The clan politics of Maguindanao

WHEN one talks about politics and elections in Maguindanao, one will have to reckon with the clans, too. Or, a web of clans to be exact.

A spider couldn’t have spun a more complicated fabric of power: an interlocking network of a dozen families that link in and out to each other, each with at least six to at most 80 clan members running yet again in May 2013 for elective positions that they have controlled for decades.

Led by the Ampatuans – whose patriarch and scions stand accused as masterminds of the Maguindanao Massacre of November 2009 – these families include the Sangkis and Mangudadatus, Midtimbangs, Sinsuats, Dilangalens, Datumanongs and Hatamans, and the Semas, among others.

By blood or affinity, they are all related, their political and economic clout strong and unrivaled in Maguindanao, and now spreading to Sultan Kudarat and Basilan.

The Commission on Elections’ official list of candidates for the May 2013 elections reads like a who’s who of Maguindanao’s royal families, with the Ampatuans still top of the roster, with 80 candidates carrying Ampatuan as their middle or last name.

They are followed by the Midtimbangs and the Sangkis who are related by marriage to the Ampatuans, with 26 and 25 candidates, respectively; and the Mangudadatus, the foremost rival of the Ampatuans in the 2010 elections, with their own team of 18 candidates.

Also with 22 candidates are the Sinsuats; 15 for the Pendatuns; 14 for the Matalams, and eight for the Masturas.

The irony of Maguindanao is this: Far too many candidates — 1,180 in all for just 369 positions up for grabs — but far too few real choices.

In this three-part report, PCIJ MUltimedia Director Ed Lingao reviews the backward and forward links of the clan politics of Maguindanao, and its likely adverse impact on the May 2013 elections — an unchanged situation of poverty, absentee local officials, bad governance, and an unyielding culture of violence.

To illustrate the ties that bind, PCIJ Research Director Karol Ilagan worked on a diagram of how Ampatuans and their relatives form the other clans connect. The result is not a family tree but a spider web of clan networks that has defined, and continues to define, Maguindanao.

The most dynastic province in the Philippines, or one host to “the fattest dynasty” in the land, Maguindanao is a constant cellar dweller in lists of the poorest provinces of the country. It also ranks significantly low in indices of good governance.

Read The Clan Politics of Maguindanao here:

Part 1: Ampatuans, web of kin warp Maguindanao polls
Sidebar 1: The ties that bind

Prudence in handling media cases, media group cautions DOJ

WHILE MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS would want swift government action on media murder cases, government should still exercise prudence and caution, a media group said over the weekend.

The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines said that the recent handling by the Department of Justice of the case of murdered broadcast journalist Gerry Ortega may have actually done more harm than good.

Last week, the Court of Appeals nullified the DOJ’s creation of a second panel of prosecutors to investigate the Gerry Ortega case. The first panel of prosecutors had dropped former Palawan Governor Joel Reyes and his brother Mario from the charge sheet in the Ortega murder case. But after an ensuing outcry, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima immediately created a second prosecution panel that indicted the two. The murder case is now pending before the Puerto Princes Regional Trial Court.

However, the CA ruled that De Lima committed grave procedural lapses in creating the second panel. The CA said that while De Lima had the authority to reverse the first panel’s findings, she should have simply overturned it instead of ignoring it and creating a second panel. In effect, the CA said the first panel’s findings were still hanging and waiting for resolution.

Also left hanging was an appeal filed by Ortega’s wife Patty to reverse the first panel’s findings. The CA said both the first panel’s findings and Ortega’s appeal should have been resolved first.

“We find no legal basis for the second panel of prosecutors to modify the finding of the first panel of prosecutors. It must be remembered that the first panel and second panel of prosecutors are co-equals. As such, both of them are on the same level and one cannot modify the resolution of the other,” the Appellate Court decision reads in part.

The NUJP said Justice officials should take greater care not to trip over legal proceedings that could endanger the case.

“However, instead of taking action on the first panel’s decision and Patty’s petition, De Lima formed a second panel of prosecutors. The DOJ should be more careful not be caught in their own bureaucracy,” said NUJP national vice chairman Alwyn Alburo. Alburo added that lapses like these could weaken Ortega’s quest for justice.

Alburo added that De Lima still faces “the challenge of doing what is right for the case so that justice will be delivered to the Ortegas.”

Alburo also said that the CA ruling does not touch on the merits of the case, but merely on the procedural aspect. Nevertheless, Alburo said greater care should be exercised by the DOJ if the case is to move forward, he said.

“But we stand by the analysis of Atty. Alex Avisado (legal counsel of the Ortegas) when he said that the CA ruling did not absolve the guilt or proved the innocence of the accused,” Alburo said.

