Transparency International, perhaps the only international NGO fighting corruption, released its Corruption Perceptions Index 2003. While it is generally a survey of academics, businesspersons, etc. and thus, can be, as the title of the report implies - a perception - the people asked are also knowledgeable of the true situation and the magnitude of corruption in their respective countries. Perception or observation, this makes a good barometer. Corruption is one scourge that we should fight.

Topping the list, meaning, the LEAST CORRUPT are Finland, Iceland, New Zealand and Singapore. The other two Scandinavian countries - Sweden and Norway - are also in the top ten. The rest of the ten are Netherlands, Australia and Switzerland.

And speaking of corruption, here are some questions to ponder:

1.) IS THE EXTENT OF CORRUPTION, AND THE PROPENSITY OF AUTHORITIES TO CORRUPT DEPENDENT ON A CERTAIN MILIEU OR CULTURAL VALUES?

Perhaps hardly, but what makes the Scandinavian countries relatively successful? The general perception that Asian governments are also corrupt does not necessarily hold water too, since Singapore and Hong Kong are on top.

2.) WHAT/WHICH PROPAGATES IT?

Politicians, political parties and government officials and employees have the responsibility - passing laws, promoting transparency, value-formation, strict implementation. The Philippines imposes the death penalty on plunder but nobody has been sentenced with finality for it. But business people also have a role. In the Philippines for instance, it is widely perceived and yes, observed, that businesspersons think of corruption as part of the game and therefore condone it. They perpetuate the cycle they hope to end.

3.) WHAT TYPES OF CORRUPTION ARE MOST COMMON?

Bribery is very common. Payoffs on government projects are also prevalent.

4.) IS THERE A NEED FOR MULTILATERAL COOPERATION?

Apparently yes, not only because international trading is affected but also because corruption eats out into funds for social investments. The poor countries suffer more.

5.) WHAT CAN THE PEOPLE DO?

Admittedly, vigilance is needed from the civil society. It is our money that is being stolen and it is our government that is being sullied. The only way for evil to succeed, as one sage puts it, is to let it. Two governments here have been toppled by popular uprisings due to corruption, and these mass actions have been fueled by the youth. We should never waver. Once, a politician here was overheard saying, "What are we in power for?" The people took him to task for it. We should do more.

Find out more in: http://www.transparency.org/

Guess who's coming to dinner?

All the streets he will pass through are being thoroughly cleaned and the places where he will be - even for just short ticks of the clock - are being spruced up so that what he will see is only the beautiful. The best course is also being prepared.

I find this strange. In front of Congress is a slum area and their dwellings were all-of-a-sudden destroyed just because the US President is coming over for a state visit and will address Congress on Saturday. Authorities claimed the move was long overdue and the squatters were to be transferred to another location. Mere coincidence? But everytime an 'event' is going to be held, Manila suddenly undergoes a face-lift. Take the last APEC Summit, the Miss Universe Pageant in 1994 and a World Bank Conference of yore.

A city which looks good is of course desired, but what is happening is plain hypocrisy. I understand the security preparations but not the cosmetic changes.

Such display of silliness has no room for public policy. In cosmetic plants, perhaps. Politicians who also cannot get in touch with reality should be slapped. Time to wake up!

Finally, the University of the Philippines has opted to shift to open-source. A project which was started early this year is being gradually implemented and people were, and are being trained to do the job.

Some parochial concern.

Robert Sagun, the hardworking President of my organization and I had a meeting last Friday to discuss, and work on some aspects of our WSIS national campaign. So in the course of this meeting, we had documents to translate into Filipino, our national language. Translating something into a language which is not our first tongue really proved difficult. Not only that, we have to consider the style of translation and this is an aspect which is so open to debate.

A lot argue that Filipino should not be the national language, even though it is the most widely understood one, albeit, may not be the most popularly spoken one. Some surveys point to Cebuano, the language of the South and one which I could fluently speak. They say that Filipino, which is based on Tagalog is 1) the language of 'imperial' Manila; 2.) not an international language and therefore not understood by investors and 3.)a language that is not enough, i.e. it is not as comprehensive and extensive as English.

These arguments baffle me a lot, especially the third one. No language is enough. All languages borrow certain words from other tongues (and some adopt them or assimilate them into the native language)since no single culture has the monopoly over all human experiences, over everything. English for example has countless words of foreign origin. A language grows. It is not stagnant. I could hardly appreciate the argument of the so-called purists.

I also find the point that using Filipino would decrease the country's competitiveness. What about the sound economic and investment policies? Is language the first priority of investors, holding more importance than usiness climate and peace and order? Ridiculous, I would say.

So, Robert and I agreed that 'any lack of word' in native Filipino should not hinder us from doing an effective translation of documents. Our readers and the public speak and understand the lingua franca. Let the others rest.

When it was the time of Nintendo craze , some doctors coined the term 'Nintendonitis' to refer to a fatigued and ailed condition of the hand as a result of too much Nintendo-playing. Now, would there be some sort of SMS-tenitis?

Excerpts from a news article by Reuters, carried by a Philippine newspaper:

"Too much text messaging?You may need professional help.More and more people are succumbing to so-called ''technology addictions," spending hours tapping on mobuile phones or surfing the Internet, one of Britain's best known psychiatric clinics said on Saturday...In the Sunday Telegraph newspaper, the head of the clinic's [Priory Clinic] addictions unit said some patients were spending up to seven hours a day text messaging. "We have a situation where some people look down on alcoholics and cocaine addicts, but then go and spend five hours in an Internet chat room," Dr. Mark Collins told the paper.

Hmmm...while the attention before was on the 'physical' effects of too much exposure on the computer, for example - eye problems, obesity, etc.- the 'mental' angle is more or less, a new facet. Well, as the banner in the Health and Wellness section of our discussion board would put it, health is an integrated whole.

The Philippines is the SMS capital of the world. More SMS are sent here than any other country in the world. I wonder how the people would react here. Too much of something is of course, bad.

This brings me to another point. What worries me about SMS is that some people seem to be so much enamored with it, that they think they cannot survive without withoout mobile phones and SMS (talk about societal and peer pressure!). A friend once told me that he was offered sex by a young woman in exchange for a prepaid load (since most here have prepaid subscriptions than regular lines.)!

Indeed, the use of technology can be good or bad.