Patrick Daniel B.

Belarmino 11-STEM

CHR P1000 Budget

for 2018
Position Paper

Patrick Daniel B. Belarmino

Ms. Joy S. Abuan

Patrick Daniel B. Belarmino 11-STEM

Topic: CHR P1000 budget for 2018

Issue: House Representatives gives Commission on Human Rights a P1000 budget for 2018

Stand: Disagree

Thesis Statement: Opposition on the reduction of allocated budget to CHR because of the mass
effect to citizens and the Houses personal interest.

I. Introduction

119 lawmakers in the affirmative, the House granted the motion of 1-Sagip Rep. Rodante

Marcoleta to slash the CHRs budget from P678 million to only P1,000. Only 32 lawmakers

opposed Marcoletas move.

The constitutional body is mandated to conduct investigations on human rights violations

involving civil and political rights, including those allegedly committed by state agents.

House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez previously accused the CHR of protecting only the human

rights of criminals and doing nothing for their victims.

The CHR proposed a budget of PhP 623.38 million for 2018. Two other government offices

were also given the same 1,000-peso budget by the House of Representatives: The National

Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) and Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC).

Pimentel noted that the decision of the House to provide only a thousand pesos for a

government agency amounts to a self-inflicted censure of the way some government bodies

are being run.

At the same time, President Rodrigo Duterte has repeatedly called on CHR chair Jose Luis

Martin Chito Gascon to resign for his alleged partisanship towards the yellows referring

to the Liberal Party of former President Benigno Simeon Aquino III.

Patrick Daniel B. Belarmino 11-STEM

CHR Commissioner Gwendolyn Pimentel-Gana, Pimentels daughter and sister of Senate

President Aquilino Koko Pimentel, was reported by ABS-CBN News Channel as having

been told by House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, Jr. that they would restore the CHR budget if

Gascon resigns.

Under the Constitution, the CHR should "investigate, on its own or on complaint by any

party, all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights."

The Constitution also specifies the CHR must "monitor the Philippine government's

compliance with international treaty obligations on human rights."

Iloilo 1st District Representative Richard Garin: "I voted 'Yes' to reduce the budget of the

CHR, but my 'yes' is geared towards the chair of the Commission," he told journalist Prince

Golez in a text message. Garin explained that while he "is not satisfied" with CHR chairman

Chito Gascon's performance, he believes in the performance of rank and file CHR employees.

"That is why I am sure that the CHR budget for personal services, especially salaries, will be

reconsidered and restored," he said.

II. Summary of Counterclaims

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) is a Constitutional body that Congress has no

power to abolish, former Senate President Aquilino Nene Pimentel said.

The constitutional body is mandated to conduct investigions on human rights violations

involving civil and political rights, if it were to be reduced to a P1000 budget after the final

screening on September 15. The CHR would not function on its purpose, and on its role.
Patrick Daniel B. Belarmino 11-STEM

Another would be, giving not only the CHR but also two other agencies the same amount

of budget would greatly affect the nation, not only the political state but the economic state.

Other agencies that would be cut of are the National Commission on Indigineous People

(NCIP) and Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC).

Similarly, all agencies were reduced to such budget because of the Failure to operate its

function properly as part of the Constitution.

It would also seem meaningless to put personal interest over public interest on ones affair

about the agency and its plan. Speaking of the partisanship of Gascon with the Yellows and

his current position, bringing it forth to the supreme court would be bias. Take note, that those

who speak of the Yellow are the same set of people who called Gascon Bias

One must seek further investigation of statement, a proper legislation voting. A house

representative should not be subjective for it will solely show unprofessionalism on his

juncture.

III. Argument

It would be ridiculous to give a body of constitution a practical amount of P1000 budget to

mandate every aspects and responsibility it has. It is already as good as being abolished as I

can see since it would not function properly.

Another came into my mind, can really the Congress or the House of Representative do an

absurd thing of giving not only 1 agency but 3 agencies to an inadequate fund. CHR practically

is not just any agency or private institution created but it is under the body of the Constitution

signed and executed under our Philippine Government.

Patrick Daniel B. Belarmino 11-STEM

Stating on a matter of reducing their fund because of inability to function well was not a

good move to begin with. Their approach regarding the matter was too subjective to a point

where even citizens can criticize the unprofessionalism of each House of Representatives and

their bias reasons.

The CHR is not for the government solely but for the body of the Philippines and those are

the citizens living in it. Putting personal interest over public interest on the case was really

absurd if one was to say. It can be seen on a statement of the Iloilo 1st District Representative

Richard Garin.

It would also seem less to fight criminality by defunding an agency, if one has to think

deeply, logic is nowhere to be found. Even Adiong mentioned during the conference I cannot

comprehend the wisdom behind the move to defund a commission that protects my rights under

Article 3 of the 1987 Constitution,

Even assuming the CHR was deficient in its work, the remedy is not to terminate or

immobilize the constitutionally-mandated agency.

IV. Conclusion

Amending the original budget of the Commission of Human Rights from P678 million to

only P1,000 was already an indirect way of abolishing one agency. The approach was not based

on public interest, the yes vote of majority from the representatives came from their personal

interest. The fund should be returned to its original state for the welfare, safety and well-being of

every people living under one country, Philippines.