SR E P REENT A T I S V E PLENARY PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17th ... · 6/9/2017 · Jalosjos Javier Labadlabad Lagman Lanete Laogan Abayon Abu Abueg ... TO THE COMMITTEE ON PEOPLE’S PARTICIPATION

Congressional RecordPLENARY PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17th CONGRESS, SECOND REGULAR SESSION

House of Representatives

Vol. 2 Wednesday, September 6, 2017 No. 19

1907PHILIPPINES

HOU

SE O

F REPRESENTATIVES

CALL TO ORDER

At 10:00 a.m., Deputy Speaker Romero “Miro” S. Quimbo called the session to order.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The session is called to order.

NATIONAL ANTHEM

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Everybody will please rise for the singing of the Philippine National Anthem.

Everybody rose to sing the Philippine National Anthem.

PRAYER

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). May I request everyone to remain standing and bow your heads for a minute of silent prayer.

Everybody remained standing for the silent prayer.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Good morning, colleagues.

The Floor Leader is recognized.

ROLL CALL

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we call the roll.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Is there

any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

The Secretary General will please call the roll.

The Secretary General called the roll, and the result is as follows, per Journal No. 19, dated September 6, 2017:

PRESENT

AcostaAdvinculaAggabaoAlbanoAlmarioAlvarez (F.)Alvarez (P.)AmatongAntonioAquino-MagsaysayAragonesArcillasAtienzaBataoilBelaroBelmonte (J.C.)BenitezBernosBillonesBironBoliliaBondocBordadoBravo (A.)Bravo (M.V.)BrosasBulut-BegtangCagasCalderonCalixto-RubianoCamineroCanamaCariCasteloCastro (F.L.)Castro (F.H.)CeraficaCerillesChavezChipecoCoCojuangcoCollantesCortesCortuna

CosalanCrisologoCuaCuaresmaCuevaDalipeDatolDazaDe VeneciaDe VeraDefensorDel MarDimaporo (A.)Dimaporo (M.K.)DuranoElagoEriceErmita-BuhainEscuderoEspinaEspinoFariñasFerrer (J.)Ferrer (L.)FloresFortunoGarbinGarcia (J.E.)Garin (S.)GasatayaGatchalianGeronGo (M.)GonzagaGonzales (A.D.)GonzalezGullasHerrera-DyHoferJalosjosJavierLabadlabadLagmanLaneteLaogan

AbayonAbu

AbuegAcop

2 Congressional Record • 17th Congress 2RS v.2 WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2017

Roque (H.)Roque (R.)SacdalanSagarbarriaSalimbangonSaloSalonSambarSandovalSarmiento (C.)Sarmiento (E.M.)SavellanoSiaoSingsonSuansing (E.)Suansing (H.)SuarezTan (A.)Tan (M.)TejadaTevesTiangcoTingTolentinoTreñasTugnaUmaliUnabiaUngabUy (R.)UybarretaVargasVelascoVelosoVergaraVillanuevaVillaricaViolagoYap (V.)YuZamora (M.C.)Zamora (R.)ZarateZubiri

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. The roll call shows that 183 Members responded to the call.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep Quimbo). With 183 Members present, the Chair declares the presence of a quorum.

The Floor Leader is recognized

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we proceed to the Reference of Business.

LeachonLobregatLopez (B.)Lopez (M.L.)LoyolaMacapagal-ArroyoMacedaMadronaMalapitanMangaoangMarcoletaMarquezMartinezMatugasMendingMirasolNietoNoelNograles (J.J.)Nograles (K.A.)Nuñez-MalanyaonOaminalOcampoOlivarezOng (H.)Ortega (P.)Ortega (V.N.)PaduanoPalmaPanchoPanganibanPanotesPapandayanPichayPimentelPinedaPrimicias-AgabasQuimboRadazaRamirez-SatoRamosRelampagosRevillaRoa-PunoRocamora

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

The Secretary General will please read the Reference of Business.

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. 6309, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING AND CREATING

THE BUYOT INTEGRATED HIGH SCHOOL IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF DON CARLOS, BUKIDNON AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative ZubiriTO THE COMMITTEE ON BASIC EDUCATION

AND CULTURE

House Bill No. 6310, entitled:“ A N A C T S T R E N G T H E N I N G A N D

MODERNIZING THE WAREHOUSE RECEIPTS LAW OF THE PHILIPPINES IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN THE PHILIPPINES THAT SHALL FACILITATE TRADE, COMMERCE, AND OTHER RELATED PURPOSES”

By Representative Yap (A.)TO THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND

INDUSTRY

House Bill No. 6312, entitled:“AN ACT DECLARING THE FEASTS OF THE

LORD AS SPECIAL NON-WORKING HOLIDAYS IN RECOGNITION OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF JUDEO CHRISTIAN VALUES IN NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT”

By Representatives Garbin, Bertiz and SalonTO THE COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF

LAWS

House Bill No. 6313, entitled:“AN ACT CREATING FIVE (5) ADDITIONAL

BRANCHES OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT IN THE NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION TO BE STATIONED IN MUNTINLUPA CITY, METRO MANILA, F U RT H E R A M E N D I N G F O R T H E PURPOSE BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 129, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ‘THE JUDICIARY

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2017 17th Congress 2RS v.2 • Congressional Record 3

REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980’, AS AMENDED, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative BiazonTO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE

House Bill No. 6318, entitled:“AN ACT CREATING TWO (2) ADDITIONAL

BRANCHES OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT IN THE PROVINCE OF BOHOL TO BE STATIONED IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF TUBIGON, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 14, PARAGRAPH (H) OF BATAS PAMBANSA BILANG 129, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS ‘THE JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980’, AS AMENDED, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative RelampagosTO THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE

House Bill No. 6319, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING AN EXTENSION

OFFICE OF THE LAND TRANSPORTATION OFFICE (LTO) IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF TUBIGON, PROVINCE OF BOHOL, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR”

By Representative RelampagosTO THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

House Bill No. 6320, entitled:“AN ACT DECLARING AS AGRICULTURAL

LAND CERTAIN PARCELS OF LAND OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN SITUATED WITHIN THE CITY OF SURIGAO, PROVINCE OF SURIGAO DEL NORTE”

By Representative BarbersTO THE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL

RESOURCES

House Bill No. 6321, entitled:“AN ACT CREATING OFFICE ERGONOMIC

STANDARDS TO ADDRESS THE HEALTH-RELATED RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH COMPUTER USE IN THE WORKPLACE”

By Representative Sy-AlvaradoTO THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND

EMPLOYMENT

House Bill No. 6322, entitled:“AN ACT ENCOURAGING THE USE OF

TELECOMMUTING BY ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS AND POLICIES”

By Representative Sy-AlvaradoTO THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND

EMPLOYMENT

House Bill No. 6323, entitled:

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). What number?

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. 6323, Sir..THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Louder.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. 6323, Sir.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Please read the title slowly and carefully.

REFERENCE OF BUSINESSContinuation

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

“AN ACT TO ENCOURAGE EMERGENCY VOLUNTEERING BY PROTECTING VOLUNTEERS FROM LIABILITY”

By Representative Sy-AlvaradoTO THE COMMITTEE ON PEOPLE’S

PARTICIPATION

House Bill No. 6324, entitled:“AN ACT ESTABLISHING THE PHILIPPINE

CORN RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREOF”

By Representative Sy-AlvaradoTO THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

AND FOOD

ADDITIONAL COAUTHORS

Rep. John Marvin “Yul Servo” C. Nieto for House Bills No. 250, 327, 778, 942, 2096, 2746, 4266, 5838, 5839, and 5840 and House Joint Resolution No. 1;

Rep. Jose Antonio “Kuya Jonathan” R. Sy-Alvarado for House Bills No. 512, 3177, 5799, 5946, 6016, 6075, 6171, 6175, 6176, 6214, 6229, 6230, 6231, 6232, 6233, 6241, 6242, 6244, 6245, 6246, 6247, 6248, 6249, 6253, 6254, 6258, and 6298;

Rep. Michelle M. Antonio for House Bills No. 4115, 4116, 5213, 5900, 5985, 6025, and 6029;

Rep. Lorna C. Silverio for House Bills No. 4115, 5213, 5900, 5985, and 6304 and House Resolutions No. 1214, 1215, 1216, and 1251;

Reps. Tricia Nicole Q. Velasco-Catera and Romeo M. Acop for House Bill No. 2716;

Rep. Winston “Winnie” Castelo for House Bill No. 3425;


Rep. Anna Marie Villaraza-Suarez for House Bill No. 4822;

Rep. Marlyn B. Alonte for House Bills No. 4115, 4116, 5213, 5900, and 5985;

Rep. Mark O. Go for House Bills No. 6251 and 6308;

Rep. Ricardo “RJ” T. Belmonte Jr. for House Bills No. 249 and 6025;

Rep. Rodante D. Marcoleta for House Bill No. 6276;

Rep. Gabriel H. Bordado Jr. for House Bill No. 6215;Rep. Eleanor C. Bulut-Begtang for House Bill No.

5868;Rep. Arcadio H. Gorriceta for House Bill No.

6026;Reps. Cesar V. Sarmiento, Jonas C. Cortes, and

Manuel T. Sagarbarria for House Bill No. 5549;Rep. Jocelyn Sy Limkaichong for House Bill No.

5355;Rep. Maria Vida Espinosa Bravo for House Bills

No. 2096, 2475, 3296, 3297, 3299, and 3300;Rep. Nancy A. Catamco for House Bills No. 5746

and 6028;Rep. Jesus “Boying” F. Celeste for House Bills

No. 2625, 4115, 4116, 4344, 4703, 5213, 5900, 5985, and 6029;

Rep. Erico Aristotle C. Aumentado for House Bills No. 56 and 474;

Rep. Strike B. Revilla for House Bills No. 56, 474, and 6026;

Rep. Eric L. Olivarez for House Bill No. 6210;Rep. Jesulito A. Manalo for House Bill No. 6016;Rep. Manuel Monsour T. Del Rosario III for House

Bill No. 2310;Rep. Evelina G. Escudero for House Resolution

No. 1178;Rep. Lawrence H. Fortun for House Bills No. 555

and 558;Rep. Edgar Mary S. Sarmiento for House Bill No.

6276;Rep. Leo Rafael M. Cueva for House Bill No. 5839;Reps. Enrico A. Pineda and Mark Aeron H. Sambar

for House Bill No. 180;Rep. Jonas C. Cortes for House Bills No. 3468,

5164, and 5523;Rep. Rodolfo T. Albano III for House Bill No.

6026; andRep. Benhur B. Lopez Jr. for House Bill No. 3468.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Report by the Committee on Natural Resources (Committee Report No. 374), re H.B. No. 5086, entitled:

“AN ACT DECLARING DAVAO ORIENTAL A MINING-FREE ZONE”

recommending its approval without amendmentSponsors: Representatives Ty and AlmarioTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

Report by the Committee on Local Government (Committee Report No. 375), re H.B. No. 6331, entitled:“ A N A C T P R O V I D I N G F O R T H E

REAPPORTIONMENT OF THE PROVINCE OF SOUTHERN LEYTE INTO TWO (2) LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS”

recommending its approval in substitution of House Bill No. 2528

Sponsors: Representatives Acharon and MercadoTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

Report by the Committee on Local Government (Committee Report No. 376), re H.B. No. 990, entitled:“AN ACT SEPARATING THE CITY OF CALAMBA

FROM THE SECOND LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT OF THE PROVINCE OF LAGUNA TO CONSTITUTE THE LONE LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF CALAMBA”

recommending its approval without amendment Sponsors: Representatives Acharon and ChipecoTO THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). The beautiful Floor Leader is recognized.

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we defer the approval of the Journal.

I so move, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). There is a motion to defer the approval of the Journal.

Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

Yes, the beautiful Floor Leader is recognized.

CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. NO. 1221

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider House Resolution No. 1221.

May I ask that the Secretary General be directed to read only the title of the measure.

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

The Secretary General is directed to read only the title of the measure.

* See MEASURES CONSIDERED (printed separately)


With the permission of the Body, and since copies of the measure have been previously distributed, the Secretary General read only the title thereof without prejudice to inserting its text in the Congressional Record.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Resolution No. 1221, entitled: RESOLUTION HONORING AND COMMENDING THE METROBANK FOUNDATION OUTSTANDING FILIPINOS OF 2017.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). The Floor Leader is recognized.

There is a motion to—I am sorry. Go ahead, Floor Leader.

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. ...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). Dapat ganyan parati ang Floor Leader natin.

REP. ROA-PUNO. Thank you, Mr. handsome Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). Thank you. Please, write in all caps—HANDSOME. (Laughter)

REP. ROA-PUNO. I move that we adopt House Resolution No. 1221 in consolidation with similar House Resolutions, namely: House Resolutions No. 1235, 1258 and 1283.

I so move, Mr. handsome Speaker.

VIVA VOCE VOTING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). There is a motion by the very beautiful Floor Leader.


As many as are in favor, please say aye.

SEVERAL MEMBERS. Aye.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). As many as are against, please say nay. (Silence)

ADOPTION OF H. RES. NO. 1221

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). The ayes have it; the motion is approved.

House Resolution No. 1221 is adopted.

REP. HERRERA-DY. Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). The equally beautiful and sexy Floor Leader is recognized, Go ahead, please.

REP. HERRERA-DY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.Mr. Speaker, I would just like to manifest, being

one of the judges of the recent Metrobank Foundation Outstanding Filipino Award, may I please be included as one of the coauthors of the said resolution.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). Who is...

REP. HERRERA-DY. Mr. handsome Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). Who is—you are one of the judges, correct?

REP. HERRERA-DY. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). Which category?

REP. HERRERA-DY. Swimsuit competition, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). No, there are several categories...

REP. HERRERA-DY. No, the Philippine National Police...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). ...teachers, generals, PNP.

REP. HERRERA-DY. Mr. Speaker, thank you.

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


CONSIDERATION OF H.B. NO. 6215Continuation

PERIOD OF SPONSORSHIP AND DEBATE

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we now take up the Unfinished Business. May we request the...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). There is a motion to take up the Unfinished Business.


Go ahead, Floor Leader.

REP. ROA-PUNO. May we request the Secretary General to read the title of the House Bill.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). There is a motion to take up the Unfinished Business, in particular, House Bill No. 6215.

The Secretary General is directed to read the title of this extremely important House Bill.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill NO. 6215, entitled: AN ACT APPROPRIATING F U N D S F O R T H E O P E R AT I O N O F T H E G O V E R N M E N T O F T H E R E P U B L I C O F T H E P H I L I P P I N E S F R O M J A N U A R Y ONE TO DECEMBER THIRTY ONE, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHTEEN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Quimbo). The Floor leader is recognized.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, before we commence the consideration of the budget of the DOJ, we would like to acknowledge the presence and greet the DOJ family present here today starting off with Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II; Undersecretary Antonio Kho Jr.; Undersecretary Erickson Balmes; Undersecretary Raymund Mecate; Undersecretary Reynante Orceo; Undersecretary Deo Marco; Assistant Secretary Adonis Sulit; Assistant Secretary George Ortha II; Assistant Secretary Moslemen Macarambon; Assistant Secretary Cheryl Daytec-Yangot; Assistant Secretary Sergio Yap; OIC Prosecutor General Severino Gaña; Chief State Counsel Ricardo Paras III; from the Bureau of Immigration, we have Commissioner Jaime Morente; Land Registration Authority Administrator Renato Bermejo; from the NBI, we have Director Dante Gierran; from the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel, Government Corporate Counsel rather Rudolf Philip Jurado; from the Office of the Solicitor General, we have Solicitor General Jose C. Calida; the Administrator Manuel G. Co of the Parole and Probation Administration; Acting Chairman Reynold S. Munsayac of the Presidential Commission on Good Government; and from the Public Attorney’s Office, we have Chief Public Attorney Persida V. Rueda-Acosta.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). May we ask the persons named, the DOJ family, to please stand up so your presence can be acknowledged. (Applause) Nasaan na po ang DOJ family? Tumayo po ang DOJ family. (Applause) Welcome to the House of Representatives.

What can you say, respondents? I am sorry, go ahead, Floor Leader.

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we take up the budget of the Department of Justice and its attached agencies.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). There is a motion to take up the budget of the Department of Justice.


Go ahead, Floor Leader.

REP. ROA-PUNO. I move that we recognize the Hon. Doy C. Leachon of the First District of Oriental Mindoro.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The honorable Representative, Congressman Doy Leachon of the First District of Oriental Mindoro, a TOYM awardee, is recognized to sponsor the budget of the Department of Justice and its affiliated attached agencies.

Go ahead, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. LEACHON. Thank you, honorable handsome Speaker, and of course, thank you also for the beautiful Floor Leader.

Good morning to each and everyone of you, our dear colleagues in Congress, so with our guests from the Department of Justice.

Mr. Speaker, today, as part of the deliberations on the incoming budget for 2018, we have now on the floor, for consideration, the budget of the Department of Justice, together with more or less nine attached agencies and the total budget under consideration is more or less P17.2 billion. With that, Mr. Speaker, this Representation is ready to take questions and interpellations from our colleagues in Congress.

Good morning and thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Maraming salamat, Congressman Leachon.

Mme. Floor Leader is recognized.

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize for his interpellation, Minority Leader Danilo Suarez of the Third District of Quezon.

I so move, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The honorable Minority Leader Danilo Suarez, the kingpin of the province of Quezon, is recognized.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Please proceed, Manong.

REP. SUAREZ. Will the distinguished Sponsor be willing to yield the floor for some questions?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, I will be glad to answer the queries of the distinguished Minority Leader, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. At the outset, distinguished Sponsor, I would like you to know that the incumbent Secretary of Justice is my kababayan.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Not only kababayan at kadistrito, the good Secretary is from Bondoc Peninsula, and we are proud to have a resident of the far-flung area of Bondoc Peninsula to be the Justice Secretary.

Distinguished Sponsor, the Department of Justice is seeking the approval of the proposed P17.28 billion. Is that correct?


REP. SUAREZ. This is 10.9 percent higher than last year.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, we do admit, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Meanwhile, can I just relay to you the utilization rate of this Department on a historical data.


REP. SUAREZ. 2012, 93.4 percent; 2013, 94.5 percent; 2014, 93.5 percent; 2015, 93 percent; and 2016, 89.6 percent.

I would just like to highlight, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, the role that we are doing here in scrutinizing the budget of this agency.

Ito ho ay thankless job na ginagawa natin, na kung minsan nakaka-offend pa ho tayo sa kanila, pero sana ho maintindihan nila lahat, talagang trabaho lang ho ito. Kaya, we can say that this agency is consistent in having a 90-percent utilization rate, and 10 percent, Your Honor, if you are going to come up with a relative comparative figure that is P1.72 billion, if they will remain with a 10-percent unutilized budget. Considering the trust and importance of this agency, Your Honor, P1 billion will play a major role in their performance. So, may I ask from the agency that you are sponsoring, how can Congress be assured this time that in 2018, budget utilization will improve?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Based on our record and of course the DOJ record, in fact, we had our pre-plenary briefing yesterday and I was able to talk to them, especially about the same query of the distinguished Minority Leader, and it was made known to us that based on record, they have been consistent with the utilization percent relative to the annual budget. In fact, for 2016, I have the record right now, that the utilization of the Department of Justice was more or less 92.2 percent. And in fact, under the current fiscal year, as of June, meaning half of this fiscal year, they were able to utilize already about almost 49 percent.

So meaning, given the period from July to December, Mr. Speaker, I am quite pretty confident that with the representation also made by the Department of Justice, the utilization percent gained by the Department of Justice will be as consistent as before and it will be as high as we expect this year, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Minority Leader.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, thank you for that assurance, Your Honor.

On this proposed budget, the Office of the Solicitor General will be included. Is that correct, Your Honor?


REP. SUAREZ. Is the OSG present?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Well, per communication given to me, the Solicitor General is actually on his way. Because as per original schedule, the DOJ will still be at number seven, so it was just relayed this morning. So, with this Representation, I was informed just this morning, about more or less an hour or two hours before. But, I was informed right now that the SolGen is already within the vicinity of the House of Congress.

REP. SUAREZ. I have some issues about OSG.


REP. SUAREZ. That is why it is important that he be around during the deliberations on this budget.

The Office of the Secretary, distinguished Sponsor, gets the bulk of the budget on their presented budget at 37.3 percent. Is it correct, Your Honor?


REP. SUAREZ. The justification is that they will be used for Law Enforcement, Legal Services, and Corrections Program. What is Corrections Program, Your Honor?


REP. LEACHON. The Corrections Program, Mr. Speaker, relates to the programs and policies being undertaken and implemented by the Department of Justice relative to the functions of the Boards of Pardons and Parole, so with the Victims Compensation Program and so with other similar undertakings, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. So, you are saying that these are the PAO, the BUCOR, the NBI and the LRA, namely in that order, Your Honor.

REP. LEACHON. They are principally dealing with correction.

REP. SUAREZ. Because these agencies will only get a billion.

REP. LEACHON. No. The Corrections Program, Mr. Speaker, deals as I have said with the Pardons and Parole Services, the Victims Compensation Program being undertaken by the Board of Claims and some other Legal Services being undertaken, Mr. Speaker by the DOJ.

REP. SUAREZ. So, if our finding is that the PAO, the Bureau of Corrections, the NBI and the LRA are going to receive about a billion and then what are the targets for the Law Enforcement, Legal Services and Corrections Program in 2018? Where will the bulk of the money go?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker.

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, I move for a one-minute suspension of the session?

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

It was 10:26 a.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 10:27 a.m., the session was resumed.

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

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Distinguished Sponsor, how will you rate the performance of the National Bureau of Investigation? I am talking about success rate, apprehensions, dropped cases, lost cases, you know.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Well, we are just getting the records as requested by the distinguished Minority Leader, but then, Mr. Speaker, yesterday when we had our pre-plenary, we required them to submit the required documents particularly dealing with that of the query of the honorable Minority Leader.

REP. SUAREZ. Are you saying that the NBI Director is also not present right now?

REP. LEACHON. No, he is around, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is the NBI Director.

NBI DIRECTOR. Good Morning, Sir.

REP. SUAREZ. So, I am just curious, Your Honor, because the sensitivity of this Office is very important. Lahat po ng mga what we call the “high profile investigations” ay sa inyo napunta. Tama po ako doon, Your Honor? I think this Office is tasked to handle those issues, if I am not mistaken. Wala naman ho yatang ibang sangay ng pamahalaan tungkol sa hustisya na pagdating ho sa imbestigasyon, ang nagha-handle ay ang NBI.

REP. LEACHON. Well, of course collaterally, similar to the functions being undertaken by the National of Bureau of Investigation, they also have functions of the PNP. But dealing with specific subject, as per record of the National Bureau of Investigation, they have, more or less, in 2016, a record of more or less 61,000 cases investigated. And at the end …

REP. SUAREZ. Sixty …

REP. LEACHON. Sixty-one thousand.

REP. SUAREZ. Ito ho iyong—okay, I will go to that later.

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. Pero buti nabanggit mo na. Medyo malilimutin na ako.

How many cases are pending with the NBI?

REP. LEACHON. Well, per record with us, Mr. Speaker, as I just answered, the cases that were being investigated in 2016—because at the current year they are just, of course, receiving new investigation cases—but then in 2016, they had, more or less, about 61,000—to be more specific, 61,266. And at the end of the year, the terminated cases, whether dismissed or filed before the courts because there have been probable


causes sufficient to file the complaints before the Court of Justice, the terminated cases were 59,700. Meaning, they have high rating with respect to the termination of the cases pending or assigned to them.

REP. SUAREZ. Can you educate me, Your Honor, the NBI handles criminal and civil cases, as well, or only criminal cases?

REP. LEACHON. Well, the mandate of the NBI is dealing of course with criminal cases, principally.

REP. SUAREZ. Principally.

REP. LEACHON. Yes. But, the civil aspect will always be included in the criminal charges whenever cases will be filed.

REP. SUAREZ. So, kung ganoon ka-sensitive po ang trabaho ng NBI, then why are we only allocating P1 billion for that purpose?

REP. LEACHON. Well, based on the recent law, in fact, the NBI Modernization Law or RA …

REP. SUAREZ. Let me intervene, distinguished Sponsor. How much did they ask for?

REP. LEACHON. They requested for about, more or less, P1.4 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. How much?

REP. LEACHON. P1.4 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. One point four and they were given a billion.

REP. LEACHON. Yes. And when I asked them yesterday, the only concern of the NBI is, they are actually contented with the budget given to them but they are requesting for hazard pay, to increase it by more or less P2,000 or 100 percent. I think that is a minimal amount of money that is dealing with about 500 employees nationwide, with an addition of about P2,000 per head. That is, more or less, P1 million a month times 12, that is more or less about P12 million.

REP. SUAREZ. Do they get—the NBI agents who go to the field, do they get hazard pay, Your Honor?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, along with the …

REP. SUAREZ. Well, that is a very valid reason. I would even recommend that they should be given more.

In the unforeseen event, God forbids, that an agent on mission suffered death, what do they get?

REP. LEACHON. Unfortunately, under the present system, Mr. Speaker, just like all other employees similarly situated, what they only get in that case would be a claim from the GSIS.

REP. SUAREZ. Iyong benefit lang ng GSIS?

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. Parang katulad ng isang member na yumao, iyon lang ang makukuha.

Wala hong benefit for fulfilling his duty, being a casualty in an armed confrontation? There is no …

REP. LEACHON. Unfortunately, as I have said, Mr. Speaker, the only claim would be under the GSIS, under the present system.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, distinguished Sponsor, we still have another year. We are discussing 2018, and, if there is ample time for us to do some or what we call––going back to our drawing board—and come up with some programs that will somewhat give additional benefits to agents who put their lives at stake especially in doing their profession, I think, we should come up with this and reanalyze the proposed budget. And, if there is a need for us to increase ceiling, so be it, let us increase the ceiling.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I perfectly agree with the comments of the distinguished Minority Leader. In fact, as I told them yesterday, to kindly submit to us at the soonest possible time, considering that we are here and dealing with them, and so far as other concerns of the agency like the establishment of the BuCor.

In fact, under consideration is––that one is very important to us, especially to this Representation, for which I told them to submit the request. Like, for that one, for the benefits in terms of––well, of course, part of the occupational hazard, so with the increase of the hazard pay and address it to the Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. And, definitely, on our end, considering we have this power of the purse, as they say, we will definitely coordinate with the Department of Budget and Management for the consideration of this measly sum amount of money considering, vis-à-vis, the high importance or the higher regard for that claim.

I would also like to commend our Minority Leader. I know in his heart, similar with the other Members of Congress that definitely we will be pushing through with this one, but then, a necessary request should be made. We are just awaiting the request and, thereafter, a communication, a follow-up or a representation


with the DBM will definitely be given priority by this Committee, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, is the NBI spread nationwide?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, they have …

REP. SUAREZ. I mean to say, is there an NBI in every province?


REP. SUAREZ. Do they have …

REP. LEACHON. In fact, they have …

REP. SUAREZ. Do they have regional offices as well?

REP. LEACHON. They have regional offices. Just like in our province, in Oriental Mindoro, we have a regional office there and they have been based there. We have given a space for them and they are performing their mandated function under the law.

REP. SUAREZ. Now, you …

REP. LEACHON. In fact, nationwide, …

REP. SUAREZ. Now, you share my concern.

REP. LEACHON. … by province, …

REP. SUAREZ. They are spread nationwide.

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. They have important tasks to do. Their agents put their lives at stake to fulfill their mission, and yet, this is the only amount they are getting.

Now, can I just go back a little. Can you ask the good Director if he has a wish list? What is it that is needed by the NBI or what should be acquired that they do not have right now?


REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to manifest that I will just be coordinating with the NBI Director as to the request of our distinguished Minority Leader.


It was 10:38 a.m.




REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Yes, you may proceed. But, before you do so, we would like to––there is a one-minute suspension request. But before we suspend, …



It was 10:40 a.m.




Before the Minority Leader proceeds, the Chair would like to acknowledge the presence of our beloved Ombudswoman, the Hon. Conchita Carpio-Morales.

Magandang umaga, Ma’am.The Minority Leader may proceed.

REP. SUAREZ. My question, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, is: what are the needs of the NBI that they cannot acquire due to budget constraints?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, relative to the query, I just inquired with the NBI family and I was informed that, as of now, they would be contented with their budget, because as graciously offered by the honorable Speaker, under the NBI Modernization Law, there is actually a retention of the income.

For example, the NBI clearance …

REP. SUAREZ. Clearance.Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, sorry to intervene, are

you saying that we remit the NBI clearance earnings to the National Treasury?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, but under the new law, there is a retention program being …

REP. SUAREZ. Why retention? Why do they not get it all?


REP. LEACHON. That is under the law. That is a recent law passed about three or four years ago, Mr. Speaker, and the retention is, more or less, about 30 percent. Actually, that is pretty huge considering the income derived from just the NBI clearances which amount to more or less P694 million per year. So they have, more or less P200 million.

Also, under the law, they are authorized to retain, more or less 30 percent, but not more than P150 million. Under the law, the maximum amount to be retained for the usage or utilization of the Bureau would be, more or less, P150 million.

Now, upon inquiry with them, the first year or the first tranche was already given to them amounting to, more or less, P150 million. But then, the utilization should be submitted to the Department of Budget and Management.

I was informed also that, as of now, their priority would be for medical purposes. As for the information, again, the amount is under the Special Account opened by the Bureau. They have P150 million. They are just being required to submit the necessary documents for the approval of the utilization scheme. If that will be approved by the DBM the soonest possible time, they will be allowed to withdraw that money and make the necessary utilization to augment whatever, as you said, wish list or the basic and important mandate to be implemented or to be undertaken by the Bureau.

I think, with that assurance or the words of contentment being relayed to me by the NBI Director, with just the Retention and the Augmentation Fund principally given by Congress, these would be sufficient to sustain the basic needs of the Bureau to enhance the very mandate of law enforcement in the country, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, you have related to me and to the Members that the sharing of the NBI clearance fee, in their desire to upgrade, does not go to the standard of quality of facilities like in some developed nations. But in some cases wherein we watch television, may nakita po akong series of matching. Sinabi lang ang basic concept noong suspect, then they come up with a matching of 3 percent, 4 percent, until it reached 100 percent. Makikita po sa kanilang computer printout ng mga what we call usual list of criminals or suspects. Iyon ang sinasabi ko, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. The facility of the NBI must be upgraded for crime solving. It is sad to note that even ang maliit na amount ay hindi pa natin maibigay sa kanila considering that the unused budget of this administration ranges to about P600 billion a year.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Actually, it is everybody’s dream to have a better country, to have better agencies equipped with advanced technical

equipment. With the assumption of the new NBI Director, I was actually telling them, and their assurance right now is, of course, they are formulating the basic needs of the Bureau, especially with the advancement of the equipment as suggested by the Gentleman. With the hazard pay, the repair and the necessary procurement, the Bureau may be more competitive with the advanced countries, not only in Asia, but with the rest of the world. If they can have the equipment just like what is being used by advanced countries, so much the better. As of now, we are quite assured under their representation that the Bureau will be preparing such Modernization Program relative to the advancement of the science in dealing with investigation, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Mr. Speaker, this Representation has no more question to raise on the proposed budget of the Department of Justice.

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, thank you. I would like to thank our distinguished Minority Leader.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Maraming salamat, distinguished Minority Leader.


REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. France L. Castro from the ACT TEACHERS Party-List for her interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Ang kagalang-galang at magaling na guro mula sa lungsod ng Quezon ay kinikilala para magtanong sa ating distinguished Sponsor. Go ahead, Madam.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Magandang umaga po sa lahat. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker.

Maaari po bang tumanggap ng ilang mga katanungan ang ating Sponsor mula sa Representasyong ito?

REP. LEACHON. G. Ispiker, ang inyong lingkod ay nagagalak na tumanggap ng mga katanungan mula sa ating iginagalang na Kongresista.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Salamat po.Ang badyet po ng DOJ ay P7.2 billion. Tama po

ba?

REP. LEACHON. Tama po. Yes, it is correct, Mr. Speaker. That is P17.2 billion.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Opo. Ito po ba ay tumaas o bumaba doon sa nakaraang badyet ng DOJ, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?


REP. LEACHON. It actually increased po. Tumaas ito ng 10 porsiyento kumpara sa nakaraang badyet nila, G. Ispiker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Salamat po, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Dito po sa mga nakalagay sa Support to Operations, ang mga programa kagaya ng Special Enforcement and Protection Sub-Program na makikita sa page 1051 ng GAB, mayroon ditong Special Protection of Children. Maaari po bang malaman, i-educate ninyo ang Representasyong ito, saan ito ginagamit ng DOJ?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, the query being relayed to this Representation refers to the budget for the development of a package of a child protection and service capacity-building. Ito po ang mga kaso na would involve a minor and, definitely, this refers only to capacity-building, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, ito po ba, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, ay may kinalaman, halimbawa, sa pag-iimbestiga ng mga kaso ng isang minor? Kagaya ng kaso ngayon na nakikita natin, ang kaso ni Kian, ang kaso ni Carl and other related cases. Kasama po ba iyon sa budget na ito?

REP. LEACHON. No, Mr. Speaker, that is not included. If we notice, it is only about more than a million. The one being referred to by the distinguished Representative, the budget for that, actually, is built-in with the law enforcement agency of the DOJ, and that is the NBI. So, with regard to the law enforcement as in the case of Kian, it is actually built-in in the budget of law enforcement, under the budget of the NBI, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Ito namang Anti-Trafficking in Persons, by the way, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, dito po sa mga kaso na tinatalakay natin sa mga kabataan, sa mga youth, ilan ba sa ngayon ang naka-pending sa Department of Justice.

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, I will just be getting the copy. Actually, they already submitted that because that is one of the issues being tackled during the Committee’s budget hearings and so with the pre-plenary conferences. They actually submitted already to the Appropriations Committee.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Puwede po bang mabigyan and Representasyong ito ng kopya.

REP. LEACHON. I have now the copy, Mr. Speaker. What I only know is that the data recording

of the department would be assigned to the different agencies, like for example the total cases filed, this would rest with the NPS or the National Prosecution Service. But then as submitted to this Representation and asked by the distinguished Lady, what we have right now is the record of convictions relative to the trafficking cases from 2005 to 2010. We have more or less about 42 cases with conviction. In 2011, they have about 23 cases with conviction; in 2012, 26; in 2013, 26; a little bit higher in 2014 with 59 cases with conviction; in 2015, 54; and in 2016, 44 cases with conviction.

As of now, half of the fiscal year until June, the record shows 23 cases with conviction. These are the trafficking cases being referred to the distinguished Lady, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, puwede po ba akong mabigyan ng copy niyan, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, we will furnish the honorable Congresswoman with a copy.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Okay. Isa pa po, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Nakalagay sa page 1,052 ng GAB ang Implementation of Administrative Order No. 35, with regard to Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal Killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and other Grave Violations on the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Personnel. Mayroong nakalaan dito na P33,272,000. Puwede ba akong mabigyan ng kopya nito, at ano po ba ang ginagawa ng inter-agency na ito?

REP. LEACHON. May I say that it is a task force created under the law or under a Department Order. We will provide the good Representative the requested copy.

As of now, we have the record of so many cases submitted to us with the percentage of investigations. So far, this is being conducted specifically by the NBI and with a percentage on successful prosecutions.

As of now, more or less 40 percent have been completed. But with the accomplishment, meaning, the termination of the case and until the final conviction to the perpetrators, they have more or less 47 percent of successful prosecutions, Mr. Speaker. Relative to this, extra-legal killings are being investigated by the Department.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Ang ibig sabihin, wala pang 50 percent ang naiimbestigahan o napo-prosecute kaugnay ng mga cases na ito. Hindi po ba mababa ito?

REP. LEACHON. Actually, what we have right now are the cases being conducted from about a year


ago. Until now, the cases are being processed under the process of case build-up. But the most important thing that I am telling right now is, actually, they are being candid about it, and the successful prosecution percentage of the Department of Justice is particularly being done by the National Bureau of Investigation. With so many cases being filed, they have more or less about 47 percent rate on successful prosecutions.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Salamat po. Mayroon ding budget on Corrections Program. Mayroon po ba tayong guidelines o sistema na ini-evaluate ang mga kaso ng mga preso? How often na ginagawa ito at paano po ang proseso?

REP. LEACHON. That, during the budget hearing, is actually one of the main concerns of this Representation. During the time that I was in private law practice, we have been seeing cases that the penalty would be, more or less, about two years, but then the detainees have been languishing in jail for about three years already.

That was about 20 years ago. But under the present scenario, during the time that I made the same query with the Bureau of Pardons and Parole, we are assured right now that they have been with so many offices distributed or spread out across the country. They have been consistent with, how shall we say it, the verification, the conduction of periodic status or evaluation of the cases that they are principally involved with, the submission or recommendation of cases involving pardon or parole, and if cases are being tried regularly. They assured this Representation, Mr. Speaker, that the Board of Pardons and Parole has been consistent in this undertaking.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mr. Sponsor. So mayroon po ba tayong average number ng napa-parole every year? Kasi sinasabi natin na marami pong mga prisoners na hindi na nga magkasya doon sa ating mga bilangguan, pero may mga dapat na ma-evaluate. Halimbawa, iyong mga sickly, iyong mga seniors, at saka iyong talaga pong dapat na mabigyan na ng parole. So, mayroon po ba tayong numbers or mayroon po ba tayong yearly na data kung ilan po iyong nabibigyan ng parole?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, I have actually a long list of this one, but after this one, we will be submitting also this copy to the honorable Representative.

If I may say this one, we have different cases being handled by the Board of Pardons and Parole and those are cases for parole, for commutation of sentence, conditional pardon, absolute pardon, cases for final release and discharge. So, in the first one, the cases for parole is solely being undertaken by the Bureau, meaning, on their own, they can already issue the cases for parole.

As of 2016, this is actually the Board of Pardons and Parole’s Accomplishment Report and they have reviewed, more or less, those qualified for parole across the country, meaning, nationwide. They had about, more or less, a total of 5,049 inmates or detainees who were considered cases for parole and under proper investigation and evaluation. Out of that 5,049 who were supposed to be qualified for parole, those convicts who were granted parole, 1,950 were already released and about 656 were denied.

As to the commutation of sentence, conditional pardon and absolute pardon, these three cases are actually exclusively vested with the Office of the President of the Republic of the Philippines. So, the cases for evaluation will only be recommendatory on the part of the Board of Pardons and Parole and it will be up for the President whether to grant it or not. The number one consideration is old age. As of this moment, they have, more or less, a total of 169 cases for executive clemency and for the consideration of the President. These were submitted sometime in August this year. They have recommended 169 inmates who are presently detainees and for consideration of the President for discharge, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

How about po iyong mga political prisoners? Kasama na rin po ba dito iyong ating mga political prisoners? By the way, ilan po ba ito? Iyong ating mga matatanda, old age, iyong ating …

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. In as much as this Representation would like to answer that query, this is not within the jurisdiction of this Representation, as that refers to the function exclusively vested to the OPPAP.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Pero recently po, di ba, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, kapag natapos na iyong sintensiya noong ilan pong political prisoners na na-release po natin, mayroon po ba tayo nito? Hindi po ba parang recently mayroon tayong ni-release?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, we would like to reiterate that is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the OPPAP.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Okay.

REP. LEACHON. I think they will be here on another date to present their budget, and probably, the good Representative can ask the same question, Mr. Speaker, to the concerned agency, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Okay.Under the Bureau of Corrections pa rin, mayroon

po ditong Special Provision: Revolving Fund for Agro-


Industrial Products. Mayroon po dito, the Revolving Fund constituted for the sale of agro-industrial products shall be used for—ito po, gusto ko lang pong malinawan, saan po ito ginagamit? Or may mga places po ba sa bansa natin na kung saan mayroong ganitong pinaggagamitan at ano iyong success, kung mayroon?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, with regard to the question, the Revolving Fund for Agro-Industrial Products is actually for the following purposes:

(i) payment of allowance to prisoners working in agricultural or industrial projects—[well, the rate is included here] at a rate of not less P500 for each prisoner per month; (ii) payment of additional subsistence allowance of prisoners in the National Penitentiary; and (iii) purchase of additional supplies and materials, farm tools, and equipment for the construction, maintenance, repair and operations of agricultural or industrial and prison facilities.

So, tatlo po iyon: una, para po sa kanilang allowance; pangalawa, additional subsistence allowance; at pangatlo, pambili po ng mga farm equipment para po maisakatuparan nila iyong kanilang mga trabaho para sa pang-agrikultura, kung dito ay may ginagawa nang naturang prison facility, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Saan po ba ito? Saan ito ginagawa? Ito po ba ay nasa Davao? Nasa Palawan? Puwede po bang magbigay tayo ng ano …

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). … mayroon po ba tayong report on the success noong ganitong programs na ginagawa natin sa Bureau of Corrections?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Apart from the National Penitentiary which is

located here in Metro Manila, we have around seven attached prison facilities across the country. Number one is in Palawan. We have in Occidental Mindoro. Another one is in Davao, and some other prison facilities located in various parts of the country. As I was informed, Mr. Speaker, those seven prison facilities are using this one because all of them are involved in agricultural production, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, puwede po bang, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, mabigyan ang Representasyong ito noong reports o iyong mga success ng mga ganitong

klase ng programs natin? Doon sa mga binanggit ninyo po, sa seven places across the country, kung puwede pong mabigyan kami ng achievements or performance report, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Opo, amin pong isusumite sa kagalang-galang na Representante iyong kaniyang pangangailangan patungkol sa mga listahan patungkol sa Revolving Fund for Agro-Industrial Products.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Salamat po, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

Dito rin po under the Bureau of Corrections, number two, Special Provisions: Subsistence and Medicine Allowance of Prisoners—allowance of P60 per day siguro po ito, and P10 para po doon sa medical para po doon sa 44,789 number of prisoners for the year. So ganito po ba karami iyong ating mga prisoners all over the country—44,789?

REP. LEACHON. Tama po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So iyong P60 na para sa food or subsistence allowance, sa tingin ninyo po ba tama lang ito? Sa tingin ninyo po ba, hindi maliit ito na para sa pagkain ng isang tao sa tatlong meal na kailangan ng isang tao para mabuhay naman iyong kaniyang katawan at maging malusog? P60, tama po ba ito?

REP. LEACHON. Tama po. Sa katunayan po, ito ay nataasan na ng P10. Ako po ay sumasang-ayon na kung atin pong mas matataasan, mas maganda. But then, under the present circumstances that we are having right now or with the circumstances availing at the present moment, in fact, a due consideration was made with an increase of more or less P10 for subsistence allowance for each prisoner.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Opo. Ang Representasyon pong ito ay nagpapahayag ng—ang budget po na ito para sa subsistence and medicine allowance ng ating mga prisoner na P60 at P10 sa medicine ay sa tingin ko po ay hindi makatao. Iyong P60 na ito ay hindi po talaga makakapagbigay ng tamang, kumbaga, sustansya sa ating mga prisoners kung ganito lang po ang ibina-budget natin. Kung madadagdagan po sana iyong budget na ito ay kasama po ninyo ang Representasyong ito para madagdagan, kasi ito ay parang pinapatay na rin natin dito iyong ating mga prisoner.

Last question na po, tungkol po naman sa NBI clearance—may sasabihin po ang ating Sponsor?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to agree with the distinguished Congresswoman, but then, if I may say, that is actually


based on the standard set forth by the Department of Health and with the BJMP and we should remember that the prisoners or the detainees who are involved here are those only within the confines of the National Penitentiary. This is actually different from those under the BJMP. So we—this government, through the Department of Health, has made a standard for that one, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, for the last question?

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mr. Sponsor. Last question na po about the NBI. Ito ay parating

itinatanong ng mga nagwo-work o kumukuha ng NBI clearances. Hindi po ba ang ang validity po ng NBI clearance dati ay one year, ngayon po ay naging six months. Sinasabi po noong ating mga mamamayan na kumukuha po ng NBI clearance, bakit masyado pong maliit iyong time frame? Ibig sabihin, ang paggagamitan nito ay six months. Alam ninyo po ba kung gaano kahaba ang ipinipila ng ating mga mamamayan sa pagkuha ng mga NBI clearance? Nakita ko iyan sa mga SM—sa mga iba’t ibang mga malls na kung saan mayroong mga NBI clearance branches po tayo. So, ano po iyong naging basis bakit six months na lang ngayon iyong duration ng NBI clearance po, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, two concerns: number one, with all due respect to our distinguished Congresswoman, we would like to make a little correction or a manifestation that it is not actually six months but per the information just now, the validity would be for one year po—ang sabi po ng NBI Director, one year; pangalawa po, iyon pong matagal na pila, wala po tayong magagawa dahil mahaba talaga ang pila; but insofar as per client is concerned, their commitment is to release the NBI clearance within 10 minutes from the time of application.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Sige po. Parang—sa karanasan ko po noong last year na kinuhanan ko ng NBI clearance iyong aking asawa ay six months iyong duration nito na nakuha namin sa SM Fairview.


REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, ...

REP. LEACHON. They actually have a unified...

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, ngayon nagbago na po?

REP. LEACHON. ...system right now. The effectivity would be for at least about...

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). For one year na?

REP. LEACHON. For one year.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Okay. So, iyon lang po, Mr. Speaker. Maraming salamat po sa ating Sponsor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Maraming salamat po.


REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of the budget of the Department of Justice and the attached agencies.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). There is a motion.


REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, before we tackle the budget of the Office of the Ombudsman, we would like to acknowledge the presence of our guests today from the Office of the Ombudsman starting off with the Ombudsman herself, Conchita Carpio-Morales, Deputy Ombudsman Melchor Arthur H. Carandang, Deputy Ombudsman Gerald A. Mosquera, Deputy Ombudsman Paul Elmer M. Clemente, Deputy Ombudsman Rodolfo M. Elman, Deputy Ombudsman Cyril E. Ramos, and Special Prosecutor Edilberto G. Sandoval.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The guests mentioned may now take the secretariat table at the back.

The session is suspended to allow the technical staff to sort out the personnel.

It was 11:16 a.m.





OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we begin the consideration of the budget of the Office of the Ombudsman.

I move that we recognize the Sponsor from the First District of Oriental Mindoro, Rep. Doy C. Leachon.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The honorable Sponsor is recognized.

REP. LEACHON. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mme. Floor Leader.

Under consideration right now is the budget of the Office of the Ombudsman, headed of course by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, with a budget of P2.497 billion.

Mr. Speaker, this Representation is now ready for any interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Thank you, distinguished Sponsor.


REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize for his interpellation the Minority Leader, Rep. Danilo Suarez, from the Third District of Quezon.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The honorable Minority Leader is recognized.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is the distinguished Sponsor willing to yield for

some questions in the plenary?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, this Representation is very glad to accept interpellation from the Minority Leader.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, the office the Gentleman is sponsoring has a proposed budget of P2,588,000,000. Is this correct?


REP. SUAREZ. This is an increase from their 2017 budget of P2,299,000,000 or roughly about a P200-million or P190-million increase. Is this correct?


REP. SUAREZ. May we know the rationale behind the increase.

REP. LEACHON. The minimal increase refers only to the Personnel Services, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, the increase of P190 million mainly refers to the Personnel Services, for the increase for Personal Services.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, Mr. Speaker, ito ho kasi ang concept ng ating trabaho as keeper of the purse. Iyon hong average utilization ng Ombudsman from 2012 to

2016 was 84.1 percent. Mayroon po silang shortfall na almost 16.9 percent; hindi ho ito nagagastos.

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, the utilization percent of the Office of the Ombudsman for the year 2016 was more or less about 86 percent, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. No, that is the highest. But, for instance, in 2015 ang utilization ninyo was only 79 percent. Ngayon lang hong 2016 kayo tumaas ng 91 percent.

I hope you will understand the position that we are in. We are the Minority, we are supposed to check and find out why you are asking for an increase in funds. Remember, these are taxpayers’ money.