TV5′s Interaksyon quoted Avisado saying the High Tribunal’s decision is favorable for their case. “The ruling does not in any way absolve the Reyes brothers. Nor is it final and executory. This is a purely legal issue,” Avisado was quoted by Interaksyon.

Alburo also said the NUJP is “saddened” by the slew of inaccurate news reports and misleading headlines following the decision of the CA.

“We are alarmed with the CA (Court of Appeals) ruling because it has given rise to different interpretations in the media. We are saddened at the news articles that reported the Appellate Court acquitted ex–Palawan governor Joey Reyes—some news organizations even used the term absolved,” he said. Alburo pointed out that many news sites reported that the CA had already cleared the Reyes brothers of the charges against them, when the CA only nullified the second prosecution panel and ordered De Lima to act on the findings of the first. The NUJP said these sites include GMA News Online, Inquirer, Rappler, Manila Times, The Daily Guardian, News Desk Asia, Sunstar, and Net25.

Doc Gerry Ortega—a radio broadcaster in Puerto Princesa City, Palawan—was a staunch environmental advocate and a vocal critic of then Palawan governor Joel Reyes. Ortega had criticized how Reyes handled the funds from the Malampaya Gas Project off the coast of Palawan. Along with his brother Coron mayor Mario, Reyes was tagged as the mastermind behind the shooting of Ortega inside a retail store on January 2011. The alleged gunman Marlon Recamata had confessed in court to shooting Ortega, while Rodolfo Edrad, Jr—a former aide of Joel Reyes—admitted to hiring Recamata.

Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 25 Judge Angelo Arizala has allowed Edrad to turn state witness. Edrad is currently under DOJ’s Witness Protection Program. Other suspects involved in the shooting are Valentin Lecias, Arturo Regalado and Romeo Serratubias. The gun used in the shooting was traced back to Serratubias—who used to serve as Reyes’ provincial administrator.

CA reverses indictment of Reyeses in Gerry Ortega murder case

ortega

THE CRIMINAL CASE against the main suspects in the Gerry Ortega murder struck a snag after the Court of Appeals reversed the recommendation of government prosecutors to indict former Palawan governor Joel Reyes and his brother Mario for the crime.

The Court of Appeals Special 10th Division said there were glaring procedural lapses on the part of Justice Secretary Leila de Lima.

The CA was acting on a petition filed by Mario Reyes questioning the decision of DOJ prosecutors to indict him and his brother for the Ortega murder. The CA ruling does not touch on the merits of the murder case against the two main suspects.

In a ruling penned by Associate Justice Angelita Gacutan, the CA noted that a special panel of DOJ prosecutors had dismissed the murder complaint against the Reyes brothers on June 8, 2011.

Ortega’s wife Patty immediately filed an appeal to overturn the decision.

Instead of acting on the finding and the appeal, however, Secretary de Lima immediately created a second panel of prosecutors that overturned the first panel’s decision and indicted the two brothers.

The CA said De Lima acted with grave abuse of authority when she immediately created a second panel to reinvestigate the Ortega case. By doing so, De Lima had simply ignored both the first panel’s findings, and even the appeal filed by Ortega’s widow.

The CA said De Lima should have acted on the first panel’s findings; as Secretary of Justice, she had full authority to affirm or reverse the panel’s recommendation anyway. She did not, however, have the authority to ignore it.

Thus, De Lima should now review the first panel’s findings and decide accordingly, the CA said.

“The Secretary of Justice should act on it, and she could either modify, reverse, or affirm the resolution of the first panel of prosecutor when she resolves the said petition for review,” the CA said. “While this court is in accord with the power of the Secretary of Justice to conduct investigation and reinvestigation, this court is also cognizant that in the exercise of such power and task, as mandated by law, there are specific rules of procedures to be adhered to by all concerned.”

In fact, the CA pointed out that since De Lima had not acted on either the first panel’s recommendations or Ortega’s appeal, “it is safe to assume that (they are) still waiting resolution by her office.”

“Since at this precise moment this finding by the said panel of prosecutors has not yet been reversed, affirmed or modified by public respondent Secretary of Justice, such finding is still valid. For all intents and purposes, therefore, (the Reyes brothers) should not have been indicted for the crime of murder,” The CA said.

