Catholic guilt is a cliché often depicted in books, movies, and popular culture as this extreme fear or discomfort coming from a sense of breaking a rule or doing something bad.

One writer describes Catholic guilt as an “excess of healthy guilt” coming from a perfectionistic or black-or-white view of morality. Persons who are riddled with this form of guilt tend to be overly scrupulous, fearful, harsh, and judgmental primarily of themselves, but often of others, too. They feel that they are never doing enough to meet moral standards.

I have encountered folks whose extreme fear and moral guilt have led to an anxiety diagnosis. I know one person who is so afraid of dying because he is sure that he is going to hell. It is unfortunate that this idea of Catholic guilt, and the image of God as the ultimate guilt-tripper, gives the impression that our faith is deeply, and only, fear-based.

At first glance, our readings today seem to reinforce this black-or-white view, given the mention of observing statues, decrees, and the law. The Book of Deuteronomy recounts Moses’ heartfelt plea to the Israelites, urging them to remain faithful to God’s commandments. In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus emphasizes the enduring value of God’s commandments.

As we read more closely, these readings point us to a more authentic perspective and a profound insight. Faith is not just a matter of making sure we do not break any rule. The statutes and decrees that we are enjoined to obey are meant to point to what is most valuable: our relationship with God. The commandments are not arbitrary rules but integral threads woven into the fabric of this loving relationship. When we love someone, the last thing we want to do is to hurt or displease them. And like all relationships, our encounter with God is dynamic, it ebbs and flows.

Moses reminds the people of Israel that observing the commandments will give evidence of their wisdom and intelligence coming from their closeness with God. Jesus declared that the fulfilment of the prophets and the law is not abstract perfection, but a person, with whom we can build a relationship. Our faith therefore should be more than just a process of ticking moral boxes or accomplishing a to-do list.

This season of Lent, we are used to doing penances and sacrifices. These are not ends in themselves. What is more important is whether these practices lead us to what is truly essential: being reconciled with God and be in right relationship with him.

The healthy way, then, to regard Catholic guilt is to see it not as an indictment and reason to beat ourselves up, but as a spiritual GPS, redirecting us towards the path of love and communion with God. It is a recognition that our actions, when contrary to our values, can strain our relationship with the Divine.

Let us pray that this season of Lent be a sacred time to reconcile, heal, and renew our relationship with God, who only wants to be close to us. Lent is not a time to showcase our spiritual and physical endurance through our penances and sacrifices. Lent is not about us and what we do. Lent is really about what God does in his great love and desire for us, that he is willing to undergo suffering out of Love.

May our Catholic guilt be transformed into a catalyst for deeper trust that draws us closer to the Divine love that knows no bounds. – Rappler.com

Father Jordan Orbe is the executive director of the Emmaus Center for Psycho-Spiritual Formation and Accompaniment. He holds a doctorate in clinical psychology from Loyola University Maryland, USA.

As we celebrate International Women’s Day, let us demand for an enabling world where women human rights defenders can continue their noble pursuits without fear of reprisals.

In Thailand, the royal defamation law is being excessively used to silence criticisms against the monarchy. Meanwhile in Sri Lanka, economic and political mismanagement has sparked peaceful protests that are met with violence and intimidation. The fate of Asia’s political climate hangs by a thread as elections are held across many countries, including Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, South Korea, and Pakistan. Now more than ever, governments across the region are finding ways to solidify their power, putting an even tighter grip on civil society to the detriment of democracy and people’s fundamental rights and freedoms.

Despite such challenges, many are courageously speaking out and taking collective action to reclaim power for the people. This includes young women human rights defenders – or Youth WHRDs – who are claiming space to call out human rights violations and to demand accountability from oppressive governments.

Between 2022 and 2023, the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) documented over 400 cases of violations against WHRDs, with judicial harassment topping the list. In fact, WHRDs are the second most at risk group, following pro-democracy defenders.

On International Women’s Day, let us commemorate the strength and resilience of Youth WHRDs across Asia. 

Indonesia’s crackdown on critical voices

Fatia Maulidiyanti is a Youth WHRD from Indonesia known for speaking truth to power.
In 2022, Luhut Binsar Panjaitan – the Coordinating Minister for Maritime and Investment Affairs – launched a defamation lawsuit against Fatia for publicly discussing research findings of nine human rights organizations that alleged Luhut’s involvement in irresponsible mining operations in Papua. 

While judges affirmed the allegations and subsequently acquitted Fatia, she was still subjected to 32 hearings from April 2023 to January 2024. As a result, Fatia was robbed of her final chance to care for her ill father before his passing. She was also subjected to online bullying and doxing.

Indonesia’s defamation laws have been widely criticized for lack of safeguards against those expressing legitimate concerns pertaining to public interest. Such laws are overused by government officials to silence critics. From January to October 2023 alone, there were at least 89 cases. 

Despite Fatia’s acquittal, the threats against dissenting voices are ever-present by virtue of such substandard laws. It is high time for Indonesia to review and amend such laws targeting critics.  

Hong Kong’s witch hunt against dissidents 

Agnes Chow, Hong Kong’s young democracy icon, is forced to live in exile. The Hong Kong police placed her on a wanted list for simply exercising her right to protest. 

After being arrested under unlawful assembly charges for her involvement in the 2019 anti-extradition bill protests, Agnes was sentenced to 10 months in prison. She was released on bail after seven months in prison on the condition that she regularly checks in with the police and surrender her passport. Prior to her first sentencing, Agnes was rearrested in August 2020 under the National Security Law for suspicion of colluding with foreigners despite a lack of evidence. 

Post-release, Agnes described how living under constant surveillance by the National Security Department has led to anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. She was also forced to write a letter of repentance for her past activism, take a trip to mainland China, and pose for “patriotic” pictures to retrieve her passport. In September 2023, Agnes pursued her graduate studies in Canada and later decided not to return for her bail check-in in December for fear of being arbitrarily rearrested and forced to act against her views. 

Expressing political views should not result in a fugitive status. Hong Kong must cease its persecution of political dissidents. 