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. And, I understand the sensitivity of this office but it must be fully explained to our constituents in this job that we are doing. Because it really does defy logic that you are asking for additional money when you are not spending it.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. With the comment of our distinguished Minority Leader, I definitely I would like to perfectly agree, but then there are underlying important reasons why they had a, more or less, little low utilization percent: number one, we must remember the fact that many of their employees, particularly those in lawyer positions, have been leaving the Office of the Ombudsman. And for that reason, there are actually many vacancies for positions in their office. That perfectly states why they have low utilization, because these funds are not being used. Second, under their internal policy, they have continuing programs being implemented by the Office of the Ombudsman. But, principally, as I said, it is about the numerous vacancies in their office, Mr. Speaker, our distinguished …

REP. SUAREZ. There are a lot of unfilled vacancies, a lot. When the Gentleman says a lot, can we have some specific numbers?

REP. LEACHON. Yes. I was, I am actually surprised right now. They have about a 40-percent vacancy for their lawyer positions, mainly for lawyer positions.

REP. SUAREZ. Are these positions—may we know the plantilla that are still unfilled, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. LEACHON. Come again, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. What are the positions of plantilla that are still unfilled?


REP. LEACHON. Mainly for lawyer positions and …

REP. SUAREZ. Lawyers are not interested to work in the Ombudsman?

REP. LEACHON. …because under normal circumstances just like in the provinces, whenever—we would like to state the fact that the Office of the Ombudsman, just like in an ordinary circumstance vis-à-vis the Department of Justice, they act as Prosecutors. Now, after spending more or less a few years of practice under the Office of the Ombudsman, many of them apply to the Judiciary for Judgeship, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, we are halfway through 2017. How much have they spent so far?

REP. LEACHON. As relayed to me by the Deputy Ombudsman for Finance, the utilization percent for as of this moment is actually 44.57 percent, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. How many percent, Mr. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. It is 44.57 percent, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. And we are three months in. “Ber” na tayo, so that is three months before the end of the year.

REP. LEACHON. That is actually as of June, which is mid-year.

REP. SUAREZ. Forty-four?

REP. LEACHON. June of the current year.

REP. SUAREZ. So, we are saying that there will be a marked improvement in the utilization for 2017?

REP. LEACHON. If we are to ratio it within the period, 44 percent for a six-month period is actually very much reasonable and we are expecting a similar percentage to be utilized for the remaining six months, inclusive of those already spent from July to December of this year, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, on those adjudicated issues, how many cases have been investigated with outputs, for instance, for this year?

REP. LEACHON. Okay, based on the record that we have right now, they carry-over, I mean, the total number of cases in addition to the present cases filed is carried over from the previous years. They have, more or less, 6,000 cases filed with them not only for this year but

including the previous years. But as of now, as of this moment, they have 2,700 cases disposed, distributed in the different areas or jurisdiction as of June of this year, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, I would like to highlight to the Gentleman the problem of having an Ombudsman case. When a case is filed against, for instance, any Member of Congress, as long as that issue is not resolved, it remains pending and it is a nightmare. Alam mo na kapag mayroon kang Ombudsman case eh you can never be at ease.

So, iyon po bang pagfa-file ng Ombudsman of a complaint that is—you have to educate me kasi wala ho akong Ombudsman case, kaya hindi ko ho alam—so kapag ho may nag-file at sinabi ng Ombudsman na ifa-file nila iyong kaso, I suppose that they have undertaken the necessary investigation. Is that the procedure? Hindi ho ba ganoon?

REP. LEACHON. Yes. The jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman has dual aspects or two considerations: number one is the administrative case, and if ever one would be found guilty as charged, the proper penalty will be meted against the respondent. But then, once the case is filed before the Office of the Ombudsman dealing with criminal cases, of course, it will conduct the investigation and, just like in the ordinary course of business under the prosecution, it will conduct a preliminary investigation. Once a probable cause is found, then under the law, it will be filed before the Office of the Sandiganbayan. Otherwise, the cases will be dismissed by the Office of the Ombudsman.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, according to the Commission on Audit in 2014, only three out of 13 COA recommendations were fully implemented by the Ombudsman. Is that figure correct? Nine were partially implemented. May I know what is the term—explain to me the term “implemented.”

REP. LEACHON. Implemented, meaning, they have undertaken the necessary recommendations of the Commission on Audit and they have complied with all the mandates and requirements of the Office of the Commission on Audit, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, being a non-lawyer, I just would like to find out, can the Office of the Ombudsman recommend permanent disqualification, so an elected official cannot run again for another position?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, definitely, if a case has been filed with them and upon due investigation, definitely, a


disposition of case or judgment would be made. And if a particular charge carries with it the penalty provided for under the law, and that is the permanent disqualification to run for public office, and then, of course, under the law, they are definitely authorized to issue such cases of judgment…

REP. SUAREZ. So, no, it somewhat jibes with my question. The Gentleman said permanent disqualification for that position.

REP. LEACHON. …to any…

REP. SUAREZ. It says that you cannot run again for any public position.

REP. LEACHON. Any government position or government service—they are barred from entering any government position under the law.

REP. SUAREZ. And the Ombudsman has that power?


REP. SUAREZ. Is that constitutional?


REP. SUAREZ. Name me, tell me why. Is it within the Constitution? Tell me the provision wherein …

REP. LEACHON. Well, just in the cases of—we have definitely various laws, to say specifically, because you have, under the Revised Penal Code also being, of course, enacted by Congress, that for different offenses involving public officials, apart from conviction, apart from being imprisoned, apart from the paying of fines, they carry with them, definitely, a bar from holding government office.

Particularly, of course, Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to our Minority Leader, logic dictates that if you are convicted for an offense relative to your discharge of duty, as a government official, I think, I believe and I know that, definitely, you will already be unfit to discharge your function for the position you are holding, and so with other positions in the government because there was a finding of malfeasance or misfeasance or a criminal case that, more or less, would taint your reputation and ability to hold public office.

We must remember that under the Constitution, if I may say so, “public office is a public trust.” And, from that simple provision, Mr. Speaker, it connotes, definitely, that if their trust upon a government employee holding that position is lost, I think, it is constitutional

to enact laws by a simple act of Congress to give that penalty of perpetual disqualification from public office along with conviction or imprisonment of the perpetrator, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. So, iyong distinguished Sponsor is saying that the decision of an Ombudsman to make a judgment that a certain elected official found guilty and removed from his position can be given the additional punishment of not being able to run again for any other position?

REP. LEACHON. That is actually in the disposition or …

REP. SUAREZ. As I have said, this is a learning curve because I am not a lawyer.

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. Is that discretionary to the Office of the Ombudsman?

REP. LEACHON. That is an accessory to penalty provided under the law apart from, as I said, the conviction or imprisonment of the offender.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, on these last six years of the previous administration, I was the Minority Leader from 2010 to 2013, not so active during 2013 to 2016, but I was informed of several cases that were filed under the Office of the Ombudsman, serious issues, even several cases of plunder. And, up to now, I would like to find out, have the Office of the Ombudsman filed cases for those alleged offenses that were committed during the last six years?

REP. LEACHON. Of course, based on records, there are actually numerous cases particularly dealing with plunder that have been filed with the Office of the Ombudsman.

REP. SUAREZ. That was filed already by the Ombudsman?


REP. SUAREZ. And, these cases are now with the Sandigan?

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. Can I be given a copy of those cases?

REP. LEACHON. For the record, it is a public work.



REP. SUAREZ. Can I request for a one-minute suspension of the session, Mr. Speaker?


It was 11:38 a.m.




REP. SUAREZ. Distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, I asked for a copy of the Lawmakers involved in scams: 2014, former Senator Enrile, Senator Revilla, Senator Estrada; 2015, Edgar Valdez, Congressman Jaraula, Congressman Plaza, Congressman Dangwa, Congresswoman Lanete; 2016, Congressman Villanueva, Arthur Yap, Aurelio Umali, the late Secretary Datumanong, Secretary Baterina, Governor Cagas, Thomas Dumpit, Coquilla, Pancrudo, Valencia, Cagas, Alvin Sandoval, Olaño, Ruffy Biazon, Pingoy, Lim; 2017, Senator Honasan, Luis Asistio, Cajayon, Vincent Crisologo, Teves, Ma. Victoria Sy, Ed Veloso, Ong, Tupas, Antonino, Gregorio Ipong and ex-Congressman Nograles.

Iisa lang ang Liberal dito. Wala bang kasalanan na ginawa for the last six years ang mga Liberal?

REP. LEACHON. Well, with all due respect to our distinguished Minority Leader, Mr. Speaker, …

REP. SUAREZ. Let me just expound a little. I am sorry to intervene, distinguished colleague.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Minority Leader, you may proceed.

REP. SUAREZ. Sen. Gringo Honasan was the prime mover of RAM. History will never dictate of what could have happened to this country if there was no movement of RAM that was somewhat responsible for the overthrow of the Marcos administration. You will agree with me on that.

Now, the issue of Senator Honasan is about a simple P2 million case of purchases that were consummated. The allegation is that it was not properly implemented as a procedure. Does it warrant for him to be arrested, an incumbent Senator, and be given—go to having the mug shot and his fingerprint? Why?

REP. LEACHON. Well, Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to our distinguished Minority Leader, I mean, the Office of the Ombudsman does not, I know, would not look for any party involved. But then, if I may reply to that query of our distinguished Minority Leader, I mean, if—definitely, under the law, regardless of the position, regardless of the power you are holding, regardless of the memory you have imprinted upon the minds of Filipinos, regardless of family affiliation, regardless of anything, as long as there is a violation of the law and there is a corresponding charge, he will be dealt with in accordance with the law. Just as simple as that.

Second, I mean, upon finding probable cause, the cases definitely will be disposed off, out of the jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman. It will be filed before the Sandiganbayan, and then, of course, it is within the power of the Sandiganbayan to issue the warrant of arrest for, precisely, under the law, again, that is the mandate of procedure to be undertaken on any case filed before them under an information duly filed by the Office of the Ombudsman.

If it involves P2 million, I may or would like to agree, because personally, during my time, I was City Mayor, Mr. Speaker, and I have been filed with about 13 cases during my time, because that is part of our occupational hazards, measly, at least, for cockfighting, for simple cases. Fortunately, they have been disposed with. Eh that is part of our occupational hazards regardless of the gravity of the offense involved. I think as long as not only the Office of the Ombudsman but any court of justice in this country would definitely—I would like to believe they should dispose off and give judgment in accordance with and based on the law.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, naka-one year na ho tayo noong manalo ang Pangulong Duterte. Bibigyan natin ng one-year learning curve. Nagyu-euphoric tayo kasi bagong administration. Hindi ho tayo masyadong nagtanungan last year. But by this time, magtu-two years na tayo, I will repeat my question—I gave you a list. Iisa lang ho ang Liberal doon. Lahat kalaban ng nakaraang administrasyon. Pangalawa, iyong pangalawang tanong ko, bakit walang fina-file na kaso iyong mga dating nakaupo noong nakaraang anim na taon? Eh ang dami pong mga, alam namin na ang mga na-file na, marami pa nga hong plunder eh.

REP. LEACHON. Okay. With the cases involving the—they have the list here apart from those given to the Minority Leader. But, of course, Mr. Speaker, those comments of the distinguished Minority Leader would definitely be noted and we are quite assured that the cases within their jurisdiction should be resolved with necessary dispatch in order to clear out those cases


already filed or pending before them, if ever cases have been filed before them involving this concern.

REP. SUAREZ. For the record, distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, am I correct to say that up to now, there is no case that has been filed by the Office of the Ombudsman on those officers of the previous administration that allegedly committed serious crimes and a sizeable amount of plunder? Ngayon, kung sasabihin ho ninyo na pine-prepare pa o wala sa record ninyo, then I will have to say that when those records or data are prepared, then we could proceed again in deliberating the proposed budget of the Ombudsman. So, I will move for a deferment.

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, again, with all due respect to the distinguished Minority Leader, we have cases, if what is being insisted here are cases filed before the Sandiganbayan and disposed off by the Office of the Ombudsman, involving employees or elected officials under the Liberal Party or affiliated with the Liberal Party. I think we have the same list, distinguished Minority Leader. But, you know, …

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, I have nothing against the Liberal Party. What I am just saying is that this particular …

REP. LEACHON. Yes, yes.

REP. SUAREZ. … sensitive office should not be politicalized.

REP. LEACHON. Yes. We have the case of Joel Villanueva. That case has already been filed before the Office of the Sandiganbayan and the necessary posting of bail has been made.

Congressman Ruffy Biazon of Muntinlupa, Liberal Party, has been filed a case, and former Congressman Junjun Tupas.

REP. SUAREZ. Senator Villanueva is a member of the Liberal Party, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, or did he run under the banner of the Liberal Party?

REP. LEACHON. He ran under the banner of the Liberal Party during the time that he ran for the Senate.

REP. SUAREZ. I understand he is with a party-list. Is that correct, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. But he is under the banner of the Liberal.

REP. SUAREZ. Yes, but party-lists are supposed to be non-partisan.

REP. LEACHON. During the time that he was in Congress, he was a Member of Party-List CIBAC and he got three terms, but when he ran …

REP. SUAREZ. I repeat, but they are not supposed to be members of any political organization.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, but then, when he ran for the Senate, he was ...

REP. SUAREZ. He is an adopted candidate of the Liberal.

REP. LEACHON. … of the Liberal Party.

REP. SUAREZ. But not a member of the Liberal Party.

REP. LEACHON. Yes. But then during that time, I would like to remember that we even campaigned for him because he was always under the banner of the Liberal Party during that time.

REP. SUAREZ. So, I hope you will understand and digest the sentiment of this Representation.

REP. LEACHON. Perfectly.

REP. SUAREZ. I will admit the fact, distinguished Sponsor, that Senator Honasan is a good friend.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, perfectly.

REP. SUAREZ. And I would like to say again the heroic deeds that he has done because ang puhunan po nila when they did a breakaway late 1986 or 1987, buhay po ang kanilang puhunan doon, Your Honor. Hindi man lang ba inisip noong nag-imbestiga sa office ng Ombudsman na napakaliit na kaso naman nito na hindi naman glaring iyong amount at saka mukhang procedural ang issue ng misspending ay inisyuhan na agad natin ng warrant of arrest?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, with regard to the query of the honorable Minority Leader, the authority to issue warrants of arrest is lodged before the Office of the Sandiganbayan.

REP. SUAREZ. I know. But a case was filed.

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. Kung medyo, ika nga, pinag-aralang mabuti, how serious is the gravity of the crime committed, hindi ho naman siguro makikita. Pero ang point ko, the amount is P2 million. The plunder cases


that were filed before the Office of the Ombudsman allegedly by the previous administration were in billions. Wala ho tayong ifina-file na kaso.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker. I perfectly agree with the sentiment of the distinguished Minority Leader.

Number one, with respect to the cases being referred to, as of now, with respect to the DAF cases and PDAF cases, the Commission on Audit has yet to submit the vital documents necessary for the Office of the Ombudsman to rule on the matter. But then if really, well, of course, I would like also to agree that we are not referring here just to the name of the party. But we should also be reminded, of course, with all due respect, that even the case of the former President, in the case of Mamasapano, has been disposed off with by the Office of the Ombudsman, finding probable cause against the former President of the Republic for usurpation of authority in relation to the cases filed before—relative to the Mamasapano cases.

REP. SUAREZ. You are talking about the case filed against the former President.


REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, if I may quote the statement of our incumbent President Duterte, he said that a good lawyer will dismiss that immediately. That is what he said. I am not a lawyer.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, we respect …

REP. SUAREZ. So, I am not in a position to say whether he is correct or not. But at the outset, I was surprised. And I say that, hey, at least a case is filed against, as you are aware, the Mamasapano case was so serious. That caused the death of how many, 47 of our SAF?

REP. LEACHON. Forty-four.

REP. SUAREZ. Forty something. We lost lives. We lost the battle. So, my point here, distinguished Sponsor, is this, I would like to ask that the Lady who will be serving her last—almost several months before she retires. Can her position be extended? Can the President ask for the extension of the term of the Ombudsman?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, the Office of the Ombudsman has a term under the Constitution.

REP. SUAREZ. So, pagkatapos po, is that an eight-year term? Am I correct?

REP. LEACHON. Seven years.

REP. SUAREZ. Seven years. So, maaari bang bigyan lang ako ng assurance ng Ombudsman, who is quite close to me and is a good friend, na bago siya umalis sa kanyang opisina ay mabibigyan naman ng justice iyong aming sinasabi na alisin na natin ang political color at gawin ang dapat gawin? Na iyong mga nagkasala na may allegation ng criminal act, it is just an allegation, ay mai-file?

Mr. Speaker, bago mag-Disyembre, we still have some good three months for that.

REP. LEACHON. If the Ombudsman can only speak before this court, but then we are definitely assured that they will dispose with the cases without biases, without prejudice, without referring to party affiliation. And, rest assured to our distinguished Minority Leader that the cases will be resolved at the soonest time possible, before she retires on the expected date.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I would like to erase from my mind my malicious thinking that there is an unwritten order, from time to time, that is being given to our Lady saying, “Go slow with my people during the last administration.”

I hope it is not happening. So, para mawala po iyong ating doubt about the sincerity and dedication of the Lady from the Office of the Ombudsman, cases should be filed bago po siya magbitiw sa kanyang katungkulan.

REP. LEACHON. Rest assured, Mr. Speaker, that the biases that will end in the Office of the Ombudsman, as requested and as duly noted—all the recommendations of our distinguished Minority Leader will be definitely and perfectly taken into consideration, especially with high priority and respect to the matters raised during this budget deliberation.

REP. SUAREZ. Maybe the Lady can put a liaison office in the office of the Minority to keep us posted on our request.

REP. LEACHON. We will definitely do so, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, thank you for your answers. I do not have any more questions …

REP. LEACHON. It has always been …

REP. SUAREZ. … on the proposed budget of the Ombudsman.


REP. LEACHON. … a pleasure dealing with our distinguished Minority Leader.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

REP. MERCADO. Mr. Speaker, there being no Member who wishes to interpellate, I move that we close the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Office of the Ombudsman.

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

The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.


REP. MERCADO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we proceed to the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the office of the Department of Justice and request that the representative—Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the session.

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

It was 11:59 a.m.




Yes, Minority Leader. Is there a motion?

REP. SUAREZ. I just would like it to be official, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of the Minority, we move for the closure of the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the Office of the Ombudsman.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). There is a motion by the Minority Leader, joining the earlier motion of the Majority Leader, to terminate the consideration of the budget of the Office of the Ombudsman.

REP. MERCADO. Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Yes, the Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. MERCADO. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the

Majority, we join the Minority in terminating the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Office of the Ombudsman.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Thank you very much, Dep. Majority Leader.

There is now a reiteration of two motions. Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

Congratulations, Mme. Ombudswoman. Stay beautiful, Ma’am.


REP. MERCADO. Mr. Speaker, I move for the suspension of the session for one minute.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). We will suspend the session to allow the officials of the Office of the Ombudsman to extricate themselves from the secretariat table and to allow the officials of the Department of Justice to take over.

The session is suspended.

It was 12:01 p.m.


At 12:11 p.m., the session was resumed.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The session is resumed. The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

COMMISSION ON AUDIT

REP. MERCADO. Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary status of the Bill is that we are in the period of sponsorship and debate. I move that the Hon. Doy Leachon be recognized to sponsor the budget of the office of the Commission on Audit.


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

The Hon. Doy Leachon is recognized for the first time this morning. Go ahead, Congressman Leachon.

REP. LEACHON. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Dep. Majority Leader.

The budget under deliberation this time is that of the Commission on Audit. We are ready, Mr. Speaker, for any interpellation.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Before you do so, yes, Mme. Floor Leader?

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, before we recognize the first interpellant, we would like to acknowledge the presence of the members of the Commission on Audit ...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Go ahead.

REP. ROA-PUNO. ...who are present today: the Chairman, Michael Aguinaldo; Commissioner Jose Fabia; Commissioner Isabel Agito; and the COA Assistant Commissioner’s Group including Elizabeth Zosa, Winnie Rose Encallado, Susan Garcia, Delfin Aguilar, Luz Tolentino, Alexander Juliano and Manolo Sy.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The officers of the Commission on Audit are welcome to the House of Representatives.

Yes, the Mme. Floor Leader is recognized.

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize, for his interpellation, the honorable Congressman Rodante D. Marcoleta.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Hon. Rodante Marcoleta, before I recognize you, I would like to acknowledge the presence of the Chairman—the true intellectual heavyweight of the Commission on Audit, Commissioner Chairman Michael Aguinaldo.

Magandang umaga. Magandang tanghali po.Yes, Congressman Marcoleta, you are recognized.

Please proceed.

REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Can we ask the secretariat to please fix the microphone of our beloved Congressman Marcoleta. Maputulan na ang lahat, huwag lang si Congressman Marcoleta.

REP. MARCOLETA. Putol eh, ayun.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Ayan.

REP. MARCOLETA. Maraming salamat po, Mr. Speaker.

Good morning, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. LEACHON. Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Good morning, Congressman.

REP. MARCOLETA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, with its vision to evolve as a trustworthy, respected and independent audit institution, will it be fair to assume that the officials and auditors of the Commission on Audit are quite familiar with all the circulars issued by the office?


REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you. Is it not true that COA Circular No. 96-003,

dated February 27, 1996, was issued to all heads of GOs, meaning to say, national government agencies, LGUs and GOCCs, which extend funds to NGOs in implementing their development efforts?


REP. MARCOLETA. May I hear the answer again, Mr. Speaker.


REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you. Considering that Circular No. 96-003 categorically covers implementing agencies and the COA, is it correct to assume that the Members of Congress are not specifically covered by the said circular?


REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you very much for the answer.

Will COA agree that in financing the development efforts of the NGOs, clause 3.4 of Circular No. 96-003 mandates the national government agencies, LGUs and GOCCs, to enter into a MOA with NGOs incorporating the following requirements:

3.4.1 Project statement including identification of beneficiaries;

3.4.2 Standards for project implementation by the NGO/PO and acceptance by the GO to include completion date;

3.4.3 Systems and procedures for project implementation such as but not limited to, the procurement of goods and services by the NGO/PO and the schedule of release of the fund assistance by the GO x x x;

3.4.4 Project cost estimates and the time schedules; and

3.4.5 Reporting, monitoring and inspection requirements?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, rightfully said, Mr. Speaker.


REP. MARCOLETA. Yes, thank you very much. Will COA also agree that clause 4 of Circular No.

96-003 requires the concerned GO to:

4.1 accredit the NGO/PO after proper verification of required documents and statements;

4.2 deve lop s t anda rds fo r p ro j ec t implementation and acceptance;

x x x 4.4 require monthly or quarterly financial

and physical status reports as it deems necessary;

4.5 m o n i t o r a n d i n s p e c t p r o j e c t implementation and verify financial records and reports of the NGO/PO;

4.6 issue certificates of acceptance upon completion of the project and acceptance by its beneficiaries, among others;

x x x

REP. LEACHON. Yes, as stated in the circular, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you very much.Will COA also agree, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor,

that under clause number 5 of Circular No. 96-003, the NGO is obligated to:

5.1 ensure project implementation in accordance with the MOA;

x x x5.3 require beneficiaries to issue certificate

of acceptance for accomplished or completed projects;

5.4 submit the required financial and physical status reports; and

5.5 submit to the GO a certificate of accomplishment with required evidence, and for projects involving assistance of P100,000 or more, duly audited financial assistance.


REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you for the answer, Mr. Speaker.

With the above safeguards, now duly confirmed by COA, particularly clauses 3.4, number 4 and number 5 of Circular No. 96-003, will COA agree with this Representation that there exists a robust mechanism that will ensure the completion of all NGO-implemented projects, not to mention the prudent utilization of public funds?

REP. LEACHON. I perfectly agree, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you very much. If that is so, Mr. Speaker, can an endorsement letter

of a Member of Congress nullify or render ineffectual any of the procedures laid down in Circular No. 96-003?

REP. LEACHON. No, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. No. Thank you very much.When a Member of Congress, Mr. Speaker,

is asked to sign the MOA mandated between the GO and the NGO, does not his signature become a superfluity considering that he is not even required to do so in any of the clauses under Circular No. 96-003?


REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you very much for the answer.

Considering that the Members of Congress, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, are not parties to the procedures and mechanisms outlined in Circular No. 96-003, will it be presumptuous and arbitrary to make them liable in the notices of disallowance issued by COA?

REP. LEACHON. It would depend, Mr. Speaker. Number one, if based only on the MOA of which the Member of Congress who is not a participant thereto, definitely not. But, just in case there would be extraneous evidence dealing with that, apart from the signature, there was a degree or level of participation in the implementation of the project, hopefully, it would be an aboveboard project, then definitely that Member would not be liable under the MOA as provided for under the Circular as mentioned by the distinguished Representative.

REP. MARCOLETA. That is not quite clear, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. LEACHON. Well, …

REP. MARCOLETA. The question is very categorical. Considering that the Members of Congress are not parties to the procedures and mechanism outlined in Circular No. 96-003, will it be presumptuous and arbitrary to make them liable in the notices of disallowance issued by COA?

REP. LEACHON. If plainly on that question, the answer is no.

REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you very much.Will the COA also agree with this Representation


that the COA itself is obligated under clause 6 of Commission on Audit Circular No. 96-003 to:

6.1 audit the grant of the fund assistance, with emphasis on the GO’s monitoring and inspection system, in accordance with laws and regulations; and

6.2 conduct special audits of NGOs/POs upon request by proper authorities or as determined by the COA Chairman.


REP. MARCOLETA. Thank you very much.When the said Circular stated “to audit the grant

of the fund assistance with emphasis on the GO’s monitoring and inspection system,” the COA itself, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, acknowledged the need to check on GOs while the project is being implemented. Is that correct, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor?

REP. LEACHON. It will be covered under the present system, the system being adopted by the COA which is post-audit, meaning, after the implementation of the project.

REP. MARCOLETA. I did not get that, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, previously, I would like to reiterate that the system being adopted by the Commission on Audit is a post-audit scheme. Meaning, after the implementation of the project, the necessary documents will be submitted to them for audit.

REP. MARCOLETA. If that is the answer, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, then that defeats the very purpose of auditing the grant of fund assistance with emphasis on the GO’s monitoring and inspection system. How can you monitor and inspect when the very measure of the audit is always post-audit? I am asking, Mr. Speaker, whether or not, the very purpose of the audit of the grant in here even if it is only the grant, the COA is already obligated, Mr. Speaker, with emphasis on the GO’s monitoring and inspection system as determined by the COA Chairman. I think it is within the prerogative of the COA Chairman to adapt a timely audit because it will defeat the purpose of the monitoring and inspection system.

REP. LEACHON. I understand, Mr. Speaker, the position of the good Representative, but then if I may say so, this is an audit with respect to emphasis on government or GO’s monitoring, meaning, it does not necessarily mean that during the implementation process, the monitoring procedure—the audit of the monitoring procedure may happen even at post-audit when documents would state that there is a certification on

the part of the GO that there was monitoring. But at any rate, as regards the comment of the good Representative, that would be properly noted, Mr. Speaker, and be duly considered in the review of this Circular being the subject of this interpellation, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. Anyway, we will tackle that later. We have questions in relation to that because monitoring will be consistent only if it is timely, Mr. Speaker. Anyway, if the COA is conscious, because if the COA will conduct an audit many years after the grant of the fund to the NGOs, Mr. Speaker, that will not sit well with the time-bound monitoring and inspection functions of the audit. Is it not correct, Mr. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. Well, we have the assurance here of the Chairman of the Commission on Audit that the remarks of the good Representative will be duly noted and will definitely be part of the process in undertaking the provisions of the subject Circular, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. But if the COA is conscious of its very own obligation in undertaking this audit, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, and the COA itself is obligated under the very own Circular that they issued, I am referring to Circular No. 96-003. How can the COA now explain the notices of disallowance which are so many that were issued to the government agencies and LGUs? It only proves that the COA after all, Mr. Speaker, did not discharge the very essential function it is committed to do.

REP. LEACHON. Okay, Mr. Speaker, we would like to reiterate that as of now based on the representation of the Chairman of the COA with the communication coming from the field personnel. They had been doing that, the monitoring of the grant being received in accordance with the provisions of these Circular apart from the post-audit that they have after the implementation of the project.

REP. MARCOLETA. Will the COA also agree, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, that despite the fact that Circular Number 96-003 was already superseded by COA Circular Number 2007-001, dated October 25, 2007, it continues to invoke Circular Number 96-003 in the issuance of the many notices of disallowance?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, I just have to confer with the Commission on Audit.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Mr. Speaker, I move for a one-minute suspension of the session.

It was 12:29 p.m.





Distinguished Sponsor, you have the floor. Please proceed.

REP. LEACHON. Yes. If what is being referred to is the Department or the Commission on Audit Circular No. 96-003, which was effectively superseded by a Circular …

REP. MARCOLETA. No. 2007 …

REP. LEACHON. … by Commission Circular No. 2007-001, yes, it was superseded, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. And even if i t was superseded by this later Circular, Circular No. 96-003 is still being invoked in several issuances of notices of disallowance.

REP. LEACHON. It would depend, Mr. Speaker, if the subject of audit happened prior to the amendatory or the new Circular. If that is covered prior 2007, definitely, that will still be covered by existing law at that time but not after 2007 when a new Commission Circular was issued, particularly on the date of October 25, 2007.

REP. MARCOLETA. But, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, there are notices of disallowance that are dated prior to 2007.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, precisely.

REP. MARCOLETA. But, again, Circular No. 96-003 is still being invoked as one of the bases for notices of disallowance. I am not unconscious of the fact that there are cases, even prior or earlier than 2007, but the COA is still invoking Circular No. 96-003.

The only thing that I am going to ask you is why, or whether or not this is true, or whether they accept it. I can show you, if you want, several of these notices of disallowance.

REP. LEACHON. May we know, Mr. Speaker, if the notices have been issued under whose authority. I know this is the Commission on Audit but then did they have different offices, like the regional offices?

REP. MARCOLETA. Mr. Speaker, what I am only asking is whether or not the COA agrees to the fact that even if Circular No. 96-003 was already superseded by

a later issuance, dated October 25, 2007, it continues to be invoked even for cases of notices of disallowance even before 2007.

REP. LEACHON. Precisely.

REP. MARCOLETA. Or, after 2007.

REP. LEACHON. After 2007, yes. May we request, Mr. Speaker, that we be furnished the documents referred to by the good Representative? And the reason I am asking for the determination of what agency, even though under the cluster or under the central authority of the Commission on Audit, is because of my personal experience. It was referred to me by one department or agency, and the findings of the different regional offices vary with the interpretation of a particular or a single provision under the law. So, that is why I am asking the regional agency. That may, precisely, be the same reason or similar situation why we do have the same scenario as now.

At any rate, Mr. Speaker, the comment, of course, is duly noted. And, we are humbly asking our good friend here, Rep. Rodante D. Marcoleta, that we be furnished the documents referred to so that we can intelligently answer or discern the main problem with respect to those documents referred to here, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. I will do that, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, and I commit to give them some documents. But, as of now, I would like to know if the COA, represented by its Chairman, was not informed that even in notices of disallowance dated 2015 and 2016, they are still invoking Circular No. 96-003. Does the Chairman not know that, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor?

REP. LEACHON. Yes. As I have said earlier, Mr. Speaker, that would precisely happen, if he has the documents. So, the remark, definitely, would be duly noted and corresponding actions will be taken to rectify any problem because if the Circular is being used for transactions made after 2007, definitely, I would like to agree with Representative Marcoleta that the subject Circular should be the amendatory law or the revised law or the revised guidelines with respect to transactions after October of 2007.

At any rate, we would like also to agree that like the PhilHeath disallowances, the different regional offices nationwide vary in interpretation as to the disallowance. Meaning, Region I would not disallow, but Region VII would disallow. So, precisely or probably by mere oversight, the old law is still probably being used by certain agencies under the Commission on Audit.

To sum it up, Mr. Speaker, the comment is duly noted, as I have said, then we will do the necessary


action to rectify any problem as to the application of the right law for transactions happening after 2007, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. Let me go on, Mr. Speaker.In determining liability under the notice of

disallowance, why did the COA not bother to explain the role of the auditing units embedded in the implementing agencies concerned as defined under Section 20 of PD No. 1445 or the Government Auditing Code of the Philippines?

REP. LEACHON. Come again, Mr. Speaker.

REP. MARCOLETA. In determining the liability under the notices of disallowance, why did the COA not bother to explain the role of the auditing units embedded in each of the implementing agencies concerned as defined under Section 20 of PD No. 1445 or the Government Auditing Code of the Philippines?

REP. LEACHON. Yes. We cannot definitely answer that, Mr. Speaker, without those documents being given to us, so that we can appropriately answer the query of Representative Marcoleta. In fact, there have been cases when the explanation as to the liability of the implementor was not discussed in the notice of disallowance.

May we know what particular, as again, agency?


REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, I move for a suspension of the session.


It was 12:39 p.m.


At 12:55 p.m., the session was resumed



REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of the budget of the Commission on Audit.

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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we continue the consideration of the budget of the Department of Justice and its attached agencies.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). There is a motion to resume the consideration of the budget of the Department of Justice.


REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Carlos Zarate from Bayan Muna Party-List for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The Hon. Doy C. Leachon is recognized to continue the sponsorship, and the Honorable Zarate is likewise recognized for his interpellation.

REP. ZARATE. Maraming salamat po, G. Ispiker. Magandang tanghali sa ating lahat.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Magandang tanghali—nag-aalab, mapula.

REP. ZARATE. Para sa ating kagalang-galang na Sponsor, puwede bang magtanong ang Kinatawang ito?

REP. LEACHON. Puwede po at isang maiinit ding pagpapaunlak kung ano po ang inyong mga itatanong sa amin ay malaya naming sasagutin.

REP. ZARATE. Salamat po, Mr. Speaker, G. Isponsor.Gusto ko lang sundan ang mga naunang

katanungan kanina patungkol po doon sa AO 35 na may mandato na magbuo ng isang Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal Killings or Extra-Judicial Killings, Forced Disappearances, Torture, and Other Grave Violations on the Rights to Life, Liberty and Security of Persons.

Sinabi po ninyo kanina na maganda naman ang naging trabaho ng ahensya mula nang mabuo ito. Ang tinuran ninyo kanina, kung hindi ako nagkakamali, ang conviction rate ay 40 percent, iyon po ba ang naturan ninyo kanina, Mr. Speaker, G. Isponsor?

REP. LEACHON. Yes. I would like to reconfirm or confirm that the percentage of successful prosecutions so far is 47 percent.

REP. ZARATE. Forty-seven percent. Matanong ko lang po, anong period ang tinitingnan natin dito na ang kanilang success rate of conviction ay 47 percent?


REP. LEACHON. Vis-à-vis the cases filed …

REP. ZARATE. Yes.

REP. LEACHON. … and then out of those cases filed, how many were convicted after trial, and after judgment, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker, G. Isponsor. Kaya ko itinanong iyan dahil may hawak akong dokumento na galing din po sa Kagawaran ng Katarungan. Ang nakikita ko rito ay mukhang hindi magkatugma sa sinasabi ng kagalang-galang na Sponsor, Mr. Speaker. Sa usapin ng extralegal killings as of July 31, 2017, sinasabi po rito na from 2011 to 2016, mayroon lamang limang conviction at walong acquittal, bale 13 court dismissals. Sa katunayan, ang average rate of conviction nito ay nasa 19 percent lamang, hindi ho 47 percent gaya ng inyong naturan. Puwede hong ipaliwanag ito ng kagalang-galang na Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, kung bakit ho hindi magkatugma ang ating pinag-uusapang mga datos dito?

REP. LEACHON. That only refers, Mr. Speaker, to a particular case. What I am speaking about—this one, Mr. Speaker, is the totality of all cases referred to under this program of the DOJ.

REP. ZARATE. So, puwede ho nating baybayin. Sabi ninyo, kabuuan iyon. Kung pag-uusapan na ho nating ang extrajudicial killings, ito ho ang tamang datos …

REP. LEACHON. Binasa ko po.

R E P. Z A R AT E . … i n c l u d i n g e n f o r c e d disappearances.


REP. ZARATE. So, unahin ko lang ho iyong extralegal killings dahil ito iyong nauna ho rito sa istatistikang ibinigay sa akin. Dito, 19 percent ang average na rate of conviction.

REP. LEACHON. I would like to inquire, Mr. Speaker, if that is the same document which I instructed the DOJ to furnish a copy to the good Congressman yesterday?

REP. ZARATE. Yes, Mr. Speaker. I was furnished by the DOJ because I requested, during the pre-plenary briefing, for the statistics, which document was dated September 4, 2017, and Assistant Secretary for Financial Service Adonis Sulit, forwarded to this Representation this report from the DOJ. It was from here that I gathered those statistics, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. If I may ask the indulgence of the good Congressman, I am just actually waiting for the document referred to by Congressman Zarate.

So while waiting, may I proceed to a related point.

REP. ZARATE. Yes, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. You may go ahead, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. Yes. Napapansin ko rin po rito sa binigay sa akin na dokumento, sa usapin ho ng extralegal killings, for example, on the status of incidents per year or occurrence, parang huminto ho lahat ng mga extralegal killings in 2015 dahil pagdating ho ng 2016, zero incident na po. Let us remember ho na ang report na ito ay as of July 31, 2017. Pagdating din ho sa usapin ng torture, ganoon din ho ang nakalagay dito, zero incident as of 2016. Enforced disappearance, the same, zero incident. Other grave human rights violations in 2016, zero incident.

Parang hindi ho kapani-paniwala ang ganitong mga report, G. Isponsor, Mr. Speaker, dahil sa katunayan po, sa pagtatala ng human rights watchdog na Karapatan from July 2016 to March 31, 2017, sa usapin pa lang po ng extrajudicial killings ay may naitala na silang 47 incidents or cases involving farmers, Lumads, laborers, and other victims. Sa katunayan po, kung pag-uusapan natin ay extrajudicial killing, ang pinaka-latest na nangyari diyan ay ito ngang pagpatay kahapon lamang ng isang Lumad sa Davao del Norte na binaril ng isang CAFGU. Ito ay si Obillo Bay-ao na isang Lumad estudyante sa salugpongan school. Isa ito sa mga eskuwelahan na pinaratangan ng militar na eskuwelahan raw ng mga rebelde kahit na mayroon itong mga kaukulang permit.

So, hindi ho kapani-paniwala iyong report na ito na in 2016, parang biglang naglaho ang isyu ng extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance, torture at iba pang human rights violations na dapat ay sinsaklaw ng Inter-Agency Committee, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, actually, the one who is actually holding the records is Usec Arceo and he just went out for lunch. During that time that the deliberation was being conducted, it was suspended to accommodate the Commission on Audit. I think he was already advised and he will be going back at the soonest time. Maybe we can accommodate further questions apart from that, Mr. Speaker, in the meantime that the resource person concerned is not around.

REP. ZARATE. Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Can the honorable Congressman Zarate kindly proceed to other matters muna.


REP. ZARATE. Yes, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker. Okay, I will proceed to other items, Mr. Speaker.

During the pre-plenary presentation, I also raised an issue on the fact that there are killings related to the war on drugs. The good Secretary said that they cannot be covered by A.O. No. 35 because it specifically relates to political killings involving the media, members of progressive organizations, et cetera. So, my question now, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, with the advent now of this latest development, the recent development that, indeed, there are cases of killings involving victims of the war on drugs, whose perpetrators are, allegedly, members of the police.

Ano ho ang tayo natin doon ho sa panukala na magtayo o magbalangkas ng isa ring administrative order na pangungunahan rin ng ahensiya ng Kagawaran ng Hustisya para, specifically, tingnan ang ganitong mga problema, lalong-lalo na ang mga pinaghihinalaang sangkot sa mga pagpatay na ito ay nagmumula sa mga kapulisan, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. Primarily, of course, the recommendation is duly noted, but, Mr. Speaker, if I may also, I would like to convey to our dear Congressman Zarate that the Bureau as well as the Department has not been remiss in its duty with respect to the alleged extrajudicial killing relating to or the killings in relation to the war on drugs. In fact, as requested by the good Congressman, we have submitted also the list of the DOJ on those cases which had been investigated by the Bureau and what actions had been made.

Specifically, considering the controversy surrounding the case of Kian who was killed during the alleged encounter in relation to the war on drugs, we would like to convey to the good Congressman and to everybody that a case has already been filed by the National Bureau of Investigation last week of August against the four policemen involved, and it is now pending for preliminary investigation before the Department of Justice. In fact, they opted not to file it before the Prosecution Office in Caloocan City in view of the venue of the killing. So, the case is now pending, and we hope that it will be acted upon with dispatch—these notices for the four policemen to answer, and I think they will file in due time their counter affidavits— so that the case can be resolved at the soonest possible time.

REP. ZARATE. Yes.

REP. LEACHON. With respect to the other boy who was just killed, more or less, on the same date, the good Secretary, Secretary Aguirre, has already issued a memorandum addressed to the National Bureau of Investigation to do the same necessary investigation so that the appropriate case, if ever, will be filed in the

same way as the Kian case. So, the other case right now is under investigation of the National Bureau of Investigation and I was assured yesterday, during the pre-plenary briefing, that they would terminate the case in the soonest possible time, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. Maraming salamat, G. Isponsor, Mr. Speaker. So iyong nga po ang talagang gusto nating pinupunto kaya pinanukala natin na kagaya noong extrajudicial killings ay mayroon isang ahensiya na tututok dito dahil talagang lumalabas na this is not just an isolated case.

Itong pinag-uusapan po natin, sa Caloocan City pa lang ay dalawang kaso na, si Kian at si Carl Arnaiz na pinatay. Mayroon pag-aaral na kung mga menor na edad ho ang pag-uusapan ang namatay sa giyera laban sa droga ay may halos 52 cases na kaya gusto ho nating matutukan iyan. Make no mistake about it. Sabi nga natin, kailangang i-address ang problema ng droga pero itong nakakabahalang numero ho ng mga namatay ay kailangang tingnan. Sa istatistika mismo ng PNP, sa kanilang accomplishment report on the illegal drug campaign—and this is on police operations only at hindi pa kasama doon ang mga riding-in-tandem—ang mga napatay na drug users, 696; drug pushers, 3,082, for a total of 3,778. Matanong ko lang po dito ho sa mahigit 3,000 na mga namatay na ito during police operations, are there ongoing investigations conducted by the Department, either the NBI or other agencies under the Department of Justice, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, with regard to the query of Congressman Zarate, we should also be reminded that, of course, those cases referred to are only those cases which came to the knowledge of the Department, particularly the law enforcement agency which is the National Bureau of Investigation, because some other cases might have been pending before, of course, with the PNP; but insofar as the DOJ is concerned, about 50 alleged killings came to the knowledge of the DOJ through the National Bureau of Investigation...

REP. ZARATE. If I may interrupt— 50 cases?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, 5-0.

REP. ZARATE. So, 5-0.

REP. LEACHON. Out of the 50 cases, as of this moment, 8 cases had been filed in court, four cases are considered closed and terminated, and the other 38 cases are undergoing investigation by the National Bureau of Investigation as confirmed herein by the NBI Director, Mr. Speaker.


REP. ZARATE. So, there are at least 50 cases which came to the knowledge of the NBI and these cases are related to drugs and the alleged perpetrators of the killings are members of the PNP. Is that correct, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?


REP. ZARATE. Out of the 50 cases, gusto ko lang hong malinaw ito, eight cases were already filed.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, filed.

REP. ZARATE. Filed, and how many cases are still ongoing investigations?

REP. LEACHON. There are 38 cases.

REP. ZARATE. So, 38 cases. When we say eight cases were already filed, are they still pending before the prosecution or they are already in court?

REP. LEACHON. They are either filed or pending before the Prosecutor’s Office of before the courts of justice.

REP. ZARATE. Okay. At any rate, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, may we just request for a detailed report on that—if they are already in the courts, in which particular courts are these cases pending; and if these are still before the Prosecutor’s Office, in what jurisdiction, city or province?

Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, we will do that, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. By the way, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, the agency is requesting for a P17.275-billion budget. May I just inquire from the Sponsor iyong caseload ngayon ng Department, especially sa Prosecution Service, kung ilang cases ba ang backlog ngayon ng Department. I know for a fact that in the previous administration, napakaraming pending cases po.

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to, first, read this one. I would like to tell the good Congressman that what I will be reading will be the case record for about seven years.

REP. ZARATE. Okay.

REP. LEACHON. So, for those cases pending before the lower courts, we have a total of 917,000 cases filed in courts all over the country, and then—sorry,

just to rectify. Every year, like for example, in 2010, you have 700,000 cases filed; in 2011, 706,000 filed; in 2012, 726,000 cases filed; in 2013, 732,000; in 2014, 773,000; and in 2015, 827,000.

Now, regrading the cases for disposal, in the conviction or prosecution, the success rate is 77 percent.

REP. ZARATE. Yes, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. Then, the dismissal, well, it varies every year, but if I may just say this, in 2016, the conviction rate is about 20 percent.

REP. ZARATE. Twenty percent, 2-0.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, for the conviction rate, and the dismissal rate is about 36 percent. So, it would vary every year, depending on the number of cases filed, but we have to look into consideration the caseload of every prosecutor for that matter. For example, for the current year, we have 900,000 cases filed, and the average number of cases per prosecutor—wow, this is almost 400 cases per prosecutor and so, I think that is the main predicament right now. Just imagine if you have about 400 cases per prosecutor. At any rate, they have right now the conviction rate at 20 percent.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker. I read recently, just these past days, that there are now at least 4,000 pending cases or backlog. The DOJ has 4,000 cases. I also learned that in the previous administration, there were 12,000 cases.

So, if ganoon ho ang average natin every year, there are 7,000 cases filed, tapos iyong ating rate of disposal is medyo mababa, probably, my next question is, with an increase in our budget now, as you mentioned earlier that there is an average of 10 percent increase in our budget, paano ho ang tingin ng Sponsor matutugunan ba ito para mapabilis, as you said that there is an average of 400 cases per prosecutor?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, the Department is assuring us that the corresponding disposition of cases, the rate or the percentage of disposing cases definitely will be higher with the additional budget requested by the Department.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

Pareho tayong naging practitioner before we entered Congress at alam ho natin na talagang overburdened ang ating mga prosecutors. Is it not a fact that if we increase the number of our prosecutors at mababaan iyong caseload nila ay mas mapapabilis iyong ating pag-respond doon sa napakaraming backlog ng cases?


REP. LEACHON. Nauunawan ko ho iyong posisyon ni Congressman Zarate, but the main problem right now is that, again, we have so many vacant positions again.

REP. ZARATE. How many vacant positions do we have in the Prosecutorial Service?

REP. LEACHON. The main problem right now, aaminin ko sa inyo, Congressman Zarate, mataas na rin ang suweldo nila pero wala pa ring pumapasok.

REP. ZARATE. Hindi ho totoo iyan na walang pumapasok dahil ako po, alam kona maraming na nag-a-apply sa Kagawaran ng Hustisya at hanggang ngayon ho ay wala pang mga appointments, ano.

REP. LEACHON. That is the main problem right now. Mr. Speaker, these positions that are vacant until now are carried over from the previous years.

REP. ZARATE. Yes.

REP. LEACHON. As of now, we have 1,400 unfilled positions for prosecutors.

REP. ZARATE. It is 1,400?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, 1,400.

REP. ZARATE. All over the country?

REP. LEACHON. All over the country. As of now, under the present administration, they have, more or less, deliberated on these positions and have recommended about 300, or almost 400 have been recommended to the Office of the President for consideration of the President.

REP. ZARATE. For appointment?

REP. LEACHON. For signing na po.

REP. ZARATE. So, mayroon pa ring 1,000?

REP. LEACHON. No, no. We have, as of now, 1,000 positions that are vacant.

REP. ZARATE. Yes.

REP. LEACHON. For 400 of those positions, the list of applicants, the recommendees, had been submitted to the Office of the President for final signature of their appointments. So, 600 positions still remain vacant and with the number of applicants, the Department is now undertaking a continuous process

of selection and deliberation, to select a few more or a hundred more recommendees, whose appointments will be for signature by the President.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor. Sana nga po ay pabilisin natin iyong proseso

dahil marami akong kakilalang prosecutors na may multiple sala na hinahawakan dahil sa kakulangan ng prosecutors. I know also for a fact that recently ay may mga bagong appointments. In fact, magkakaproblema na naman si Atty. Acosta dito dahil maraming public attorneys or lawyers na lumipat doon sa Department of Justice. So, iyon na naman ang magiging problema natin, kukulangin iyong ating mga public attorneys.

