The president's remarks, however, seem to oppose local laws
19/06/22
NO TALKING POLICY IN MRT, LRT AND JEEPS ABSURD, UNIQUE WORLDWIDE: THESE AGENCIES HAVE NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER TO FORBID TALKING. FURTHER THERE IS NO PROOF WHATSOEVER THAT TALKING SPREADS "COVID". IT IS CLEARLY A VEXATIOUS POLICY VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES AS WELL AS PUBLIC POLICY. BUT FOR DUTERTE THE POSSIBILITY TO FORBID CRITICISM SO CHEAPLY COULD NOT BE REJECTED.
LRT-2 implements ‘No Talking’ policy
The Light Rail Transit Line 2 (LRT-2) has started implementing a “No-Talking” policy inside trains as part of its measures to contain the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
The policy which prohibits talking to fellow passengers and answering phone calls during “train journey” took effect Thursday, July 16.
The management said the policy was made “to avoid possible droplet transmission” inside the trains.
The train management also reminded passengers to wear face masks properly for their own safety.
Other train lines like the Metro Rail Transit Line 3 (MRT-3) and the LRT Line 1 have also implemented the same “No Talking” policy.
TULOY ANG PANLOLOKO NI DUTERTE SA ILALIM NI BONG BONG MARCOS, ITO AY LALAKIHIN PA SA MILITARY ORGANIZED OPPRESSION.
Overworked, underpaid health workers are walking away as Delta ravages PH
(UPDATED) ‘Our salary was delayed for over two months. If you
have family to support, how will you be able to put food on the table?’
James*, a 32-year-old nurse resigned in mid-July from the provincial hospital where he had served for more than seven years. It was a tough decision to make, but the choice was between a job and protecting his family from contracting the deadly coronavirus. He wanted a hospital that offered better working conditions.
“Halos dalawang buwan eh wala kami sinasahod, delayed. Kung may pamilya ka, siyempre saan ka kukuha ng pangkain? Doon talaga ako napuno,” an emotional James told Rappler in a phone interview on Thursday, September 2.
(Our salary was delayed for two months. If you have family to support, how will you be able to put food on the table? That was the last straw for me.)
James is the breadwinner of the family. He has a son who is an incoming Grade 4 student, while his wife is pregnant with their second child. He said that the condition of his pregnant wife was also a major consideration in his decision since his exposure to the virus was very high – he had been assigned to the emergency department of the hospital.
“Exposed na exposed talaga ako dahil na-assigned ako sa ER. Nabuntis kasi si misis, sabi ko mahirap ang ganito, kaya nag-resign na ako. ‘Yung exposure doon sa virus, matindi eh,” he said.
(I was really exposed in the hospital because I was assigned in the ER. My wife got pregnant, and so I said this will risky, so I resigned. The exposure to the virus there was really high.)
James said the workers received little to no help from the hospital so they could be better protected. He said they requested the management to provide them lodging so that they wouldn’t bring home the virus to their family. This request seemed to have fallen on deaf ears.
“Nag-suggest kami sa ‘bisor ko sa ER na kung sakali na puwede kami magkaroon ng bahay, kaming mga staff, kasi marami na sa amin ang nagpa-positive. Sabi aaprubahan pa raw. Hanggang sa umalis ako, wala pa rin,” he said.
(We suggested to our supervisor in the ER if they could provide us lodging because many among the staff were getting sick and testing positive for the virus. They said it was still up for approval. Up until I left, the request had not been granted.)
Delayed salary, benefits
As the country deals with the fresh surge in infections driven by the highly transmissible Delta variant, health workers who are on the front lines continue to suffer from poor working conditions and delayed benefits.
Frustrated health workers recently took to the streets to demand the release of their long overdue COVID-19 benefits.
“If we are heroes for you, why has it been a year now yet we are still here in the streets calling and shouting for the immediate release of our hard-earned COVID-19 benefits?” said Edwin Pacheco, president of the National Kidney and Transplant Institute Employees Association- Alliance of Health Workers.
At the House of Representatives’ deliberations on the proposed 2022 budget of the Department of Health on Wednesday, September 1, the DOH said some 526,727 health workers were eligible to receive special risk allowance (SRA). Of these, a total of 399,395 had received theirs.
127,332 health workers
Still waiting for their special risk allowance
The DOH explained that issues in paperwork contributed to the delays in the release of benefits since they needed to validate if a health worker indeed directly treated COVID-19 patients.
Senators have said that all health workers, whether they are directly treating COVID-19 patients or not, should receive special risk allowance since they are all exposed to the risk of contracting the virus.
Based on a joint circular from the DOH and the Department of Budget and Management, eligible health workers may receive a special risk allowance not exceeding P5,000 per month. It would cover the number of days the health workers physically reported to work in a month from September 15, 2020, until June 30, 2021.
It seems health workers cannot expect better benefits next year. During deliberations on the health department’s proposed budget for 2022, it was bared that no funds were allocated for health workers’ allowances.
Exodus
Various hospitals have been hit by resignations, aggravating a shortage of manpower and exposing once more the plight of health workers in the Philippines.
In 2020, about 40% of Filipino nurses in private hospitals resigned, according to the Private Hospitals Association of the Philippines. Recently, St. Luke’s Medical Center, a big private hospital, was hit by resignation of employees, affecting its operations at a time when admissions were rising in an unprecedented levels.
In a press briefing on Friday, September 3, Philippine College of Physician’s president Dr. Maricar Limpin turned emotional as she read the statement of the Healthcare Professionals Alliance for COVID-19 (HPAAC) on the status of health workers.
“Maraming healthcare workers ang pagod, umiiyak, naglalabas ng galit, o nagre-resign na sa trabaho. Nagdurugo ang puso namin, at humihingi kami ng patawad, sa mga pasyenteng kinakailangang tanggihan dahil di na kayang ma-admit,” she said.
(Many of our healthcare workers are tired, shedding tears, angry, or resigning. Our hearts are bleeding, and we are sorry, for patients whom we have to turn away because we cannot admit them anymore.)
The HPAAC is the Philippines’ largest group of health workers, and includes medical groups that called on the government to review its pandemic response. The group had said the country was “losing the battle” against COVID-19.
James was able to find a job in a small private hospital in their province. Though his salary is smaller than what he was getting from his previous job at a government facility, he takes consolation in not experiencing delays in compensation anymore.
