Transcript of interview of SP Sotto

SP Sotto: I'm filing today or at the latest tomorrow, a resolution asking for a review of the law covering the good behavior issue, RA 10592. Kasi meron dun sinasabi na allowance for good conduct tapos ang computation nila, for the first two years of imprisonment, a deduction is being increased from 5 days of each month of good behavior to 20 days. On the 3rd to the 5th year, naging 23 days. Tapos the 10th year ginawang 25 days. Pagdating ng 11th year and successive years, na increase from 15 days to 30 days each month for good behavior. So bale inaalis na talaga yung 1 buwan. Ngayon ang tanong, tama ba yung computation na nadamay si former Mayor Sanchez? For good behavior siguro. Pag kinumpute mo, lumalabas sa klase ng computation na nakita namin, lumalabas na nakapag serve na sya ng 49 years sa 40-year sentence daw nya, although kung tutuusin 26 years because of good behavior daw. Question, panong naging good behavior that in 2006 there was a complaint filed against him for a possession of marijuana inside the NBP. In 2010, P1.5-million worth of shabu was found in the image of the Virgin Mary in his cell. Panong naging good behavior yun? So dapat dyan ang good behavior ngayon nag count after 2010 kung nag good behavior na sya at hindi na sya nagdo droga or hindi na nagkakaroon ng possession ng droga, whether he's a user or not. So panong naging good behavior yung computation nyan? Nakakalitong computation yung sinasabi nilang yan kapag ganun. Eh dapat linawin natin yan. Now this is on top of the fact that, ewan ko kung nagkaron ng mga hearing ng parole or pinapatawag nila yung mga offended relatives of the victims di ba? At saka yung tinatawag na indemnity. Hindi raw tinupad yung indemnity up to now. Hindi naman importante dun sa pamilya nila Sarmenta at Gomez yun but still you have to follow the law. Did you follow the law? Is that good behavior, di ba? So tama ba yun? So in short, he doesn't qualify. Ganun kasimple lang ang usapan dun.

Q: And yung taga Bureau of Corrections madaming dapat ipaliwanag dito...

SP Sotto: Hindi lang paliwanag, dapat mag-ingat sila. Probably this could serve as a warning that in the law that they are using, yung director of Corrections, pati chief of the BJMP, so sa ibang areas like wardens, provincial, city and municipal jails, kapag sila eh hindi nag comply sa law or nagkaroon ng maling computation, they can be subject to 1 year imprisonment and P100,000 fine or perpetual disqualification from office. So pati dun sa nag co compute ng mali, aba'y mananagot pa sila. So this probably serves as a warning, before they commute or terminate this issue and release prisoner Sanchez.

Q: Investigation will not just center on Sanchez, kasi marami din daw dun heinous crimes...

SP Sotto: Oo. Dapat yan. Siguro blessing in disguise na matingkad yung issue nung kay Sanchez. Sapagkat matitingnan na rin yung iba. This would be a call to the leadership of the DOJ, not only the NBP, to look into the computation that they are doing and what is their definition of good behavior. Kaya nga, pinaka maganda nito, I'm filing a resolution either this afternoon or tomorrow calling for a review of RA 10592.

Q: Your tweet na it's a case for death penalty...

SP Sotto: Hindi. Dun lang sa mga palitan namin ng tweet nila Sec. Teddyboy Locsin, alam mo, may mga nagtatanong na, hindi ba magandang argument daw ito para sa death penalty because sa death penalty, you already inhibit the criminal from committing the same crime again or you inhibit him from being alive. If you commit a very heinous crime.

Q: It will boost the call to reinstate...

SP Sotto: My tweet had a question mark. I don't want to bring the issue back to death penalty dito sa issue. Anyway hindi naman yan retroactive, if ever.

Q: Would you say na highly suspicious yung inclusion nya kasi questionable...

SP Sotto: Questionable. I will probably agree that this is questionable because I don't believe that the computation is correct and I don't know what their definition of good behavior is. Possession of illegal drugs is good behavior? Hindi bale kung 1 stick ang pinag-uusapan or 1 gramo ang pinag-uusapan eh.

