Transcript of Zoom interview of Senate President Vicente C. Sotto III

On the special resolution of Sens. Dela Rosa and Tolentino regarding a constituent assembly considering the Duterte Administration has only two years left before the next election.

SP Sotto: Often, charter change ang pinagusapan, napakasikip kaagad. Halos imposible. Baka amendments to the charter. Baka one or two points kung ano ang pag aamyendahan doon. May pag-asa pa. Kapag sinabi mong charter change is the entire constitution that you are going to replace. Hindi gaano kadali iyan dahil sa research sa term of tenure. (unclear) paguusapan. To amend a certain provision or provisions, mapapagusapan iyan. But then again, I knew about the resolution as early as first week of December. Even before the first week of December, bandang November ay napapagusapan na iyan kasi it was discussed during the meeting with the President.

Q: Did the President himself during the meeting ask the two Houses of Congress to push for charter change?

SP Sotto: Tanong ko muna sa inyo ha para hindi ako magtunog at magmukhang madaldal or hindi ko dapat ikwento, ay ikinuwento ko. Paano ninyo ba nalaman na may resolution sila Sen. Tolentino at Sen. Dela Rosa? Merong balita before that the President is pushing for a constituent assembly. Paano ninyo ba nalaman iyon?

Q: Sir, yesterday po may nag tweet na congressman saying that a senator or two senators, filed a joint resolution. Nagti-tweet po ang dalawang congressmen, nagpatawag din si Speaker Velasco sa kanila to discuss eto pong cha-cha sa House. And actually sir, nagpatawag na rin po ng hearing so next week po ang cha-cha hearings na po. At least in the committee level para gawin ang version nila.