At any rate, ang gusto ko o ang pinupunto ko lang po diyan, napakarami nating bakanteng mga posisyon pa. Lumaki ang ating budget, P17.275 million for next year, kaya sana po ay matugunan na itong sabi ninyo na carryover ng previous administration. Sana itong unfilled positions natin, sa susunod na mag-uusap tayo ng budget—I know na mayroon pa ring mga unfilled positions diyan, but sana iyong backlog positions na hindi napupunan ay mapunan na natin.

Thank you, Mr. Sponsor.I will now go to another item, kung hindi ko

pa puwedeng balikan iyong aking mga katanungan kanina. Dito ho sa usapin, Mr. Sponsor, na lumulutang ngayon, iyong pagsasauli ng nakaw na yaman ng mga Marcos. Noong lumutang ito, parang kahapon yata, may panukalang bigyan sila ng immunity. Ano po ang tindig ngayon ng kagawaran? Alam naman natin na under Executive Order No. 1, ang pangunahing may poder para habulin ang mga nakaw na yaman ng mga Marcoses ay nasa PCGG pa rin. Malinaw iyan doon sa Executive Order No. 1. In fact, lahat ng poder para mahabol ito ay nandoon na. Ano po ang tayo ngayon ng kagawaran sa usapin na ito, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. On that concern, the position of the DOJ, and also of the PCGG in particular, is definitely—they realize the lack or the absence of an enabling law as regards the giving of immunity to those persons qualified in order to facilitate the return.

REP. ZARATE. Enabling law to give immunity?

REP. LEACHON. Yes. The position of the PCGG is very simple. If ever a compromise would be reached, and that would only be available upon the participation of those involved, the grant of immunity would be a factor; but as of now the SOJ, the Secretary of Justice, admits that there is no law regarding the giving of immunity insofar as those cases are concerned.



Sinasabi po ba natin na talagang ang PCGG ay kino-consider ang option na ito na magbibigay ng immunity doon ho sa inakusahan ng plunder at nagnakaw sa yaman ng bayan? Malinaw naman ho doon sa Executive Order No. 1 na nag-create ng PCGG, na hanggang ngayon nandiyan pa rin ang PCGG at ang poder ay nasa kanila upang habulin ang involved dito sa ill-gotten wealth ng Marcoses. So, linawin ho natin— iyon ho ba ang tindig ngayon ng pamunuan ng PCGG, ang pagbibigay ng immunity, dahil para hong lumalabas diyan na ang mensaheng binibigay natin, “Sige magnakaw ka, tapos damihan mo ang nakaw mo. Pagkatapos, ibalik mo ang bahagi ng ninakaw mo kasi bibigyan ka namin ng immunity.” Ganoon ho ba ang gusto nating mangyari, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. Hindi po ganoon ang ating ibig sabihin. We clearly understand that, of course, giving—if ever there will be a compromise agreement, but if we have other evidence or other factors to claim that ill-gotten wealth from those who possibly did it or the real perpetrators, definitely, immunity would not be needed. But in case there is no evidence other than those ones— if ever a compromise agreement will be made with the perpetrators, definitely, that would be tantamount to condonation and absolution and that is actually unwarranted and not permitted under such circumstances. So the condonation or the compromise agreement definitely would not be achieved because that would be condonation on their end—that immunity, that is only their suggestion and it is up to Congress to pass that law if ever that would be needed.

REP. ZARATE. Salamat po, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

Kung darating man ho ang panahon na iyan, parang ang Kongresong ito ay nagbibigay ng premium doon ho sa mga nagnanakaw sa kaban ng bayan, dahil hindi ho ito kagaya ng usapin na magbibigay tayo ng amnesty, for example, sa political offenders.

REP. LEACHON. Kaya nga po ang ating posisyon ay napakasimple—kung mayroon pong mga ebidensya, at hindi kinakailangan makipag-compromise sa kanila, ay kahit ho ako, hindi naman puwede iyon na ganoon na lang.

Ang akin lang pong puntos na gustong ipaabot sa aking kagalang-galang na Kongresista, na kung mayroon ang PCGG na mga pamamaraan na makukuha at mababalik ang kaban ng bayan, well they may do so, definitely, as it within their jurisdiction and their power to make. But then, if ever a compromise agreement, as I said, would happen to be considered between the government and the family concerned, definitely,

we will not allow it because that is tantamount to condonation, and that is unwarranted, definitely, under the circumstances. It will be up to the government—well, definitely, if immunity would not be given, then there would be no compromise agreement and so, it will be up to the government, on the policy of the government to deal with it. As of now, it is premature to talk about it, considering that there is no law giving immunity to those persons involved in ill-gotten wealth.


Napag-usapan na lang po din natin itong mga isyu ng katiwalian at korupsiyon, ang related po na tanong ho siguro diyan—recently, I read sa mga pahayagan na nai-turn over ng DBM iyong mga dokumento o ebidensiya na may patungkol ho doon sa isyu ng PDAF and the Disbursement Acceleration Program. Gusto ko lang hong magtanong, ano ho ang update na dito? Ano na ang development dito? Isa ho ako sa naging petitioner sa kaso sa Disbursement Acceleration Program at gaya ho ng ibang usapin ng katiwalian, gusto nating managot ang lahat ng mga sangkot dito ho sa mga usapin na ito, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. We were told that it is one of the priorities being undertaken by the Department. It is just that, it is really taking time to gather all the necessary documents, to be sufficient enough to constitute a good number of evidence, and constitute them to be a valid ground for the filing of cases against the responsible persons. As of now, the Department is undertaking an investigation and collating documents. Rest assured, Mr. Speaker, in the soonest time that these documents are gathered and up for evaluation, they would definitely file the necessary cases before the courts or concerned agencies, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. Thank you po, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

Kasama rin ho dito ba ang pagbibigay ng immunity rin kay Gng. Napoles, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. Hindi po. Categorical po, hindi po. In fact, pursuant to Department Order No. 435 dated about two months ago or three months ago, there was an order coming from the Department for the creation of a task force particularly on the violations concerning the Disbursement Acceleration Program. So, I think, with this memorandum or the letter, we are quite assured—the Department is assuring us that the necessary cases would then be filed at the soonest time possible.

REP. ZARATE. Salamat ho, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.


Dapat po talagang pagtuunan ng pansin iyan at mabuti naman at may isang task force na ginawa. Sa usapin ho ng DAP, for example, talagang napakahirap hong tukuyin kasi napakaraming proyekto niyan at hindi natin alam kung saan napunta. Kahit na nagtanong tayo sa COA, for example, sabi nila, we have to go to the report of every agency or department na nakatanggap ng DAP para malaman kung paano ito nagugol. At any rate po, salamat ho doon sa inyong update sa usapin na iyan, sa PDAF and DAP.

Gusto ko na lang hong balikan iyong naiwan ko kanina, doon sa statistics related to EO 35, na gusto nating ma-reconcile kung tama ba iyong mga datos na ibinigay sa akin at iyong tinuran ho ninyo, if this is already available, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.


REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, may I move for a minute suspension of the session please.


It was 1:35 p.m.




The distinguished Sponsor is recognized.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, as regards the query regarding the cases filed, the status of prosecution and the judgment attained with respect to those cases covered under EO 35, which is actually limited in character, they are definitely dealing only with specific cases, those that came into the knowledge of the Department. We have here the percentage or the breakdown with respect to acquittal or the conviction of cases pending before them during that time, starting in 2011 up to this period, referring to extralegal killings, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZARATE. Yes, thank you, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

Actually, ang naiwanan ko hong tanong kanina, ang pinagtataka ko lang ho, dito sa natanggap kong report nga ay parang biglang naglaho iyong mga usapin ng extrajudicial killing, torture, enforced disappearance, and other grave human rights violations pagdating ng 2016, kasi ang nakalagay ho rito: zero incident, 2016, on extralegal killings; torture, zero incident; enforced disappearance, ganoon din, although beginning 2012 ay wala na hong nai-report na dito sa opisyal na datos.

REP. LEACHON. I would like to rectify the remark of the good Congressman Zarate. It is not actually zero because in 2013, there were four cases reported; and in 2016, there were two cases reported by the Department.


REP. LEACHON. I think I was informed that this is the particular document given to your office, Mr. Speaker, Congressman Zarate.


REP. ZARATE. May I ask for a one-minute suspension of the session, Mr. Speaker.


It was 1:41 p.m.




The distinguished Sponsor is recognized.

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify the concerns of Congressman Zarate. The numbers that we have here on record with respect to the cases of the status of those filed, acquitted and convicted, refer to those cases released in that particular year, and that is why we have here a list of incidents. Actually, the concern of Congressman Zarate refer to those cases in those years, particularly in 2016. The records showed that there are actually no cases really of those cases involved within the scope of AO 35, because, I am informed, there is a technical working group which is deciding whether a particular case can be covered under AO 35. Be that as it may, rest assured that we will take a second look at those cases reported to them and if those cases would fall within the scope of AO 35, Mr. Speaker.


Kailangan ho talagang i-review iyan, repasuhin iyong ibinigay ninyo na datos dahil misleading ho iyan. Kapag sinabi ho nating walang extrajudicial killings in 2016, walang cases of enforced disappearance, torture, at iba pa ay hindi ho kapani-paniwala iyan at para hong lumalabas diyan, nililinis natin iyong rekord. Kahit sa


usapin ho ng pagpatay ng mga miyembro ng media, ang dami hong nangyari noong 2016 although ngayon ay nakahiwalay na iyong pag-iimbestiga sa mga miyembro ng media pero in 2016 ay hindi pa ho. Kaya gusto ho nating magkaroon ng pagrepaso diyan dahil ang sinabi ko nga ho kanina, from July 2016 to March 31, 2017 alone, mayroon hong naitalang 47 cases of extrajudicial killing ang Karapatan. Just recently, kahapon ho, we can consider this as an extrajudicial killing, iyong binaril ng isang CAFGU ang isang Grade 6 student ng Salugpongan School in Davao del Norte.

So, sana po, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, ay linawin ito dahil, again, ang sinasabi ko kanina, it is misleading, parang sinasabi natin wala nang cases of extrajudicial killing as covered by AO 35.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the recommendation is duly noted.

REP. ZARATE. Marami pa pong gustong mag-interpellate kaya doon ko na po tinutuldukan iyong aking interpellation.

Maraming salamat po sa ating Sponsor at sa ating kagalang-galang na Speaker. Maraming salamat po.

REP. LEACHON. Thank you, Congressman Zarate.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). Maraming salamat, Congressman Zarate.


REP. ROA-PUNO. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. H. Harry L. Roque Jr. of KABAYAN Party-List for his interpellation.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Quimbo). The Hon. Harry Roque is recognized.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mme. Floor Leader.

Unang-una po, bagamat ito ay budget hearing ay hindi naman po puro katanungan ang nangyayari dito sa plenaryo. Nais ko pong simulan ang aking intervention ngayon sa pagbibigay-puri sa ating Departamento ng Katarungan dahil itinaguyod po ng Departamento ng Katarungan ang katarungan doon po sa kaso ni Kian Delos Santos. Dito po sa kasong ito, sinabi ng kapulisan na nanlaban daw itong bata pero nanindigan po ang PAO Chief at saka ang Secretary ng DOJ na ang totoong nangyari ay murder at hindi po instance ng nanlaban.

Magsisimula po ako dito sa kasong ito doon naman sa aking mga pagtatanong. Ang una kong katanungan po ay mayroon pong pangalawang kaso ng binatilyo sa Caloocan City din na diumano nangholdap naman. So,

ang katanungan ko po sa DOJ, either kay PAO Chief Acosta o kay Secretary ay ano na ba ang status ng kanilang imbestigasyon dito sa pangalawang binatilyo na kailan lamang ay napatay na naman ng pulis dito po sa Caloocan City? Ang batang ito ay dating estudyante sa UP. Ito ho ba ay isang kaso na naman ng nanlaban ayon sa inyong imbestigasyon, o kaso po ito ng murder na naman?

REP. LEACHON. Mr. Speaker, in the same way that the Kian case was handled and disposed, the case of Kian is now before the Department of Justice with a case filed against four policemen. On this one, there are two concerns that I would like to raise: number one, we should be reminded that the Secretary of Justice already issued the Department memorandum addressed to the National Bureau of Investigation to immediately resolve and investigate the case involving Mr. Arnaiz who is a 19-year-old victim; and number two, as relayed to us just right now, based on forensic findings, dito po, iyong bata ay hindi nanlaban.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Maraming salamat po sa ganyang kasagutan. Ito po ay dahilan na naman para magbigay puri sa DOJ dahil talaga naman pong pinaninindigan ng ating DOJ ang katarungan sa ating bayan. Ngayon po, ang tanong ko ay tungkol sa pulisya. Tama po na kapag may mga instances na involved ang kapulisan at ang nagkakaroon ng isyu kung ang napatay dito sa giyera natin laban sa droga ay nanlaban o nagkaroon ng paggamit ng dahas na hindi ligal, ang NBI ang nag-i-investigate dahil ang NBI po ay patas. Hindi gaya noong Internal Affairs Office ng police na, sa tingin ko, ay palaging pinagtatakpan ang kapulisan.

Ang tanong ko po, sa aking data po ay mahigit nang 3,000 iyong deaths under investigation in relation with the ongoing war against drug, at ang alam ko po, ang NBI ay mayroon pong special office, iyong Death Investigation Division, kung hindi po ako nagkakamali. So, dito po sa mahigit t na 3,000 na mga napatay sa ongoing war against drugs, ilan ba ho ang naimbestigahan ng Death Investigation Division ng NBI? Karamihan kasi naman po, kung hindi sa lahat ng patayan na ito na mahigit nang 3,000, ay mayroon pong dawit na kapulisan.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, the aggregate number of 3,000 refers to extralegal killings in general, but in those cases involving policemen particularly committed during the enforcement or in the course of enforcement of the drive or the war against drugs, as I have said, just recently, there are about 50 killings involving policemen and these are under the watch and investigation of the National Bureau of Investigation.

Out of the 50 cases, the breakdown will be as follows —as I have said, out of 50, eight cases have been


filed either in court or before the prosecution office; and, as stated, we will be furnished with a copy whether that particular case or the name or title of that case had been filed with the courts or before the prosecution office. Now, four cases had been either closed or terminated, meaning, those had been disposed by the National Bureau of Investigation. As of now, 38 cases are still undergoing investigation by the National Bureau of Investigation and hopefully, in the soonest possible time, cases will be filed or either closed or terminated by the National Bureau of Investigation, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Mr. Speaker, it is not my task to engage in an argument on figures, but the figures I am quoting are from the Philippine Information Agency which mentioned that there are at least 3,000. In fact, I released the figure when the Minority had a press conference earlier. It is also in the press statement that I issued where the figue is more than 3,000.

My question is, obviously, the 50 cases being investigated by the NBI is miniscule compared to the total number of killings involving policemen. I know that the NBI has limited resources currently and they cannot investigate all killings involving policemen. So, what is the projection of the NBI? How much more resources do they want so that perhaps next year, we can allot sufficient resources so that the NBI can get involved in or can investigate every single killing that involves a policeman because that is the rationale in the first place of why we established the National Bureau of Investigation?

In the 26 years of practice that I have, I know that when there is a policeman accused especially of murder, it is the case that the NBI would want to particularly investigate because the NBI, obviously, is an impartial investigator compared to all other bodies that can conduct an investigation.

REP. LEACHON. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and our distinguished Congressman Harry Roque. Again, two concerns: number one, with respect to these cases, probably, these cases may have a minimal number because those cases are actually referred to them only. Definitely, they are across the country as they have several offices handling investigations, but with respect to the recommendation or suggestion as to what kind of improvement or advancement the Bureau is undertaking right now, I think that has been addressed just this morning.

Mr. Speaker, I was told that the amount of resources that they have right now, with them earning, more or less, about P150 million a year, just to start with, by virtue of the retention as provided for by law in terms of collections of NBI clearances amounting to more or less about P600 million, I think their problem as to the funding or financing would be addressed subject

only to certain requirements by the DBM. After that, they will be, of course, preparing for the procurement of, definitely, the technical equipment that they would be needing in order to enhance their power of law enforcement and prosecution, as the case may be, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Mr. Speaker, I raised this point because whenever the Philippines undergoes periodic reviews before either the UN Human Rights Council or the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva, New York, the issue is always if the State has performed its obligation to protect and promote the right to life, and this obligation is discharged by the holding of an honest-to-goodness investigation of the perpetrators behind the violation of the right to life and according the victims adequate domestic remedy, including payment of compensation. So, unless we can show to the international community that these investigations, in fact, are being conducted in a credible manner, and in my mind, the most credible institution to conduct investigations on these extralegal killings is the NBI, then we may be criticized for being in breach of our treaty obligations.

That is why my suggestion is, whatever revenue is needed to upgrade the capacity of the National Bureau of Investigation to investigate these killings, we should allot and, in fact, provide the NBI even if they have resources generated on their own through the issuance of NBI clearances, but that is a suggestion.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, definitely, that is duly noted and will be considered if ever the amount of P150 million per year would not suffice and subject, again, to the request to the DBM also addressed to the Committee on Appropriations, headed by our Chairperson, Cong. Karlo Nograles, so that an appropriate measure regarding that, for example, for the acquisition of forensic equipment, would be submitted as soon as possible.

With the assurance right now that hopefully the retained amount out of NBI clearances would be given to them, I think they can move forward at least to advance or enhance their legitimate operations as mandated under the law, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Mr. Sponsor, my next question has to do with addressing the bigger problem of extralegal killings. Extralegal killings were not problems that the Duterte administration started. The UN was very clear that extralegal killings have been happening in our country since the time of previous administrations, at least the time of three Presidents before President Duterte— meaning, this is not the first time that our attention was called to the problem of extralegal killings.


This is not the first time there have been recommendations made on how to address extralegal killings, one of them being a closer coordination between the police investigators and the prosecutors. Now, although this is the recommendation coming from academics and the NGOs, including the European Union, the reality is, this coordination between the police and the National Prosecution Service through an inquest prosecutor is even codified in the PNP Manual—that when there is a death under investigation or when there is a suspect who was killed in a police investigation, the PNP Manual provides that there must be inquest proceedings to be presided by an inquest prosecutor from the Department of Justice. This mirrors the recommendation made that there should be closer coordination between police investigators and the prosecutors.

So my question is, are we implementing this inquest proceedings whenever a person is killed as a result of a police investigation? As I said, there have been 3,000 instances reported by the PDEA, so there should have been, at least, 3,000 inquest proceedings conducted by the police in conjunction with an inquest prosecutor.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Quimbo relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Mylene J. Garcia-Albano.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, I think that activity or that obligation provided for, as mentioned by Congressman Harry Roque, is being implemented nationwide. In fact, in our jurisdiction, particularly in my province, I would like to attest that the manner of inquest in relation to the PNP is, they have been in close coordination, so that when inquest proceedings would be needed, that could be readily available. As confirmed right now, with the assurance of the Department, I think that matter is being implemented 24/7, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Mme. Speaker, I think the Sponsor misunderstood my question. The Sponsor may have misunderstood what I meant by inquest proceedings because in normal inquest proceedings, you resort to it when a person is under police custody and you need to charge him before the reglementary period; In which case, you proceed or you bring the matter before an inquest prosecutor. But “inquest prosecutor” has a second meaning under the guidelines of the Philippine National Police and under inquest proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, particularly in Europe, Spain and the United Kingdom from which we borrowed this.

I understand from my aunt, who is a veteran in the DOJ, that there really used to be inquest prosecutors who are sent to the scene of the crime for the purpose of assisting the police in investigating the instance of

a murder. So, it is not a case of going to a prosecutor in a club, who is assigned for the night, to conduct a preliminary investigation which is inquest in character. But in the PNP guidelines, whenever there is a person killed in connection with the police investigation, there is an investigation and there is a prosecutor from the DOJ called to assess the scene of the crime and to determine if there was lawful use of force or not. That is the inquest proceedings that I am referring to.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, yes. Well, with all due respect to Congressman Harry Roque, there is actually no misapprehension about the question. I would like to reiterate that based on a confirmation gathered or as told to me by the Department, whenever there is a crime and there would be a need for a prosecutor to be in the crime scene to assist in determining what crime has been committed or how the crime has been committed, I was just informed that they are doing exactly what you said. That has been implemented or is being implemented by the Department nationwide, as just confirmed to me, right now, by the officer or the particular person concerned at the Department of Justice.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Mme. Speaker, but we see that the recent experience with the Delos Santos and Arnaiz cases belies this because had there been a prosecutor in the scene of the crime, we should not have heard statements from the policemen alleging that the victim was guilty of “nanlaban.” The prosecutor, had he been present at the scene of the crime, would have easily made a conclusion on whether or not it was a case of murder, or it was a case of unnecessary use of force.

REP. LEACHON. Yes. With all due respect to Congressman Harry Roque, just to belie the claim, there was a prosecutor sent to the scene of the crime in the Kian case. It is just unfortunate that I have to divulge this right now because the sentiment that I had during that time was actually the same sentiment of just any other individual here. In fact, the prosecutor that was sent to the scene of the crime was Fiscal Cañete who made the exposition in social media, and that is why he was relieved, taken out of the scene. That is why they filed the case before the Department of Justice. He was eventually transferred to another locality, from Caloocan City to Mandaluyong City for such inappropriate utterances during the time that the investigation was being made. To tell you right now, Mme. Speaker, there was a prosecutor sent to the scene of the crime during that time, and this is just to attest that the recommendation given by Congressman Harry Roque is being implemented by the Department, Mme. Speaker.


REP. ROQUE (H.). I wonder if—Mme. Speaker, I am sorry.

Mme. Speaker, I wonder if the Sponsor could ask the DOJ to provide us with the written report on this inquest proceedings because, again, as a matter of defense that the Philippines is properly discharging its obligation to investigate every instance of possible violation of the right to life, we need to prove convincingly that the State, through the inquest proceedings, in fact, actively investigates instances of death involving policemen.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker, even though I am a Sponsor of this budget, I would like, of course, to perfectly join Congressman Roque in his remark on that, and on the part of the Department, that will be duly noted.

REP. ROQUE (H.). I will move on to a different topic now and that is, “Congress had concluded its investigation of the drug trade in Muntinlupa.” May I know now what reforms, if any, the Department of Justice has implemented to curtail this drug trade in Muntinlupa.

For instance, one of the very obvious solutions that we have to curtail the drug trade is the installation of a—what do you call that—cellular, where the use of this device would bar all calls made through cellular phones because we are not able to confiscate all cellphones in Muntinlupa. I do not know if the Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, knows the contraption I am talking about.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, yes. It was, in fact, deliberated during the time that we had a committee hearing.

REP. ROQUE (H.). What is that code, Mme. Speaker? Jammer. A cellular phone jammer. Have we finally installed a jammer within the premises of Muntinlupa, Mme. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. I would like to raise three issues, Mme. Speaker: number one, the process of procurement is already ongoing as to the procurement of that jammer. Number two, regrettably, we would like to inform this Body also that with the new law reorganizing the Bureau of Prisons, the Secretary of Justice has been dislodged from having any power to manage, administer and maintain the efficiency of the Bureau of Prisons because of the new law. It is now limited to supervision, and we are now awaiting the appointment of the new BuCor chief by the President. Hopefully, if the new BuCor chief will be appointed, that would definitely be a major consideration for the new BuCor chief to adopt the recommendations of the Committee on Justice as they had done during the last time that we had the

committee hearing. Number three, that is actually my very intention, being also the Vice-Chair handling this budget—so, I was particularly interested also, during the time that we had our hearing at the Committee on Justice, in that there were two reasons for the problem at that time: number one, the failed leadership of the BuCor; and second, the facility.

Now, the Secretary of Justice has just admitted this to me, of course, definitely with the guidance of the Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, because we were asking them to submit to us the recommendations or the options as to how a new prison facility can be made either with the original setup or under a new scheme that would be implemented or recommended by the Secretary of Justice. So, right now, we are just waiting for the recommendations of the Department of Justice with respect to what aspect or option to be made in order to perfectly create a new prison facility, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Mme. Speaker, I am actually disappointed with the issue of the jammer because from the hearings that we had here, it would have been a major tool to prevent drug trafficking had we installed the jammer earlier rather than later and that, while I understand that we have to go through the steps of procurement, I think by now that should have been installed.

If I am not mistaken, in fact, during the investigation, it was already mentioned by the DOJ that they have available jammers already and that they just need to install them. I think we should not waste time any more if additional appropriation is needed to install this effective jamming system. So be it. But I do not think we should wait for any other conditionalities before we install the jammer. I know that we have to wait for a new head of the Bureau of Corrections but a jammer is a device that can be installed independent of who will be the new Director of the Bureau of Corrections. That is only a suggestion.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, the suggestion is duly noted, Mme. Speaker. Definitely, the Department would be willing to accede to the recommendation and suggestion of Congressman Harry Roque, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ROQUE (H.). Actually, Mme. Speaker, that concludes my queries to the Department of Justice and again, I would like to commend the Department of Justice for actually promoting justice in this country, at least in the case of the killing of Kian Delos Santos and Carl Arnaiz.

Thank you, Mme. Speaker, and good afternoon.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Floor leader is recognized.


REP. ROA-PUNO. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Antonio L. Tinio of ACT TEACHERS Party-List for his interpellation.

I so move, Mme. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Honorable Tinio is recognized for his interpellation.

REP. TINIO. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Mme. Speaker, ang mga tanong ko po ay tungkol sa

budget ng Department of Justice, Office of the Secretary. Sa General Appropriations Bill, mayroon pong P6.5 billion na nakalaan para sa budget na ito at sa P6.5 billion na ito, sa punto de vista ng mga programa ng Department of Justice, ang pinakamalaking bahagi ay nasa justice effectively and efficiently administered, so P5.8 billion total ang nakalaan dito at sa ilalim noon, ang pinakamalaki ay iyong Law Enforcement Program which includes the prosecution sub-program. In other words, ang pangunahing tungkulin ng DOJ ay iyon ngang prosecution—pagtiyak na naipatutupad ang batas, na iyong mga lumalabag sa batas ay nasasampahan ng kaso at kung talagang may sala, siyempre na mabigyan ng karampatang parusa. Iyon ang tinatawag nating sistema ng hustisya.

Ngayon, sa ilalim ng Duterte administration, of course, ayon sa Presidente, ang number one law enforcement issue ay ang iligal na droga kaya nga tampok ang kanyang giyera kontra droga. Ang tanong ko po, ano ba ang papel na ginampanan o ano ang kontribusyon ng DOJ sa giyera kontra droga ng Duterte administration, specifically, in terms of prosecution? What are the accomplishments in the more than one year of the Duterte administration? Ang naririnig natin, iyong PNP contribution, tapos ang naha-highlight, iyong tinatawag na extrajudicial killings, libu-libo iyan. How about the DOJ?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker. Before proceeding with the answer, we would like to manifest that the honorable Secretary of Justice has to leave because he has an urgent appointment with the President at Malacañang right now, together with Atty. Acosta. Be rest assured, as we were assured also, that any queries coming from the Members will definitely be attended to by the remaining higher officials of the Department.

Thank you, Mme., Speaker.Just to answer the query of a good friend,

Congressman Tinio, with respect to the contribution of the DOJ, we should remember that the primary solution to this one is to solve the main problem. In fact, during that time, it was known to us that the origin from which these drugs have emanated, definitely, would be the Bureau of Prisons. That is why, in the Committee on Justice, we had an investigation regarding the proliferation of drugs in that area, and that led to the

prosecution of concerned officials, also other persons, relative to toleration and of the proliferation of drugs in the BuCor. Second, the DOJ, definitely, in fact, with the statement and memorandum issued by the Secretary, the war on drugs should be taken with utmost priority, especially with respect to the killings; and in fact, right now, every now and then, especially with the high-profile cases, those have led to the filing of cases against the perpetrators in the Kian killing in Caloocan. Third, the Department of Justice, again, issued a memorandum immediately, after it had knowledge of the killing of Mr. Arnaiz, and addressed, commanded or instructed the National Bureau of Investigation to conduct an immediate investigation and a resolution on the case so that appropriate cases can be filed before the court of justice.

Rest assured, Mme. Speaker, that along with the major departments of the government which are at the forefront of this war against illegal drugs, the Department of Justice has always been an effective partner in this program of eliminating drugs in the country.

REP. TINIO. Mme. Speaker, ang sagot ng Sponsor, ang pangunahing kontribusyon daw ng DOJ sa giyera kontra droga ay iyong pagsampa ng mga kaso sa mga personalities allegedly involved in drug trafficking from within the National Bilibid Prison. So, I suppose, the Sponsor is referring to the filing of cases, particularly against Senator de Lima.

But as we know, that happened last year, very early, in the term of this current administration pero sa kabila nito, alam din naman natin na nagpatuloy pa rin iyong problema ng droga. In fact, just recently, no less than President Duterte himself made a statement that contrary to his campaign promise that he would end the drug problem in the country in three to six months, sabi na niya ngayon ay hindi niya mapipigilan iyan sa kabuuan ng kanyang term. Imposible daw kasi daw kahit ang bansang tulad ng US, hindi daw nila matapos-tapos iyan, paano pa raw dito sa Pilipinas? In other words, ang point ko po, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, malinaw na hindi sumapat iyong binabanggit ninyong aksiyon ng DOJ which has resulted in the filing of a case against a Senator of the land.

Kaya ako po, ang gusto ko pong singilin, kasi nga ang kalakihan ng budget o ang kalakhan ng budget ng DOJ ay para dito sa Law Enforcement, particularly iyong Prosecution Program, more than 90 percent of the DOJ budget of the Office of the Secretary is allocated there.

Ilan po iyong mga kaso na related sa anti-illegal drugs campaign ng administrasyon ang na-file ng DOJ? In the more than one year of the so-called war on drugs, how many cases have actually been filed in court?


REP. LEACHON. Number one, primarily, we should admit also that the problem against drugs in the country is not a one-shot deal and definitely, without the efforts being undertaken, the more reason that drugs will proliferate without this intervention of the President. Second, there was admission on the part of the President, and he just said in a humble admission, that it is a really a bigger problem than he had imagined.

Now, with respect to the Department of Justice on the cases filed before the courts of justice, I would like to inform, Mme. Speaker, our good friend, Rep. Antonio L. Tinio, that as I said, we have to clarify this because, of course, definitely for the cases involving those extralegal killings, those that came into the knowledge of the Department and the National Bureau of Investigation relative to the war on drugs, there are, more or less, 50 cases involving policemen.

REP. TINIO. Mme. Speaker, let me clarify. I am not asking about iyong cases related to so-called extrajudicial killings. I just want some figures. Let me be more specific. Ilan iyong mga kasong isinampa ng DOJ in relation to violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act? Iyon na lang. Kasi ito ay giyera kontra droga, e di dapat mahalaga ang papel ng DOJ at particularly noong kanilang Prosecution Service sa pagsampa ng mga kaso sa lumalabag sa ating batas kontra sa droga. So, how many cases are there?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, that is why we will be dealing with the nature of the cases, of course, filed in connection with dangerous drugs. Per record of the National Prosecution Service, out of, more or less, 900,000 cases as I have mentioned earlier, the cases involving dangerous drugs that had been filed by this administration, the number is 65,119 cases or complaints, where information filed before the courts against those involved in the …

REP. TINIO. Okay. So sa ilalim ng kasalukuyang administrasyon, in the more than one year of the war on drugs, mayroon pong 65,119 cases that had been filed?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, per record of the National Prosecution Service.

REP. TINIO. Out of the total 900,000 po ba,? You mentioned the figure of 900,000?

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. TINIO. So, 900,000 total cases, I am assuming, tama po ba?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, out of those cases filed—yes, that is the particular number of cases vis-a-vis the

number of all cases filed nationwide, these are murder with rape and other cases.

REP. TINIO. Yes, para sa lahat na ng mga krimen po.

REP. LEACHON. Opo, lahat na ng krimen.

REP. TINIO. Obviously, naintindihan naman natin iyan na maraming iba’t ibang krimen na nagaganap, hindi lang sa droga, even though talagang ang naha-highlight sa atin ngayon ay iyong sa droga. So 900,000—could we have a more exact figure lang just for reference, 900,000, ilan po?

REP. LEACHON. In order to speed up this proceeding, Mme. Speaker, the records… I cannot locate it.

REP. TINIO. Sige po.

REP. LEACHON. But it is more than that or 916,000 cases.

REP. TINIO. Okay. I will take that answer but I hope the Sponsor will provide me with more accurate figures later.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Okay, all right. So, of the 65,119 cases, presumably these are all cases of violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act. Of those cases, ilan po doon, and I hope I can be given the numbers on this, ang mga kaso ng violation ng Article ll, Section 4 and Article ll, Section 8 of the Dangerous Drugs Act, namely: Section 4, Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals, and Section 8, Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals?

Ang punto ko po, at ang itinatanong ko po rito ay, ilan po iyong nahuli at nasampahan ng kaso ang mga actual supplier ng drugs dahil alam naman po natin siyempre marami sa Dangerous Drugs Law natin ang nasasaklaw po diyan, from mere possession to, you know, distribution in one way or another and of course, nandiyan din iyong actual supply at sa ating bansa, alam naman natin na dalawa ang pinanggagalingan ng droga: ang una ay iyong actually manufactured dito, ginagawa dito, partikular ang, halimbawa, shabu na actwal na ginagawa sa mga sikretong laboratoryo sa iba’t-ibang mga lugar. Tapos, ang isa ring malaking source, at na-highlight ito recently doon sa naging celebrated na kaso, ay iyong importation, iyong tangkang importation ng P6.4-billion worth of shabu na dumaan mismo sa Port of Manila. So, obviously hindi matitigil ang problema


sa droga kung nagpapatuloy ang supply. Para sa akin, importante po na malaman natin bilang isang sukatan kung gaano epektibo itong giyera kontra droga, kung mayroon po bang mga positibong hakbang tungo sa pagtigil ng gripo ng supply, kaya ang tanong ko po, of the 65,119 drug-related cases that had been filed by the DOJ, ilan po doon ang for importation or manufacture of drugs?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, as of this moment, I am very honest to tell you that we do not have any data right now, but upon the request of Congressman Tinio, Mme. Speaker, together with the specific number of cases pending in all courts of justice across the country, on submission of those numbers, we will be glad to supply the necessary documents relative to this being requested right now. What we have here is only an aggregate number of cases involving dangerous drugs, but as to how the crime is committed, definitely, we would require ample time because we have to segregate each and every case filed before the courts of justice across the country, and we will definitely be glad to submit that, Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Well, Mme. Speaker, on the one hand, I understand the reply of the Sponsor that they needs more time to go through the aggregate data that had been provided by the DOJ. However, to me, this seems to be indicative of a larger problem kasi, you know, ang isang mainam na istratehiya talaga sa anumang giyera kontra droga, siyempre, ay i-target iyong pinaka-source o iyong pinanggagalingan ng droga. Hindi magiging epektibo kung ang i-tatarget lang ay iyong end user. Kung baga, mayroon kang source, mayroon ka ring downstream, tapos dito sa 65,119 cases na ito, siyempre, sa tingin natin, medyo may problema kung ang mga kaso na ito ay puro mga street-level drug pusher at saka street level user. Kailangan mayroon naman tayong mga upstream, iyong sa pinanggagalingan mismo.

Since the Sponsor has said that he is not, at this point, able to provide data on the cases filed with respect to importation of drugs or manufacture of dangerous drugs, could the Sponsor, perhaps, cite, at least, some notable instances where cases have been filed within the past year or so against big-time importers or manufacturers of drugs?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, as much as I understand the query of Congressman Tinio, it would be very accurate if we can just submit later, together with the total number of cases filed all over the courts of justice across the country, the actual number so that my answer can be more definitive on that one. As of this moment, I will honestly tell you, Mme. Speaker, that we do not have any figures here and I do not want to be misquoted, and I really want to report this in a

precise manner that Congressman Tinio would like to have because we will be naming names. Whatever happened to Kian is a case that happened also in other cases, but definitely, I am pretty sure that apart from the users, definitely, for the pushers or importers, a number of cases had been filed against them.

So, at least on my end, I am giving the guarantee right now, Mme. Speaker, that at the soonest time possible, we will require the Department to submit the necessary data requested by Representative Tinio, Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Well, Mme. Speaker, I will expect the data pero siguro at this point and to conclude this point, siguro iyon lang ang isang tila malinaw na kakulangan o kakapusan sa giyera kontra droga dito sa Pilipinas. Sa ibang bansa po, I mean, ang tina-target sa mga bansa sa Latin America, halimbawa, you know, Colombia, Mexico, and so on, malinaw po na pinapangalanan at saka tina-target ng law enforcement ay iyong mga drug syndicates at saka mga drug lords. Kapag sinabing drug lords, sila iyong mga aktwal na nagpo-produce o nag-i-import at ang pinakapinuno noong distribution ng iligal na droga. Of course, some of these personalities have even become known worldwide, names like Pablo Escobar and so on, at sila iyong mga pinuno ng mga kartel.

Dito po sa Pilipinas, sa ating drug war, parang, at most, ang mga naa-identify at nata-target ay mga government officials who are protectors of drug lords pero iyong drug lords mismo ay parang nameless, anonymous. Hindi sila nakakasuhan at hindi nata-target ng police or ng NBI operations. So, I think na isang malaking kakulangan iyan, at kung ang approach ay iyong street level, na ang target ng pulis ay iyong street level pushers at saka users, talagang hindi po matatapos ang problema sa droga.

So, siguro,doon ko na po tatapusin iyong punto na iyon at nakabukas pa rin iyong tanong ko at paniningil sa DOJ. Nasaan naman iyong record of prosecution of actual importers or manufacturers of illegal drugs? Kailangan pong maipapakita ng gobyernong ito, at kung seryoso sila sa giyera kontra droga, kailangan mayroong accomplishment on that front.

Okay. Now, the second topic which is still in relation to the budget of the Department of Justice, the Office of the Secretary. Alam naman po natin sa Constitution, sa Bill of Rights dito, ang number one po na karapatan, ang pinaka-basic na right ay iyong right to life, iyong karapatang mabuhay. Sa Bill of Rights, ito ang number one, “Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law x-x-x”, ano po, so, iyong right to life.

Kaya naman po kanina, iyong ilang kasamahan ko ay nagtanong din tungkol sa extrajudicial killings. Alam natin tampok sa giyera kontra droga, tapos, kasabay noon iyong mga pagkuwestiyon sa pagdami ng


pagpatay, partikular, ay iyong tinatawag na extrajudicial killings, na dalawang klase—iyong nangyayari kaugnay sa mga drug-related police operations, at iyong mga drug-related killings na iyong mga vigilante raw ang pumapatay.

Ngayon, iyong Office of the Secretary ng DOJ, mayroon po siyang hiwalay at partikular na budget kaugnay sa implementation of Administrative Order No. 35. Earlier, Congressman Zarate was interpellating regarding this, and I would like to pursue some further questions further in relation to that.

Sa proposed budget po, mayroong P33.27-million budget itong implementation of Administrative Order No. 35, particularly the Inter-Agency Committee on Extralegal killings, Enforced Disappearances, Torture and Other Grave Violations of the Right to Life, Liberty and Security of Personnel. First of all, ang nakalagay po sa GAB, and I would just like to point this out, ay violations of the right to life, liberty and security of personnel. Maybe, it should be, perhaps, the House Committee on Appropriations that should take note of this. Bakit po ang nakalagay ay violations of the right to life, liberty and security of personnel?

Ang interagency task force po ba na ito ay––well, I should ask the Sponsor because he is the one advocating for the passage of the General Appropriations Bill. Ang nakalagay pong teksto dito, violations of right to life, liberty and security of persons. Parang, I hope this is just a typographical error––I would like a clarification kasi, kapag sinabing personnel, that seems to imply that this Inter-Agency Committee is concerned about the right to life, liberty and security of law enforcement personnel. There is nothing wrong with that. Siyempre, mahalaga ang buhay nila pero, you know, that would unduly and unconstitutionally limit, of course, the protection that is supposed to be provided by Administrative Order No. 35. So, bakit po “personnel” kasi ang alam ko, ang dapat diyan ay “of persons”—ibig sabihin po, lahat ng mamamayan.

REP. LEACHON. Opo.

REP. TINIO. Hindi personnel.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, para lang po mabilis, iyon po ay talagang mali kaya papalitan.

REP. TINIO. Okay. So, malinaw po, ano po, na ang tama ay “persons”? Ang tama po ba ay “persons”?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker, napasobra lang ang pag-type.

REP. TINIO. Napasobra nang pag-type, do, okay. Mabuti pong malinaw iyon at sana ma-note ng mga nasa Committee on Appropriations natin dahil, you know, it could be a typographical error but it has major

implications, na parang ang concern na ngayon ng DOJ ay—minsan naririnig kasi natin iyan e, paano naman daw iyong buhay ng pulis. So, malinaw na hindi nililimita ang coverage ng A.O. No. 35 sa police or law enforcement personnel, okay, kundi ang lahat ay covered.

Okay, ngayon, may proposed budget po kayo na P33.2 million dito. Nararapat lang po na tanungin natin kung paano, sa nakaraang taon o sa kasalukuyang taon, ba ginamit ito. Una po, alam natin ang Inter-Agency Committee na iyan is chaired by the Secretary of Justice and there are a number of other member-agencies. Nandiyan ang, you know, as members, the Presidential Human Rights Committee, the Department of the Interior and Local Government, the DND, the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process, the Presidential Adviser on Political Affairs, the Chief of Staff of the AFP, the Director General of the PNP, and the Director of the National Bureau of Investigation. In other words, this is a high-level Inter-Agency Committee.

So, ang tanong ko po, una, sa ilalim ng Duterte administration, nakapagpulong ba, na-convene ba ang Inter-Agency Committee na ito, at kung nakapagpulong na ito, ilang beses na at ano po ang mga napag-usapan? Kasi may budget po iyan.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, I would like to inform the Body, of course, also Congressman Tinio, that the undersecretary assigned to that was just recently appointed, about less than six months ago. As per communication, they met already just once because that was actually the organization of the special task force relative to A.O. No. 35.

REP. TINIO. Okay. So in more than a year, the Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal Killings has met only once, minsan pa lang, at nasa gitna ito ng lumalawak na alegasyon kontra sa Duterte administration, both dito sa loob ng bansa at sa labas ng bansa, na maraming nagaganap na extrajudicial killings and other gross violations of human rights. Mukhang may problema na minsan pa lang sila nagkita. Humihingi pa naman ito ng budget na P33 million.

REP. LEACHON. We would like to reiterate, Mme. Speaker, that although it is one year as may be said, its head was appointed last May or just about three or four months ago. So they just met only once, of course, with the head present right now, I think that should convince us, Mme. Speaker, that the Committee will be definitely convening more, especially with the good suggestion from Congressman Tinio.

REP. TINIO. With a proposed budget of P33.2 million, how often does this Inter-Agency Committee intend to convene? Ano po ba ang kalakaran? Is this on a case-to-case basis or will it be a regular basis?


REP. LEACHON. I was just informed that there was actually a plan already relayed to the members of the special task force that they would be definitely meeting monthly starting this September, to be apprised of the circumstances, if certain cases are indeed covered by A.O. No. 35, Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. All right. That is good to know because obviously, given that the issue of extralegal killings is hounding the Duterte administration, it is important that this mechanism becomes truly active and play the role it should play.

Kanina po ay tinanong ni Congressman Zarate kung sa ilalim ng Duterte administration kung gaano karami ang mga bagong kaso na pinanghahawakan ng Inter-Agency Committee on Extra-Legal Killings, at mukhang may hindi pagkakasunduan sa numero. Sabi ni Congressman Zarate, ayon sa hawak niyang datos, zero, pero ang sabi naman ng Sponsor, there were a few. So, could I just be clarified on that. Paano po na-resolve iyon, what are the actual numbers? In other words, what is the performance of the Inter-Agency Committee as of now?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, for the information of everyone, of course, what we are talking about here is A.O. No. 35 …

REP. TINIO. Yes.

REP. LEACHON. … which deals specifically with certain cases of killings. Initially, when we had our conversation, what was said here, there were about two cases disposed of but per record of Congressman Zarate, it was actually zero in 2016. We should be reminded that there is a technical working group created for the implementation of A.O. No. 35 and if there are cases reported to them, the technical working group would convene to decide whether that case would be definitely covered by A.O. No. 35.

As of this moment, there was in fact, I also talked with them, actually an assurance on the part of the Department of Justice—considering that in 2016, that was the advent or the turnover or the transition period that we had during that time—that for that record, it showed zero. But they gave an assurance that they will have to review whether those cases referred to them really in 2016 are indeed covered by A.O. No. 35 or not. As of this moment, we are very candid enough, Mme. Speaker, to admit that there was actually no occurrence that is within the coverage of A.O. No. 35 in 2016, and we were able to settle that with Congressman Zarate, Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. So there were no occurrences of A.O. No. 35 cases in 2016. Pero if we just go by one piece of information, for example, according to the human

rights organization, Karapatan, they have recorded 78 extrajudicial killings in 2016 to July 2017 for a period of one year. Granted that it included 2017, but a fair number of those cases of extrajudicial killings took place in 2016. Doon pa lamang po ay mukhang may problema na. If I may just go to the implementing rules of A.O. No. 35, what are the specified procedures, for example, with respect to new cases, because Section 10 thereof, Initial Assessment and Report, stated “When a killing,” which shall be deemed to include an attempted or frustrated killing, “or a deprivation of liberty or a suspected case of torture or other suspected A.O. No. 35 violations…”

As we note, with this A.O. No. 35, a special category of violations or crimes, namely extrajudicial killing, torture, illegal detention, enforced disappearances and so on, are now known as A.O. No. 35 cases. Tama lang po na dapat singilin ang DOJ with respect to A.O. No. 35 cases. It also says here that if suspected A.O. No. 35 violations occur or are reported, the local law enforcement agency office or unit concerned shall make an initial assessment within 48 hours from deployment whether or not the incident may be treated as a possible A.O. No. 35 case.

In other words, may malinaw po na guidelines na kapag may nangyari, it does not even have to be reported to the DOJ.

REP. LEACHON. Correction po, kasi sinabi na pulis daw ang mag-a-assess. Iyong pulis po dapat ang magre-report sa DOJ.

REP. TINIO. Yes.

REP. LEACHON. That should be clarified.

REP. TINIO. Yes, precisely. In other words, the AO requires law enforcement officials and agencies—kaya nga po kasama ang PNP Director General sa Inter-Agency Committee for A.O. No. 35 dahil mayroong special role na kailangang gawin ang pulis. Kapag may kaso ng pagpatay, tapos kung ang kaso involves, possibly, an activist, a journalist and so on, kailangan may assessment ang pulis whether or not this is an A.O. No. 35 case.

Mme. Speaker, may problema ako sa statement na for 2016, walang A.O. No. 35 case na natanggap at naaksiyunan ng Inter-Agency Committee kasi mayroong mga kaso ng media killings, mayroon mga kaso ng pagpatay sa aktibista. Obviously, the Inter-Agency Committee is not working as it should.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, uulitin ko po. Inaamin naman po at napakalinaw ng sinabi ng DOJ na wala silang record o zero dahil bago naman ito mapapasok o mapapaloob sa A.O. No. 35, dapat may


mga kwalipikasyon. Base po sa technical working group, walang napalagay doon. Ganoon pa man, dalawang rason, dahil nga po bago ang administrasyon, hindi agad nakapag-constitute noon dahil kaa-appoint lang ng head ngayong Mayo. Ngayon po, ganoon pa man, dahil maaaring may katotohanan ang sinasabi at tinuturan ng ating kagalang-galang at kaibigan na Kongresista Tinio, nandoon po ang aming garantiya na pinasasabi, pinaaabot ng DOJ na rerepasuhin at magpupulong sila buwan-buwan para talakayin—nandoon po ang pag-amin ng pagkukulang kaya nga po ito ay tutugunan.

We would like to manifest, Mme. Speaker, that we are really intending to comply with the directives and mandates of A.O. No. 35 as suggested by the Honorable Tinio.

REP. TINIO. Thank you for that assurance from the Sponsor, Mme. Speaker. I hope that will be carried through, including the monthly meetings of the Inter-Agency Committee.

Matanong ko lang po kung mayroon ba sa kasalukuyan—sabi po kasi sa guidelines, “Designations of A.O. No. 35 Prosecutors.—There shall be in every city, province or region of the country, a roster of A.O. No. 35 prosecutors who shall be available on an on-call basis in order to serve as team leaders in the investigation and case build-up of A.O. No. 35 cases.”