Asked if he has plans to leave the country, James said, “If there will be better opportunity, why not?”
For many years, Filipino nurses have been leaving the country after failed attempts at fighting for higher wages and better working conditions.
According to the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), an entry-level registered nurse receives an average salary of P8,000 ($160.39) to P13,500 ($270.66) per month.
Registered nurses hired by private hospitals commonly receive an average salary of P9,757 ($195.62) a month. In government facilities, starting salary of nurses is at P33,500 ($671.64).
More than a year into the pandemic, the Philippines is still struggling to contain it with over 2 million of the population infected and more than 33,000 reported fatalities. On August 30, the Philippines saw its highest ever single-day tally of new COVID-19 cases at 22,366.
“Ang daming pangako, tapos hindi naman natutupad. Iyon ‘yung pattern nila: titingnan ito, aaralin ito. We are in a national health emergency situation, ang lahat ng kilos dapat mabilis. Ang bawat oras na sinasayang mo, bawat araw, it means the life of an individual,” said Maristela Abenojar, national president of the Filipino Nurses United.
(There have been many broken promises. That’s their pattern: they will look into this, they will study that. We are in a national health emergency situation, so every action should be swift. Every hour, every day that you waste can cost the life of an individual.) – Rappler.com
*Name has been changed for privacy
Duterte: May 'karapatan ang mga employer na tanggihan' ang mga hindi na-vaxx na aplikante. IPINAKILALA ni DUTERTE ANG OBLIGASYON SA BAKUNA NA WALANG ANUMANG BATAS AT LABAN SA KONSTITUSYON SA PAMAMAGITAN NG BLUNT FORCE NG LABOR MARKET SA PILIPINAS, ISANG PAMILIHAN NA HALOS NA: IT IS RUTH A NEO-FEUDAL ARBITRARY ALLOCATION MECHANISM OF WORCATION. MAS MAY DISKRIMINASYON ANG LUMAGOS SA PROBLEMA, SIYEMPRE. ALAM NI DUTERTE NA ANG SINABI NIYA AY MALI PA RIN: ANG MGA EMPLOYER SA PILIPINAS BAWAL MAG-DISCRIMINATE NG POSITIVE LAW, PUBLIC POLICY AT THE CONSTITUTION. LIMITADO ANG MANAGERIAL PREROGATIVE, KASAMA NG IBA PA NG PERSONAL NA PAGMAMAY-ARI NG PAGGAWA, ISANG SETTLE PRINCIPLE OF PHILIPPINES EMPLOYMENT LAW. PERO, BILANG MR. IMPUNITY, PWEDE NIYANG PAAYAAN ANG SARILI NIYA ANG GANITONG MALIIT NA DETALYE. ISA PANG PANLOLOKO ANG MGA PAGSUSULIT NG PCR: NGUNIT NAGPAPAKANYAG SIYA NA KAYA NIYA KAYA NIYA KUNDISYON ANG PAGGAMIT NG KARAPATAN SA ARI-ARIAN NG PAGGAWA SA PANLOLOKO. SIYA MISMONG PANLOLOKO AT HINDI MAS MAGANDA ANG KANYANG ANAK AT KAIBIGAN.
Duterte: Employers have 'right to refuse' unvaxxed applicants
Employers in the Philippines have the "right to refuse" employees who are not yet vaccinated against COVID-19, according to President Rodrigo Duterte.
"You have the right to refuse to accept as an employee somebody who is not vaccinated and would go and join the rest of the employees in the factory or whatever workplace you have," said Duterte in his weekly taped address to the public.
According to Duterte, he thinks it’s legal for employers to reject accept applicants not yet vaccinated. The Philippine president's remarks, however, contradict his Cabinet officials as well as a local law that prohibits making vaccinations a pre-condition for employment.
Read more: Philippines labour officials issue '13th month' pay guidelines
The country's Republic Act 11525, or the COVID-19 Vaccination Program Act of 2021, stipulates that "vaccine cards shall not be considered as an additional mandatory requirement for educational, employment, and other similar government transaction purposes."
The country's Department of Labour also ruled in the past that requiring vaccinations for employment has no legal basis.
"The requirement that an employee must be vaccinated has no basis in law. That means, it cannot be imposed by companies," said Labour Undersecretary Ana Dione in late October.
According to Dione, this also means that employers cannot terminate employees for refusing to have the jabs. The country has already permitted the return of unvaccinated workers to the workplace, and Labour Secretary Silvestre Bello III said the department will issue a compliance order to allow all workers to return to offices.
COVIDOCRACY MADE EMPLOYEES TOTALLY DEPENDENT FROM EMPLOYERS, NOT FROM THE GOVERNMENT, FOR SURVIVAL. THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS WHAT IS A REVOLUTION, THE EMPLOYERS DO NOT.
Work options for unvaxxed workers up to employers: DOLE
(File photo)
MANILA – Employees who are still unvaccinated against the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have options to be able to work and get paid, an official of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) said on Monday.
In a virtual forum, Labor Assistant Secretary Ma. Teresita Cucueco said this is possible through arrangements with their employers.
“If he/she has a work-from-home arrangement, he can work from home. but if he doesn't have it and he really needs to be onsite, he can work, right? But they have to be tested. Now, if they still refuse that and he/she has leave (credits), it will apply. If they don't have (leave credits) they would have to go to no work, no pay. But there are options. They would just need to be tested,” she said.
She added that the department continues to encourage workers to get the vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19).
“What we are saying here is you do have an option if you don't like (to get inoculated)... because if he doesn't want that, they can take the test regularly,” Cucueco said.
Earlier, the government said the vaccination of eligible employees who are doing on-site work in both the public and private sectors will be required in areas where there are sufficient vaccine supplies.
The Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases (IATF-EID), in Resolution No. 148-B, provides for the implementation of measures to increase demand for Covid-19 vaccinations but except when all the onsite employees/workers of an establishment are required under the Alert Level System Guidelines to be fully vaccinated.
It added that all partially vaccinated employees in the public and private sector tasked to do onsite work need not undergo regular reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test at their own expense, as long as their second dose is not yet due pursuant to the interval prescribed for the brand of vaccine received as first dose.