Q: Yung RA 10592, dapat I amend na rin especially with regards dun to kung ano yung mga covered crimes

SP Sotto: I think the review would call for the inclusion of heinous crimes in the elaboration in the law. In other words, right now, the way I'm thinking, I will push for the exemption on this issue of good behavior if it's a heinous crime. Basta't classified na heinous crime, hindi dapat mag qualify. Dapat reclusion perpetua ka. Tutal ayaw nyo ng death penalty, o sige reclusion perpetua ka. You die in your cell.

Q: Reclusion perpetua decision ng SC sa kanya

SP Sotto: Oo nga eh kasi nga, based on the Revised Penal Code, ang ginagawa nilang computation nung 7 life imprisonment or 9 counts eh sabay-sabay tumatakbo yung 40 years. Yan ang computation nila eh.

Q: Dapat pag heinous crime, you die in your cell, wala ng pardon, parole...

SP Sotto: Hindi dapat siguro unless talagang absolutely sure na talagang hindi lang good behavior kundi talagang pardonable ang pagkatao mo or yung crime.

Q: Yung nagiging reason na bedridden na maliban dun sa good behavior...

SP Sotto: Well that's subject to discussion pagdating dun sa review of the law. After the resolution and after a hearing by the proper committee then we may be able to craft amendments to the law. Dun pwede nating i-take up yung mga ganyang issue.

Q: While pushing the amendments, what could possibly stop yung RA 10592 right now..

SP Sotto: Right now, it has to be stopped because the computation is not correct.

Q: Kailangan syang i-implement, it's existing...

SP Sotto: They can implement if the computation is correct. I think it does not apply to all the 11,000 would-be prisoners to be released. The way this is computed, pag sinabing good behavior, dapat from the time na kinumpute yung good behavior mo, up to the time na nag compute sila eh good behavior ka, wala kang ibang crime na kinomit. Obvious, 2006 marijuana, 2010 shabu. Is that good behavior?

Q: Since questionable, sino magpapa stop the implementation...

SP Sotto: The Department of Justice cannot ask the signing authority to approve it.

Q: Can the DOJ act on its own...(inaudible)

SP Sotto: We don't have that power

Q: Just the recommendation...

SP Sotto: And perhaps someone can bring it up to the SC for a temporary restraining order so that it will not be executed right away.

Q: On SOGIE, ano likelihood of it passing in the Senate

SP Sotto: The problem kasi dun sa issue ng SOGIE or the anti-discrimination act or bill that they are pushing, definitely it's going to be subject to abuse. Kitang-kita ngayon pa lang eh. Ngayon pa lang nakita ninyo, merong mga nagrereklamo na ngayon, lumilitaw yung mga nagrereklamo na kababaihan na doon sa kanilang mga comfort rooms ay ginagawang, for comfort rooms nung mga transgender or transwoman, pagkatapos nagpapakitaan ng mga genitals nila doon at tinuturo kung papano nila tinatago, pagkatapos ay nung pinapansin sila nitong mga kababaihan, tinatakot yung mga kababaihan na vini-video daw nila, nila live video daw nila. So dun pa lang kita mo, wala pa ito, ina-abuse na. So that's another problem. The other issue is the issue of cross-dressing. In the United States there was just a case now, that it is not discriminatory. Baligtad eh. It's discriminatory to those who are offended. Katulad dito sa atin sa mga toilets natin...by the way before I go to that, criminalizing it doon sa proposal sa bill, eh minimum P100,000 to P500,000 tapos imprisonment pagka discrimination. Hindi ba discrimination yung doon sa amin sa mga straight, pagka nandun sila sa toilet at sinabi nila, at pinupuna nila, sila nadi discriminate pag umangal sila eh, di ba? Baligtad eh. Definitely it's class legislation because most of the issues na nakatutok are for the gays. The lesbians are not complaining because they use the women's CR and there is no problem at all. Yun pang issue ng academic freedom, hindi na pwedeng ituro, yung magdi discriminate daw sa 3rd sex or gender. The freedom of religion ganun din masasagasaan yan. If the bill is redundant, lahat nung sinasabi doon na complaint, the discrimination are found in the Magna Carta for Women, Women and Children Abuse Act, tapos sa Revised Penal Code, lahat yan covered eh. Lahat ng crimes na pwedeng nangyari dun covered, merong mga krimen na ganun. Ngayon, because of this issue that happened a few days ago at kung saan-saan nakarating, hanggang sa Malacanang nakarating na ang tingin ko naman ay hindi naman kasi buo yung istorya, kung nakita nila yung buong istorya, hindi siguro papatulan nung Palasyo eh. But anyway, given that, I now feel very strongly about it because it has not turned from a transgender rights to a women's rights. This is now an issue on women's rights because I feel that a woman's body is a temple and to her, the toilet is sacred. It's where she has a weakest point. Kaya kung ikaw meron kang sandata, hindi ka dapat dun nag c-CR. You go to the men's room.

