I was the subject of the Editorial of the Manila Standard Today with regard to a comment I made concerning the brazen robbery-hold up in Greenbelt 5. (Read it HERE)
I wrote to the editors requesting that my side be printed, especially since they publicly raised questions to me. I don't know if my reply will see print in their paper, so I will also post it in the web:
The Editor
Manila Standard Today
Dear Editor,
This is regarding your editorial published on October 21, 2009, where questions were posed to this representation regarding a comment on the recent robbery in Greenbelt 5. Since the questions posed were publicly directed towards me, I am hoping that this reply will merit print in your newspaper in the interest of fairness and transparency.
Before I proceed to answering the questions posed by the editorial, please allow me to make some corrections to the write-up, which I think is necessary in order to ensure that only facts make its way to the public’s attention.
First of all, the editorial was incorrect when it said that I “felt compelled to comment on the daytime robbery”. I did not issue a press statement nor did I seek out the press to give a comment on the robbery. It was the media reporter who sought me out for my comment.
Second, the editorial was also incorrect when it said that I proposed there should only be one authorized supplier of uniforms for the police. My comment was that there should be a regulation of manufacturers of uniforms and that only suppliers who are contracted by the PNP to supply uniforms with the specified design, color and material should be allowed to manufacture the same. Manufacture of similar or the same material, design and color should be prohibited.
Third, the editorial was once again incorrect when it said that I proposed secret tags sewn into the uniforms. I made no such proposal, although I did have in mind that the designs should be exclusive and no other material should be manufactured which resemble the design for the PNP.
Fourth, the editorial also erred when it said that I supported a bill filed by a colleague which proposed to impose stiffer penalties on unauthorized use of police uniforms. The focus of my proposal is on the manufacturers and suppliers of those uniforms.
As to the questions, following are my answers:
The first question was how will changing the current uniforms prevent those who are already so inclined to create new counterfeit uniforms? Changing the current uniforms will automatically render all the counterfeit uniforms currently in circulation ineffective since there will be a new way to identify genuine police personnel.
As to the production of new counterfeits, that is where the proposed new regulations on the importation, manufacture, distribution, or sale of the new uniforms or textile material of the uniforms come in. While it is really difficult to prevent criminal intent (even currency, which has enough security measures and regulations are still counterfeited), we should de everything and anything we can to make it difficult, if not costly, to the perpetrators.
The second question, which asks how secret would a secret tag be, is irrelevant because I did not propose a secret tag in the first place. I would like to point out, however, that the uniforms of the US Army and the US Marines have distinct markings embedded in the design to easily identify counterfeit uniforms from the genuine.
The last question, which asks if I really think that determined criminals will be deterred by stiffer penalties for wearing fake uniforms is also irrelevant because that was not the subject of my proposal. My proposal pertains to the unauthorized importation, manufacture, distribution, and sale of police uniforms or textile materials for the uniforms, including those with similar designs or material.
As a matter of additional information, it might interest you to know that such a proposal is not even a unique proposal and I do not claim originality for it. In other countries, similar restrictions and regulations are imposed. I already mentioned above the measures adopted by the US Army and US Marines.
In Canada, there is even a federal law prohibiting the sale of uniforms issued to members of the Canadian armed forces, penalizing soldiers who sell their uniforms to surplus shops or civilians. They are required to return old uniforms to the government for proper disposal. Uniform designs are copyrighted in order to provide additional protection of their integrity under the law.
Finally, the editorial said that if there was anything that I proved, it was that the mouth moves faster than the brain. I couldn’t agree more.
