Let’s use more ferryboats and trains

As I See It
By Neal H. Cruz
Philippine Daily Inquirer

The Pasig River ferryboat is sailing again, thanks to Metropolitan Manila Development Authority Chair Francis Tolentino. It resumed cruising up and down the Pasig last Monday, giving commuters free rides.

The ferryboat provides a fast ride to people commuting to and from the cities beside the river. Some commuters said it took them only 28 minutes to travel from Makati to Pasig—a trip that takes from one to two hours by land.

Everything should be fine with traveling by ferryboat except for one thing: the stink of the river. It was one of the factors that had earlier driven commuters away, causing the shutdown of the service. It may do so again.

But the stink should be easy to remedy. The present ferryboat consists of the body of an old bus placed on board a barge that cruises up and down the river. Simply air-conditioning the bus ought to do the trick.

What about the sight of floating garbage and squatters’ shanties on the riverbanks and under the bridges? Install a television set on board to distract the passengers from the passing scenery.

But things should not stop there. The national government and the local government units—not only the MMDA and the Department of Transportation and Communications—should work together to clean up the river and relocate the squatters. Most of the garbage comes from the squatters who just throw their waste out of the windows of their shanties. Just relocating the squatters should prevent much of the garbage pollution in the river.

Then more ferry stations should be built. At present, there are only four stations—in the cities of Manila, Makati, Mandaluyong and Pasig. How will the commuters get to the ferry and to their final destinations if there are only a few stations along the way?

Later the ferry service can be extended to the towns and barangays on the shores of Laguna Lake. This will make travel to the isolated towns and barangays of Rizal and Laguna easier and faster. Right now commuters have to take long, circuitous and expensive routes by land to get to these towns and barangays (some of them are not even accessible by land).

The government should subsidize the ferryboat operations in the beginning to keep fares low and encourage commuters, in the same way it is subsidizing the light rail transit operations. Fares can be increased once the ferryboat becomes popular.

Why shouldn’t it be popular once the river is cleaned up and the ugly sights removed? The trip would be not only faster but also cool and relaxing, in contrast to the cramped rides in jeepneys and buses crawling on the crowded streets of Metro Manila.

Our country is surrounded by water, and it is surprising that the government is not promoting the use of ferryboats. Rivers and esteros were our primary routes of transportation before the Americans seduced us into using—and buying from them—more land vehicles on very few roads. We have ships and roll-on/roll-off (Ro-Ros) boats sailing to various islands, but we have no ferryboats to take passengers from barangay to barangay along the seashores. Travel to these isolated barangays by water would be faster, easier, and cheaper than the circuitous routes by land.

Many maritime countries in the world make maximum use of ferryboats, including European and American cities with extensive river systems. But the Philippine government, the DOTC, and local government officials are not promoting the use of ferryboats here.

When I covered President Diosdado Macapagal’s reelection campaign, we traveled mostly by Navy ships. From the ships, we boarded rubber boats that took us to shore, then we walked to the center of the barrio where Macapagal made his campaign speeches. Thus, he was able to reach more people, many of whom had never before seen a visiting president.

There used to be a ferryboat that daily plied the route from Manila to Cavite City and back every day. We used to take this ferry in the late afternoon or early evening just to relax and enjoy the sea breeze as well as the famous Manila Bay sunset. There were ice-cold beer and snacks on board. In Cavite City, we would look around and go shopping before boarding the same ferry back to Manila. The sight of Manila’s skyline with all the lights on in the evening is something rarely enjoyed by Filipinos.

For some strange reason the ferry operation was abandoned, and now the government is going to build a very expensive light rail transit from Manila to Cavite.

Elevated light trains have been very successful in Metro Manila because they travel much faster than the buses and jeepneys below. The trouble is that they have become so popular that the government and its private partners cannot keep up with the demand. Passengers are packed worse than sardines in the trains and have to wait in long lines just to be able to go up to the platforms. Waiting in line takes much, much longer than the trip itself. The government is buying more trains, but because of red tape and losing bidders taking the government and winning bidders to court, the first of the new trains won’t be here until next year.

