A more than a monument for the heroism of a Great Filipino

Posted by
Belarmino Dabalos Saguing
Rome, Italy 20 August, 2015

Andres Bonifacio Monument, Cry At Balintawak, Caloocan City (downloaded photo)

For those who passionately argue that Andres Bonifacio has suffered the double-edged sword that is martyrdom-by-history, the Bonifacio Monument likewise attests to the drawback a prominent memorial represents. The symbolism resonates: The nominal hero of the masses, the plebeian idealist, the revolutionary from Tondo, standing still in the midst of the hustle and bustle of the city—his gaze forever fixed on the length of Avenida Rizal, the old road leading back to Manila—indistinguishable in the background, unmistakable yet obscure in the pocket of Caloocan skyline that has sprung up around it.

The monument has stood for eighty years—first a solitary rise in the expanse of Caloocan, and over the years a lynchpin for the city’s landscape to form itself around. It has lent its very name to the area now dotted by establishments that had once almost furtively crept toward it, and which now threaten to tower over its Winged Victory perched forty-five feet from the ground. Glancing at the monument enveloped in the shadows cast by these new and ever-newer buildings, pedestrians and commuters circle around it, barely looking up, even as those in vehicles consider it more obstacle than landmark. The Bonifacio Monument, imposing yet graceful, thus manages to both serve as gateway and landmark to the thousands that traverse it, and yet fades into the scenery for those who’ve seen it far too often for far too long.

Nominally created on October 23, 1933 by virtue of Governor-General Frank Murphy’s Executive Order No. 452, the National Executive Committee for the Inauguration of the Andres Bonifacio Monument undertook a ceremony steeped in Filipino symbolism that would adorn every element of the day’s activities: whether the parade, or the unveiling, or the inauguration. 

As soon as the Speaker of the House Quintin Paredes arrived for the inauguration of the monument, the three women who represented the three principal islands of the archipelago came forward, accompanied by members of the Katipunan. In 1933, this meant three bent but proud men dressed in their Katipunero best—Lt. Col. Venancio de Jesus, Capt. Inocencio Peralta, and Lt. Dionisio Buensuceso. The six positioned themselves around the monument to form a triangle. The women stepped forward, escorted by designated members of Congress, to unveil the monument to the crowd that had gathered to witness this tribute to Andres Bonifacio.

The Bonifacio Monument was both valedictory of the Revolution of 1896 and pledge to future generations that independence would one day be restored. The unveiling of the monument itself was the culmination of a decades-long movement to commemorate not just the father of the revolution, but to reassert the continuing aspiration for independent nationhood of the Filipinos.

The political context of the campaign to build the monument is crucial to understanding the identity of the monument as both vindication and pledge. In 1901, the Americans passed the Sedition Act (Act No. 292), prohibiting Filipinos from advocating either independence or separation from the United States. Ahead of permitting the election of an all-Filipino lower house—the Philippine Assembly, due to take office in October 16, 1907—the Americans noticed that in the campaign for the election of assemblymen, the Philippine flag came to be prominently displayed: one such rally took place in Caloocan, rich in memories of 1896.

Alarmed American associations passed a resolution in August 23, 1907—a month redolent with memory for Filipinos—demanding the proscription of the Filipino flag. And so among the last acts of the American-dominated Philippine Commission was to ban the Philippine flag, anthem, and symbols of the Katipunan and the First Republic, on September 6, 1907.

Even if hemmed in by a thicket of legislation, Filipinos kept pursuing independence: the first efforts concentrating on symbolic actions to assert that the aspiration for nationhood had not dimmed. On June 19, 1908, Speaker Sergio Osmeña formally pledged the legislature to pursuing Philippine independence. Assemblymen would pursue legislation at home and abroad to secure a pledge of independence, while reclaiming the symbols of nationhood. And so even as members of the legislature filed bill after bill to legalize the Philippine flag, others—led by a prominent veteran of the Katipunan, Guillermo Masangkay—literally had a representative forum in which to propose that a monument be erected to Bonifacio’s memory.

By 1911, a monument (“El Grito del Revolucion,” with a generic Katipunero whose image has come to be indelibly stamped in our popular culture as the Supremo himself) was built in Caloocan (though it has since been transferred to the front of Vinzons Hall, in UP Diliman) not as a government-approved, or funded, memorial, but as a private initiative. Only a year later, in 1912, would the Rizal Monument be unveiled. The question would then shift to who would be honored in only the second national monument to be dedicated to a Filipino.

It would be Bonifacio and the effort would be pursued in a methodical manner. On February 5, 1915, the Philippine Assembly passed Act No. 2494, which appropriated funds for public works and monuments. In August 29, 1916, the United States Congress enacted the Jones Law making, Philippine independence a question of not if, but when— and replacing the American-dominated Philippine Commission with an all-Filipino Senate, which was inaugurated in October of that year. The coast was clear. On February 23, 1918, Act No. 2760 was passed, which approved the building of a memorial to Bonifacio, as well as the creation of national committee to oversee it. A year and a half later, the Philippine flag and anthem were finally legalized.

