who have no legal impediment to marry, like respondent and her boyfriend, is not deemed as immoral." No law proscribes such, and said conduct does not contravene any fundamental state policy enshrined in the Constitution." 

Going by this law Christian schools cannot forbid their faculty from engaging in fornication because "no law proscribes such, and said conduct does not contravene any fundamental state policy enshrined in the Constitution." Any morality clause signed by a teacher is made void and null by these decisions. That is an outright denial of the right to freedom of association. According to the Supreme Court a teacher at a Christian school can commit the most "immoral" acts imaginable and there is nothing the school can do about it. Firing the teacher for his conduct would be illegal. 

This ruling, as well as the previous two, opens a can of worms. For instance, homosexuality is not illegal in the Philippines. According to the Supreme Court that means it is also not immoral. Is that what Philippine society thinks? Then why is there no sodomite marriage? Why does the SOGIE bill languish in Congress? Because even though homosexuals are tolerated and in some instances celebrated homosexual immoral in the eyes of Philippine society. 

What about abortion? Right now it is illegal and thus, according to this ruling, immoral. But if it were to become legal then it would suddenly become a moral act. What kind of legal sorcery is that? Would the status of abortion from illegal and immoral to legal and moral reflect Filipino values? On what basis could it be said today abortion is detrimental to society and tomorrow it is beneficial?

What about divorce? Right now it is illegal and seen as "detrimental to conditions upon which depend the existence and progress of human society." If it ever becomes legal then it will be moral. How can this be so? On what basis can an action go from moral to immoral? The Supreme Court has told us on what basis, public opinion. That is no foundation on which to erect morality or ethics.

I'm no legal scholar but the implications of basing morality on public opinion and what is legal or not sets a bad precedence. This ruling will surely come back to haunt the Philippines in the coming years as it debates abortion, homosexual marriage, and divorce. Let's not forget there is a separate Sharia law system in the Philippines where this definition of morality would not fly. 

Selfies With Wanted Fugitives

Despite disgraced former Mayor Alice Guo's attempt to flee justice she was finally caught in Indonesia. DILG Secretary Abalos and PNP Chief Marbil flew to Indonesia to accompany her home. While in Indonesia both Abalos and Marbil took a selfie with Alice Guo which was then posted online. This picture caused a lot of anger.

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3277509/philippine-officials-under-fire-after-smiling-selfies-fugitive-alice-guo-spark-anger

Philippine officials are facing a storm of criticism after images surfaced of authorities treating infamous fugitive Alice Guo with what many described as undue “deference” during her extradition, sparking allegations of double standards in the country’s justice system.

President Ferdinand Marcos Jnr on Friday shrugged off the anger directed at officials who appeared to be enjoying photo opportunities with the former mayor, as he insisted the Philippines was called the “selfie capital of the world”.

Guo, wanted for failing to assist a Senate investigation into her alleged connection to Chinese organised crime groups, was extradited from Indonesia to the Philippines on Thursday following her arrest in Jakarta.

Outrage erupted on social media overnight after photos and videos were posted showing Guo smiling and posing for selfies with officials including Department of Interior and Local Governments Secretary Benhur Abalos and Philippine National Police Director General Rommel Marbil, as well as arresting officers from the National Bureau of Investigation and Bureau of Immigration.

One photo with over a million views and dozens of angry comments showed a beaming Guo making a double peace sign while seated between a smiling Marbil and Abalos.

PNP Spokesman Col. Jean Fajardo explained the purpose of the picture as a means to document her capture. 

https://mb.com.ph/2024/9/8/nagpa-cute-pala-pnp-tells-the-story-behind-viral-photo-of-alice-guo-abalos-and-marbil

The supposed success story in the hunt against dismissed Bamban, Tarlac mayor Alice Guo was clouded  by her controversial photo with two of the ranking officials of the Philippine government.

On Sunday, Philippine National Police (PNP) spokesperson Col. Jean Fajardo apologized anew and narrated the story behind the photo which went viral on social media.

In an interview over dzBB, Fajardo said that when Guo was turned over to the Philippine authorities in Indonesia, her first request was for an exclusive meeting with Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) Secretary Benhur Abalos and PNP chief Gen. Rommel Francisco Marbil.

Abalos and Marbil went to Indonesia to personally oversee the transfer of custody of Guo to Philippine authorities after she was arrested in Tangerang City. 

It was during that meeting that Guo told Abalos and Marbil of the death threat she has been receiving.

This was the reason, according to her, why she decided to go out of the country.

