Pastilan! Living the dog-eat-dog world of a Global Pinoy!

Trillanes release hits snag: "Sen. Antonio Trillanes 4th may have to languish in jail for at least one more month after Congress went on recess Wednesday afternoon without approving a concurrent resolution concurring with a government proclamation granting amnesty to the senator and more than 300 other soldiers.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said that the Senate would adopt the resolution on November 8 when it resumed its session.

Sen. Teofisto Guingona 3rd expressed the hope that Trillanes could be free and attend Senate sessions before the year ends.

Malaca�ang also on Wednesday admitted that Justice Secretary Leila de Lima was not consulted on the final draft of the proclamation that granted amnesty to all the soldiers who rebelled against the past Arroyo administration."

Critics of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, the Philippine president, have stepped up claims that she has been cashing in on her position, to add to her growing personal wealth.

But Arroyo says she has been falsely accused, and there is no proof she has been plundering state funds.

The accusations come ahead of May's presidential elections, in which a former president - once convicted of plunder himself - is running for office.

(No. 355 - November 26, 2009 - 11:15 a.m. EST) The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement condemning the November 23 killing of civilians in the southern Philippine province of Maguindanao:

“Canada condemns the brutal murders perpetrated in Maguindanao in the lead up to local elections. We extend our deepest sympathies to the families and friends of the victims.

“Canada supports calls for the rule of law to prevail and for those responsible for these acts to be brought to justice.”

Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada advises against all travel to the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. Canadians travelling to the Philippines are encouraged to consult Travel Report-Philippines.

- 30 -

For further information, media representatives may contact:

Natalie Sarafian
Press Secretary
Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs
613-995-1851

Foreign Affairs Media Relations Office
Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada
613-995-1874

http://www.international.gc.ca/media/aff/news-communiques/2009/355.aspx

The Philippines is ailing, almost lifeless to witness hope that soon we will become a great nation. What is deplorable about our nation is we are not even close being a novice with political turmoil. We already endured a long history of political mayhem, we even had more serious disarray than this but never in the history of the Philippines had that political unrest caused unimaginable degree of economic impact to the nation - specifically to the poorest of the poor. The Filipino people turned out to become poorer and much less reasonable. Our country is already a splitting nation and death as a nation is already knocking at our doorstep.

To split a country constitutes a major disagreement between opposing factions. Nevertheless, to distinguish a death or rebirth of a nation requires an even more than understanding of the results and measurable outcome of how these are affecting the majority. Historically, other nations underwent worst political turmoil as well – killing each other before they became an imposing nation. Democratic super powers like USA, France, Great Britain, and etc. during their time were in great mayhem of domestic struggle as well – all tasted the bitterness of civil wars.


A Functional Democracy is an Operative Catalyst in Building a Nation

Although many might disagree, I always see that democracy, democratic governance that is based on a country’s culture and economic modalities, is an operative catalyst in building a nation. Despite the passionate debate on how much credit the democracy can claim for prospering a democratic country, various theories have been put forth, all of them controversial. It has been argued that, “it is not democracy that causes economic prosperity, but rather the other way around: prosperous nations will tend to become democracies.”

One great example is the Philippines, a bastion of democracy in South East Asia. It is saddening to see how the Filipino people suffer excessive misery due to poverty. Forget the GNP and GDP as the economic indicators, forget the inflation rate, forget other socio-economic indicators that determines the ability of the people to buy goods that we always hear during SONA or read in press releases, what is more important to know now is how capable are the Filipino people to live conveniently. How many Filipinos, regardless of the supposedly “class-less society” in the Philippines, are now more capable to bring decent food into their tables and provide the most basic necessities in order to live?

Chaotic Version of Democracy

The problem in the Philippines is that the kind of democracy we practice is at its crudest form, almost dysfunctional. Our democracy becomes the very cause of political chaos not because of the system per se but the very people who promulgate chaotic version of democracy.

When a democratic country, combined with the sense of political valuing of its people is based on greed and selfishness, liberty and freedom are naturally taken out of context. The democracy is then subjected to an open abuse. It becomes ultimately problematic because the distribution and ownership of freedom becomes unilateral, no party would want to have less freedom thereby causing a great imbalance.