Media groups lamented the CA decision, saying it sends the wrong message both to journalists and those who would want to harm them. The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines says the decision sends the signal that journalists could be killed with impunity. Lawyers for the Ortega family in turn said the CA ruling does not absolve the Reyes brothers of the murder case; all it does is raise legal and procedural issues that have nothing to do with the merits of the case.
The Reyes brothers were charged with masterminding the murder of Ortega in Puerto Princesa City in January 2011. Ortega was a crusading radio broadcaster and environmentalist who was also a fierce critic of former Palawan governor Joel Reyes and his handling of funds derived from the Malampaya Gas Project off Palawan. The brothers were tagged as the masterminds of the murder by the gunman and his accomplices, who were arrested immediately after the killing.

The case is now pending before the Puerto Princesa Regional Trial Court Branch 52. Arrest warrants were issued against the Reyes brothers last year; however, the brothers were reported to have fled to another country before the warrants could be served.

SC fines media lawyer for indirect contempt

ATTY PRIMA QUINSAYAS
THE MEDIA LAWYER who filed a disbarment case against Ampatuan defense counsel Sigfrid Fortun before the Supreme Court was the one instead who was cited for contempt and fined by the tribunal after she allegedly violated the rule on confidentiality in disbarment cases.

The Supreme Court ordered Atty. Prima Jesusa Quinsayas, a lawyer representing media murder victims in several cases including the 2009 Maguindanao Massacre, to pay a fine of P20,000 after the tribunal found her guilty of indirect contempt.

Interestingly, the charge stems from the disbarment case that Quinsayas filed against Fortun, the main defense counsel of the Ampatuan clan that has been accused of masterminding the Maguindanao Massacre.

Quinsayas, who is a lawyer of the Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists (FFFJ), a network of media organizations that supports the families of media murder victims, filed the disbarment case against Fortun in November 2010, a year after the Maguindanao Massacre. Quinsayas accused Fortun of using and abusing “all legal remedies” in order to delay the proceedings in the Maguindanao Massacre case. The Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism is a co-founder and an active member of the FFFJ.

The disbarment case has not yet been resolved more than two years after its filing. The case is still being reviewed by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), which will then make a recommendation to the high court. Fortun for his part struck back at Quinsayas by filing a petition for contempt against Quinsayas and several media personalities for allegedly violating the confidentiality rule governing all disbarment cases.

Fortun accused Quinsayas of distributing to the media copies of the disbarment complaint that she had filed against Fortun in 2010. Fortun claimed that in doing so, Quinsayas violated Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court that makes all disbarment proceedings confidential until a ruling is finally made by the court.

In addition to Quinsayas, Fortun had asked the SC to also cite for contempt the officers of the FFFJ, media executives and on-camera talents of ABS-CBN and GMA, and several reporters and editors of the Philippine Star and the Philippine Daily Inquirer. Fortun said the other accused were also guilty of disseminating information on the disbarment case.

Among those that Fortun asked the court to cite for contempt were members of the Board of Trustees of the FFFJ, including PCIJ executive director Malou Mangahas, Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility director Melinda Quintos de Jesus, Center for Community Journalism and Development director Red Batario, and Rey Hulog of the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court said that proceedings against attorneys need to be confidential so that the court may be free from all influence or interference. The confidentiality rule was also intended to ensure the protection of the professional reputations of attorneys and other officers of the court.

“As a general rule, disbarment proceedings are confidential in nature until their final resolution and the final decision of this court,” the court said.

The court absolved the media organizations, saying they merely reported on a lead that they received on the filing of the disbarment case against Fortun, who is a person of public interest. Members of the Board of the FFFJ were also absolved after Fortun failed to prove that they had a hand in the distribution of the complaint.

However, in the case of Quinsayas, the court said that she remains bound by Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court, “both as a complainant in the disbarment case against petitioner and as a lawyer.”

“Instead of preserving its confidentiality, Atty. Quinsayas disseminated copies of the disbarment complaint against petitioner to members of the media which act constitutes contempt of court,” the court ruled.

Sought for comment, Quinsayas said the ruling was “totally unexpected,” and said she may still file a motion for reconsideration.

“I have mixed feelings,” Quinsayas said in a text message to the PCIJ. “Being cited for indirect contempt was totally unexpected. At the same time, there are reasons to be thankful for as the High COurt reaffirmed the importance of press freedom and recognized the significance of the massacre case.”

 

PH slips 7 pts again in 2013 World Press Freedom Index

The PHILIPPINES did it again — slipped 7 points but this time, in a global index of media freedom and freedom of information.

The country’s ranking in the 2013 World Press Freedom Index dropped in rank from 140 in 2012 to 147 in the latest report that covers 179 nations of the world.

Released today, Wednesday, by Reporters Without Borders (Reporters Sans Frontieres) the Index placed the Philippines in the “red” zone of nations where the state of media freedom and freedom of information stand significant improvement.