India’s discomfort with artivism

In India, many Youth WHRDs utilize artivism – a powerful combination of art and activism – to convey their criticisms and advocacies. Unfortunately, such creative efforts are often met with harassment.

Folk singer Neha Singh Rathore has faced repeated police scrutiny for her songs touching on local socio-political issues.

In February 2023, Neha received a police notice for “inciting hate” after releasing a song criticizing the government’s handling of a tragic incident in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, where a mother and daughter died in a fire during an eviction drive. 

Neha went viral in January 2022 for a song which criticizes government inaction, including issues on COVID-19 deaths and the gang rape-murder of a young Dalit woman. Despite ongoing threats, Neha remains steadfast in her artivism, stating, “I stand by the song and will continue singing. I am not afraid and will not be intimidated.”

Artists and defenders alike should be free to express their opinions, India must start embracing artivism and end its intimidation against critics.  

Kazakhstan’s iron grip over civic space

In November 2023, Kazakh pro-democracy defender Nazym Tabyldieva was charged with disseminating false information and defamation after posting online criticisms against President Qasym-Zhomart Toqaev and three prosecutors.

Facing potential imprisonment, Nazym was placed on a 1.5-year probation and banned from socio-political activities for five years. Nazym’s case illustrates how authorities resort to “creative” and extreme measures to repress Youth WHRDs.

Kazakhstan must stop using punitive measures to silence dissent. Instead, it should foster an environment that encourages people’s democratic participation.

The future of young women rights defenders in Asia

As Asian societies predominantly adopt patriarchal values, young women are inherently subject to gender-based discrimination. Boxing women and girls into traditional social roles preclude the idea that young women can defy norms and stand up against oppression.

In their pursuit of justice, Youth WHRDs face harassment, threats, politically motivated charges, and attacks. To silence them, governments tend to weaponize laws on national security, defamation, and incitement. In many parts of Asia, activism often comes at a personal cost. Nevertheless, Youth WHRDs are not backing down.

Amidst Asia’s massive storms of repression, Youth WHRDs are persistently and peacefully fighting for meaningful change. Such repression, however, should have not happened in the first place. Harassment against human rights defenders should never be normalized. 

We cannot stay silent as governments brand activism as a crime.

We must urge governments in Asia and beyond to cease their oppression against Youth WHRDs. Likewise, they should establish strong legal protections and ensure accountability for violations made against defenders. 

Let us call on civil societies to give their support and solidarity with Youth WHRDs. Together, we are stronger. Together, we are inspiring more and more women to show up, speak up, and make their marks in the world. – Rappler.com

Almyra Luna Kamilla and Rosalind Ratana are staff members at FORUM-ASIA.

The Philippines hosts the fifth largest mineral reserves globally, with potentially $1 trillion in untapped reserves. These include deposits of nickel (fifth in the world), which is needed for batteries of electric vehicles, and copper (fourth) that can be applied from electric transmission in power grids to operating solar panels. 

Scaling up renewable energy (RE) technologies, especially wind and solar, and reduced conversion of forests remain the most effective way of mitigating the climate crisis. While exporting ETMs to countries with the highest greenhouse gas emissions is needed to prevent further increase in global temperatures, this has to be balanced with such minerals also being used to accelerate the development of RE facilities in the Philippines.

A comprehensive critical minerals strategy, currently being developed by the government, must cover how to approach this balancing act. It should also include other key issues, such as protecting critical biodiversity and ecosystems, the well-being of local communities and indigenous peoples (IPs), and upholding corporate transparency and accountability.

The issue on transparency and accountability is especially important, considering the recent incidences involving mining companies. In recent years, nickel mining companies have been ordered to halt their operations in Sibuyan Island, Romblon and Brooke’s Point, Palawan due to their failure to secure the necessary permits and potential damages to the local environment. 

The landslide in a mining village in a supposed no-build zone in Davao de Oro also raises more concerns about the safety of workers and the accountability of the mining company and other stakeholders; such details must also be considered in a critical minerals strategy.

From Our Archives

[Vantage Point] Gov’t turns to mining to lift economy

An alternative approach

It is no secret that the mining industry is among the main proponents for the current administration pushing for the growth of the sector. This policy direction has been branded under many advocacies, from economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic to a response to the climate crisis.

Yet based on the history of mining incidents leaving local stakeholders and ecosystems reeling from damages and how most of the domestic mineral production goes to foreign industries, it is fair to say that there is a risk of the well-being of many Filipinos and our environment not being given enough attention in this planned expansion of the mining industry.

While the President has publicly stated that being environmentally-conscious and safe working conditions for mining workers must be accounted for by government agencies, recent incidents alone have shown that there are significant gaps in both existing policies and their implementation that need to be remedied.

Any Philippine-based critical minerals strategy must be part of a just transition, especially in the energy context, that is beyond the current notions of “sustainable mining” or “responsible mining.” It should focus not on maximizing extraction mainly to generate the most profits that has no guarantee to benefit local communities. Instead, it must be anchored on producing only ETMs that are necessary for vital economic sectors in the Philippines, such as RE technologies and other local industries.

How the production of ETMs benefits and protects local communities and IPs must also be included in this strategy. The government’s policy regarding the mining sector benefiting the Filipino nation cannot only be reflected in financial terms. For instance, no mining operations should take place in areas designated as either of critical importance for biodiversity or agricultural production, or prone to climate change impacts or other disasters caused by natural hazards.

Local stakeholders, especially IPs, must also be given the proper spaces to actively participate in decision-making processes. The exploration, development, and usage of mineral resources and products must always benefit the Filipino people first, and should be included in the development of a national industrialization plan. The State must also respect and protect the rights of these stakeholders, especially during disputes against foreign corporations. 

Currently, 60% of mineral deposits in the country are within ancestral domains. If conflicts arise between businesses and IPs arise about ETMs because the latter exercises their right to not have their lands disturbed, how unfair is it for the IPs to be potentially portrayed as the ones preventing progress? 

Must Read

There’s gold in Sagada, but miners barely get by. Now they want more support.

