Tag: Supreme Court

Philippines Supreme Court Upholds Law Granting VAT Refund To Foreign Tourists

Philippines Supreme Court Upholds Law Granting VAT Refund To Foreign Tourists

carlocarrasco

Remember the law granting value-added tax refund (VAT refund) to foreign tourists signed a few years ago? That law was challenged and recently the Supreme Court of the Philippines upheld the constitutionality of Republic Act 12079 (the act creating a VAT refund mechanism for non-resident tourists), according to a news report by GMA News.

To put things in perspective, posted below is an excerpt from the report of GMA News. Some parts in boldface…

The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the constitutionality of a law that grants value-added tax (VAT) refunds on select local purchases by non-resident foreign tourists.

In a 30-page decision, the SC En Banc dismissed a petition challenging the validity of Republic Act 12079, or an act creating a VAT refund mechanism for non-resident tourists, adding Section 112-A to the National Internal Revenue Code.

“Granting VAT refund to foreign tourists was not arbitrarily done. It is a policy decision based on legitimate state interests, i.e. the need to remain competitive as a global tourist destination,” the SC said.

“In fine, foreign tourists may be granted privileges and benefits that are not extended to Filipino citizens, so as long as these distinctions are based on reasonable and justifiable classifications, as in here,” it added.

According to the SC, the VAT refund applies to goods brought from duly accredited stores and taken out of the country within 60 days from purchase. The goods must be priced at least P3,000 per transaction.

Meanwhile, the SC said Section 5 of the law’s implementing rules and regulations limit the refund to retail and tangible goods, including clothing, apparel, electronics, gadgets, jewelry, accessories, souvenirs, food or non-food consumables, and other items intended for personal use.

The petitioner, however, argued that the law violates the constitutional guarantee of equal protection as it excludes Filipino citizens.

For its part, the SC said equal protection does not require identical treatment for all persons.

It said the act also distinguishes foreign tourists from Filipino citizens.

According to the SC, the VAT refund system follows the basic rule of VAT that goods are taxed where they are consumed. If the goods are consumed in the Philippines, they remain subject to Philippine VAT.

Meanwhile, the SC added that VAT refund for foreign tourists is a well-established international practice.

“The Philippines is among the last few countries in Asia to adopt such a system. Our Asian neighbors, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, China, and Japan have long implemented this VAT refund mechanism for foreign tourists,” it said.

Let me end this post by asking you readers: What is your reaction to this recent development? Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision on the law about VAT refund for foreign tourists? Apart from the VAT refund for foreign tourists, what problems that plagued the Philippine tourism industry should the government solve this year?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at @CarloCarrascoPH as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram athttps://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

US Supreme Court Approves Trump’s Move To End Temporary Protective Status For Haitians And Other Refugees

US Supreme Court Approves Trump’s Move To End Temporary Protective Status For Haitians And Other Refugees

carlocarrasco

Remember years ago when the failed US President Joe Biden welcomed a massive number of Haitians to the United States with the temporary protective status (TPS)? That finally ended when the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) approved US President Donald Trump’s authority to put a definitive stop at the TPS of the Haitians as well as other refugees living in America, according to news reports by Breitbart and CBN News. The vote was 6-3.

This development is justice for the nation and the many Americans whose lives got disrupted severely when the numerous, protected Haitians arrived in their local communities causing spikes in rents, taking job opportunities away, entering schools and the like. It also clarifies that the US President has the authority on TPS.

To put things in perspective, posted below is the excerpt from the Breitbart report. Some parts in boldface…

In a 6-3 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court has endorsed President Donald Trump’s authority to end “Temporary Protected Status” for at least 450,000 Haitian migrants welcomed by President Joe Biden.