As for the requirement of regular RT-PCR (reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction) tests for purposes of onsite work, the IATF said its frequency shall be construed as that determined by the employer but which should be at least once every two weeks. (PNA)
ANG ORDINARY COURT SYSTEM AY HINDI LAMANG SARADO DAHIL SA PANDEMIC, KUNDI BORELY ACCESSIBLE NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA PILIPINAS. ANG NLRC AY ISANG LUBOS NA WALANG KWENTA AT WALANG PUNTOS NA INSTITUSYON, NA ANG PANGUNAHING LAYUNIN AY ILAYO ANG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA MGA ORDINARYONG KORTE, NA UMABAYA SILA SA ANUMANG ABUSO NG KARAPATAN AT KAPANGYARIHAN NG MGA EMPLOYER. HINDI NAGWATAS ANG PIYUDALISMO SA PILIPINAS, AT DAPAT ITO IPAGPALIT SA NWO LABOR SYSTEM NA HIGIT PA FEUDAL NA ANG NAG-EEXIST: ABSOLUTE FEUDALISM. ABSOLUTE FEUDALISM ANG TINAWAG NI BONG BONG MARCOS AT SARA DUTERTE NGAYONG DEMOKRASYA SA PILIPINAS.
‘Employers forcing workers to get vaccinated face legal action’
Mayen Jaymalin - The Philippine Star 
November 26, 2021 | 12:00am
MANILA, Philippines — Employers requiring their workers to get vaccinated or undergo swab tests face legal action, the country’s largest labor coalition warned on Wednesday.
In an interview with “The Chiefs” on Cignal TV’s One News channel, Nagkaisa chairman Sonny Matula said there are workers who intend to hale employers to court for forcing them to get inoculated.
“There are workers who came to us,” Matula said in Filipino about workers who plan to take legal action over their predicament with their employers. “If they are (gravely) affected, we can take the case to court.”
Since the government has made pronouncements in support of certain employers requiring vaccination among their workers, Matula said a class suit may be filed before the Supreme Court (SC).
They can petition the legality of the resolution issued by the Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases (IATF), which mandates vaccination for employees who perform on-site work, he said.
Even with the IATF resolution, no employer can require an employee to get vaccinated because the existing law only provides for voluntary vaccination, Matula added.
The labor leader said workers also have the option to file a complaint before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) or seek a voluntary arbitration case if they feel discriminated by employers for not meeting the vaccination requirement.
He maintained that the IATF resolution on mandatory vaccination for on-site workers is unreasonable considering that the country’s vaccination rate outside Metro Manila remains low at this time.
Even the option to undergo a swab test for those who refuse to get vaccinated is unreasonable as it will push many workers to hunger and debt, he said.
Matula said the government should also consider that there are a number of workers who refuse to get vaccinated because of their religious beliefs. “It is very important that we respect the (religious) beliefs of other people,” he said.
Labor Secretary Silvestre Bello said vaccination is not mandatory, but employers may also require workers to undergo swab test before they can be allowed entry to worksites.
“It’s a valid condition an employer can impose,” Bello said as he stressed that fewer workers are reluctant to get vaccinated at this time.
Citing how vaccine supply is sufficient for all workers, he urged them to get inoculated during the National Vaccination Days on Nov. 29 to Dec. 1.
Matula said labor unions are also encouraging workers to get vaccinated, but those who refuse should not be penalized.
DOLE open to complaints
Yesterday, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) assured the public it would look into complaints of discrimination or termination among workers on account of their being unvaccinated against COVID-19.
Speaking at the Laging Handa public briefing, Labor Assistant Secretary Ma. Teresa Cucueco stressed that no unvaccinated worker shall be terminated despite the policy requiring inoculation for on-site employees.
Cucueco said workers may go to the nearest DOLE regional or provincial office to file a complaint.
She said the DOLE will check the company’s compliance with the IATF resolution on vaccination requirements for on-site workers.
However, workers cannot be compelled to get vaccinated if they do not want to, she stressed.
The labor official said the DOLE is no longer coming out with new guidelines because the IATF resolution is already clear on the matter.
She noted the DOLE has received reports from establishments on the sudden surge in the number of workers getting vaccinated since the issuance of the IATF resolution.
Meanwhile, as the economy starts to reopen, the DOLE reported that more workers nationwide affected by the disruption caused by the pandemic are now opting to resign and not go back to their previous employment.
The phenomenon is global amid the pandemic and has been called the “great resignation.” Bello said the Bureau of Local Employment is keeping track of the dawning of this trend in the country.
“It’s really happening, that there are workers who, if given the opportunity, I think they would opt to be businessmen or engage even in small-time business rather than go back to employment where you know the security there is not ensured,” Bello said in an interview with The Chiefs.
ANG DUTERTE GOVERMENT AY DE FACTO NA NAGPAPATAWAD NG ILLEGALLY VACCINATION PASSPORTS SA PAMAMAGITAN NG PAHAYAG SA MGA EMPLOYER NA HUMINGI NG VACCINATION CARDS, NA NAGLALAMAN NG HIGHLY SENSITIVE PERSONAL DATA NA DAPAT "PROTECTED" NG PHILIPPINES PRIVACY OF COVERATION, AND INCREACY COVER. ANG MGA TAONG PILIPINAS NA MAY POISONOUS COVID GENIC THERAPY SHOTS, NA ANG LAYUNIN AY HINDI COVID, KUNDI ANG LEGALIZED NA PAGPAPATAY SA MGA PILIPINO, SA KANILANG PAMILYA AT SA KANILANG MGA ANAK. ITUTULOY NI BONG BONG MARCOS AT SARA DUTERTE ANG UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ILLEGAL, CRIMINAL MISSION NA ITO NG DUTERTE GOVERNMENT.
Philippines: The Department of Labor and Employment issues guidelines on the administration of COVID-19 vaccines in the workplace
DUTERTE, SA PAMAMAGITAN NG PAGPAPATAYA SA MGA EMPLOYER NG PILIPINAS NA MAGTURI NG MGA VACCINATION CARDS, AY NAGPILALA NG PRIVATE COVIDOCRACY NG MGA EMPLOYER: PINAHAYAGAN NILA ANG SARILI NILA NA GAWIN ANG HINDI PINAPAHAYAG NA GAWIN NG GOBYERNO. LAHAT AY GINAGAWA NILA ANG ANUMANG LEGAL AT ILLEGAL PARA MAIWASAN ANG KONSTITUSYON AT ANG TINATAYANG JURISPRUDENCE NG SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES.