The point is the Filipino people are less likely to give, unwilling to concede personal advantages in order to achieve equilibrium in the exercise of roles in a democratic society. The results are an endless protest, sometimes superfluous and mostly devoid of legitimate patriotic intentions. Then the exercise of democracy is no longer positive, it becomes detrimental to the society, affecting the economy of the nation.

The Price to Pay in Democracy

Many political scientists believe that democracy has a high price to pay. Sarah Mitchell in their article entitled “Evolution of Democracy-War Dynamics” have proposed that, “democratization tends to follow war, that democratization decreases the systemic amount of war, and that the substantive and pacific impact of democracy on war increases over time.” All Kantian thinkers on political science declared that democracy lessens the possibility of war between “democratic countries” but there is very scant information whether a nation has to undergo a civil war before they reach a functional democracy.

Splitting a nation is tantamount as engaging in civil war except that maybe, arm conflict at this time, Heaven forbids, is still far fetch considering the current lack of support from other sectors of the Philippine society.

In “The Democratic Peace and a Sequential, Reciprocal, Causal Arrow Hypothesis” article of Karen Rasler and William R. Thompson of Indiana University, they explained that, “One of the democratic peace puzzles is the question of whether and to what extent the democracy peace relationship underestimates the possibility that peace precedes democracy: the reversed causal arrow hypothesis. From a war making–state-making perspective, democratization needs to be viewed as a partial function of external threat and domestic power concentration.” Almost as a predecessor to attaining democracy, it seems that war is in the offing.

Then the question should be, is civil war the answer to end this dilemma? That do we need to kill each other first to achieve the golden age of Philippine democracy? I believe that what must be answered first is “where do we stand in the brink of splitting our nation?” To see the Philippines divided over many issues is not something unsullied.

If you will take a quick historical tour, our nation is one of those countries in the world that have fought each other over many political differences that could have been resolved in a “more mature” democratic settings. Although the Philippines have reaped international admiration for toppling the dictatorship during the mid 80’s peacefully by exercising the power of the people, nothing remarkable enough to call our country prosperous have happened next. Have we become more civil and united and in tackling more vital issues to help build our nation? No. It is because the Filipinos have a very peculiar political attitude each brought by our degraded values with regard to self-interest, lack of discipline and poverty-related mind-set. The Filipino people have become, unfortunately – a malevolent race.


The Death of the Philippine Nation

In every death comes resurrection, at least which is a Christian way of looking at life.

In a political showground however, rebirth is a possibility but only after undergoing sinister human sufferings first. At the rate our political situation is going, it is not very far for the nation to meet death.

What else is good left for the people? The government is already engrossed with defending their seats from the bickering and nasty political warfare of their enemies. The very essence of governance now lies between who is more powerful and who is more “cunning” in evading public prosecution for their respective plunders and heists. The civil society has found a new, more exciting and thrilling hobby – joining the oppositions in rallying the poor masses to the streets, particularly not sure whether it is driven by their libertarian patriotism and love of the county or otherwise.

The poorest of the poor have become more succumbed to the false pretense of the politicians as champions of their cause. The number of street children and vagrants have increased tremendously that even the NGO’s taking care of these kind of people are now incapable to handle such increase, yet the government have done so little to even better the lives of these deprived members of our society. The unemployment rate has continuously walked up high its peak. While the rest of the countryside remains to be poor, under developed and neglected because their “representatives” are much busier lately in pondering whether to vote against or for the impeachment process.

The judicial system is even less helpful to indict the corrupt and the criminals to keep our society from hotshot frauds and hoodlums. Instead of dancing against or with the administration to help protect or undermine important faces, the legislators seems to be less occupied in promulgating laws that will aid in building our nation.

Should there be death waiting at the end of the rainbow for the Filipino people, one thing is for sure. It is brought by the collective contribution of everyone in our country. Death becomes us because of our sheer interest with personal favors even if it becomes utterly unfair to other people, because of our disrespect to constitution and value of fair judgment, because of the commercialism of our mass media that promotes further instability brought by their irresponsible reporting, because of our lack of discipline to obey simple traffic rules and keeping our surrounding free of litters, because of our lack of taste in mode of entertainment.

The Philippines may be one of the countries in the world with a high literacy rate but also has a very poor understanding of what is morally beneficial and wrong. Take for example the basis of the people in supporting candidates during elections. The popular and the bad-boy with mass appeal tend to be the champions, never mind if they are incapable, never mind if they have moral flaws, never mind if they do not know the basic difference of running a government or a Sunday cock derby.

