President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has initiated a “lifestyle check” for executive officials to combat rampant corruption. He and Vice President Sara Duterte will also undergo this scrutiny. However, Congress and the judiciary are not included, though they can opt for it voluntarily.
But what’s the real purpose of this check? Can it genuinely expose hidden wealth among politicians or fix the reported P1.7 trillion capital loss? Many wonder if the public even cares about the president participating in this check. Wasn’t it expected for him to disclose his own wealth before asking officials to do the same?
A “lifestyle check” is vague. Who decides the criteria? How is it enforced? Will it cover just the official’s lifestyle at home, or also their luxurious experiences abroad? For instance, is attending a car race in Singapore or dining with dignitaries included?
Opposition Senator Risa Hontiveros has called for the president to make his Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) public. While praised for her stance, the SALN’s effectiveness is debatable. Officials are required to disclose their assets upon taking office, but many may hide wealth once in power. Instead of focusing solely on these declarations, we should highlight the extravagant lifestyles of some public officials.
A recent article reported on a contractor-politician and their wife, who own a fleet of luxury cars valued at over P40 million each. This kind of wealth should spark questions about its source, especially amid government contracts. Even if the wife lost the latest election, her wealth remains suspect and should be investigated.
The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee is currently examining corruption, but there’s a growing concern that surveys and investigations may not suffice to quell public outrage. Citizens are losing faith in government responses, and immediate, effective actions are necessary.
Former Defense Secretary Norberto Gonzales expressed worries in a recent interview about the possibility of citizens seeking solutions outside the constitutional framework. He cautions that if official pathways fail, the military could decide to intervene, which would be a troubling scenario.
Some groups are now discussing constitutional revisions to address the crisis. Finding a national consensus is crucial, but this task is challenging amid pressures from both constitutional and non-constitutional forces.
In summary, while a “lifestyle check” sounds like a step toward accountability, it may not be enough. True focus should be on investigating unexplained wealth among officials and addressing the deeper issues of public trust. For further insights on government accountability measures, refer to the Transparency International report.
Source link
The,lifestyle,check,is,not,enough
