DEBATE AND ISSUE 101

Hot Motions

2010-10-21T16:22:00.002+08:00

1. This house believes the development of computing was the most significant technological advance of the 20th century. (The Economist)

2. This house believes that religion is a force for good. (The Economist)

3. This house believes that governments must do far more to protect online privacy. (The Economist)

4. This house would recognize a Palestinian State.

Trade and Climate Change

2009-12-03T10:56:00.000+08:00

Trade and climate change are issues that should be handled together in order to create a better economy in a sustainable environment. Whatever trade policy is pursued by countries engaged in trade agreements will have a direct impact on the state of the world’s environment. Trade policy may mitigate or aggravate climate change which in the long run will either improve or defeat trade activities.

What is climate change?

Climate change as defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to the natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.”

What is the effect of climate change?

A major evidence of climate change today is global warming. Global warming is the accumulation of greenhouse gases (GHG)—carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxides in the atmosphere; these trap the sun’s heat energy thus resulting in increases in the average global temperature. It is caused by GHG-emitting human activities such as excessive burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, and growing waste dumps.

Other effects of climate change are increase in sea levels, increase in temperature and acidity of oceans, melting of ice caps, spread of climate-related diseases such as malaria, higher incidence of hurricane and forest fires, and destruction of crops.

In the Philippines, the most affected sectors of climate change are agriculture, food security, and health. (Atty. Rommel J. Casis, Professorial Lecturer at the U.P. College of Law, and Program Director of the International Environmental Law Research Program)

Is climate change relevant to international trade? How can climate change impacts affect trade and investment flows?

Yes. The Stern Report put this into perspective by calculating that the costs of action on climate change were in fact less than the costs of inaction, and noting that failing to address the problem creates the equivalent of a 20% loss of GDP globally, now and forever, with losses falling disproportionately on poor countries. In such a context, delivering on the fundamental goals of the multilateral trading system becomes impossible.

Climate change will have significant impacts on trade flows, given its expected impacts on agriculture, forestry and a number of other highly traded sectors. In general, the impacts of this type will involve changes in comparative advantage based on environmental factors.

Another sort of impact involves climate change directly affecting trade‐related infrastructure, or trading routes. The Stern Report identified several of these sorts of impacts:

• Rising sea levels may endanger coastal infrastructure that supports trade, such as ports, as well as trade‐related facilities located close to ports such as steel mills, petrochemical plants and other energy facilities.

• Rising Arctic temperatures will make Arctic sea lanes safer and more reliable as transport routes. However, melting permafrost may damage high latitude oil and gas installations, pipelines, as well as railways.

• As well, extreme weather events can be expected to disrupt markets and infrastructure. Particularly vulnerable is infrastructure located near coastlines, such as oil refineries, nuclear power plants, and port facilities. One of the predicted effects—increased flooding—will affect infrastructure as well as transport routes.

How do trade liberalization, investment agreements or other sorts of trade policy changes alter the economy in ways that impact on climate change?

1. Lowering tariffs just on particularly GHG‐intensive goods (whether intensive in production or in their end use) is likely to aggravate climate change.

2. Agreement to restrict domestic subsidies will have a positive composition impact if the subsidies in question encourage the production or use of particularly GHG‐intensive goods. On the flip side, agreement to allow domestic subsidies to support climate‐friendly goods and technologies might have positive climate change impacts, though the wider long‐term impacts of any increased subsidies would demand careful consideration.

3. The very fact of increased trade, in and of itself, will lead directly to more global GHG emissions from increased transport of goods. The GHG‐intensity of transport varies enormously from marine transport to trucks to air freight, but in the end all modes of transport have some emissions.

4. It is also conceivable that changes in intellectual property rights law could have climate change impacts. Specifically, it is possible that weakening patent protection on climate friendly technologies could have immediate climate benefits, if it led to more widespread dissemination of those technologies. The longer term impacts, however, might be negative if weakened protection discouraged investment and innovation in sectors of promise from a climate change perspective.

Are there existing international agreements that address climate change?

Yes. The following international agreements address climate change:

1. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)- This was established on March 21, 1994 to set an overall framework that will address issues on climate change. The convention intends to initiate strategies that will encourage GHG emission reduction and to contribute to the preparation for adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change.

2. Kyoto Protocol- The Kyoto protocol, which was put in force on February 16, 2005, is an international agreement that sets a target reduction of GHG (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, HFCs, and PFCs) emissions for 37 industrialized countries and European communities starting from 2008 to 2012. Specifically, it requires an average reduction of five percent from the GHG emission recorded in 1990. National targets range from 8% reductions for the European Union and some others to 7% for the US, 6% for Japan, 0% for Russia, and permitted increases of 8% for Australia and 10% for Iceland."

Are these agreements effective in addressing climate change?

The UNFCC is just a framework agreement. As for the Kyoto Protocol, according to Atty. Antonio G.M. La Viña (Dean of the Ateneo School of Government, and Professorial Lecturer at the U.P. College of Law) the same is not a complete success because some of the member countries have failed to meet the agreed targets.

Are there efforts to resolve further the problem of climate change?

Yes. A number of negotiations addressing climate change are on-going. The most recent plan presented was the Bali Road Map, which consists of decisions and future measures against climate change. The Bali Road Map includes the creation of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action, the long-term goal of emission reduction, mitigation actions, and adaptation funding and cooperations.

What is the Philippines response to climate change?

Philippines has participated in the discussions and negotiations leading to the ratification of various international agreements:

1. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) ratified on August 2, 1994 and
2. Kyoto Protocol, which was ratified on November 20, 2003.

At the national level, the Medium Term Philippine Development Plan of 2004-2010 (MTDP) underscored the need to manage the environment more effectively in order for the country to address the problem of poverty particularly in the rural areas.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, developing countries such as the Philippines are called to pass and implement national measures that shall advance the international community’s agenda pertaining to environmental preservation through the reduction of greenhouse emissions (GHGs) in the atmosphere. Pursuant to the provisions in this treaty, the Philippines passed national legislations to uphold the agreements embedded in the Kyoto Protocol:

1. The Clean Air Act of 1999, otherwise known as Republic Act 8749, was enacted in order to arrive at an effective air quality management program that will mitigate the worsening problem of air pollution in the country.
2. Reinforcing the country’s drive towards a healthier environment was the enactment of the Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003) that aimed at providing a comprehensive solution to the country’s garbage problem.

At the institutional level, prior to the signing and ratification of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the creation of the Inter-Agency Committee on Climate Change (IACC) in May 8, 1991 under the Environmental Management Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) was a concrete manifestation of the Philippines’ attempt to promptly address the issue of climate change. IACC was created by virtue of Presidential Order No. 220 with the secretary of the DENR sitting as chair and the secretary of the DOST as co-chair.

The ultimate aim of the committee is to harness and synergize the various activities being undertaken by the national government and civil society in response to the crisis posed by growing problem on climate change. The IACC likewise formulates policy actions and recommendations while at the same time assumes a very significant role in terms of shaping the Philippines’ national positions in the various international negotiations that aim to mitigate the effects of global climate change and prevent the worse possible consequences of this.

The IACC therefore ensures the Philippines’ faithful compliance to the mandates and principles contained in the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol and sees to it that adequate public awareness campaign and initiatives are held to bring the issue to all the sectors of the country.

What campaign on international trade can be done to address climate change?

1. Ensure that the country we are dealing with complies with the multilateral environmental agreements to which the country is a party and has in force adequate environmental laws and regulations, has devoted sufficient resources to implementing those laws and regulations, and has an adequate record of enforcement of those laws and regulations;

2. Trade in goods and services- call for the reduction or, as appropriate, elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to environmental goods and services.

3. Push for provisions providing for non-actionable subsidies for the environment.

4. Push for provisions that shall provide for the reduction/removal of fossil fuel subsidies.

5. Trade agreements shall include environmental and public safety standard:

The environmental provisions shall—

(A) be included in the core text of the trade agreement;

(B) prohibit each country that is a party to the trade agreement from weakening, eliminating, or failing to enforce domestic environmental or other public health or safety standards to promote trade or attract investment;

(C) require each country that is a party to the trade agreement to implement and enforce fully and effectively, including through domestic law, the country’s obligations under multilateral environmental agreements and provide for the enforcement of such obligations under the trade agreement;

(D) prohibit the trade of goods derived from illegally harvested or extracted natural resources, at any stage of production, including timber and timber products, fish, wildlife, and associated products, mineral resources, and other environmentally sensitive goods; and

(E) allow each country that is a party to the trade agreement to adopt and implement environmental, health, and safety standards, recognizing the legitimate right of governments to protect the environment and public health and safety.

Sources:

1. Aaron Cosby, Trade and Climate Change Linkages, 2007
2. Aaron Cosby, Harnessing Globalization: Scaling Up Trade and Investment Policy’s Contribution to Climate Change Efforts.
3. Agnes Paculdar and Melissa Parreño, The Philippines’ Response to Climate Change, http://www.researchsea.com/html/article.php/aid/3638/cid/6
4. http://www.iisd.org/trade/crosscutting/bali_copenhagen.asp
5. 111th U.S Congress, 1st Session, H.R, 3012: To require a review of existing trade agreements and renegotiation of existing trade agreements based on the review, to set terms for future trade agreements, to express the sense of the Congress that the role of Congress in trade policymaking should be strengthened, and for other purposes.

PIDC 2010

2009-12-03T10:48:00.002+08:00

December 2, 2009

Hello everyone!

The UP Debate Society is proud to invite everyone to the upcoming Philippine Intercollegiate Debating Championship 2010, the largest and most prestigious national debate tournament in the Asians Parliamentary format. Be one with us as we once again gather the most brilliant and most promising young Filipino debaters and leaders to challenge boundaries and engage in critical discourse about the most pressing issues that confront our society and the world. For over 9 years now, the UP Debate Society has shared the passion for debate excellence and creativity through PIDC. It has become a well-anticipated event for keeping its trademark of a tournament experience beyond expectations which complements the competitive intellectual forum for young minds and their brave ideas.

Mark your calendars! PIDC 2010 will be held on April 7-12, 2010 at the University of the Philippines - Diliman. We will be releasing official communication and tournament information soon. For initial queries, you may contact us through 0916 593 5647 (Angelo) or online through our email (pidc2010@gmail. com), Facebook (PIDC 2010) and Twitter accounts.

We are all excited to see you this summer. Thank you very much!

Cheers,

Angelo Paolo T. Kalaw
Communications Director
PIDC 2010

SSE Riga IV 2009

2009-10-23T10:30:00.003+08:00

One of the most prestigious debate tournaments in the Central and Eastern Europe -

The SSE Riga IV.

General details:

CA: Arvydas Ziobakas – a long term member of the SSE Riga DebateSociety, Oxford IV 2008 quarterfinalist, the ESL champion of CambridgeIV 2008, the 8th best ESL speaker of EUDC 2009.

DCA: Will Jones - reigning WUDC champion, the champion of EUDC 2008.

Registration fee: 70 EUR per team and 30 EUR per adjudicator.

n-1 rule is applied for the teams from the Baltics.

Webpage where all the additional information could be found: www.sserigads.com

For inquiries, e-mail sserigaiv@gmail.com and look for Nikita Pusnakovs, Chief convener

THE ASEAN TRADE IN GOODS AGREEMENT

2009-04-30T13:48:00.001+08:00

What is the ATIGA?

The ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement (ATIGA) is an improvement over the current ASEAN Free Trade Area-Common Effective Preferential Tariff (AFTA CEPT) Scheme.
- The AFTA CEPT Scheme was focused on tariffs, the main component of which was the schedule for tariff reduction/elimination for trade in goods in ASEAN.
- The ATIGA is akin to a Trade-in-Goods (TIG) chapter of an FTA, which comprises both tariff and non-tariff elements (e.g. trade disciplines on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) measures, Customs Procedures, and Trade Facilitation, among others).

Why the ATIGA?

The AFTA CEPT Scheme was implemented in 1993. After 15 years, ASEAN has matured in the area of trade-in-goods. Given this, coupled with the changes in business processes and that ASEAN has negotiated and concluded FTAs with several Dialogue Partners, it is timely for the AFTA CEPT scheme to be upgraded, so that ASEAN remains current.

What is the objective of the ATIGA?

The objective of this Agreement is to achieve free flow of goods in ASEAN as one of the principal means to establish a single market and production base for the deeper economic integration of the region towards the realisation of the AEC by 2015.[1]

What are the features of this agreement?

1. Comprehensive coverage- it covers trade-related rules and regulations, including tariff liberalisation, non-tariff barrier liberalisation, rules of origin, trade facilitation, customs procedures, standards and conformance, and Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) measures.

2. Consolidated and streamlined rights and obligations- To have an agreement that is more user-friendly for traders, the ATIGA consolidates all ASEAN’s existing initiatives, obligations and commitments made with regard to intra-ASEAN trade-in-goods into one comprehensive document.

3. Most-favoured nation treatment- if a Member State enters into any agreement with a non-Member State where commitments are more favourable than that accorded under this Agreement, the other Member States have the right to request for negotiations with that Member State to request for the incorporation herein of treatment no less favourable than that provided under the aforesaid agreement. The decision to extend such tariff preference will be on a unilateral basis. The extension of such tariff preference shall be accorded to all Member States.[2]

4. Full tariff reduction schedules- Member States shall eliminate import duties on all products traded between the Member States by 2010 for ASEAN-6[3] and by 2015, with flexibility to 2018, for CLMV[4].[5]

5. Streamlined and unified provisions on modification of concessions and trade remedies- In exceptional circumstances where a Member State faces unforeseen difficulties in implementing its tariff commitments, that Member State may temporarily modify or suspend a concession contained in its Schedules.[6]

6. Trade facilitation and related chapters- The ATIGA has taken into account, and dedicated chapters on Trade Facilitation and for each of the relevant sectors, i.e. (i) customs, (ii) standards, technical regulation and conformity assessment procedures; and (iii) SPS Measures. The ATIGA details disciplines in these areas to ensure clear and consistent application of trade procedures; and establishes formalised contact points of customs authorities to facilitate the resolution of customs-related issues that arise during import/export of goods.

7. Trade repository- An ASEAN Trade Repository containing trade and customs laws and procedures of all Member States shall be established and made accessible to the public through the internet. The ASEAN Trade Repository shall contain trade related information such as (i) tariff nomenclature; (ii) MFN tariffs, preferential tariffs offered under this Agreement and other Agreements of ASEAN with its Dialogue Partners; (iii) Rules of Origin; (iv) non-tariff measures; (v) national trade and customs laws and rules; (vi) procedures and documentary requirements; (vii) administrative rulings; (viii) best practices in trade facilitation applied by each Member State; and (ix) list of authorized traders of Member States.[7]

8. Issuance of Legal Enactments
- ATIGA provides for the issuance of a single legal enactment for the whole tariff reduction schedule
- No later than 90 days for ASEAN 6 and 6 months after entry into force for CLMV.
- Would have retroactive effect from 1 January of the year of entry into force
- In case where single legal enactment cannot be issued, legal enactment would be issued 3 months before tariff reduction takes into effect

What is the status of this agreement?

1. Draft text substantially concluded/legally scrubbed
2. Considered and endorsed by the 22nd AFTA Council, 26 August 2008
3. Signing by 14th ASEAN Summit, February 2009.

What are the concerns of various groups over this agreement?

1. Lack of public consultations- It is required under the Tariff and Customs and under the current set-up of the Committee and Trade Related Matter that before negotiating a trade policy position, public hearings should be made so that the people could register their concerns over a trade agreement. In the negotiation of this agreement, no prior public consultations were made. Public consultations, characterized by lack of transparency, were conducted only after the negotiation has been concluded;

2. The agreement should be submitted to the Senate for ratification given the direction of the agreement towards a legal framework and rules-based system;

3. The agreement should not be in conflict with Philippine domestic laws and international commitments; and

4. Philippines should not accelerate tariff reductions given the fiscal problem that it is facing and given the global financial crisis affecting US and Europe. The timelines for tariff reduction implementation should consider the development needs of the country with a view of revisiting and postponing even the accelerated timetables for zero tariff levels beyond 2010. Under ASEAN-CEPT, tariffs on the remaining 40% shall be eliminated not later than 2010. Accelerating said tariff elimination, ATIGA requires that Import duties of at least 80% tariff lines are eliminated even as early as 2009.

Sources:

1. Association of Petrochemical Manufacturers of the Philippines, Inc. (APMP)
2. ASEAN Economic Ministers 2008: Media Factsheet on ATIGA
3. Department of Trade and Industry
4. Final draft of the ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement
5. Protocol to Amend the Agreement on the Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT) Scheme for the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) for the Elimination of Import Duties, 31 January 2003
6. Tariff Commission

Endnotes:

[1] Article 1, ASEAN Trade on Goods Agreement
[2] Article 5, ATIGA
[3] “ASEAN-6” refers to Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and
Thailand.
[4] “CLMV” refers to Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and Viet Nam.
[5] Article 19, ATIGA
[6] Article 23, ATIGA
[7] Article 13, ATIGA

Philippine Perspective: Legal Issues and Objections to the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand FTA

2009-04-30T13:42:00.003+08:00

1. The agreement provides no assurance in the facilitation of trade in goods.

Chapter 6, Standards, Technical Regulations and Conformity Assessment Procedures, provides that nothing in this Chapter shall limit the right of a Party to prepare, adopt and apply standards, technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures only to the extent necessary to fulfill a legitimate objective. Such legitimate objectives are, inter alia, national security requirements; the prevention of deceptive practices; protection of human health or safety; animal or plant life or health; or the environment.

What is the limitation to this provision? What common standards shall be observed?

In interpreting the provisions of the agreement, it appears that parties have the right to adopt their own standards, technical regulations and conformity assessment procedure. Parties therefore have blanket authority to refuse market access of goods coming from another party on the basis and pretense of independent policy to fulfill legitimate objectives.

2. Contrary to what FTAs should be, the provisions of the AANZFTA in trade in services provide no preference to facilitate the free movement of natural persons of the parties.

Paragraph 3, Article 4, Chapter 9, of the agreement gives parties the right to deny entry of natural persons if they fail to follow immigration prescribed procedures and all the eligibility requirements for entry to the granting party. Article 7, Chapter 9, gives the State the full and wide discretion to discriminate the entry of natural persons by not preventing the Parties from applying measures to regulate the entry of natural persons of another Party into, or their temporary stay in, its territory, provided that such measures are not applied in such a manner as to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to another Party under said Chapter or to unduly impair or delay trade in goods or services or the conduct of investment activities under this Agreement.

As to what are considered nullification or impairment of the benefits under the Agreement, or unduly impairing or delaying trade in goods or services or the conduct of investment activities, are not clearly defined in said agreement. It only provides that the sole fact of requiring persons to meet eligibility requirements prior to entry to a Party shall not be regarded as nullifying or impairing benefits accruing to another Party, or of unduly impairing or delaying trade in goods or services or the conduct of investment activities under this Agreement.