Building a Nation: The Rebirth of the Filipino People

What is required in building a nation? What rebirth then? Rebirth is about changing even the smallest aspect of our lifestyle, sense of valuing and moral judgment. Rebirth means a radical shift of our already corrupted attitude about governance. Rebirth is such a profound word that might be excessively difficult for many of the Filipinos if not impossible to mold out to. Rebirth is about instilling each self with a basic discipline and a more stringent, dedicated will to become more productive citizens of the Philippine nation.

What makes nation? I believe, its citizens. The discipline and their communal interest to better each other’s lives constitute a good nation. Ironically, the Philippines is the stronghold of Christian faith, where we are supposed to be more tolerant, where we are supposed to be less judgmental, where we are supposed to be more helpful and charitable. Look at our nation? A nation full of scum, full of cheaters and liars, what happened to our being religious and prayerful people?

A nation becomes a nation because of its moral strength. A nation becomes one because it upholds the law and sees it in black and white and not because he is an Uncle or a contributor or because I owe him back. No nation has been or will ever be spared from political turmoil. Even the greatest of the greatest, every one will be subjected to open opposition, that is the basic component of a democracy. No nation has become perfect but there are nations that have great determination to rise and become imposing that they are now the countries where every Filipino aspires to work for.

Loyal Opposition in a Democratic Culture

There is an opposition for all reason. Although the concept of a "loyal opposition" is one of the key aspects of democratic culture, this is an especially difficult cultural shift to achieve like the Philippines where transitions of power have historically taken place through a very divisive modality like a people power. This crude exercise of democracy does not necessarily means it is wrong but because the Filipino attitude of being revengeful and self-centered especially when it comes to unseating someone from power made unity even harder than landing on planet Mars, it is even becoming counter productive.

Loyal opposition tells us that all sides in a democracy share a common commitment to uphold the nation’s welfare. Political competitors may disagree, but they must tolerate one another and acknowledge the legitimate and important roles that each play - something that many Filipino politicians would not just relent.

What is very unfortunate in Philippine democracy is our inability to concede to the election winners and the ability of whoever is in the position to rig votes. These are two main recipes for political chaos and blunder in democracy.

Never since the Philippines elected their presidents after the Marcos regime that no electoral protest were ensued after every proclamation. It has never occurred in the political history of our country since the 1986 revolution that the losers conceded defeat.

What Then?

What is more miserable is these losers take their battle to the masses, to the chambers of the judiciary and loudly under their immunity and privilege in the legislative branch. All are in sheer abandon of colluding to promote further chaos and confusion. What do we get? We get nothing but a vicious cycle of political bickering and faultfinding. We get a splitting of a nation.

So as to whether a splitting of a nation means death or rebirth, come on, it is a rudimentary principle that there will never be rebirth without death. Death is already at hand and rebirth may even be unattainable at this time – unless we collectively become radically new Filipinos leaving those spiteful political attitudes and lack of personal discipline, rebirth will never see its chance in our sorry grimy horizons. If this fail to happen, can we all blame it to the elusive miracle?

It’s been a while since I have not written anything about politics in the Philippines. I do not have an excuse but my absolute distaste with the personalities made my self a bit cold to ventilate or stimulate my reasoning. I am worried that I might just end up discussing bitterness and be tempted to instigate a downright assault to the situation at hand.

But for the sake of those friends who wanted to know my opinion, here is my 10-cent worth of rant.

The other day, while I was cooling down from my gym workout and waiting for my friend finish his, I had the chance to read about Sorley McLean, one of those 70’s writers I got acquainted with from my modern literature class back in school. While reading some of his work, I was stricken with his unreserved love of his country and the Gaelic culture.

I began to contemplate about how much love I still have for my country. I was surprised that my patriotism remained unscathed despite the unending blunders and shameful endeavors of many of our almost “delusional” politicians. But why do I feel this way? I have lost the enthusiasm to even discuss matters involving Gloria and about those people who I swear seem to me an “All-Star Cast” for melodramatic tele-novela about hypocritical and delusional government servants. They remind me of uncanny thugs that are unmindful of the greater good of the people.