A decade spent in fierce clashes between Filipino politicians and American Governors-General would pass until, on the occasion of Bonifacio’s 66th birth anniversary in 1929, at 5:45 p.m., the cornerstone of the monument was ceremonially installed by Mrs. Aurora Quezon, the wife of the highest-ranking Filipino official at the time, Senate President Manuel L. Quezon.

“The Bonifacio Monument,” Alcazaren writes, “was intended to sit at its site specifically to commemorate the historic spark ignited there and that led to the culminating events of 1898.” Moreover, the site was a perfect counterpoint to the monument of Rizal in Luneta: The two leading figures of the Philippines’ emancipation from Spain would bracket Manila—the national man of letters down South by the sea, and the father of the Philippine revolution up North—not unlike sentries.

Caloocan used to be part of Tondo until 1815 when it became a municipality. The town’s growth surged after the completion of the Manila-Dagupan railway in 1892. It was there, in August 23, 1896, that Andres Bonifacio led the famous cry that sent the clear message of resistance to Spanish rule. For several years after, Caloocan was in the thick of the fight; first against the Spanish, then quickly against the Americans. By the turn of the century, the terror of war turned into reluctant acquiescence and Caloocan fell into the new colonizer’s sphere of influence. [...] Manila was slowly filling out and parts of the Daniel Burnham master plan for the city was taking shape. One of the main roads leading out of the city was Rizal Avenue. The avenue’s extension was to link it with the highway leading north (now known as the MacArthur Highway). A junction was formed with these two and a circumferential road known as Route 54 (now EDSA). This junction gave the opportunity for a rotunda and hence, a perfect setting for a monument, an entry statement for the city as well as an opportunity to commemorate the heroes and the events that occurred in Caloocan.

“The Bonifacio Monument,” Alcazaren writes, “was intended to sit at its site specifically to commemorate the historic spark ignited there and that led to the culminating events of 1898.” Moreover, the site was a perfect counterpoint to the monument of Rizal in Luneta: The two leading figures of the Philippines’ emancipation from Spain would bracket Manila—the national man of letters down South by the sea, and the father of the Philippine revolution up North—not unlike sentries.

Tolentino’s aesthetic would influence numerous Filipino sculptors, many of them having studied under him at the UP School of Fine Arts. One of these students was Anastacio Caedo, his star pupil, assistant, and protegé. Caedo would be Tolentino’s right-hand man in the creation of the Bonifacio Monument, the two leading a team of sculptors that toiled in a studio garden in Malate. The Bonifacio Monument was thus, expectedly, a collaborative effort that sought to realize Tolentino’s singular vision: The construction of the central column, including the base, was done by the architect Andres Luna de San Pedro (son of the ilustrado hero Juan Luna, and the chairman of the jurors that chose Tolentino’s design); the pedestal and shaft were carved in granite imported from Germany. The sculptor Francesco Riccardo Monti, Italian by birth, would likewise lend his expertise in the forging of the 23 bronze figures (cast in Italy) that served as the memorial’s central element. (Monti, too, would provide a postwar link, in terms of monuments: Monti designed the mourning angels that surmount the Quezon Monument—itself designed by Federico Ilustre, who started his career as a draftsman for Juan Nakpil.) 

If the tableaux in the Rizal monument are static and sparse, those in the Bonifacio Monument are imbued with energy and emotion. Each figure is modeled with classical perfection in composition, but charged with the fierce sentiments of a romanticist—and all of them fashioned with a realist’s careful and conscientious attention to detail. Emilio Jacinto’s face is frozen in a battle-cry right behind Bonifacio; on the other side of the obelisk are the priests Mariano Gómez, José Apolonio Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora. Caedo would serve as a model of one of the Katipuneros—the one that cradled a dead infant, with a sheet thrown over its still face. (Caedo, too, is among those considered to be the model for the UP Oblation, as he was Tolentino’s assistant during its creation.) Tolentino also modelled after Mrs. Angela Sison (wife of Senator, and later Defense Secretary, Teofilo Sison) the young woman that lay prostrate before an angry old man; Guillermo Masangkay’s role in the revolution and the realization of this monument to its nominal father would be forever immortalized as a Katipunero tearing up a cedula.

Nearly unseen unless from a considerable distance from the monument, the winged figure of Victory rises 45 feet in the air, the granite tower her pedestal. Patterned after the Winged Victory of Samothrace, the triumph it evokes only underscores the value of the tumult and the struggle and the fury that holds her up. That in the centuries of subjugation, for every mother who had held her dead child, every laborer who defiantly tore proof of Spain’s ownership, for every boy from Tondo who dared form a nation—the goddess of Victory looked on. We had won.

Nothing demonstrates this—the claiming of the Monument and the Hero for a nation once more on the threshold of independence—better than the marker at the foot of Bonifacio’s statue: cast in the same enduring bronze, but in the various codes of the Katipunan, with exhortations not in English or Spanish, but the Tagalog wielded by Bonifacio as every bit as powerful a weapon as the bolos, rifles, and handguns of the Katipuneros. Literally a codex—it is a proclamation, enduring, inscrutable except to those to whom the words were originally addressed: the Filipinos. Decoded, it is Bonifacio’s proclamation of August 28th, two days before he led the attack at San Juan del Monte—the first real battle of the Philippine revolution:

The Tagalog wielded by Bonifacio as every bit as powerful a weapon as the bolos, rifles, and handguns of the Katipuneros. It is a proclamation, enduring, inscrutable except to those to whom the words were originally addressed: the Filipinos. 

