Strengthen and Reform Sangguniang Kabataan

The creation of the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK), through the Local Government Code of 1991, was meant to empower the country’s youth by giving them a direct hand in governance and decision-making in the barangay level. By providing for the mandatory allocation of barangay funds for SK-led projects and programs promoting awareness, education and action among the youth, the Code sought to ensure that the needs of young barangay constituents are serviced by their peers. To do this effectively, the Code upholds the principle of democratic representation by instituting mechanisms for the youth to annually elect their representatives to the Sangguniang Barangay.

Unfortunately, since this supposedly progressive measure was put into place, the SK as an institution has been mired with allegations of corruption and inefficient governance. Allegations range from vote-buying, gathering kickbacks from SK-initiated projects and programs, and colluding with higher barangay officials to secure their vested interests. Consequently, legislative measures have repeatedly been proposed to abolish the SK to address such allegations.

Yet it is believed that the institution as a whole should not suffer from the practices of an erring few – if indeed the few are solely culpable for such crimes related to governance. In most barangays, the SK still stands as a representative body of the youth, advancing meaningful youth participation, promoting access to education and youth employment, and struggling for the delivery of basic social services for the youth sector. If anything, what the SK needs from the legislative is not a proposal to abolish it but a proposal to strengthen it through concrete and specific reforms that directly and unequivocally tighten the loopholes in existing laws.

As such, after due consultation with the SK National Executive Board and various SK officials around the country, there's a bill created, House Bill no. 1963 respectively. Among its important aims are: to institute a uniform procedure for releasing and reviewing SK budgets, to empower the Katipunan ng Kabataan as the basic unit and consultative body of the SK, to more clearly define the procedures for succession and filling of vacancies, and to regularize training seminars for SK members. Essentially, these proposed reforms intend to return the faith of people, most especially the youth, in the SK as a genuinely representative local government unit that strives at all times to advance the rights and welfare of the Filipino youth and, concomitantly, to empower duly-elected SK officials as persons in authority to more efficiently carry out their duties and responsibilities.

In light of the foregoing, the urgent passage of this bill is earnestly sought.

As time goes on ...

As we grow up, we learn that even the one person that wasn't supposed to ever let you down, probably will. You will have your heart broken probably more than once and it's harder every time. You'll break hearts too, so remember how it felt when yours was broken. You'll fight with your best friend. You'll blame a new love for things an old one did. You'll cry because time is passing too fast, and you'll eventually lose someone you love. People always say to follow your heart but what they don't tell you.. Is that, just because you follow your heart, it doesn't mean there'll be a happy ending.

 Do you ever just get that feeling where you don't want to talk to anybody? You don't want to smile, and you don't want to fake being happy. But at the same time, you don't know exactly what is wrong either. There isn't a way to explain it to someone who doesn't already understand. If you could want anything in the world it would be to be alone. People have stopped being comforting...and it seems as though they're just asking because they feel obligated to do so. At least when you're alone no one constantly asks you what is wrong and there isn't anyone who wont take i don't know' for an answer. You feel the way you do just BECAUSE. You hope the feeling will pass soon and that you will be able to be yourself again, but until then all you can do is wait..Have you ever been in love? Horrible, isn't it? It makes you so vulnerable. It opens your chest and it opens your heart and it means someone can get inside you and mess you up. You build up all these defenses. You build up this whole armor, for years, so nothing can hurt you, then one stupid person, no different from any other stupid person, wanders into your stupid life...You give them a piece of you. They don't ask for it. They do something dumb one day like kiss you, or smile at you, and then your life isn't your own anymore. Love takes hostages. It gets inside you. It eats you out and leaves you crying in the darkness, so a simple phrase like 'maybe we should just be friends' or 'how very perceptive' turns into a glass splinter working its way into your heart. It hurts. Not just in the imagination. Not just in the mind. It's a soul-hurt, a body-hurt, a real gets-inside-you-and-rips-you-apart pain. I hate love :'(

love lots,

russel r.