Find me an institution in the government that has decency plastered across their foreheads please and quick. The House is just devastated, divided (no pun intended) and full of craps. I told a friend that in the Philippines, there are two major forces in the government. Those who are intelligent and those who are competent, the sad thing about it is that this two distinctiveness can hardly be found in a single person. The supply of “intelligent” personalities actually floods your TV screen sounding so eloquent but disappointingly lack the ability to put the words into action, they don’t even have any substantial “put-into action agenda”.

They were not even mindful to file a respectable legal protest. It happens when the opposition reveals an honest display of impure motive to protect the nation. They were too obsessed with jumping into the hype and to further infuriate the masses to cry their dissent instead. I hope they would just stop playing with the sentiment of our poor Filipino people.

The people in the Congress know very well that when antagonism and impure motives seeps in (which always happens), being rational becomes elusive. The Filipino people have just enough of your stupid display of incompetence and selfish determination to gain your personal agendas.

Or maybe, it is about time now for the Legislators and defunct-like government officials to rethink their strategy to cause further instability to the already sinking Philippine economy. Maybe this is not enough yet, there are still more tricks these dog fools can imagine instead of focusing on what is more important. Never mind the starving millions of Filipino people. I bet you my 10-cent plea, these people we see on TV enjoying the awe of their idiocy will continue with their political bickering and soon enough, the Filipino people will just become another race full of maligned political squabbling and indecent withering aspirations.

In comparing the democratization of East Timor and Cambodia, it is essential to establish their short history of existence as a nation, their past wars and how the self-government of its people has started. Since democracy is not limited to just a set of constitutional rules and procedures, a government should exist but since government is only one element coexisting in a social composition of its people (institutions, political parties, organizations, and associations), it is important to determine the participation of its people in the exercise of their rights to form a nation based on the majority rule and protection of the rights of the minority. Pluralism exists when there is diversity and it assumes that the many organized groups and institutions in a democratic society do not depend upon government for their existence, legitimacy, or authority.

East Timor has a colonial past from Portugal, the Dutch and the Japanese (during the World War II). East Timor declared itself independent from Portugal on 28 November 1975 and was invaded and occupied by Indonesian forces nine days later and became the province of Timor Timur (East Timor). There were two decades of arm struggle against the Indonesian government by which 100,000 to 250,000 East Timorese died. On 30 August 1999, in a UN-supervised popular referendum, an overwhelming majority of the people of Timor-Leste voted for independence from Indonesia. The Government of Timor-Leste held presidential and parliamentary elections from April to June 2007 (Taylor, 1991).

Cambodia has an imperial past (Khmers of the Angkor Empire). The French put Cambodia under its protection in 1863 and it became part of French Indochina in 1887 then the Japanese occupied the country during WWII, and was later declared independent in 1953 from France. In April 1975, Communist Khmer Rouge forces captured Phnom Penh and executed at least 1.5 million Cambodians. Vietnamese invasion followed which drove the Khmer Rouge into the countryside and began a 10-year Vietnamese occupation. Cambodia nursed an almost 13 years of civil war. The 1991 Paris Peace Accords mandated democratic elections and a ceasefire, which was not fully respected by the Khmer Rouge. The UN-sponsored election in 1993 gave birth to a coalition government but was later ended by factional fighting in 1997. The second round of national elections in 1998 led to the formation of another coalition government and renewed political stability, the remaining elements of the Khmer Rouge surrendered in early 1999. The July 2003 election was relatively peaceful, but it took one year of negotiations between contending political parties before a coalition government was formed. In October 2004, King Sihanouk abdicated the throne due to illness and his son, Prince Norodom Sihamoni, was selected to succeed him (Chandler, 2007). Their latest election was last July 2008.

Hence, some elements of democracy should exist in order to determine the democratization of the two countries at case. The first consideration is the sovereignty of the people. Both of the countries gained sovereignty (to a certain degree) in some point of their histories. Their history of independence from their colonizers (East Timor from Portugal in 1975 while Cambodia from France in 1953) is distinct and actually provides a clear statement that both countries have achieve some degrees of sovereignty. Nonetheless, their democracy as to sovereignty of the people exists.