Mga maginoong namiminuno, kasapi at mga kapatid: Sa inyong lahat ipinatutungkol ang pahayag na ito. Totoong kinakailangan na sa lalong madaling panahon ay putulin natin ang walang pangalang pang-lulupig na ginagawa sa mga anak ng bayan, na ngayo’y nagtitiis ng mabibigat na parusa at pahirap sa mga bilangguan. Na sa dahilang ito’y mangyaring ipa-tanto ninyo sa lahat ng mga kapatid na sa araw ng sabado, ika-29 ng kasalukuyan, ay puputok ang panghihimagsik na pinagkasunduan natin, kaya’t kinakailangang sabaysabay na kumilos ang mga bayanbayan at sabaysabay na salakayin ang maynila. Ang sino pa mang humadlang sa banal na adhikang ito ng bayan ay ipalalagay na taksil at kalaban maliban na nga lamang kung may sakit na dinaramdam o ang katawa’y may sama at sila’y paguusigin alinsunod sa palatuntunang ating pinaiiral. — Bundok ng Kalaayan, ika-28 ng Agosto ng 1896, May Pagasa.

###

Reference:

Agoncillo, Teodoro. The Revolt of the Masses. Quezon City: University of the Philippines, 1956. Print.

Alcazaren, Paulo. "Wait a Monument." Philippine Star. March 9, 2002.http://www.philstar.com/modern-living/153242/wait-monument/.

Chua, Michael Charleston. “Shouting in Bronze: The Lasting Relevance of Andres Bonifacio and His Monument in Caloocan.” Artes de las Filipinas.http://www.artesdelasfilipinas.com/archives/52/shouting-in-bronze-the-lasting-relevance-of-andres-bonifacio-and-his-monument-in-caloocan.

Guillermo E. Tolentino. Facing History. Kalipunan ng Sining at Kultura ng Pasig, Inc., 2003. Print.

Richardson, Jim. “Katipunan: Documents and Studies.” Katipunan: Documents and Studies.http://www.kasaysayan-kkk.info/.

May, Glenn Anthony. Inventing A Hero: The Posthumous Re-creation of Andres Bonifacio. Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1997. Print.

Melendez, Christian Bernard A. “A Moment for the Monument.” National Historical Commission of the Philippines. March 22, 2013. http://nhcp.gov.ph/a-moment-for-the-monument/.

Ocampo, Ambeth R. Bonifacio’s Bolo. Manila: Anvil Publishing Inc., 1995. Print.

CCP Encyclopedia of Philippine Art, Volume IV: Philippine Visual Arts.

Programa de la Inauguracion del Monumento de Andres Bonifacio

RECOMMENDED READING AND RELATED DOCUMENTS:

Bonifacio 2013: Featuring an interactive multimedia timeline of the life, works, and achievements of Andres Bonifacio

Imprinting Andres Bonifacio: From Portrait to Peso: How well do we know Andres Bonifacio? An essay on the different artistic renditions of the Supremo through the years.

The Founding of the Katipunan: An essay on the revolutionary secret society’s history, structure, and membership, as well as a list of members who were present in Balintawak at the outbreak of the Philippine Revolution in August 1896.

Andres Bonifacio’s Decalogue, and the Kartilya ng Katipunan

Evolution of the Revolution: A series of maps tracing the progression of the Philippine Revolution from 1896 to the First Philippine Republic.

Tejeros Convention: An essay on the Tejeros Convention, and the events leading up to it, as well as a series of maps that illustrate in detail the various offensives and counter offensives launched by both Filipino and Spanish forces during the revolution.

The Trial of Andres Bonifacio: A retrospective on the trial of Andres Bonifacio as the natural progression from the events and the outcome of the Tejeros Convention.

Transcript of the Trial of Andres Bonifacio: A collection of accounts and documents related to the trial, such as the testimony of Andres Bonifacio himself.

Andres Bonifacio’s Letter to Emilio Jacinto (April 24, 1897)

Andres Bonifacio’s Letter to Julio Nakpil (April 24, 1897)

Mrs. Andres Bonifacio’s Letter to Emilio Jacinto Re: Bonifacio’s Arrest

Mrs. Andres Bonifacio’s Letter to Emilio Jacinto Re: Bonifacio’s Arrest (English Translation)

General Pantaleon Garcia’s Account of the Revolution

General Pio del Pilar on the Arrest of Andres Bonifacio

Francisco Carreon’s Account of the Arrest of Andres Bonifacio

Artemio Ricarte on the Arrest and Execution of Bonifacio

Origin of the Symbols of our National Flag: An essay tracing the origins of the Philippine flag’s design elements.

Flags and Banners of the Colonial Era: An infographic timeline tracing the various flags and banners that have flown over the Philippine islands since 1521.

