rc pag-asa's reply to d-3780 reply to the election complaint

8/14/2019 RC Pag-Asa's Reply to D-3780 REPLY to the Election Complaint

1/11

Rotary Club of Pag-Asa, Q.C. R.I. District 3780

Club 79736

Subject: Reply to IPDG Rufino Policarpios Letter to Mr. John Hewko 1 | P a g e

October 8, 2013

John HewkoThe Secretary GeneralRotary InternationalOne Rotary Center1560 Sherman Avenue,Evanston, IL, 60201-3698U.S.A.

Thru: Ms. Joy Walker, ManagerSouth Pacific and PhilippinesRotary InternationalLevel 2 #60 Phillip StreetParramatta, NSW 2150Australia

Subject: Reply to IPDG Rufino Policarpios Letter to Mr. John Hewko

Dear Miss Walker:

Thank you for providing us with a copy of the above-mentioned letter. Hereunder are ourcomments on the statements of IPDG Policarpio. These comments are numbered according tothe order of his statements:

1. As clearly stated and proved in our complaint, the selection of the members of theDistrict Nominating Committee and the district governor-nominee for 2015-16 wasinconsistent with the R.I. Bylaws and Code of Policies. The selection process was inviolation of the R.I. Bylaws and conducted under unfair practices of the RI D3780

governor and Credentials Committee. We stand by our claims which are founded onRotarys Four-Way Test.

2. Validity of the D3780 Terms of Reference. Our claims on this issue have been clearlystated in Sections a.1, a.2, and a.3 of our complaint. The said TOR was not discussed andapproved during the District Conference 2012. Otherwise, the said document wouldhave been scrutinized and the discrepancies corrected. Such a basic and vital documentcannot be finalized with provisions that would make it erroneous and shameful in theeyes knowledgeable individuals. Moreover, there is no minutes to prove that thereindeed was actual discussion and voting on the TOR during the Plenary Session.


2/11


2.1. The truth is that the objection of PP Oca Karaan of RC Pag-asa was immediatelyshot down with the statement of the district officer in charge that the TORpresented was merely a compilation of rules and it did not need any furtherapproval. That statement alone proved that there was no voting that followed.

2.2. In the 2013 Camp John Hay District Conference, PP Oca Karaan of RC Pag-asaraised the same question simply because the said TOR never underwent scrutinyand approval and the defects it had in its provisions during the 2012 Taal DistrictConference still existed. Our arguments on this issue are covered by Sections a.4,a.4.a, a.4.b, a.4.c, a.4.d, anda.4.e.

2.3. It is deceptive and misleading to say that RC Pag-asa participated withoutquestion in the selection process using the invalid TOR. The fact that we hadregistered our objections to the TOR, sent him letters (which he never botheredto answer) and complained against the indifference of the governor towards our

suggested steps to safeguard the ballots is enough proof that we had beenobjecting to the way the selection process was conducted. Did the governor wantus to raise hell to get the proper treatment or did he want our candidate towithdraw so that his favored candidate would have a lazy walk to the position.The truth is we had faith that he would take the righteous way through theFour-Way Test- in the conduct of the selection process.

2.4. Inconsistencies in the TOR. The inconsistencies presented in our complaint aspresented in Sections a.3, a.3.a, a.3.b, a.3.c, anda.3.d are not minor but majorinconsistencies. An ordinary but knowledgeable Rotarian would be able to judgethat these blatant discrepancies are unintelligible and irrelevant. Even a highschool student would be able to judge whether these discrepancies are minor ormajor if given a corrected copy of the TOR. Where can you find a TOR (Article I)where there are two Section 2s which are entirely the same in content andmeaning? Where can you find a TOR (Section 1, Article IV) where the governorappoints the members of the Nominating Committee? Where can you find a TOR(Section5, Article VII) where the message is unintelligible because the sentence isincomplete?

2.5. On the contrary, based on these arguments and those presented in ourcomplaint, there should be no dispute that the provisions of the Terms of

Reference as the governing rules in the selection process of the district governor-nominee are invalid, inapplicable, and in violation of RI rules.

2.6. On the contrary, our complaint has been based on fact and reason. It is IPDGPolicarpio who has been issuing false statements to mislead all concerned.