3. The Agreement may directly violate investment provisions of the Constitution relating to acquisition and ownership of land, use of marine resources and the extraction and exploitation of natural resources.

Investment provisions of the agreement allow the acquisition and control by an investor of movable and immovable properties, and other property rights subject to reservations to be made by each government (Chapter 11). It also allows any concession to search for, cultivate, extract or exploit natural resources. And it provides for the application of national treatment in the acquisition, control and exploitation of said properties.

What are the limitations to this Chapter? What are the limitations reserved by the Philippine government? As of this moment, the government has not yet produced any reservation list.

In line with this, it is our position that the government shall reserve the following:

a. 1987 Constitution specifically but no limited to Article 12, the National Economy and Patrimony. The government shall reserve specific provisions of Article 12 but not limited to the following:

· Section 2- Natural resources shall not be alienated with the exception of agricultural land. The exploration development and utilization of natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State shall reserve the use and enjoyment of marine wealth exclusively to Filipino citizens.

· Section 3- Private corporation or association may not hold agricultural lands except by lease for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and not to exceed one thousand hectares in area. Citizens of the Philippines may lease not more than five hundred hectares, or acquire not more than twelve hectares thereof by purchase, homestead or grant. And taking into account the requirements of conservation, ecology, and development, and subject to the requirements of agrarian reform, the Congress shall determine, by law, the size of lands of the public domain which may be acquired, developed, held, or leased and the conditions therefor.

· Section 5- The State, subject to the provisions of this Constitution and national development policies and programs, shall protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social, and cultural well-being. The Congress may provide for the applicability of customary laws governing property rights and relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain.

· Section 10- The Congress shall reserve to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may prescribe, certain areas of investments. The Congress shall enact measures that will encourage the formation and operation of enterprises whose capital is wholly owned by Filipinos. In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos. The State shall regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments within its national jurisdiction and in accordance with its national goals and priorities.

b. Philippine domestic laws specifically but not limited to the following:

· RA 8371, Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act

· RA 7042 as amended by RA 8179, Foreign Investment Act

· Foreign Investment Negative List

· RA 7652, Investors’ Lease Act

4. As regards provisions on intellectual property rights, the agreement obliges a party to be bound to a number of international agreements on IPR even if they are not a signatory to said IPR international agreements.

Basic is the principle in law that contracts are binding only those who are privy to said contracts. Therefore, obligation arising from contracts cannot be enforce against parties who are not privy to said contracts.

Chapter 13 of the agreement, allows a party, who is a signatory to other international agreements on IPR, to seek other parties to support its implementation. Said IPR international agreements are as follows:

(a) the Patent Cooperation Treaty 1970; (Philippines is a signatory)
(b) the Strasbourg Agreement Concerning the International Patent Classification 1971; (Philippines is not a signatory)
(c) the Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Micro-organisms for the Purposes of Patent Procedure 1977; (Philippines is a signatory)
(d) the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks 1989; (Philippines is not a signatory)
(e) the Patent Law Treaty 2000; (Philippines is not a signatory)
(f) the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants 1991; (Philippines is not a signatory)
(g) the TRIPS Agreement; (Philippines is a signatory)
(h) the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks 2006; (Philippines is not a signatory)
(i) the WIPO Copyright Treaty 1996; and
(j) the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty 1996.

5. The agreement defines Intellectual Property Rights by including rights in plant varieties. This provision is inimical to the interests of farmers who have inherent rights as breeders of plants since time immemorial.

By including National Treatment provisions on intellectual property, laws such as RA 9168 or the Plant Variety Protection Act of 2002 will now be extended to parties under the AANZFTA. Thus, creating a monopoly on the development of seeds by transnational corporations.

6. The agreement sets limitation on the state’s power of taxation. The Chapter 15 provides that the agreement shall only grant rights or impose obligations with respect to taxation measures where:

(a) corresponding rights and obligations are also granted or imposed under the WTO Agreement;
(b) they are granted or imposed under Article 8 (Transfers) of Chapter 11 (Investment); or
(c) they are granted or imposed under Article 9 (Expropriation and Compensation) of Chapter 11 (Investment).

Parties are therefore not allowed to impose taxation measures outside these provisions.

PIDC 2009 Motions

2009-04-30T12:28:00.001+08:00

Elimination Rounds:

Round 1: Gender

· THBT gay rights movements should compel openly gay celebrities to actively support their causes
· THBT feminist politics must transition from the halls of Congress to the bedroom
· THBT Muslim universities should grant professional subsidies to feminist scholars living in radically conservative Muslim states.

Round 2: Europa

· THW ban the ownership of multiple properties in land strapped European countries
· THBT it is justified for EU countries with bailout responsibilities to excuse themselves with financial commitments to the union
· THBT the European Union should subsidize rehabilitation clinics for computer addicts

Round 3: Culpability

· THBT sober passengers of a drunk driver should be held criminally liable
· THW punish bystanders of a crime
· THW allow witnesses of gruesome murders to claim emotional damages against the criminal

Round 4: Environment

· TH celebrates the use of emotional blackmail as part of environmental strategies
· THBT Earth Hour is a meaningless, faddish, exercise
· THW make waste-disposal a mandatory requirement for free trade agreements

Round 5: Print Media

· THBT print media is dead
· THW ban government officials from obtaining board positions in print media
· THW require print media to grant criticized individuals compulsory reply space

Round 6: Pop Culture

· THW remove the foreign films category in the Academy Awards
· TH regrets the rise of vegetarianism
· THW shut down the World Wrestling Entertainment for good

Round 7: Geopolitics

· THBT China should revise its amoral foreign policy by sanctioning North Korea
· TH regrets Obama’s stance of reducing investments for foreign policy initiatives
· THBT it’s time to grant statehood to Taiwan

Break Rounds

Octofinals: Local Headlines

· THB in extending the land distribution program
· TH overreacted Chip Tsao
· THBT it is time to shut the doors on visiting forces

Quarterfinals: Rights

· THW lift the moratorium on blood donations for men who have sex with men
· THBT parents who are minors should be allowed to retain custody of their offspring
· TH supports the preferential disclosure of sexual harassment issues to religious leaders over state authorities within some religious communities

Semi-finals: Football

· TH regrets the recruitment of Third World football players by European football clubs
· TH celebrates players walking-off the field in response to racist crowd hooliganism
· THBT all players should donate majority of their advertising revenue to league development of the clubs they play for

Finals: Education

· TH celebrates the rise of political activism among students in public universities
· THW accommodate student-teacher relationships among consenting adults in universities
· THB in mandatory sex education in all religious schools

Source:

Debate Philippines

La Salle Intervarsities 2009

2009-03-09T14:09:00.001+08:00

Hi Guys!

In behalf of the La Salle Debate Society, I would like to formally invite you to the La Salle Intervarsities 2009 which will be on March 28 to 29 (Saturday-Sunday) at the De La Salle University Manila Campus at Taft Avenue, Manila. This tournament will serve as an excellent preparation for the upcoming PIDC and AUDC this April and May respectively.

The tournament will have four (4) elimination rounds with three (3) break rounds. We have invited individuals who have stellar debate and adjudication records to join the adjudication core for this tournament. However, thier confirmation are still pending. But, we are pleased to announce that our Chief Adjudicator for this tournament will be Victor Mari Baguilat who has an excellent adjudication and debating record.

The tournament will maintain an N=1 rule policy with a tournament cap of 60 and an institution cap of 6. We dont have a strict rule on the composition of teams. This means that composite teams are most welcome to register and compete in the tournament. We have very limited slots for this tournament, so it is imperative that you rregister your teams and adjudictors before the pre-registration deadline.

To register, pls email the important details to this add: robinmichael_robingarcia@yahoo.com . The details should include the names of team members and adjudicators you will field. The Pre-registration will end on March 21 (Saturday). This means that at this date, we wont entertain team and adjudication registrants anymore.

Additional details will be posted soon.

If you have any questions please contact me at 09157646291.

See you all there!!!

Robin Michael U. Garcia

External Tournament Director

La Salle Intervarsities 2009

6th CSB IVs

2009-03-03T15:56:00.000+08:00

Dear all,

I would like to invite you to the 6th CSB IVs. This will be held on March 7-8, 2009, in the College of Saint Benilde.

As with last year's IVs, the format is still Asians, with composite teams allowed. That means, you could finally compete with your girlfriend/boyfrien d from the other institution, as well as get to see dinosaurs debate in a competitive environment.

Our adj core is Jay Mata (CSB), Steph Co (ADMU) and Robin Lucas (UPM). Rego is at P250 per head. N=1 rule shall apply.

No need to pre-register; you all could just go to CSB on March 7 and register your teams. Alternatively, for those of you who are really excited, you may contact me at this email address weebph@yahoo. com or message me to reserve your slot.

Looking forward to seeing you all again in CSB this year. :)

ciao,

Wilb :D
CSB

MINT 2009 Pre-reg extension

2009-01-26T10:45:00.000+08:00

Hi all, the UPMDC is extending the Manila Intervarsity pre-registration until January 29. Kindly reserve your slots at http://upmdc. phildebate. com. For any concerns, kindly contact us at +639172593960 or manila.intervarsity @gmail.com. Thanks!

- Alvina Antonio
MINT Tournament Director

Source: Debate Philippines

An Updated Official PIDC 2009 Invitation Link

2009-01-19T15:27:00.000+08:00

Hi, everyone! We have fixed the technical errors present in the first invite release for the Philippine Inter-Collegiate Debate Championship (PIDC 2009). This is the updated link, containing the official invitation with the comprehensive tournament profile and registration details: http://issuu. com/pidc2009/ docs/pidc2009_ tourney_profile_ .

The official invitation may also be downloaded at http://www.pidc- online.com. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you need further assistance in terms of PIDC registration or if you have additional concerns.

Thank you very much. We are looking forward to sharing the PIDC tournament experience with you this coming April 15-20, 2009.

Anna Arcellana
Communications Director
PIDC 2009

Official PIDC 2009 Invitation

2009-01-16T10:44:00.002+08:00

The Official Invitation for the Philippine Inter-Collegiate Debate Championship (PIDC) 2009 can be viewed by clicking this link:http://issuu. com/pidc2009/ docs/tournament_ profile_for_ participants_ _final_?mode= embed&documentId=09011417 0707- be6df39321774747a7e cf006369d08 23&layout=grey

This contains the comprehensive tournament profile and registration details.

Source:

Anna Arcellana
Communications Director
PIDC 2009

Hot Motions

2009-01-09T11:31:00.002+08:00

TH supports UN suspension of food aid deliveries to Gaza.

THBT English courts stifle free speech around the world.

Sources:

International Herald Tribune
The Economists

Motions: 2009 WUDC

2009-01-09T10:59:00.003+08:00

Final : That this house would allow abortion at all stages of pregnancy

Semi Final: This house believes governments should subsidise private home ownership.

Qtr Final: This house believes that the international criminal court should prosecute crimes against the democratic process.

Octo Final: This house would arm local militia to fight the taliban in Afghanistan.

ESL Final: This house would implement quotas for domestic players in national football leagues.

EFL Final: This house would prohibit all private health care.

Round 9: This house would ban the publication of political opinion polls.

Round 8: This house would apply a lower rate of income tax to women.

Round 7: This house believes that the west should recognise the independence of Abkhazia.

Round 6: This house would criminalise adultery.

Round 5: This house believes that China and India should bear the same obligations as the West in fighting climate change

Round 4: This house would force the religious desegregation of Northern Irish schools.

Round 3: This house would allow soldiers to sue their government for negligence.

Round 2: This house would fire the senior managements of all corporations which receive government bailouts.

Round 1: This house would ban all forms of gambling.

Womens Debate: This house would ban all forms of religious gender discrimination.

Adj Test: This house would allow insurance companies to view genetic test results in assessing potential customers.

Sources:

World Debating Website
Global Debate Blog

2008 NDC Motions

2008-10-22T00:35:00.008+08:00

Round 1. THBT Affirmative actions in South Africa has gone too far.

Round 2. TH Supports a referendum on Bangsamoro Secession.

Round 3. THW Ban negative campaign advertising.

Round 4. THW Audit and publish the financial records of the Catholic Church.

Round 5. THBT the State should assist healthy consenting adults to commit suicide.

Round 6. TH regrets the dominant historical narrative that depicts Aquino as a hero and Marcos as a villain.

Round 7. THBT teacher-centered teahing methods and traditional education at the primary level have done our children more harm than good.

Master Cup: THTB being torn between two lovers should be decriminalized.

Octos: THBT the West should allow its allies to negotiate with terrorists.

Quarters: THBT we should provide assylum for sexual minorities in danger of persecution in their own country.

Semis: THBT the State should support religious and atheist organizations.

Union Cup: THBT the Philippines is better off with latin american populism.

Finals: THBT the embracing of materialistic consumerism has led to economic disempowerment across the world

Master Cup Finals: THW decriminalize corporal punishment at home

** Special thanks to:

1. Cristina Miclat for giving me fresh updates from NDC in Davao.

2. Anna Marie Dominggo

I'll see you guys soon. Sayang im not there to join you.

At the moment, im preparing for a law moot court competition! Good luck!

SSE Riga & LMT IV 2008

2008-10-19T19:37:00.004+08:00

The oldest debate competition in Central and Eastern Europe, hosted by the SSE Riga & LMT Debate Society, has entered its tenth year and promises to be special!

- Register till November 30 (team cap – 40 teams);

- Come to Riga (Latvia) on December 12-14;

- Compete with high level debaters in British Parliamentary style (5 preliminary rounds, semi-finals and the Grand Final);

- Experience high level of adjudication (Co-CAs: Nick Devlin and Yuri Romanenkov, and their selected pool of independent judges);

- Be accommodated in a 5-star Radisson SAS Daugava hotel;

- Enjoy lavish socials with unlimited free alcohol and excellent food;

- Explore the splendid surroundings of the central Riga's Art Nouveau architecture.

Things To remember:

Institutional cap – 2 teams;

N-1 rule applies;

Registration fee is 40 Eur per debater and 20 Eur per adjudicator.

For more information, please visit http://www.sserigaiv.com

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=30972617939

Hot Motions

2008-10-17T13:22:00.004+08:00

THW veto climate-change reduction plans.

THW give economic aid to solve economic crisis.

THBT bail-out will work.

THBT markets are always right.

THW have a security deal with Iraq.

THW emulate the US Presidential Election Process.

VILNIUS OPEN 2008

2008-10-15T23:38:00.002+08:00

What: Vilnius Open 08

When: November 21 - 23, 2008

Where: MRU University in Vilnius

The tournament will be held in British Parliamentary style.
Language – English.
Team cap – 32 teams.
Participation fee is €30 per debater, and €20 per adjudicator. Participants are provided with accommodation, food and transportation.

Registration is open! Fill in the aplication you will find in web page www.mru-debate. eu and send it to vilniusopen08@ gmail.com Registration will be closed at 2008 11 15

contact:

vicepresident@ mru-debate.eu
justina@mru- debate.eu

European Open Schools Debating Championship

2008-10-15T23:32:00.002+08:00

What: European Open Schools Debating Championship

When: 30th November to 6th December 2008

Where: Germany

For more details, visit www.schoolsdebate.de

Motions: Claremont National Open

2008-10-08T12:06:00.000+08:00

1. This House opposes international adoption.

2. Governments should require medical personnel to act against their personal ethics in the performance of their medical duties.

3. Free speech should include Holocaust denial.

4. This House supports diversity quotas for legislative assemblies.

5. This House supports substantial increases in fuel taxes.

6. Pakistan is more an enemy than an ally to the West.

Semis:

This House would use political assassination.

Finals:

This House supports slave reparations.

Square Off: The CVC Law Debates Finals

2008-10-08T11:34:00.003+08:00

Square Off: The CVC Law Debates finals is this Wednesday, October 8, 2008, 8-9pm.

Catch Arellano University and Ateneo de Davao battle it out for prestigious prizes and the honor of being recognized as the best in the land.

Catch the live telecast at ANC Channel tonight.

This house would nationalize oil distribution.

2008-09-24T00:26:00.002+08:00

OUTLINE

Background:

President Hugo Chávez announced a measure to nationalize wholesale gasoline distribution in Venezuela—despite the lobbying of British Petroleum, Exxon Mobil and Chevron, whose local subsidiaries currently control the business. Under the measure, which received initial approval in the National Assembly Aug. 27, the state company PDVSA will control Venezuela's fuel distribution network, although privately owned gas stations will not be nationalized. Dominated by Chávez allies, the National Assembly is expected to give its final approval to the legislation soon. (http://ww4report.com/node/5962)

Many countries are considering the need to nationalize oil distribution.

Pros

1. To secure fuel supply and to solve oil crisis.

2. Prices could be lower if oil is traded between governments and not through private companies. “Service contracts for supplying oil usually involve private companies. And these companies profit from it. (Carmelito Tatlonghari, a climate change expert and former Energy Program Manager of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) )

3. Oil giants are a clear and present danger to democracy and need to be put under state control. In an era of oil scarcity we no longer have the luxury of allowing a handful of corporate plutocrats to decide the fate of the global economy. (MIKE WHITNEY)

Cons

1. Legislation could cause fuel shortages, because the government is not prepared to take full control over distribution.

2. We’d be creating a false foundation for the economy. In effect, we’d be subsidizing petroleum use; the artificially low price would encourage more consumption at a time when conservation is necessary. (Jay Bookman)

3. In economic terms, it would send a false price signal. You simply can’t run the world’s biggest economy on heavily subsidized energy. Not for long, anyway. (Jay Bookman)

Victoria IV 2008

2008-09-23T00:26:00.002+08:00

WHAT: Fifth annual Victoria IV, aka the NZ British Parliamentary Open Debating Championships.

WHEN: November 28-30, 2008

WHERE: Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.

The tournament this year is being sponsored by the New Zealand Business Roundtable, an organisation comprising major business firms committed to contributing to the development of sound public policy for New Zealand.

Further details, please email vicdebating@ gmail.com

Source:

Victoria University of Wellington Debating Society

Hot Motions

2008-09-21T23:53:00.003+08:00

This House believes that the West must be bolder in its response to a newly assertive Russia.

This House would take ownership of bad mortgages to avoid another Great Depression.

This house would regulate the use of Melamine.

This house believes that secularism leads to nihilism.

This House would call for a positive laïcité.

This House supports ancient alternative remedies.

Suggested reading:

International Herald Tribune.
The Economist.

Congratulations!

2008-09-21T23:21:00.003+08:00

Congratulations to Quezon City Science Highschool Debate Team for being part of the top 16 teams during the 2008 CMLI National Debate Competition held on September 20-21, 2008 at Angelicum College.

Congratulations as well to Southville International School and Colleges Debate Team for having participated in your first ever debate competition at CMLI Debate.

Good luck to both teams in your preparation for PSDC 2008.

----

Congratulations as well to CLL and CEFP for making it to the Grandfinals of the 2008 PUP Inter-Collegiate Debate. Congratulations to CLL for having been declared as the Debate Champion.

