Hindi ko alam kung legal-legalan nga ang film clip na ito, pero ang astig e.
Hindi ko alam kung legal-legalan nga ang film clip na ito, pero ang astig e.
Brokensauce. Coming soon to a club near you.
Sir Jonar kung humantong na sa ganyan ang bembangan sapakan na lang... :-X
"Kung ayaw mong masaktan mag-chess ka na lang!"
Something I just recently got to reading from the eminent Prof Solita Monsod:
How PHAP turned a health issue into a trade issue
By Solita Collas-Monsod
Last updated 03:45am (Mla time) 06/23/2007
"MANILA, Philippines -- Trade and Industry Secretary Peter Favila tells me that he does not recall -- and neither does his office have a copy of -- a private letter that, according to Representatives Etta Rosales and Risa Baraquel, he wrote to Solicitor General Agnes Devanadera regarding the Milk Code issue. I accept his statement. But information I obtained subsequent to our conversation is that he had a private talk or talks with Devanadera (I am given to understand that she wasn’t falling for his line) regarding the issue. I leave it up to Secretary Favila whether he wants to deny that, too.
What Favila’s office provided me were copies of (1) a letter he wrote to Health Secretary Francisco Duque referring to the Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Association of the Philippines’ “concern over the negative effects” of two provisions of the Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (RIRR) and asking Duque to “revisit or review” them -- it is noteworthy that the letter was dated May 18, 2006, three days after the health secretary signed the administrative order that contained the RIRR; and (2) the official position of the Department of Trade and Industry on the proposed RIRR submitted to the House Committee on Trade and Industry. I am still waiting for Favila’s response to US Chamber of Commerce president Thomas Donohue’s letter to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, in effect lobbying against the RIRR. I want to compare Favila’s response to that of Duque’s, who essentially told Donohue that he was totally off-base.
But how did the House, and particularly the Committee on Trade and Industry, get involved in a health issue? I am informed that this was a result of the efforts of infant milk-producing pharmaceuticals to convert the issue into a trade issue, since they weren’t making any inroads into the health secretary’s position, despite the intervention of the US Embassy, through its commercial attaché, and a US government functionary concerned with Southeast Asian trade. Presumably the House committee wanted a copy of the RIRR in “aid of legislation,” and wanted to hear what the DTI and others had to say about it. But in light of the recent massacre of the cheap medicine bill in the same House (to the benefit of foreign pharmaceuticals and to the gross disadvantage of Filipinos who buy exorbitantly priced medicines), one is not sure anymore what the two hearings it conducted were in aid of.
One thing was certain: There was a sea change in the attitude of some congressmen between the first (unsympathetic to the pharmaceuticals) and the second (reduced animosity, bordering on sympathy) committee hearing. I leave it to the reader to guess why. There is also another interesting sidelight, which would be amusing if the implications were not so disgusting: After Duque signed the RIRR, three separate house bills on Milk Code amendments were introduced within the space of a month; and, surprise: All three hew pretty closely to the pharmaceutical industry’s line!
But, in any case, it is clear to me that the Department of Trade and Industry’s official position on the RIRR exhibits both gross ignorance of the issues and an indefensible partiality toward the pharmaceuticals.
That may sound like harsh judgment, but anyone who reads (with an open mind, that is) the two documents that Favila’s office sent me is bound to come to the same conclusion.
How’s this for ignorance: As per the official position of the Department of Trade and Industry, “While we agree that ‘breastfeeding is good for babies up to two years,’ we also recognize that the practice of breastfeeding is slowly becoming uncommon, as supported by a report of the World Health Organization showing Filipinos spending P21.5 billion yearly on infant formula.”
Helloo! That “slowly becoming uncommon” phenomenon is precisely why the Department of Health and every right-thinking Filipino, are getting concerned -- because it is accompanied by unnecessary infant and children deaths and morbidity. The Department of Trade and Industry seems to think it is a phenomenon that must be taken as a given. And it seems to be blissfully unaware (ignorant?) that the pharmaceuticals’ official position is that “there is even a decline in the use of breast milk substitutes in the domestic market,” what with a low “penetration rate” of 9 percent (changed to 7 percent more recently) -- a figure which is the result of combining two very unrealistic assumptions -- one that increases the denominator of the ratio, and the other that decreases the numerator.