SP: Okay. Kaya ko tinanong iyon ano to set the record straight at para hindi ako ang source. Ayoko kasing lumabas na ako ang nagkuwento bigla nang pinagusapan namin almost two months ago. If you are going to have a report on the matter, make it a point na hindi ako ang pinanggalingan nito. Kina-clarify ko lang ang sinabi ng congressmen or kung sino man ang congressmen na nakausap ninyo. Kina-clarify ko lang ang pagkaka kwento at accuracy noong pinagusapan. Alright? Hindi ako ang source. Because the last thing that I would want that there is a private conversation between me and the President and some other congressman tapos kinukwento ko sa media. I don't like that. Unless the President wants it out or merong importante dapat na i-announce. Hindi din naman private conversation, hindi din naman dapat. But nevertheless, it appears that the House of Representatives' members, nag kwento na. I-clarify ko lang ang nakarating sa media at iyong nakarating sa inyo. Kasi ang narinig ko, hindi accurate. Ang narinig ko na sabi ninyo o sabi ng media is that the President is pushing for charter change and wanted the Congress to go for the constituent assembly para sa (unclear) election or term extension. Eh hindi totoo iyon. I can tell you bluntly na walang sinabing ganoon ang Pangulo. Ang sinabi niya, opening pa lang, ang pinag usapan namin, nakaharap naman sila, congressmen na nandodoon at limang senador na nandodoon and about three or four from the high levels of the Armed Forces where there. Ang malinaw na tinanong ng Presidente pag upo, ay sinabi niya na "I want this problem with the CPP-NPA solved. So, hinintay ko kung ano ang sasabihin niya about it. Sabi niya na the best way is that we remove the party-list system, or change it in the constitution so we can call for a constituent assembly and amend that. And then of course, samantalahin ninyo na. You can amend the economic provisions, sabi niya. Those two points, pwede na. In so many words ha, iyon lang ang sinabi ng Presidente, wala siyang sinasabing term limit. Wala siyang sinasabing extension of term. Wala siyang sinasabing no election. Mainit na mainit siya doon sa CPP-NPA issue, at ang dating sa kanya na some members of the House of Representative, particularly Makabayan bloc ay sympathizers and connected sa CPP-NPA. At, karamihan ay partylist. Ang biro pa nga was that papaano ang asawa ni Martin. Nandodoon kasi si Martin e party-list iyon. Nagbibiruan pa nga. In that effect and tapos, the economic provisions. Alright? So, iyon talaga ang nangyari. Walang ibang binanggit o pinagusapan. Let me just tell you what had just transpired afterwards, sabi ko, why don't we just (unclear) Mayor. Why don't we just amend the partylist book. (Unclear) ang sagot niya noong una, sabi niya, dadalhin lang nila sa Supreme Court iyon. Mahaba ang usapan. Iti-table lang iyan. (Unclear) iyon ang sabi niya. (Unclear) we should vote separately. (Unclear) hindi po pwedeng voting jointly. And I think we have to resolve that once and for all. Noong una, Speaker Velasco and colleagues were more or less saying that iyong voting jointly is the probability. And then I said, pinaalala ko kay Presidente, na in the constitution, there are at least three to four times (unclear) and the constitution says that congress votes separately. It is only once that the constitution says that the congress votes jointly and only in the issue of martial law. There is no other mention. Pero, (unclear) sa akin, (unclear) framers of the constitution. Anyway, in so many words also, (unclear) and then later on, Speaker Velasco sounded like amenable naman na siya doon sa voting separately. But then again, bottom line, cut the long story short, and ending, sabi ko, Mayor, three-fourths votes approve any amendments through a constituent assembly sa amin. Sabi ko, we are 20 in the majority. We need 18 votes therefore. So (unclear) that we can do, is to feel out my colleagues and (unclear) kasama ko si Sens. Cayetano, Tolentino, Angara, Go, ang sabi ko I will try to feel them out and see if it is possible. Doon kami nagtapos. Walang pinagusapan na term limits or kung anu-ano. Ngayon in the process, nabanggit ng President na "I hope you're able to resolve this problem of partylist. I do not want to be able to," sabi niya, paano ba yung wording niya para hindi naman, para accurate, he said something like "I" ano, "on the issue of the CPP-NPA" ah sabi niya, "I hope I don't need to use military (unclear)" parang ganon. Eh medyo ang nabalitaan ko na naman, iba na naman ang pagkakakuwento eh. Di ba parang sinasabi ng Presidente na 'pag hindi natupad eh, magma-martial law siya or magpatawag siya ng, gagamitin na niya ang military. He doesn't want the military option, in case hindi namin ma-resolve yung problema sa CPP-NPA through Congress. Yung ganon. Yun ang talagang eksaktong istorya. Yung mga naririnig ninyo, yung ano na yun, medyo may dagdag, may kulang. Eh hindi yun ang accurate na nangyari. Thereafter, a week or two after, Sen. Tolentino and Sen. Dela Rosa filed a resolution calling for that. Again, I started calling my colleagues as a matter of fact, tumawag ako ng caucus nung majority to get the sense of the members on the issue na binanggit ng Presidente. Sinabi ko sa kanila, yung pagkakakuwento ko sa inyo, eksakto yun ang kwento ko sa mga colleagues ko. And there were automatically about, 2 or 3 that were (unclear).

Q: Sorry SP, again, meron pong 2 or 3 na?

SP Sotto: May mga tinatanong antimano about the issue, about the calling for constituent assembly. So therefore, may mga discussion kami ng konti, hindi naman namin mafa-finalize in a majority caucus lang. We left it at that. Therefore, bottom line, I do not have yet the consensus with the majority of the members of the Senate to be able to (unclear) that.

Q: Kung matutuloy po yung sinasabi ninyo na, 2 provisions lang: economic provision and partylist provision, kailangan pa rin po ba na charter change constituent assembly level or by bill? Pwede po bang by bill na lang siya na regular or talagang charter change (unclear)?

SP Sotto: That is another option, oo. No, I doubt if charter change is possible. As I said, hindi pupwede, less than 2 years to go, charter change paguusapan mo. Definitely, if yung dalawang provision na yun ang pag-uusapan, lalo na economic provisions, baka nga pwedeng piece meal, baka pwedeng throw a constituent assembly aamyendahan mo lang yung dalawang provision na yon. That's possible. But then, there are members of the Senate and I, I will not... Let's wait for them to talk about it. There are members who would say that, dangerous to open suddenly because baka biglang meron na lang ibang agendang ipasok.

Q: Sir, clarify ko lang po. So ang order, so ang gusto pong mangyari ni Presidente is to abolish the partylist system, is that correct Sir?