The second aspect of the democracy on this comparison should be the government formed by its people. The government based upon consent of the governed and it should have a free and fair elections. Although both countries held several elections under the United Nations and international peace keeping coalition, they have elected their own leaders. However, it is important to note that internal conflicts from factions undermine the peaceful electoral process of both countries. It is also impossible to ascertain the degree of independence and veracity of the election result (as it is always common in third world countries to those who are in position or the powerful to manipulate the votes of the people). During the last election in Cambodia, the electorate voted through: in the Senate, 57 members are elected by functional constituencies to serve 5-year terms, 2 members are elected by the National Assembly to serve 5-year terms and 2 members are appointed by the monarch to serve 5-year terms. In the National Assembly (Radhsphea Ney Preah Recheanachakr Kampuchea) 123 members are elected by party-list system with proportional distribution of seats to serve 5-year terms (International Foundation for Electoral Systems, 2008). On the other hand, the recent election in East Timor had been a close race. With nearly 47% of the East Timorese people opting for one of the other 12 parties or coalitions. These voters turned to other smaller parties, from Christian-influenced parties, through to parties with traditional-based ties, through to the leftist Socialist Party of Timor (PST). The National Unity Party (PUN), which had not run in previous elections, gained nearly 5%, in part due to tacit approval of its policies from the leadership of the Catholic Church (Lamb, 2007). In other words, both of the countries have exercised their right to vote for their leaders and established a government led by the personalities chosen by the populace. As to the question if it was fair and free election, it should be noted that Cambodia had a more military influence and have greatly affected the free will or the outcome of the election, alleged widespread fraud and irregularities and more than 300 complaints have been lodged against partial returns from individual vote counting stations (Gluck, 1998) although East Timor is far better than Cambodia having noted that “over 500 observers from 15 countries and international organizations, including Australia, were in East Timor for the elections and overwhelmingly characterized the elections as peaceful, fair and democratic” (Downer, 2007).

Since democracy should assure that the majority rule while the rights of the minority right are being protected as well, which form the third basis of a democratized nation. In Cambodia, there is a cloud of doubt in terms of having the majority rule principle. Based on their history, the factions have created an institutionalized affair of closed military governance and speckled with the powerful and mighty usually dominate. In a report by Ronald Bruce St John for the Foreign Policy in Focus regarding the failure of the government of Cambodia’s ability to withstand the demands of democracy, he states that, “Unfortunately, the international community has largely sanctioned Cambodia's failures. It has continued to provide substantial quantities of aid in the face of mounting evidence that even modest democratic reforms are compromised (St John, 2006). In addition, since there is a question of political reforms by which the participation of the majority through pluralism is lacking, St John added that, “Cambodia must curb executive powers as it develops an honest, independent judiciary and a concomitant respect for the rule of law. Active political parties remain important precursors for a sustainable, pluralistic order with a strong educational system a prerequisite for an effective democratic polity. These are only a few of the tough issues the international community must address if it is to succeed in promoting democratization in Cambodia and in other states with little or no democratic tradition, like Afghanistan and Iraq (2006).” This means that equal powers from the judiciary, legislative and executive must maintain the balance but something that does not happen since the Executive is overpowering the balance. On the other hand, East Timor has its own set of problems as regard to democratization. The institutionalization of democracy in East Timor faces major obstacles. Due to a long history of colonization, the East Timorese people have no experience of running a large modern democracy. Consequently, they have a lack of expertise in developing and maintaining democratic institutions. To set up the administrative systems that make a modern democracy possible requires money, time and skilled staff, none of which is plentiful in East Timor.

The guarantee of basic human rights in both countries is problematic. Their infancy in the arena of democracy has resulted to a certain degree of abuse of human rights. For a democracy to be effective, human rights need to be a priority. This means that the government must ensure that basic needs such as food, shelter and health care are met. Education should also be considered a human right and is an essential component of a healthy democracy. It is very difficult for people to participate in the political life of their country if basic needs like these are not met. These two countries are very poor, they lack the resources to provide equal opportunity for its citizens to access the basic services and attend to the basic needs of its people. According to a Joint Statement by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch during the 9th session of the UN Human Rights Council, “Lack of integrity and independence within the court system sits at the centre of Cambodia’s current human rights problems – its most notable impact is an escalating land crisis. Forced evictions further impoverish the marginalized, who are routinely deprived of redress. Violence against women goes unpunished. Freedoms of expression and association are compromised and human rights defenders, opposition journalists, and community activists defending land and natural resources are increasingly imprisoned on baseless charges, physically attacked, or murdered; the perpetrators are rarely brought to justice. The Supreme Council of Magistracy, established to ensure independence and effectiveness of the judiciary remains ineffectual, while the Constitutional Council has continuously failed to demonstrate its role to safeguard the constitutionality of legislation.” (Amnesty International & Human Rights Watch, 2008) While the human rights situation in East Timor is primarily effected by the Indonesian government, a report by Angela Balakrishnan noted that a report found Indonesia was guilty of carrying out human rights abuse on a grand scale during East Timor's 1999 break for independence (Balakrishnan, 2008).