Sigwa - The Capitalist Pig

Sigwa - The Capitalist Pi

7 out of 10

Sigwa is a film made to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the 1st quarter storm, a particularly tumultuous period of 3 months in our nation's history just before herr Marcos declared martial law. Unlike most communist anniversaries, this is an event that commemorates a bloody revolutionary event where they lost. This film is no communist victory however. This film is a story about the relationship of a group of friends as they happen from two initial snapshots, one taken in 1970 and another in 2009 and what happens after those snapshots are taken. While the historical recollection of the 1st Quarter Storm is "mga taga UP yan", to either correct or artificially diversify that assumption, the only school mentioned by one of the students as their school of origin is what would eventually become PUP. Sigwa not only diverts origins from UP, it waters down it's labels as it refers to communism as the revolution or activism - which dangerously relates any activism and revolution to communism. The students are now known as activists only. NPA rebels are never called NPA rebels and are never even called rebels. They are armed fighters and are openly thanked by the poor for getting that landlord off their backs so they can remain poor in peace. This isn't a film that tries to glamorize being a communist or an NPA as it never shows that the communists or rebels have ever alleviated poverty or that they even can. Sigwa shows that it only causes misery for it's practitioners and participants in one way or another. Neither does it paint the military as evil and they aren't even called the military when in civilian clothes, they are simply the government and are largely faceless here. The one face of evil that is revealed is Marcos and to balance that, it also shows images of Ninoy Aquino as a nod to historical murmurs that he was the head of the communist party of The Philippines. Heavy handed imagery would be too great a burden for an audience that disagrees with it so the filmmakers wisely kept most of it out. It remains the story of old friends. Old Warhorses The cast is made up of two groups of actors. One representing the present tho' displaced by a year in order to put it in the regime of Gloria "Ferdinand" Arroyo and her husband Mike "Imelda" Arroyo. Dawn Zulueta plays the Fil-Am named Dolly who was born and raised in the Western Empire of The United States. If in the past she was finding herself, today she is looking for a part of herself she left behind. Dolly is our initial eyes and ears to the group of friends and to the eras they are in but Dawn plays her a bit more as a socialite displaced than a foreigner. The counterpart of Dolly is Cita. If Dolly was the intellectual, Cita is the fighter but not a fighter born. Cita was an intellectual as well and previously opposed action but events conspire to change her mind. Zsa Zsa Padilla plays the elder Cita as the warrioress with little to no sign of the younger version as her transformation is now complete and even if both Dawn and she play very different characters, they aren't played as opposites because there is a third woman who dilutes the polarization. She is Azon who is played by Gina Alajar. The one who would be a fighter but became something else. Gina Alajar had the task of being an actor playing a person who was also acting all her multiple facets to different people without behaving as if she was lying. The trio of older women are played by mainstream actors here and I was waiting for one of them to stumble but no such thing happened. They did really well, particularly Zsa-Zsa Padilla. The older male warhorses are represented by two men, one of which is a long-missed name in the mainstream. Tirso Cruz III (sans Nora, sadly) plays Oliver, the ex-boyfriend of Cita and was in fact the man who wished for action as opposed to Cita's initial opposition to it. Tirso Cruz II plays an accurate caricature of several different people put together. What he says the first time he speaks tells you all you need to know about who he has become. There is a bit of deadpan and stiffness to the portrayal but it actualy serves the character well so it may've been intended. It makes the character all the more deceitful. Rounding out the cast of the oldies is the second of the two older males in Jim Pebanco as Rading, the first of the old friends that Dolly meets upon her return. He has that thespian air about him and of a character actor as we like to call them. He isn't a