SP Sotto: Una, hindi order. Hindi order. Kung ang question mo order hindi, he was suggesting. That was the word he used eh. "I am suggesting that you look into the problem of the partylist system", sabi niya. "So that they can finally resolve this problem with the CPP-NPA," and so many words yun ang sinasabi niya.

Q: And how did you understand that Sir? Does that, the deed mean abolition po ba ng partylist system or meron lang kailangang baguhin sa partylist system?

SP Sotto: Eh 'pag inalis mo sa constitution yung partylist system, eh di abolish na yun. That's possible. Also, there is another possibility, which I suggested, ang problema lang ang sabi niya, baka matagalan dahil idi-dribble, dadalhin sa Supreme Court ang usapan. Yung, ang sabi ko amyendahan yung batas. But also remember, I don't know but you really have to ask Speaker Velasco. The way I recall it, Speaker Velasco mentioned the possibility of people's initiative on that matter. Pero nabanggit lang, hindi namin na-pursue yung usapan.

Q: Pero Sir, para lang hindi namin kayo ma-misquote, ang suggestion po ni Presidente ay tanggalin na yung partylist system? Tama po ba yun Sir?

SP Sotto: Teka, I am trying to recall if tanggalin yung word na ginamit. Ah, oo parang ganon.

Q: Tanggalin is abolition...

SP Sotto: He did not use that word, para hindi ninyo ako ma-misquote at para hindi ko rin ma-misquote ang Presidente, "I suggest that you look into this problem of this partylist system. The CPP-NPA are using it," ganoon eh. So, take it the way you want it. But that's how he said it.

Q: But how did you understand it Sir? Ano pong dapat niyong gawin, how did you understand it?

SP Sotto: He wanted the partylist system amended or resolved ganoon ang dating sa akin, or removed.

Q: Do you think Sir that's possible? Considering the partylist groups make up 20 percent of the House? Tapos yung iba dating mga congressman meron din silang mga hawak na partylist groups di ba? Is it doable Sir? I think almost 60 yata ang partylist representatives, papayag ba sila Sir?

SP Sotto: I leave the answer to the Congress. Sila ang makakasagot kung kaya nila o hindi. We don't have a say on the number of partylist members eh at kung ano ang pulso nila. But again, as far as I am concerned and my suggestion was to amend the law (unclear) marginalized (unclear) and yung suggestion nung iba is that (unclear) talk to the other members of the Senate, kasi hindi ko matandaan kung sino yung nag-suggest, pero may nag-suggest na kapag ikaw ay nilalaban mo na ibagsak ang gobyerno, disqualified ka. Kung ang grupo mo ay lumalaban sa gobyerno at gusto ibagsak ang gobyerno, dapat hindi pwede yung party ninyo, yung partylist ninyo. Ganoon ang suggestion. We can take it up if we will file a bill, amending the partylist law.

Q: Sir kapag ia-amend mo lang yung specific provision sa enabling law, okay lang yun, hindi na kailangan ng charter change or constituent assembly? Kailangan lang ng constituent assembly kapag ia-abolish siya, tama po?

SP Sotto: Hindi, hindi kailangan. Kung aamyendahan lang yon, we have to make it really clear para walang misinterpretation, para walang subject to interpretation of the Supreme Court or whoever. Kailangan malinaw na malinaw kung ano ang gusto natin dun sa participation ng partylist. Ganon... Ng partylist system, I should say, I'm sorry.

Q: Sir may sinabi po ba yung mga Senador tungkol dito? Kung anong stand nila in so far as the partylist is concerned?

SP Sotto: 'Di ko matandaan eh. I think so, I think some members are agreeable.

Q: Sir, some agreed dun sa amendment, tama po?

SP Sotto: Oo. Doon sa amendments, I'm not talking about the constitution amendments. I'm not talking about the constitution. Amendments to the partylist law, ako ang tingin ko, the majority of the members will agree.

Q: Sir last na on my end po. Sir historically, siguro a year before the election sinasabi nila medyo nagiging lame duck na daw yung Presidente and we are a year and a half, just a year and a half away from elections. Sa tingin ninyo sir kaya pa bang - kaya pa bang gawin itong mga suggestion po ni Presidente considering ang lapit na nga natin sa eleksiyon and sinasabi nga na nagiging lame duck daw po yung Presidente.

