|
TAN UP
FOR SEC REGISTRATION
In view of
establishing the network’s presence in good governance initiatives, the
TAN Executive Council has decided to register TAN with the Securities
and Exchange Commission as a Foundation.
The TAN
Operations Team is currently processing the TAN registration with the
SEC and expects the registration process to be completed by May.
TAN
Foundation, Inc. will have a Board of Directors composed of the TAN
Executive Council, namely:
1. Dean
Henedina Razon-Abad (ASG)
2. Fr. Jose Magadia SJ (ACSPPA)
3. Dr. Segundo Romero (DAP)
4. Mr. Rommel Martinez (EBJFI)
5. Dr. Francisco Magno (LSIG)
6. Mr. Vincent Lazatin (p@P)
7. Dr. Steve Rood (TAF)
Dean Henedina
Razon-Abad serves as the Chairperson and Fr. Jose Magadia as Treasurer
of the Network.
TAN
WEBSITE REVIVED
The
www.tan.org.ph website is revived and will be updated on a monthly basis
beginning April. We encourage all the members to contact the TAN OpTeam
and share with us information on organizational activities that need to
be posted for the network’s viewing.
UPDATE
ON THE BANTAY-AKLAT PROJECT
Partnerships
for the Bantay-Aklat Project have been finally forged. The following
civil society groups have already expressed their commitment to the
monitoring of textbooks delivery:
1. Philippine
Governance Forum (GWatch, BAP and TAN OpTeam)
2. NAMFREL
3. MINCODE
4. Procurement Watch, Inc.
NAMFREL and
MINCODE will provide volunteer workers as local monitors for the
project. Procurement Watch, Inc. will provide trainings to potential
regional trainors or directly to the local monitors. The Philippine
Governance Forum will serve as the central monitoring unit. It will
coordinate monitoring efforts, summarize monitoring reports and transmit
the same to the Department of Education for action.
THE
ASIA FOUNDATION SPONSORS WORKSHOP ON ANTI-CORRUPTION
TAN attended a
workshop on anti-corruption in Bogor, Indonesia last March11-13.
Dubbed
“Efficiency and Integrity in Government: Diagnosing Problems and
Creating Solutions” was a three-day workshop offered by The Asia
Foundation where selected reform-minded representatives of
non-government organizations received training in counter corruption
methods.
The workshop
focused on several case studies that illustrated success stories in
combating corruption around the world. Participants included officers
and members of non-government organizations in Indonesia and
representatives from organizations in the Philippines whose common
thrust is in dealing with corruption.
The activities
and lectures were conducted by Professor Robert Klitgaard, dean of the
RAND Graduate School in Santa Monica, California, who has been consulted
by various governments on corruption and anti-corruption efforts.
The three-day,
in-house workshop composed of lectures, small-group problem-solving
activities, and presentations. Case studies on the following provided
substantial information on anti-corruption efforts outside of Indonesia
and the Philippines, as well as lessons learned and best practices that
may be utilized in the participants’ respective areas and countries:
a. Subverting
Corruption
b. Municipal Strategy for Reform: La Paz, Bolivia
c. The City of Peñafrancia: Naga City, Philippines
d. Colombia Against Corruption
e. The Importance of Information: Promoting Good Governance in
Bangalore, India
The following
presentations were likewise given by participants in order to share with
the group their own efforts and little successes:
a. Indonesia:
Avoiding Corruption Potentials in Legislative Drafting
b. Indonesia: One-Stop Shop Project for Small and Medium Enterprises
c. Philippines: Transparency and Accountability Network
d. Philippines: Balay Mindanaw Foundation, Inc.
e. Philippines: Kadtuntaya Foundation, Inc.
The final
activity for the workshop participants involved the development of a
diagnostic activity for their respective organizations.
What was most
appreciated by the participants in this workshop was that the focus was
on success stories. The participants are mostly those working towards
the reduction of corruption, and this kind of work, whether in the
Philippines or in Indonesia, makes one particularly vulnerable to
depression. Very little difference could be seen or measured by the
human eye, and the vastness of what needs to be cleaned up can be quite
overwhelming.
Studying cases
of small municipalities, progressive cities, an entire country where
people who do the same work have succeeded and are continuing the job,
leaves big hope for the participants of this workshop. Meeting each
other also gives us big hope. We know we are not alone.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LEGISLATION – INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR AND WORKSHOP
The Access to
Information Network (ATIN) hosted a forum-workshop on the right to
information last March 17 at the Manila Galleria Suites. The Philippine
forum was the last part of a series of fora conducted in other parts of
Asia. Apart from ATIN, international networks Article 19 and Forum Asia
sponsored the activity.
The
forum-workshop focused on the need for a law on Access to Information in
the Philippines, underscored by the local experience and the experiences
of various countries in Asia. Local and international delegates attended
the forum. The international delegates and resource persons came from
Thailand, India, Indonesia, Australia, South Africa and USA. Also as
resource persons, local legislators presented the major provisions of
the existing Access to Official Information bill in Congress.
The afternoon
session divided the participants into four workshop groups. The workshop
focused on the exceptions to the right to information.
ATIN is
composed of the following organizations and networks:
1. Action for
Economic Reform
2. Center for Community Journalism and Development
3. Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility
4. Kaisahan
5. Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center-Kasama sa Kalikasan
6. National Institute for Policy Studies (as individual
organization and as TAN member)
7. Pagbabago@Pilipinas (as individual organization and
as TAN member)
8. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism
9. PRESS
10. SALIGAN
11. Womenlead
12. Women’s Legal Bureau
* TAN’s involvement in bold letters
CRAFTING NATIONAL TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AGENDA: DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATON AND DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM
The focus
group discussion with the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) conducted
last March 24, 2003, at the Sulo Hotel, Quezon City, was participated by
stakeholders such as Project Development Institute, Partnership for
Agrarian Reform and Rural Development Services, Philippine Peasant
Institute, and SALIGAN. The agency was represented by Administrative
Director Nelson Genito and Assistant Director for Special Concerns, Mr.
