1.
THE PHILIPPINES SHOULD ADOPT A The proposed law also guarantees protection
NATIONAL ID SYSTEM NOW.
AFFIRMATIVE
At least 3 lawmakers are re-introducing bills
seeking to establish a national identification (ID)
system for all Filipinos here and abroad.
Feliciano Belmonte Jr authored House Bill (HB)
Number 12 or the Filipino Identification System
Act. AKO Bicol Representatives Rodel Bacobe
and Christopher Co also co-authored a bill with
the same title, HB Number 523.
The Philippines is one of only 9 countries in the
world without a national identification system,
according to Belmonte. Under his proposal,
the Filipino Identification System will
consolidate all government-issued ID systems
into one to "improve government services and
limit red tape in government transactions."
The national identification card will lower costs,
streamline transactions, and provide ease and
convenience,
The ID may also be used for applications for
passport, driver's license, Social Security System
(SSS), Government Service Insurance System
(GSIS), PhilHealth, Home Development Mutual
Fund (Pag-IBIG), and the National Bureau of
Investigation (NBI).
The Filipino ID card may also be used to identify
voters, schools, and employees, as well as to
avail of senior citizens' benefits. It may also be
used for court, prosecutor, and police clearances,
and in banking and financial institutions.
The ID shall have the capability to store at least
the biometric data of the cardholder. The initial
application shall be free of charge. Replacements
shall be paid by the cardholder.
the card will include the person's photograph,
name, birth date, gender, date of issue, signature
of owner, and corresponding individual serial
number issued by the Philippine Statistics
Authority.
The Philippine Statistics Authority shall
implement this for Filipinos in the country, while
the Department of Foreign Affairs will handle the
ID of Filipinos overseas.
against unlawful disclosure of information.
Information may be disclosed only upon the
following conditions: the authorization of the
cardholder, the event of accident disaster or
fortuitous events, in the interest of public health
and safety and the order of a competent court.
"Contrary to some beliefs, there is no need to fear
this measure because its only purpose is to
consolidate the cardholder's data which are
already contained in other government IDs and
documents so that we could do away with so
many other IDs and at the same time provide
identification to those who do not have access to
government issued IDs, such as the minors and
the unemployed. No invasion of privacy will
occur and no violation of due process will happen
since no other unwarranted data will be featured
in this ID. The biometrics alone can already
identify the person, enough to warrant service
from the government and private sectors,"
"In cases however, where incriminating data
appear in the computers and databases of the
transacting offices based on the identification of
the person as contained in the FilCard, it is by no
means a product of this system but a consequence
of the person's own personal activities which will
normally be recorded by the proper authorities
and sent out to all government agencies, as a
matter of fact and information,"
Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, author of a Senate
bill on the national ID system, however said "It
won't violate privacy rights because access to the
database will be limited to authorized
government agencies with the necessary penal
provisions in case of misuse and abuse,''
Trillanes explained his proposal's rationale is "for
us to have a centralized database of basic and
biometric information for all Filipino citizens
and be the primary identification card for all
transactions. It will facilitate the delivery of
social services and also be the backbone of our
anti-crime campaign."
1
 If passed into law, the Filipino Identification
System Act would make the following offenses
punishable:
o Falsifying information in applying for
the issuance of a Filipino ID card or
procures through fraud
o Utilizing the card in an unlawful
manner
o Any person or establishment refusing
to recognize the Filipino ID card of a
member
o Any public official or employee
conniving in the application or
issuance of an unauthorized Filipino
ID card
Violators shall be punished with a fine of not less
than P50,000 but not more P500,000, or an
imprisonment of not less than 6 months but not more
than two years or both.
NEGATIVE
In 1996, a similar plan was also adopted.It was
denominated as a "national computerized
identification reference system" ostensibly for a
purpose that has nothing to do at all with the
problems of national security and criminality
confronting the present government although
they were already existing then. But such plan
was shot down before taking off the ground.It
encountered a lot of objections because in reality
it was likewise designed and adopted as a
security measure that gives the government the
"power to compile devastating dossier against
unsuspecting citizens."