FREE FORUM On "Current Trends and Developments in Dispute Prevention, Settlement and Resolution in the Philippines"

2008-09-19T11:27:00.001+08:00

Chief Justice Puno: Freedom of the press is a 'touchstone of democracy'

2008-09-17T14:42:00.002+08:00

Speech about freedom of the press. Good reference for moot court competitions.

----

Speech delivered by Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno during the International Conference on Impunity and Press Freedom on February 27, 2008

We are here now to strengthen democracy, especially one of its touchstones – the freedom of the press.

It is a noble thing that we set out to do, but is also one which is difficult to accomplish. Thus, it is important that before we begin with our endeavor, we must first ensure that we all understand fully who "We" are, where "here" is, why we are here "now," and what "democracy" is basically all about.

It is a dangerous time for those who report the truth. From 1992 to 2008, 679 journalists have been killed worldwide. The Philippines has the 5th highest number of incidents where journalists have been murdered. Since 2001, 70 journalists have been killed in the line of duty on Philippine soil. Of the cases filed as a result of these killings, only one has been resolved, 6 are undergoing trial, 18 are under investigation, 4 have been dismissed, and 4 are pending prosecution.

"We" are persons who can do something that will have a profound impact in defense of freedom of the press. "We" are the advocates, experts, journalists, and jurists coming from all over the world who share the same concern over the rampant human rights violations around us. I emphasize that it is "We" who can do something, because we can better effect change not in our individual stations, but as a group working together.

"Here" is a conference organized by the Southeast Asian Press Alliance with the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility aimed at three objectives: first, to contribute to ongoing multisectoral efforts, as well as national, regional, and international campaigns, to fight impunity in the Philippines by finding, discussing, and generating insights and models for enhancing the rule of law, free expression, and human rights in general; second, to bridge Philippine campaigns on impunity with similar efforts around the world; and third, to raise public awareness about impunity and its effect in the Philippines on both the freedom of the press and of expression. "Here" is a forum for us to work together as a group.

"We" are "here" because of the urgency of "now." It is the culture of impunity that encourages attacks on journalists. Unless and until we do something to submerge this pernicious culture, these attacks will continue to litter our collective consciousness with corpses of people who are bearers of truth.

"Democracy" is all about the voice of the people. It is, as John Stuart Mill defines it, "government by discussion." Imperative to discussion are the cognate freedoms of information, of expression, and of the press. Hence, no less than the Universal Declaration of Human Rights assures that "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers." The freedom of the press rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public; that a free press is a condition of a free society.

Democracy in this country is under siege because bullets fired at the direction of journalists pierce not only human flesh, but also our republican ideals. In their Joint Declaration regarding International Mechanisms for Promoting Freedom of Expression, the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, and the OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression identify two threats to freedom of expression and the free flow of information and ideas, which have now reached crisis proportions in many parts of the world: first, dubbed censorship by killing, are attacks on journalists and others exercising their right to freedom of expression; and second, is the abuse of restrictive defamation and libel laws. In the same declaration, each State was reminded of its obligation to take adequate measures to end the climate of impunity. Such measures should include devoting sufficient resources and attention to preventing attacks on journalists and others exercising their right to freedom of expression, investigating such attacks when they do occur, bringing those responsible to justice, and compensating victims.

Let not our knees wobble. These two challenges, censorship by murders and the restraint of libel laws, have been with us since time immemorial. Legal historians trace the roots of freedom of expression in Athens, Greece as far back as 800-600 B.C. Even then, expressive freedom was given only to select "citizens" which did not include women, resident aliens and juveniles. The Athenian majority was not accorded the expressive freedom by their aristocratic rulers.

During the Roman time, freedom of expression was likewise severely restricted by the ruling class. The Caesars controlled the distribution of news to the people. Without exception, they smothered dissent against their government. They hounded their critics to their graves.

So it was in England. Here the struggle to eliminate censorship took more than 500 years. The Crown of England was just as intolerant of criticisms. The 1274 De Scandalis Magmatum presaged the beginnings of seditious libel law. The edict proscribed political dissent. From the early 1500s, through the Puritan Revolution, until the 17th century, printing was regulated by the Crown and the restrictions were implemented through the church. Scribes tell us that it was during Henry VIII's reign that royal measures were enacted to censor alleged heretical materials. Thus, there was a special law to restrict the distribution of William Tyndale's English translation of the New Testament. The law states:

“There shall be no annotations or preambles in Bibles or New Testaments in English. The Bible shall not be read in English in any church. No women or artificers, prentices, journeymen, servingmen of the degree of yeomen or under, husbandmen, nor labourers, shall read the New Testament in English… anything contrary to the King's instructions… shall be thereof convict… his first offense recant, for his second abjure and bearer a fagot, and for his third shall be adjudged a heretic, and be burned. (Neal 1885)"

The English Court of Star Chamber, a secret tribunal, was an instrument of censorship. It meted out such punishments as levying unlimited fines, imprisonments, the pillory, flogging, mutilation and branding. In 1630 for instance, a certain Alexander Leighten published "An Appeal to Parliament" in which he urged the superiority of the Scriptures over the monarchy. On orders of the Star Chamber, Leighten was taken to Westminster and was "whipped, had one of his ears cut off, his nose slit and one side of his face branded." A week later, the mutilation was repeated on the other side of his face. In 1641, the Star Chamber was dissolved due to its surfeit of excesses. In fine, history tells us that no amount of mutilation, no amount of murders of truth tellers will kill freedom of press.

The second threat to freedom of the press is abuse of defamation and libel laws. The origins of defamation date back to Greece. As aforestated, it was in Athens, Greece that certain types of "citizens" were given freedom of expression. But even then, these "citizens" were made answerable for slander and sedition. This restriction was carried on in Roman times and got embedded in English common law. Early English defamation laws were of a different kind. Under early English common law, the truthfulness of a statement is not a defense. Hence, a truthful criticism of the Crown could result in a severe penalty. English law recognized four types of libel: (1) blasphemous libel, which is any speech that denied the existence of God or ridiculed any Christian doctrine; (2) seditious libel or criticism of the government, its leaders or policies; (3) obscene libel, which is the forerunner of obscurity laws; and (4) private libel, which is speech that injured the reputation of another person. Again, history teaches us that the misuse and abuse of libel laws against media practitioners through the ages did not stamp out the flame of freedom of the press, and it never will.

At this point, let me share with you our humble efforts to strengthen democracy in our country by enhancing human rights and giving more flesh to the freedom of the press. On the area of human rights, our High Court has promulgated the Writ of Amparo and the Writ of Habeas Data. It is interesting to note that the provenance of both the Rule on Writ of Amparo and the Rule on Habeas Data is a forum much like this one. The National Consultative Summit on Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances, held last July 16-17, 2007 addressed also the culture of impunity that stalks our country.

The Rule on the Writ of Amparo which protects the victims of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances took effect last October 24, 2007. In the Supreme Court alone, a total of 14 writs of Amparo have already been issued out of 18 petitions that prayed for the writ. Out of these 14 cases, 5 have already been decided by the Court of Appeals from October 2007 to present.

On the other hand, the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data took effect last February 2, 2008. This Rule is an independent remedy to enforce the right to informational privacy and the complementary "right to truth." It is also as an additional remedy to protect an individual's civil rights. This writ is available "to any person whose right to privacy in life, or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting, or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home, and correspondence of the aggrieved party." Reliefs include the "deletion, destruction, or rectification of the erroneous data or information."

Just a month old, no writ of habeas data has been issued yet. It is an excellent human rights tool used mostly in countries recovering from military dictatorships. It enforces the right to truth, which is the bedrock of the rule of law. Observers say that with the promulgation of these two writs, the number of victims of extrajudicial and enforced disappearances had declined. Perhaps it is too early to rejoice over their deterrent effect. This fight for human rights is one fight full of commas and no period; a fight where you never write "30."

On the second area (i.e., protecting freedom of the press), the High Court, through Administrative Circular No. 08-2008, issued Guidelines in the Observance of a Rule of Preference in the Imposition of Penalties in Libel Cases. In this Circular, the High Court directed judges to determine whether the imposition of a fine alone in libel cases would best serve the interest of justice. The High Court cited cases where it refused to incarcerate those accused of libel but instead penalized them with the payment of fine. Somehow, this Circular has caused Congress to fast track debate on bills decriminalizing libel. I respectfully suggest that Congress should also look into the idea of putting a cap on civil liability for libel of media people. It is not only the threat of imprisonment that handcuffs media. The punches of poverty coming from threats of unlimited civil liability can also convert some of their backbones into mere wishbones. Just a few days ago or on February 15, 2008, we decided the case of Chavez v. The Secretary of Justice and the National Telecommunications Commission (G.R. No. 188338). We struck as unconstitutional prior restraints the warnings issued by the respondent public officials that media people will be prosecuted if they air the controversial wiretapped conversation between the sitting President and a Commissioner of the COMELEC allegedly revealing fraud in the 2004 national elections.

Let me submit that attempts to curtail freedom of the press all over the world will never end. We should never weary in protection. I end by emphasizing just one particular value promoted by freedom of the press – the search for truth. I can do no better than quoting the explanation of First Amendment scholar Thomas Emerson:

xxx A central value of free and open debate is the discovery of truth and knowledge through the free trade of ideas. In language that is reminiscent of John Milton's Areopagitica and John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, Emerson stated,

an individual who seeks knowledge and truth must hear all sides of the question, consider all alternatives, test his judgment by exposing it to opposition, and make full use of different minds. Discussion must be kept open no matter how certainly true an accepted opinion may be; many of the most widely acknowledged truths have turned out to be erroneous. (Emerson 1970, 6-7)

The idea that free expression is central to discovering truth is not just discussed in philosophical tomes of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It appears in Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes's 1919 dissent in Abrams, in which he passionately stated, "[T]he ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas --- that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the marketplace" (Abrams v. United States [1919] 630). It also appears in Justice Louis D. Brandeis's 1927 concurring opinion on Whitney, in which he referred to the Founding Fathers and how "they believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and the spread of political truth" (Whitney v. California [1927] 374). Brandeis added, "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence" (Cornwell, Freedom of the Press, pp. 4-5).

Today, our society is bedeviled by the enforced disappearances of some votaries of democracy, especially media practitioners. An enforced silence on these enforced disappearances cannot but give impetus to its growing culture of impunity. It is this enforced silence that we ought to break for if there is anything that democracy can ill afford it is the sovereignty of the deaf and the dumb. It is speech and speech-plus that will dissipate the darkness that today hovers over the heads of the Filipino people. Speech is the function of the press. Speech-plus is the action of the sovereign people. Let them converge for they will lead us to the doorstep of truth.

A pleasant day to all.

2008 WSDC Impromptu Motions

2008-09-13T11:31:00.005+08:00

Preliminary rounds

This House would ban strikes by workers in essential state services

This House would make humanities subjects compulsory at undergraduate level

This house would cease the use of detention without trial in the war on terror

Octo-final

This House believes that heads of government should be required to have a parliamentary majority to govern

Quarter-final

This House regrets the holding of the 2008 Beijing Olympics

Semi-final

This house would drop all US sanctions on Cuba.

Source:

New Zealand School's Debating
World Schools Debating Championship

10th National Debate Championship

2008-09-11T16:57:00.003+08:00

The Office of Student Affairs of the Ateneo de Davao University is delighted to be hosting the 10th National Debate Championship to be held from 20-25 October 2008. The NDC is an annual competition that features the top debating teams from all over the Philippines. The 6 day event will be held in the Ateneo de Davao University Jacinto campus.

The NDC will use the British Parliamentary format and will have seven rounds of preliminary
debate.

Download official invites, registration procedure and tournament schedule at
this link: http://rapidshare. com/files/ 144313957/ NDC_Documents. rar.html

"Dialogue NSU 08" Motions

2008-09-11T11:28:00.000+08:00

Round 1
THW recognise the independence of South Ossetial

Round 2
THW ban Digital Enhancement in magazines and billboards.

Round 3
THW ban all Blood Sports.

Round 4
THW Ban Coca Cola.

Semi Final
THW legalize voluntary ethunasia for lifetime inprisoned War Criminals.

Grand Final
THW Build the Wall.

Rhetoric'08

2008-09-11T11:18:00.003+08:00

The English Debating Society, Sri Venkateswara College (EDS.SVC) cordially invites your institution to participate in our annual international parliamentary debate Rhetoric'08.

The EDS.SVC has been one of the most constructive associations in Delhi University and has been a platform where students exhibit their public speaking skills and are awarded for the same. Events organized by EDS.SVC have always received overwhelming response from students, faculty and visitors from prestigious institutions. Coupled with this are the achievements of the society's debaters who have excelled at both national and international debating events.

This year the EDS.SVC aspires to take the debate to an entirely new level by making Rhetoric'08 a South Asian Parliamentary Debating Championship. The debate seeks participation from institutions from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, China and Singapore.

Rhetoric will be held from the 9 to 13 (previously 13 to the 17) of October 2008. The debate will consist of 7 preliminary rounds, followed by Octo-quarters, Quarter-finals, Semi-finals and eventually the Finals. All the debates will be held on the college premises. The debate will follow the 3 member Asian format with minor modifications, the details of which will be forwarded after registration.

For more information, email eds.svc@gmail.com

Motions for the day

2008-09-09T12:14:00.003+08:00

This House Believes That U.S forces should withdraw from Iraq.

This House Would regulate Salvia.

This house would penalize advertisers for gender stereotyping.

This house vows to stick with Samak.

This house needs another web browser.

Reference: International Herald Tribune

10TH NDC Registration Packages

2008-09-06T21:25:00.001+08:00

Regular Registration: September 8 – October 10, 2008

Stay-in Package: PhP4500 per participant

Inclusive of:
• Hotel Accommodations (October 19-25, 2008)
• Meals
• IDs
• Debate Kits
• Shuttle Service (hotel to school & vice-versa)

Stay-out Package: PhP2000 per participant

Inclusive of:
• Meals
• IDs
• Debate Kits

Late Registration: October 11 – 19, 2008

Stay-in Package: PhP5000 per participant

Inclusive of:
• Hotel Accommodations (October 19-25, 2008)
• Meals
• IDs
• Debate Kits
• Shuttle Service (hotel to school & vice-versa)

Stay-out Package: PhP2500 per participant

Inclusive of:
• Meals
• IDs
• Debate Kits

* Limited slots are available for the Stay-in Package. Reservations are on a first-come, first-served basis. Participants who register as debaters and adjudicators are given priority over those registered as observers.

Institution Cap: 8 teams

-from NDC OrgCom

For other concerns, kindly log on to www.addu.edu. ph/webforum and look for the 10th NDC topics.

Source: Karla Stefan Singson (debate_philippines)

Intramuros IVs Pre-registered Institutions since Sept. 3, 2008

2008-09-05T11:55:00.003+08:00

1. Lyceum of the Philippines University (5 teams)
2. Colegio de San Juan de Letran (5 teams)
3. Mapua Institute of Technology (5 teams)
4. Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila (5 teams)
5. De La Salle – College of St. Benilde (4 teams)
6. St. Louis University (3 teams)
7. Polytechnic University of the Philippines (3 teams)
8. San Beda College (6 teams)
9. University of the Philippines – Manila (number of teams tentative)
10. University of the Philippines – Los Baños (3 teams)
11. Philippine Normal University (6 teams)
12. Far Eastern University (3 teams)

There are already 48 reserved teams. Hence, there are only 12 slotsleft to be filled in. Please confirm your institution’ s attendance onor before the 2nd week of Sepetember.

For more information, please contact Ryan Joseph Castaneda through these numbers: 09228800365/ 09067140913. You may also e-mail him at darklord_ryan16yahoo.com.

Source: The Nutbox

Hot motions

2008-09-03T16:41:00.000+08:00

This house would nationalize oil distribution.

This house would wage war against Russia.

This house would worry about nitrogen.

OUTLINE: This house would impose death penalty

2008-09-02T22:08:00.003+08:00

Background:

Due to the alarming upsurge of heinous crimes which has resulted not only in the loss of human lives and wanton destruction of property but also affected the states' efforts towards sustainable economic development and prosperity while at the same time has undermined the people's faith in the Government and the latter's ability to maintain peace and order in the country, death penalty is proposed to be imposed.

Pros:

1. The crimes punishable by death are heinous for being grievous, odious and hateful offenses and which, by reason of their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity and perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and norms of decency and morality in a just, civilized and ordered society.

2. The interest of justice, public order and the rule of law necessitates the imposition of death penalty.

3. To foster and ensure not only obedience to government's authority, but also to adopt such measures as would effectively promote the maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty and property, and the promotion of the general welfare which are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy in a just and humane society

Cons:

1. Imposition of death penalty will not in anyway prevent commission of heinous crimes. It only reflects the failure of the government and the society to instill proper values to its citizens.

2. Justice cannot be attained by killing the perpetrator of heinous crime. We must value life and in the same vein, the government must not resort to imposing death penalty to find justice to the victim. A civil society should not descend to the status of murderers by preferring revenge over far better forms of justice.

3. Punishment is supposed to reform and rehabilitate the perpetrator of a crime. Imposing the death penalty will not achieve said goal. Death penalty is an absolute judgment against the life of a person.

Motion: University of Helsinki Debating Society

2008-09-02T00:45:00.003+08:00

The University of Helsinki Debating Society is exhibiting a debate show on September 3, 2008 on the motion that:

"This House Would Immediately Accept Georgia into NATO"

Philippine Schools Debate Championship

2008-09-01T23:56:00.003+08:00

The Ateneo Debate Society (ADS) is pleased to invite high school institutions to take part in the largest and most prestigious gathering of the country’s brightest high school public speakers and debaters.

The Philippine Schools Debate Championship (PSDC), the first-ever national high school debate tournament, now on its 7th year, will be held on November 4-9, 2008 at the Ateneo de Manila University. This truly national event brings together high school debaters from all over the country to compete in several rounds of British Parliamentary debate. Furthermore, members of the top 32 teams will have the chance to try out to be part of the official Philippine team that will represent the country in the 2009 World Schools Championship to be held next February in Athens, Greece.

Registration fees for the tournament will be P2,300.00 for stay-out delegates and P 3,000.00 for stay-in delegates.

Register your institution right away and the number of teams that you wil be sending. Institutions may send a maximum of 5 teams.

Details of the registration process can be found at www.psdc2008.multiply.com

Source: Debate Philippines

NASHDC '08

2008-09-01T23:32:00.003+08:00

Philippines-- On September 5-9, 2008, the De La Salle Debate Society (LSDS) and the Manila Bulletin are hosting the largest and most notable gathering of the nation’s high school debaters and public speakers—the Manila Bulletin-6th National Asians High School Debate Championship! (MB-NAsHDC)

MB-NAsHDC aims:
1. To HONE the potentials of the youth and unleash their talents;
2. To INCULCATE the value of critical thinking and awareness to the future leaders of our country;
3. To PROVIDE an avenue for academic discourse and cultural exchange amongst our youth;
4. To CONTRIBUTE to the social, cultural and intellectual growth of the nation’s young generations; and
5. To DEVELOP the youth’s English proficiency.

