Secrecy is the freedom tyrants dream of.—Bill Moyers
Action for Economic Reforms (AER) is a public-interest organization involved in research and reform advocacy. Last March, AER coordinator Filomeno Sta. Ana III wrote a letter to Undersecretary Elmer Hernandez, managing head of the Board of Investments, requesting information that would help AER’s research on fiscal incentives. The research, according to Sta. Ana, was in connection with pending legislation “to streamline and rationalize the incentives systems.”
Sta. Ana asked Hernandez for a list of companies that received fiscal incentives, the sectors to which they belonged, and the types of and equivalent amounts of incentives given to them, specifically the following:
1. Income-tax holiday.
2. Exemption from taxes and duties on imported spare parts.
3. Exemption from wharfage dues and export tax, duty, import and fees.
4. Tax exemption on breeding stocks and genetic materials.
5. Tax credits.
6. Additional deductions from taxable income.
Hernandez replied to Sta. Ana one month later, through Lucita Reyes, executive director, Project Assessment Group.
“We regret to inform you that we cannot provide the data requested given that incentives availed by firms do not form part of general information and are, therefore, considered confidential in nature.”
Kompeeedentchal in naychor? A seeekret?
The government gives tax breaks and other fiscal incentives to certain companies and it can keep the beneficiaries, the type and amount of incentives hidden from the public? Yes!
There is no law that requires government officials to disclose information that the public has a right to know. Even the Supreme Court lamented the absence of such a law.
“It is unfortunate, however, that after almost 20 years from the birth of the 1987 Constitution, there is still no enabling law that provides the mechanics for the compulsory duty of government agencies to disclose information on government transactions. Hopefully, the desired enabling law will finally see the light of day if and when Congress decides to approve the proposed Freedom of Access to Information Act.” (Chavez v. NFA).
The Supreme Court in Valmonte et al. v. Belmonte also said the right to information is essential to democracy.
“The cornerstone of this republican system of government is delegation of power by the people to the state. In this system, governmental agencies and institutions operate within the limits of the authority conferred by the people. Denied access to information on the inner workings of government, the citizenry can become prey to the whims and caprices of those to whom the power had been delegated.”
The right to information is a pillar of democracy because it supports other rights. Freedom of the press and of speech, the right to petition the government for redress of grievances cannot be properly exercised if the public is kept in the dark about the government’s doings.
The Freedom of Access to Information Act of 2009 (FOIA) will strengthen the principle of the accountability of public officials.
“Unless citizens have the proper information, they cannot hold public officials accountable for anything” (Supreme Court in Chavez v. Public Estates Authority).
Lawyer Nepomuceno Malaluan, a staunch advocate of the FOIA, explained the urgent need for the law.
“The essence of the bill is to make the constitutional right to know and the policy of full disclosure of transactions involving public interest finally operable. Currently, the right is practically unenforceable. For instance, there is no standard procedure in dealing with information requests. Second, there is no clear law defining coverage. Third, although the Supreme Court said the policy of full public disclosure requires government to disclose certain transactions of public interest without need of request or demand, there is no legal mechanism to do this. Fourth, there are no effective sanctions for the unlawful denial of information so there is no disincentive against violating the right.”
The Freedom of Information Act of 2009 is pending in the Senate. This is the third time such a bill has been brought before that body. An earlier version was not taken up because the Senate was preoccupied with the Estrada impeachment. A later version was derailed when the Committee on Public Information took on the “Hello Garci” hearings. There are no distractions this year. The Senate has no excuse not to pass the law this time around.
Right to Know, Right Now!
No tags for this post.
This Asian guy sure looks familiar.
http://tiny.cc/OhNLU
In the U.S. , we have the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. The law allows
any citizen to access government informations important to them. It is only in Dictatorial countries that the informations from the government are denied to its citizens. The government hides from its
people.
If you want to do unlawful things as government official. You have
to hide informations and data. This is the cause why government
officials who steal and are living beyond their means are hard to
prosecute.
Cockroaches hate the light. So are corrupt officials.
i agree with you here. there ought to be a right to information.
‘Even the Supreme Court lamented the absence of such a law.’
