15 June 2011

One Unnecessary Bill Coming Up

Philippine Military Academy
I never thought that one’s bias would be so obvious when powers are vested on them. This was made more apparent when party-list congresswomen filed a bill prohibiting retired and active military and police officials from being appointed to sensitive posts in the government.

House Bill 4566 was filed by the Gabriela party-list representatives Luzviminda Ilagan and Emmi de Jesus. Is this a surprise to anyone? According to the two women, they filed the bill as "succeeding administrations continue with the practice to ensure the loyalty of the military."

If this is not a clear and blatant display of ignorance and discriminatory behaviour, then I don’t know what is. Did I already mention that they belong to the leftist group whose ideals and principles were long ignored and rejected by their original ancestors, the Russians.

It seems that Gabriela has long been obsessed with a malicious assumption that the Philippine military today were the same as the force that pursued them relentlessly 30 years ago. They said that the "militarization of the Philippine civilian bureaucracy began when the late President Ferdinand Marcos appointed military men to civilian positions" and, therefore, this practice should stop.

What again? You are prohibiting all retired and active military and police personnel, including officers, from being appointed to a concurrent or any other capacity to the positions of Secretary, Undersecretary, Head or Member of governing bodies of government-owned-and-controlled corporations simply because they came from an organization that you failed to topple using the conventional means?

Can we get more compelling arguments from these guys?

"Military men are trained under a discipline that is necessary in a war situation. Military and police personnel including officers bring their military training, culture and practices even after they have been appointed to civilian positions," De Jesus said as quoted in one of the country’s major dailies.

My question is, so what? Is there any problem bringing their discipline and rigid practice in a civilian-dominated institution? Has there been a study from any reputable institution and not from a left-leaning-trying-to-be-important organization that says military discipline is not an efficient management practice for a civilian position?

And don’t let us start with an assumption that cabinet secretaries with military background are more prone to corruption because this heinous behaviour is not a monopoly of military officers alone. The corruption committed by civilian personnel and even those who were espousing communism when they were still in school are much worse.