'No vaccine, no ride' on public transport panned as impractical, violative of rights
January 12, 2022 | 11:48am
Passengers
pictured at Tandang Sora Jeep Terminal in Visayas Avenue, Quezon City
on Oct. 19, 2021. The Department of Transportation is pushing for an
increase in passenger capacity of public utility vehicles following the
downgrading of Metro Manila's COVID-19 alert level from 4 to 3.
The STAR / Michael Varcas
MANILA, Philippines (Updated 1:58 p.m.) — Transportation Secretary Arthur Tugade has ordered a "no vaccination, no ride" policy on public transportation throughout Metro Manila, which transport groups say violates Filipinos' right to mobility and skirts responsibility for vaccination.
This comes after Metro Manila's mayors unanimously agreed to restrict the mobility of unvaccinated people in the capital region. A number of local governments have already passed ordinances banning the unvaccinated from entering malls and establishments in their localities.
The Department of Transportation said the policy's implementation will be "initially in the National Capital Region" while Alert Level 3 or higher remains in effect pending the decision of the coronavirus task force.
Tugade said the DO takes effect immediately after publication in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation, and the submission of a copy with the Office of the National Administrative Register, U.P. Law Center.
“All concerned attached agencies and sectoral offices of DOTr are directed to ensure that operators of public transportation shall allow access or issue tickets only to ‘fully vaccinated persons’ as evidenced by a physical or digital copy of an LGU (local government unit)-issued vaccine card, or any IATF-prescribed document, with a valid government-issued ID with picture and address,” the DOTr department order read.
'Cumbersome for transport workers, commuters'
According to the DO, a person is considered fully vaccinated against COVID-19 two weeks after receiving their second dose in a two-dose vaccination series, such as with the Pfizer or Moderna brand of vaccines, or two weeks after a single-dose vaccine such as with Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen vaccine.
Sought for comment, The Passenger Forum convenor Primo Morillo told Philstar.com in a phone call that while the commuter advocacy group is pro-vaccine, vaccine access remains the main issue that the department order fails to address.
"We know we aren't efficient with our vaccine rollout, [so] it’s hard to do given the vaccines aren’t readily available. How are you going to do that in a jeep where they don’t have doctors and they’re not terminal-to-terminal? People will be rushing, will you be checking them one by one?" he said in mixed Filipino and English.
"For the longest time, they couldn’t even implement social distancing for practical reasons...This will only make it difficult for commuters as well as drivers and conductors even though in reality, they do not have a quick and effective way to identify who is fully vaccinated and who is not."
As of this writing, only 67.8 percent of Metro Manila residents are fully vaccinated.
"How does the DOTr think of this? It will cause more problems, and it doesn’t address the root reason why many are not getting vaccinated, which is access. By this time, they should be able to map who is getting vaccinated and who is not...Before the government can think of these things, we should be ensuring vaccines are available first. Why aren’t they going house to house to vaccinate for example?"
In a text message, Pagkakaisa ng Manggagawa sa Transportasyon convenor Dante Lagman told Philstar.com that the policy's implementation "would be too cumbersome for public transport workers who actually to don’t have access to vaccinated persons database."
"It has no legal basis to stand on and, in fact, violates existing laws...After two years, we should already be able to 'live with COVID', if only the health system was strengthened enough to accommodate patients and home care introduced extensively," he said.
"If unvaccinated workers are not allowed on public transport to get to work then it is tantamount to being a requirement for work."
The COVID-19 Vaccination Program Act of 2021 or Republic Act No. 11525 provides that vaccine cards shall not be considered as an additional mandatory requirement for educational and employment purposes.
The pandemic task force has, however, made it policy to require vaccination for on-site work in certain industries and for unvaccinated workers to take regular RT-PCR tests at their own expense.
‘Violation of the right to mobility'
In a statement, Partido Lakas ng Masa presidential aspirant and labor leader Leody de Guzman called the policy an "explicit coercion of the masses," saying that the resurgence in coronavirus cases came after the national government "eased all restrictions to increase the consumption of the people at Christmas as a solution to revive businesses and profits."
De Guzman called on the Duterte administration to accelerate and expand the vaccination drive by providing incentives for hesitant Filipinos to get vaccinated.
"One solution is to provide paid leaves by the private and public sectors to their workers. House-to-house vaccinations may also be considered, as some LGUs have done in the distribution of aid," he said in Filipino.
"It is infuriating that for two years now, the Duterte regime has not responded to these calls properly," he said.
PLM vice presidential bet Walden Bello slammed the policy as being too tight, saying it is better to just provide financial incentives for those who complete the COVID-19 vaccine than to be strict.
"Yes, [vaccine] certificates should be checked, but segregation, not repression is the answer, as in the case of restaurants. Unvaccinated people should be able to ride buses and public transportation specifically designated for them, just as in restaurants," he told reporters in a Viber message.
"There is already a negative incentive here, since [unvaccinated] people have to wait longer for special buses, but it is not draconian and repressive."
Under the Order, the department said that violations of the policy are considered violations of applicable general safety and health provisions under any concession or service agreements, authority or permits to operate of public transportation, and other similar instruments.
"That’s what’s confusing about it because that means Tugade is worse than the former generals in the IATF. Before they said they’d just tell [violators] to go home. This time there’s an actual violation," Morillo said.
"Not allowing them in malls, that’s not essential. But commuting? That’s so essential. If it’s debatable with going to malls, this time, there’s really a violation of the right to mobility."
The Department Order also exempts just two groups from the policy, namely:
- Persons with medical conditions that prevent their full COVID-19 vaccination as shown by a duly-signed medical certificate with the name and contact details of their doctor.
- Persons who will buy essential goods and services, such as but not limited to food, water, medicine, medical devices, public utilities, energy, work, and medical and dental necessities, as shown by a duly issued barangay health pass or other proof to justify the travel.
"We are exempted as consumers, but we are not exempted as workers. That just means you can buy, you can go out if you want to spend, but not if you want to work and earn. Both of those are important to the economy and to the lives of people," Morillo said.
"While the right to travel may be infringed under circumstances such as those existing now, to us, it is simply diverting blame away from the government who has failed to take us to the new normal," Lagman added.
DoTr: No discrimination
At a press briefing later Wednesday, Transportation Undersecretary Artemio Tuazon Jr., who represents the DOTr before the IATF, said that he expected the policy to be fully effective by next Monday to give passengers time to prepare. He added, however, that it was "continually being implemented today."