But during the meeting, there was a decision to document it and it was then that an official photographer was asked to take a photo of the three.

“It’s normal for us to smile whenever we or somebody take a photo of us,” said Fajardo in explaining why Abalos and Marbil were seen smiling.

“But they are not aware that she (Guo) made a cute pose,” she added.

While the photo was supposed to be for documentation, it was not immediately clear how it leaked and was uploaded on social media.

As a result, the photo went viral and both Abalos and Marbil were ridiculed and bashed on social media for having a photo opportunity with a “fugitive”.

“”We apologize to the people who were offended by that photo,” said Fajardo.

It is interesting that they don't know how the photo was leaked online. The pool of suspects isn't very deep. Also interesting is that Marbil and Abalos claim they did not know "she made a cute pose." Is their range of vision limited to only what is in front of them? Did they not review the picture after it was taken?

DILG Secretary Abalos and PNP Chief Marbil were not the only government officials who posed for a selfie with fugitive Alice Guo. Several NBI agents thought it was a good idea to snap a photo with her while driving her to jail. 

https://globalnation.inquirer.net/248055/hontiveros-on-alice-guo-lets-see-how-photogenic-she-is-at-mondays-probe

Opposition Senator Risa Hontiveros criticized the suspected human trafficker and dismissed Bamban Mayor Alice Guo for gamely posing for pictures, emphasizing that the Senate wants answers on her Philippine offshore gaming operator (Pogo) links and not a photoshoot.

(After she hid from us, Alice Guo used her arrest as a fan meet. The only thing that’s lacking is a red carpet.)

(Let’s see how photogenic she is during our hearing on Monday. She’ll have unlimited pictures there.)

Before issuing these remarks, Hontiveros already issued a stern warning against government officials who were seen taking pictures with Guo.

Now-viral photos show some agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and Bureau of Immigration posing for photos with Guo.

Some images likewise show Interior Secretary Benhur Abalos and Police chief Rommel Marbil with the dismissed local official.

(One reminder to our fellow government officials, we should not use the arrest of a fugitive involved in multiple cases of human trafficking, money laundering, fake identity, gross misconduct, illegal recruitment and detention, as well as corruption as a social gathering.)

Goodness knows what these people were thinking. President Marcos has brushed off these photos as no big deal because the Philippines is the "selfie capital of the world." This claim goes back to 2014 and you can read about it here in Time Magazine. 

So, why was Alice Guo all smiles knowing she was on her way to jail? She said she feels safe.  

https://globalnation.inquirer.net/248008/why-is-alice-guo-all-smiles-in-pics-i-feel-safe-she-says

Dismissed Bamban mayor Alice Guo appeared cheerful in photos despite her arrest in Indonesia after being on the run for months.

Guo, who returned to the Philippines through a chartered flight early Friday morning, said this is because she felt relieved under the custody of Philippine authorities.

“I feel safe,” she said in a media briefing upon her arrival when asked about her smiling in photos.

She also said she was “happy” to see Interior Secretary Benjamin Abalos Jr. and Philippine National Police chief General Rommel Marbil whose help she sought after being subjected to death threats.

“As you can see in her picture earlier, she felt relieved,” Abalos said, partly in Filipino.

Photos circulating on social media showed Guo grinning while doing a double peace sign next to Abalos and Marbil who fetched her in Indonesia on Wednesday.

Another photo released by authorities showed Guo sporting a smile together with National Bureau of Investigation operatives inside a car.

However, Guo appeared somber when she faced the Philippine media.

Guo was wearing an orange shirt for detainees and was also handcuffed but she concealed it with a white towel.

She also refused to take her face mask off, despite being coaxed by the press.

When not being talked to, Guo turned away from the cameras and faced the wall.

If she feels so safe why did she refuse to remove her face mask and face the wall? Maybe she is simply putting up a good front. Why give the media a chance to publish photos of her sulking and looking angry? It's certainly a good publicity stunt. 

Alice Guo is not the only fugitive with whom government officials took selfies. 

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1981164/apollo-quiboloy-has-been-arrested-dilg-chief-abalos

Fugitive televangelist Apollo Quiboloy has been arrested, Interior Secretary Benjamin Abalos Jr. announced on Sunday.

Abalos bared the news in a short Facebook post, but he did not reveal details of Quiboloy’s arrest.

“NAHULI NA PO SI APOLLO QUIBOLOY,” his post said.

He likewise posted a photo of the religious leader with the same caption.

Well, it's not every day one gets a photo opportunity with the Appointed Son of God.