The judges said Congress’s law bars any judicial review of the White House TPS decisions:

The TPS statute plainly bars consideration of respondents’ non-constitutional claims. It allows “no judicial review of any determination… with respect to the… termination” of a TPS designation. 8 U. S. C. §1254a(b)(5)(A). The term “determination” can be used to describe either an individual decision or the whole process leading to a final decision, and under either understanding of the term, §1254a(b)(5)(A) squarely bars all of respondents’ non-constitutional claims.

The decision is good news for many Americans, including the citizens of Springfield, Ohio. The Ohio town has been radically disrupted because the local elite welcomed at least 10,000 wage-cutting, rent-spiking, diversity-boosting Haitian migrants into the city’s jobs, homes, schools, welfare offices, and roadways.

The decision means that the Haitian migrants will lose their work permits, access to government aid, drivers’ licenses, and legal residency. In turn, employers will face fines if they keep employing the Haitians instead of Americans, and landlords will have to negotiate cheaper rents for Americans as Haitians move out of the local housing market.

Many Haitians were actually provided visas by Biden’s officials to fly from Haiti to American towns — despite the huge economic and civic harm to the millions of left-behind Haitians. The crippling outflow included many doctors, cops, teachers, and politicians.

But the decision is also an economic loss for many investors and a management headache for many employers who hired Haitian migrants instead of competing for Americans in the national labor market.

In April, Breitbart News reported that pro-TPS lobbyists had submitted a legal brief by pro-migration economists which said Biden’s 1.4 million TPS migrants from Haiti, Venezuela, and El Salvador create $20 billion in annual profits for investors.

The report of CBN News mentions Syrians and Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s highly unusual way of reading her dissent from the bench. Some parts in boldface…

The Supreme Court issued a key decision on the issue of immigration on Thursday, ruling that the Trump administration has the authority to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for certain refugees living in the U.S.

The immigrants affected by this case were granted Temporary Protected Status under a law passed by Congress in 1990. The program allows the Homeland Security Secretary to let people from certain countries remain and work in the U.S. when conditions back home make it unsafe to return. That same law also gives the secretary the authority to end those protections.

“It gives people protection while the country’s in turmoil or after they suffer a hurricane,” explained Border Czar Tom Homan during a press briefing Thursday.

The Trump administration first announced its plans to end TPS for Haitians in the summer of last year, and for Syrians in the fall. Those decisions were put on hold by lower courts until Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling.

“The decision creates the type of panic, in a sense, that people in our community are wondering what the best action to do now,” said Viles Dorsainvil, who runs a support center for Haitians in Springfield, Ohio.

He and his wife are also now at risk of deportation.

“We are just TPS holders and asylum seekers. So, we’ll be relying on our asylum. We have our permit in the asylum, that we will continue to work. We will continue to do what we gotta do, but we don’t know how long,” Dorsainvil said.

Thursday’s ruling was 6-3, the majority saying Congress gave the Homeland Security Secretary broad discretion over TPS, including the authority to decide when to end it.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor strongly disagreed with the ruling, taking the unusual step of reading her dissent aloud from the bench. “The consequences of today’s decision are predictable,” said Justice Sotomayor. “More people will die.”

“More people will turn back and be subjected to violence because of something they cannot or should not have to change about themselves, such as their race, religion, nationality, or political opinion.”

Following her comments, Justice Samuel Alito, who read the majority decision, remarked that, had he known she planned to read her dissent from the bench, he would have said more in defense of the majority decision.

Let me end this piece by asking you readers: What is your reaction to this development? Has your local community been flooded by foreigners with TPS? Do you think the government should start the process of declaring temporary protective status illegal? Apart from the mentioned investors, who else do you think makes a lot of money out of TPS foreigners in America? What should the Trump administration do about the remaining TPS foreigners from other nations? Do you think US Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor tarnished the Court’s image with her unusual move?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at @CarloCarrascoPH as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram athttps://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

Philippine Exporters Feeling Uneasy Over Trump’s New 15% Global Tariff

Philippine Exporters Feeling Uneasy Over Trump’s New 15% Global Tariff

carlocarrasco

The new 15% tariff on imports announced by US President Donald Trump after reacting to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision is already troubling exporters of the Philippines, according to a report by BusinessWorld.