Mayroon po bang active roster ngayon ang DOJ on the A.O. No. 35 prosecutors?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker, mayroon po. Iyon nga ang unang tinalakay sa una nilang pagpupulong. Mayroon na po.

REP. TINIO. Puwede po bang mabigyan kami ng kopya?

REP. LEACHON. Opo, ipapadala po natin.

REP. TINIO. Mahalaga rin po siguro na alam ng publiko na mayroong mga prosecutors na may special assignment para tumutok sa mga tinatawag na A.O. No. 35 cases. Kung puwede po ay maibigay ito natin.

REP. LEACHON. The request is noted, Mme. Speaker, and we will act accordingly.

REP. TINIO. Thank you.Siguro, ang huling punto na lang po natin, we

note, and the Sponsor has mentioned here, again in relation to, sorry, before I go to that point, I just remembered na ang mga drug related alleged extrajudicial killings—these alleged drug-related killings, are they considered as A.O. No. 35 cases, Mme. Speaker? Halimbawa, ang kaso ni Kian, is that under A.O. No. 35 case?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, I am actually reading now the coverage, and with the permission of the distinguished Congressman Tinio, before, I think that was not covered as there are only four cases in which a victim may be covered by A.O. No. 35.

It is clear and apparent in this A.O. No. 35 that the killings in relation to the war on drugs, those killings are not covered by A.O. No. 35. That is very clear, Mme. Speaker. Otherwise, if those would be included, there would be 35,000 cases under the jurisdiction of that office, Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Okay. Ayon nga po sa guidelines, ang extralegal killings or extrajudicial killings for the purpose of operationalization and implementation of A.O. No. 35, the ELKs or the EJKs will refer to killings wherein the victim was a member of or affiliated with an organization to include political, environmental, agrarian, labor or similar causes or an advocate of the above-named causes, or a media practitioner, or a person apparently mistaken or identified to be so.

Apparently, ang definition ng A.O. No. 35 sa extralegal or extrajudicial killings is limited to either political activists or to media practitioners, generally speaking. Kasama rin po dito ang enforced or involuntary disappearances at torture. Ito po ang tanong ko, A.O. No. 35 also covers other grave human rights violations. In the definition of terms, it refers to acts that grossly violate an individual’s right to life, liberty and security of persons and/or their physical or mental integrity and dignity.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Halimbawa, ang kaso ni Kian where, according to witnesses and even the law enforcement agencies that had filed cases, no less than the police themselves took an innocent boy, arrested him without a warrant and killed him on the spot. Hindi po ba ito kasama sa other grave human rights violations? Is that not a gross violation of an individual’s right to life?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, isang simpleng kasagutan lang po ang aking itutugon. Ang A.O. No. 35 ay ginawa para tumukoy sa mga partikular na kaso at sinabi dito, hindi ko na nga binanggit kanina pero binabanggit po ng ating kaibigan, ang inyong enumeration na napapaloob doon, at ang nakalagay po sa bandang huli ay, “and other equally human rights violations.” Pagka ganoon po ang ating pagtrato, hindi na po kailangan noong A.O. No. 35 kasi ang mandato nito ay sa specific na kaso. Kapag sinama natin lahat ng human rights violations, hindi na po kailangan ang A.O. No. 35 dahil puwede na sagutin ito ng Commission on Human Rigjhts.

Ito po ay natutugon lamang for these cases as provided or enumerated under A.O. No. 35 since it


deals with specific cases. Now, if we were to include human rights violations in generic terms, I think there will be no need for or there will be no logic in A.O. No. 35, considering that jurisdiction pertains definitely to the Commission on Human Rights.

I think that is very clear, Mme. Speaker. As to the specific question on Kian’s killing and with the war on drugs, we would like to reiterate that it is the humble manifestation of this Representation that the killing and the war on drugs, definitely are not covered by A.O. No. 35.

I think that response would suffice to answer the query of Congressman Tinio, Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Mme. Speaker, maraming salamat sa sagot niya pero I beg to disagree na makasasapat na iyong Commission on Human Rights para sa mga kasong katulad nang nangyari kay Kian, iyong mga extrajudicial killings na drug-related at hindi political killings or media killings dahil magkaiba po ang papel ng Commission on Human Rights at saka ng DOJ, particularly ng Inter-Agency Committee na ito. Precisely, this Inter-Agency Committee was created and it is a high-level committee involving the highest officials of our law enforcement agencies. It is given a special budget for 2018 and P33 billion is the request. Precisely, it is under the budget of the DOJ because the DOJ, unlike the CHR, has prosecutorial powers, at saka iyong papel talaga ng Inter-Agency Committee ay para matiyak na magkaroon ng wastong imbestigasyon, mayroon pang oversight function para ma-follow up iyong mga kaso kung mabagal ang takbo at para maresolba ang mga ito. So, iba po iyong papel ng CHR at iba iyong papel ng Inter-Agency Committee under the DOJ. If it is an A.O. No. 35 case, mayroon pong special attention na binibigay sa mga kasong ito dahil ang intensiyon diyan, ang ideya diyan ay ang pagbibigay ng partikular na pagpapahalaga sa karapatan sa buhay, right to life o karapatang mabuhay. Kaya, hindi po ito katulad ng ibang mga krimen, iyong pagnanakaw, you know, paninirang-puri or whatever kasi buhay po ang pinag-uusapan dito.

So, for the record, Mme. Speaker, ang gusto ko pong sabihin, sa palagay ko, ay hindi kailangan ng anumang amendments sa A.O. No. 35, because in the Order itself, its implementing rules allow the Inter-Agency Committee to take cognizance of and to act on cases of extrajudicial killings perpetrated by State forces, by law enforcement agents such as the PNP in relation to the drug war. Puwedeng-puwede po iyan at sa palagay ko nga, dapat maitrato bilang A.O. No. 35 case iyong kaso ni Kian. I would like to put that on the record and I hope that the DOJ will take that into consideration.

Iyon na lamang po, Mme. Speaker. Maraming salamat po.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mme. Speaker, we move that we recognize the Gentleman from the First District of Albay, Cong. Edcel C. Lagman, to be the next interpellator.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Hon. Edcel Lagman is recognized for his interpellation.

REP. LAGMAN. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Let me first commend the distinguished Sponsor for

standing for several hours already in defending several agency budgets, including that for the Department of Justice. I think that is the price of being a competent and industrious Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.

Will the distinguished Sponsor yield to some questions?

REP. LEACHON. Yes. Preliminary, Manong Edcel, thank you for that generous remark. Of course, we will be glad to answer your queries.

REP. LAGMAN. Now, I would like to start with the PCGG. I think the officials of PCGG are still around. Let me know what is the totality of the Marcos’ hidden wealth per estimate of the PCGG because there are so many figures coming out, from a low of US$5 billion to a high of US$10 billion.

REP. LEACHON. Per information relayed to this Representation, Mme. Speaker, Congressman Lagman, the estimate of the hidden wealth is more or less about, as coming from PCGG, US$5 to US$10 billion.

REP. LAGMAN. How much had been recovered by the government with the assistance of the PCGG out of that totality?

REP. LEACHON. Congressman Lagman, Mme. Speaker, per information, more or less, it is about US$4 billion already.

REP. LAGMAN. What is projected to be recovered in 2018, 2019 and 2020 up to end of the term of the President?

REP. LEACHON. As of now, what we have in sight, Mme. Speaker, are those involved only in the pending cases before the courts of justice and as of now, the total amount expected, because of the pending cases, would amount to, more or less, P102 billion, Mme. Speaker.


REP. LAGMAN. Magkano?

REP. LEACHON. It is P102 billion.

REP. LAGMAN. That is in pesos. How much would that be if translated into US dollars using the present exchange rate, because we started in dollars.

REP. LEACHON. Yes. I hope the computation is right –it is $2 billion.

REP. LAGMAN. So, $2 billion. That is $4 billion already recovered.

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. LAGMAN. The $2 billion will still be recovered.


REP. LAGMAN. If the estimate would go up to $10 billion, then there will be still another $4 billion.

REP. LEACHON. It is actually an estimate only of anything between $5 to $10 billion, Mme. Speaker.

REP. LAGMAN. Okay. Now, are there any new cases projected to be filed?

REP. LEACHON. It is a continuous effort on the part of the PCGG but as of now, we will be having new cases filed because they have new discoveries right now about paintings in the United States, and I am even shocked and surprised to know that one painting would cost about $32 million.

REP. LAGMAN. Okay. It is good to know that there is still an ongoing effort to retrieve the ill-gotten hoard. Now, may we know what is the principal role of the PCGG in relation to the incumbent President of the Republic in the recovery of the ill-gotten hoard of the Marcoses. You have to refer to E.O. No. 1.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, per information under the Executive Order concerned, it is a continuing effort on the part of PCGG regardless of the transition of the President. So meaning, this whole obligation that they have right now is purposely to get that ill-gotten wealth and correspondingly submit it to the Treasury even with the incumbency or the transition in Presidents.

REP. LAGMAN. But if we have to refer to the presidential decree and in the present Executive Order

No. 1, the principal authority in the recovery effort is the President of the Republic to be assisted by the PCGG. Is that correct?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker, that is absolutely true but then, they are working on their own, of course, because by acknowledgement, the PCGG definitely, apart from being under the DOJ, they are working, definitely, under the jurisdiction and authority of the Office of the President.

REP. LAGMAN. Okay. Now, just to make things very clear, let me quote the pertinent provision of E.O. No. 1, which was issued by the late President Corazon Aquino on February 28, 1986, and it says here that the “Presidential Commission on Good Government shall be charged with the task of assisting the President in regard to the following matters that include the recovery of ill-gotten wealth, investigations, and other parameters.”

I am saying this because under the existing law, Executive Order No. 1 which was issued by the late President Aquino in her exercise of legislative powers during the revolutionary government, it is actually the President who is the principal authority and it is the role of the PCGG to assist the President in recovering the ill-gotten wealth. Is that correct?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, according to Executive Order No. 1 as signed by President Aquino, definitely, under the law, it should be the President assisted by the PCGG.

REP. LAGMAN. Okay.

REP. LEACHON. But we have to understand really, of course, by the principle of delegation and considering the gargantuan task of the President, by authority, the PCGG acts as an alter-ego of the President and in that case, the acts of the PCGG will definitely be the acts of the President subject, of course, to the authority, revocation and definitely, under the close supervision and control of the President. Whatever the President would wish otherwise, definitely, the PCGG is bound to obey all of the orders and regulations to be issued by the Office of the President, Mme. Speaker.

REP. LAGMAN. We have no problem with that answer. As a matter of fact, it reinforces our position that under the existing law, there is no need for the President to ask Congress to enact another law because the law is there already.

With respect to the recovery of the Marcos’ ill-gotten hoard, the recovery would include negotiation for its surrender. Is that correct?


REP. LEACHON. Come again, Mme. Speaker. Did I get it right that we need another law in case...

REP. LAGMAN. No. I am debunking the call of the President for Congress to enact a law authorizing him to negotiate for the recovery of part of the Marcos’ hidden wealth because he does not need that authority since in Executive Order No. 1, he has the continuing authority to recover the Marcos’ hidden wealth, including negotiating for their surrender, with the assistance of the PCGG. Is that correct?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker, my answer will be as simple as this. In fact, in the previous cases, definitely, these cases have been involved in several cases, and in accordance with the doctrine settled by the Supreme Court, it is very clear that if part of the compromise agreement would be entailing immunity on the part of the one involved in such compromise agreement, in this case, on the ill-gotten wealth, that would definitely be needing an enabling law. It is not within the ambit of the power of the President to negotiate if the corresponding entailment would be immunity on the part of the other contracting party in such compromise agreement.

REP. LAGMAN. Not even Congress can give the President the authority to negotiate for immunity from criminal prosecution of the principals, the Marcoses, because the settled doctrine in our jurisdiction is that criminal liability is not subject to compromise. In the case of Chavez vs. PCGG, issued on December 9, 1998, the Supreme Court voided the challenged compromise agreement insofar as it granted the Marcoses immunity from criminal prosecution.

Does the distinguished Sponsor, in consultation with the PCGG officials, confirm such case?

REP. LEACHON. Well, of course, with respect to the remarks of our esteemed Congressman from Albay, of course, with the eloquent remark and comment about this one, well, we have nothing but to respect the comment. But then, if I may clarify, it has been settled and in fact, a differentiation has been made by the Supreme Court that if ordinary cases would be involved or ordinary witnesses, definitely, immunity would not be needed. In this case, it was said and it was settled that another enabling law will be needed because they are the main respondents in this case, and that would be tantamount to condonation; thus, to give them immunity would definitely be unwarranted under the situation.

REP. LAGMAN. Now, while we will be giving advance notice, that if this Chamber would authorize the President to enter into such a compromise

agreement giving the Marcoses immunity from criminal prosecution, we are going to oppose it, and we would rely on the prevailing doctrine enunciated in Chavez vs. PCGG. It is a mockery of justice, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, and an insult to the aggrieved sovereign people to exempt the Marcoses from criminal culpability in exchange for a few pieces of stolen gold bars or even for their entire ill-gotten hoard. A criminal must pay for his crime despite his having belatedly returned the object of his transgression.

Having said that, let me go to another issue. This Representation has received from the Department of Justice a report on the collated list of cases investigated with respect to summary killings related to the war on illegal drugs. This letter is dated September 4, 2017. It is limited to cases with the DOJ prosecution offices.

Unfortunately, this report does not include a summary of the items. Let me just observe that the figures reported are so anemic—very few cases are being handled by the Prosecution Service. As a matter of fact, for Region 2, Region 11 including Davao, Region 12, Region 13, and Region 14, there are no entries with respect to the cases being referred to or being handled by the DOJ prosecution offices. I was promised that a summary will be given to me and I will await that summary, but whatever summary is there, this report would show very anemic figures.

REP. LEACHON. Well-taken, Mme. Speaker. Actually, the Department would like to extend an apology that they were not able to give at least or attached a summary on that despite the submission of the required documents. Now, per the manifestation cum apology of the Department, I will would like to manifest, on record, that we will be submitting the necessary documents to Manong Edcel Lagman.

REP. LAGMAN. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to ask these questions, distinguished Sponsor. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.

REP. LEACHON. Thank you, Congressman Lagman.


REP. GONZALES (A.). Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the next interpellator, Cong. Emmi A. De Jesus of GABRIELA Party-List.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Honorable De Jesus is recognized for her interpellation.

REP. DE JESUS. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, at magse-second the motion po ako doon sa pagkilala sa


ating Sponsor, na ang balita ko po ay ilang oras nang nakatindig. Kinikilala ko rin po, bilang Kinatawan ng sector ng kababaihan, na mahalaga po na maipahayag din namin at makapagtanong kami sa ating Sponsor. So, katulad ng nabanggit ko, magbibigay din po ako doon sa katanungan hinggil doon sa kababaihan at mga bata, inasmuch as most of the questions were already asked by my colleagues who interpreted before me.

G. Isponsor, pursuant to R.A. No. 9262—alam po natin ang batas na ito ay laganap laban sa karahasan sa kababaihan. Gusto pong malaman ng Kinatawang ito, ano na po ang naitala o naiakyat na petition for review sa ating ahensiya ng Department of Justice?

REP. LEACHON. Mahal na Congresswoman, ito po ba ay patungkol sa petition for review lang o iyong mga kaso ng VAWC?

REP. DE JESUS. Ang pagkakaunawa ko po, mayroon kasi tayong interagency group rin na nangangasiwa pero iyon pong petition for review, kasi alam din po namin na kalakhan ng mga kaso, kapag inilapit, ang VAWC ay tumutungo doon sa pinapag-areglo. Pero kikilalanin ko po, kung mayroon po kayong datos kaugnay sa lahat ng kaso, mas maganda po, at ibigay na rin po ninyo kung ano na iyong natanggap na petition for review ng Department of Justice?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, I have this, Mme. Speaker, and I would like to address the good Congresswoman that in relation to violations of R.A. No. 9262, otherwise known as AN ACT DEFINING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN, given the comprehensive data, as of now, we have more or less 27,000 cases nationwide and the breakdown is as follows: violation of child protection, this is covered by the VAWC, 10,457, distributed nationwide; violations against women, that is 10,300, and apparently, I included this one because normally it would be a violation against women because these are rape cases, 7,000. So that is more or less 27,000, the total number for violations crimes against women.

REP. DE JESUS. Dito sa R.A. No. 9262, kasi katulad ng nabanggit ko po, talagang may dumudulog din dahil karamihan ay naiisantabi o ina-areglo iyong petition for review po na tinatanggap na ng inyong ahensiya. Marami rin po talaga dito na dumadaan sa aming tanggapan at sa GABRIELA National Office Headquarters.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, mahal nating Congresswoman, sa ngayon po ay wala sa hawak ko ang datos na hinihingi po ninyo patungkol sa mga kaso na naka-pending sa Department of Justice na may petition for review, but hayaan po ninyo, nandito po sila

at binibigay po nila ang garantiya na magsusumite sila ng mga kaso na nakabinbin na may petition for review within the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice relating to the alleged offenses.

REP. DE JESUS. Kasi iyong violations of R.A. No. 9262 ay pinangunahan din ng aming party list, katuwang ang Association of Women’s Legislators sa Kongresong ito. Noong Marso po ay inilunsad namin iyong monitoring kaya mahalaga sa amin na doon po sa ibibigay ninyong ulat ay sana makita rin namin kung ano iyong mga probinsiya or mga areas na mas laganap ang mga ulat kaugnay sa R.A. No. 9262 violations dahil ito po ay isang programa na kinikilala namin na aming tungkulin. Aasahan po namin na mayroon po talagang maibibigay na listahan.

Iyong susunod po rito. kauganay naman po doon sa inyong Executive Order No. 53, which is one of the agencies attached under the Special Protection of Children—ang tanong ko po rito, may intervention na din po ba kayo sa mga ulat kaugnay ng mga cybercrime? Dahil malinaw din naman po na ang paglaganap din ng cybercrime, na alam natin na kalahati o ang nakararami sa biktima ay mga bata, ano po ang ginagawang mga hakbang ng Department of Justice kaugnay po ng paglaganap ng cybercrime, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. LEACHON. E.O. No.?

REP. DE JESUS. Under E.O. No. 53.

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. DE JESUS. Iyong Special Protection of Children pursuant to Executive Order No. 53. Kinikilala po namin na ang ahensiya ay mayroon ding pagbabantay doon sa mga kaso ng cybercrime dahil talagang kalakhan po o libo-libo ang biktima nito na ayon nga po sa UNICEF, nakakatanggap ito ng halos 7,000 na ulat monthly kaya I think this is very alarming.

REP. LEACHON. Yes. Mme. Speaker, I would like to guarantee, good Congresswoman, that efforts have been made continuously by the Department of Justice with respect to the prevention of cybercrimes, the proliferation of violations of the Cybercrime Law, particularly of R.A. No. 10175. Yes, it is correct to note that every month, there is an alarming increase in reports of exploitation with respect to this. Rest assured that the Department is doing its best to at least, if not totally prevent, curtail the proliferation of these cases as mentioned by the good Congresswoman, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DE JESUS. Kasi po ay nakatala rin dito sa ating budget target for 2018, naglaan tayo para rito. We


expect that the report that this Representation would be expecting from the agency is the current status and would have some operational plans with regard to attending to the issue of preventing cybercrime cases.

Kaugnay din po ng isyu ng mga bata, siyempre, Mme. Speaker, G. Isponsor, alam ko naman po na pamilyar kayo dito sa isang batas, Republic Act No. 9344, kaugnay po ng juvenile justice. Mayroon po kasi kaming mga kaso na ang intervention kaugnay ng mga kabataan na below 15 years old, ano po, na ang attitude dito o ano po ba ang papel ng Department of Justice with regard to the intervention, lalo na po doon sa isyu na ginagamit ng—kasi ang pangunahing ahensiya po pagdating dito sa juvenile justice violators na mga kabataan, ay ang DSWD po at gumagamit sila ng tinatawag nilang tools para po sa discernment. Ang inyo po bang ahensiya, ang Department of Justice po ba ay may papel kaugnay dito sa pagtitiyak na hindi po talaga magkakaroon ng paglabag doon sa JJ o juvenile justice po sa kabataan, lalu’t lalo na baka po ang mga tools na ginagamit sa iba’t ibang safe house o bahay-arugaan ng mga batang hinuhuli nila ay lumalampas doon sa balangkas ng pagtitiyak na ang mga kabataan ay nabibigyan ng proteksiyon? Can the good Sponsor share with us how the agency makes an intervention, if there is any, with regard to the handling of minors and implementing the law on juvenile justice, R.A. No. 9344?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, we would like to address that one being raised by the good Congresswoman that definitely, as espoused by the good Congresswoman, the primary department dealing with this is definitely the DSWD. The intervention is, if ever, it would be the role of the Department of Justice, whenever there is endorsement, to file the necessary case in relation to the violation of these laws. In all cases wherein the law has been violated or there is an imminent or apparent violation of any law, definitely, that will be role of the National Prosecution Service under the Department of Justice. So, whenever a violation is involved, it will be up to the endorsement by the DSWD and if ever no case is filed, then, definitely, it rests within the exclusive jurisdiction of the DSWD. If apparent violations are made, upon endorsement by the DSWD, then, the power and jurisdiction of the DOJ will come into place, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DE JESUS. Thank you for that answer, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

Nasa yugto po kami na inaaral din namin na dapat talagang iyong mga laws na pumapatungkol doon sa mga kabataan, lalung-lalo na sa mga menor de edad, ay higit nating maaral. Sabi ninyo nga, kapag may mga kaso na kailangan talagang pagpursigihian, na may mga lumalampas, ihahain po ito sa Department of Justice.

Thank you for that answer, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. LEACHON. Welcome po.

REP. DE JESUS. Balik lang po din ako sa issue ng hinaharap din ng victimization ng ating mga kababaihan, ito pong kaugnay naman ng issue ng sex trafficking. Batay po sa naitala from January to October 2016, ang binabanggit ay naka-receive na ang kapulisan natin ng higit 1,000 kaso. Ano na po ang naihain para po doon sa mga natukoy ng perpetrators at nai-file na po sa korte? Siyempre po, ang pinakamahalaga po rito, dahil sa prosecutory role ng ating mga korte, ilan na po ba ang napanagot at naparusahan para po doon sa mga gumawa ng trafficking ng ating mga kababaihan?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, in dealing with the general data or the aggregate amount or the number of cases relative to this one, we have, more or less, the exact number is about 575 cases, and in conjunction with the other pending cases, the total number of cases now filed before the court is 607 cases with respect to trafficking.

REP. DE JESUS. Was there an increase, Mr. Sponsor, or it would be best if this Representation can receive a comparative study of the cases the Department has received for 2016 relative to 2017 and to the current month?

My objective in putting forward this question is that it should really be some kind of concern not only for the Department, ano, kasi napakaganda po na maunawaan din bakit tuloy-tuloy ang victimization ng trafficking of women and children. Maganda rin pong maunawaan o iyong maugat natin, makita iyong profile ng mga victims at makalampag din kung ano ang nararapat. This Representation is more on rooting out— should there be a record on the increase, talaga pong makikita natin na tuloy-tuloy, ano, iyong kakulangan ng serbisyong panlipunan kaya tuloy-tuloy din ang victimization.

Anyway, Mr. Sponsor, hihintayin ko na lamang po ang ganoong ulat.

REP. LEACHON. Okay.

REP. DE JESUS. On my last point, kasi alam ko pong pagod na pagod na rin kayo, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, just to quote iyon pong Budget Message ng ating Pangulo with regard to pursuing swift and fair administration of justice, ang sinasabi, “Enhancing the social fabric is not possible without justice. Fostering an atmosphere of trust means that we pursue justice that is swift and fair.” Ito pong tanong ko: During the Appropriations Committee briefing, talagang gusto ko makita ito pong ating correction program kasi kapag sinabi nating “justice that is swift and fair,” ang binabanggit po, itong ating mga


corrections, itong ating mga koreksiyonal, pero patuloy po ang pagdami ng bilang at napakabagal ang pag-grind talaga ng mga hearing.

What can the Sponsor say on this, any commitment with regard to hastening this, to give swift and fair trials, para naman po ma-unload din at mabigyan ng katarungan iyon mga detenido, na alam nating iyong kalakhan diyan ay, victimization talaga, kasi napo-prolong ito dahil hindi nga nahaharap iyong kaso. What can the Sponsor say on this, Mme. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. Yes. Two concerns, Mme. Speaker: number one, as earlier elucidated, with respect to the subject matter, there is a commitment already on the part of the Department to facilitate or to hasten the disposition relative to all cases pending before them or being prosecuted by the Department. If I may say also, it should also be understood, to the effect, that the administration of justice is not the sole problem or the sole obligation on the part of the Department of Justice as it entails a lot of interagency commitment, especially so that on the part of the prosecution, it should be the DOJ, but on the part of the administration of justice, especially in the disposition and rendering of judgment or rendition of judgment, it should be the role of the Judiciary.

REP. DE JESUS. Judiciary?

REP. LEACHON. At any rate, Mme. Speaker, that is our commitment as part of the reforms being achieved by the Committee on Justice and right now, we have several measures being undertaken by the House Committee on Justice.

On that ground, we would like to assure our good Congresswoman that, really, at this point in time, the thrust of Congress with respect to that is to coincide the view of the good Congresswoman in line with the policy of the President that a peaceful country can be achieved only if there is true attainment of justice, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DE JESUS. Thank you for that answer, Mr. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, because the evaluation of convicted prisoners for the grant of parole and recommendation for executive clemency is part of the Department’s role and in fact, it has a budget presented for 2018. Aasahan po namin ang inyong commitment at pagtitiyak po, lalong-lalo na doon sa mga nasa correctional centers natin na may mga matatandang kababaihan at mga maysakit.

With that, Mme. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, salamat po sa inyong kasagutan.

REP. LEACHON. Walang anuman po.


REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Gentleman from BUHAY Party-List, Sr. Dep. Minority Leader Jose “Lito” L. Atienza.

REP. ATIENZA. Salamat po, Mme. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Sr. Dep. Minority Leader, Cong. Lito Atienza, is recognized for his interpellation.

REP. ATIENZA. Thank you, Mr. Dep. Majority Leader, Mme. Speaker.

Mayroon lang po kaming nais iparating sa liderato ng ating Departamento ng Katarungan. Ang kahilingan ng marami rito, ang damdamin ng maraming Miyembro ng ating Kongreso ay kung maaari, lahat iyong mga maysakit at matatandang nakakulong magmula po roon sa NBP at iyong mga ibang kulungan ay mabigyan po nila ng pansin, at kung maaari ay maisama na po sa susunod na listahan na mapagbibigyan po ng kalayaan—matanda, maysakit—pasanin pa po iyan sa loob. Samantala, kung makakauwi na po sila, sa mga huling sandali ng kanilang buhay ay makapiling naman nila iyong kanilang mga mahal sa buhay, ang pamilya nila, at sa bahay na sila yumao, at iyon po ay isang magiging makatao, maka-Diyos, at mayroong damdaming panggugobyerno.

Kung maaari po nating makunan ng reaction ngayon ang ating Secretary of Justice, pararatingin ko po sa lahat, lalong-lalo na po kay Congresswoman Aggabao na bago po lumabas ay nagpaalala sa akin dito na iyong ating ipinakikiusap ay sana naman mabigay nila.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker.Actually, nasabi ko na rin po kanina. Well,

of course, we would like to assure Manong Lito, Congressman Atienza of BUHAY Party-List, that the request definitely is being implemented right now by the Department. In fact, they have quarterly and regular conduct of evaluation with respect to all inmates and detainees in various prison cells and prison facilities across the country. In fact, as of now, they have recommended already to the President those persons requiring immediate discharge or release from their respective prison cells.

REP. ATIENZA. Honorable Sponsor, maraming salamat po. Umpisahan na nila iyong naka-pending na listahan po sa Malacañang ngayon sapagkat alam ko mayroon silang ginawang rekomendasyon na wala pong aksiyon. Araw-araw po, iyong mga mahihina nang matatanda ay baka hindi na po abutin iyong kanilang adhikain at panaginip na makapiling ang kanilang mga mahal sa buhay. Wala na pong magagawang masama sila sa lipunan kaya maaari po naman talagang pagbigyan. Iyon po ang aming pakiusap.

Maraming salamat po. Mme. Speaker, thank you.


REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker, walang anuman po. We will comply with that.


REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Minority Leader, Congressman Danilo E. Suarez, of the Third District of Quezon.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The honorable Minority Leader, the Hon. Danny Suarez, is hereby recognized.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Mme. Speaker, on behalf of the Minority, we

interpose no more questions on the proposed budget of the Department of Justice and its other agencies.



REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mme. Speaker, inasmuch as there is no other Member who wishes to ask questions, I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Department of Justice.


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

The period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Department of Justice is hereby approved.

REP. LEACHON. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, Dep. Majority Leader.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Floor Leader is recognized.

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, the parliamentary status of House Bill No. 6215 is that it is still in the period of sponsorship. I move that we take up the budget of the Civil Service Commission.




REP. DE VENECIA. I move that we recognize the

Hon. Raul V. Del Mar to sponsor the budget of the Civil Service Commission.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Honorable Del Mar is recognized to sponsor the budget of the Civil Service Commission.

He is recognized.

REP. DEL MAR. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, Floor Leader.

REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker.


REP. DE VENECIA. I move that we acknowledge the presence of the members of the Civil Service Commission.

These are Chairperson Alicia Dela Rosa-Bala; Commissioner Robert S. Martinez; Commissioner Leopoldo Roberto W. Valderosa Jr. and Executive Director Maria Antoinette Velasco-Allones.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Civil Service Commission officials led by its Chairperson, the Commissioners and the Executive Director, and the other officers and staff are welcome to the House of Representatives.


REP. DE VENECIA. I move that we recognize the honorable Minority Leader Danny Suarez.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The honorable Minority Leader, the Hon. Danilo E. Suarez, is hereby recognized.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Will my long-time friend, Congressman Del Mar, be willing to yield the floor for some minor interpellation?

REP. DEL MAR. Of course, to the distinguished Gentleman, the honorable Minority Leader.

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, what is the total workforce of the Civil Service now?

REP. DEL MAR. The total workforce is in the vicinity of—excuse me for a while, Your Honor, I want to get the exact figure—it is 1,037.

REP. SUAREZ. How much are they asking for 2018, Your Honor?


REP. DEL MAR. They are asking for P1.489 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. So, P1.489 billion. How much did they receive last year, Your Honor?

REP. DEL MAR. This year, you mean, Your Honor, they have P1.838 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, what is their absorbing capacity? Did they spend all of that money last year?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. All of it?

REP. DEL MAR. I believe so, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. You can say that this is one or maybe, the only agency among the government offices that manage to absorb their budget 100 percent.

REP. DEL MAR. This Representation does not know the budget of the different Departments and agencies but insofar as the Civil Service Commission is concerned, that is correct, Your Honor. It is clear, their budget is P1.838 billion and expenses is exactly P1.838 billion, so 100 percent, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. You can say that this is the only agency which knows how much they need, and they have spent it all, properly applied their budget to all the presented programs.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Without any problem in the Commission on Audit?

REP. DEL MAR. None, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. I just have one question. You are aware, Your Honor,

that we crafted a law on efficiency of revenue and we call that the “Attrition Law,” especially applied to the personnel of the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the Bureau of Customs wherein we set and gave targets for these agencies and if they do not meet ther targets, they can be subject to forced resignation from their position or what we call, attrited. Is the distinguished Sponsor aware of the Attrition Law?

REP. DEL MAR. The Attrition Law is applicable both to the BIR and the Bureau of Customs, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. No, but are you well aware of the

implementing rules of the attrition, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor?

REP. DEL MAR. The Commission is not fully conversant, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, there was a particular case wherein an attrited official went to the Civil Service Commission and asked for support, stating that he cannot be attrited because of his protection or what we call his “right of employment as a government employee.” To my knowledge Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, the position of that individual was supported by the Civil Service Commission.

REP. DEL MAR. The target of the person you are referring to, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, was not set. Therefore, there is no basis in saying that he has not met the target.

REP. SUAREZ. No, no. My question …

REP. DEL MAR. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there was no target set and so, there was no way to determine whether the target was achieved because there was none in the first place.

REP. SUAREZ. So, the defense of the said employee is that he cannot be attrited because there was no target given to him.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, because the basis of attrition is that there is a definite target set individually for the collectors and so, if there is no target set, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there would be no basis for attrition.

REP. SUAREZ. I am not privy to the date. When did this happen because it was just a month ago that I got this information.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Garcia-Albano relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Ferdinand L. Hernandez.

REP. DEL MAR. We are still checking, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. They are checking the specific date that the Gentleman is asking.


REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, can I request for a one-minute suspension of the session.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Hernandez). The session is suspended for one minute.


It was 3:59 p.m.



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

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of the budget of the Civil Service Commission.


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

SUSPENSION OF CONSIDERATION OF H.B. NO. 6215

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of House Bill No. 6215.



ROLL CALL

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we call the roll.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Hernandez). Is

there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

The Secretary General will please call the roll.

The Secretary General called the roll, and the result is as follows, per Journal No. 19, dated September 6, 2017:

PRESENT

Aquino-MagsaysayAragonesArcillasArenasAtienzaAumentadoBagatsingBaguilatBanalBarzagaBataoilBatocabeBelaroBelmonte (F.)Belmonte (J.C.)Belmonte (R.)BenitezBernosBertizBiazonBillonesBironBoliliaBondocBordadoBravo (A.)Bravo (M.V.)BrosasBulut-BegtangCagasCalixto-RubianoCamineroCamposCanamaCariCasilaoCasteloCastro (F.L.)Castro (F.H.)CatamcoCeraficaCerillesChavezChipecoCoCojuangcoCollantesCortesCortunaCosalanCrisologoCuaCuaresmaCuevaDalipeDatol

AbayaAbayonAbellanosaAbuAbuegAcharonAcopAcostaAcosta-AlbaAdvincula

AggabaoAlbanoAlejanoAlmarioAlvarez (F.)Alvarez (P.)AmanteAmatongAngara-CastilloAntonio

DazaDe JesusDe VeneciaDe VeraDefensorDel MarDel RosarioDeloso-MontallaDimaporo (A.)Dimaporo (M.K.)DuavitDurano ElagoErmita-BuhainEscuderoEspinaEspinoEstrellaEusebioFariñasFernandoFerrer (J.)Ferrer (L.)FortunFortunoGarbinGarcia (G.)Garcia (J.E.)Garcia-AlbanoGarin (R.)Garin (S.)GasatayaGatchalianGo (A.C.)Go (M.)GonzagaGonzales (A.P.)Gonzales (A.D.)GonzalezGullasHernandezHerrera-DyHoferJalosjosJavierKhoKhonghunLabadlabadLagmanLaneteLaoganLeachonLimkaichongLobregatLopez (B.)Lopez (M.L.)


LoyolaMacapagal-ArroyoMacedaMadronaMalapitanManaloMangaoangMangudadatu (Z.)MarcoletaMarcosMarquezMartinezMatugasMellanaMercadoMirasolMontoroNavaNietoNoelNograles (J.J.)Nograles (K.A.)NolascoNuñez-MalanyaonOaminalOcampoOlivarezOng (H.)Ortega (P.)Ortega (V.N.)PacquiaoPaduanoPalmaPanchoPanganibanPanotesPapandayanPimentelPinedaPlazaPrimicias-AgabasQuimboRadazaRamirez-SatoRamosRelampagosRevillaRoa-PunoRocamoraRodriguez (I.)Rodriguez (M.)RomanRomualdezRomualdoRoque (H.)

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. The roll call shows that 242 Members responded to the call.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Hernandez). With 242 Members present, the Chair declares the presence of a quorum.




REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mr. Speaker, I move that we resume the consideration of House Bill No. 6215. For this purpose, may I request that the Secretary General be directed to read the title of the Bill.


The Secretary General is hereby directed to read the title of the Bill.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill No. 6215, entitled: AN ACT APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES FROM JANUARY ONE TO DECEMBER THIRTY-ONE, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHTEEN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

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

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mr. Speaker, I move to resume the consideration of House Bill No. 6215, and we will now consider the budget of the Civil Service Commission.



REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mr. Speaker, I move to recognize the Minority Leader Danilo E. Suarez of the Third District of Quezon.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Hernandez). Rep. Danilo Suarez, the Minority Leader, is hereby recognized.

REP. DEL MAR. Mr. Speaker.

Roque (R.)SacdalanSagarbarriaSahaliSalimbangonSaloSalonSambarSandovalSantos-RectoSarmiento (C.)Sarmiento (E.M.)SavellanoSiaoSilverioSingsonSuansing (E.) SuarezSy-AlvaradoTambuntingTan (A.)Tan (S.)TejadaTevesTiangcoTingTinioTolentinoTreñasTugnaTupasTyUnabiaUngabUnicoUy (J.)Uy (R.)UybarretaVargasVargas-AlfonsoVelardeVelascoVelasco-CateraVelosoVergaraVillanuevaVillaricaViolagoYap (M.)Yap (V.)YuZamora (M.C.)Zamora (R.)ZarateZubiri


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Hernandez). Go ahead.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes. The date that the Honorable Suarez is asking is still being looked into and it is not that easy to look into the files. For many years in the past—but the issue is that the Attrition Law is applicable to both officials and personnel of the BIR and the Bureau of Customs. There is a target set for collections for both agencies and if their officers do not meet, where they are posted, the target collection, then they will be attrited and the minimum basis for meeting that will be 7.5 percent of the total target revenues.

In this case, the officers and employees were attrited and removed from the service for the specific reason that they did not meet their targets. But in this case, there was no breakup of the figures such that each employee will have his definite target. So that was the question. They were removed and they appealed to the Civil Service Commission.

In the decision of the Civil Service Commission, which was to reverse the removal, the attrition of the employees concerned mainly on the basis that there was no way to determine whether they were not able to reach their target because after closer examination of the facts, there was no target set; so, since there was no target set, we could never determine whether these employees met or failed to meet the targets.

Right now, what is being looked into is the year that the Honorable Suarez is asking.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Ferdinand L. Hernandez relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Mylene J. Garcia-Albano.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. DEL MAR. Perhaps.

REP. SUAREZ. I just would like to explain a little on the rationale behind. Both of us are seasoned legislators and we both know the problems of these two agencies—the BIR and the Customs.

We look at this Machiavellian or an unorthodox approach of helping the government improve revenues by setting a target with punitive action and reward as well. During the time of then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the Bureau of Customs was given a reward of P600 million because they surpassed their target. So my point, distinguished Sponsor, is, if those employees were reinstated by the Commission on the premise that the target was not met because there was no target, then maybe it is because the administration did not implement the Attrition Law.

REP. DEL MAR. Well, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, in a way, you are correct because while they removed

these employees in accordance with the Attrition Law, they did not enforce it properly because they did not give them specific targets to which they will be subjected and the determination of whether or not they will be subject to attrition for failing to meet the target. So, you are correct, Your Honor. There was a failure on the proper application of the law and the procedures on this particular case.

REP. SUAREZ. When can we have, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, the specific dates of this incident?

REP. DEL MAR. It is still being looked into, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker. Perhaps, we can move along and by the time we discuss other things, we will have the exact date or even the year.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, distinguished Sponsor, that is the only question that I would like to raise, but I just would like to inform the good office of the Civil Service Commission that this is time-tested with the Supreme Court.

When I crafted and had this law approved in the plenary, the BIR and the Customs went to the Supreme Court, arguing the constitutionality of the Attrition Law, and the Supreme Court sustained Congress. The position of the Supreme Court then is that, it is a valid law and it does not violate Constitution. As a matter of fact, it clearly states that it is the right of the government to seek full performance, dedication to and compliance with what their mandated task. Karapatan po ng gobyerno na hingin sa isang empleyado na gawin niya ang lahat ng kanyang magagawa para magampanan niya ang kanyang tungkulin. Iyon po ang sinabi ng Supreme Court.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. We completely agree to how the attrition came about through your efforts, and it would not have been enacted into law had it not been meritorious, that it was a good legislative measure, for which reason, it was enacted into law.

Now, since that is the only question you are referring to, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, we are not reminded that was the principal author of this law, and the year of the incident is the main question now. So, it is a question of whether it was during the term of former President Arroyo—oh, we have the year, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, now, finally, 2010 is the year in question.

REP. SUAREZ. So, it was the term of President Aquino.

REP. DEL MAR. Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, this was on June 29, 2010.


REP. SUAREZ. Well, in that case, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I will not raise further issues because as I have said, the previous administration did not implement the Attrition Law.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, and it is through Civil Service Commission Resolution No. 101329, and yes, June 29, 2010, and the person involved was Arthur Sevilla.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, on behalf of the Minority, we have no more question to raise on the proposed budget of the Civil Service Commission, and I do not think there is anybody who would like to raise further questions. So, I move that we terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the Civil Service Commission.



REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mme. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the …

REP. TINIO. Mme. Speaker.


REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mme. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority.

REP. TINIO. Mme. Speaker, I asked to be listed as an interpellator.


REP. GONZALES (A.D.). May I move to recognize the Gentleman from ACT TEACHERS Party-List, Rep. Antonio L. Tinio.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). Congressman Antonio Tinio is hereby recognized for his interpellation.

REP. TINIO. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Mme. Speaker, I would like to focus on the policy

question and this is the issue of contractualization in the civil service.

As we know, alam po natin na isa sa mga ipinangakong pagbabago ni Pangulong Duterte noong panahon ng kampanya, at isa sa mga ipinanalo niya

ay iyong pangako na wawakasan ang endo o iyong kontraktwalisasyon. Pagkatapos ng mahigit isang taon, kung titingnan natin ang pribadong sektor, bagamat may inilabas na bagong order and Department of Labor and Employment, kung tatanuning natin ang mga labor unions in the private sector, para sa kanila, hindi tunay na nawakasan ang endo kung hindi sabi nila na-institutionalize pa nga ito.

Ngayon, sa totoo lang, iyong problema ng kontraktwalisasyon ay hindi lamang problema sa pribadong sektor kung hindi maging sa pampublikong sektor. In fact, puwede nating sabihin na ang single biggest na gumagamit ng endo sa buong bansa ay ang pambansang gobyerno, the national government. Last year, nang tinanong po natin ang Civil Service Commission, nagbigay sila ng datos sa atin na more or less nasa mga around almost 700,000 nationwide ang mga Contract of Service or Job Order both sa national government, sa iba’t ibang mga ahensya nito at sa mga local government units.

So, malinaw na malaking problema ito kasi out of a total of 1.4 million or so na regular government employees of the national government, kailangang idagdag pa natin ang more or less 700,000 na mga nagtatrabaho rin sa gobyerno pero mga Job Order or Contract of Service. Ibig sabihin, wala silang security of tenure, hindi sila tumatanggap ng sweldo na katumbas noong kanilang mga counterparts sa national or sa local government, at wala silang mga benepisyo na ginagarantiya na dapat sa bawat kawani ng gobyerno.

So, una, Mme. Speaker, gusto ko pong malaman, ano po ba iyong updated figures, numbers or statistics kaugnay sa Job Order and Contract of Service sa gobyerno?

REP. DEL MAR. Your Honor, as of August 31 of this year, we have a total of 1,762,442, broken into two classes: (1) Career of 1,571,526 representing 89.17 percent in all levels: first level is 360,749; second level is 1,208,836; third level is 1,941, for a total of 1,571,526. (2) In the Non-Career, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, the total is 190,917,000 representing 10.83 percent, broken down into casual – 96,456; contractual – 39,578; coterminous – 35,476; and elective – 19,407, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Mme. Speaker, thank you to the Sponsor for providing that data, although I believe that only covers the numbers for government employees. Even the contractual, the 39,500 plus figure mentioned for contractuals, these contractuals by definition are still considered to be in an employer-employee relationship with the government. So, my question, the numbers I wanted are the number of job orders and contracts of service that are used by various agencies. I could not use the word employed because they are not considered


employees. So, ano po iyong bilang ng mga Contract of Service and Job Order apart from the 1.7 billion that are considered to be government employees?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, we regret that we do not have the records for the private sector. What we have is just the …

REP. TINIO. No. Yes, from the public sector po?

REP. DEL MAR. The public sector, the statistics of the JO and COS in June 2016, it was 595,162; in August 2017, it was 660,390 and the percentage of at least from 2016 to 2017 is 9.88 percent, Your Honor.

REP. TINIO. Well, thank you very much. Those are very enlightening figures, Mme. Speaker. As our Sponsor mentioned last year 2016, the number was around 595,000 contracts of service, and job orders. The latest figures for this year, the numbers are now up to 660,390 or as the Sponsor mentioned, 9.88 percent increase in just one year. So, in other words, ang punto po natin dito ay sa halip na mabawasan ang bilang ng endo sa gobyerno ay lumalaki pa po matapos ang isang taon ng Duterte administration. So, malaking problema nga po ito dahil matindi po ang paglabag sa karapatan ng maraming mga kababayan natin na nagtratrabaho sa gobyerno pero hindi kinikilala bilang empleyado kung hindi ang serbisyo nila ay nakabatay lamang sa Job Order o Contract of Service.

Okay. Ngayon po alam ko din, batid din po natin na after many years, sa mga budget hearing po ng mga nakaraan, noong nakaraang taon pa, alam ito ng Civil Service, alam ito ng COA, alam din ito ng DBM, nire-raise ko po ang issue na ito, ano po ba ang malinaw na patakaran na gumagabay sa paggamit ng mga ahensya ng gobyerno kaugnay sa job order at contract of service? Paano kung naabuso ang mga job order at contract of service, sino ba ang namamahala sa kanila? At ang karanasan po over the past few years that I have been focusing on these issues, nagtuturuan po iyong Civil Service, iyong DBM, at iyong COA. Sabi ng Civil Service, since they are not government employees, they are not considered government employees, kaya walang employer-employee relationship, hindi iyan covered, they are not part of the Civil Service. We wash our hands of these Job Order and Contract of Service. Tapos maybe you should look at COA. So, kasi daw since mga ano sila, they fall under the Procurement Law daw, since this is a matter of outsourcing from the private sector. Okay, so COA daw. Tinanong natin ang COA, sabi naman ng COA, well you know, hindi talaga, it was never clear what their stand was with respect to the working conditions and the rights, the labor rights of job order and contract of service personnel.

Iyong DBM, well, ang palagi nilang sagot, “The issue is under study and we are coming up with guidelines.” But, I am aware that, finally, after many years, the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Audit, and the DBM, this year, on June 15, came out with Joint Circular No. 1. Joint Circular No. 1, s. 2017 being Rules and Regulations Governing Contract of Service and Job Order Workers in the Government. So, at least, for this year, finally, naglabas ng guidelines, rules and regulations, so at least, government now will exercise some regulations on government agency’s use of Job Order and Contract of Service.

Now we have some questions pertaining to this particular Joint Circular.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes. Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, it is good that you pointed out the Joint Circular No. 1 s. 2017, dated June 15, 2017, and the subject is the Rules and Regulations Governing Contract of Service and Job Order Workers in the Government. Part of the rules is the identification of the government agency who will be responsible, Your Honor, to see to it that the rules and regulations are followed and not abused—and it is the Commission on Audit, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker. Here in monitoring, “10.0. – Monitoring. The COA shall monitor the compliance of agencies with the provisions of this Joint Circular.”

REP. TINIO. Okay. Well, thank you for pointing that out.

Although, also in Section 13, I will call it section, “Section 13. Resolution of Issues,” it does say here, “Issues and concerns that may arise in the implementation of these rules and regulations shall be resolved by the CSC, COA and DBM, as appropriate.” So, it is still not exclusively under the COA.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes. But, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, the monitoring will be the basis of the facts that will be the subject of the resolution of the issues.

REP. TINIO. Understood.

REP. DEL MAR. You are right, Your Honor, that this came about as a result of your observation, which is validated, that the job orders and contract of services have led to the proliferation of these practices. To counteract this, Your Honor, and regulate it, that is the reason why this Joint Circular was made.

And, I guess, Your Honor, there is nothing wrong in having the three agencies concerned to resolve issues—the Civil Service Commission, the COA, and the DBM—so that they can have a complete picture and they can arrive at the best decision under the circumstances.


