Archive for September, 2007

Application for Gun Ban Exemption
September 20, 2007

Government Employee : Security Agency : Cashiers/Disbursing Officers : TransportPNP : AFP : Security Personnel : BJMP : High Risk Persons : Bodyguards of High-Risk persons

Important: All Requirements must be submitted in Three (3) sets; ALL REQUIREMENTS IN PHOTO COPIES SHOULD BE AUTHENTICATED BY THE ISSUING OFFICE; and Payment of the requirements fees shall be made upon filling of your application (no reimbursement in case of disapproval of application)

A. QUALIFIED GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE

• Application signed by applicant

• Firearms (Non-government Issued Firearms) License and Valid Permit to Carry Authenticated by PNP Firearms and Explosive Dept.

• Letter Order ( Government Issued Firearms)

• Appointment Papers – CSC (Certified True Copy or Authenticated.

• Endorsement Letter from the Head Agency.

• Latest 2×2 Photo of applicant.

• Latest Identification Card.

SCHEDULE OF FEES:

1.) Government issued firearms – No fee

2.) Non-government issued – P 500.00 per firearms

3.) SC, CA, Sandiganbayan Justices – P 250.00 per firearms

Provincial and City Prosecutors.

(privately owned firearms)

B. SECURITY AGENCY

• Application signed by Head of Agency

• Letter Request ( Address to the Chairman of Committee).

• License to Operate ( Authenticated Copy)

• Itemized List of Firearms with Serial Numbers, caliber, and must Validated by Chief, Records SAGSD or FESAGSS.

• Disposition of Personnel / Firearms.

• Latest 2×2 Photo of owner. ( 3 copies)

SCHEDULE OF FEES:

1.) Licensed Firearms – P 30.00 per firearms

C. CASHIER / DISBURSING OFFICERS

• Application Form duly signed

• Letter Request and Certification from Head of Organization.

(Disbursing a sum of money or other valuables amounting to not less than 200,000 pesos)

• Firearms License and valid Permit to Carry (Authenticated by PNP Firearms and Explosives Division)

• Statement of Account of the Company

• DTI, Mayor’s and Business Permits of the Company

• Latest 2×2 Photo of applicant. ( 3 copies)
SCHEDULE OF FEES:

1.) Licensed Firearms – P 500.00 per firearms

D. TRANSPORT (Import / Export)

• Application Form duly signed by the Broker, Importer, Exporter or Manufacturer

• Authority to Import/Export (Authenticated by the PNP Firearms and Explosive Dept.)

• Commercial Invoice

• License to Operate of Broker, Importer, Exporter or Manufacturer

• Latest 2 x 2 Photo of Applicant (3 copies)

TRANSPORT (Local Movement)

• Application duly signed by the Broker, Firearms Dealer or Manufacturer

• Authority to Transport/Certification (from PNP Firearms and Explosive Dept.)

• List of Firearm(s) and its serial numbers

• Latest 2 x 2 Photo of applicant (3 copies)

TRANSPORT (Shooting Competitions)

• Application duly signed by the Participant

• Letter Request of the Participating Association

• License to Possess and Permit to Carry Firearm

• Latest 2x 2 Photo of the Applicant (3 copies)

SCHEDULE OF FEES :

1.) Firearms – P 60.00 per application

2.) Components of Explosives – P 150.00 per application

3.) Ammunition – P 60.00 per application

E. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE

• Application Form duly signed by the Applicant/Police Officer

• Memorandum of Receipt or LEA (for Government Issued Firearms) and Mission Order

• Valid Firearms License and Permit to Carry (for Privately Owned Firearms duly authenticated by the Firearms and Explosive Dept.)

• Absorption Order or Appointment Papers (Authenticated or Certified True Copy)

• Latest PNP Identification Card

• Latest 2 x 2 Photo of Applicant (3 copies)

SCHEDULE OF FEES :

1.) Government Issued Firearms – No Fee

2.) Non-government Issued Firearms – P250.00/firearm

F. ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES

• Letter Request from Unit Head

• Roster of Troops

• Individual applications signed by each soldier

• Updated Memorandum Receipt and Mission Order

• Certification from the immediate Commanding Officer stating that he is a bonafide Member of the AFP.