"I don’t think there will be discrimination...we are not limiting their right to transportation, but they will not be able to use public transportation. They have other means of transportation," he said when asked about the criticisms over the policy.
Asked how the DOTr can operationalize the policy, Tuazon said that the burden of the policy is on drivers and operators who will have to check if each passenger is able to present a vaccination card before allowing them to board.
According to Tuazon, enforcers will "work together" to implement the policy in road transportation while the PNP and its Highway Patrol Group has already been asked to help.
He said that the department was looking at "points of checking" but clarified that these are "not necessarily checkpoints."
Responding to critics, Transportation spokesperson Goddess Libiran said: “It is more anti-poor and anti-life if our countrymen are infected and infect others because they are not vaccinated.”
"Worse, if they infect our public transport personnel, it will be more dangerous and more people will be affected. We want to prevent a repeat of the public transport shutdown...We are doing everything we can to maintain and keep our public transport operations safe and running," she told reporters in a Viber message.
According to data from the Japan International Cooperation Agency, though, around 71% of households in Metro Manila do not own private vehicles and have to rely on public transportation.
"They seem to have forgotten that the reason people take public transport is because they have no choice, they do not have their own vehicles," Morillo said in Filipino.
"It is true that others already use a bicycle but first, not everyone has the ability to buy or even use it. Besides not all areas have been reached by bike lanes. It is obvious that our transport officials do not experience the difficulty of commuting and other problems of the simple passenger." — with a report from James Relativo
ANG MGA PANGAKO NG ISANG PAMILYA NG MGA SINUNGALING AT MANLOLOKO. MAGPAPAKILALA SIYA NG MARTIAL LAW NA HINDI ITO TAWAGIN AT API ANG PILIPINAS NG MILITARY COVIDOCRACY NA LALAKI NA MAHALO SA DUTERTE.
Marcos rules out martial law
Presidential aspirant Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. PHOTO BY ENRIQUE AGCAOILI
Read this in The Manila Times digital edition.
Presidential candidate Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. gave assurances that he will not declare martial law if he wins in the elections in May.
In an interview with DZRJ radio that aired Tuesday night, Marcos said that martial law should only be used in an "extreme and emergency situation" such as war.
"I don't see it happening in the near future. I don't see that there is going to be that necessity in the near future," he said when asked if he will commit to not declaring martial law if he becomes president.
The former senator said that declaring martial law or engaging in military confrontation is "something we will like to avoid as much as we can."
"We will certainly do everything we can to avoid getting into that situation because it is an extreme and an emergency situation that we really do not want to be involved considering especially that we are trying to recover from the pandemic, we are trying to rebuild our economy and refocus all our energy so that the Filipinos can go back to work, Filipinos can once again have a good job where they can feed their families. These are the basic elements that we are trying to achieve," he said.
"So being involved in some kind of war or in some kind of confrontation, military confrontation would be highly counterproductive. So that is something that we would like to avoid as much as we can," he added.
Marcos said that martial law, which was imposed by his father when he was president, should be kept as an extreme option.
"Martial law is needed when you are at war. If we somehow find ourselves at war — and I sincerely pray and hope that it never happens — then you'll have to institute martial law," Marcos said, citing Ukraine's decision to declare martial law to defend its territory from Russia's invasion.
"Let us look at the situation going on right now between Russia and Ukraine. Once the enemy forces entered into the borders of Ukraine, they declared martial law. That's a necessity. But it only comes up when we are at war," he explained.
"That is why despite all the criticisms of martial law, it remains in the Constitution in the event that war is declared upon us or we are somehow embroiled in a war and we will need to institute martial law," Marcos added.
President Ferdinand Marcos Sr., Bongbong's father, placed the country under martial law in 1972 and lifted it in 1981.
Under Article 7, Section 18 of the Constitution, martial law may be declared in the Philippines or any part thereof in cases of an invasion or rebellion when public safety requires it.
The President shall submit a report in person or in writing to Congress within 48 hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
The Congress, voting jointly, may revoke such proclamation or suspension by a majority vote.
TINITINGNAN NG INTERNATIONAL COVIDOCRACY ANG PILIPINAS BILANG HALIMBAWA NA DAPAT SUNDIN PARA SA LAHAT NG DEVELOPING COUNTRIES SA NWO, TULAD NG PAGTINGIN NILA SA ITALY BILANG MODELO NG NWO PARA SA MGA DEVELOPED COUNTRIES. TOTOO NA WALANG MAG-AARI PA SA PILIPINAS, PERO WALANG MASAYA: IT will be the REIGN OF IMPUNISHABLE MURDER. ITO ANG MISYON NI BONG BONG MARCOS AT NI SARA DUTERTE.
So how would Marcos Jr. explain martial law to the youth?
A video of President Ferdinand Marcos declaring martial law in 1972 is one of the many images that people can access Martial Law Museum of the Ateneo de Manila University (martiallawmuseum.ph).
MANILA, Philippines — Presidential candidate Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. found himself faced with this question in an interview with CNN Philippines that aired on Tuesday: How would you explain to the youth of today the martial law era under his father, Ferdinand Sr.
“I think the best people who can explain it to them are the relatives who went through it,” Marcos Jr. said. “We have explained it. We have been explaining it for 40 years already, and I explain it by saying that the situation at that time was dire. We were fighting war on two fronts.”
ADVERTISEMENT
He was referring to the Moro “secessionist movement” in Mindanao and the “dissident” countryside rebellion of the New People’s Army, the fighting component of the Communist Party of the Philippines.
“These were people who wanted to bring down the government and the government had to defend itself. So that was my understanding. That’s always been my understanding,” Marcos said.
Among the issues hounding his presidential bid is his father’s martial law regime and the reported human rights violations that happened under it.
According to the Human Rights Violations Victims’ Memorial Commission (HRVVMC), 11,103 people had fallen victims to rights violations during the Marcos Sr. dictatorship.
But the 11,103 human rights victims were only those with approved claims for compensation under the Human Rights Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013.
According to Amnesty International (AI), 107,200 people were killed, tortured, and imprisoned during the martial law years.