[AUDIO] Alerta! Katipunan: Listen to the march of the Katipunan.

[AUDIO] Sa Marahas Na Manga Anak Nang Bayan: Listen to Andres Bonifacio’s manifesto, as read by Mario O’Hara.

OFWs and the Human Rights Situation the Philippines

By Belarmino Dabalos Saguing
Rome Italy 20 July 201\5

Will you remain CONTENT TO LOOK ON PASSIVELY and let it happen to your children, parents and relatives you have lefty behind in the country?

Freedom and Human Rights


Throughout history people have strived to be free. Yet all people still live with less freedom than is possible. Individuals must sacrifice some of their freedom in order to live in even a democratic society, such as for example not being able to violate any laws. Additionally, even if one lives in a free society, their freedom is limited by the need to earn a living, which subjects them to spending time in a dictatorship environment, or even  slavery, if tied to a capitalled employer as a paid worker.
True freedom is the ability for each person to live as they desire. This is the ultimate human dream, and therefore should be Humanity's consummate goal.We could accelerate the pace at which we reach this better world if we made the same a common goal, and devoted some more resources toward finding the knowledge to make it a reality for all. 


When there is interaction between humans, there must be some limits on conduct. Any rules, and methods for enforcing the rules, should be established by the majority of humans through democracy. Basic fundamental government services are also necessary for coordinating common efforts, determining land use, and ensuring that everyone has access to the production capabilities. Under such future technological circumstances all institutions, other than government, are unnecessary. Multiple levels of government are unnecessary, and a global government is all that is needed. Of course there should be total freedom for people to organize.


We often think of freedom in a military sense—a war is won, soldiers return home, prisoners are freed, and bullets no longer fly. People walk their streets in safety, and citizens enjoy such rights as free speech, voting, and worshipping as they choose. From this perspective, liberty is achieved through force—combat or a military presence and maintained through laws, governing bodies, judges, and men and women who fight against those who oppose freedom. 


What is, there this so-called freedom or human rights?  This is defined in the preamble of trhe United Nation InUniversal Declaration of Human rights.[2]

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

The fundamental rights of every person living on this planet is defined in Articles 1 – 30 of the aforementioned Declaration of Rights [2]

What it Means to Violate Human Rights

There is now near-universal consensus that all individuals are entitled to certain basic rights under any circumstances. These include certain civil liberties and political rights, the most fundamental of which is the right to life and physical safety. Human rights are the articulation of the need for justice, tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity in all of our activity. Speaking of rights allows us to express the idea that all individuals are part of the scope of morality and justice.

To protect human rights is to ensure that people receive some degree of decent, humane treatment. To violate the most basic human rights, on the other hand, is to deny individuals their fundamental moral entitlements. It is, in a sense, to treat them as if they are less than human and undeserving of respect and dignity.

 Examples are acts typically deemed "crimes against humanity," including genocide, torture, slavery, rape, enforced sterilization or medical experimentation, and deliberate starvation. Because these policies are sometimes implemented by governments, limiting the unrestrained power of the state is an important part of international law. Underlying laws that prohibit the various "crimes against humanity" is the principle of nondiscrimination and the notion that certain basic rights apply universally. [3]

The number of deaths related to combat and the collateral damage caused by warfare are only a small part of the tremendous amount of suffering and devastation caused by conflicts. Over the course of protracted conflict, assaults on political rights and the fundamental right to life are typically widespread. Some of the gravest violations of the right to life are massacres, the starvation of entire populations, and genocide. Genocide is commonly understood as the intentional extermination of a single ethnic, racial, or religious group. Killing group members, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing measures to prevent birth, or forcibly transferring children are all ways to bring about the destruction of a group. Genocide is often regarded as the most offensive crime against humanity.

The term "war crime" refers to a violation of the rules of jus in bello (justice in war) by any individual, whether military or civilian. The laws of armed conflict prohibit attacks on civilians and the use of weapons that cause unnecessary suffering or long-term environmental damage. Other war crimes include taking hostages, firing on localities that are undefended and without military significance, such as hospitals or schools, inhuman treatment of prisoners, including biological experiments, and the pillage or purposeless destruction of property. Although clearly outlawed by international law, such war crimes are common. According to Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations, it is increasingly true that "the main aim...[of conflicts]... is the destruction not of armies but of civilians and entire ethnic groups.”

Women and girls are often raped by soldiers or forced into prostitution. For a long time, the international community has failed to address the problem of sexual violence during armed conflict. However, sexual assaults, which often involve sexual mutilation, sexual humiliation, and forced pregnancy, are quite common. Such crimes are motivated in part by the long-held view that women are the "spoils" of war to which soldiers are entitled. Trafficking in women is a form of sexual slavery in which women are transported across national borders and marketed for prostitution. These so-called "comfort women" are another example of institutionalized sexual violence against women during wartime. Sexual violence is sometimes viewed as a way to destroy male and community pride or humiliate men who cannot "protect" their women. It is also used to silence women who are politically active, or simply inflict terror upon the population at large. Mass rapes may also form part of a genocidal strategy, designed to impose conditions that lead to the destruction of an entire group of people. For example, during the 1990s, the media reported that "rape and other sexual atrocities were a deliberate and systematic part of the Bosnian Serb campaign for victory in the war" in the former Yugoslavia.

