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.

Filipinos are known for being family-oriented and this dominant quality is probably one of the reasons a law that exempts family who commit theft, swindling and malicious mischief from criminal liability exists. While it is a dead give-away that Filipinos value their family more than anyone or anything else, can this law be a good reason to promote solidarity in spite of criminal liability of a loved one?

Under Article 332 of the Revised Penal Code, "No criminal liability, but only civil liability shall result from the commission of the crime of theft, swindling, or malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by the following persons:

1.Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line;

2.The widowed spouse with respect to the property which belonged to the deceased spouse before the same shall have passed into the possession of another; and

3.Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if living together.

The exemption established by this article shall not be applicable to strangers participating in the commission of the crime."

However, there are still some exceptions to the rule. A family will not be criminally liable for the aforementioned crimes, but the person will still be subject to civil liability. A complex crime will also be treated as one and will be subject to a single criminal prosecution. The exception only applies to a complex crime and not a crime of simple estafa. As mentioned under Article 332 the law only applies to the felonies of theft, malicious mischief and swindling. However, if the crimes that are included in Article 332 are perpetrated with another crime such as estafa, extension will not be applied.  A person still has a criminal liability regardless of his relationship to the offended party. 

The provision’s coverage is only for estafa, simple theft and malicious mischief. This means complex crimes are not covered by such provisions. In one case involving an accused who did not only commit simple estafa but estafa through falsification of public document, the offense’s real nature was identified by the facts presented. As a result, the accused was not given the ability to avail himself of the absolutory cause that is only provided under the exempting law. The law still brings confusion when it comes to exception and if promoting solidarity and harmony is the only reason to deter the offended party from pursuing criminal charges, then it is no longer surprising this law has been considered strange and absurd.

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. 

This year, the Philippines hosted the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and while it aimed to foster camaraderie and unity among participating nations, it continues to torment Juan Dela Cruz as though a daily dose of traffic woes is not enough to show the worsening traffic situation in the country.  People has taken their litany of complaints to social media with hashtags #APECfail, #APECtado, #APECtraffic and you do not need a regular update of the traffic situation because the status updates you get in rapid succession are enough to describe the horrifying truth that Leaders are so desperate to hide. 

It was a week filled with pretense as the government leaders tried to put their best foot forward. It only takes a week to hide the vicious cycle and the harsh truth,  that is poverty. It continues to plague the country, but in just a matter of weeks, the homeless families were taken off the streets of Metro Manila. They were provided with a dingy shelter to roost in so the city will look “pleasing” to the eyes of foreign visitors. 

This goes to show that everyone in the government office has an active participation in the preparation for APEC meeting from November 17 to 20 and with that said, the government claimed they have not ordered flight cancellations as it was the ‘call of the airlines’. According to Quezon City Representative Winston Castelo, flight cancellations can be detrimental to the economy. Acting Metro Manila Authority head Emerson Carlos said that measures will be put in place to ensure that major roads are passable for APEC delegates. From a bird’s eye view, you can clearly see the huge difference between the roads intended for APEC delegates and the roads for the locals. 

November 18 and 19 has also been declared special non-working days and the following pay rules are observed upon issuing Labor Advisory No. 14 of 2015 by Labor and Employment Secretary Rosalinda Dimapilis-Baldoz.

“If the employee did not work:

He/she will not be paid, unless there is a favourable company policy, practice, or collective bargaining agreement (CBA) grantingpayment of wages on 17-20 November; and

When the employee has accrued leave credits, he/she may be allowed to utilize such leave so that he/she will have compensation on said days.

If the employee worked:

No additional pay is given to the employee, but only their salary on said day.”

“The following pay rules shall apply for private sector workers in NCR from 18 to 19 November 2015:

If the employee did not work, the “no-work, no-pay” principle shall apply, unless there is a favorable company policy, practice, or collective bargaining agreement (CBA) granting payment on a special day;

If the employee worked, he or she shall be paid an additional 30 percent of his or her daily rate on the first eight hours of work [(daily rate x 130 percent) + COLA];

If the employee worked in excess of 8 hours (overtime work), he or she shall be paid an additional 30 percent of his or her hourly rate on said day (hourly rate of the basic daily wage x 130 percent x 130 percent x number of hours worked);

If the employee worked during a special day that also falls on his or her rest day, he or she shall be paid an additional 50 percent of his or her daily rate on the first 8 hours of work [(daily rate x 150 percent) + COLA];

If the employee worked in excess of 8 hours (overtime work) during a special day that also falls on his or her rest day, he or she shall be paid an additional 30 percent of his or her hourly rate on said day (hourly rate of the basic daily wage x 150 percent x 130 percent x number of hours worked).”

