Katipuneros vs punyeteros; Amal Clooney on South China Sea conflict

Who are the katipuneros?

BayanKo, Katipunan, NACTODAP, Dutertistas – the forces of change.

I see them all coming together. They are the heirs of Andres Bonifacio and Heneral Luna.

As Jose Alejandrino said, in the end the battle will be between the katipuneros and the punyeteros.

Who are the punyeteros?

They are the established order who oppose change, those who betrayed the 1898 Philippine Revolution and hijacked Edsa 1986, the oligarchs and family dynasties who perpetuate a political system of corruption and greed to serve their personal interests.

In this battle, the katipuneros will prevail. Why? Because they represent the majority, the marginalized sectors that have been shut out of the political mainstream. They will win because their cause is just. They will win to build a new nation under God.

Quietly they are organizing. Quietly they are working to consolidate their ranks. Then they will descend like thunder.

The traditional politicians failed to understand there is a wind of change blowing in the country. The people are tired of the old politics. They are tired of corruption and incompetence. They are tired of being enslaved by poverty and hunger. They are tired of the lies and propaganda being fed to them.

They have begun to realize power belongs to them and only they can change the course of their country’s destiny, thanks to the social media.

No money, no machines can stop them. If need be, they are ready to draw their bolos. When that happens, the punyeteros better flee the country.

*      *      *

There are two UN decisions that affect us that we should think about. The first is the UN decision in favor of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo that her human rights were violated by the Aquino government by keeping her imprisoned without trial and no evidence against her according to the rules of law and evidence.

The other UN decision from UNCLOS decided it would hear the case the Philippines lodged against China on their dispute in the South China Sea. These decisions are ironic because in the first case the Aquino government refuses to honor the UN decision. The UN found the Aquino government violated GMA’s human rights on three counts. As far as I know, the UN decision is being contested by the Sandiganbayan which has redefined the meaning of “plunder” to keep GMA under detention.

 The UN Working Group issued an opinion and endorsed all the arguments in the complaint filed by Amal Clooney.

 Amal Clooney, the celebrated barrister, works with Doughty Chambers in London. She filed the case with the United Nations on behalf of the former president of the Philippines. This decision was long awaited by Filipinos.

I quote from Amal’s letter to GMA’s Philippine lawyers: “More specifically the panel (UN Working Group) ruled that her (GMA) detention is arbitrary under each and all of the three categories of arbitrariness recognized by the UN Working Group that we had put forward in our Petition (categories ii, iii, and v) holding that : Mrs. Arroyo was denied bail on grounds that are not compatible with international law; she did not benefit from the presumption in favor of bail; she was denied bail exclusively on the basis of the alleged strength of evidence against her ; measures alternative to pre-trial detention were not considered and there were undue delays in considering her bail position in the proceedings against her as a whole.” 

 Accordingly the UN recommended the ‘reconsideration of Mrs. Arroyo’s application for bail in accordance with the relevant international human rights standards.’

*      *      *

What is interesting to us is the UNCLOS decision it would hear the arbitration case sought by the Philippines on the South China sea conflict. Philippine ambassador Alberto A. Encomienda sent me what he calls a monograph on “The South China Sea Issues and Related Core Interests of the Philippines.”

 Encomienda is probably the most knowledgeable Filipino diplomat on the subject but has been shunned by the Department of Foreign Affairs as being pro-China.

 In a dinner I hosted for Amal Clooney when she came to Manila, I seated Ambassador Encomienda on one side next to her, and, on the other, Mr. Kang who was the political attaché of the Vietnamese embassy. Our conversation was how to bring together the Vietnamese and Philippines positions closer on the issues of the conflict.

Amal told us her work as a lawyer included other areas of international law. Among the cases she had handled was Cambodia vs Thailand, requesting for interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear. She also represented Cambodia in inter-state territorial claim before the International Court of Justice.

We had an interesting conversation. At the time I thought it would be interesting if we could get her firm Doughty Chambers to advise us on the South China Sea conflict.

This was her answer: “It is a bit complicated because while Ambassador Encomienda’s group is an NGO, the South China Sea is a problem of the government that is handled by the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Office of the Solicitor-General. However, we might be able to start the work now… and we should be ready.”

Unfortunately, the Philippines has a shortsighted policy regarding its relations with China. It failed to see the bigger picture. The Vietnamese, who also have territorial disputes with China, showed themselves to be more practical.

Their disputes did not prevent Vietnam’s Communist Party Secretary-General Nguyen Phu Trong and China’s President Xi Jinping from signing a dozen cooperation agreements covering party-to-party relations, investment, infrastructure, culture and a bank loan worth $200 million from China Development Bank to the Bank of Investment and Development of Vietnam.

The Xinhua News Agency commented the settlement of their territorial disputes depend on “the two neighbors’ will and ability to properly manage their differences” and not allow the outside world to interfere.

This “trade-and-commerce” approach by Vietnam towards China is what I had been advocating in my past columns on how best to deal with the Philippine-China dispute. Our territorial dispute can be put in the backburner by concentrating on trade, commerce, and investment opportunities that benefit both countries.