The 1996 "National Computerized Identification
Reference System" was invalidated by the
Supreme Court on two main grounds: "one, it is
a usurpation of the power of Congress to
legislate, and two,it impermissibly intrudes on
our citizenry’s protected zone of
privacy."(Ople vs. Torres G.R.127685 July
23,1998) < READ
The second and more important constitutional
objection is the violation of the right to privacy.
This is the main concern of Congress as it
proceeds in the enactment of the law. According
to the SC in the same case of Ople vs. Torres
supra, although a law may have been impelled by
a worthy purpose, it must "satisfactorily show the
presence of compelling state interest and it must
be narrowly drawn to preclude abuses".
The compelling state interest in the proposed ID
system has been openly disclosed.The
government has been honest enough to say that it
is designed in the interest of national security, or
to put it more bluntly, as a tool to "crackdown"
on crime and terrorism.The government did not
conceal its intention despite being aware that the
proposal may encounter objections precisely
because of the dangerous tendency to
indiscriminately invoke "national security" to
justify abuses.Such openness is therefore a clear
sign of its sincere desire to preclude any abuse;
or at least its assurance that the danger of abuse
will be properly addressed and minimized.
Reason #2: An ID card system will lead to a
slippery slope of surveillance and monitoring of
citizens.
A national ID card system would not protect us from
terrorism, but it would create a system of internal
passports that would significantly diminish the
freedom and privacy of law-abiding citizens.Once
put in place, it is exceedingly unlikely that such a
system would be restricted to its original purpose.
Social Security numbers, for example, were
originally intended to be used only to administer the
retirement program. But that limit has been routinely
ignored and steadily abandoned over the past 50
years. A national ID system would threaten the
privacy that Americans have always enjoyed and
gradually increase the control that government and
business wields over everyday citizens.
Reason #3: A national ID card system would
require creation of a database of all
Americans
What happens when an ID card is stolen?
What proof is used to decide who gets a card?
2
 A national ID would require a governmental perceived as looking or sounding "foreign."That is
database of every person in the U.S. what happened after Congress passed the Employer
containing continually updated identifying Sanctions provision of the Immigration Reform and
information. It would likely contain many Control Act of 1985: widespread discrimination
errors, any one of which could render against foreign-looking American workers,
someone unemployable and possibly much especially Asians and Hispanics. A 1990 General
worse until they get their ""file"" straightened Accounting Office study found almost 20 percent of
out.And once that database was created, its employers engaged in such practices. A national ID
use would almost certainly expand. Law card would have the same effect on a massive scale,
enforcement and other government agencies as Latinos, Asians, Caribbeans and other minorities
would soon ask to link into it, while became subject to ceaseless status and identity
employers, landlords, credit agencies, checks from police, banks, merchants and others.
mortgage brokers, direct mailers, landlords, Failure to carry a national I.D. card would likely
private investigators, civil litigants, and a come to be viewed as a reason for search, detention
long list of other parties would begin seeking or arrest of minorities. The stigma and humiliation of
access, further eroding the privacy that constantly having to prove that they are Americans
Americans have always expected in their or legal immigrants would weigh heavily on such
personal lives. groups.

Reason #4: ID cards would function as "internal
passports" that monitor citizens' movements
Americans have long had a visceral aversion to
building a society in which the authorities could act
like totalitarian sentries and demand ""your papers
please!"" And that everyday intrusiveness would be
conjoined with the full power of modern computer
and database technology. When a police officer or
security guard scans your ID card with his pocket
bar-code reader, for example, will a permanent
record be created of that check, including the time
and your location? How long before office
buildings, doctors' offices, gas stations, highway
tolls, subways and buses incorporate the ID card
into their security or payment systems for greater
efficiency? The end result could be a nation where
citizens' movements inside their own country are
monitored and recorded through these ""internal
passports.""

Reason #5: ID cards would foster new forms of

discrimination and harassment
Rather than eliminating discrimination, as some have
claimed, a national identity card would foster new
forms of discrimination and harassment of anyone
3
 2. A TOTAL BAN ON THE
CONTRACTUALIZATION OF
EMPLOYMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES
WOULD BE COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE.