There is one more public transport system that we have neglected—the train and the Philippine National Railroad. In all developed countries, the train is the most efficient and cheapest means of transportation. But successive Philippine administrations have neglected the PNR. We used to have a train line from San Fernando, La Union, to Legazpi, Albay. Not anymore. Now the PNR can go only until Quezon.
Read more: http://opinion.inquirer.net/74112/lets-use-more-ferryboats-and-trains#ixzz30WcuFDPM 

Obama returns from Asia with a mixed bag

Manila Times Online

Now that President Barack Obama has returned from a weeklong trip to Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and the Philippines, it’s time to assess what he achieved.

He traveled there to underscore his 2-year-old “pivot to Asia” policy, part of which recognizes the growing weight of Asian countries in terms of two-way trade and investment opportunities for the United States. As part of that focus, Mr. Obama should pay most attention to U.S.-Chinese relations, given the two countries’ sales to and investments in each other and given America’s multi-trillion-dollar debt to China.

The fact that he went to four other countries, including China rivals Japan and South Korea, is an ambivalent “plus,” although Mr. Obama has been assiduous and realistic in his attention to China and its leaders. One of his objectives was to promote the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal which would involve seven Asian and five North and South American nations. If approved by the Senate, a doubtful prospect, it would reduce tariff barriers in the participant nations. Whether it is or is not to America’s advantage depends on who agrees to what, a still-opaque calculation.

Obama made no visible progress on the pact during this trip, unless private talks achieved results that will be revealed later.

The president handed out some gifts along the way, however. To Japan he pledged U.S. support in its dispute with China over some uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that China and Japan both claim. In South Korea he stood alongside a president and a government being severely criticized for the loss of a ferry boat with hundreds of passengers. In Malaysia he soothed a government that has dealt ineptly with the disappearance of Flight 370 and its 200-plus passengers. In the Philippines, Obama signed a 10-year agreement allowing for increased U.S. military equipment, training and presence there.

Whether the trip was worth it depends as much on what Obama gave away as what he received.

The U.S. guarantee of the Japanese position on the disputed islands may pose problems down the road. The wise U.S. course is right in the middle, urging negotiations by China and Japan. The value to the United States of more access to Philippine bases, as they also quarrel with the Chinese, is also dubious. And, as far as his consoling the South Koreans and Malaysians, he didn’t need to be there to do that.

MCT

Obama: US committed to defend Philippines

By Louis Bacani and Alexis Romero 

The Philippine Star

President Barack Obama addresses U.S. and Philippine troops at Fort Bonifacio in Manila, Philippines, Tuesday, April 29, 2014. Obama is wrapping up his four country eight day tour of Asia. AP Photo/Charles Dharapak

MANILA, Philippines — Saying nations’ territories must be respected, President Barack Obama vowed on Tuesday that the United States will remain committed to defend its treaty ally, the Philippines.

Speaking to about 500 American and Filipino troops in Fort Bonifacio, Obama said the two nations are reaffirming their enduring alliance that has been bound by the Mutual Defense Treaty for more than 60 years.

“This treaty means our two nations pledge and I’m quoting ‘Our common determination to defend themselves against external armed attacks so that no potential aggressor could be under the illusion that either of them stands alone,’ Obama said in his remarks delivered at Fort Bonifacio in Taguig.

“In other words, our commitment to defend the Philippines is ironclad. And the United States will keep that commitment ’cause allies do not stand alone,” the American leader added, drawing applause from the audience.

Obama made no mention of China in his short speech, but he did reiterate that the territorial disputes must be resolved peacefully and not by intimidation or force.

“We believe that nations and peoples have the right to live in security and peace and have their sovereignty and territorial integrity respected. We believe that international law must be upheld, that freedom of navigation must be preserved, and commerce must not be impeded,” Obama said.

His remarks came after failing to categorically assure in a press conference on Monday that the US will defend the Philippines if and when the tensions in the disputed South China Sea escalate into an armed conflict.

When asked Monday whether the US will defend the Philippines in case its dispute with China leads to an armed conflict, Obama did not give a direct answer, stating instead that Washington does not seek to contain Beijing.

He added that the US does not take sides on disputes between nations but believes that these should not be managed through coercion and intimidation.

Obama echoed similar lines in his remarks as he noted the importance of upholding territorial integrity and freedom of navigation.

Obama has said that the US is not aiming to counter nor contain China, which is claiming virtually the entire South China Sea.

Taking advantage of the Philippines’ weak military capability, Beijing has occupied areas that are well within Manila’s exclusive economic zone including the Panganiban (Mischief) Reef off Palawan and Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal off Zambales.

