Support Human Rights in the Philippines
By Catherine Gordon
Justice is turned back, and righteousness stands at a distance; for truth stumbles in the public square, and righteousness cannot enter… the Lord saw it and it displeased him that there was no justice. He saw that there was no one, and was appalled that there was no one to intervene … (Isaiah 59:14-16)
One visible result of the scramble to end terrorism is to take legal shortcuts and legal shortcuts always shrink the scope of human rights… Terrorism is a military-police problem but its ultimate solution lies beyond the guns of our armed forces …The apathy of those who can make a difference is the reason why violations of human rights continue to prosper. The worst enemy of human rights is not its nonbelievers but the fence sitters who will not lift a finger despite their violations.
— Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines Hon. Reynato Puno
The 217th General Assembly (2006) passed a resolution lifting up the current human rights violations in the Philippines and expressing its deep concern for the United Church of Christ in the Philippines and the men and women who have been murdered by forces opposed to the protection of human rights. The Assembly further called upon the Philippine government to “bring to justice the killers of the pastors, other church workers and other Filipinos similarly executed and/or tortured by paramilitary forces.” The Assembly called for a full inquiry into these matters by the Philippine government.
Unfortunately, in the following two years little has been done to investigate the killing of members of the church and civil society in the Philippines working for human rights. In fact, the count of those murdered and disappeared has increased and the human rights situation has steadily deteriorated. According to a report by Karapatan, a Philippine human rights organization, there have been 886 extrajudicial killings and 179 disappearances since 2001.
The disappearances and murders are largely attributed to security forces and elements of the Philippine military. According to the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Philippine non-governmental organizations and churches report that, as part of their counter-insurgency program, the armed forces of the Philippines continue to conduct operations that vilify members of civil society organizations and accuse them of being “front groups” for a communist insurgency. This creates a climate of fear and impunity that is leading to the extrajudicial execution or disappearance of members of civil society organizations, including many Filipino church leaders working for human rights whose murders and disappearance have not been investigated or solved.
Many, including the Philippine Supreme Court and Amnesty International, are concerned that Philippine President Arroyo is trying to bypass the legal system in its counter insurgency program. After a visit to the country in 2007, the UN Special Rapporteur characterized the Philippine Armed Forces as being in a state of almost total denial on the need to resolve the significant numbers of killings that have been convincingly attributed to them. The Philippine government’s own investigation by an independent commission has called for the government to take firmer action to resolve the killings.
The situation in the Philippines should be of particular concern for Christians here in the United States as the U.S. Department of State will spend over $149 million in military aid and equipment to the Philippines this year alone. Because the Philippines is seen by the current administration as the second front in the war on terror, military aid has steadily increased since 2001 and the Philippines is one of the largest recipients of U.S. aid in Asia.
The increase in the number of extrajudicial killings of members of the civil society of the Philippines has directly mirrored the increase in military funding to the Philippines, which was over $406 million dollars between 2001 and 2006. This year, the U.S. government will fund the counter insurgency programs of the Philippine armed forces with $30 million in Foreign Military Financing (FMF). What is particularly troubling is that as early as 2005 the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, stated that U.S. government oversight of our military aid and training to the Philippines was weak and ineffective.
Churches and faith-based organizations in the United States are working together, calling for Congress to ensure that U.S. military aid to the Philippines, if any, is transparent and accountable, to prevent directly or indirectly promoting the abuse of human rights.
Please contact your Members of Congress to express your concern for the Church in the Philippines. Tell your Members that Congress must not provide military aid to the Philippines until the U.S. Departments of State and Defense publicly certify that the Philippine government is:
- Strictly enforcing a policy of command responsibility by suspending, investigating and prosecuting military personnel credibly alleged to be responsible for human rights violations; and
- Ensuring that Filipinos live in a country free of fear and violence where they can freely exercise their rights.
Please remember in your prayers those Christians in the Philippines who have died working for the poor and oppressed whose murders remain unsolved. The General Assembly lifted up these 18 brothers and sisters, ranging in age from 13 to 71 years. There are many more.
Rey Corpin
Isaias Manolo, Jr.