3. The organization of the Nominating Committee, Election Procedures Committee,Credentials Committee, Balloting Committee, and District Legal Committee has not beenmade a part of our complaint. We have no problem with that. These committees havebeen in operation for years in the district.


3/11


4. Here, we reiterate our argument that the selection process was in violation of the RIConstitution and Bylaws and was conducted under conditions of unfair practices by thegovernor and the Credentials Committee.

4.1. If the TOR were valid and applicable as IPDG Policarpio maintains, why did he not

appoint the members of the Nominating Committee, as provided in the saidTOR? Thats because he realized that the provision was erroneous, inapplicableand in violation of the RI rules on selection of the Nominating Committee!

4.2. Isnt it a foregone conclusion that IPDG Policarpio appointed Rotarians who weresympathetic to his personal choice of DGN candidate? While it is true that mostof the members of the said committees, particularly the Credentials Committee,have served in the same committee in the previous years, he covered the factthat the independence of the Credentials Committee chairman had beenquestioned in the past because of partiality in the process of assessing thequalifications of candidates for membership in the Nominating Committee. Isntit obvious that IPDG Policarpio chose committee members who were close tohim and who had the necessary experience and knowledge of the selectionprocess to ensure ease in manipulating the results?

4.3. There is no need to mention any specific name in our complaint since theviolation of the RI rules and use of unfair practices to manipulate the results of the selection process were committed by IPDG Policarpio and the CredentialsCommittee. Our complaint is one that has not been filed in a court of law.

5. Letters of Pres. Lorenzo Dizon of RC Pag-asa to then DG Policarpio. What can be more

un-Rotarian for a Rotary governor than to deny that he did not bother to correct thedefects in the TOR and still willfully applied such defective TOR in the selection process.This is precisely the reason that we lodged our complaint against him for using a TORthat was invalid and inapplicable. His lie is written on the wall. He does not believe inand live by the Four-Way Test.

5.1. IPDG Policarpio never called Pres. Dizon regarding the first letter or any of thesubsequent letters. Through his arrogance, he simply ignored the letters.Moreover, he never told Pres. Dizon that no formal letter would be sent to theclub. He simply thought that ignoring the letters would make the issues die anatural death. As the only officer of RI in the district he should know that a

formal letter even a simple invitation letter - should be answered with a formalreply and not by silence.

5.2. Copies of the RI election guidelines were provided only when the club presidentsstarted complaining about its unavailability and in haste when the selection wasvery near in order to diminish the time that could be spent to make a thoroughreview of the document. On the matter of conducting the selection process in adignified manner, and in strict compliance with the prohibitions againstcampaigning and electioneering. This was just lip service on his part. He brokethis rule.


4/11


5.3. Again, IPDG Policarpio is lying that he publicly acknowledged receiving the letterof RC Pag-asa dated 12 Feb 2013. If he did not bother to answer the said letter of RC Pag-asa the more he would not acknowledge publicly his receipt of the saidletter. On the matter of the ping-pong balls and tambiolo, it should be madeknown that the tambiolo provided during the District Conference was too smallto allow free movement of the ping-pong balls.

5.4. Again, IPDG Policarpio never informed Pres. Dizon that no formal letters wouldbe issued in response to the said letters of RC Pag-asa. In addition, IPDGPolicarpio never expressed his intention not to be drawn into a series of exchange of letters with anybody including Pres. Dizon. We believe that he wasafraid to face the truth and to accept that certain situations and steps in theselection process needed changes to safeguard the sanctity of the ballots.

5.5. No Rotarian ever questions the qualification of good moral character for any

candidate either for the Nominating Committee or the DGN. Even the mereadmission of a new Rotarian requires that the candidate for membership shouldbe of good moral character. What we questioned was the insertion of the saidqualification without due process. That act could give any governor or districtofficer involved in the selection process the license to do what he wants with aformal document that is of vital importance to Rotary operations in the district.That is exactly what they did to the TOR and thats why the document has majordiscrepancies. Dont we ever listen to wisdom and righteousness?

