Lunes, Hulyo 3, 2017

RA 10771 - Philippine Green Jobs Act of 2016

Republic Act 10771
Philippine Green Jobs Act of 2016
April 29, 2016
S. No. 3092
H. No. 6100
Republic of the Philippines
Congress of the Philippines
Metro Manila
Sixteenth Congress
Third Regular Session
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-seventh day of July, two thousand fifteen.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Short Title. – This Act shall be known as the “Philippine Green Jobs Act of 2016”.
SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. – It is the declared policy of the State to:
(a) Affirm labor as a primary social economic force in promoting sustainable development;
(b) Afford full protection to labor, local and overseas, organized and unorganized, and promote full and productive employment and equality of employment opportunities for all; and
(c) Promote the rights of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
The State shall identify needed skills, develop training programs, and train and certify workers for jobs in a range of industries that produce goods and render services for the benefit of the environment, conserve natural resources for the future generation, and ensure the sustainable development of the country and its transition into a green economy. In recognition of the participation of individuals and business enterprises in jobs creation, the State shall provide incentives therefor.
SEC. 3. Coverage. This Act shall apply to all business enterprises unless otherwise provided herein.
SEC. 4. Definition of Terms. – As used in this Act:
(a) Business enterprises refer to establishments engaged in the production, manufacturing, processing, repacking, assembly, or sale of goods and/or services, including service-oriented enterprises. It shall include self-employed or own-account workers, micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) and community-based business enterprises;
(b) Climate change refers to a change in climate that can be identified by changes in the mean or variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period typically decades or longer, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity;
(c) Green jobs refer to employment that contributes to preserving or restoring the quality of the environment, be it in the agriculture, industry or services sector. Specifically, but not exclusively, this include jobs that help to protect ecosystems and biodiversity, reduce energy, materials and water consumption through high efficiency strategies, decarbonize the economy, and minimize or altogether avoid generation of all forms of waste and pollution. Green jobs are decent jobs that are productive, respect the rights of workers, deliver a fair income, provide security in the workplace and social protection for families, and promote social dialogue.
(d) Green economy refers to one which is low-carbon and resource-efficient, and results in the generation of green jobs and in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities;
(e) Green goods and services refer to goods and services that benefit the environment or conserve natural resources, and may include research and development, installation and maintenance services;
(f) Green technologies refer to the development and application of products, equipment and systems used to conserve the environment and natural resources; and
(g) Sustainable development refers to development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs.
SEC. 5. Incentives. – For the purpose of encouraging business enterprises to generate and sustain green jobs as certified by the Climate Change Commission, as provided in Section 6(o) hereof, business enterprises shall enjoy the following incentives:
(a) Special deduction from the taxable income equivalent to fifty percent (50%) of the total expenses for skills training and research development expenses which is over and above the allowable ordinary and necessary business deductions for said expenses under the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997, as amended; and
(b) Tax and duty free importation of capital equipment: Provided, That the capital equipment is actually, directly and exclusively used in the promotion of green jobs of the business enterprise.
Incentives that will be granted under this Act shall be in addition to fiscal and non-fiscal incentives already granted or provided under existing laws, orders, issuances and regulations. Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted or construed to diminish or limit, in whatever manner, the incentives granted or provided under existing laws, orders, issuances and regulations which shall include, but not limited to, Republic Act No. 10121 or the “Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010”; Republic Act No. 10068 or the “Organic Agriculture Act of 2010”; Republic Act No. 9513 or the “Renewable Energy Act of 2008”; Republic Act No. 9367 or the “Biofuels Act of 2006”; Republic Act No. 9275 or the “Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004”; Republic Act No. 9003 or the “Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000”; Republic Act No. 8749 or the “Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999”; and Republic Act No. 8550 or the “Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998”.
SEC. 6. Role of Agencies. –
(a) The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) shall, in coordination with other government agencies, formulate a National Green Jobs Human Resource Development Plan on the development, enhancement and utilization of the labor force, both in the private and public sectors. The plan shall have the primary objective of enabling and sustaining the transition into a green economy and the generation of green jobs towards more employment and equal opportunities and the promotion of social justice and workers’ welfare. It shall include programs, projects, and activities pertaining to basic, higher and technical-vocational education and training, database that identifies and links green job opportunities with private and public entities, and information on knowledge and skill requirements of a green economy.
