Congressional Record · public auction” by representative deloso-montalla ... international character, granting certain prerogatives conducive to its growth as such, and for other

Vol. 3 Tuesday, February 25, 2014 No. 52a

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 4:00 p.m., the session was resumed with Deputy Speaker Roberto V. Puno presiding.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The session is resumed.

The Asst. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. BELMONTE (J.). Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker. I move that we proceed to the Additional Reference of Business.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

The Secretary General will please read the Additional Reference of Business.

ADDITIONAL REFERENCE OF BUSINESS

The Secretary General read the following House Bills on First Reading, and Committee Reports, and the Deputy Speaker made the corresponding references:

BILLS ON FIRST READING

House Bill No. 3942, entitled:“AN ACT EXCLUDING CERTAIN PORTIONS OF

SITIO BAQUILAN IN BARANGAY SAN JUAN, MUNICIPALITY OF BOTOLAN, PROVINCE OF ZAMBALES FROM THE OPERATION OF PROCLAMATION NO. 907, SERIES OF 1992 AND DECLARING THE EXCLUDED PORTIONS AS RESIDENTIAL AREA AND OPEN TO DISPOSITION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 730 AS AMENDED TO BONA FIDE RESIDENTS ACTUALLY OCCUPYING THE SAME WITHOUT PUBLIC AUCTION”

By Representative Deloso-MontallaT O T H E C O M M I T T E E O N N AT U R A L

RESOURCES

House Bill No. 3946, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL BUREAU

OF INVESTIGATION (NBI) DISTRICT OFFICE IN THE PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative TejadaTO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE

Congressional Record16th CONGRESS, FIRST REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

* See ANNEX (printed separately)

House Bill No. 3947, entitled:“AN ACT RECOGNIZING THE GERMAN EUROPEAN

SCHOOL MANILA, INCORPORATED AS AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF INTERNATIONAL CHARACTER, GRANTING CERTAIN PREROGATIVES CONDUCIVE TO ITS GROWTH AS SUCH, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

By Representative Dela CruzTO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION

AND CULTURE

House Bill No. 3948, entitled:“AN ACT TO GRANT MONTHLY PENSION TO

GOVERNMENT RETIREES UNDER R.A. 1616 WHO HAVE REACHED THE AGE OF SEVENTY (70) YEARS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES”

By Representative Dela CruzTO THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT

ENTERPRISES AND PRIVATIZATION

House Bill No. 3949, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL HIGH

SCHOOL IN BARANGAY MAHARLIKA VILLAGE IN THE SECOND DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TAGUIG, TO BE KNOWN AS MAHARLIKA VILLAGE NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative CayetanoTO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION

AND CULTURE

House Bill No. 3950, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL HIGH

SCHOOL IN BARANGAY FORT BONIFACIO IN THE SECOND DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TAGUIG, TO BE KNOWN AS GAT ANDRES BONIFACIO NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative CayetanoTO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION

AND CULTURE

ADDITIONAL COAUTHORS

The list of additional coauthors is reflected in Journal No. 52, date February 25, 2014.*

2 TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2014

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Report by the Committee on Cooperatives Development (Committee Report No. 85), re H. No. 3981, entitled:“AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE MANDATORY

APPOINTMENT OF A COOPERATIVES OFFICER IN EVERY LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7160, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ‘THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991’ ”

recommending its approval in substitution of House Bill No. 281

Sponsors: Representatives Paez, Bravo (A.) and Arnaiz

TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

Report by the Committee on Youth and Sports Development (Committee Report No. 86), re H. R. No. 875, entitled:“ R E S O L U T I O N C O M M E N D I N G A N D

CONGRATULATING THE SAMAHANG BASKETBOL NG PILIPINAS (SBP) LED BY ITS PRESIDENT, MR. MANUEL V. PANGILINAN, AND THE NATIONAL TEAM GILAS PILIPINAS FOR WINNING THE SILVER MEDAL IN THE 27TH FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DE BASKET-BALL (FIBA) ASIA MEN’S BASKETBALL CHAMPIONSHIP HELD LAST AUGUST 1-11, 2013”

recommending its adoption in substitution of House Resolution Nos. 408 and 507

Sponsors: Representatives Del Rosario (A.G.), Olivarez and Gullas


Report by the Committee on Youth and Sports Development (Committee Report No. 87), re H. R. No. 876, entitled:“RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING AND

COMMENDING THE MEMBERS OF THE UNDER SIXTEEN (U16) PHILIPPINE MEN’S BASKETBALL TEAM FOR WINNING THE SILVER MEDAL IN THE 3RD FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DE BASKET-BALL (FIBA) ASIA U16 CHAMPIONSHIP HELD IN TEHRAN, IRAN FROM SEPTEMBER 25 TO OCTOBER 14, 2013”

recommending its adoption in substitution of House Resolution Nos. 381, 407 and 424

Sponsors: Representatives Del Rosario (A.G.), Yap (S.), Olivarez and Puno


Report by the Committee on Dangerous Drugs (Committee Report No. 88), re H. No. 2285, entitled:“AN ACT TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN THE ANTI-

DRUG CAMPAIGN OF THE GOVERNMENT AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 21 OF REPUBLIC ACT 9165 OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002”

recommending its approval with amendmentsSponsor: Representative Belmonte (V.)TO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The Asst. Majority Leader is recognized.

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

REP. BELMONTE (J.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the session for a few minutes.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The session is suspended.

It was 4:02 p.m.


At 4:21 p.m., the session was resumed.


The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

PRIVILEGE HOUR

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, with leave of the House, I move that we declare a Privilege Hour.

I so move, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the Chair declares a Privilege Hour.

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, first to avail of the opportunity to speak is our esteemed colleague from the Party-List Bayan Muna, the Hon. Carlos Isagani T. Zarate.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The Gentleman from the Party-List Bayan Muna, the Hon. Carlos Isagani T. Zarate, is recognized for his privilege speech.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. ZARATE

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.Mr. Speaker, my esteemed colleagues, good afternoon,

maayong hapon. I rise today on a personal and collective privilege to bring to the attention of this august Body the wanton violations by members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) of a law that supposedly protects the interest of our children, particularly those living in the rural areas. I am referring here, Mr. Speaker, to Republic Act No. 7610 otherwise known as an Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes, and providing penalties for its violation which was signed into law on June 17, 1992.

As a social legislation, Article 10, Section 22(a) of R.A. No. 7610, provides:

Children shall not be the object of attack and shall be entitled to special respect. They shall be protected from any form of threat, assault, torture or other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2014 3

Section 22(e) also provides, and I quote: Public infrastructure such as schools, hospitals and rural health units shall not be utilized for military purposes such as command posts, barracks, detachments, and supply depots.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, despite the clear mandate of the law, particularly the non-utilization as military facility of public structures, members of the AFP continue to violate and take the same for granted. The latest violation of this nature, Mr. Speaker, was the January 25, 2014 encampment by at least 36 members of the Philippine Army’s 25th Infantry Battalion (IB) of the Salugpungan Ta ‘Tanu Igkanugon Community Learning Center located in Sitio Side 4, Barangay Mangayon, Compostela town, Compostela Valley Province. The learning center, a DepEd-accredited school for indigenous Filipinos is located in the center of Barangay Mangayon, which, like several other hinterland villages in the province has also been affected by the counterinsurgency operations conducted by government troops against the New People’s Army.

But, Mr. Speaker, before I proceed, allow me to show a short video clip showing the army’s occupation of the said alternative school.

(Audiovisual presentation)Thank you, Mr. Speaker.It is very clear from that short video clip, Mr. Speaker,

that what the soldiers did is not only illegal, the occupation of the school was meant to harass and even sow fear among the residents of the area.

Indeed, after the community was surprised by the arrival of the 25thIB soldiers—who even threatened the teachers and branded the school as an NPA school—the students, as well as their parents, were expectedly frightened and opted to stay home instead. This is truly condemnable and lamentable, Mr. Speaker, because for a long time, the Lumads or the indigenous children in the said place did not enjoy their right to have an education until the said alternative school came about. The school, constructed by the joint efforts and resources of the indigenous peoples and some well-meaning peoples’ organizations, currently has 130 Lumads or indigenous pupils in its pre-school to Grade 5 sections. It was previously damaged by typhoon Pablo but was rebuilt with the help of funds from the Redemptorist Brothers, Ateneo de Davao University and Balsa Mindanao, a network formed in response to humanitarian crisis. While the soldiers, Mr. Speaker, grudgingly left the school premises several days later following repeated objections by the residents and concerned groups, yet, it is not a guarantee that they will not come back and occupy again the said alternative learning school. In fact, during a recent dialogue hosted by Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, some residents claim that while the soldiers left the school premises, they instead merely transferred and occupied the houses of some residents in the community.

