Press Release
March 14, 2018

Transcript of Ambush Interview of Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III

On last night's meeting with President Duterte

SP Pimentel: Nagmeeting kami kagabi but it was about the BBL. We informed the president of the status in the Senate. Ang sabi ko, so far, so good, we are in the interpellation stage, unlike in the House nasa TWG stage pa sila.

Q: Achievable sir yung May 13 deadline?

SP Pimentel: Yes. Actually disappointed na nga ako na yung original timetable po ni subcommittee chair Migz Zubiri, dapat ngayon. We will not be able to achieve it, but maghanda naman yun, it's an accelerated timetable, hence May is acceptable.

Q: Second reading po next week?

SP: Wala, interpellations lang tayo, but we will still make good use of the time available, we will continue with the interpellation. Dapat naman, maraming interpellations kasi landmark law po ito.

On the postponement of the barangay elections, did the President ask about it?

SP: Wala, nothing. Uulitin ko, BBL ang pinag-usapan, wala ng iba.

On whether the President has concerns about the BBL?

SP: Wala, nag-update lang. Sabi sa akin, kamusta na? Sabi ko BBL is going smoothly.

Q: Bakit po wala si Senator Zubiri?

SP: Kasi mauubusan kami ng tao rito. Alam nyo na 23 Senators, we cannot bring everybody there and we allowed them to continue with the session, so as not to waste time. The BBL interpellations can continue.

Q: Ang sabi ninyo po, kung April isubmit ng Consultative Committee yung kanilang report?

SP: By accident, kung May ang aming resumption, ang commitment yata ng Consultative Commission, April, they will have something. So, it will also be available to us for consideration.

Q: Sa approval ng BBL?

SP: Sa discussion, sa interpellation, isama na lang.

On the dismissal of the charges against the drug lords.

SP: Pagdating dyan sa Espinosa, yung details hindi ko alam. I know sa practice you have to limit yourselves sa papers before you. So I will just support the call for the DOJ Secretary to give us more details, what happened here, what were submitted, what were originally submitted by the complainant, and what evidence were submitted by the respondent.

Q: Yung pag-amin ba ni Kerwin Espinosa na isa siyang drug dealer, pwede hong gamitin ng DOJ yun?

SP: OO pero hindi niya pwede sigurong from memory, sana kumuha sila ng transcript, certified true copy, kahit napanood niya yun, hindi niya all of a sudden huhugutin niya from memory. Hindi niya pwedeng sabihin "napanood ko ito." When you write your resolution, ano ang ia-attach nyo doon? What are you citing? So get that certified true copy of the transcript. Available ang transcript namin dito.

Q: Di ba constitutional yun na share with them?

SP: Basta public documents, we are willing to share our documents, but we cannot assume na idi-disturb lahat ng documents. Basta hihingi lang sila dito.

Q: Nasaan yung burden? Sa complainant o nasa DOJ mismo? Sino po ang dapat kumuha ng transcripts?

SP: Sana, complainant. If you want to we thorough, if you want to have an airtight case, you prepare your case thoroughly. Kaya I understand yung sinabi ni Secretary Aguirre na this will teach us to be thorough, sabi niya. Tama po yun.

Q: Parang wala pa pong committee report?

SP: The transcripts are available. Ibibigay namin ang transcript. Pag may committee report, we will give committee reports. Pag may transcripts, we will give transcripts. CCTV footages, we will give. Walang problema.

Q: Kung wala pong sinubmit ang CIDG, di ba dapat may initiative din ang CIDG prosecutors? O magrerely lang sila sa sinasabi nila?

SP: Dapat nga may inisyatibo sana. Pero yun na nga, kung hindi niya hiningi and transcript, hindi nya pwedeng sabihin sa from his memory napanood ko ito. Basta ang sinasabi ko, ang importante sa interview natin, ina-announce ko na if you need documents from the Senate, specially of public nature, the Senate will give you. We will give you copies, certified true copies.