famous mainstream actor at all so his portrayal seems the most believable because there is no actor who has to disappear. You might even think he was an actual activist who wound up an actor. The grizzled old veterans are played first as old friends meeting each other again after a zillion years but soon enough all the old wounds are reopened, one scab at a time. Things don't change, they just get more serious. The massive ensemble cast were all placed in a story-driven film so there is little room for spectacular performance, tho' a couple manage to do so. They were all believable enough. The older cast however lose out to the youngsters since as older characters, they have lost the exuberance of their youth. With the exception of Zsa-Zsa Padilla's grimly determined elder Cita which is the standout among the elder cast, the actors have to play slower, less vibrant characters. The young'uns in the 1970's are much more lively as this is where the action really happens. It's where all these old wounds were freshly cut. Brats from The Past Once again our first eyes and ears into this older world is Dolly, this time played by Megan Young. Her younger Dolly is also portrayed more as a socialite who got lost rather than a foreigner. She has a love interest here named Eddie played by Allen Dizon who shows none of his origins as a star of gay porn - oops, i mean gay art films. The two of them play their love story with very little affection. The impression is of unrequited interest yet somehow they wind up together. Much like Mao's New Democracy, this then is New Love - one without any. The significance to the story of Eddie however is more than just the lover of Dolly. He is pivotal to a great many things and Allen Dizon doesn't play him over the top even if there is so much temptation to do so. In every other area of the character, he is fine. It's jsut that one thing as Dolly's lover that he falls a bit short. Props to Mon Confiado as well because he brings out a very nice badly hidden reaction from Eddie. The coupling that is far more believable is the one between the young Cita as played by Pauleen Luna and the young Oliver as played by Marvin Agustin. This one was perhaps more believable because these two were in fact a couple in real life and it only took a bit of recall for the roles. They are a couple in love but not outright loving. Their spats are even given political taint as they compare it to the old Rizal vs Bonifacio argument - that of brains vs brawn. Then right after arguing, they exchange gifts and snog. Awesome. These two characters undergo the greatest change and these two actors show you just how they changed. It doesn't come as an evolution of their points of view. It comes harshly and brutally and the two actors sell it well. Marvin Agustin in particular is a major standout in the younger cast if not the entire cast itself. His Oliver is the loudest voice and the most advocative of direct action and militancy at the beginning. The younger Azon is played by Lovi Poe and she seems to have a problem making her voice and her character heard. I honestly cannot remember what her role was about other than to say there was a younger version of the much older Azon we meet later on and this is what happened to her. The same can be said of the role of young Rading played by Jay Aquitania. In the parlance of the socialist, young Azon and young Rading only have utility value but no predetermined exchange value. The laborers who produce young Azon and Rading are therefore left uncompensated by the audience proletariat. The Politburo and the Premier Joel Lamangan directs a story here. He resorts to neither gimmickry nor novelty and our focus is always upon the characters of that story. He is therefore transparent and we never look at any signatures or trademarks that would draw attention to himself because that would take it away from those characters. The ending however goes on a bit and loses some cohesion. It doesn't detract from the whole and if you stood up the first time the screen went blank, you would miss very little. There are also many major events in between 1970 and 2009 that he never mentions or acknowledges and it looks like it was a good decision. The addition of those events would've made it a more politically charged film and remove the very human faces of the friends who participated in the events of 1970. The film's story as written by Bonifacio Ilagan is never evangelical and avoids becoming preachy in almost all parts except one where Sigwa has to admit the flaws of