The experience of the residents of Barangay Mangayon, Compostela Town in Compostela Valley was not the first of such cases, Mr. Speaker. In the past, several cases of

similar nature where schools and other public facilities were being used for military purposes had also been reported. This practice has now become common especially in the government’s pursuit of its current Oplan Bayanihan counterinsurgency program. For example, Mr. Speaker, in March 2011, the B’laan Literacy School and Learning Center, situated in Sitio Dlumay, Barangay Upper Suyan, Malapatan, Sarangani Province, was also closed for several months due to the encampment made by the members of the Army’s 73rd IB. The learning center established by the Center for Lumad Advocacy and Services or CLANS, is also recognized by the Department of Education under the Alternative Learning Systems Program.

In an another case, in November of 2011, the New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) has also condemned such military practice when it also called for an end to the unlawful use of schools for military purposes. The Human Rights Watch statements came after the HRW had separately documented five cases in several areas in the Cordillera Administrative Region where the military, in violation of Philippine and international laws, used parts or functioning schools as barracks or bases for military detachments since 2009.

What happened in Compostela Valley, Saranggani Province and the Cordillera Region mirrors how Oplan Bayanihan, the so-called peace and development campaigns, are but a rehashed version of the previous administration’s Oplan Bantay Laya that also vilified legitimate civil society and people’s organization and individuals.

The KARAPATAN Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights has in fact documented from July 2010 to December 2013, at least 18 cases of minors as victims of extrajudicial killings and 132,633 others, mostly children, as rights violation victims in the course of the government’s use of such venues for military purposes.

Mr. Speaker, this wanton violation occurs despite the fact that even the AFP hierarchy already issued Letter Directive No. 34, on November 24, 2009, mandating that basic infrastructure such as schools, hospitals and health units shall not be utilized for military purposes such as command posts, barracks, detachments, and supply depots by all AFP personnel. While several appeals by concerned groups, both locally and internationally, have already been made and raised to stop this practice, yet these apparently fell on deaf ears.

Mr. Speaker, these illegal acts, I submit, will even become worse in the coming days following the approval by DepEd Secretary Armin A. Luistro last December 13, 2013 of Memorandum No. 22, that supposedly sets the procedures for the approval and monitoring of the AFP’s activities in public schools, including the submission of post-activity reports by school principals and reports on any violation of the AFP guidelines. Again, Mr. Speaker, even with the said guidelines already in place, the encampment of soldiers in Compostela Valley still happened and the subject soldiers apparently even justified their acts in occupying the said school. These acts, we repeat, Mr. Speaker, do not only violate Republic Act No. 7610, but also other international protocols, wherein our country is a signatory.

Among these are the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional Protocol on the involvement of children


in armed conflict; the UN Security Council Resolution No. 1612, establishing the monitoring and reporting mechanisms on grave child rights violations in situations of armed conflict; and the UN Security Council Resolution No. 1882, which calls for decisive state actions on abuses against children in situations of armed conflict.

Mr. Speaker, my dear colleagues, this Representation, thus, reiterates the call of child rights advocates and other human rights groups for the members of the AFP to stop this illegal practice of using public facilities, like schools, as command posts, barracks, detachments and supply depot in the conduct of its counter-insurgency operations.

Along this end, Mr. Speaker, this Representation will also file an appropriate resolution for the proper House Committee to investigate these illegal actions committed by government troops in the conduct of their counterinsurgency operations, particularly that the same affect the rights and lives of our children. I humbly urge my colleagues to support this investigation.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, to echo the calls made by the New York-based Human Rights Watch, it states:

…that the establishment of army camps at schools puts both children security and their education at risk. Schools should be places for learning and play free from fear. Thank you, my dear colleagues. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that our colleague, the Hon. Francisco Ashley L. Acedillo, be recognized for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The Honorable Acedillo is recognized.

REP. ACEDILLO. Mr. Speaker, will the Gentleman from the Party-List BAYAN MUNA yield to a few questions.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). He may do so if he so desires.

REP. ZARATE. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). Please proceed.

REP. ACEDILLO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleague.

Mr. Speaker, although I caught the latter part of the video, I did get the gist of the speech of our distinguished colleague. In fact, I joined him in his concern towards certain activities of our AFP personnel.

In line with that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the distinguished Gentleman if the 27th Infantry Battalion, which was alleged to have perpetuated the acts which were discussed

a while ago, were asked of their official position regarding this matter, Mr. Speaker?

REP. ZARATE. Actually, Mr. Speaker, it is not the 27th IB but the 25th IB. Last week, there was a dialogue hosted by Mayor Rodrigo Duterte of Davao City where the head of the infantry division was present, and there was an admission that indeed the school was used by the soldiers. It was mentioned during that dialogue that further investigation will be conducted, especially so that there was clear demand from the residents not to occupy the schools. Despite that, my dear colleague, Mr. Speaker, they stayed for several days in that school and it was even reported that even during the time that a dialogue was held in Davao City hosted by Mayor Duterte, several soldiers, though they abandoned the schools, occupied instead some houses of the residents in the community, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ACEDILLO. In that case, Mr. Speaker, I believe that it should be proper also that the school authorities should have transmitted through the DepEd hierarchy their concerns. Had there been such a report submitted by the school authorities to the DepEd, Mr. Speaker?

REP. ZARATE. As far as this Representation knows, Mr. Speaker, the school authorities already filed the proper complaint before the Commission on Human Rights and they also raised that concern during that dialogue hosted by Mayor Duterte. Precisely, Mr. Speaker, in the coming days, this Representation will also file a proper resolution for this case to be investigated so that we can also hear the side of the concerned soldiers why they occupied or used that particular school in their encampment, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ACEDILLO. Mr. Speaker, a while ago, our colleague alleged to the effect that despite constant and repeated pleas, not only by the community but also by the school authorities for the AFP personnel from the concerned infantry battalion to desist from their actions that, if I may quote our distinguished colleague, “the pleas fell on deaf ears.” I would just like to clarify this statement because I do not believe that the AFP hierarchy is that “inutil” in asking a subordinate commander of a subordinate unit to follow its specific instructions. May we be clarified along this line, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. Mr. Speaker, when I said that there was condemnation of these actions both locally and internationally— that fell on deaf ears because it has been happening for several times already, as I have mentioned it also happened in 2011 in one school in Malapatan, Sarangani province, where the school was also closed because it was used by the soldiers as camps or barracks.

The New York-based Human Rights Watch also documented at least five cases in the Cordillera Region, where the same practice by soldiers also happened. So, in a manner of saying, it appeared indeed that these calls to stop using schools and other public facilities for military purposes did not stop. In fact, Mr. Speaker, my dear colleagues, I even cited that this happened, this encampment in Compostela Valley happened, despite the fact that there was already a


letter Directive No. 34 issued by the General Headquarters of the AFP, proscribing the use of schools and similar public facilities for military purposes. So, that is in a manner of saying, an answer to the question of my dear colleague that it appears, indeed, that hindi po pinakinggan ang guidelines ng ating mga sundalo.

REP. ACEDILLO. Mr. Speaker, if I understand it correctly, the distinguished Gentleman is saying categorically, that not only in the case of the 25th IB, but also in five separate instances that the General Headquarters’ order prescribing this and other actions remained unheeded, is that correct, Mr. Speaker?

REP. ZARATE. Tama po, Mr. Speaker. Ang sinabi ko, kahit na mayroong directive, and there was already a directive issued sometime in November 24, 2009, which is Directive No. 34 that categorically states:

Basic infrastructures such as schools, hospitals, and health units shall not be utilized for military purposes such as command posts, barracks, detachments, and supply depots by all armed forces personnel.

Pero kahit na mayroong directive from the headquarters, at kahit na mayroong guidelines na na-issue ang Department of Education, there were condemnations in the past, nangyayari pa rin ito, at ang pinaka-latest na nangyari, Mr. Speaker, ay noong January 25 where elements of the Philippine Army’s 25th IB occupied and used as barracks, the schools of the Lumads in Compostela Valley province, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ACEDILLO. Mr. Speaker, if I may ask our distinguished colleague, is he aware of the current grievance mechanisms within the armed forces and even outside of it, where this and other similar incidents can be brought to its attention for its proper disposition?

REP. ZARATE. I suppose there is indeed a mechanism for that, but as I have mentioned earlier, Mr. Speaker, this is already a complaint that has been lodged before the Commission on Human Rights, by the concerned teachers and principal and even the leaders of the Lumad organization in that area. But ang ginagawa po natin ngayon dito, we are bringing this to the attention of this august Body, because as I have said, Mr. Speaker, in 1992 we already passed a law in R.A. No. 7610, proscribing such actions using schools for military purposes. That is more than a decade, Mr. Speaker, at nangyayari pa rin ang ganito.