The DOLE, in coordination with the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), shall also maintain a database of green careers, professions and skills, as well as a list of emerging business enterprises, which generate and sustain green jobs. It shall facilitate skills training assessment and certification, career advocacy, provide productivity and livelihood training, and extend technical assistance to enterprises to ensure labor law compliance.
(b) The Department of Finance (DOF) shall administer the grant of incentives as discussed in Section 5 of this Act to qualified individuals and business enterprises engaged in registered strategic activities, and shall maintain a database on the same.
(c) The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) shall establish and maintain a climate change information management system and network as reference in the formulation of strategies and approaches to develop potential green jobs.
(d) The Department of Education (DepED) shall implement faculty, facility and curriculum development for primary and secondary education in support of the knowledge and skills requirement of a green economy.
(e) The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) shall develop and implement curriculum and related standards and instructional materials in support of the green economy.
(f) The Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) shall formulate the necessary training regulations for the implementation of skills training, program registration and assessment and certification in support of the requirements for skilled manpower of the green economy.
(g) The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) shall ensure the mainstreaming of green jobs concern in development plans.
(h) The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) shall develop a special business facilitation program for individuals and business enterprises that create green jobs.
(i) The Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) shall encourage the development of qualifications framework that can facilitate the recognition of knowledge, skills, and competencies of professionals working in the green economy.
(j) The Department of Science and Technology (DOST) shall, together with the TESDA, assist the DOLE in analyzing skills, training and re-training needs in relation to the use of green technology that has the potential to create new green occupations and greener jobs, especially in industries or sectors undergoing structural changes due to climate change and greening of the economy. It shall also provide a range of business development support to MSMEs. These may include prototyping or modeling of technologies, conducting assessment to match technological needs and demands, subcontracting business to develop clean technologies, providing technical written guides, procedures as well as instructions and training on clean technology for business.
(k) The Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) shall ensure the mainstreaming of green jobs concern in its sectoral development plan and encourage more investments in public transport infrastructure and services to optimize the potential of public transport to foster green growth and job creation. It shall also explore strategies of shifting to more environmentally friendly modes of transport and improving the efficiency of all modes of transportation.
(l) The Department of Tourism (DOT) shall outline sustainable tourism planning and integrated approach for the promotion of job rich sustainable tourism industry.
(m) The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) shall develop and implement programs that promote the importance of green building practices in safeguarding the environment and its role in sustainable economic development.
(n) Any provision in their respective charters to the contrary notwithstanding, government financial institutions (GFIs) shall, in consultation with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), provide preferential financial packages to business enterprises that create green jobs.
(o) The Climate Change Commission (CCC), in consultation with concerned agencies, such as the DENR, the DTI, the DOLE, the Department of Agriculture (DA), the Department of Energy. (DOE), the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), and the DOST, shall develop and administer appropriate standards for the assessment and certification of green goods and services, and green technologies and practices for the purpose of regulating the availment of incentives and ensuring green jobs content pursuant to the National Green Jobs Human Resource Development Plan as provided in Section 6(a) hereof.
SEC. 7. Role of the Secretary of Labor and Employment. The Secretary of Labor and Employment shall be included as an additional member of the Climate Change Commission constituted under Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9729, as amended or the “Climate Change Act of 2009”.
SEC. 8. Appropriations. – The amount necessary to carry out the operation of this Act shall be included in the annual General Appropriations Act.
SEC. 9. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – Within one hundred eighty (180) days from the effectivity of this Act, the Secretary of Labor and Employment, in coordination with concerned agencies as may be deemed necessary, shall formulate the necessary rules and regulations to implement the provisions of this Act.
SEC. 10. Separability Clause. – Should any provision of this Act be declared unconstitutional, the remainder thereof not otherwise affected shall remain in full force and effect.
SEC. 11. Repealing Clause. – Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9729, as amended or the “Climate Change Act of 2009”, is deemed amended or modified by Section 7 of this Act. All other existing laws, presidential decrees, executive orders, proclamations or administrative regulations that are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly.
SEC. 12. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in two (2) newspapers of general circulation.