China has also set up a blockade in Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal to prevent supplies from reaching a grounded ship that serves as a Philippine military installation.

The Philippines has filed a complaint against China before an international arbitral tribunal, a move that has drawn support from the US.

The US and the Philippines on Monday signed the 10-year Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, allowing increased rotational presence of American soldiers in the country.

Areas of cooperation

Former President Fidel Ramos, who was present when Obama delivered his remarks, said the Philippines should seek collaborations with China on issues like disaster mitigation and poverty.

He said nations should work together to address common problems instead of engaging in bickering.

“Who is the enemy here? Is it us against them or them against us? No, the enemy here is climate change, super typhoons, infectious diseases, poverty, hunger, lack of electricity, lack of jobs. That should be our focus,” Ramos said.

“Let us gather all our assets we use for building up lethal weapons and defenses and use them to fight poverty, disease hunger, and ignorance. (We should) take care of the young people,” he added.

Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, a former soldier, said Obama’s remarks should not be construed as referring to the West Philippine Sea row.

“We have to take that away in the context of the territorial dispute because they (US) are also very clear in that regard that they are not going to intervene in territorial disputes so we have to deal with the dispute ourselves,” Trillanes said.

“They (US) are not at war with China. They are dealing with China and strengthening their alliance with us so we can do the same. We can have a strong ally with the United States and deal with China in a more friendly way,” he added.

http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2014/04/29/1317422/obama-us-committed-defend-philippines

Obama in the Philippines: ‘Our Goal Is Not to Contain China’

By Emily Rauhala   

TIME Magazine

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks during a bilateral press conference with Philippine President Benigno Aquino at Malacañang Palace in Manila on April 28, 2014 Jim Watson—AFP/Getty Images

The Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement took eight months to negotiate but mere days to anger Beijing, which sees U.S. involvement in East Asia as interference despite President Obama’s insistence the goal is not to “contain” China

This is not about China. That has been the theme of Barack Obama’s four-nation trip to East Asia. Yet China loomed large over stops in Japan, South Korea and Malaysia. And in the Philippines today, China was front and center.

On Monday morning, local time, the U.S. and the Philippines signed a 10-year pact that will give U.S. planes, warships and troops more access to the archipelagic nation. The U.S. will not re-establish a permanent base, but will rotate troops through. The deal, officially called the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, took eight months of negotiation, and gives some substance to the Obama Administration’s “pivot” to Asia.

At a joint press conference in Manila, President Obama insisted the deal was not about thwarting China’s rise. “Our goal is not to counter China. Our goal is not to contain China. Our goal is to make sure international rules and norms are respected, and that includes in the area of international disputes,” he said.

His counterpart, President Benigno S. Aquino III, said the agreement was about deepening U.S.-Philippine ties and would promote “regional peace and security.”

China begs to differ. Locked in territorial disputes with the Philippines, Japan and others, Beijing sees U.S. involvement in East Asia as unwelcome interference. In an editorial published less than an hour after the agreement was officially signed, state-backed newswire Xinhua blasted the pact, calling the Philippines a “troublemaker in the South China Sea” and warning the U.S. that its plans may backfire.

“Given that the Philippines is at a bitter territorial row with China, the move is particularly disturbing as it may embolden Manila in dealing with Beijing,” it read.

The agreement is no less contentious within the Philippines. The country has a long and complicated history with the U.S., particularly the U.S. armed forces. The Philippines spent 300 years as a Spanish colony before being “liberated” by the U.S. in 1898. What followed was a brutal Philippine-American War and the U.S. colonization of the islands. When the Philippines became independent in 1945, the Americans left behind massive military bases — and with them a well-documented legacy of rights abuses and environmental problems.

More than a decade of antimilitary activism led to the closure, in 1992, of U.S. bases. But the Americans never fully withdrew. U.S. forces have maintained a small but continuous presence, conducting training exercises and, since 2002, antiterrorist operations as part of the so-called global war on terror. For a dedicated block of activists, the fact that the U.S. military still has boots on the ground is tantamount to neocolonialism. Some staged protests outside the U.S. embassy in Manila last week.

“I think people are angry that this was negotiated behind close doors and made public after it was signed,” says Alex Magno, former professor of political of science at the University of the Philippines, now a political commenter for the Philippine Star. “It is being sold to the public as an enhancement of our national defense [but] Obama tries to tone down that expectation by saying that it is not America’s role to counter China.”

