What can you say about the declaration of the State of National Emergency (PD 1017) in the Philippines?
108599
The Philippines has been on a political struggle for a long time, almost everybody from different political groups wants to be the ruling party, so the result is....what we have now in the philippines,slow economic growth,poverty and all sorts. Under PD1017, political crisis might be resolve,no rallies and demos,no armed struggle or be arrested, i think this is what my country needs now a harder implementation of rules so as to tame down these politicians with vested interest.
917814
di bahagi Fulfillment ng ang Requirements dahil sa ang pampangalawa antas\n\nThough, I don't know why you'd need, everyone in the Phillippines speaks English.
202814
I can't find the article online, but the article was published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on December 12, 2004.
57834
http://www.gov.ph/directory/main.asp?id=14
665652
its The Republic of the Philippines.
99053
Looks like the unit commander of the elite Rangers was planning a coup of President Arroyo.  According to news report here in the USA, the rumors have been spreading of a coup for the last few weeks.  Arroyo has declared a state of emergency to lockdown all the military forces in the barracks.  It gives me flashback of Marcos declaring martial law before he was overthrown by the people.
636028
non-Filipinos please do not type something you do not understand in our country because it will just make you look bad. Our country the Philippines is under the government of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo who I have to say is better than some of the past presidents. The Problem is that the opposition always finds a way to bring down the Gloria Administration in order for then to take full control of power. Most of corrupt officials belong to the opposition and for this I hate them. The president for me is very educated and has all the knowledge to govern the country. In the other hand most of the opposition is made up of people who have not finished college or actors who does not have all the experience to govern. some of the senators are also a waste for they only stay in power yet do nothing to help the country. I hope to give more power to the charter change of the president to parliamentary system because it will do a big difference in passing laws. It will also do good because the corrupt officials will be taken away from their seat of power. Many people hate the charter change yet most of these people do not even know what charter change is, they don't even know how the parliamentary system works. the following are some factors that hinders the growth of the economy and the country:\n1. Uneducated Filipinos who wants to prove nothing.\n2. Corrupt officials who want to stay in power.\n3. poor people who are paid to rally\n4. terrorist\n5. The opposition. Is it not ironic that the oppositions that want to make a better country only destroys the country by the pointless rallies they make that affects the economy.\n\ngood thing the president is there to keep the economy from collapsing.
1099056
Article IV: Citizenship\nSection 1.The following are citizens of the Philippines: \n\nThose who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution; \nThose whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines; \nThose born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and \nThose who are naturalized in accordance with law. \nSection 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens. \nSection 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by law.\n\nSection 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by their act or omission they are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.\n\nSection 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.
992003
That's an emergency???
50894
On June 5, 1898, Aguinaldo issued a decree setting aside June 12 as the day for the proclamation of Philippine independence. At the same time, he commissioned Julian Felipe, a composer from Cavite, to prepare a composition which would be played during the independence ceremonies. On June 11, Felipe showed Aguinaldo the draft of his musical composition, which was entitled Marcha Filipina Magdalo. Aguinaldo and the other revolutionary leaders, upon hearing the composition played on the piano, adopted it as the official march of the Philippines. Aguinaldo then requested Felipe to teach the music to the members of the band of San Francisco de Malabon so it could be played the next day. Felipe changed the title of the march to Marcha Nacional Filipina(Philippine National March). \nHistory of the Filipino People. Teodoro A. Agoncillo \nThe following day(June 12, 1898), the music band of San Francisco de Malabon played it for the first time during the unfurling of the Filipino flag at Kawit. The beautiful melody of the anthem stirred the people's patriotic fervor. \n\nFor more than a year, the anthem remained without words. Towards the end of August 1899, a young poet-soldier named Jose Palma(younger brother of Dr. Rafael Palma) wrote the poem entitled Filipinas. This poem expressed in elegant Spanish verses the ardent patriotism and fighting spirit of the Filipino people. It became the words of the anthem. At last the national anthem was complete -- with music and words. \n\nThe Philippines: A Unique Nation. Dr. Sonia M. Zaide \n \n Follow the link for more information.\n\nhttp://www.msc.edu.ph/centennial/anthem.html
1122159
Democratic statement.
554737
http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration.html
620583
the biggest problem of the philippines today is our lack of identity, our lack of knowledge about who we are and what we stand for as a people.  Without a clear stand on who we are as a nation, we would not have any clue on how to work together much less what we should work together on.  We havent the faintest idea about the goals we should have for our nation.  We are so busy just trying to survive with just the bare essentials. We are so caught up with how we can provide for our own families, just that. No clear national goals that the people truly embraces.  Kanya-kanya is the order of the day, especially in government! Its too overwhelming just thinking about this. We need a great leader who is capable of directing all our attention and energies on putting our act together. Really working together and sacrificing personal gains first.  That's another big problem, the absence of a truly capable honest to goodness ethical leader, and still another problem... a followership that would rally behind this great leader.  If we shall ever have both, that would certainly be the day for our beloved country, the Philippines!
