In the previous years, the election period starts in February, but it comes a month earlier this year. This means rules and regulations under Section 3 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC) commences on January 10, which is 30 days in advance.

From January 10 to June 8, 2016, these following acts are prohibited:

•    Suspension of elective local officials;
•    bearing firearms and other deadly weapons, unless authorized by the Comelec, this is also referred to as the gun ban;
•    organization of reaction forces, strike forces, etc;
•    alteration of territory of a precinct, or the establishment of a new precinct;
•    use of security personnel/bodyguards by candidates, unless authorized by the Comelec;
•    transfer or movement of officers and employees in the civil service.

If one of these prohibitions is violated, it can be a ground for disqualification in case the offender is running for an elective public office.

The prohibited acts can be found under Section 261 of the Omnibus Election Code:

“Sec. 261. Prohibited Acts. - The following shall be guilty of an election offense:

a. Vote-buying and vote-selling.
1.      Any person who gives, offers or promises money or anything of value, gives or promises any office or employment, franchise or grant, public or private, or makes or offers to make an expenditure, directly or indirectly, or cause an expenditure to be made to any person, association, corporation, entity, or community in order to induce anyone or the public in general to vote for or against any candidate or withhold his vote in the election, or to vote for or against any aspirant for the nomination or choice of a candidate in a convention or similar selection process of a political party.

2.     Any person, association, corporation, group or community who solicits or receives, directly or indirectly, any expenditure or promise of any office or employment, public or private, for any of the foregoing considerations.
b.    Conspiracy to bribe voters. - Two or more persons, whether candidates or not, who come to an agreement concerning the commission of any violation of paragraph (a) of this section and decide to commit it.

c.    Wagering upon result of election. - Any person who bets or wagers upon the outcome of, or any contingency connected with an election. Any money or thing of value or deposit of money or thing of value situated anywhere in the Philippines put as such bet or wager shall be forfeited to the government.

 d.   Coercion of subordinates.

1.    Any public officer, or any officer of any public or private corporation or association, or any head, superior, or administrator of any religious organization, or any employer or land-owner who coerces or intimidates or compels, or in any manner influence, directly or indirectly, any of his subordinates or members or parishioners or employees or house helpers, tenants, overseers, farm helpers, tillers, or lease holders to aid, campaign or vote for or against any candidate or any aspirant for the nomination or selection of candidates.

2.    Any public officer or any officer of any commercial, industrial, agricultural, economic or social enterprise or public or private corporation or association, or any head, superior or administrator of any religious organization, or any employer or landowner who dismisses or threatens to dismiss, punishes or threatens to punish be reducing his salary, wage or compensation, or by demotion, transfer, suspension, separation, excommunication, ejectment, or causing him annoyance in the performance of his job or in his membership, any subordinate member or affiliate, parishioner, employee or house helper, tenant, overseer, farm helper, tiller, or lease holder, for disobeying or not complying with any of the acts ordered by the former to aid, campaign or vote for or against any candidate, or any aspirant for the nomination or selection of candidates.

e. Threats, intimidation, terrorism, use of fraudulent device or other forms of coercion. - Any person who, directly or indirectly, threatens, intimidates or actually causes, inflicts or produces any violence, injury, punishment, damage, loss or disadvantage upon any person or persons or that of the immediate members of his family, his honor or property, or uses any fraudulent device or scheme to compel or induce the registration or refraining from registration of any voter, or the participation in a campaign or refraining or desistance from any campaign, or the casting of any vote or omission to vote, or any promise of such registration, campaign, vote, or omission therefrom.

f. Coercion of election officials and employees. - Any person who, directly or indirectly, threatens, intimidates, terrorizes or coerces any election official or employee in the performance of his election functions or duties.”

The detailed list of prohibited acts can be found in the official website of Comelec.

The reported cases of passengers being harassed by rude taxi drivers are increasing and while some passengers choose to keep silent, one passenger posted a video of an enraged cab driver who went ballistic when the passenger refused to give in to the amount he demanded. Joanne Garcia expressed her discontentment and anger by posting the video she took herself. The video that Garcia took went viral but this is just a snippet of the altercation that took place. According to her, the cab driver asked her to pay a fixed rate of P250 but she insisted on using a taxi meter.

Garcia assumed that she and the cab driver have already agreed to use the taxi meter instead of paying a fixed rate. However, upon the passengers’ arrival at POEA, the meter is at P140. She paid P200 and asked for her change. That was when the cab driver started cursing at Garcia and her companion demanding a much higher amount. The part when Catipay curses at Garcia and her companion have been caught in the video.

She also suspects Catipay of taking drugs during that time. The Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) had served summon for the cab driver and the operator, Ariel Gamboa on January 5. They appeared before LTFRB on January 6 and required to explain why the franchise should not be cancelled in spite of the violations they committed to the passenger such as harassment, overcharging of fare, contracting passenger and threatening of passenger. The video only revealed a portion of the altercation and according to Garcia, Catipay threatened to hurt her if she did not leave the cab. Catipay also refused to take a drug test and denied being high on drugs when the incident happened. The matter will be discussed on January 12 to dig deeper into Garcia’s complaint.

