EXTORTION AT NAIA HAPPENED, MR. GENERAL SIR (PART II) The first part “Extortion at NAIA Continues, Mr. President” was published by Rappler on May 31, 2014 at rappler/move-ph/ispeak/59340-extortion-tourists-naia. It was shared more than 9,000 times in Facebook and more than one hundred and twenty remarks were commented by netizens. On June 22, the article was shared by the Philippine Flight Network, the country’s leading source of airline and aviation news, at philippineflightnetwork/2014/06/extortion-of-tourists-at-naia.html. I have received six (6) communications from the government pertaining to the article I have written and which appeared in Rappler. They came from the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office (PCDSPO) thru The Official Gazette Webteam, the Department of Tourism (DOT) thru the Chief of Staff of Secretary Jimenez and the Undersecretary for Tourism Regulation, Coordination and Resource Generation, and from the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA). I also received a private message (PM) in Facebook and text from an employee of the Civil Aeronautics Board. Six Letters from the Government I received the first letter from the government on June 2 at 6:13pm, thru The Official Gazette Webteam gov.ph of PCDSPO, informing me that they have referred my article to the DOTC. Apparently, a citizen emailed to PCDSPO the article on June 1 at 1:54am. On June 5, I received a PM from Kristine Liu of the Civil Aeronautics Board informing me that CAB is conducting an investigation and asking to get my side on the matter. I told her I and WBPP President Rey Sta Ana can make ourselves available as long as an official invitation is given. She said she would relay that to their lawyers, but I haven’t heard from her again. But I submitted my article to her inbox, flight itineraries and photographs. On June 11 at 11:24am, I received a second letter dated June 6 from the Assistant Secretary Atty. Eugene Kaw, Chief of Staff of Tourism Secretary Ramon Jimenez, Jr., thanking me and the Wild Bird Photographers of the Philippines (WBPP) for supporting the tourism industry through bird photography workshops and tours and for helping in making the country an established eco-tourism destination. The letter also conveyed that Secretary Jimenez has directed the Office for Tourism Regulation, Coordination and Resource Generation (TRCRG) to investigate the matter and that the said office is presently coordinating with MIAA to determine the people liable in the incidents mentioned in the article. It ended with a hope that despite the incident we will continue to invite our friends from abroad to visit the country and enjoy its natural beauty. On June 17 at 2:48pm, I received a third letter dated June 16 from DOT Undersecretary Atty. Maria Victoria Jasmin informing me that her office has already received the report of MIAA General Manager regarding “a meeting called 3 days after the unpleasant incident at NAIA Terminal 4 last May 30.” The letter enumerated the summary of the report. It ended with a hope that the information provided “has given me a clearer picture of what has actually taken place and of the actions being undertaken by the concerned offices,” and that they “shall continue to monitor the continuing investigations.” I will deal on the summary of the report later. The last paragraph actually irked me as it insinuated that I did not have a clear picture of what have happened. I forwarded the last two replies to Rappler on the same day at 4:46pm. By 5:36pm, Rappler’s Investigative Desk head Chay Hofilena forwarded to me a fourth letter dated June 9 from MIAA General Manager Retired Major General Jose Angel Honrado. The letter is addressed to me, but was sent to Rappler. It informed me of a meeting held on June 2 and enumerated the same items mentioned by Tourism Undersecretary Jasmin in her letter. The letter ended with an advice that in our next visit to NAIA, we may approach the Concierge Desk to assist us or our friends with any airport information we might need. The following day, June 18 at 11:37am, DOT Secretary Jimenez COS Kaw sent a fifth letter (erroneously dated June 6) updating me on actions taken by MIAA, re. the meeting, and providing me details of the meeting in attached letters of MIAA to DOTC Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya and to Tourism Undersecretary Jasmin. On June 23 at 5:18, I received a sixth letter from PCDSPO forwarding an email from DOTC Operations Monitoring Office dated June 23 at 3:34pm providing copy of MIAA GM Honrado’s letter to me c/o Rappler (which Rappler’s Hofilena has earlier already forwarded to me). There are four (4) documents that deal with the minutes of the meeting that MIAA called for. The first was dated June 16 and signed by DOT Undersecretary Jasmin (third letter). This document summarized the results of the meeting based on the reports of MIAA GM Honrado (which included the third and fourth document). The second, third and fourth documents are all signed by MIAA GM Honrado. The second was dated June 9 and addressed to me c/o Rappler (fourth letter), the third dated June 2 and addressed to DOTC Secretary Abaya, and the fourth dated June 10 and addressed to DOT Undersecretary Jasmin dated June 10 (fifth letter, 2 documents). Let me go to the meat of the matter. Let us focus on the contentious issues that have been discussed in their meeting. NAIA Terminal 4 Extortion Incident 1. It was established that the “airport authorities” n NAIA Terminal referred in the article were not officers or personnel of MIAA. 2. The said “airport authorities” in NAIA Terminal 4 are personnel of Air Asia. Air Asia admitted that the incident happened at their check-in counter. 3. Air Asia claimed that Mr. None Huqiusheng exceeded the allowed weight of hand carried baggage per passenger of seven (7) kilos. 4. The supposed hand carried luggage of Mr. Huqiusheng does not only exceeded (sic) the allowed weight but also exceeded the permissible dimensions of hand carried luggage of the airline. Thus, pursuant to the standing airline policy, the passenger was required to check-in the subject luggage. It was submitted that this is not a question of how expensive or valuable the hand carried luggage, but on the enforcement of a standing airline policy on permissible luggage dimensions which should be applied uniformly and consistently. 