921012
binabati kita sa iyong ika-18 na kaarawan.. sana masaya ka, na sa raw na ito ay kasama mo ung mga taong mahalaga sa iyo.\n\nwag ka sanang magmadali sa mga bagay-nagay sa buhay mo.  mas malawak na ang mundo mo, mas madami ka ng makikilala, wag mo sanag makalimutan ang mga aral ng magulang, kamag-anak at kaibigan mo.\n\nwag mong kalimutang unahin ang mga mahahalagang bagay na ikakabuti mo.  ang kasiyahan laging anjan yan pero ang mga oportunidad, bihira yan.\n\nmaayos na kalusugan sa iyo at sana maging masaya ka sa iyong sisimulang bagong kabanata.\n\nPwede na ba o corny na??!!  Bahala ka ng mag-isip.
547327
G.R. No. L-44678 April 8, 1986\n\nFRANCISCO BALIGWAT, petitioner, \nvs.\nHON. COURT OF APPEALS and ALBINO ESTAVOS, respondents.\n\nRamon P. Mabanag for petitioner. \n\nDulcisimo Tampus for private respondent. \n\n \n\nPATAJO, J.:\n\nIn this petition for review of the decision of the then Court of Appeals dated July 20, 1976, petitioner, the tenant of private respondent over 1 1/2 hectares land devoted exclusively to coconut trees, seeks a ruling from this Court that personal cultivation by the landowner, one of the grounds for the dispossession of a tenant under Section 50 of Republic Act 1199, otherwise known as the Agricultural Tenancy Act of the Philippines, had been repealed by Section 7 of Republic Act 6389, and that, therefore, he could not be ejected from the landholding in question on the alleged ground that the landowner wanted to cultivate the land himself personally. The decision of the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Court of Agrarian Reforms which denied the motion to dismiss filed by petitioner of the complaint to eject him from the landholding in question, said Court holding that Section 7 of Republic Act 6389 amending Section 36 of the Code of Agrarian Reforms of the Philippines, Republic Act 3844 deleting personal cultivation by the lessor-owner as ground for dispossessing the tenant-lessee does not apply to coconut lands. \n\nThe undisputed facts of this case is stated by the Court of Appeals in its decision subject of the present petition for review as follows: \n\nDefendant Francisco Baligwat is the tenant of plaintiff Albino Estavas over one and one-half hectares of his coconut land in Pualas, Tubod, Lanao del Norte, Estavas wanted to eject Baligwat because he wanted to cultivate the land personally, so he notified the defendant of his desire to personally cultivate the land one year before he filed this case on April 4, 1972 by sending a letter (Exhibit 'B') written on February 7, 1971, addressed to the defendant at Pualas, Tubod, Lanao del Norte. He mailed that letter by ordinary mail and the defendant received it through the Barrio Captain. He also complied with the requirements of law to inform the Court regarding his desire to personally cultivate the land as shown by a copy of the notice he filed in Court, (Exhibit 'C') received on February 15, 1971 (Exhibit 'C-l').\n\nAfter one year, he sent another letter to the defendant re-minding him that after February, 1972, the latter was to vacate the premises (Exhibit 'D'). Because the defendant did not vacate the premises, plaintiff filed his petition in this case on April 4, 1972 (Exhibit 'E'). \n\nEstavas wanted to personally cultivate the land because he had no job and he has had experience as farmer of the coconut land of his father. The entire area of the coconut land is 26 hectares. The tenanted area of the said land is one hectare and a half. Plaintiff has four children all of majority age, with children of their own. He wants to cultivate personally the area of one and a half hectares use the rest of the 26 hectares are cultivated by his children who are all farmers, including the only one of them who is employed and who visits the place every month. Four hectares of the land were acquired by his wife and the other portions were acquired by him and his wife. He has a house on the land in question. Three of his children have their own houses on the portions of land they are occupying and cultivating. \n\nWe are in full agreement with the holding of the Court of Appeals upholding the Court a quo that insofar as coconut lands are concerned, personal cultivation by the owner-lessor, a ground for dispossession of the tenant-lessee under Section 50 of Republic Act 1199, is still a valid ground for dispossession of a tenant. This is so because Section 35 of Republic Act 3844 expressly provides that with respect to lands principally planted to citrus, coconuts, cacao, durian and other similar permanent
144878
Proclamation 1017 commands the Armed Forces of the Philippines "to maintain law and order throughout the Philippines, prevent or suppress all forms of lawless violence, as well any act of insurrection or rebellion, and to enforce obedience to all the laws and to all decrees, orders and regulations."
1017326
On June 5, 1898, a week before Philippine independence would be declared, Julian Felipe, a local pianist from Kawit, Cavite, arrived at the home of Maximo Inocencio, one of Cavite's thirteen martyrs during the revolution. Upon his arrival, the leader of the revolution, General Emilio Aguinaldo, asked Felipe to play a march written by a Filipino in Hong Kong. However, Aguinaldo was not satisfied with this march. Recognizing Felipe's skills, he asked him to compose a more soul-rousing tune that would install courage and patriotism in the hearts of every Filipino.\n\nOn June 11, the day before the declaration of independence, Felipe arrived again and played his tune to the revolutionary leaders. The leaders unanimously approved it as the national hymn. Felipe called his\nwork the "Marcha Filipina Magdalo."\n\nOn June 12, Felipe's tune was played during the hoisting of the Philippine flag at the historic window at the Aguinaldo mansion. The march was renamed the "Marcha Nacional Filipina," and immediately became the National Anthem. However, the anthem still lacked words. The next year, a young soldier named José Palma penned the poem "Filipinas" in Spanish, to match the music of the anthem. It was adopted as the official lyrics.