Post-2017 ASEAN Summit: A Revolutionary Government?
Is it true that P17 billion was spent for the 2017 ASEAN Summit attended by nine nations and 600 to 1,000 delegates and only P10 billion was spent for the 2015 APEC event attended by 21 nations and more than 7,000 delegates? Wow.
In the name of transparency and public accountability, can the Office of the President and the COA inform the Filipino people how the P17 billion pesos budget was spent?
What criteria should be used to gauge the success of the just concluded summit? Not the pomp, not the glitter, not the publicity.
The ultimate test of the success of the 2017 ASEAN Summit will be the positive, concrete benefits for the people and communities of the ASEAN, the region, and the world. Did the 2017 ASEAN Summit result in significant inroads for regional peace, territorial conflicts, human rights, migrant protection, cultural exchanges and environmental protection? Time will tell.
Debates have been raised regarding the merits and demerits of fair versus free trade supported during the summit. While the Center for Migrant Advocacy (CMA) head Ellene Sana lauded the signing of the ASEAN Consensus that "stipulates the general principles, fundamental rights of migrant workers and members of their families, specific rights of migrant workers, obligations and commitments of ASEAN Member States and aims to establish a framework for closer cooperation among member states on addressing migrant workers' issues in the region," the implementation and practice of this non-legally binding, evolving document need to be monitored to guarantee the genuine protection and rights of migrants.
For now, locally, protests have been raised about the huge budget for the summit, which critics say could have been used instead for the millions of poor and other vulnerable sectors of this country. People have also asked why protocols appeared to have been shamelessly broken (for example, Vice President Leni Robredo was conspicuously sidelined while former president GMA and other undeserving were given prominent roles). To our national embarrassment, Du30's newly appointed spokesperson was publicly exposed when he repeatedly denied that the issue of human rights was not raised during the meetings with heads of state. Later, the White house and Canadian PM Trudeau confirmed that this sensitive human rights issue was raised with DU30.
Unmindful of the criticisms, DU30 and his supporters will remain heady, intoxicated by the positive statements about the "successful" ASEAN Summit, the hospitality of the Filipinos, the safe management of the protection of the foreign guests, the loans and grants promised for the Philippines, etc.
The "successful" ASEAN Summit plus the "successful" Marawi conflict management, coupled with survey results showing high public support for DU30 and his and his appointees' own personal sense of entitlements and achievements are predicted to boost the confidence of DU30 to push for a revolutionary government as early as this November"if destabilization -coming from communist groups, the allies and supporters of the Liberal Party and PNoy- worsens." Local and global groundwork and calls have been posted calling for public support for his revolutionary government this November 30.
We sincerely hope the AFP and DND officers are real gentlemen who will honor their word and not disclaim later that it was VP Leni Robredo, not them, who made public their non-support for revolutionary government.
The flippant reaction of DU30 to the VP's military assurance against revolutionary government was uncharacteristically too mild, however, and is now making many conclude, with more certainty that "the threat of a revolutionary government - an authoritarian rule, is real."
To the calls for public support for DU30's revolutionary government, this alternative call: "Let us not be complacent. Let us be ready to defend democracy. It is time to make a stand."
- Latest
