THEY ROBBED THOSE WHO DID THE WORK—THEN TOOK THE APPLAUSE

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD, DM

I heard about a family who had just lost someone they loved. Before the siblings could grieve, they had to find money for the hospital bill and the burial. May tumatawag sa mga kaibigan. May naghahanap ng mahihiraman. May nag-aasikaso ng mga papeles kahit halos hindi na makapag-isip sa pagod at lungkot. They wanted to give their loved one a dignified farewell. Sa gitna ng matinding dalamhati, silang magkakapatid ang gumawa ng paraan.

Then a relative arrived. This person presented themselves as wealthy and influential, with government connections that could supposedly open doors. The relative took photographs at the hospital and posted them online. Pagkatapos ng libing, sinabi ng kamag-anak na siya raw ang nagbayad ng hospital bills at lahat ng gastos sa pagpapalibing. People praised that supposed generosity. Ang magkakapatid, na ayon sa kanilang salaysay ay naghanap ng pera at nag-ayos ng lahat, ay naiwan upang pakinggan ang papuri para sa ibang tao.

According to some people who knew the relative, the image of wealth did not match the person’s circumstances. Ayon sa ilan sa mga nakakakilala sa kanya, siya ay nabubuhay sa utang habang ipinakikilala ang sarili bilang isang taong malakas ang kapit sa gobyerno. I cannot independently know every detail of those finances or connections. Ngunit malinaw ang sakit na inilarawan ng magkakapatid: habang sariwa pa ang kanilang pagluluksa, may ibang umaangkin sa sakripisyong ginawa nila para sa yumao.

How do you correct that story without turning a funeral into a fight? The people who did the work may be too exhausted, too hurt, or too respectful of the dead to argue. Iyon ang pagkakataong sinasamantala ng mga mahilig umangkin ng kredito. Habang sila ay malakas magkuwento, pinipili ng tunay na kumilos na manahimik. Their silence is understandable. Ngunit ang katahimikan ay hindi pahintulot para baguhin ng iba ang nangyari.

I think of that family when I see a government initiative launched before the cameras. An official speaks, the audience applauds, and the program becomes associated with the person holding the microphone. Ngunit bago pa dumating ang araw ng paglulunsad, may nag-aral na ng problema. May nagsulat ng konsepto, nagtipon ng datos, nakipagpulong, at nagbago ng plano nang paulit-ulit. Some of those people are consultants who have agreed to remain unnamed. Tahimik sila, ngunit hindi ibig sabihin noon na wala silang ginawa.

Since 2000, I have written and conceptualized numerous legislative proposals, policies, government programs, projects, and activities. I remained largely invisible because I chose to be. Seeing some of those ideas take shape and help people has made me happy, even without recognition. Mas mahalaga sa akin na may mabuting nagawa ang isang panukala kaysa makita ang pangalan ko sa bawat tarpaulin. Pinili kong magtrabaho sa likod ng entablado. Hindi ko piniling ibigay sa iba ang karapatang angkinin ang aking ginawa.

I felt proud when I heard President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. refer to the “8 Es” of an effective anti-illegal drugs strategy. I had conceptualized that framework, and many people in the Philippine National Police knew of my work on it. Para sa isang taong matagal nang gumagawa nang tahimik, may kakaibang bigat ang sandaling iyon. Narinig kong binibigyang-halaga sa pambansang talumpati ang konseptong pinaglaanan ko ng isip at panahon. I was glad it had travelled so far. Sana ay makatulong ito sa mga taong dahilan kung bakit ito binuo.

The President mentioned the 8 Es in his July 2024 State of the Nation Address. The framework had appeared publicly in the PNP’s 2022 ADORE campaign. 

Today, people can find advertisements for ghostwriting and research services online. Some offer academic work, including theses and dissertations, that students may submit as their own. May mga alok sa social media na para bang karaniwang serbisyo lamang ang pagpapagawa ng akdang ikaw ang pipirmahan. A student who claims another person’s dissertation as their own compromises academic integrity. Iba ang isang consultant na may malinaw na kasunduang magtrabaho nang confidential para sa isang tanggapan. Both situations can hide the writer, but they do not carry the same ethical meaning. 

A government consultant may know from the beginning that the office will present the program and the consultant will not be named. Tanggap niya ang kasunduang iyon. Hindi niya hinihingi ang kanyang pangalan sa poster, sa press release, o sa talumpati. He may even feel joy when the initiative succeeds without anyone knowing his role. Ngunit ang confidentiality ay hindi pahintulot para may ibang magsabing siya lamang ang nag-isip, nagsulat, at bumuo ng programang alam niyang ipinagawa niya sa iba.