Anti-corruption advocates were quite disappointed when Makati Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay Jr. invoked the Aguinaldo doctrine, questioning his order of suspension last March. The decision was made by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales. The Makati Mayor claimed that he was no longer held responsible nor liable for the construction of Makati Science High School Building (MSHSB) because such liability has already been rendered ineffective by his reelection in 2013.  The same doctrine was used for defending himself against anomalous and shady transaction involved in the construction of the Makati City Hall Parking Building II. Perhaps, the existence of Aguinaldo Doctrine has been misused and abused by politicians who still aspire to run for 2016 elections in spite of pending administrative cases. 

The Aguinaldo doctrine removes the elected officials’ liabilities for administrative offenses that were committed in previous terms once they are reelected. It is so easy for elected officials to evade liabilities so long as they are reelected into office. The doctrine also emphasizes that the law only applies to administrative cases. If elected official has a pending criminal case, the acts will not be pardoned and the judicial processes will push through. Anti-corruption advocates believe that scrapping this doctrine can reduce graft and corruption in the country. 

As stated in the doctrine: “Offenses committed, or acts done, during a previous term are generally held not to furnish cause for removal and this is especially true were the Constitution provides that the penalty in proceeding for removal shall not extend beyond the removal from office, and disqualification from holding office for a term for which the officer was elected or appointed.”

“The Court should ever remove a public officer for acts done prior to his present term of office. To do otherwise would be to deprive the people of their right to elect their officers. When a people have elected a man to office, it must be assumed that they did this with knowledge of his life and character, and that they disregarded or forgave his fault or misconduct, if he had been guilty of any. It is not for the court, by reason of such fault or misconduct, to practically overrule the will of the people. (Lizares v. Hechanova, et al., 17 SCRA 58, 59-60 [1966]) (See also Oliveros v. Villaluz, 57 SCRA 163 [1974])”

“Equally without merit is petitioner's claim that before he could be suspended or removed from office, proof beyond reasonable doubt is required inasmuch as he is charged with a penal offense of disloyalty to the Republic which is defined and penalized under Article 137 of the Revised Penal Code. Petitioner is not being prosecuted criminally under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code, but administratively with the end in view of removing petitioner as the duly elected Governor of Cagayan Province for acts of disloyalty to the Republic where the quantum of proof required is only substantial evidence.”

In the Philippines some laws are undeniably out dated and further amendments need to be made. One of the laws that require amendment and expansion is the immigration law or the Commonwealth Act No. 613. The law was made and implemented in 1940 and the outdated sections of this law including Section 29-A is an indicator that necessary changes must be made. 

“Sec. 29. (a) The following classes of aliens shall be excluded from entry into the Philippines:

1. Idiots or insane persons and persons who have been insane;

2. Persons afflicted with a loathsome or dangerous contagious disease, or epilepsy:

3. Persons who have been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude;

4. Prostitutes, or procurers, or persons coming for any immoral purposes;

5. Persons likely to become, public charge;

6. Paupers, vagrants, and beggars;

7. Persons who practice polygamy or who believe in or advocate the practice of polygamy;

8. Persons who believe in or advocate the overthrow by force and violence of the Government of the Philippines, or of constituted lawful authority, or who disbelieve in or are opposed to organized government, or who advocate the assault or assassination of public officials because of their office, or who advocate or teach principles, theories, or ideas contrary to the Constitution of the Philippines or advocate or teach the unlawful destruction of property, or who are members of or affiliated with any organization entertaining or teaching such doctrines;

9. Persons over fifteen years of age, physically capable of reading, who cannot read printed matter in ordinary use in any language selected by the alien, but this provision shall not apply to the grandfather, grandmother, father, mother, wife, husband or child of a Philippine citizen or of an alien lawfully resident in the Philippines;

10. Persons who are members of a family accompanying an excluded alien, unless in the opinion of the Commissioner of Immigration no hardship would result from their admission;

11. Persons accompanying an excluded person who is helpless from mental or physical disability or infancy, when the protection or guardianship of such accompanying person or persons is required by the excluded person, as shall be determined by the Commissioner of Immigration;

12. Children under fifteen years of age, unaccompanied by or not coming to a parent, except that any such children may be admitted in the discretion of the Commissioner of Immigration, if otherwise admissible;