There is concern that the new tariff may dampen the export recovery of the Philippines. It should be recalled that the American tariff on Philippine-made goods was set at 19% following the meeting between President Trump and Philippine President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr. last year.

To put things in perspective, posted below is an excerpt from the BusinessWorld news report. Some parts in boldface…

THE United States government’s plan to impose a new 15% tariff on imports may dampen the Philippines’ export recovery and disrupt supply chains, according to analysts.

“Under a 15% tariff, there might be a disruption in the supply chain, because other countries might negotiate or diverge [to other markets],” Philippine Exporters Confederation, Inc. President Sergio R. Ortiz-Luis, Jr. said in a phone call.

“Unfortunately, our competitors here in the ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) are supported by their governments, but we aren’t,” he added.

Mr. Ortiz-Luis said the Philippine government must resume negotiations with its US counterparts to ensure exports remain competitive.

Philippine Institute for Development Studies Senior Research Fellow John Paolo R. Rivera said the new tariffs could dampen export recovery, especially for electronics, garments, and agricultural sectors.

“The renewed threat of a 15% global tariff signals that protectionist risks remain and could dampen export recovery if implemented, especially for semiconductors and intermediate goods integrated into US supply chains,” he said in a Viber message.

US President Donald J. Trump said he wants to impose a new 15% duty on US imports from all countries, starting Tuesday, Reuters reported. (Read related story “Asian economies weigh impact of fresh Trump tariff, uncertainties” on S1/11).

This after the US Supreme Court struck down his previous tariff program, ruling that Mr. Trump had exceeded his authority when he imposed higher tariffs under an economic emergency law.

Government officials emphasized that the US remains an important trading and investment partner.

“We will continue to engage with (the US). A stable and predictable arrangement with the US will be very beneficial to our stakeholders,” Trade Undersecretary Allan B. Gepty said in a Viber message.

Finance Secretary Frederick D. Go earlier said that the majority of the country’s exports — like semiconductors and key agricultural goods — were already exempted before the US Supreme Court’s ruling.

The US has long been the Philippines’ biggest export market. From January to December 2025, the value of Philippine exports to the US stood at $13.44 billion.

“We don’t know under what authority he (Mr. Trump) will impose those tariffs, and if these will last. We will have to wait until the dust settles to properly assess the impact of his new universal tariffs,” Foundation for Economic Freedom President Calixto V. Chikiamco said in a Viber message.

Reuters reported the new US tariffs are grounded in a separate but untested law, known as Section 122, that allows tariffs up to 15% but requires congressional approval to extend them after 150 days.

Foreign Buyers Association of the Philippines President Robert M. Young said its members have been resuming talks with its US buyers.

“We have survived, for the last eight months, the US’ 19% tariff. So, I think we have to just go on with what we are doing, and we’ll try our best to just lower our price to be competitive with other ASEAN nations,” he said via telephone.

Let me end this piece by asking you readers: What is your reaction to this development? Do you think Filipino exporters will do better with the new 15% tariff instead of the previous one set at 19%? If you are managing a company that makes products for export mainly to the United States, do you have any backup plans when dealing with new tariffs?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at  @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram athttps://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

Trump To Hike Global Tariff To 15%

Trump To Hike Global Tariff To 15%

carlocarrasco

Wow! US President Donald Trump sure acts fast and with certainty. Following his reaction to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision that found America’s sweeping global tariffs unconstitutional, President Trump announced that he will increase the rate of his new global tariff on imports from the initial 10% to 15%, according to a Kyodo News report.

To put things in perspective, posted below is an excerpt from the Kyodo News report. Some parts in boldface…

U.S. President Donald Trump said Saturday he will raise the rate of his new global tariff on imports from all countries from the 10 percent announced a day earlier to 15 percent, following the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down a core pillar of his economic policy.

