golden butterfly wings

golden butterfly wings
alight delicately on cheeks
unsmudged by tears.





fingers nimble--
minds at rest,
hearts quiet.





the loom snaps out and back,
the little mouse races across,
wheels whirr, bob comically, whirr once more.





a dark beast
casts its shadow
on the rainbown fabric.





a sad tale
is written in each thread
of each tapestry.





a hope shines in each candle,
each window opens to the sun.





Yangon, May 2012.

Human Rights in ASEAN: A view from two regions

On 18^th February in Jakarta, the ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) concluded its second deliberation over the long-anticipated ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD).

Since the drafting process began last July, a number of analysts and activists have criticized the lack of transparency in the process. Consultation with civil society organizations has been limited to national discussions in some countries. However, meaningful consultations require information and the AICHR is encouraged to release an official draft as soon as possible. Speculation over an early draft leaked online will otherwise continue to be counter-productive for all parties concerned.

In a promising development, the AICHR committed to organizing two regional consultations on the AHRD in the coming months to encourage inputs from civil society groups. “This is a people-oriented document. Of course we have to consult the people and dialogue with them,” says Ambassador Rosario Manalo, Philippine Representative to the AICHR.

Speaking in Prague last November to over 100 officials and civil society participants at the 11^th Informal Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) Seminar on Human Rights, Indonesian Representative to the AICHR and then Chairman Mr. Rafendi Djamin emphasized that: “This Declaration will be a major step for ASEAN and shall add value to the existing international and regional instruments on human rights.”

The largest regular dialogue on human rights between the two regions, the Prague seminar brought together national human rights commissioners, human rights ambassadors, representatives of justice and foreign affairs ministries, academics, activists and human rights defenders from 42 Asian and European countries. Among the participants were AICHR representatives from Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines and Singapore.

The discussions did not focus exclusively on the AICHR but rather more broadly on regional mechanisms and their procedural effectiveness, national institutions and the interplay among mechanisms at different levels, including at the United Nations.

Discussions pooled participants’ expertise and familiarity with other regional bodies in Europe, the Americas and Africa, providing interesting observations for the relatively young AICHR as the only regional human rights body in Asia.

First, the UDHR and international human rights treaties provide the minimum standards for human rights protection by national and regional bodies.

The AICHR terms of reference articulate the body’s aim to uphold international human rights standards as prescribed by the UDHR, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, and international human rights instruments “to which ASEAN Member States are parties.” This need not mean the lowest common denominator. Moreover, the ASEAN has moved forward on the rights of women and children as well as of migrant workers through specific initiatives.

Second, a regional human rights body could play an intermediary but potentially critical role between international and national systems. Where a regional court exists, sanctions can be made against states that violate their human rights obligations. Regional bodies may also help to prevent violations through the exercise of political or moral influence. Regional frameworks can serve as the impetus to improve domestic law by setting higher standards, in consonance with international frameworks.

There are many other examples where a regional body might serve an acute function within the mosaic of available mechanisms, tailoring solutions to the specific needs of the region. The AICHR’s terms of reference endow it with a mandate for both human rights promotion and protection; more could be done to fully explore the potential of the latter.

Third, human rights start at home. The AICHR could envision a mechanism that involves National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) where they exist. Some NHRIs possess an indispensable protection mandate that complements the AICHR’s current focus on the promotion of human rights.

Moreover, a number of NHRIs in the Asia-Pacific have more experience than others--including European counterparts--in handling individual complaints and facilitating redress through courts.

A regional-national link has promise in ASEAN, considering that half of the member states have NHRIs (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and—recently—Myanmar; Cambodia is in the process of setting one up). “NHRIs do not only have a responsibility limited to national issues because they are faced with cross-border as well as transnational issues”, says Prof. Amara Pongsapich, Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand.


The Prague Report suggests that “there is value in exploring the development of minimum international standards for regional human rights mechanisms”, as no such standards have been defined.

Thanks, Noot, for getting me a copy!

Despite any dissatisfaction over the AHRD drafting process and how the AICHR works, one must not lose sight of the immense opportunity that a human rights body in Asia—warts and all—represents. The process of creating the AICHR was not an easy one to begin with; yet it now exists, contrary to reasonable expectations a decade ago. Any possible evolution of the AICHR towards the realm of human rights protection will almost certainly be a slow process, apace with political developments in the region.