SP Sotto: Hindi kasi ako naniniwala sa lame duck na Presidente. Kahit na nung araw hanggang ngayon nasa Presidente yun - on how you're able to use and wield your influence and power for not only congress but the people. So there's no such thing to me, there's no such thing as a lame duck president.

Q: Sir, klaruhin ko lang. Tama ba yung reading ko o reading namin na ang posisyon ninyo as the Senate President is hangga't maaari i-amend na lang yung party list law instead of entering into any cha-cha amendments o consti amendments.

SP Sotto: Sa akin that is better plan A. Ako feeling ko lang ito, I know the President already said that he's worried about - he's not (unclear) about it. Pero sa akin, you're asking my personal opinion, yes sa akin plan A amend na lang the law and then if we want to go on to the economic provisions, we can amend it nang parang batas and we need not open a constitutional convention or constituent assembly. Yun ang opinion ko. But then again, I lead by consensus so I will leave it to the members of the majority kung ano ang mas napupusuan nila. They have their own opinion and I have mine.

Q: Sir doon sa pinatawag ninyo na caucus after meeting with the President, I assume 20 senators ang directly nagparticipate doon aside from the 2 to 3 senators...

SP Sotto: If I recall it right, there were 18 who attended, bale 19 kasi Sen. Lacson was not able to attend but he gave me his authority to answer for him or vote for him if ever. So if I recall it right, 18 yata kami dun sa caucus na yun. Hindi ko matandaan kung sino yung isa (unclear).

Q: So sir aside from the 2 to 3 na nagbibigay agad ng questions, anu-ano yung concerns nung ibang members if there are any.

SP Sotto: Eh yung baka ano - baka voting jointly ang mangyari at saka baka kung anu-ano na ang pag-usapan. Yun ang apprehension nung iba.

Q: Sir may ganun din ba kayong apprehension na baka masingitan ng ibang provisions at you know pumasok yung ibang mga political provisions.

SP Sotto: On a personal level, sa akin, hindi, kasi alam ko kung papaano ang strategy. Alam ko rin ang parliamentary strategy kung paano iiwasan yun eh. So hindi ako masyadong kabado dun. Although, I can always be outvoted.

Q: Pero yung reading ninyo during the caucus is reflective ba sir yung posisyon ninyo doon sa, during your caucus na talagang let's just amend the existing law, the partylist law, wag na tayong pumasok sa any initiative to amend the charter, the constitution.

SP Sotto: Sana because if you look at the way or the modes of amending or revising the constitution in our present constitution, tatlong ways. Una, the congress upon two thirds of all its members, among the vote of two thirds of all its members. Ayan na yung interpretasyon ng House eh na kami (unclear) yan. Di ba (unclear). Tapos second is constitutional convention. And the third is people's initiative amendment only. Yun ang nakikita ko na pwede. Pwede rin yun. Kung economic provisions lang ang gagalawin natin sapagkat talaga naman (unclear) majority ng kababayan natin alam ang economic provisions nung 1987 constitution. Eh di sumobra sige.

Q: Sir, itong sabi ninyo nga kanina, suggestion yung binigay ni Presidente. Sabi ninyo nga, ang sinabi niya was "maybe you should consider looking at the partylist at amending the partylist law" parang ganun sir di ba. How powerful is that suggestion to you?

SP Sotto: It's very powerful.

Q: Powerful in a sense na?

SP Sotto: Hindi naman, hindi naman. Hindi naman niya--hindi naman pagkakasabi niya. (Unclear) hindi ganun ang dating sa akin. Pagbukas ng opening ng usapan naming, alam ko na kagad na, na galit siya o may inis siya dun sa issue ng CPP-NPA. So he's looking at the possibilities, all the possibilities on how to be able to (unclear) or to remove them from the Philippines. Parang ganun ang dating. And he feels that the Makabayan or the members of the party system or (unclear) coach or signing the (unclear) parang ganun.

Q: Sir, few more questions lang ha, can we take this to (unclear) na kung dalawa lang naman or talagang specific lang naman yung hinihingi niya, can we take this to mean that the President will not allow any constitutional change pagdating sa political provisions that he will block it or oppose it. He will tell his followers or members...

SP Sotto: Yes, I think so. I don't think he will do that.

