Transcript of interview of Senator Mar Roxas on ANC

On the Supreme Court decision upholding Sec. Neri's claim of executive privilege

MAR: I was one of the very few saying that we should have accepted the arrangement of the Supreme Court because we would have been able to ask Sec. Neri 1,000 other questions without having to deal with the three questions that the Supreme Court would be deciding on. That's why I was in favor of accepting the Supreme Court arrangement. Nonetheless that's water under the bridge. What is important now is that we are on the side of finding of the facts and finding of the truth relative to the NBN-ZTE. I believe the Supreme Court is wrong in its interpretation or in its decision but they are the last word on the matter, so we have to accept their decision.

Q: Is a motion for reconsideration an option?

MAR: Yes, those motions for reconsideration are more pro forma than substantive. I hope that the Supreme Court has this in mind. My understanding is it rarely does reverse especially in a decision of 10-5 or 9-6. The margins are quite substantive.

Q: The Supreme Court noted that the Senate rules had not been published, and thus the orders against Neri could not be enforced.

MAR: These rules are published in previous Congresses. Maybe there was an oversight of the leadership and we'll have to respond to that. These rules have been applied to previous Congresses so maybe this is the technicality.

Q: Secretary Neri's counsel said Neri may attend Senate hearings but will continue invoking executive privilege.

MAR: That's their right to invoke. If a person feels that their right to self incrimination will be violated, then they can invoke that. Whether a question is objectionable or not is quite subjective and I guess we will deal with it or we will cross the bridge when we get to it. What is important here is that we try to get to the bottom of this. This contract, to my mind was something that is not in our priority, was something we really never needed. It was overpriced. There are indications that the overprice is in the hundred and millions of dollars for a contract that is 329 million dollars. And we need to get to the bottom of this so that we don't burden ourselves with debt and with contracts that we will have to pay for while the people who make the money scrupulously and illegally get away with it.

Q: Do you think it would still be productive to continue with the hearings even with the continued invocation of executive privilege?

MAR: The Supreme Court decision pertains to those three specific questions and to my mind, there is some vagueness relative to what elements of it transgress the executive privilege provision the Supreme Court upheld. This will be a continuing battle and I expect that the Senate won't give up on this. I certainly will not give up on trying to find out the truth.