Posts

Jobs crisis intensifying under Duterte – IBON

Research group IBON said that despite recently hyped growth of 6.8 percent in first quarter 2018 the country’s jobs situation continues to worsen under the Rodrigo Duterte administration.

The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) reported that the employment rate grew slightly to 94.5 percent in April 2018, while the unemployment rate was lower at 5.5 percent.

The jobs situation seemed to improve as the number of employed Filipinos rose by 625,000 and the number of unemployed declined by 83,000.

The government largely attributed this to increased infrastructure spending.

According to IBON estimates correcting for government underestimation, however, the number of unemployed actually grew by 82,000 to 4.1 million in April 2018 from 4 million in April 2017.

Official unemployment figures do not reflect discouraged workers or those who have dropped out of the labor force after failing to find work after six months.

The agriculture sector, which is the second largest source of employment among the country’s sectors, had the most job losses, said the group.

Official data shows that the number of employed in agriculture fell by 723,000 to 9.8 million in April 2018 from 10.5 million in April 2017.

The sector has been plagued with job losses for the past four consecutive rounds of the labor force survey.

IBON also noted that the agriculture, hunting and forestry subsector lost 558,000 jobs, while fisheries lost 134,000.

The fisheries subsector had notable job losses for all labor force survey rounds under the Duterte government.

Poor quality work or jobs that are insecure, lack benefits and have low wages persists, said the group.

The number of underemployed or those looking for additional work increased by 466,000 from around 6.5 million in April 2017 to 6.9 million in April 2018.

IBON noted that among underemployed persons, those who worked 40 hours and over in a week grew by 758,000 from 2.4 million last year to 3.2 million this year.

The growing underemployment despite the increase in full-time work may indicate that much of reported full-time work still does not give enough income for the employed to meet their basic needs.

The number of part-time workers who worked less than 40 hours in a week decreased but still comprised 52.5 percent of total underemployed in April 2018.

The group also noted that nearly half or 47.1% of underemployed for this round were in the services sector, 32.4 percent in agriculture, and 20.5 percent in the industry sector.

Both services and industry sectors registered increases in underemployed persons from April last year.

IBON said that government has been content with minimal job generation in the non-productive sectors such as the kind offered during job fairs.

According to the group, government should instead ensure sustainable and decent jobs and livelihoods for Filipinos.

This can be done by embarking on a solid economic program that genuinely boosts the agriculture and fisheries sectors and develops the country’s vastly rural economy to build strong and vibrant domestic industries. #

Php750 minimum wage possible, non-inflationary and good for the economy–​IBON​

Contrary to government and big employers’ claims, research group IBON said that raising minimum wages nationwide to Php750 is doable, need not spike prices further, and will benefit millions of Filipino workers and the economy.

The group cited the following reasons:

  1. Raising minimum wages nationwide to Php750 is doable if owners of establishments allow a small portion of their profits to go to their workers instead.

    Firms and the economy as a whole have more than enough profits to support this.

    Data from the 2015 Annual Survey of Philippine Business and Industry (ASPBI) of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) shows that the 34,740 establishments employing 20 or more have Php1.7 trillion in total profits and 4.5 million employees.

    Raising the average daily basic pay of wage and salary workers from the nationwide average of Php378.71 to Php750 transfers just Php473.2 billion to workers’ pockets, which is only a 28.3 percent decrease in profits.

    Workers will meanwhile get to take home an additional Php8,076 per month on average.

    This still falls short of the family living wage and does not necessarily bring everyone up to a decent standard of living but such an increase will provide immediate relief to millions of Filipino workers and their families.

  2. Raising minimum wages nationwide to Php750 will not necessarily hike inflation. Prices need not go up and workers need not be laid off if employers accept the slight cut in profits.

  3. As it is, wages are not even keeping up with the rising productivity of workers so their ever-growing contribution to the economy increases employer profits more than improves workers’ welfare. For instance, according to the Labor Productivity Statistics of the PSA, the contribution of each worker to total gross domestic product (GDP) increased from Php196,179 in 2015 to Php198,215 in 2016 (up by 2.2 percent). This means that the average daily contribution of each worker to the economy amounts to some Php759.44 per day, which is more than double the average daily basic pay and more than the proposed national minimum wage.

  4. The economy will also benefit by increasing workers’ purchasing power and aggregate demand which stimulates higher production and increases economic activity. Raising minimum wages nationwide also reduces inequality by transferring wealth overly concentrated in a few to millions of workers and their families.

