Loose Change by Ben Kritz EVEN for a country where political scandals are unfortunately far too common, the P60 million Department of Tou...
Loose Change
by Ben Kritz
EVEN for a country where political scandals are unfortunately far too common, the P60 million Department of Tourism “ad controversy” really seemed an insult to everyone’s intelligence; most crooked politicians at least try to be discreet about their corruption. Wanda Tulfo-Teo, the now-former head of the DOT, apparently never got that memo, which is why she is now out of a job, her husband Roberto Teo resigned from his position as a director of the Tourism Industry Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA), and her brothers’ media company, Bitag Media Unlimited Inc. (BMUI) scrambling to reimburse the P60 million paid to it by the DOT for advertising on Ben and Erwin Tulfo’s PTV-4 program “Kilos Pronto.”
Letting it go at that and not investigating further, which is what the Tulfo-Teo team is obviously hoping will happen, would be a mistake, for two important reasons.
First, with respect to the specific case involving the tainted advertising deal, everyone involved has maintained they actually did nothing wrong; this is of course what they’d be expected to say. Ms. Teo and her husband resigned their positions and the Tulfo boys are returning the money because they realized it looked bad, but it really was a legal deal – it was just a coincidence everyone involved in passing around a large amount of taxpayers’ money was related. It was, they claim, the network (PTV-4) and not Ms. Teo who decided the ads should be aired on her brothers’ TV show.
So they say; the Teos’ lawyer went on TV to repeat it several times, as if saying it more than once somehow makes it more believable. Even a non-lawyer would realize, however, that in offering that explanation, the Tulfo-Teo camp is implicating a third party – in this case, the management of PTV-4 – in a possible crime of misuse of public funds. That is a very serious allegation, and one that PTV-4 should not sit still for if it is not true. The only way to find out, of course, is to let the investigation by the Ombudsman continue.
The second reason the investigation must continue is bigger than the personalities involved in this particular case. It has become a bad habit in this country to allow erring officials to make the restitution of their choice when they are caught in a corrupt act, and by doing so avoid any other penalties, and preserve their eligibility to reappear later in some other capacity when the scandalous issue has faded from the public consciousness. It makes a mockery of otherwise sincere efforts to reduce corruption, because it does little to curb the temptation to misuse public office for personal gain; the biggest risk getting caught poses is no more than being compelled to return what was ill-gotten in the first place, and that is a risk far too many politicians have been willing to take.
The Filipino people can only have confidence that significant progress to stamp out corruption is being made when the laws governing conduct of elected officials are applied objectively, consistently, and without regard to whatever attempts corrupt officials make to manage their images and avoid real consequences of their acts. Doing exactly that in the DOT case will send a powerful and much-needed message to the people and public servants alike.
Ben Kritz holds a Master’s degree in Economics and is a former auto industry executive, and writes the thrice-weekly Rough Trade column on business and the economy for The Manila Times. You are welcome to send him your questions and comments at benkritz@outlook.com, or follow him on Facebook and Twitter.
EVEN for a country where political scandals are unfortunately far too common, the P60 million Department of Tourism “ad controversy” really seemed an insult to everyone’s intelligence; most crooked politicians at least try to be discreet about their corruption. Wanda Tulfo-Teo, the now-former head of the DOT, apparently never got that memo, which is why she is now out of a job, her husband Roberto Teo resigned from his position as a director of the Tourism Industry Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA), and her brothers’ media company, Bitag Media Unlimited Inc. (BMUI) scrambling to reimburse the P60 million paid to it by the DOT for advertising on Ben and Erwin Tulfo’s PTV-4 program “Kilos Pronto.”
Letting it go at that and not investigating further, which is what the Tulfo-Teo team is obviously hoping will happen, would be a mistake, for two important reasons.
First, with respect to the specific case involving the tainted advertising deal, everyone involved has maintained they actually did nothing wrong; this is of course what they’d be expected to say. Ms. Teo and her husband resigned their positions and the Tulfo boys are returning the money because they realized it looked bad, but it really was a legal deal – it was just a coincidence everyone involved in passing around a large amount of taxpayers’ money was related. It was, they claim, the network (PTV-4) and not Ms. Teo who decided the ads should be aired on her brothers’ TV show.
So they say; the Teos’ lawyer went on TV to repeat it several times, as if saying it more than once somehow makes it more believable. Even a non-lawyer would realize, however, that in offering that explanation, the Tulfo-Teo camp is implicating a third party – in this case, the management of PTV-4 – in a possible crime of misuse of public funds. That is a very serious allegation, and one that PTV-4 should not sit still for if it is not true. The only way to find out, of course, is to let the investigation by the Ombudsman continue.
The second reason the investigation must continue is bigger than the personalities involved in this particular case. It has become a bad habit in this country to allow erring officials to make the restitution of their choice when they are caught in a corrupt act, and by doing so avoid any other penalties, and preserve their eligibility to reappear later in some other capacity when the scandalous issue has faded from the public consciousness. It makes a mockery of otherwise sincere efforts to reduce corruption, because it does little to curb the temptation to misuse public office for personal gain; the biggest risk getting caught poses is no more than being compelled to return what was ill-gotten in the first place, and that is a risk far too many politicians have been willing to take.
The Filipino people can only have confidence that significant progress to stamp out corruption is being made when the laws governing conduct of elected officials are applied objectively, consistently, and without regard to whatever attempts corrupt officials make to manage their images and avoid real consequences of their acts. Doing exactly that in the DOT case will send a powerful and much-needed message to the people and public servants alike.
Ben Kritz holds a Master’s degree in Economics and is a former auto industry executive, and writes the thrice-weekly Rough Trade column on business and the economy for The Manila Times. You are welcome to send him your questions and comments at benkritz@outlook.com, or follow him on Facebook and Twitter.
No comments