Trump announced the sudden change on social media, adding that during “the next short number of months,” his administration will consider introducing other “legally permissible” tariffs.

On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariffs targeting nearly all of America’s trading partners, as well as fentanyl-related levies he applied to goods from China, Canada and Mexico.

The court ruled that Trump overstepped his presidential powers when he used a 1970s-era emergency law last year to impose those tariffs.

Hours later, Trump responded furiously to the decision at a press conference, announcing the new, across-the-board tariff under a different legal framework, which has never before been used by a U.S. president to impose trade restrictions.

The 10 percent tariff, set to take effect Tuesday, is based on Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. It allows import restrictions, including duties of up to 15 percent, if there are “large and serious” trade deficits. Such measures only last 150 days unless Congress approves an extension.

On Saturday, Trump did not say when he plans to raise the rate to the statutory limit.

Let me end this piece by asking you readers: What is your reaction to this development? Considering Trump’s latest action with the new global tariffs, do you think the Supreme Court of the United States made the wrong decision? What is your honest opinion about tariffs right now? Do you think SCOTUS was influenced by foreign entities which opposed Trump’s tariffs?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at  @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram athttps://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

Trump Responds To US Supreme Court Decision With New 10% Global Tariff

Trump Responds To US Supreme Court Decision With New 10% Global Tariff

carlocarrasco

In response to the United States Supreme Court’s decision that found America’s sweeping global tariffs unconstitutional, US President Donald Trump announced he will impose a 10% global tariff, according to a news report by Kyodo News.

To put things in perspective, posted below is an excerpt from the Kyodo News report. Some parts in boldface…

U.S. President Donald Trump said Friday that he will impose a new 10 percent “global tariff” after the Supreme Court struck down his duties targeting nearly all of America’s trading partners, delivering a major blow to his signature economic policy and likely complicating Washington’s relations with the rest of the world.

Upholding lower court findings, the highest court ruled that Trump overstepped his presidential powers when he used a 1970s-era emergency law last year to impose the so-called reciprocal tariffs, as well as fentanyl-related levies he applied to goods from China, Canada and Mexico.

Calling the ruling “deeply disappointing,” Trump said, “I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country.“

At a press conference, Trump unleashed a barrage of criticism against the justices, accusing them of being “very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution,” and claimed that the court has been influenced by “foreign interests.”

At the center of the case was Trump’s invocation of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to swiftly bring the tariffs into effect without congressional approval, even though taxation is an enumerated power of the legislative branch.

During oral arguments in early November, a majority of the court’s nine justices, six of whom were appointed by Republican presidents, already appeared skeptical of Trump’s authority to bypass Congress in levying the double-digit tariffs.

Writing for the final 6-3 judgment, Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative appointed by President George W. Bush, said Trump could not legally justify his extraordinary action.

“The president asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it,” Roberts said.

Tariffs are the centerpiece of Trump’s “America First” agenda. The Republican president has argued they will revitalize U.S. manufacturing, create jobs, reduce the country’s debt, raise tax revenue and equip the United States with more negotiating leverage to extract concessions from other countries.

In the early months of last year, the Trump administration introduced the tariffs on goods from China, Canada and Mexico, accusing the top three U.S. trading partners of not doing enough to stem the flood of deadly fentanyl coming into the United States.

In April, Trump announced “Liberation Day” tariffs, which consist of a 10 percent universal tariff, plus varying additional duties on dozens of countries with which the United States runs significant trade deficits.

The emergency law, known as IEEPA, stipulates that it can be exercised “to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy.”

No president had previously used the law to impose tariffs, with countless U.S. and foreign companies suing the Trump administration to challenge the legality of the IEEPA-based measures and to ensure they receive refunds should the Supreme Court invalidate them.

The Supreme Court did not say whether the U.S. government must refund revenue from the tariffs.