What kind of Supreme Court is that? If it is in the constitution then the Supreme Court should rule in favor of a citizen’s right to information. Then it is now up to the government to pass a law prohibiting the release of certain information.
In a country well known for the rent seeking activities of big business why is it a surprise when this government functionary says to citizens seeking information on who gets perks to F-Off.
This is one case where all incentives must be given universally. Who gets to decide on who prospers and who does not?
Why is there a government agency that gets to decide? Isn’t that a sort of central planning for big business alone. Isn’t that a form of state socialism for big business?
It is a well known fact that the cell phone industry was the recipient of this type of tax incentives.
Hey MB if you guys want to reform this system then why not ask for uniform policies for all businesses?
The minute you give the bureaucrats in weak states power to decide on anything they turn it into a tradable commodity.
It is a sad fact of economic life in the Philippines that the small business guy carries the load for the big guys who have a license to avoid taxation.
The case law on the right to information has been continually abused by the NFA in its massive importation of rice.
“Hey MB if you guys want to reform this system then why not ask for uniform policies for all businesses?”
Hindi nga ba sinabi ko that AER requested information on fiscal incentives so we can do research on how to streamline and rationalize the incentives system? AER does research before proposing recommendations. Isn’t that the way it should be?
I’m curious bakit panay ang banat mo sa AER?
“Sta. Ana asked Hernandez for a list of companies that received fiscal incentives, the sectors to which they belonged, and the types of and equivalent amounts of incentives given to them, specifically the following:”
MB, the BOI regularly publishes a list of the type of industries/businesses that get incentives. The incentives are made public. Otherwise how will companies know to get their registration with the BOI to get the incentives. They are of public knowledge. Always have been.
Padre your groups question to the BOI was who are the individual companies who got these incentives?
I always thought you understood what you wrote?
Ever since the early 80’s the type of business that was entitled to incentives are public knowledge. This was available from the BOI.
What is the need for the BOI anyway? So what is it you guys want to reform?
Yes, that is the way it should be, make a study first before recommending anything.
Executive privilege?
Manny Villar will probably use the passage of the Freedom of Information Act of 2009 in his campaign for Malacanang 2010 and that part of his platform relating to reducing graft/corruption.
VILLAR’S mindset is like that of the “Mananso sa Quiapo”.
Those con people who entices you to exchange your watch with
a “diamond ring” that is in fact a “Puwit ng Baso.
“You vote for me. Then, I will pass the Freedom of Information
Act”. The Fellow is a sitting Senator. He can help pass it. If
he wants to make it pass. But, You have to vote for him as
a President first. Then he will pass it. Scratch my ass, then
I will scratch your damn ass.
I have not seen such immature and childish thinking of Politicians. The fellow has hidden agendas, duplicitous and has stinking thinking.
Hyden: that is not what I meant, and remember, laws are not created by the EXECUTIVE Branch/Malacanang-resident. What I meant was that in 2007, Manny Villar authored Senate Bill 1578, which (along with the bill authored by Jinggoy Estrada and about 2 others) result in the Freedom of Information Bill of 2009.
Manny Villar can say that for many years, he has always been for better governance, in particular, transparency in government — evidence: Freedom of Information Act.
Hyden:
you can use the same logic on “vote for me – and I will stop corruption”.
“Manny Villar can say that for many years, he has always been for better governance, in particular, transparency in government…”
Transparency my assh, Villar won’t even care to explain to the people in the senate inquiry why he is clean/unclean in the C-5 mess.
Transparency and anti-corruption are not Villar’s strong points in his campaign for president.
he has learned from Erap and Arroyo.
Face the allegations in a judicial court of law NOT in the senate kangaroo court of public opinion.
A tactic for Villar — point to the many bills he authored that became law, then say NoyNoy is hanggang salita promises promises lang. Villar will ignore C5 like NoyNoy will ignore Hacienda Luisita massacre and Erap will ignore “convicted of plunder”.
Manny Villar is for transparency and accountability? Bwaahaha. He wouldn’t even explain his shenanigans before his peers, remember?
he prefers to face the allegations in a judicial court of law – not a kangaroo court
manuel,
Offhand, you should not have allowed time (after 20 years) to have slipped away without an enabling law having been passed to erect the structural foundation for full access to information of public interest.