The Philippines came ahead of countries that all, except for Burma, scored lower in the 2013 Index. These are Russia, Singapore, Iraq, Burma, Gambia, Mexico, Turkey, Swaziland, and Azerbaijan that were ranked No. 148 to 156.

However, the Philippines just trailed nations, some newer and weaker democracies, in the latest Index, notably India, Oman, DR Congo, Cambodia, Bangladesh Malaysia, and Palestine that were ranked No. 141 to 146 in the latest Index.

Thailand landed at No. 138, and Indonesia, No. 141, although both had launched their reformasi and democratization movements years after the EDSA people power revolt of 1986 in the Philippines.

In the 2013 Press Freedom Index, Reporters Without Borders said it was publishing for the first time an annual global “indicator” of worldwide media freedom.

“This new analytic tool measures the overall level of freedom of information in the world and the performance of the world’s governments in their entirety as regards this key freedom,” it said.
“In view of the emergence of new technologies and the interdependence of governments and peoples, the freedom to produce and circulate news and information needs to be evaluated at the planetary as well as national level. Today, in 2013, the media freedom “indicator” stands at 3395, a point of reference for the years to come.”

The indicator can also be broken down by region and, it added, “by means of weighting based on the population of each region, can be used to produce a score from zero to 100 in which zero represents total respect for media freedom. This produces a score of 17.5 for Europe, 30.0 for the Americas, 34.3 for Africa, 42.2 for Asia-Pacific and 45.3 for the former Soviet republics.”

However, “despite the Arab springs, the Middle East and North Africa region comes last with 48.5.”

The year 2012 was “the deadliest year ever registered by Reporters Without Borders in its annual roundup,” citing “the high number of journalists and netizens killed in the course of their work.” This factor “naturally had a significant impact on the ranking of the countries where these murders took place, above all Somalia (175th, -11), Syria (176th, 0), Mexico (153rd, -4) and Pakistan (159th, -8).”

Founded in France in 1985 by four journalists, and registered in 1995 as a non-profit organization, Reporters Without Borders has correspondents in 150 countries of the world today.

Its statement of purpose declares that, “freedom of expression and of information will always be the world’s most important freedom.”

On its official website, the group says: “If journalists were not free to report the facts, denounce abuses and alert the public, how would we resist the problem of children-soldiers, defend women’s rights, or preserve our environment? In some countries, torturers stop their atrocious deeds as soon as they are mentioned in the media. In others, corrupt politicians abandon their illegal habits when investigative journalists publish compromising details about their activities. Still elsewhere, massacres are prevented when the international media focuses its attention and cameras on events.”

“Freedom of information is the foundation of any democracy. Yet almost half of the world’s population is still denied it,” it adds.

The 2013 Index did not offer a specific section on the state of media freedom in the Philippines. However, in its 2011-12 Index, Reporters Without Borders ranked the Philippines No. 140 (out of 179 countries surveyed), noting that, “the (Aquino) government that took over in July 2010 has not yet responded effectively to the media’s problems.”

Last year’s Index averred that, “threats and violence against local radio station hosts (including physical attacks and murders) and the culture of impunity represent the biggest obstacles to media freedom.”

Paramilitary groups and privately-owned militias, which were included in the 2011 list of Predators of Press Freedom, “have been implicated in most of the attacks on journalists since democracy was restored in 1986,” the group said. “Corruption facilitates the impunity enjoyed by those responsible for violence against journalists. Politicians maintain links with criminal networks. The judicial system is not sufficiently independent.”

According to the 2012 Index, “difficulty accessing information, self-censorship and journalists’ low pay also pose serious problems for the independence of newspapers, which are often influenced or controlled by powerful business and political interests.”

The group had lamented that, “the trial of 96 people accused of planning and carrying out the 23 November 2009 massacre in Maguindanao province, in which 32 journalists were killed, has been under way for more than a year without anyone being convicted yet.”

Reporters Without Borders also noted the opposition to the right of reply bill pending in Congress that media organizations have called an “act of terrorism against the media,” as well as “the revised criminal code and the witness protection program constitute obstacles to media freedom and give the authorities the power to silence undesired voices.”

In the Philippines, “the environment for journalists is marked by fear and violence,” the 2011-12 report said. “The prevailing impunity, particularly on the island of Mindanao, one of the world’s most dangerous regions for journalists, is holding back the process of improving the media freedom situation and the right to information.”

Last year’s Index stressed that President Aquino had promised during a meeting in August 2010 with the Freedom Fund for Filipino Journalists the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines to take the “necessary concrete measures” to stop the killings.