Kaya po ito ay tinatalakay natin ngayon at sinasabi nang Kinatawang ito na maghahain siya ng isang resolusyon para ito ay maimbestigahan, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ACEDILLO. Mr. Speaker, the reason I asked the previous question is, precisely, I would also like our distinguished colleague and many others who have similar issues with the AFP to test not only the AFP, but the current systems if they are able to respond to such complaints. Kasi po, as much as we would like to explore other avenues like, for example, filing a complaint with the Commission on Human Rights, there is probably or there should be instances

where the AFP can be seen to demonstrate its commitment not only to human rights, but to the interest of discipline among its members. So, is the Gentleman open to that possibility, Mr. Speaker?

REP. ZARATE. We may suggest that to the concerned individuals, Mr. Speaker, and certainly what is important here is that ma-address ang complaint ng mga kababayan natin sa Compostela Valley at mahinto ang ganitong gawain ng ating mga sundalo, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ACEDILLO. If I may proceed to my last point, Mr. Speaker.

Just out of curiosity, if I may ask our distinguished colleague, what would be the other instances where, as much as the AFP would like to avoid being in those places where they should not be, both as provided by law as well as provided by the guidelines of the AFP, what if their presence would be unavoidable and would be explainable, Mr. Speaker?

REP. ZARATE. Malinaw naman po, Mr. Speaker, it is very clear this Representation said that these acts are violations of what was stated in R.A. No. 7610, which enumerated the acts that should be avoided by government troops in the conduct of its operations. Sinasabi nga rin dito, for example, in Section 22, that the delivery of basic social services such as education shall be kept unhampered. So, maraming naka-enumerate na acts dito na dapat hindi po ginagawa, o dapat prinoprotektahan ng mga kasandaluhan natin in the conduct of their counterinsurgency operations. I suppose there are other acts, Mr. Speaker, sa iba pang mga batas. Ang pinupunto natin dito, totoo na ang ating mga kasandaluhan ay mayroong mga gawain, pero sa paggampan po nila ng kanilang mga gawain dapat tandaan nila ang mga panuntunan na mga ito na itinatakda ng ating mga batas, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ACEDILLO. Natanong ko po, Mr. Speaker, dahil kamukha ng instances of disasters, kung saan ang ating mga miyembro ng hukbong sandatahan are the first responders side-by-side with the LGU personnel. Now, sa ganoong sitwasyon, magkakakaso po ba ang ating mga sundalo kung sakali po, in the event that they respond? Ang ating evacuation centers ay palagi sa mga eskwelahan, and in the nature of that response, they will have to go to these schools. Will that be construed then as a violation of our laws and the guidelines of the AFP, Mr. Speaker?

REP. ZARATE. Very clearly ang nakatakda po sa ating batas ay kapag gagamitin ang facilities for military purposes or in the conduct of military operations. So, sa mga ganoong sitwasyon, sa tingin ko ang ating batas ay may tinatanggap naman na exceptions. Halimbawa, sa sinasabi ng ating kasamahan, sa panahon ng disaster at kung sila ay pupunta doon sa mga eskwelahan dahil meron ngang disasters na ganito, I do not think it will apply. But very clearly, in the conduct of military operations, our soldiers or the Armed Forces of the Philippines, are prohibited from using the schools and public facilities as military camps, barracks or depots. Meron itong purpose. Neutral po dapat ang facilities na ito because the lives of our children who are in those schools may be affected, for example, pag ginamit nila ang mga ito bilang barracks or kampo, Mr. Speaker.


REP. ACEDILLO. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the distinguished Gentleman has made his point clear. Also, he has allowed us to clarify certain points.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished Gentleman. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you my dear colleague. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, as our esteemed colleague is about to take his seat, I move that the speech of the Honorable Zarate and its corresponding interpellation be referred to the Committee on Rules.




REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move for a few minutes suspension of the session.


It was 4:50 p.m.





REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, next to avail of the Privilege Hour is our colleague from the Party-List BUHAY, the Hon. Jose “Lito” L. Atienza, Jr.

I move for his recognition, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The Gentleman from the Party-List BUHAY, the Hon. Jose “Lito” L. Atienza, Jr., is recognized for his privilege speech.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. ATIENZA

REP. ATIENZA. Salamat po, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Dep. Majority Leader.

Today is a very important day in our history. We all know that. Today symbolizes our people’s continuing struggle for a better life, the anniversary of EDSA and the people’s struggle to free themselves from the yolk of oppression and loss of liberties and lives.

Mga minamahal kong mga kasamahan, G. Ispiker, ang EDSA po ay nabigyan ng maraming kahulugan sa pagdaan ng maraming taon. Dalawampu’t walong taon na po ang nakararaan magmula noong Pebrero 25, 1986, subalit

pinagtiyak marahil ng pagkakataon na itong linggong ito at itong araw na ito, araw ng Martes, Pebrero 25, ay ganoon din po ang araw noong ito ay nangyari noong 1986. February 25 in 1986 was a Tuesday, and the revolution started on a Friday. Ngayon po ay Martes, at ganoon din po ang inaasahan nating mga pangyayari.

Following the events of 1986, tonight, we would gain our liberties and we would be celebrating as a people with one nation, nagkakaisa sa kalayaan. Hindi na po natin malilimutan ang sigla, ang saya, ang damdaming naghari noong gabi ng Pebrero 25, 1986 na ang mga Pilipino ay nagsilabas, sumayaw, kumanta at nagkaisa sa mga lansangan ng bansa lalung-lalo na po sa Metro Manila.

Nasabi ko po na nabibigyan natin ng iba’t ibang kahulugan itong araw na ito, at ito po ang nakababahala, sapagkat ang ating naramdaman noong 1986 ay para bagang naghiwa-hiwalay na muli ang ating diwa ng EDSA.

Sa hapong ito, meron mga kabataang nandoon sa EDSA na nakaitim at ipinaglalaban ang kanilang nais isigaw sa bayan tungkol sa Cybercrime Law. Kahapon, nandoon po ang ating mga principal characters noong 1986, si General Ramos then, at ang mga kasamahan na nagbigay din ng selebrasyon sa kanilang sariling paraan. Kahapon at ngayon, ang ating Pangulo ay nasa Kabisayaan. He went to Cebu, Bohol, Leyte and now he is in Samar, also celebrating EDSA in his own manner and in his own way, encouraging everybody to stay united behind the spirit of EDSA. But right now, if you ask people, and as I ask the young today, what and how do they look at EDSA, ano ang kanilang naaalala kapag nasabi ang People Power Revolution? Sa 10 tinanong ko, wala pong pare-pareho. Iba’t iba ang kanilang pakahulugan. Kaya ko nasabing ito ay nakababahala sapagkat darating ang isang araw na baka mawalan na ng tunay na kahulugan ang araw na ito.

We, as Members of Congress, yours truly, in my own little humble way, I would like to contribute to our perspective definition, based on our experiences in the struggle under martial law and the exuberant feeling of joy, ecstatic joy on the evening of February 25, 1986, na sana ay tingnan nating mabuti, kung ano ba ang tunay na kahulugan ng People Power sa ating bansa.

G. Ispiker, isa lang ang namumukod at palagay ko ay magkakaisa tayong lahat dito—na ang People Power Revolution ay nangyari dahil po sa pagkakaisa, walang kumontra. Pati na ang mga sundalo na hiningan ng tulong ng naghaharing diktador noon ay hindi sumunod at kumampi na rin sa taong bayan. Nagkaroon tayo ng pagkakaisa sa ating layunin na magkaroon ng demokrasya muli, maibalik ang tunay na Kongreso, maibalik ang Senado, maibalik ang karapatang pantao, maibalik ang lahat ng ating adhikain na tayo ay maging maunlad sa ating sariling bansa. But, if we do not consciously appreciate what we have gone through, then we are bound to lose the full meaning of our People Power Revolution which inspired the whole world, but seemingly getting lost in our struggle for day-to-day survival.

Sa ating paningin, ang EDSA po ay bahagi na ng kasaysayan at pagkatao ng mga Filipino. Maituturing na natin bahagi ito ng ating kultura. EDSA should now be part of our culture, our character even, because it is something that is truly Filipino. Hindi po naganap ito sa saan mang bahagi ng mundo.


Maraming mga nagsikap lumaya sa ganitong paraan, ngunit hindi po nagtagumpay. Sinubukan nila sa Tsina, sinubukan nila sa Middle East, sinubukan nila sa Ukraine at sinusubukan nila sa maraming bahagi ng mundo, subalit hindi po sila nagtagumpay sapagkat hindi sila Filipino. Kaya masasabi natin ang EDSA, katangi-tangi lang sa Filipino, Filipino lang ang nakagawa at wala na marahil makakakopya. Kaya kung ito po ay bahagi na ng ating kultura, minamabuti po naming ipanukala.

Let us look at this event not just as a celebration of personalities. Hindi po nangyari ang EDSA dahil sa mga personalidad, kung hindi dahil sa nagkakaisang damdamin ng mamamayang Filipino na humihingi na ng kalayaan noong mga panahong iyon.