It is fair to pose this question, considering that again, players in the mining industry are the ones with the most to benefit from a growth in their sector, and the history of IPs in cases of destructive mining. 

Some state officials may see these potential elements of said strategy as too restrictive. Yet these so-called restrictions are also necessary to uphold multiple components of sustainability, especially the environmental and social aspects. To minimize their importance, if not outright ignore them not only goes against the supposed policy direction, but also disregards the well-being of the very people who are supposed to be benefitting the most from it. 

How a national strategy would be developed in these next few months would decide for whose benefit the production of ETMs and other minerals truly are. If anyone thinks this issue is irrelevant, they are wrong. It does matter. – Rappler.com

John Leo Algo is the National Coordinator of Aksyon Klima Pilipinas and the Deputy Executive Director for Programs and Campaigns of Living Laudato Si’ Philippines. He is also a member of the Youth Advisory Group for Environmental and Climate Justice under the UNDP in Asia and the Pacific. 

The fallout from this incident has resulted in the resignation of the organization’s faculty adviser and prompted a statement signed by more than 700 UST alums. The statement goes beyond the immediate issue, asserting that the stifling of the campus press through OSA is symptomatic “of a much more malignant disease in UST” — one that has been present since its establishment under colonial rule.

I submit that the malignancy has a name: clericalism. In the context of the Catholic Church, clericalism refers to an attitude or mindset that excessively prioritizes the authority and privileges of priests and ordained ministers over the laity, the non-ordained members of the Church. However, clericalism also extends to the laity who, by uncritically supporting clerical privilege, inadvertently sustain a culture with invisible yet problematic features of authoritarianism, exclusivity, entitlement, and lack of accountability and transparency. Together, they form what scholars refer to as a clericalist culture. Pope Francis has spoken extensively about institutionalized clericalism, describing it as a scourge or plague that inflicts wounds on the Church and its members. 

OSA’s controversial decision is symptomatic of a more deeply rooted clericalist culture permeating the entire university. Clericalism is particularly pernicious because, according to sociologist and ecclesiologist Father George Wilson, SJ, clerical culture is entrenched behaviors and thoughts, often unconscious, shaping values and actions. Those within may find it ordinary, while outsiders may find it troubling or offensive.

But while unfortunate, the OSA-TomasinoWeb controversy offers an opportunity for the entire Thomasian community to reflect not only on the suppression of free speech on campus but an opportunity to inquire about how clericalism could endanger the essential values of academic freedom, freedom of association for students and workers, protection from gender and social prejudice, and participation in the crafting of policies affecting them, among other values that ought to thrive in a higher learning institution, more particularly how such a culture contradicts the purpose of a Catholic university as an institution primarily for evangelization.

Must Read

FAST FACTS: University of Santo Tomas

Indeed, public scrutiny through an active press and social media could be a blessing. For example, in the US, the Boston Globe’s exposé on the long-standing cover-up of sexual crimes by a priest ignited nationwide anger and exposed similar allegations worldwide, leading to the eventual resignation in 2002 of Cardinal Bernard Law, the then Archbishop of Boston. In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis from the Church hierarchy on transparency and accountability in handling allegations of sexual abuse by members of the clergy. Even bishops and cardinals implicated in mishandling or covering up such cases have been removed or asked to resign. The press and social media have a purgative function. They pressure Catholic leaders and institutions to implement the much-needed reforms seriously and decisively.

UST should anticipate increased public scrutiny via social media. Nevertheless, leveraging the university’s rich experience and intellectual/spiritual resources, the Thomasian community should be well-equipped to handle it.

In 1216, St. Dominic founded the Order of Preachers, emphasizing a communal and democratic structure within the order, making decisions through consensus rather than authoritarian rule. St. Thomas Aquinas, the university’s namesake, emphasized not only faith or divine revelation but the use of knowledge derived from natural human reason to understand and address everyday challenges. 

Presently, Pope Francis advocates for greater synodality — a process he deems an antidote to clericalism. It involves listening and collaboration, contrasting with a top-down authority approach, enhancing the Church’s discernment process. Priests and laity share a common priesthood by virtue of baptism. Thus, we need to shift our thinking of the priest from a hierarchical to a service-oriented function where the priest and laity are co-responsible.  

Moreover, amid the controversy, some UST teachers use it as a springboard to converse with students on free speech and dialogue, embracing diverse opinions and fostering critical thinking dispositions, including intellectual courage, fair-mindedness, integrity, and intellectual humility.

Dr. Robert Dominic Gonzales, an alumnus and a teacher at the UST College of Medicine and Surgery, in a Facebook post, commented on the resignation of the TomasinoWeb faculty adviser: “There are indeed resignations which speak volumes and tell us that there is something really wrong within the system. I love UST, but unconditional love doesn’t mean blind love. Recognizing flaws allows for a more grounded and sustainable type of ‘love.'”

As for UST, moving forward, beyond managing PR and optics, it must simply walk the talk consistent with its spiritual and intellectual forebears to repair its tarnished image. – Rappler.com

Rene Luis Tadle is a faculty member of the Philosophy Department of the Faculty of Arts and Letters, University of Santo Tomas, and a lead convener and President of the Council of Teachers and Staff of Colleges and Universities (CoTeSCUP). Currently, he is a member of the Board of the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), representing the labor sector.

The immediate presumption was that the woman who left the child was the mother. I thought, “Who else could it have been?” After having recently read about cognitive reflection, I wanted to give this  woman the benefit of the doubt. So I reflected and asked myself: Who is this woman? Why did she do it? What is her problem? What drives her to leave her helpless child in a dirty place? How can she be so heartless? Certainly, she must have reasons, right? 

Regardless of whether the woman is the mother or not, she will be facing criminal charges. It is a criminal offense to abandon a minor, let alone a newborn. What defense might she reasonably offer? I imagine her saying that she has no money and is incapable of rearing the child, hence the abandonment. But of all places, why leave the child in a filthy toilet? I imagine her claiming that the child’s father abandoned her, causing emotional distress or that she did not know who the father was. Again, why blame it all on a child by disposing of him like a piece of garbage? 