In time, we will more clearly assess the impact of the AICHR and AHRD on the lives of the region's people, in the fulfillment of their fundamental rights and freedoms.

Sol Iglesias is Director for Intellectual Exchange at the Asia-Europe Foundation but writes here in a personal capacity.

People Power--walking from Tahrir to Edsa

Photo from http://gelsantosrelos.typepad.com with thanks

Overnight on 11th February, the outpouring of comments on facebook were either jubilant (e.g. Magandang umaga, Egypt!) or apprehensive (e.g. Hold your horses if you think tonight that Egypt will suddenly turn into a modern democracy and an advanced economy). After 18 days of popular protest against his regime, Hosni Mubarak stepped down as Egypt's president of the last 30 years. On TV, news anchors pronounced Mubarak's ouster as a triumph of 'people power'.

That reference has a historical connection to us Filipinos, having been coined to describe the culmination of protests that started with the assassination of Ninoy Aquino in 1983, and ended with: a four-day demonstration along Edsa in 1986; a US Navy/Airforce airlift of Ferdinand Marcos and his family to exile in Hawaii on 25th February 25 years ago; and, the swearing-in of Corazon Aquino as President. Martial Law babies like myself watch Egyptians, as well as the Tunisians, Jordanians, Yemenis and others, celebrate Mubarak's departure with wistful nostalgia for 1986.

Democracy is a process and outcome of continuous struggle to protect individual freedoms and human dignity; it is a struggle that never ends, even in more mature democratic political systems. We have had several people-powerish experiences since Edsa, such as the 1997 anti-Cha Cha rallies against changing presidential term limits as well as the 2001 EDSA Dos protests that overthrew Joseph Estrada when the impeachment process in the Senate failed.

There are no oppressors where there are no oppressed; and what we see on our screens today is an oppressed people realizing this. Liberation is possible simply by voting on their feet--without violence. That's a one-of-a-kind, pure shot of empowerment; and that's what Tahrir and EDSA have in common.

The comparison ends there, however.

The jarring element in the story of Egypt is the unqualified welcome given by Egyptians themselves to the military as caretaker. Mohamad ElBaradei has furthermore publicly stated that an election could take place in as long as a year from now. In contrast, 25 years ago in the Philippines, then Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and General Fidel Ramos defected from the Marcos dictatorship when rumors of a purge in the military threatened them. It was Cory Aquino and, Cardinal Archbishop of Manila, Jaime Sin who raised the call for people to come into the streets and also to protect Ramos and Enrile by forming a human barricade around them. Thus the military, complicit in perpetrating human rights violations in the name of counter-insurgency and national interest under Marcos, was relegated a secondary role under civilian authority from the outset. And somehow, Cory weathered the seven coup d'etat attempts throughout the six years of her administration.

This brings me to a second and related point. There is as yet no clear civilian figurehead to lead Egypt through this political transition. ElBaradei is internationally-respected as the three-term Director-General International Atomic Energy Agency head until 2009; since his departure from that office, he was moreover an early voice for Egypt's democratization, and enjoys real distance from the Mubarak regime. But domestically, he is not well known. Then there is the face of the online youth upswelling in this revolution, Wael Ghonim, who has not yet expressed interest in entering politics.

Viewed with great distrust by Israel and the Americans, the Muslim Brotherhood party-- outlawed by Mubarak--may stand the best chance of winning a snap election should there be one. Unlike the social movement that seemed to mushroom out of nowhere, they are organized and reach far outside Cairo.

Perhaps others might emerge. But they will still have the military to deal with. They do not have a Cory Aquino who, as a "plain housewife" and Ninoy's widow, had both the perceived moral ascendancy (backed by the people) and a machinery (backed by a united opposition party) needed to lead the messy transformation toward democracy.

Thirdly: unlike Egypt, the uprising in the Philippines took place after Cory Aquino had won a snap election against Marcos. Cory therefore had the legitimacy to lead; the popular revolt was sparked precisely by Marcos' attempt to steal the choice of leadership away from voters. In a vote marked by intimidation and cheating, many public school teachers, church workers, Commission on Election personnel, NAMFREL election observers and other citizens guarded ballots valiantly. They were Edsa's early heroes and foreshadowed the upheaval that was to come.