Bill of Rights 2152 aims to put a stop on cab drivers who unscrupulously prey on unsuspecting passengers:

“this bill seeks to clearly enumerate and establish the rights of taxi passengers and the responsibilities of taxi drivers and operators. Moreover, it also seeks to support current provisions of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board in determining the system and proper avenue for passengers to file their complaints with regard to their rights that are violated. “

Drivers and operators who violate any of the provisions Under Section 3 shall be meted a fine and/or a penalty, depending on the degree of offense:

“a. First Offense. - A minimum fine of Five Hundred Pesos (P500,00) but not to exceed Two Thousand pesos (P2,000.00);

b. Second Offense. -  A minimum fine of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) but not to exceed Five Thousand pesos (P5,000.00);

c. Third and Succeeding Offenses. -   A minimum of Three Thousand pesos (P3,000.00) but not to exceed Ten Thousand pesos (10,000.00) and the suspension of the driver's license and/or the Certificate of public Convenience for a period of one (1) week. “

A raid was conducted on December 21, 2015 on New Bilibid Prison’s maximum security compound. This is already the ninth raid conducted at the Bilibid Prison, but the premise never fails to provide more surprises. While being incarcerated can be very depressing as prisoners are deprived of the freedom that only the outside world offers, discovering two swimming pools and a hidden lounge within New Bilibid Prison’s premise will make you think otherwise. However, the luxurious lifestyle and lavish spending are only experienced by prisoners who have vast amounts of cash.

The raid is a blunt reminder that something needs to be done and while these prisoners continue to enjoy unlimited supply of contraband, people just cannot help but wonder where justice really went or if such really existed. Who wouldn’t be surprised to discover huge quantities of illegal drugs, firearms electronic gadgets, air conditioners, flat-screen TV and other facilities that can provide convenience? The kind of lifestyle that some of these prisoners continue to enjoy is tantamount to staying in a luxurious hotel and other types of accommodation.  How can these be possible when the persons who were appointed to impose discipline are not doing their job? High-profile inmates continue to enjoy luxurious lifestyles while the rest turn green with envy.

The Bureau of Corrections also confiscated hamsters and aquarium fish. According to Rainier Cruz, director of Bureau of Corrections, the BuCor employees are the ones who file requests for the appliances and this is the reason why some of the televisions, freezers and refrigerators bore BuCor equipment stickers.  The New Bilibid Prison violates a vast range of laws including Republic Act No. 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.

The definition of this Act can be found in Section 3.

(a) Administer. – Any act of introducing any dangerous drug into the body of any person, with or without his/her knowledge, by injection, inhalation, ingestion or other means, or of committing any act of indispensable assistance to a person in administering a dangerous drug to himself/herself unless administered by a duly licensed practitioner for purposes of medication.

(b) Board. - Refers to the Dangerous Drugs Board under Section 77, Article IX of this Act.

(c) Centers. - Any of the treatment and rehabilitation centers for drug dependents referred to in Section 34, Article VIII of this Act.

(d) Chemical Diversion. – The sale, distribution, supply or transport of legitimately imported, in-transit, manufactured or procured controlled precursors and essential chemicals, in diluted, mixtures or in concentrated form, to any person or entity engaged in the manufacture of any dangerous drug, and shall include packaging, repackaging, labeling, relabeling or concealment of such transaction through fraud, destruction of documents, fraudulent use of permits, misdeclaration, use of front companies or mail fraud.

(e) Clandestine Laboratory. – Any facility used for the illegal manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical.

(f) Confirmatory Test. – An analytical test using a device, tool or equipment with a different chemical or physical principle that is more specific which will validate and confirm the result of the screening test.

(g) Controlled Delivery. – The investigative technique of allowing an unlawful or suspect consignment of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, equipment or paraphernalia, or property believed to be derived directly or indirectly from any offense, to pass into, through or out of the country under the supervision of an authorized officer, with a view to gathering evidence to identify any person involved in any dangerous drugs related offense, or to facilitate prosecution of that offense.

(h) Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals. – Include those listed in Tables I and II of the 1988 UN Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances as enumerated in the attached annex, which is an integral part of this Act.

(i) Cultivate or Culture. – Any act of knowingly planting, growing, raising, or permitting the planting, growing or raising of any plant which is the source of a dangerous drug.

(j) Dangerous Drugs. – Include those listed in the Schedules annexed to the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, as amended by the 1972 Protocol, and in the Schedules annexed to the 1971 Single Convention on Psychotropic Substances as enumerated in the attached annex which is an integral part of this Act.

(k) Deliver. – Any act of knowingly passing a dangerous drug to another, personally or otherwise, and by any means, with or without consideration.

(l) Den, Dive or Resort. – A place where any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical is administered, delivered, stored for illegal purposes, distributed, sold or used in any form.

(m) Dispense. – Any act of giving away, selling or distributing medicine or any dangerous drug with or without the use of prescription.

(n) Drug Dependence. – As based on the World Health Organization definition, it is a cluster of physiological, behavioral and cognitive phenomena of variable intensity, in which the use of psychoactive drug takes on a high priority thereby involving, among others, a strong desire or a sense of compulsion to take the substance and the difficulties in controlling substance-taking behavior in terms of its onset, termination, or levels of use.

(o) Drug Syndicate. – Any organized group of two (2) or more persons forming or joining together with the intention of committing any offense prescribed under this Act.

(p) Employee of Den, Dive or Resort. – The caretaker, helper, watchman, lookout, and other persons working in the den, dive or resort, employed by the maintainer, owner and/or operator where any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical is administered, delivered, distributed, sold or used, with or without compensation, in connection with the operation thereof.

(q) Financier. – Any person who pays for, raises or supplies money for, or underwrites any of the illegal activities prescribed under this Act.

(r) Illegal Trafficking. – The illegal cultivation, culture, delivery, administration, dispensation, manufacture, sale, trading, transportation, distribution, importation, exportation and possession of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical.

(s) Instrument. – Any thing that is used in or intended to be used in any manner in the commission of illegal drug trafficking or related offenses.

(t) Laboratory Equipment. – The paraphernalia, apparatus, materials or appliances when used, intended for use or designed for use in the manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, such as reaction vessel, preparative/purifying equipment, fermentors, separatory funnel, flask, heating mantle, gas generator, or their substitute.