Tayo ay kailangang matuto na kung ano ang bumuo sa Filipino ay ating muling damhin at ipangaral sa kabataan ngayon upang hindi tayo sagutin ng iba’t ibang sagot kapag tinanong natin, “Ano ang EDSA sa pakahulugan ng mga kabataan?”

Ang kultura ang kaluluwa ng isang bansa. The soul of a nation is its culture. We, as a people, have a very rich culture. Mayaman po ang Pilipinas sa kultura. Ito ang mga bumuhay, nagbigay ng inspirasyon sa ating mga bayani—Jose Rizal, Bonifacio, Del Pilar. Bumilang na po tayo ng maraming bayani na ang nagbigay inspirasyon ay ang ating kultura. Tayo ay mahusay, mataas ang antas ng pamumuhay noong mga panahong iyon, subalit ang bumubuhay sa atin ay ang kultura na dapat ay ating ipinangangaral.

Ngayon sa mga eskewelahan, ngayon sa ating lipunan, ngayon sa ating bansa, wala na tayong matatawag na programang pangkultura. Iyon man lamang ay pakinabangan natin dito sa EDSA People Power Revolution—na ang ating kultura ay mapayabong pang muli sa pamamagitan nitong araw na ito. Culture is no longer a priority of all governments that happened after 1986.

For twenty-eight years we have been hungry for culture. Magmula po noong nakaraang diktadura na inalis natin ay nawalan na po ng kultura ang ating bansa. Wala na po tayong pinag-uusapang pagpapalaganap ng ating tugtugin, ng ating sayaw, ng ating pananamit, ng ating pagkatao. Kung anu-ano ang ating pinag-uusapan na nakapaghihiwalay sa atin samantalang iyong makapag-iisa sa Pilipino ay parang hindi natin binibigyan ng pansin.

I am speaking as an ordinary citizen who takes note, and I am taking note that for the past 28 years, we had no cultural program in the country that we can speak of. All Presidents who had already passed after EDSA forgot that we need culture as the soul of a nation, para bagang hindi pinansin ang kultura upang palaganapin. Now that we have even been enriched by the EDSA People Power Revolution, heto na naman naghiwa-hiwalay ang ating pakahulugan dito.

Hindi ko maintindihan, Mr. Speaker, why this is so and why this is happening. If there is one uniting element in society, it is the culture of a people. Mapalad ang Pilipinas sapagkat tayo ay mayaman sa kultura dahil iyan po ang nagbigay ng lakas ng loob para sa ating mga kababayan, sa mga ninuno natin, para kumawala sa tanikala ng pang-aalipin ng mga banyaga. Iyan ang kinanta ng ating mga Katipuneros sa kanilang mga kuta sa mga bundok upang magbigay ng lakas ng loob, na handa silang magsakripisyo ng kanilang buhay sa pagmamahal sa ating sarili. Ito ang nakakalimutan

nating lahat. We seem to be busy with other matters. Ang mga bata ngayon ay bilad na bilad sa kultura ng ibang bansa. Nakasubsob ang ulo nila sa kanilang mga iPad, sa kanilang Internet connections, at pinag-aaralan ang kultura ng ibang bansa subalit nakalimutan na nila ang kultura ng Pilipino.

Dito naman sa Kongreso, ang ating prayoridad, seemingly, obviously, are matters which divide the nation and do not unite us. Kapapasa lamang ng RH Bill—very contentious, very divisive, nagkawatak-watak ang ating lipunan sapagkat niyakap ng ilan ang banyagang pag-iisip na kailangan iyong Reproductive Health Bill ay ituro sa mga batang Pilipino. Iyan po ay lihis sa tunay na kailangan natin. Bakit tuturuan ang mga bata ng sex education? Iyon bang sex education ay kailangang ituro pa sa eskuwela for seven years? Isipin ninyo, iyan ang mangyayari kapag ang Reproductive Health Law ay maipasa sa Korte Suprema. Hindi ko nalilimutan ang ating mga karanasan noong tayo ay nag-aaral, ang itinuro sa atin ay good manners and right conduct. Iyon ay Pilipino, good manners and right conduct— paggalang sa mga nakatatanda, paggalang sa magulang, paggalang, pagmamahal at paglilingkod sa kapwa. Ngayon, kapag natupad ang layunin ng Reproductive Health Law, para sa ating mga kabataan, mag-iiba na ang kanilang prayoridad. Naaalala ko noong tayo ay nagging mga Boy Scouts, ang itinuro sa atin ay mga katangiang Pilipino, mga katangiang taglay nating lahat bilang mga nilalang ng Panginoon upang maging modelo ng mundo—trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, kind, courteous, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. Hindi natin dapat makalimutan ang mga katangiang iyan sapagkat ang mga iyan ang humubog sa pagkatao ng bawat Pilipino sa mga nakaraang panahon.

Subalit ngayon ang ating pinagkakaabalahan ay mga ibang bagay na. Mabuti na lang, sapagkat malalim ang kultura ng Pilipino sa ating pagkatao, hanggang ngayon ang mga bata ay may paggalang pa rin sa mga nakatatanda. Hanggang ngayon ang ating mga apo, ang ating mga anak ay nagmamano pa rin bilang paggalang nila sa mga lolo at lola. Sa ibang kultura, wala na po iyan; sa ibang kultura sa ibang bansa, wala na pong pamilya, wala na pong anak, wala nang kamag-anak sapagkat sila ay nalulong na sa pagkakamali ng kanilang mga pinuno. Dito sa ating bansa ay mayroon pa tayong pag-asa. Nandito ang pagkakataon ngayon na tayo, bilang mga Miyembro ng Kongreso, ang humuhubog ng batas ng bansa and it behooves upon us now to do what is necessary so that we may serve the purpose of our vocation as leaders in our own ways.

Minamahal kong Tagapangulo, nakalulungkot mang aminin subalit ang kabuluhan at kahulugan ng EDSA ay tila nawawala sa takbo ng panahon. Siguro, mas mabuti pong ito ay sine-celebrate natin sa kani-kaniyang tahanan. Magdasal tayo, ipagdasal natin ang mga bayani ng ating panahon. We have an abundance of modern-day heroes. Those who resisted Martial Law are heroes in themselves. Those who disappeared in the middle of the night, thousands and thousands of them up to now are unaccounted for— they are heroes of our time. Ipagdasal natin si Ninoy Aquino, ipagdasal natin si Evelio Javier, ipagdasal natin si Macliing Dulag, ipagdasal natin si Bobby Dela Paz, ipagdasal natin si Cesar Climaco. Ipagdasal natin lahat ng Pilipinong tumayo upang tayo ay maging malaya but let us not concentrate on the personalities who were there at EDSA on February 25, 1986 because they are not EDSA. EDSA is the Filipino people. EDSA is the spirit


of the Filipino. EDSA is for all of us to cherish not only as a memory but as an inspiration to succeed in our endeavors.

Gusto natin ng isang maunlad na bansa, gusto natin ng maunlad na buhay. Pagod na pagod na ang Pilipino sa kahirapan. Pagod na pagod na sila sa mga pangako ng pulitika, mga pangako ng gobyerno, subalit hindi nagbabago ang buhay nila dahil sa gobyerno. Nagbabago ang buhay nila sa kanilang sariling pagpupunyagi. The economy is moving because of the people and their desire for a better life, many times in spite of the government.

Huwag sana nating kalimutan,at nagugunita ko ang isang talata ng isang tula na binuo ng isang taong may inspirasyon sa kaniyang paninindigan, the story of a people persevering against all odds. I would like to remind everybody of the poem Invictus written by William Henley. Ito po ay nagbigay inspirasyon sa mga bayani ng kani-kanilang mga bansa: sa Inglatera, si Winston Churchill. Nagbigay inspirasyon kay Nelson Mandela ng South Africa. Nagbigay inspirasyon kay Martin Luther King ng Amerika. Noong sila ay nagigipit, ang hinahanap nila ay pagkakaisa at ang kanilang isinigaw sa kanilang panahon, “I am the master of my fate. I am the captain of my soul.”

Iyon ang diwa ng EDSA—na kung bibigyan natin ng tunay na pakahulugan ay ito ang kasaysayan ng isang lipi, ng isang lahi na nagkaisa upang alisin ang tanikala sa kanilang mga leeg—at ngayon ay tinatamasa natin. If we forget that, then we are doomed to repeat the same; if we do not forget that, then we are going to be free from all these and lead our nation to prosperity. God will lead the Filipino and we will be a model to the whole world. Ito po ay nangyari na, ito po ay mangyayari maraming ulit dahil nasa atin ang paraan.

Maraming salamat po sa pagkakataong ibinigay ninyo sa akin. Thank you.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move for the recognition of the Hon. Roy V. Señeres Sr.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The Honorable Señeres is recognized.