REP. TINIO. One concern that I would like to raise, Mme. Speaker, is with respect to the “Coverage.” In this Joint Circular, the rules and regulations will apply only to Contracts of Service and Job Order workers in the national government including Government-Owned and/or Controlled Corporations, and State Universities and Colleges. In other words, hindi po kasama rito iyong local government units. Sa totoo lang po, doon sa binanggit nating 660,000 mahigit na Job Orders and Contracts of Service, I believe that more than 50 percent of that may be found in local government units. So ang tanong ko po, bakit hindi isinama sa “Coverage” iyong mga LGUs? National government agencies lang po ang covered nito.

REP. DEL MAR. Your Honor, this is because under the Local Government Code of 1991, Republic Act No. 7160, Section 77, the local governments are specifically authorized to hire based on these COs and GOCs, Your Honor. So, that is why it could not be extended to local government employees because of this provision. So, …

REP. TINIO. Well, …

REP. DEL MAR. … I guess, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, if there is a need for reforms here, then, we can look at amendments that we can make to cover the whole situation, Your Honor.

REP. TINIO. Well, I think, malinaw naman sa Local Government Code, yes, the law authorizes them to hire contracts of service and job order, but, there is nothing in the law that says that the COA, and the Civil Service Commission cannot prescribe rules and regulations that should be followed by both, by government agencies in general, whether national or local. In the same way na ang Civil Service Commission po, iyong mga rules and regulations ng Civil Service, nag-a-apply po sa national government employees at maging sa local government employees. Alam naman natin iyon, so bakit hindi isinama dito?

In other words, if the intention of this Joint Circular is to extend some sort of protection from abuse to personnel hired on contracts of service or job order, why is that protection only extended to those hired by national government and not by local government? So, parang nagkakaroon po ng diskriminasyon dito. Kapag JO or CO ka ng national government, there are rules that will protect you. Pero, kapag LGU, walang rules. Hindi po ba may problema doon?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker. Again, we have to cite Section 77, which specifically states that LGUs do not have to submit to the Civil Service Commission the contracts for approval. But,

then again, Your Honor, they are not without regulations because they are subject to the rules and regulations of the auditing requirements of the Commission on Audit.

REP. TINIO. Precisely, and that is precisely my point. They are subject to the, you know, rules and regulations of the Civil Service Commission, and their auditing rules and regulations applied by the COA, e hindi po ba kasama ito doon? Ito na nga iyon. This is one of the rules and regulations, bakit hindi po ito mai-apply?

So, iyon lang po. I mean, maybe the Sponsor cannot clarify, then I will move on.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, there is nothing they can do, Your Honor. They cannot—the LGUs do not have to submit it to them and so they cannot require the LGUs to submit these requirements to them. Your Honor, the LGUs do not submit it to them because they do not have to.

REP. TINIO. All right. So, I will leave that for now. Let it be noted for the record that I do not find that answer satisfactory.

Palagay ko, kung gugustuhin, as in the past, there were times when the Civil Service Commission took a more proactive role in reviewing and regulating the use of job order and contract of service in LGUs.

So, I do not think this matter is closed. And, if these budget deliberations will not suffice, then I hope that Congress will look further into this matter. Kasi po ang reyalidad ay talagang matindi ang paggamit, at kaugnay noo, iyong pag-aabuso sa Job Order at Contract of Service ng mga LGU. Sa kanila mahahanap ang pinakamalaking bilang ng mga job order at contract of service. So, iyon iyong sa coverage.

Ngayon, ang isang concern na nakita natin dito ay ang very broad definition of terms at limitations on the use of contracts of service. I would just like to put on record that I have a particular concern in point number seven of the Joint Circular on “Limitations,” ang ganitong limitations, ang wordings ng limitations.

Ang sabi dito, and I quote:

Hiring under contract of service shall be limited to consultants, learning service providers, and/or other technical experts to undertake special project or job within a specific period. The project or job is not part of the regular functions of the agency, or the expertise is not available in the agency, or it is impractical or more expensive for the government agency to directly undertake the service provided by the individual or institutional contractor.

What are my concerns with that provision? One, the very specific inclusion of learning service providers.


This seems to open up the teaching profession, teaching in government, kasi learning service providers eh. In fact, isang malaganap na paggamit ng job order and contract of service ay sa mga State universities and colleges, kahit sa public schools, and the like.

Why have learning service providers been specifically identified as allowed to be utilized under contracts of service in these guidelines?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the description of learning service providers does not include teachers because teachers are in the regular plantilla of the agencies.

REP. TINIO. Yes, Mme. Speaker, that is correct.

REP. DEL MAR. So, the resource persons, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, may be covered there but not the teachers.

REP. TINIO. Iyon na nga ang problema, Mme. Speaker, kasi ang phrasing “learning service providers,” of course, teachers are learning service providers.

The Sponsor mentioned that they are part of the plantilla. Pero if you look at the roster of State universities and colleges, of public schools, you will find that teachers or individuals, professionals performing the role of teachers are utilized under contracts of service. Iyon po ang problema natin doon. That is one concern.

REP. DEL MAR. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, “learning service providers” is the HR lingo/language for those who act as resource persons and trainors. It definitely does not cover teachers.

REP. TINIO. Okay.

REP. DEL MAR. But then, again, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, if you feel that the interpretation should include teachers and the Civil Service Commission’s interpretation does not, based on what I have just given in my reply, then maybe we can go further if we test this issue by letting the courts decide …

REP. TINIO. Sige po.

REP. DEL MAR. … whether your interpretation or the interpretation of the Civil Service Commission is the one that should be followed.

REP. TINIO. Mme. Speaker, I am assured that it is on record that the Sponsor and the Civil Service Commission have clearly stated that by “learning service provider,” they do not mean or the circular does not mean to include teachers or the teaching profession

in the public sector. That is the assurance I was looking for because we would like to uphold the integrity of the teaching profession. One of the guarantees made by, among others, such laws as the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, is that the right to job security of teachers as professionals are assured, particularly in the public sector. I am glad that that has been clarified.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. Perhaps to add to the clarification given, in support of the position of the Civil Service Commission that the learning service providers do not include teachers, is that the definition of teachers is clear under the Magna Carta or Republic Act No. 4670, and they are falling back on that as additional basis for their interpretation, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. Maybe, we can look at this further and justify it or even amend it. We can always amend laws. We certainly can amend joint circulars.

REP. TINIO. Thank you for that, Mme. Speaker. The other concern I would like to raise is in relation to the observation of the Sponsor that this can be further amended. Again, I would like to put on record the concern on provision 7.1 where the circular allows for the use of contract of service or job order if “it is impractical or more expensive for the government agency to directly undertake the service provided by the individual or institutional contractor.”

I would just like to point out that such wording could open up the floodgates for government agencies to resort more liberally to outsourcing. An agency can always say it will be cheaper for us to just outsource from the private sector, then provide the service ourselves especially since we will be using personnel that will not be paid in accordance with the Salary Standardization Law. We can pay them cheaper. What is to prevent government agencies from resorting to outsourcing through job order or contract of service on this basis. Parang naging almost like a catch-all provision that can be easily abused, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. I think the overriding reason or justification is whatever is in the best interest of the persons involved, and that is the sentiment that is shared by the Civil Service Commission, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. TINIO. All right. My final concern has to do with the application or how these guidelines could possibly be applied given the current situation, as mentioned by the Sponsor, that there are over 600,000 individuals utilized by various government agencies through Job Orders or Contract of Service. Mayroon tayong 660,000 ngayon. Dito, sa pamamagitan ng guidelines na ito, ipinagbabawal o nililimita ang paggamit sa mga ito. Ang isang sinabi rito, one of the


limitations, very clearly, is that the project or job is not part of the regular function of the agency.

Furthermore, item 7.2 says that:

Contract of Service and Job Order workers should not, in any case, be made to perform functions which are part of the job description of the agency’s existing regular employees.

Malinaw po iyon na bawal. Kapag regular function ng agency or kapag ginagawa ng regular na employee, hindi puwedeng gamitin ang Job Order or Contract of Service. But let me point out in this 2018 Budget under consideration. For example, there is a provision in the DSWD for the hiring of over 9,000 of their employees or rather 9,000 contract of service personnel to implement various programs, various regular programs of the DSWD such as the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program.

If we go to the Department of Health budget, there is a provision there for the hiring of, more or less, 10,000 doctors, nurses, midwives and other health professionals. Again, the provision there is to hire them on contracts of service. Hindi naman po PS. Walang plantilla positions para sa mga ito. How do we reconcile this, Mme. Speaker? We have guidelines issued and effective right now, which says that government agencies cannot make use of contract of service for personnel who will perform the regular functions of the agency. And yet, in the national budget which we are supposed to approve, there is funding, there is a provision for the hiring of more employees on contracts of service, not employees, more personnel on contracts of service, and they will be performing the regular function of the agency. Mga doktor nga ito sa Department of Health, mga nars. Sa DSWD, mga tagapagpatupad ng CCT, we cannot say na hindi pa regular na function ng DSWD ang CCT. Paano po iyon? How can the Sponsor explain and what will the Civil Service do in relation to that reality?

REP. DEL MAR. First, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, we note that under transitory provisions 11.1, the first phrase reads as follows: “Agencies may renew the individual contracts of existing Contracts of Service or Job Order workers until December 31, 2018.” We can also refer to the 11.3 provision which I do not have to read if the Gentleman has a copy.

REP. TINIO. Yes, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DEL MAR. In accordance with Section 90 of the General Provisions of Fiscal Year 2017 General Appropriations Act, “Government agencies shall review their functions, systems, procedures, organization structures, staffing pattern, et cetera.

REP. TINIO. All right, thank you, Mme. Speaker. I did want to go to those transitory provisions. In other words, I wanted some clarification. Ang ibig pong sabihin nito, yes, in the 2018 Budget, there is a provision for national government agencies to hire, to make use of contracts of service and job order. However, apparently, what the Sponsor is saying is that no new contracts will be utilized by the agencies. There will only be renewal of existing contracts.

That is one, and do we take it to mean then, Mme. Speaker, that in this transitory provision, national government agencies are in effect given a one-year grace period, parang ganoon? Ang mga contract of service at job order, hanggang sa 2018 na lang. Tama po ba, Mme. Speaker?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. It is until December 31, 2018.

REP. TINIO. Is it correct Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, that after that, for example, to be concrete, the DOH can no longer hire nurses and doctors, midwives and other health professionals through Contract of Service. If they want their services, then the national government must provide plantilla positions, regular positions to continue to avail of the services of these personnel.

In the same way, the DSWD after 2018, kung gusto pa ng gobyerno na ipagpatuloy ang programa gamit ang, for example, ang Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program or whatever other programs of the DSWD, that makes use of Contract of Service or Job Order, I think they call them MOA employees or memorandum of agreement employees.

So, after 2018, kailangang gawing regular na sila o kailangang wala nang Contract of Service. Is that correct, Mme. Speaker?

REP. DEL MAR. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the reply to this would be, it is all up to us. If we would provide a provision in the GAA to that effect, then this will be amended.

REP. TINIO. All right.

REP. DEL MAR. That is the way it goes.

REP. TINIO. Thank you for that response, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. So, it is up to us. In the end, it is up to Congress to approve the proposed budget for regular plantilla positions for the individuals who are now working on Contracts of Service and Job Order. Understood.

Ang ibig lang sabihin nito, hindi lang po sa atin ang bola. Kailangang magsimula ito sa Executive branch. Sabi nga, they proposed, but it is our job to dispose, to approve or not.


So, kailangan pong manggaling sa Executive branch ang proposal. I will expect then that same time next year ay wala na pong provision para sa libu-libo pa, tens of thousands of new Contracts of Service or Job Order, and instead, kailangan na pong mayroon nang provision for regular positions for nurses, for doctors, for social workers, and other such employees in the national government.

Iyon po ang aasahan natin at iyon po ang babantayan natin, Mme. Speaker, dahil ipinagpapatuloy natin ang adbokasiya para kilalanin ang karapatan ng mga empleyado sa gobyerno na hindi na sila maabuso sa pamamagitan ng sistema ng Job Order or Contract of Service.

I hope the Sponsor will also join us in that concern, Mme. Speaker. Hanggang dito na lamang po. Maraming salamat.

REP. DEL MAR. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, definitely we will join the Gentleman on that and we expect that to come about.

REP. TINIO. Maraming salamat po.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, as previously stated by the Minority, on behalf of the Majority, we join them in terminating the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Civil Service Commission.


The period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Civil Service Commission is hereby terminated.


THE JUDICIARY

REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, I move that the Hon. Raul V. Del Mar be recognized to sponsor the budget of the Judiciary.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Hon. Raul Del Mar is recognized to sponsor the budget of the Judiciary.

REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mme. Speaker, we would like to acknowledge the presence of the members of the Supreme Court Justices: Associate Justice Diosdado M. Peralta, Associate Justice Samuel R. Martirez, Deputy Court Administrator Raul B. Villanueva; Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Amparo M. Cabotaje-Tang, Associate Justice Karl B. Miranda; Court of Appeals Acting Presiding Justice Remedios A. Salazar-Fernando, Associate Justice Danton Q. Bueser; and Court of Tax

Appeals Presiding Justice Roman G. Del Rosario and Associate Justice Juanito C. Castañeda, Jr.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Honorable Justices, welcome to the House of Representatives.

Honorable Del Mar is recognized.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, Mme. Speaker, thank you and the Dep. Majority Leader.

So, we are ready to entertain any question on the budget of the Judiciary.

May I just start that the Judiciary asked for a total budget of P46.852 billion for 2018, and per NEP or the National Expenditure Program, this was reduced to P34.77 billion or a reduction of P12.078 billion, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.



REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, we ask for a few minutes suspension of the session.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The session is suspended.

It was 5:02 p.m.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The session is resumed.



REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of House Bill No. 6215.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved. The bill …

REP. DE VENECIA. Yes.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). Please proceed.



REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, we have some special guests in the gallery. Earlier today, we adopted House Resolution No. 1221, in consolidation with House Resolution No. 1235, 1258 and 1283, honoring and commending the awardees of the 2017 Metrobank Foundation Outstanding Filipinos. May we recognize the following awardees who are present today in the gallery. Perhaps, they could stand as acknowledged: Mrs. Jennifer M. Rojo, Master Teacher II (Applause); Mr. Edgar T. Elago, Teacher III (Applause); Dr. Esperanza C. Cabrera, Full Professor (Applause); Dr. Alonzo A. Gabriel, Professor I (Applause); SSgt. Narding N. Pascual (Applause), Lt. Col. Elmer B. Suderio (Applause), Lt. Col. Ricky P. Bunayog (Applause), PO3 Shiela May S. Pansoy (Applause), P/Chief Insp. Rosalino P. Ibay Jr. (Applause), and P/Sr. Supt. Joel B. Doria (Applause).

Mme. Speaker, our Metrobank awardees for the year 2017. (Applause)

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). Congratulations to the Metrobank Foundation Outstanding Filipino awardees. We congratulate all of you and we welcome you to the House of Representatives.



REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, we ask for a few minutes of suspension of the session.


It was 5:06 p.m.





REP. GONZALES (A.D.). Mme. Speaker, we are in receipt of a message from the Senate informing the House that the Senate passed with amendments the following:

1. House Bill No. 4923 – dividing Barangay Pampanga in the City of Davao into three (3) distinct and independent barangays to be known as Barangay Pampanga, Barangay Alfonso Angliongto, Sr., and Barangay V. Hizon;

2. House Bill No. 4941 – creating a barangay to be known as Barangay Rizal in the City of Makati; and

3. House Bill No. 4943 – dividing Barangay Canumay in the City of Valenzuela into two (2) distinct

and independent barangays to be known as Barangay Canumay West and Barangay Canumay East.

We have been advised that the Committee on Local Government, the Sponsor of the said House Bills, as well as the authors thereof, have no objection to the amendments introduced thereto by the Senate.

Mme. Speaker, in accordance with our rules, may I make an omnibus motion to concur with the Senate amendments to House Bills No. 4923, 4941 and 4943.



The omnibus motion to concur with Senate amendments to House Bills No. 4923, 4941 and 4943 is hereby approved.


NOMINAL VOTING ON H.B. NO. 5784ON THIRD READING

REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we vote on Third Reading on House Bill No. 5784 and direct the Secretary General to read the title of the measure, and call the roll for nominal voting.

I so move.


Thereupon, the Secretary General read the title of the measure, printed copies of which were distributed to the Members on August 30, 2017, pursuant to Section 58, Rule X of the House Rules.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill No. 5784, entitled: AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A UNIVERSAL HEALTH COVERAGE FOR FILIPINOS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR.

The Chair directed the Secretary General to call the roll for nominal voting. Thereafter, pursuant to the Rules of the House, a second roll call was made. The result of the voting on Third Reading on the aforesaid measure is as follows, per Journal No. 19, dated September 6, 2017:

Affirmative

AbayaAbayonAbellanosaAbuAbueg

AcharonAcopAcostaAcosta-AlbaAdvincula


AggabaoAlejanoAlmarioAlvarez (F.)Alvarez (P.)AmanteAmatongAngara-CastilloAntonioAquino-MagsaysayAragonesArcillasArenasAumentadoBagatsingBaguilatBanalBarzagaBataoilBatocabeBelaroBelmonte (F.)Belmonte (J.C.)Belmonte (R.)BenitezBernosBertizBiazonBillonesBironBoliliaBondocBordadoBravo (A.)Bravo (M.V.)Bulut-BegtangCagasCalixto-RubianoCamineroCamposCanamaCariCasteloCastro (F.H.)CatamcoCeraficaCerillesChavezChipecoCoCojuangcoCollantesCortesCosalanCrisologoCua

MacedaMadronaMalapitanManaloMangaoangMangudadatu (Z.)MarcoletaMarcosMarquezMartinezMatugasMellanaMercadoMirasolMontoroNavaNietoNoelNograles (J.J.)Nograles (K.A.)NolascoNuñez-MalanyaonOaminalOlivarezOng (H.)Ortega (P.)Ortega (V.N.)PacquiaoPaduanoPalmaPanchoPanganibanPanotesPapandayanPimentelPinedaPlazaPrimicias-AgabasQuimboRadazaRamosRelampagosRevillaRoa-PunoRocamoraRodriguez (I.)Rodriguez (M.)RomanRomualdezRomualdo

CuaresmaCuevaDalipeDatolDazaDe VeneciaDe VeraDefensorDel MarDel RosarioDeloso-MontallaDimaporo (A.)Dimaporo (M.K.)DuavitDuranoErmita-BuhainEscuderoEspinaEspinoEstrellaEusebioFariñasFernandoFerrer (J.)Ferrer (L.)FortunFortunoGarbinGarcia (G.)Garcia (J.E.)Garin (R.) Garin (S.)GasatayaGo (A.C.)Go (M.)GonzagaGonzales (A.P.)Gonzales (A.D.)GonzalezGullasHernandezHerrera-DyHoferJavierKhoKhonghunLabadlabadLagmanLaneteLaoganLeachonLimkaichongLobregatLopez (B.)Lopez (M.L.)Macapagal-Arroyo

Roque (H.)Roque (R.)SacdalanSagarbarriaSahaliSaloSalonSambarSandovalSantos-RectoSarmiento (C.)Sarmiento (E.M.)SavellanoSiaoSilverioSingsonSuansing (E.)SuarezSy-AlvaradoTambuntingTan (A.)Tan (S.)TejadaTevesTiangcoTingTugnaTupasTyUnabiaUngabUnicoUy (J.)Uy (R.)UybarretaVargasVargas-AlfonsoVelardeVelascoVelasco-CateraVeloso VergaraVillanuevaVillaricaViolagoYap (M.)Yap (V.)YuZamora (M.C.)Zubiri

Negative

BrosasCasilaoCastro (F.L.)De Jesus

ElagoTinioZarate


Abstention

None

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker. Mme. Speaker, my vote is “No.”

REP. DE VENECIA. Sorry, what is the...

REP. BROSAS. May I be allowed...

REP. DE VENECIA. Sorry, what is the pleasure of the honorable Lady from GABRIELA?

REP. BROSAS. Yes, Mme. Speaker. My vote is “No” on House Bill No. 5784 and may I be allowed to explain my vote?

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Lady shall be so allowed after the conclusion of the voting and announcement of the results.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DE JESUS. Mme. Speaker, my vote is “No” and may I explain my vote later? Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). Yes, the Lady shall be so allowed. Please proceed.

RESULT OF THE VOTING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The results shows 222 affirmative votes, 7 negative votes, and no abstention.

House Bill No. 5784 is approved on Third Reading.

EXPLANATION OF VOTES

REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, in accordance with our Rules, I move that, again, the Secretary General be directed to call the roll of Members for those who would like to explain their vote on the said Bill.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the Secretary General is so directed.

The Secretary General called the roll of Members.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, Mme. Speaker, may I explain my vote.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). Yes, please proceed, Congresswoman Brosas.

REP. BROSAS EXPLAINS HER VOTE

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, mga kapwa ko Kinatawan, ang Representasyon pong ito ay tutol sa pagsasabatas ng House Bill No. 5784 o ang Universal Healthcare Act.

Bagamat kinikilala natin ang matinding pangangailangan para sa reporma ng sistemang pangkalusugan sa bansa, naniniwala po ang GABRIELA na hindi ito ang sasagot sa mga pangangailangang pangkalusugan ng ating mamamayan.

Sa panukalang batas, nililimitahan ang mga condition for access tulad ng pagkatali sa insurance financing, parusa sa mga missed contributions, listahan ng negative and positive lists of covered health conditions, at maging ang mga bureaucrative interventions na nagdidikta kung aling mga sakit ang covered ng health insurance.

The problem with insurance-based policy is the event when insurance is taken out of the control of the patient. The private hospital dictates what examinations are to be done and it may deny as many insurance claims as possible. Gustuhin man nating dalhin ang mga mamamayan sa pampublikong ospital, hindi naman ito maa-accommodate dahil sa kakarampot na ibinibigay nating budget dito. In fact, taun-taon, there is an attempt to cut down its MOOE. Nakakapangamba ang mga hakbangin para ilayo ang serbisyo sa mamamayan sa pamamagitan ng mga ganitong batas. Sa halip na dagdagan natin ang budget upang makapagpatayo ng mga bagong ospital, makapag-acquire ng mga medical facility, at makapag-hire ng mga medical personnel, patuloy nating binabawasan ang pondo ng pampublikong ospital. Dahil dito, nadodomena ng mga pribadong ospital ang pagbibigay ng medical care sa ating mga mamamayan kaya kung mayroon mang seserbisyuhan ang batas na ito, hindi ang mamamayan, kung hindi ang pagbibigay ng guaranteed profit sa private healthcare institutions.

Kaya, Mme. Speaker, mga kapwa ko Kinatawan, malinaw ang tindig ng Gabriela Women’s Party, “No” to House Bill No. 5784. Push for a free, quality, comprehensive and progressive healthcare system.

Maraming salamat po, Mme. Speaker.

REP. CASILAO. Mme. Speaker, allow me to briefly explain my negative vote.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). Please proceed, please proceed.

REP. CASILAO EXPLAINS HIS VOTE

REP. CASILAO. In the initial deliberations on this Bill, this Representation supported in view of the need for a universal comprehensive healthcare program


for our Filipinos that is accessible, if not free—it is too much to ask for free health services from the government, since we are currently deliberating the budget for 2018. However, Mme. Speaker, upon the continued deliberations on this Bill in the Committee, this Representation found so many loopholes and so many provisions that are essentially anti-people.

That declaration, the Article II, Declaration of Principles and State Policies of the 1987 Constitution clearly states in Section 15, Mme. Speaker, and I quote:

The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill health consciousness among them.

Article XIII, Section 11, clearly stipulates also:

The State shall adopt an integrated and comprehensive approach to health development which shall endeavor to make essential goods, health and other social services available to all the people at affordable cost.

Mme. Speaker, isang matingkad na puna ng Kinatawang ito sa mga probisyon ng panukalang batas na ito ng House Bill No. 5784, the Universal Health Coverage Bill, ay ang pagbibigay ng malaking kapangyarihan sa isang heath provider na mala-insurance. Hindi po ito ang health services na nilalayon ng Kinatawang magkaroon ang ating gobyerno. Maraming pera po ang ating gobyerno na puwedeng ilaan hindi lamang sa isang preventive mode ng health services, kung hindi sa mas mainam na curative, doon sa hindi lamang kung kailan magkasakit ang isang mamamayan ay doon kailangan niyang magamit o puwede niyang gamitin. Ang karapatan sa kalusugan ng mamamayan ay nailalagay ito sa kondisyon at dagdag na mga proseso na maaaring magresulta sa inaccessibility ng healthcare at exclusion ng maraming maralitang o mahihirap na mamamayan.

With this, Mme. Speaker, this Representation registers a negative vote on House Bill No. 5784.

Thank you, Mme. Speaker.

REP. DE JESUS EXPLAINS HER VOTE

REP. DE JESUS. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Definitely, this is to expound the explanation of GABRIELA Women’s Party’s vote of “No” to House Bill No. 5784, in as much as my colleague has already explained her vote.

Sa panukalang batas na ito, tila magsisilbing kolektor na lamang ng kontribusyon ang gobyerno sa halip na pangunahing nagpopondo para sa pampublikong serbisyong kalusugan. Sa kabila ng pangakong pagtitiyak ng coverage for indigent patients, hindi maikakaila na sa panukalang batas ito, may presyo ang bawat serbisyo, gamit at gamot sa mga ospital, habang

limitado rin ang reimbursements mula sa Philippine Health Security Corporation. Itinutulak din nito towards self-sufficiency through income-generation ang mga pampublikong ospital sa pagtatanggal ng allocation for maintenance and other expenses.

Ang mga condition for access and delineated exclusion ay maaaring magresulta sa lalong inaccessibility ng health services. Kabilang sa maaring manakawan ng karapatan sa serbisyong kalusugan ang napakarami nating mga mamamayan sa informal sectors na hindi makakabayad ng contributions, maging ang mga katutubo at iba pang mamamayang nasa geographically isolated and depressed areas.

Hindi nireresolba ang matagal nang usapin sa sektor pangkalusugan—ito iyong malaking kakulangan sa ospital, kagamitan at mga medical personnel. Malaking bilang ng mamamayan ay takot magpaospital hindi dahil sa tusok ng karayom kung hindi sa malaking gastos na bubutas sa bulsa nating mga mahihirap. Hindi makapagpagamot ang ating mga kababayan hindi dahil sa kawalan ng health insurance, kung hindi dahil sa kakulangan ng ospital, kapos na serbisyo, kulang na pasilidad at kawalan ng sapat na mga manggagawang pangkalusugan. Hindi makakapagpagamot ang ating mamamayan dahil pinapasan niya ang matinding presyo ng bilihin at batayang serbisyo na lalo pang haharapin kapagka rumagasa na ang TRAIN na sasagasa sa kabuhayan at karapatan ng mamamayan.

Mme. Speaker, kapwa ko Kinatawan, naninindigan ang Gabriela Women’s Party: No to House Bill No. 5784. Push for a free, quality, comprehensive and progressive healthcare system.

Maraming salamat, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO EXPLAINS HER VOTE

REP. ELAGO. Maraming salamat, Mme. Speaker.Sa bahagi ng mga kabataan, ang Representasyong ito ay

bumoboto ng “No” sa House Bill No. 5784 sa kadahilanan na kung talagang libreng serbisyong pangkalusugan ang ating layon, ang serbisyong pangkalusugan ay dapat sapat, libre at direkta mismo galing sa pampublikong ospital, wala nang mga rekwesitos katulad ng PhilHealth membership, PhilHealth claims, listahanan sa NSTS, at iba pang mga pabigat na hakbang. Ang pondo para sa PhilHealth at iba pang insurance packages na ito ay dapat na lamang ilagay sa Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses ng ating mga pampublikong ospital imbes na ang kalakhan ng pondo na nailalagay sa PhilHealth ay napapakinabangan din para sa pribadong interes at interes ng mga negosyo sa buong bansa.

Muli, ang KABATAAN ay nananawagan sa isang progresibo, isang komprehensibo, at libreng serbisyong pangkalusugan na matatamasa ng lahat ng mamamayang Pilipino.

Maraming salamat, Mme. Speaker.


REP. TINIO EXPLAINS HIS VOTE

REP. TINIO. Mme. Speaker, bumoto po ako ng “No” sa House Bill No. 5784, Universal Healthcare Bill.

Malinaw po sa Kinatawang ito na sa panukalang batas na ito, ang sukdulang layunin ay itulak tungo sa privatization at commercialization ang ating sistemang pangkalusugan. Mauugat ito mula sa ginawang devolution ng health services noong 1990s at nagpatuloy sa pagtulak ng mga patakaran ng commercialization at privatization sa mga public hospitals na pangunahing ginawa sa pamamagitan ng korporatisasyon ng mga ospital ng gobyerno at iyong tuluy-tuloy na pagbawas sa Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses ng mga ospital. Sa ilalim ng panukalang batas na ito, tatanggalan na po ng MOOE ang mga public hospital at iaasa na lamang ang buong kita nila sa mga reimbursement mula sa PhilHealth.

So sa ganitong modelo po ay ganap nang magiging commercialized ang operasyon ng mga public hospital at malinaw nang sa pamamagitan ng batas na ito ay hindi makakamit ang layunin ng milyun-milyong mga kababayan nating Pilipino, lalo na ng mga maralita para sa isang libreng sistemang pangkalusugan para sa bawat Pilipino.

Kaya, bumoto po tayo ng “No,” Mme. Speaker.

APPROVAL OF H.B. NO. 5784ON THIRD READING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). With 222 affirmative votes, 7 negative votes, and no abstention, House Bill No. 5784 is approved on Third Reading.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we resume… sorry, let me repeat that.

Mme. Speaker, I move that we immediately transmit copies of this Bill to the Senate.






REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we resume the consideration of House Bill No. 6215. For

this purpose, may I request that the Secretary General be directed to read the title of the Bill.


The Secretary General is hereby directed to read the title of the Bill.



THE JUDICIARY

REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Raul V. Del Mar to sponsor the budget of the Judiciary.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The Honorable Del Mar is recognized to sponsor the budget of the Judiciary.

REP. DEL MAR. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, Floor Leader.

We are now ready to entertain any questions anyone might have on the budget of the Judiciary.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, I move that we proceed to the period of interpellation and debate, and we would like to recognize the honorable Minority Leader Danilo Suarez for his interpellation.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garcia-Albano). The honorable Minority Leader, Congressman Danilo Suarez, is hereby recognized for his interpellation.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Will my good friend, the Sponsor, Raul Del Mar, be

willing to yield the floor for some questions?

REP. DEL MAR. Of course, to my good friend, likewise, the Honorable Suarez, the distinguished Minority Leader.


REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, the Judiciary seeks approval in the amount of P33.78 billion. Am I correct with the figure?

REP. DEL MAR. That is right, Mme. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. And this will be higher than the 2017 Budget, Mme. Speaker, by P1,259,000,000. Is that correct also, Mme. Speaker?

REP. DEL MAR. That is correct, Mme. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, I may sound repetitious, but I always have been very concerned about utilization rate. The historical data on the utilization rate of the Judiciary is as follows: 85 percent in 2012; 85 percent in 2013; 82 percent in 2014; 81 percent in 2015; and, there is a jump, a remarkably improved performance in 2016, with 93.7 percent. I have two questions here: why the low utilization up to 2015 from 2012, and why did they start to improve utilization in 2016?

REP. DEL MAR. One moment, Mme. Speaker.One reason, Mme. Speaker, is that the procurement

of supplies and equipment is still under process. Second is that the statement of accounts for the billing of other expenses is still ongoing. Third, reimbursable expenses of judges and personnel of the trial courts are usually submitted after the end of the first semester. Fourth, the MOOE …

REP. SUAREZ. What year are we talking about here, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. DEL MAR. As of June 2017, Mme. Speaker. In fact, it covers January to June of this year.

REP. SUAREZ. So, there is no reply on your part about the underutilization for 2012 to 2015 because they just start to pick up utilization of their budget in the 2016? So, are we saying that there is a marked improvement in the utilization of the budget of Judiciary right after the election of 2016, Mme. Speaker?

REP. DEL MAR. Mme. Speaker, the Gentleman’s question is from 2000?

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, what I said …

REP. DEL MAR. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. … was, from 2012 to 2015, the utilization rates were very, very bad. On an average, they have an underutilization of about 19 percent per annum.

REP. DEL MAR. That is right.

REP. SUAREZ. Ito hong 2016, there is a dramatic increase, an improvement of about 12 percent and I would just like to find out, ito ho bang improvement na ito is right after the election?

REP. DEL MAR. Not only was it after the elections, Mme. Speaker, but even before the first semester of the year of 2016.

REP. SUAREZ. Can I just go into the next question? May I know the rate of disposal in the Judiciary?

REP. DEL MAR. For the Supreme Court, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, it has registered a 95-percent clearance rate and 107-percent accomplishment rate based on the target for 2016. For the Court of Appeals, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, 113-percent clearance rate and 96-percent accomplishment rate for the same period.

REP. SUAREZ. Distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, what is your target for 2018?

REP. DEL MAR. For the Supreme Court, it is 5,840; for the Court of Appeals, it is 14,520; for the Sandiganbayan, it is 418; for the Court of Tax Appeals, it is 352; and for the lower courts, second level courts, it is 194,066; and for the first level courts, 211,444.

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, can you please turn to page three of this presented budget that you handed to this Representation, and I am somewhat concerned about the Court of Tax Appeals, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

There are two concerns of this Representation on the Court of Tax Appeals. When certain cases of tax avoidance or evasion are being tried, the procedure is that the BIR which initiated investigation of this tax case is not the one that will be facing the trial. Instead, it will be a lawyer from the Department of Justice. Am I correct there?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, that is correct, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, but they are deputized lawyers.

REP. SUAREZ. No. My concern is this, napaka-sensitive po ng—it has been my advocacy on enhanced revenue measure, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker. So, what I am saying is that iyon hong abogado ng BIR will be very knowledgeable about the case. Pero bakit hindi po sila ang dapat na humarap sa korte to present their case in litigation?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, that might be the case, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, but they are tax experts as well.


REP. SUAREZ. Tax experts.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, that is correct.

REP. SUAREZ. From the Department of Justice?

REP. DEL MAR. No, deputized lawyers from the DOJ and the BIR.


REP. SUAREZ. Can I request for a one-minute suspension of the session?


It was 5:44 p.m.




REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, the reason I am

somewhat concerned about this is that it is this Representation who crafted the law in upgrading the standard of the Court of Tax Appeals to the level of Court of Appeals when I was the Chair of Ways and Means, and the rationale behind is quick disposition of tax cases.

Now, for a historical data, noong panahon ho na hindi natin in-elevate ang CTA, ang kaso ho ng taxes, whether it is evasion or avoidance, nagsisimula po tayo sa municipal trial, pupunta ka sa regional trial, pupunta ka sa Court of Tax Appeals, Court of Appeals, and then Supreme Court. Hindi po ba?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, that is right, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Now, if you go to the chronological and historical data of tax cases, we are talking about 50, 60 years old cases. Patay na po iyong tao, sarado na iyong kumpanya, pero naka-pending pa rin sa atin.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, that is correct.

REP. SUAREZ. So, noong ginawa ho natin sa Kongreso na in-upgrade natin iyong status ng CTA to the level of CA, meaning, the only time that you can elevate a tax case to the Supreme Court is when you question the law. But if it is a factual decision, it is non-appealable. Iyon ho ang ating ginawa.

So, ang tanong ko lang ho dito is this, napaka-sensitive ng ating collection matter. Before I go to the success rate of your Court of Tax Appeals cases, I will ask this: Why did you reduce the budget of the CTA?

REP. DEL MAR. We have an increase, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, for the CTA from P324,519,000 in 2017, increase to P599,851,000 in 2018 and registering 85-percent increase, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, I am talking about the CTA here on a certain page which says that the 2018 proposed budget was P771 million, and then the national expenditures is P599 million. So, you are referring, Your Honor, to this comparative data of 2017 of P324 to the proposed budget of P599. Fine. But what I am saying, this is a marked reduction of the proposed budget of P771 million?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, the proposal is from the Judiciary. But it was reduced to P599—P851 million for the NEP already.

REP. SUAREZ. May I know why there is a marked reduction of P171 million to a—how many salas do we have now in the CTA, Your Honor?

REP. DEL MAR. We have nine justices, three divisions—nine justices, three divisions.

REP. SUAREZ. So, tatlo na ang sala ho natin.

REP. DEL MAR. Three justices per division.

REP. SUAREZ. Can I ask the Judiciary to go back to their drawing board and do something about the concern of the Minority on this reduction, Your Honor, because napaka-sensitive po ng Court of Tax Appeals. Napakababa po ng success rate natin ngayon. May I know the success rate of our tax cases.

REP. DEL MAR. Seventy-three percent, Your Honor, is the clearance rate. And the accomplishment rate is 125 percent.

REP. SUAREZ. One hundred twenty-five percent.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. No. What I am saying is, ilan po ang in-elevate na sa CTA na tax cases na nakapag-decide na? Ilan po ang panalo ang gobyerno? At ilan po ang talo ang gobyerno?


REP. DEL MAR. For the years 2012 to 2016, the total number of cases elevated to the Supreme Court is 485—affirmed 66, reversed 31, a total of 97 for a success rate of 68.04 percent.

REP. SUAREZ. So, mas lamang po na panalo ang pamahalaan kaysa sa natalo.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. Can I just go into another subject, Your Honor?

Five hundred fifty-six million was allotted to Sandiganbayan in the 2018 NEP. Am I correct there, Your Honor?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, that is the National Expenditure Program, NEP.

REP. SUAREZ. This is a P103-million decrease from their P660 million actual budget in 2018.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, that is correct, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Now, Sandigan has a high record of cases disposed during the past first half of 2017, with 442 cases, more than 371 cases disposed in the year 2016, rendering a disposal rate of 74 cases per month. This is a record compared to only 276 and 277 cases in 2015 and 2014, respectively. Am I correct here?

REP. DEL MAR. That is correct. That is for the period January to June.

REP. SUAREZ. They have a good performance. Then why are you reducing the budget?

REP. DEL MAR. The reduction is the result of the—that there was no more budget for the recurring items.

REP. SUAREZ. Can the distinguished Sponsor ask the office that he is sponsoring that, henceforth, the belief of this Representation, wherein I am going to ask for the support of the Members is, we should not be hampered by a ceiling. Kung magkano iyong kailangan ninyo, iyon ang hingin ninyo. Because we have to try to say that what you need was given to you because you will be performance-based tested here. Sa susunod na taon ho tatanungin namin ang performance ninyo at hindi ninyo dapat ikatwiran na “kaya hindi namin nagawa, kulang ang budget.”

REP. DEL MAR. Noted, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. It is what is addressed to the Judiciary and they have duly noted your …

REP. SUAREZ. May I know…

REP. DEL MAR. … advice …

REP. SUAREZ. … if one of the justices, Justice Carpio, is in the country right now?

REP. DEL MAR. Here, in the halls, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor?

REP. SUAREZ. No. I did not see him here, but is he in the country right now?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, he is now acting Chief Justice.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, this Representation, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, filed a resolution commending him for his victory in the International Court on the Arbitration on the question of the Philippine Sea. And, I think, we should—it is notable that a member of the Supreme Court worked thoroughly, did the research, came up even with maps 300-400 years old to support his position, presented it to the international court and proved himself that he is right—that those contested islets are indeed the property of the Philippine government.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Garcia-Albano relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Sharon S. Garin.

REP. DEL MAR. We recognized that, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor. The Judiciary, likewise, and personally, I join the commendation you made for Justice Carpio on his excellent research and work which led to a very successful arbitration decision.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there are two impeachment complaints filed against the Chief Justice. Is the Chief Justice around, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor?

REP. DEL MAR. Not here in the Hall right now, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, but she is on wellness leave.

REP. SUAREZ. Wellness.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes. Two weeks ago, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, only for two weeks; and only one week …

REP. SUAREZ. Well …

REP. DEL MAR. … has expired.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, the complaint filed by Mr. Gadon involves Sereno, for the Chief Justice’s alleged betrayal of public trust over the whimsical


and expensive purchase of the latest model of Toyota Land Cruiser worth P5.1 million. And I understand she decided to have it bulletproofed?

Is that correct?

REP. DEL MAR. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, that is what the Sponsor also read in the papers, but we do not …

REP. SUAREZ. Is this correct?

REP. DEL MAR. … we do not have any information or knowledge about her reply because she has not …

REP. SUAREZ. Please ask your principal.

REP. DEL MAR. …she has not submitted the reply because the complaint has not been referred to the Committee on Justice. Even we, Members, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, were not given copies of the complaint. At which time, after it has been referred to the Committee on Justice, that is the only time we will be given a copy of the complaint, and I am sure, Your Honor, that there will be a corresponding reply from the Chief Justice and we will surely get a copy of that reply.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, my question, is, I will just backtrack a little. My question is, was there an intention on the Supreme Court to purchase a Toyota Land Cruiser, bulletproofed.

REP. DEL MAR. It is quite difficult to make a comment on that, Your Honor, because that is one of the allegations in the impeachment complaint …

REP. SUAREZ. Disregarding the allegation, Your Honor.

REP. DEL MAR. … that I was able to read now.

REP. SUAREZ. We are not saying that it is an illegal act. Wala ho naman sa atin iyon eh. Ang gusto ko lang ho malaman ay kung totoo that there was a plan by the Supreme Court to purchase a service vehicle for the Chief Justice which is a bulletproofed Toyota Land Cruiser. The answer is simple. It is either yes or no.

REP. DEL MAR. We cannot answer either way, Your Honor, because those allegations are among the charges in the complaint. We do not know, we do not have enough information to make a personal comment even. So, as an official reply, we are in no position, Your Honor, to answer your question on that.

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, the Chief of Staff, the Chief of the PNP, for their safety, can buy bullet

proof vehicles because it involves their security. Well, the sensitivity of the position of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is clearly understood. If it is within your budget and you can buy vehicle for that purpose, I do not see anything wrong with that. The only question is that some people made some malicious reason, we are saying, it is whimsical or abuse of authority. So, I just would like to have the comfort level of whether it is true or not that they have an intention of buying a bulletproofed Toyota. That is all. I can say, why not a Hummer? Why not a Cadillac Escalade which I am using?

REP. DEL MAR. I regret, Your Honor, that I cannot comment on that for lack of any basis on the information that you are bringing up. So, in any case, Your Honor, since the complaint has been filed, at the proper time, we will get to know the details of the issue that you have placed before this plenary session.

REP. SUAREZ. Distinguished Sponsor, there is also another issue with regard to the allegations on the nondisclosure of SALN. We knew very well that they won the case on the Piatco. As a collaborating lawyer, I think she was paid in foreign currency. Am I correct there?

REP. DEL MAR. I must rather not comment on that, Your Honor, for really lack of information on the matter, but this will be taken up, I am sure, Your Honor, when the complaint will be referred to the Committee on Justice and a copy of the complaint is furnished the respondent.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, the late Chief Justice Corona faced a similar situation wherein he was impeached due to his failure to declare his peso and dollar deposits. Am I correct there? It happened already.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes.

REP. SUAREZ. So, may his soul rest in peace. Namatay na po ang ating kaibigang si Chief Justice, broken-hearted for that matter. The rationale behind is misdeclaration of SALN, hindi po ba?

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, among others, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, as we have been informed through the media and other sources of information on the matter.

REP. SUAREZ. Iyon hong Piatco 3, iyong isyu ng construction po ng Terminal 3, if you will recall, Your Honor, was that, I think, collaborating lawyer siya ni Justice Feliciano. Am I correct there, Your Honor?

REP. DEL MAR. Based on the record, Your Honor, it appears so.


REP. SUAREZ. So, well—we cannot just inevitably notice that our magistrates are prone to allegations of misdeclarations of earnings in their SALNs.

Now, may I ask what are the measures being implemented internally so they can come up with the cleansing of their own system to avoid and prevent such from happening again?

REP. DEL MAR. The respected Justices filed their SALN on their own. This is made available, subject to certain terms and conditions, to proper authorities that seek a copy of the SALN, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, before I end my interpellation, I just would like to relay to you an incident in my district. There was a land dispute. The two parties decided to call for the commander of the New People’s Army in the area, and they gave their version of who is right and who is wrong. When I asked them, “Why did you not go to court?” “Your Honor, expensive, and there are cases here that have been there for 15, 20 years on land matters.” I am just telling you the problem of long litigation. You have thousands of pending cases, and sana maintindihan po ng Judiciary iyong ordeal na mayroon kang kasong nakabitin.

Right now, even in your submitted papers to this Representation, Your Honor, halos napakabagal po ng pagkilos ng hustisya, kaya pumupunta na po sa New People’s Army iyong ating mga kababayan. Baka ho mamihasa iyon.

So, that is just an observation and calling the attention of our Judiciary to give more importance on the plight of our citizens who have pending cases when it comes to judicial matters.

REP. DEL MAR. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there are decongestion programs in the Supreme Court to address the problem of delays in this resolution of cases, among which are: first, Hustisya Project – a decongestion activity that aims to reduce the backlog of 175 highly congested courts; second, hiring of Case Decongestion Officers – these are contractual employees, target number is 635, who are employed to heavily-burdened courts nationwide; third, Assisting Court System – a program where burdened courts in Quezon City and Makati Metropolitan Trial Courts, including those Regional Trial Courts in Lapu-Lapu and Mandaue, Cebu, among others, are assisted by counterpart courts with low dockets coming from Manila Metropolitan Trial Courts and RTCs from Cebu City; and fourth, Revised Continuous Trial Guidelines – the Supreme Court approved the nationwide implementation of said guidelines effective September 1 of this year after its pilot testing proved effective in speeding up the trial of cases and the disposition thereof in 52 pilot courts in the National Capital Judicial Region.

So, these are some of the reforms, Your Honor, that are being done to address your concern.

REP. SUAREZ. Distinguished Sponsor, you are saying that they are regionalizing and spreading salas so they do not have to commute to Manila and even going near to these places of abode. Para ho hindi na mamasahe, ang thinking ninyo, kung nandoon ang mga sala sa Davao, sa Cebu, sa Leyte, sa Iloilo, dapat ho siguro sa Luzon. Palagay ko ang pinakamaraming kaso nasa Luzon, di ho ba? Baka puwede iyong isa sa Northern Luzon, isa sa Central, maybe dalawa sa National Capital Region, isa sa Region V.

REP. DEL MAR. Yes, that would be considered, certainly, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. So, is it in the drawing board or is it being implemented already?

REP. DEL MAR. Not only in the drawing board, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, but it is already being implemented.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, thank you very much for the time.

I would like to terminate my interpellation with serious concern. Nevertheless, I move that we terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the Judiciary.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in its motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Judiciary.

I so move, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

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


COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the Commission on Human Rights.





REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we suspend the session so the technical staff may enter the plenary.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The session is suspended.

It was 6:13 p.m.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The session is resumed. The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, we would like to greet our guests from the Commission on Human Rights. Here are Chairperson Jose Luis Martin Gascon and the other Commissioners, …

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Kindly stand when your names are called so we can welcome you properly.

REP. GULLAS. … Commissioner Leah Tanodra-Armamento, Commissioner Roberto Eugenio Cadiz, Commissioner Karen Lucia Gomez-Dumpit and Commissioner Gwendolyn L. Pimentel-Gana.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Welcome to the House of Representatives.

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Sponsor, the Hon. Raul V. Del Mar of the First District of Cebu City.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Del Mar is recognized. Please proceed.


REP. DEL MAR. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, Dep. Majority Leader.

Can I ask for a two-minute suspension of the session just to allow our...


It was 6:14 p.m.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The session is resumed.

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, may we recognize the honorable Minority Leader Danilo Suarez for his interpellation.

REP. DEL MAR. Before that, can I have the floor, Mme. Speaker, and Dep. Majority Leader?


REP. GULLAS. May the honorable Gentleman from the First District of Cebu City be recognized.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Del Mar is recognized.

Please proceed.

SPONSORSHIP SPEECH OF REP. DEL MAR

REP. DEL MAR. Mme. Speaker, in light of what happened yesterday where the budget of the ERC was reduced to a ridiculous amount of P1,000, it rendered the agency not only ineffective but no longer operational.