Q: Why sir?

SP Sotto: Kung meron man lang siyang ganun, there would have been a hit, there would have been something na nabanggit niya to that effect. Hindi. I'm very sure, you can ask him point blank. I'm sure he will tell you he does not have any other plans.

Q: So yun yung assurance na hawak ninyo sir?

SP Sotto: Except only (unclear). Except only these two points that he wants resolve because of the issue of the CPP-NPA.

Q: But of course his position will not be always as reflective kung ano yung magiging agenda ng house counterparts ninyo, tama sir?

SP Sotto: Of course, biglang eh ngayon palang nakarinig na ko ng, bakit nakarinig na ako ng term extension. Saan galing yun? I'm telling you now the president never mentioned anything to that effect.

Q: The Senate will block it kung magkakaroon ng ganoong maipasa sa House or kung ano mang form, kung constituent assembly man or con-con?

SP Sotto: Block is a harsh word. Hindi naman namin iba-block. We will discuss whatever they send to us, and if we agree, we pass, if we disagree, we cannot allow the passage.

Q: Last na lang. Sabi ni Senator Kiko he will ask you to call for an all-member caucus to discuss kung paano aatakihin itong issue na charter change. Do you intend to call for a caucus in the coming days or sa resumption na ng session?

SP Sotto: I have not received the request yet but perhaps we can do that on the resumption of the session because we will be very busy with the hearing on Monday, then the days after that we might have an extension or we will be preparing for the next session days. Depende, but I have not received a request yet. I can call a caucus, why not? I can call a caucus if it is requested to discuss this particular issue, but then as I said, members of the majority know about it. If I recall it right, I even mentioned it to Sen. Drilon. I told him about it already. I think after the meeting ng majority there was a chance that we talked. We talk naman every now and then. I told him to think about it.

Q: Speaking of Sen. Drilon, instead of considering or entertaining a possible consti amendments, meron siyang public service law and trade liberalization amendment bill, ito ba, better na ito ang iconsider to discuss the economic issues sa constitution instead of opening up a cha-cha at this point?

SP Sotto: If it proves to be a resolution to the issue or problem on economic provisions then I will support it. If it proves to be effective, as long as it can resolve the issue on economic provisions, the liberalization, and the public service law amendment, yes, I am willing to support it.

Q: Kung two provisions lang naman, party-list and economic provision, hindi ninyo na kailangan mag constituent assembly at hindi ninyo na kailangan pasukin yung proseso ng charter change?

SP Sotto: Pag isa lang ang paguusapan, pwedeng hindi mag constituent assembly. Pag dalawa, I doubt it but I cannot say yes or no. I will yet to look into that. Definitely kung isa lang ang paguusapan, kaya ng (unclear) batas, ng sistemang gawin namin.

Q: So yung gusto ni Pangulo na two provisions, most likely talaga you need to convene as a constituent assembly?

SP Sotto: Oo. Most likely, but I will look into it.

Q: Yung sinasabi ninyong pagbabago sa party-list, hindi kailangan abolition? Ano ang gusto niyang pagbabagong gawin?

SP Sotto: Yun nga kasi hindi ko matandaan yung exact term na sinabi niya, meron siyang term na binanggit ko kanina. Exact term na sinabi niya is we have to resolve this problem, the CPP-NPA number one na yan na nasa partylist na yan, mga kasama nila and they are using government money to pursue their goals of bringing down the government, parang mga ganoon. Ganoon yung (unclear) na sinasabi niya, so, partylist na yan, ano ha? I am not sure about this pero something to the effect that it's better if we remove it from the constitution, ganoon.

Q: Remove the partylist provision from the constitution?

SP Sotto: Parang ganoon, ganoon ang dating sa akin. It is better to ask him. Tanungin ninyo siya para hindi ko siya ma-misquote.

Q: So pag removal, pwedeng bill na?

SP Sotto: Yun ang sinabi ko. Yun ang sinuggest ko, yun ang sinagot ko sa kanya. Sabi ko, Mayor, baka pwedeng amyendahan na lang natin yung partylist law. I distinctly remember that (unclear) was the sponsor. I was his vice-chairman. Kaya ako ay nalulungkot nung nalaman ko na minisinterpret ng iba, hindi na marginalized yung kasama dahil yung intention namin talaga marginalized yan. Farmers, labor, women, youth, urban poor, (unclear), anim, anim lang yun. Yun ang original namin.