I also imagine the backlash and bashing from the public: “You are a heartless human  being,” or “You could have gone to an orphanage or some institution where the child can have a better place to live.” You could have had the child adopted” or “You enjoyed the pleasure but  discarded the innocent child. Shame on you.” “That’s what you get for being irresponsible. You should have done the right thing. You should rot in jail.” These are some of the thoughts that I could envision from the public. 

But really, what is the right thing to do? I’ve heard stories of newborn babies whose identities are fabricated through agreement between the birth mother and the prospective parents, often involving monetary transactions. The child is given directly to the adoptive parents without following legal adoption procedures. The parties involved justify this practice by arguing that the child, unaware of the implications, will at least have the chance of a better life. There have also been stories of a hopeless mother or irresponsible father opting to end the life of a child because, in their minds, caring for that child would interfere in enjoying and pursuing their respective dreams and goals in life. In short, they are not ready. Nothing is more disgusting than treating a human being like a disposable object, tossing them aside when you are done with them.  

But why did the mother, or whoever she was, choose that toilet? If the intention really was to discard that child permanently, why not end his life immediately? Why not place the child in a dark alley where passing motorists would unknowingly ensure his immediate demise? Why not throw that child in a sewer or a nearby river? These are difficult questions whose answers are somehow essential to the understanding of the motives of the woman.

Must Read

[Science Solitaire] Arguments are our antidote to our naturally lazy brains

It is often difficult to know what the right answers are because moral decisions can involve conflicting principles and complex situations, which brings to mind the famous trolley experiment. The trolley experiment presents a moral dilemma involving a runaway trolley. In this scenario, a person is positioned near a switch that can divert the trolley onto a different track, veering it away from a group of people who are in its path. However, by diverting the  trolley, the person would cause it to collide with another individual who is on the alternative  track. What is the right thing to do? Is it better to divert the trolley and kill one individual rather than killing a group of people?

Likewise, consider the transplant experiment where a doctor has the ability to save five patients in need of organ transplants by harvesting organs from one healthy individual. Or, recall the lifeboat experiment, where there is a need to throw someone overboard to ensure the survival of the remaining passengers, otherwise the boat may risk sinking due to overcrowding. In any and every one of these scenarios, one has to make a difficult choice. Either way, that choice will cause harm to a human being. 

Circling back to the news story where a woman abandoned a child in a gas station toilet, does it justify her decision not to kill the child but instead leave it in a filthy place? Does it justify her decision not to throw the child in a polluted river, but instead leave it somewhere where discovery is more likely? But why put tissue paper in the child’s mouth making it impossible for him to voice his cry?  

There are more questions than there are answers. Just like with any other dilemma, we do not want to think through complexities. Studies show that our brain is designed to think simply, while any complexities are frowned upon. We prefer mental shortcuts. We form opinions based on incomplete information. It’s part of being human; otherwise, we couldn’t function as expected. In our daily lives, however, decision-making is not always straightforward, and even well-intentioned decisions and actions can have unintended consequences. Emotions can cloud judgment. Our feelings of guilt, fear, empathy, or disgust may impact our ability to objectively assess a situation and make a rational decision. We are not immune to biases. We seek out information that confirms our existing beliefs, leading them to dismiss or overlook alternative perspectives that challenge our views. For example, supposed that we’ve concluded that the woman is irresponsible and must be punished, it only takes seconds to formulate who that woman could be – a deranged, unthinking slut. We tend to make snap judgments without taking the time to understand individual differences or unique circumstances. Why should we? It’s exhausting.  

Must Read

[Science Solitaire] What is an open mind?

But in a fast-changing world where even the boundaries of truth and fiction appear to be blurrier than ever, the least we could do is to pause and reflect. This applies to you, me, and that woman who abandoned a child. What I am driving at here is that in some instances, no matter how outrageous a situation, no matter how utterly disgusting, no matter how impossibly beyond imaginings, we may need to zoom out or practice distancing. This helps to give us some perspective so that we could ask questions such as: “What is really happening here? What am I looking at here? Am I missing important details?” This proves to be  challenging because it is not our default approach. Perhaps we can try? – Rappler.com

Winston Pagador, 36 years old, lives in General Santos City and works as a lawyer.

Three days after their disappearance, their mothers and a group of civil society and church representatives met with police to file a report, but were instead told by officers that the activists were connected to the New People’s Army (NPA), the armed wing of a communist insurgency ongoing in the Philippines since the 1960s.

A few weeks later, the National Security Council announced that Castro and Tamano had sought help from authorities to exit the communist underground and were being held in a safe house for their protection. Human rights organizations, however, were suspicious – in the Philippines, one of the most dangerous countries in the world for environmental defenders, activists like Castro and Tamano are far more likely to be killed by state forces than by communist fighters. The state often justifies these extrajudicial murders by “red-tagging” victims, associating them with the underground Left to justify their deaths.

On September 19, the truth surfaced at a press conference convened by the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict, a body set up by former President Rodrigo Duterte to combat communist insurgency. Though state representatives continued to insist that Castro and Tamano were underground leftists, the two women bravely contradicted the state line in front of news media, saying they had been abducted by the military, threatened with death, and forced to surrender.

Must Read

Activists in gutsy press conference indicted for ’embarrassing AFP’

“We want to show today the state’s blatant fascism towards activists, who only want to fight for Manila Bay,” said Castro. At present, they are continuing their work with communities in Manila Bay – Castro as a community organizer with the Alliance for the Defense of Livelihood, Housing, and Environment in Manila Bay (AKAP KA Manila Bay), Tamano as program director of the Community and Church Program for Manila Bay of the Ecumenical Bishops Forum – despite persecution by state forces, who have filed a perjury case against them.

Even as the global community made commitments in last year’s COP28 to transition away from fossil fuels, Filipino activists like Castro and Tamano find their efforts to protect the environment constantly threatened by a repressive state. Though President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. has paid lip service to the need to take “appropriate and responsible action to mitigate…the effects of climate change,” such promises are belied by ongoing state investment in massive infrastructure projects with incredibly deleterious environmental impacts.