Speaker of the House
of Representatives

President of the Senate

Senate Bill No. 3092, which was approved by the Senate on February 1, 2016, was adopted as an amendment to House Bill No. 6100 by the House of Representatives on February 2, 2016.

Secretary General
House of Representatives

Secretary of the Senate

Approved: APR 29 2016

Biyernes, Hulyo 8, 2016

Four laws of ecology versus 4 anti-ecological laws of capitalism

Please read the explanation at:

The four laws of ecology and the four anti-ecological laws of capitalism

Posted on April 2, 2012
by John Bellamy Foster

Climate & Capitalism is pleased to publish, with permission from John Bellamy Foster and Monthly Review Press, this excerpt from Chapter 6 of The Vulnerable Planet.

In the first part of the chapter, Foster discusses the “qualitative transformation in the level of human destructiveness” that characterized capitalist production after World War II. This transformation included massive increases in the use of synthetics that could not be readily reabsorbed by nature, accompanied by a radical expansion in the use of all forms of energy, particularly fossil fuels. These changes in the patterns of production, he writes, are “the chief reason for the rapid acceleration of the ecological crisis in the postwar period.”

In the rest of the chapter, published here, he discusses the factors that underlie capitalism’s ever-growing conflict with nature.


Four laws of ecology

In order to understand the ecological impact of these trends, it is useful to look at what Barry Commoner and others have referred to as the four informal laws of ecology:

1. Everything is connected to everything else,
2. Everything must go somewhere,
3. Nature knows best, and
4. Nothing comes from nothing.

The first of these informal laws, everything is connected to everything else, indicates how ecosystems are complex and interconnected. This complexity and interconnectedness, Haila and Levins write, “is not like that of the individual organism whose various organs have evolved and have been selected on the criterion of their contribution to the survival and fecundity of the whole.” Nature is far more complex and variable and considerably more resilient than the metaphor of the evolution of an individual organism suggests. An ecosystem can lose species and undergo significant transformations without collapsing. Yet the interconnectedness of nature also means that ecological systems can experience sudden, startling catastrophes if placed under extreme stress. “The system,” Commoner writes, “is stabilized by its dynamic self-compensating properties; these same properties, if overstressed, can lead to a dramatic collapse.” Further, “the ecological system is an amplifier, so that a small perturbation in one place may have large, distant, long-delayed effects elsewhere.”[1]

The second law of ecology, everything must go somewhere, restates a basic law of thermodynamics: in nature there is no final waste, matter and energy are preserved, and the waste produced in one ecological process is recycled in another. For instance, a downed tree or log in an old-growth forest is a source of life for numerous species and an essential part of the ecosystem. Likewise, animals excrete carbon dioxide to the air and organic compounds to the soil, which help to sustain plants upon which animals will feed.

Nature knows best, the third informal law of ecology, Commoner writes, “holds that any major man-made change in a natural system is likely to be detrimental to that system.” During 5 billion years of evolution, living things developed an array of substances and reactions that together constitute the living biosphere. The modern petrochemical industry, however, suddenly created thousands of new substances that did not exist in nature. Based on the same basic patterns of carbon chemistry as natural compounds, these new substances enter readily into existing biochemical processes. But they do so in ways that are frequently destructive to life, leading to mutations, cancer, and many different forms of death and disease. “The absence of a particular substance from nature,” Commoner writes, “is often a sign that it is incompatible with the chemistry of life.”[2]

Nothing comes from nothing, the fourth informal law of ecology, expresses the fact that the exploitation of nature always carries an ecological cost. From a strict ecological standpoint, human beings are consumers more than they are producers. The second law of thermodynamics tells us that in the very process of using energy, human beings “use up” (but do not destroy) energy, in the sense that they transform it into forms that are no longer available for work. In the case of an automobile, for example, the high-grade chemical energy stored in the gasoline that fuels the car is available for useful work while the lower grade thermal energy in the automobile exhaust is not. In any transformation of energy, some of it is always degraded in this way. The ecological costs of production are therefore significant.[3]

Four laws of capitalism

Viewed against the backdrop offered by these four informal laws, the dominant pattern of capitalist development is clearly counter-ecological. Indeed, much of what characterizes capitalism as an ecohistorical system can be reduced to the following counter-ecological tendencies of the system:

1. The only lasting connection between things is the cash nexus;
2. It doesn’t matter where something goes as long as it doesn’t reenter the circuit of capital;
3. The self-regulating market knows best; and
4. Nature’s bounty is a free gift to the property owner.