(u) Manufacture. – The production, preparation, compounding or processing of any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical, either directly or indirectly or by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis or by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis, and shall include any packaging or repackaging of such substances, design or configuration of its form, or labeling or relabeling of its container; except that such terms do not include the preparation, compounding, packaging or labeling of a drug or other substances by a duly authorized practitioner as an incident to his/her administration or dispensation of such drug or substance in the course of his/her professional practice including research, teaching and chemical analysis of dangerous drugs or such substances that are not intended for sale or for any other purpose.

When the temporary restraining order (TRO) was served to Uber and GrabCar for new applications, the commuting public was left with a few transportation options. While this is the season for giving and sharing, there are corrupt and abusive taxi drivers who choose to seize the opportunity and commuters who only want to reach their destination in the most convenient way are not spared from falling prey to these taxi drivers’ schemes.
 
These taxi drivers collect fares in excess of the actual amount charged to the passengers. They have lots of lame excuses to deter passengers from getting the exact change. While it is the passenger’s prerogative to give a tip, a taxi driver cannot just prey on these unsuspecting passengers to collect more than the amount due to them.

In response to the perennial complaints from passengers against these unconscionable practices, TaxiKick has been created. The site accepts complaints from passengers who have been scammed by taxi drivers. Once complaints are lodged, the site will forward them to the LTFRB, which takes action on each complaint. The LTFRB will contact complainants to get more information.

The passengers also have the option to follow up on any report they file by sending an email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or text/call the LTFRB at 459-2129 or 0921-448-7777.

Proposed acts HB 4016, 2346, 2669, 5107 and 3503 are intended to address growing concerns on taxi drivers’ abusive treatment to passengers.

Here is an overview of one of the house bills being pushed:

“Jurisprudence reveals that a contract of transport of passengers is quite different from any other contractual relationship since it is imbued with public interest. Moreover, it is a policy of the State to protect the interest of passengers, promote their general welfare and establish the strictest standards of conduct for the transportation industry.

Several laws and ordinances have been enacted to safeguard the safety of the commuting public. Traffic enforcers have been deployed in strategic locations to ensure the efficient flow of various forms of public transportation and more importantly, the safety of our commuters.

In relation to this, it is the right of every person to choose whatever means of public transportation he/she prefers. Most of our commuters would choose to take the bus, jeepney, tricycle but for convenience sake, they have also opted to take our railway system (LRT and MRT) to avoid the horrendous traffic in most of our major thoroughfares. Still some for the sake of expediency, have chosen to take the taxi because it saves on time and gets them to their place of disembarkation much faster.

However, passengers are most often than not victims of abusive taxi drivers. Rampant abusive practices by these taxi drivers include the collection of fare in excess of what is due to them. In the event a passenger asks for his/her exact change, the common answer is that they do not have enough coins or this was their first trip.”

The extra-judicial killings are one of the reasons why human rights violations in the country continue to increase. Perpetrators continue to roam the streets as killings go unpunished.  Although the Philippines does not have a large-scale armed conflict, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) considers the Philippines as one of the countries with the worst offenders. Until now, the perpetrators have not paid for the crime they committed. Based on 2015 Global Impunity Index, the Philippines has the highest impunity rates. Human rights groups and advocates also put the blame on the present administration for the lack of urgency in addressing this concern.

Extrajudicial killings have been so rampant that it becomes an ordinary yet sickening scenario. Some of the killings are said to be politically motivated, but one thing is for sure, the victims’ cries for justice continue to fall on deaf ears. A perfect example of sluggish justice system in the country is the trial of the retired Army Maj. Gen. Jovito Palparan. 

He currently faces kidnapping and illegal detention charges. The two missing farmers and University of the Philippines students Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen Empeno were suspected to be members of the New People’s Army, a communist group. General Palparan’s trial is still ongoing and the two students are still missing. There are still other cases of extrajudicial killings, in which justice has not been served. The family members of the victims of Maguindanao massacre and Lumad killings continue to seek elusive justice. These human rights violations continue to bring fear since they day the country has been placed under Martial Law courtesy of Marcos regime. 

Human rights violation is defined in Section 3 of the Republic Act No, 10368:

“(b) Human rights violation refers to any act or omission committed during the period from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986 by persons acting in an official capacity and/or agents of the State, but shall not be limited to the following:

(1) Any search, arrest and/or detention without a valid search warrant or warrant of arrest issued by a civilian court of law, including any warrantless arrest or detention carried out pursuant to the declaration of Martial Law by former President Ferdinand E. Marcos as well as any arrest., detention or deprivation of liberty carried out during the covered period on the basis of an “Arrest, Search and Seizure Order (ASSO)”, a “Presidential Commitment Order {PCO)” or a “Preventive Detention Action (PDA)” and such other similar executive issuances as defined by decrees of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, or in any manner that the arrest, detention or deprivation, of liberty was effected;

(2) The infliction by a person acting in an official capacity and/or an agent of the State of physical injury, torture, killing, or violation of other human rights, of any person exercising civil or political rights, including but not limited to the freedom of speech, assembly or organization; and/or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, even if such violation took place during or in the course of what the authorities at the time deemed an illegal assembly or demonstration: Provided, That torture in any form or under any circumstance shall be considered a human rights violation;

(3) Any enforced or involuntary disappearance caused upon a person who was arrested, detained or abducted against one’s will or otherwise deprived of one’s liberty, as defined in Republic Act No. 10350 {{1}}, otherwise known as the “Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012”

(4) Any force or intimidation causing the involuntary exile of a person from the Philippines;

(5) Any act of force, intimidation or deceit causing unjust or illegal takeover of a business, confiscation of property, detention of owner/s and or their families, deprivation of livelihood of a person by agents of the State, including those caused by Ferdinand E. Marcos, his spouse Imelda R. Marcos, their immediate relatives by consanguinity or affinity, as well as those persons considered as among their close relatives, associates, cronies and subordinates under Executive Order No. 1, issued on February 28, 1986 by then President Corazon C. Aquino in the exercise of her legislative powers under the Freedom Constitution;

(6) Any act or series of acts causing, committing and/or conducting the following:

(i) Kidnapping or otherwise exploiting children of persons suspected of committing acts against the Marcos regime;

(ii) Committing sexual offenses against human rights victims who are detained and/or in the course of conducting military and/or police operations; and

(iii) Other violations and/or abuses similar or analogous to the above, including those recognized by international law.”