• CAD Order

• Enlistment Papers

• Latest Identification Card

• Latest 2×2 Photo (3 copies)

• A DISK COPY OF roster / disposition of troops/ personnel with the corresponding description of firearm/s assigned to the firearm/s holder.

SCHEDULE OF FEES :

1.) Government Issued Firearms – No Fee

2.) Non-government Issued Firearms – P250.00/firearm

G. SECURITY ESCORT / BODYGUARD

• Application / Endorsement from concerned VIP

• Certificate of Exemption previously issued by the Commission to the particular PNP member assigned as security or bodyguard.

• Memorandum Receipt (MR) and Mission Order (MO) if firearm is government issued.

• Firearm License and Permit to Carry for privately owned firearm.

• Certification from the immediate Commanding Officer stating that he is a bonafide Member of the AFP or PNP.

• Police Security Protection Office (PSPO) Indorsement.

• Latest Identification Card

• Latest 2×2 Photo (3 copies)
SCHEDULE OF FEES :

1.) Government Issued Firearms – No Fee

2.) Non-government Issued Firearms – P500.00/firearm

H. PRISON GUARD OF THE BUREAU OF JAIL MANAGEMENT AND PENOLOGY (BJMP)

• Application for Escort Certificate filed with the Regional Committee by jail warden, his assistant, or the particular guard assigned as escort;

• Certificate of Exemption previously issued by the Commission covering a specific firearms issued to the particular guard;

• Memorandum Receipt (MR) and Mission Order (MO) if firearm is government issued;

• Firearm License and Permit to Carry for privately owned firearm;

• Order / Subpoena issued by the Court, Tribunal or Government Investigator;

• Certificate of Exemption is valid only if accompanied by the Regional; Committee;s foregoing Escort Certificate, together with the foregoing order or subpoena;

• Latest Identification Card and

• Latest 2×2 Photo (3 copies)

SCHEDULE OF FEES :

1.) Government Issued Firearms – No Fee

2.) Non-government Issued Firearms – P500.00/firearm

I. HIGH RISK PERSONS

• Applications form duly signed by the applicant

• Valid and current Firearm License to Possess and Permit to Carry issued by the PNP

• Credible evidence of threat to life and/or limb, or of clear and present danger thereof, to the applicant by virtue of his position, occupation or situation

• Latest Identification Card.

• Latest 2×2 Photo (3 copies)
SCHEDULE OF FEES :

1) Licensed firearms – P250/per firearm

J. BODYGUARD OF HIGH RISK PERSONS

• Letter request of High Risk Person in behalf of bodyguard.

• Applications form to be signed by bodyguard.

• Valid and current Firearm License to Possess and Permit to Carry issued by the PNP to the bodyguard.

• Latest and current official Identification Card.

• Latest 2×2 Photo (3 copies)

• Police Security and Protection Office (PSPO) Indorsement.
SCHEDULE OF FEES :

1) Licensed firearms – P250/per firearm
<

Advertisements

Hope they don’t flip-flop
September 20, 2007

Seems like Senator Richard J. Gordon is hopping mad that his peers in the Senate don’t want to postpone the Barangay Elections. According to him, by not giving the COMELEC more time to prepare, the Senate is ‘allowing’ COMELEC to violate the automation law. In the meantime, Rep. Prospero Nograles wants to use the ZTE troubles besetting the Chairman as a reason to delay the polls.

But, as I’ve argued before, the law does not compel the performance of an impossible thing. So, if not automating is because of a physical impossibility brought about by the lack of time, how can there be a violation of law, as the Senator maintains. To me, his claim seems arguable at best.

Rep. Nograles’ position, however, is another matter altogether. The COMELEC is ready to hold the elections. The Chairman himself has insisted that the matter of elections takes precedence. He even asked for a re-scheduling of his Senate appearance precisely because he had to attend B&SK elections-related activities.

It’s the Senate’s call
September 16, 2007

This continued reportage on the House’s efforts to postpone the B&SK elections is causing alot of confusion. The good thing about this particular article, tho, is that while it serves to inform the public that the House is totally committed to the idea of postponement, it actually points out a very crucial detail: It isn’t up to the House.

The fate of the measure will still depend on the Senate, however.