The fourth defining element of democratization is the equality before the law, implementation of due process of law and existence of constitutional limits on government. Earlier it was noted in this paper that the Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch delivered a report that Cambodia has continuously failed to safeguard the constitutionality of legislation. There is an overwhelming influence of the Executive power as it tips the balance of power. On the other hand, East Timor has shown its continued effort to provide the nation with a democracy but is constantly under siege by internal conflicts. The conflict in both countries, especially in East Timor has been devastating the peaceful implementation of the government of democracy while the government of Cambodia has continuously failed to curb corruption thereby causing inequality among its people. The corruption in both countries exist but Cambodia has more flaws in terms of its failure to reduce the surging rate of corruption while East Timor finds it hard to control the nation because of internal arm struggle and political conflicts.

The social, economic, and political pluralism in a democratized country must be evident. Active political participation can only emerge in democracies that are able to solve more fundamental problems of major economic inequalities and poverty. The problem with both countries, the predicament of economic inequality and poverty is at its highest point. The values of tolerance, pragmatism, cooperation, and compromise in both countries do exist to some extent. It is essential that a democratic country should have the ability to cooperate and promote tolerance with each other, such as the existence of freedom of speech, assembly, press and other freedoms that inherently promotes tolerance and compromise. Nowadays, it is extremely difficult to completely subdue these basic freedoms though to the advent of modern communication. It is however unfortunate that Cambodia find its too uneasy to grant this rights to its people, the Government, the military forces, and the ruling political party continued to dominate the broadcast media and to influence the content of broadcasts. According to a 2001 report by the UNHCHR, the procedures for licensing and allocation of radio and television frequencies to the media were not impartial. The SRP has consistently been unable to obtain a broadcast license. During 2001, it briefly broadcast radio programs from a site in a neighboring country, but subsequently suspended broadcasts for technical reasons. There were seven television stations, all controlled or strongly influenced by the CPP. Government control severely limited the content of television and radio broadcasting. At the initiative of the President of the National Assembly, the Ministry of Information-controlled national television and radio stations broadcast taped sessions of the National Assembly's debates; however, in several instances, these broadcasts were censored (UNCHR, 2001). In East Timor, the freedom is relatively relaxed compared to that of Cambodia. Given the country's transition to a functional democracy, the government has warned journalists to exercise their freedom with responsibility, and official reactions to overly adverse reporting remain a concern. In June, the Ministry of the Interior expelled Australian freelance journalist Julian King for allegedly subverting the state in his reporting. There is as yet no press council to adjudicate disputes. Therefore, the government uses legal codes adopted from Indonesian and Portuguese laws to address any aberrant, albeit undefined, media-related practices. However, no major incursions on press freedom were noted in 2004, although the government did on several occasions attempt to influence coverage (Freedom House, 2005).

Democratization in Cambodia and East Timor is an effort, an endeavor by which they both has to undergo the process to adopt such a regime. It is extremely difficult to determine how that process occurs, including what criteria to use in determining if democratization has, in fact, taken place. Typically, democracy has truly taken root until at least three national elections have been held. Another criterion could be the peaceful transfer of power from one political party or coalition to the former opposition. Such a transition is critical because it indicates that the major political forces in a country are prepared to settle their disputes without violence and to accept that they will all spend periods of time out of office. Unfortunately, using that as our determinants, it is still immature to predispose or declare that both countries have actually achieved democracy.