RELATED STORIES
Bongbong Marcos admires father’s ‘love for country’
Marcos’ martial law: Golden age for corruption, abuses
BONG BONG MARCOS AY MAGPAPAKILALA MULI SA MARTIAL LAW SA PILIPINAS BAGO NGAYONG AUTUMN, BAKA SA IBANG PANGALAN: YUNG COVIDOCRACY. NAPATUNAYAN NA NG MGA PILIPINAS NA KAHIT ISANG ISANG ISANG SOLUSYON ANG PROBLEMA, MAS MABUTI NA ANG PANGULO AT BIBIE AY MAHANDA NA ANG MGA BAHON. GAANO MAN AY DAPAT IPAKITA NG MAMAYANG PILIPINAS NA HANDA NITO NA MULI. ANG KATUTURAN NG THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES NA IBINIGAY NG NWO AT NG COVIDOCRACY PRELIMINARY TO ITO AY HINDI MATANGGAP PARA SA ANUMANG DEVELOPING COUNTRY.
In the Philippines, presidential frontrunner Bongbong seeks to rebrand Marcos’ brutal legacy
Key Points
- Philippine presidential frontrunner Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has stuck to an evocative message of rekindling the idea of former greatness.
- Over 50% of Filipinos eligible to vote are between the ages of 18 and 41, and many have no memories of the brutal regime of his father, the long-time dictator Ferdinand Marcos.
- The younger Marcos, better known as Bongbong, has kept a low profile in the mainstream media, instead running a sophisticated social media campaign with millions of followers.
watch now
For a significant portion of Filipinos voting for the presidential election in the Philippines, the memories of dictator Ferdinand Marcos’ brutal and corrupt reign have not been erased.
In fact, they don’t even exist — because a majority of the electorate were either not born or were too young to remember that era.
Over 50% of Filipinos eligible to vote on Monday’s election are between the ages of 18 and 41, according to the Commission on Elections as quoted by the local media.
Ferdinand Marcos Sr. ruled with an iron fist for nearly two decades until 1986, a period marked by great poverty, unemployment and a debt crisis. Arbitrary arrests, disappearances and alleged torture during his rule provoked a mass uprising, which came to be known as the People’s Power revolution.
It eventually forced him to flee to Hawaii, where he died in 1989.
Today, his son Ferdinand Romualdez Marcos Jr., 64, is the frontrunner to replace outgoing President Rodrigo Duterte and reclaim the presidency for the Marcos family. Bongbong, as he is popularly known, was 15 when his father imposed martial law in the Philippines in 1972.
Marcos
Jr seen here addressing a rally in suburban Manila in April. The Marcos
name has lost its menace for a new generation of Filipinos which has
grown up with no memory of the brutal martial law era of the last
century.
Jam Sta Rosa | Afp | Getty Images
The younger Marcos has spent long years in politics. He has served as vice governor, governor and congressman in the family stronghold of Ilocos Norte in the north of the country since the 1980s. His mother Imelda Marcos, 92, ran for president twice and lost in the 1990s.
Her infamous 3,000-pair shoe collection — discovered when protesters stormed the presidential palace in the 1986 uprising — is now housed in a Manila museum. But today, public disillusionment with successive democratic governments seems to have displaced the excesses of the Marcos regime in public consciousness.
Social media star who rarely meets journalists
The Marcos name today is ringed by a kind of romanticism, a vintage it has acquired from the days when, as the narrative goes, the Philippines used to matter in world affairs. Bongbong, whose slogan is “Together we shall rise again,” has stuck to an evocative message of rekindling the idea of former greatness.
His father ran a similar campaign, promising to make the Philippines “great again.” But unlike his father, the younger Marcos has kept a low profile in the mainstream media, instead running a sophisticated social media campaign with millions of followers.
He is a popular presence on Chinese media app TikTok, where he posts reviews and presents a storyline of his family which once enjoyed a Kennedy-like mystique.
He often invokes his family name at campaign rallies but remains wary of exposing himself to the vagaries of political debate.
Among the 10 candidates in the race, Marcos Jr. was the only one to skip the two televised debates held by the government’s Commission on Elections. Late in April, he rejected a one-on-one debate with his closest rival Leni Robredo, the current vice president. He also refused to attend a debate hosted by CNN in the Philippines.
A
supporter flashes the peace sign, the campaign symbol of Ferdinand
“Bongbong” Marcos Jr., during his last campaign rally before the
election on May 07, 2022 in Paranaque, Metro Manila, Philippines.
Ezra Acayan | Getty Images News | Getty Images
He has rarely given media interviews and refuses to answer shouted questions from journalists at rallies. It is a strategy he has honed on the back of a narrow loss to Robredo, who defeated him during the 2016 vice-presidential race. At that time, his father’s corrupt and brutal legacy was at the front-and-center of the opposition’s campaign.
watch now
It helps that Duterte is an ally. He has helped the country reimagine the Marcos legacy.
In 2016, the remains of Marcos Sr. were buried at the national cemetery, the Philippines’ equivalent of Arlington National Cemetery.
Treading a fine line between China and the U.S.
Marcos Jr. has maintained a commanding lead over Robredo throughout the presidential campaign.
In the latest opinion poll released this week, the late dictator’s son polled at 56% while support for Robredo was at a distant 23%.
If he wins, Bongbong is expected to walk a fine line between the U.S. and China.
watch now
The Philippines was a traditional military ally of the U.S. but after his presidential election in 2016, Duterte moved closer to China and declared his country’s “separation” from the U.S.
Addressing a virtual forum in March, Marcos Jr. said the Philippines shared a “special relationship” with the U.S.
“Military deals are advantageous to both countries,” he said, adding that the U.S. could do “many things” to help the Philippines. But it remains to be seen if the younger Marcos will risk upsetting Beijing by drawing closer to the U.S..
Notably, he has not said much on the economy. Instead, he has used vague phrases such as “national unity” and implied that his policies would continue to back Duterte’s infrastructure-based “Build, Build, Build” public works plan.
ANG GINAWA NG DUTERTE GOVERNMENT PARA SA BAYAN NG PILIPINAS SA 7 YEARS, GINAWA NG PILIPINO SA 7 DAYS. PATULOY ANG PANLOLOKO SA MATATANGI NA LEVEL KINA BONG BONG MARCOS AT SARA DUTERTE AT KANILANG OLIGARCH FINANCIERS.
Can Duterte fix agrarian reform?