MB-NAsHDC is part of a larger framework which is the Lasallian Education on Adjudication and Debate (LEAD). Under this program, LSDS envisions to educate Filipinos by spreading the culture of debating throughout the Philippines.

Watch out for the best Highschool team in the said competition. The penultimate rounds of MB-NAsHDC will be televised on NBN4 National Television.

Source: NAsHDC Website

The Next Doha Debate

2008-09-01T15:52:00.002+08:00

Below is the motion of the next Doha Debate:

September 16^th, 2008

'This House believes that progress towards democracy has halted in the Arab world.'

Source: The Doha Debates

Cross-training Motions: Quezon City Science Highschool and Southville International School and Colleges

2008-09-01T02:29:00.003+08:00

Congratulations to Quezon City Science Highschool and Southville International School and Colleges for having successfully staged a cross-training on August 31, 2008 in the Quezon City Science Highschool Campus.

The motions during the debate rounds are as follows:

Round 1: THBT Marriage should have an expiration date

Round 2: THBT the 2008 Olympics is a failure

Round 3: THW expand the permanent membership of the UN Security Council

OUTLINE: That this house would expand the permanent membership of the UN Security Council

2008-08-27T22:47:00.002+08:00

Background:

Four nations that aspire to permanent seats on the Security Council — Japan, Germany, Brazil and India — are preparing a resolution to change the U.N. charter to expand the council. Under this plan, the number of permanent members would increase from five to 11, including two African countries that have not yet been named. The number of rotating elected seats would rise from 10 to 14. The draft also proposes that the new permanent members have the same veto power as the five current permanent members. (Maggie Farley, UN Divided over Proposal to Expand Security Council, May 13, 2005 )

Pros:

1. To reflect more accurately the realities of the international community, which has experienced dramatic change over the past 60 years, and to bring about improvement in the representation of the Member States. (Permanent Mission of Japan to the U.N.)

2. In order to adequately address the wide range of today ’ s challenges, the composition of the Security Council must be reformed to permit Member States with the requisite capabilities to participate continuously in the Council’s decision-making process. (Permanent Mission of Japan to the U.N.)

3. Activities of the Security Council have greatly expanded in the past few years. The success of Security Council's actions depends upon political support of the international community. Any package for restructuring of the Security Council should, therefore, be broad-based. In particular, adequate presence of developing countries is needed in the Security Council. Nations of the world must feel that their stakes in global peace and prosperity are factored into the UN's decision making. ("India's position on UN Reform Process", India's Permanent Mission to UN)

Cons:

1. Regional disputes persist. North Korea and South Korea dislike the idea of a permanent seat for Japan. The United States opposes Germany's bid for a permanent seat. Within Africa, a fight between South Africa and Nigeria, which represent the continent's two largest economies, has emerged over which nation should get a seat. And though India is a natural choice for a permanent seat since it is home to a fifth of the world's population, its nuclear rival Pakistan opposes its inclusion. (Kristina Nwazota, U.N. Member States Torn Over Security Council Expansion, Online NewsHour).

2. An expanded Security Council could find it more difficult to garner support and act quickly in times of crisis. (Maggie Farley, Mexico, Canada Introduce Third Plan to Expand Security Council, July 22, 2005 ) More countries on the Security Council would mean a greater divergence of goals and thus more gridlock. (Cowin, Andrew J., Expanding The U.N. Security Council: A Reciepe for More Somalias, More Gridlock, and Less Democracy)

3. The present five permanent members already place a great burden on the Council. Eleven permanent members would add to this burden. Their presence would block future reform and make limitation or outright elimination of permanency far more difficult. (Africa Week Magazine)

RP-China agreements probed for legal, constitutional infirmities

2008-08-27T00:55:00.002+08:00

Committee News: house of Representatives of the Philippines
* A Publication of the Committee Affairs Department

Committee Source: AGRICULTURE & FOOD

LAWMAKERS representing the marginalized sectors of society were one in urging Congress to conduct a comprehensive review of the various lease and agribusiness agreements recently entered into by the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China.

Fighting to uphold and protect the national interest in general and the rights of the small farmers in particular, Party List Representatives Ana Theresia Hontiveros-Baraquiel (AKBAYAN), Crispin Beltran (ANAKPAWIS), Satur Ocampo and Teodoro Casiño (BAYAN MUNA), and Liza Largoza-Maza and Luzviminda Ilagan (GABRIELA) filed House Resolutions 79, 224 and 237, respectively.

Upon receipt of the measures, the Committee on Agriculture and Food, together with the Committee on Agrarian Reform, under the leadership of Rep. Abraham Kahlil Mitra (2nd District, Palawan) and Rep. Elias Bulut Jr. (Lone District, Apayao) respectively, started its inquiry into the alleged anomalous bilateral agreements made between the Philippine government through the Departments of Agriculture (DA), Agrarian Reform (DAR) and Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and China and some private Chinese corporations.

The authors of the resolutions expressed concern on the contracts’ serious implications on food security, economic stability and the over-all national sovereignty of the country.

They also found the agreements wanting for “transparency” and “reciprocity” as they will only be beneficial to the interest of China to the detriment of the Filipino people.

These agreements, Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel presented, pose serious threat to the country’s agrarian reform program citing one contract which allowed the lease of one million hectares of land to a Chinese corporation for twenty five years without specifying the nature of these lands.

In addition, she said, the produce of these lands are to be exported to China “rendering our food supply vulnerable.”

As presented in Rep. Beltran’s HR 224, there were 31 Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) signed between the Philippine government and China and some private Chinese corporations. These will promote bilateral trade and development in agricultural, fisheries and food products according to the government.

Quoting a position paper of the Initiatives for Dialogue and Empowerment through Alternative Legal Services (IDEALS) Inc., HR 224 stated that the 31 RP-China agreements cover a broad range of obligations, which include questionable financial grants and concession loans, the removal of some protective barriers on trade, a 25-year lease of more than one million hectares of agricultural lands whose produce will be exported to China, and the utilization of lands for bio-fuel production intended for China’s consumption.

Arnel Mateo, who represented IDEALS during the hearing, expressed objection to the agreements. He noted that the lack of transparency, consultation and people’s participation are the reasons why these contracts are perceived as anomalous.

The lease of one million hectares of land to the Fuhua Co., Mateo said, will effectively disenfranchise farmers and farm workers tilling these lands which directly violate the principles of agrarian reform.

This contract, he added, is also in direct violation of the 1987 Constitutional provision on patrimony which stipulates that no foreign-owned corporations can lease agricultural lands of the public domain exceeding one thousand hectares.

The pertinent provision in the Constitution (Section 3, Article 12) reads “Alienable lands of the public domain shall be limited to agricultural lands. Private corporations or associations may not hold such alienable lands of the public domain except by lease, for a period not exceeding 25 years, renewable for not more than 25 years, and not to exceed 1,000 hectares in area.”

Mateo opined that this venture should only serve as an interim measure to arrest poverty until such time that farmers have acquired the necessary skills to cultivate the lands on their own and not for 25 years.

Another point raised by IDEAL concerns the protection and conservation of the country’s marine resources as well as the livelihood of small fishers.

These agreements, Mateo read, “alter the policy framework of the government where land and marine resources are protected for Filipinos, domestic industries are nurtured, agrarian reform is of the highest order, and food security is primordial.”

Concealed from the

Rep. Hontiveros-Baraquel also questioned the involvement of the three executive departments known as “DA-DAR-DENR Convergence” in the agreements.

She disclosed that the agencies involved concealed the contents of the agreements from the public in the guise of private contracts beyond the ambit of the Constitutional requirement of disclosure.

On the other hand, DA Undersecretary Bernie Fondevilla stated that the agency is willing to cancel all the agreements it entered into if verified unconstitutional.

He added that the concerns raised will not fall on deaf ears but will be tackled in a consultative meeting with their Chinese counterparts this month.

Not listed in SEC

Suspicions of corruption arose when three of the seven local corporations involved in the RP-China agreement were not found under the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) listing of registered companies or corporations, observed Rep. Teofisto Guingona III (2nd District, Bukidnon).

The corporations named were the B.M. SB Integrated Biofuels Company, the Negros Southern Integrated Biofuels Company, and the Philippine Marine Technology Group Inc.

The Chair questioned the legality of the said corporations’ creation and incorporation two months after the signing of the MOA.

Upon learning that grains produced on Philippine soil will be exported to China, Rep. Justin Marc Chipeco (2nd District, Laguna) proposed that the particular MOA be revised so that part of the produce will remain in the country for consumption by the Filipinos.

Rep. Pryde Henry Teves (3rd District, Negros Oriental) suggested that the government adopt China’s rice production technology as well as the method of planting known as “Alturas” which is being practiced by Chinese folks in Bohol.

The Committee decided to continue the investigation at a later date.

WSDC 2008 motions

2008-08-26T23:52:00.001+08:00

PRELIMINARY ROUND PREPARED MOTIONS

That this house supports military intervention to deliver emergency aid in humanitarian crises

That this house believes that governments have a duty to bail out failing financial institutions.

That this house would ban the use of unethically obtained data in scientific research

That this house would make the directors of multinational companies personally liable for environmental abuses committed by their companies in the developing world

GRAND FINAL MOTION:

That this house would expand the permanent membership of the UN Security Council

Source: World Schools Debating Council Executive Committee

Matterloading

2008-08-26T23:12:00.002+08:00

I invite everyone to visit the Website of St. Ambrose University Library at http://library.sau.edu/bestinfo/HOT/hotindex.htm . The site compiles papers about different issues that are usually debated upon in debate competitions:

Affirmative Action
Article Files and Indexes to Hot Topics
Attack on America / Terrorism/ Iraq War Bioethical Issues
Brown v. Board of Education
Censorship
Death Penalty Drug Issues
Elections
Gender Issues
Global Warming
Gun Control Health Care Reform
Help for Term Paper Writers
Homeland Security, Open Government & the PATRIOT Act
Human Rights
Hurricanes
Identity Theft Internet Issues
Media Issues
More Miscellaneous Issues
Plagiarism
Same-sex Marriage
Social Security
Space Shuttle Disasters
Waterboarding

"Humanitarian Law and Policy Forum"

2008-08-26T22:31:00.002+08:00

Humanitarian Law and Policy Forum
A Global Community of Humanitarian Professionals

Live Seminar:

Humanitarian Law and Human Rights:

Convergence or Divergence?

Interactive Webcast

29 August 2008, 9h30 a.m. Boston Time

The Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research at

Harvard University is pleased to announce its upcoming Live

Seminar on Humanitarian Law and Policy focusing on the

interactions between International Humanitarian Law and Human

Rights.

Featuring:

Professor Marco Sassòli, University of Geneva, Switzerland
Mr. Anthony Dworkin, Director and Web Editor, The Crimes of War Project.

This Seminar offers a unique opportunity for humanitarian

professionals from around the world to engage in discussions on

key challenges to the implementation of IHL.

Claude Bruderlein, Director of the Program at Harvard, and

Naz Modirzadeh, Senior Associate at the Program, will host the discussion.

Practical and interactive

The Live Seminars have been designed to inform professionals

engaged in humanitarian and peacebuilding operations about

recent policy and legal developments. They offer an opportunity

to engage with leading experts in the field of humanitarian law

and policy.

During the Seminar, participants will be able to:

Engage with the hosts and guest panelists by sending

questions and comments via a dedicated online forum

Participate in live exchanges with over 300 other

participants via a dedicated chat platform

Provide immediate feedback on key issues raised by the

speakers through opinion polls and surveys

The Live Seminars are offered at no cost to humanitarian

professionals.This event requires prior registration.

To register for the Live Seminar:

1. Go to the WebEx Registration Site

2. Click "Register".

3. On the registration form, enter your information and then click

"Submit".

You will receive a confirmation email message with instructions

on how to join the event. For more information, please visit:

http://ihlforum.ning.com or email us at ihlforum@hpcr.org.

Source: IHL Forum

Happy 1st Year Anniversary Debate and Issue 101!!

2008-08-25T23:56:00.004+08:00

Remarks by Arnel Mateo (Author of Debate and Issue 101)
August 26, 2008

Great day everyone!

Join me as I celebrate today the 1st year Anniversary of my blog!

When I started this blog, my only thought was to post my debate materials and instructional outlines. I aimed to present analysis of issues around the globe and to share my knowledge about debating. And for some time, I got bored and pre-occupied by my work and law school schedule. I thought of asking myself, will this effort be worthwhile?

Then one day, I received an email from Alfred Snider of the Global Debate Blog telling me that he featured my blog in his blog. Sparks came in as I realized that what I've started was good. On that same day, the fire of interests within me flourished and I decided to continue my plans about this blog. Many days had passed and so are the months. And now, I am celebrating the 1st year Anniversary of my blog! 110 posts, 102 comments and 22,350 hits in one year!

After one year, I learned that debating does not stop in debate rehearsals and debate competitions, the greatest challenge is to live up to the notion that 'Once a debater, is always a debater!'

I have lived up to that promise and forever I will. And that I couldnt do without the support of the Almighty and all the people who believe in me. This blog would never reached its one year anniversary without everyone's support and attention.

Debate and Issue 101 extends heartfelt and deepest gratitude to the following people for the support, attention and generosity that they had given to this humble blog, whether they are aware of it or not:

1. Alfred Snider- for featuring my blog in his blog and introducing the same to the world community;

2. Colm Flynn- for the wisdom that you shared to me through the series of emails that we exchanged;

3. PUP (CLL, CEA, CB, CEFP and Law);

4. Quezon City Science High School;

5. Southville International School and Colleges;

6. All students, coaches, debaters and visitors around the globe whose suggestions and comments have become an indispensable part of this blog. And for making me a part of your blogrolls.

For this coming year, more than just a source of news, motions and debate materials, Debate and Issue 101 will bring in fearless opinions and documentaries that will seek to present deep analysis of the different issues affecting the humanity!

Thank you very much!

Happy Anniversary Debate and Issue 101!!!

__________________________________

The following letter was sent to me through email:

Letter from Anna Marie Domingo (Philippines)

Rock On!

It's more than just a blog,I'm telling you. It wasn't just the usual ranting cyber corner of a nut who had nothing decent to do or someone who is just so into journals that the notebook isn't enough.It is a newspaper on the go,a bulletin board for the whole debating cosmo,an instant matterloader,a cyber teacher( oh c'mon!) and most of all a friend.

I have to admit that I'm a green horn in debate(or must I say an accidental debater?).I really don't know a single damn thing about the motions, the rudiments,the techniques and other nose-bleeding high falluting terms in this new world.You may have imagined how i felt then.It was a weird mix of wonder and well,fear.If not for this blog,oh boy! would have drowned in that overwhelming environment!

This blog has always been so helpful. I'd say a million hear! hear! to that.It has been first of all a teacher.It's not that I haven't learned anything from school but additional reading always clears the fog you know and certainly this did the trick for me.I even had the chance to ask questions I was sooo ashamed to ask others ( i have to admit typing a question is a lot more comfortable than asking it face to face to, say,your professor.I hate seeing that stare which screams 'hell! are you stupid!?") I was also able to get a clearer picture of everything since the stuff in here on debate101 is very comprehensible like Kisses (or Ferrero Rocher) -small but still as pure and packed as a whole bar,hehe.

This is where we get the motions we use in practice debates.One click and voila! tons of motions used in national, foreign and mind you, even international debating competitions.Everything's here-all the motions for all the rounds (as in ALL,imagine that?) of that particular competition(and till now I wonder where all those come from...) And well it's being so debater-friendly doesn't end with it providing the motions it also provides a lot of matter resources or links to various useful sites of world news and articles on the hottest debatable issues and even other debate sites( be it school debate orgs or even events) Aside from it having all these motions and very debater-friendly links it is also a bulletin board. Wanna get updated??? Visit this blog!! Hell! you won't see these scheds on Wall Street! If there are changes in sched or venue it's all here.There even was this time that I had to show this to my parents just to prove that i'm really a part of the delegate to a particular competition! it was also through this blog that I was able to show (and kinda brag ) the rankings to my Mom(all the time saying that I wasn't a very bad debater after all! haha!)

So you see this blog is truly more than just your common blog.Yes it is a blog that is made for anyone who wants to learn bout debate and you guys may say that anyone can certainly make a blog that provides all these info and tips and links but I'm telling you this is and will always be outstanding. Why? well because this is a blog with the heart and the passion for debate.It aims to not to empower self-expression but to do public service as well.After all who would understand us who loves debate than a debater himself?

At the end of the day I say-rock on!

Oh and also THANK YOU!

Heroes day: A day before my blog Anniversary

2008-08-25T10:41:00.000+08:00

Last night, August 24, 2008, I had the occassion to watch ABS-CBN's 'BEYOND CONSPIRACY': 25 Years after Ninoy Aquino's Assasination. I was able to follow the analysis of how Ninoy's assasination was plotted all along. Ive seen the video of Ninoy's arrival on August 21, 1983 and how we was fetched by military personnels who were the ones in-charged of killing him. Ive observed how views were blocked to cover the incident on said date from any eye witnesse. And in the eyes of the Crying lady and other witnesses who paved their way to see who shot Ninoy, I felt bad and saddened by the fact that a Filipino who has the bravery to fight for the freedom of his country would have to be killed by his fellow Filipino. More importantly, Im saddend by the fact that many of us seemed to have forgotten what Ninoy and the rest of our National Heroes have done for us.

Today, August 25, 2008, a day before my blog anniversary, we are celebrating our National Heroes' Day. I would like to have this opportunity to thank them for fighting for our independence and freedom against colonial intruders and against the martial law rule. Without them, Philippines will not enjoy the blessings of self-determination and democracy that the country has right now. And without them, Filipinos would never enjoy the opportunity to exercise their freedom to life and liberty, and the freedom to express their opinions as regards issues affecting.

Jose Rizal fought the colonizers by attacking them in his brave writings in Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. Andres Bonifacio established the Katipunan to directly fight the regime of the colonizers. And Benigno 'Ninoy' Aquino fought against the Martial rule by exposing the corrupt leadership of Martial Law.

To my fellow Filipinos, have we live up responsibly in exercising the freedom that we have right now? Have we manage to continously fight against any threat to our freedom?

Let us remember the heroic efforts of our heroes. More than celebrating our birthdays or our personal anniversaries, let us spend our lives in worthy endeavors toward vigilant and responsible exercise of our freedom.

The Filipinos are worth dying for!

1st Year Anniversary of Debate and Issue 101

2008-08-23T23:41:00.000+08:00

Debate and Issue 101 is celebrating its 1st Year Anniversary on August 26, 2008!

For the past one whole year, Debate and Issue 101 has lived up to its promise of sharing the rudiments of argumentation and debate by presenting outlines and materials in debating; by sharing critical analysis of different issues; and by sharing the experience of what competitive debating is all about. It has served as a resource and reference to students, teachers and coaches from all over world in everyway possible. And most especially, it has touched lives of ordinary people who in their own rights want to have a grasp of the issues that affect their social and political lives.