The case of the New Manila International Airport (NMIA) is instructive. According to a Global Witness report, the $15-billion mega-development project – managed by the Philippine conglomerate San Miguel Corporation and given the green light by the government in September 2019 – stands to displace at least 700 families, disrupt complex coastal ecosystems (including the migratory route of more than 50 million waterbirds), and lead to the felling of hundreds of mangrove trees, whose root systems play a key role in mitigating flooding in the typhoon-prone country. The Dutch dredging giant Royal Boskalis Westminster N.V. (Boskalis) has signed a contract worth €1.5 billion to undergo the first phase of the airport’s construction, a sum insured by the Dutch state via its export credit agency Atradius Dutch State Business (Atradius DSB).

Must Read

Exempted from suspension, Pasay reclamation projects get green light from PRA

The approval process for the NMIA was littered with irregularities, as San Miguel bought up a smaller firm with landholdings in the area and used its Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) as cover for construction, despite the fact that this company’s ECC made no mention of either the airport or San Miguel. Soon, armed soldiers were going door-to-door telling residents to leave to make way for the project, in a blatant convergence of state impunity with corporate interests.

This conjunction of massive infrastructural spending for a project ostensibly meant to “develop” the Philippines, but one which instead lines the pockets of corrupt politicians and corporate elites, is emblematic of a larger pattern in Philippine history. Ferdinand Marcos, father of current president “Bongbong” Marcos, infamously declared martial law in 1972 and proceeded to plunder the coffers of the state while filling national positions with his relatives and cronies. Flashy infrastructure projects such as the San Juanico Bridge and the Philippine Heart Center served as both visual emblems of his drive to create a “New Society” and convenient mechanisms for his systematization of national theft.

To manage the threats to his regime presented by communist rebels and Muslim separatists, Marcos – backed by tremendous amounts of US military aid – both expanded the army and weaponized a variety of paramilitary death squads still in state employ today. More recently, former president Rodrigo Duterte has invoked the threats of rampant drug-use and leftist subversion to justify a massive campaign of state-sponsored killings that has left thousands dead, while simultaneously pushing massive infrastructure developments under his “Build, Build, Build” program. Armed state and extra-state forces have consistently silenced dissent from community members who resist the opening up of more and more of the Philippines’ green spaces to aggressive development.

The fight for climate justice in the Philippines, therefore, is as much a fight against the authoritarian overreach of the Philippine state, the collusion between corporate interests and an oligarchic ruling class of family dynasties, and the militarized manufacture of community “consent” as it is a fight for transition away from fossil fuels, the protection of endangered ecosystems, and the reduction of carbon emissions.

As the bravery of Jhed Tamano and Jonila Castro shows us, there will always be environmental defenders who stand up against state impunity. But for the Philippines to build a more sustainable future for its people and environment, the state must stop killing those who are protecting both. – Rappler.com

Ethan Chua is an international student from the Philippines currently pursuing their second year Master’s in International and World History at the London School of Economics.

Whatever your own definition is, one thing is for sure: life is much more meaningful when you have it, feel it, or are fighting for it. It is both pure and complicated, simple and dynamic all at once. 

Regarding the romantic kind, many factors impact how we approach love. We account for personality, values, attractiveness, and resources, to name a few. Yet there is another emerging factor that is being considered more and more when it comes to romantic love: the climate crisis.

‘Green dating’

During a recent speed dating event at a café in Quezon City, one of the café managers shared to me their experiences related to the climate crisis. Within the past five years, they had to install another air-conditioning unit and have their windows tinted to respond to an increasingly warmer environment, including for events like the one mentioned above.

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been an emergence of “green dating,” or the pursuit of romance with strong considerations for ecological consciousness and a shared desire for climate and environmental action.

Over the years, numerous reports show that a person’s perspectives and actions related to green issues are increasingly valued among singles seeking relationships. Dating apps such as Tinder and Bumble reported an increase in the mentions of climate-related issues on user profiles worldwide, with more people seeking dates that involve the outdoors or being physically active.

From Our Archives

The Green Report: Finding love in the great outdoors

In Germany, the United Kingdom, and India, environmentalism is among the most popular causes indicated in the profiles of both new and existing Bumble users. A similar trend is seen in Singapore, where 73% of singles expressed interest in living a sustainable lifestyle. Gen Z singles comprise 80% of Bumble users that also value environmentalism in the United States.

For other apps, veganism and veganism were prominent in the profiles of many Tinder users in Brazil. Dating platform OkCupid saw a 368% increase in climate change or environment references in many of its user profiles within five years.

Green dating is also quickly catching on in the Philippines, as part of a singles community more conscious of values-centric dating. As of 2023, 48% of Bumble users give importance to the active engagement of their potential partner in social causes. Sustainability ranked second among the most-prioritized causes, seen in 73% of the app’s users, behind human rights (84%) and political participation (72%); it should be noted that the latter two causes are also intricately linked to climate and environmental issues.

‘Couples for Climate?’

A similar phenomenon can also be seen in many romantic couples regarding an increased concern for green issues. I have seen people in my social circle, married or in a relationship, take greater interest in environmental issues in recent years. They ask me what environmental organizations they can join to help, how their children can be taught eco-friendlier habits, or how to talk about this matter in case of differences of opinion.

How partners influence each other regarding the climate crisis was also the subject of a recent study by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. It found that partners having similar perspectives about the climate crisis does not necessarily mean a full alignment of the beliefs and behaviors between them. This emphasizes the need for couples to have more open communication with each other regarding their views and ideas on this issue, from misconceptions to preferred modes of action. 

The climate crisis has different impacts on different scales, and the same can be said at the personal and interpersonal level. Some people can focus more on its environmental implications, like how it affects coral reefs or forests. Others may relate more to the economic impacts (i.e., how going eco-friendly would affect their budgets), political lens (i.e., a politician’s green agenda compared to their reputation), or personal choices (i.e., choice of clothing or vacation spot).

Must Read

Want to go on an epic PH adventure in 2024? Here are 4 travelers who did it – and their tips!

