The more than 30-year journey to the top

VARIED reactions followed the publication of my column “Inordinate use of political power over the AFP” on February 25.

I received private messages, mostly from Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) retirees, commending my piece. They were unpleasantly surprised to know, though, that two major generals, three brigadier generals and a colonel were on “floating status.” Except for one of the three brigadier generals, who was indicted for a criminal offense and was thus booted out from his position to give way to an impartial court proceeding, the rest were unceremoniously removed from their posts. They were neither charged before a general court-martial (GCM) for violations of the Articles of War nor referred to the appropriate Efficiency and Separation Board (ESB) for issues of their fitness to remain in active military service. Since the reasons for their removal were unknown or undefined, it would have been better had they been sued before a GCM or brought before an ESB so they would know the charges against them and be able to defend themselves through their legal counsels.

Someone conveyed to me a message from what we call the Chief of Staff AFP (CSAFP) informing me that the AFP leadership is currently “looking for available positions” for the “floating” senior officers to fill. “Hinahanapan pa ng puwesto.”

I also saw at least one blog post — the link to which was sent to me — by a male blogger who first promoted chocolates before trying to “amplify” my article, but already with obvious slants.

‘Check six’

I appreciate the concern of former colleagues who warned me to “check six,” which, in military jargon, means “watch your back.” “From whom?” I asked. “From no one in particular,” I was told, “but you just hit a ‘soft spot.’” Well, individuals or groups who are parties to this anomaly in the AFP may do me harm, but it will only magnify rather than hush the issue. That while it is constitutionally provided that civilians reign supreme over the military at all times, such political power to appoint or to remove by the commander in chief and president who is a civilian should be exercised with utmost prudence rather than abuse. Indeed, the country’s chief executive has the ultimate power to approve or disapprove the AFP’s recommendations for the designation and promotion of key officers via the secretary of National Defense, but it behooves him to respect or at least give copious weight to the AFP’s selection process.

Understanding the AFP selection and vetting process

A select group of top AFP brass make up the Board of Generals (BoG), which was created by virtue of Executive Order 730, dated Sept. 10, 1981. It is chaired by the CSAFP with the vice chief of staff, the deputy chief of staff, the commanding generals of the Philippine Army and the Philippine Air Force, and the flag officer in command of the Philippine Navy as voting members with the assistant deputy chief of staff for personnel, J1, as secretary. The presidential issuance mandates the BoG to “pass upon the recommendation x x x based on the criteria that shall be set forth by the Board covering performance, leadership, and managerial or technical ability desired for every recommendee” to identified vacancies in general or flag rank positions in the AFP’s Table of Organization.

The BoG tediously deliberates and carefully passes judgment upon the qualifications and fitness of senior officers being considered for key positions and subsequent promotion to star rank. Aside from seniority, which is an important consideration in an organization that thrives in command and leadership like the AFP, the candidates’ leadership, managerial skills, and technical and tactical qualifications are given much weight. But the most important criterion that the BoG considers, which anyone outside the organization is incapable of knowing, is service reputation, which defines the totality of the officer since he joined the military service. The BoG, through its members who have been in the military service for more than 30 years, is in the best position to know the track record and past performances of the candidates for the position.

In the selection for the commander of any of the six unified commands like the Southern Luzon Command (Solcom) or the Visayas Command (Viscom), for example, where the incumbent commanders are due for compulsory retirement, the BoG may add other considerations. Aside from those mentioned above, it is ideal for the candidates to have commanded a battalion, a brigade and a division before — preferably in Luzon in the case of Solcom or in the Visayas in the case of Viscom. With regard to selection for commanders to lead the Western Command and the Northern Luzon Command, the selection base is usually between qualified Air Force generals or Navy flag officers owing to the peculiar nature of the operating environment that deals with security threats in both aerial and maritime domains.

The BoG, therefore, has both the competence to determine and the moral obligation to submit the names of two or three officers who are “best qualified” for the positions under consideration for the commanderin-chief to choose from. And given the critical importance of putting the right person in the right position, which has gone through the Defense department’s exhaustive vetting process, politicians, individuals or interest groups should stop meddling in the selection and designation of senior officers to key positions in the AFP.

The next column will tackle “independent” and “dependent” variables and “weather.”