Thursday, August 16, 2012
A rude awakening...
ADVISORY:
Just had a phone meeting with Mario Umbao Gaudiano, Head of the ICC on Helmet Program and Specialist Product Manager of the BPS under the DTI.
I have just confirmed the "alleged" meeting with the DOTC, LTO, MMDA, MCPF and another undeclared party with him and the program being "arranged" in Antipolo for August 18.
Here is what we talked about:
1. The meeting took place and a lot of questions were raised... There was another party in the meeting which was not included in the announcements made... Why? I don't really know and honestly, I don't really care... A lot of questions were thrown around and a lot of advise coming from the DTI as to the issues facing the riders in the stickering program and the upcoming street level apprehensions... All they (the undeclared party) can utter is, "what can we do, the law has been passed... Whats left is for us to TRY and make amendments to it..." I would say, since you have made this law, instead of passing blame to others when you could have fixed it prior to it's approval, is spearhead its amendment... If you can't or wont, then we will fix the mess you left for us...
2. As far as enforcement on street level is concerned, the discussion led to, the LTO does not need to issue any directive or deputation to any of the enforcement agency (MMDA, LGU and PNP) for them to conduct their own operation... The issue with this is, since the law has many TECHNICAL PROBLEMS, the enforcement can misinterpret or use their own interpretation to apprehend riders... A means to corruption on the streets and pass the burden to the riders as stated in our fears and worst expectations... DTI is asking LTO and the other agencies to setup guidelines on what is required on the streets as the ICC sticker should only serve as the guideline for the consumer and not the enforcer... This way, the consumers are protected from the worst on street level... I told him that it may not be enough that the amendment is the absolute solution... All we need to do is to make it happen and support what needs to happen...
3. There are no arrangements, no MOA's, no joint forces or agreements between the DTI and any other group except the other government agencies involved in this act... So anything announced, is something that DTI has been conducting and doing from the get go... The stickers and forms are free since this all started... The offer to serve groups, organizations, NGO's and private companies with 30 riders/helmets or more is something they came up on their own and had been doing before some announcements were made claiming it as their project or saying that it is "courtesy of..." MRO's announcement on August 2 in regard to this is clear that this was instigated by the DTI and they reached out to us for help and cooperation which we gladly agreed to in service of the community... NOT TO TAKE CREDIT FROM WHERE IT IS DUE...
4. That there are things that has yet to be coordinated properly, but should always be coursed through the DTI so that nobody is misquoted, misinterpreted and misrepresented... In fairness to the others, there is a program on August 18 in Antipolo as announced only verbally late yesterday, but no paperwork has been made and no notice given to the DTI branch in Antipolo as of this morning...
5. That prior to making such statements or announcements, we should be sure of what we promise people before things go sour and things become ill gotten... It is so easy to say that they announced it without coordination and planning if this was to push through or not and now, they are trying to rush the departments who had offered this program to them like it was offered to us... That program in which they are claiming as their own and making it FREE for their co-federation members only...
6. That it is sad to see how something that DTI had given to the people on their own accord is being claimed by others and is even being promulgated as "courtesy of" the said parties taking recognition from those UN-aware... That this will be brought up with the Director of the BPS and the Under Secretary of the DTI on how they were not shown due respect with these acts of hypocrisy from the very people who have been attacking the other groups because of their (candidly announced) intention to run for office and yet, they allow this ka-EPAL-an to happen... And when I say "allow", I mean it by giving them the benefit of the doubt that they did not instigate or is not part of any of this pre-marking of DTI's form for the stickering of helmets...
With that said, I hope, for their sake, that they only made a mistake in their statements (which the followup posts clearly shows otherwise) and make the necessary corrections and give back credit to where it is due... The DTI only means to help the people and protect the consumer... However, since they are only the implementing body of the LAW, the people behind the said ACT should have made efforts to help protect the riders that they CLAIM to represent instead of making it look like they are CLAIMING CREDIT for what DTI has been doing for us...
