Thursday, October 28, 2010

PUBLIC SERVANT: to enrich or not to enrich?


Recently, a group filed a report on Mikey Arroyo’s assets, which were not included in his Statement of Assets and Liabilities and Net Worth. His failure to declare his properties opened a can of worms which placed him under fire. This seemed to conceal, intentionally, a large increase in his net worth since 2002. These properties include a $1.32-million California which he said he transferred to a private corporation, which reports revealed its non-existence, and whose shareholders, he declined to identify. Also under fire is about the dramatic rise in his income from P5 million in 2002 to P99 million. 

When asked, he said he received these as wedding gifts and donations to his congressional campaigns. Again, he declined to identify his benefactors. All these confusions he said was due to his misunderstanding of the requirements in filing the declaration.  He insisted there was nothing illegal in his actions. 

These improprieties led to some questions on ‘palakasan’ system, the political hierarchy is notoriously famous for. Because he is the son of the President of the Republic, the Speaker of the House quickly absolved him. The action is understandable. It is common knowledge that the presidential son worked hard to install him. And this is a clear returning a favor: “utang na loob”.

What comes to mind is the seemingly importance of cover-up over honesty. The recent actions of the presidential son point to graft and corruption or ill-gotten wealth. To control such practice, there ‘oughta be a law’ on what kind of gifts to receive by a public servant, the amount they should receive, identify who gave these gifts, and who received the gifts.  With this law, transparency will not be sacrificed and ignorance of the law will not be used as an excuse in perpetuating a crime, especially if the person involved is a high-profile public servant, or even a Presidential Son.  

No comments:

Post a Comment