Moreover, Favila’s letter to Duque cites the two provisions of the RIRR which the pharmaceuticals object to -- but it cites truncated, incomplete provisions which make them appear unreasonable. The complete provisions are eminently reasonable.
The partiality of the Department of Trade and Industry toward the pharmaceuticals is obvious from the following: First, the only provisions of the RIRR it takes exception to are the very same provisions that the pharmaceuticals also take exception to. Second, again per its position paper, “The Department of Trade and Industry, meanwhile, charged with the mandate to protect the rights and welfare of the consumers, has to balance the mandate of the law with a friendly environment conducive to the growth of business.” And yet in doing so, it has weighed 16,000 lives and an even greater number of infant and child ailments against the profits (derived from misleading ads and promotions) of four pharmaceuticals -- and clearly finds the latter more deserving of concern.
Hey, the Department of Health isn’t creating an environment that stops those four pharmaceutical firms from growing. They can grow -- as long as they don’t do it at the expense of the growth and health of Filipino children. Capisce?"
Is there really no limit to the avarice of the giant multinationals? Could their regard for human life and basic decency really get any lower than this?
FRIENDS LANG KAMI
iba talaga pag pera na ang pinag-uusapan. perhaps not many are aware that multinational drug firms line the pockets of certain hig-ranking members of the Philippine Medical Association. you want proof? then proceed to the PMA headquarters in north avenue, which is right across the new TriNoMa and next to the Block. once inside, scan the names of their conference halls and facilities. kulang na lang magpagawa sila ng bagong "Viagra proctology seminar room."
that is why i truly admire social reformers like dr. alran bengzon who, as health secretary during the aquino administration, was instrumental in providing the material basis for the generics law. God knows what he was up against when he successfully pushed for its ratification.
"Of all the books I read, Facebook is the greatest"
--sign on a T-shirt I saw on the way to work the other day
Sh*t, i've been working in the Middle East too long. This clip turned me on. That is until the negotiations moved from the coitus articles to the commitment clauses. Fortunately, the third-party provision saved the day.Originally Posted by JonarSabilano
"Catalonia is a country and FC Barcelona is their army."
Army sues Left leaders for bringing kids to street rallies
By Nestor P. Burgos Jr.
Last updated 07:14am (Mla time) 07/08/2007
ILOILO CITY, Philippines—A spokesperson of the Armed Forces of the Philippines in Western Visayas has filed a complaint at the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) against Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) founding chair Jose Maria Sison and leaders of militant groups here for bringing children to protest rallies.
In a two-page complaint filed before the CHR yesterday, Capt. Lowen Gil Marquez, chief of the AFP’s Civil Relations Service in Western Visayas, alleged that militant groups Gabriela, Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU) and the party-list group Bayan Muna violated the rights of children under Republic Act No. 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act) and Presidential Decree No. 603 (The Child and Youth Welfare Code of the Philippines).
Aside from Sison, named respondents were Boy Bosque, spokesperson of Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) in Panay; Wenefredo Dubliso, KMU-Panay spokesperson and Lucy Francisco, regional coordinator of the Gabriela Women’s Party.
Marquez claimed that he saw around 100 children age 5-15 years old holding streamers and placards “under the scorching heat of the sun” during the Labor Day protest rallies held at the Iloilo provincial capitol on May 1. The children were among 2,000 protesters that joined the rally and marched in the main streets of the city.
He attached with his complaint pictures, news clippings and video footage of the children attending the rally.
Marquez said that he included Sison, who is in exile in The Netherlands, because the militant groups are among the CPP’s alleged “front organizations.”
He said protest rallies are “not a good environment” for children below 18 years old because these are usually outpouring of grievances that might confuse the children.
“They are developing potential recruits in the leftist movement,” Marquez told the Inquirer in a telephone interview.
He said he did not want to prosecute the children, or the parents, but to stop the practice of bringing them to protest rallies.