I do not know who wrote the part of the President’s speech that mentioned the 8 Es, and I have no basis to say that writer claimed authorship of the framework. Ang punto ko ay mas malawak kaysa sa isang talumpati. A person can announce an initiative without claiming to have conceived it. Maaaring igalang ang lihim na kasunduan at maging tapat pa rin sa lawak ng sariling ambag. No confidential name needs to be disclosed for an official to avoid a false claim of sole authorship.

Officials deserve credit for approving a proposal, finding resources, coordinating agencies, and taking responsibility for implementation. Those tasks require judgment and work. Ngunit ang pag-apruba ay hindi paglikha. Ang pag-aanunsiyo ay hindi patunay na ikaw ang unang nag-isip. A leader can accept praise for leading while remaining honest about the fact that other minds helped build the program. Walang nababawas sa dangal ng pinuno kapag hindi niya inaangkin ang buong kuwento.

Sometimes the deeper wound is not the lack of public recognition. The consultant expected to remain unnamed, but there was still an agreement to be honored or a relationship built on trust. Maaaring may napag-usapang bayad o patuloy na papel sa proyekto. Maaaring ang inaasahan lamang ay hindi siya basta kalilimutan matapos maibigay ang lahat ng kanyang maitutulong. When the work is done, however, the calls stop. Ang dating laging nangangailangan ng iyong payo ay tila hindi ka na kilala.

I have helped people in situations like that. Sa simula, mahalaga ka. They seek your ideas, your time, your connections, and the program you can build. Sinasagot mo ang tawag kahit abala ka dahil naniniwala kang may mabuting patutunguhan ang inyong ginagawa. Then they obtain the concept, use the proposal, and move forward without you. Pagkatapos, sila-sila na lamang. Your messages go unanswered. Para bang hindi mo sila tinulungang makarating doon.

That is the saddest part. I can accept being unnamed. I can be happy that an initiative helps people who will never know I contributed to it. Ngunit masakit makita na ang taong tinulungan mong umangat ay siya ring nakalimot sa iyo. A person does not need a public tribute to feel valued. Minsan, sapat na ang tuparin ang usapan, sagutin ang tawag, at huwag angkinin ang trabahong alam mong ginawa ng iba.

Honor confidentiality. Honor an agreement to pay for completed work. Do not turn a contributor’s silence into a story of your sole genius. Kung ikaw ang namuno sa pagpapatupad, iyon ang sabihin mo. Kung may ibang bumuo ng konsepto, huwag mong sabihing ikaw ang gumawa ng lahat. The truth can be respected without revealing a confidential consultant’s name.

The relative at the hospital could have said that the siblings settled the bills and arranged the burial, and that the relative came to be with them. Sapat na sanang sabihin ang totoo. There was no need to become the hero of their grief. Ganoon din sa pamahalaan: maaari kang mamuno at tumanggap ng nararapat na pagkilala nang hindi inaagaw ang pinaghirapan ng tahimik na tumulong.

I remain proud that the 8 Es reached a national audience. I want useful ideas to travel and help people far beyond their creators. Pinili kong maging tahimik, at masaya akong makita ang ilan sa aking mga konsepto na nagiging kapaki-pakinabang kahit walang pagkilala. But no one should mistake that happiness for permission to break an agreement, abandon a person who helped, or claim the work as their own. Huwag gawing pagkakataon ang katahimikan ng gumawa upang angkinin ang kanyang pinaghirapan. At huwag kalimutan ang taong tumulong sa iyong makarating sa entablado.

 _________________________________________________________

Dear Reader,

I invite you to explore my complete collection of published books now available on Amazon. Whether you are seeking in-depth analysis, strategic insights, or engaging narratives, my catalog covers a range of essential topics designed to inform, inspire, and provoke thoughtful discussion.

You can browse all my current titles, read excerpts, and order your copies directly through my official Amazon Author Page: 

Click this Image to View:

Thank you for your continued support and interest in my work. If you enjoy any of the titles, leaving a review on Amazon would be greatly appreciated as it helps bring these ideas to a broader audience.