Years ago I wrote an article about how Filipinos love lawsuits. They will file a lawsuit and then pose for the cameras holding the suit for all to see. I think this explains the reason why government officials took selfies with fugitives Alice Guo and Apollo Quiboloy much better than saying the Philippines is the selfie capital of the world. These officials are showing off. 

Just be grateful none of these government officials made a TikTok video with Alice Guo. 

Another Stupid Philippine Law Proposal by the DOH

Cases of leptospirosis are on the rise in the Philippines. The DOH has a novel solution on how to combat this disease. Ban swimming in flood waters. 

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2024/08/13/2377467/doh-wants-ban-swimming-floods

As cases of leptospirosis continue to rise, the Department of Health (DOH) plans to ask local government units, especially in flood-prone areas, to ban swimming in floodwaters.

Speaking to reporters yesterday at Malacañang, Health Secretary Ted Herbosa lamented the public’s lack of information about leptospirosis.

“I will recommend to local chief executives, to mayors, to issue an ordinance... to ban swimming in floodwaters,” Herbosa said.

The DOH chief said he would also talk with Education Secretary Sonny Angara to help in educating children about acquiring the disease by swimming in water contaminated with animal urine.

“It’s not a communication problem, it’s a behavior problem. We need a change in behavior,” Herbosa said.

He also called for proper solid waste management as accumulation of garbage attracts rats, the common cause of leptospirosis, adding that most of the cases were in areas affected by the recent flooding due to Typhoon Carina and the southwest monsoon.

Herbosa gave assurance that there is no shortage of doxycycline, which is used to treat the disease. Symptoms of leptospirosis include fever, vomiting, nausea, muscle pain and headaches.

Reports said a total of 1,444 leptospirosis cases were recorded from Jan. 1 to July 27 this year – a figure 42 percent lower compared to the 2,505 cases in the same period last year.

Dr. Alberto Domingo, DOH spokesman and assistant secretary, said the cases are expected to rise further.

“Not yet included in our latest data are the new cases we have now – those lined up in hospitals. Thus, we are seeing a rise in the number,” Domingo said in a televised interview.

He assured the public that even with the rise, there are still enough beds in hospitals for leptospirosis patients.

“We do not lack hospital beds. There are times, we observe there are hospitals about to get filled with patients but we are still able to manage,” Domingo said.

He reminded the public to seek immediate consultation after wading in floodwaters.

There are a lot of things wrong with this proposal. 

Who is going to enforce such a ban? Will the PNP be on patrol during heavy rains to arrest or scold children playing in gross flood waters? Perhaps they will arrest the parents instead?

Most importantly it does not address the root causes of the problem. The problem is the massive flooding which happens every rainy season in the Philippines. One would think that after nearly 80 years of self-rule the government would have been able to solve something so detrimental to the public but alas that is not the case. No matter how many roads are built or drainage tunnels dug the nation continues to flood. 

Part of the reason flooding continues is because many residential and business districts are built on easily flooded land which is below sea level. Banning building on flood-prone land would keep people out of the danger zone. 

The other part of the reason is, as DOH Secretary Herbosa notes:

"it’s a behavior problem. We need a change in behavior."

That includes teaching people to not litter and how to properly store and toss their garbage. That also means reforming how the government handles waste management. Garbage trucks need to come at regular intervals, same day and same time, to collect the waste. This does not always happen which causes waste to pile up which leads some to burning or littering. 

The bottom line is the Philippines does not need more laws on the books which will not be enforced. Real change in the Philippines will come with reeducation of the people and the government finally doing its job.

Unjust Vexation is Justly Vexatious

Apparently a fat lady was told to get off the jeepney recently. This resulted in a complaint filed by her and a reminder from the LTFRB that fat people cannot be refused passage.

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1226739

The Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) on Tuesday reminded transport operators and drivers that they cannot force a passenger to get out of a vehicle due to body size or physical appearance.

In a statement, the LTFRB said body shaming and discrimination of passengers is against the agency's policies.

"PUV drivers are not allowed to double or triple the fare depending on the passengers' physique," the statement read.

The LTFRB issued the statement after a female passenger was forced off a jeepney by the driver due to her physical size in Parañaque City. 

The passenger, who filed a police report against the driver for unjust vexation, also reached out to the LTFRB on Monday and was assisted by the agency's legal department. 

While the driver violated LTFRB policy he certainly did not commit a crime. Yet the offended lady "filed a police report against the driver for unjust vexation." What is unjust vexation? Essentially it is annoying someone.