Q: You are removing it from the constitution, kailangan na rin ito ng charter change di ba para baguhin yung nakalagay sa constitution?

SP Sotto: Kaya nga, hindi charter-change. Kasi pag charter-change, you are changing the constitution. (Unclear) charter amendments lang. Amendment lang. Since time immemorial...

Q: Kailangan ninyo pa ring magsama-sama, yung House and Senate, need mag convene?

SP Sotto: Constituent assembly para makapag amend. Even to change the constitution. (Unclear) I have always had apprehensions when it comes with cha-cha, and that is charter-change. Mas naniniwala ako na ang kailangan natin ay cha-cha, character change. Mas kailangan natin.

Q: The fact na nagfile nung December ng resolution sina Sen. Tolentino, Bong Go and Bato, so pag nag-resume yung session sa January 18, ano ito, maisasalang agad sa plenary para talakayin na yung resolution?

SP Sotto: Hindi. There is a procedure that we follow, and the resolution was referred to the Committee on Constitutional Amendments.

Q: Magkakaroon pa ng committee hearing doon sa resolution?

SP Sotto: Oo, magkakaroon ng hearing.

Q: Pag dumating na sa plenary, considering yung mga sentiments ng mga senators, sa tingin ninyo makakakuha yun ng enough votes?

SP Sotto: To approve the resolution, that is easy. We only need majority. Pero to approve the output of a resolution, you need the vote, three-fourths. You need three-fourths.

Q: Sabi ni Sen. Drilon it is a sin to talk about charter change amid Covid-19.

SP Sotto: Teka, may ica-clarify lang ako. Bakit ko sinasabi ang (unclear) two-thirds? Three-fourths. Ano yung tanong mo?

Q: Sa sinabi ni Sen. Drilon. Sabi ni Sen. Drilon it is a sin to talk about charter change amid Covid-19.

SP Sotto: Amyendahan ko ang sinabi niya. Again, using the word sin could be harsh. Baka ang ibig niyang sabihin ay hindi nababagay na pagusapan ngayon during the pandemic. Q: Wrong time.

SP Sotto: It depends on how important the topic is, but I will agree with him if we are talking about other matters. But if we are talking only of economic provisions and the issue of the party-list, then it is a possibility to talk about it. To pass it is another matter.

Q: Pero di ba, historically kapag patapos na yung administrasyon, ang slim na ng chance na makapag pasa ng mga amendments sa constitution?

SP Sotto: Lagi, at saka laging late kasi pagpasok nila. Ang suggestion ng mga experts, eh pag umpisa pa lang ng term ng isang bagong administrasyon, kung meron silang gustong galawin, galawin na kaagad, yan ang sinasabi nila. So, we fall back to that thinking kung kailan patapos saka lang magi-isip ng ganyan, hindi maaalis sa tao magbintang na gustong mag extend, kung gustong mag extend ng mga term or may ibang gustong political na issue, hindi natin maaalis na mag isip sila ng ganoon. Bagamat ako, hindi naniniwala na ganoon ang thinking ni President Duterte.

Q: So pinagdududahan yung motibo kapag patapos na yung term.

SP Sotto: Oo, pag patapos na, kung anu-anong (unclear) ang lumalabas. By the way, clarify lang natin, yung hearing sa Lunes, ewan ko kung bakit meron pang dialogue yung...report ng DZRH at report ng Manila Standard, tumiklop daw ang Senado doon sa (unclear) ang PSG. (Unclear) nga yung Manila Standard at yung sumulat noon, kailan kami nagpatawag ng PSG at kailan kami tumiklop? Anong pakialam namin doon, hindi yun ang issue namin ang issue is the Covid-19 vaccination. Malinaw yun. Safety, efficacy, sensitivity, the cost and supply chain requirements, access to clinical trials, local production or distribution, yun ang ating pakay namin, bakit sinasali kami sa problema ng PSG? Kina-clarify ko lang para maliwanag, kung ireport kami, para bang ang Senado ay napapatiklop. Wala naman kaming pakialam doon, di namin tinatalakay yun. We have never mentioned it.