Militant groups denounced Marquez and denied that they were forcing the children to attend the rallies.
“Their parents bring them to the rallies because no one is left at home to tend for them. We do not force them and we ensure that they are safe and secure and they are made to understand the issues,” said Francisco in a telephone interview.
Francisco pointed out that under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children, children have the right to express themselves and peacefully assemble for redress of grievances.
“The parents of these children believe that their children should be part of these protest rallies because the issues that they carry, like joblessness, poverty, low wages and high tuition fees, affect the whole family,” said Francisco.
She said Marquez should “stop pretending to be an advocate of children’s rights.”
“If Marquez is really concerned with the welfare of children, then he should help put a stop to the killings and abduction of activists whose children are agonizing daily if their parents are alive or dead. He should also call for a stop to the massive militarization in the countryside that is victimizing civilians especially women and children,” said Francisco.
Bosque said the complaint is part of the AFP’s campaign to “harass” militant groups and their leaders by filing criminal complaints similar to the rebellion charges filed against militant lawmakers which were later ordered dismissed by the Supreme Court.
^^^ Mabuhay ang AFP! Akala ng mga Komunista at Tibak sila lang marunong manloko ng huwes at korte? O ha! Bakit nga naman kasi nagdadala ng mga bata sa mga rally? Wala akong pakialam kahit sino may pakana ng rally, hindi dapat nagdadala ng mga bata dun. Para namang alam ng mga bata ang lahat ng issue tungkol sa pinagra-rally nila.
"Kung ayaw mong masaktan mag-chess ka na lang!"
This is from PDI's main editorial today___
Savages on the loose
First posted 8 hours and 24 mins ago
"MANILA, Philippines -- President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo called it right. Last Tuesday’s ambush of a search-and-rescue military convoy in Albarka, Basilan -- 14 Marines looking for kidnapped Italian missionary Fr. Giancarlo Bossi were killed, 10 of them beheaded -- was a bestial act, the work of savages. To this deliberate provocation the national leadership must respond with both iron fist and open mind. The Armed Forces of the Philippines must bring the savages to justice. But the government must also push peace negotiations with Moro separatists, finally, to a fair conclusion.
A senior military officer said the beheadings were a sure sign that Abu Sayyaf bandits were involved. “Only the Abu Sayyaf is into beheading people,” the officer said.
But the presence and the participation of Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) rebels in the ambush, confirmed on Wednesday by Mohagher Iqbal himself, the separatist movement’s chief negotiator, complicates the matter considerably. The government is engaged in peace negotiations with the MILF, an undertaking that may be only several months away from completion. The MILF’s role in the ambush has cast a pall on the peace talks. Because of the ambush, the nagging question that drives critics of any peace agreement has gained emotional resonance: Can the government, in fact, trust the rebels?
The MILF has certainly some explaining to do. Iqbal could readily claim self-defense as the reason for the MILF’s armed response to the convoy’s passage through Barangay Ginanta, but he was at a loss to explain the beheadings. “I received the report that our troops beheaded seven Marines. We are investigating and determining the identities of those involved.” (He also said MILF rebels had recovered 11 headless bodies, not 10.)
Many of the details of the ambush, described by GMA Network reporter Jun Veneracion as hell on earth, remain enveloped in the so-called fog of war. But a careful review of the first reports tells us that the following facts are key, and that together they paint a bleak picture indeed.
First: The ambush took place in Barangay Ginanta, the site of an MILF redoubt. The entry of seven military vehicles into the area suggests that it was the MILF -- taking advantage of the pouring rain -- that started the skirmish. Iqbal said there was lack of proper coordination; rebels could have taken the unexpected sight of unknown military trucks as a provocation. But Marine spokesman Lt. Col. Ariel Caculitan criticized that line of thinking: surely, he said, lack of coordination was “not a 'go' signal to consider attacking Marine troops.”
Second: The ambush started in the morning and lasted about 10 hours. The military estimates that about 400 bandits and “lawless elements” took part in the ambush. (The MILF claims four of its guerrillas were killed and seven were wounded.) The duration of the skirmish suggests that it could only have been sustained by other armed groups joining forces with MILF rebels. Caculitan has raised that same possibility: “Considering blood relations and other connections in the community,” it may well be that “other lawless groups” joined the battle.