According to IBON, the country’s largest corporations and the wealthiest families owning these can easily absorb the substantial wage hike.

Smaller producers in micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) will also be able to afford the wage hike with government support such as immediately providing cheap and easy credit, giving marketing support, nurturing locally-integrated supply chains, and improving their scientific and technological capabilities.

MSMEs will also benefit from increased worker demand for their goods and services in the domestic market, said the group. #

Substantial wage hike urgent, gov’t told

Research group IBON said that the government’s recently announced plan to respond to labor’s clamor for an increase in the minimum wage is welcome but underscored that this move is urgent amid rising prices.

The group said that the hike should be meaningful enough to keep up with accelerating inflation and worsening poverty.

Amid the three-year-high first quarter inflation, widely perceived to be caused by the government’s Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) among other factors, and labor’s demand for a wage hike, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) said that a wage increase is coming up within the month.

According to IBON, it is urgent for government to ensure the legislation of a minimum wage hike that is sufficient for the working people to cope with the rising cost of goods and services.

Recent price spikes have been brought about by government’s own market-oriented policies such as the oil deregulation and tax reform laws that press prices up while wages remain low.

The group however stressed that the wage increase should be substantial, as the recent inflation rate will only continue to erode a paltry increase.

IBON explained that despite the last increase of Php21 in October 2017, which raised the National Capital Region (NCR) minimum wage to Php512 from Php491 per day, the real value has eroded by Php16.25 from Php464.19 in October 2017 to Php447.94 as of April 2018.

IBON also noted that the TRAIN has inflicted a heavy blow on the workers’ purchasing power as the real value of the NCR minimum wage lost a significant Php18.79 since the Duterte administration took office in July 2016.

According to IBON, initially increasing the minimum wage nationwide to at least Php750 as recently proposed by progressive lawmakers is the more practical measure.

This will allow wage earners to cope with inflation and increase their purchasing capacity.

It will also help bridge the gap between the nominal minimum wage and the family living wage (FLW) of Php1,173.14 in the NCR, for instance, as of April 2018 computed by IBON.

While the amount still falls short of the FLW, a Php750 minimum wage can be an initial important step towards increased economic activity and more vibrant economic growth that shall ensure a more stable price situation, said the group. #

Php750 national minimum wage a legitimate call

(IBON Facts & Figures excerpt)

The demand of progressive workers’ federations for the re-installation of a national minimum wage and pegged at Php750, along with the abolition of the regional wage boards, is an immediate, important and doable step towards making economic growth genuinely inclusive and addressing worsening inequality in the country.

Based on IBON estimates, raising the average daily basic pay from the nationwide average of some Php367.35 to the proposed Php750 national minimum wage transfers just Php448 billion to workers’ pockets – this is only 27.4 percent decrease in profits, which still leaves employers with a significant 72.6 percent (Php1.18 trillion) of their clean profits.

On the other hand, each worker will be able to take home, on average, an additional Php8,364.00 per month.

The amount of profits transferred to workers’ wages was computed based on data from the latest (2014) Annual Survey of Philippine Business and Industry (ASPBI) of the PSA. The census shows that 35,009 establishments with employment of over 20 or over had Php1.63 trillion in total profits and 4.13 million employees.

The country’s largest corporations and wealthiest families are the most able to absorb the wage hike. In fact, the total cost of proposed Php750 national minimum is only equivalent to 20 percent of the total net worth of the 10 richest Filipinos.

Meanwhile, the government can ensure special support for small producers of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) to help them cope with the proposed national minimum wage. This includes immediately providing cheap and easy credit, giving research, development and marketing support, nurturing locally integrated supply chains, and improving their scientific and technological capabilities. (Excerpt from Continuing Wage Depression, IBON Facts & Figures, April 2017.)

Unsolicited projects for favored business interests to rise under Pres. Duterte?

By Arnold Padilla / IBON Features

When President Duterte said last month that “all projects of the Philippines would be something like a Swiss Challenge”, media attention has focused on the Swiss Challenge and its implications. But what the presidential statement implied was that in order to supposedly fast track his ambitious Build Build Build program, the administration may encourage more unsolicited proposals and negotiated contracts.

And there lies the real and bigger problem. Unsolicited proposals and negotiated contracts are the worst form of public procurement of infrastructure under the public-private partnership (PPP) scheme. These negotiated deals are the most prone to bureaucratic corruption and to patronage for favored business interests.