Fourth, the Philippine economy had already been decimated and plundered by the Marcoses and the cronies by '86, digging a deep hole out of which we haven't yet to managed to climb. Already by the end of week 1 of the Egypt crisis, economists were already making dire pronouncements that economic collapse would be deep-set and irreversible within days. Egypt, unlike its neighbors does not capitalize on oil but tourism, and had been at an economic standstill for almost three weeks. They are more dependent on a globalized economy than we were in the '80s, and recovery will be more complex.

Finally, the largest complication for Egypt is its delicate position in the dynamics of peace and conflict in the Middle East. Egypt was the first of only two Arab countries to sign a peace treaty with Israel. Egypt also controls access to the Gaza Strip on its Rafah border, although it has partially opened access since last June following the Gaza flotilla incident. Egypt has long been a lever of American and Western influence in the Middle East. In contrast, the eventual closure of the US bases in the Philippines (one key issue that pitted the Senate and civil society against the Aquino government in '92) did not result in devastating consequences for security in the region.

Still, there is cause for celebration. There are dangers to be wary of, yes, but from one more Filipino: Magandang umaga, Egypt. Magandang araw sa inyong lahat.

Skeptical of the Skeptical Environmentalists

I have been on the phone, facebook and skype with my family in Bangkok and Manila about the current heavy rains and flooding due to the typhoon raging at home, 'Ondoy' to us Pinoys but 'Ketsana' to the world. Family members in Manila have had to move upwards our fridge, washing machine, stove, carpets, etc. from the bottom of our split-level house. In 35 years standing in flood-prone Manila, this is only the second or third time the water has actually come into the house, and the first time it's been so bad. GMA news calls this an 'epic flood' due to a 'record' 6 straight hours of rainfall (roughly equivalent to one whole month of the average), with a death toll so far of 46, hundreds still stranded and in need of rescue with dwellings, houses, cars gone--we will know the full implications over the next few days.

For donations, particularly for those overseas, I would encourage people to give to the Philippine National Red Cross (although online you can't specify the purpose of the donation it seems), or www.txtpower.org (I can personally vouch for one of the founders/leaders).

While browsing through facebook, I read a post with regard to climate change alarmism.

So here's a thought: we can wait for a few years' or decades' time for a scientifically sound and unassailable verdict (if such were even possible and non-contradictory) on, say, whether or not Tropical Storm Ondoy is an extreme weather event with a provable causal link to human-originated climate change. In the long run, we are all dead anyway--so we shouldn't bother to try to make a difference today.

The thing is...

I have followed the international climate change negotiations from 2002 when only scientists and government negotiators were mainly involved in this milieu. Certainly before it became a pop phenomenon with Al Gore and his "Climate Change for Dummies" media campaign (not to denigrate at all the important work that the IPCC has produced to deserve--more than Gore--the honor of accepting the Nobel Peace Prize).

Some researchers, scientists and policy wonks are saying, and some with evidence, that climate change discourse is domineering, and that it is alarmist. I respect and believe in the exigency of contrarian views that question 'authoritative' narratives as a condition for healthy public policy debate.

But... here are some of the arguments against pernicious, human-led climate change:
- Changes in climate can be explained by natural phenomena e.g. solar activity
- Artificial emissions aren't sufficient to explain climate change, natural emissions (sheep farting) are greater
- It's not global warming, it's global cooling! (yeah, I'm sure the dinosaurs would have appreciated a heads up when it was their turn)
- The IPCC forecasts and models are wrong (flawed, I can accept. but plain WRONG?)
- The pro-climate change negotiators "use science to argue the polemics of the case rather than just draw attention to the science" thus blurring the line between scientific inquiry and politics
- The IPCC fudged the data in the report
- Every major national scientific body in the world is wrong and/or they are simply silencing the opposition
[for less sarcasm, here's one such article: Forecast: A cooling trend on climate change]

When I first started getting interested in the climate change issue, I even read Bjorn Lomborg's The Skeptical Environmentalist when it first came out--and with an open mind. But after going through that hefty book, it seemed to me that the skeptic's arguments were flawed because the technical criticisms that he and his students made against the IPCC and related research, particularly on methodological grounds, were weak. I just googled him and found that he and his book have been discredited by the Danish committee on scientific dishonesty, yet vindicated by the Danish ministry for science, technology & innovation; one verdict is rejected by some in the scientific community, one verdict is rejected by others. Well, I suppose inquiring minds would argue that this is another example of the Authorities beating down dissent. Bjorn Lomborg isn't exactly the poster boy for the Weak and the Helpless--having made quite a killing with his bestseller (fiction or non-fiction?) and even appointed by the Danish conservative government to head the national Environmental Assessment Institute three years after he published his signature book. One wonders whether he whispers to himself, 'And yet it moves!' before going to bed each night...