Third: According to Veneracion, the houses in the village that the convoy passed through were ominously empty. This, soldiers had told him some time before, usually meant “trouble” ahead. Why? Imminent armed action naturally forces villagers to flee to safer ground.
Taken together, what do these facts, and the logical implications they carry, tell us about the situation in Basilan?
The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) remains on the losing end of the war for hearts and minds; we find it telling that not a single resident tried to send a warning to the military convoy.
Also, the lines that divide anti-AFP forces are porous indeed: MILF, Abu Sayyaf, “lawless elements” -- in certain villages the differences may not make much of a difference, or may not exist at all.
This lack of public support at the local level and the ambiguousness of the “enemy” make it difficult to root out the causes of insurgency, terrorism, even crimes of opportunity like kidnapping. All the more reason to forge a fair deal with the MILF. Those we smoke the peace pipe with have less incentive to lie in ambush, in the pouring rain."
I find it ridiculous that a separatist group that has done nothing but flout this nation and this republic for decades should have its "own" territory within our sovereign land. How the hell we ever let this happen is mind-boggling, and an absolute insult to any claims we may have to genuine nationhood. No self-respecting state would nor should ever agree to ceding control to any degree to those sworn to set up their own country within a country.
The AFP has always said that these insurgencies are under control. Now I believe, with this latest barbarous and tragic episode, it is high time for the AFP to put up or shut up. After all, would the AFP want the people to believe that these insurgents have been around as long as they have simply because they've done good business with the colonels and generals while the foot soldiers have been left as fodder?
The marines who lost their lives, and especially those who lost their heads, deserve better.
FRIENDS LANG KAMI
Thousands of Women Killed for Family "Honor"
for National Geographic News
February 12, 2002
Hundreds, if not thousands, of women are murdered by their families each year in the name of family "honor." It's difficult to get precise numbers on the phenomenon of honor killing; the murders frequently go unreported, the perpetrators unpunished, and the concept of family honor justifies the act in the eyes of some societies.
Most honor killings occur in countries where the concept of women as a vessel of the family reputation predominates, said Marsha Freemen, director of International Women's Rights Action Watch at the Hubert Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota.
Reports submitted to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights show that honor killings have occurred in Bangladesh, Great Britain, Brazil, Ecuador, Egypt, India, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Pakistan, Morocco, Sweden, Turkey, and Uganda. In countries not submitting reports to the UN, the practice was condoned under the rule of the fundamentalist Taliban government in Afghanistan, and has been reported in Iraq and Iran.
But while honor killings have elicited considerable attention and outrage, human rights activists argue that they should be regarded as part of a much larger problem of violence against women.
In India, for example, more than 5,000 brides die annually because their dowries are considered insufficient, according to the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). Crimes of passion, which are treated extremely leniently in Latin America, are the same thing with a different name, some rights advocates say.
"In countries where Islam is practiced, they're called honor killings, but dowry deaths and so-called crimes of passion have a similar dynamic in that the women are killed by male family members and the crimes are perceived as excusable or understandable," said Widney Brown, advocacy director for Human Rights Watch.
The practice, she said, "goes across cultures and across religions."
Complicity by other women in the family and the community strengthens the concept of women as property and the perception that violence against family members is a family and not a judicial issue.
"Females in the family—mothers, mothers-in-law, sisters, and cousins—frequently support the attacks. It's a community mentality," said Zaynab Nawaz, a program assistant for women's human rights at Amnesty International.
There is nothing in the Koran, the book of basic Islamic teachings, that permits or sanctions honor killings. However, the view of women as property with no rights of their own is deeply rooted in Islamic culture, Tahira Shahid Khan, a professor specializing in women's issues at the Aga Khan University in Pakistan, wrote in Chained to Custom, a review of honor killings published in 1999.
"Women are considered the property of the males in their family irrespective of their class, ethnic, or religious group. The owner of the property has the right to decide its fate. The concept of ownership has turned women into a commodity which can be exchanged, bought and sold."