Whatever the case may be, there is a higher chance of a person influencing their partner’s views compared to a climate expert or famous communicator, given the level of familiarity, comfort, and trust that ideally exists between them. Climate conversations at the household level are vital to making this issue even more grounded and understandable, which is critical for a nation like the Philippines that has a strong familial culture yet has low levels of properly comprehending the climate crisis.

Of course, being climate and environmentally-conscious is not the only factor when it comes to love, for singles searching for it or couples that have found it. Yet with the climate crisis potentially becoming worse over time without the much-needed ending of the fossil fuel era, it would increasingly influence how we view, express, and embody it in our words and actions, whether we are aware of it or not.

Nonetheless, there is one thing that loving someone and acting against the climate crisis have in common: we choose to commit to it for the sake of our future. It is my hope we make the right choice. – Rappler.com

John Leo Algo is the National Coordinator of Aksyon Klima Pilipinas and the Deputy Executive Director for Programs and Campaigns of Living Laudato Si’ Philippines. He is also a member of the Youth Advisory Group for Environmental and Climate Justice under the UNDP in Asia and the Pacific. 

Part of the reason that it’s difficult to decide on who is right and who is wrong is that both camps are not exactly speaking the same language. For instance, while those against charter change employ a rhetoric of political suspicion, those who are campaigning for charter change see in it a kind of economic panacea to the ills of our society. From this perspective, the reason for our inability to solve our social problems are problematic constitutional restrictions repelling foreign domestic investments and stunting our country’s economic growth, which can be fixed if we revise the Constitution.

Contingency, power, and charter change

Of course, this assumes that it can be 100% scientifically demonstrated that a less protectionist Constitution would be so much better for our country. Unfortunately, economics is not hard science, unlike physics or chemistry. Even with all the math, economics represents humanity’s attempt to make orderly models out of a chaotic reality influenced by dozens, if not hundreds, of factors. 

But if, for the sake of argument, we assume to be factual the assertion that charter change will fix the economy, then it would indeed make charter change an attractive proposition. Logically, we cannot achieve certain targets no matter how hard we work if the structures that frame our efforts are ineffective and inefficient.

This is not new rhetoric. Our country’s socialist Left has always argued this – that reforms are meaningless within a failed structure – and this has been the driving force behind its protracted people’s war, its dream of revolution. I can’t say whether or not our politicos are aware of it, but they share the same language with the communists they routinely take shots at. It is a messianic rhetoric that pegs a utopian ideal on a central idea, whether the revolution or charter change. And because of this, they share the same weakness – a lack of sufficient respect for historical contingency.

By this, I mean that their rhetoric is fundamentally based on a view that reduces history to a single, logical chain and assumes that one crucial thing can lead to another – in this case that changing the charter will lead to social progress. 

But history isn’t always logical. Logical prophecies routinely go wrong. This is because logic can only be truly, 100% effective when it has access to all relevant factors. The success of prophecy is proportionate to the extent of the prophet’s grasp of relevant information. Unfortunately, history is too large – involving too many actors and factors, being too contingent – for one person or group of persons to have a complete understanding of the big historical picture.

People pessimistic about revolution usually ask, “After the revolution, what then?” People too optimistic about charter change should ask themselves the same question, since their rhetoric is bordering on promising some kind of utopia, as if charter change by itself can solve all our woes.

The anti-charter change groups recognize this. They say this isn’t the best time to be messing around with the Constitution. They point to the fact that removing economic restrictions from the Constitution would not actually accomplish much if the administration continues to fail in fixing all the other challenges that make the Philippines unattractive as a destination for foreign direct investments. These challenges include problems relating to infrastructure, governance, corruption, and ease of doing business.

However, I don’t think that this is an effective argument. It leads to the usual form-vs-content debate which quickly deteriorates into a chicken-or-egg question. For example, the question of whether charter change will lead to more economic capacity to improve infrastructure and governance, or whether improving our people’s culture of governance first would make changes to the Constitution economically meaningful. Such questions are a waste of time. 

Must Read

Why 1987 Constitution framer Hilario Davide Jr. opposes charter change

Structures influence people and people also influence structure. The relationship is dialogical, and the extent of their influence on each other is contingent on many other factors. We need both a good economic structure as well as a good culture that produces good people to fill these structures. So if we take seriously the argument that our problem is structural and that charter change can help solve that problem, then the right time to deal with it is not now or tomorrow, but yesterday. If charter change can bring about much-needed structural reforms, so be it.

Of course, that’s a big “if.” And the reason for my observation that the contending camps are not speaking the same language is that while charter change proponents choose to focus on structural, economic issues, their opponents are more concerned about another issue altogether, the issue of power. While the former see charter change as a cure, the latter see it as something that can make things worse. For if we were to all hypothetically agree that the charter needs to be changed, the question becomes: who will decide on these changes and whose interests will these changes serve?

This is the reason why charter change debates in previous administrations featured fierce arguments on how these changes were to come about. One option was for Congress to designate and organize itself as a constitutional assembly. But Congress had been revealed in past decades to be a circus, and respected senators and congressmen were exposed as either incompetents, clowns, or both. Their credibility to represent the people’s interests has become suspect. It is for this reason that some groups advocate the formation of a constitutional convention, which they thought would be more democratic, but even then, the process remains suspect when one cannot fully trust those who appoint or choose members of the convention.

Must Read

[In This Economy] Stop using the PH economy as excuse for charter change

Given this background, it becomes easy to read why some groups have instead pushed for a “people’s initiative.” A people’s initiative organized at the barangay level using government resources makes for a process of constitutional change that is easier implement – and also easier for some politicians to hijack. 

And there lies the rub: this is about the struggle for power between those who want more authentic representation and those who want to consolidate even more power in more effective ways under a new system.

In other words, while Cha-Cha proponents engage in a messianic rhetoric that promises social progress as a result of charter change, their opponents are seeing that this project for saving the national economy can easily be hijacked by ill-intentioned, powerful individuals who will not hesitate to find ways to piggyback their selfish interests on the shoulders of charter change.

