Over the weekend, I read in the papers that local police would, from then on, support and enforce the local government’s intensification campaign at enforcing Presidential Decree 1563 or the Anti-Mendicancy Law. The news report further said under such PD, those who give alms to beggars shall be imposed a P20 fine while mendicants themselves shall be fined P500 or be imprisoned for not more than two years. However, in the case of habitual mendicants, a fine not exceeding P1,000 and imprisonment of not more than four years shall be handed down.
Read that again.
I gathered the principle behind the local government’s intensification campaign is to first protect those begging in the streets (along with motorists and commuters) from harm and second, discourage them from the misconception that on a day to day, seeking alms is not a source of livelihood. Also, under the said law, underaged children shall be ‘rescued’ and placed under the custody of the Department of Welfare and Development or DSWD.
Noble and well-meaning as it may all sound, I still can’t quite put it; there seems to be a disconnect somewhere. For starters, on the subject of fines, a visit to the nearest police station to pay a fine of twenty pesos for those people caught giving alms seems like a mere slap on the wrist. On the other hand, the mendicant offender, being meted a maximum of 500 big ones likewise seems ironic, when the very reason they go to the streets in the first place is because they do not have money and can only dream of having such an amount to get by. As this is so, does it also mean that because of the law, they’re prison-bound for not more than two years, and will thereby be added to another problem… the inmate overpopulation in the jails?
In the case of ‘rescued’ children, isn’t it that this whole problem of mendicancy (and poverty) is not merely limited to caring for them? If in theory, the police will already have successfully done its mandated duty and will have gathered all, thereby effecting a zero incidence of beggars in the streets, the most important question still stands out: is there an already in-place comprehensive program from social welfare and development that will accommodate all of them? It appears to be the same with local government; how will we fare in creating more job opportunities so that no more mendicants will ply the streets in the future?
In hindsight, it reminds one of a similar mindset as we address the problem of the present traffic in the city. Even as more roadways appear to be not enough for accommodating the yearly increase of private vehicles on the road, you would notice that we’re now tearing down buildings in order to create more parking spaces and encouraging private sector to do so as well. Genius.