Honor killings are perpetrated for a wide range of offenses. Marital infidelity, pre-marital sex, flirting, or even failing to serve a meal on time can all be perceived as impugning the family honor.
Amnesty International has reported on one case in which a husband murdered his wife based on a dream that she had betrayed him. In Turkey, a young woman's throat was slit in the town square because a love ballad had been dedicated to her over the radio.
In a society where most marriages are arranged by fathers and money is often exchanged, a woman's desire to choose her own husband—or to seek a divorce—can be viewed as a major act of defiance that damages the honor of the man who negotiated the deal.
Even victims of rape are vulnerable. In a widely reported case in March of 1999, a 16-year-old mentally retarded girl who was raped in the Northwest Frontier province of Pakistan was turned over to her tribe's judicial council. Even though the crime was reported to the police and the perpetrator was arrested, the Pathan tribesmen decided that she had brought shame to her tribe and she was killed in front of a tribal gathering.
The teenage brothers of victims are frequently directed to commit the murder because, as minors, they would be subject to considerably lighter sentencing if there is legal action. Typically, they would serve only three months to a year.
In the Name of Family Honor
Officials often claim that nothing can be done to halt the practice because the concept of women's rights is not culturally relevant to deeply patriarchal societies.
"Politicians frequently argue that these things are occurring among uneducated, illiterate people whose attitudes can't be changed," said Brown. "We see it more as a matter of political will."
The story of Samia Imran is one of the most widely cited cases used to illustrate the vulnerability of women in a culture that turns a blind eye to such practices. The case's high profile no doubt arises from the fact that the murder took place in broad daylight, was abetted by the victim's mother, who was a doctor, and occurred in the office of Asma Jahangir, a prominent Pakistani lawyer and the UN reporter on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions.
In April 1999 Imran, a 28-year-old married woman seeking a divorce from her violent husband after 10 years of marriage, reluctantly agreed to meet her mother in a lawyers' office in Lahore, Pakistan. Imran's family opposed the divorce and considered her seeking a divorce to be shaming to the family's honor. Her mother arrived at the lawyer's office with a male companion, who immediately shot and killed Imran.
Imran's father, who was president of the Chamber of Commerce in Peshawar, filed a complaint with the police accusing the lawyers of the abduction and murder of Imran. The local clergy issued fatwas (religious rulings) against both women and money was promised to anyone who killed them.
The Peshawar High Court eventually threw out the father's suit. No one was ever arrested for Imran's death.
Imran's case received a great deal of publicity, but frequently honor killings are virtually ignored by community members. "In many cases, the women are buried in unmarked graves and all records of their existence are wiped out," said Brown.
Women accused by family members of bringing dishonor to their families are rarely given the opportunity to prove their innocence. In many countries where the practice is condoned or at least ignored, there are few shelters and very little legal protection.
"In Jordan, if a woman is afraid that her family wants to kill her, she can check herself into the local prison, but she can't check herself out, and the only person who can get her out is a male relative, who is frequently the person who poses the threat," said Brown.
"That this is their idea of how to protect women," Brown said, "is mind boggling."
"Catalonia is a country and FC Barcelona is their army."
Buti nalang ang Honour Killing version ng Pinoy more in line sa Sicilian vendetta. Pag winalang hiya ng husto pamilya mo, ubusan na ng lahi.
"Catalonia is a country and FC Barcelona is their army."
Why oh why do we put up with this kind of shit from the pharmaceutical industry...?
"Cheap medicines bills explained
By Neal Cruz
Last updated 02:40am (Mla time) 08/03/2007
MANILA, Philippines -- A few days ago, a front-page story in the Philippine Daily Inquirer reported that foreign pharmaceutical companies in the Philippines have put together a P1-billion lobby fund to kill the cheap medicines bills. I am inclined to believe this report. The local pharmaceutical market, after all, is worth P100 billion a year, 70 percent to 80 percent of it controlled by the foreign drug companies. What’s P1 billion to kill a bill that would drastically reduce their profits?