The deal is also under fire from Filipino politicians who see it as a hasty and counterproductive turnaround. In an email reply to questions from TIME, Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago blasted the government for signing the pact without input from the Senate and questioned the logic behind the agreement. “The U.S. should not continue to treat [the Philippines] as a satellite state, while aiming to remain on good terms with China,” she wrote. “America cannot have it both ways.”

Since his election in 2010, President Aquino has alternated between reassuring and castigating Beijing. In a 2012 interview, Aquino told TIME that U.S. military aid “helps us address our needs without giving [our neighbors] any sense of added nervousness.” (One of the unnamed neighbors, of course, was China.) He has since become more direct: in a February interview with the New York Times, Aquino compared his country’s plight with the West’s failure to protect Czechoslovakia in 1938 when Hitler demanded land. “At what point do you say, ‘Enough is enough?’” he asked.

At the press conference in Manila on Monday, Aquino once again spoke softly, noting, among other things, that his country does not have a single fighter jet. But he said it with President Obama at his side — a fact that will not be lost on Beijing.

http://time.com/78779/obama-philippines-china/

Tribesmen celebrate govt troops pullout in Davao

by AL JACINTO
SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
The Manila Times

ZAMBOANGA CITY: Tribesmen on Thursday celebrated the pullout of government troops from Davao del Norte’s Talaingod town and praised all those who supported their plight at the height of military offensive against communist rebels in the area.

More than 1,000 tribesmen have fled the town and sought safe refuge with the United Church of Christ in the Philippines in Davao City. Many indigenous villagers have accused the soldiers of harassing them and some even tagged them as members of the rebel group New People’s Army.

They said soldiers put up encampments in civilian communities and public infrastructures, including schools and government buildings. The pullout of troops from at least 11 areas in the town was an offshoot of negotiations initiated by Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte and Davao del Norte Gov. Rodolfo del Rosario.

Del Rosario recently sent a truckload of rice and canned goods for the refugees in Davao City to convince them to return to Talaingod.

The indigenous group Salug–pongan ‘Ta Tanu Ig Kanugon and PASAKA which assisted the refugees thanked all those who supported and sympathized with them in their plight. The indigenous groups celebrated what they considered as “gains” that they have won after almost a month at the evacuation camp provided by the UCCP.

Del Rosario also said that the refugees would be given relief goods and medicines before they return to their respective villages in Talaingod.

Datu Doloman Dawsay of Salugpongan ‘Ta Tanu Ig Kanugon said they will all remain vigilant despite the pull out of troops.

“We gained this victory because we are united. The abuses of the military would not have been exposed if we did not fight. We became victorious because we are militant. The military and their cohorts are really determined to discredit and divide us, but we remain strong. They fabricated a lot of lies just to hide their abuses.”

“They accused us of being NPA to cover-up their crimes against our people. The truth will not come out if we had allowed ourselves to be captive by the military,” he said.

The group Exodus for Justice and Peace (EJP) also vowed to continue monitoring the areas and the evacuees when they return home.

EJP also warned the military not to retaliate against the leaders and communities that protested their abuses citing various cases in Agusan and Compostela Valley provinces where troops allegedly harassed indigenous leaders who exposed military abuses.

“We are happy that the lumads can now go back to their community,” said EJP’s Pastor Jurie Jaime.
The support group of the Manobos, Defend Talaingod Save Pantaron Range, also said: “The pull out of the military forces in the area is just an initial victory just so the refugees can go back to their homes. But this is just the beginning; the soldiers involved in abusing these people should still be held accountable.”

Second Thomas Shoal: The New Battleground

The Second Thomas Shoal is the new flashpoint in the South China Sea. Solving it is vital for the region and the world.

By Darshana M. Baruah
The Diplomat 

Last month China prevented two Philippine boats from reaching the Second Thomas Shoal, claiming that Manila was trying to build structures on the reef in an attempt to fortify its claim. In 1999, the Philippine navy ship BRP Sierra Madre – a former U.S. tank landing vessel – ran aground the shoal and has been since stationed there ever since with a handful of Filipino marines to enforce the Philippines’ claim to the reef. The shoal lies within Manila’s 200 nautical miles Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) but is also claimed by Beijing. The presence of the Sierra Madre and the soldiers aboard is part of Manila’s larger strategy in the South China Sea to protect its contested maritime territories.