Having a hunch that the present budget of the Commission on Human Rights might suffer the same fate, I hope not. I therefore would like to ask the indulgence of the Body to allow me to just make some remarks before we start the interpellation, Mme. Speaker.

If I may proceed, the Commission on Human Rights or CHR is a constitutional office established under Article XIII, Sections 17 to 19 of the 1987 Constitution. It was created to serve the people as a State institution, separate and independent from the three principal branches of the government, to perform a mandate of being a watchdog and protector against human rights abuses. Over the past 30 years of its existence, it has pursued this mandate by undertaking human rights protection, promotion and policy-advisory functions. The appropriations that Congress allocates to the CHR cover the cost of operations for the investigators, lawyers, researchers, analysts, information officers and trainers and other human rights workers, in both the central office and regional offices. It is an active member of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, the GANHRI, and has consistently secured an “A-Status” accreditation, which has given it access to many UN Bodies. It comes up with regular reports and recommendations to both the Executive and Legislative departments, to ensure adherence to the human rights guarantees provided in the 1987 Constitution. It monitors, as well as gives policy advice on, the State’s compliance with international obligations under human rights treaties and norms.


For these reasons, Mme. Speaker, bearing in mind that as an independent State institution for human rights it shall call out violations and abuses as these occur across administrations, with the view towards securing appropriate redress and remedies in order to achieve the societal goals of justice and rule of law, among others, it does so, without fear or favor, in a nonpartisan manner. The position it takes in favor of human rights standards should not be viewed by the State as being combative to it, but as another checking mechanism established by the framers of the Constitution to strengthen our enduring system of checks and balances and separation of powers.

Thus, when Congress allocates the budget for the CHR as an institution, it does so, in order to bolster Philippine democracy by keeping all public officials honest in the performance of their duties, as these relate to the universally accepted principles of human rights. Conversely, underfunding the CHR sends a dangerous signal to our people that we eschew the basic democratic principles upon which we have built our Republic, and worse, we are serving notice to the international community, to whom we have obligations, that we are unable and unwilling to abide by human rights. This will negatively impact our global standing on important aspects—diplomatic, economic, and geopolitical.

The relationship, Mme. Speaker, between the CHR and the other agencies of government is not necessarily confrontational. The CHR has built and sustained dynamic partnerships with multiple agencies of the government in furtherance of their desired goal of respect for all human rights. In fact, in acknowledgment of its positive contribution to society, Congress expanded CHR’s role beyond that provided in the Constitution by giving it other powers and functions in special laws that have been enacted such as the Magna Carta of Women, the Anti-Torture Law, Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Law and as Children’s Ombudsman, among others. It cooperates with different stakeholders and has assisted the Human Rights Offices of the security sector, as well as the Presidential Human Rights Commission itself.

For these reasons, Mme. Speaker, the President’s budget proposed an adequate sum for the CHR to continue in undertaking its important functions. And Congress, in the exercise of its power over appropriations, should acknowledge its contribution to good governance by approving sufficient, and I repeat, sufficient resources for it to meaningfully perform its mandate. Not doing so would mean turning our backs on our constitutional duty to render justice for all. The concern for human rights is beyond partisanship or disagreement.

Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished colleagues.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you. The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, we move to recognize the honorable Minority Leader, Rep. Danilo E. Suarez.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The honorable Minority Leader is recognized.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Distinguished Sponsor, in the 1987 Constitution

of the Republic of the Philippines, in Role and Rights of Peoples’ Organizations, Section 18, paragraph (1), it states and I quote:

Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights.

I am a living witness, distinguished Sponsor, of several cases wherein a good friend of mine, a political leader, a simple farmer, member of the CAFGU protecting their hamlet, was summarily executed or killed by terrorists. Your Honor, wala hong kasong nangyayari at wala hong nagfa-file man lamang Because there are no present officers representing the Commission on Human Rights, the office on human rights, I move to defer the consideration of the budget of this particular office.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S .). The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. BONDOC. Mme. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we joined the Minority in deferring the consideration of the budget of the Commission on Human Rights.




PHILIPPINE COCONUT AUTHORITY

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we take up the budget of the Philippine Coconut Authority.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the presence of the guests from the Philippine Coconut Authority: Administrator Romulo


J. De la Rosa; Deputy Administrator Glenn B. Santos; and Deputy Administrator Roel M. Rosales.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we

recognize the Sponsor, the Hon. Mark Aeron H. Sambar.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Hon. Mark Aeron H. Sambar is recognized, please proceed.

REP. SAMBAR. Good evening, Mme. Speaker. This Representative is ready to answer questions on the Philippine Coconut Authority.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the honorable Minority Leader, the Hon. Danilo E. Suarez.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Hon. Danny Suarez is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you Mme. Speaker. Will the —ilang beses ko na bang imo-move ito—will the distinguished Gentleman be willing to take the floor for some minor questions?

REP. SAMBAR. Mme. Speaker, it would be my honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Dapat recorded na lang iyon para hindi na tayo napapagod dito.

This particular office is very close to the heart of this Representation. Ako po ay lumaki sa bayan ng Unisan at pinalaki ng aking mga magulang gawa po ng niyog kaya concerned na concerned po ako dito sa Philippine Coconut Authority.

In 2015, distinguished Sponsor, the country produced a total of 14,735,188 metric tons of coconut. Please correct me if I am wrong.

REP. SAMBAR. Fifteen million, that is correct, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. One thousand three hundred seventy-nine produced in the CALABARZON Region, and the total export sales received from coconut products reached P2 billion in 2016, Your Honor.

REP. SAMBAR. Yes, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Two weeks ago, Your Honor, I

presented in the plenary yesterday the Niyogyugan Festival highlighting the importance of this particular plant or what we call the “Tree of Life.” This is very important to the province. We were hit by typhoon Niña and the 325,544 hectares lost 33 million coconut trees to Niña, Pablo, and Yolanda, Your Honor.

May I know if there is an inclusion in the budget for somewhat recovery or rehabilitation of these damaged coconut plantations.

REP. SAMBAR. Yes, Your Honor, in the 2018 budget for the PCA, there is an allotted P900 million for Accelerated Coconut Planting and Replanting. So that is an increase of 125 percent from previous years.

So, I think, this is done by the PCA in response to the different natural calamities that have affected the Philippines especially in the coconut-producing areas. So the thrust for PCA for fiscal year 2018 is to really accelerate replanting of coconut throughout those affected areas.

REP. SUAREZ. But it is really quite impossible for the presented budget for 2018 to replicate all these programs at once. Napakaliit ho ng budget na ibinibigay natin sa kanila, and with their number of activities coming up with a massive tree planting program, definitely, it cannot be covered by the presented budget for this coming year, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

So, during the campaign last year, distinguished Sponsor, we crafted even a joke. I was with my dear colleague, Rep. Jose L. Atienza Jr., wherein we said that when we will present our Presidential candidate who was then Vice President Jejomar “Jojo” C. Binay Jr., we are going to say, “I would like to present to you the next President of the Philippines, who looks like Coco Martin, unlike our opponents who look like cocolisap.”

So, cocolisap is another issue that threatens the coconut industry, Your Honor. So, may I know what is being done by the Authority to prevent the proliferation and, at the same time, maybe to be advanced in coming up with preventive measures in case there is another type of infestation that might affect coconut trees.

REP. SAMBAR. Your Honor, the PCA’s policy, with the new Administrator Dela Rosa, has continued the surveillance and strengthening of agricultural practices, Your Honor. With regard to data, if you would like, the PCA can submit to you the data on how they have controlled the cocolisap in different areas, specifically the Zamboanga Peninsula and the Basilan province, so that you can be furnished more information, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. With a positive outlook, Your Honor, the House hopes to pass a bill on the utilization of the Coco Levy Funds, and through, maybe, the hard work of the Speaker, our Lady Deputy Speaker, sana mabilisan po natin …


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Sana nga.

REP. SUAREZ. … as I have asked the leadership to come up with measures and make use of this almost P100 billion. Am I correct there, Your Honor? Because, hindi ho ito katulad ng palay na kapag itinanim mo eh after several months, tutubo na. On an average, a regular coconut tree that is what we called “island-born,” will take you about five-and-a-half to six years, hindi ba? There are some variety that are, what we call the…

REP. SAMBAR. Hybrid.

REP. SUAREZ. … there is a term for that, mabilis po ang yield but we have to sacrifice the life span of the tree.

I just hope that the leadership of the Philippine Coconut Authority can come up with, by this time, prepare already a program and work closely with the distinguished author of the Coconut Levy Fund––Rep. Sharon S. Garin here––para po kapag na-approve ang Bill ay mabilis po ang implementation kaagad. Huwag na ho tayong mangapa pa sa dilim, paspas po ang implementation because, as you are aware, distinguished Sponsor, the coconut farmers, if I may quote Rep. Edcel C. Lagman, is the lowest in terms of earnings sa agricultural industry ng ating bansa. That is why special attention should be given to this particular problem.

With that, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, the Minority do not have any more questions on the proposed budget of the Philippine Coconut Authority and I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the said budget.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in its motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Philippine Coconut Authority.


COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the Commission on Elections.




REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move to suspend the session.


It was 6:37 p.m.





REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Sponsor, the Hon. Doy C. Leachon.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Doy C. Leachon is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. LEACHON. Good evening, Mme. Speaker, Majority Leader.

For consideration right now is the budget of a constitutional Body that is the Commission on Elections, headed by Chairman Andres D. Bautista. I think, the COMELEC family is around.

The budget under consideration is, more or less, about P15.9 billion, Mme. Speaker. With that, this Representation is open for any queries from any Members of Congress.

Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the honorable Sr. Dep. Minority Leader, the Hon. Jose L. Atienza Jr.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Hon. Lito Atienza is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. ATIENZA. Maraming salamat po. Thank you, Mr. Majority Floor Leader.

If the Gentleman will help me clarify certain issues, I believe that the whole country will benefit from our exercise tonight.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, very gladly, Mme. Speaker, and also to the distinguished Gentleman from BUHAY Party-List, Manong Rep. Lito Atienza.


REP. ATIENZA. Unang-una, hindi na po iyong budget ang pag-uusapan natin. Ano po ba ang ating plano sa mga darating na halalan sapagkat ang halalan natin ay napakaimportante sa pagpapalakas ng ating demokrasya? Without a credible election, we cannot have a stable democracy. We all know that.

Now, I would like to ask the Gentleman, and he could consult the officers of the COMELEC present tonight, ano po ba ang plano natin sa susunod na halalan? Are we going to use, once again, the services of a foreign company to run our elections? I am talking about Smartmatic, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, Mme. Speaker, Congressman Atienza.

Per the information relayed to this Representation, there is an existing law to that effect, Republic Act No. 9369. On that note, there is an inter-agency task force or a committee created under the law headed by the DICT to give recommendations on what to use, or what method, or what options to make in the next or the forthcoming election. Second, it is also stated therein that, of course, the power admittedly, we have the power of oversight, the two houses of Congress, the Senate and the House, under the law, we can be a joint oversight committee which handles the recommendations.

As relayed to me, the Commission on Elections, definitely by mandate of the law, on their own volition, is amenable to a consultation on what could be the rightful advice on how to take up new steps towards the forthcoming election, all towards a credible, and of course, with integrity, election on which this country is, and every democratic institution is founded, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Mme. Speaker, sa tingin ko po nandoon ang problema.

The Commission on Elections still does not seem to accept that the Philippine elections, as run by the Smartmatic Corporation, have many tainted areas which put the whole Commission, definitely, in a shaded mindset as far as people are concerned.

I would say that victims of the past elections like in 2010, 2013 and 2016—I am counting myself as one of those victims who will continue to question the wisdom, the practicality, the patriotic sense of allowing our elections in the hands of Venezuelans, foreigners at that, when they cannot even hold their own elections in their own country properly. They are in trouble.

May I tell my experience, Mme. Speaker. In 2010, we in the city of Manila experienced, I believe, the first cheating mechanism of computerized elections. I am thankful that Congress, at one point, investigated that. But this corporation seems to be very deeply rooted that the Congressional probe did not even lead to any

prosecution, and much less, allowed Smartmatic to continue running the Philippine elections in 2013 and 2016.

Kung mayroon pong makikinig pa sa ating Komisyon ay nais kong balikan ang panahon.

Noong 2010, ang election returns sa Maynila contained different dates of election. Pakitanong nga po natin sa Komisyon ngayon kung iyan ay normal, starting April 24, 25, 27, 29, May 1, May 4, May 5 and May 9. Ang election po noon ay May 10. When we kept on asking the Commission then and Smartmatic, in the beginning they said, those are just ordinary computer glitches at iyon daw ay puwede nang palusutin.

Ang susunod na itinanong namin sa kanila ay bakit iba-iba rin ang oras ng eleksyon. Mayroong nag-eleksyon ng alas siyete ng umaga, mayroong alas nuwebe, alas dose, ala una, hanggang madaling araw nag-e-eleksyon kami. So, different dates of election, different times of opening of the polls, different closing, isa lang po ang consistent—it always took six seconds to open and close the polls. In six seconds, kumpleto ang eleksyon sa presintong iyon. Hindi po ba kaduda-duda? Hindi ba ito alam ng COMELEC? Hindi ba ito pinag-aralan ng Legal Department nila?

The first protest against Smartmatic was filed by this humble Representation so I know what I am speaking of. Their computer system is manageable. Kung kayo po ay makikipag-usap nang tama, wala na kayong problema, panalo kayo. Pero, kapag hindi po kayo nakipag-usap, malamang matalo kayo at makikita ninyo kung bakit. Iba-iba ang date ng eleksyon, iba-iba ang time ng eleksyon. Isa lang ang consistent—six seconds between the opening of the polls and the closing. Our suspicion is very simple—iyon ang encoding time; in six seconds, nabago nila ang eleksyon ng lungsod ng Maynila.

May I ask the present leadership of the Commission of what he thinks about all these issues. I am sure they are aware of our complaints against Smartmatic, and for us to allow its continued manipulation of our election will be a serious breach in our patriotic duties as Members of Congress.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, may I answer the query of the Gentleman from BUHAY Party-List.

Probably on three concerns, Mme. Speaker. First, I would like to share the sentiment of the good

Congressman from BUHAY Party-List. In fact, during the time that we had a budget hearing at the COMELEC where I presided, of course, under the authority of the Chairman, Congressman Karlo Nograles, actually I was trying to restrain myself from asking so as to hasten the proceedings. But then, I cannot help letting it pass during the budget hearing without asking very similar questions. When I asked, because there were similar circumstances in our province, there were varied


experiences that would be tantamount to statistical improbability. At any rate, the answer was categorical on the part of the COMELEC that they still maintain the integrity of the process that they had. Second, in your particular case, that was, if we remember it right, it was an allegation on what happened in 2010. We should remember that it was the pioneering stage of the computerization of elections in the country, and admittedly, there were gaps during that time. Third, that is why they are in the process of continuing the evaluation of preparations to which they are amenable. In fact, under the law, we should have this Oversight Committee to once and for all, give more credence to a credible election with integrity, with no biases, and without question, including the recommendations of the DICT, as mandated by Republic Act No. 9369.

Be that as it may, Mme. Speaker, if we will continue to be haunted by these issues, on hindsight, we should also think that the very reason we are here is because we gave our confidence on that election, a computerized election, under Smartmatic. Otherwise, if we will not and we continue to belie the integrity of that one, why are we here? In the first place, we are here serving the people and the Republic under the good mandate the people gave us.

At any rate, Mme. Speaker, and with due deference to and understanding of the sentiments of Congressman Atienza, definitely, for now, this is the very foundation of why this democratic institution has been erected—because of a credible election, that we, until now, believe to be so. Until such time that we will have the operational procedures or process to adopt a new mechanism, I think by the time it would happen, Congress will be a part of it, at least, and be satisfied. We can guarantee that the next options that the COMELEC will be have, of course, with the imprimatur of this Congress, will definitely bring the country through a better and credible elections forthcoming to all of us, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Thank you for the answer of the distinguished Sponsor on the budget of the COMELEC. But this Representation is not relying on his words because he is merely performing the task of defending its budget. I would like to ask the Commission on Elections tonight, ano po ba talaga ang kanilang plano? Sila ba ay susuporta sa kasalukuyang sistema o open sila sa pagbabago? Sapagkat sabi ninyo, kailangan nating aksiyunan sa Kongreso, kasama na po ako roon.


REP. ATIENZA. Ang tanung ko po, ang Smartmatic ba ay nakatala sa batas na kung tayo ay magko-computerize, kinakailangan Smartmatic ang gamitin? Mayroon po bang ganito?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, with the kind indulgence of the Gentleman, I would like to humbly reiterate that Smartmatic is not permanent in this country. Fortunately, they got the bidding during the past elections. But then, as very clearly manifested by the Commission, they are amenable, along with the Officers, to the Commissioners, the Chairman, they are, in fact, amenable with all of us, that if we intend, in our good judgment and sound discretion, if we want to change a new system, then it would happen, because after all, that is the mandate of the law. We should remember that no man is above the law. The Chairman and the Commissioners would be amenable to any subsequent options that may be used in the next elections.

Ito po ay gagampanan at susunod ang Komisyon sa kung ano man ang maitatala at mairerekomenda ng Kongresong ito through the Joint Oversight Committee as mandated by law, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Ayaw po ba nating samantalahin ang pagkakataon? Nandito po, nakikita ko si Chairman Bautista. Kaibigan ko po siya.


REP. ATIENZA. Nakikita ko din po ng ibang mga Commissioner. Kunin po natin sa kanila ang kanilang pagtanaw, ang kanilang damdamin dito sa aking inihahayag ngayon. This Representation and the distinguished Sponsor are one.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, definitely, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. They are on the other side.

REP. LEACHON. Definitely, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. So, can we ask them now what is their thinking about Smartmatic because it is not part of the law anyway. Can I get a categorical answer on that question that they are open to any local technology. We do not have to give up computerization. We can continue with computerization as the very spirit of the law. But Smartmatic is not part of the law. It is a decision on the part of the Commission on Elections, from Chairman Melo, Chairman Brillantes and then 2016, Chairman Bautista.


REP. ATIENZA. May I ask if Chairman Bautista will still be Chairman by 2019.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, for the first query, may I kindly reiterate my manifestation that I would not be standing here without the proper consultation


from and the words of the COMELEC. The words that are being uttered by this Representation definitely come from them and not from me. So, if the intention is for them to respond, we can give the floor to them. Definitely, the words I uttered came from them. But for the satisfaction of the Gentleman, a good friend of mine, I will again move for a suspension of the session and again talk with the Commissioners, get their side and I will speak again.

REP. ATIENZA. I will be moving for the suspension of the session so that the distinguished Sponsor can get it better.

I move for a one-minute suspension of the session. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The

Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.


REP. GULLAS. I move that we suspend the session.


It was 6:55 p.m.





REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, may we recognize the Honorable Leachon to continue the sponsorhip and the Honorable Atienza for his interpellations.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Leachon is recognized.

REP. LEACHON. Regarding the recent query, we would like to manifest again, Mme. Speaker, that the same manifestation would be given that if ever we would like to change, on the premise that the present system is governed by Republic Act 9369, and there are parameters provided for under the law which this Congress created for the selection of, although, there is a mandate as to the use of automation. The use of that system should be in accordance with the provisions provided for by law.

But the Commission is hogtied on the premise that if ever they will be using a different system, the

machine that should be included in the bidding should have undergone testing in a successful election. The problem that we have right here or the circumstance availing right now is that there is only one company that was used by this country and that is Smartmatic. If we want to change Smartmatic, then, we have to amend the law because under the automated system, the parameter set forth by the law is that the machine that would be used should have been successfully used in a previous or prior election.

Again, I would like to repeat that, Mme. Speaker, on that note, if it is local, it is only Smartmatic; otherwise, other players from other countries might participate because, probably, their machines had been used successfully in a previous election or prior to the forthcoming election. Number two, the COMELEC always conducts a technology fair where everybody or other players are invited. It is actually open to the public. Lastly, as I again manifested earlier, the Commission is open for public consultation and if ever a joint effort or a joint decision will be made, particularly by an oversight committee of Congress, with the House and the Senate efforts being joined together, and then their suggestion is to change the system, we can amend rightfully the existing law on that matter and we can proceed to other options as may be provided for by an amendatory law.

So, if that is a way of answering the query of Congressman Atienza and precisely, although the answer is coming from this Representation, these are definitely matters that this Representation has consulted with the Commission, and the very same words that I uttered were actually a manifestation and the guarantee coming from the Commission, with the Chairman and other members therein, the other Commissioners, present during this plenary deliberation of their budget, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Mme. Speaker, we must admit, as we heard the honorable Sponsor after his consultation with the Commission on Election, that we are now in a situation na para nating hinahabol iyong sarili nating buntot. We heard the same song and dance in 2013 that we cannot change the computer company because the machine will have to be paid for. We are tied up with the machine, and therefore, with Smartmatic. We heard it again in 2016 that we cannot change because Smartmatic machines are on loan or whatever and that we will have to spend more if we change it. But the point of this Representation is that, if the COMELEC starts admitting to itself that we need a better system, that will combine the integrity of elections and computerized counting or computerized transmission, thus, the counting should have integrity at hindi po iyong katulad ng aming naranasan kung saan kami ang una-unang nagprotesta. In the history of Smartmatic


and computerized elections, Manila registered the first protest. Believe it or not, the Commission on Elections did not touch our protest after requiring us to deposit P10 million. Eight months after, doon po lang inumpisahan iyong proseso. Eight months after and we were afraid, they were already manipulating the proofs of fraud inside the boxes.

Again, ito po ang nangyari, binuksan iyong unang 200, iyong laman ay tama po ang tally doon sa resulta. Sabi ng COMELEC, “Oh, pareho naman, e. Pareho ang numero.” Hindi nila napuna iyong kanilang na-post noong election night na the figure on the total number of voters per precinct, hawak na namin. So, sabi namin: “Parehong resulta pero dito po sa inyong na-post, sa Precinct No. 1, ang bumoto ay 1,050. Bakit po iyong balota sa loob at iyong score ay umaabot lamang ng 950?” Of the 75 percent of the 200 boxes we opened then, ganoon po ang diperensiya. Hindi nagta-tally iyong number of ballots sa loob ng ballot box doon sa kanilang posted number of voters who had cast their ballots.

Ang tinutukoy po namin, katulad po ng sinabi ng PPCRV, ang election sa Maynila ay kaduda-duda sapagkat nakita naming may mga diperensiya ang mga election returns. “They had markings we cannot explain.”—iyon ang sinabi ng PPCRV and I still have a copy of their full report. Pero ang COMELEC, noong pinuna namin ito, na hindi po nagta-tally iyong bilang noong mga bumoto doon sa balota sa loob ng box at iyong score—imposibleng mag-tally, aktwarya lang ang ginawa nila pero hindi puwedeng perfect ito:1,200 voted; 1,200 ballots; 1,200 total number of votes. Hindi po kami pinakinggan ng COMELEC. Ano sabi nila, “Ibang klaseng protesta iyan, mag-file kayo ng panibago.”

Kaya ang itinatanong ko po ito ang pagkakataon, sapagkat ipinadala ako rito ng Panginoong Diyos upang aking maisumbong sa bayan ang dinanas namin sa kamay ng Smartmatic. I am now taking full advantage of my representation of my political party so that we may move for the replacement of Smartmatic with another company that will handle the election. I hope the honorable Sponsor will join me in that crusade. Alisin natin ang Smartmatic sapagkat ito ay talagang nandito upang gumanap ng kanilang sariling pakay. Pa ganun-ganun lang po iyan pero in the end, sila rin ang magpapatakbo ng ating halalan. I am ready to lose my election if they continue with their malicious and fraudulent system. They can manipulate me out of Philippine politics, but I do not care because I will continue my crusade na iligtas ang ating demokrasya dahil dadami po ng dadami ang pandaraya at panloloko ng mga dayuhan dito sa ating sariling bansa.

I seek the understanding of the Commissioners present tonight, that they understand what we are trying to point out—one case in Manila, another case

in Mindanao, another case in the Visayas, although isolated, it cannot be allowed, it should not be allowed. There will come a time we will run to Smartmatic and no longer believe in the integrity of our own Commission on Elections in its count because of the very big disparity that we have seen; we saw it in 2013, we continue to see it in 2016. In fact, there is still a pending political contest for the vice presidency, and we were watching and observing that particular case as it has a bearing on the integrity of Philippine elections.

At this point in time, I can only appeal to the Commissioners. Ako po ay nakikiusap sa kanilang makabayang damdamin. Huwag na po nating panaigin iyong matali tayo sa Smartmatic, iyong machines na nandidiyan, aarkilahin na naman natin. Itapon na po natin sa Pasig River lahat iyang mga makinang iyan sapagkat I see the perfection of the system—the perfection of manipulation. The earlier we do it, the earlier it will be good for our country.

To the honorable Sponsor, I ask him to join me in this crusade.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, as much as I would like to refrain from speaking more and making arguments, because I know that there are several departments still waiting for their budget’s deliberation, I would just like to raise some short pieces of arguments just to fully address the issue.

Number one, I do not want to be misunderstood. Plainly, ako po ay buo, 200 percent, na sumasama sa kagustuhan ng ating ginagalang na Kongresista ng BUHAY Party-List. Kung may alegasyon po siya ng fraud sa Maynila, sa akin pong karanasan, dalawang bagay lang. Lahat po tayo ay pulitiko. Sabi ko nga ho noon, during the budget hearing, there were two instances: una, pang-lima ko na po ang eleksyon na nasalihan at doon sa apat na eleksyon ay pare-parehas ng resulta. Itong huli, bakit, kung dala ako ng mga kapatid sa Iglesia, alam natin na bumuboto lahat iyan. Sa 1,000 botante lamang, sa akin ang 900, pero bakit noong nakaraan, 37 lang ang lamang? Pangalawa, sa isang barangay, 100 porsiyento ay mga kamag-anak ko pero lumalamang ako ng 800 dati, bakit ang lamang ko lang ay 200?

I raised the very same questions during the budget hearing and I even confronted the Commission on Elections. Pero mabalik po tayo, iyong karapatan po ninyo na nandiyan sa plenaryo, pati po iyong karapatan ko na narito, kapagka po kinuwestyon natin iyon, ano ang saysay natin kung bakit naririto?

Precisely, right now, I would like to tell to this plenary that the Commission is actually amenable to changing that. The Smartmatic is not permanent in this country. As I said, then definitely, with both hands, I would like to join you if we can file an amendatory law to erase all the doubts that we have before the


COMELEC for us to participate freely in a credible election. As I said, these elections that we have in this country is the very foundation of why democratic institutions are proven, working and operating.

With those words of our good friend, the Congressman from BUHAY Party List, we can talk privately, we can talk separately and agree on certain matters on how to amend the law because we cannot blame the COMELEC here right now. If there are actually signs of fraud happening, the COMELEC is tied under the law— that they have to conduct public bidding and the requirements are set forth under the law. Under the law, unfortunately, it is only Smartmatic which, so far, has qualified.

So, Mme. Speaker, this Representation, I am, of course, fully supportive of the remarks of Congressman Atienza, and that, of course, it is good that had been raised during the budget deliberation and probably, the only thing that we have to do is to file an amendatory law to, once and for all, clear all the signs of fraud in the coming elections, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. I thank you the Gentleman for his remarks,but let me doubly stress that what I had done tonight is not to delay the budget of the Commission on Elections but to bring this point out in the open.

Why in the plenary? Because the plenary is the most open, the most transparent process in addressing problems in the Commission on Elections. This is the best forum where we can awaken the country. Kailangan pong gumising tayo na hindi puwedeng magpatuloy ang Smartmatic—dayuhan ang magpatakbo ng ating halalan. I will trust any Filipino but definitely, not a foreigner, to handle my ballots and I hope everybody feels the same way.

So, we are not wasting our time here. We have brought out in the open a very important critical point in our election. Ito po ay matagal ko nang kinukuyom at ngayon ang pagkakataon na inilalabas ko sa inyong lahat, inilalabas ko sa buong Pilipinas na ang Smartmatic ay hindi puwedeng pagkatiwalaan sapagkat sila ay nahuli na namin at wala po silang paliwanag kung hindi sabihin lang “computer glitches.”

Noong hindi maipaliwanag iyong bilang ng balota compared to the records of election for that precinct, mag-file daw kami ng panibago. Ano ang ibig sabihin noon—kami ay maglalagay na naman ng P10 milyon na pinagsama-sama na ngang tulong ng lahat ng mga tumulong? Hindi po namin magagawa iyon kaya ako ay natawa. Sa sarili ko lang, may araw din kayo. Hindi araw-araw “pasko.” Mayroon ding “bagong taon.” Ito po ang hinihintay natin. Ang “bagong taon” ng halalan sa Pilipinas at inaasahan po natin ang Commission on Elections ay tutulong sa ating pagsisikap na ito na magkaroon tayo ng isang halalang walang duda ang resulta. Ang lahat ng akin

pong tinukoy sa gabing ito, mayroon po akong record, sa loob ng Commission on Elections at sa aming tanggapan, na ipinaglalaban namin na maalis na sa ating sistema ang Smartmatic.

We are not against computerized election but we are definitely against Smartmatic getting again the contract from the Commission on Elections so that they may run roughshod over the right of the citizenry, the right of the people to a just, and definitely with full integrity, process of election. Kailangan po nating pagtulong-tulungan ito.

You are right and, well, I am right in bringing this out now in the open and this will continue, and we will continue the crusade. I appeal to our colleagues tonight to join us in cleaning up the Philippine elections. Huwag tayong tumatanggap na lamang ng pananakot na baka kayo ay mabiktima. Kinakailangang ipaglaban natin. Democracy is only for the stouthearted, sabi nga nila. Mawawalan tayo ng saysay bilang mga halal ng bayan, mga Mambabatas, kung hindi natin gagawin ang tama.

Maraming, maraming salamat, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, honorable Sponsor and we will definitely budge the present Commission about this issue.

Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER. (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, Honorable Atienza.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move the we recognize the Hon. Anthony “Tony” M. Bravo, PhD for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Hon.Tony Bravo of COOP-NATCCO Party-List is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker, Dep. Majority Leader.

Will the distinguished Sponsor entertain clarifications from this Representation?

REP. LEACHON. Gladly, Mme. Speaker, to the champion of coops in the country.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, distinguished Sponsor.

Distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, during our Committee hearing, I inquired on one particular item of expenditure in 2018, as proposed, that is, the Rental of Lease Expenses under MOOE of COMELEC, because it comprises about 69.16 percent of the total budget as proposed in 2018, which is amounting to P16,151,560,000.

Distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, how much was appropriated in 2017 for this particular item of expenditure?


REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, the account in the budget that had been raised refers actually to the very question which Congressman Atienza actually raised earlier, and this is the subsequent procurement of machines for the 2019 elections, considering that they have to make the necessary move ahead of, or at least, before the forthcoming elections in 2019.

Now, if there will be an amendatory law, definitely, this would not be used or before they are used because, of course, definitely, we will not leave the automated election system, but this refers to that one because they need to prepare it ahead of or prior to the conduct of the next election.

REP. BRAVO (A.). May I just go back to 2017, how much was appropriated for this particular expenditure?

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, there was none in the budget for the current year.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, in 2017, there was no expenditure incurred by the COMELEC relative to rental or lease.

REP. LEACHON. Yes, because that deemed it proper to include it right now, considering that this is the best time to have it, not last year but this year, a foresight, of course, of the next elections in 2019.

REP. BRAVO (A.). I just want to be clarified, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, on this particular item of expenditure. Aside from the rental intended for the machines that will be used for the elections, for the record, please clarify that, indeed, the COMELEC does not have any expenditure, as far as rental or lease expense incurred in 2017.

REP. LEACHON. Insofar as the account of rental is concerned, definitely, apart from those machines, we should be reminded also that the COMELEC, nationwide, has offices and they are, of course, renting these and so, the needed budget for the cost of these rentals should be included in the budget.

REP. BRAVO (A.). That is why I am clarifying that because …

REP. LEACHON. Yes.

REP. BRAVO (A.). … I requested for a report relative to these details, which the COMELEC promised to provide in the last Committee hearing.

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, I would like to to extend an apology for that, but this Representation

would like to guarantee that I will be giving, within the week, the necessary document so as to satisfy the query of the Honorable Bravo regarding this matter.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, after our Committee hearing, now comes the plenary, but the COMELEC failed to provide this despite their promise. But I know for a fact that the machines that we leased in 2013 and in 2016 are being kept in a warehouse for which the COMELEC pays rental or lease.

REP. LEACHON. Okay. Mme. Speaker, I stand corrected here. This Representation would like to manifest that, well of course, with due deference to the Hon. Anthony Bravo, probably he had a miscommunication with his staff because the required documents were submitted to his office by the COMELEC. In fact, there was stamped “Received” on these documents by his office, that the same was given to his office already.

REP. BRAVO (A.). May I request for a suspension of the session for one minute.



REP. GULLAS. I move to suspend the session, Mme. Speaker.


It was 7:21 p.m.




REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Distinguished Sponsor, I did not actually see the

actual report. Just for the record, it contains, among others, in 2017 and 2018, the details of proposed expenditures.

So, with that, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, thank you very much. That is all. I rest my case.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, Congressman Anthony Bravo of the COOP-NATCCO Party-List.



REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, may we recognize the Minority Leader, the Hon. Danny Suarez, for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Hon. Danny Suarez is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Is the distinguished Sponsor willing to yield the

floor?

REP. LEACHON. Yes, good evening, honorable Minority Leader. Of course, we are always glad to hear his queries.

REP. SUAREZ. I will not raise issue first on the proposed budget of the COMELEC, but I just would like to raise this issue that has been forwarded to this Representation a few weeks after the election of 2016.

You knew very well, distinguished Sponsor, that this Representation worked closely with the UNA, United Nationalist Alliance, and I am the President of the UNA. I would just like to report these to the Sponsor on whether these are true or not. Vice President Binay got, by clustered precincts, zero votes in 1,174 precincts; one vote in 1,041 precincts; two votes in 1,181 precincts; three votes, 1,163 precincts; four votes, 1,189 precincts; and five votes, 1,226 precincts. In othe places, namely: ARMM, Binay – zero; Basilan – zero; Sagay City, Negros Occidental, in several precincts thereat– zero; and part of Nueva Ecija – Palayan City; Cavite –Dasmariñas, several precincts; Zamboanga del Norte – Dapitan; and Zamboanga del Sur – Aurora, Bayug – zero. Now, let us go to those places with one vote: Ifugao, Negros Occidental, Zamboanga Dapitan, Castillana—this is so important and this is a very thick listing, Mme. Speaker.

It would appear that in the last election, some candidates won but did not deserve to win; and it would appear that some candidates lost but did not deserve to lose. Unless, I can get an answer on these data that I had just stated, I move to defer the consideration of the budget of the COMELEC.




REP. GULLAS. May I ask for a suspension of the session for a few minutes, Mme. Speaker.


It was 7:26 p.m.





REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, in behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in their motion to defer the consideration of the budget of the Commission of Elections.

I so move.


REP. LAGMAN. Mme. Speaker.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Edcel C. Lagman for a short manifestation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Lagman is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. LAGMAN. This short manifestation, Mme. Speaker, is relative to the deferment earlier of the plenary consideration of the proposed budget of the Commission on Human Rights because the officials of the Commission were not at the Session Hall at the time their budget was called. I would like to rectify our records.

As early as 9:30 a.m., 30 minutes before we called the roll, the officials of the Commission on Human Rights, led by Chairman Chito Gascon, Commissioner Pimentel-Gana, Commissioner Gomez-Dumpit, the Executive Director and practically all of the Directors of the Commission and important officers were here already in the House of Representatives. Some wanted to stay here but they were told to go back to their holding room at the Fuentebella Hall in the South Wing Annex. They were told that they will just be notified when their proposed budget will be deliberated on but unfortunately, they were not seasonably notified. Hence, when they arrived at the Session Hall, the consideration of their budget had already been deferred.

That, I would like to make of record, Mme. Speaker and also, that they never had the intention not to attend the deliberation on their proposed budget for 2018. This is to just rectify our records, Mme. Speaker.

Thank you.




REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, for the record, it is the practice in the House of Representatives that when your budget is called and when your budget is considered, you should be at the Session Hall. We recognize that the CHR was here at 9:30 a.m. and we asked them to come at 9:30 a.m. as well tomorrow if and when their budget will be taken up.

REP. LAGMAN. Mme. Speaker, that is correct, the officials of the agency concerned should be here at the Session Hall but in the case of the CHR, they were not seasonably notified when they were held at the holding room at Fuentebella Hall.

Thank you.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the Commission on Audit.



REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Minority Leader, the Hon. Danny Suarez, for his interpellation.

Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the honorable Sponsor, the Hon. Doy Leachon.




REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, before we suspend the session, we manifest that the CHR should be here at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow.

I move to suspend the session.


It was 7:34 p.m.




REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, our parliamentary status is that we are in consideration of the budget of the Commission on Audit. I move that we recognize the honorable Sponsor, the Hon. Doy Leachon, and the honorable Minority Leader for his interpellation.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Leachon and the Honorable Suarez are recognized. Please proceed.

COMMISSION ON AUDIT

REP. LEACHON. Mme. Speaker, thank you.This will be the fourth Department under

consideration which is being sponsored by this Representation and, again, we started actually this morning, and again, there was deferment. Now, again, this Representation is very much willing to accede to the queries of the honorable Minority Leader.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Distinguished Sponsor, as usual, the Gentleman is

willing to yield to some questions.


REP. SUAREZ. I have a very brief manifestation on my concern with the Commission on Audit, something which I would have done last year. I think I raised it with the Chairman, I tried to catch up with him but I was late and when I arrived in the plenary, his budget was already approved. But I managed to catch up with him over lunch, if you remember. Magaling pa ang memory ko, Chairman Aguinaldo.

Ang concern ko po, Mme. Speaker, is, iyon pong mga Members natin ay nagkakaroon ng cases na what we call “COA allowed and COA not allowed.’” Kung minsan po kasi naglalagay tayo ng pera sa mga local government unit, mayroon pa tayong tinutulungang mga bayan, mayroon pong mga scholarship tayo na binibigyan and then suddenly, bibigyan po tayo ng notice saying that “This expenditure is not allowed under COA rules.” Ang akin hong pakiusap, the leadership of the House should sit down with the COA to let us have a menu of what we can do and what we cannot do. It might be parochial to say that this Representation is concerned because 2018 is near 2019 which is an election year, and I do not want cases wherein Members of the House will be facing charges or filed complaints in the COA saying that certain Members of the House spent their money illegally.


Kaya po iyong what we can do and what we cannot do should be thoroughly analyzed. At the same time, we would like to ask the COA to be somewhat more flexible, considering that the thrust of what we would like to do is more of humanitarian in nature, and we are talking about assistance to burials, hospitalizations, scholarships, birth assistance to newly born babies, et cetera. Kaya iyon lang po ang hihingin kong pakiusap.

I would like a confirmation from the Chairman and the other members of the Commission that right after the deliberation on the budget, maybe we can have a four or five days continuous sessions with them so that we can report in the plenary that this is the agreement of the COA, and this is what they say, “ If you do this, you will not be charged with illegal expenditures.” Can I have that, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker?

REP. LEACHON. There is actually an assurance from their end, Mme. Speaker, that they are amenable to the suggestion of the honorable Minority Leader.

REP. SUAREZ. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, considering that we have an affirmative answer from the Commission on Audit in coming up with a working team, as I had said, relative to expenditures included in the menu of congressional funds, I do not have any more questions to raise on the proposed budget of the Commission on Audit. I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate.

I so move.

REP. LEACHON. Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, honorable Minority Leader.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in its motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Commission on Audit.



DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the Department of Education.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, we would like to acknowledge the presence of our guests from the Department of Education. With us are Dr. Leonor Briones, our Secretary; Usec. Atty. Alberto Muyot; Usec. Dina Ocampo; Usec. Alain Pascua; Usec. Analyn Sevilla; Usec. Jesus Mateo; Usec. Ma. Victoria Catibog; Asec. Atty. Umali; Asec. Escobedo; Asec. Malaluan; Asec. Ambat; Asec. Maribojoc; and from the attached agencies—Angel Bautista, Usec. Muyot, Gerry Tizon, Victor Emmanuel Carmelo Nadera and Dr. Teresita Inciong; and all DepEd Regional Directors, Mme. Speaker.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker.


REP. GULLAS. I move that we recognize the Sponsor, the Hon. Maria Carmen S. Zamora.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The honorable Sponsor is recognized.

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the honorable Cong. Gabriel “Gabby” H. Bordado Jr. for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Bordado is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. BORDADO. Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker.

Mme. Speaker, may I ask the honorable Sponsor if she is willing to answer some questions?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Gladly, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BORDADO. Mme. Speaker, at the outset, let me congratulate the DepEd for getting the third highest trust rating of 93 percent in the so-called Philippine Trust Index as reported by the Philippine Daily Inquirer today.

Now, Mme. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, can you give us a brief overview of the accomplishments of the DepEd during the first two quarters of 2017?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, the Department of Education, being one of the agencies that received one of the highest budgets in 2017, has accomplished a lot of things even considering the fact that the Department has a new Secretary and, in fact, to


borrow the words of the Secretary, they admitted that although they were on a honeymoon stage for the first year, they had accomplished various projects already. The Department is committed to do its constitutional mandate to assure that every child learner is given the opportunity to have a quality education; and giving them a better quality of education means giving them a better environment where they can study and develop as child learners.

For the past months, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, the DepEd has been doing its job and while they also admit that they are still on a honeymoon period, there are several adjustments that were made, even to the point of admitting that some of the backlog being committed by the DepEd are due to the fact that the Department is doing some policy changes in order to improve its services. That is the reason the Department of Education, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, is still in the process of threshing out and finishing the work that has been left by the previous administration.

REP. BORDADO. Thank you, Mme. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker.

How about the K to12 Program implementation?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the K to 12 Program, being one of the major programs mandated to be implemented by the Department, is now on its year wherein we are expecting to have graduates up to Grade 12. So far, the Department of Education has made several major interventions, especially in the program where it gives cash grants to senior high school students from the public school who are now enrolled in the private schools, and they have significant accomplishments in terms of the implementation of the K to 12 Program, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BORDADO. Okay. Thank you, Mme. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker.

Yesterday, actually, Mme. Speaker, I had the opportunity to meet up with the Secretary of Education, the Honorable Briones, and I was telling her something about the destroyed classrooms. You know, Mme. Speaker, Mme. Sponsor, typhoon Nina struck the Bicol Region, particularly my district, the Third District of Camarines Sur, on Christmas Day. A lot of classrooms were destroyed, a lot of classrooms were damaged and up to now, I believe most of them are still in a state of disrepair. I was asking the Secretary the reason the DepEd cannot act on this particular issue. Then she informed me about the Quick Response Fund and that the DepEd is not handling the QRF. Is that correct, Mme. Speaker?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, our Honor, that is true. In the 2017 appropriations, there was no Quick Response Fund lodged with the Department

since the Quick Response Fund is being lodged with the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council.

REP. BORDADO. Yes.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Per record, the Department of Education, in compliance with its mandate to repair the damaged classrooms brought about by several calamities, has already requested the NDRRMC for the release of P1.7 billion from its Quick Response Fund but unfortunately, as of now, the Department of Education has not received any allocation yet, Your Honor.

REP. BORDADO. Yes, thank you, Mme. Sponsor. Mme. Speaker, actually, that is the problem. The

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council is not acting on the request of the people on the ground. I understand that in the 2018 Budget, Mme. Sponsor, the Quick Response Fund will be reverted to the Department of Education. Is that true, Mme. Speaker?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, for the 2018 Budget, it is the intention of the Department to have control of the Quick Response Fund. Therefore, the only way to do that is for the Department to submit an errata requesting that the Quick Response Fund be lodged with the Department of Education instead of the NDRRMC. However, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, there is a second option that the Department has requested, that in the event that the Quick Response Fund will not be transferred to the Department of Education, then the Special Provisions should be amended so that they will be allowed to get the fund intended for the repairs from the regular budget of the School Building Program, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BORDADO. Thank you, Mme. Sponsor. Mme. Speaker, I fully support the move to give

the DepEd the leeway to handle the Quick Response Fund.

Thank you very much.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Thank you very much for that manifestation, Your Honor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin. S.). Thank

you.The Floor Leader is recognized.

REP. ORTEGA (V.). Mme. Speaker, I would like us to recognize the Hon. Jose “Lito” L. Atienza of BUHAY Party-List for his interpellation.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Atienza is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. ATIENZA. Maraming salamat po, Mme. Speaker and Floor Leader.

With the permission of the Lady, we would like to ask some timely questions to the DepEd leadership tonight.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Gladly, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Iyon po ay tinanong ko na sa kanya kanina, sa ating Sekretarya pero gusto ko pong ilagay ito sa ating official record tonight. We tried to make representations on the part of the Philippine Normal University, the training center of our teachers in the country, so that their new or the building being constructed na nabitin po ay kung maaari pong maisama nila sa kanilang pondo ngayon para po naman iyong mga guro na gumawa ng representasyon sa inyong lingkod ay aking matulungan, sapagkat ito po naman ay para sa kagalingan ng ating edukasyon.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, per the statement of the Secretary of the Department, inasmuch as the Department would like to help in the improvement of education, the Philippine Normal University, however, is not part of the basic education system which the DepEd is mandated to support. The Philippine Normal University is under the tertiary education and therefore, technically, the DepEd could not allocate the budget for the university, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. ATIENZA. Masasabi po natin, Mme. Speaker,

na walang kinalaman ang Department of Education dito sa pagbibigay ng pagbabago sa loob ng Philippine Normal University na pakikinabangan ng ating mga guro. Nakabinbin po iyong construction dahil kinulang ng pera kasi ang ibinigay lamang ay ang pang-first phase kaya wala pa pong pagtapos, kaya wala pong halaga iyong itinayo sa unang hakbang. Ang isinagot po sa atin ng ating Sekretarya ng Kagawaran ay wala silang kinalaman sa Philippine Normal University. Tama po iyon. We are putting on record the answer of the good Secretary that the DepEd has nothing to do with the Philippine Normal University. It falls under the State Universities and Colleges.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, according to the Secretary of the Department of Education, while it is not within the jurisdiction of the DepEd to assist the Philippine Normal University in terms of infrastructure, however, there are several partnerships that may be explored between the

Department of Education and the Philippine Normal University and that is in terms of training and research.

REP. ATIENZA. In other words, Mme. Speaker, I am to understand that the suggestion of the teachers can still be attended to by the DepEd leadership.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. ATIENZA. That would be a totally different picture that I am trying to put on record. Kanina po ang sinabi nila ay wala silang maitutulong pero ngayon, ang sinasabi nila ay mayroong silang magagawa na ibang paraan.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, for training and research, yes.

REP. ATIENZA. So, officially we are taking note that we have brought the problem to the attention of the good Secretary and the whole Department present tonight, and we will rely on the words of the Secretary that she will try to help in every way she can although the project is actually part of the State Universities and Colleges.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The Secretary and the rest of the undersecretaries are taking note of the concern, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. ATIENZA. Maraming salamat po. Lilipat naman po ako sa ibang paksa.

Mayroon po tayong nabubuong problema na lumalala. Ang ating mga kabataan ay lumalaki nang wala po silang kaalaman sa ating sinig at kalinangan—culture, specifically. Our young generation does not have the cultural orientation that we enjoyed during our time, that you enjoyed during your time. Everyone in this Chamber, I am sure, has a very strong cultural foundation because of the education system prevailing during our younger days. Ngayon po, wala na po iyan dahil inalis po ng batas. Kung ako po ay hindi nagkakamali, panahon po ni Secretary Roco noong inalis po iyong kultura sa tungkulin ng Kagawaran ng Edukasyon. Inalis na rin po iyong sports development. Ang pagsasanay ng ating mga kabataan sa public schools sa paligsahan ay inalis din po sa Department of Education, Culture and Sports, kaya naiwan na lamang iyong Department of Education.

So many years had passed since then and now, it is time to check and look back at what it produced after 12 years, 15 years, kung nagbunga po ba ito ng kagalingan sa pag-aaral ng mga kabataan, kung nagbunga po ba ito ng kabutihan sa pagpapalakas ng ating mga kabataan. Kabaligtaran ang nangyari.