AFFIRMATIVE
Labor Secretary Silvestre Bello III on Labor Day
admitted that a ban on the practice is not yet
legally possible.
"What they want is total ban [on]
contractualization, which is not legally possible
right now. The rule is there should be no
contractualization but the law allows
exceptions,"
Bello explained that the law allows contractual
setups for seasonal workers and project-based
employees like janitors and security guards.
He however said there is a proposed bill in
Congress already that seeks a total ban on the
practice.
The Labor department has begun implementing
Department Order 174, which seeks to regulate
labor-only-contractualization.
According to DOLE, DO 174 will end the
practice of "endo" wherein employment
contracts are deliberately terminated before the
sixth month to avoid paying benefits that are due
to regular workers.
Analysts have warned that small businesses will
NEGATIVE
be forced to lay off workers or hold off on hiring
new employees because of the department order
In a press conference, Labor Secretary Silvestre
Bello III said there are several bills pending in
Congress, including one that provides a total ban
against contractualization. Total ban on
contractualization, we are not likely to support
that. Otherwise companies will go bankrupt,
Only a law can totally prohibit
contractualization, Labor Secretary Silvestre
Bello III said. "Yung gusto nilang total
prohibition hindi kaya ng Secretary of
Labor...Only congress can come out with a law
prohibiting total contractualization," Thus, Total
prohibition cannot be done through the secretary
of labor.
Trade Secretary Ramon M. Lopez warned on
Monday that a total ban on contractualization
may only provoke investors from pulling out of
the country or even holding off their expansion
plans.
Reacting to the clamor by some labor groups to
eliminate contractualization altogether, Lopez
said the country stood to lose more jobs in the
process should this ban happen.
If you eliminate contractualization, the
investors may leave. I have talked to at least three
companies and they said that they would either
leave or they wont expand anymore, he said.
He cited a Japanese company, which currently
has 30,000 workers in the Philippines, was
planning to double the number. But theyre
looking at the contractualization issue. If the
Philippine government decides to ban it
altogether, the Japanese firm will look for
another location to operate,
I told (some proponents) that if there is no
contractualization altogether, there might be no
direct jobs to even speak of. Im more concerned
about the jobs we will lose if we ban even the
legitimate practices under contractualization,
Lopez stressed the need to implement a win-win
solution, aimed at ending only the abusive
practices of labor contractualization, which
include the controversial end-of-contract (endo)
scheme.
Under the proposal, principal companies can
retain the flexibility of contracting certain
services from third party agencies or service
providers. The latter, in turn, are expected to
provide their workers a regular and permanent
status. They will also be mandated to provide
benefits, including retirement and separation
packages.
The workers being deployed should also not be
co-terminus with the agencys contract with the
4
 principal company. This would assure workers of
security of tenure.
Lopez had clarified that the legitimate
contractualization was different from the illegal
endo schemes, wherein workers are hired
temporarily for a five-month contract and then
transfer again to another entity for another five-
month contract. He said there were legitimate
schemes accepted even globally.
Industries like mining and construction are
among those that hire on a contractual, per-
project basis due to the seasonality of their
operations

5
 3. THE CURRENT STRATEGY OF
PRESIDENT DUTERTE IN DEALING
WITH CHINA ON THE WEST
PHILIPPINE SEA ISSUE SHOULD BE
RECONSIDERED.
http://www.scmp.com/week-
asia/geopolitics/article/2073858/duterte-plays-
dangerous-game-south-china-sea
http://www.philstar.com/news-
feature/2017/03/24/1684195/defend-west-
philippine-sea-philippines-must-bring-allies
AFFIRMATIVE
Playing the US with China may prove a smart move
for the President
When Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte meets his
Chinese counterpart President Xi Jinping ()
this week, two questions will be on the minds of
international observers. First, what sort of
geopolitical game is Duterte playing? Second, will
he cross the Rubicon over to China, as he has
repeatedly threatened to do in recent weeks, and
thereby fundamentally alter the geopolitical equation
in East Asia?