19 Junio 2016
Author(s):
Eduardo Climaco Tadem
Source:
Language of the news reported:
inglés
THE DESIGNATION by incoming President Rodrigo Duterte of Rafael “Ka Paeng” Mariano as his secretary of agrarian reform is welcome news for the Filipino peasantry, farmworkers and the rural poor. Mariano, born into a poor peasant family in Nueva Ecija, is chair of Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas and former Anakpawis party-list representative.
He will be the first Cabinet member to come from the peasant class, who has a long history of activism on behalf of the marginalized rural masses. Mariano immediately called for a review of the “antifarmer decisions” of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and announced his priority in completing the long delayed redistribution of thousands of hectares of the Cojuangco-Aquino’s Hacienda Luisita, the Araneta estates in Bulacan and the Aguinaldo landholdings in Cavite.
Political will crucial
In implementing a contentious social justice program such as agrarian reform, the political will of the sitting President is crucial. The deficit here, however, has been appalling. Outgoing President Aquino’s public stance and the absence of an agrarian reform agenda in his major policy announcements reveal no sympathy, interest and understanding of agrarian reform’s role in the country’s overall socioeconomic, political and cultural development.
Ultimately, this self-indulgent and antireform mindset, common to all Philippine Presidents, have spelled the doom of agrarian reform.
The question is whether Duterte, by his self-ascribed Left persona and avowed socialist sympathies, would reverse the long-standing presidential pattern of ignoring agrarian reform’s social justice principles and stand firmly on the side of the long-suffering Filipino rural masses.
28th year of Carp
This June, the Philippine government’s agrarian reform law reached its 28th year of implementation with completion nowhere in sight. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) and its extension, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension with Reforms (Carper) had provisions that were generally favorable to their intended beneficiaries. But Carp and Carper were also essentially the result of a compromise between pro and antiagrarian reform blocs in Congress and thus also contained provisions, inserted by antireform and landowner lobbyists, that are considered legal loopholes.
CARP, enacted in 1988, was an improvement over previous legislation in that it covered all agricultural lands and the entire rural landless labor force. But it was hobbled by antipeasant and prolandlord provisions that allowed mere regulation of existing tenurial forms, including the nefarious stock distribution option and leaseback agreements, provided for an omnibus list of exemptions, established “fair market value” for landowner compensation, created a payment amortization scheme that was unfavorable for beneficiaries, set a high retention limit that could reach 14 hectares, mandated a long period of implementation, and generally ignored the role of beneficiaries and civil society groups in seeing the program through.
Carper’s record
Carper, on the other hand, also contained provisions that favored beneficiaries, such as the indefeasibility of awarded beneficiary lands, recognition of usufruct rights of beneficiaries, a grace period for amortization payments, speeding up the process of awarding lands, removal of the stock-distribution option, disallowing the conversion of irrigable and irrigated lands, automatic coverage of lands targeted for conversion pending for at least five years, reinstating compulsory acquisition and voluntary offers-of-sale as main redistribution modes, and recognition of women farmers as beneficiaries.
‘Killer amendment’
Despite all these gains, antireform legislators still managed to insert a “killer amendment” that allowed landowners to determine who would be beneficiaries and who would be excluded from the program. Other objectionable provisions are those expanding the list of exempted lands, allowing local governments to acquire agricultural lands beyond the 5-ha retention limit and the deprioritization of seasonal and other nonregular farmworkers as qualified beneficiaries.
Major CARP constraints, such as landlord compensation based on market value and the beneficiary payment formula based on gross production, have been retained.
According to the peasant organization Katarungan, the DAR has accomplished only 18 percent of its 2015 target for land distribution, “the lowest performance in the history of CARP implementation.”
In five years under the Aquino administration, less than 20 percent of the goal for land distribution has been accomplished. As of December 2015, there remained a balance of about 477,000 ha of undistributed lands while 1 million ha of agricultural lands inexplicably vanished from the public records. To camouflage its lackluster performance, the DAR has resorted to merely reporting the issuances of notices of coverage as accomplishments while keeping from public view the more essential indicators of certificates of land ownership awards (CLOAs) and, even more crucial, emancipation patents (EPs).
Snail-paced implementation
Indeed, land distribution under the Aquino administration has been moving at a snail’s pace
—marked by a consistent and chronic failure to meet annual targets, the
misrepresentation of performance indicators and lack of political
commitment by the DAR leadership under Secretary Virgilio de los Reyes.
In the distribution of privately owned and/or privately controlled
landholdings, which constitute the heart and soul of agrarian reform,
the implementation of Carp and Carper has been found to be most wanting
and negligent.
Despite favorable judicial decisions, the redistribution of Hacienda Luisita lands has been slow and bureaucratic with harassments of worker-beneficiaries continuing. Worse, between 80 and 90 percent of the hacienda’s distributed lands have been taken over by nonfarming ariendadors (capitalist-financiers) due to the failure of government to provide the required support services.
Landowner resistance
Chronic landowner resistance continues to plague the program with numerous reports of farmers being evicted, harassed, intimidated and killed by landlords and hired goons. Land grabbing and land-use conversions are intensifying even in landholdings that have been covered for distribution.
These converted and grabbed lands are often misappropriated for nonagricultural purposes, such as real estate development, tourism, mining and special economic zones by foreign and domestic land speculators.
Property developers
Leading these antireform initiatives are influential politicians, local governments and giant property developers. In many instances, powerful families have taken control over public lands and have resisted (sometimes violently) their distribution to qualified beneficiaries.
Rent-seeking property developers pose a counterproductive and destructive role by their expansion into the Philippine countryside, which encourages the conversion by local government units of agricultural lands for commercial purposes. This is exemplified by the land conflict in Porac, Pampanga, where Ayala Land is developing a P75-billion 1,125-ha mixed-use commercial, recreational and high-end residential estate.
The “Alviera” project was facilitated by the exemption from agrarian reform coverage and conversion of 750 ha of Hacienda Dolores to commercial use. The conflict has resulted in “the unsolved killings of two Hacienda Dolores farmers, the jailing of a village chief, the eviction of 300 farmers and the destruction of their crops and huts, and the denial of access to a road traversing through Alviera property that leads to Aeta villages and farms.”