At the press conference, Trump suggested that he would not refund the hundreds of billions of dollars, and the issue would end up in a long court battle.

Trump said foreign countries must be “so happy, and they’re dancing in the streets, but they won’t be dancing for long — that I can assure you.”

He stressed that his administration has “very powerful alternatives” to replace the tariffs the court “incorrectly rejected.”

While voicing willingness to advance his trade agenda by other means, Trump said he will introduce a new 10 percent tariff on imports from all countries, on top of the existing duties.

He said the additional tariff will be backed by Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which permits him to levy such a measure for up to 150 days if there are serious trade deficits that need to be addressed.

Under the country-specific tariff framework, Trump initially threatened to impose a 25 percent levy on Japan, but the figure was lowered to 15 percent after months of negotiations, in return for Tokyo committing to massive investments in the United States in the coming years.

As Japan also promised to buy more American products, a trade agreement struck by the two countries resulted in Japanese automobiles being subject to a 15 percent tariff, down from the hefty 27.5 percent rate that took effect in April.

Let me end this piece by asking you readers: What is your reaction to this development? Are you surprised with the US Supreme Court’s decision? What do you think will happen to the economy of the United States as a result of the US Supreme Court’s decision?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at  @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram athttps://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

Tokyo High Court Rules Japan’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban Constitutional

Tokyo High Court Rules Japan’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban Constitutional

carlocarrasco

Recently in Japan, the Tokyo High Court ruled that the nation’s ban on same-sex marriage is constitutional, according to a news release published by Kyodo News. Already the woke mob, the liberals, the social justice warriors (SJWs) and the LGBTQ extremists – including those who are not even Japanese and are based outside of Japan – condemned the decision through social media and a fight at the Supreme Court of Japan is anticipated.

To put things in perspective, posted below is an excerpt from the news release of Kyodo News. Some parts in boldface…

A Japanese court on Friday ruled that the country’s ban on same-sex marriage is constitutional, becoming the only high court to uphold the state’s position among six rulings on similar lawsuits filed nationwide.

The Tokyo High Court concluded the current civil law provisions that do not allow same-sex marriage are still reasonable under the current circumstances, in contrast with five earlier high court rulings in Sapporo, Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka and Fukuoka that said the lack of legal recognition of same sex marriage violated the Constitution. Those other rulings, however, all rejected compensation claims.

In handing down the latest ruling, Presiding Judge Ayumi Higashi said that the current marriage system is useful in preparing an environment for raising children, and that it is reasonable to interpret “husband and wife” as a man and a woman.

The ruling also said that the freedom of marriage guaranteed under Article 24 of the Constitution does not apply to same-sex couples, noting that “part of the effects of marriage can be substituted by contracts,” and that people can marry if they change their legal sex.

The court expressed concern, though, over stalled discussions in parliament, warning that if this situation continues, it could lead to violations of the constitutional guarantee of equality under the law. It also urged that being treated based on gender identity is an important legal interest.

As the plaintiffs plan to appeal, the Supreme Court is expected to issue a unified decision next year at the earliest.

In the latest lawsuit, eight plaintiffs in their 40s to 60s had sought 1 million yen ($6,400) in damages each, arguing civil law provisions that do not allow same-sex marriage violate the right to equality ensured under the Constitution and its guarantee of freedom of marriage.

The government denied that the provisions are unconstitutional, arguing that the Constitution defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

The plaintiffs had appealed a Tokyo District Court ruling in March 2024 that found the situation to be “in a state of unconstitutionality” but rejected their damages claims.

Among 12 high and lower court rulings so far, the Osaka District Court was the only other court that ruled that the lack of legal recognition is constitutional.