REP. SEÑERES. Mr. Speaker, will the distinguished Gentleman from the BUHAY Party-List yield to a few questions?

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). He may if he desires.

Will the Gentleman from BUHAY Party-List yield to a few questions?

REP. ATIENZA. For the Gentleman imbued with patriotism, anytime, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). Please proceed.

REP. SEÑERES. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much, distinguished colleague from the BUHAY Party-List.

The Gentleman’s extemporaneous privilege speech

impacted upon me like an ode or lamentation concerning the vanishing culture of the Filipino.

REP. ATIENZA. Tama po iyon, G. Ispiker.

REP. SEÑERES. Mr. Speaker, can you please abbreviate or describe to me what the Filipino culture is all about.

REP. ATIENZA. Naaalala ko po si Andres Bonifacio, ang ating pambansang bayani. Ang kanyang pangarap sa kanyang maikling buhay, subalit naging makahulugan sa ating kasaysayan, ay mag-isip tayo bilang Pilipino, hindi bilang banyaga; gumalaw tayo bilang Pilipino, hindi banyaga; magsalita tayo bilang Pilipino, huwag banyaga. Kung maaari, iyong nakita sa mga nakaraan ay ating ipaalaala sa mga kabataan. Sabi ko nga sa inyo, ito naman ay hindi galing sa akin kundi sinabi na rin ng mga tanyag na philosophers, political leaders and many others. Those who forget the past are doomed to commit the same mistakes. We do not want to commit the same mistakes, so we must never forget the past. Mayroon tayong sariling sayaw, mayroon tayong sariling kanta, mayroon tayong sariling tugtugin, mayroon tayong katutubong tugtugin, mayroon tayong Muslim, mayroon tayong Mountain Province—mayroon tayo ng lahat ng kulay ng buhay na sinasalamin ang ating kultura. Iyon po ang aking tinuturan. Wala na po niyan ngayon. Nobody is promoting culture in the country, no President magmula pa po noong l986. Wala po tayong cultural program na matatawag na nagbibigay aral sa mga kabataan. Nakalimutan na ang harana, nakalimutan na ang tugtugan, nakalimutan na ang sayawan, nakalimutan na ang Los Bailes de Ayer, nakalimutan na ang La Jota Moncadeña.

REP. SEÑERES. Salamat po.

REP. ATIENZA. Marami pong nakalimutan na. Puwede tayong mag-usap nang maghapon at hindi mauubos ang usapan natin sa kultura ng Pilipino.

REP. SEÑERES. Kagalang-galang na Kinatawan ng BUHAY Party-List, G. Ispiker, mayroon po tayong mga libo-libong mga kapwa manggagawa sa mga call centers. Mabuti na lang po at sinanay nila ang kanilang mga sarili na makapagsalita sa wikang Ingles kung hindi, marahil sa halip na magsipuntahan dito ang mga foreign companies para mag-hire ng ating mga kapwa manggagawa, and there are tens of thousands of them presently, baka nagpunta na ang mga iyan sa India at sa ibang bansa. Kaya kung sila ay sumunod sa inyong panawagang na dapat tayo ay magsalita sa wikang Pilipino sa halip na wikang Ingles ay baka maapektuhan ang kanilang kakayahan na maging mga empleyado ng mga multinationals.

REP. ATIENZA. G. Ispiker, mukhang hindi kami nagkaintindihan ng kagalang-galang na kaibigan kong Congressman Señeres. Hindi ko sinabing huwag tayong mag-aral ng ibang wika. Lamang tayo roon na mayroon tayong sariling wika at magaling tayo sa Ingles, magaling tayo sa Kastila. Ang ilan sa atin ay nag-aral ng Latin, marami sa atin ang nakapagsasalita ng Pranses, German. Iyon po ay katangian ng isang lahi na tayo ay marunong matuto at marunong tayong tumayo sa mundo upang igalang at


respetuhin dahil mayroon tayong kakayahang magsalita ng kanilang sariling wika. Dr. Jose Rizal learned how to speak German.

REP. SEÑERES. Ako po ay naliliwanagan na. Salamat po sa inyong paliwanag.

REP. ATIENZA. Hindi ko po sinabing huwag tayong mag-aral ng ibang salita.

REP. SEÑERES. Opo, maliwanag na po iyan, kagalang-galang na Kinatawan ng BUHAY Party-List. Mayroon pa po akong isang katanungan. Ang sinasabi po ninyo, dapat tayo ay mag-celebrate ng EDSA People Power dahil napaka-significant ng araw na iyon, February 25, kahapon, several years ago. Ang ibig sabihin ng EDSA ay nakawala sa mga tanikala ang ating mga kababayan mula sa diktadura. Ang tanong ko pa sa inyo: Wala bang diktadura ngayon, of the collective kind, not of the individual kind? It is not a dictatorship by one man, but right now there is a dictatorship of an elite na mas destructive pa sa tingin ko po.

Halimbawa, noong diktadura na tinutukoy ninyo, ang dictatorship ng Pangulong Marcos, alam po ba ninyo na noong kanyang kapanahunan, walang employer ang maaaring magtanggal ng isang manggagawa sa kanyang trabaho unless mayroong clearance sa Department of Labor bago siya tanggalin? Sa ngayon, matindi at malawak ang contractualization, kung saan binabale-wala ang security of tenure ng mga manggagawa. Sa bagay na iyan, mukhang may maganda din namang nagawa ang rehimen ng Pangulong Ferdinand Marcos. Ngayon, ang mga diktador, ang mga practitioner ng contractualization, binabale-wala nila ang mga karapatan ng mga manggagawa.

REP. ATIENZA. G. Ispiker, sumasang-ayon po ako kay Kagalang-galang Señeres sa kanyang tinuran na hindi naman lahat ng ginawa ng dating Pangulong Marcos ay masama. Maraming ginawa si Pangulong Marcos na mabuti na hanggang ngayon ay pinakikinabangan natin. Maraming ginawang mabuti ang kanyang kabiyak, the First Lady then, Imelda Romualdez-Marcos who is now a Member of our Chamber. I am one who will always praise her for her cultural leadership. When I said 28 years have passed and we have not had any cultural program, I refer back to the time of the former First Lady, who is now a Congresswoman, a Member of this Chamber, because only then did we have a Cultural Center, only then did we have a Folk Arts Theater, only then ahead of its time, we had the PICC, the Philippine International Convention Center. Lahat po nga mga iyan ay sa loob ng pananaw noong nakaraang rehimen. Wala po akong masasabi kung hindi papuri at pagkilala.

REP. SEÑERES. Mayroon pa po, mayroon pa pong isang inaalala ko na magandang …

REP. ATIENZA. Dadagdagan ko lang po. Subalit iyong sinasabi nila na diktadura ng mayayaman at makapangyarihan ay pang-aapi sa mga mahihirap ngayon. I agree with you, my dear colleague.

REP. SEÑERES. Thank you.

REP. ATIENZA. Our people continue to suffer poverty under the yoke and control of the super rich and the oligarchs. Iyon po ay hindi nabuwag ng EDSA People Power.

REP. SEÑERES. Thank you very much.

REP. ATIENZA. Kaya mayroon pa tayong trabahong …

REP. SEÑERES. Just to expedite …

REP. ATIENZA. … dapat ginagampanan dito sa ating Kongreso.

REP. SEÑERES. I am very happy with the Gentleman’s response to that particular question of mine. Mayroon pa akong naaalaalang kabutihan na nagawa ng dating Pangulo ng Pilipinas, halimbawa po, itong 13th month pay. Ang pinaka-basic concept ng 13th month pay ay it should come from the generosity of the employer, bonus iyan, at noong kapanahunan ni Pangulong Marcos, ginawa niyang mandatory ito. Kahit saan ka man pumuntang bansa sa buong mundo noong panahon ng dating Pangulong Marcos, walang bansa na inuutusan ang mga employer na magbigay ng Christmas bonus pero noong kapanahunan niya, ginawa niyang mandatory ito. Kaya habang tayo ay nagse-celebrate ng EDSA, huwag naman natin masyadong ginagawang kontrabida ang ibang mga tao dahil marami rin silang kabutihang nagawa para sa bansa.

REP. ATIENZA. Mr. Speaker, I think the Gentleman from Party-List OFW is the one putting negative, destructive meanings to what I have said on the floor. Hindi po iyon ang aking ibig sabihin— na pintasan o siraan si Pangulong Marcos dahil pinapupurihan ko rin ang liderato ng taong iyon. He is the one saying it. What I am just saying is that …

REP. SEÑERES. Malamang …

REP. ATIENZA. What I am saying is that on February 25, 1986, we united as a people and so, let us not lose that unity and let us not divide ourselves …

REP. SEÑERES. Maraming …

REP. ATIENZA. … with nonsensical issues.