Rather than simply killing off whole populations, government forces may carry out programs of torture. Torture can be either physical or psychological, and aims at the "humiliation or annihilation of the dignity of the person." Physical torture might include mutilation, beatings, and electric shocks to lips, gums, and genitals. In psychological torture, detainees are sometimes deprived of food and water for long periods, kept standing upright for hours, deprived of sleep, or tormented by high-level noise.

Torture is used in some cases as a way to carry out interrogations and extract confessions or information. Today, it is increasingly used as a means of suppressing political and ideological dissent, or for punishing political opponents who do not share the ideology of the ruling group.

In addition to torture, tens of thousands of people detained in connection with conflicts "disappear" each year, and are usually killed and buried in secret. Government forces "take people into custody, hold them in secret, and then refuse to acknowledge responsibility for their whereabouts or fate." This abduction of persons is typically intended to secure information and spread terror. In most cases, interrogations involve threats and torture, and those who are arrested are subsequently killed. Corpses are buried in unmarked graves or left at dumpsites in an attempt to conceal acts of torture  and summary execution of those in custody. Because people disappear without any trace, families do not know whether their loved ones are alive or dead.

Various lesser forms of political oppression are often enacted as well. Individuals who pose a threat to those in power or do not share their political views may be arbitrarily imprisoned, and either never brought to trial or subject to grossly unfair trial procedures. Mass groups of people may be denied the right to vote or excluded from all forms of political participation. Or, measures restricting people's freedom of movement may be enforced. These include forcible relocations, mass expulsions, and denials of the right to seek asylum or return to one's home.

Political oppression may also take the form of discrimination. When this occurs, basic rights may be denied on the basis of religion, ethnicity, race, or gender. Apartheid, which denies political rights on the basis of race, is perhaps one of the most severe forms of discrimination. The system of apartheid in South Africa institutionalized extreme racial segregation that involved laws against interracial marriage or sexual relations and requirements for the races to live in different territorial areas. Certain individuals were held to be inferior by definition, and not regarded as full human beings under the law. The laws established under this system aimed at social control, and brought about a society divided along racial lines and characterized by a systematic disregard for human rights.

In addition, women are uniquely vulnerable to certain types of human rights abuses -- in addition to the sexual abuse mentioned above, entrenched discrimination against women is prevalent in many parts of the world and leads to various forms of political and social oppression. This includes strict dress codes and harsh punishments for sexual "transgressions," which impose severe limitations on women's basic liberties. In addition, women in some regions (Africa , for example) suffer greater poverty than men and are denied political influence, education, and job training.[3]

The Question of Humanitarian Intervention

There is much disagreement about when and to what extent outside countries can engage in humanitarian intervention. More specifically, there is debate about the efficacy of using military force to protect the human rights of individuals in other nations. This sort of debate stems largely from a tension between state sovereignty and the rights of individuals.

Some defend the principles of state sovereignty and nonintervention, and argue that other states must be permitted to determine their own course. It is thought that states have diverse conceptions of justice, and international coexistence depends on a pluralist ethic whereby each state can uphold its own conception of the good. Among many, there is "a profound skepticism about the possibilities of realizing notions of universal justice." States that presume to judge what counts as a violation of human rights in another nation interfere with that nation's right to self-determination. In addition, requiring some country to respect human rights is liable to cause friction and can lead to far-reaching disagreements. Thus, acts of intervention may disrupt interstate order and lead to further conflict.

Others think, "Only the vigilant eye of the international community can ensure the proper observance of international standards, in the interest not of one state or another but of the individuals themselves.] They maintain that massive violations of human rights, such as genocide and crimes against humanity, warrant intervention, even if it causes some tension or disagreement. Certain rights are inalienable and universal, and "taking basic rights seriously means taking responsibility for their protection everywhere." If, through its atrocious actions, a state destroys the lives and rights of its citizens, it temporarily forfeits its claims to legitimacy and sovereignty. Outside governments then have a positive duty to take steps to protect human rights and preserve life. In addition, it is thought that political systems that protect human rights reduce the threat of world conflict. Thus, intervention might also be justified on the ground of preserving international security.

Nevertheless, governments are often reluctant to commit military forces and resources to defend human rights in other states. In addition, the use of violence to end human rights violations poses a moral dilemma insofar as such interventions may lead to further loss of innocent lives. It is imperative that the least amount of force necessary to achieve humanitarian objectives be used, and that intervention not do more harm than good. Lastly, there is a need to ensure that intervention is legitimate, and motivated by genuine humanitarian concerns. The purposes of intervention must be apolitical and disinterested. However, if risks and costs of intervention are high, it is unlikely that states will intervene unless their direct interests are involved.

Many note that in order to truly address human rights violations, we must strive to understand the underlying causes of these breaches. These causes have to do with underdevelopment, economic pressures, various social problems, and international conditions.[39] Indeed, the roots of repression, discrimination, and other denials of human rights stem from deeper and more complex political, social, and economic problems. It is only by understanding and ameliorating these root causes and strengthening civil society that we can truly protect human rights.

