Repatriation, OWWA, and the OFW

It did not surprise me at all when Secretary Ermita said that Malacanang was not insulted with the comment of the Lebanese ambassador to the Philippines. The Lebanese ambassador said the representatives of various government agencies charge with the evacuation of overseas Filipinos in war-torn Lebanon should stop bickering and quarreling about funds, but should concentrate on their job. Ermita was right, why should Malacanang be insulted with that simple statement of fact when it has ignored more serious accusations before?

What surprised me was Ermita’s admission that there was really some problem in the availability of funds for the evacuation. That admission plus the comment made by Ambassador Al Francis Bichara that his office is running out of funds caused the Senate and several cause oriented groups and individuals to call for an investigation into the use and status of the OWWA funds.

The Senate for its part called its own hearing on the matter which, as usual was snubbed by Malacanang. Senator Miriam Santiago ended filing a resolution calling for the filing of plunder case against former President Fidel Ramos, for having directed the investment of Five Hundred Million pesos in OWWA funds in the Smokey Mountain Project which up to now is has not yet been fully recovered. Atty. Frank Chavez also filed with the Office of the Ombudsman charges against several government officials, including GMA, for the unauthorized transfer of OWWA funds to the PhilHealth. The transfer enabled GMA to distribute PhilHelalth insurance cards to thousands of Filipinos in the rural areas before the 2004 elections.

All the charges filed are premised on the fact that the OWWA fund is a trust fund. As such it cannot be used for purposes other than those mandated by law. The same principle was also the premise of a case filed by a group of migrant and OFW oriented groups headed by the Philippines Migrants Rights Watch, against the Board of OWWA seeking to nullify the OWWA Omnibus Policy which said Board adopted in 2004. Among the most contested provision of said policy was the requirement for every overseas worker to pay $25 every two years. This provision, the petitioners said, shifted the burden in the payment of contribution from the employer to the worker. It also made access to benefits from the Fund member-based, as those who do not renew their membership contribution, by paying $25 every two years, will not get any benefit from the Fund, other than burial expense.

With the OWWA Fund now being used in the evacuation of OFW in Lebanon (including non-OFW Filipinos who are married to Lebanese nationals), most of whom are undocumented, meaning they did not go through the POEA, and therefore did not pay the mandatory contribution, it is ironic that some OFW as well as non-OFW organizations are questioning whether the use of said Fund, which is now supposed to be member-based is not against the OWWA omnibus policy. Why should those who did not contribute to the Fund be first to benefit from it? was the singular question being asked.

While the law provides that OWWA leads the repatriation efforts in case of emergency, it did not say that OWWA Funds will be used. What the law provided is the establishment of an Emergency Repatriation fund coming from a yearly appropriation of at least 100 million pesos by Congress. But Congress, while taking care of their annual “country side development fund” failed to provide for the emergency need of those it loves to call modern day heroes.

Overseas Filipinos in Saudi Arabia, it is high time to think of establishing your own emergency repatriation fund. You have seen that our government is not ready to provide the required assistance in the event of an emergency. Many of you will have died before they will be able to make a decision. Decide for yourselves, now.