The answer to the first question is straightforward.
Like everyone else, Duterte wants to maximise the
gains for the Philippines in its relationship with
China and the US. Most would assume that he is
trying to play off the US against China in the hope of
getting the best deal. Therefore, the argument goes,
his friendliness towards China and his expletive-
laden criticism of the US should be seen in this light.
The answer to the second question whether Duterte
will cross the Rubicon is more complicated. The
short answer is, it depends on how the US and China
respond to moves.
If the US does not want to completely lose Duterte to
China, how then should it respond to his game? The
US should play a game of costly signalling. Drawing
valuable lessons from game theory, a signal is costly
if the sender will incur certain costs it would have
otherwise avoided. Costly signals are necessary to
demonstrate ones sincerity in a relationship. This is
what Duterte wants from the US.
Thus, the US should first of all help, rather than
merely criticise, Dutertes war on drugs. After all,
Duterte is on a crusade and crusaders dont back
down. Duterte thinks that the US is hypocritical
because, although the US has helped Mexico and
Colombia wage a bloody war on drugs, it has been
nowhere near as proactive in aiding the Philippines
campaign against illegal drugs. And there is room for
cooperation.
For instance, America, and the Western powers in
general, can and should help the Philippines set up
rehabilitation centres for hundreds of thousands of
drugs users, who have surrendered to the government
in the past three months. China has already been
helping the country in this regard.
Second, the US should adopt a measured approach to
the human rights issue. For the Duterte
administration, the US should take a hard look in the
mirror before pointing fingers at others.
Third, this is also about according due respect to the
democratically elected head of a sovereign state. This
is the difference between Dutertes treatment of the
US and Japan. Both countries committed atrocities
against Filipinos in the past but Duterte has not
criticised Japan because not only is it the Philippines
largest donor, giving far more than the US, but it is
also respectful towards Duterte and has sincerely
apologised for its war crimes. Meanwhile,
Washington has yet to express similar contrition vis-
-vis its colonial-era crimes. This is the context of
Dutertes rhetoric about the US treating the
Philippines as its little brown brothers.
Fourth, America should provide commensurate aid
to its longest-standing ally in Asia. It should increase
its economic and military aid to the Philippines in
return for the Enhanced Defence Cooperation
Agreement between the two countries. Duterte thinks
that the agreement is lopsided in favour of the US. It
6
gets access to five military bases in the Philippines in
return for US$180 million a year in aid.
To put things into perspective, nations such as Egypt,
Pakistan and Jordan have been receiving billions of
dollars annually in recent years, far more aid than the
Philippines, even if they are undemocratic, non-
treaty allies which have shunned granting
comparable base access to US forces.
Finally, this is also about more clarity on the extent
of the US commitment to the Philippines under their
1951 Mutual Defence Treaty. Repeated rhetorical
assurances from President Barack Obama about
ironclad commitments have not reassured Duterte
and many Filipinos, who legitimately seek more
clarity than semantics.
Duterte wants to build a credible deterrence posture
for the Philippines but feels the US has been reluctant
to provide the necessary military equipment. The US
is concerned that this might escalate tensions with
China. Duterte knows this reluctance by the US, and
that is why he is considering Russia and staunch US
allies such as Israel as alternative military suppliers.
To make his signals credible, Duterte has been
ratcheting up his threats against the US, starting with
the threat of pulling out US military personnel in
Mindanao, ditching the Enhanced Defence
Cooperation Agreement, which is an executive
agreement, and suspending joint patrols and military
exercises in the South China Sea.
What about China? China would have to play the
game of costly signalling as well. Apart from
increasing trade, aid and investments in the
Philippines all part of Dutertes wish list China
would do well to allow Filipino fishermen back at
Scarborough Shoal without being seen as having
acceded to the Hague ruling.
This will give Duterte more domestic political capital
to enable him to continue mutually beneficial
dialogue and negotiations with China. If China plays
hard on him, he would lose domestic credibility in
future rounds of negotiations. It is in Chinas interest,
therefore, to strengthen Dutertes hand.