Now, to some other key points you seem to drive hammer-in-nail to.
One. It is all too clear that the request of the requesting party has been sort of not really denied, but clarified by the proper office concerned as to the fact that the data requested do not form part of general information that could be supplied sans need of request or demand.
Two. A letter like that requesting for a rather utopian list (omnibus list of companies)is hardly a well-thought out and considerate request from any requesting party. No right-thinking office will supply or provide such information since companies do likewise enjoy certain rights to confidentiality.
Three. Let us await the Committee Report of the Senate and the manner Senate Bill 3308 will be voted upon on third and final reading at the Senate and the consequent bicameral conference perhaps by the legislators who will either vote for it or against it.
Obviously, manuel, you should realize all too well not to place the cart before the horse at this point in time that the legislative mill still in the grinding process or mode.
Pay patience to a prospective law that has been rather set too fast.
Primer,
Offhand, I did not control both Houses of Congress so I could not have allowed time to slip.
Now to some other key points you raised, my replies are as follows:
1. Why is such a list not available without even asking? Fiscal incentives and tax breaks are matters of public concern.
2. Companies availing of tax breaks are entitled to hide the fact that they are getting tax breaks and other fiscal incentives?
3.Obviously, Primer, you ignored the fact that these will be the third congress to take up the FOIA. It’s about time the law is passed as the SC said.
Dear MB,
In 2002, in a forum before an international audience in Manila,Arroyo said her “administration is infusing common sense, discipline, ACCOUNTABILITY and INTEGRITY in governance based on three principles. These are a SOUND MORAL FOUNDATION to guide our leadership at all levels, a philosophy of TRANSPARENCY in ALL government transactions, and an ethic of effective implementation throughout the bureaucracy”. (Caps supplied)
Nepo started the advocacy for the Freedom of Information Act shortly after Arroyo gave that speech. Before running in 2004, she gave another speech on the prospects of an extended term and seeking another incumbency. She lied in the latter speech.
Consequently, she said she was sorry in another televised speech upon the dicovery of the Garci tapes. She lied about being sorry, again.
I guess when she said in 2002 that her government would pursue a “philosophy of transparency in all government transactions” and then subsequently hides behind executive privilege as in the NBN-ZTE deal, she was merely being true to form.
Your quote by Moyers on tyrants and secrecy is so apt.
Tyranogloria Vex.
More power to AER,
Dean
Dean,
well she is one cockroach terrified of light
The notion of “stealing you blind” requires that you be kept blind.
Joe
If there were anything Villar had benefitted from by virtue of his position as Speaker of the House of Representatives, what could it be?
The same question as Senate President?
Some questions are needing answers and their available ‘units of historicism’ – in aid of (il)legislation.
Or this one, please.
Why should Manila Water Company be granted exemption from the payment of their business taxes where they have installed their ‘utilities’ at the expense of the local government that allowed them to destroy supposedly 45-year concrete roads built by the DPWH?
maganda din sana kung ang government to government agency me information sharing.
bir tax data for sure will be different from the local government’s treasury data.
sayang, kung walang anomalya ang zte o kung enough ang infrastructure ng mga telco natin tulad ng sinasabi sa UP study na nagsasabi na di na nating kailangan ang zte broadband,mas madali ang info sharing.
kahit lto pwede magbigay ng dta sa bir para maimatch ang number ng kotse at ang dineklarang tax
kung gov to private sector naman pwede magbigay ang meralco ng info sa bir sa mga individual na mataas mag consume ng kuryente,
maybe next time.
pati na din itong freedomo f info act :sa december pa ito susunod na tatalakayin ng senado nakapag file na ng kandidatura nag mga kandidato, wla na silang panahon para magtrabaho.
Do not believe on the political statements, false agendas and quick fix solutions on our country’s problems. They will surely be promoted
by Politicians with hidden agendas. Remember these people want to be
elected. With good pays, good allowances and opportunities to enrich
themselves.
Nazi Germany’s Adolf Hitler cried for Peace. Yet, he
invaded his neighbors. LOOK UP WHAT THEY DID, NOT WHAT THEY SAY!