Anyway. My conclusion as a layperson is that I have no reason to doubt that climate change is real and that it is caused by human activity.

I am even more so skeptical of skeptical wannabe-environmentalists that, say, dominate the US Congress and block constructive American action in the international community's efforts to address climate change that negatively affects people throughout the planet--especially those who are most vulnerable. What pro-climate change conspiracy can exist when powerful politicians have the means to wage a counter-campaign that decries a significant portion of the world's scientific community as frauds? These politicians are in the pockets of the oil companies, the automakers and big industry--and blatantly so: they monger fear of negative impact on the American economy (a tune they played in the boom years that they play louder in the middle of an economic crisis).*

Global consensus on climate change is a myth itself; two of the biggest polluters, the US and China, have not agreed to binding commitments on mitigation. And if we blame the Bush administration for stalling international action on climate change we can also point a pinky at Al Gore who pushed UN consensus to the lowest common denominator by having brought the Kyoto Protocol to the table in the first place as a flooded-down version of what the protocol could have been. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Kyoto agreement that the US government refused to sign for 12 years was actually their idea. Who says Americans don't have a sense of irony?

I don't doubt that there is a certain amount of exploitation from researchers who want funding (because they often get too much already as it is?), from the $64 billion-worth emissions trading market players (in comparison, rescuing Wall Street we were talking in the trillions), from beneficiaries of renewable energy subsidy (i'd rather that governments subsidize solar or wind than oil), et cetera.

Still, I can't help but think that there isn't enough alarm! Who's pulling the wool over whose eyes? We feel it, we see it. We grew up knowing what to expect in May and December, and now we are reliant on the daily AccuWeather on our iPhones. To climate change deniers, I say this: convince the pacific islanders, cancer-ridden sunbathers in Australia and the polar bears. Then maybe you can convince me.


Image property of Kipper Williams

* Just to continue on this ad hominem rant: These are politicians that can't even find the conscience to provide adequate healthcare to their citizens, who are furthermore probably the same ones that deny they descended from apes, and to quote a certain presidential aspirant, cling to guns and religion.

A Farewell of Sorts, Madame President

Corazon Aquino, 11th President of the Philippines, died early Saturday morning, 1st August.

Yellow ribbon on the car antenna, flashing Laban signs and smiles at random people, my sister's Cory doll, singing Handog ng Pilipino sa Mundo in school...

The point of people power was that it wasn't delivered by one single person--it was the Church leaders and workers, the renegades in Marcos's military, the two million people who streamed into the streets. But Cory Aquino was a focus and symbol that mobilized all these individuals; and while not a sufficient condition for democratic transition she was necessary, essential.

As a nation, this was our defining moment. Our historic crisis against which events in the future will forever be compared.The unfortunate after-effect is that someone like me, whose formative years passed during that moment of history, will always look at life and politics through this good-vs.-evil leitmotif. The lines were so easily drawn then between the politicians you could trust and those that can never be trusted. How one behaved under Marcos was a litmus test of human courage and dignity.

Even after Cory's tenure as president, the messianic force of her belief in democracy (or at least in her mission to protect it) continued to mobilize people against any hint of tyranny, echoing the shouts of "never again!" against Marcos.

Her presidency was flawed, however.

We raged when she waffled over securing a moratorium over paying for Marcos's debts (a burden passed on to generations of our people).

We were dismayed that she stood by while Congress riddled the Agrarian Reform Law with loopholes, and we were baffled by the Mendiola Massacre.

We marched against the renewal of the US bases treaty, shouting "Imperialista, Ibagsak!".

I was a child in all of this, trying to mediate my understanding of what was happening around me through imitation: in the Third Grade, I staged a people-power revolution to depose my English Teacher (a temp, who didn't know the difference between proper and common nouns).

When I think of Cory and those times, I can't help but think of my Dad. Hanging out at his office after school, I was once "interviewed" by a journalist (who was there I suppose to actually interview my Dad) on how I felt about Marcos. He told me that my Dad and I were very brave for speaking honestly. I couldn't sleep that night, expecting to be arrested and brought to Camp Cramé. I was about seven.