5.6. As was mentioned earlier, the discrepancies in the TOR are not minor. Theseerrors specified in our complaint (Sections a.3, a.3.a, a.3.b, a.3.c. and a.3.d) didmake the TOR inoperable or inapplicable and should have been amended duringthe 2012 District Conference. IPDG Policarpio again lied in his statement that RCPag-asa was advised to submit a club resolution to correct the discrepancies. Thefact is that his objection was immediately shot down. We maintain that the TORshould have been thoroughly scrutinized and subsequently voted upon forapproval during the 2012 District Conference when RC Pag-asas PP Oca Karaanposed his objection to certain provisions of the TOR.

6. On the matter of Sections 2-B, b.1 b.5 of our complaint, the issue in question is not thevalidity of the entire process for selection of members of the Nominating Committee but

the manner in which the ballots were kept in custody to safeguard the documents. If thesaid documents were placed under secure lock and key under his custody, why did heask his staff where the key was when Pres. Dizon was in the district office? He was toldby the staff that the key was with the Credentials Committee chairman, a knownsupporter of PP Rey David, one of the three candidates for DGN. That simply proved thatthe documents were not in his custody. The absence of the ballot box, where theindividual ballots of clubs could have been dropped personally by the presidents or theclub representatives, exposed the documents to certain anomalies. That is precisely thereason we suggested in our letter that a ballot box be provided to safeguard thedocuments.


5/11


6.1. RC Pag-asa and RC Cubao East were invited after and not before the ballots weredrawn. The envelopes containing the ballots were not presented before theselection was made at the District Conference. There was no transparency in theprocess as we were not even informed of the exact number of ballots that weresubmitted at the district office at the time of the deadline for submission of ballots. We were not told either when the ballots would be transported toBaguio City where the 2013 District Conference was held. How can we be surethat the ballots presented at the District Conference were the same ballots thatwere submitted to the district office?

6.2. We were never told, either verbally or through a formal letter that the ballots arestill in the box and readily available for review by any representative of RC Pag-asa.

6.3. Contrary to the claim of IPDG Policarpio, the statements in our complaint have

factual basis. The accusations are based on actual happenings before, during, andafter the selection process for members of the Nominating Committee and DGN.

7. Mandate and Authority of the Credentials Committee. Article VIII on the validity of challenge and concurrence merely states the authority of the Credentials Committee toresolve matters regarding a challenge to the choice of the Nominating Committee. It isnot a fool-proof insurance that the governor cannot interfere in or influence the processof evaluation by the Credentials Committee. Even a law can be broken by anyoneespecially by people in authority and those who have the power to interfere in orinfluence the decisions of others. We were not born yesterday.

8. Evaluation & Validation of Club Resolutions by the Credentials Committee. How can theguidelines used by the Credentials Committee in the evaluation and validation of clubresolutions be consistent with the RI Bylaws and policies when it is inconsistent with theprovisions of the Manual of Procedure?

8.1. We have no problem with the authority of the Credentials Committee but wequestion the validity of the guidelines issued by the said committee.

8.2. As stated earlier, the said guidelines issued by the Credentials Committee wereinconsistent with the Manual of Procedure; hence, the RI Bylaws.

8.3. As stated in Section b.1 of our complaint, the Credentials Committee sent a letterdated April 23, 2013 to club presidents setting the deadline for the payment of SAR and subscription to the Philippine Rotary Magazine on March 31, 2013 as arequirement for clubs to be considered a functioning club. Who in his right mindwould inform all concerned about a certain deadline one month after suchdeadline has been set? Would you have time to lodge a protest? Would it not bewiser to just let the rules set by R.I. be the basis for whatever action all thoseconcerned would take? In the first place, the RI Manual of Procedure providesthat SAR payments due and payable on July 1 may be made until December 31and those due and payable on January 1 may be made until June 30. As to

payments to the Philippine Rotary Magazine, PRM has adopted the RI paymentscheme, thereby giving its subscribers the same grace period for the payment of


6/11


subscriptions. The guidelines of the Credentials Committee are clearlyinconsistent with the Manual. The actions of the Credentials Committee betraythe claim of IPDG Policarpio that he chose knowledgeable and experiencedRotarians as members of the Credentials Committee.