Yours truly,
Ruffy Biazon
Lone District, Muntinlupa City
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
CHAIRMAN TATAY MO HOUSING SA SENADO BAKIT DI NYA IPINASA CRIMINALIZATION SQUATTER TAPOS GUSTO MONG MAGPALITAN KAYO TATAY MO. WALA KA NAMAN NAGAWA SA KONGRESO, NASA MAJORITY KA PA NI GMA MAGNANAKAW, DI BA LP, NPC, NP NASA MAJORITY PALAGI WALA NAMAN KAYO PANININDIGAN, PORK BARREL CONGRESSMAN PALA KAYO, ANG DAMI SQUATTER SA ILOG NG MUNTINLUPA BAKIT DI NYO DINIDIMOLISH GINAMIT NYO LANG PALA BULWARTE SQUATTER. ANG LAKI PA LOTE SA SAN JOSE DEL MONTE CITY BULACAN NHA RELOCATION BAKIT DI NYO RENELOCATE SQUATTER ILOG SA SUCAT MUNTINLUPA MALAPIT PNR, ILOG SA BAYANAN MUNTINLUPA MALAPIT SLEX, NASA MAJORITY KA, BAKIT DI NYO PINAGAWA MEGA SPILL WAY SA PARANAQUE PARA DI NA MAGKADELOBYO, LP NI NOYNOY AQUINO SINUNGALING WALA REFORMA SA PARTIDO NYO PARTIDO NG OPORTUNISTA, VESTED INTEREST. SAGUTIN
MANUEL A. ALER JR. HALANG CALAMBA CITY LAGUNA
Dear Mr. Aler (I hope that is your real name),
Thank you for posting your comment. First of all, I would like you to know that I had the option of not publishing your comment and relegating it to oblivion by pressing "delete". But I did not. I would like to show respect for your opinion by letting others read it and judge for themselves.
I will go directly to the issues you raised:
1. With regard to Sen. Biazon being the chairman of the Housing COmmittee, it is common knowledge that passage of a law in a bicameral legislative system does not rely on only one man, even the chairman of a committee. Sen. Biazon was part of the Congress which decriminalized squatting but pushed for stiffer laws on SQUATTING SYNDICATES. It would be foolish for him to decriminalize it and then criminalize it again. Besides, the evaluation of his chairmanship of the committee is not based one piece of legislation alone. He has accomplished much as Chair of the committee with the passage of other laws.
2. With regard to my performance, I would like to invite you to visit the website of the House of Representatives at www.congress.gov.ph and view my profile where my legislative performance is listed. It indicates the number of bills and resolutions I filed and the number of bills I filed which passed into law. For the sake of your information in case you do not care to visit the website of the House, I filed 84 bills in the 14th Congress. I delivered no less than 10 prvilege speeches and to this date, I have authored and co-authored 41 Republic Acts since I became congressman in 2001.
For my district accomplishments, I invite you to visit my website at www.ruffybiazon.ph so you can see the activities that I have done in Muntinlupa.
I;m proud to say, that i have been instrumental in the relocation of some 10,000 squatter families along the railways of Muntinlupa and I successfully pushed for the in-city relocation within the NBP reservation. I am also credited for modernizing the educational system in my district with my aggressive push for IT in education since 2001.
It is easy to accuse a public official of doing nothing, but most often, people do that without really first looking into the performance of that official. I would be careful about saying things without basis because I wouldn;t want to be seen as ignorant. And there's a fine line between being ignorant and being stupid.
3. I am with the LP and in the impeachment of GMA, I voted to impeach her. The LP you are referring to is what used to be referred to as the Atienza Wing. I do not belong to that group.
4. With regard to the pork barrel, I do not use it for inconsequential projects. I focus the use of my pork barrel in delivering social services such as education,. schoilarships, medical assistance. In fact, I was lauded by the Dept. of Education as an Outstanding COngressman in the use of the pork barrel for education.
5. Demolition of squatters along the riverbanks of Muntinlupa are a duty and responsibility of the local government unit headed my the mayor, not the congressman. I have recommended many times such demolition, but the appropriate authorities ahve not acted on it. So the failure to relocate them is not mine.
6. I was overwhelmingly elected by my constituents from all sectors, not just informal settlers or squatters as you call them.
7. the spillway project was proposed way back in the late 70s and early 80s. The repsonsibility of it not being pursued was that of the president, because it is of such a magnitude that the decision to pursue it or not lies in the highest levels of government. I became congressman just in 2001.
I hope that this answers your questions.
Thank you.
Post a Comment