In this modern day and age, raves and rants are taken to social media and when your post is made available to the public, any defamatory statement can spread like wild fire in just a few clicks. While one can use freedom of speech as an excuse to post anything, it does not give you a license to say something offensive to another person. Libellous statements that can ruin a person’s reputation or image can make you guilty of the crime of libel. 

Just recently, a woman was found guilty of the crime of libel and ordered to pay the sum of 100,000 to the offended party due to malicious posts. Ramada Vallespin admitted to posting defamatory statements and since the posts were set to public, it seems easy for everyone to gain access to the post and hit like, share or comment. 

According to the three witnesses of the aggrieved party, they were able to read Vallespin’s Facebook posts and said the posts where ‘false and highly defamatory’.  The accused did not present any substantial evidence that would vindicate her. The accused party has violated Article 354 of the Revised Penal Code.

"Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown, except in the following cases:

1. A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty; and

2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative or other official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of any statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of their functions."

President Aquino also enacted Republic Act No. 10175, or also referred to as Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. The cybercrime offenses mentioned include cybersquatting, child pornography, identity theft, cybersex, libel and illegal access to data.

These cybercrime offenses can be found under Section 4 of Republic Act No. 10175. Now that the law has been implemented, the case of Vallespin definitely serves as a warning to those whose fingers are itching to post on Facebook for the purpose of humiliating and destroying a person’s reputation. While Facebook can provide a perfect avenue for expressions, you are still held responsible for what you post. You may still want to think before you type because you might end up in court for your posts.

Marriage is more than just a contract as it also involves fulfilling the promise to stand by each other through thick or thin. However, there are situations which are beyond the married couples' control and one of which is death. The vows can be broken because of death. Widows have to undergo grieving process before gaining full acceptance of the loss. 

It can take years before a woman can be on the road to recovery. This is where remarrying another person comes in. Unfortunately, if a woman decides to remarry, there are still some rules to follow based on Article 351 of Republic Act 3815. 

“Any widow who shall marry within three hundred and one day from the date of the death of her husband, or before having delivered if she shall have been pregnant at the time of his death, shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos.

The same penalties shall be imposed upon any woman whose marriage shall have been annulled or dissolved, if she shall marry before her delivery or before the expiration of the period of three hundred and one day after the legal separation.”

The reason for the implementation of this law is to “prevent confusion as to the paternity and filiation of the child,” but due to the advancements in technology, paternity testing is considered unnecessary as DNA test serves as a strong proof. 

A bill that repeals premature marriages has already been approved without further amendments by the committee on woman, family, relations and gender equality. The bill is already up for plenary deliberations. According to Senator Nancy Binay, who proposed the bill, the law is considered antiquated and an instrument to discriminating women. She added that there were series of proposals that aim to amend the anti-women provision specified in the Revised Penal Code, but none of them had been enacted into law. 

The alarming increase of bullet planting scam cases is indeed an unsettling news knowing the fact that anyone can be caught carrying bullets in their bags. A plethora of speculations have been heard but the truth remains in the dark. It is just another blame game that almost everyone can play at. While authorities are investigating on this matter, people just cannot help putting the blame on anyone who has access to their luggage. Anyone can be a suspect: the guards, taxi drivers, airport security personnel and porters. 

While the case remains unsolved, the livelihood of those who are working in and around the airport is also at risk. Passengers are also creating their own safety measures to avoid falling prey to the bullet planting scheme. Without a doubt, the luggage wrapping services at NAIA are becoming a lucrative business considering the fact that many passengers have become more vigilant.

Passengers who are caught carrying live bullets or ammunition in their bags violate Republic Act No. 10591 or the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act, which states that “It is the policy of the State to maintain peace and order and protect the people against violence. The State also recognizes the right of its qualified citizens to self-defense through, when it is the reasonable means to repel the unlawful aggression under the circumstances, the use of firearms. Towards this end, the State shall provide for a comprehensive law regulating the ownership, possession, carrying, manufacture, dealing in and importation of firearms, ammunition, or parts thereof, in order to provide legal support to law enforcement agencies in their campaign against crime, stop the proliferation of illegal firearms or weapons and the illegal manufacture of firearms or weapons, ammunition and parts thereof.”

The bullet planting cases in 2015 has a total of 1394 and still counting. While there are some passengers who admit to carrying live bullets in their bags due to superstition, others are completely clueless how the bullets got in their bags.  There are lingering questions that remain unanswered and this issue will continue to be a guessing game for everyone unless the people who are responsible for this bullet planting scheme is incarcerated. 

There are political figures who have already offered legal aid to the victims. If abuse of power and extortion are the reasons for the prevalence of bullet planting, the passengers must also consider safety measures for their protection. 

In the event an official claims to find a bullet in a passenger's bag, the passenger has the right to delay immediate opening of the bag, summon presence of the official’s supervisor and obtain lawyer’s presence or third party witnesses.  Keep in mind that no officer can force you to be a witness against yourself. If you are coerced into admitting ownership of the planted bullet, you have the right to remain silent. Any admission without the presence of a lawyer is considered inadmissible in court. If you are required to pay in exchange of your freedom, simply refer to Section 9 of the Republic Act No. 3019 or Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

“Penalties for violations. (a) Any public officer or private person committing any of the unlawful acts or omissions enumerated in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, perpetual disqualification from public office, and confiscation or forfeiture in favor of the Government of any prohibited interest and unexplained wealth manifestly out of proportion to his salary and other lawful income.”