REP. SEÑERES. All right. Maraming salamat po sa inyong clarification dahil hindi ko masyadong nakuha noong kayo po ay nagde-deliver ng inyong napakagandang extemporaneous speech.

Kaya po ako ay tumayo dahil noong patapos na ng inyong talumpati ay may binanggit kayong tanikala or “chain” sa wikang Ingles. Sa ngayon po, we now have 40 million workers, 40 million members of the labor force, and 10 million of them are suffering from the pain of being exiled overseas; 12 million of them are jobless; and 20 million are underemployed. Aba, mas marami dahil milyun-milyon ngayon ang mga tanikala na naggagapos sa kanila kaya while we criticize, while we throw praises at some regimes, we should not forget the positive contributions of previous leaders to the welfare of the people of this country.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.


REP. ATIENZA. Mr. Speaker, …

REP. SEÑERES. Thank you very much to my colleague.

REP. ATIENZA. … let me just manifest my clarificatory answer to those distorted, disjointed appreciation or misappreciation of my message. What I stressed today is the need for a cultural program for the Philippines. Kailangan tayo ay matuto sa nakaraan upang tayo ay makarating sa ating paroroonan, na tayo ay may sarili nating himig, sarili nating sayaw, sarili nating galing. Si G. Martinez ay nagpakita ng kanyang galing pero walang suporta ang gobyerno. Si Manny Pacquiao, nagpakita ng kanyang galing, walang suporta ang gobyerno. Ang ating mga batikang artistang nakilala sa buong mundo—nandiyan si Cecille Licad, nandiyan si Lea Salonga, pero nandiyan ang ating mga ballet dancers, prima ballerinas na sinanay sa Makiling dahil sa gobyerno. Iyon ang aking tinuturan po sa inyo. Tayo ay matuto sa nakaraan upang tayo ay makarating sa ating paroroonan. Kung ayaw ninyong mag-aral ng nakaraan, wala tayong pupuntahan pare-pareho.

REP. SEÑERES. Mr. Speaker, I have already said my thanks to my distinguished colleague, but may I just point out that I object to the word “distorted.” Probably, he also has no malicious afterthought in describing what I was asking him and precisely, that is why I am standing because I want clarification from him. Do not accuse me of saying something distorted since that is an offensive word, distinguished colleague, because I can very well also use other words which might offend him but which I did not do. Let us all be gentlemen here, okay.

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. Thank you, distinguished colleague.

REP. ATIENZA. I withdraw the word “distorted,” Mr. Speaker. I will use the word “disjointed.”

REP. SEÑERES. That is a synonym of “distorted.”

REP. ATIENZA. Salamat po.

REP. SEÑERES. If you want, we can consult the Webster’s Dictionary. You are not withdrawing anything, distinguished colleague, you are being sarcastic.

Thank you very much.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, as there are no other registered interpellators, I move that the privilege speech of our colleague from the Party-List BUHAY, the Hon. Jose “Lito” L. Atienza Jr., and the corresponding interpellation thereon be referred to the Committee on Rules.



REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, with the indulgence

of our colleagues in the House, may we take time out to acknowledge the presence of some guests in the gallery. We have the guest of Cong. Josephine R. Sato and Cong. Frederick “Erick” F. Abueg: the former Board Member and now Sangguniang Bayan Member of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, Mr. Nathaniel Cruz.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). Our guest, please rise. Welcome to the House of Representatives. (Applause)

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we extend the Privilege Hour for another 30 minutes.



REP. TINIO. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). What is the parliamentary inquiry of the Honorable Tinio?

REP. TINIO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.This is with regard to Committee Report No. 19 of the

Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms on House Bill No. 3587, An Act prohibiting the establishment of political dynasties, sponsored by Representatives Castro, Colmenares, Erice and myself. This has been in the Calendar of Business of the House since we have resumed the session, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to inquire on when the said report will be actually deliberated upon for sponsorship and debate, Mr. Speaker.



REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I will ask our distinguished colleague’s indulgence, and we will ask for a few minutes suspension to be able to clarify and answer his query.



It was 5:26 p.m.





REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, in response to our esteemed colleague, the measure in question is already part of the Business for the Day and will be taken up in plenary at the appropriate time.


REP. TINIO. Thank you for the response, Mr. Speaker. For now, I will accept the response.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.


REP. BONDOC. Thank you, esteemed colleague.Mr. Speaker, we have a colleague who wishes to make

a manifestation. I move for the recognition of the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The Honorable Bravo is recognized for his manifestation.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to express a very short manifestation in recognition of the honesty of our two staff here in this House, namely: Aurelio S. Rivera Jr. and Nimrod D. Destura.

Kahapon po ay mayroon akong bisita dito sa House at nahulog po ang kanyang pera nang di niya namamalayan pero isinauli po ng dalawang ito. Let us congratulate them.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The manifestation is noted.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, our parliamentary status is that we are still in the Privilege Hour, it having been extended, and the next to take advantage of the Privilege Hour is our colleague from the Party-List ANAKPAWIS. I move for the recognition of the Hon. Fernando “Ka Pando” L. Hicap.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The honorable Gentleman from the Party-List ANAKPAWIS, the Hon. Fernando “Ka Pando” L. Hicap, is recognized for his privilege speech.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. HICAP

REP. HICAP. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker.Honorable Speaker of the House, kapwa Mambabatas

sa Mababang Kapulungan ng Kongreso:Magandang hapon sa ating lahat. Mr. Speaker, nais kunin ng Kinatawang ito ang

pagkakataon upang ibahagi ang kasalukuyang kalagayan ng mga mangingisdang Pilipino. Ngayong 2014, ito ang ika-16 na taong pagkakasa-batas ng Republic Act No. 8550 or the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, ang sentral na batas sa pangisdaan na pinagtibay ng Kongreso noong Pebrero 24, 1998. Mr. Speaker, isinabatas ang Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998 upang iahon diumano sa kumunoy ng kahirapan ang mga mangingisdang Pilipino. Taglay umano ng nasabing batas ang mga makabuluhang reporma sa pangisdaan, pagpapataas ng antas ng kabuhayan ng mga maralitang mangingisda at pagtutulak ng modernisasyon ng agrikultura at pangisdaan tungo sa pagkakamit ng panlipunang hustisya. Mr. Speaker, ang magandang bukas na ipinangako ng Fisheries Code of 1998 sa 1.3 milyong maralitang mangingisda ay nanatiling

mga pangako at sa katunayan, taliwas ang nangyari dahil ibayo pang naghirap ang mga mangingisda sa bansa. Mr. Speaker, para sa mga mangingisdang Pilipino, isang malaking kabiguan, isang malaking kalamidad ang Fisheries Code of 1998. Hindi nito tinugunan ang pundamental na suliranin sa kawalan ng tunay na reporma sa lupa at pangisdaan. Sa isang banda, ibayo pang nalugmok ang dati nang atrasado, hiwa-hiwalay at maliitang produksiyon samantalang tumitindi pa ang kahirapan at kawalan ng oportunidad sa hanay ng mga mangingisda.

Ibayo lamang pinalala ng Fisheries Code ang suliranin ng sektor ng pangisdaan. Nagpatuloy ang pagpapasok ng mga dayuhan at lokal na komersiyal na palakaya sa mga munisipal na pangisdaan habang nasadlak sa kakarampot na huli ng isda ang mga maralita na hindi na lumampas sa limang kilo sa isang araw ang huli habang 10,000 kilong isda ang average na huli ng mga komersiyal na palakaya. Ang mga dambuhalang palakaya ang umuubos ng yaman ng isda na dapat sana ay para sa kapakinabangan ng mga maralitang mangingisda. Nagpatuloy ang pribatisasyon ng mga lugar pangisdaan upang bigyan ng daan ang paglawak ng mga korporadong pangisdaan, pagkukultura ng yamang-tubig na pang-export. Sa kabilang banda, itinulak nito ang pagtindi ng pagkasira at pagkitid ng pangisdaan ng mga maliliit na mangingisda. Dagdag pang pasanin ng mga mangingisda ang mga samu’t saring patakaran sa ilalim ng Fisheries Code of 1998 tulad ng zoning ordinance at color coding na ibayong naglilimita sa mga mangingisda para makapamalakaya. Ibayong pasanin rin ang mga kinokolektang bayarin ng mga lokal na gobyerno gaya ng rehistrasyon ng mga mangingisda at mga ginagamit na bangka at kagamitan sa pangingisda, bayad sa lisensiya ng bangka at iba pa.