Rene E. Colocar.
Director
Genito of DAR mentioned the threefold mandate of DAR: improvement of
land tenure, providing of agrarian justice, and support services to DAR
beneficiaries. The director admitted that one of the major problem
encountered by the agency is the delivery of agrarian justice. There are
almost 2,000 backlog cases referring to land injustices.
Currently,
there are fourteen on-going projects by DAR which are mostly on
infrastructure: irrigation, farm-to-market roads, post-harvest
facilities, and the like.
During the
focus group discussion proper, these issues were raised:
1. Alleged
reports of padding or misreporting of distributed lands
2. The absence of systems that serve to validate or test the reliability
of the accomplishment reports by DAR.
3. Lack of clear and transparent DAR procedures and guidelines
4. Concentration of power on one official/officer (i.e. Municipal
Agrarian Reform Officers, Provincial Agrarian Reform Officers, etc.)
which makes it more vulnerable to corruption
5. Lacking of comprehensive audit reports on CARP
6. Non-issuance of Certificate of Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs)
As to the
current process, comments were that there exists no information campaign
regarding the activities of DAR. This is due to avoid the DAR activities
and programs from being politicized. Some of the problems by DAR though
could be as a result of this lack of means of transparency in this
system of the agency. Many of the carpable lands do not reach the target
farmer beneficiaries. There are instances that farmer beneficiaries do
not even know that a specific land was already awarded to them and had
already been reported as CARP accomplishment. And in terms of the
issuance of CLOAs, the beneficiaries are being passed around by MAROs
and PAROs, who happen to have contradicting answers on the release of
these land award certificates.
Representatives from various non-government organizations gave the
following suggestions:
1.
Presentation of a more recent audit report (the last audit report made
available to the public was done in 1996)
2. To have a DAR information campaign, i.e. postings on billboards,
websites, and newspapers
3. Pinpoint who among the officials are accountable for each process (MARO,
PARO, and the like)
4. Standardization of report-making on the national level and in the
lower levels such as in the provincials and municipal.
5. To provide clear guidelines and timetables for DAR processes and
transactions
6. Partnership from the Central Office with community-based
organizations
7. To provide a timetable for the release of CLOAs and sanctions for its
non-issuances.
It was agreed
upon by TAN, PAGC, PCEG, OMB, DAR Officials, and the rest of the
participants that there will be a second round of focus group discussion
with the agency. It was also suggested that officials such as MAROs and
PAROs be invited to give clarifications on the system. This FGD part two
will be on April 30, 2003, at the Humabon Function Room, Sulo Hotel.
On the other
hand, the focus group discussion with the Department of Education held
last March 26 at the Ateneo Professional Schools served as a follow-up
to the first discussion conducted last March 3 at the Manila Galleria
Suites.
Civil society
participants included representatives from the Development Academy of
the Philippines, UP National College of Public Administration,
Fellowship of Christians in Government, Procurement Watch, Inc., Evelio
B. Javier Foundation, Inc., Makati Business Club, and Government Watch.
Representatives from various public schools and publishing houses also
graced the occasion like Rizal High School, Manila Science High School,
Novaliches High School, T. Paez Integrated School, and a representative
from the Philippine Association of Superintendents. As for the
publishing companies, we have the Rex Publishing and Anvil Publications.
The Department of Education was represented by Usec. Miguel Luz, Usec.
Chito Gascon, and other DepEd officials.
During the
discussion, the top areas vulnerable to corruption identified are:
procurement, appointments of teachers/ promotions/ evaluation, and
private lending.
As to the
hiring of teachers, there are criteria and guidelines in the hiring,
ranking and promotion of teachers. A problem though was emphasized that
favoritism really happens in line with promotion. In addition, teachers
are being evaluated for performance by officials who are not aware of
their day-to-day activities.
Some of the
possible solutions suggested during the discussion with regards to the
hiring and promotion of teachers were the following:
1. To amend
the Local Government Code regarding the local school boards involvement
in the appointment of teachers
2. Local school boards should be chaired by the Superintendent and not
by the Mayor
3. Diversion of money of school boards
4. Civil Society Organizations be included in the board for transparency
5. Collective decision-making in hiring (e.g. committee)
As for
procurement of books, DepEd emphasized that the agency is to buy books
that have been tested already or have already been used in the private
and public schools. The DepEd also explained their procurement procedure
and schedule to maximize the use of the books throughout the school year
that were bought from the publishing houses.
And as for the
bidding, a comment was raised that there may be an existence of a cartel
because it seems that there is a regular set of bidders winning the bid.
Also, local bidders shy away because of the bidding requirements. A
suggested solution was that there must be a content evaluation first
before evaluation of bidding price.
Like the DAR
FGD, it was agreed upon that there will be another consultation for
DepEd with the stakeholders and different civil society organizations
which is scheduled in May.
BY WAY
OF CLARIFICATION…
The articles
shown here are written by the TAN Operations Team. The TAN OpTeam does
not attribute “editorialized” sections of the articles to the Network or
to any person in the Network. Editorialized sections may have been
lifted from the following sources:
1.
E-discussions among network members and partners
2. Open discussions (e.g. meetings, workshops, fora)
3. Media sources (newspaper articles, television features)
…. or may have
been deductions made by the author based on the same sources.
We appreciate
comments and feedback on the articles. Please submit them in writing and
we can print it for purposes of discussion. Thank you. |