Fast food has become a staple diet for busy people especially when time is not enough for food preparation. What could be worse than sinking your teeth into your favorite food, unperturbed to the fact that it is crawling with germs? You have already consumed and digested your meal before discovering that there is an additional “ingredient”, which is, without a doubt, a recipe for disaster. A person will more likely choose to starve to death than eat contaminated food. There have been several complaints about food poisoning and unsafe food handling practices. While some complainants are already well-aware of the steps to take, others still need guidance so their complaints will not end up falling on deaf ears. 

The Republic Act No. 10611 otherwise known as the “Food Safety Act of 2013” strengthens food safety regulatory system in our country. The law provides protection to consumers so they will have access to local foods and food products that have undergone thorough and rigid inspection. 

Under Section 3 of the Republic Act, the objectives are as follows:

“(a) Protect the public from food-borne and water-borne illnesses and unsanitary, unwholesome, misbranded or adulterated foods;

(b) Enhance industry and consumer confidence in the food regulatory system; and

(c) Achieve economic growth and development by promoting fair trade practices and sound regulatory foundation for domestic and international trade.”

The food safety regulatory system combines various processes to ensure that food safety standards are met. Food safety standards refer to the formal documents, which contain the food requirements that the food processors need to comply with so human health is safeguarded. These safety standards are implemented by law and authorities. Some of the processes that are under the regulatory system include inspection, testing, data collection, monitoring and other activities, which are carried out by various food safety regulatory agencies. 

Under Section No. 37, these acts are prohibited:

(a) Produce, handle or manufacture for sale, offer for sale, distribute in commerce, or import into the Philippines any food or food product which is not in conformity with an applicable food quality or safety standard promulgated in accordance with this Act.

(b) Produce, handle or manufacture for sale, offer for sale, distribute in commerce, or import into the Philippines any food or food product which has been declared as banned food product;

(c) Refuse access to pertinent records or entry of inspection officers of the FSRA;

(d) Fail to comply with an order relating to notifications to recall unsafe products;

(e) Adulterate, misbrand, mislabel, falsely advertise any food product which misleads the consumers and carry out any other acts contrary to good manufacturing practices;

(f) Operate a food business without the appropriate authorization;

(g) Connive with food business operators or food inspectors, which will result in food safety risks to the consumers; and

(h) Violate the implementing rules and regulations of this Act

In a country where poverty is one of the biggest challenges that the government faces, you just cannot turn a blind eye on squatters, which are clear and undeniable proof that something needs to be done when it comes to finding these individuals a better place to roost in. Past and present administrations have continued to delve deeper into the root cause of the growing numbers of squatters in and around Metro Manila. 

It constantly ignites a spark of controversy and many fingers have been pointed at the present administration. In the hopes of giving equal rights to the less fortunate, Republic Act 8368 or better known as the “Anti-Squatting Law Repeal Act of 1997” repealed Presidential Decree No. 772. The Presidential Decree penalized squatting and with the repeal act, squatting is deemed a non-crime due to the fact that the squatters themselves are also victims of injustice and unequal social system. 

Under Section 2 of Presidential Decree No. 772, “Any person who, with the use of force, intimidation or threat, or taking advantage of the absence or tolerance of the landowner, succeeds in occupying or possessing the property of the latter against his will for residential commercial or any other purposes, shall be punished by an imprisonment ranging from six months to one year or a fine of not less than one thousand nor more than five thousand pesos at the discretion of the court, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.”

Land owners may slightly have a clue which side this Republic Act is on and as a consolation the act does not exempt the so-called professional syndicates and squatters. The squatting syndicates refer to groups of people who are engaged in squatting housing business for their personal gain or profit. Professional squatters are individuals or groups who occupy the land without permission from the landowner. They are referred to as professional squatters because they have sufficient income for legitimate housing. People who have sold their housing units or homelots awarded by the government and chosen to settle illegally in the same place are also considered professional squatters. This law can be found in Republic Act 7279 or the “ Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992.” 

Under Section 16 of the Republic Act:

“Sec.  16. Eligibility Criteria for Socialized Housing Program Beneficiaries. — To qualify for the socialized housing program, a beneficiary: 

(a) Must be a Filipino citizen; 

(b) Must be an underprivileged and homeless citizen, as defined in Section 3 of this Act; 

(c) Must not own any real property whether in the urban or rural areas; and 

(d) Must not be a professional squatter or a member of squatting syndicates.”

Elections provide voters a unique form or element of entertainment not only due to the list of candidates filing for certificate of candidacy, but also due to the complexities of the electoral system. Before the results are released, voters need to wait for several weeks as the canvassing of election results can be a long and tedious process. There will be disputes, which can delay the declaration process. 

The Philippine elections give voters some sort of confusion and excitement when two candidates have tied. Instead of undergoing another voting process, the tie is simply broken by drawing of lots. While this method may appear to be tongue-in-cheek, it is covered by Resolution No. 9648. “In case there are candidates receiving the same number of votes for the same position, the Board immediately notify the said candidates to appear before them for the drawing of lots to break the tie. The drawing of lots should be conducted within one (1) hour after issuance of notice by the Board of candidates concerned.” 

“The candidate who won in the drawing of lots and so proclaimed shall have the right to assume office in the same manner as if he had been elected by plurality of votes.”

This electoral system is also under Section 240 of the Omnibus Election Code: “Whenever it shall appear from the canvass that two or more candidates have received an equal and highest number of votes, or in cases where two or more candidates are to be elected for the same position and two or more candidates received the same number of votes for the last place in the number to be elected, the board of canvassers, after recording this fact in its minutes, shall by resolution, upon five days notice to all the tied candidates, hold a special public meeting at which the board of canvassers shall proceed to the drawing of lots of the candidates who have tied and shall proclaim as elected the candidates who may be favored by luck, and the candidates so proclaimed shall have the right to assume office in the same manner as if he had been elected by plurality of vote.”