The first of these counterecological tendencies, the only lasting connection between things is the cash nexus, expresses the fact that under capitalism all social relations between people and all the relationships of humans to nature are reduced to mere money relations. The disconnection of natural processes from each other and their extreme simplification is an inherent tendency of capitalist development. As Donald Worster explains,

“Despite many variations in time and place, the capitalistic agroecosystem shows one clear tendency over the span of modern history: a movement toward the radical simplification of the natural ecological order in the number of species found in an area and the intricacy of their interconnections…. In today’s parlance we call this new kind of agroecosystem a monoculture, meaning a part of nature that has been reconstituted to the point that it yields a single species, which is growing on the land only because somewhere there is a strong market demand for it.”[4]

The kind of reductionism characteristic of “commercial capitalism,” Indian physicist and ecologist Vandana Shiva states, “is based on specialized commodity production. Uniformity in production, and the unifunctional use of natural resources, is therefore required.” For example, although it is possible to ‘use rivers ecologically and sustainably in accordance with human needs, the giant river valley projects associated with the construction of today’s dams “work against, and not with, the logic of the river. These projects are based on reductionist assumptions [of uniformity, separability, and unifunctionality] which relate water use not to nature’s processes but to the processes of revenue and profit generation.”[5]

All of this is reflects the fact that cash nexus has become the sole connection between human beings and nature. With the development of the capitalist division of nature, the elements of nature are reduced to one common denominator (or bottom line): exchange value. In this respect it does not matter whether one’s product is coffee, furs, petroleum, or parrot feathers, as long as there is a market.[6]

The second ecological contradiction of the system, it doesn’t matter where something goes unless it re-enters the circuit of capital, reflects the fact that economic production under contemporary capitalist conditions is not truly a circular system (as in nature) but a linear one, running from sources to sinks-sinks that are now overflowing. The “no deposit/no return” analogue, the great ecological economist Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen has observed, “befits the businessman’s view of economic life.” The pollution caused by production is treated as an “externality” that is not part of the costs to the firm.[7]

In precapitalist societies, much of the waste from agricultural production was recycled in close accordance with ecological laws. In a developed capitalist society, in contrast, recycling is extremely difficult because of the degree of division of nature. For instance, cattle are removed from pasture and raised in feedlots; their natural waste, rather than fertilizing the soil, becomes a serious form of pollution. Or, to take another example, plastics, which have increasingly replaced wood, steel, and other materials, are not biodegradable. In the present-day economy, Commoner writes, “goods are converted, linearly, into waste: crops into sewage; uranium into radioactive residues; petroleum and chlorine into dioxin; fossil fuels into carbon dioxide…. The end of the line is always waste, an assault on the cyclical processes that sustain the ecosphere.”[8]

It is not the ecological principle that nature knows best but rather the counter-ecological principle that the self-regulating market knows best that increasingly governs all life under capitalism. For example, food is no longer viewed chiefly as a form of nutrition but as a means of earning profits, so that nutritional value is sacrificed for bulk. Intensive applications of nitrogen fertilizer unbalance the mineral composition of the soil, which in turn affects the mineral content of the vegetables grown on it. Transport and storage requirements take precedence over food quality. And in order to market agricultural produce effectively, pesticides are sometimes used simply to protect the appearance of the produce. In the end, the quality of food is debased, birds and other species are killed, and human beings are poisoned.[9]

Nature’s bounty is a free gift to the property owner, the fourth counter-ecological tendency of capitalism, expresses the fact that the ecological costs associated with the appropriation of natural resources and energy are rarely factored into the economic equation. Classical liberal economics, Marx argued, saw nature as a “gratuitous” gain for capital. Nowhere in establishment economic models does one find an adequate accounting of nature’s contribution. “Capitalism,” as the great environmental economist K. William Kapp contended, “must be regarded as an economy of unpaid costs, ‘unpaid’ in so far as a substantial portion of the actual costs of production remain unaccounted for in entrepreneurial outlays; instead they are shifted to, and ultimately borne by, third persons or by the community as a whole.” For example, the air pollution caused by a factory is not treated as a cost of production internal to that factory. Rather it is viewed as an external cost to be borne by nature and society. [10]

By failing to place any real value on natural wealth, capitalism maximizes the throughput of raw materials and energy because the greater this flow-from extraction through the delivery of the final product to the consumer-the greater the chance of generating profits. And by selectively focusing on minimizing labor inputs, the system promotes energy-using and capital-intensive high technologies. All of this translates into faster depletion of nonrenewable resources and more wastes dumped into the environment. For instance, since World War II, plastics have increasingly displaced leather in the production of such items as purses and shoes. To produce the same value of output, the plastics industry uses only about a quarter of the amount, of labor used by leather manufacture, but it uses ten times as much capital and thirty times as much energy. The substitution of plastics for leather in the production of these items has therefore meant less demand for labor, more demand for capital and energy, and greater environmental pollution.[11]

The power of profit

The foregoing contradictions between ecology and the economy can all be reduced to the fact that the profit-making relation has become to a startling degree the sole connection between human beings and between human beings and nature.