OFWs and Human Rights Violation In the Philippines

Many OFWs are unaware of the connections between HRV and outward Migration of Filipino Workers, for one important reason: Freedom from want (poverty) is a fundamental right of everty human being. If we are looking for a common denominator, let us analyze this context. Almost every OFW, in varying degrees, has experienced poverty, has seen it everywhere in the country, and has known its devastating effects to a family, yet failed to see the connection.

In the present set up of our establishment in the Philippines, we should have known that it is SYSTEMATIC. The economic programs of the country has no room for economic advancement of the people. It aims to make the establishment rich without filtering the wealth to the people. Only the very rich, mostly who benefits from the so-called economic advances of the country. The few rich amassed more wealth, leaving the poor majory poor than ever. For this reason, the workers has been left with no alternatives left within the Philippine territory and are goaded to migrate.

OFWs must be informed and warned that our country is in danger of sinking. We must know that facts and understand that we, too, mjust act to help prevent it from happening, for the sake of our kindreds, for the sake of our children and grand children.

There are many OFWs who even consider those who vocally criticize the government for its failkure to give even a minimum remedy to the problem of poverty. Many frown at the so-called activists who call for action to dethrone the ruling regime.

But we must understand that when the rule of the establishment has been to the dewtrement of the people, it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law (see Presamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). And the time is ripe! The establishment is, for a long time, has even been using what was supposed to be the people’s protection from detrimental acts of the establishment against the people, now is being used to commit more human rights violations: silencing the critics by killing then or imprisoning them with false accusation. The establishment is using the armed forces to stiffle lawful protests and  criticismsWith this acts of terrorism the regime is commiting a series of Human Rights violations.

POVERTY IS TERRORISM.

Will you remain CONTENT TO LOOK ON PASSIVELY and let it happen to your children, parents and relatives you have lefty behind in the country?

THE CHOICE IS YOURS.

   

[1] Wikipedia 

[2]  United Nations International Declaration of Human Rights           

[3] Human Rights Violations, Beyond Intractabiliy July 2003

.

Filipino and Indonesian Women overseas domestic workers

Posted by Belarmino Dabalos Saguing
Rome, Italy 27June,2015

source: Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia  Overseas Filipino Workers, Labor Circulation in Southeast Asia, and the (Mis)management of Overseas Migration Programs, Essay by Odine de Guzman  http://kyotoreview.org/issue-4/overseas-filipino-workers-labor-circulation-in-southeast-asia-and-the-mismanagement-of-overseas-migration-programs/

Filipina maid (dowloaded image)

While the majority of Filipino and Indonesian women labor migrants end up in domestic work, it is considered to be risky and sending governments do not have strong bilateral agreements with receiving states on the protection of these women. As noted earlier, numerous Filipino women have met misfortune in varying degrees in their quest for economic upliftment as overseas domestic workers. Media reports in Indonesia have likewise exposed the abuses experienced by women migrant workers, many of whom are domestic workers. The abuse begins in the home country, at the hands of a tekong (middleman/illegal recruiter) and calo (small company or individual recruiter), and continues in the employer’s home in the form of non-payment of wages, long working hours, subjection to cultural taboos, or physical and sexual abuse. The protection of domestic workers is made difficult because of the location of the work in the employer’s private residence, where the lines between the employee’s work and private time/space are blurred.

It is made even more difficult in Indonesia when “maids are not [considered] workers” and “continue to be regarded as the private property of households” (Ati Nurbati 2000, 91, 90). Because of the general assumption that domestic workers have low education and that “they sleep and eat for free,” their salaries are low and are not governed by minimum wage laws. In fact, “[a]s ‘part of the family,’ a maid’s wage is not public business” (ibid., 91). The notion that a domestic worker’s welfare, including salary, lies beyond the scope of public business partly originates from the capitalist division of labor into the productive and reproductive spheres, where the notion of work is a “production process that contributes to capitalist accumulation and exchange” (Eviota 1992, cited in Cheng 1996, 110). In contrast, domestic work falls within the “process of reproduction, essential to the survival of the family and society, [but] does not directly lead to the process of accumulation and exchange;” thus, it is not customarily considered work, thereby, it converts the status of domestic workers into non-workers (ibid). To a certain extent, women domestic workers fall within the ambit of the private on account of gender relations in society. Patriarchal societies deem women’s proper place to be the home, while men rightly belong in the public arena.

A review of most government policies and legislation on the protection of migrant workers shows that domestic workers’ specific labor problems are not factored in at all (Palma-Beltran and Javate-de Dios 1992; Heyzer 1994, also cited in Jones 2000; Goldberg 1996). Even so, many women leave because domestic workers at home earn only 15-20% of what they can earn abroad. In real terms, however, the enormous recruitment fees and other travel expenses increase their family’s living expenses, sometimes exponentially.