During the 2013 general elections, San Teodoro, Oriental Mindoro mayoralty candidates tossed a coin to break the tie. Although this is considered an unconventional electoral system, it is not considered unique as there are states in the US that also follow the same method. 

As you rivet to the TV screen, political campaign ads seem to remind voters that a few months from now, another person will lead the country. As the 2016 national elections approach, political aspirants are also making necessary preparations. On October 12, Commission on Elections (COMELEC) welcomed candidates who wished to pursue political seats. The filing for the Certificates of Candidacy (COC), has also been a source of entertainment for the nation. 

Aside from the familiar faces in Philippine government, there are also ordinary citizens who wish to give the presidential seat a try. These presidential hopefuls have platforms that are out of the ordinary. 

Under the Constitution, an individual can only aspire for the highest seat in the government if they meet the following criteria: 

1. natural born citizen of the Philippines

2. registered voter

3. able to read and write

4. at least 40 years of age on the day of election

5. resident of the Philippines for at least 10 years immediately preceding the election.

However, not everyone who files for certificate of candidacy for presidency is considered an official candidate. After filing, all of the candidates are subject for deliberation and it is then that the official candidates will be announced. 

Under Section 69 of the Omnibus Election Code, “The Commission may motu proprio or upon a verified petition of an interested party, refuse to give due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy if it is shown that said certificate has been filed to put the election process in mockery or disrepute or to cause confusion among the voters by the similarity of the names of the registered candidates or by other circumstances or acts which clearly demonstrate that the candidate has no bona fide intention to run for the office for which the certificate of candidacy has been filed and thus prevent a faithful determination of the true will of the electorate.”

Under Section 72, “Any candidate who has been declared by final judgment to be disqualified shall not be voted for, and the votes cast for him shall not be counted. Nevertheless, if for any reason, a candidate is not declared by final judgment before an election to be disqualified and he is voted for and receives the winning number of votes in such election, his violation of the provisions of the preceding sections shall not prevent his proclamation and assumption to office.”

According to COMELEC, an independent candidate can also be considered nuisance if they do not have the capacity to support a national campaign. While these independent candidates can be a form of entertainment considering the fact that national elections are filled with tension, stringent laws weed them out when the number of candidates filing for candidacy becomes out of control.

In some States in the US, marijuana has already been legalized. One of the merits for its legalization is its ability to provide relief for various neuropathic diseases such as multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer’s. It can also treat epileptic seizures and loss of appetite after a person with AIDS or HIV undergoes chemotherapy or following treatment. 

Selling or using marijuana is a criminal offense under the Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. However, it is also highlighted in Section 2 of the Act that: “The government shall however aim to achieve a balance in the national drug control program so that people with legitimate medical needs are not prevented from being treated with adequate amounts of appropriate medications, which include the use of dangerous drugs.

It is further declared the policy of the State to provide effective mechanisms or measures to re-integrate into society individuals who have fallen victims to drug abuse or dangerous drug dependence through sustainable programs of treatment and rehabilitation.”

The bill that seeks to legalize the use of cannabis or marijuana for medical treatment is known as the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Act. 

Section 2 of this act states that “the State shall legalize and regulate the medical use of cannabis which has been confirmed to have beneficial and therapeutic uses to treat chronic or debilitating disease or medical condition that produces one or more of the following: cachexia or wasting syndrome; severe and chronic pain; severe nausea; seizures, including but not limited to those characteristic of epilepsy; or severe and persistent muscle spasms, including but not limited to those associated with multiple sclerosis.”

Before marijuana can be prescribed to a patient, it is necessary that a licensed physician provides a complete assessment of the patient’s medical history. The patient’s current medical condition will also be examined and this includes personal physical examination and diagnostic. This is to determine if the patient’s medical condition is debilitating. This is stated on SEC 3 of the Act under Definition of Terms.

The main concern of those who oppose the legalization of marijuana in the Philippines is its ability to provide easy and quick access to those who use and sell it.

The author of this bill has seen this coming. This is why Section 5 outlines the Act’s Power and Functions. One of the powers and functions of this act include: “Approve the recommendation made by the certifying doctor who has a bona fide relationship with the patient that, after completing a medical assessment of the patient’s medical history and current medical condition, including an appropriate personal physical examination, in his professional medical opinion, a patient is suffering from a debilitating medical condition, and is likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of cannabis.”

When a man is liable for a crime of rape, forgiveness can be obtained through marriage. This can be found in Article 266 of the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 or the Republic Act No. 8353. Now, if your head is in the clouds, let us first take a good look at what the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 is all about. 

Chapter 3, Article 266-A defines when and how a crime of rape is committed. 

1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:

a. Through force, threat, or intimidation;

b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;

c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and

d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present. 

Pardon or forgiveness can be given to the offender once marriage takes place. Under Article 266-C, Effect of Pardon, in case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty: Provided, that the crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio.

With this law, it is a case of forgive and forget. Unfortunately, forgiveness can be elusive especially when the criminal act has left a very deep wound, that scars become a reminder of such an unpleasant experience. As they say, it is easier said than done. 

Rape becomes a violent crime not only because of the force applied but also due to the fact that sexual act is committed against the will of the offended party. The problem with this law is that it sets aside other issues associated with rape. One important point is missing and the fact that a vast range of abuses such as physical, psychological and sexual can take place over a period of time while the offender and the offended party are living under one roof makes the law more open to question. 

Women who are victims of rape become held prisoner of repeated abuse and violence. Marriage only makes the situation worse for women by allowing them to be trapped in such a vicious cycle. Rape victims are traumatized and have difficulty coping. Filing criminal charges against their offenders is difficult let alone marrying the offender.  Sadly, myths about rape have not yet been completely debunked. 