Join me as I celebrate this achievement! This site would never made this far without your support and constant visit.

Share to me your views on how this site has helped you by sending me an email at arnel5mateo@yahoo.com and your articles will be posted here on the day of the anniversary! Share to me your thoughts, pictures or even your videos!

Lets continue the tradition of debating!

Lets celebrate Debate and Issue 101's 1st Year Anniversary on August 26, 2008!

Asian Parliamentary: Discussion points for each speakers

2008-08-21T14:19:00.000+08:00

Prime Minister:

1. What is the motion all about? (Simplify it)
2. Give the background of the debate. State the problem.
3. Define the issues.
4. Give a Model: Mechanism/Standards.
5. Give the outline of your arguments
6. Discuss arguments 1 by 1
7. Summarize your points by reiterating your outline.
8. Throw a burden

Leader of the Opposition

1. Overview, try to recontextualise the debate.
2. Rebut: bash the model; attack substantive case. Sometimes a counter-model will be introduced.

Sample Rebuttal:

“Will taxing church property solve the budget deficit?
No – for two reasons ...”

3. Give the outline of your arguments
a. Discuss arguments 1 by 1
b. Summarize your points by reiterating your outline.

4. Throw a burden

Deputies

1. Give a brief rebuttal (integrate rebuilding of arguments)
2. Give the outline of your arguments
3. Discuss arguments 1 by 1
4. Summarize your points by reiterating your outline.
5. Throw a burden

Whips

1. Lay down the issues in the debate
2. Discuss each issue by:
a. presenting the analysis of the opponent on said issue
b. Rebut their analysis (by using the case presented by your team or by giving supplements)

Reply

1. Why should you win the debate?

Criteria:
a. Greater contribution to the debate.
b. Responsiveness to the motion and the issues presented.

2. Comparative analysis:
a. How your team had advantage over the other?
b. What is the problem with the case of the opponent? (Causal links, Assertions, Contradictions)

Role of an Adjudicator

2008-08-18T23:30:00.000+08:00

1. Decide which team won the debate.

There is no draw or tie in a debate. Only one side can win the debate. An adjudicator who doesnt know how to decide which team won the debate must not have taken much attention on the details of the debate.

2. Determine the crucial issues in the debate.

The adjudicator shall determine the important issues that were discussed during the debate. These issues refer to those where substantial clashes of points occured and where crucial responses were made.

3. Discuss these issues in a manner that would cover the brief summary of points of both sides, and the explanation on how one team had an advantage over the other.

Discussion of issues are crucial. Debaters would want to hear the adjudicator's assessment of the arguments that they have raised. The adjudicator should clearly convince the losing team why they dont receive the favorable decision on the basis of the issues presented.

4. Rate each speech.

5. Give points for improvement.

Adjudicators shall point out the mistakes committed and how said mistakes may be remedied. Adjudicators shall help the debaters get some points to learn as to how to argue and how to keep their dynamism during the debate.

Intramuros IVs Debate Championship

2008-08-18T15:07:00.000+08:00

WHAT: IntramurosInter-varsities Debate Championship

WHEN: September 27-29, 2008

WHERE:

The first3 rounds will be held in Mapua.

The last three rounds which will be on the 2nd day will be held in PLM.

Octofinals and quarterfinals will be in Letran.

And the Semifinals and Grand Finals will be held inLyceum.

FORMAT: British Parliamentary

There would be no team cap for the tourney. However there would be atournament cap of 60 teams. This would be on a first-come-first- servebasis. Composite teams will also be allowed to join. The N-RULE wouldapply which means that the number of the teams and adjudicators youwish to send should be the same. Otherwise, your institution wouldcompensate for it.

REGISTRATION FEE: Php 400.00 for the debaters andadjudicators

If you are interested, please contact Ryan Joseph Castaneda of the Intramuros Debate Union through email at darklord_ryan16@yahoo.com or though his number at 09228800365/ 09067140913.

Should the Philippine Constitution be changed to bring peace to Mindanao?

2008-08-14T13:06:00.000+08:00

OUTLINE:

NO.

The Constitution should not be changed to bring peace to Mindanao.

Not necessary and impractical.

1. The Constitution already provides autonomy to the Muslim through the ARMM and elements of federalism are already embedded therein.

2. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8371, the Indigenous People’s Rights Act already recognizes the right of the indigenous people to their ancestral domain and their right to self-determination.

3. We only need to strengthen our exiting laws. No need to change the Constitution which may lead to extension of terms of those who are already in power.

4. The creation of an additional layer of government—namely the state—will inevitably lead to higher levels of expenditures.

Not beneficial

1. No assurance of peace. We should learn from Pakistan which adopted a federal form of government, and yet, peace is not achieved in said country.

2. Premium for greater demand for an independent Muslim state.

3. Will trigger conflict. MILF is not serious about peace. They would continue to fight for an independent state.

OUTLINE: Should church property in the Philippines be taxed?

2008-08-10T02:39:00.000+08:00

NO

Taxation of church property is not necessary:

A. Present stastusqou already provides taxation and this is if elements of exemption under the Constitution are not present.

Article VI, Section 28(3)):

1. Lands, buildings and improvement;
2. Actually, directly and exclusively used for religious purposes.

A claim of exemption from tax payments must be clearly shown and based on language in the law too plain to be mistaken. Elsewise stated, taxation is the rule, exemption therefrom is the exception.

B. Jurisprudence proves that exemption from real property tax is not absolute.

1. When they lease their real property to private entities as these are not the actual, direct and exclusive used contemplated by law.. (Lung Center vs. QC, 433 SCRA 119)
2. Church is not exempted from excise taxes. (Lladoc vs. CIR, 14 SCRA 292)
3. organization is automatically exempt without first having to apply and demonstrate that the actual use of the property is within the limited purposes prescribed in the particular exemption statute. The fact that a property is being used for non-profit purposes will not merit an exemption unless the use is one specifically exempted by law. (Maryland)
3. In a 1997 case the Arkansas Court of Appeals said that ownership of the property by a church is not necessary to entitle it to an exemption; use is determinative of entitlement. The property must be used for church purposes. If the property is being used by the owner with a view toward profit it will not be exempt.

C. Loss of revenue is attributed to corruption, trade liberalization where Philippines allows trade in goods and services through elimination of tariffs, tax evasion and over expenditure.

Taxation of church property is not beneficial:

A. It will result to the Impairment of freedom of religion

Rule on freedom of religion:
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. (Article 18, Universal Declaration of Human Rights) Exemption furthers this provision.

The Philippines adopt the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land.

2. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. (1987 Constitution)

Taxing church property and income would destroy the free exercise of religion that the Bill of Rights seeks to protect. The old principle that the power to tax is the power to destroy is still valid. In regard to taxing door-to-door religious solicitation, the court held in Murdock v. Pennsylvania in 1943:

The power to tax the exercise of a privilege is the power to control or suppress its enjoyment. . . . Those who can tax the exercise of this religious practice can make its exercise so costly as to deprive it of the resources necessary for its maintenance.

The power to tax religious institutions must be construed as the power to limit the free exercise of religion. Levying property taxes upon churches would have the effect of closing the doors of thousands of small congregations that operate on a shoestring. Many downtown churches would be forced out by the property taxes on their valuable land, and their buildings would be replaced by high-rise office complexes.

It will severe the principle of cooperation between church and state. Church gives considerable assistance to the State in the improvement of the morality of the people and the care of the indigent and the handicapped (Essential governmental function). Taxation will make this assistance to the State burdensome due to the impediment of taxes that they otherwise would have to shoulder.

B. It will result to impairment of the separation between church and State.

Reason for not taxing church property is the excessive government entanglement that such taxation would bring. What agency would be responsible for assessing the value of the property, and how would the value be calculated? To what extent will the government require inspection of church property and, in the process, its records? These are but a few areas of church-state entanglement that would come with church property taxes. Of course, with government intervention comes government regulation, which could extend into many aspects of church life. Such entanglement must be viewed as unconstitutional.

By not taxing churches, the government is prevented from directly interfering with how churches operate. By the same token, those churches are also prevented from directly interfering with how the government operates in that they cannot endorse any political candidates, they cannot campaign on behalf of any candidates, and they cannot attack any political candidate. (Murdock v. Pennsylvania)

Taxation of church property is not practical:

A. Not only is exemption from property tax provided by the Real Property Tax code, it is the fundamental law of the land that grants the exemption.

Since taxation is the rule and exemption therefrom the exception, the exemption may thus be withdrawn at the pleasure of the taxing authority. The only exception to this rule is where the exemption was granted to private parties based on material consideration of a mutual nature, which then becomes contractual and is thus covered by the non-impairment claim of the Constitution. (Mactan Cebu International Airport vs. Marcos)

B. Since it is unconstitutional, the only way to do it is through revision of the Constitution. Revising the Constitution is not an option.

Our Constitution is a rigid one which can only be done through a difficult process.
The cost of revising the Constitution is very high.

Debate Motions for the Youth

2008-08-07T13:04:00.000+08:00

THW introduce child curfews.

THBT the State should ban all private schools from sanctioning students who exhibit homosexual behavior.

THW allow Universities to allot slots for the admission of children of alumni.

THBT the Sangguniang Kabataan is irrelevant today's youth.

THW abolish tuition fees.

THBT any pupil participating in a school activity should be expelled.

THBT drugs education should be carried out by outside agencies and not by teachers.

THBT allowing young people to drink legally would result in more responsible attitude towards alcohol.

THBT the youth's political maturity is ill-served by their generation's representatives in the print media

THW abolish fraternities and sororities.

THBT youth should participate in country's decision making.

THW allow divorce in the Philippines.

THW allow child labor.

THW penalize youth engaging in pre-marital sex.

THW penalize youth involved in military juntas.

THBT the conduct of achievement test is the way to go.

THW ban smoking.

THW allow abortion.

THW introduce sex education.

Philippines "Down Under": Negotiating the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand FTA

2008-08-04T12:47:00.000+08:00

A number of treaties are now being negotiated by the government in its effort to promote trade liberalization. One of these is the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement (AANZFTA) that is expected to be concluded by the end of the year. Surprisingly, different Non-government Organizations got said information not from Philippine agencies but from the information available in the websites of New Zealand and Australia.

We’ve learned that this agreement will be comprehensive in nature and it will cover liberalization of investment, government procurement, competition policy and trade facilitation which will result to an unfair agreement as it threatens to eliminate the remaining powerful tools the Philippines still have in order to protect and develop its own domestic industries. The negotiation also seeks to eliminate all forms of barriers to trade including preferences given to Filipinos. The agreement seeks to give access to Australian and New Zealand miners the right to explore, develop and utilize Philippine natural resources as the agreement seek to give national treatment to these two countries.

New Zealand and Australia are demanding no limitation on the schedule of trade in services. The services offers of New Zealand and Australia seek 100% ownership and control of foreign investment opportunities in the Philippines which is against the pertinent provisions of Philippine laws. No 100 % ownership and control is allowed under Philippines laws in advertising services, public utilities, practice of engineering, architecture and mining, the practice of law, accountancy, and environmental planning, agriculture, fisheries, forestry, and education which are the services interests of the two foreign countries.

Question is, are consultations to domestic stakeholders being made by the government? How come that our government cannot provide said information about the negotiation if New Zealand and Australia can?

In the recent decision of the Supreme Court in AKBAYAN vs. Aquino in the disclosure of the JPEPA, the Supreme Court said that diplomatic negotiations are recognized as privilege in this jurisdiction. Only after a consideration of the context in which the claim is made may it be determined if there is a public interest that calls for the disclosure of the desired information, strong enough to overcome its traditionally privileged status.

What will warrant a strong public interest to overcome the privileged status of diplomatic negotiations? Based from said decision, it can be viewed that strong public interests can be shown only by those whose functions involve the right to be involved in treaty-negotiation. If we will study our law, and based on the decision, it says that negotiation is the sole power of the President. If that is the case, will there ever be a situation that other people will be involved in treaty-negotiations?

In light of the negotiation of the AANZFTA, what will happen now to the people’s right to participate at all levels of social, political and economic decision-making? How do we build a strong showing of need that will overcome the privileged status of diplomatic negotiations? How do we do effective and reasonable participation during the negotiation of treaties such as the AANZFTA?

Executive Privilege in the Philippines

2008-08-02T01:28:00.000+08:00

Executive Privilege

The power of the Government to withhold information from the public, the courts, and the Congress.”

The right of the President and high-level executive branch officers to withhold information from Congress, the courts, and ultimately the public.”

It has encompassed claims of varying kinds. One variety of the privilege, is the state secrets privilege invoked by U.S. Presidents, beginning with Washington, on the ground that the information is of such nature that its disclosure would subvert crucial military or diplomatic objectives. Another variety is the informer’s privilege, or the privilege of the Government not to disclose the identity of persons who furnish information of violations of law to officers charged with the enforcement of that law. Finally, a generic privilege for internal deliberations has been said to attach to intragovernmental documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated.

This privilege, based on the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers, exempts the executive from disclosure requirements applicable to the ordinary citizen or organization where such exemption is necessary to the discharge of highly important executive responsibilities involved in maintaining governmental operations, and extends not only to military and diplomatic secrets but also to documents integral to an appropriate exercise of the executive’ domestic decisional and policy making functions, that is, those documents reflecting the frank expression necessary in intra-governmental advisory and deliberative communications.

In this jurisdiction, the doctrine of executive privilege was recognized by this Court in Almonte v. Vasquez. Almonte used the term in reference to the same privilege subject of Nixon. It quoted the following portion of the Nixon decision which explains the basis for the privilege:

“The expectation of a President to the confidentiality of his conversations and correspondences, like the claim of confidentiality of judicial deliberations, for example, has all the values to which we accord deference for the privacy of all citizens and, added to those values, is the necessity for protection of the public interest in candid, objective, and even blunt or harsh opinions in Presidential decision-making. A President and those who assist him must be free to explore alternatives in the process of shaping policies and making decisions and to do so in a way many would be unwilling to express except privately. These are the considerations justifying a presumptive privilege for Presidential communications. The privilege is fundamental to the operation of government and inextricably rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution x x x ” (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)

Almonte involved a subpoena duces tecum issued by the Ombudsman against the therein petitioners. It did not involve, as expressly stated in the decision, the right of the people to information. Nonetheless, the Court recognized that there are certain types of information which the government may withhold from the public, thus acknowledging, in substance if not in name, that executive privilege may be claimed against citizens’ demands for information.

In Chavez v. PCGG, the Court held that this jurisdiction recognizes the common law holding that there is a “governmental privilege against public disclosure with respect to state secrets regarding military, diplomatic and other national security matters.” The same case held that closed-door Cabinet meetings are also a recognized limitation on the right to information.

In In Re: Sealed Case, the U.S. Court of Appeals delved deeper. It ruled that there are two (2) kinds of executive privilege; one is the presidential communications privilege and, the other is the deliberative process privilege. The former pertains to “communications, documents or other materials that reflect presidential decision-making and deliberations and that the President believes should remain confidential.” The latter includes ‘advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated.”

The above cases, especially, Nixon, In Re Sealed Case and Judicial Watch, somehow provide the elements of presidential communications privilege, to wit:

1) The protected communication must relate to a “quintessential and non-delegable presidential power.”
2) The communication must be authored or “solicited and received” by a close advisor of the President or the President himself. The judicial test is that an advisor must be in “operational proximity” with the President.
3) The presidential communications privilege remains a qualified privilege that may be overcome by a showing of adequate need, such that the information sought “likely contains important evidence” and by the unavailability of the information elsewhere by an appropriate investigating authority.

Senate vs. Ermita, G.R. No. 169777. April 20, 2006
What remains to be valid provision of E.O 464?

In accordance with Article VI, Section 22 of the Constitution and to implement the Constitutional provisions on the separation of powers between co-equal branches of the government, all heads of departments of the Executive Branch of the government shall secure the consent of the President prior to appearing before either House of Congress (Section 1).

Executive privilege covers all confidential or classified information between the President and the public officers covered by this executive order, including (Section 2(a)):

Conversations and correspondence between the President and the public official covered by this executive order (Almonte vs. Vasquez G.R. No. 95367, 23 May 1995; Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, G.R. No. 133250, 9 July 2002);

Military, diplomatic and other national security matters which in the interest of national security should not be divulged (Almonte vs. Vasquez, G.R. No. 95367, 23 May 1995;

Chavez v. Presidential Commission on Good Government, G.R. No. 130716, 9 December 1998).
Information between inter-government agencies prior to the conclusion of treaties and executive agreements (Chavez v. Presidential Commission on Good Government, G.R. No. 130716, 9 December 1998);

Discussion in close-door Cabinet meetings (Chavez v. Presidential Commission on Good Government, G.R. No. 130716, 9 December 1998);

Matters affecting national security and public order (Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, G.R. No. 133250, 9 July 2002).

Q&A

1. For purposes of appearing before the Congress, when is consent of the President necessary? Only when the Congress exercises oversight functions.
2. May oversight functions be facilitated by compulsory process? Yes, if it is made in aid of legislation. In which case, Department heads may be compelled to appear.
3. Is there an instance when a Department Head may refuse to appear in inquiries in aid of legislation? Yes, if he informs the President that the information might be covered by executive privilege and the President invokes the same, he cannot be compelled to appear.
4. Who can invoke executive privilege? Only the President and its Executive Secretary

Neri vs. Senate, G.R. No. 180643, March 25, 2008

The revocation of E.O. 464 does not in any way diminish our concept of executive privilege. This is because this concept has Constitutional underpinnings occasionally interpreted only by this Court in various cases.

The Court is convinced that, indeed, the communications elicited by the three (3) questions are covered by the presidential communications privilege. First, the communications relate to a “quintessential and non-delegable power” of the President, i.e. the power to enter into an executive agreement with other countries. Second, the communications are “received” by a close advisor of the President. Under the “operational proximity” test, petitioner can be considered a close advisor, being a member of President Arroyo’s cabinet. And third, there is no adequate showing of a compelling need that would justify the limitation of the privilege and of the unavailability of the information elsewhere by an appropriate investigating authority.

Presumption can be overcome only by mere showing of public need by the branch seeking access to conversations. Here, the record is bereft of any categorical explanation from respondent Committees to show a compelling or critical need for the answers to the three (3) questions in the enactment of a law. Instead, the questions veer more towards the exercise of the legislative oversight function under Section 22 of Article VI rather than Section 21 of the same Article.

AKBAYAN vs. Aquino, G.R. No. 170516, July 16, 2008
Are trade offers and notes during negotiations privileged?

The privilege character of diplomatic negotiations has been recognized in this jurisdiction. In discussing valid limitations on the right to information, the Court in Chavez vs. PCGG held that “information on inter-government exchanges prior to the conclusion of treaties and executive agreements may be subject to reasonable safeguards for the sake of national interests. In PMFF v. Manglapus, the Court stressed that secrecy of negotiations with foreign countries is not violative of the constitutional provisions of freedom of speech or of the press nor of the freedom to access to information. An essential characteristic of diplomacy is its confidential nature. Further, the President is the sole organ of the nation in its negotiations with foreign countries. Into the field of negotiations the Senate cannot intrude; and Congress is in itself powerless to invade it.