5. The four passengers including Mr. Huqiusheng were even granted collective excess check-in baggage of eight (8) kilos free of charge. However, notwithstanding aforesaid discount, the allotted check-in baggage allowance still exceeded, hence the passengers were required to pay a total of P6,500.00 6. An official receipt was properly issued to the passenger for the payment P6,500, according to the airline representative. My observations: 1. How can the four passengers be granted collective excess check-in baggage of eight (8) kilos free of charge, and then, notwithstanding aforesaid discount, the allotted check-in baggage allowance still exceeded, hence the passengers were required to pay a total of P6,500.00? What kind of policy is that? Do we hear the airline saying, “I’m giving you additional 8 kilos free, but you’re still in excess, so you still have to pay P6,500 for the excess?” 2. The P6,500 payment was covered by a receipt. Is this an admission from the airline that the P6,500 payment is the US$200 that was given? If so, we haven’t heard of any change given? 3. The enumeration of the report is not chronological. Items #3 and #4 should have been written after items #5 and #6. The first stop is the check-in counter where all check-in luggage are weighed and checked in. At this point, excess check-in baggage are determined and, later paid for at the cashier counter (Hence, items #5 and #6 in the report should be items #3 and #4). So there was payment of P6,500 for the excess and a receipt was given for such payment… The hand-carried baggage is not checked at this counter. 4. It is before the next security check-in that the hand-carried baggage is checked (Hence, items #3 and #4 in the report must be items #5 and #6). This was where and when the extortion happened. This is where and when the US$200 was given. 5. The passenger was not allowed to board his flight because a) his hand-carried luggage exceeded the permissible weight and b) it also exceeded the permissible dimensions, so it must be checked-in. This was determined not in the first check-in counter but in the next security check-in. So when the hand-carried luggage was turned over for check-in, the unfortunate passenger was asked for money. He first gave US$100, which was turned down, then he gave another US$100, which was accepted. No receipts… No receipts, because the area is beyond or after the cashier counter. 6. Is this area still under Air Asia? or under the Office of the Transportation Security (OTS) of the DOTC? 7. Has Air Asia placed under preventive suspension their personnel who were on duty from 7:00 to 7:30pm of May 30, 2014 to determine who made the extortion? 8. Will OTS place under preventive suspension their own personnel who were on duty from 7:00 to 7:30pm of May 30, 2014 to determine who made the extortion if the area were under its jurisdiction? NAIA Terminal 3 Attempted Extortion Incident. 1. It was established that the “airport personnel” in NAIA Terminal referred in the article was not an officer or personnel of MIAA. 2. The said “airport personnel” in NAIA Terminal 4 is from the Office of the Transportation Security (OTS) of the DOTC. 3. The Office of the Transportation Security (OTS) of the DOTC admitted that the incident involved one of their security screening officers (SSO). 4. The OTS is now investigating the attempted extortion of the SSO. My observations: 1. Why can’t the OTS place all SSOs that were on duty from 3:00-4:00pm of May 22, 2014 when the incident happened on preventive suspension while an investigation is going on? 2. Twenty-five (25) days have already passed, and the investigation has not yet come out with the culprit? How long will the investigation take? Lanting Security Guard. 1. NAIA Terminal 4 is not an open airport terminal. Pursuant to security regulations non-passengers including well-wishers are not permitted inside the terminal. 2. Civil aviation security personnel at NAIA are trained to enforce security regulations strictly and scrupulously, but with courtesy and consideration. 3. MIAA GM Honrado will direct their civil aviation security personnel to be more cordial in dealing with the public. My observations: 1. Had the authorities been more diligent, they would have known that the civil aviation security personnel on duty at the door from 7:00 to 7:30pm of May 30, 2014 is Mario Santos of Lanting Security Agency. 2. The issue is not the strict enforcement of rules and policies, it’s the cordiality, courtesy and consideration. It’s fun in the Philippines, remember? Some Questions, Mr. General Sir 1. Are there monitoring cameras or CCTVs strategically placed around the terminal to monitor movements of personnel and authorities? If there are, have the tapes been reviewed and have they been consistent with the findings? 2. Other than CCTVs, are there established mechanisms in the terminals to deter or prevent extortion and wrong doings like Help Desks, Complaints Section, Foreign Liasons and Interpreters, Internal Affairs, Drop Boxes, etc? 3. Why is MIAA more concerned in establishing that their personnel were not involved and in justifying the actions of Air Asia, OTS and Lanting Security Agency, rather than determining where and how the extortion could have possibly taken place, and what corrective measures to undertake to rectify errors or to deter future wrong doings? 4. Have the MIAA and all other airport-related agencies and offices read the more than one hundred and twenty comments from netizens at the Rappler article, at my Facebook wall, at the walls of those who shared the article, and identify one-by-one all the similar complaints and possible red flags of extortions and wrong doings? I am not the culprit here, Mr. General Sir, I’m your partner in cleaning up our airport. I refused to believe that we can forever be the worst airport in the world. I will not take that sitting down and neither will you, Mr. General Sir! Your Boss calls me Boss, but I would rather we become allies in cleaning up this mess. But first, please open your eyes and take a second look at that mess. The NAIA extortion happened, Mr. General Sir. Alain Pascua Co-Founder and Vice President, Wild Bird photographers of the Philippines, Inc. (WBPP) Vice President, Philippine Bird Photography Workshops and Tours
Posted on: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:30:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015