Perhaps, the political climate can change sooner or later so that the charter change process can be initiated with more credibility and in a manner that is truly more democratic. But for now, we cannot help but subject charter change to a realistic apprehension of historical contingency, knowing that the future is in our hands but not totally. The imminent debate on charter change is not a case of a unified, monolithic national body deciding what is best for itself, but a case of fragmented interest groups rallying to consolidate their power over other people and to shape the charter in order to legitimize their will-to-power. That’s what this is about.

And that’s why this is not about charter change. – Rappler.com

Formerly an Assistant Professor in De La Salle University’s Behavioral Sciences Department, Joseph Nathan Cruz has a master’s degree in sociology from the National University of Singapore where he graduated in 2011. He currently works as head of quality management for a savings and loans cooperative. 

The 2022 Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA) results indicate that our students are five to six years behind the average learner. Across 81 countries, the Philippines ranked among the lowest in reading, mathematics, and science.

These dismal results have raised alarm over the country’s current education system, with many (rightfully) holding the Department of Education accountable. There had been a widespread clamor for urgent education reforms.

We argue, however, that reforms need not only be in the education sector but in the health sector as well. Our argument is simple: hungry children do not make good students. 

Malnourished bodies, malnourished minds

Often overlooked are the growing cases of malnutrition in the country and its categorical link to low academic performance.

Malnutrition is a perennial concern in the Philippines. According to the United Nations Children’s Fund as of 2023, malnutrition kills 95 Filipino children daily. 27 out of 1,000 children do not get past their fifth birthday. In 2019, the Department of Education reported that 1,836,793 pupils from kindergarten to Grade 6 were undernourished. 

Moreover, 1 out of 4 Filipino children under 5 years old is stunted. In fact, the Philippines ranks among the 10 countries globally with the highest number of stunted children. These alarming figures drove the World Health Organization to classify the stunting prevalence of children in the Philippines with “very high” public health significance in 2021.

Alongside undernutrition, the incidence of overweight and obesity among children has been slowly rising. The Food and Nutrition Research Institute in 2019 reported that nearly 1 in 10 children, aged 5 to 19, are overweight. Moreover, overweight and obese children tend to stay obese into adulthood and develop noncommunicable diseases.

While the prevalence of obesity and overweight is nowhere near undernutrition, the Department of Health cautions that “it will be unfortunate to prejudice the public health attention it deserves to mitigate its future risk on non-communicable diseases, premature death, and disability.”

What the Department of Health has missed however is drawing a connection between these figures and the dismal PISA scores.

With stunting contributing to cognitive delays, malnutrition can lead to a severe loss of human potential and productivity, manifesting inside the classroom.

The effect of malnutrition on academic performance has long been empirically established. Multiple studies have demonstrated how malnutrition among school-age children has severe effects on physical conditions and increases the risk of high absenteeism, and early dropout rates, as well as contributes to low enrollment and poor academic performance.

Furthermore, malnutrition may have lasting effects on the logic and critical thinking of the youth, as evidenced by the low PISA scores. This may also have an impact on the global competitiveness of our labor workforce, especially migrant workers, many years down the line.

The underbelly of learning poverty

Just as malnutrition is associated with learning poverty, it is also indisputably linked to material poverty. Poverty remains the leading cause of malnutrition.

Many poor Filipinos are hungry. According to the Third Quarter 2023 Social Weather Survey, nearly 1 in 10 families experienced involuntary hunger at least once in the past three months. A study by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies in 2022 associated this with the high cost of food– especially nutrient-adequate diets, making it unaffordable to many Filipino households. 

This is only bound to worsen as prices of basic commodities soar. In December 2023, the country’s inflation rate stood at 5%, as reported by the Philippine Statistics Authority. Furthermore, while several cheap foods may exist as an option, these may likely lack the required nutrition, as was the trend in Singapore in April 2023 amid rising inflation.

According to the Global Food Security Index in 2022, the Philippines is the most food-insecure Asian economy. Bearing the brunt of this unaffordability are the poorest among the poor, who suffer the highest incidence of malnutrition.

Must Read

[OPINION] Food insecurity and the politics of codependency

The cost of malnutrition in the Philippines is staggering. In 2016, Save the Children reported that the Philippines lost nearly P166.5 billion worth of income due to lower levels of education by the fraction of the workforce who suffered from childhood stunting. Malnutrition also cost the country around P160 billion in lost productivity as an outcome of premature deaths. Moreover, approximately P1.23 billion is spent on additional education costs to cover repetitions due to undernutrition.

All in all, nearly P328 billion is lost annually due to malnutrition. 

Multifaceted issue, multisectoral approach

This is not of course to absolve the education sector of the blame, nor to frame the substandard PISA results as solely a health issue. Rather, we advance the position that the learning poverty that currently haunts the education system is a multifaceted issue that mandates a multisectoral approach.

The Philippine government must implement a more integrated strategy that aligns health and education together. The two departments must work more cohesively in addressing the root causes of students’ underperformance.

The Philippine Plan of Action for Nutrition (PPAN) 2023-2028 may serve as an important framework to guide the country’s long-term nutritional goals. Launched on September 4, 2023, by the National Nutrition Council, the new PPAN seeks to address all forms of malnutrition in partnership with government agencies, civil society organizations, the private sector, and the academe.

It is however important that we learn from the gaps of the previous initiatives, such as weak nutrition program leadership in several local government units and the need for adequate human resources. Targeting these pitfalls can help strengthen our national strategies moving forward.

We also wish to underscore the centrality of research in this undertaking. The country’s approach to confronting malnutrition must be evidence-based, backed by thorough and well-meaning research.

We have a health crisis in our midst. Leaving no children behind also entails ensuring that there is food on their table. – Rappler.com

Kenneth Y. Hartigan-Go is the Senior Research Fellow for Health Governance at the Ateneo Policy Center, School of Government, at the Ateneo de Manila University.

Melissa Louise M. Prieto is the Research Assistant and Program Coordinator for Health Governance at the Ateneo Policy Center, School of Government, at the Ateneo de Manila University.