the ideology. The truths of today's communism are undeniable but since it would reveal the ideology as ineffective in practice, it has to be said by the slimiest character in the entire film. The counter to it comes when it claims that whatever revolution happens in The Philippines will be because of what happens in The Philippines and not because of communism's failings elsewhere. This make about as much sense as claiming that the results of a person jumping off a tall building elsewhere will be different if done here because if someone convices us to jump off a tall building here, we'll do it differently like perhaps do a flip. It was a huge huge reach by the scriptwriter and it failed - tho i suspect the faithful at it's screening would agree with it anyway. That description of them as the 'faithful' resembles a religion intentionally. In that one conversation we see what the survivors of the First Quarter Storm and in fact the other communists have become. The revolution to them has stopped being an ideology and instead become their religion and they act upon it more with faith and one in fact has become a violent zealot. They spout communist dogma with the same fervor as a Christian would quote the bible. In that scene where slimy makes the claim that progress abounds and that communism is failing elsewhere, it is not the claim of progress everywhere that is taken to task when most of them live where progress is a joke, it is the affront to their New Faith that they simply must address. This is where the story of friendship takes on greater importance than any isms from marx, mao, lenin or whoever else. In the end, the friends of this one cause no matter what it was found each other and stuck with each other regardless of their differences - most of them anyways - and this is their story. If it wasn't this cause that brought them together, it would've been something else and it wouldn't matter whether we agreed with it or not. it was simply their story. Two lesser flaws are the makeup and the accents. Gina Alajar's makeup in her closeup was meant to make her look sickly but the higher resolution of HD revealed that it just looked like caked makeup. The other complaint is the accents. Both Megan Young and Dawn Zulueta make the attempt to sound American but don't quite get there. Dawn sounded more like she was a Spanish landowner and Megan was occasionally good but occasionally grating - referring to an autopsy as an eh-topsy among others. A simple reset of the suspension of disbelief button fixes this however and even if they are the most prominent actors here, the flaws aren't ruinous. More important however is the lack of diversity in the Filipino accents. One step out of the capital and the Filipino accent changes but all the NPA sound like they all came from Manila. No other province is represented. Lastly, and this isn't a flaw - none of them look like the 60-ish age they should be but nobody cared. The High Revolutionary Regardless of it's dictionary definition, propaganda in practice is a work that promotes the ideals of one point of view that you disagree with. If it promotes one that you agree with, then you call it a truthful and honest work instead. I disagree with communism but I don't see this film as propaganda at all. I dunno about truthful, but it was an honest film. A very important dedication is made by Joel Lamangan before the premiere of this film at the CCP. He dedicated the film to the survivors of the first quarter storm, not to something else. The movie is about the people involved and that's what this film was always about and it's the very human faces of the people involved that you see. Perhaps a complaint could be made that there is no adequate representation of those who don't believe in communism as the only use for characters like that in Sigwa is to be killed. It's because the movie isn't about them at all and it's the same as why there aren't accurate depictions of Muslims in a Christian film other than to be converted. It would only be a complaint if Sigwa delved deeper into the political instead of the narrative and the film steers clear of that and stays on the road it's story tells. I don't know what Joel Lamangan's motivations were for not going outright left here - personal safety, wider acceptance or whatever else - but I like that he did. The entirety of it's political overtones served merely as a backdrop. As a film about old friends and what's happened to them in the years since they were separated, it succeeds above and beyond the call of duty.