Indonesian domestic workers in Malaysia are offered between US$90 and US$150 per month with recruitment fees to be deducted from the first three months. But there are numerous reports of more deductions than agreed upon and failure to receive full or any salary at all (Jones 2000; Ati Nurbaiti 2000; Eko Susi Rosdianasari 2000). Yet for US$100 a month, many a rural woman would take the risk of illegal detention, torture, and even death, strengthened by the hope that one’s own fate will be different. (The bulk of reported abuse of Indonesian domestic workers is in Saudi Arabia, with many physically and sexually abused.)

Aside from the often-marginalized position of migrant workers in receiving countries, workers also fall into hierarchical categories within migrant groups, which can be imposed upon them by local society. In the hierarchy of overseas domestic workers in Malaysia, for example, Filipinos are on the top rung. Indonesians fall into a lower salary range because they usually have a lower level of education, are not yet knowledgeable about the use of “modern” household equipment, and are not proficient in the English language.

But regardless of foreign language proficiency, overseas domestic workers are almost always unjustly considered “potential prostitutes” by local officials and laypeople who tend to prejudge foreign workers (Jones 2000, 65); in fact, even in their home country, unmarried Indonesian women leaving to work as domestic workers are imagined as “social misfits who could not get husbands or who had personal problems at home that prompted them to leave” (64-65), despite the financial support they send back. Of course, recruited domestic workers every now and then unwittingly do end up in prostitution. The multi-million dollar business of trafficking in women thrives upon deceiving, or convincing, unsuspecting women and families about the rewards of overseas work. Once the migration process has started, where a worker actually ends up is determined by the recruiters and their allies. Sydney Jones asserts that in the case of Indonesian women, the high demand for overseas domestic workers in Malaysia facilitates the recruitment of women legal and illegal recruiters conscripting women for housework or for the brothel (65).

KNOW OUR INDIGENOUS PEOPLE 1. The Lumads of Mindanao

Posteed by Belarmino Dabalos Saguing
Rome, Italy 01.04.2015

Lumads of Mindanao

LUMAD is a Bisayan term meaning "native" or "indigenous". It is adopted by a group of 15 from a more than 18 Mindanao ethnic groups in their Cotabato Congress in June 1986 to distinguish them from the other Mindanaons, Moro or Christian. Its usage was accepted during the Cory Administration when R.A. 6734, the word Lumad was used in Art. XIII sec. 8(2) to distinguish these ethnic communities from the Bangsa Moro.

About the 11th century, called the "emergent period" by the anthropologist, F. Landa Jocano, the dynamic interactions between the indigenous cultural elements and that of the migrants brought about the eventual narrowing down into distinct ethnic groups. Pigafetta, Magellan's chronicler in 1521, mentioned four Mindanao groups as: Caragan, Mandanaos, Lutaos, Subanus and Dapitans. Apparently, the Caragans were found in the Misamis Oriental, Agusan, Bukidnon area. The Mandanaos in Central Mindanao; Lutaos in Zamboanga del Sur and Basilan; Subanus and Dapitans in Zamboanga del Sur and del Norte; and the Dapitans in Zamboanga del Norte provinces as these are called today.

Called " infideles" during the Spanish regime, the subjugation of the Lumads was equally important as that of the Muslims. Thus, Jesuit missions were established near infieles territories. They were found among the Tiruray in Cotabato; among the Subanons in Dapitan; among the Manuvus and Caragans in Misamis and Surigao; and among the Bilaans in Davao.

 At present, Mindanao Lumads account for 2.1 million out of the total 6.5 million indigenous people nationally. (1993 Census) these fifteen Lumads in the Cotabato Congress were the following:

Subanen, B'laan, Mandaya, Higaonon, Banwaon, Talaandig, Ubo, Manobo, T'boli, Tiruray, Bagobo,Tagakaolo, Dibabawon, Manguangan, and Mansaka. 

They are found in the following towns and cities:

Cotabato, Tandag, Dipolog, Kidapawan, Marbel, Tagum, Cagayan de Oro, Davao, Malaybalay,Pagadian, Butuan, Surigao, Ozamis,  Ipil, Digos, Mati and Dipolog.

 The Lumads in Mindanao resisted against American colonization. In 1906, Gov. Bolton of Davao was murdered by the Bagobos in the area. Between 1906-1908 the Tungud Movement of the Lumads in Davao spread through Agusan and Bukidnon. A Subanon uprising against the Americans occurred between 1926-27. The coming of the Japanese in Davao was resisted by the Bagobos between 1918 to 1935 as the latter threatened to displace them from their homelands for business purposes.

Recently, new heroes among the Lumads were put to the fore in commemoration with the Centennial Celebration of the Philippine Revolution. A Manobo Protestant pastor, Mars Daul, researched on the history of the Lumad warriors through interviews with his forebears. These heroes are Datu Balingan, who defended the Mansaka and Mandaya ethnic groups in Davao Oriental from the hands of the Spanish official, Capt. Uyanguren; also Datu Bago of the Bagobo ethnic group fought Uyanguren in Davao City and Putaw Tumanggong, a Manobo chieftain who is Daul's grandfather. Tumanggong led his men in fighting the Spaniards and the Americans at the turn of the century. In Sarangani, the group B'laan leader Sigalu joined forces with Datu Lumanda, who made the Spanish fleet retreat to its base in Cebu . However, according to Daul, some Lumads refrained from fighting the Spaniards such as the Tirurays because the Spaniards built them schools and chapels. The historicity of Mars Daul's research however still has to be verified.