And what makes it more intriguing is the fact that they announced that they will put a stop to the stickering through the DOJ and now, they admit that they cannot do anything about what they have started in the first place... That they have even resorted to pointing fingers at other people that, if they only paid attention to and listened to the warnings of others, could have been avoided prior to the passage of the LAW...
It is truly funny how all of this works...
All this could have been avoided if only they PAID ATTENTION and put the people's interest before their own that has looked like it only fed their EGO...
Thursday, August 9, 2012
MRO/MAP EAST (MARIKINA) RELIEF OPERATIONS - AUGUST 9, @ 10AM onwards...
THE DELAYED EAST (MARIKINA) RELIEF OPERATIONS WILL TENTATIVELY RESUME TOMORROW @ 10:00AM, AUGUST 9, IF WEATHER PERMITS...
We need to watch over the weather condition as we have been delayed by today's mis-interpretation of the weather...
Let us not allow this to stop us from what we intended to do today...
I will be announcing the go or hold signal before 9:30AM... If you can do self assessment, feel free to proceed to the site as soon as you can... Otherwise, please watch for announcement here... If in case the weather is bad, but you made it to the site, My mom's house is only a corner away (SEE MAP) and I will be there the whole day... Feel free to come over...
Collection of Relief goods for the East Side (For Marikina and San Mateo hit areas) is now activated.
All those closer to Marikina may join us or contribute in the operations to provide help for the people hit near the Marikina River and other low level areas hit hard by flood waters.
Collection and packing area will be at the Sta. Teresita Village Covered Basketball Court at AGOHO ST.
Please see the map...
We would also like to ask those who can contribute for the operations. We need:
Clothes (for all ages)
Blankets
Towels
Food (ready to eat, canned goods, rice, bread)
Drinking Water
Coffee
Medicine
Toiletries (soap, toothbrush, toothpaste, alcohol)
Infants food and milk
Any financial support received will be used to buy more relief goods @ South Supermarket which is just behind the site of the operations.
We shall start the collection @ 10:00 AM, August 9 (IF WEATHER PERMITS) and the packing will commence as soon as we have enough collected.
We need volunteers!!!
We also need:
A vehicle to bring the collected items after the packing
Chairs and tables
Hot water pot
Coffee
Drinking water
Extension cords
LETS MOVE NOW PEOPLE!!! You may text me @ 09217754388 if you need assistance on how to get there...
If you are unable to go, we would appreciate if you can pass, like, link, share this to make it viral... Thank you!!!
Friday, August 3, 2012
No ex post facto law shall be enacted... NOT!!!
Let me go back to the why... The law states that if your helmet does not have the appropriate marking, then anybody who USES will be fined... Therefore, this came about during the creation of the law... Not during it's implementation as it was the law that tasked DTI that the helmet carry the PS or ICC mark for compliance...
The DTI's job is to enforce the law onto the importers, dealers and sellers... However, because of the time they were given, the law did not take into account the helmet life span...
Let me explain... If the law stated that by a certain date (August 1 kunware) all helmets should be of standard, then everything being used should be of standard... If not, either you replace your helmet or you risk apprehension... The law was approved in 2010, the IRR was released Jan 2012... Jan to August is roughly 6 - 7 months... What if, I bought my helmet the day before the release of the IRR? Does it disqualify my helmet automatically because it had no markings on it? When was the requirement for markings specified? This part alone already violates Bill of Rights, Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
Ex post facto literally means “from something done afterward...” Note four categories of ex post facto laws: 1) laws that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, and punishes such action, 2) Laws that aggravate a crime, or makes it greater than it was when committed, 3) laws that change the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law attached to the crime when it was committed, and 4) laws that alter the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender.
So, if I bought my helmet the day before the helmet law was set in motion with the IRR, I should be exempt from the law itself... Otherwise, the ex post facto law is violated...
What should have happened is this:
Then on street level, the standard marking that the helmet has should be the check and balance and not the ICC sticker... Standard markings can be anything from SNELL, DOT, ECE, TIS, JIS and other internationally known standards...