Look at these facts:
The Philippines ranked second to Japan as having the highest medicine prices in Asia. Filipinos spent for medicines the equivalent of $1 billion a year, from 1997 to 2001, the highest in Asean, notwithstanding that half of the Philippines’ 80 million population have no access to essential medicines. The cost of medicines here is 40 percent to 70 percent higher than in other Asean countries. For Filipinos who have access to medicines, their budget for total health-related expenses (not just medicines) is a measly P2,000 per person per year.
The government has tried to provide the people with cheaper medicines by importing them, through the Philippine International Trading Corp. (PITC). The efforts of the PITC, however, are puny and doesn’t even make a dent on local drug prices. In a P100-billion market, the PITC’s yearly import budget is only P300 million. What’s more, it has few outlets for its drugs. The two biggest drugstore chains in the country, Mercury Drug and Watson’s, refuse to sell medicines imported by the PITC.
How can the multinational drug companies get away with such profiteering? Mainly because of the law on patents and the Intellectual Property Code. These two laws allow pharmaceutical companies exclusive rights to manufacture and sell products they have developed. The multinationals have taken advantage of these laws by pricing their medicines for as much as the market can bear. They can price their products at any level because there is no competition. Any medicine importer, including the government, can be sued by the multinationals that do not like imported drugs to compete with their products.
The Philippines is clearly in the grip of a cartel or oligopoly. The medicine market is controlled by foreign companies who have their own association with plenty of money for propaganda and lobbying. Their products are manufactured here by one or two companies, also foreign-owned. They are distributed by only one foreign company and retailed by two drugstore chains, one of them (Watson’s) foreign-owned.
The Constitution mandates the government to prevent restraints in trade, such as cartels and monopolies, but lawyers say it is difficult to prove the existence of a cartel, hence government exerts no effort to enforce the ban although we have cartels not only in the pharmaceutical industry but also in cement, petroleum products and the power sector. What is obvious to the layman – cartels -- the legal profession refuses to see.
The government has tried to fight back with legislation. The first was the Generics Law wherein doctors are mandated to write the generic names of the medicines they prescribe and the drugstores to carry generic equivalents of branded ones. But many doctors still forget to write the generic names, and the drug companies have mounted a subtle campaign to make people believe that generics are less effective than the branded, and expensive, medicines. On parallel importations, they have a campaign painting imported medicines as “counterfeit,” even if these imported products are genuine ones manufactured by their sister companies.
Congress is counterattacking with two bills, one in the Senate and the other in the House. The Senate passed its version before the 13th Congress adjourned, but the House failed to pass its version for lack of quorum. The bills have been refiled in the present Congress. Their main authors are Sen. Mar Roxas for the Senate bill, and Rep. Ferjenel Biron for the House version.
Kapihan sa Manila invited the two lawmakers to explain the differences between the two bills. Biron was there but Roxas only sent his legal counsel Blas Viterbo. Former Health Secretary Quasi Romualdez and former PITC chief Obet Pagdanganan were also there.
The differences are quite simple. The Biron bill seeks to impose price controls on medicines, while the Roxas bill seeks to amend the Intellectual Property Code.
In a separate interview, Roxas outlined the provisions of his bill:
“1. Disallow another patent for new uses of an existing substance (already patented) so that drug manufacturers can immediately copy off-patent products without fear of lawsuit.
“2. Allow parallel importation and international exhaustion of intellectual property rights for patents. Parallel importation refers to the importation, without the consent of the patent holder, of a patented product that is marketed in another country. International exhaustion refers to the regime where the supply and price of a product is moderated by competition. Both would allow the Philippines to shop around for a quality product with a better price.
“3. Allow the ‘early working doctrine’ to enable generic drug companies to experiment and test generic versions of patented drugs before their patents expire. It will also allow them to produce and sell generic versions of patented drugs upon their patents’ expiration.
“4. Restructure provisions of government use. At present, the government is required to apply for a license before it can use patented medicines or processes for manufacture. The bill does away with this compulsory licensing, making it easier and quicker to respond to public health threats without fear of law suits.”
FRIENDS LANG KAMI