Applying the principles in PMFF v. Manglapus, while the final text of JPEPA may not be kept perpetually confidential, the offers exchanged by the parties during the negotiations continue to be privileged even after the JPEPA is published for historic confidentiality would govern the same.

The Court sees no reason in abandoning the doctrine in PMFF v. Manglapus there being a public policy supporting a privilege for diplomatic negotiations. In our jurisdiction, there is no counterpart of the Freedom to Information Act nor is there any statutory requirement for withholding information. Hence, Philippine Courts when assessing a claim for privilege for diplomatic negotiations are more free to focus directly on the issue of whether the privilege being claimed is indeed supported by public policy.

Diplomatic negotiations, therefore, are recognized as privileged in this jurisdiction, the JPEPA negotiations constituting no exceptions. It bears emphasis, however, that such privilege is only presumptive. For as Senate v. Ermita holds, recognizing a type of information as privilege does not mean that it will be considered privileged in all instances. Only after a consideration of the context in which the claim is made may it be determined if there is a public interest that calls for the disclosure of the desired information, strong enough to overcome its traditionally privileged status.

There are at least two kinds of public interests that must be taken into account. One is the presumed public interest in favor of keeping the subject information confidential, which is the reason for the privilege in the first place, and the other is public interest in favor of disclosure, the existence of which must be shown by the party seeking the information.

Petitioners failed to present the strong and sufficient showing of need to overcome executive privilege. They failed to show that the information sought is critical to the performance of the functions of Congress, functions that do not include treaty-negotiation

ANC Square Off: The CVC Law Debate

2008-07-31T13:33:00.000+08:00

On July 30, 2008, another spectacular debate was witnessed when two top lawschool in the Philippines competed with one another on the motion that Church property should not be exempted from taxation. Defending the Affirmative side is the University of the Philippines College of Law and on the other hand, defending the negative is the Polytechnic University of the Philippines College of Law.

UP Law argued that the reason for exempting church property from taxation is no longer existing thus they propose to revise the Constitutional grant of exemption to church property. They argued that taxing the church will bring in revenue to the government.

PUP Law defended the statusquo arguing that exempting the church property is not absolute. The limitation requires a heavy burden to the church before they could claim exemption. Taxation is the rule while exemption is the exception. They said that taxing church will necessarily violate the separation of church and state and will bring about an added burden to the people because they are the one's who will be shouldering the same.

The match was so close thus declaring a tie, an that event that happened for the first time in ANC Square Off debate history. Both teams garnered the score of 220.

In breaking the tie, the chair of the judges chose UP Law to advance to the next round. PUP Law on the other hand will still be competing with another school to advance to the next round.

Arnel Mateo, Cruzette Dela Cruz and Rofylyn Lagundino were the members of PUP Law team.

Congratulations to both teams!

The Future of IHL: Live webcast from Harvard University

2008-07-10T15:02:00.000+08:00

International Panel on the Future of IHL:

Challenges and Perspectives

July 16, 2008

3:15 p.m. EST

HPCR International, in cooperation with the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research and the International Committee of the Red Cross, is organizing an "International Panel on the Future of International Humanitarian Law" in the context of the upcoming Advanced Training on Humanitarian Law and Policy.

The panel discussion will be broadcast live on the web (audio/video) from Harvard University on July 16, 2008, at 3:15 p.m. EST via the Humanitarian Law and Policy Forum.

The event will review practical challenges facing humanitarian professionals in the implementation of IHL and draw a prospective analysis on its development. Panelists will include:

Mr. Antoine Bouvier, Legal Advisor, Delegate to Academic Circles, International Committee of the Red Cross
Mr. Claude Bruderlein, Director, Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research
Dr. Knut Dörmann, Head of the Legal Division of the International Committee of the Red Cross
Dr. Jennifer Leaning, Co-director, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative
Ms. Naz Modirzadeh, Senior Associate, Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research
Ms. Daphna Shraga, Principal Legal Officer, Office of the Legal Counsel, United Nations

The panel will focus on the emerging challenges to, and continued relevance of, international law in the protection of civilians. Issues to be covered will include opportunities for the enforcement of humanitarian law, responsibilities of states and non-state actors, negotiation of humanitarian access, and the role of civil society in humanitarian protection.

Panelists will take questions and comments from humanitarian professionals from around the world. Online viewers are warmly invited to submit questions before or during the event to the moderator, Dr. Vincenzo Bollettino, at vbollett@hsph.harvard.edu.

Please visit the Forum on July 16 to join the live event. The panel will begin at 3:15 p.m. EST. To confirm the webcast time in your city, please see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html.

For more information on this event, please visit the Humanitarian Law and Policy Forum at http://ihlforum.ning.com. From more information on HPCR International's Professional Development Program on IHL, please visit http://www.hpcr.org/professional_development.html.

Motions: 2008 World Schools Debating Championships

2008-07-09T11:41:00.000+08:00

PRELIMINARY ROUND PREPARED MOTIONS

That this house supports military intervention to deliver emergency aid in humanitarian crises

That this house believes that governments have a duty to bail out failing financial institutions.

That this house would ban the use of unethically obtained data in scientific research

That this house would make the directors of multinational companies personally liable for environmental abuses committed by their companies in the developing world

GRAND FINAL MOTION

That this house would expand the permanent membership of the UN Security Council

Source: Global Debate

Motions: 10th Turkish Nationals

2008-06-26T12:55:00.000+08:00

Round 1: Thbt Income of gambling addicts should be directly given to their spouses

Round 2: Thbt University graduates should not be sent to places of war for fulfilling their military service.

Round 3: Thbt all football clubs should have salary cap

Round 4: Thbt people in drunk drivers’ car should be also punished

Round 5: Thbt local governments should not forcibly move residents for ‘Urban Renewal Projects’

Round 6: Thbt Central Bank should stop being guarantor to bankrupt banks

Round 7: Thbt Political party leaders should have a time limit of duty

Quarter: Th would force media agencies not to use any word other than 'terrorist groups' for whom state declares to be 'terrorist group'.

Semi: Thbt UN Food Office should have all the responsibility of distribution, pricing or sale of wheat across the world

Final: Th would abolish inheritence

Source: Debate Topics/ Debate motions

2008 PUP-FEU Moot Court Competition

2008-06-13T13:00:00.000+08:00

Everyone is invited to watch the final match between PUP-LAW and FEU-LAW in this year's PUP-FEU Moot Court Competition. The final match will be held on June 14, 2008, 2-5pm at the Auditorium of FEU in Morayta, Manila.

Moot court is a debate format praticed by students in lawschools wherein the topic dwells on a legal hypothetical case. Two sides have to defend their position on the legal issues involved in the given case.

IDEA Internship Opportunity

2008-06-11T14:31:00.000+08:00

An opportunity to work with IDEA as a part-time intern helping to develop web-based debate resources is now open. They are looking for someone to help jump start a wiki portal for Asian Parliamentary Debate on their website. This would include posting materials for beginners (i.e. format, rules, ect.) as well as beginning argumentation threads and topic ideas.

The only qualifications are:

1) Knowledge of Asian Parliamentary Debate
2) A current university student
3) Knowledge of wiki formatting or willingness to teach oneself

If you are interested, email Alex Dukalskis, IDEA Program Coordinator at adukalskis@idebate. org with a bit about your background in debate and a CV.

Source: Korea Debate

Motions: ICRC International Humanitarian Law Debate 2008

2008-06-11T12:05:00.000+08:00

Round 1: Intervention
THBT the UN's responsibility to protect is more important than itsrespect to national sovereignity
THBT constructive engagement works better than military intervention
THBT invasion into other sovereign countries is justified only in thename of counter-terrorism

Round 2: Nukes
THBT all nations have the right to possess nuclear weapons
THBT only democratic states have the right to civilian nuclear energy
THBT South Korea should provide unconditional aid to North Korea

Round 3: Negotiating with terrorists
THBT Israel should include Hamas in its dealing with Palestine.
THW not recognize Hezbollah as the rulers of Lebanon.
THW not negotioate with violent separatist movements.

Round : Food Security
THBT the World Bank and other bilateral donors should tiedevelopmental aid to investment in agriculture.
THW curb the production of biofuels to address the growing food crisis.
THBT the EU should not bow to the pressures of WTO in reducingagricuktural subsidies.

Quarter Finals: Cluster Munitions Treaty
THBT the greatest impact of the ban on cluster munitions is not inprotecting civilians but in hampering the military capability.
THBT the "Big Players" persistence on the option of using clustermunitions is a threat to collective security.
THW criminalize countries that cooperate with other nations usingcluster munitions.

Semi Finals: Responsibility
THW force countries to make contributions to relief funds proportionalto their GDPs
THW hold states responsible for collateral damage
THW allow America soldiers to not respond to the call of war

Third Placing: Justice - 3rd
THBT perpetrators of crimes against humanity should only be tried ininternational courts or tribunals, not local courts
THBT the ICC is ineffective in delivering justice to victims of crimesagainst humanity
THBT TRCs are a sufficient form of recourse afforded to victims ofcrimes against humanity

Grand Finals: The Geneva Conventions
THBT the Geneva Conventions have no place in modern warfare
THW include terrorists as combatants under the Geneva Conventions
THBT rendition has no place in a democratic world.

Source: Prasad (IMU)

Motions: Israeli National Championships

2008-06-10T12:57:00.001+08:00

1. Thw send over-weight children to weight watching groups.
2. Thw return fire to its sources, even at the cost of harming citizens.
3. Thw introduce progressive inheritance tax.
4. Thbt its legitimate to publish the sexual orientation of public figures.
5. Thw oblige doctors to inform parents before performing an abortion on a minor.
6. Thw force Haredic jewish people to change their way of living.

Semi-Final: Thbt drunk driving is equivalent of attempted murder.

Final: Thw not interrogate an active prime minister.

Source: World Debating Website

UP Diliman Pre-Australs Website Launch

2008-06-05T17:01:00.000+08:00

Greetings! The UP Debate Society is hosting Pre-Australs on June 28-30, 2008 at the University of the Philippines, Diliman campus. This tournament would really serve as an excellent preparation for the upcoming Australasians 2008, which will be held in Manila just two days after this.

We are pleased to announce that the official website of Pre-Australs has been launched. You may now visit http://preaustrals.updebatesociety.org/ for the comprehensive tournament information.

Also, we have presented below a REGISTRATION FAQ.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are composite teams allowed to compete and break?

Yes, composite teams can join Pre-Australs and are eligible to break in this tournament.

Can teams not registered in Australs join Pre-Australs?

Yes, we are allowing teams that are not competing in Australs itself to join Pre-Australs.

Is there an institution cap and a breaking cap for institutions?

There is no institution cap and all registered teams from each institution are eligible to break. However, we do have a tournament cap of 30 teams so we are requesting institutions to confirm early to secure slots.

How many adjudicators should each institution send?

Institutions sending debaters and as well as composite teams must fulfill the n-rule for sending adjudicators; i.e. the number of adjudicators sent must be equal to the number of competing teams.

How many debate rounds will Pre-Australs have?

Pre-Australs will consist of 5 preliminary rounds. The top 8 teams will compete in the break rounds featuring a quarterfinal, semifinal and a final round.

Will Pre-Australs have a coaching system?

Yes. Teams, upon registration, can opt in for a coach who can provide valuable input during preparation time. The enriching debates and outstanding adjudication will truly result into fruitful training for the upcoming major tournament.

What are the requirements for registration?

Institutions and composite teams must accomplish a pre-registration form and should send it to preaustrals2008@gmail.com not later than June 20, 2008. The pre-registration form may also be filled out and sent via the registration page on http://preaustrals.updebatesociety.org/.
The deadline for the full payment of the registration fee is on June 23, 2008.
For participants availing of accommodations, the deadline of full payment of accommodations package is on June 23, 2008. However, these participants must still check the official invitation for the deadline of payment of their chosen accommodations package because some hotel options may require confirmation and payment dates earlier than June 23, 2008 in order to secure slots or obtain discounts.

How much is the registration fee and what does it cover?

The registration fee is just Php 2000 (approximately USD 47.00) inclusive of three lunch meals, dinner, and two socials events. Please note that accommodations costs are not covered by the registration fee.

How can we avail of accommodations?

The Pre-Australs Board of Directors has provided several affordable and good accommodations options within the UP Diliman area. Participants who wish to get accommodations should check the accommodations section of the official invitation, select a hotel option, and inform the organizers upon pre-registration about this choice. The organizing committee will take care of the hotel booking provided that the participants confirm and pay on the set deadline for that particular hotel option.
Participants availing of accommodations just have to pay an additional Php 335 (USD 8.00) for their transportation fee, which covers the cost for airport transfer upon arrival in Manila and shuttling services from the hotel to the tournament venue, socials venues and back to the hotel for the entire duration of the tournament.

Can we still avail of these accommodations after Pre-Australs?

Yes, participants may opt in to avail of these accommodations until after Pre-Australs, before they are transferred to their accommodations for Australs. The accommodations packages can be extended to 5 days and the Fersal Inn accommodations package, in particular, offers a 15% discount for a 5-night stay.
Pre-Australs will be concluded just 2 days before Australasians 2008. Should you need any assistance, please do not hesitate to approach the Pre-Australs organizers to ask help for securing cheap accommodations, setting up an itinerary to tour around Manila, or making travel arrangements for other tours for these 2 free days before the major tournament.

Where can I get more information about Pre-Australs?

Please download an official invite. We also encourage you to visit http://preaustrals.updebatesociety.org/ regularly for updates on this tournament.
Should you have further questions, concerns or comments about Pre-Australs, please do not hesitate to forward them to us through Ms. Anna Arcellana, Communications Director at + 639178862232. You may also send us a message at preaustrals2008 @ gmail.com.

Thank you very much and we are looking forward to seeing you at Pre-Australs!

Anna Arcellana
Communications Director
Pre-Australs

Harvard Program launches new online course on humanitarian law and policy

2008-06-03T16:19:00.000+08:00

2 June 2008
Following extended research on distance learning among humanitarian agencies, the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research at Harvard University announces today the launch of its online course and discussion forum on humanitarian law and policy.

These online sessions combine video/audio lectures, selected readings, a discussion forum, a calendar of IHL training events, and other related resources. These materials have been developed as part of a multi-year research study being conducted by the Program at Harvard, in cooperation with HPCR International, on the use of distance learning tools in humanitarian affairs. These electronic resources are made available to humanitarian professionals at no cost.

Featured modules during summer 2008 include:

Introduction to IHL
Distinction between Civilians and Combatants
Humanitarian Protection
Interplay between IHL and Human Rights

To learn more about the online course or to get started viewing lectures, please visit the Humanitarian Law and Policy Forum at http://ihlforum.ning.com to complete the free registration process.

We hope that these new tools will offer useful resources to humanitarian professionals and look forward to your comments in the discussion forums. We also invite you to share this announcement with any colleagues interested in humanitarian law.

HPCR International

Source: HPCR International

Motions: IIU AUDC 2008

2008-05-29T10:59:00.000+08:00

Young Ones
THW allow abortion on the ground of permanent physical deformity.
THBT the government should take away obese children from their parents.
THBT the state should financially support single teenage pregnantmothers.

Malaysia
THW not allow elected MPs to change their political parties.
THW allow unrestricted religious conversion of its citizens.
THBT Malaysian government should end its subsidy on oil.

Bargaining and Concessions
THW give aid to Myanmar in exchange of political concessions from themilitary junta
THBT it is time for South Africa to cut its aid to Zimbabwe until Mugabesteps down
THW make recognition of an independent Kosovo a precondition forSerbia's membership into the WTO

Taboo
THW legalize incestuous marriages
THW recognize the choice of identity for those who have undergone sexualreassignment surgery
THBT Non-citizens should not be allowed to be legal prostitutes

Sports
THW have airtime quota on domestic media to promote women's sports.
THBT players should walk off the field in response to racisthooliganism.
TH should lift the ban on expression of political beliefs by athletesduring sporting events.

Economics
THW make economic aid conditional on opening up development tenders toforeign bidders
TH would punish companies' home for bribing abroad
This house would make eco-labeling mandatory for cross-border trade

Election
This house would restrict aid to troubled democracies unless their election is held under an international body.
This house would ban campaign contribution from foreign entities innational election.
THBT Asian democracies should disallow the succession of close relativesto top political posts

State & Religion
This House would allow use of Sharia Law for Muslim minorities inBritain
THW grant unrestricted access to pilgrimage sites to people of otherfaiths.
THW impose a quota for female teachers on government subsidized madrasas

Food Security
THW impose a moratorium on the production of Bio-Fuel
THW nationalize the food production
THW not leave food prices in the hands of the market

US Foreign Policy
THBT United States should lift the embargo on Cuba
THBT Lebanon should accept United States' offer of military aid tofight the Hezbollah
THBT United States should involve Iran in the nation-building of Iraq

Media
THBT Media corporations should be held accountable only to theirshareholders
THBT broadcast media organizations in the US should provide equalairtime to competing views on controversial issues.
TH supports full live television coverage of legislative sessions

Bio-Ethics
THW supports surrogacy for profit
THBT private insurance companies should be allowed to access geneticinformation of its policy applicants
THW ban pharmaceutical companies from giving monetary compensation toclinical trial volunteers

In Times of War
THBT United States should not detain juvenile enemy combatants
THBT conscription of child soldiers by their parents is justified in thewar for freedom
THBT in times of war, the state should offer convicts imprisoned forheinous crimes the option to fight for the army in exchange ofconditional pardon.

Source: Rashedul Hasan Stalin, DCA, IIU Asian Universities Debating Championship- AUDC 2008

Motions: Great Serdang Debate 2008

2008-05-28T12:12:00.000+08:00

Round 1 - Prisons and Prisoners
Taht Prisoners should be allowed to vote
That we should privatize prisons
That we should revoke the possibility of parole for sex offenders

Round 2 - The gender
That we should legalize abortion
That aid should be conditional to the development of women's right

Round 3 - Economics
That trading blocs are better than global free trade
That WTO should enforce fair trade instead of free trade
That we should prioritize food security over bio-fuel

Round 4 - The underaged
That voting should start at age 16
That pregnant students should be allowed to take maternity leaves
That parental consent is not needed for teenagers seeking abortion

Round 5 - feeling suicidal
That suicide should be decriminalized
That websites facilitating suicide should be banned
That parents of children that commited suicide should be subjected to a negligence inquiry

Quarterfinals - Democracy
That state owned media should not exist
That democracies should allow citizen-initiated referendums
That opinion polls distort the democratic process

Semifinal - Education
That parents should be allowed to teach their children at home
That education vouchers are necessary to create better schools
That state should provide free and compulsory nursery education for all children

Final - Medical Ethics
That doctors should be compelled to report instances of domestic violence.