While the Scarborough Shoal incident drew international attention in 2012, the Second Thomas Shoal is the new flashpoint in the South China Sea (SCS). The region is becoming a maritime hotspot with Beijing engaging in territorial disputes with four ASEAN nations. Beijing claims most of the sea as its territory with Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also having overlapping claims in the area. China is the largest party and has been engaged in growing provocations, which are being vehemently opposed by the Philippines and Vietnam – who are seeking the presence of external actors to counter Beijing.

China is becoming increasingly assertive in its claims and its recent move to block Philippine boats carrying supplies to their troops stationed in the Second Thomas Shoal is indicative of this trend. Supporting Manila in its protests, Washington said that the blockade is a “provocative move that raises tensions,” calling for all parties to maintain status quo. With growing international attention to the region and the U.S. rebalance, the Philippines has been increasingly vocal about its ongoing dispute with China. Meanwhile, China’s aggressive and assertive behavior in both the East and South China Sea is hampering Beijing’s relationship with its neighbors.

While Beijing’s assertiveness in the region is not a new phenomenon, its attempt- if any- to occupy the Second Thomas Shoal will have serious consequences for Asia. As noted, Washington has been increasingly vocal in opposing Chinese actions in the region and is likely to extend its support and influence against Chinese attempts to seize the Second Thomas Shoal. This will also create panic and tension amongst the other claimants to the South China Sea, creating mistrust between governments and a greater potential for confrontations in the waters of the South China Sea.

Manila is worried that Beijing will repeat the Scarborough Shoal fiasco all over again, wherein the Philippines withdrew its forces to ease tension while China continued to maintain its vessels in the region, treating the shoal as its territory. However, the scenario is much different this time around as any attempt by China to occupy the Second Thomas Shoal will run up against the Philippine Marines stationed on the Sierra Madre. Thus, Beijing would have to remove the Filipino soldiers either by force or by intimidation as Manila has resolved to fight “up to the last standing soldier.”

Further complicating the situation is China’s adamant refusal to engage with the other claimants to the South China Sea at an international/multilateral forum. In an effort to force China’s hand on the matter, in January 2013 the Philippines approached an international tribunal under the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) to submit the dispute for resolution. Although Beijing has refused to participate at the tribunal, the Philippines is continuing the process and recently submitted its memorial to the court. China argues that there are no territorial disputes in the South China Sea and all of its claims are legal. Hence, it argues it does not have to participate in any international forum. At the same time, China seeks to appear conciliatory be expressing a willingness to discuss the disputes bilaterally with each party, where Chinese power would be at its greater. The Philippines, on the other hand, does not want to be seated alone against its powerful neighbor and therefore seeks to discuss the issues in multilateral forums.

Even if the UN court rules in favor of Manila, it will not have a binding effect on China. However, it will strengthen the Philippines’ position by grounding it in international law, and putting China in a negative spotlight. This could also set a precedent for other claimants to the South China Sea who would have a renewed incentive to bring their own disputes with China to international arbitrators.

In the meantime, China is unlikely to stop patrolling the waters near the Second Thomas Shoal. While the Philippines air dropped the supplies to its troops the first time around and dodged Chinese vessels the second time, it cannot continue to avoid and escape Beijing’s maritime vessels. Manila will have to continue shipping supplies to the Marines so they can maintain their outpost. Each time the Philippines does so now carries the risk of a miscalculation leading to a conflict between the two countries. The problem however is that a conflict between the two nations won’t be limited to their respective militaries or even the region. The South China Sea is a vital international trade route affecting countless countries around the globe.

While most other nations put forth their concerns regarding freedom of navigation in the area, China is prompt in its response that it will never affect the innocent passage of ships. However it is not just about the passage of trade vessels, the question is about one country controlling very important waters where no military reconnaissance will be allowed. It is in global interest to keep the region free of conflict.

In the face of strong opposition from the Philippines and an assertive China, ASEAN as a community must speak with a single voice in helping to resolve the matter. As four ASEAN countries continue to clash with China over the South China Sea, it is becoming increasingly important for a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. While ASEAN is not a silver bullet for solving the various territorial disputes, it definitely has the potential to facilitate dialogue with China. It must seize this opportunity or risk living with the consequences of failing to do so. These consequences will shake the world.