Ang mga bata ngayon ay walang kaalaman sa kultura. Ang mga bata ngayon ay hindi po nagsasanay sa palakasan. No better proof, Mme. Speaker, that I can cite than the miserable showing of the Philippines in the latest Southeast Asian Games. Kawawa po naman ang mga atleta natin sapagkat sila po ay mga bunga lang ng mabilisang pagpili at pag-training dahil nawala po iyong pagsasanay sa pamamagitan ng mga paaralang pampubliko.

Iyong sports development noong araw ay nagmumula sa grade school hanggang high school. Nagsasanay po ang mga bata at diyan po nakukuha ang mga material for championship quality. Sila po ang nagdadala ng bandila ng bansang Pilipinas sa mga paligsahan. So, we had excelled in international sports competitions once upon a time but today, there is no more breeding ground, there is no more training ground, there is no more broad source of young talents because we removed sports training and cultural activities in our public schools. Isipin ninyo, tinatalo po tayo ngayon ng Singapore pero apat na milyong tao lang mayroon doon. Tinalo tayo sa paligsahan pero mahigit 100 milyon ang Pilipino. Sila ay may pagsasanay, iyong mga bata sa paaralan. Tayo, wala.

So, I would like to get the thinking of the good Secretary, knowing her practical but patriotic sense. She has coached us for a long time on the functions of the Department of Education. Today, we are making moves to restore culture and sports development or sports training in our public schools para po naman mapanumbalik natin ang tamang paglaki ng mga batang Filipino na mayroon ng kagalingan sa paligsahan pangkalakasan at mayroon pang damdamin, mayroong nilalaman ang isipan at puso at katauhan sa kultura at sining ng ating bansa. So, could we get her thinking along the lines that I have enumerated?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, while the Department had been renamed Department of Education, taking away the culture and sports in its name of the agency, the Department did not stop in its mandate to develop the young learners in terms of developing culture and arts, and sports in them.

In fact, music and the arts are still part of the curriculum. Music and the arts are still part of the K to 12 curriculum where there are tracks intended for sports and tracks intended for the arts. These tracks, actually, are specializations and are giving opportunities for the learners to study, specifically, culture and the arts. A part of those programs of the Department, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, are several activities such as National Festival of Talents that the Department of Education is spearheading in order to encourage young learners to develop their talents in terms of the arts. The annual Palarong Pambansa of the Department of Education has given our learners the opportunity to excel in

sports and therefore, in fact, there are athletes coming from the different public schools who were given the opportunity to improve their skills further by being one of the best-discovered players from the Palarong Pambansa. These are initiatives from the Department, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Naiintindihan ko po, Mme. Speaker, ang sinasabi ng ating butihing honorable Congresswoman pero dito ay umaasa tayo sa kusa ng mga namumuno. Wala po iyan sa sistema. May kasabihan tayo na “the proof of the pudding is in the eating.” Are we now producing better sportsmen? Are we now leading the sports competitions in Asia, at least in Southeast Asia? Do we even qualify for the major events of the Olympics? Wala po, zero, dahil umaasa na lang tayo sa mga guro na nais tumulong sa development ng sports and cultural orientation.

Ang sinasabi ko po ay mas maganda po iyong mayroon tayong maibalik na Departamento o Kagawaran ng Edukasyon, Sining at Palakasan. Huwag tayong umasa sa Palarong Pambansa—that is once a year. I know that event, being a former Mayor of Manila and we participated in that. We have always been the champion, incidentally. In Manila, we train our children, school children in public schools, totally in sports development. Pero hindi tayo puwedeng umasa na lang sa mayor o sa kabutihang-loob ng Sekretarya. Kailangan po may batas tayo na magsasabing sa isang daang milyong Pilipino, marami diyan ay magagaling sa paligsahan, kaya kailangan doon sa public schools ay magturo at magsanay sila upang magkaroon o umani tayo ng mga medalya para sa bansa.

Before, the best sportsmen in local competitions came from the public schools. Ako po ay naglalaro ng softball noong araw. Kapag ang kalaban namin ay taga public school, talo na kami dahil magagaling sila kaysa sa amin na mga private school players. Ngayon, wala na po. Ang mga public school players, ano mang paligsahan, ay dinadaig ng mga taga private school.

Kaya iyon po ang aking idinidiin at ibinibigay sa kanila—it is time to think about this particular effort of removing cultural orientation and sports development in public schools because this is the reservoir of all the talents of the Filipinos. Huwag po nating ibigay sa pribado na lamang ang karangalan. Ang isang mahirap na bata ay mayroon ding galing na maaari nating pakinabangan.

Kaya ko sinasabing magagaling ang ating sportsmen pero kapos o kulang sila sa training. Wala po naman tayong masasabi dahil ginawa nila ang magagawa nila, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating at kulelat tayo. Ayaw nating paulit-ulit ito. Malalagay na sa basurahan ng kasaysayan ang mga Pilipino kapag ito ay nagpatuloy. In fact, I will propose, kung hindi natin babaguhin ang sistema ng ating sports development na


may kaugnayan sa ating mga paaralan, ay huwag na tayong sumali sa anumang paligsahan, kung hindi ay kawawa iyong mga batang pinadadala natin para lang matalo. Ano ang masasabi natin, wala? Bakit? Dahil kulang sa training.

Ang tunay na kabuluhan ng pag-aaral ng isang bata ay hindi lamang sa isip, kung hindi pati sa pangangatawan at sa kanyang kaalaman tungkol sa kanyang pagkatao bilang Pilipino. Iyong pagbabalik ng culture and sports among the Department functions is what we are fighting for, and we hope to get a listening ear from our tutor and trainer, Secretary Briones, who is now at the helm of the Department.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department, especially its Secretary, shares and recognizes the valid concern of the Honorable Atienza, and that the Department continues to be committed to train its young learners to be involved in sports. However, legally, by mandate, the Department is limited up to the school sports level only, and that elite sports is lodged with the Philippine Sports Commission. While we have those limitations, Your Honor, …

REP. ATIENZA. Naintindihan po naming lahat iyan.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). … the Department and the rest of the officials …

REP. ATIENZA. Ang itinatanong ko po lamang ay simpleng masasagot ng yes or no.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes. It continues …

REP. ATIENZA. Tama po ba na …

REP. ZAMORA (M.). … to be committed to sports, Your Honor.

REP. ATIENZA. … bigyan natin ng training ang mga batang Pilipino sa paaralang pampubliko o hindi?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). For school sports, Your Honor, yes, the Department continues to be committed to that.

REP. ATIENZA. Anyway, we will continue with our efforts because we want to help in the full development of our children. Ang mga batang nag-aaral sa mga paaralang pampubliko ay dapat maibalik sa tugatog ng karangalan, tagumpay sa mga paligsahan, whether mental or physical. Mabubuo lamang iyan kapag mayroon tayong magawa sa ginawa nilang pag-alis ng culture and sports sa pag-aaral ng mga bata sa ating public schools.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Thank you for your concern, Your Honor.

REP. ATIENZA. Let me just shift to another topic. Alam ko naman na ang budget nila ay sobra-sobra na nga dahil hindi na nga nagagawa iyong mga school houses hanggang ngayon. Short sila sa production.

Anyway, may we now ask the honorable Sponsor, mayroon po ba silang inilalaan ngayon for the training of special children. Kung napupuna ninyo, dumadami po ang mga batang biktima ng lahat ng problemang pangkasalukuyan—poverty, malnutrition, undernourishment—kaya dumarami po ang mga autistic children. Sa aking sariling tahanan, mayroon po akong dalawang ampon na parehong autistic, kaya alam ko po itong aking binibigay na paksa.

Mayroon po ba tayong pondo na inilalaan for early childhood care and development? Mayroon po bang items sa kanilang budget para dito? Mayroon po ba tayong pondo for that? Dahil kung hindi po natin bibigyan ng training ang special children, again, magiging malaking problema iyan. Lalaki itong mga batang mayroong autism at sa paglaki po nila, may kakulangan sila sapagkat hindi sila nakapag-aral nang tama. Ang pinag-uusapan natin, sa pinakamalaking kagawaran kung saan nag-aaral ang mga bata, tinatanong ko kung ano ang nilalaan nila para dito sa mga batang ito na bunga ng matinding paghihirap sa ekonomiya at kakulangan sa wastong kinakain, pagkukulang sa pangangalaga noong kabuntisan ng nanay, maraming dahilan subalit, again, the reality is marami na sa ngayon ang ipinanganganak na may problemang autism.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there is an appropriation of P483 million under the Early Childhood Development Council which is an attached agency of the Department of Education. This council is mandated to cater to the needs of children aged 0-4 years and that is within the early childhood, for them to promote their optimum growth and development during their early years. Apart from the intervention for the early childhood development, the main Department of Education has integrated special education or SPED in the MOOE budget of the public schools and therefore, every school, in the use of their MOOE, will have the opportunity as well to make interventions in terms of early childhood development, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ATIENZA. Ang sinasabi po ba ng ating kagalang-galang na Kongresista ay mayroong programa at pondo para doon sa aking ibinigay na problema—iyong early education of children with real problems in their natural selves? Mayroong problema po iyang mga ipinanganganak na mayroong autistic characteristics. Sila po ay may depekto sa pag-iisip, may depekto po


sa kanilang paggalaw, at kailangan po nila ng special care. Mayroon po silang pondo for that? Iyon po ang aking tanong.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, yes, there is an allocation intended for special education and in fact, the DepEd has already established SPED centers in the different regular schools nationwide.

REP. ATIENZA. Mayroon po tayong pondo?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, Your Honor.

REP. ATIENZA. Salamat po. Titingnan ko na lang ang mga detalye ng programa later on.

Now, on another matter. Ito po ang pinakamalaking raket sa gobyerno—pinakamalaking raket ng korupsiyon, nakawan, kurakot— at ito po iyong pagbili ng mga libro sa ating mga paaralan.

Noong ako ay Mayor, napababa ko ang presyo ng mga libro sa Maynila by 30 percent. Papaano? Tinawag ko ang lahat ng mga publishers at sinabi ko sa kanila:

It is about time, panahon na upang huwag na kayong magbigay ng lagay sapagkat pinutol ko na lahat ng lagay dito sa City Hall ng Maynila, kasama na po ang City Schools. Iyong ibinibigay ninyong five percent sa ganito, two percent sa ganyan, 10 percent sa mayor, burahin na po ninyo iyan. So, reduce your prices by 30 percent or increase your delivery over and above what is stated in the purchase order. Matagal na panahon pero nagtiyaga po ako. Kung hindi kayo magbibigay ng 30 porsiyentong diskuwento ay hindi ko po kayo bibigyan ng negosyo. Pipigilin ko na ang lahat at pipili ako ng kung sinuman ang tutulong sa aking pagsisikap.

Noong una, walang may gustong tumulong dahil papaano naman daw iyong malalaking PO nila sa DepEd? “Kapag kayo ay binigyan namin, aba ay hihingi ang DepEd” pero, mabuti na lang, na mayroong mga makabayan at talagang may konsensiyang mga publishing house. In particular, I would like to mention it officially because they are the ones that responded to my challenge, Rex Publishing. Lumapit sa akin, “Mayor, nakakahiya, nahihiya kami kung hindi kami tutulong sa iyo, kaya sa amin po, tutuparin namin sapagkat tama kayo, iyong 30 porsiyento, panglagay po namin iyan sa buong burukrasya.”

I hope the good Secretary is doing this because, otherwise, magkano po ba ang budget, honorable Sponsor, sa pagbili ng mga libro annually? For this budget, magkano po ba ang nakalaan for book purchases?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, for 2018, the amount we requested is P2.9 billion for the textbooks.

REP. ATIENZA. It is P2.9 billion and 30 percent of that is almost P9 million. Iyon po ang napupunta sa korupsiyon, P900 million, kaya ayaw tumulong sa lokal dahil inaalala nila iyong PO sa national. So, with this revelation, I would expect the good Secretary to take a look at their book purchases and to take note of what I said today. You can check it with the records of the Department, with the City Schools, that during my time, we were able to reduce the prices of books by 30 percent. You can do that now. I am sure of the integrity of the good lady pero baka po kayo ay napapalusutan, kayo ay tinatawanan, kayo ay kunwari sinusunod pero i-check po ninyo iyong presyo ng mga libro. Madali po namang malaman iyan. Ipatawag ninyo ang lahat ng publishing houses and I will monitor the same to check if the purchases of books will be 30 percent more or 30 percent less.

Kapag nagpatuloy po ang bilihan, business as usual, kaya ko sinabing ang pinakamalaking nakawan ay nangyayari sa Department of Education pero naniniwala po akong mababago ni Secretary Briones iyan, as we have full confidence in her.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Secretary is assuring the Gentleman that she will look into the matter and she thanks him for that concern.

REP. ATIENZA. Yes, I see her nodding her head. As I told you, I believe in her integrity, na iyan ay makakapagbago ng sistema diyan. Kaya kayong mga nagbebenta ng libro, kayong mga kumikita sa libro, baguhin na ninyo ang inyong negosyo. Wala na kayong makukuhang negosyo kung hindi ninyo babawasan ang presyo ng libro na binibili ng Kagawaran.

Maraming salamat po, Mme. Speaker. I believe that we have taken note of some observations that can improve the quality of education that the Department is giving to our children, especially those from the poor communities.

I believe that we can produce champions. I believe that we can produce patriotic and culturally molded children. Alam nila kung bakit sila Pilipino kung mayroon tayong kultura, sining, kalinangan sa kanilang pag-aaral, at ito ay magagawa ng isang katulad ni Secretary Leonor M. Briones.

Maraming salamat po.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Thank you very much, Your Honor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, Hon. Jose “Lito” L. Atienza Jr.



REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. France L. Castro for her interpellation. I so move, Mme. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Hon. France L. Castro is recognized, please proceed.

REP. CASTRO (F.L). Maraming salamat po, Mme. Speaker.

Ang una pong topic ay iyong tungkol doon sa memo natin sa Yes for Peace —Bayanihan ng Bayan in DepEd Memo No. 66, series of 2017, dated April 6, 2017. So, Mme. Speaker, MMe. Sponsor, nagpapasalamat po ang Representasyong ito dahil po sa kagyat na pagtugon ng Department of Education doon sa kanilang pagre-release ng DepEd Memo No. 142, series of 2017, iyong pagsu-suspend po ng implementation noong Yes for Peace. So, inaasahan po ng Representasyon na ito na lalabas din po ang review na kino-conduct po ng ating Departamento at nang tuluyan ma-revoke itong DepEd Order No. 66.

For the record, Mme. Sponsor, gusto ko lang ipaliwanag kung bakit natin ito karapat-dapat na tutulan o hindi dapat na gawin ito sa mga schools. Una, naka-target dito ang 30 million respondents by September 2017, 18.4 million out of 30 million are school children from Grades 4 to 11, both in public and private schools. The student government and teachers of AP o Araling Panlipunan, Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao or Values Education are the ones to undertake the activity. The NGO assigned to task is Yes for Peace—Bayanihan ng Bayan na tingin naman natin ay hindi naman ito attached sa ating Department of Education. Aside from the questionnaire, the barangay, municipal city or province is urged to create a resolution declaring such barangay et cetera as zones of peace. They will agree to the permanent cessation of hostilities between the government and group to realign the war funds, et cetera.

Sa una pong question, ano po iyong ating kritisismo dito on “peace is not just an absence of war”? If the Department really wants to educate its students and teachers, it must explain that the ongoing war in the country is rooted on legitimate people’s demands. Solving the root causes would permanently give peace, at hindi puwedeng lay down arms without CASER o iyong tinatawag nating pag-address doon sa socio-economic reforms, in case doon sa NDFP. On question number two, contrary to the agreement between the GRP and the NDFP, ang panawagan dito sa Pilipinas ay maging venue ang peace talks. On question number three, malicious and opportunist ang pagkarga ng tanong ukol sa pag-amyenda ng Konstitusyon dahil sa palagay ng Representasyong ito, delikado ito, sapagkat may mga proseso tulad ng referendum at iba, at maling ibigay ang ganitong mga tanong sa mga batang nasa Grades

4 to 11, na nagkaka-edad ng mula 10 hanggang 17 na mga menor de edad.

So, iyon po ang ating memo, Mme. Sponsor. Mayroon po ba kayong comment? Okay lang po.

So, next topic po ay iyong tungkol sa budget— at pagre-reiterate lang po ito, Mme. Secretary, Mme. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, dahil bilang Kinatawan po ng Guro, at minsan sa isang panahon ay nakasama po ako ng ating mga kaguruan sa kanilang pakikibaka para sa self-organization o ang pagbuo ng mga unyon ng ating mga kaguruan. Pagre-reiterate lang po ito—doon po sa ating budget hearing, iyong tungkol po doon sa Collective Negotiation Agreement na mayroon na po sa ngayon, mayroon na pong tatlong rehiyon na mayroon pong Collective Negotiation Agreement. Ito po iyong NCR, Region Xl at saka iyong Region Vl pero hanggang sa ngayon po at kahit mayroon na po silang CNA, sa budget po ng DepEd ay hindi nakalagay dito iyong mga nonmonetary benefits na sana ay ina-acknowledge ng ating Departamento.

So, tinanong ko po iyong mga Regional Directors kung nailagay po nila ito doon sa budget nila noong ibinigay nila ito doon sa ating Departamento, pero wala po,hindi po ito nailagay. So, ibig sabihin, parang hindi kinikilala ng ating Departamento, sa mga rehiyon na iyon, ang atin pong pagsisikap. Napakatagal na panahon kung saan pawis at sariling pag-gasta rin ng mga guro ang iniukol nila dito para lang po ma-accredit ang isang unyon on a regional level. Napakatagal po iyong panahon na ito at inaasahan po ng mga teachers ang pagkilala naman po ng DepEd dito sa mga pagsisikap na ito ng ating mga kaguruan.

Ano ba iyong mga ni-negotiate na hindi naman ito mag-iincur ng malaking budget sa ating Departamento o puwede rin namang memo ito na maaaring kuhanin sa mga MOOE ng schools o ng mga division katulad po ng mga—ito po iyong mga nane-negotiate, halimbawa, schedule ng vacation and other leaves; personal growth and development; communication system; internal and external work assignments; distribution of the workload; provision for protection and safety; provision for facilities for handicapped personnel; provision for first aid, medical services and supply; physical fitness program; provision for family planning services for married women; annual medical physical examination; and recreation, social, athletic and cultural activities and facilities. So, ito po iyong mga ilan sa mga nonmonetary naman.

Medyo hindi lang kami gaano nagkaintindihan ni Secretary last time, Mme. Sponsor, dahil sinabi niya noon na ito ay mga bagay na kinokonsider naman nila seriously at tinitingnan sa Magna Carta kung ano pa iyong kulang, kaya lang sa limited resources nila ay hindi ito makakayanan pero hahanapan nila ng paraan. Gusto ko pong marinig muli categorically sa ating Departmento kung ano po iyong plano nila sa


mga sinasabi po natin, na napakadali lang naman po itong gawin kung ilalagay po natin ito sa mga memo, para lang po magkaroon ng katiyakan iyong ating mga kaguruan na maipapatupad itong mga nonmonetary provisions na nasa CNA.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Maraming salamat Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

While the CNA as we all know, Your Honor, is chargeable to specific MOOE savings, the Department is considering the nonmonetary benefits that you have mentioned, and there are several, and while the Department is having ongoing discussions and coordination with the different groups, they are also working these out with the Department of Budget and Management as to the technicalities on the provision of the nonmonetary benefits. Rest assured, Mme. Speaker, the Secretary is assuring that all these will be considered and will be given due consideration as they proceed with their discussions with the Department of Budget and Management.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mme. Sponsor. Kaugnay naman po doon sa kakulangan ng MOOE,

isa din po ito sa malaking problema lalong-lalo na po sa ating mga schools, lalong-lalo na po sa ating school administrators. Ayon po kay DepEd Undersecretary for Finance, Victoria M. Catibog noong nakaraang preliminary budget briefing sa DepEd, mayroon pong study na ginagawa sa normative funding ng MOOE at considered lahat ang programs ng DepEd sa usapin ng classrooms; type of classroom, ancillary room, library, faculty room, et cetera; at considered din daw iyong trainings, school-based LAC sessions and division-led trainings which involves travel. Kung masusunod ang normative funding level, dapat ang school MOOE ngayon ay nasa level ng P42 billion. Tama po ba, Mme. Sponsor?

Kung masusunod po ito, iyong sinasabi po noong ating DepEd, through Undersecretary Victoria M. Catibog, ay dapat P42 billion ang kakailanganin natin sa MOOE.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is correct, Your Honor.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Sa tingin po namin, dapat magsikap ang ating Department of Education na i-pursue, iyong mapataasan ang ating MOOE sa schools. Guro pa po ako noon ay talagang problema na iyong mga facilities, iyong ating mga utilities, at kung ano pang mga gastusin sa eskuwelahan, na napakahalaga naman para sa ating mga eskuwelahan at talagang kulang sa mga eskuwelahan natin.

Ang tingin po namin, dahil ikinarga na rin ng DBM dito iyong ating mga CNA benefits, hindi makatarungan

na hindi tugunan iyong actual needs ng schools. Nakakaapekto po ito sa quality of education at isang injustice to our teachers who shoulder the costs. It is contrary to the “No Collection Policy” kung pipigain natin ang mga magulang sa kontribusyon. Kulang na nga ang MOOE kaya tiyak na walang savings at dapat pumosisyon ang DepEd at makipag-ugnayan po sa the Department of Budget and Management upang maamyendahan ang the DBM Budget Circular Guidelines on the Grant of the Collection Negotiation Agreement Incentives.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department shares the same sentiment and, in fact, the Department has already proposed for the use of normative financing. However, the Department of Budget and Management still uses a different formula and so, the Department is tied with the technicalities, again. Now, the Department is still doing some talks, again, and asking for a consideration from the Department of Budget and Management, but the Department is thanking the Lady for that very valid observation.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mme. Sponsor. Thank you, Mme. Speaker.

Dito po sa atin pong budget, sa NEP, sa Special Provisions, on page 187, mayroon po ditong item no. 9, Employment of Qualified Contractual and Volunteer Teachers.” Nakalagay dito, if I may proceed in reading item no. 9:

In the hiring of new teachers, whether by the DepEd or by the LGUs, to fill unfilled or newly created positions, priority shall be given to qualified contractual or volunteer teachers, whether employed by the DepEd or the local government units, with due consideration to the number of years of actual teaching experience.

Ang tanong ko po, ito po ba ay religiously na ipinatutupad ng ating Department of Education?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Mayroon po kasing reports sa amin, na nakarating sa aming opisina, na mayroon pa rin po na volunteer and contractual teachers, lalong-lalo na po sa mga probinsiya, sa LGUs, at ipinapatupad pa rin po ito. Ano po ang masasabi ng ating kagalang-galang na Sponsor dito?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, the Department will look into that as it is their policy to


give the said qualifications and criteria for hiring. So, on the matter that you just raised, the Department will look into that, Your Honor.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, maaasahan ba ng Representasyong ito na ma-monitor iyong lahat ng mga division sa mga probinsiya, lalong-lalo na sa mga LGU, na talagang iginagalang o nirerespeto ang probisyon na ito, dahil matagal po rin ito nating ipinaglaban sa ating budget na mailagay ito dahil po, sa tingin namin, ang pagtuturo o ang pag-aaral ay hindi dapat ginagawang tingi-tingi ito, kaya ang contractualization ay hindi dapat ginagawa sa ating Departamento.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Your, Honor, in fact, the Department has a Department Order setting the criteria for the hiring and they are looking on its strict implementation. However, should there be any incident based on your observation, the Department would be very glad to get some information from the Lady.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Balik ako doon sa textbooks. Tinatanong, Mme.

Sponsor, ng ating mga guro sa Grade VI kung available na po ba iyong ating mga Grade VI textbooks, kasi hanggang ngayon, hirap na hirap iyong ating mga kaguruan, lalong-lalo na po sa mga probinsiya na wala pong gaanong access doon sa ating Internet. Ano po ba ang ating update doon sa ating mga textbooks sa Grade VI?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, per record, ongoing na po iyong delivery ng mga textbooks for Grade VI.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Lahat po?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Ongoing delivery, Your Honor.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Ongoing?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Iyong delivery po.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Ongoing delivery. Sana po ay mapabilis itong pagde-deliver natin ng ating mga Grade VI textbooks dahil sa ngayon po, I believe na nasa second quarter na po tayo at ang mga teachers po natin, ito po iyong isa sa pangunahing reklamo nila.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is well taken, Your Honor.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mme. Sponsor.Kahapon po, napag-usapan with the DBM iyong

PBB ng mga empleyado natin sa government. Mayroon po tayo dating memo tungkol sa PBB na kung saan

ang ating mga qualified na mga empleyado, teachers at non-teaching personnel, ay nakakatanggap, dati-rati, ng mula P5,000 hanggang P35,000. Mayroon po sa Executive Order No. 201 na nakalagay po doon na ang PBB na ang matatanggap po ng mga empleyado natin, kung qualified, ay one month salary hanggang two months salary, pero mayroon pong nilabas ang DBM na memorandum circular kung saan binabaan po iyong matatanggap ng ating mga kasamahang government employees ranging from 50 percent to 65 percent.

Ano po ba iyong pananaw ng ating Departamento dito sa memorandum na ito na inilabas ng DBM? Basically po, pagpapababa ito ng mga benefits hindi lang para sa teachers kundi sa lahat ng government employees.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, since this is a nationwide policy, this does not only affect the Department of Education, and while the Department acknowledges the sentiments of the teachers who will be the beneficiaries of the PBB, the hands of the Department are also tied, considering that this is a national policy, Your Honor.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mme. Sponsor.Mme. Speaker, ano po ba iyong—alam ko po, at

parang narinig ko po sa mga kaguruan natin, na binago na po iyong criteria na gagamitin sa pagtanggap po ng PBB. Anu-ano na po ba ito? Puwede po bang ma-educate ang Representanteng ito kaugnay ng bagong memo on PBB, Mme. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there are already changes being applied in terms of specific indicators on the school’s ranking.

If the Lady, Mme. Speaker, would like to get a copy, I will gladly give her a copy of the criteria.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). So, ilan na lang po ba ang criteria? Tama ba na tinanggal na ang dropout?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). In the school’s level, from five indicators, it was reduced to two; for the SDO, from 14 indicators, it was reduced to four; for RO, from seven indicators, it was reduced to four; and for CO, the criteria remain to be four. So, nabago na ang number of criteria for the PBB.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Tinanggal na po ba dito ang criterion for the dropout rate?


REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.


Nagpapasalamat po ang Representasyong ito sa pagtanggal ng Department of Education sa dropout rate as a criteria sa Performance-Based Bonus. Matagal na natin itong ipinapanawagan sa Department of Education na hindi naman kasalanan ng teachers ang tungkol sa pagda-dropout ng mga estudyante kasi maraming environmental and social factors na dahilan.

Nagpapasalamat po ang Representasyong ito sa Department of Education.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Panghuling punto po, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Sa Government Assistance and Subsidy at ang Education Service Contracting na budget, na-raise ko na po ito sa budget briefing ang tungkol sa GASTPE at sa Education Service Contracting, iyong pondo po na inilalaan ng DepEd sa private education o sa pribadong sektor para ma-accommodate ang mga estudyante galing sa public school, para magkaroon sila ng slots sa private school.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Sa private school?

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Okay. Ito nga ang decongestion ng ating public school system.

Naniniwala rin ang Representasyong ito na dapat magkaroon din ng partnership ang pribado at ang publikong sektor pero ang nagiging trend, parang lumalaki yata o lumalaki talaga ang budget na ibinibigay natin sa pribadong sektor. In fact, ngayong 2018, mayroon tayong P39 billion sa GASTPE. Hiningi ko po ang data na ito noong last briefing, iyong data po patungkol sa schools kung saan na inilalaan po natin itong P39 billion.

Sa 2016 data natin, saang private schools po inilagay ito, at saang TESDA-accredited schools? Naniniwala po ang Representasyong ito na dapat magkaroon ng transparency o kaugnayan dito dahil napakalaki po ng pondo. Kailan po tayo nag-usap, noong last briefing pa, pero hanggang ngayon wala pa po kaming natatanggap na data.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, the documents that were asked by the Lady are already with the Committee on Appropriations. The Department had already complied with the request. However, because of the voluminous documents, they are still reproducing the copy for your office.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Sige. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, parang medyo natatagalan po ako doon sa pagpo-produce nitong mga dokumento, na

sa tingin ko, ay mahalaga para sana doon sa magiging interpellation sa araw na ito na may kaugnayan dito.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Rest assured, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the documents will be provided, will be given to the Lady’s office, as these are already here, with the Committee on Appropriations.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Hihintayin po ng Representasyong ito ang copy ng list of schools, kasama na ang amount na naibigay natin sa mga eskuwelahan kung saan mayroong GASTPE at iyong ESC or Education Service Contracting Program. Maaasahan ko ba ito, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, sa lalong madaling panahon? Kailan? Mayroon po bang time frame?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, we will provide these to the Lady today. The documents are with me but we only have one copy and so, I am requesting the Committee on Appropriations to reproduce the documents.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Okay. Within the week?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Tomorrow, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. CASTRO (F.L.). Okay. Maraming salamat po, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Maraming salamat po.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, the Honorable France Castro.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Orestes T. Salon for his interpellation.


REP. SALON. Thank you very much, Dep. Majority Leader. Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker.

Will the distinguished Sponsor yield to few questions from this Representation?


REP. SALON. Thank you very much, Mme. Speaker.Now, let me go straight to the DepEd budget.

In the 2018 NEP, particularly or specifically on the


budgetary adjustments, am I right that the amount of P73,183,500,000 had been transferred in 2016 to the DPWH?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is for the School Building Program, yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SALON. That is correct, that is for the construction, replacement and completion of kindergarten, elementary and secondary school buildings, including construction of water sanitation facilities. Am I correct, Mme. Speaker?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is true, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SALON. This is also part of the basic education facilities which amounts to P82 billion, more or less, Mme. Speaker.


REP. SALON. Yes. For the information of the honorable Sponsor, I requested for a breakdown on the usage of this fund per region and per province as early as June and up to now, there is none submitted yet. I share the exasperation of the honorable Congresswoman from ACT TEACHERS Party-List that we have, more or less, a pattern of not submitting these reports to Congress. May I get a feedback on why up to now I do not have any data.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the data for 2016 is still being generated by the Department, it is still ongoing, also that for 2017, but they will provide these at the soonest possible time.

REP. SALON. Yes. You know, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, it is very important for us legislators to be able to dispense with our job. We are trying to scrutinize the budget, we try to look into it, and because of scant resources, we need to put this at optimal use, to where and what agency should these limited funds be allocated.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there seems to be a miscommunication between the Committee on Appropriations and the Department because what is being requested is the 2017 data. This Representation will look into it and will advise the department to furnish the Gentleman a copy of the data at the soonest possible time.

REP. SALON. Yes, thank you very much. May I proceed, Mme. Speaker.

Now, out of the P73 billion, I know that the DepEd has a tall order in terms of meeting its classroom requirements and I understand that there is a backlog of around 47,000 classrooms that the Department still has to build.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, and that forms part of the unfinished construction since they assumed office.

REP. SALON. Yes, thank you, Mme. Speaker.In 2017, for basic education facilities, there is

a budget of P118 billion plus, more or less. In the budget for 2017, P109 billion, more or less, is for the construction of classrooms and water sanitation and sewage. Am I right, Mme. Speaker?


REP. SALON. Now, in 2016, the Unused Appropriations amounted to P56 billion and for the Unobligated Appropriations, you have P43 billion. Meaning that if you have a target of building schools, the backlog of which is 47,000, why is it that you still have this big amount in terms of Unutilized Funds?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, the data mentioned by the Gentleman are all correct. Based on the DPWH report, one of the factors that have affected the backlog is the change of policy between the Department of Education and the DPWH in terms of the implementation of the construction of school buildings. Since the Secretary assumed office, and taking note of all the comments raised by Congress during the 2017 budget hearings, they needed to change several policies. That one, the costing of the school buildings should be based on the location; and two, the actual situation of the school where the building will be constructed and its design. Therefore, it took time for the Department of Public Works and Highways to revalidate all the schools that had been listed by the Department of Education. As of now, it is just recently that the Department of Public Works and Highways has finished its validation and in fact, both the DPWH and the DepEd are all set now for the implementation to catch up with the backlog for 2016 and 2017, Mme. Speaker.

REP. SALON. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, Mme. Sponsor.

I also saw, from the PowerPoint presentation of no less than our Secretary, that she is trying to grapple with an institutional problem of underutilization. I know she is trying to do some in-house reforms about this. Nonetheless, may I ask for the utilization rate in 2016 and in 2017? Has there been any change, Mme. Speaker?


REP. ZAMORA (M.). Based on records, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, for 2016, the utilization rate of the Department is at 89.57 percent.

REP. SALON. It is 89 percent?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). It is 89.57 in 2016.

REP. SALON. In 2016?


REP. SALON. How about in 2017, although we are not yet finished with the fiscal year, Mme. Speaker?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Per records, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, as of August 15 of this year, the obligation rate of the Department is at 47 percent.

REP. SALON. Yes, and I think you only have, more or less, four months to be able to use up this fund.

Mme. Speaker, is the distinguished Sponsor confident, or may this Representation be give a certain level of confidence, that they are going to, more or less, meet their schedule?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, we have the word of the Secretary that they are confident that they will be able to catch up with the backlog brought about by the factors that I had mentioned. In fact, the Department is also working closely with the Department of Budget and Management to resolve the issues among all the departments involved. It is the Department of Education which operates and implements all the projects based on a school year basis and not on a fiscal year basis …

REP. SALON. I am sorry. I stand corrected, Mme. Speaker.

REP. ZAMORA (M.) … and that affects the implementation of the projects, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SALON. Thank you very much. You know, in the last, last budget hearing, I gathered that you are, more or less, one quarter delayed in terms of the implementation as articulated by our Secretary. The reason is that the agency tasked to construct these school buildings met so many challenges in terms of, you know, geo or technical…

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Technical preparations, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SALON. But year in and year out, in all these budget briefings, in the GAA and the NEP, there is always a mention of a master plan. Hindi ba mayroon namang master plan and can this Representation be, more or less, be briefed on the master plan, what it consists of, how do you arrive at the targets? For 2016, I am sure, even every year, mayroong master plan. How come na parang history repeats itself.

REP. ZAMORA (M.) Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the master plan is already being considered by the Department and in fact, the preparation of the master plan is one factor for the delay. They are trying to catch up, but because of the data system, it is only now that the Department is trying to collate all the data to prepare the master plan, and part of that is the change in the costing and design of the classroom because the Department wanted it to be more realistic and resilient, especially in calamity-stricken areas, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SALON. Yes, I understand that. That is precisely the reason you have a master plan, you know, where you make adjustments. What I had mentioned here is that, year in and year out, we talk about the master plan and yet we face the same challenges.

Now, can this Representation get a copy of the master plan or an orientation of what or how it is?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department will comply with that and will furnish you a copy.

REP. SALON. Thank you very much. Mme. Speaker, Mme. Sponsor.

For 2018, you also have P106 billion in terms of, you know, funds proposed to be transferred to the DPWH. Now, ang concern ko lagi is that, over the years ay parang walang significant increase in terms of fund utilization. I am worried about this and that is why I am asking for all these data for me to be able to, more or less, come up with my own estimates and conclusions, so that I can help in this, so that I can help the agency.

If it is not put to good use, baka puwedeng ilipat iyan doon sa pinirmahan si Presidente na free tuition for students in state colleges and universities and we need, more or less, P17 billion to be able to fund that project. I think that that is equally important and is also in line with our plans for the education sector, hindi ba? Kung hindi naman talaga nagagamit, bakit hindi natin ilipat doon? That is the importance of, you know, requesting for all these data to help us decide where to put these funds to good use where it is needed and what agency needs it.

I would like to terminate my interpellation na kapag wala talagang—I am not convinced, ano—that iyong mga funds na ito, kung hindi talaga high level


of assurance na magagamit ang mga ito, I will be constrained to have these funds transferred to other areas where we can them, probably, to scholarships, to the free tuition for State Colleges and Universities, or doon sa DAR, doon sa mga nangangailangan ng farm-to-market roads. Can I reiterate my request to them that these data be furnished this Representation?

I terminate my interpellation. Thank you, Mme. Speaker, honorable Sponsor.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is well taken, Your Honor.


The Dep Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Arlene D. Brosas of GABRIELA Party-List for her interpellation.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Brosas is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Good evening, Mme. Speaker. Good evening, MMe. Sponsor.

Distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, nagkakaisa po tayo na ang pangunahing mandato ng Department of Education is to formulate, implement and coordinate policies, plans, programs and projects in areas of formal and nonformal basic education. Tama po ba?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is correct. Tama po, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Kaya mayroon po tayong iba’t ibang mga regulations patungkol sa pagbibigay ng quality and accessible education for both formal and nonformal basic education. Sa patuloy na pagbaba ng subsidy para sa mga pampublikong paaralan, nagiging matingkad ngayon iyong nagiging papel ng nonformal or alternative education. Ito rin po iyong sentro ng aking interpelasyon noong nakaraan sa Department of Education. May this Representation be enlightened on the kinds of nonformal and alternative schools that the Department of Education promote?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department of Education expands ALS to reach more learners and it is offering the program for drug surrenderers, children in conflict with the law, rebel returnees, and laborers. The Department has rolled out the revised and enhanced ALS curriculum to ensure that the knowledge and competencies of ALS learners through the K to 12 Program are also aligned. The

Department also sees to it that the ALS is established in countries where children of Filipino migrants do not have access to formal education.

The Department has enhanced the Alternative Learning System by piloting a complementary initiative to the regular ALS which integrates a skills training component with existing academic interventions. So, ito po iyong mga component o mga ginagawang hakbang for the Alternative Learning System, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you, good Sponsor.How do we attain equitable access to education

with the reduction of the already-meager budget for programs that cater to the marginalized, excluded and vulnerable sectors such as, iyong isa po ay iyong Alternative Delivery Mode. Binawasan po ba ito ng budget? Magkano po ito?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is confirmed, at nabawasan iyong budget about P100 million.

REP. BROSAS. Sa Madrasah Education Program, magkano po iyong binawas?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Let me just refer to the records, Your Honor. Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, for the Madrasah Education Program, the budget is the same as that for 2017, it is P505,000,000, the same with 2018.

REP. BROSAS. Iyong pata sa Indigenous Peoples Education Program?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Your Honor, Mme. Speaker,

there is a decrease of P31,567,000 for 2018 and that is from P162 million to P130 million.

REP. BROSAS. Sa Special Education Program, magkano po ang nabawas?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, for the Special Education, wala ho tayong budget …

REP. BROSAS. Wala tayong budget?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). … because it is embedded in the school’s budget for the MOOE.

REP. BROSAS. Ang Special Education Program po, dito po iyong may mga special kids tayo at napakahalaga po ng nagiging papel ng mga ito sa sinasabi na natin na marginalized and vulnerable sectors. Dito pa po ay nagkakaroon ng ganitong pagbaba ng budget, inabi ninyo po, specifically, sa Indigenous Peoples Education Program, P31 billion ang decrease…

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Million po.


REP. BROSAS. … at napakalaki po nito para sa mga nangangailangan natin na katutubo, mga indigenous peoples natin, lalong-lalo na sa Mindanao. Ilan po ba ang napapaaral ng Department of Education mula sa indigenous peoples natin all throughout the country, nationwide?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, per records, we have a total of 2,251,765 IP learners in elementary, and 677,691 learners in secondary. That is nationwide.

REP. BROSAS. Yes.Mme. Speaker, good Sponsor, ang mga figures

po na ito ay nagsasabi sa atin ng bilàng lang ng ating napapag-aral, pero iyong hindi natin napapag-aral ay malamang napakalaking bilang, ano po. Nangangamba po tayo na ang budget na ito na hindi na nga sumasapat ay nabawasan pa. Actually, iyong sa Madrasah Education Program, it is the same lang, parang walang pagbabago, ano po?. Sa naging populasyon natin ngayon, nangangamba po tayo na ito talaga ang magsa-suffer sa budget ng Department of Education.

Ngayon po, may mga DepEd orders po tayo on the guidelines for alternative schools. Ano po ang guidelines natin when it comes to alternative schools for cultural minorities?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Are you referring to the IP intervention, Your Honor?

REP. BROSAS. Yes.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, in the recognition and operationalization of the rights of the IP learners, the Department of Education adopted the National Indigenous Peoples Education Policy Framework in August 2011, which is formulated in consultation with representatives of the indigenous communities, they have agreed on the following guidelines: to provide culture-responsive basic education services through both the formal school system and Alternative Learning System accessible to all IPs; to provide adequate and culturally-appropriate learning resources and environment to IP learners; to strengthen hiring and provide for the continuous development of teachers and learning facilitators in the implementation of the IPEd Program; to establish and strengthen appropriate multi-level units within the DepEd responsible for planning, implementing and monitoring IP education interventions; to expand to strengthen institutional and civil society linkages to ensure proper coordination, knowledge-sharing and sustainability of the IP Education Program; and to implement affirmative action to eradicate all forms of discrimination against IPs in the education system.

These guidelines are being implemented by the Department, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Sa dinami-dami po na mga guidelines na binanggit ninyo, hindi naman po lingid sa inyo iyong kaalaman na matindi iyong dinaranas na karahasan ng mga Lumad schools natin ngayon. In fact, seven volunteer-teachers ng Lumad schools ang pinatay, ano po, sa areas ng Mindanao. Tapos, mayroon po tayo ngayon, kamakailan lamang, na isang estudyante na 19 years old na pinatay ng CAFGU. Siya po ay estudyante ng Salugpongan Ta ‘Tanu Ito po iyong nakaraan, ano, kung kaya po mayroon tayong mga guidelines na tumutulong, sinasabi natin, partikular sa alternative schools. Bakit ganito pa rin iyong mga nangyayari, distinguished Sponsor, sa ating mga Lumad schools?

Marami pong mga karahasan ang nagnyayari sa kanila, lalo na iyong mga tina-target na kapag hindi daw accredited ng Department of Education—ito ay parang okay lang na magkaroon ng ganitong mga insidente sa mga lugar na ito.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme., Speaker, Your Honor, on the matter being presented by the Lady, the DepEd’s position is that the alleged militarization is a matter that involves another agency. All these incidents are not just within the jurisdiction of the Department of Education, and the DepEd had already raised the matter in a memorandum to the President through the Executive Secretary for a possible resolution by other agencies.

REP. BROSAS. Iyong DepEd Order No. 221 po ay nagiging tuntungan ng military para sila ay magkampo sa mga lugar ng Lumad schools. Ano pong masasabi ninyo dito?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, regarding DepEd Memo No. 221, series of 2013, which refers to the Guidelines on the Protection of Children during Armed Conflict, the DepEd reiterates its stand regarding schools being zones of peace and thus, this includes protecting learners and the DepEd personnel from armed conflict and its impacts.

The DepEd Memorandum No. 221 is being implemented in this light—it prevents the unwarranted entry of military personnel inside schools and sets conditions before military personnel can enter school premises. The schools are directed to submit reports regarding cases of harassment by military personnel, which reports are elevated to the appropriate agencies.

REP. BROSAS. Distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, hindi po nangyayari iyon sa kasalukuyan, bagkus, kabaligtaran po ang ini-invoke ng DepEd Memo No. 221 kung saan napapayagan pa lalo na magkaroon ng harassment sa mga Lumad schools sa


atin. Nais ko pong itanong din kung kasama sa ina-accredit ninyo iyong commercialized alternative schools tulad ng home school programs?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, that is part of the accreditation, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Kasama din pong ina-accredit ninyo ang mga Lumad schools mula sa remote areas, iyong mga self-sustaining and based on community efforts mismo ng mga Lumad?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). They are included, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Binibigyan po ba natin sila ng permit to operate?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, there are schools that were given permits but there are also schools that were not yet given due to non-submission of the requirements set by the Department of Education.

REP. BROSAS. May pondo po ba ang DepEd para patayuan sila ng eskuwelahan?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department of Education has transferred P500 million to the DSWD for its implementation.

REP. BROSAS. Bakit sa DepEd po ay wala ito?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). This is the DepEd fund being transferred to …

REP. BROSAS. To the DSWD?

REP. ZAMORA (M.) . …the DSWD for implementation, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Kaya po bang magbigay ng mga guro at pasilidad ang DepEd sa mga Lumad schools natin?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). For the registered schools, yes, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, as long as it is a part of the public schools.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, Mme. Speaker, good Sponsor, ang mga Lumad po natin na mga bata ay nagsisikap sa sarili nilang paraan, pati ang mga magulang. Sila po ay mga mabubuting indibidwal at gusto nilang makapag-aral pero dahil hindi nga inaabot ng gobyerno natin, at sa kasalukuyan nga ay sinasabi ninyo na two million lamang ang mga bata na napapag-aral natin mula sa

Department of Education at napakarami pa nating, milyon ang bata na actually ay disenfranchised—hindi nakakapag-aral, walang silang pasilidad, walang eskuwelahan, walang guro. Kaya po nakakalungkot sa bahagi ng Representasyong ito na may ganito tayong kalagayan, na iyong mga batang Lumad ay napagkakaitan ng karapatan nila sa edukasyon, napagkakaitan ng mapayapang lugar-aralan, na dapat malayo sila sa karahasan, pero iyong kanilang lugar ay talaga namang under fire, ano po? Under fire dahil ini-invoke iyong DepEd Memo No. 221, ini-invoke po iyong mga ganoong polisiya na tila baga pupuwedeng pumasok ang militar sa mga lugar na ito na bahay-aralan ng ating mga Lumad.

Isa pong malaking indikasyon nito ay iyong pagkamatay ng ilang mga volunteer-teachers at mga estudyante, kung kaya ang Representasyon pong ito ay gustong sabihin na dapat lamang asikasuhin natin iyong mga kalagayan ng ating mga Lumad. Nakakalungkot po, at nakakagalit din sa bahagi namin, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Sila po ay naglalakbay, even hanggang ngayon, ano po, para iparating sa atin kung ano ang kalagayan nila doon. Lahat po tayo ay dapat maging concerned dito, ano po? Hindi naman po nagkukulang ang mga batang Lumad sa pagpahayag na ang nais nila ay makapag-aral lamang, kahit na nga sa lansangan nila ito gawin. Ibig sabihin, malaki po ang pagkukulang natin sa pagbibigay sa kanila ng g karapatan na makapag-aral.

Iyon lang po, bilang manipestasyon, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the concern of the Lady is also my concern, the DepEd’s concern and the concern of each and every one. In fact, the Department of Education would like each of us to take note that for Lumad or IP learners, they also form part of the regular public school system, and our regular schools accept all learners regardless of their background. That is a manifestation that the Department is taking care of the learners no matter where they come from, especially IP learners. The matters that you have just raised are well-taken by the Department and will be taken by this Representation, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, iyong ipapakita po na practice, iyong kailangan nating malaman, kasi ang batayan po ng pag-alam natin ay kung ilan na ba talaga iyong napapag-aral natin na mga Lumad, ilan na po iyong napatayo nating eskuwelahan para sa kanila, ilan na po iyong pasilidad at mga teachers na naibigay natin sa kanila.

Iyon po ang kongkreto na dapat na nakikita natin sa ngayon pero dahil wala po ang mga ito, and we should


really do something about this. Ang Department of Education po talaga ay nararapat lamang na hindi lang ito ang sinasabi nila, kung hindi ang ginagawa talaga nila, kasi iyon po iyong patunay na ginagawa natin ang ating trabaho, nagagawa po natin at napagbabago po natin iyong kalagayan nila.

On another matter po, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, kaugnay po ito sa mandatory drug testing. Sa war on drugs na ginagawa po ng Duterte administration, ano ang participation, particularly, ng Department of Education?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, the Department of Education is also committed to supporting the present administration’s campaign against drugs. The Department of Education would like to put in context the drug testing that the Department will conduct. First, drug testing is a component of the DepEd’s continuing program on anti-illegal drugs. Second, drug testing, including the integration of subjects on anti-illegal drugs in the curriculum, is not only a matter of policy but a legal obligation of the DepEd under existing laws. Lastly, the DepEd is committed to supporting the campaign by doing its mandate in terms of giving education on this as part of the curriculum of the department.