Angel Faye G. Castillo is the Program Manager for Health Governance at the Ateneo Policy Center, School of Government, at the Ateneo de Manila University.

While Miru Systems Co. Ltd of South Korea is the only firm that has submitted bids, the Special Bids and Awards Committee or SBAC confirmed that five more companies purchased bidding documents but did not submit bids. These companies include Dominion Voting Systems, which acquired documents on January 3, Indra Philippines Inc. on January 4, AMA Group Holdings Corporation on January 4, and Smartmatic or SMMT-TIM 2016 Inc. on January 5, with the latter earlier disqualified by the Comelec. (Editor’s note: Here’s what you need to know about Miru Systems, the lone bidder for the costliest 2025 election contract.)

Smartmatic’s last-minute acquisition and purchase of bidding documents raised suspicion in the local information technology community that it was bound to get the contract. The IT community surmised that Comelec would allow it to participate at the last minute with the goal that the controversial firm bags the contract.

Must Read

Why Comelec threw out lone bid proposal for its 2025 full automation project

This gives discomfort to the legitimate technology firms, because they thought that by participating in the bidding process, they would confer legitimacy to Smartmatic if ever it bags the contract in its last-minute participation. Their reluctance to participate in the public bidding yields a dilemma for the Comelec.

The AES for the 2025 midterm elections has two components: the Full Automation System with Transparency Audit/Count (FASTrAC), which deals with the actual voting and counting of votes on the precinct level; and the transmission system, which deals with the delivery of votes for counting and consolidation in a central server.

Comelec earlier decided en banc to separate the two bundles of services to ensure clean, honest, free, and open elections in 2025. The poll body has come out with terms of reference (ToR) specifying that the winning bidder would come out with the hardware and software, to ensure the technology firm would deliver in 2025.

Comelec decided to exclude the transmission system in the “bundled” FASTrAC project. Its chair George Garcia said Comelec wants to do away with the single transparency server that was used in previous elections, enabling the poll body to have a new system to transmit to all recipients without a transparency router.

According to Garcia, Comelec plans to purchase by end-March this year a new poll automation system for the 2025 midterm elections. He announced the registration of voters would start on February 12 and end on September 30 to get at least three million new voters.

It could not be said with finality if the ban, which Comelec has imposed on Smartmatic, was for real and good. Press reports on Comelec’s “ban” on Smartmatic Philippines Inc., a local unit of its London-based parent firm, would be final. All they said was that Comelec did it because Smartmatic threatens the “integrity” of future elections. 

Press reports said the ban was due to a probe launched by the US Justice Department against former Comelec chair Andres Bautista for alleged corruption, conspiracy, wire fraud, and money laundering.

“Given the gravity of allegations related to bribery and compromised procurement processes, as independently determined by foreign bodies, the Commission recognizes the imminent threat to the strength and integrity of our democratic processes,” the Comelec said in a statement. “Smartmatic Philippines Inc. is disqualified and disallowed from participating in any public bidding process for elections.”

Smartmatic said in a statement that the Comelec ruling has no basis and it “unjustly besmirched” its reputation, as the company itself “has not been indicted in the United States.”

“By using the non-existent indictment as a motive, Comelec did not follow the legal process to disqualify Smartmatic,” it said. Smartmatic claimed it was never given an opportunity to present its side of the controversy.

Comelec said the ban did not mean the integrity of the 2016 and 2022 presidential elections, for which Smartmatic won contracts for vote-counting machines and services, were compromised to favor certain candidates. Bautista, who denied the allegations, awarded Smartmatic a $199-million contract to supply the Philippines with 94,000 voting machines for the 2016 presidential election won by Rodrigo Duterte.

The Comelec ruling said US prosecutors accused Bautista, Comelec chair between 2015-2017, of “receiving bribes in exchange for awarding a contract for election machines to Smartmatic Corp” and for having “laundered the bribe money through multiple entities.” US prosecutors sought the Philippine government’s aid to obtain official Comelec records as part of efforts to build the case against Bautista and others, it said.

Bautista earlier said he “did not ask for nor receive any bribe money from Smartmatic or any other entity.” Bautista earlier claimed the 2016 elections that he presided over had been “hailed by various independent national and local election stakeholders as the best managed in our electoral history.” He did not elaborate.

On the other side, Miru Systems’s track record has been fraught with questions about its ability to deliver free, honest, open, and clean elections. Civil society organizations with local, regional, and global constituencies have raised serious allegations of its inability to meet obligations in nations, where Miru Systems was contracted to provide automated election systems.

Must Read

How Korean firm Miru became front-runner in search for 2025 PH election provider

In Iraq, where it was contracted in 2018 to assist in the May parliamentary elections, Miru Systems encountered difficulties that prompted Iraq’s Parliament to order a full recount of the election results. It was widely reported in the global media that Miru System’s voting machines yielded disparate results to show a failure of elections.

In another instance, the Argentinian government refused to adopt Miru System’s because of what the former considered security vulnerabilities in its “single ballot system.” Buenos Aires did not allow the Miru System to participate in its elections.

The December 2023 elections in Congo were cited as another instance of Miru System’s failure to provide adequate services to ensure open and free automated elections. Its voting machines conked out in the middle of elections triggering security issues that delayed elections in several areas in Congo, it was reported.  

For its part, Comelec did not declare Miru Systems as winner of the public bidding. It said the Korean firm as “eligible,” a word which escapes definition. The poll body did not make it clear if that means Miru System is eligible for a new bidding. Neither did Comelec say it is eligible to tackle the adoption of an automated election system for the 2025 elections.

It is a word that could be interpreted in many ways. Besides, a public bidding with a single bidder is no public bidding. It requires the participation of several firms to describe it as a successful public bidding. Meanwhile, other technology firms are waiting for a final word from Comelec on Smartmatic’s disqualification, and a change in the bidding rules to mean Smartmatic’s complete disqualification from the process and the adoption of more open and transparent technology to entice other technology firms to participate. – Rappler.com

Philip M. Lustre Jr is a freelance journalist. He specializes in economic and political journalism.