Now, since the adopted standard is specific to ECE, the other standards, even those higher, becomes at fault because the standard is "SPECIFIC" rather than "ECE 22.05, it's accepted equivalents or higher standards..." To make the law more consumer and economic friendly, they should have unspecified the standard since standards such as TIS and DOT is being allowed as we speak...
Therefore, the specifics of the term "USES" made it a prerequisite on the end user as well... And the only way to rid the law of its violation of the ex post facto law in the Bill of Rights is to allow everybody the chance to get their helmets compliant to that prerequisite of having the PS or ICC marking...
So again, the law is the root cause of the problem... DTI tried to do damage control... Just like how the move of the federation and Sen. Bong Revilla to stop DTI from issuing stickers is branded the same... DAMAGE CONTROL...
Now that we have specified where the law has technically failed, the only way to save it, is to have the said provisions amended, allow the newly purchased helmets prior to the effective date of the law run it's homologation course of 5 years before stopping every rider and checking if his helmet does pass the regulations or standard...
Irregardless, the Helmet Act should have started from the importation up to the store level only... And just kept the use of helmets to the use of "MOTORCYCLE HELMETS" to get every rider and their passenger to wear MOTORCYCLE HELMETS before a standard is even regulated on street level... BACK TO BASICS 101... WEAR YOUR MOTORCYCLE HELMET DAMMIT!!!
And if the quality check, importation check and store level check is done properly, there wouldn't be any need to take this down to the street level except for not wearing a motorcycle helmet while riding since there is no more sub standard, or non standard helmet available for purchase in the market... And even if there is, we simply look if it has an ICC mark before we buy it...
After you buy it, it shouldn't matter if you remove the sticker as it shouldn't be the basis of street level apprehension for helmets... And that protects the end user from extortion attempts on street level or what we candidly call as "kotong..."
DAMN! SAKIT SA BANGS!!!
The DTI's job is to enforce the law onto the importers, dealers and sellers... However, because of the time they were given, the law did not take into account the helmet life span...
Let me explain... If the law stated that by a certain date (August 1 kunware) all helmets should be of standard, then everything being used should be of standard... If not, either you replace your helmet or you risk apprehension... The law was approved in 2010, the IRR was released Jan 2012... Jan to August is roughly 6 - 7 months... What if, I bought my helmet the day before the release of the IRR? Does it disqualify my helmet automatically because it had no markings on it? When was the requirement for markings specified? This part alone already violates Bill of Rights, Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
Ex post facto literally means “from something done afterward...” Note four categories of ex post facto laws: 1) laws that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, and punishes such action, 2) Laws that aggravate a crime, or makes it greater than it was when committed, 3) laws that change the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law attached to the crime when it was committed, and 4) laws that alter the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender.
So, if I bought my helmet the day before the helmet law was set in motion with the IRR, I should be exempt from the law itself... Otherwise, the ex post facto law is violated...
What should have happened is this:
- Helmet Law IRR released
- DTI eradicates all stores of non standard or sub standard helmets that does not pass regulations
- DTI sets in motion, a screening process for importers to apply for the ICC sticker, ensuring that all stores only sell helmets bearing the ICC mark
- DTI, DOTC and LTO, during the time of eradication of substandard helmets and ensuring that all helmets in the market are within standard and bears the marking (ICC) should conduct information and education drive campaigns for public dissemination
- As soon as the homologation of helmets purchased prior to the start of the initial implementation (after the IRR and the start of eradication of substandard helmets) has ended (homologation is the life span indicated for helmets which is 5 years), then regulation should commence on street level
Then on street level, the standard marking that the helmet has should be the check and balance and not the ICC sticker... Standard markings can be anything from SNELL, DOT, ECE, TIS, JIS and other internationally known standards...
Now, since the adopted standard is specific to ECE, the other standards, even those higher, becomes at fault because the standard is "SPECIFIC" rather than "ECE 22.05, it's accepted equivalents or higher standards..." To make the law more consumer and economic friendly, they should have unspecified the standard since standards such as TIS and DOT is being allowed as we speak...