Let me end this piece by asking you readers: What is your reaction to this development? Do you seriously believe that having same-sex marriage (AKA gay marriage) will be beneficial to Japan socially and economically? Do you think that the LGBTQ and Leftist forces from around the world are secretly funding the same-sex marriage movement in Japan? Do you think it is inevitable for the Supreme Court of Japan to declare the same-sex marriage ban constitutional? Are you convinced that same-sex marriage in Japan will ruin not only Japanese families but also the nation’s society?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at  @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram athttps://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

Most Wanted Man in Muntinlupa City Arrested For Qualified Rape and Lascivious Conduct

Most Wanted Man in Muntinlupa City Arrested For Qualified Rape and Lascivious Conduct

carlocarrasco

Recently in the progressive City of Muntinlupa, the most wanted person was apprehended by the local police over charges of qualified rape and lascivious conduct, according to a Manila Bulletin news report.

To put things in perspective, posted below is an excerpt from the news article of the Manila Bulletin. Some parts in boldface…

Police arrested a 42-year-old man tagged as Muntinlupa’s No. 1 top most wanted person for qualified rape and lascivious conduct on Friday, Sept. 6.

The suspect, identified as alias “Ranielle,” was nabbed in Barangay Alabang, Muntinlupa by operatives from the Warrant and Subpoena Unit of Muntinlupa police.

He is facing charges of lascivious conduct under Republic Act 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act) and qualified rape under Republic Act 11648 (An Act Promoting for Stronger Protection Against Rape and Sexual Exploitation and Abuse, Increasing the Age for Determining the Commission of Statutory Rape).

According to the Supreme Court website, lascivious conduct, based on the implementing rules and regulations of Republic Act, 7610, is “the intentional touching, either directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, or the introduction of any object into the genitalia, anus or mouth, of any person, whether of the same or opposite sex, with intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person, bestiality, masturbation, lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a person.”

The Supreme Court Office of the Spokesperson stated that “qualified rape, on the other hand, refers to sexual intercourse with a woman against her will, committed under any of the circumstances listed in Article 266-B of the RPC (Revised Penal Code), such as abuse of authority, moral ascendancy, relationship, or the victim’s vulnerability.”

Presiding Judge Phillip Aguinaldo of the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 207 issued the warrant of arrest. Bail was set at P200,000 for each of four counts of lascivious conduct and no bail for qualified rape.

Let me end this post by asking you readers: What is your reaction to this recent development? If you are a resident of Muntinlupa City, are there many property owners in your local community who have yet to know about the real property tax amnesty offered?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at  @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

For more South Metro Manila community news and developments, come back here soon. Also say NO to fake news, NO to irresponsible journalism, NO to misinformation, NO to plagiarists, NO to reckless publishers and NO to sinister propaganda when it comes to news and developments. For South Metro Manila community developments, member engagement, commerce and other relevant updates, join the growing South Metro Manila Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/342183059992673

Yamsuan, Bernabe and elected Parañaque teammates sworn in at Supreme Court

Yamsuan, Bernabe and elected Parañaque teammates sworn in at Supreme Court

carlocarrasco

Yesterday at the Supreme Court here in the Philippines, the newly elected members of Parañaque-based Team Pag-Asa were formally sworn in by SC Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan.

Sworn into office by Gaerlan were Brian Yamsuan as Parañaque District 2 Representative, Benjo Bernabe as Parañaque City Vice Mayor, Tess de Asis as Parañaque District 2 City Councilor, Binky Favis as Parañaque District 2 City Councilor and Shannine Olivarez as Parañaque District 1 City Councilor.

Brian Yamsuan sworn-in as Parañaque City District 2 Representative. (image captured from Brian Yamsuan Facebook page video)

Each of them was formally sworn in by turn and with the presence of their respective family members. Present during Benjo Bernabe’s taking of the oath of office was former Parañaque City Mayor Florencio “Jun” Bernabe. Bernabe’s turn can be viewed in full by clicking https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ATYd4yrBC/

For the newcomers reading this, Parañaque City has two districts and each one has eight seats for the City Council. The Vice Mayor is elected throughout the city. The new term of office for those who got elected or re-elected will start on June 30, 2025.