Joe Baclao
Juancho Sanchez
Vincente Olea
Abe Sungit
Fr. William Todena
Alfredo Davis
The Rev. Edison Lapuz
The Rev. Raul Domingo
Jose Manegdeg
Junico Halem
Mateo Morales
Nestor Arinque
The Rev. Jemias Tinambacan
Jose Doton
Andy Pawikan
Noel Capulong
Lend, Expecting Nothing in Return: The Subprime Lending Crisis
By Leslie G. Woods
In his Sermon on the Plain, Jesus declares “But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return” (Luke 6:35a). It seems that Jesus is re-interpreting the law in Exodus, “If you lend money to my people, to the poor among you, you shall not deal with them as a creditor; you shall not exact interest from them” (Exodus 22:25).
In “A Reformed Understanding of Usury for the Twenty-first Century,” the 217th General Assembly explored the evolution of these scriptural statements on charging interest, or usury, through the Reformed tradition. In short, the 217th GA concluded that there are two features of the Church’s wrestling with the topic of usury that clearly have continuing relevance:
- Even as the Church came to terms with the appropriateness of interest charges on loans for commerce, it continued to argue against charging interest to the poor.
- Where it did judge that interest … was justifiable, it still applied the principles of fairness and justice to the transaction.
In this context, I think about the current unrest in U.S. housing and financial markets. The subprime lending and foreclosure crisis is distressing a sector of the housing market, but more than that, it is having a ripple effect on other financial markets, leading the Federal Reserve to slash interest rates and rescue a major investment bank. But more poignant than the stock market’s woes are those of the families whose homes hang in the balance.
Most homes are the household’s single largest investment, the primary way a family builds wealth and security for the future. And yet the foreclosure crisis is robbing many families of that asset. As the crisis continues, demand for rental housing (and therefore, its price) will only continue to rise, presenting a double-edged sword to those families who were most vulnerable to subprime loans in the first place: loss of home, including the resulting poor credit, and a shortage of available rental housing in their price range.
The boom of the subprime lending industry and ensuing foreclosure crisis are fruits from the same tree – engraved upon which is “every man for himself.” We live in a culture that tells us that owning something — a house, a car, a particular brand of “stuff” — is a fundamental good. In this society, we are enticed to live beyond our means and spend on credit. From the constant barrage of materialistic ads to general cultural acceptance of personal debt, our culture is inculcated with the belief that we must own all we want now.
And so we come to the foreclosure crisis. As the housing market boomed at the end of the 1990s, lenders were willing to take larger risks, providing subprime loans to buyers they would have otherwise denied. Likewise, homebuyers took out larger mortgages than they could afford, some recklessly, but others in good faith, but desperate to invest in something for their future.
What is happening in the mortgage industry is a 21st century version of a “run on the bank.” Too many investors have gotten nervous at the riskiness of their own investments and have attempted to cash out. The banks, in their turn, have also made risky investments, and do not have the cash on hand to pay out to the nervous investors — hence, foreclosure.
All the consequences of this crisis are yet to be seen. What will happen in the rental market as middle-income families seek new homes? Will there be help for the 40 percent of those affected by foreclosure who are renters? Will the empty, foreclosed homes remain vacant? Who will buy foreclosed homes? Who will refurbish them? What will happen to those at the very bottom of the income scale, who do not own their homes, but will find their already inadequate affordable housing market under pressure from those in higher income brackets, who now have poor credit? It remains to be seen.
And from Washington: will Congress fix it? Indeed, members of Congress are already crafting and debating legislative proposals to avert more foreclosures and refinance loans in bulk; to provide grants for the purchase and rehabilitation of foreclosed homes; to modernize the Federal Housing Administration and housing-related government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and to prevent similar mortgage abuses in future. Many or all of these proposals will probably become law in the next few months, but alone they will not solve the problem.
Economists and politicians will continue to debate the best way to save the economy, but reflection on the social situation that set the stage for the crisis will likely be ignored. Subprime loans take advantage of exactly the group the Church has traditionally tried to protect from usury — the poor. Those who are low- and even middle-income are targeted for too-good-to-be-true mortgages that are, indeed, just that. But the Church goes further than protecting the poor from unscrupulous lenders, saying that even if the borrower is not poor, loans still must be fair and just.
It is a complicated problem. Is it the fault of the lender, who extends more credit than is advisable or exacts more interest than is ethical? Is it the fault of the homebuyer who pours family wealth into a home that is not affordable? Is it Wall Street, for enabling such risky mortgages, or investors for their greed for higher returns? Is it the advertising industry, which spurs us to own what we do not need and spend what we do not have? Is it the Church, for failure to bear witness to the injustice and sinfulness of a society that places so much emphasis on personal property? Truthfully, the answer is all of the above. But laying the blame is not helpful. It is easy to assign fault and to name the sins of others, but it solves nothing.