Did you know that the act of annoying someone is a crime? Yes, it is and we certainly are not pulling your leg.  The act of annoying someone is called unjust vexation and considered a form of light coercion punishable under Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code, to wit:

“Art. 287. Light coercions. — Any person who, by means of violence, shall seize anything belonging to his debtor for the purpose of applying the same to the payment of the debt, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period and a fine equivalent to the value of the thing, but in no case less than 75 pesos.”

Any other coercions or unjust vexations shall be punished by arresto menor or a fine ranging from One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) to not more than Forty Thousand (P40,000.00), or both.

Consequently, unjust vexation is punishable by imprisonment ranging from 1 day to 30 days and/or a fine of P1,000.00 to P40,000.00.  Yes, you read it right – an annoying person can be imprisoned or slapped with a fine that should have just been used to buy a new cellphone.

Oh, and yes.  You can sue that annoying neighbor who sings at the top of his lungs every night for unjust vexation.

https://ndvlaw.com/annoying-someone-is-a-crime-updated-last-10-june-2020/

The fat lady who was mocked by the jeepeney driver for her extra poundage claims she was traumatised.

The 29-year-old complainant, Joysh Gutierrez, recounted her ordeal in a post on Facebook, which has since become viral.

Gutierrez said that she and a co-worker got on a Baclaran-bound jeepney with license plate NWJ 221 at a passenger stop in Multinational Village along Dr. A Santos Avenue. However, the driver and his wife, who was also on board, told her to alight from the vehicle because she was chubby, saying that the vehicle might suffer a flat tire.

According to Gutierrez, she vehemently protested being discriminated against and even offered to pay a higher fare. The other passengers came to her defense but she said the jeepney driver and his wife continued to shame and insult her. The driver also deliberately slowed down the vehicle in an apparent attempt to mock her weight.

In an interview over radio station dwPM, Gutierrez said she was traumatized by her experience, adding that she would always remember it whenever she gets on a jeepney. She also said that she was determined to pursue charges against the respondents. In a TV interview, Gutierrez added that while she was used to being bullied over her weight, what the jeepney driver did was far worse than she had experienced before.

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1950645/body-shamed-passenger-files-complaint-vs-jeepney-driver-owners

Does being traumatized meet the definition of unjust vexation? A close reading of the law says no because the term unjust vexation is not defined. In 2009 Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago filed a resolution to amend RPC article 287 to define unjust vexation. 

Unjust vexation is punished under the 2nd paragraph of Article 287 of the Revised Peiial Code:

“Any other coercions or unjust vexations shall be punished by arrest0 menor or a fine ranging from 5 pesos to 200 pesos, or both.”

It is a well-established doctrine that a criminal or penal legislation must clearly define or specify the particular acts or omissions punished.

Unlike the crimes of theft, murder and rape that are specifically defined in the Revised Penal Code, the definition of the crime of unjust vexation is conspicuously absent. Because of this Article 287, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code that punishes “unjust vexation” suffers from congenital defects and may be declared unconstitutional for the following reasons:

a) Article 287, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code condemns no specific or definite act or omission thus failing to define any crime or felony;

b) Said penal provision is so indefinite, vague and overbroad as not to enable it to be known what act is forbidden;

c) Such vagueness and overbreadth result to violation of the due process clause and the right to be informed of the nature of the offense charged; and 

d) Such vagueness and overbreadth likewise amount to an invalid delegation by Congress of its legislative power to the courts to determine what acts should be held criminal and punishable.

The state having the right to declare what acts are criminal, within certain well defined limitations, has a right to specify what act or acts shall constitute a crime, as well as what act or acts shall constitute a crime. Hence, the instant bill seeks to provide a legal defiiiitioii for the crime of “unjust vexation” and provide the corresponding penalty for its commission.

https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/lisdata/1176810353!.pdf

This resolution was never acted on and unjust vexation remains an undefined crime to this day. However, in 2006 the Supreme Court took it upon themselves to define unjust vexation in a ruling. 

The second paragraph of the Article is broad enough to include any human conduct which, although not productive of some physical or material harm, could unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person. Compulsion or restraint need not be alleged in the Information, for the crime of unjust vexation may exist without compulsion or restraint. However, in unjust vexation, being a felony by dolo, malice is an inherent element of the crime. Good faith is a good defense to a charge for unjust vexation because good faith negates malice. The paramount question to be considered is whether the offender’s act caused annoyance, irritation, torment, distress or disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is directed. The main purpose of the law penalizing coercion and unjust vexation is precisely to enforce the principle that no person may take the law into his hands and that our government is one of law, not of men. It is unlawful for any person to take into his own hands the administration of justice. 

https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/sep2006/gr_165065_2006.html

In 2021 the SC issued another ruling defining unjust vexation saying "it basically penalizes acts intended to cause emotional distress."