References

Balakrishnan, A. (2008, July 15). Indonesia accepts guilt over East Timor human rights abuses.
The Guardian. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from http://www.guardian.co.uk
Chandler, D. (2007). A History of Cambodia. Westview Press, 2007
Downer, A. (2007, July 12). East Timor Parliamentary Elections. Retrieved October 7, 2008,
from http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/releases/2007/fa085_07.html
Freedom House, Freedom of the Press - East Timor 200) (2005, 27 April). Online. UNHCR
Refworld. Retrieved October 7, 2008 from available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4734515c23.html
Gluck C. (1998, August 5). Asia-Pacific Hun Sen wins Cambodia election. The BBC News.
Retrieved October 7, 2008, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/145702.stm
Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International (2008, September 15). Joint statement at the
UN Human Rights Council. New York: United Nation
IFES (2008, July 7). Election Profile for Cambodia. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from
http://www.electionguide.org/election.php?ID=1188
Lamb, J. (2007, Jul7 14). East Timor: Uncertainty over future government. Green Left Online.
Retrieve October 7, 2008, from http://www.greenleft.org.au/2007/717/37249
St John, B. (2006, January 23). Cambodia’s Failing Democracy. Foreign Policy in Focus.
Retrieved October 7, 2008, from http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/3079/
Taylor, J. G. (1991). Indonesia's Forgotten War: The Hidden History of East Timor. Australia:
Pluto Press

News always fascinates me. Writing is a challenge and one of those passions included in my very short list of things on my bed spread. The problem with news, it should be straight that I ended up spending so much of my time being vigilant so that the truth is not bent, that honesty shall prevail and for fraud to surface. The good news is, in the College of Nursing, there is not much bad news and it is good to me. But in the long run, it is practically impossible that good news is constant. In the words of Napoleon Bonaparte, he warned that, “Never awake me when you have good news to announce, because with good news nothing presses; but when you have bad news, arouse me immediately, for then there is not an instant to be lost.”

It is the bad news that excites me. I actually loathe at it. But just like Bonaparte, there is not an instant to be lost when presented with it. In my short stay in the University of Baguio, I have met spectacular personalities, worked with different types of people and rubbed elbows with the amazing and the simple. The culture was extremely unfamiliar to me, I learned a thing or two and bruised me big time in the process but at the end of the day, I hit the bed with a smile, that at least, life has never been less interesting. I even pray for it. Hoping that life be a constant opportunity to beat the bad news, that bad news never stays the same. It churns the optimist in me.

Being a chunk in the arena of student leadership, I want to emphasize two things. First, there is a need for all the students of the College of Nursing to sprint and be “bold and daring.” Secondly, everybody must do the same. When it comes to what is considered as bad news, it is when change is introduced. That of course is a sign of lack of understanding that change would improve us all. Another is often the news that would involve participation and time. Time is what we make of it. It is just frustrating to hear complaints about certain issues but only the few would put effort to be a part of the solution. The majority would flee from involvement, so it elates me to see students reading what is on the bulletin board. That is a sign that at least their visual gift is not actually wasted.

I dare everyone to be bold and daring. Be bold to stand for what is right and to uphold the truth. Be bold to accept our roles as student by respecting our Clinical Instructors, administrators and those who are in authority. Be bold to accept that our mentors are not omniscient and only through constructive participation and sharing that true symbiotic relationship shall exist. Be bold to respect individual differences and promote tolerance. Dare to be part of the solution, but if you are oblivious to bother, try not to add to the problem. Be bold to go beyond your potential. Do not be satisfied with what is just being presented within the boundaries of the classrooms, the world is so vast, we can actually drown with its vastness and yet, we are still ignorant of what the world has to offer. Dare to make a difference. Dare to acknowledge that all the persons we meet in this university have its own purpose, be nice to everyone even if others are not. Do not be too traditional. Life changes and together with it is the demand of the time compelling everyone to be more creative, to be assertive of our rights and to be more participative. Be bold to remain a person of character and virtue.

Student life is not without end. This part of our life shall be reduced to memories but what would be left is our ability to withstand the real battle waiting for us after graduating from this university. What lies ahead is the true test of our character, our virtue and our strength to win the real challenges of life. Take advantage of this chance, when we are still allowed to falter because of our naïve disposition, when we can still fail because it is understandable, be wary of this opportunity to be care free for at the end of the day, when we are no longer under the responsibility of our instructors and administrators, we shall be by ourselves. We shall be the person based on the choices we made during the time when we are still being prepared to travel the journey they call life. Let us all be careful of what we pick along this journey, for what may break or help us is what we did or did not choose.

Life will be a constant skirmish of good and bad news. It will not change but it does not matter, what matter most is who was left standing. Who fought the fight, who made the difference, who were the bold and the daring.