Source: Muhammad Yunus

The new AUDC website

2008-05-25T14:12:00.000+08:00

Check out AUDC's new website at http://www.audc.info/

The site contains section for Video, Galleries, a Forum, a Calendar, Links, AUDC Documentation and a Mailing List.

What should be the Basis for Assessing the Impact of Trade Agreements?

2008-05-23T19:13:00.000+08:00

Envisioned Regional Trade Agreements and Bilateral Trade Agreements[1]
By: Arnel D. Mateo[2]

In order to assess the impact of an impending trade agreement, it is a must that we know how regional trade agreements and how bilateral trade agreements should operate. The rules provided for by the World Trade Organization provide flexibilities which can be utilized by the developing worlds. These rules are reflected in the Uruguay Round, in the Doha Declarations and in the succeeding WTO rounds.

Here is an outline of how Regional Trade Agreements and Bilateral Trade Agreements should be which are geared toward economic development and alleviation of poverty. Entering into Regional Trade Agreements and Bilateral Trade Agreements is supposed to be the best way of negotiating trade between Developed Countries and Developing Countries.

I. An RTA or BTA…

..Must be WTO Compliant:

1. At initial stages, a level of flexibility is needed in eliminating/reducing tariff and non-tariff barriers to promote economic development of developing countries, to protect infant industries and to serve as source of government revenue. (GATS5, GATT28).

2. RTAs/BTAs must provide increase market access with enabling clauses. Enabling clauses allow giving of favorable treatment to imported goods coming from developing countries.

3. Must provide transitional time periods for development.[3] The WTO Rules generally provide a 10 year transition period before a developing country could fully eliminate or remove its tariff and non-tariff barriers.

4. Must cover substantially all trade except sensitive sectors. (GATT24) Although full liberalization is the objective to increase competitiveness of industries, sensitive industries may be excluded in order to protect the crucial sectors of the State.

5. Must not have more restrictive measures than third party trade. A State or a region cannot restrict its trade base on sensitivity of the industry by excluding some of its sectors if the same has been opened to a third party. (ex. EU-ASEAN vs. EU-US on Airlines)

..Must protect developing countries domestic interest: Developing countries must be allowed to adopt or implement strategic trade policies or selective industrial trade policies that were utilized by the present industrialized countries.

6. Government subsidies for domestic and export for developing countries must be allowed at initial stages. Although this is discouraged for it will defeat the essence of full liberalization and will lower down efficiency of domestic industries, the same can be done during the initial stages of trade in an effort to protect infant industries.

7. Must liberalize market access by imposing less restrictive rules of origin.[4] Setting lower content threshold for developing countries will avoid tariff discrimination.

8. Must incorporate special safeguards on agricultural products. It allows temporary application of an additional duty on top of applied tariffs in cases of import volume surges or import price falls.[5]

..Must involve a Process that engages the sectors:

9. There must be a clear trade policy agenda and institutional accountability. Direction must be set as to what concessions can be made and what cannot. Institutional framework must be transparent so as to clearly define the responsibilities of our trade negotiating team.

10.Must be constitutional. The RTA or BTA must be in line with the States’ national economy and patrimony principles.

11. Must recognize people’s right to effective and reasonable participation as well as right of access to information. An impending trade agreement can only be assessed by the stakeholders if negotiation exchanges are made available to them.

II. Before entering an RTA or BTA…

1. Policy makers have to consider which of their industries are ready to deal with international competition.

2. Determine if the products are along the country’s comparative advantage or if these are being produced by firms that realized economies of scale in production.

3. Policy makers must identify if these industries have ready access to infrastructures and that the educational system is able to produced skilled labor force over the next ten years or so.

4. Expenditures on social services must be made available.

5. There must be functioning financial system that will provide credit to domestic industries.

6. Government must extend support for technology, production management, organization, marketing, etc.

7. Government must provide market incentives, and

8. There must be State intervention.

[1] Author’s reflection on WTO Rules
[2] Student, 2008 Philippine Global Trade E-Learning Program
[3] Par. 8, Art. 12 of the TBT Agreement
[4] William E. James, Asian Development Bank
[5] Article 5 and under the Special Treatment provision in Annex 5 of the WTO Agreement.

Oxford Union: Debate Motion

2008-05-23T14:35:00.000+08:00

TONIGHT: The DEBATE is ‘THIS HOUSE BELIEVES SPORT & POLITICS DON’T MIX’.

Speakers include Simon Hart (Chf Exec Countryside Alliance), Sir Philip Craven (Int Olympic Cttee & Pres of Int Paralympic Cttee), Jason Cundy (former Chelsea footballer, now Radio talkSPORT presenter), Daniel Finkelstein (Comment Editor The Times) and Jenni Russel (editor of Radio 4 ‘The World Tonight’).

Source: Oxford Union

WTO Principles: Foundation of Multilateral Trading System

2008-05-20T23:37:00.000+08:00

International trade law is very important for us to understand in this era of globalization. To fully understand how it works, we basically need to understand how multilateral trading system operates.

Taking WTO as the model, it is important for us to know the principles that govern the economic activity of each nation with one another.

Trade without discrimination

1. Most-favoured-nation (MFN) : treating other people equally. Under the WTO agreements, countries cannot normally discriminate between their trading partners. Grant someone a special favour (such as a lower customs duty rate for one of their products) and you have to do the same for all other WTO members.

2. National treatment: Treating foreigners and locals equally. Imported and locally-produced goods should be treated equally — at least after the foreign goods have entered the market. The same should apply to foreign and domestic services, and to foreign and local trademarks, copyrights and patents.

Freer trade- barriers coming down through negotiation

Predictability- foreign companies, investors and governments should be confident that trade barriers (including tariffs and non-tariff barriers) should not be raised arbitrarily; tariff rates and market-opening commitments are “bound” in the WTO

Promoting fair competition— discouraging “unfair” practices such as export subsidies and dumping products at below cost to gain market share

Encouraging development and economic reform- more beneficial for less developed countries, giving them more time to adjust, greater flexibility, and special privileges.

Source: World Trade Organization

Motions: 15th All Asian Debate Championships

2008-05-15T17:46:00.000+08:00

ROUND ONE
ENERGY

This House believes that biofuels do more harm than good.
This House supports the privatization of all energy production and distribution.
This House would no longer price oil in US dollars.

ROUND TWO
21st CENTURY

This House advocates human colonization of outer space.
This House would restrict research and development of artificial intelligence.
This House believes that humanity will not reach the 22nd Century.

ROUND THREE
MARRIAGE

This House would allow both men and women to have multiple spouses.
This House would allow divorce for any reason.
This House would eliminate age restrictions for marriage.

ROUND FOUR
ANIMAL RIGHTS

This House would abolish zoos.
This House would make the fur trade illegal.
This House would not eat whales and sharks.

ROUND FIVE
SMALL AND MEDIUM BUSINESSES

This House would not enforce labor laws on SMEs.
This House believes that trade liberalization hurts SMEs.
This House believes that SMEs should not be allowed to hire foreign workers.

ROUND SIX
GENDER RELATIONS

This House would recognize choice of gender identity as a fundamental human right.
This House would disqualify transsexuals from professional sporting events.
This House would reserve one-third of seats for women in national legislatures.

ROUND SEVEN
EDUCATION

This House believes that standardized testing is the enemy of learning.
This House prefers need based higher education scholarships to affirmative action in admissions.
This House would require all elementary and secondary schools to include debating in the curriculum.

OCTAS
LITERATURE

This House believes that Asian governments have a duty to support literature in their native language
This House would institute an annual prize for the best pornographic novel.
This House believes that politicians should not be allowed to publish their autobiographies during their lifetimes.

Quarter-finals - Migration
THBT human trafficking should be made a capital offence.
THBT the migration of high-skilled workers creates 'brain-gain' for the sending country.
THBT the ASEAN countries must have an 'open border' labour migration policy.

Semi-finals + EFL Final - BUDDHISM
THBT the Dalai Lama uses his position for personal gain.
THBT all Buddhist orders should ordain woman as monks.
THBT non-violent Buddhist social movements do not lead to social change.

FINAL - MEDIA
TH opposes state run media.
THBT commercial media advertising degrades the quality of life.
THBT celebrities do not have a right to privacy.

Source: Global Debate blog and AUDC

THE Doha LATEST DEBATE: APRIL 29th, 2008

2008-05-15T17:39:00.000+08:00

MOTION: THIS HOUSE BELIEVES THE SUNNI-SHIA CONFLICT IS DAMAGING ISLAM'S REPUTATION AS A RELIGION OF PEACE

The Next debate: May 27th, 2008; Motion to be confirmed.

UP Diliman Pre-Australs

2008-05-11T20:42:00.000+08:00

Greetings! The UP Debate Society is hosting Pre-Australs this June 28-30, 2008 at the University of the Philippines, Diliman campus. We are inviting you to join this tournament in preparation for Australasians 2008, which will be held in Manila a few days after this.

Please contact us at +639178862232 or send us a message at preaustrals2008@gmail.com if you are interested.

Thank you very much and hope to see you at Pre-Australs 2008!

Anna Arcellana
Communications Director, Pre-Australs 2008

Source: Debate Philippines

10th Philippine NDC [ Dates ]

2008-05-10T12:03:00.000+08:00

What: The 10th NDC

When: October 19-26, 2008

Oct 19- Day 0: Registration and Billeting

Oct 20- Day 1: Debate Seminar, Adjudication Seminar, and Opening Dinner

Where: Ateneo de Davao University

Contacts: David Jalotjot (Ateneo Debate Community, ADDU) 09194026385

More details soon..

Source: Debate Philippines

HPCR International launches a Professional Certificate in Humanitarian Law and Policy

2008-05-07T12:46:00.000+08:00

HPCR International
Brussels - 6 May 2008

In view of the growing demand for professional development opportunities in humanitarian law and policy, the International Association for Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR International) announced that it will award a new Professional Certificate in Humanitarian Law and Policy to qualified candidates completing the requirements of its professional training program.

The Professional Certificate aims to recognize qualified candidates who demonstrate a command of the fundamentals of international humanitarian law (IHL) with a nuanced understanding of the contemporary challenges of applying IHL in a variety of operational settings. It complements the existing Advanced Trainings on Humanitarian Law and Policy offered by HPCR International and developed in cooperation with the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research at Harvard University.

"The Professional Certificate in Humanitarian Law and Policy builds on HPCR International's experience in professional development and represents an enhancement to those trainings offering humanitarian professionals the legal and policy tools needed to address growing challenges to humanitarian protection," said Claude Bruderlein, President of HPCR International. "It incorporates the latest findings from researchers and policy-makers from leading institutions on such issues as counterterrorism, private security companies, human rights in times of conflict, occupation and peacebuilding, humanitarian access, and Islamic Law and protection of civilians."

"This is an exciting moment for humanitarian professionals who had until now only limited opportunities to seek new professionals skills in this area, mostly through full year academic degree programs on law or social science," said Dr. Vincenzo Bollettino, Head of Professional Development at HPCR International.

Professionals may complete the Professional Certificate, encompassing more than 60 hours of advanced training, at their own pace in four international locations.

Government officials, representatives of international agencies, and staff of non-governmental organizations are encouraged to apply through HPCR International's Advanced Training program.

"The rising challenges in humanitarian protection require dedicated and skilled professionals," concluded Claude Bruderlein. "HPCR International makes every effort to maintain the highest standards of quality and relevance of its training curriculum."

For more information on the Professional Certificate in Humanitarian Law and Policy, please visit http://www.hpcr.org/profdev/certificate.php.

For additional inquiries, please contact Dr. Vincenzo Bollettino at ihlseminar@hpcr.org.

Motions form KNC 2008

2008-04-30T11:31:00.000+08:00

Round 1.
Korea
THBT Korea should priortize China over the US in diplomatic relations.
THW nationalize the tele-communications industry.
THW exclude Soju from the list of essential items announced by the Korean government to monitor inflation.

Round 2.
Social Contract
1. THBT all democratic governments should abandon laws which allow prosecution of citizens for insulting their nations.
2. THBT government should not financially profit from its citizens¡¯ sins.
3. THW limit civilian use of guns in America.

Round 3.
Human Body
1. THW allow commercial surrogate motherhood.
2. THW give prisoners with a life sentence the right to choose the death penalty.
3. THW chemically castrate pedophiles.

Round 4.
Ideology
1. THBT socialism in Latin America has done more harm than good.
2. THBT authoritarian regimes are justifiable in developing nations.
3. THBT feminism has not contributed to the well-being of women in the world.

Round 5.
International Institutions
1. THW limit the number of times United Nations Security Council members can veto.
2. THBT democracy should be the condition for debt relief for African nations.
3. THBT it is legitimate to use aid to buy votes in international organizations.

(Rookie Final)
Cute Animals
1. THW ban fur imports from developing nations. (debated)
2. THBT zoos bring more benefits than harms to society.
3. THW allow the police to shoot poachers.

(EFL Final)
Celebrities¡¦ on the spotlight!!!
1. THBT paparazzi are beneficial for celebrities.
2. TH supports celebrities entering politics.
3. THBT celebrities should not adopt children from developing nations. (debated)

Quarter
Elections
1. THW repudiate the democratic election in Bhutan.
2. THW discourage women in Pakistan from casting ballots in order to protect their lives.
3. THW place a cap on the spending of candidates during election campaigns.

Semi
Greater Asia
1. THBT China¡¯s quest for raw materials from developing nations/rogue regimes is detrimental to the world.
2. THW pressure India to open its border to accept Tibetan exiles.
3. THBT the Kurds are better off without a Kurdish state.

Final
Law and Justice
1. THBT civil disobedience is essential to democracy. (debated)
2. THW abolish the use of insanity as a legal defense.
3. THW require doctors to report minors with HIV to their parents regardless of patients¡¯ consent.

Source: www.knc08.org

Invitation for MMU IV 2008 (3rd & 4th May 2008)

2008-04-22T10:40:00.000+08:00

Date : 3rd and 4th May 2008
Venue : Faculty of Engineering, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya
Time : 9am (both days)
Rounds : 4 preliminaries + semi-finals + grand finals
Rules : N-1
Team Cap : None
Rego fees : None
Chief Adj. : Suthen "Tate" Thomas
Rego deadline : 29th April 2008

Food and Accommodation will not be provided.

You can register by sending an email (asap) to:
Ips --> anthrex_13@hotmail.com (hp: +6012-400 5260)
Guljan --> m_guljan1@yahoo.com (hp: +6016-697 9343)<>

Source: Voices MMU

AUBG 2008 Motions

2008-04-16T12:02:00.000+08:00

Round 1: This house would deny extremist parties, the oxygen of publicity.

Round 2: This house believes the EU should force its citizens to recycle.

Round 3: This house believes in African solutions for African problems.

Round 4: This house believes terrorism is justified.

Quarter Finals: This house would re-tailor the Common Agricultural Policy.

Semi Finals: This house would embrace the Lisbon Treaty.

Grand Final: This house would draw state boundaries to comply with the principle of national self-determination.

source: http://www.debate-motions.info/

Motion from The Doha Debates

2008-04-16T11:07:00.000+08:00

The Latest Debate: April 1, 2008

MOTION: THIS HOUSE BELIEVES THE PALESTINIANS RISK BECOMING THEIR OWN WORST ENEMY

The Next Debate: April 29, 2008 (Motion to be confirmed)

The Doha Debates are a public forum for dialogue and freedom of speech in Qatar.

They are chaired by the internationally renowned broadcaster Tim Sebastian, formerly of the BBC's HARDTalk programme, and held in the headquarters of the Qatar Foundation in Doha each month during the academic year.

For the past three years, the Doha Debates have been providing a platform for serious discussion of the hottest issues in the Arab and Islamic worlds, striving to be both controversial and informative. They have gained a huge international following through their broadcast on BBC World - the BBC's international television channel.

For more details, visit their website at http://thedohadebates.com

Source: The Doha Debates

Asian Debate Institute 2008

2008-04-16T10:57:00.000+08:00

The Korea Development Institute School of Public Policy and Management is pleased to announce the Asian Debate Institute 2008. The ADI is now in its fifth year and since 2004 has educated hundreds of high school and university students in the art of persuasion and debate.

The workshop will be hosted on the campus on the KDI School, in Seoul, Korea from August 14-23, 2008.

For more details, visit their website at http://www.asiandebateinstitute.com/

ICRC International Humanitarian Law Debate 2008

2008-04-15T23:59:00.000+08:00

WHO: All Debaters

WHAT: ICRC International Humanitarian Law Debate 2008

(Theme: "War, Suffering & Humanity")

WHEN: 2nd to 5th of June 2008

WHERE: Law Faculty of UiTM Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

Important Notes:

Hosted by the UT MARA Debate Society in collaboration with the Student RepresentativeCouncil of Law Faculty together with ICRC.

The tournament will be using the Australs style of debating.

The registration is now open. Fee for each person (debaters,adjudicators, observers) is only RM60(including food). Deadline for registration is 19th May 2008.

For those require accommodation, it is available upon request. Accommodationfee for non-UiTM participants is only RM15 per night, plus RM5 forlaundry.

The team cap for each institution is 6 teams, with only 3 breakingteams. The N=1 Rule applies for adjudicators.

For any inquiries, please contact Rafiezi(Convenor) +60126876212 orAizek(Tournament Director) +60122529187 or you can email at icrcihldebate. uitm@gmail. com

2008 PIDC Tabs

2008-04-13T10:16:00.001+08:00

Please follow the link below for the official tabs of PIDC 2008.

http://www.pidc-online.com/pidc08-prelims-summary.xls

According to the organizers, Sir Martin Cortez, Chief Adjudicator for the tournament has the following important notes regarding the tabs:

1. Only the judges eligible to break to the elimination rounds of the PIDC have been included in the adjudication tabs. Eligible judges should have registered AND adjudicated AT LEAST four (4) rounds in the prelims

2. Only the non-adjudication- team judges are eligible for the Best Adjudicators of PIDC 2008

3. Apologies for the following oversights in the adjudication tabs:

-Mark Ysla of FEU should have been part of the initial adjudication break announcements instead of only being part of the reserved breaking adjudicators

-Angangco should have been announced as the 4th Best Adjudicator of PIDC 2008 instead of Katherine Diaz. Ms Diaz is, instead, the fifth best judge of the tournament

4. UTMara debating teams are non-breaking

Source: Melissa Sayoc thru debate_philippines

OUTLINE: Should Tibet be given Independence?

2008-04-10T11:03:00.000+08:00

Background:

Beijing's rule in Tibet has been alarmed by series of protests coming from the Tibetan communities. These protests are brought about by the desire of the Tibetan to attain independence from China. Issues about self-determination, human rights and issues of economic sustainability are the concerns that were largely raised during the protests. The debate comes now if Tibet has the legal capacity to be independent.

Pros:

1. Tibet has the right to self-determination. The Himalayan region was an independent kingdom for many centuries, and that Chinese rule over Tibet has not been constant. For example, after a brief military conflict between China and Tibet in the early part of the 20th Century, Tibet declared itself an independent republic in 1912.