Therefore, the specifics of the term "USES" made it a prerequisite on the end user as well... And the only way to rid the law of its violation of the ex post facto law in the Bill of Rights is to allow everybody the chance to get their helmets compliant to that prerequisite of having the PS or ICC marking...
So again, the law is the root cause of the problem... DTI tried to do damage control... Just like how the move of the federation and Sen. Bong Revilla to stop DTI from issuing stickers is branded the same... DAMAGE CONTROL...
Now that we have specified where the law has technically failed, the only way to save it, is to have the said provisions amended, allow the newly purchased helmets prior to the effective date of the law run it's homologation course of 5 years before stopping every rider and checking if his helmet does pass the regulations or standard...
Irregardless, the Helmet Act should have started from the importation up to the store level only... And just kept the use of helmets to the use of "MOTORCYCLE HELMETS" to get every rider and their passenger to wear MOTORCYCLE HELMETS before a standard is even regulated on street level... BACK TO BASICS 101... WEAR YOUR MOTORCYCLE HELMET DAMMIT!!!
And if the quality check, importation check and store level check is done properly, there wouldn't be any need to take this down to the street level except for not wearing a motorcycle helmet while riding since there is no more sub standard, or non standard helmet available for purchase in the market... And even if there is, we simply look if it has an ICC mark before we buy it...
After you buy it, it shouldn't matter if you remove the sticker as it shouldn't be the basis of street level apprehension for helmets... And that protects the end user from extortion attempts on street level or what we candidly call as "kotong..."
DAMN! SAKIT SA BANGS!!!
Thursday, August 2, 2012
ICC fiasco... Passing the blame on DTI? Think again... Read this first and be informed...
In recent meetings with the DTI, it is clear that that the provisions of the law made the ICC sticker as the basis for checking the helmets on store and street level... DTI is moving forward in assuring that stickers remain free until the end of the stickering period in December and are making procedures a lot easier and faster for riders... As discussed, if we can come in groups of more than 30, they will come to us to do the inspection and stickering to avoid the hassles of lining up... All we need to do is to make sure we have more than 30 riders in attendance and name the time and place where we can meet with them...
This is our way of helping the riders and the DTI in making everybody's lives easier and to help protect them from street level apprehensions intended to milk us riders...
1st, it was made free...
Now it is made even easier...
They will do this until we are able to get the law amended and rid ourselves of the ICC requirement on street level...
But where did this all start? Was it DTI's mandate? Are they to blame? Read carefully on what I am about to say...
Based on the paper trail, DTI is just the "fall guy" in all of this... They are the primary agency who will set the standards, ensure that the stores, dealers, retailers, distributors and importers are complying to "LAW"... While the second agency in-charge of street level apprehensions will ride on the ICC sticker to check if the helmet is acceptable for use on the roads or not... This was written even before DTI and DOTC/LTO was tasked to make the IRR and to push its implementation...
Sila ang tagapangasiwa ng batas... Hindi sila ang nag didikta kung ano o pano ito dapat gawin...
Looking at all the documents from the use, selling and importation of helmets, it is clear that this is based from the Act itself and the IRR was simply made based on it...
Excerpt from the Helmet Act RA 10054 As stated from Section 7 (c):
So this was implemented from the get go and not by the joint IRR...As the joint IRR was only made in the basis set forth by the act itself...
People who have been pointing to the DTI for this, have to look beyond the implementing agency and look at the cause of all the problems and where it all started...
And to those planning on passing the blame and calling this a propaganda of DTI, think again on who the blame should be passed on... And to those who consulted, instigated, pushed, supported and used the bill to promote yourselves, SHAME ON YOU for trying to wash your hands... The documents never lie as they will always show where the problem started...
Looking at the post carefully and by looking at how it is worded, it states that anybody with the "STANDARD" protective helmet shall be relieved from acquiring DTI stickers... This is what we are aiming to amend... Pero, those who do not fall under the said "STANDARD" are still under scrutiny and denial in order for them to change their helmets... This in turn, hits anything and everything that is not ECE 22.05 compliant...
