Never on Wednesday and Other Disaster Preparedness Plans

Sept. 26 marked the one year anniversary of Ondoy, the flood that wreaked havoc throughout Metro-Manila (see my Sept 28, 2009 post "Storm Signals").  There is much that still needs to be done to prevent a recurrence of the damage that would recur if a similar storm to were to strike again. Yet it's heartening to see that steps have already been taken in that direction including a campaign to reduce estuary-clogging  litter.

One of the most problematic forms of such refuse is the ubiquitous non-biodegradable plastic bag.  When improperly discarded it becomes an environmental menace, especially in blocking water drainage.   In order to encourage responsible use of these containers, several mall and supermarket chains  throughout the Philippines have teamed up with the DENR (Department of Environmental and Natural Resources).  They have declared Wednesdays as "Reusable Bag Day" and will charge shoppers a fee for these bags on those days beginning this week.  The purpose is to encourage consumers to be less wasteful by furnishing and reusing their own bags  while shopping. (Just think, what did we do both here and in the U.S. before plastic bags were invented?  Somehow we survived to tell the tale.)

Another favorable sign in the ongoing struggle to clean up Metro-Manila and at the same time reduce the risk of flooding  is the planned crackdown by the MMDA (Metropolitan Manila Development Authority) via renewed implementation of the anti-littering law, which has been on the books since 1996s but has not been enforced since 2003.  I really hope that something good comes of this ordinance,  However, given the cultural barriers against success, such as  indifference by Filipinos toward public sanitation, the practice of bribery by businesses and individuals towards officials and enforcers, and the national trait of ningas cogon  (initial enthusiasm followed by a quick wane of interest), I'm skeptical that this particular project will make much headway over the long haul.  But it's worth a shot.

On a larger scale, the Philippine government has taken such measures as upgrading the national meteorological  service PAGASA (Philippine Atmosphere Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration.  BTW Pag-asa is also the Tagalog term for "hope") to enable that department to issue hourly updates about storm and water level conditions. Previously that information was available only every 6 hours. In addition there has been  disaster preparedness training in various communities and supposedly overall better preparedness if the worst happens.

These are just a few steps in the right direction. Whether they will make a meaningful  impact can't be known of course until a disaster actually strikes. However, much of the damage to Metro-Manila from typhoon Basyang in July for example was the result of an unexpected swerve that the storm took, which the weather service using the old six-hour report schedule was unprepared to announce.  With their newly improved meteorological equipment, is there certainty that the authorities will be warned in a more timely manner next time in order to take proper precautions? And will they react accordingly?  We can't say for sure, but at least there's room for pag-asa.

The Official Hostage Taking Story: It Just Keeps Getting Weirder

I have refrained from commenting about Aug. 23 hostage tragedy because so much has been said about it already that I wasn't sure what more I could add.  But as recent developments have come to light, I've decided to put in my two cents.

According to the Sept. 8 edition of the "Philippine Daily Inquirer", a respected local newspaper, witnesses said that the hostage taker, Rolando Mendoza,  arrived by car at 9:30 at the point where, according to the bus driver and a passenger, he commandeered the bus 15 minutes later. However —and here's the bizarre part— the SWAT team was alerted at 9:07 a.m and was deployed at 9:15.  This was of course long before the perpetrator seized the bus or even showed up at spot where he hijacked the vehicle. In other words, as the PDI said, the police were "tipped off" ahead of the event.

The attorney representing the SWAT team claims that this sequence time line  was erroneously reported as the result of an honest mistake and will be corrected, but the police stand by the original time that they were first notified of the event.  If that's the case,  it means at least one other person was in on the crime and for whatever reason dropped the dime on Mendoza.  Yet this wrinkle only surfaced today in the course of a hearing held by the committee investigating the takeover.

Now here's something else that's not clear to me, and I've not yet seen this point mentioned elsewhere:  Had Mendoza already targeted the particular tour bus that he hijacked?  If so, how did he know that the bus was going to be at the place, Fort Santiago, where he seized it?  Inasmuch as this vehicle was a tour bus and not a public utility transport, it didn't follow a schedule. Alternatively, perhaps it's a popular spot for tour buses and Mendoza was aware of that and instead happened to pick this one at random?

Also, when the PDI said Mendoza alighted from his car at the hijack location, it didn't say from which side, the passenger or driver's seat.  If the former, then does this mean that someone drove him to there?  If so, whoever that person was had to know what Mendoza was up to as he was already decked out in fatigues and carrying a rifle.  And if there was another person in the car, a likely suspect is his brother who later made a scene and was taken away by police at the location where the bus finally wound up at the Quirino Grandstand in Rizal Park.  When Mendoza saw his brother being dragged away, this supposedly set him off into the shooting frenzy that left eight passengers dead plus Mendoza.himself who was shot supposedly by police when they stormed the bus.

What apparently drove Mendoza to carry out the hijacking was hopelessness over his allegedly wrongful employment termination, attendant loss of retirement benefits, and subsequent denial of due process regarding his appeal of the dismissal. Perhaps out of desperation he figured that taking hostages was the only way that he could get the authorities to listen to him.  I certainly can't condone Mendoza's actions.   Yet I do understand how a perceived injustice that has cost a person his livelihood and reputation can cause him to become unhinged and lash out irrationally.

The possibility that Mendoza originally had a companion with him, the time line discrepancy , the unprofessional manner in which the police assaulted the bus to free the hostages, and the conditions under which Mendoza lost his job are just a few of the matters that I hope will be covered in the the panel's report which is due for release later this month.  IMO,  the information that's been made available thus far contains too many  anomalies. May truth not wind up as the ninth victim.