Shrifts

Cong Corrales

“Is it so difficult for alleged lawyers to understand that the mandate of CHR is to check state abuses?” – Prof. Luis V. Teodoro, former dean of the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication

THERE have been many things that unfolded last week that I have decided to adapt my late father Emilio’s column template — shrifts. Even though the incidents are all political in nature, I cannot weave them into one narrative prose. I do not have the academic smarts to pull that one through. So, here goes.

Change has come indeed.

Now, in the Philippines, when you say “you weep for the youth,” you’ll be branded by the President a pedophile or straight-out homosexual.

“You are so fixated with the death of young males, kaya nagdududa ako na pedophile kang gago ka,” Digong Dada said of Commission on Human Rights chair Chito Gascon on Saturday as reported by GMA News Online.

Using your (demented) logic, Sir, what does that make you then — somebody who is “fixated” with illegal drugs? Aren’t you also “fixated” on branding people you disagree with as gays?

***

After more than a hundred days of being held captive by Isis-inspired Maute Group, Fr. Teresito “Chito” Suganob was supposedly “rescued” by military forces.

Opapp Secretary Jesus Dureza broke the news on his Facebook wall, without any regard to what might happen to the other hostages left behind. Maybe Dureza didn’t want to be “out-scooped” by other government agencies circling around Marawi City.

Like my former editor at Mindanews, Carolyn Arguillas, I ask: “Escaped? Released? Abandoned? Rescued?” I ask the same questions because these are four vastly different scenarios. So, which is it? One might retort that the most important thing is Fr. Suganob is safe.

An assault ops on the mosque is vastly different from a rescue op for Suganob. Both have different scenario settings and different outcomes.

Still, if he escaped and you insist that you rescued him, that’s a whole different ball game, all together. That’s not information. That’s propaganda.

I could almost see another “rescue” of the rest of the hostages in the future when this administration stumbles upon, yet, another political faux pas.

My last question on this: Sirs, are you hard of herring, the red kind?

***

The Davao City Social Services and Development Office was only implementing a city ordinance that is supposed to curb human trafficking when they caused indigenes to miss their Saturday flight to join other “Lakbayanis” in Manila.

“The implementation of the Children’s Code of Davao is something that we always do (every day) and this is to protect our children from possible incidents of trafficking,” reads the statement of Malu Bermudo of Davao’s CSSDO on the incident.

The last time I checked, the Constitution trumps any city ordinance, all the time. Yes, freedom of movement and travel is guaranteed under the 1987 Constitution. More importantly, the children are not residents of Davao City. Why should they be required to secure a permit from CSSDO?

If that’s how it is in Davao City, I’m never flying out from that city whenever I have my kids in tow. Even if, say, I’m from General Santos City or Cotabato City.

And what’s with the problem of Cebu Pacific’s ground crew?

Interaksyon.com reported: “Even ground staff of Cebu Pacific, said Trenilla, ‘took a hostile attitude towards us when they learned we were attending the SOS conference, claiming that the children were only being ‘used’.”

Is it the airlines business now to know what you’re going to do when you reach your destination? Did the pilots of Cebu Pacific Flight 387 tell the passengers what they will do with the plane as it circled its way around Mt. Sumagaya back to Cagayan de Oro?

That’s right. It is none of your business. Your business is to take people where they want to go, period. Focus on that, Davao ground crew of Cebu Pacific, because I’m sure the passengers of flight 387 didn’t want to arrive at their untimely “final destination.”