SEN. ERWIN, KINuWESTIYON ANG PAGMAMADALI NA BAGUHIN ANG SENATE RULES; MINORITY BLOC, NAG-WALKOUT

Kinuwestiyon ni Senator Erwin Tulfo ang pagtatangka ng majority bloc na baguhin ang Senate rules upang makaboto ang mga Senador kahit wala sila sa sesyon, kasabay ng pagtatanong kung ang pagmamadali ng mga taga-Majority ay may kinalaman sa sinabi ng Ombudsman na dalawang Senador ang malamang ay makulong.

Bagamat di niya pinangalanan, sinabi naman ni Ombudsman Boying Remulla na maghaharap sila ng plunder charges laban kay Senator Jinggoy Estrada sa Huwebes at kay Senator Joel Villanueva sa loob ng dalawang linggo.

Sa plenary session Martes ng gabi, iminungkahi ni Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano na daanin sa boto ang mosyon ni Senator Rodante Marcoleta na baguhin ang Senate rules, dahilan upang tumayo si Tulfo at magpahayag ng manifestation, kasabay ng pagdidiin na ang pagboto nang hindi personal ay maari lamang kung may national emergency o ‘force majeure’.
Kasunod ng manifestation ni Tulfo, nag-walkout ang minority Senators bilang protesta at naiwan si Minority Leader Vicente ‘Tito’ Sotto III upang siyang magkwestiyon ng quorum at mag-‘move for adjournment.’ Pinayagan ni Presiding Officer Senator Loren Legarda ang motion, matapos bigyang-diin ni Sotto na ito ay binibigyan ng prayoridad sa Senado.

Samantala, naglabas ng joint statement ang minority bloc upang kondenahin ang “attempt to rush a major change in the Senate Rules, especially when several members of the minority still wanted to speak and raise serious questions on the floor.>

“Bakit kailangang madaliin? Bakit kailangang pigilan ang mga gustong magsalita? Bakit kailangang i-divide ang house kung marami pang senador ang nagtatanong tungkol sa proseso? Minamadali ba ang rule change na ito dahil gusto nilang maka boto si Senator Bato? At ngayong may mga ulat na may mga majority senators na maaaring arestuhin?,” anila.

“The walkout was because what happened on the floor looked less like orderly deliberation. The proposed rule change affects how senators may attend sessions, participate in proceedings and exercise their mandate through remote means and such a measure should be opened to healthy public debate instead of being rushed by the tyranny of the majority,” ayon pa sa statement.

“We have always welcomed healthy discussions on the floor, but that it should mean allowing all members to be heard, not forcing the chamber to move at the speed preferred by the majority. At the time the motion was taken up, there was no duly constituted Committee on Rules and there was not even an elected Majority Leader who could properly guide a rules amendment through the regular process,”pahayag pa ng minorya.

Dagdag pa nito: “How could there have been any action or discussion before the Committee on Rules when no Committee on Rules has been organized to date? With due respect, the answer that no Senate rule had been violated does not settle the matter, because the rules cannot be treated as a matter of convenience when the very process for amending them is under serious question. The timing raises a question that the public deserves to hear debated openly. Kaya pinili naming tumayo at iwan ang majority sa plenary. Kaya kami nagdesisyon to question the quorum and call for adjournment. If the proposal is truly defensible, then let it pass through the proper route. We owe it to the people who voted for us to do our mandate. This is why we want more time to discuss this further. (JERRY S. TAN)