The modern technology provides us a much easier way to rave and rant or so we thought. While turmoil and discontentment can be expressed in more ways than one, taking everything to social media may not be a good idea due to the existence of cybercrime prevention law or the Republic Act No. 10175. 

Social networking sites are now the modern avenue for expressions. Views and opinions can spread like wild fire, thanks to the ‘share’ button of an immensely popular social networking site. However, you may need to think before you click because there are corresponding penalties for people who break rules and cross lines. 

The penalties are outlined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code. This is quite interesting because the provision has been ruled out since the Spanish era. While critics were apprehensive about the degree of penalty, the government officials rejoiced. Need I say more?

Let’s have a look at what the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 is all about.

As highlighted in Sec. 4 of the Republic Act No. 10175, the following acts are considered punishable:

a. Offenses made against the integrity, availability and confidentiality of computer systems and data:

• Data Interference: When a person deletes or damages computer data, or electronic data message, without permission including transmission or introduction of viruses, he or she is guilty of committing data interference. Reckless alteration and deterioration of computer data also fall under this category.

• Illegal Access: An unauthorized access to the whole or any part of a computer system.

• Illegal Interception: If an interception is made without right of any non-public transmission of computer data to, from, or within a computer system, a person commits illegal interception. 

• Misuse of Devices: A person violates the law if devices are sold, distributed, imported or made available without right. These devices include computer program, access code and computer password.

• System Interference: Any intentional alteration or reckless interference or hindering with the functioning of a computer network or a computer by damaging, inputting, deleting, deteriorating or altering computer program or data are considered system interference. This also includes transmission or introduction of viruses.

• Cyber-squatting: If a domain name is acquired over the internet to mislead, profit, deprive others from registering the same domain name and destroying reputation, the crime of cyber-squatting is committed. Some examples include identical or existing trademark, the name is similar or identical with a person other than the registrant and domain name acquired without permission or right. 

b. Computer-related Offenses:

• Computer-related forgery: This includes deletion, input or alteration of any computer data without permission resulting in inauthentic data with the intent of making them available for legal purposes as if it were authentic. Dishonest and fraudulent designs are also considered computer-related forgery.

• Computer-related fraud: This crime refers to the unauthorized alteration, deletion or input of computer program or data which cause interference in the functioning of a computer system  or damage.

• Computer-related identity theft: If a person intentionally acquire, transfer, use, misuse, alter, possess or delete identifying information belonging to another, whether judicial or natural without permission or right, he or she commits the crime.

c. Content-related Offenses

• Cybersex: The control, operation, maintenance or willful engagement directly or indirectly of any lascivious exhibition of sexual activity or sexual organs with the help of a computer system in exchange of consideration or favor.

• Child Pornography: The prohibited or unlawful acts, which are also punishable by RA No. 9775 or also known as the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009, committed with the use of a computer system.

• Unsolicited Commercial Communications: The offense refers to transmission of commercial electronic communication using a computer system, which seek to sell, advertise or offer for sale services and products without consent.

• Libel: As defined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, libel can be committed through a computer system or any other similar means. 

The Cybercrime Law has a broad scope and the hopes are still high that it will soon be abolished. While this law is still at work, make sure you don’t commit any of these offenses.

In a country where moral standards are high, the mere mention of abortion is considered a taboo topic. There are mixed views on abortion, but most of which are against the idea of legalizing the act. If a medical practitioner is found guilty of carrying out abortion, he or she has to face criminal charges. 

Not only does the Philippine law deter women from considering abortion but religious sectors as well. Is it really about time law makers consider the merits of legalizing abortion? 

There are countries that are still not open to the legalization of abortion, and Philippines is one of them. Due to the social stigma, women resort to self-induced abortion, which is considered unsafe and dangerous. 

There are cases when abortion is considered necessary especially if the pregnant woman’s health is at risk. For instance, ectopic pregnancy requires surgery as a means of saving a woman’s life. So long as therapeutic abortion is banned in the country, more and more women continue to subject themselves to dangerous measures. 

For instance, pregnant women who are well aware of the criminal law on abortion refuse to be hospitalized for the fear of getting imprisoned if found that they have undergone unsafe abortion. This is why there is a dramatic increase in the number of women who choose to risk their health and lives.

These women continue to receive moral punches and will be stigmatized for the rest of their lives because of the country’s legal and moral boundaries.

Other countries allow therapeutic abortion when:

• pregnancy is the result of incest or rape;

• the pregnant woman suffers from a medical condition that is life or health threatening such as eclampsia, diabetes, hypertension and cancer. 

• pregnancy is at risk of fetal impairment causing the baby to develop mental or physical defects or die after birth.

Under the Philippine law, abortion has been considered a crime since 1930. Whether abortion is intentional or unintentional, anyone who carries out abortion is said to commit the crime. Even physicians and midwives who perform abortions in the Philippines may be charged of a crime, which can result in six years in prison under the Revised Penal Code. They are still going to be subject for criminal punishments. These are also supplemented by separate laws, prescribing sanctions if medical practitioners including doctors, pharmacists and midwives participated in the process of abortion.

Legalizing abortion in the Philippines is far from happening as there are still various factors that need to be taken into consideration. While the country is still firm in banning abortion, women will continue to endure life-threatening pregnancies and resort to measures that deviate from the medical standards.

One thing that will sure serve as a reminder you are residing in Manila is the heavy traffic, which has become a regular part of a Filipino commuter's life. The dreaded peak hour and the heavily congested roads in Metro Manila have caused such a hooha. The number of vehicles that are lined up like ants, are longer than the patience adhering to your nerves. 