Darshana M. Baruah is a Junior Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation (ORF) and the Associate Editor of the ORF South China Sea Monitor.

http://thediplomat.com/2014/04/second-thomas-shoal-the-new-battleground/

Dad wants dismissed PMA cadet to begin new life

By Dharel Placido, ABS-CBNnews.com

MANILA – The father of dismissed Philippine Military Academy (PMA) cadet Aldrin Jeff Cudia wants his son to forget his dreams of joining the military and join the private sector instead.

Renato Cudia, however, said his son cannot do this unless the PMA gives his son his transcript of records and diploma, which he needs to either get a job in the private sector or pursue different studies.

''Hindi lang siya fully maka-move on dahil kumbaga naka floating siya dahil ang kanyang transcript of records ay may 'granted indefinite leave' although 'di kami nagrequest,'' Renato told ABS-CBN News' "Umagang Kay Ganda."

''Hindi siya pwedeng maka-graduate. Hindi pwedeng maka-enrol sa ibang school kung gusto niya mag-aral ulit at hindi siya makahanap ng trabaho."

The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) on Wednesday released its final report on Cudia's case. Cudia was dismissed from the country's premiere military academy after being found guilty of lying about the reason why he was late for a class.

Every cadet is bound by the Honor Code, which states cadets ''do not lie, cheat, steal or tolerate those among them who do so."

CHR chair Etta Rosales, however, said it was Cudia's tactical officer, Major Dennis Hindang, who ascribed malice to Cudia's statement "by substituting his own bias to the explanations provided by Ms. Costales (the instructor) and Cadet Cudia, thereby paving the way for an unjustified referral to the Honor Committee."

Cudia was earlier reported to have said that he got late for his next class because he was asked by his instructor in the previous class to wait for the section's grade.

The CHR said it was not Cudia's intention to lie to or deceive his peers and superiors at the military academy.

'Sham trial'

The decision to dismiss Cudia was handed down by members of the Honor Committee, composed of PMA cadets.

The CHR concluded that there had been deliberate efforts to prevent Cudia from graduating from the PMA and receive his honors for his academic performance.

The CHR findings revealed that a member of the Honor Committee who participated in the trial of Cadet Cudia had a vested interest in the result of the case.

According to CHR, Cadet First Class Noel Raguindin ranked second to Cudia in the Navy class. Therefore, should Cudia be dropped from the rolls, Raguindin would automatically occupy his position in the class standing.

The commission said Raguindin’s participation was questionable due to conflict of interest.

The CHR report also noted that the Honor Committee's chair, Cadet First Class Mike Mogol, had been bent on removing Cudia. It noted that prior to the lying allegation, Mogol had filed an honor violation against Cudia for cheating. The cheating charge was eventually dismissed.

The CHR also criticized the Honor Committee for supposedly rigging the voting process that led to Cudia's dismissal. It said the members of the committee initially voted 8-1 (guilty-not guilty), but later forced the lone ''not guilty'' voter to change his vote.

It is a rule that a cadet charged with honor violation may only be kicked out of the academy through a unanimous vote.

''The Honor Committee proceeding, particularly the voting process, was a sham trial. Without doubt, there was only one voting conducted which yielded an 8-1 vote which was announced by the Committee,'' Rosales said.

Based on its findings, the CHR deemed that the PMA should reverse the ruling of the Honor Committee on the Cudia case and give the cadet his status as a graduate of the PMA.

Rosales said the PMA leadership, by failing to exercise command responsibility, ''rendered itself complicit in this mockery of justice."

The CHR said it will look into the criminal, administrative and civil suits that may be filed against the people who supposedly violated laws during the process that resulted in Cudia's dismissal.

It said apart from the right to due process, Cudia's right to private communication was also violated. This, after Cudia discovered a recording device taped on the wall of the room adjacent to his room at the PMA holding area.

The CHR also called for a review of the implementation of the Honor Code and the passage of a law against ostracism and discrimination.

Renato said President Benigno Aquino III, being the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, can overturn the Honor Committee ruling, but he also acknowledged that it would be hard for the president to confront institutions such as the PMA and AFP.

''Nalalagay siya (Aquino) sa alanganin dahil sa bagay na ito… Pero sana maawa naman siya at tuldukan ang bagay na ito para para maka-move on na ang aming anak."