Close ties

San Miguel Corporation (SMC) president Ramon Ang, for instance, is among the closest to Malacañang. He is publicly known as one of the (unofficial) major campaign contributors of Pres. Duterte and patron of the Chief Executive’s controversial anti-drug campaign. SMC, a Php255-billion diversified conglomerate and known to cultivate close ties with whoever is in power, is currently implementing theunsolicited Php62.7-billion MRT-7 while awaiting government approval of two more unsolicited mega infrastructure projects.

Based on the revised (2012) Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) Law, unsolicited proposals are “project proposals submitted by the private sector, not in response to a formal solicitation or request issued by an Agency/LGU (local government unit) and not part of the list of priority projects as identified by Agency/LGU, to undertake Infrastructure or Development projects.”

A third party could challenge the offer of the original proponent of an unsolicited proposal through what is called the “Swiss Challenge”. In order to bag the contract, the original proponent should match the counter-offer of the third party. In practice, however, all unsolicitedprojects concluded in the Philippines since the 1990s were clinched by the original proponent except in the case of the controversial NAIA Terminal 3 where the challenger (Philippine International Terminals Co. Inc. or PIATCO) won but the contract was declared null and void by the Supreme Court (SC) due to irregularities.

At the start of its term, the Duterte administration’s economic managers already announced that the government is open to unsolicitedproposals aside from its so-called hybrid PPP – i.e. mobilizing official development assistance (ODA) to build infrastructure and later bidding out its operation and maintenance (O&M) to the private sector. Ang, however, called hybrid PPP as “complicated” and expressed preference for unsolicited proposals for supposedly faster delivery of projects.

Following the President’s pronouncement of openness to unsolicited projects, the latter flooded the government, with project proposalsreaching a total of as much as Php3 trillion in the first year of the Duterte administration according to a news report last year. But most of these are just concepts or ideas, with actual proposals under evaluation by the Investment Coordination Committee (ICC) reaching only three as of the latest (January 2018) projects status report from the PPP Center.

But these three unsolicited proposals are among the just five PPP projects that the PPP Center said could probably be rolled out this year. Two of these unsolicited proposals have SMC as the original proponent – the Php700-billion New Manila International Airport and the Php338.8-billion Manila Bay Integrated Flood Control, Coastal Defense and Expressway Project. The third one is the Php51.17-billion East-West Rail Project of Megawide Construction Corp.

A separate news report said that SMC has an unsolicited proposal to the state-run Philippine National Construction Corp. (PNCC) to expand the Metro Manila Skyway and the South Luzon Expressway (SLEX) for Php554 billion.

Combined, the indicative cost of SMC’s reported unsolicited proposals (Php1.59 trillion) already account for 53% of the cost of all unsolicitedproposals (Php3 trillion) reportedly being pitched to the Duterte administration. To get a better grasp of how huge these two projects are, note that the total amount of all (16) PPP projects that have been awarded since the Aquino administration is “just” Php323.06 billion.

Beyond transparency and corruption

Even PPP advocates while recognizing that the presence of unsolicited proposals is on the rise warn governments to use them with caution and within a strict regulatory framework. In a review of unsolicited projects worldwide, a study commissioned by the Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF) of the World Bank noted that among the common concerns on unsolicited proposals are: (1) lack of transparency in selection and implementation of projects; (2) avoidance of competition; (3) avoidance of due diligence processes; (4) opportunities for corruption and political patronage; and (5) acceptance of poor quality projects (design and/or execution) that do not even meet minimum requirements of any sort, in the name of expediency. The World Bank reportedly prohibits the use of unsolicited proposalsin projects that they fund.

Beyond transparency and corruption issues, however, the greater impact of unsolicited proposals involve how such procurement method further weakens the mandate and capacity of the state to design and implement a rational infrastructure program that is responsive to the long-term needs of the people and the economy. Unsolicited proposals also represent how corporate interests that are mainly driven by profit motivation take over infrastructure development and operation, often at the expense of the country’s overall development and social agenda.

Ideally, infrastructure projects are determined by and consistent with the development plan of a country, meaning projects are initiated and prioritized (including in terms of resource allocation) by government based on such plan. Government’s role goes beyond identification, resource mobilization and construction, and extends to operation and maintenance of the infrastructure.