A Glimpse at the Face of Child Labor in the Philippines

A Glimpse at the Face of Child Labor in the Philippines

Child Labor as a Social Problem
The film documented different faces of child labor in different phases of Philippines. It has three segments exposing how children despite their ‘right to be children’ were forced to work and earn a living for their family. The segments were: (1) Child labor at Slaughter House, (2) Children as “Maghohornal” and lastly (3) Children unloading cement at the Port.
Child labor is indeed a social problem in our society. There are many reasons as to why it was considered such. First is, it is illegal. Our Constitution intensely prohibits this act that it only mandates children to receive proper education and the right to live as children. Legally speaking, it is a social problem because our society rejects child labor yet its condition persists.
Secondary, on a sociological viewpoint, child labor is a social problem due to the fact that it applies to a large number of people. As expressed on the former statements, the documentary highlights this condition by showing its viewers that it occurs on different places of this country — be it on the rural or on the urban — although it took various forms; it does exist.
Lastly, child labor elicits norm violation in our society i.e. deviating in our normative standards. Children should play; children should not be exposed to the harshness and injustices of the world; children should be supported and not the ones supporting; children should be protected and children should enjoy life as how normal children do. Normally, those are what our senses absorb and undoubtedly, that is what our society inculcated us to believe. We accept child labor per se as abnormal because it does not portray exactly the way how our society envisioned it to be. It doesn’t paint the image that our society imagined her children to be.
Child labor — An analysis of the Social Problem using the Three Levels Approaches
In the movie, the people who are greatly affected in it are the child laborers. It is important to note that the result or the problem i.e. their being child laborers, is not caused by a homogenous circumstance. At some point, interlocking causes and problems lead them to become such. The succeeding paragraphs would discuss child labor as a social problem on: (a) personal level, (b) group level and lastly (c) societal level.
Looking at this on the personal level, problem would be viewed on a personal milieu. On each segments, children has different personal stories to share relating to the problem. These personal problems they had contributed to their status, generally, as child laborers.
The first segment, at the slaughter house, Tikboy, 9 year-old, shared that he had to work to help his family. He knew that the nature of work from 7: 00 pm to 10: 00 pm was dangerous; however, he had no other option for that was the only possible way wherein he could earn money. He was even wounded. The salary was also not judicial for his efforts.
On the second, Belena, labeled as “batang hornal” was interviewed. She honestly said that she wanted to go to school but she could not because her family had too many debts to fund for her education. Although she would be enrolled and promised that she would continue schooling, she would later be asked not to go to school so that she could work and earn money. On the other hand, Cito, 14 year-old, same as Belena, seemed to acquire learnt-helplessness that he did not long to study anymore. He just accepted that he couldn’t catch up with the lessons and that he would rather go to field; hold his “matsete” and work to help his family.
The Child laborers at the port of Dapitan were also willing to tell their stories. One confided that it was because his father only battered his mother and that they didn’t have any money. The other mentioned that his father was only a fisherman and that his earnings were not enough to suffice the family’s need.
On the Group Level, the milieu is not just the person who experiences this but rather, the other persons who are also involved and affected, suggesting a system, not a person.