The elections will still push through if the Senate fails to act on the legislation.

“It will be up to the Senate to decide whether the polls should be postponed or not,” House Majority Leader Arthur Defensor said.

This is what I’ve been saying all along. If the Senate doesn’t act on the House measure, the elections will push through as scheduled. So the question becomes, will the Senate? Or won’t it?

Senate President Manuel Villar has already made his opinion public, so at that level at least, resistance to the postponement can be expected. I don’t know about the others, but I suspect Senator Pimentel won’t be too keen on it either.

Hopefully, inertia too will be on the side of pushing through with the elections on the 29th of October 2007.

Not Sept.14, Sept.29
September 13, 2007

I can hear the groans of the COMELEC’s field officials, even as I’m writing this. I can hear the ‘tsk-tsk’ of everyone else, from pundits to exasperated COMELEC watchers. I can hear ’em all. And I can give ’em no comfort except to say, this’ll be better for everyone concerned.

====

RESOLUTION No. 8301 (13 Sept 2007)

Filing of certificates of candidacy: 29 September – 18 October 2007 (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays) during regular office hours, except on the last day during which certificates of candidacy may be filed up to 12:00 midnight.

Gun ban: 29 September – 13 November 2007 

RESOLUTION No. 8302 (13 Sept 2007)

Pursuant to Section 36(g), Art. III of RA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002), the COMELEC resolves to require all candidates for Punong Barangay, Sangguniang Barangay Kagawad, SK Chairman, and SK Kagawad, in the upcoming B&SK Elections,  to undergo a mandatory drug test conducted by drug testing centers accredited by the Department of Health. The drug test certificate shall be filed not later than 18 October 2007.

====

Soft copies of the full text of these new resolutions will be up over at inside the COMELEC within the hour. Give or take.

Why the B&SK elections might not be postponed
September 12, 2007

For the past week, the buzz has all been about how the House of Reps is vigorously pushing for the postponement of the B&SK elections. With that much coverage given to the House efforts, it seemed to everyone that postponement was a done deal.

Well, it isn’t.

Approval of the Bill in the House only gets them halfway there. There’s still the Senate to contend with. And based on this article – which I nicked from the Manila Bulletin Online – it doesn’t look like the postponement boat will encounter placid waters in the Upper Chamber.

Rock on!

Barangay Elections

By Manny Villar

OUR barangay system of governance brings democracy to the lowest community level. It is a vital instrument in enabling the people to feel and interact with government directly.

The political role of barangays in strengthening democracy in the country cannot be overemphasized.

Every effort must be exerted to firm up the credibility and the relevance of the barangays. This implies that the right of barangay residents to choose their kagawads and punong barangays as provided for by the law must be respected and upheld. It also follows that the holding of barangay elections as legally specified and scheduled should be sustained.

Indeed, it was bad enough that the last scheduled barangay elections were postponed. Another postponement would be worse. It would trivialize the whole meaning of participatory democracy at the community level.

No doubt funding an electoral exercise on a nationwide scale exerts pressure on the national treasury. But any election is the heart and soul of democracy.

Moreover, a second postponement of barangay elections would be beneficial only to present barangay officials who are already holding office beyond their terms. Another postponement would simply extend their terms some more to the prejudice of barangay residents.

A second postponement of barangay elections can only be construed by the people that the barangay system of governance is the least of our national priorities. Why is there a budget for another national election and none for choosing barangay leaders? To ordinary people, it does not seem to make sense.

And assuming that the October barangay elections will be moved to 2008 or 2009, what assurance is there that a third postponement will not be proposed? If budgetary constraint is the main argument for the second postponement, will this problem disappear next time?

This whole practice of postponing barangay elections may become habitual to a point when the people will be indifferent to the barangay system.

This possibility should never be allowed to happen.

Money used for holding the October barangay elections is really an investment in democracy. An investment in making people believe that their right to choose their barangay officials is inviolable.

As they say nowadays, waleh keng ketulad, meni!

B&SK Filing of Certificates of Candidacy
September 11, 2007

Resolution 8297, the Guidelines on the Filing of Certificates of candidacy for the B&SK elections, was published today in the Philippine Daily Inquirer and the Malaya (the paper versions only, sorry).