Ayon mismo sa datos ng National Statistical Coordination Board, noong 2006, 2008, 2009 and 2012, ang mga mahihirap na mamamayang Pilipino ay matatagpuan sa mga pook at lugar pangisdaan. Ibig sabihin, ang pinakamahirap na Pilipino ay ang mga maliliit na mangingisda. Batay pa rin sa pag-aaral ng gobyerno, ang mga pinakamahihirap na mangingisda ay matatagpuan sa mga rehiyon sa Caraga, sa Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, sa mga rehiyon ng Bicol, Eastern Visayas, Negros Island, Panay Island, Central Visayas at maging sa mga rehiyon ng Ilocos, Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog at National Capital Region. Mr. Speaker, ayon sa pag-aaral ng Pamalakaya, isang pambansang pederasyon ng mga mangingisda, sa mga rehiyon na nabanggit, masuwerte nang mapakain ng isang mangingisda ang kanyang pamilya ng tatlong beses sa isang araw dahil sa kawalan ng kita at oportunidad. Halimbawa po sa Laguna Lake, malaking bilang ng pamilya ng mga mangingisda sa Laguna de Bay ang hindi nakakakumpleto ng tatlong beses na kain sa isang araw dahil sa sobrang kahirapan. Ang isang mangingisda ay kumikita lamang ng P50 hanggang P150 kada -araw dahil sa pagliit ng huli at sa lumalaking gastos sa produksiyon gaya ng pagtaas na presyo ng gasolina, krudo at mataas na presyo ng mga bilihin. Malayo ang pang-araw-araw na kita ng mga mangingisda kumpara sa P466 daily minimum wage na itinatakda ng batas at sadyang mas malayo sa mahigit na P1,034 na kakailanganin ng isang pamilyang Pilipino upang mabuhay ang anim na miyembro ng pamilya.

Mr. Speaker, ang kalunos-lunos na kalagayan ng mga mangingisdang Pilipino ay pangunahing mauugat sa kawalan ng tunay na reporma sa lupa at pangisdaan at sa kawalan ng programa ng pambansang industriyalisasyon.


Sa isang banda, ang patuloy na pagkatali ng bansot na industriya sa kalakarang export-oriented, import-dependent sa balangkas ng liberalisasyon, pribatisasyon at deregulasyon na ang pangunahing nakikinabang ay ang mga dayuhan at malalaking negosyanteng lokal sa pangisdaan. Pinanatili ng Fisheries Code at ng iba pang mga batas, programa at patakaran sa pangisdaan ang masaklap na kalagayan ng mga mangingisdang Pilipino. Walang naganap na modernisasyon at pambansang industriyalisasyon at nananatiling atrasado ang pangisdaan.

Ang matinding pinsala ng Fisheries Code of 1998 sa loob ng 16 na taon sa hanay ng mga mangingisda ay ibayo pang pinalala ng mga kasalukuyang programa gaya ng Public-Private Partnership at sa hangarin ng gobyerno na ibenta sa mga dayuhang negosyante at malalaking kapitalista ang mga pook at rekurso ng pangisdaan sa ngalan ng tubo. Mr. Speaker, walang lugar pangisdaan ang hindi ligtas sa plano ng Public-Private Partnership sa kasalukuyang panahon. Walang pook pangisdaan ang hindi target ng mga “development projects” na nagdulot na ng malawakang dislokasyon sa kabuhayan at karapatan sa paninirahan ng mga mangingisdang Pilipino. May plano ang Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA)na magsagawa ng malakihang reklamasyon sa mga pook pangisdaan ng bansa. May 102 reclamation projects na kinukonsidera ang PRA at National Economic Development Authority o NEDA sa buong kapuluan. Sasaklaw ito sa 38,000 ektarya ng katubigan at ang 26,234 ektarya para sa reklamasyon ay isasagawa sa Manila Bay lamang. G. Ispiker, bukod sa Public-Private Partnership reclamation projects, sumasalanta rin sa kabuhayan at karapatan ng mga mangingisda ang iba pang proyekto gaya ng Laguna Lake Master Development Plan, Manila Bay Master Development Program, Aurora Pacific Economic and Free Port Zone Project at mga dambuhalang eco-tourism projects sa Visayas at Mindanao. Mr. Speaker, hindi rin ligtas ang ating pangisdaan sa magnetite mining katulad na lamang sa Cagayan Valley, sa mga rehiyon ng Ilocos, La Union, Pangasinan, Zambales, Negros at sa buong rehiyon ng Eastern Visayas.

Sa Eastern Visayas, ang kalakhan ng mga nasalanta ng super bagyong Yolanda ay mga coastal municipalities kung saan nag-o-operate ang malalaking black sand mining companies.

Mr. Speaker, tampok rin sa malaking suliranin ng mangingisda at pangisdaan ang malawakang pagmimina ng gas at langis sa mga mayor na karagatan ng bansa. May 15 kontrata ng oil and gas exploration ang pinayagan ng gobyerno para sa mga dayuhang mamumuhunan gaya ng sa kontrobersiyal na Malampaya. Ayon sa pag-aaral ng Pamalakaya, aabot sa 10 milyong ektarya ng karagatan sa bansa ang ilalaan para sa mga investor sa energy sector na sasaklaw sa Cebu-Bohol Strait, Sulu Sea, Palawan, at West Philippine Sea. Bukod sa hindi papayagan ang pangingisda sa mga lugar na ito, tiyak rin ang ibayong pagkasira ng biodiversity sa pangisdaan dahil sa walang habas na pagmimina ng langis at gas sa mga katubigan ng bansa.

Mr. Speaker, lalo pang nakakabahala ang patakaran na ipinatutupad ngayon—ang— “no build zone, no dwell zone policy” —na magpapalayas sa mamamayan sa mga baybayin na sinalanta ng super bagyong Yolanda sa Visayas, habagat sa Luzon noong 2013 at bagyong Ondoy sa Laguna Lake at Manila Bay noong 2009. Mr. Speaker, hindi naniniwala

ang mga mangingisda na ang “no build zone, no dwell zone policy” ay para sa kaligtasan ng mga mangingisda at residente. Sa halip, magsisilbi itong clearing operation upang bigyan daan ang mga kliyente ng PPP project ng administrasyong Aquino. Mr. Speaker, ayon mismo sa DENR, ang “no build zone, no dwell zone policy” ay para bigyan daan ang pagtatayo ng mga eco-tourism project at economic zone project sa ngalan ng Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Program. Kasuklam-suklam ang ganitong patakaran at polisiya. Ang pagpapatupad ng “no build zone, no dwell zone policy” sa ilalim ng kamay na bakal ng tambalang Aquino at Panfilo Lacson ay magdudulot ng ibayong pagpapalayas sa hanay ng mga mangingisda.

Mr. Speaker, nanggaling mismo sa bibig ng Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA) na problemado ang ahensiya kung paano ililikas at saang relokasyon ilalagay ang 3.9 milyong pamilya sa paligid ng Lawa ng Laguna kapag ipinatupad nang puspusan ang “no build zone” policy sa Laguna Lake at bigyan daan ang pagpasok ng mga dayuhang mamumuhunan sa 90,000 ektaryang katubigan ng lawa. Samantalang sa Manila Bay, dahil sa reklamasyon, may taya na aabot sa limang milyong mangingisda at maralita mula sa Cavite hanggang Bataan ang sapilitang papalayasin para sa reklamasyon ng Public-Private Partnership Program ng gobyernong Aquino.

Mr. Speaker, “business as usual” ang tugon ng Palasyo sa mga mangingisdang biktima ng kalamidad. Iwinawasiwas nito ang P360 bilyong Rehabilitation Program sa Eastern Visayas para sa kapakinabangan ng malalaking negosyo at malawakang dislokasyon naman para sa mga mangingisda at mga maralita. Mr. Speaker, susi ang komprehensibo at mulat na National Disaster Preparedness Program, na hindi natin nakita sa panahon ng pagdaluyong ng bagyong Yolanda.

Ayon sa mga mangingisda, ang gobyernong Aquino ang pinakamalaking kalamidad na dumating sa mamamayan.

Mr. Speaker, ilan lamang ito sa mga isyu at suliraning kinakaharap ng mga mangingisdang Pilipino. Tiyak na lalo pang sasahol ang kalagayan ng mga mangingisda at maralita kung itutulak ng Kapulungang ito ang pag-rebisa ng 1987 Constitution sa pamamagitan ng charter change.

Mr. Speaker, hindi sang-ayon ang mga mangingisda na baguhin ang 1987 Constitution para bigyan daan ang 100 porsyento na foreign ownership of land. Hindi sang-ayon ang mga mangingisda na bigyan ng lisensya ang mga dayuhang monopolyo na kamkamin ang pangisdaan at rekurso ng bayan para sa mga naghahangad ng malaking tubo. Hindi ito ang kasagutan sa naghihikahos na kalagayan ng mga mangingisda.

Mr. Speaker, bilang pagtatapos, nais kong sumahin ang aking privilege speech sa mga sumusunod na punto at panawagan:

1. Ibasura ang Fisheries Code of 1998.2. Itigil ang National Reclamation Plan (NRP) at

ipahinto ang black sand mining and oil and gas exploration sa buong kapuluan.