Then there was the time, post-86, my Dad was doing some consultancy for the Aquino government, specifically the Office of the Executive Secretary. As he was leaving for Malacañang, he asked me to write a few recommendations to the President. I think I came up with about five, written in pencil on a sheet torn from a notebook.

My generation of Filipinos was too young to really grasp the horrors of Martial Law or even remember how Ninoy Aquino's assassination sent a shudder through society. We knew people, people's sons and daughters, who were abducted by the military and tortured but this didn't really mean much at the age of five or six. We could only parrot what our parents said over coffee and cigarettes.

What we will always remember is the heady joy of February '86. The liberating impact of the end of the Marcos regime and the sensation of empowerment that buoyed us along. The crowds cheering. The smiling strangers.

In our mind, yellow will always color the triumph of justice and democracy. And Madame President will always be that lady in yellow.
From the Iglesias Film Vault. Camera work by my Dad. Everyone's so blurry, it looks like a motion Renoir painting.

thought for food

12 years ago, independent analysts warned that World Bank and FAO projections of today’s world farm output were higher, and price increases slower, than they should have been. The World Bank recently reported that overall global food prices increased by 83% in the last three years. Food price inflation could rapidly push at least 100 million people into poverty. Looking at Asia, since January this year, rice prices have gone up by 141%.

Naturally, rising food prices will have various effects on the different Asian countries, which are politically and economically diverse. Rising food prices should benefit farmers and, in the medium-term, spur agricultural production. A recent study by World Bank economists found that the short-run impacts of higher staple food prices on poverty differ considerably by commodity and by country. Nevertheless, they found that poverty increases are much more frequent, and larger in scale, than poverty reductions. For example, in Indonesia, more than 75% of the poor are net rice buyers, and an increase in the relative rice price by 10 percent will result in an additional two million poor people (or 1% of the population).

Even if recent news reports, as of this writing, indicate that an infusion of supply from countries like Cambodia, Vietnam and Pakistan will ease the rice crisis, this does not detract from three serious problems that the last few months have exposed: a resounding dissonance in government responses that does not auger well for the future; the failure of global energy security efforts to arrest the accelerating price of oil; and, the shocking gaps and tatters in the safety nets—especially for agriculture—that governments assured would accompany trade liberalization.

Firstly, the events have revealed fissures in East Asian integration and the limits of its crisis management capacity. Given government reactions such as a proposal to start a rice cartel or the imposition of rice export restrictions by key producers, it is obvious that governments might take policies seemingly in the national interest that hurt the region, and the world, economically. In contrast, regional coordination and sober management of export and import flows as an extraordinary and time-limited step could have buttressed confidence in the food market (instead of further driving prices upwards).

Secondly, Asia has been unable to curb its reliance on oil for energy security despite lessons from the oil shocks of the 1970s. Oil prices have again quadrupled over the last five years. While some headway has been made with renewable energy, Asia has been slow to develop such alternatives and attract large-scale investment in this sector. Surging fuel prices and, hence, transportation throughout the food supply chain, contribute to food price inflation. To complicate matters, incentives for biofuels—while part of climate change mitigation and improving energy security—divert land and crops like wheat, soy and maize from the food market. Governments should consider temporarily suspending subsidies or re-channelling crops to food supply.

Thirdly, trade liberalization in the developing economies of East Asia necessitate social safety nets. These should be designed to brace vulnerable sectors, like agriculture, for the crush of opening trade and globalizing competition. It seems that these safety nets have very wide holes through which the region’s poorest have fallen through. The current situation uncovers a disconcerting absence of effective mechanisms to attenuate trade-related disturbances. Direct cash transfers, food relief (as well as its variants) and hoarding are unsustainable options; medium-to-long term planning is required. Agriculture has weakened in some Asian economies; moreover, there has been an increasing shift from subsistence to cash crops. Policies to improve farm output and attain food supply targets will be integral to attaining food security for the future.

The potential human cost of unguaranteed food security is staggering. The current troubles have already sparked protests, work stoppages and other forms of civil disobedience as well as riots. With scarce natural resources becoming scarcer in the coming years, in the absence of any stunning technological breakthrough to feed the world’s hungry, the prognosis is bleak. Furthermore, East Asia needs to consider approaching future crises in a coordinated way at the regional level.


