Press Release
April 29, 2009

Transcript of interview with Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile

Q: Sir, yung kay Senator Villar, do we expect a fair trial after nung sinabi niya na "kangaroo court"...

SP: I promised him a fair trial. That he will not be abused. That he will not be degraded, he will not be intimidated. He will be accorded all the courtesies befitting his position as senator and former head of the Senate and as a presidential candidate, and for him to answer all the charges pending before the Senate Committee of the Whole.

Q: Would you advise him, sir to stop issuing statements?

SP: I am not going to advise anybody. I am the presiding officer of the investigating committee and I would rather not advise one or the other of the contenders because I am supposed to maintain impartiality.

Q: So, nag- commit na po siya na magiging cooperative dun sa committee?

SP: He did not make any commitment. I said ...I was very careful with my language. My impression is that he would participate in the hearing.

Q: Sir, nagpahayag si Senator Lacson kanina na hindi lang dapat sa inyo humingi ng apology si Senator Villar , maging lahat dapat ng senador.

SP: Yung ang position ni Senator Lacson and I will leave it to the wise judgment and discretion of Senator Villar.

Q: Sir, tingin ninyo ba na offensive ba po yung naging statement ninya na "bigger kangaroo court" ang committee.

SP: Well, if you call the Senate a "kangaroo court", that is not my Senate. I am a member of it but it's the Senate of the people. What will that mean if a member of the Senate will call its own Senate a "kangaroo court"? I think you're wise enough and intelligent enough to understand the import of the word used. Anyway, I said let the matter rest. The gentleman has apologized to me not as Juan Ponce Enrile but as the President of the Senate. I assume that, that is a sincere apology to restore peace, respect for the Senate as an institution.

Q: Sir, ano po ang explanation niya at bakit nasabi niya iyon, " bigger kangaroo?"

SP: As I said, maybe it's an outburst of emotion.

Q: Sir, ano po yung atmosphere ng meeting ninyo kagabi? The 30-minute meeting with Senator Villar.

SP: As I said, yesterday afternoon, my office received a request for a dinner with Senator Villar. I thought about it but I said with due reference to him, as courtesy to him, I acceded. And so, I have to notify the members of the Ethics committee about it, in order to avoid suspicion that there is any other effort to undermine any side of the recent controversy. And Senator Lacson, Senator Madrigal, Senator Roxas and all the others, agreed for me to meet with Senator Villar. While I was in the Session hall, Senator Aquilino Pimentel also came to my side, seated beside me and asked, what is the low down about the Committee of the Whole? And I said, nothing. We are going to have a preliminary hearing and I hope you will be there. We will discuss the rules to be used in the hearing. You can offer all your suggested amendments if you wish. And if we have to republish the rules in order to protect the interest of the respondents, we will do that. You can assure the respondent, Senator Villar, that he will be accorded with the utmost fair play in this proceedings, utmost impartiality. The chair will not allow him to be abused, disabused, distressed, stressed or in any way, maligned. So then all of a sudden, I got an information that the former Senate President was interviewed earlier than when I received his invitation for a dinner and that he called the Senate a "bigger kangaroo court". So I asked somebody to call up the office of the senator and said that I will cancel the dinner because I do not think it's proper for me to attend a dinner with someone who considers the Senate a "kangaroo court", which included me because that means there is a distrust. So because of that, Senator Villar all of a sudden appeared in my office and that point I was talking to Senator Estrada. So, I received Senator Villar and Senator Estrada left and we talked. I assured him that he had nothing to fear as far as the Senate Committee of the Whole is hearing his case. Because we will see to it that the public is satisfied that there is justice being done there.

Q: Kailan ang hearing, sir?

SP: The first meeting of the Committee of the Whole will be on Monday

Q: Sir, may time frame ba kayo, may target ba kayo kalian tatapusin?

SP: I cannot say. It depends upon how prepared the parties are to present their respective cases. I will allow lawyers to appear in the hearing. They can bring their batteries of lawyers. Under the rule, there is a right of examination and cross-examination. I will not allow argumentative questions. However, anybody who will ask question cannot argue with the witness. The purpose of the hearing will be to elicit gathered facts. No argumentation. They can ask leading questions. Maybe, we will probably let the pass on leading questions, but not the misleading questions.

Q: Sir, paano kung hindi humarap si Senator Villar? Kasi ang sabi niya, sasagutin niya sa floor pero hindi sa imbestigasyon ng Committee of the Whole.

SP: Nasa kanya iyon. The hearing will proceed. There is no reason why it will not proceed. With or without the respondent. It is his responsibility to present his case and his defense and evidence before the committee. If he will not, then we will have to evaluate his case on the basis of evidence received by the Committee of the Whole.

Q: So, disadvantageous po yun kay Senator Villar?

SP: I will not teach his lawyers and the respondent on how to defend himself.

Q: Sir, will it be open to the media?

SP: That is something I have to discuss with the members of the committee. As far as I am concerned, I have no aversion to opening it to the public or to making it a close hearing depending upon the decision of the committee.

Q: So, isa iyon sa i-re-resolve ninyo sa Monday?

SP: Yes.

Q: Sir, naitanong ninyo po ba kay Senator Villar na bakit since Monday hindi na siya nagpapakita sa floor?

SP: Hindi ako nagtatanong ng mga ganoon. I thought personal iyon sa kanila. Whether they want to do their work here or not. They are answerable to the people for that, not to me.

Q: Sir, last time sinabi niyo na ni-review ng Secretariat yung rules ng ethics.

SP: Yes, Ni-re-review. Dahil gusto namin na kung may vagueness, it has to be clarified.