At the beginning of the 20th century, the Lumads controlled an area which now covers 17 of Mindanao’s 24 provinces, but by the 1980 census, they constituted less than 6% of the population of Mindanao and Sulu. Significant migration to Mindanao of Visayans, spurred by government-sponsored resettlement programmes, turned the Lumads into minorities. The Bukidnon province population grew from 63,470 in 1948 to 194,368 in 1960 and 414,762 in 1970, with the proportion of indigenous Bukidnons falling from 64% to 33% to 14%.

Lumads have a traditional concept of land ownership based on what their communities consider their ancestral territories. The historian B. R. Rodil notes that ‘a territory occupied by a community is a communal private property, and community members have the right of usufruct to any piece of unoccupied land within the communal territory.’ Ancestral lands include cultivated land as well as hunting grounds, rivers, forests, uncultivated land and the mineral resources below the land.

Unlike the Moros, the Lumad groups never formed a revolutionary group to unite them in armed struggle against the Philippine government. When the migrants came, many Lumad groups retreated into the mountains and forests. However, the Moro armed groups and the Communist-led New People’s Army (NPA) have recruited Lumads to their ranks, and the armed forces have also recruited them into paramilitary organisations to fight the Moros or the NPA.

For the Lumad, securing their rights to ancestral domain is as urgent as the Moros’ quest for self-determination. However, much of their land has already been registered in the name of multinational corporations, logging companies and other wealthy Filipinos, many of whom are, relatively speaking, recent settlers to Mindanao. Mai Tuan, a T'boli leader explains, "Now that there is a peace agreement for the MNLF, we are happy because we are given food assistance like rice … we also feel sad because we no longer have the pots to cook it with. We no longer have control over our ancestral lands.

The Lumad terretories by tribe

The Subanen inhabits the Zamboanga Peninsula. And often mix with Tausugs and Badjaos of the region.

The B'laan is concentrated in Davao del Sur and South Cotabato. They practice indigenous rituals while adapting to the way of life of modern Filipinos

Mandaya Lumads dwells in Davao Oriental

The Higaonon occupies Bukidnon

The Banwaon are also known as the Adgawanon, Banuaonon, Banwanon, Higaonon-Banwaon and Manobo. There are concentrations of Banwaon's found in the province of Agusan del Sur.

The Talaandigs are one of the indigenous groups in the province of Bukidnon, The members of the group are found in barangays and municipalities surrounding the mountain of Kitanglad, the historic domain of the Talaandig people

The Ubo peopleis  an ethnic sub-tribe of the Tboli are concentrated inSouth Cotabato province with its i

The Manobo cluster includes eight groups: the Cotabato Manobo, Agusan 

Manobo, Dibabawon Manobo, Matig Salug Manobo, Sarangani Manobo, 

Manobo of Western Bukidnon, Obo Manobo, and Tagabawa Manobo

The T'boli Tribe that lives in the province of South Cotabato, around Lake Sebu.

 The Tirurau are a traditional hill people of southwestern Mindanao. They live in the upper portion of a river-drained area in the northwestern part of South Cotabato, where the mountainous terrain of the Cotabato Cordillera faces the Celebes Sea. The Tiruray call themselves etew teduray or Tiruray people, but also classify themselves according to their geographic location: etew rotor, mountain people; etew dogot, coastal people; etew teran, Tran people; and etew awang, Awang people, or etew ufi, Upi people

Until sometime in this century, there were two major groups, which were distinguished from each other by geographic separation and by several cultural distinctions. The upland Bagobo live in the very mountainous region between the upper Pulangi and Davao rivers on Mindanao in the Philippines, whereas the coastal Bagobo once lived in the hills south and east of Mount Apo. The coastal Bagobo were influenced by Christianity, plantations, and resettlement among coastal Bisayans; they now reside either with the upland Bagobo or with the Bisayans and do not exist as a separate group.

The Tagakaolo inhabit Mindanao, Sarangani, Davao del Sur, and Mt. Apo.  Tagalaya, from the mountains, indicates they came from the river sources.  Presently, they're also found in the coastal towns of Malita, Lais, and Talaguton Rivers. 

The Dibabawon, one of the Lumad tribes in Mindanao concentrated in Compostela Valley. While they also have a unique language of the same name, the residents have learned to speak the Visayan language.

The Manguangan are found in the Cordillera Sugut mountains in Mindanao, scattering up to the great lakes of Buayan or Maguindanao and in the territory  between what is occupied by the Manobo and the Mandaya in Davao and South Cotabato.

The Mandaya are found in Davao Oriental and Davao del Norte, Mindanao. Their name means “the first people upstream,” derived from man (“first”) and daya (“upstream or upper portion of a river”). Mandayas are said to be polygynous; divorce is also socially acceptable. Mansaka is a combination of man (“first”) and saka (“to ascend”), and is almost identical to the meaning of Mandaya: “the first people to climb the mountains or go upstream.” Mansaka can be found in Davao Oriental.