This means that while we can envision more sustainable forms of technology that would solve much of the environmental problem, the development and implementation of these technologies is blocked by the mode of production-by capitalism and capitalists. Large corporations make the major decisions about the technology we use, and the sole lens that they consider in arriving at their decisions is profitability.

In explaining why Detroit automakers prefer to make large, gas-guzzling cars, Henry Ford II stated simply “minicars make miniprofits.” The same point was made more explicitly by John Z. DeLorean, a former General Motors executive, who stated, “When we should have been planning switches to smaller, more fuel-efficient, lighter cars in the late 1960s in response to growing demand in the marketplace, GM management refused because ‘we make more money on big cars.'”[12]

Underlying the general counter-ecological approach to production depicted here is the question of growth. An exponential growth dynamic is inherent in capitalism, a system whereby money is exchanged for commodities, which are then exchanged for more money on an ever increasing scale.

“As economists from Adam Smith and Marx through Keynes have pointed out,” Robert Heilbroner has observed, “a ‘stationary’ capitalism is subject to a falling rate of profit as the investment opportunities of the system are used up. Hence, in the absence of an expansionary frontier, the investment drive slows down and a deflationary spiral of incomes and employment begins.”

What this means is that capitalism cannot exist without constantly expanding the scale of production: any interruption in this process will take the form of an economic crisis. Yet in the late twentieth century there is every reason to believe that the kind of rapid economic growth that the system has demanded in order to sustain its very existence is no longer ecologically sustainable.[13]

From The Vulnerable Planet: A Short Economic History of the Environment. Monthly Review Press, 1999. Published with permission from the author and publisher.

John Bellamy Foster is editor of Monthly Review. His recent books include The Ecological Revolution: Making Peace with the Planet and (with Fred Magdoff) What Every Environmentalist Needs to Know About Capitalism.


[1] Commoner, The Closing Circle, pp. 29-42; Edberg and Yablokov, Tomorrow Will Be Too Late, p. 89; Haila and Levins, Humanity and Nature, pp. 5-6. Although Commoner refers to the fourth law as “there’s no such thing as a free lunch,” the Russian scientist Yablokov has translated this more generally as “nothing comes from nothing.”

[2] Commoner, Closing Circle, pp. 37-41; and Making Peace with the Planet, pp. 11-13. Commoner’s third law should not be taken too literally. As Haila and Levins write, “The conception that ‘nature knows best’ is relativized by the contingency of evolution.” Haila and Levins, Humanity and Nature, p.6.

[3] Ibid., pp. 14-15; Herman E. Daly and Kenneth Townsend, eds., Valuing the Earth (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993), pp. 69-73.

[4] Donald Worster, The Wealth of Nature (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), pp. 58-59.

[5] Vandana Shiva, Staying Alive (London: Zed Books, 1989), pp. 23-24, 186.

[6] Haila and Levins, Humanity and Nature, p. 201.

[7] Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, The Entropy Law and the Economic Process (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971), p. 2.

[8] Commoner, Making Peace, pp. 10-11.

[9] Haila and Levins, Humanity and Nature, p. 160.

[10] Georgescu-Roegen, Entropy Law, p. 2; K. William Kapp, The Social Costs of Private Enterprise (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971), p. 231.

[11] Chandler Morse, “Environment, Economics and Socialism,” Monthly Review no. 11 (April 1979): 12; Commoner, Making Peace, pp. 82-83; and The Poverty of Power (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1976), p. 194.

[12] Ford and DeLorean quoted in Commoner, Making Peace, pp. 80-81.

[13] Robert Heilbroner, An Inquiry into the Human Prospect (New York: W.W. Norton, 1980), p. 100.

Huwebes, Hulyo 7, 2016

Justice for Gloria Capitan! Stop the Killing of Climate Justice Activists!


We condemn the killing of Gloria Capitan, Filipino woman  leader-activist of KILUSAN, a member organization of the Philippine Movement for Climate Justice. Ate Glo, as she is called by people close to her, was shot by motorcycle-riding gunmen last July 1.  She was 57 years old, a mother and a grandmother.