8.4. No such conversation happened between IPDG Policarpio and Pres. Dizon. He islying.

8.5. IPDG Policarpio or the committee chair can always claim independence of theCredentials Committee in its actions. This claim can always be made to denyactual complicity between the two parties.

8.6. Four of the six clubs whose concurrence was declared not valid are the subject of our complaint against IPDG Policarpio and the Credentials Committee. Theirdisqualification was based on invalid guidelines and the result of unfair practices

by the governor and the committee.8.7. Contrary to IPDG Policarpios claim, we did not accept the terms of the

guidelines. As stated earlier, we received the guidelines one month after thedeadline set by the Credentials Committee for payment of SAR and subscriptionto the Philippine Rotary Magazine. It would not have mattered if the selectionwas conducted fairly and with transparency.

8.8. How can one be immature and irrational when you reveal the truth and stick tothe rules?

8.9. We are not attacking the selection or evaluation process. It should be clear thatwe are questioning the manner in which the said processes were conducted. If the character of the district governor has been put in question, it is becausecontrary to being neutral, he demonstrated partiality in the process.

9. Again, we did not question the outcome of the selection process. Rather, we questionthe manner with which the process was conducted. We question the validity of theguidelines that were inconsistent with the Manual of Procedure and RI rules.

9.1. The only motive behind the election complaint is to ensure that the selectionprocess is conducted with transparency and honesty. In this manner, the

outcome of the selection process is accepted gracefully and without question.We would like to point out the fact that in most election complaints, it is theoutcome that is assailed. But in our complaint, we did not question the result butthe manner in which the selection process was conducted.

10. The Credentials Committees Action on the Rule on Clubs with Past Due FinancialObligations to R.I. Manual of Procedure, Page 9. The Credentials Committee actuallyviolated this rule, particularly when it issued the guidelines for submission of concurrences to the challenge.

10.1. IPDG Policarpio claims that the Credentials Committee did not set March 31,

2013 as the deadline for payment of SAR. This is a plain lie.


7/11


If the Credentials Committee did not set that deadline, why did it declare as notvalid the concurrences of RC New Manila West, RC Midtown Diliman and RCPrima Vida simply because these clubs had outstanding obligations with R.I. as of March 31, 2013? (Please refer to 10.9 of his May 28, 2013 letter).

As we have stated, the Manual of Procedure provides that SAR payments dueand payable on July 1 may be made until December 31 and those due andpayable on January 1 may be made until June 30. Within those specified periodsany club with outstanding obligations is still considered a functioning club. Thismeans that RCs New Manila West, Midtown Diliman, and Prima Vida werefunctioning clubs when they submitted their concurrence.

11. Contrary to the Credentials Committees interpretation of a functioning club, a club withoutstanding financial obligations with R.I. within the 180-day period for payment of SARcannot be disqualified from submitting its concurrence to a challenge. We disprove IPDGPolicarpios claim that the decision of the/credentials Committee is consistent withcurrent practice in India. We hereby quote the provision on Concurrence of Challengesas specified by the Bylaws of RI District 3202: A club in good standing is one which haspaid all RI, DT., & magazine dues & is not suspended/ terminated by RI. On the contrary,the D3780 Credentials Committees guidelines on submission of concurrence are notconsistent with those of Indias District 3202. A club is not suspended or terminated byRI within the 180-day period for payment of SAR.

12. If IPDG Policarpio merely announced the report of the Credentials Committee after whathe claims as a careful review with the committee, it demonstrates the fact that heconnived with the committee in deliberately not naming which of the 12 Rotary clubs

that concurred were disqualified from concurring with the challenge and the reasons fortheir disqualification. Wisdom dictates that he should have advised the committee to dowhat was proper. It was only after sensing chaos was brewing in the district due to theiraction that a second letter was issued naming the 6 whose concurrence was declarednot valid and indicating the reasons for such action.

13. RC New Manila West - Basis for Invalidation of Concurrence.

13.1. First of all, AG Ace Caole and not AG Ernie Paranis was the AG assigned to RCNew Manila West. That means AG Paranis must have been sent to spy on theclub. Second, AG Paranis went to the club on April 18, 2013 and reported that

there was no quorum, but the resolution to concur was discussed and approvedduring the clubs April 25, 2013 meeting wherein a quorum was present andwhere the said AG was not present.

