Press Release
September 24, 2008

From "Road to Nowhere"
To "Complaint to Nowhere"?*

The charge of Sen. Lacson that there was a double entry in the 2008 Budget for the C-5 which is officially known as Pres. Carlos P. Garcia Ave. has uselessly occupied the time of the Senate for almost two weeks disrupting even its schedule and upsetting time-bound practices of fair play.

Let's dissect the events.

Monday, September 15th Senator Lacson delivered a privilege speech on the subject. There he said,

"Ladies and gentlemen of this august Chamber, I said it before, and I will say it again. This is not about "presidentiables." This is not about corruption. Corruption committed right in this Hall involving one of us, plain and simple. Everybody therefore, except that one among us should be standing up to denounce and investigate this abominable act of corruption committed right under our noses during our budget deliberations; everyone except that one who abused our trust and goodwill as fellow senators."

When the period of interpellation came, the session was derailed because of the insistence of Senator Madrigal that she be allowed to interpellate first, ahead of one from the majority. This is contrary to the practice and tradition of the Senate for a long long time, following parliamentary practices the world over, the rationale being that the first interpellator cannot be from the same party or group of the legislator that delivered the speech because he/she will ask friendly or leading questions to the speaker instead of being interpellated with searching questions by a senator from the opposite camp. That practice and tradition, long held by the Senate, was broken on Monday, Sept. 15th.

The next day, Tuesday, September 16th, Sen. Arroyo spoke on a question of personal and collective privilege under Section 106 of the Senate Rules because Sen. Lacson talked about corruption in the Hall of Senate and thereby attacked the "reputation, conduct, decorum and dignity of the Senate and of its members as well as the integrity of its proceedings."

Sen. Arroyo did not rise under Section 110, the privilege hour, which refers to "matters of public interest."

Sen. Cayetano, who was also mentioned by Sen. Lacson likewise rose under Section 106, not under Section 110.

Tuesday evening, September 16th, Sen. Madrigal had not yet interpellated Sen. Lacson. Thus, no one could interpellate him because of Sen. Madrigal's insistence and Sen. Lacson's acquiescence that she should interpellate ahead of all others. Operationally, she was shielding him.

Wednesday, September 17th. It was the turn of Sen. Lacson to be interpellated on his privilege speech. The calendar for the day formally indicated this. Sen. Lacson foiled his interpellation by the neat trick of being absent along with the other minority senators.

Monday, September 22. Before Sen. Lacson could be interpellated on his first speech, he registered that he would avail of the privilege hour and thereby delivered a second privilege speech. Lo and behold, it was related to the same subject, the C-5 issue, a question Sen. Cayetano had raised but which Sen. Lacson refused to answer.

Sen. Lacson foiled again his interpellation.

Look at the canvass. Left unnoticed is Sen. Lacson's stratagem. In one week he has delivered two privilege speeches on an inter-related matter and yet, he has prevented anyone from interpellating him on his first speech. He might as well have pleaded the Fifth Amendment that his answers would incriminate him.

He has nimbly moved from one subject to another, one after the other, and has deliberately cluttered the issues, from the original issue of double entry to corruption in the halls of Congress to Congressman Arroyo's attack against Mr. Villar while they were both in the House of Representatives. He wants your to get lost trying to figure out what he really wants.

It is a rule that once a resolution is referred to a committee, the committee assumes jurisdiction over that issue and subject matter and the proponent cannot use the privilege hour to buttress his position. If that were allowed, a sponsor could unduly make use of both the plenary and the committee as a forum for the same subject and thereby give him an undue advantage. Senator Lacson has resorted to a prohibited maneuver.

Neither the Senate nor myself can be distracted from the core issue which Sen. Lacson himself raised and that is --- whether or not there was a double entry. Sen. Lacson should rise or fall on that --- he should not obscure it with collateral issues he raises one after the other designed to confound and confuse so that you cannot pin him down because he is a moving target. He has turned his attack on Sen. Villar into a movable feast dragging everyone to becloud the issues.

My concern is on the corruption issue Sen. Lacson claimed was committed right here in this hallowed Senate Hall. He cannot escape that.

Sen. Lacson's quarrel with Senate President Villar over the so-called double entry is between him and the Senate President. That was clear in my privilege speech.

Sen. Lacson realizes that he will be answerable and accountable for the falsity of his corruption charge if his double entry allegation is a dud and he knows it. Thus, he has been side-stepping that issue by diverting the battle to another stage --- the attack of Congressman Arroyo on then Speaker Villar.

It would be idiocy to bite the poisoned bait. We should zero-in on what he started --- the double entry. Sen. Lacson should not run-away from that.

I will demonstrate in visual form the falsity of Sen. Lacson's allegation thru a powerpoint presentation.

(Powerpoint presentation)

 

___________________________
*
Privilege speech of Sen. Arroyo on September 23, 2008.
News Latest News Feed