Salient points:

We’ll be electing one Punong Barangay and 7 Sangguniang Barangay Kagawads. The same thing goes for the SK (Section 1).

Candidates for Barangay positions must be Filipino citizens, at least 18 y/o on election day, able to read and write in Pilipino or any local dialect, registered voters in the barangay they’re running in, and residents of the plae for at least one year immediately preceding the elections.

Candidates for SK have the same qualifications, except that they must be at least 15 but under 18 y/o (Section 2).

There are a lot of grounds for disqualification:

  • sentencing by final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one year or more of imprisonment, and within two years after service of sentence;
  • removal from office due to an administrative case;
  • conviction by final judgment for violating allegiance to the Republic;
  • dual citizenship, unless – at the time of the filing of the c-o-c – the candidate makes a personal and sworn renunciation of his foreign citizenship;
  • becoming or being a fugitive from justice (this includes those who flee after conviction and those who flee after being charged in order to avoid prosecution);
  • permanent residency in a foreign country
  • insanity and feeblemindedness
  • being guilty of vote buying, committing acts of terrorism to enhance his candidacy; overspending in the campaign, having solicited illegal contributions, and having committed election offenses.  (Section 3)

Petitions for disqualification may be filed at any time before proclamation; if a candidate is disqualified before election day, votes for him will not be counted; if he is not disqualified before election day, wins and is proclaimed, the disqualification case persists; in such case, his proclamation  may be suspende, upon motion, if evidence for suspension is strong (Section 11).
Appointive officials who run for B&SK are considered automatically resigned. Elective officials are not (Section 4).

Certificates of candidacy can be filed from Sept 14 to 19, 2007. If a person files a c-o-c for two positions, he won’t be eligible for either, but he may withdraw one c-o-c before the deadline for filing c-o-c’s. The c-o-c must be filed with the EO who has jurisdiction over the barangay (Section 5).

A candidate may withdraw his candidacy at any time, but not ater than 3 days before election day (Section 8).

No substitution  of candidates, except in case of death. Candidates should indicate in their c-o-c’s the names of the persons (in order of preference) who can substitute them should they die (Section 9).

Grounds for cancellation of c-o-c’s: Nuisance – under Section 69, OEC; and material misrepresentation in the c-o-c – under Section 78 (Section 10).

Got all that? Also check out the actual resolution over at inside the COMELEC.

Like watching a train wreck
September 7, 2007

You see it unfolding before your very eyes, and yet you can do nothing to stop it happening.

Lyceum, Batangas
September 2, 2007

I spoke to a group of graduate students, college students, and some faculty at the Lyceum of Batangas today. Also present were COMELEC Election Officers and at least one representative from the Association of Barangay Chairmen (ABC).

The topic was electoral reform. I won’t bore you with what i said, but I will say that i enjoyed the experience immensely. The students, alot of them SK voters, were attentive and incisive with their questions. Most of all, they were very participative – something you don’t normally see.

01092007334.jpg01092007335.jpg01092007336.jpg

As you can tell, especially from the last pic, I’m a lousy shot.

I certainly hope I can return at some point in the future. And hopefully, all those SK youth that I met will have had the chance to vote. Especially Aron(?) and the third girl from the right in the third pic; both girls seemed particularly keen on exercising their right of suffrage.

Again with the contempt
September 1, 2007

On the heels of Abalos’ announcement that Lintang Bedol’s motion for reconsideration was denied, Bedol’s lawyer Andrei Tagum took a page from Bedol’s play book and showed his contempt for the Commission:

Tagum admitted that they were “half-expecting” the Comelec to junk their motion for reconsideration.

“If we go by the history of the commission, I don’t think they have ever reversed their decision because that would be an admission that they erred.  There’s no other remedy for us with the Comelec so we might go to the Supreme Court,” he maintained. 

When a quasi-judicial body declines to reverse its decision on a motion for reconsideration, it is because the arguments in the motion do not justify reversal, or because the motion failed to present any new arguments, i.e., different from – or perhaps better than – those that led to the original adverse decision.

It strikes me as being extremely arrogant for defeated lawyers to claim that the tribunal before which they are arguing is composed of petty men who would rather perpetuate an injustice than to admit their error.  Arrogant and sophomoric.