13.2. RC New Manila Wests outstanding financial obligation with RI at the time of submission of its concurrence did not make its concurrence invalid. It is afunctioning club.

13.3. If AG Paranis was not sent to spy on and monitor the meeting of RC NewManila West and to intimidate the club, why was AG Paranis sent to the club?


8/11


14. RC West Triangle Basis for Invalidation of Concurrence.

14.1. We reiterate the following answer as stated in our complaint: Of the 14registered members, 6 regular members and a visiting club president fromanother club actually attended which constitute a quorum. It is very surprising

why the 2 AGs reported that there was no quorum, considering that they leftearly from the meeting. The attached letter (attached to our complaint) wassigned by 11 members attesting to the truth that there was indeed a quorumduring the said meeting. The action of the 2 AGs is highly suspicious consideringthat they were sent by the governor purposely to monitor the result of themeeting.

15. RC Prima Vida Cubao Basis for Invalidation of Concurrence

15.1. The clubs outstanding financial obligation with RI does not disqualify the clubfrom concurring with the challenge. The club had until June 30, 2013 to settle the

account as provided in the Manual of Procedure. Its concurrence was thereforevalid.

15.2. On the matter of club meeting day, the club has always been meeting onTuesdays, not Thursdays. As a matter of fact, the Governors Official Visit wasmade on a Tuesday (September 4, 2012).This matter had been reported to thedistrict, attested by the fact that the District Assembly souvenir program in RY2012-2013 and 2013-2014 showed Prima Vida meets every Tuesday. Moreover,their Asst. Governor Dwight Ramos visited their club during meetings onTuesdays. Why doesnt IPDG Policarpio check on the records of the districtconcerning the Governors Visit and visits of the AG? Doesnt the district believein its clubs?

15.3. The absence of the signature on the identification document was not part of theoriginal grounds for invalidation of the clubs concurrence. If a passport wassubmitted, doesnt every passport bear the signature of the holder?

16. RC Midtown Diliman Basis for Invalidation of Concurrence. We reiterate herein theanswer of RC Midtown Diliman to the reported violations: Non-payment of SAR and non-subscription to either the PRM or Rotary Magazine. The club had until June 30, 2013 topay its SAR and PRM as provided in the Manual of Procedure. On May 2, 2013 the club

paid Php5,400.00 for its copies of the Philippine Rotary Magazine for the period Jan. 1 June30, 2013, thereby making it a subscriber to the PRM.

17. RC Philam & RC Global Kalinga- Basis for Invalidation of Club Resolution to Concur.

17.1. We did not pose any objection to the invalidation of the two clubs concurrence.

18. Not Enough Concurrence to Support a Valid Challenge. Of the twelve (12) concurrences,only six (6) were validated by the Credentials Committee. We posed no objection to theinvalidation of the concurrence of RC Philam and RC Global Kalinga. But we maintain,through our complaint, that the concurrences of RC New Manila West, RC West Triangle,

RC Midtown Cubao, and RC Prima Vida were valid and therefore there was enoughnumber of concurrences to support our challenge. We also maintain that the decision of


9/11


the Credentials Committee to invalidate the concurrence of these four clubs was taintedwith partiality and with the intention to undermine the election challenge.

19. Declaration of the Nominating Committees Choice for DGN. We maintain that thedeclaration was made in haste and in a highly suspicious manner. It disregarded the right

of the six (6) Rotary clubs with invalidated concurrence to contest the actions taken bythe Credentials Committee. As mentioned in our complaint, the said letter not onlyhastily declared PP Rey David as DGN but also deliberately evaded naming which of the2 Rotary clubs were disqualified and the grounds for the invalidation of theirconcurrence.