So, the challenge is to find a solution, not only to the foreclosure crisis or the falling stock market, but a solution for the cultural problems — materialism, consumerism and rampant individualism — that make this crisis possible. A social problem requires a social response.
This crisis has affected and will continue to affect people of all stripes — those with great wealth and those with very little. This could be our generation’s opportunity to challenge our expectations and reexamine our values. Perhaps the biblical ideal of “lend, expecting nothing in return” is beyond the reach of our current economy, but as people of faith, it is not beyond the reach of our values, if we choose to make it so.
Update on Criminal Justice, Homeland Security and Education
By Mary Anderson Cooper, Consultant
The Second Chance Act
On March 11, the Senate passed HR 1593, the Second Chance Act, clearing it for President Bush’s signature. He signed it with no ceremony, which was somewhat surprising given that the Act includes provisions he requested in his Prisoner Reentry Initiative, in the 2004 State of the Union message
HR 1593’s purpose is to help people who are released from prison and jail to secure the mental health and substance abuse treatment they may need, expand job training and placement services to help them find legitimate jobs, and facilitate housing and case management services. Community and faith-based organizations will join government agencies in providing mentoring and transitional services. All of these types of assistance are intended to help released prisoners adjust to life in the larger society and avoid the activities that so often lead to their return to prison.
A little-noted humanitarian provision of the law creates a pilot program to test the feasibility of releasing non-violent prisoners over age 65, who have behaved well while incarcerated and have served at least ten years in prison.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates the cost of implementing HR 1593 at $400 million for Fiscal Years 2008-2012. The average cost of incarcerating a prisoner for one year is a minimum of $24,000. More than 650,000 inmates return to their communities each year, often with very little transitional assistance and with great odds against their making a successful reentry, given their poverty and societal discrimination against ex-offenders.
Homeland Security
In February the House let the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (HR 3773, FISA) expire, when Republicans insisted the body vote immediately rather than taking time sought by the Democrats to consider changes made to the bill by the Senate earlier that month. President Bush denounced House failure to prevent the expiration of the FISA provisions.
On March 13, the House held its first closed session in 25 years, to allow confidential discussion of classified information. Republicans sought the secret session to present information they thought would persuade opponents of the measure to change their minds.
The next day, however, by a vote of 213-197, the measure was sent back to the Senate, including major changes insisted upon by the House. Among the dissenting votes were every Republican present and twelve Democrats, a mix of conservatives and liberals who opposed the measure for varied reasons. The Senate is unlikely to accept the House changes, leading to further stalemate.
The major source of conflict is a provision in the House bill eliminating legal barriers created by the Administration. These let telecommunications companies use classified information in civil court to defend themselves against charges of illegally cooperating with the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretap program after September 11. Congressional Republicans and the Administration want to give such companies retroactive immunity from prosecution.
The President also wants authority extended indefinitely to order warrantless wiretaps on overseas communications as long as one party to a call is in the United States. Opponents of HR 3773 contend that the President has authority under previous laws to secure warrants for wiretaps and that anything more is excessive and not needed. The President argues that he needs enhanced powers in order to protect the United States from foreign enemies.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Mr. Bush continues to press Congress to reauthorize his No Child Left Behind program which faces opposition from legislators at both state and federal levels. The President wants the law changed to give merit pay to teachers, invest more in private tutors, permit states to move good teachers to poorly performing schools in violation of teachers’ union provisions and include high schools in standardized testing. Such proposals led to failure to reauthorize NCLB last year.
Mr. Bush threatens to make his changes through administrative fiat if Congress rejects his plan. This may not be an empty threat, since law is so loosely written that the Secretary of Education has great latitude to make changes unilaterally.
Observers fear that Secretary Margaret Spellings might take on the issue of merit pay, tying it to student standardized test scores, thereby forcing states to spend heavily on awards for teachers whose students perform especially well. The Secretary could also exercise her relatively free hand to shift funds within the Department of Education budget to achieve Administration goals without congressional approval. State reluctance to keep changing programs would make it difficult for the next President to reverse such initiatives.
Save the Dates
Ecumenical Advocacy Days 2009 takes place March 13-16, 2009, in Washington, D.C. Religious public policy advocates and activists will gather in the Nation’s Capital for worship, issue briefings, workshops, advocacy skills training and lobbying with members of Congress. Updated information will be available on the Ecumenical Advocacy Days Web site. |