Ate Glo was very active in the fight against coal and led in a series of mass actions and petitions calling for a permanent closure of a coal stockpile in their village.

If this is an attempt to silence other anti-coal activists like her, then they are mistaken. On the ground where Ate Glo's body fell, where the blood from her body flowed, more anti-coal and climate justice activists will sprout.

We are activists and movements from all corners of the world.  Ate Glo’s sacrifice only further strengthens  our  solidarity and our conviction that this evil menace which is coal must end.  We will persevere in this fight and see to it that our children and the children of our children will be free from coal.

We join the clamor for the Philippine government to immediately launch a thorough investigation of her killing and bring the perpetrators  to justice.


Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ)
Asian Peoples Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD)
Alyansa Tigil Mina (ATM)
Freedom From Debt Coalition (FDC)
Our Rivers Our Life Philippines (OROL)
Gitib Mindinao
Bukluran ng Manggawang Pilipino (BMP)
Kongreso ng Pagkakaisa ng Maralitang Lungsod (KPML)
Youth for Climate Justice Pilipinas (Y4CJ)
Koalisyon Pabahay Pilipinas (KPP)
Makabayan Pilipinas
Kalayaan Pilipinas
Green Convergence for Safe Food, Healthy Environment and Sustainable Economy
Bishop Broderick Pabillo
RECON Phils.
FPE-Mindanao Regional Unit
The Climate Reality Project Philippines
Ecological Society of the Philippines
Germelino M. Bautista
Tess Tabada
Focus on the Global South
Aniban ng Mangagawa sa Agrikultura (AMA)
Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM)
No Nukes Asia Forum
Pambansang Koalisyon ng Kababaihan sa Kanayunan (PKKK)
FDC-Western Mindanao Region
PALAG Mindanao
PMCJ-Western Mindanao Chapter
Sanlakas Misamis Occidental
Tambuyog Development Center
Philippine Human Rights Information Center (PHILRIGHTS)
Center for Energy, Ecology and Development (CEED)
Socsargen Cared
World March of Women - Pilipinas and Coalition Against Trafficking in Women - Asia Pacific (CATW-AP)
Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa (SENTRO)
Citizens' Environment Network (CEN).

Linggo, Hulyo 3, 2016

Hustisya para kay Ate Glo Capitan!

ni Gregorio V. Bituin Jr.
15 pantig bawat taludtod

nabasa ko ang balita, di ko siya kilala
ngunit nakaliligalig ang nangyari sa kanya
aktibo siyang kumilos para sa climate justice
coal stockpile sa lugar nila'y nais mapaalis

coal ay batid niyang isa sa mga pangunahing
malaking nakaambag sa pangkalikasang krimen
hustisya sa klima ang mayor nilang panawagan
hustisyang pangklima ang adhika nilang makamtan

hangarin ng pagkilos na pinangunahan niya
coal stockpile malapit sa nayon nila'y masara
marangal na adhika para sa kinabukasan
ng nayon nila, ng madla, para sa kalikasan

limampu't pito ang edad, walang awang binaril
ngunit sa kanyang adhika'y walang makapipigil
sa kinabagsakang lupang binahiran ng dugo
tiyak maraming susulpot na tulad ni Ate Glo

magpapatuloy ang laban sa coal, magpapatuloy
at kaisa akong ang laban niya'y itutuloy
ang hiyaw ngayon nitong aming diwa't kalooban
hustisya! hustisya para kay Ate Glo Capitan!

(ang tula ay batay sa ulat ng Philippine Movement for Climate Justice)

FILIPINA ANTI COAL ACTIVIST KILLED. Her name is Gloria Capitan, Ate Glo to people close to her. She was a very nice person, always with a smile. At 57 years old she was very active in the fight against coal, and led their village last year in a series of mass actions and petitions calling for a permanent closure of a coal stockpile near their village. Her life was cut short last night, July 1, by a bullet from motorcycle-riding gunmen. If this is an attempt to silence other anti-coal activists like her, then they are mistaken. On the ground where Ate Glo's body fell, where the blood from her body flowed, more anti-coal activists will sprout. Instead of silencing us, it will only strengthen our conviction that this evil menace which is coal must end. And we will persevere in this fight and see to it that our children and the children of our children will be free from it. ~ Philippine Movement for Climate Justice

Biyernes, Pebrero 26, 2016