I'm still thinking about that half-eaten sandwich that I left for garbage last Friday...

The Man in Burma

I visited Burma when I was still a student. It was a singular opportunity: the reclusive state was ruled then as it is now with the obsidian hand of the military junta but it was slowly opening to tourism and visitors from outside; an international gathering was possible for the first time in years. My research wasn't on Burma but I tagged along with my Canon SLR as my companions had the most fascinating interviews with former politicians (including a member of parliament during the early years of Burma's independence five decades ago), members of an ethno-nationalist movement as well as a visit to a monastery.

I remember the monastery in particular. The abbot was seated on a mat on the floor, with his legs folded in the customary way. As he spoke in a lilting voice that I didn't understand, I busied myself with my sketchbook and pencil, trying to capture each line on his face and the feeling of frailty and power that emanated from him. The young monks were clustered around us, their leather slippers scattered two by two outside the door. The slippers were so worn with steps that probably could be counted in years; the grooves of time had left deep imprints of the ball and heel of each foot.

The police had questioned the mother of a home that housed us, simply because we were foreign. One of our companions was interrogated as he left the country, simply because he was Burmese.

Internet access was unheard of in those days and one could only check one's email at the swanky hotels for a lot of American dollars; things improved in the last few years up until Sunday, when the military cut off the country's internet access.

Flash forward: 2007. After over a year of preparation, we finally organised a meeting on human rights last week in Cambodia. I had put a lot of myself into this meeting. It was, bar none, the most difficult project I've handled to date. I think it was because of the subject matter itself: freedom of expression. The freedom to think, say, paint, sing, write what one wants; and the freedom of accessing information particularly from the government--this is a fundamental right protected by international law; from which other freedoms emanate. The freedom to assemble and protest, the freedom of people to demand for the basic minimum standards that all human beings should enjoy.

And a thousand miles away, as we spoke and emailed and surfed the web and ate our hotel kitchen food, monks, nuns, students, activists, journalists, street vendors, mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters were being shot at, clubbed and beaten into submission. As I write, they are probably being interrogated, tortured. Monks have reportedly been disrobed and hundreds detained. The monasteries are empty. Midnight raids of homes and abductions continue. Fear is the rhythm that beats in the hearts of the people; a threat hangs over Burma as the darkness of night spreads.

Throughout history we've seen this kind of injustice play out over and over with different faces, in different places, different times. Eternity spans and is indifferent.


Drawn in pencil on the back of a random envelope, December 2001.

He wrapped his maroon cloak around his body like a mantle from a higher power. Nearly six years later, his image presses itself to my mind's eye. I don't believe in prayer. But last week, I joined a few others in a Buddhist temple at Angkor Wat to pray for Burma and to be blessed by the water of belief... if just for the tenuous hope that my thoughts for him and his people reach the indefinable ether of collective human consciousness. For whatever that's worth.

East Timor Notebook: How did I end up here? cont'd

1st July
Counting Center, Ainaro

The possibility of actually going to East Timor was a kernel of an idea because of the paper that I’m revising. I was always apologizing for not having done any field research to substantiate my paper. I remember writing, at the start of the year, about how I was simply not doing enough with my life, and asking myself: is tomorrow the day I finally go to East Timor?




And here I am.

East Timor Notebook: How did I end up here?

30 June. Election Day.
Sitting on a hillock outside a Polling Center, Ainaro

East Timor. How did I end up here? The story as I tell it is this: I’d first heard, even just heard, of the country when I was a freshman or sophomore at don’the University of the Philippines. APCET (Asia-Pacific Solidarity Coalition for East Timor, methinks) had invited Ramos-Horta to speak on campus and then president Fidel Ramos barred him from entering the country. In some circles, particularly in UP—which holds academic freedom above all (or mostly) else, there was a furor, and I was dimly, dimly aware of it. I really don’t know how the incident seeped into my consciousness, but my mind retains an image of Ramos-Horta’s face on a poster about the event. That was in ’93 or ’94. Probably a consequence of international attention on the 1991 Santa Cruz massacre.


santa cruz cemetary

in 1991, to protest the killing of sebastiao gomes, a student activist, hundreds of timorese in dili walked in a procession to the santa cruz cemetary, where indonesian troops trapped the protesters and killed a reported 271 people with hundreds of others injured, hospitalized and 'disappeared'.