DTI first saved the Filipino Rider by making the sticker free and by spearheading the request to extend the free stickering to accommodate all the riders... Then they accepted other standards such as DOT, TIS, SNELL and other internationally known standards to be more considerate to the riders... Now, they are passing the blame to somebody else, particularly the DTI and another "SENATOR" for making such amendments on the "ACT" kuno... But the documents show that this all started from the ACT itself... Then if another "SENATOR" made amendments to the ACT, why is there only one signatory? Why is it allowed to be passed in the first place? Why wait till now, to move and point fingers at others? We have been lobbying for the amendment ever since this was a proposal and now, after the mess it made, are you passing the blame? I don't get it...
In giving them the benefit of the doubt, may I say that if they are after the welfare of the riders in general, Ok, let us wait for the results of their move with the DOJ and allow them to push for this... We are, after all, after the welfare of the riding community... So, by all means, please pass that petition with the DOJ and if you can, please do what we initially started, amend the law to make the standard unspecified and keep the internationally known standards acceptable until the market is cleaned of all contraband, fake and substandard helmets... We will wait for Monday and we will be watching out for the petition and what it holds... Does it only protect the ECE users or does it protect the consumer's welfare? The ball is in their court... Let's hope it is for the riders and not for anything else...
I believe DTI was only making it easier for the riding public based on what they were tasked to do... Besides, based on the other publications prior to the implementation, the DTI was pressured into fast-tracking the IRR into effect... Which only tells us that somebody is "nag mamadali"...
To blame DTI for this is barking at the wrong tree as they were only following what was ordered of them to do... The basis of the ICC sticker as the means to identify the helmet as within standard is already stated on the ACT itself...
Look and read the following:
1. The Helmet Act RA 10054
2. The press release titled: PENDING IRR BLOCKS FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF HELMET LAW (NOTE THE DATE ON THIS PRESS RELEASE)
http://senate.gov.ph/press_release/2011/0817_revilla1.asp
And see where I am coming from and what I am talking about...
Is DTI really the agency to blame for all of this? Is it fair for us to pass the buck to them and call it DTI's propaganda?
Is there really another SENATOR who called the shots on RA 10054 and had it amended prior to it's passing? Who is this Senator? Is there really another one?
Think... Think hard... Then ask yourself WHY?
On the other hand, if there really is another Senator, maybe Bong Revilla was only ill-advised in all of this... So, instead of making blind items of the information they hold, why not just speak aloud and name the Senator that they are trying to identify as the perpetrator of this ICC fiasco...
That way, we can relieve the DTI for being the fall-guy of the ACT who initially needed the amendment before it was passed...
For now, let us not blame the Senator who passed this ACT until the other Senator who made the amendment to RA10054 is named by these people who made the accusation... For all we know, he might have been made a fall-guy himself...
Se more of whats happening on our FB Group Page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/mcrightsorg/
This is our way of helping the riders and the DTI in making everybody's lives easier and to help protect them from street level apprehensions intended to milk us riders...
1st, it was made free...
Now it is made even easier...
They will do this until we are able to get the law amended and rid ourselves of the ICC requirement on street level...
But where did this all start? Was it DTI's mandate? Are they to blame? Read carefully on what I am about to say...
Based on the paper trail, DTI is just the "fall guy" in all of this... They are the primary agency who will set the standards, ensure that the stores, dealers, retailers, distributors and importers are complying to "LAW"... While the second agency in-charge of street level apprehensions will ride on the ICC sticker to check if the helmet is acceptable for use on the roads or not... This was written even before DTI and DOTC/LTO was tasked to make the IRR and to push its implementation...
Sila ang tagapangasiwa ng batas... Hindi sila ang nag didikta kung ano o pano ito dapat gawin...
Looking at all the documents from the use, selling and importation of helmets, it is clear that this is based from the Act itself and the IRR was simply made based on it...
