To hide in plain sight

It’s a standard feature of any fictional movie, TV series or novel in the action/thriller genre: effortless access by state security, intelligence or law enforcement agencies to data bases, both public and private, to identify or monitor a friendly or hostile target. The overall plot and story line may be fictionalized. But the identification technology is real. And so is the ease by which the state can appropriate it.

Actually, we already live in a world with a de facto National ID system. Government surely has issued sets of ID cards across several of its agencies. And the databases exist in both public and private realms which are, or have the capacity to be, centralized. The physical token, the card, that represents your distinct identifier in the computerized national ID system can even be dispensed with. Ultimately, we will be identified by captured physiological data: fingerprints, eye scans, facial recognition.

The imminent passage of a National ID law has forced us to reexamine our stand on this issue. A considerable majority either support the proposal or are otherwise ambivalent. But the smaller, vocal opposition remains. The hysteria is due to the horror stories. Breaches of privacy, even in the most advanced systems abroad. Databases for sale, etc., etc. Harassment, surveillance.

High bar. The Supreme Court will have the last word. It first faced this challenge, 20 years ago, under the administration of President Fidel V. Ramos. His was the administrative order to establish a National Computerized Identification Reference System. Senator Blas Ople said No. The Court, in the case of Ople v. Torres, speaking thru future Chief Justice Reynato Puno, struck down the issuance in one of the strongest worded and most passionate defenses of the right to privacy and its preeminence. It was a rejection of the entire idea of a National ID system absent a guarantee that even the slightest possibility of misuse or abuse were obviated.

There are virtues touted by proponents, foremost being the facilitation of delivery of services and its law enforcement advantages. The downside is self evident: the compromise of privacy and liberty. Again, proponents riposte that, with technology advances, our privacy levels have stooped low anyway. So no blood? The debate is really to what extent are we prepared to surrender our freedoms in exchange for the conveniences this system offers.

At bottom, the cost is your anonymity. As pundit Jane Robbins puts it: ‘In a free society, “efficiency” and “ability to do cool things with it,” or even “it’s for their own good,” are not killer arguments. These arguments are those of a police state.’

Competitiveness. Trade Secretary Ramon Lopez didn’t know what hit him. Philippine Gross Domestic Product of 6.7% placed us at a high 5th among all the countries ranked in the World Competitiveness Yearbook (WCY). In the four main factor groupings, however, across which the WCY 340 sub factor indicators were spread, we experienced drops: economic performance, government efficiency, business efficiency, infrastructure. It didn’t help that the competition also upped their game. Hence, the drop in our overall rank and the whopping 9 points of the spread, from 41st to 50th (of 63 countries).

It’s a catastrophe but lets accept it as a wake up call. Its undeniable that we’re doing good. Let this be a challenge for us to do better.

Degrees of separation. The Consultative Committee on Constitutional Change (ConCom) is proposing a higher educational qualification for aspirants to elective office. This used to be a property qualification issue. The poor could not afford to study. But the State negates this with the free college education program. 

The ConCom is betting that a college degree can be a measure of better service. But in a republican democracy, the core idea remains that everyone should have a voice. You can’t change that. The right to vote and be voted for has long been the most enduring emblem of equality in a democracy.

Plus, put in all the qualifications you can invent. You can never legislate competence.

Freedom to dream. Suddenly coming into a measure of celebrity, whether by fame, notoriety or accident of birth, tends to impact on a person’s sense of self worth. Just scroll down the names of 2019’s aspirants for the Senate.

My dream ticket includes several incumbent and past members of both Houses. I have extra fervent hopes for certain personalities who never held elective public office. Dean Chel Diokno. Susan Ople. Dr. Willy Ong. Regina Lopez. Brando, on the waterfront, lamented that he could have been a contender. These four will not regret their lives of service. It is their best platform and propaganda. It is also serves as assurance of their good conduct should we carry them into office.

Team sports.  A love for sports was a pleasure my brothers and I shared with our late father. If Manong Ernie were still with us, his daily fix of front page, opinion section, business page news and the stock market reviews would be joined by a healthy fixation with the ongoing NBA playoffs. Of course, his home team would be the Warriors. Too bad they lost yesterday’s game 5 to Houston.

The tradition lives on in my generation. My son and I are excitedly anticipating next month’s opening whistle of the biggest sporting event of all, the 2018 World Cup in Russia. The world has always been the stage of football, the most popularly watched and played sport. Even if it lags as a poor third to basketball and boxing at home, our national team can proudly boast of being ranked 111th in the world. This is the highest ranking we have ever managed in history. Only Vietnam is better placed among our ASEAN neighbors. We have high hopes for Philippine football. One day, we know that the AZKALS will play in the World Cup.