The petition is without merit. Herein petitioner insists on his innocence and alleges that the ruling of the CA is not in accord with applicable law and jurisprudence. Herein petitioner claims that based on the account of the minor victim, the act of masturbation was not done with the participation of and was not directed at her, hence, he should be penalized with unjust vexation under Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) as it basically punishes acts which is intended to cause emotional distress.

https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/jan2021/gr_246231_2021.html

Where in RPH article 287 is a single word said about "emotional distress?" No where. The SC is basically making it up as they go. 

What we see is that not even the Supreme Court can give a precise definition of RPC article 287. Unjust vexation remains a very broad term subject to interpretation not on objective facts but on circumstance. That is what one Philippine law firm says. 

Definition and Scope

Unjust vexation is a catch-all offense under Philippine law, often utilized when specific crimes cannot be easily categorized. Under Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code, unjust vexation is defined as any human conduct that causes annoyance, irritation, torment, distress, or disturbance to the mind of another person.

Elements of the Offense

To successfully prosecute someone for unjust vexation, the following elements must typically be present:

1. Act or Omission: An action or a failure to act by the accused that causes vexation to another person.

2. Intent: A general criminal intent to vex, annoy, or irritate must be present.

Interpretations and Case Law

Due to its broad scope, jurisprudence on unjust vexation is varied. Courts consider the social and psychological impact on the complainant, the intent of the accused, and the surrounding circumstances when determining guilt or innocence.

Conclusion

Unjust vexation serves as an adaptable tool within the Philippine legal framework for addressing minor offenses that cause emotional or psychological harm. Understanding its scope and limitations can be crucial for both complainants and defendants navigating the legal landscape.

https://www.respicio.ph/features/unjust-vexation-philippines

Unjust vexation is an adaptable tool to address minor offenses that cause emotional or psychological distress?  It's as catch-all used when the crime cannot be categorized?  That's not law. Laws are defined offenses. They are objective.  A law is not a catch-all or adaptable tool for alleged crimes that cannot be categorized or defined. To go by that admission is to admit there is no such crime as unjust vexation that can be categorized or defined. 

Note that while this law firm says RPH article 287 "unjust vexation is defined as any human conduct that causes annoyance, irritation, torment, distress, or disturbance to the mind of another person" that is simply not the case. The law offers no such definition. Doesn't every crime contain an element of "annoyance, irritation, torment, distress, or disturbance to the mind?" Of course they do. 

Funny that the late Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago was sharp enough to point out the fact that unjust vexation is undefined and so broad  "as not to enable it to be known what act is forbidden." She also authored her resolution 3 years after the Supreme Court gave a tenuous definition in a 2006 ruling. Why has no one else pointed out this fact? Why do Philippine law firms claim that RPC article 287 is defined when it is not? 

Unjust vexation is simply a way for aggrieved parties to vex the alleged perpetrators. And why then shouldn't those charged with unjust vexation counter file for the same? After all being charged with a crime can cause emotional and psychological distress. In fact this jeepney driver says he was defamed by this obese woman. 

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1950890/driver-on-body-shaming-issue-is-sorry-but-claims-his-image-was-also-ruined

"We apologize sincerely. But what about the defamation that almost ruined our reputation around the world?"

The driver’s partner stressed that Gutierrez also needs to apologize to them.

"For me, she also made a mistake. As a person, she needs to apologize. What she did was defamation. It could have been settled by talking."

But the driver and his partner claimed that the incident in the video was not their first encounter with Gutierrez.

"She once rode with us in the small jeep. We already had arguments. In that small jeep, during our first argument, I asked her to move, but she refused to do so."

In the viral video, the driver’s partner said that she reminded Gutierrez of their first encounter.

"I said, “Miss, you might get angry again.”

According to her, Gutierrez replied with confusion, saying that it was her first time to ride their jeepney.

"She became hysterical when I was explaining things to her. When she became hysterical, she was out of control. There was no video of that."

She stressed that Gutierrez even cursed the driver and mocked his source of livelihood.

“You only work as a driver yet your attitude is like that.”

Sounds like there is more to the story and the driver was unjustly vexed by the passenger. 

But since the crime of unjust vexation is not defined it does not exist. It is quite ridiculous that in the Philippines being rude is a crime the courts are too ready to prosecute. The existence of this undefined statue in RPC article 287 is another proof the Philippine justice system is broken.