2. Independence will ensure peace andsecurity in Tibet. China's rule in Beijing is characterized by human rights violations. Widespread mistreatment of the Tibetan population and a denial of religious and political freedom.

3. Tibet can govern itself. People of Tibet recognizes the authority and mandate of the Dalai Lama in leading region's autonomy.

4. China is taking advantage of Tibet's economy. Work and trade is dominated by the Hans leaving the Tibetan in a disadvantageous position.

Cons:

1. Tibet is part of China's Territorial Jurisdiction. Tibet has officially been part of the Chinese nation since the mid-13th Century, so should continue to be ruled by Beijing. China sent troops to Tibet in 1950 and summoned a Tibetan delegation the following year to sign a treaty ceding sovereignty to China.

2. Tibet cannot protect itself from foreign elements. Beijing plays up the foreign threat. Beijing has raised the specter of Tibetan suicide squads organized by the "Dalai Lama clique" attacking the Olympics.

3. Tibet is not ready to be an independent State. The Dalai Lama, who fled Tibet after a failed uprising in 1959 but remains the religious and cultural leader of many Tibetans, has said that he wants greater autonomy for the remote mountain region but is not seeking independence.

4. China knows what's best for Tibet. The Communist Party is like a parent to the Tibetan people and is always considerate about what the children need. Hans have poured in the money to Tibet's economy.

References:

1. BBC News, Q&A: China and Tibet
2. International Herald Tribune, US lawmakers criticize China for Tibet crackdown, urge negotiations with Dalai Lama, April 9, 2008
3. Philip Bowring, Bowring: Beware an angry China, April 8, 2008, iht.com

Scholarship Opportunities

2008-04-10T10:47:00.000+08:00

To each individual who loves doing research, enjoys advanced education, and who loves to keep that analytical brain burning, the following opportunities are worth your time:

The Chinese University & University of Cambridge Joint Scholarship for Young Academics (Asia Deadline : May 30, 2008)

The Joint Conference organisers have set up a fund from which scholarships will be awarded to young academics. The scholarship aims to provide young academics with financial support and also the opportunity to present a paper before eminent lawyers and academics in the field. The scholarship will cover registration costs for the Conference and will include some contribution towards associated costs.

Interested applicants will need to submit a paper relating to the main conference theme (Effective Judicial Review: A Cornerstone of Good Governance).

PhD position in Signal Processing (Sweden Deadline : May 25, 2008)

Uppsala University hereby declares the following position to be open for application: PhD position in Signal Processing at the Department of Information Technology, Division of Systems and Control. At the Division of Systems and Control, methodological research is conducted in the areas of estimation, system identification, signal processing, spectral analysis, fault detection, and automatic control. More applied research areas are within wireless communications, radar and synthetic aperture radar, modelling and control of mechanical systems, process control, environment, and medicine.

We are now recruiting a PhD student who will be active in research projects of both theoretical and practical character. The main focus will be on statistical signal processing in general and more specifically on spectral analysis. The main application areas are signal processing for advanced radar, astronomical data mining, biomedical image analysis or genomic signal processing, depending on the interest of the student.

The successful candidate should have a master of science in Electrical Engineering. Good skills in oral and written English are required.

6 PhD positions in Mathematics/ Physics (Germany Deadline : May 16, 2008)

The DFG Research Training Group "Analysis, Geometry and String Theory" is offering six PhD positions in Mathematics/ Physics starting from 01 October, 2008. The appointments are limited to two years. An extension for one year is possible. Candidates will have the opportunity to work towards a doctoral degree in Analysis,Geometry or Mathematical Physics. Applicants are expected to hold a Master's degree or a Diplom in Mathematics or Physics. The successful applicants are expected to contribute to the teaching programme of the research training group.

As an equal opportunities employer, Leibniz Universität Hannover wishes to support women in the context of statutory requirements. For this reason suitably qualified women are specifically invited to apply. Equally qualified applicants with disabilities will be given preferential treatment.

Dorothy Hodgkin Postgraduate Awards (United Kingdom Deadline : May 23, 2008)

Details of the 2008/09 Dorothy Hodgkin Postgraduate Awards (DHPA) are not yet available but it is anticipated that the University of Liverpool will be offering two awards (full tuition and living costs) under the scheme. The eligible academic departments for the 2008/2009 competition will be confirmed by the beginning of March.

Departments will select the strongest Mphil/PhD applicants who match the areas of the awarding research councils, and take account of the preferences of the industrial partners and the University's own strategic priorities. Any applications for a PhD place received up to and including 23 May 2008 will be eligible for consideration. Offers will be made to the chosen candidates in June 2008.

Source: andycode@yahoo.com thru AUDC

How to matterload?

2008-04-09T01:03:00.000+08:00

Matterloading is a very important skill that every debater should master.

It is one of the great differences that distinguishes a great team from a bad one. Good matterloading prepares debaters to have good and in-depth analysis when they deliver their constructive speeches. It help debaters provide positive contribution and logical explanation of issues that they intend to expound.

I hope the following outline will help you do your matterloading:

1. Select a specific area of debate ( place, subject)
2. Identify the problems currently faced by such place/subject.
3. Identify the cause and effect of said problems.
4. Explain how ineffective is the current mechanism in solving the problem.
5. Identify suggested solutions in solving the problem.
6. Explain how will the suggested solution address the problem.
7. Identify situations where and when said suggested solution succeeded.
8. Identify the key players.
9. Identify important issues that are relevant in discussing the debate.

PIDC 2008 Photos

2008-04-08T12:03:00.000+08:00

1. ADMU C: 2008 PIDC Champion

2. Adj Core of PIDC 2008: Sir Martin, Estelle, Cyris, Sam, Adrian, and Sharmila

3. Venue of the Championship Dinner

4. Right after the Championship round: Bobby and Leloy

5. Championship round: ADMU C vs. ADMU A

6. PUP Delegation to PIDC

7. PUP's Breaking Adjudicators: Vangie, Irene, and me (Arnel)

8. Learn walking different venues

9. PIDC 2008: Tiring yet fulfilling.

10. The Philippine Debate Community

11. University of the Philippines hosted the 2nd PIDC: April 3-7, 2008

12. SHARMILA PARMANAND: During PIDC Adj Seminar

Results of PIDC 2008

2008-04-08T11:31:00.000+08:00

Champion: Ateneo de Manila University C
1st Runner-up: Ateneo de Manila University A

Best Speaker for the Grandfinal Round: Kip Oebanda (ADMU C)
Best Speaker of the Tournament: Claire Jiao (UPD A)

Best Adjudicator: Wyndale Wong (ADMU)

Best Rookie Team: UPD F

Grandfinal Motion: THBT the mass emigration of workers has eroded Philippine Nationalism.

2008 PIDC Motions

2008-04-08T09:54:00.000+08:00

Preliminary Rounds
Round1
* THBT the State should ban all private schools from sanctioning students who exhibit homosexual behavior.
* THW allow Universities to allot slots for the admission of children of alumni.
* TH supports the right of private elementary schools to require pre-school education for grade one applicant.

Round2
* THBT America should welcome Iran's involvement in Iraq.
* THW lift U.S. sanction in Cuba.
* THBT U.S should not support the entry of former Soviet States into the NATO.

Round3
* The government should stop funding research searching for the gene for autism.
* TH supports the parent's right to avail of medical procedure infantalizing their disabled children by inhibiting their physical growth.
* THW abolish employment quotas for the disabled.

Round4
* THW abolish the MMDA.
* THBT the Sangguniang Kabataan is irrelevant today's youth.
* THBT instead of being a political appointee, the Ombudsman should be elected by the people.

Round 5
* TH celebrates the role of organized religion in attaining equality.
* THBT the Dali Lama should cede control of Tibet to China.
* TH would remove restrictions on campaign donations made by religious organizations.

Round6
* THBT the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Plan has served the interests of the Filipino farmers.
* THW end the conservation of the indigenous lands.
* The developing world should prioritize food security.

Round7
* THBT Independent Filmmakers should welcome the piracy of their work.
* THBT authors of commercial spin-offs of copyrighted literature should not be made to pay royalties to the authors.
* THBT sponsors of commissioned art should have the right to alter the final work even without the consent of the paid artist.

Octofinal Round
* TH regrets the joint seismic marine undertaking at the Spratlys.
* THBT democratization should not be a goal of Western Foreign Policy.
* THW prioritize citizens of former colonies in admitting guest workers.

Quarterfinal Round
* TH regrets formal and informal rules restricting sexual and romantic relationship in the workplace.
* TH celebrates the rise of easily accessible and non-commercial on-line amateur porn.
* THBT States should give married individuals the option to have multiple legal spouses.

Semi-final Round
* THBT the leftist populist revolution in Latin America has failed.
* THBT post modern feminists have betrayed their sisters in the third world.
* THBT the culture of privileging formal education has broadened inequality in the developing world.

Grandfinal Round
* TH celebrates Philippine historical attachment in former colonial masters.
* THBT the mass emigration of workers has eroded Philippine Nationalism.
* THBT the hold of the elite in the Philippine governance has strengthened democracy.

** Special thanks to Anna Marie Domingo for helping me record the motions for semis and finals.

Advanced training on humanitarian law and policy

2008-04-07T11:47:00.000+08:00

Dear colleague:

HPCR International and the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict
Research at Harvard University are pleased to announce the 2008-2009
Advanced Trainings on Humanitarian Law and Policy.

For seven consecutive years, the Advanced Trainings have provided
professionals engaged in humanitarian action a thorough and practical
understanding of the legal and policy challenges involved in humanitarian
protection. Combining working group discussions, case studies and
simulations, this series of events offers:

- New three-day core training sessions ("Advanced Principles of
Humanitarian Law and Policy") in four international locations: Cambridge in
July 2008, Brussels in September 2008, Singapore in October 2008, and
Amman in February 2009;

- Two-day thematic workshops focusing on specific challenges to
humanitarian action, including counterterrorism, private security companies,
human rights in times of conflict, occupation and peacebuilding,
negotiation of access, and the protection of civilians under Islamic law;

- Online course resources, to be launched in June, that will present
introductory and refresher materials on IHL for registered participants;

- Tuition assistance for selected professionals from civil society
organizations in developing countries; and

- A Professional Certificate on Humanitarian Law and Policy for
candidates interested in pursuing a comprehensive program on IHL.

Applications for all advanced trainings are now available online. For a
complete list of course dates and locations, please visit our website
at http://www.hpcr.org/profdev or contact ihlseminar@hpcr.org.

Claude Bruderlein
President, HPCR International

PIDC 2008: PUP's breaking Adjudicators

2008-04-07T11:28:00.000+08:00

Congratulations to PUP's breaking adjudicators in the 2008 Philippine Inter-Collegiate Debating Championships held last April 3-7, 2008 in UP Diliman.

PUP's breaking Adjudicators (alphabetical order) :

1. Mateo, Arnel D.
2. Peralta, Evangeline T.
3. Santos, Maria Irene I.

CSB IVs' Official Schedule

2008-03-14T12:07:00.000+08:00

1. Registration and call time will at 12pm on saturday. Lunch will be provided to participants. We expect everybody to have signed by 12:30.

2. March 29, saturday will have 3 rounds, not 2. Break announcementswill be given immediately after the 3rd round (silent).

3. The motion for the 1st round will be given an EXACTLY 1pm. Soeveryone is expected to be around by then. As lunch will be providedthere will be no excuse to not be there :). This is to ensure that wecan finish on time as well *begging* Please be on time guys :)3. March 30, sunday will have 3 break rounds

Here is the schedule that the organizers are aiming for:

March 29 saturday

before 12 team registrations and payments

12pm-1pm Lunch, team roll call around 1230

1pm-130pm 1st round motion announcement and prep

130pm-230pm 1st round

230pm-3pm 1st round oral adj and tabulation

3pm-330pm 2nd round motion announcement and prep

330pm-430pm 2nd round

430pm-5pm 2nd round oral adj and tabulation

5pm-530pm 3rd motion and prep (silent round)

530pm-630pm 3rd round

630pm-7pm* tabulation and break round announcement

*we have a threshold of up to 8pm in case problems arise. We will makesure that we run on time. We'll make the 2nd round silent if we haveto (although i don't think that would be necessary)

Sunday march 30

9am call time

930am-1130am quarterfinals

1130am-1pm lunch

1pm-3pm semifinals

330pm-530pm finals

6pm awarding ceremony

PIDC 08 Schedule

2008-03-14T11:37:00.000+08:00

March 29 (Sat) 7:00AM - 12:00NN
Adj exam for Manila institutions (Venue: College of St. Benilde)

April 03 (Thu)
Adj exam for non-Manila institutions Opening Ceremony* Rounds 1-2

April 04 (Fri)
Rounds 3-5

April 05 (Sat)
Rounds 6-7 Issue Forum* Break Night

April 06 (Sun)
Octofinals and Quarterfinals ESU Public Speaking Preliminary Round

April 07 (Mon)
Semifinals and Finals ESU Public Speaking Finals Championship Dinner and Awarding

Schedule in detail: http://www.pidc-online.com/PIDC%2008%20Schedule.pdf

Ancients 2008 Motions

2008-03-14T10:54:00.000+08:00

Round 1: This house would introduce a minimum price restriction for the sale of all alcoholic beverages

Round 2: This house would legalise incest between consenting siblings of the age of majority

Round 3: This house loves the smell of napalm in the morning (Open Motion)

Round 4: This house would force pharmaceurtical companies to give full disclosure of clincial trials

Round 5: This house believes the government should never fund IVF treatment

Semi-Final: This house would refuse to recognise an independent Kosovo

Final: This house would restrict access to pro-anorexia websites

Hongkong BP 2008

2008-03-14T10:44:00.000+08:00

To all debaters from acroos the asia-pacific region and elsewhere around the world:

WHAT: Hongkong BP Tournament

WHEN: July 13-16, 2008

WHERE: Hongkong

Adjudication Core:

1. Logandran Balavijandran (Chief Adjudicator, MMU Worlds),
2. Loke Wing Fatt (Worlds Break Judge and founder of SAID),
3. Fiona Prowse (Grand Finalist, Assumption Worlds),
4. Jacob Cliffton (Semi-Finalist, MMU Worlds)
5. and many others.

website: www.hkpds.org

Facebook group: "Hong Kong BP Open 2008".

Aside from the first ever BP tournament in Hong Kong, HKPDS will also be holding our annual Summer Workshop for high school kids with trainers and guest speakers like British MPs during July 18 to 22 2008.

Parliamentary Debate Lecture

2008-03-11T11:39:00.000+08:00

To all who have become a Grandmaster of the School of Debaters, to serve and to share knowledge in Debate to students of a former College ( College of Economics Finance and Politics ) is a very fulfilling experience.

On March 8, 2008, I was invited by Professor de Guzman to be a Guest Lecturer in his class Argumentation and Debate in CEFP. He invited me to discuss my expertise in competitive debating and to elaborate debate strategies. I was so excited that time because I'll be meeting debate enthusiasts who are great in their own right. And I know, that I am serving my purpose of making everyone in PUP a great debater.

During my Grandmastership in CEFP, debating has been very open to everyone. The road towards that end have been difficult because not all masters of SOD would want to make SOD available to other Colleges due to some reasons about possible negative effects and issues of practicability. Fortunately, with the help of my very able Masters Rofylyn Lagundino and Paul Francis Jamarolin, we have convinced everyone that success in debating is measured on how you extend that skill to other Colleges of the PUP community. A PUP debate society needs to be filled by students not only coming from CEFP but also from students of other Colleges as well.

Our principle during that time is to make debate available to all members of PUP who wants to learn debate. We train not only our beloved College CEFP, but also other Colleges like College of Business, COABTE, Engineering, PUP Taguig, etc. I also remember during that time that CEFP have a very strong friendship with College of Accountancy and College of Languages and Linguistics. I further remember competing in one debate competition where the composition of three speakers of PUP team consisted of CEFP (me), CLL and College of Accountancy. During that time, PUP debate exercise is very united.

All these I recalled when I lectured in CEFP.

During my lecture, the spirits are very high. I can see in the eyes of the students how interested they are to learn strategies in debate. Students are very participatory and are very active in seeking knowledge.

I lectured to them the best strategies on how to properly define motions, how to do good preparation and case building, how to construct killer arguments, how to do good rebuttals and how to make a reply speech which is totally different from a rebuttal speech. I also lectured to them strategies in raising, recieving and giving killer POIs. And I shared to them my template in ensuring a seven minute speech for beginners.

This is again an achievement in debating. And forever will I extend my knowledge in debate to all students from every Colleges of PUP which is one of the guiding principles of the School of Debaters as a debate society not by CEFP alone, but by PUP.

Great Serdang Debating Championship (GSD) 2008

2008-03-01T13:37:00.000+08:00

University Putra Malaysia is proud to announce that it is hosting The Great Serdang Debating Championship 2008 and also known as GSD ’08. This prestigious tournament is going to be held in Serdang, Malaysia from 22nd May to 26th May 2008. GSD’08 used Asian Parliamentary concept, which is used in All-Asian Intervarsity Debating Championships.

Details are as below:

Date : 22nd May to 26th May 2008
Venue : Kolej Tun Dr. Ismail,
Universiti Putra Malaysia,
43400 Serdang, Malaysia

(A) CONTACT ADDRESS :
(1) mailto:gsdupm2006@yahoo.
(2) http://aa.f530.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=m_nazri03%40yahoo.com (Convenor)

(B) REGISTRATION FEE :
Registration until 1st April 2008
(1) For domestic participants
RM 150.00 per person (for debater)
RM 100.00 per person (for adjudicator)
RM 100.00 per person (for officer/ observer)
1 team including 3 debaters and 1 adjudicator and maximum 5 teams per institution

(2) For international participants
50 USD per person (for debater)
32 USD per person (for adjudicator)
32 USD per person (for officer/observer)
1 team including 3 debaters and 1 adjudicator and maximum 5 teams per institution

(C) PRIZES
Champion : RM 3 000.00,
runner up : RM 1 500.00, trophy
Best speaker : RM 500.00, trophy

(D) CONTACT DETAILS
Corresponding address: Committee Great Serdang Debating Championship 2008
(U/P: Nurul Syafiqah Mohd Shokaily : 012-4351167)
Kolej Tun Dr.
Putra Malaysia
43400 UPM Serdang,
Selangor,

Fax: +603 89467364
Mohd Nazri Mohd Rahim (014 - 2211750)
Convenor GSD ‘08

6 teams from PUP are going to PIDC

2008-02-29T13:40:00.000+08:00

The following are the Colleges from PUP who are joining this year's PIDC:

1. College of Arts: Two teams, Two Adjes.

2. College of Economics Finance and Politics: Two teams, Two Adjes.

3. College of Languages and Linguistics: Two Teams, Two Adjes.

Good luck guys! Fight for PUP! Bring home the glory! See you there!

For the complete list of Institutions of All over the Philippines who are joining PIDC,
click http://www.pidc-online.com/RegMatrix.htm