Q: With the review of the Justice Secretary, pwede pang ma-reverse yun?

SP: Oo, pwede pa. I think the second panel can even also overturn the first panel kasi because of the sequence, kaya nag form ng second panel to review the first panel.

Q: Appropriate ba na maimbistigahan ng first panel na nag-dismiss ng kaso?

SP: Actually hindi naman siguro imbestigahan yung mga tao but imbestigahan yung pangyayari. Parang ganun na rin yun. Actually yung second panel halos ni-rereview mo na yung nagawa ng first panel. Kung magkalayo ang conclusion, then we have an issue to be explained. Ganun yun. Kung magkalayo masyado ang conclusion ng first panel and second panel, then we have to explain, bakit ganun? Both parehong mga experienced prosecutors ito. Parehong mga abogado ito, pero totally different or contrasting conclusions, bakit. Pero sa future pa yan. Hintayin pa natin yung conclusion ng second panel.

Q: Hindi naman kayo beholden sa recommendations nila, you can push for a total ban here?

SP: Yes. Kaya tuloy they used the word regulate because they were not really prohibiting. Yun ang nangyari, but let us prohibit it. Ang importante dito, the degree of relationship and what kind of arrangement or set-up or scenario are we prohibiting? Ang pinaka-realistic sa aking opinion is the succession. Yun na lang, kasi pwede kasing walang dynastic situation, tumakbo yung magkamag-anak at the same time, hindi sila incumbent, nanalo sila. Kasalanan ba nila yun? The succession ang pinaka-logical na dapat i-ban natin because hinahanda ni relative yung second relative to succeed him or her in office. Therefore ang assumption natin, the incumbent is using now the resources and the powers of the present office, to prepare a relative. Yun ang pagbawalan po natin.

Q: How exactly will the recommendations of the Con-Com be taken into account?

SP: Babasahin namin and then kung ano yung applicable. Kunyari federal form, paano yung sharing dun? Ano yung detalye, sharing ng revenue, sharing ng resources, sharing ng power, i-compare namin ngayon sa draft ng BBL. Ganun yun kasi kung magfe-federal, dapat, hindi dapat apektado ang BBL because medyo unfair yun, we give them a BBL law and then we pass a new Constitution, all of a sudden, after a short period of time, abandoned na yung BBL. Dapat ibalanse po namin.

On the timetable for passing the TRAIN 2.

SP: Yung TRAIN 2, ang pinag-usapan namin ngayong May. Before sine-die kung kaya. Kasi last four days, hindi pa. Nasa committee level pa yun.

Q: Will you address the concerns that the removal of tax incentives in TRAIN 2 will negate the reduction of corporate income?

SP: Itong TRAIN 2 kasi is supposed to be revenue neutral. Wag matakot ang mga negosyante, it is not meant to raise revenues out of them or from them. Ang main idea nga nito is to rationalize, walang forever, ganun, kasi I think we gave concessions forever. Kasi mistakes of previous administrations, if the incumbent administration is convinced that these are mistakes, then we should correct it now. Walang ganun. If you look at other countries, hindi naman sila ganun. Bakit tayo ganun? Ganun po yun, and then syempre, may changes, may tatamaan but it was not meant to really squeeze revenues out of the tax payers, the business entities. Revenue neutral po ito. Kung ano yung tatanggaling concession or benefits, yun din po ay binabalik in the form of another benefit in the form of lower taxes. But if you apply it at the individual business level, merong tatamaan. But generally speaking, hindi siya tinarget. And if you look at the entirety, tabla-tabla lang po yun.

On whether PDP-Laban is ready to include Bong Go in its line-up.

SP: Ready ang party of course. Bong Go is our national auditor, nasa sa kanya na po yun if he is really interested. Nasa sa kanya but the party is ready, because we have not yet finalized the slots, but unfortunately we have more than 20 names and that's a problem.

News Latest News Feed