Benjo Bernabe sworn in as Vice Mayor of Parañaque City. Present were members of his family, including former Mayor Florencio “Jun” Bernabe. (image captured from Benjo Bernabe Official Facebook page video)
The newly sworn-in Team Pag-Asa members showing their certificates in the presence of Supreme Court Associate Justice.Samuel Gaerlan. From left to right are Parañaque District 2 City Councilor Binky Favis, District 2 City Councilor Tess de Asis, District 1 City Councilor Shannine Olivarez, District 2 Representative Brian Yamsuan and Vice Mayor Benjo Bernabe. (photo source – Benjo Bernabe Facebook account)

To see the final results of the 2025 Parañaque City elections, click https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/eleksyon/2025/results/local/NATIONAL+CAPITAL+REGION/NATIONAL+CAPITAL+REGION+-+FOURTH+DISTRICT/CITY+OF+PARA%25C3%2591AQUE/?tfb_a&smartsearch

Let me end this post by asking you readers: What do you think about this recent development? If you are a resident of Parañaque, are you hopeful that meaningful and positive reforms in the city will begin once the newly sworn-in Team Pag-Asa members take office?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at  @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

For more South Metro Manila community news and developments, come back here soon. Also say NO to fake news, NO to irresponsible journalism, NO to misinformation, NO to plagiarists, NO to reckless publishers and NO to sinister propaganda when it comes to news and developments. For South Metro Manila community developments, member engagement, commerce and other relevant updates, join the growing South Metro Manila Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/342183059992673

What to watch on YouTube right now – Part 72

What to watch on YouTube right now – Part 72

carlocarrasco

Welcome back my readers, YouTube viewers and all others who followed this series of articles focused on YouTube videos worth watching. Have you been searching for something fun or interesting to watch on YouTube? Do you feel bored right now and you crave for something to see on the world’s most popular online video destination?

I recommend you check out the following videos I found.

#1 Christine Grace Smith discusses gender differences and major UK Supreme Court decision – I like watching Christine Grace Smith’s commentary about society as well as her ways on pointing out the wrong and the twisted. Recently the United Kingdom’s (UK) Supreme Court delivered its major decision on the legal definition of the term woman in relation to human biology. Christine Grace Smith not only calls the UK Supreme Court decision a win for women (read: men who believe they are women are clearly NOT women at all), she also explains a lot of relevant stuff and details as well. It’s a win for women and a defeat for the transgender mob. Watch and learn from her video below.

#2 Predator reaction videos by Ashleigh Burton, VKunia, Popcorn in Bed and You, Me and the Movies  – The 1980s was a memorable decade of R-rated action movies from Hollywood. Among them was the action-packed science fiction film Predator that starred Arnold Schwarzenegger and the movie itself had a careful blend of elements from specific genres under the direction of John McTiernan. By today’s standards, Predator is a classic and now is a good time to see how it impacts YouTubers like Ashleigh Burton, VKunia, Popcorn in Bed and You, Me and the Movies through their respective reaction videos.

#3 PatmanQC examines the Alien vs. Predator arcade game – In 1994, Capcom released Alien vs. Predator in video arcades around the world. In addition to being well received by game critics, the game became a big hit commercially and added to Capcom’s credibility as an arcade industry player. If you are wondering how the arcade game first started, who the developers were and why the game was never ported to any console, watch and learn from PatmanQC’s in-depth video below.

#4 Decker Shado’s review of The Fifth Element – Back in 1997, The Fifth Element was released in cinemas and it attracted the attention of a lot of people mainly because of Bruce Willis’ fame. With its style of presentation, the movie impressed local moviegoers and there were some who found it a zany film experience. Some time ago, Decker Shado posted his video review of The Fifth Element and it is entertaining to watch.  