Q: So, kailangan i- publish po ulit iyon, matatagalan masimulan yung hearing?

SP: Sandali lang yung publication.

Q: Pero sir, nagyon may nakikita na po ba kayo na vague na provision doon sa rules?

SP: Wala pa. Meron siguro, sabi nila. Rerebisyunin ng secretariat.

Q: Yung initiative na i- review yung rules, sa Secretariat pa bo nanggaling or from you?

SP: Sa Secretariate. Sinabi nila na there were errors daw on the rules. So I said that if there are errors, correct the errors before the onset of the hearing. Have the rules re-published so that there will be no quibbling about the validity of the rules to be used.

Q: Sir, would you like to comment dun sa sinasabi na rescue plot or sinasabing plano na itakas sina Senator Trillanes and involved pa dito si former president Joseph.

SP: I don't know if that is true or not. I cannot comment something that I do not know anything about.

Q: Going back to Senator Villar, should he apologize to other senators for calling the committee a "kangaroo court?"

SP: He has apologized. And as far as I'm concern, I will let the matter rest there. Now, there are other senators with a different position, then I respect their position.

Q: Sir, dun po sa warrant of arrest against Jun Lozada, any comment.

SP: In the start, I always believed that if the authorities believe that you have committed a crime, nobody is immune from obeying the law. In my case, how many times have I been hailed to court. But I obeyed the orders of the authorities of this country. Because the first duty of a leader is to respect the law. You cannot respect the law, you have no business as a leader.

Q: Dapat isuko ni Jun Lozada yung sarili niya?

SP: If he wants to be a leader, he must show that he will abide by the law. He should have no fear with the justice system of his country. In the same way that I have no fear in the justice system of my country when I was arrested twice. And I was able to free myself.

Q: Will it not discourage whistleblower?

SP: Whether discourage or not, there is a law that must be obeyed. And we will respect the law. We are asking you for a policy decision. The policy has already been established.

Q: Sir, hindi kaya gawin ito ng mga ibang militanteng grupo para sa kilos protesta sa Biyernes, sa pag arrest kay Jun Lozada?

SP: Di bahala sila kung gusto nila mag rebulusyon.Go ahead, start the revolution. That's the way the game is being played in this country. Nobody is immune from the net of the law if there is a violation. I am not saying he's guilty. He has to defend himself in the proper forum. It's not the public who will judge a person. We have a system of justice. The courts will render the innocence or guilt of anyone charged with a crime.

Q: Sir, sabi ni Senator Lacson hihikayatin daw mag piyansa si Jun Lozada, kasi nagsalita si Jun Lozada na hindi daw siya mag piya-piyansa, anong stand niyo po?

SP: Problema na niya yon. Kung gusto niyang pakulong pala, nasa kanya yon. If he wants to sacrifice himself at the altar of what he considers to be the truth and justice, that is his prerogative. I will applaud him. I will pray for him.

Q: Sir, a court in Cagayan de Oro had already recommended na kasuhan na si Celso Delos Angeles for syndicated estafa.

SP: It's about time. You commit a crime, you go to jail, if necessary.

Q: Sir, what if he evades arrest?

SP: Then, he will be hunted. If he can swim from here to Guam, from Guam to Hawaii, from Hawaii to San Francisco then so be it.

Q: Sir, pero may mga balita na that he may use excuse na health reasons.

SP: Health reason is no defense in a crime. It is an appeal for humanitarian consideration. But whether you are sick or not if you are charged with a crime, you are charged. If it's bailable, you bail. If not bailable, then the court will decide whether to exercise humanitarian act in order to put you in a hospital.

Q: Sir, kasama din po si Carol Minola, yung bumaligtad po at nagtestigo against him?

SP: Well, pwede yon. But if they are going to be state witnesses then they can be discharged according to the rules of Court in a proper motion for that purpose. They could be discharged from the information and used as state witnesses.

Q: Sir, it all depends on Secretary Gonzales?

SP: No, it does not depend upon Secretary Gonzales. It will depend upon the Court. It is the Court that will decide.

Q: Sir, wala bang mali dun sa immediate appointment ng isang nagre-retire na military official like Yano na mag-early retirement?

SP: Wala. There's nothing wrong with that. That's the prerogative of the appointing power. He can appoint anybody and his responsibility is political to the people.

Q: Sir, yung kay Jun Lozada, hanggang kalian po siya nasa ilalim ng Senate protective custody kasi up to now may sergeant-at-arms pa rin na nagbabantay sa kanya?

SP: Binawasan na nga namin yon dahil malaki ang gastos naming sa Senado. Anim ata o apat, binawasan na namin. Dalawa na lang ata ang naiwan.

Q: Hindi niyo ba iyon ire-recall kapag inaresto na siya?

SP: Hindi naman pwede samahan ng mga OSAA sa loob ng kulungan yon. May custody na siya, ang may responsibility sa kanyang security ay nasa husgado na. At that point, kung magpapakulong siya I'll have to recall the assigned security because he is now in the custody of other authorities.

Q: Pero sir hanggang kailan po siya kailangan guwardiyahan ng mga sergeant-at-arms?

SP: Habang nasa labas ng kulungan because the threat is there according to him. If he wants to expose himself to further threat by putting himself inside the kulungan, he is behind bars as far as we are concerned. We do not want our security to join him in the kulungan.

Q: Kung magpa-piyansa sir, balik po ba ulit ang OSAA?

SP: Nasa husgado na siya. Bahala na ang husgado to give him security, pulis na.

News Latest News Feed