Protest marches
In April, several hundred farmers marched for 122 kilometers from Sariaya, Quezon to Manila. Organized by Katarungan and its NGO support group, RightsNet, the farmers were demanding the full implementation of a meaningful agrarian reform program, protection for the agricultural sector, food sovereignty and return to farmers of the coco levy fund. The Sariaya farmers lament the cancellation of CLOAs and EPs of 3,781 farmer-families covering 4,800 ha.
This was just one of the many long protest marches undertaken over the years by restive Filipino peasants and farmworkers frustrated and indignant over the poor track record of government in agrarian reform.
Special economic zones
Equally destructive of agriculture and family farms are the proliferation in almost all regions of the country of special economic zones, such as the controversial Aurora Pacific Zone and Freeport Authority, displacing farms and peasant households and establishing enclaves that have little or no backward and forward linkages with rural communities.
Mining activities, on the other hand, impact negatively on farming communities (including indigenous peoples) and on the agricultural environment. As lawyer Christian Monsod pointed out: “Mining activities are usually located in rural and mountainous areas and can affect farmlands, rivers and shorelines, where the poorest of the poor are located.”
Worse, land grabs by large mining companies are taking place, such as the 508-ha farmlands in Calatagan, Batangas, tilled by 323 farmers and covered by 818 EPs.
The Aquino administration, like all previous administrations, via its inaction on abuses and its neoliberal economic policies of indiscriminately welcoming any and all forms of investment regardless of the social consequences, is party to and similarly accountable for this uncontrolled pattern of dispossession and human rights violations triggered by land speculations gone berserk.
Inadequate support services
The neglect by government agencies led by the DAR and the Department of Agriculture to provide timely and adequate support services to agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) have prevented the latter from becoming economically viable producers and jeopardizing whatever land distribution may have accomplished. Only 44 percent of agrarian reform beneficiaries have had access to support services packages with 27 percent of them in so-called agrarian reform communities (ARCs).
As with other farmers, a majority of ARBs source their credit from loan sharks,who charge usurious interest rates. ARBs in commercial farms and plantations are forced to rely on former landowners and corporations for support services. In Mindanao, reformed areas and ARB ownership of lands have been rendered meaningless due to onerous contracts, leaseback and lopsided growership and production arrangements, leading eventually to farmer bankruptcies.
Property rights
The reasons for Carp and Carper’s failures cannot be traced, as a University of the Philippines Economics professor argues, to the absence of a fully functioning property rights regime “due to strictures on the sale (and rental) of reformed lands and the land ownership ceiling.” Under conditions of a protocapitalist system where political and other noneconomic factors play dominant roles, where rural elites are predatory in character and where rent-seeking financial speculation through aggressive property developers rules the day, it would be the height of naiveté to dream of a fully functioning property-rights regime.
Even today, the absence of such a regime has not prevented “investors” from invoking the “laws” of the market by encroaching on land reform areas and harassing and dislocating legitimate ARBs and other farming communities. All in the name of productivity, efficiency and optimum land utilization.
Ayala Land, through its president for international sales, Thomas Mirasol, candidly admitted that the lack of a “land use blueprint by a regulatory body … has enabled it to acquire large plots of land and develop them according to its own plan and design” (Business Times. May 6, 2014). Mirasol added that the absence of a land regulatory framework “has been great for Ayala Land,” which uses its resources to develop “big tracts of land” and thus “become the government; (that) control and manage everything (and become de facto) mayors and the governors of the communities that (Ayala) develops.”
On the other hand, an “efficiently managed” property rights regime will simply open wide the floodgates of the rural areas to modern versions of the unlamented landlord class and reintroduce the oppressive and exploitative social relations that necessitated a land reform program in the first place. It is precisely this elite-biased property rights regime in the rural sector that a truly just and meaningful agrarian reform seeks to prevent and where it exists, to overturn.
Recommendations
After 28 years of implementation of a program meant to emancipate the Filipino peasantry from serf-like servitude to elite landowning interests, the agrarian reform goal remains elusive with final resolution nowhere on the horizon. To start the process of fixing this dismal state, the incoming administration must immediately take the following steps:
First, extend the land distribution component of agrarian reform since it is obvious that the DAR will be unable to complete this by June 30.
Second, provide that all unpaid amortizations of farmers be condoned and all future land distribution be made free of cost to the beneficiaries.
Third, constitute a high level independent commission of upright and credible citizens with legal powers to evaluate and audit the performance of the DAR, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and LandBank, and investigate all circumventions of coverage and human rights violations against farmers and farmworkers, their leaders and supporters.
Lastly, the goal of equitable land redistribution must be made a permanent feature of the state’s policy agenda. Land redistribution is a continuing process that will necessarily have to be resorted to time and again in order to assure that there is no backtracking on the agrarian reform agenda.
Social justice has no beginning and no end.
(Eduardo Climaco Tadem, Ph.D., was one of the founders of the Congress for a People’s Agrarian Reform in 1988 and coconvenor of the People’s Agrarian Reform Congress in 2014. He is currently president of Freedom from Debt Coalition and professorial lecturer in Asian Studies, University of the Philippines Diliman.)
Lee más contenido como éste
- DAR gives land titles to farmers in Bago City
- Philippine peasants fight for land 30 years after reform
- Land reform bill certified as priority- Philippines
- 'Bungkalan' caused by unaddressed social injustice, land rights group says
- DAR conducts door-to-door distribution of land ownership certificates to agrarian reform beneficiaries
Copyright © Fuente (mencionado anteriormente). Todos los derechos reservados. El Land Portal distribuye materiales sin el permiso del propietario de los derechos de autor basado en la doctrina del "uso justo" de los derechos de autor, lo que significa que publicamos artÃculos de noticias con fines informativos y no comerciales. Si usted es el propietario del artÃculo o informe y desea que se elimine, contáctenos a hello@landportal.info (link sends e-mail) y eliminaremos la publicación de inmediato.
Varias noticias relacionadas con la gobernanza de la tierra se publican
en el Land Portal cada dÃa por los usuarios del Land Portal, de diversas
fuentes, como organizaciones de noticias y otras instituciones e
individuos, que representan una diversidad de posiciones en cada tema.
El derecho de autor reside en la fuente del artÃculo; La Fundación Land
Portal no tiene el derecho legal de editar o corregir el artÃculo, y la
Fundación tampoco espalda sus contenidos. Para hacer correcciones o
pedir permiso para volver a publicar u otro uso autorizado de este
material, por favor comunÃquese con el propietario de los derechos de
autor.
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)