How galunggong and electoral fraud figure
Credit to Author: Mauro Gia Samonte| Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 16:48:00 +0000
In my column on Saturday last week, I happened to mention the issue of the high price of galunggong because the topic for that piece, extortion at the port of San Pascual, Masbate, was similarly placed; that is, a seaport. Metro Manila’s poor and those in the suburbs get their poor man’s viand through the Navotas fishport.
My highly reliable source has expressed deep concern over the fact that galunggong has come to be prohibitively priced. Consumers, according to him, grapple with the price increase of the fish unmatched over the past 10 years.
Quoting the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), my source bemoans the P10-spike in galunggong price per kilo in Metro Manila beginning in June and has since stood at P160 per kilo; in Cebu City, such spike was P50 per kilo or a new price level of P180 per kilo; and in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, the price has risen to P200 per kilo.
In certain far-flung areas, galunggong sells at as high as P300 per kilo — dearer than beef, pork and chicken.
This fact has been admitted by Agriculture Secretary William Dar in his confirmation hearings, where he justified the agency’s importation of some 45,000 tons of round scad (the English term for galunggong). The admission got Sen. Francis Tolentino fuming.
“Exactly 34 days ago, sinabi mo sa budget hearing na 98.5 percent ang ating round scad pero bakit ngayon nag-import na tayo ng galunggong? Tayo pa naman ang may fifth largest shoreline sa mundo (Exactly 34 days ago, you said in the budget hearing that we had a 98.5 percent [sufficiency] in round scud, but why are we importing galunggong now? To think that we have the fifth largest shoreline in the world), Tolentino said.
“Prior to the importation, as of Nov. 27, 2019, the retail price of round scad or galunggong is P220. Pero after the importation, P320 na ang retail price (but after the importation, the retail price became P320. Nagmahal pa ang presyo (The price became even higher),” he added.
This revelation by the senator has a way of opening up the floodgates of the real score in the continuing controversy in Navotas City over charges and counter-charges between Mayor Tobias “Toby” Tiangco and his political opponents. Mayor Tiangco is being accused of maneuvering criminal cases against his rivals in order to rid himself of any opposition.
For sometime now, I have been devoting space to the controversy with a mindset to helping out settle the controversy. As I pointed out in one past column, Navotas City, specially that section of the fishport, is dear to me for it was there that I have had rich occasions of preaching revolutionary thoughts to the toiling Navotas folks. And I was glad when a good old friend from the Jejomar “Jojo” Binay presidential campaign sought me out to intercede somehow in having the mayor’s side in the controversy fairly ventilated.
But the controversy just pushes on. Accusations of electoral frauds in connection both with the 2016 elections and the 2019 midterm elections continue to hound Mayor Tiangco’s men, who retaliate with alleged trumped up criminal cases filed against them with express blessing by the city executive.
The legal camp of those whom Tiangco allegedly maneuvered to be criminally hailed in court has farmed out to the media what is called “Executive Summary” of cases allegedly funded by “Tobias M. Tiangco and John Reynaldo M. Tiangco.”
One case is docketed as “Bucatcat v. Prades, et al., NPS Docket No. XV-11-INV- 00333, Office of the City Prosecutor, City of Navotas, Unlawful Arrest under Article 269, Revised Penal Code.”
According to the document provided, Bucatcat, a Tiangco supporter, admitted to committing the act of vote-buying upon apprehension by the police at the initiative of respondents. The prosecutor ruled that respondents could not be held liable for unlawful arrest; it was the Philippine National Police-Maritime Group (PNP-MG) that made the arrest.
Another case is docketed as “People v. George So, Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC), Branch 118, City of Navotas, Criminal Case No. 19-21103, Slight Physical Injuries under Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code.”
The document provided tells of a private complainant, one Salvacion Flores, an official of Barangay San Rafael attending to Senior Citizens’ concerns, accusing respondent So of harming her physically. The court convicted So, but his counsel issues the opinion that with the complainant having never provided proof of the offense other than mere allegations be it by her or by her sole witness, the respondent may not be held liable for slight physical injuries under Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code.
In a third case, People v. Danilo C. Ang, MTC Branch 119, City of Navotas, respondent Ang, a political rival of Tiangco, had been charged with Slight Physical Injuries under Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code for accosting a Tiangco supporter, private complainant Roderick R. Bernal, over alleged vote-buying and inflicting harm on him. The court found Ang guilty, a verdict that the defense counsel, who prepared the above-cited executive summary, called erroneous.
“It must be emphasized that Ang merely accosted Bernal as regards the alleged vote-buying incident. There was nothing illegal in said act. It was a valid exercise of Ang’s rights as a citizen, and an effort to preserve the integrity of the 2016 elections,” said the lawyer.
Comes now this controversy in San Pascual, Masbate, whereby a legitimate missionary route by Star Horse Shipping Lines is being given all legal hurdles by the town’s executive.
Why, because he wants to gain all for himself the benefits from control of his turf.
The situation in Navotas cannot be any different. No city executive would wish to let go of the many gains he already has in his command. What are those gains?
Senator Tolentino has given us the clue when he fumed at Secretary Dar’s admission of importation of 45,000 tons of galunggong and yet the fish exorbitantly costing P320 per kilo thereafter.
The senator had not gone as far as condemning the importation of galunggong as the primary reason for the decline of local fish production — that is, fishing by local fishermen.
Ultimately that should lead to the impoverishment of Philippine fisherfolk. And with galunggong being rated now as the prime inflation pace setter, the real evil in Navotas ultimately rears its ugly head.
Unavoidably, such importation must be coursed through the main fish port of the metropolis, which is Navotas. If only for the fortunes realizable from the commerce of galunggong, Navotas should be a prime bone of contention for warring political factions.
All the more so if you own not only the vessels used to import the fish but the fish importing business, too, in fact. You would never wish to let go.