ON October 16, Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago’s anti-epal Senate Bill 1967—“An Act Prohibiting Public Officers from Claiming Credit through Signage Announcing a Public Works Project—made some real progress at last.

The Senate Civil Service and Public Works committees, which were tasked to tackle the bill since Senator Santiago filed it last year, formally endorsed SB 1967 for approval at the plenary session hall. The vote has yet to be taken.

But the consolidated version of the bill is a watered-down brew.

The bill to be voted on still prohibits politician-officials from having their names, pictures, initials and logos shown in billboards, tarpaulins, posters or any signs about any government project.

The bill empowers the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), local government units involved and in the NCR the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) to tear down epal signs.

But the weakened bill no longer punishes epal politicians but instead holds liable persons assigned to remove the signs and fail to do their duty. They would be charged administratively and punished.

This widely differs from Sen. Santiago’s original bill that would impose a year-long imprisonment and perpetual disqualification from government service of officials and politicians found guilty of violating the anti-epal law (if this bill is enacted).

Praise from many quarters
The bill has gained praise from many quarters, including President Benigno Aquino 3rd, whose dislike of self-promotion by officials drove him to ban the use of sirens (the so-called “wang-wang”) except by ambulances and police responding to emergencies.

The National Secretariat for Social Action (Nassa) of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines lauded Sentiago’s bill for being aligned to Biblical injunctions against boasting of one’s good works and much more against claiming undeserved credit as epal politicians do.

Fr. Edu Gariguez, executive secretary of CBCP-Nassa, said Santiago’s bill would also remind people of the Lord Jesus Christ’s teaching against advertising one’s good works and almsgiving.

Civil society organizations and most media outfits, including this paper, have rallied behind the bill all over the country.

The Department of Interior and Local Government, under the late Sec. Josse Robredo, launched an anti-epal campaign last year. With the help of media, the DILG ran a shame campaign against epal politicians.

In some places, local government officials have taken Sec. Robredo’s order to heart and sent out task forces to tear down politicians’ self-promotion billboards and tarpaulin posters.

This caused some quarters to protest.

The president of the Association of Information Officers in Metro Manila (AIMM), Paul Edward Sison, who is also the public information officer of Marikina City, complained that some of those carrying out the shame campaign were going against the DILG’s own memo permitting some billboards.

The DILG memo of September 23, 2010 bans billboards for government projects and vehicles displaying the faces and names of government officials. But it does not forbid billboards containing public service messages and calls for action and cooperation related to health, disaster, peace and order and announcements of public events and ceremonies.

Aside from Sen Santiago’s bill, Bayan Muna Congressmen Teddy Casino and Neri Colmenares also filed an anti-epal bill in the House of Representatives last year. It too has not moved as fast as the public would want it to.

Epal is Tagalog slang. It comes from “kapal muks” (an abbreviation of “kapal mukha” literally meaning “thick-faced”) and the term “maka-papel” meaning “role (papel) seeker” or “scene stealer.”