In September ’99, I had just moved to Singapore. On the daily commute to hang out with Junior at the Yacht Club, I’d read the Straits Times—its coverage of Southeast Asia especially. Somehow, I followed the developments in the news as the 1999 referendum for independence in East Timor unfolded. I’d complain to Junior: why hasn’t the UN intervened? Then, why have only the Australians sent troops? Et cetera.

In April 2000, I was thrilled to discover the Singapore International Film Fest. My graduate studies and scholarship hadn’t yet started yet, and Junior and I was still living very simply on his salary. I was surviving on a contract for some technical writing (a procedures manual) from the Yacht Club. But I allowed myself this one luxury: to watch as many films as I could in the week and a half of the film fest. One of which was Punitive Damages.

Punitive Damages is a documentary about a young Malaysian student activist named Kamal Bamadhaj. It’s about the underground student movement in East Timor that developed in the 1990s. It’s about the human rights groups and NGOs in Australia and elsewhere that supported this movement. It’s about Kamal, killed among the Timorese massacred in the Santa Cruz cemetary by the Indonesian military. And the case lodged by his family in American courts that indicted the culpable parties, though none have been brought to justice.

At the screening, they sold copies of a book of Kamal’s journal and essays and analyses by his sister, Nadja, of the political context of Kamal’s life and death: the Suharto regime, the occupation of East Timor, and military oppression in other places such as Aceh and Irian Jaya. I read the book avidly and finished it fairly quickly, poring over it through silent evenings in the little bedroom that was home then.


christo rei or christ the king, a massive statue overlooking built in dili by, oddly enough, the indonesians

In Kyaw’s class on social movement theory, I decided to write my course paper on East Timor. I read books and books on the Indonesian invasion and occupation of East Timor and on Fretilin especially. John Taylor, Helen Hill (who I met in Dili, completely randomly, last Thursday!), Noam Chomsky, Matthew Jardine, Constancio Pinto, Ramos-Horta, Joao Saldanha—through these authors, I tried to understand what had happened in East Timor. Pinto, an underground movement student leader who fled to the US, is now ambassador to the US. Saldanha is the lead candidate and president of the Partido Republikan. I attended their campaign rally at Kampo Demokrasya.

So I’ve got this paper. I presented a version at the International Convention of Asia Scholars in 2005 in Shanghai and Kasarinlan Journal of Third World Studies is interested in publishing it.

Another Flashback: Rage Against Ani Desierto

No to Ani D for the Philippine Supreme Court!
Thursday, July 18, 2002

I cannot believe that Ani Desierto is even being CONSIDERED for appointment as a Supreme Court Justice.

FYI. He lost his credibility early on as an Ombudsman over the Kuratong Baleleng case:
1. Ombudsman Desierto overruled his own committee's findings that Philippine National Police Chief (now Senator) Ping Lacson as well as other police chiefs should be charged as principle respondents. What had been reported as a shoot out between a bank robbery gang may have turned out to be a "rub out" or execution.
2. The eye witness who identified Ping Lacson and blew the whistle on the rub out, police officer SP02 Ed de los Reyes, also swore in an affidavit that a man named Faustino "Pong" Salud (ano ba yan? may Ping, may Pong!) had tried to bribe his family on Ping Lacson's behalf.
3. An insider at the Ombudsman's office later revealed that Pong Salud had sold Ani Desierto 10 TV sets at unbelievably low prices. In his own defense, Ani said that Pong was an old friend. Plus he gave away the TV sets as gifts to his staff. Baka hindi naka tanggap yun nagsumbong?

More about Ani Desierto, the Kuratong Baleleng case, and his expensive house-buying available from this Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism article.

Ani Desierto has also bungled the prosecution of only the biggest (documented) plunderer since Marcos, Joseph Estrada, who is in an airconditioned hospital room when he should be on death row! (gratuitous aside: no to the death penallty!)

And to make things worse, while names like Hayde Yorac and Simeon Marcelo are being floated by civil society groups as Desierto's replacement, so are names like Antonio Carpio, whose law firm has represented Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and Mike Arroyo. Given fat ass Mike Arroyo's penchant for corruption, this might present some sort of insurance for Madame Presidente.


Ani Desierto. No wonder he and Darth Vader have the same nickname.