Without a doubt, the worsening traffic situation in Manila can make you want to sing "Welcome to the Jungle". Then came the Number Coding Scheme, which was referred to as the Unified Vehicular Volume Reduction Program. It was previously mistaken as the Color Coding Scheme and drivers in Metro Manila are pretty much aware of this ordinance. 

The Number Coding Scheme came to existence to address the problems with the traffic situation in Metro Manila. The scheme took effect in March 2003 and it is said to manage traffic situation by means of reducing the number of vehicles on the street. A certain plate number is barred from traveling in Metro Manila in a particular day. For instance, plates ending in 1 and 2 are prohibited on the streets on Monday between 7 AM to 7 PM. Window hours may also apply depending on the city. 

The Number Coding Scheme can make or break your day. For a regular commuter, it can either be relieving or traumatizing. The scheme does not apply during weekends and holidays. Any rule has an exception and the Number Coding Scheme also applies some especially on special cases and emergencies. If a vehicle has a passenger that requires immediate medical attention, the Number Coding Scheme will no longer be necessary.

Even doctors and other medical practitioners can also apply to be excused from the Number Coding Scheme. There are also cities in Metro Manila that exempt senior citizens from following the scheme. In Makati, senior citizens with BLU card no longer need to adhere to this rule. If caught, all they need to do is to present the BLU card. 

Guidelines on this scheme have already been updated, but until now, the problems with traffic in Metro Manila remain the same. Now, if you don't want to get stuck in a nightmarish peak-hour routine, stay cooped up in your room if it is unnecessary to go out. Unfortunately, people who need to go to work have to bear with the endless and torturous toing and froing. 

It's going to be a normal routine for you unless you decide to escape the concrete jungle and choose to live in a place away from the distractions and demands of a modern city. Indeed, it is a love-hate relationship with Metro Manila due to heavy traffic. Manila: love it, leave it. 

Have you been screening your phone calls to avoid collectors who are constantly nagging you to settle your unpaid credit card balance? Have you been threatened to face a lawsuit if you fail to repay a lender? If incessant calls from creditors caused you to be allergic to phone calls, being armed with the basic principles of the consequences for non-payment of debt can give you greater peace of mind. In fact, it can be a whiff of fresh air if you heard the statement that no one will end up in jail for non-payment of debt. 

Before you allow paranoia to feast on you, know more about the laws associated with unsettled debt.

Some common laws that are said to violate the constitutional prohibition against non-imprisonment of debt:

Credit Cards

The Access Devices Regulation Act of 1998 (RA. 8484) states that any person who obtains the money or anything that is valuable with the use of an access device with the sole intent to defraud or with intent to gain and fleeing once motive has been executed will be held liable for a crime punishable with a fine and imprisonment. In addition, a cardholder who intentionally abandons the residence, place of employment or business that was declared on the application or credit card without informing the credit card company of the current place where he could be reached will also be liable for a crime. If during the abandonment, the person has outstanding and unpaid balance which is past due for at least 90 days and is more than P10,000.00, the individual shall be prima facie presumed to have used his access device or credit card with intent to defraud.

Bouncing Checks 

Bouncing Checks Law (BP22) has also been viewed as a violation of constitutional prohibition against non-imprisonment for debt. In the context of this law, the non-payment of an obligation is not its main concern. The law is not designed to force a debtor to settle his debt. The main purpose of the law is to prevent anyone with the gumption to make checks that don’t have any value with the intention of putting them in circulation. Checks have become a substitute for cash and widely accepted as a medium of payment especially in trade and commerce and when the confidence of using these checks are marred due to its misuse, its value and usefulness will also be diminished. 

Trust Receipts

Trust receipts and bouncing checks share the same argument based on the Trust Receipts Law (PD 115), which states, if a person fails to turn over the proceeds of the sale of goods which are considered covered by a trust receipt or if the person fails to return said goods if they have not been sold, penal sanctions shall be imposed. The punishment is due to the abuse of confidence and dishonesty in the handling of goods or money.

Imagine a country without laws. It will surely be a land full of chaos and disarray as people can do as they please. No stern guidelines, no rules to follow, no restrictions etc. However, the laws, no matter the complexities, are considered a chain that binds our sanity so we continue to be law abiding citizens. 

Some laws may not work in our favor as they can be odd in every sense of the word, but they still have that element of surprise and entertainment. Unfortunately, entertaining as they may sound, these laws still come with a caveat. Some laws may appear to be out of the ordinary, but just like other laws, you can still get incarcerated once you are found guilty of violating them.

Sure laws, are rigid and formal, but they can be twisted sometimes. Even in this modern day and age, laws that are weird, wacky and obscure still exist. These strange laws can bring laughter, but can also bring you to court once you break them. Well, color me surprised. Although some of them are already obsolete, it is still worth knowing them. 

Now, let's start with number 1....

1. You can end up in jail for violating religious freedom.

The violation of the freedom of religion is covered in ART 132 and ART 133 of the Revised Penal Code, which states that interruption of religious worship and offending against religious feelings can charge a person of a crime in violation of the freedom of religion. This penal law has been in existence since the Spanish era. 

Can you still vividly remember Carlos Celdran who was dressed as Jose Rizal? Apparently, he was found guilty of violating Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code. During a mass at the Manila Cathedral, Celdran stood in front while raising a placard bearing the word "DAMASO". Damaso is an oppressive character from Jose Rizal's novel Noli Me Tangere. 

The Iglesia ni Cristo's brouhaha over Justice Secretary Leila de Lima's decision of dealing with the case of serious illegal detention filed against INC leaders recently became the subject of controversy. The issue was taken to social media and there were mixed reactions. To some, it was a violation of INC's religious freedom while others were supportive of the decision and it's not quite surprising that some politicians also came to INC's defense. INC urged De Lima to resign but the Justice Secretary remains unfazed. 

So what's the moral of the story? Stay away from an unfamiliar territory and you'll be fine.