Warm regards,

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

*About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academic, public intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, management, economics, doctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

VIEWS: 1.11M

THE WEST PHILIPPINE SEA: We Have Sovereign Rights in Our Exclusive Economic Zone, Not Territorial Ownership of the Entire Sea

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD, DM

Before sunrise, a Filipino fisherman checks his boat, counts what he can spend on fuel, and heads out to sea. Sa bahay, may pamilyang naghihintay. His hope is simple: enough catch to pay for food, school expenses, and another day of living.

For him, the West Philippine Sea is more than a diplomatic issue. It is where he works. Kapag may malaking foreign vessel na lumapit sa kanyang maliit na bangka, the concern becomes immediate: Makakapangisda pa ba siya? Makakauwi ba siyang ligtas?

Those questions deserve protection and clear answers. Kapag sinasabi nating “atin ang West Philippine Sea,” we need to understand what we are defending. Are we referring to Philippine territory, rights over natural resources, or jurisdiction over particular activities? Magkakaugnay ang mga ito, pero hindi magkakapareho ang kanilang legal meaning.

We must also be careful with the statement that nations cannot own seas and oceans. No nation can claim sovereignty over any part of the high seas. Article 89 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS, expressly prohibits it. The high seas cannot become a country’s territory simply because that country names them, patrols them, or draws a line around them on a map.

Pero hindi ibig sabihin nito na lahat ng maritime waters ay nasa labas ng national sovereignty. States exercise sovereignty over their internal waters and territorial seas. An archipelagic state such as the Philippines also exercises sovereignty over its archipelagic waters, subject to the conditions and passage rights recognized by UNCLOS. Kaya mas accurate sabihin na nations cannot treat the seas and oceans as unlimited national possessions; their authority depends on the maritime zone and the rights recognized by international law.

This distinction matters because an exclusive economic zone is not territorial ownership. Within its exclusive economic zone, the Philippines has sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve, and manage natural resources. May jurisdiction din tayo over specified matters, including marine scientific research, artificial islands and installations, and protection of the marine environment. These are substantial rights, although they differ from sovereignty over territory.

A coastal state’s territorial sea may extend up to 12 nautical miles from its applicable baselines. Beyond it lies the exclusive economic zone, which may reach a maximum of 200 nautical miles measured from those baselines. Hindi ito dagdag na 200 nautical miles pagkatapos ng territorial sea. At hindi lahat ng nasa loob ng distansiyang iyon ay awtomatikong territorial waters ng bansa.

Hindi nito pinapaliit ang Philippine rights. It explains their scope. The Philippines does not need territorial ownership over the entire exclusive economic zone to protect its fisheries, petroleum, and other natural resources. UNCLOS recognizes sovereign rights for those purposes. Kaya parehong nakalilito ang “atin ang lahat ng naroon” at “dahil hindi natin teritoryo, wala tayong karapatan doon.”

It is equally important to distinguish the exclusive economic zone from the high seas. They have different legal regimes. An exclusive economic zone carries specific coastal-state rights, even while preserving important freedoms for other countries. Hindi tamang tawagin itong lugar na puwedeng gawin ng kahit sino ang anumang gusto niya.

International freedom of navigation is one of those preserved freedoms. Ships of all states may navigate through another country’s exclusive economic zone, subject to UNCLOS. The Convention also recognizes freedom of overflight and the laying of submarine cables and pipelines under its applicable rules. Kung may foreign cargo ship na dumaraan papunta sa ibang bansa, its presence alone does not establish a violation of Philippine rights.

But passing through and taking resources are different activities. A vessel navigating across the zone may be exercising a lawful freedom. A vessel fishing, drilling, or exploring for resources must respect the coastal state’s rights and applicable legal requirements. Ang karapatang dumaan ay hindi awtomatikong karapatang mangisda, mag-drill, o kontrolin ang kabuhayan ng iba.

These freedoms come with responsibilities. Other states must exercise their rights with due regard for the coastal state’s rights and duties. The coastal state must likewise respect the lawful freedoms of others. May karapatan ang magkabilang panig, at may obligasyon silang igalang ang isa’t isa.

Passage through the territorial sea follows a different rule. Foreign ships enjoy innocent passage there, subject to UNCLOS conditions. Fishing or conducting research during passage, for example, can make it non-innocent. This is why a vessel’s exact location matters. Hindi puwedeng ilapat sa buong exclusive economic zone ang lahat ng rules para sa territorial sea.

These distinctions become particularly important when discussing Chinese patrols.