20. Report of the Credentials Committee. This report was not made readily available to anyinterested Rotarian or club. As mentioned earlier, the letter of the DG, which declaredthe Nominating Committees choice for DGN and the findings of the CredentialsCommittee, did not mention the names of the clubs with invalidated concurrences and

the grounds for invalidation of their concurrence. It was only when eyebrows wereraised and questions circulated in the district that the Credentials Committee providedcopies of the findings. IPDG Policarpios statement that We simply thought it wasprudent not to broadcast the contents of the Report to safeguard the privacy andconfidentiality of the clubs and Rotarians concerned, and simply make them available toany Rotarian at the District Office was simply an alibi for concealing the names of theconcerned clubs for their own selfish intentions.

21. IPDG Policarpios claim that all the district officers acted consistently with Rotarys Codeof Conduct and the Tenets of the Four-Way Test is baseless and skin-deep. Thearguments presented in our complaint are writings on the wall. The wrongdoingperpetuated by some district officers are known district-wide and even in other districts.Even governors in other districts talk about these wrongdoings and talk about ourdistrict as being run by a Mafia. How can IPDG Policarpio make such a claim? Even hehimself had not done anything to safeguard the selection process for members of theNominating Committee and the DGN.

22. IPDG Policarpios claim that we have presented sweeping, imaginary accusations andfalse statements, is a futile attempt to conceal the truth about whats happening in thedistrict.

22.1. It is a fact and is common knowledge that CP Gloriosa Valarao has been a victimof black propaganda by the MAFIA that is exercising control over the choice of governors in the district. The MAFIA is widely known in Philippine Rotary. Theonly problem is that Rotarians are afraid to come out in the open. Even IPDGPolicarpio is a product of the districts MAFIA and he has this debt to pay. We donot wish to dignify this issue but please take note that from the start, IPDGPolicarpio had already given support for his anointed candidate.

22.2. On the contrary, our statements are supported by evidence, such as provisions inthe Manual of Procedure and other printed materials. On his claim that we haveresorted to name-calling, gossip, innuendo and other tactics, these are exactlythe tools with which we have become victims of his group. Our reference to the


10/11


MAFIA is not name-calling. The MAFIA is real and not imaginary. Rotarians arepleased that we have the courage to expose it in order to get rid of it.

22.3. Our efforts to expose the truth about whats happening in the district specificallyon the selection process are not malicious attempts to destroy the reputation of

the district. If we do not do this, who will? This has been going on for years andnobody gathered enough courage to stand up against wrongdoings in theprocess. It is time for radical change.

22.4. We have not made any hostile statements in our complaint. What we presentedare clear manifestations of abuse of power, violations of the RI Constitution andBylaws, and unfair practices in the selection of the members of the NominatingCommittee and DGN. Any Rotarian who believes and lives by the Four-Way Testshould not be ashamed or afraid to stand up against any wrongdoing thatdestroys the integrity of the Rotary movement. And that is exactly what we are

doing. Contrary to IPDG Policarpios statement, we and our club and those whoshare in our commitment to institute change in the district ought to be proud asRotarians. If he can prove otherwise, we would be glad to leave the movementand hand over the district to the dogs. The morale in the district has truly gonedown and before we know it, if nobody stands up for the 4-WayTest, Rotary hasno future to hope for in our district.

23. IPDG Policarpios Accusations against Candidate Gloriosa Valarao.

23.1. The accusations in this section are issues separate from the issues in ourcomplaint. If IPDG Policarpio thought his accusations stood on solid grounds, he

should have taken steps to disqualify Candidate Gloriosa Valarao the momentshe was endorsed by our club as candidate for DGN. His last-minute effort tomalign her name through his baseless accusations is an attempt to divert thevalid issues presented in our complaint.

24. Summary and Conclusion

24.1. We will leave the judgment on these issues to the wisdom of the RI ElectionReview Committee and the RI Board. We however reiterate that the TORproposed during the 2012 District Conference did not undergo scrutiny andintelligent discussions and no voting was made to approve and adopt said TOR.

Otherwise, it would not have become a comedy of errors.

In closing, we also wish to reiterate our stand that we submit the merits of our complaint to thedecision of the RI Election Review Committee and the RI Board. All we ask is that our prayer fora ballot-by-mail will be heard to ensure that the true choice of Rotarians in District 3780 is madethrough a clean and honest election. Rest assured that we shall accept with grace whatever theresults of the election will be.


11/11

rc pag-asa's reply to d-3780 reply to the election complaint

Documents