13. Stowaways, except that any stowaway may be admitted in the discretion of the Commissioner of Immigration, if otherwise admissible;

14. Persons coming to perform unskilled manual labor in pursuance of a promise or offer of employment, express or implied, but this provision shall not apply to persons bearing passport visas authorized by Section Twenty of this Act;

15. Persons who have been excluded or deported from the Philippines, but this provision may be waived in the discretion of the Commissioner of Immigration: Provided, however, That the Commissioner of Immigration shall not exercise his discretion in favor of aliens excluded or deported on the ground of conviction for any crime involving moral turpitude or for any crime penalized under Sections Forty-Five and Forty-Six of this Act or on the ground of having engaged in hoarding, black-marketing or profiteering unless such aliens have previously resided in the Philippines immediately before his exclusion or deportation for a period of ten years or more or are married to native Filipino women;

16. Persons who have been removed from the Philippines at the expense of the Government of the Philippines, as indigent aliens, under the provisions of section forty-three of this Act, and who have not obtained the consent of the Board of Commissioners to apply for readmission; and

17. Persons not properly documented for admission as may be required under the provisions of this Act.”

Some of the proposed amendments of the Commonwealth Act No. 613 include the expansion of the classification of disqualified aliens and the penalties that will be imposed for aliens who have involvement in syndicated criminal activities. The purpose of the amendments is to enhance national security and ensure safety in the country. 

Lawmakers seek support so major changes can be made, making the law responsive to the current immigration concerns of the country. 

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.”

If you happen to come across Article 333 and 334 of the Revised Penal Code, you will realize that gender inequality is evident even in our Penal Law. Proving women of committing a crime of adultery is not a daunting task as proof of sexual intercourse between the married woman and another man will suffice. Once the husband charges the offending parties with adultery, they can carry a penalty of two to six years if found guilty. 

“Art. 333. Who are guilty of adultery. — Adultery is committed by any married woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and by the man who has carnal knowledge of her knowing her to be married, even if the marriage be subsequently declared void.

Adultery shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.

If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense while being abandoned without justification by the offended spouse, the penalty next lower in degree than that provided in the next preceding paragraph shall be imposed.”

“Art. 334. Concubinage. — Any husband who shall keep a mistress in the conjugal dwelling, or shall have sexual intercourse, under scandalous circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with her in any other place, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods.

The concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.”

The husband can only get convicted for a crime of concubinage if and only if the wife has proven that her husband has been keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling or if he has been found to have sexual intercourse with a woman other than his wife under scandalous circumstances. The wife can also file charges if the husband has been cohabiting with the mistress in any other place.

However, the husband will only serve a sentence of six months to four years when convicted while his mistress would only receive banishment, which is also referred to as destierro. When a mistress is sentenced to destierro, she will be prohibited from entering the place or places designated in the sentence, or within the radius designated. She should keep a distance of at least 25 kilometers, and 250 kilometers at most from the place designated. 

If the offended spouse has pardoned the offenders, the criminal charge cannot prosper. Pardon can either be expressed or implied. An expressed pardon refers to writing an affidavit that the offended party is pardoning his or her spouse for his or her act. If the offended spouse chooses to continue living with the offender even after the offense has been committed, this will be considered an implied pardon.

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 Bank Secrecy Law really rings a bell and it is just a great reminder of the significant event  that ousted one of the Philippine presidents from his office in 2001. People clamored and took their turmoil to the streets of EDSA, hence EDSA 2 came to existence. The Filipino people were compared to a ticking time bomb, waiting to explode due to the refusal of the former president to open "the envelope". 

The refusal was enough to create social mayhem and endless outburst, which were appeased when the impeachment trial finally pushed through. Former President Joseph "Erap" Estrada was charged with plunder and perjury. While he was not guilty of perjury, he was found guilty of plunder and was sentenced to reclusion perpetua. Well, being an actor and protagonist that he was, there was not even the slightest element of surprise when the "plot" worked in his favor, placing him on house arrest. 

Juan dela Cruz should not wonder when a politician charged of a crime, suddenly becomes ill. When politicians are plagued with diseases after being found guilty of a crime,  you know what is going to happen next: the politician will be sent home on vacation or words to that effect. 