#5 Slope’s Game Room examines the history of Pac-Man – Do you still remember playing Pac-Man long ago? As a little boy, I only played the Atari 2600 port of Pac-Man and managed to play the original arcade game on different platforms much later. There is a lot of history behind Pac-Man and it involves the growth of its game franchise and reach towards cartoons and merchandise. To have an in-depth look at Pac-Man’s history, watch the extensive video by Slope’s Game Room below.

#6 Tron revisited – You must have heard the news about the newly announced Tron sequel called Tron: Ares. Honestly, I am not too confident about it and 2010’s Tron: Legacy left me unsatisfied. That being said, the original Tron movie from 1982 remains special and memorable, and now is a good time to take a look back at it through the selected videos below. Watch, learn and enjoy!

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at  @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram athttps://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

Las Piñas City Councilors Santos and Medina claim P103.8 billion reclamation project won’t cause flooding

Las Piñas City Councilors Santos and Medina claim P103.8 billion reclamation project won’t cause flooding

carlocarrasco

Recently in the City of Las Piñas, Councilors Mark Santos and Henry Medina defended the P103.8 billion Las Piñas-Parañaque Coastal Bay Reclamation Project – already approved by the Supreme Court in 2021 – from allegations that it will cause flooding, according to a Manila Standard news report.

To put things in perspective, posted below is an excerpt of the Manila Standard news report. Some parts in boldface…

Two incumbent Las Pinas City councilors denied allegations that the P103.8-billion Las Piñas-Parañaque Coastal Bay Reclamation Project could lead to “disastrous flooding” in two Metro Manila cities.

Las Piñas City councilors Mark Anthony Santos and Henry Medina said the multi-billion project was already approved by the Supreme Court in 2021, after dismissing the environmental concerns raised by Las Pinas residents.

Voting 11-2, the Supreme Court (SC) en banc approved on Oct. 21, 2021 the reclamation project of around 530 hectares of the Manila Bay coastline in Las Piñas and Parañaque, ruling that the supposed environmental threat was not sufficiently established.

It was penned by Associate Justice Rosmari Carandang, with dissents from Associate Justices Marvic Leonen and Amy Lazaro Javier. Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan did not vote. There were only 14 justices when the ruling was promulgated.

Alltech Contractors proposed developing 321.26 hectares of land in Las Piñas and 174.88 hectares in Parañaque, both along the coastline of Manila Bay in 2009.

The Philippine Reclamation Authority approved the project in 2010, subject to compliance with environmental rules.

Santos said the petitioners against the project failed to provide sufficient evidence of environmental harm and that he supports the reclamation for its potential economic benefits, including socialized housing and job creation.

Medina said while the SC initially granted a Writ of Kalikasan in 2012, it later allowed the Court of Appeals to hear the case.

The CA ruled that the petitioners failed to support their claim by any competent, credible and reliable evidence that the proposed reclamation project will expose Las Piñas and Parañaque residents to catastrophic environmental damage.

According to the CA, Tricore Solutions Inc. and Center for Environmental Concerns-Philippines, the companies commissioned by the petitioners, failed to conduct a comprehensive and objective assessment of the proposed project.

The two companies also lacked the expertise necessary in the field of hydrology and hydraulics to competently conclude that the proposed project will cause environmental damage, the CA said.

Let me end this piece by asking you readers: If you are a resident of Las Piñas City, what is your reaction to this development? Do you think that any form of reclamation within the city will cause flooding or any other form of severe environmental damage? Do you think that reclamation will be economically beneficial for Las Piñas and its people?

You may answer in the comments below. If you prefer to answer privately, you may do so by sending me a direct message online.

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at  @HavenorFantasy as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

For more South Metro Manila community news and developments, come back here soon. Also say NO to fake news, NO to irresponsible journalism, NO to misinformation, NO to plagiarists, NO to reckless publishers and NO to sinister propaganda when it comes to news and developments. For South Metro Manila community developments, member engagement, commerce and other relevant updates, join the growing South Metro Manila Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/342183059992673