This has been the practice in many countries including the Philippines until the advent of neoliberalism in the 1980s and its rapid expansion in the 1990s. Government’s role has been reduced to listing down of infrastructure projects and soliciting private investors to build and operate them through bidding or direct negotiation. This is already problematic by itself as it essentially privatizes the infrastructure and distorts its economic and social purpose as commercial viability becomes the primary consideration.

Tailor-made public infra for private interests

Unsolicited proposals thus further detach infrastructure development from specific public needs and interests. With the private proponent initiating the process of identification and conceptualization, unsolicited projects are often not reflective of priority infrastructure needs. In addition, unsolicited proposals reinforce the undue concentration of infrastructure development in urban centers and more developed regions at the expense of poorer regions or areas that need more infrastructure, but where commercial prospects or interests are less for private sector proponents.

There are cases where big business proposes infrastructure projects that are not just meant to supply public needs (and directly profit from it) but are also tailor-made to bolster its other private commercial interests. One example is the unsolicited proposal jointly submitted by SM and Ayala groups to build a Php25-billion 8.6-kilometer elevated toll road that will supposedly help decongest traffic along EDSA. But the project will actually benefit the two conglomerates’ property development interests as the proposed toll road would also increase access to the SM Mall of Asia complex and Ayala’s Makati business district. SMC is questioning the SM-Ayala proposal because it will allegedly duplicate the existing SMC-operated NAIA Expressway and affect traffic volume (and profits).

But while SMC is questioning the need for the SM-Ayala’s unsolicited toll road, the wisdom of its own unsolicited New Manila International Airport is also questionable. Under its proposal, SMC will build a massive Php700-billion airport spanning thousands of hectares along Manila Bay in Bulakan, Bulacan with six parallel runways and an initial 100-million passenger capacity (thrice of NAIA’s). But it will also just duplicate the recently awarded Clark International Airport Expansion Project (a solicited PPP deal bagged by Megawide) whose further expansion has lower social (as a new infrastructure, the Bulacan airport could potentially displace more communities) and financial costs (e.g. there are three separate unsolicited proposals to develop Clark airport from JG Summit, Megawide, and Manny Pangilinan’s group with costs ranging from Php187 billion to Php337 billion).

For SMC, the agenda is not just to build and operate an airport that would be an alternative to the highly congested and inefficient NAIA. What SMC wants to build is an “aerotropolis” or a metropolis revolving around an airport. Aside from the 1,168-hectare airport, the plan includes a 2,500-hectare city complex which gives the giant conglomerate additional potential profits from property development as well as a toll road that will link with NLEX, on top of running the airport.

No guarantees

According to the BOT Law and its IRR, unsolicited projects are not entitled to direct government guarantee, subsidy or equity. Nonetheless, like solicited PPP projects, they are still eligible for other perks including investment incentives under the Omnibus Investment Code and performance undertaking (i.e., a government guarantee that it will assume responsibility for the performance of an agency’s obligations under the contractual arrangement including the payment of monetary obligations, in case of default) such as what SMC’s unsolicited MRT-7 project enjoys. They even enjoy “security assistance”, or the deployment of police or military forces in the vicinity of the project site to provide security during the implementation of the project up to completion.

The BOT Law requires as well that proposals be innovative and offer a new concept or technology. But it is unclear what is particularly innovative in an airport in Bulacan or an MRT along Commonwealth Avenue to pass as unsolicited projects. Indeed, a 2012 assessment ofunsolicited projects prepared for the PPP Center (with support from the Asian Development Bank or ADB) concluded that “most (unsolicited)proposals did not really offer new technology”.

What is clear is that there are no guarantees that the country’s chronic infrastructure crisis, which is being used to justify more unsolicitedproposals and negotiated deals, would be solved with more unsolicited projects. On the contrary, undue public burden could increase as numerous but disjointed or impractical networks of roads, airports, and other infrastructure are built through self-serving unsolicitedprojects by big business interest.