Under Section 2 of the Republic Act No. 1405 or An Act Of Prohibiting Disclosure Of Or Inquiry Into, Deposits With Any Banking Institution And Providing Penalty Therefor, "all deposits of whatever nature with banks or banking institutions in the Philippines including investments in bonds issued by the Government of the Philippines, its political subdivisions and its instrumentalities, are hereby considered as of an absolutely confidential nature and may not be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office, except upon written permission of depositor, or in cases of impeachment or upon order of a competent court..."

Under Section 2 of the Republic Act No. 6426 or An Act Instituting Foreign Currency Deposit System In The Philippines, And For Other Purposes, "any person, natural or juridical, may, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, deposit with such Philippine banks in good standing, as may, upon application, be designated by the Central Bank for the purpose, foreign currencies which are acceptable as part of the international reserve, except those which are required by the Central Bank..."

With this law, any politician accused of plunder or perjury stands a chance of getting out of this situation scot-free. They can simply put up a facade as though nothing happened and after which, they are back to business. 

The absence of divorce in the Philippines no longer comes as a surprise and for married couples who have already lost the spark of romance that used to ignite their way, this is bad news. Imagine the ordeal you have to go through just to file for petition for marriage annulment. Aside from the emotional difficulties you experience, the process is undoubtedly costly. 

The State mandates that “ marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the State.” The statement can be found in Section 2, Article XV of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. 

In Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, the State shall defend:

1. The right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation and other conditions, which are considered preducial to their development;

2. The right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions and the demands of responsible parenthood;

3. The right of the family to a family living wage and income; and 

4. The right of families or family associations to participate in the planning and implementation of policies and programs that affect them. 

In addition, the high court also requires inferior courts for a fiscal or an agent to appear from the Solicitor General’s office, representing himself as a counsel during hearings for annulment. The representative must also write whether annulment is approved or not.

To put it simply, the State will be the third party in any marriage. Everything must be done to save one’s marriage and annulment will be the couple’s last resort. Considering the tight bond of Filipino families, this law is indeed a clear indicator of how lawmakers put great importance to marriage. This is a challenge for married couples who have already decided to go on separate ways due to individual differences and other conflicts that cannot be settled through marriage counseling or other similar means. 

For Pinoys who have family members or relatives abroad, balikbayan boxes make up for the absence of the person working abroad. It takes months before the boxes can be filled with the family member’s favorite things. Without a doubt, the balikbayan boxes are a tangible sign of the Overseas Filipino Workers’ love for the family members. With the most recent announcement on the stricter rules and regulations imposed by Bureau of Customs, OFWs and their families could not help but go ballistic on the revised rules.

The BOC’s rules and regulations subject balikbayan boxes to 100% physical examination. However, not all balikbayan boxes will be placed under alert. The boxes that have been deemed to have violated the law on importing articles will be brought to the authorized area for examination or inspection. 

Under Section 105 of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines (TCCP), the following items cannot be brought into the Philippines:

• Coffee

• Used clothing and rags

• Toy guns

• Onions, potatoes, cabbages, garlic

The following commodities are prohibited to be brought into the Philippines:

• Marijuana, opium or any type of synthetic drugs or narcotics;

• Roulette wheels, loaded dice, marked cards, gambling outfits, apparatus, machines or mechanical devices used in gambling;

• Opium pipes;

• Tickets for lottery and sweepstakes except those authorized by the Philippines government, advertisement thereof, and list of drawings therein;

• Dynamite, ammunition, gunpowder and other explosives such as fire-arms and weapons of war, and parts thereof, except when they are authorised by law;

• Articles, drugs, instruments, substances designed, intended or adapted for producing unlawful abortion, or any printed matter which describes or advertises or gives directly or indirectly information regarding where, how or by whom unlawful abortion produced;

• Written or printed articles in any form containing any matter advocating or inciting treason, or rebellion, insurrection, sedition or subversion against the government of the Philippines, or forcible resistance to any law of the Philippines;

• Written or printed articles, negatives or cinematographic film, photographs, engravings, lithographs, paintings, objects, drawings or other representation of an obscene or immoral character;

• All other articles or part thereof, the importation of which is prohibited by law or rules and regulation issued by competent authority.

The physical examination of balikbayan boxes are in accordance with Section 3604 of the TCCP. The revised rules and regulations are also said to put a lid on violations made by individuals who use balikbayan boxes to break the law such as bringing thousands of anti-anxiety drugs, misdeclared as food supplements into the Philippines. 

All boxes are expected to undergo mandatory x-ray and K-9 examination at no cost to the person who sent it. Once there are derogatory findings, the physical inspection of goods will be considered. 

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.