Q: inaudible

SP Sotto: Hindi, yung mga lalaki hindi nao-offend. Si Alan K, bakit si Xenon mga sikat pa yan, nagpupunta sa CR ng mga lalaki yan. Doon sila. Wala naman nagdi discriminate sa kanila dun.

Q: Unfounded yung sinasabing nabubugbog sa CR...

SP Sotto: Ay hindi, hindi totoo eh di demanda nila. Yun ang discrimination pag ginawa sa kanila yun. Hindi naman nangyayari yun eh. Tapos yung ginagamit nilang example yung mga coffee shops na genderless daw. Genderless kasi isa lang ang pwede sa loob. Isa-isa lang eh. Kaya talagang pwedeng genderless. Subukan mong sabay, di ba? Tingnan natin. Now, even in the Senate, the 2nd floor has a genderless CR. So kung meron kanina may kinukwento dyan na merong daw iisa-istambay dun sa CR ng mga babae, meron daw transgender kanina dyan na iista-istambay lang dun, nakaupo lang daw dun, ewan ko parang nag-iintay na magkaroon ng issue na paalisin sya or something eh meron namang bi-gender toilet dito sa 2nd floor kasama nun sa PWD na toilet dito. Meron eh. Aba eh ano ginagawa mo dun? Di ba naghahanap ka lang ng gulo. But I already told the Sergeant-at-Arms to get rid of him. Eh may sandata ah. Oo nagpo provoke eh. Baka gustong palakihin yung issue lalo. Pero hindi ganun yun. If you are infringing on the rights of others, particularly the women, then you have no right to do it.

Q: Ano feedback sa Sergeant-at-Arms...

SP Sotto: Hindi ko pa alam. Sinabi ko pa lang na paalisin eh. Umalis. Oo kanina, siguro habang nag-he-hearing. Pinalipat sya dun sa genderless toilet. O hindi discriminatory yun.

Q: Baka magsumbong kay Sen. Hontiveros...

SP Sotto: Eh di magsumbong sya.

Q: Sen. Risa said after one hearing gagawa na sya ng committee report...

SP Sotto: Imbitahin nya muna yung mga organizations na kontra - the women's organizations, the religious - eh puro mga pro-transgender ang inimbita eh, wag ganun. If they bring it to the floor without the side of those who are against it, aba eh we will move to bring it back to the committee.

Q: Ano assurance nyo sa mga tunay na babae when it comes to SOGIE bill...

SP Sotto: The assurance is that we will make sure that we fight for the women's rights.

Q: Sa pakikipag-usap nyo sa mga kasamahan nyo mas marami bang anti....

SP Sotto: I would rather think that there are more pro-women's rights. There are more who are pro-religious freedom, there are more pro-academic freedom. That's all I can say.

Q: Hindi ba kayo nape pressure na supportive daw si President dun sa SOGIE bill...

SP Sotto: Hindi. Eh hindi ba supportive din sya dun sa ibang bill namin hindi naman naming pinapasa eh.

Q: Baka hindi lang sya well-informed...

SP Sotto: Correct. Correct. We have a meeting next week. I hope he will try to hear our side. He has to listen to the other side as well. Hindi pwedeng ang narinig mo lang yung isang side.

Q: Saan yung meeting...

SP Sotto: Yung small LEDAC.

Q: Ito yung first small LEDAC...

SP Sotto: Yes.

Q: Dun sa priority measures, sa list nyo nandun yung death penalty?

SP Sotto: Oo. May bago sila? Bago yan. Perhaps they're looking at 16 na mas madali ang possibility na mapasa.

Q: Can you recall some...

SP Sotto: Like for example yung sa tanong mo kanina, yung death penalty. Hindi naman namin napasa nung 17th Congress. TRAIN 2.

Q: Human security act kasama ...

SP Sotto: Oo, yes. It only proves that we are independent, that we are living up to what the people want the Senate to be, an independent Senate.