PH minerals benefit foreigners not Filipinos

By IBON.org

Majority of Philippine minerals are exported and mainly benefit foreign corporations, research group IBON said. While ensuring environmentally safe and responsible mining methods, the Duterte administration should also ban the exodus of the country’s raw minerals. These should instead be efficiently reserved for and utilized to support and develop the country’s key industries towards national industrialization, said the group. Read more

On Consumer Welfare Month: 20 years of MWSS privatization, 20 years of violating the people’s right to water

By Water for the People NetworkThe 20th anniversary of the privatization of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) in August was considered a milestone by privatization proponents. The MWSS has often been used to showcase the supposed benefits of turning over water supply services to private corporations. But the start of government-declared Consumer Welfare Month is an opportune time to note that two decades of MWSS privatization has harmed the interests of the consumers and the general public. While ensuring huge profits for Manila Water Co. Inc. and Maynilad Water Services Inc., it has violated the people’s right to water, the various ways by which are listed below:

  1. MWSS privatization has resulted in soaring water rates as private concessionaires rake in massive corporate profits

Between August 1997 and August 2017, the basic tariff of Manila Water has soared by 969 percent. The basic tariff of Maynilad, meanwhile, has ballooned by 596 percent. The all-in tariff, which counts the basic tariff plus add-on charges, for Manila Water has increased by 762% during the same period. For Maynilad, it has jumped by 548 percent.

This translated to enormous profits with a combined accumulated income of Php94.5 billion from 2000 to 2015. Such soaring rates and massive profits for Manila Water and Maynilad were made possible by the concession agreements (CA) they signed with MWSS. Tariffs reflected the impact of inflation, adjustments in the foreign exchange rate, and the concessionaires’ petitioned basic charge which would allow them to supposedly implement their business plan and achieve a guaranteed rate of return in the succeeding five years.

Privatization guaranteed the profits of Manila Water and Maynilad not only by allowing them to pass on all the risks of running a business to the consumers. Privatization also legitimized the collection from the consumers of onerous and questionable charges by MWSS concessionaires.

During the last rebasing in 2013, it was exposed that Manila Water and Maynilad had been including questionable items in their application for new rates. As in previous rebasing exercises (2002 and 2007), they passed on to clueless customers the costs of their corporate income tax (CIT), unimplemented projects, advertising, donations, and recreation.

  1. MWSS privatization has seriously undermined the power and mandate of government to regulate the private concessionaires to protect public interests and welfare

The last rebasing also exposed a key feature of MWSS privatization which is how the power of the state to regulate businesses to protect public interest is greatly undermined. When the Regulatory Office (RO) prohibited the concessionaires from passing on their CIT and other questionable charges to the consumers, Manila Water and Maynilad promptly challenged the decision through international arbitration. This is a mechanism provided by the CA to settle disputes between the concessionaires and MWSS on the interpretation and implementation of the contracts’ provisions, including on the setting of rates. It is a secretive and undemocratic process that includes only representatives of MWSS and the concessionaires and without any public participation. It is being chaired by an unaccountable foreign third party that also represents big business interests.

Filipino taxpayers now face the possibility of shouldering as much as Php82 billion in additional burden if the concessionaires are able to secure favorable decisions from international arbitration. Already, the arbitration panel that heard Maynilad’s case ordered government to pay Php3.4 billion. These amounts represent the supposed losses of the concessionaires when the RO disallowed the continued collection of the CIT and other questionable charges. As stipulated in the CA, government has committed to pay for these supposed losses through what is called sovereign guarantee.

As early as 1998 or a year into privatization, Manila Water had already sought international arbitration to compel the RO to increase the firm’s rate of return contained in its original bid. Aside from the arbitration mechanism, concessionaires also resort to blatant arm-twisting to force favorable decisions from government. In 2001, the original investors of Maynilad blackmailed government to amend the CA to allow it to increase rates or else it would terminate the contract.

  1. MWSS privatization has further weakened the people’s right to water amid questionable claims by the concessionaires of improved water services

The soaring water rates and onerous charges being imposed by Manila Water and Maynilad have effectively marginalized poor households from enjoying the right to access water for domestic use. Amid depressed wages and chronic unemployment, water services along with other basic daily necessities, have put increasing pressure on ordinary families’ budgets.

While both concessionaires claim almost universal water supply coverage, poor communities in their service areas do not enjoy the same quality of service that well-off customers like richer households and commercial areas have. Instead of individual connections, poor communities have to make do with bulk meter connections. Aside from compromising the safety and quality of water, it is also not unusual that the water supply in these poor communities is not available 24/7.

Based on the latest available data, the number of persons per connection for Manila Water is seven, and nine for Maynilad, indicating the prevalence of bulk connections – mainly among urban poor communities – in the MWSS concession areas. Thus, while the concessionaires claim outstanding performance (which the RO apparently could not even independently verify), the truth is that many households, in particular the poor, are not individually connected to the water supply system, which is supposed to be the standard. The poor also end up paying more as block tariff rates apply on these bulk connections.