What about Duterte? He knows that this is an
evolving game and is likely to adjust his game
depending on how China and the US respond to his
play.
In the first round of the game, he has already
signalled in colourful language what he wants from
the US and his resolve as a leader. If the next US
president plays this costly signalling game, Duterte
is likely to reciprocate in commensurate terms.
However, he is unlikely to stop his colourful
language because he thinks this is a useful tool to
advance his game.
When he meets Xi this week, Duterte will find out
how far his relationship with China will evolve. He
is realistic enough not to expect China to respect the
Hague ruling. At the same time, he knows that China
wants the Philippines to be in its sphere of influence.
Duterte knows that the Philippines is a booming
emerging market, an emerging geopolitical player in
East Asia and hes got two avid suitors. Fortunately,
at the moment, he need not choose either the US or
China.
At the recent China-US strategic dialogue, Xi called
on the US to work together to cultivate a common
circle of friends instead of exclusive friends.
It is a delicate balancing act, which shrewd statesmen
such as Duterte can pull off, especially if he
appreciates the counsel of his trusted advisers. A
win-win outcome for all the players is possible. In
the end, everybody gets what they want. The US gets
to keep the Mutual Defence Treaty and remain a key
security partner with the Philippines. China will gain
a valuable friend, in spite of the Hague ruling, and
Duterte can maximise the benefits for the Philippines
by maintaining an equi-proximate relationship with
both superpowers.
NEGATIVE
Its a dangerous game that [Dutertes] playing,
said American historian Alfred McCoy, who
believes that in accommodating China in the
South China Sea, the Philippines is in danger of
7
 becoming a pawn in a two-pronged strategy by With both China and the US seeing their
China to deal a crippling blow to US global relationships with the Philippines as key to their
power. ambitions in the South China Sea, Duterte has a
He argues in a new book, In the Shadows of the powerful bargaining chip, one he has shown
American Century: The Rise and Decline of US every intention of using since the arbitration
Global Power, that China is trying to break out of courts ruling.
US lines of encirclement that enable Since then he has upped the anti-American
Washington to dominate both ends of the rhetoric while praising Chinese President Xi
Eurasian land mass. These lines include its Jinping ( ) and swooning over Russian
alliance with North Atlantic Treaty Organisation President Vladimir Putin. He has scrapped joint
countries in the West and its Pacific alliances in patrols with US ships and reeled in his hardline
the East that have let it set up bases in countries posturing regarding sovereignty. He recently
including Japan, South Korea and, in particular, withdrew his threat to ride a jet ski to
the Philippines. Scarborough Shoal and erect the Philippine flag,
One prong of Chinas strategy, according to telling Al Jazeera his words were just
McCoy, is to become the epicentre of a vast hyperbole...you cannot expect me to ride [a jet
Eurasian continental market through efforts such ski]. I dont even know how to swim.
as the One Belt, One Road trade initiative to
link economies through infrastructure. The other
prong is to break US encirclement with bases on
man-made islands in the South China Sea and a
US$200 billion Port of Gwadar in Pakistan.
McCoy said that Duterte risked a military coup if
he traded financial support from China for
silence over Beijings build-up of armed forces
in the strategically located waterway through
which a third of the worlds shipping passes.
Theres a possibility that if [Duterte] moves too
far to China,[and] hes giving away the
Philippine territorial waters in the South China
Sea, this could produce a very strong nationalist
reaction among the ranks of the military, he
said, noting that Philippine military officers had
long enjoyed close relations with their American
counterparts. Thats one of the very real threats
that he faces. Hes got to be very skilful in the
way that he handles the armed forces.
Even without a coup, McCoy said that in backing
away from the arbitration courts decision the
Philippines would be at risk of losing a third of
its maritime territory, located in the richest
fishing ground in the world with a vast potential
of hydrocarbon deposits. And what would they
get for it? Low cost loans which would have to
be repaid. It doesnt strike me as a great bargain
so far, he said.
8