3. Itigil ang pagpapatupad ng “no build zone, no dwell zone” policy at hayaang makabalik sa kanilang mga komunidad ang mga mangingisda, magsasaka at maralita upang muling ibangon ang kanilang kabuhayan at itindig ang kanilang mga karapatan sa lupa, pangisdaan, kabuhayan at paninirahan.


4. Hindi Charter change ang sagot sa kalunos-lunos na kalagayan ng mga mangingisda at mamamayan. Susi sa tunay na pag-unlad ng bayan ang tunay na reporma sa lupa at pangisdaan at ang pagkakamit ng pambansang industriyalisasyon. Ito ang tangi lamang tutugon sa tunay na pag-unlad at pagsasarili pang-ekonomiya ng ating bayan

Muli po, magandang hapon, maraming salamat at mabuhay ang mamamayang Pilipino.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we refer the speech of our honorable colleague to the Committee on Rules.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The privilege speech of the Honorable Hicap is referred to the Committee on Rules.

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, the next colleague who wishes to take advantage of the Privilege Hour is our colleague from the Party-List AKBAYAN. I move for the recognition of the Hon. Walden F. Bello.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The Gentleman from the Party-List AKBAYAN, the Hon. Walden F. Bello is recognized for his privilege speech.

PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. BELLO (W.)

REP. BELLO (W.). Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and dear colleagues.

The title of my privilege speech is the “Rice Fiasco: How Smugglers, Bureaucrats, and Naive Economists are Mugging our Farmers.”

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, in Bertolt Brecht’s The Measures Taken, a political opera set in China in the 1920’s, the rice trader sings: “How should I know what rice is? How should I know who knows what rice is? I have no idea what rice is, I only know its price.”

These lines come to mind as one observes the awful debacle that has overtaken the fate of the most important item in the Filipino diet. In a controversial recent judgment, a court in Davao recently ruled against the Bureau of Customs and ordered the release of 4.2 million kilos of seized smuggled rice. Now the smugglers are shouting with glee at an unexpected development: Justice Secretary Leila de Lima seems to be on their side. In a recent opinion issued after the smugglers sued the National Food Authority (NFA) and the Bureau of Customs (BoC) for seizing their illegal imports, Secretary De Lima said that, according to the terms of its agreement with its trading partners in the World Trade Organization (WTO), the government’s right to impose import quotas on rice expired in June 2012. In her opinion which was recently leaked to the media, De Lima ascertained, and I quote:

To renege on this agreement, consent to which was manifested by the act of both the President and the

Senate in accordance with the Philippine Constitution, is beyond the power of a mere implementing agency like the NFA which must exercise its rule-making and regulatory powers in accordance with, and not contrary to, applicable laws.

Mr. Speaker, honorable colleagues, we anticipated that a crisis like this would break out sooner or later when the Philippines signed the Agreement on Agriculture of the World Trade Organization in 1995. Quotas or quantitative restrictions were eliminated on all agricultural products except rice. The Philippines was obligated to accept what was called a “minimum access volume” of around 350,000 metric tons of rice yearly. Near the close of the 10-year period that the agreement on rice was in effect, that is in 2004, the Philippines filed for an extension, and it was granted, covering the period 2007-2012. As the 2012 deadline approached, pressure from rice farmers and farmer advocates forced the Department of Agriculture to seek another extension, but the Philippines’ trading partners have so far refused to enter into negotiations, apparently in search of concessions in terms of increased meat imports as a quid pro quo for granting the government’s rice request. Thus, we have a period of indeterminacy where the rice quota extension agreement has lapsed but no agreement has taken its place.

This fiasco, dear colleagues, could have been avoided had there been closer coordination among the government agencies, particularly the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Justice. This process could have begun way before the expiration of the extension in 2012. This could have resulted in an executive order or some other legal instrument maintaining the quota until a new agreement was reached with the Philippines’ trading partners. Instead, the NFA and the Bureau of Customs put their heads in the sand, pretending that the Agreement with the WTO had not lapsed and acting on the basis of obsolete provisions of the Agricultural Tariffication Act, R.A. No. 8178. Secretary De Lima, for her part, issued a judgment based on very narrow grounds, failing to even explore the provisions in the WTO Treaty such as those allowing import restrictions, owing to dumping and violations of the Safeguard, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards Agreement. Without a proactive government push to retain the quota in the form of notices to our ASEAN partners, we will face a similar quandary when the ASEAN Economic Community becomes reality in 2015. We are talking about a free-trade area that will no longer have commodities like rice on a “temporary exclusion list” or a “sensitive list.” Informing our trading partners now that we intend to keep rice as a protected commodity under quota will save us a lot of diplomatic grief later on when we could be accused of having negotiated the ASEAN Economic Community in bad faith.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, in the midst of this bureaucratic fiasco, the members of the academic community associated with the University of the Philippines School of Economics have also come out in support of the smugglers. In recent statements, these academics, claiming to base their estimates on international prices, had asserted that local consumers have been paying 40 percent more for rice than should be the case. The thrust of their interventions is that in the interest of consumers, the government should drop the quantitative restriction on rice. These economists blame


the rice farmers for their alleged low productivity. What these neoliberal ideologues forget is that the key countries that determine the international price of rice—the United States, Thailand and Vietnam—subsidize their rice producers heavily, then dump their products at cut-rate prices on world markets. The Thai government, for instance, buys rice from Thai rice farmers at far-above market prices, then dumps the rice on the international market at extremely low prices. In the recent controversial case of competitive bidding between Vietnam and Thailand to sell to the Philippines 500,000 metric tons of rice, what we were witnessing was a battle between two governments that heavily subsidize their rice production seeking to dump their artificially cheap rice in the Philippines, their actions guided not by production costs but by non-price considerations like grabbing a greater share of our country’s rice market. This manipulation of prices owing to subsidization by foreign producers is creating a lot of grief for our farmers who are not subsidized and who in fact produce and estimate their product according to the cost of production.

A key person who has resurfaced in the debate after years of relative obscurity is Dr. Ramon Clarete, now the Dean of the UP School of Economics, who played a key role as a government resource person during the 1994-1995 debates on whether the Philippines should join the WTO. Clarete predicted then that signing the Agreement on Agriculture, which required the Philippines to eliminate all but one of its import restrictions, would result in the addition of 500,000 new jobs yearly in agriculture. Instead, the number of people employed in agriculture declined from 11.2 million in 1995 to 10.8 million in 2001. Clarete also predicted that allowing enlarged imports of traditional crops like rice and corn would push farmers to shift to so-called “high value-added crops” like broccoli, snowpeas and cutflowers, the production of which would make the Philippines a major exporter of these products. The opposite happened. From being a net agricultural exporter in 1995 when it joined the WTO, the Philippines became a net agricultural importer. Nearly 20 years, after the Philippines entered into probably its most disadvantageous agreement, Clarete and his neoliberal associates still do not understand the harsh realities of global agricultural trade where the policies of powerful governments undermine their imagined nirvana of an international market running on free market lines.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, the country’s agricultural policy is in crisis. High level intervention by Malacañang is needed to sort out the mess and clarify our priorities and among these aims must be the reinvigoration of our agriculture, promotion of the interests of our rice farmers and other agricultural producers, and a fair deal between consumers and our rice producers—one that is based on the

true cost of rice production, not one based on rice prices that are artificially depressed by rice dumping in the international as well as the Philippine markets by aggressive players like Thailand and the United States. Beyond this, what we need is a renewed appreciation of the role that rice plays in our diet, cuisine, and society. Our 2.5 million rice farmers who support some 10 to 12 million family members are guardians of that heritage. Our country would be a great loser, not only economically but also culturally, if we allow our rice economy to slip into irreversible crisis owing to pressure by business interests seeking to make a killing in the rice trade, the bungling of bureaucrats and negotiators who allow themselves to be intimidated and outmaneuvered by avaricious trading partners, and the pernicious influence of neoliberal academics who are naives when it comes to understanding the harsh realities of global trade.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker; thank you very much, dear colleagues.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we refer the speech of our colleague, the Hon. Walden F. Bello, to the Committee on Rules.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The privilege speech of the Honorable Bello (W.) is referred to the Committee on Rules.

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we terminate the Privilege Hour.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the Privilege Hour is terminated.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the session until tomorrow, February 26, 2014, at four o’clock in the afternoon.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Puno). The session is suspended until tomorrow at four o’clock in the afternoon.

It was 5:59 p.m.

Published by the Publication and Editorial Service, Plenary Affairs BureauThe Congressional Record can be accessed through the Downloads Center of the official website

of the House of Representatives at www.congress.gov.phFLL/02262014/1430

Documents

Congressional Record · public auction” by representative deloso-montalla ... international character, granting certain prerogatives conducive to its growth as such, and for other