Excerpt from the Helmet Act RA 10054 As stated from Section 7 (c):
(c) Any person who uses, sells and distributes substandard
motorcycle helmets or those which do not bear the PS mark or
the ICC certificate shall be punished with a fine of not less than
Three thousand pesos (Php3,000.00) for the first offense; and Five
thousand pesos (Php5,000.OO) for the second offense, without
prejudice to other penalties imposed in Republic Act No. 7394 or
the "Consumer Act of the Philippines".
So this was implemented from the get go and not by the joint IRR...As the joint IRR was only made in the basis set forth by the act itself...
People who have been pointing to the DTI for this, have to look beyond the implementing agency and look at the cause of all the problems and where it all started...
And to those planning on passing the blame and calling this a propaganda of DTI, think again on who the blame should be passed on... And to those who consulted, instigated, pushed, supported and used the bill to promote yourselves, SHAME ON YOU for trying to wash your hands... The documents never lie as they will always show where the problem started...
Looking at the post carefully and by looking at how it is worded, it states that anybody with the "STANDARD" protective helmet shall be relieved from acquiring DTI stickers... This is what we are aiming to amend... Pero, those who do not fall under the said "STANDARD" are still under scrutiny and denial in order for them to change their helmets... This in turn, hits anything and everything that is not ECE 22.05 compliant...
DTI first saved the Filipino Rider by making the sticker free and by spearheading the request to extend the free stickering to accommodate all the riders... Then they accepted other standards such as DOT, TIS, SNELL and other internationally known standards to be more considerate to the riders... Now, they are passing the blame to somebody else, particularly the DTI and another "SENATOR" for making such amendments on the "ACT" kuno... But the documents show that this all started from the ACT itself... Then if another "SENATOR" made amendments to the ACT, why is there only one signatory? Why is it allowed to be passed in the first place? Why wait till now, to move and point fingers at others? We have been lobbying for the amendment ever since this was a proposal and now, after the mess it made, are you passing the blame? I don't get it...
In giving them the benefit of the doubt, may I say that if they are after the welfare of the riders in general, Ok, let us wait for the results of their move with the DOJ and allow them to push for this... We are, after all, after the welfare of the riding community... So, by all means, please pass that petition with the DOJ and if you can, please do what we initially started, amend the law to make the standard unspecified and keep the internationally known standards acceptable until the market is cleaned of all contraband, fake and substandard helmets... We will wait for Monday and we will be watching out for the petition and what it holds... Does it only protect the ECE users or does it protect the consumer's welfare? The ball is in their court... Let's hope it is for the riders and not for anything else...
I believe DTI was only making it easier for the riding public based on what they were tasked to do... Besides, based on the other publications prior to the implementation, the DTI was pressured into fast-tracking the IRR into effect... Which only tells us that somebody is "nag mamadali"...
To blame DTI for this is barking at the wrong tree as they were only following what was ordered of them to do... The basis of the ICC sticker as the means to identify the helmet as within standard is already stated on the ACT itself...
Look and read the following:
1. The Helmet Act RA 10054
2. The press release titled: PENDING IRR BLOCKS FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF HELMET LAW (NOTE THE DATE ON THIS PRESS RELEASE)
http://senate.gov.ph/press_release/2011/0817_revilla1.asp
And see where I am coming from and what I am talking about...
Is DTI really the agency to blame for all of this? Is it fair for us to pass the buck to them and call it DTI's propaganda?
Is there really another SENATOR who called the shots on RA 10054 and had it amended prior to it's passing? Who is this Senator? Is there really another one?
Think... Think hard... Then ask yourself WHY?
On the other hand, if there really is another Senator, maybe Bong Revilla was only ill-advised in all of this... So, instead of making blind items of the information they hold, why not just speak aloud and name the Senator that they are trying to identify as the perpetrator of this ICC fiasco...
That way, we can relieve the DTI for being the fall-guy of the ACT who initially needed the amendment before it was passed...
For now, let us not blame the Senator who passed this ACT until the other Senator who made the amendment to RA10054 is named by these people who made the accusation... For all we know, he might have been made a fall-guy himself...
Se more of whats happening on our FB Group Page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/mcrightsorg/