Premature campaigning/ Poor families, gov’t offices dress code

BEHIND THE SCENES

Alfred P. Dizon

Political candidates for the May 2016 election are not liable and free to do anything to up their chances until campaign period starts. They may engage in KBL (kasal, binyag, libing) activities, post advertisements through media outfits and yes, indulge the friendly neighborhood drunks with a gin bottle for a vote or two.

Atty. Julius Torres, Cordillera regional director of the Commission on Elections said premature campaigning is no longer in  order because of the Supreme  Court’s decision on the Comelec vs. Penera case.

He said the SC ruling has superseded the election law which used to consider electioneering outside of the campaign period as an election offense.A candidate can only be liable for prohibited campaign acts during the campaign period, Torres said.

Republic Act 9369 or the Poll Automation Law states that “any person who files his certificate of candidacy (COC) can only be considered a candidate  at the start of the campaign period” and that “unlawful acts applicable to a candidate shall be in effect only upon the start of the campaign period.”

For the May 9, 2016 polls, the campaign period for national candidates starts on  February  9, 2016  and on   March 25 for candidates seeking local elective posts.With the SC ruling, we are requesting all candidates to tow the line and campaign only on campaign periods, Torres said.

***

Following reports of well-off individuals and families put in the list of 

Department of Social Welfare and Development and members of “poorest families” and given stipends nationwide, the DSWD urged public to help validate its updated list.

The DSWD will release this month the 2015 National Household Targeting System for Poverty Reduction, also known as the Listahanan survey.

“We need the public to participate in making sure that the final list will be accurate, complete and reliable. We advise everyone to wait for the announcement of our field offices on the start of the validation phase in their respective regions,” said Social Welfare Secretary Corazon Soliman in a media post.

The list will be posted in strategic areas such as markets, schools, churches and barangay, municipal or city halls.

The public is encouraged to appeal or notify the Listahanan area supervisor if they have questions about the list.

The DSWD has partnered with local government units and civil society groups in organizing validation committees to act on complaints and appeals about the list.

**

Dinagat Islands Rep. Kaka Bag-ao, Camarines Sur Rep. Leni Robredo, Quezon City Rep. Bolet Banal, and Ifugao Rep. Teddy Baguilat filed House Bill No. 6286, also known as the proposed Open Door Policy Act , a report from Aiza Namingit, Baguilat’s staff said.

The measure seeks to prohibit government institutions from implementing strict dress codes that prevent citizens, especially those who belong to marginalized sectors, from accessing frontline services and from attending public meetings.

 “In public offices, professionalism isn’t in what citizens wear when they avail of services that they should rightfully enjoy. It’s in how government officers and employees treat the people whom we serve,” said Bag-ao.

Robredo added that “strict dress codes are often unjust requirements that prevent ordinary Filipinos from seeing how government works for them and from being involved in development initiatives that ultimately benefit them.”

Aside from barring strict dress codes in frontline service offices, the bill aims to do the same for public meetings, which are hearings or sessions conducted by any government office or agency, including legislative bodies, that are open to the public and where citizens act as guests, observers, or participants.

Before being elected into office, Bag-ao and Robredo were both members of Sentro ng Alternatibong Lingap Panligal (SALIGAN), an organization of alternative lawyers who handled cases for farmers, fisherfolk, urban poor, and other sectors.

 “This bill, when enacted into law, seeks to correct everyday injustices that we often fail to notice. There are many cases where citizens are denied access to services and attendance in meetings that are supposedly open to the public just because they do not conform to the strict requirements on attire deemed ‘proper’ by some government offices,” said Banal.

Baguilat also signed as an author of the bill because according to him, “there are citizens who cannot afford to buy clothing and footwear that follow stringent rules and regulations. They are Filipinos who often belong to marginalized sectors of society—farmers, fisherfolk, urban poor, and indigenous peoples; and they are Filipinos who should be given due priority by government.”

“When they are denied entry to public offices because of what they are wearing, they are also denied the right to acquire services from the government and the right to observe or participate in meetings that tackle matters that affect their welfare,” said Robredo.

“Security measures in public institutions can always be implemented without being biased against the physical appearance of citizens. In some cases, it seems as if security personnel in some government offices are trained or tasked to conduct profiling of citizens based on what they wear, which is actually judging them on the basis of socio-economic status. Clearly, this is a form of discrimination that must end. The Open Door Policy Act challenges government agencies to continue to enforce security measures that are crafted and implemented with sensitivity to marginalized Filipinos,” Bag-ao said.