Understandably, many Filipinos feel uneasy when a large Chinese coast guard vessel appears near fishing grounds. Para sa isang mangingisda, mahirap maging kampante kapag napakalaking barko ang katabi ng kanyang bangka. That concern deserves attention. A legal assessment, however, must examine both the vessel’s presence and its conduct.

A Chinese vessel is not automatically violating Philippine rights simply by navigating within the Philippine exclusive economic zone. It may exercise navigation freedoms, just as vessels of other states may. But describing an operation as a “patrol” does not make every action during that operation lawful.

What is the patrol doing? Is it sailing through? Is it ordering Filipino fishermen to leave? Is it preventing a Philippine-authorized resource survey from continuing? Is it physically obstructing another vessel or creating a risk of collision? Hindi sapat ang larawan ng isang barko upang sagutin ang lahat ng ito. We need its location and the facts of its conduct.

A Chinese patrol does not acquire authority over Philippine resources merely by entering the exclusive economic zone. Freedom of navigation does not authorize interference with Philippine sovereign rights. Kung ginagamit ang patrol upang kontrolin ang lawful fishing or resource exploration in an area where Philippine rights apply, ibang legal issue na iyon.

The 2016 South China Sea arbitral award provides concrete examples. The tribunal found that China violated Philippine sovereign rights through interference with fishing and petroleum exploration, construction of artificial islands, and failure to prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing in areas of the Philippine exclusive economic zone. It also found that Chinese law enforcement vessels created a serious risk of collision when they physically obstructed Philippine vessels. These findings concerned specific actions; they did not declare every Chinese ship in the region unlawfully present.

At Reed Bank, the case examined an incident in which Chinese surveillance vessels demanded that a Philippine-authorized seismic survey vessel stop its work and leave. Ang legal issue ay ang interference with an activity connected to Philippine rights over seabed resources. That gives the complaint a clearer foundation than simply saying that foreign ships were present.

We should be equally accurate about the award’s limits. It did not settle sovereignty over all disputed islands and rocks, and it did not draw a maritime boundary between the Philippines and China. It addressed maritime entitlements, the status of features, and particular conduct under UNCLOS. Among its findings, Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal are low-tide elevations within the Philippine exclusive economic zone and continental shelf in an area without an overlapping entitlement generated by the features examined.

China rejects the award, but rejection does not erase its binding legal status between the Philippines and China in respect of the dispute decided. Article 296 of UNCLOS and Article 11 of Annex VII establish the finality and binding force of such decisions and awards. Magkaiba ang obligasyong sumunod at ang aktuwal na pagsunod. Refusal to accept a ruling does not, by itself, cancel that obligation.

Understanding these distinctions strengthens the Philippine position. Hindi natin kailangang palawakin ang sinabi ng tribunal upang ipagtanggol ang mga karapatang kinilala nito. Nor should freedom of navigation become an excuse to ignore interference with lawful Philippine activities.

A responsible public discussion asks concrete questions: Where did the incident happen? What did the vessel do? Whose lawful activity was affected? Which rule applies? These questions turn concern into a claim that government can explain and defend with evidence.

The Philippines can respect international freedom of navigation while firmly protecting its sovereign rights. Walang contradiction doon. Recognizing that we do not own the entire West Philippine Sea does not mean abandoning Philippine territory, surrendering resource rights, or accepting unlawful interference.

For the fisherman who left before sunrise, these distinctions must eventually mean safe access to lawful fishing grounds, protection of marine resources, and a government prepared to defend his rights. His family is waiting for more than a statement. Naghihintay sila sa kanyang ligtas na pag-uwi, sa kanyang huli, at sa kabuhayang umaasa sa dagat.

Understanding what is ours, what is open to others, and where the law draws the line helps us defend the country responsibly. At the center of that responsibility is a simple human hope: that those who go out to earn an honest living at sea can return home safely.

 _________________________________________________________

Dear Reader,

I invite you to explore my complete collection of published books now available on Amazon. Whether you are seeking in-depth analysis, strategic insights, or engaging narratives, my catalog covers a range of essential topics designed to inform, inspire, and provoke thoughtful discussion.

You can browse all my current titles, read excerpts, and order your copies directly through my official Amazon Author Page: 

Click this Image to View:

Thank you for your continued support and interest in my work. If you enjoy any of the titles, leaving a review on Amazon would be greatly appreciated as it helps bring these ideas to a broader audience.

Warm regards,

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

*About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academic, public intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, management, economics, doctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

VIEWS: 1.52M