Showing posts with label whut. Show all posts
Showing posts with label whut. Show all posts

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Eh-hum # 276

WHUT?

So, it has come to pass: Nicole, or Suzette S. Nicolas in real life, recanted her claims in 2005 that a US serviceman raped her. She submitted an affidavit yesterday and has terminated the services of her lawyer. In addition, Nicole accepted money from the said servicemen and has left for the United States with her American boyfriend. According to her mother, she will be staying in the US for good. In short, Nicole chose to move on.

When this sudden “change of heart” on Nicole’s part was published in the national dailies, I expected every Filipino, or anyone who cares, would give his or her two cents worth on the incident. After all, Smith was found guilty by the Makati City Court using evidence that does not suggest consensual sex. So why leave the country? Those who sympathize with her will say the Philippine justice system has failed her; hence, she would rather get the money and the opportunity to leave the country and start a new life. Unfortunately for Nicole, there are people who are not very kind and have already judged her from the very beginning.

Her decision to submit her affidavit and leave the case, she will be labeled as any or a combination of the following: a liar, an opportunist, a whore. Back in 2005, people have raised questions about Nicole’s profession in Subic, her priorities and her decision to accompany Smith’s group that fateful night. If she was indeed raped, it was because she deserved it. Moreover, given her questionable lifestyle, should we expect anything less? I admit; I have my doubts at the beginning. I believed that when we make choices, we should also be prepared for the consequences. That night, as an adult, Nicole made her choice, and therefore should know what’s coming next. However, I also learned that a woman (a child, even a man), no matter how shady her profession is or desperate the situation she is in, does not deserve to be physically, sexually or emotionally abused.

In yesterday’s Philippine Daily Inquirer, this snippet from her sworn statement struck me: “My conscience continues to bother me realizing that I may have in fact been so friendly and intimate with Daniel Smith at the Neptune Club that he was led to believe that I was amenable to having sex or that we simply just got carried away.” I don’t know if this makes sense, but in my opinion, being friendly or intimate should never be confused with wanting to have sex. She will decide if she wants to sleep with someone or not. No actually means no.

We will never truly know if she was indeed a victim of sexual assault. The courts said she was, but her affidavit could challenge the earlier conviction. Nonetheless, she was, as one PDI columnist pointed out, a victim of circumstance. Apart from the slow justice system we have, were people who rallied behind her really and genuinely concerned about her cause, or did they just used her for their own anti-VFA sentiments? Would Nicole be liable for perjury and false testimony in court? How will this affect the other cases of rape in the country? Even though she has left for the US, Nicole has not entirely left the issue behind.

Friday, February 13, 2009

Eh-hum # 274

WHUT?!

Based on today's papers, the Senate yesterday felt that one way to stop corruption and bid rigging contractors, public works officials and pork barrel holders (ehem) is by calling the World Bank to the stands. Yes, the same institution that submitted an investigative/referral report (waaaayyy) back in November 2007 on certain companies and individuals involved in the alleged collusion. These referral reports, as required by the WB's sanctions procedures, are meant to help government act on allegations of misuse of the Bank's funds. It's logical, really, that an institution like the World Bank wants to make sure that its funds and development aid does not find its way in the hands of private, greedy individuals.

I could not help but also find this Senate investigation unneccesary, as expressed by Neal Cruz of the Inquirer. Bid-rigging and other similiar unlawful activities are an open secret. The Senate, and the rest of the Government, should have worked on this problem A LONG TIME AGO, even before the WB submitted its referral report in 2007 (two years ago...hello). I find it embarrassing that an organization outside the Philippine government should TELL US that WE have a problem to solve.

Our good Senators and the lady Ombudsman went all emotional and patriotic yesterday by calling the World Bank a "squatter in Philippine territory". Ah, okay. Let's not resolve to name-calling. It's a referral report people (available BACK IN 2007), they are not dictating anything. Am sure our dear leaders can speak with WB representatives on the issue at hand (yes, yes, let's stick to the issue, please) and determine the best practices that would prevent any anomalies vis-a-vis the development funds. I don't think the Bank makes these reports just for the heck of it, their integrity as an organizaton is on the line. If their representatives on the ground heard any allegations of corruption, it is understandable they would want to scrutinize it further.

I think the matter is serious enough to merit an investigation on our part (which we should have started, oh, I don't know, BACK IN 2007!!!). If our dear Senators want to be patriotic, they should've made sure the Filipino taxpayers are getting their money's worth with all of these "in-aid-of-legislation" investigation of theirs.

Haaay buhaaayy...