WHEN I was working as a Commissioner of the Philippine Year 2000 Commission (Y2K), I was troubled by the fact that many companies were already claiming that they were already compliant, even if there was no technical or legal basis for them to support their claims.
Realizing that it was a threat to national security to allow such a free-for-all of claims, I proposed to the Commission to adopt the testing standards of the British Standards Institute (BSI), because at that time, we did not have the time and resources to develop our own standards.
Fortunately, the Commission approved my proposal, and the rest is history.
Fast forward to today, I may no longer be in government, but I am still concerned (actually alarmed) about the fact that many companies are now claiming that their products are organic, even if there is no technical or legal basis for them to support their claims.
Like “being a legend in their own mind”, they are saying that their products are organic, either according to their own imagination, or perhaps according to their mother.
To solve this problem, I propose that we adopt a national standard that is based on an existing standard, like the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) standard, for example. This is a very important and urgent matter, because many products are now flooding the market, with their distributors claiming to be selling organic quality.
By the way, being organic does not automatically mean hygienic.
PENOLOGY VS DEV’T OF DETAINEES
There appears to be a conflict of interests in the role of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP).
While their agency name alludes to “penology” as one of their functions, their mandate states that it is responsible for the “safekeeping and development of people deprived of liberties” (PDLs).
The Merriam-Webster dictionary says that a “jail” is supposed to be a place to keep people who are awaiting trial or are held for minor crimes, whereas a “prison” is a place for people convicted of serious crimes.
I am sure that the distinction is clear enough for anyone to understand, but more often than not, these two terms are often used interchangeably.
Regardless of whether a facility is a “jail” or a “prison”, I think that the objective should be to reform or develop a person, and not to punish or penalize him or her.
In reality however, the opposite is happening in our “jails” and “prisons”, because they have become places where people become more hardened criminals, perhaps more severe than when they came in.
In theory, detainees of “jails” are not supposed to stay for more than one year, not unless they are convicted of minor crimes and are sentenced to longer detention time.
Assuming, however, that their detention period would not be extended, it would really be best to “develop” their character and their skills so that they could rejoin society as responsible and productive citizens./PN
