Hoodlums masquerading as Robin Hood

In the midst of the pork barrel scam involving several members of Congress is the realization that there are at least about a hundred hoodlum organizations masquerading as Robin Hood that have ruthlessly and systematically plundered taxpayers and needy beneficiaries for over a decade.

The big question now, therefore, is how these spurious entities loosely termed as non-government organizations (NGOs) or civil society organizations (CSOs) have been allowed to operate and slip past all of the bureaucracy’s regulatory and supervisory nets.

It appears that the current local laws on NGOs make it difficult to really monitor their activities. In fact, the term NGO is something that is already difficult to define given the scope and breadth of allowed operations, which can sometimes even transcend national boundaries.

Even foundations, considered as part of the NGO community but which often involve a more systematic and stringent accreditation system to be able to enjoy tax benefits by donors, have found regulation a tough issue, more so the matter of accountability.

Punishment for both lawmakers and conduits

Of course, in the recent scandal involving the government’s Priority Development Assistance Fund or pork barrel, the onus lies primarily on lawmakers who have abused public trust. Those found guilty should get out of office.

Still, there should be punishment on those involved in defrauding government funds either by having become avenues for “commissions” to corrupt lawmakers, or siphoning the money to other uses other than the original intent. They are outright criminals who steal the people’s money.

Quick look at NGOs

Quickly, as background, let us understand NGOs. Mostly organized as non-profit, NGOs are intended to operate in areas where government assistance is weakest and not possible. Foundations and charitable institutions, though, are always non-profit.

In the Philippines, it is not clear just how many NGOs are already in existence. However, by law, they should all be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and should submit annual reports including financial statements.

Foundations operate in a slightly different environment since they are supposed to secure endorsements from specified government offices. For example, an institution that deals with charity work has to file its activities with the Department of Social Welfare and Development.

Educational foundations have to deal with the Department of Education if their work involves elementary and high schools, the Commission on Higher Education for college and other tertiary courses, and the Technical Education Skills and Development Authority for vocational courses.

Lastly, if the foundation work involves hospitals or health maintenance, coordination with the Department of Health is required. Private foundations have a fairly structured system, having associations like the Association of Foundations, the League of Corporate Foundations, and the National Council of Social Development Foundations.

NGOs, on the other hand, are more difficult to manage. So far, only the Caucus of Development NGO Networks (CODE-NGO) and the Philippine Council for NGO Certification (PCNC) purport to deal with NGO operations in the country, although both are quick to claim they have no overall regulatory powers.

In terms of self-regulation, the foundations sector is ahead of its NGO counterpart, largely as mentioned because of the need to apply tax credits on donations that fund operations. But even then, there are still errant foundations that have existed in the past and continue even at present.

Grave monitoring weakness

Even the Bureau of Internal Revenue is unable to monitor NGOs to account for their earnings and spending. Even local government units, some of which had become paper recipients of spurious NGOs, have been victimized.

So it seems the whole government bureaucracy is inutile, starting from members of Congress who have the power to endorse the PDAF allocations, down to the LGU level. From the Napoles experience, this is at least P1 billion a year down the “drain.”

CODE-NGO has come up with some recommendations to prevent the plunder of people’s money, largely focusing on improving transparency in the process of PDAF fund releases and use.

Rightly so too, CODE-NGO supports a more efficient system that will channel government funds to legitimate people’s organizations that have been genuinely helping the poor in areas where the government bureaucracy is unable to penetrate.

Organizations like the Red Cross of the Philippines, which relies heavily on PDAF allocations, run the risk of suspending large parts of their operations. If the Red Cross does not find substitute sources of funding to maintain its blood bank and blood donation programs, a lot of indigents will suffer.

Let us not cut our nose to spite our face.

Strengthen self-regulation

My two cents’ worth to this scandal is to strengthen self-regulation, which means designating a greater role and bigger responsibility for organizations like CODE-NGO and PCNC to set the pace for accreditation, monitoring and policing of NGOs and CSOs.

It may seem to be an organizational nightmare at first, but this can work if given the right focus and attention. More importantly, we cannot ignore the fact that we need NGOs, CSOs, foundations and other charitable institutions to deliver help to our countrymen who remain unreachable under the current government.

Let me end the discussion with this quote by Hans-Juergen Beerfeltz, State Secretary of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development: “If we want to make a real change to the lives of people in developing and emerging countries, we must pool our resources. We need private capital and the expertise of our industry if we are to create jobs and generate income in our partner countries, introduce environmentally sound technologies that will not harm our global climate, and provide opportunities for trainees. Businesses can intervene in areas that are difficult for the state to access and make a very specific contribution to resolving global problems.”

Collegiate hoopla ongoings

The top 16 teams in the Champions League (PCCL) 2013 National Collegiate Championship are starting to emerge. The top four teams in UAAP and NCAA and the top three from CESAFI-Cebu are automatically seeded in the Round of 16.

For UAAP, National U, Far Eastern U and De La Salle U have made it, with Ateneo and UST battling for the last slot. For NCAA, San Beda, Letran and University of Perpetual Help are leading, with San Sebastian College-Recoletos, Jose Rizal University and College of St. Benilde still in the running.

Visit www.CollegiateChampionsLeague.net for more exciting news in collegiate hoopla nationwide. Join for free ongoing contests and surveys and get surprise gifts from PCCL sponsors.

Facebook and Twitter

We are actively using two social networking websites to reach out more often and even interact with and engage our readers, friends and colleagues in the various areas of interest that I tackle in my column. Please like us at www.facebook.com and follow us at www.twitter.com/ReyGamboa.

Should you wish to share any insights, write me at Link Edge, 25th Floor, 139 Corporate Center, Valero Street, Salcedo Village, 1227 Makati City. Or e-mail me at [email protected]. For a compilation of previous articles, visit www.BizlinksPhilippines.net.