At the slaughter house, children primarily worry that they might get wounded. Sharp knives could get into their flesh and cut them just like the pigs that were slaughtered. The pigs from the boiling water were also too hot and could hurt their skin. Their only salary was the slice of pork that their boss would allow them to have. They still need to sell it to market secretly to trade it for money.
Meanwhile, the “Maghohornal” children were all occupied with the question, “how could they pay their debt?” After removing the weeds and planting the crops, the families of “maghohornal” had to wait for months to have another job. These then would make them idle. They had no income which would cause them to generate debts. Thus, by the time they would have jobs, they already had lots of credits to pay.
The Child laborers at Dapitan were also lamenting over the fact that their work was really hard, health threatening and heavy since they had to carry sacks of cement for hours. The treatment of their boss was not cruel yet harsh, since they were only allowed to have a break at 1:00 after the adults had finished having their lunch.
Yet on the societal level, the focus are on the problems experienced by every individuals (the child laborers), the group that they belong to and the society these individuals and groups constitute. On all the segments the child laborers were all striving over the economic deprivation that they were encountering. They were willy-nilly but to work hard for a small earning. Despite the danger, their dreams and aspirations, they had to stomach in their inevitable fate and that is, to be a Child Laborer.
As can be analyzed, not all personal problems are part of group problems. Not all group problems are part of societal problems. Yet, the personal problems and the group problem contribute to the growth of social problem.
On the contrary, the problems, as viewed on three distinct levels could also be given solution vis-à-vis the level that it is viewed. Provided below are some assumptions on how these solutions address the problems they were facing.
On a personal level, suppose that a philanthropist adapted Belena and funded her education and paid all the debts of her family. Her personal problem could be resolved but not the group and not the society’s problem as well. However, we could not also rely on philanthropist to cater these unfortunate children thus, it would not work to the group level.
On the group level, if the bosses of these child laborers would make their salary higher and the treatment more considerately, the group could be alleviated. It would then require them to change the rules and policies that they were applying in the work place. These changes however, are not applicable to the other. Say, the changes made at Dapitan could not be applicable to the slaughter house.
Lastly, the societal level solution could make an impact to the group and personal levels. If the government, a structural institution of society, would legalize child labor in our country and would give different provisions for these children, bills and laws would be passed protecting the rights of these children as laborers.
Children who are in this status could enjoy, if not, at least have the privilege of being a laborer. They would have the grounds for requesting wage increase and to charge their bosses of felony if they were harassed or abused.
Indeed, if the society could not eradicate child labor, at least, the society could make changes to lessen the burden of being one (a child laborer).
Minsan Lang Sila Bata(They can only be Children Once) — A Personal Reflection
Honestly, if I were to be a Child laborer, I don’t know if I could I swallow it… perhaps for a day, but not for long.
Based on what I saw in the film, I became more aware on how rampant child labor was in our country. Aware in the sense that I just didn’t know it but felt it as well.
It was not easy being child laborer. (My tears almost slipped out my eyes, glad I was able to hold it) The work was hard and the environment was not friendly for their young breaths. The money was too small even for their small hands to hold. The blood, the sun and the dust are all penetrating not just in their skin but also in their hearts.
I can never blame them. Why didn’t they refuse and insist that they should be holding toys and pencils instead? They were caught in a situation that they could not escape. Of course, before they think of theirselves, they have to think for the welfare of their family. They love their parents.
I can never blame their parents. (The children didn’t blame them too.) They love their daughters, they love their sons — those are given. However, why didn’t they sacrificed or at least became wise before planning to raise sons and daughters? But they are already there… breathing. Love per se can not put rice on their plates.
According to Maslow, love and belongingness as well as intellectualization needs belong to a higher rank than primary needs. With this in mind, the actions of these children and their parents were reasonable. Before they thought of their need to love and be loved, before they thought of their need to be knowledgeable and intellectualized, their primary needs such as food, shelter and clothing should be foremost attended.
But, is there anyone where we can put the blame?
The society can not also give an accurate answer. It can only cope and adapt the changes that the reality threw to our senses. It can create solutions — solutions that inevitably causes birth of new problems.
Take for an example, to the families of Tikboy, Belena and others interviewed, child labor is not a problem, it is more of a solution since it adds to their income. But on other perspective, it is a problem which caused more problems. Why? Those children were not receiving proper education; they were unconsciously subjected to the selfish motive of some adults who only wanted to benefit and not to help.
And then we would say, “child labor is a social problem”, yet it is rooted on a problem that exists long before these children and perhaps the parents of these children were born— poverty. Poverty takes on many forms yet it elicits different result and one is what the object of discussion is all about, not to mention prostitution and other coping strategies used by people to generate income.
What I am trying to say is that dealing or healing a social problem is like playing pick-up sticks. Same as how a kid uses his eyes to see all possible angles to remove a stick from the overlapping sticks scattered on the floor, the society should be keen enough to look for the possible angles to attack the problem. If the kid became careless, other sticks would be moved which signifies game over. It is not different if the social problem would carelessly be attacked, it would affect the values and beliefs of others thus, producing more chaos rather than prosperity.
This then made me remember what the Bible elucidates in Jeremiah 6:13-15 “For from the least one of them even to the greatest one of them, every one is making for himself unjust gain; and from the prophet even to the priest, each one is acting falsely. ¹⁴ And they try to heal the breakdown of my people lightly, saying, ‘There is peace! There is peace!’ when there is no peace. ¹⁵ Did they feel shame because it was something detestable that they had done? For one thing, they positively do not feel any shame; for another thing, they have not come to know even how to feel humiliated. Therefore they will fall among those who are falling; in the time that I must hold an accounting with them they will stumble,” Jehovah has said.”
For long, men strived to prove that they can heal its people, yet they prove none. This is not to be considered as degradation of humanity but rather, accepting what humanity is all about. We are all imperfect, thus we could not provide solution and analyze things just as how perfects, like God, could do it.
In response, we should always reflect on things we see and experience while remembering Proverbs 3: 5, 6, . That I think is the only way we can trudge on this system positively. In His own time, God would act and prove his sovereignty once more that He alone, could provide the answer, resolving all the issues that His creations were having.