Aside from universal and 24/7 supply coverage, the concessionaires also promised to provide improved sewerage coverage, which they substantially failed to do amid limited investments despite skyrocketing water rates. In their original service targets, Maynilad committed to achieve 31% sewerage coverage by 2016 and 52% for Manila Water. As of December 2013 – the latest available data – Manila Water has only achieved 12% and Maynilad, 11 percent.

  1. MWSS privatization has deepened corporate and foreign control over vital infrastructure and key services in the country

From the onset, MWSS privatization has been an agenda of big corporate and foreign interests.  Foreign creditors World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB), and Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) pushed for the privatization of MWSS, which then owed them some US$800 million in debt. The World Bank’s International Finance Corp. (IFC) served as government consultant in MWSS privatization and designed the concession agreement.

The IFC is now an investor in Manila Water, raking billions of profits from a contract it designed itself. Manila Water is led by Ayala Corporation and United Kingdom (UK)-based United Utilities. Aside from the IFC, other foreign investors include Japanese giant, Mitsubishi Corp. as well as First State Investments of the UK, Singapore-based global fund manager Aberdeen Asset Management plc, and US-based equity mutual fund Smallcap World Fund Inc.

Meanwhile, Maynilad is currently controlled by Manny V. Pangilinan through the Metro Pacific Investments Corp. (MPIC) and DMCI Holdings of the Consunji family. MPIC , of course, is backed by  Indonesia’s Salim group. Other foreign interests in Maynilad are MCNK JV Corp., a unit of Japanese giant Marubeni Corp., and Lyonnaise Asia Water Limited, a unit of French firm Suez, one of the world’s largest water companies.

Water privatization is being challenged worldwide – from France where some of the first water privatization took place and where the world’s largest water firms are based – to Jakarta, Indonesia which privatized its water system the same year as Metro Manila and used the same model.

Water privatization must be reversed. There is no way out of the trap of exorbitant water rates and unreliable service for the poor unless the concession agreements with Manila Water and Maynilad are junked and the operation of the water supply system is taken over by a reformed public sector. # (Ibon.org)

PH should assert sovereignty vs China and US – Ibon

AS THE Philippines claimed victory against China over the West Philippine Sea due to a favorable decision at the arbitral court on sea disputes in The Hague, The Netherlands, research group IBON Foundation urged President Rodrigo Duterte to assert national sovereignty versus China and the United States.

IBON in their 2016 Midyear Birdtalk held at UP Diliman last Saturday said that the real conflict is between the two superpowers China and US.

Read more

ITANONG MO KAY PROF: Podcast on Mamasapano encounter

Panayam ng Kodao Productions kay Prof. Jose Maria Sison hinggil sa madugong sagupaan sa pagitan ng SAF at MILF sa Mamasapano, Maguindanao noong January 25, 2015.

February 1, 2015

Ano ang inyong masasabi sa pahayag ng FBI na walang kinalaman ang US sa naganap na Mamasapano encounter?

JMS: Nasa katangian at papel ng FBI na magsinungaling tungkol sa covert operations o lihim na operasyon nito. Mahaba at malalim ang pakialam ng FBI sa proyekto na hulihin o patayin si Marwan at Usman. Nahahalata naman ito sa lantarang pagtanggap ng FBI na sila ang bahala sa reward money at sa DNA analysis. Pero may kinalaman din ang FBI sa pagsasanay sa Special Action Force, sa intelligence at pagsasagawa ng Oplan Wolverine.

May papel ang FBI sa porma ng bilateral police cooperation. Pero kasangkot din ang iba pang ahensya ng Amerikano,tulad ng US Army Special Forces. US Army facility ang GPS surveillance at real-time monitoring sa communications gadget na ipinain kay Marwan at mga aide niya. At malamang na si US Ambassador Goldberg o ang CIA station chief ang nag-utos kay Aquino.

Ayon sa mga tao sa baryong pinangyarihan ng sagupaan, may blue-eyed na Amerikanong sundalo na nakita nilang patay. At nakunan naman ng retrato ang Amerikanong sundalo mula sa Joint Staff Special Operations Task Force. Kasama sila sa pagtingin, pag-usisa at pagkuha sa mga bangkay ng mga sundalong SAF. Lumabas ang mga retrato sa mga peryodiko.

2014 IBON Yearend Birdtalk

2014 IBON Yearend Birdtalk
Political and Economic Briefing
UP College of Education, Diliman
January 23, 2015

More news at www.ibon.org