So, if I may continue, Mme. Speaker, the components of Department of Education’s program on anti-illegal drugs include the curriculum, instruction, the co-curricular initiatives which integrate drug education, the co-curricular activities therein, and drug testing within a broader framework of a drug-free workplace and schools and preventive drug education.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, last August 8 po, Secretary Briones signed DepEd Order No. 40, the Guidelines for the Conduct of Random Drug Testing in Public and Private Secondary Schools. For the record po, ano po ang batayan ng Department Order na ito?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, the Department issued a memorandum, based on a legal mandate in compliance with R.A. No. 9165, that the DepEd will conduct drug testing for all officials and employees in the national, regional and division offices on a random basis.

REP. BROSAS. Bukod pa po dito, ano pa ang mga kongkreto na programa ng DepEd to make our schools drug-free?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). As mentioned earlier, Mme. Speaker, apart from the drug testing, this includes curriculum and instruction as part or a component of the program. The Department also has co-curricular

initiatives which will include integration of drug education in such activities.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, nangangamba po ang Representasyong ito na maaaring maging negatibo ang epekto ng ganitong hakbangin, specifically po, iyong DepEd Order No. 40 sa random drug tests sa ating mga kabataan. Sinasabi po ng DepEd na the names will remain confidential pero hindi po maaalis iyong pangamba ng mga magulang sa seguridad ng kanilang mga anak—pangamba na baka masama sila sa watch list ng administration ng Duterte, pangamba na ang kanilang anak ay masama sa mga kaso katulad ng nangyari kay Kian Delos Santos at ng marami pang mga kabataan na naging casualty sa war on drugs. Alam po natin ngayon na sa kasalukuyan—ano po ang ginagawa ng Department of Education ngayon na ang mga reports ay mga bata ang nagiging biktima ng mga war on drugs in particular?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, the Department of Education is assuring parents and the secondary students who may be included in the random sample for drug testing that their personal privacy, dignity and security of the learners will be protected. The following safeguards are clear in the guidelines that were promulgated by the Department of Education: first, it will be done with due notice to students and their parents; strict confidentiality of test results will be observed; a positive result in a drug test shall not be ground for expulsion or any disciplinary action against the student and will not be reflected in any and all academic records; a positive result in a drug test cannot be used as evidence in any court or tribunal against the student concerned. The DepEd will provide appropriate interventions to those who will test positive for dangerous drugs.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, good Sponsor, anuman po iyong safeguards na sinasabi ninyo ngayon, hindi po mapapasubalian na mayroon na tayong apat sa listahan ngayon ng mga kabataan, ranging from 14 to 19 years old na namatay nitong mga nakaraang araw lang kaugnay dito. Napaka-vulnerable ng mga kabataan kung sila ay papasok pa sa ganitong random drug test sa secondary schools. Sa halip na puro “scratching the surface,” i-educate natin ang ating mga kabataan through values formation and health care awareness, at pondohan natin ng maayos ang ating guidance counselling programs dahil alam natin na vulnerable nga sila sa mga ganitong kalakaran, lalo na ang mga batang mahihirap. Sa tingin po namin ay hindi makakatulong ang random drug test na gagawin ng Department of Education.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, again, the Department would like to assure her that the safeguards will be observed.


REP. BROSAS. Good Sponsor, dalawang question na lang po, at kaugnay po ito sa senior high school. Magkano po ang budget ng senior high school?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Let me check the records. Mme. Speaker, for 2018, the Department is proposing a budget of P14,142,000,000 for the implementation of senior high school.

REP. BROSAS. Ano po ang breakdown ng P14 billion?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). These include the salary of the teachers which is P11.6 billion, and the MOOE which is P2.6 billion.

REP. BROSAS. Kasama po dito iyong mga binibigay na vouchers for the senior high school?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). This does not include the vouchers.

REP. BROSAS. Magkano po iyong sa senior high school na voucher?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). For the Voucher Program for the senior high school, the Department is proposing P26.7 billion for 2018.

REP. BROSAS. So, P26.7 billion? Ano po ang initial assessment natin sa senior high school dahil full implementation na po ang program ito ngayon, ano, 2017 to 2018?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, based on the enrollment alone, their program is getting major support from the learners and stakeholders, considering that more are enrolling in the senior high school. As to the assessment on how the program is faring, the Department is still waiting for the senior high school graduates to finish the program next year, by March of next year, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Marami po tayong nababalitaan, good Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, kaugnay dito sa sistema ng senior high school kung saan nahihirapan po ang mga mag-aral. Marami po sa ating mga estudyante ay nahihirapan sa sistema na mayroon ang senior high school sa kasalukuyan, lalong-lalo na po kapag sila ay binibigyan ng voucher at pinapag-enroll sa mga private schools. Ito po ay inaangal nila dahil minsan ay hindi naman sumasapat ang voucher para sa kanilang pag-enroll at kailangan pa nila or necessary pa silang maglabas ng pera pangdagdag doon.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, may I ask the Lady to raise the question again.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Mayroon po tayong mga balita mula sa mga senior high school students na nahihirapan silang mag-aral dahil iyong voucher po na ibinibigay sa kanila ay hindi sumasapat sa mga schools na pinupuntahan nila kaya kailangan nila or nagne-necessitate ito ng pagdagdag doon sa pang-enroll ng mga bata.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, while there is support in terms of the Cash Voucher Program for private schools, it is the choice of the student where to enroll: whether they will go to the public school which means all tuition fees will be free, or to go to a private school where they can avail of the Voucher Program for a specific amount, but there is still a need for a top-up counterpart on the part of the student.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, good Sponsor, classic example po nito ay iyong kahirapan ng mga estudyante. For example, iyong PUP, kung saan marami pong mga estudyante na senior high school students, ang inaangal po ng senior high school students natin ay napakabagal na nga noong sistema nila—this is a public school, ano po, hindi po ito private school—napakabagal na, napakatagal pa ng pila nila. Kukunin lang nila iyong Form 137 nila at mag-a-apply lang sila sa kanilang kolehiyo ay ang tagal-tagal ng proceso at hindi nila makita ang kanilang principal.

So, gaano po ba talaga ka-effective itong senior high school program sa public schools at private schools? Sa private schools ay nag-she-shell out pa ng pera iyong senior high school students natin, tapos sa mga public schools naman ay ang hirap-hirap noong sistema na mayroon sila.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, is the Representative referring to the PUP which is a state university?

REP. BROSAS. Come again?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). To the PUP, a state university?

REP. BROSAS. Yes.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The PUP is a …

REP. BROSAS. They have a program for senior high school.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, the PUP is an accredited school that accepts them, it has a senior high school


program, Mme. Speaker. Whether their personnel, their principal, is doing their job or not in terms of processing the vouchers is no longer within the jurisdiction of the DepEd, considering that the PUP is a tertiary and university school which is not under the supervision of the DepEd. The coordination between the Department and the PUP is just that the PUP is a recipient of the Voucher Program being implemented by the Department of Education.

REP. BROSAS. So, Mme. Speaker, good Sponsor, saan idudulog or magre-redress ang students in the senior high school program patungkol sa system na ito, is it with the Department of Education or with the institution itself? Magkano po ba iyong ibinigay natin sa …

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, if the problem of the students is the payment of the facility, on how the personnel of the PUP conducts its operation in terms of facilitating the payment in the voucher system, I think Lady has to refer this to the institution. These personnel are under that …

REP. BROSAS. So, the distinguished Sponsor said …

REP. ZAMORA (M.). …institution.

REP. BROSAS. … it is with the institution.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, with the institution.

REP. BROSAS. Okay. On to my next question po. Magkano po ang budget natin for the Early Childhood Care and Development Program?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). For the ECCD Program, Mme. Speaker, there is a proposal for P483 million. I have already given my answer, P483 million, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Okay. Kaya ko po ito tinatanong kasi iyong early childhood care and development ay napakahalaga sa ating formation ng mga bata, ano po. Bukod po dito, mayroon pa sa DSWD na ECCD, am I right? Or is the program under the DepEd na?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, the feeding program for the Early Childhood Care Program is being lodged with the DSWD.

REP. BROSAS. So, what is the breakdown sa DepEd ng P48 million?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, for the 2018 proposal under the ECCD, the breakdown is as follows:

General Administration and Support, P32.8 million; Support to Operations, P40.9 million; establishment of the National Child Development Center, P409 million; Training is P31.311 million; and Accreditation of ECCD Service Providers, P116 million, for a total of P483 million.

REP. BROSAS. Distinguished Sponsor, sa ECCD po, mayroon ba kayong monitor kung in all of the barangays ay mayroon na tayong ECCD?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, the ECCD has a council that is monitoring. However, the bigger portion of the budget for the implementation of the ECCD program is also lodged with the Department of Social Welfare and Development, and the monitoring function is also conducted by the DSWD.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, kaya po natin tinatanong ito kasi gusto po nating malaman kung ano na iyong inabot ng programa ng Early Childhood Care and Development na hawak mismo ng DepEd.

Ano na po ang naging impact nitong programa sa 2017 at ngayon, sa 2018, kung bakit po natin inilagay ang ganitong allocation sa ating budget? For example, iyong P116 million ay for the service providers, iyon po ba ay enough na para sa ating programa ng Early Childhood Care and Development?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the ECCD as a council is looking into, as an intervention, the establishment of the ECCD centers. As of this time, there is no allocation intended for the service providers.

REP. BROSAS. Iyong na-mention ninyo po kanina na service providers, hat is the NCDC?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The program for the service providers that I mentioned earlier is intended for training, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, and not for the honorarium. As of this time, most of the honoraria received by the service providers are being provided by the local government units.

REP. BROSAS. This includes the training of the day care workers.


REP. BROSAS. So, may budget po para sa training ng mga day care workers, iyon ang sinasabi ninyo.


REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, for the training.

REP. BROSAS. So, iyon lang po, Mme. Speaker, ating distinguished Sponsor.

Iyong sa ECCD po, kaya ko naitanong, nakukulangan po tayo, ang Representasyong ito, kaugnay doon sa policy para sa indigenous alternative schools na binanggit kanina. Ang gusto po natin, kung maaari nga, ay 100 percent ng ating mga Lumad, Moro at ating mga indigenous people ay mabigyan talaga natin ng kaukulang pag-aaral.

Kaugnay o doon sa administration ng war on drugs, well, doon sa inyong mga binanggit po diyan, tinututulan namin iyong random drug testing. Kaya nga po sinabi namin na mas makakaigi pa rin ang i-educate ang mga kabataan through values formation at iba pang mga health care awareness, guidance counseling at iba pang mga programa para po hindi talaga tayo nagkakaroon ng casualties na sinasabi, at ngayon nga ay nakakabahala dahil dumarami. Imbes na hindi tayo makabalita, ano po, ay parang araw-araw na, sa news na naririnig natin, iyong pagkamatay ng mga ilang mga bata dito sa war on drugs.

Iyong panghuli po, kaugnay doon sa sistema ng SHS o ng senior high school students, gusto po sana nating ma-probe pa nang husto kung ano ang mga sistema dito at kung nakakabuti po ba talaga ang ganitong pamamaraan para sa ating mga senior high schools at kung nakaka-engganyo ba talaga ito ng pag-aaral hanggang kolehiyo, hanggang sa maging dalubhasa. Ganoon din po sa usapin ng ECCD kung saan napakahalagang component ang mga maliliit na mga bata na, sa simula pa lang, natutugunan na natin iyong pangangailangan nila. Ilang porsiyento lang po ang natutugunan natin sa pamamagitan ng Early Childhood Care and Development kaya malaking kawalan po ito sa ating lipunan.

Bilang panghuli, doon sa apat na iyon, gusto namin sabihin na iyong policy ng DepEd na it is worth reviewing talaga, ang mga ito, at sa mga susunod pang pagkakataon ay mabusisi pa namin ito, at titingnan at aalamin kung ano ang kalagayan talaga sa ibaba.

Maraming salamat, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is well taken, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Maraming salamat, Mme. Speaker.


REP. GULLAS. Mme. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Anthony “Tony” M. Bravo, PhD of COOP-NATCCO for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Hon. Tony Bravo is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker.Good evening to everyone.Will the distinguished Sponsor entertain some

interpellation from this Representation?


REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Thank you, Mme. Sponsor.

Our 2018 National Expenditure Program reflects the report on the actual expenditure of 2016. Am I correct, Mme. Sponsor, Mme. Speaker?


REP. BRAVO (A.). It appears in the report that was submitted to this Representation coming from the DepEd that in 2016, you incurred an unobligated allotment amounting to P242,999,720,262.80. Is that a correct figure?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is correct, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). That is based on your report. However, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, it appears that there is a huge discrepancy in relation to the National Expenditure Program report as far as the unobligated allotment is concerned, a discrepancy of P481,435,737.20. Why is that so, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, this is because of the fact that the figures reflected in the NEP were generated by the DBM earlier than the data submitted by the DepEd to your office. That is the reason there is a discrepancy because they based the data they submitted on the actual report up to this date, while the data reflected in the NEP was generated earlier by the DBM.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, which is now the reliable figure, is it in the report of the DepEd or in the report that is reflected in the National Expenditure Program?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). It is the one submitted to you by the DepEd, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker, the data generated recently.

REP. BRAVO (A.). For the record, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, with all due respect, for 2016,


that has been concluded prior to the report as reflected in 2018. It is in my opinion that this is a reliable report. Otherwise, if the report as reflected in 2016, which is contained in the National Expenditure Program, 2018, is defective, then, therefore, we cannot rely on all reports as reflected in the National Expenditure Program.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department of Education is submitting their report to the Department of Budget and Management, and what was generated here in the NEP is based on the computation of the DBM as based on their own records.

REP. BRAVO (A.). In the same manner, distinguished Sponsor, Mme. Speaker, the report as reflected in the NEP is from the DBM. That is why it is a bit confusing that there is a huge discrepancy of about P481 million.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, may I request for time just to verify the records.

Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, based on the explanation of the Committee on Appropriations, it is a matter of presentation in the NEP and the actual financial report. If the Gentleman would just give us enough time to explain it by reconciling the records shown by the Gentleman with the records of the Department of Budget and Management.

REP. BRAVO (A.). When can we have the reconciliation, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department can give a copy and their explanation by tomorrow.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, in the interest of time, I will rely on the assurance of the distinguished Sponsor that the reconciliation statement relative to the matter will be provided to this Representation.

So, may I proceed, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Let me go to General Provision No. 62. General Provision No. 62 states:

Direct Release of Funds to Regional Offices and Operating Units.—Funds appropriated in this Act shall be released directly to the Regional Offices (ROs) and Operating Units (OUs) of agencies where funds are specifically appropriated to the ROs and OUs of agencies x x x.

My question, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, are there funds directly released from the DBM to the regional offices?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, there are funds.

REP. BRAVO (A.). In 2016, were there releases?


REP. BRAVO (A.). In the same manner in 2017?


REP. BRAVO (A.). You are holding the report that you submitted to this Representation, but it does not contain the report that I requested during the Committee hearing. I would like to read, for the record, that I requested for the following reports during the Committee hearing: breakdown on the use of Continuing Appropriations, years 2016 and 2017, and cut-off in June 2017; and statement of appropriations/obligation per region and Central Office per program and project.

The statement of appropriations/obligation per region and for the Central Office is not reflected in the report that you submitted through the Committee, copy furnished this Representation. Why am I asking for this, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor? The agency is confronted with a huge amount under the Unused Appropriations, and we want to see whether or not the failure of slow spending is within the region or within the Central Office, so that we can initiate corrective measures relative to the matter.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department notes the request of the Gentleman during the budget hearing, but because of the voluminous data being asked, because this has to be presented by region, the Department could not furnish the Gentleman a copy as of this time. I think it will take them longer to generate the per region document. However, the other documents that you requested were already transmitted to you, but in the event that the Gentleman would like to request for the per region data, the Department can probably provide you, but not at the soonest possible time because the Department is not yet automated in their system of generating the data.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, how many days is an agency given allowance as far as the submission of reports at the end of the fiscal year is concerned?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Until February of every year.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Until February in the succeeding year.


REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, meaning, I was asking for a report in 2016 and it should have been available by now. Why is that not so, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the documents may be furnished to you within the week.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Come again?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The documents may be furnished to your office within the week, Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, as a commitment of the Department.

REP. BRAVO (A.). You know Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, the reason I requested for such report during the Committee hearing is that it has a bearing on our discussion today, tonight in this plenary, so that we can propose corrective measures if necessary and address the recurring issue that is confronting the agency relative to slow spending capacity.

If it will be shown that the region is capable of using this fund or using the downloaded fund expeditiously, then why not download the centrally managed item to the region so that, once and for all, we can address the recurring issue of slow spending.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, in fact, since 2017 up to this year, the Central Office has been downloading more funds to the region because per record, the regional offices are implementing their programs faster than the Central Office.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, at this point in time I cannot agree—with all due respect but I cannot agree because there is no end report relative to the matter showing, among others, that indeed the region has that capacity to utilize the fund. As you know, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, as reflected in the report, the Unused Appropriations for 2016 is P56 billion, even bigger that in the report reflected for 2015.

Then DepEd is again asking for an increase from P543 billion to P585 billion and so, what will happen in the succeeding year? Are we going to expect another huge amount under Unused Appropriations? How about the proposal to implement a one-year validity? So, there will be a huge reversion of funds in the National Treasury.

We are very much concerned, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, relative to the improvement of the operation of our agencies of the government

because, once and for all, we are the ones who have the power of the purse and yet, we are appropriating too much to them but they do not have the capacity for spending, while another agency needs more funds and is capable of spending it, but we appropriate less.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, this Representation understands the concern of the Gentleman. We would like to request for a consideration, to give the Department time to generate the data being requested because, with all due respect, Your Honor, there seems to be a miscommunication between the Gentleman and the Committee on Appropriations. Per records, what had been requested by him during the budget hearing was the report on the budget utilization of the Department and not that per region.

Therefore, they submitted to you a report based on the whole Department’s utilization. But since His Honor would like to request for a per-region report, the Department will comply. They are requesting that they be given ample time to generate the data.

REP. BRAVO (A.). With all due respect, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I had recorded all the requests that I made during the Committee hearing.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). But I leave it that way.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, with all due respect also, we have here a copy of the transcript of what transpired during the budget hearing, which says that what was being asked is the utilization by the whole Department; but there was no mention that it will be by region, with all due respect.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, are we going back to the extent of going back to the tape, so that once and for all, we can validate?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, I have here a copy of the transcript of these stenographic notes from the Committee on Appropriations.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, meaning, in fact, this was the second request that I made during the Committee hearing. But it was not captured, and now, you are assuring this Representation that within the week, you will be providing me. I leave it that way and trust that assurance, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). They are assuring, Your Honor, the submission within the week.


REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that assurance, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

May I proceed now on next issue, Mme. Speaker.We have Gabaldon buildings in the entire country

placed to be preserved. Can you give us a figure on how many Gabaldon buildings do we have in the entire country that needs to be preserved?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, per record, we have around 1,400 Gabaldon buildings to be restored.

REP. BRAVO (A.). One thousand four hundred Gabaldon buildings. And how much was appropriated in 2016?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). For 2016, there was an appropriation of P50 million, Your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). How much?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Fifty million.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Fifty million.And as you made mention, there are about 1,400.

And in 2017?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Three hundred million for 2017, Your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Come again.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Three hundred million for 2017.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Three hundred million for 2017.


REP. BRAVO (A.). And in 2018?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). For 2018, there is a proposal of P300 million.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, the same figure?


REP. BRAVO (A.). How much does the DepEd need so that we will be able to address this rehabilitation and preservation of Gabaldon buildings, which have a figure of 1,400 in the entire country?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The Department needs around P12 billion in order to restore the 1,400 Gabaldon buildings, Your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, P12 billion is needed.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes.

REP. BRAVO (A.). And yet, we had huge fund under Continuing Appropriations. Is it not a priority of the Department?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the restoration of Gabaldon building is still a priority of the Department.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Then, if it is a priority, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, why just allocate P50 million in 2016, P300 million in 2017, and P300 million in 2018?

REP. ZAMORA (M.) . Your Honor, the Department has proposed for a large amount, which is around P2 billion, initially, but only P300 million has been given by the Department of Budget and Management.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I would like to go back to the planning of DepEd. Please study very carefully how you allocate funds. As I have said, per report, there are huge unused appropriations, and yet, there are items that need to be funded; but unfortunately, a very measly fund has been appropriated.

I hope that will be addressed by the planning of the DepEd, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Well taken, Your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). May I proceed, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. May I proceed to the Off-Budget Account of DepEd.

In 2016, the actual balance was P2,924,488,000.00. Please reconcile if my figure is correct.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Garin (S.) relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Eric D. Singson.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). What is the question again?

REP. BRAVO (A.). Under the Off-Budget Account of the Department of Education, the actual balance as of December 31, 2016 as reflected in the report is P2,924,488,000. Do you concur with these figures?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Let me check with the records first, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.


At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Singson relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Sharon S. Garin.

Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, per record, as of December 31, 2016, there was a P2.9 billion for the whole of the Department of Education.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Two point nine billion pesos.


REP. BRAVO (A.). So, our figures are the same. There was an expenditure for 2016 amounting to P1.4 billion. Am I correct?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, Your Honor, you are correct.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Will you please educate us, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, what are the items of expenditure under this? This is a big fund—P1.4 billion.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, the expenditure for 2016 included the operational requirements, examples of which are: the supplies and materials, trainings, utilities, communications, labor and wages, repairs and maintenance of buildings and ground services.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that answer.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That forms part of the expenditure.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that answer, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Is it not that those items of expenditure are also found under the Regular Fund that was appropriated in 2016 by this august Chamber?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). No, Your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). No.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). They were not taken from the Regular Fund of the Department.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Can I also get a copy of that report, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, we will provide you a copy.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Please include that in the report that you will be submitting, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, we will furnish you a copy, Your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). May I proceed, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, to National Expenditure Program, page 330. I have seen a huge fund, P139,472,000,522. Is this for 2018?

What will be the item of expenditure of this huge fund? There is no breakdown so far.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). What page is that, your Honor?

REP. BRAVO (A.). Under Basic Education Inputs Program.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Page—may I know the page number, Your Honor?

REP. BRAVO (A.). Page 344 of the National Expenditure Program. I consider it, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, as a lump sum.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, are you referring to the Basic Education Inputs Program amounting to...

REP. BRAVO (A.). 139.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). 191?

REP. BRAVO (A.). P139 billion.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). P139 billion.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Yes, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The Basic Education Inputs Program of P139 billion is the total of the items reflected below the same page.

REP. BRAVO (A.). In the next page.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Your Honor, below the same page.

REP. BRAVO (A.). In the next page. If you add, just on a single page, P139 billion, there is only a breakdown of 65, 65 and 65. If you will add them, that is far, far away from 139. In the succeeding page, there may be a breakdown about learning tools and equipment but still a lump sum of P7.8 billion which is lodged in the Central Office. Again, this is a centrally managed fund.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the P7.8 billion under learning tools and equipment includes


the Science and Mathematics equipment and the Technical-Vocational Program, and that is for Science and Mathematics equipment amounting to P3.1 billion and Technical-Vocational Program amounting to P4.6 billion.

REP. BRAVO (A.). What I am driving at, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, is these are all lump sum, so in the interest of time, again, can you please give us a breakdown of this because this is an issued fund, P8.6 billion, P7.8 billion, and P122 billion lodged in the Central Office, so that is...

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mme. Speaker, Your Honor, we will furnish you a copy of the breakdown of these items.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that assurance, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

Lastly, since other Members of this august Chamber would want also to interpellate, Mme. Speaker, I will rely on the assurance of the distinguished Sponsor that all of these requested reports will be submitted to this Representation in the proper time within the week.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). We will do that.

REP. BRAVO (A.). With that assurance, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, that is all. Thank you very much.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you, Honorable Bravo.


REP. DE VENECIA. Next to interpellate, Mme. Speaker, is the Hon. Rosanna “Ria” Vergara from the Third District of Nueva Ecija.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Vergara is recognized.

Please proceed.

REP. VERGARA. Good evening, Mme. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, guests, and the Department of Education family.

I do not have a question regarding the budget of the Department of Education, but mine is a manifestation regarding the dilemma that private schools are facing today.

In our Constitution, Article XIV, Section 4(1), it is stated:

The State recognizes the complementary roles of public and private institutions in the educational system and shall exercise reasonable supervision and regulation of all educational institutions.

The ambiguity of this complementary role of public and private institutions, which is guaranteed by our Constitution, is the main reason for the DepEd’s inability to use government resources, specifically, financial resources for private institutions. During the pre-plenary budget conference of the DepEd last August 22, I was pleasantly surprised when no less than honorable Secretary Briones articulated an existing predicament currently facing our educational system, the massive migration of private school teachers to public schools because of the attractive compensation and benefit package being given to public school teachers.

Sadly, when we say private schools, there is a tendency to think of Ateneo, La Salle, UST and St. Scholastica, to name a few. These comprise only a very small percentage of private schools. We seem to forget the small private schools, especially in the provinces, that do not have deep pockets or a strong affluent alumni base that can augment the tuition fee which is the main, if not the only, source of revenues. These private schools have to fund their fixed overhead, the biggest of which is the teachers’ salaries. While there is the K to 12 Voucher Program in which our senior high school students are accepted in all private schools, sadly, this is not sufficient to address the real problem, the growing disparity between the salaries of public school teachers and private school teachers.

I am aware that while a law can change the way DepEd uses its funds, the more pressing problem is the negative sentiment among DepEd officials and some legislators about certain private schools being supported through public funds. I believe that private schools must be supported by government funds, as these private schools are performing public function, delivering a public good, and also contributing to the education of the Filipino youth, an inestimable, invaluable service for the good of our country’s future.

Private schools are teaching the same core subjects that public schools teach. The service the private schools provide likewise helps ease the burden of public schools from hiring more teachers, ultimately, also helping our government. Private teachers can be compensated for performing a public function in the form of salary subsidies. I hope the Department of Education can look into this in line with the Senior High School Voucher Program currently in place.

An all-public school system in our country, which is where we are headed unless we address the problems we have now, is not what the DepEd envisions; rather, its mission is to protect and promote quality education for all Filipino children.

We must act now and address the immediate problem of private schools, specifically, the salary of their teachers. Let us define the complementary clause in our Constitution to mean that teachers in private


schools are also deserving to be financially supported by the government.

The wise words of an unknown author come to mind, “Teaching is not a service, profession or a job; it is a pillar of the society.”

Thank you, Mme. Speaker. Good evening.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Well taken, Your Honor, Mme. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). Thank you. The Floor Leader is recognized.

REP. DE VENECIA. Mme. Speaker, next to interpellate is the Hon.Antonio L. Tinio of the ACT TEACHERS Party-List.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Garin, S.). The Honorable Tinio is recognized. Please proceed.

REP. TINIO. Maraming salamat, Mme. Speaker. Well, Mme. Speaker, mahalaga at maganda po iyong

naging manifestation ni Rep. Rosanna “Ria” V. Vergara, at naalala ko dahil doon iyong kalagayan ng mga private school teachers. So bago ako magtanong hinggil sa kalagayan ng mga public school teachers ngayon, may tanong muna ako tungkol sa private school teachers. Alam ko na mayroon ding superbisyon ang Department of Education sa mga private school teachers. So, ang concern ko po dito ay iyong probationary period. Ang madalas pong binabanggit sa kasalukuyan ay mas mataas na ang sweldo ng mga public school teachers on average sa mga private school teachers. And in fact, ginagamit na nga itong dahilan para huwag dagdagan ang sweldo ng mga public school teachers dahil napag-iiwanan na raw ang private school teachers. Pero ang isang reyalidad na hindi gaanong natatalakay ay ang isang dahilan kung bakit mababa ang sweldo ng private school teachers, at ito ay dahil sa malaganap iyong kontraktwalisasyon. Hindi tulad sa public school kasi mayroong Magna Carta for Public School Teachers at isa sa pinakamahalagang garantiya na ibinibigay ng batas na ito ay iyong walang probationary period sa public school teachers.

So, alam ito ng lahat na kapag nag-apply ang isang qualified na individual upang maging teacher sa Department of Education at siya ay natanggap, from day one ay regular na ang teacher na ito, at bilang regular ay tatanggap na noong regular na sweldo. In this case, around P19,500 per month plus all the benefits, iyong mid-year bonus, year-end bonus, PBB, PEI and so on. And, of course, magiging miyembro na siya ng GSIS, with all the benefits and so on. Pero, iyong sa private school teachers, madalas kontraktwal nga sila, tapos probationary ang trato. At, dahil dito, madalas, minimum wage or lower ang binabayad sa kanila.

At this juncture, Deputy Speaker Garin (S.) relinquished the Chair to Deputy Speaker Raneo “Ranie” E. Abu.

Ngayon, ano po ba ang—at kadalasan ang probationary period ay mas matagal pa kaysa sa itinatakda ng Labor Code. Kasi, alam naman natin sa Labor Code sinasabing mananatiling contractual ka lang for up to six months, tapos pagkatapos noon, obligado na ang employer na gawing regular ang empleyadong ito. Pero, bakit? Ano po ba ang umiiral na patakaran ng DepEd, kung mayroon man, na gumagabay sa kontraktwalisasyon o sa paggamit ng contractual arrangements sa private schools?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the matter of contractualization for teachers in the private schools is not within the jurisdiction of the Department of Education. As only those who are employed in the public sector or in public schools are being supervised by the Department of Education.

REP. TINIO. So, tama po ba ang pagkakaintindi ko na walang anumang guidelines ang DepEd o walang existing guidelines and DepEd. Halimbawa, iyong mga so-called “Manual of Regulations.” Wala po bang mga issuances ang DepEd na nagpapatungkol sa private schools? Kasi alam ko po sa higher education, mayroong ganoong Manual of Regulations for Private Higher Education na …

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Yes.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Your Honor, at present the guidelines set by the Department of Education for the private schools pertain only to the regulation of tuition fee but as to matters of how the private schools are operating in terms of personnel, as of this moment, the Department has not released any guidelines as they are within the jurisdiction of the Department of Labor and Employment.

REP. TINIO. Okay, so purely labor issues po ito. In other words, wala po kayong kinalaman. So, for the record, ganoon po ah. So, this is purely a matter for the Department of Labor and Employment then. Okay. All right, I will be satisfied with that answer for now. Okay, so, in other words, kung kailangang harapin ang isyu ng kontraktwalisasyon sa private schools eh di hands-off ang Department of Education, dito? Okay, all right. Punta na po ako sa, okay, iyong isyu na binanggit ko po during the budget briefings of the Department of Education. Sa tingin ko isang mahalagang isyu ito, iyon ngang usapin ng promotion sa hanay ng mga public school teachers sa Department of Education. Ako,


bilang guro na nanggaling sa tertiary education, sa State university and colleges—sa sistema ng State university and colleges, malinaw po sa akin iyong kultura, iyong kahalagahan ng promotion. Sa pag-unlad ng career ng mga propesor sa State universities and colleges, para sa kanila, napakahalaga nito. Minsan nga sa karanasan ko, para sa akin, parang mas mahalaga pa para sa mga propesor iyong maging regular ang kanilang promotion kaysa iyong maitaas ang sweldo. You know, batay iyan sa ilang taong adbokasiya natin para sa salary increase. So, parang mas importante pa para sa marami iyong maging regular ang kanilang promotion.

Ngayon kapansin-pansin po na walang ganoong kultura ng iyong promotion sa loob ng Department of Education at batay po sa datos na ibinigay ng Department, nagpapasalamat tayo rito na nagpapakita ng breakdown ng teaching personnel ng Department of Education by rank. So out of 687,229 teaching personnel, mayroon po ritong almost, let say around, correct me if I am wrong, around a little over 90 percent, roughly around 90 percent of the teaching force ng DepEd 633,514 ay nasa ranggong Teacher I to III. So, pinakamaraming Teacher I, mahigit 360,000; tapos sumunod doon ay Teacher II – 101,000 at Teacher III – 171,000. Tapos kung sa Master Teachers, out of 687,000 teachers, nasa mahigit kumulang 50,000 lamang po ang mga Master Teachers, of those: Master Teacher I – 36,000; Master Teacher II –14,000, and then Master Teacher III – 19 lamang po, 1-9, labing-siyam lamang sila. Out of a teaching force of 687,000, you have 19 in Master Teacher III position. So, una, sa total number ng Master Teachers, 50,000, that is less than 10 percent of the teaching force. Tapos, bakit nga 19 lamang ang Master Teacher III? Hindi naman po yata katanggap-tanggap na sa mahigit kalahating milyong guro, ang qualified lamang para maging Master Teacher III ay disinuwebe. So, malinaw po na may problema rito. Malinaw na ang kalakhang bilang ng mga pumapasok sa Department of Education bilang Teacher I ay nagreretiro, kung hindi man lang bilang Teacher I, bilang Teacher II or bilang Teacher III. Iyon po ang sinasabi ng datos. Tapos napakaliit na bilang lamang iyong nakakarating doon sa level ng Master Teacher I, II, III.

In fact, noong binubuo po iyong SSL 3, and later on iyong Executive Order 201—in fact, noong panahon ng SSL 3, if I remember correctly, kailan ba iyon, 2009? Doon po unang nilikha iyong posisyon ng Master Teacher III and Master Teacher IV. At kapansin-pansin, by the way, and let us put it on the record, na mukhang wala pa, up to this point and, you know, since 2009—2017 na po, almost one decade na into the first creation of the Master Teacher IV position, mukhang hanggang ngayon ay wala pang Master Teacher IV sa buong Department of Education.

Ngayon ang paliwanag po kung bakit lumikha ng Master Teacher III and Master Teacher IV positions ay

dahil daw para mabigyan ng career path iyong mga guro na gustong manatili at magpakahusay sa pagtuturo as against iyong mga guro na gustong tumahak sa landas ng administration, iyong mga gustong maging mga administrador. Malinaw po ang career path na mga iyon, from classroom teacher to principal; well, to head teacher, to principal; and it goes all the way up to supervisor, superintendent, and so on. So, malinaw po iyong career path noong mga iyon, iyong gustong maging administrator o bureaucrat within the public school system. Pero paano naman po iyong mga gustong manatili sa pagtuturo? Ano ang maaasahan nila in terms of iyong pag-unlad ng kanilang career?

So ito iyong ibinigay, from Teacher I, II, III to Master Teacher I, II, III, IV. At mayroon ding katumbas na pagtaas ng suweldo. Very substantial po iyong magiging increase sa suweldo ng Teacher I kumpara sa Master Teacher I. Lalo pa kung mayroong position na Master Teacher IV, almost triple iyong maaaring itaas na suweldo.

So, ano po ang paliwanag, bakit disinuwebe lang ang Master Teacher III tapos 50,000 lang out of a total of 680,000 ang inyong mga Master Teachers? Bakit ho tila, para sa overwhelming majority ng mga teachers, mayroong ceiling? “Oh, hanggang Teacher III na lang kayo. Hindi ninyo na maaabot ito.” Bakit po tila may bara na ganoon? Ano po ang paliwanag diyan?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, at present, the Department is implementing based on the formula provided by the Department of Budget and Management in terms of allocating positions. And there is a certain formula, or percentage being followed. Apart from that, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, at present, while the Department recognizes that these are valid concerns, and they are with you in terms of their intention of opening the gates for promotion for our teachers, but the Department’s hands are also tied with that formula being implemented by the DBM. And another reason for that observation, Your Honor, is the failure of most applicants to qualify based on the qualification standards set also for the position.

REP. TINIO. Well, parang mahirap yatang tanggapin na out of 687,000 faculty, 50,000 lamang ang qualified for Master Teacher positions. I think, marami pong mga teaching personnel ng DepEd ang aalma diyan, dahil marami pong nagsusumikap. Many of them using their own resources, hindi naman po sila susuportahan sa kanilang mga Graduate Studies. Kailangan po pondohan nila iyan sa sarili nila. Pero, sa totoo lang, ang disincentive ay iyong mismong formula na binabanggit ninyo, kasi nga mayroong ratio na sinusunod and, actually, the ratio is reflected in the numbers. Roughly, you have one Master Teacher for every 12, you know, rank-and-file teacher. Kaya nga iyong numbers ninyo


are around 50,000 to––50,000 Master Teachers and around 600,000 Teacher I to Teacher III. More or less, striktong ipinatutupad iyong ratio of one is to 12. So, hindi po matanggap ng Kinatawang ito na a mere formula prescribed, according to you, by the DBM is the reason you are preventing the career advancement of 90 percent of your teaching force. So, iyon lang po ba iyon, formula at ang DBM ang may kasalanan?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, at present, the Department is doing some evaluation and reassessment all of these qualifications or the formula set for the creation of these positions and the Department is assuring his Honor that these observations that you have presented will also be taken up.

REP. TINIO. Well, to move things forward, I would propose, Mr. Speaker, na doblehin po natin iyong bilang ng mga Master Teachers sa Department at nangangahulugan iyon na kailangang doblehin din iyong budget para sa promotion. At alam ninyo po, kapag na-promote natin iyong Master Teacher, ibig sabihin niyan, may mga malilibreng posisyon sa baba at mas madaling ma-promote din iyong mga nasa baba. Iyong Teacher III magiging Master Teacher. Ibig sabihin noon, mayroong mga Teacher I at Teacher II na puwedeng tumaas din. So, in other words, it will have a cascading effect, which will greatly improve the welfare, the morale and the quality of teaching of the public school teaching force. So, sa kongkreto po ay itinutulak natin na doblehin ninyo ang mga bilang nito. Gumawa kayo ng plano para doblehin ang bilang na ito at kailangan ding doblehin iyong budget na nakalaan para dito para maging riyalidad iyan.

Right now, on page 357 of this General Appropriations Bill, you have appropriated a mere P160 million as a lump sum for Master Teachers, P160 million. Matanong ko lang po, iyong P160 million na nakalagay dito na lump sum for Master Teachers, how many Master Teachers will be accommodated? How many new Master Teachers will be accommodated for shools, in other words, for 2018? Ilan po ang makakaasa ng promotion to Master Teacher out of that lump sum, that measly lump sum of P160 million? Ilan kaya iyon, kasi, magkano ang suweldo sa isang taon?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, let me just refer to the records.

REP. TINIO. Sure, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, around 344 Master Teachers.

REP. TINIO. Mr. Speaker, imagine, 344 Master Teachers. Iyon lang po. For 2018, out of the 633,514

Teacher I to Teacher III personnel, 344 lamang sa kanila ang makakaasa na mapo-promote to Master Teacher. Only 344. Kung ikaw ay Teacher III, pinaghirapan mo ang iyong MA, kinuha mo to fulfill all the requirements, pero malalaman mo sa kongkreto, 344 lang kayo. Out of over 300,000 teachers na may budget para ma-promote to Master Teacher, paano ba naman iyan? May problema, hindi po ba, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor? Hindi ba may problema? Hindi ba malaking problema ito?

Actually, iyong sinabi ko kanina doblehin natin. Aba, from 344, magiging 688 lang pala. Napakaliit lang pala actually. Napaka-conservative noon, but at least, that would be a start.

I think napakalaki po ng problema dito. How is the Department going to encourage excellence in teaching among its teaching force kung titingnan natin sa budget, 344 lang of over 600,000 Teacher I to Teacher III ang mabibigyan ng promotion to Master Teacher sa susunod na taon?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the Department acknowledges that concern. In fact, it is one of the considerations in their present discussion on the revision and improvement of the policy. That is well-taken, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. TINIO. All right, I think, iyon na po. Ipinagdidiinan natin na hindi bibitawan ang issue na ito dahil kailangan talagang mabago, basagin na ito. Dekada na po na ganyan ang kalakaran sa Department of Education. At ipinagdidiinan po natin na umaangal ang teaching force na napakaraming mga bagong requirement, ang RPMS, DLL and so on, all of these paperwork supposedly to promote excellence in teaching of the teaching force. But in the end, where it counts most, ang professional advancement with corresponding remuneration ay wala po—334 lang ang mabibigyan ng pagkakataon. So, kailangang wastuhin po natin ang patakarang ito.

Ngayon, last set of concerns. Ito, matagal na rin po ito na gusto kong diinan, ang Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, the Magna Carta benefits of public school teachers. I would like to focus on one issue in particular.

Alam po ninyo, ang Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, 1966 pa po ito ipinasá. So that is 51 years ago, pero hanggang ngayon ay hindi pa rin ipinapatupad ang marami sa mga probisyon nito. I would like to focus on one concern in particular, the medical examination and treatment. Sabi po sa Section 22:

Compulsory medical examination shall be provided free of charge for all teachers before they take up teaching, and shall be repeated not less than once a year during the teacher’s professional life.


Now, as provided for in the law, this is supposed to be a benefit. Benepisyo dapat ito sa mga teacher, compulsory. Nire-require sila na mag-medical examination pero kailangang libre bilang benepisyo daw iyan. Ibibigay ng Estado as a benefit to teachers. Ipinapakita na may concern sa kalusugan ng teacher, pero sa halip, ang nangyari at ang tingin ng mga teacher ngayon, it becomes a burden to them. Inoobliga sila every year na magpa-medical examination tapos nire-require na may mga x-ray, blood test, urine test, and so on. Hindi naman libre, kasi out of their own pocket.

Kalahating siglo na po na nandiyan ang probisyon na iyan na hindi ipinatutupad, at ang benepisyo, ginawa pang pabigat para sa mga guro. Hindi po ba, once and for all, ika-third term ko na po ito, at ilang taon na po nating nire-raise ito, hindi po ba puwedeng tugunan na natin? Nasa batas na iyan at kahit sa mga General Provisions ng mga General Appropriations Act, sinasabi doon puwedeng dapat tugunan. There is a provision for complying with Magna Carta obligation. Hindi po ba puwedeng tugunan na, once and for all, hanapan ng pondo, once and for all, and for the first time, gawin talagang libre ang annual medical examination na ito?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, for 2018, there is no appropriation for, tungkol sa …

REP. TINIO. Exactly, walang provision. Sa 2018, wala nga talagang provision, iyon nga ang problema natin. If we were to quantify, let us say P500, siguro baka puwede na iyan for x-ray, medical examination treatment. That is probably very conservative pero multiplied by P680,000 that is roughly P340 million or P350 million. Hindi ba puwedeng tapusin na ito once and for all? After 50 years of waiting ay ibigay na sa mga public school teachers. Hanapan ng Department of Education ng pondo out of their P360 billion Personnel Services budget or out of the MOOE. Hindi ko alam kung saan kukunin ito. Hindi ba puwedeng ibigay na ito?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the concern on the medical benefit for our teachers has already been covered by the PhilHealth and that is the teachers’ primary health benefit.

REP. TINIO. It is not covered by the PhilHealth. When I raised this concern with the previous Secretary of Education under the previous administration, that was the response. Sabi, kakausapin namin ang PhilHealth para i-cover. Tapos mayroon silang programa ngayon, checkup, I think it is what is called for. One, it is not available, it is not honored everywhere. Sa mga regional, sa mga hospitals lang ng DOH and that, as you know, sa ilang regional centers lang mayroong DOH hospital, that is one. Two, PhilHealth does not cover free, the x-ray, the blood test and so on. Iyan ang sinabi

ng nakaraang administrasyon pero, after several years of implementation of this so-called checkup ay hindi naman po naipatupad. So, hindi po sapat iyon.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, one of the measures that are being conducted now by the Department is talking with the Department of Health as to the full implementation of the PhilHealth coverage, so that teachers who are members of PhilHealth will be able to avail of the primary healthcare benefits that is due them.

REP. TINIO. Let me just point out, Mr. Speaker, that this is a Magna Carta benefit. This is a special category of benefit, and by definition, it is not covered by the package of benefits that are accorded to members of PhilHealth. Since this is a Magna Carta benefit, may additional ito. Ang inilalaban po natin, tapusin na po natin ang 50 years na usaping ito, gawin na nating libre.

Mabuti po kausapin ninyo ang Department of Health. But the point is, gawing libre po ito. Either that or find some way to reduce the cost. Kailangan bang mag-submit ng x-ray, blood test ang lahat? Baka hindi naman kailangan. Maybe the Sponsor could approach it from that end, Mr. Speaker.

I will end my interpellation there, Mr. Speaker, na ang punto lang ay matagal na pong utang ito ng Estado sa mga guro natin, 1966 pa po ipinangako sa kanila, hanggang ngayon hindi pa rin ibinibigay. Ipinaglalaban po natin ang kongkretong proposal, mag-realign, hanapan ng pondo, P350 million, dapat masagutan na ito. Sa palagay ko kayang gawin ito.

Hanggang dito na lamang po. Itutuloy natin ang laban para sa mga benepisyong ito. Maraming salamat po.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Points well taken, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Floor Leader is recognized.

REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the honorable Minority Leader Danilo Suarez for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The distinguished Minority Leader is recognized.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, will the distinguished Sponsor yield to some questions?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. The Department is asking for P613 billion. Is that correct, Mr. Speaker?


REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is correct, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Which is 7.9-percent increase from 2017.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is P613 billion, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. I think some of the questions raised were on the utilization rate. Were those answered already?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Yes, they were answered earlier.

REP. SUAREZ. So, I am not going to repeat them, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

I just would like to find out why is it that most of the Unused Appropriations came from the office of my good friend, Liling, from the Office of the Secretary, amounting to P56.1 billion.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the classification term used for the whole Department is OSec. So that refers to the whole Department of Education.

REP. SUAREZ. Some of the questions were answered already while I was waiting. I just would like to announce to my colleagues here that because of the typhoon, I noticed a very slow response. The answer of the good Secretary is that their funds were taken by the DBM and moved to the NDRRMC. Is that correct, Mr. Speaker?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is correct, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. The NDRRMC is the one that is supposed to undertake the repair of those buildings. How efficient are they?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, so far, the Department has requested for P1.7 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. No, I am talking about how efficient, how fast they can work. Let us say nasa kanila na ang pera, kasi ang nangyari sa amin, they seem to be very slow because up to now, wala pa ring bubong ang aming classrooms.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the role of the NDRRMC is to just release the Quick Response Fund to the Department of Education. It would still be the DepEd which will be implementing the repair of these classrooms.

As of now, the Department has requested for the amount of P1.7 billion for the repair of these classrooms from last year. But as of now, the NDRRMC has not released any fund yet.

REP. SUAREZ. Last year, ang sitwasyon namin sa mga remote public school and far-flung barangay, mayroon tayong isang classroom na magkasama ang Grade 1 at Grade 2. Nangyayari pa po ba ito ngayon?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). That is multi-grade, yes po.

REP. SUAREZ. So swerte po ang Grade 1 kasi nakikita niya ang kaniyang pag-aaralan next year. Nakikita niya ang ginagawa ng Grade Two. Is that a severe result of our lack in classrooms. Magkasama po ang Grade 1 at Grade 2.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the reason for multi-grade room …

REP. SUAREZ. Dito po sa amin, maybe the Superintendent can attest to my statement, mamimili ka. Mayroon kaming classroom na walang bubong pero kongkreto naman ang sahig. Ang isa naman, may bubong pero ang sahig ay lupa. Issues like that, I think is mandatory in our responsibility to make sure that public schools should be given better treatment in terms of support in their learning curve.

This Representation is a graduate of public school up to high school. Ako po ay produkto ng public school and my mother is a public school teacher. That is why I understand the plight of the teaching profession.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Your concerns are well taken, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. There are a lot of questions here about K to 12, but most of them were raised already.

Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, I think the Minority has no more questions to raise on the proposed budget of the DepEd.

I move that we terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the DepEd.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in terminating the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Department of Education.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the


budget of the Department of Education and its attached agencies is approved. (Applause)


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the session to allow the technical staff of the Department of Education to vacate…

Sorry, Mr. Speaker. I move that we take up the budget of the Department

of the Interior and Local Government including its attached agencies. For this purpose, I also move that we recognize the Hon. Luisa Lloren Cuaresma from the Lone District of Nueva Vizcaya to sponsor the budget of the Department.

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

The Hon. Luisa Cuaresma, the distinguished Sponsor, is recognized to defend the budget of the Department of the Interior and Local Government and its attached agencies.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker I move for a few minutes suspension of the session to allow the technical staff of the DILG and attached agencies to occupy the floor.

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

It was 10:58 p.m.



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

REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we acknowledge the presence of the Hon. Luisa Lloren Cuaresma, and also the officials of the Department of the Interior and Local Government. These are Undersecretary and Officer-in-Charge Catalino S. Cuy; Usec. Austere A. Panadero, Undersecretary for Local Government; and Asec. Ester A. Aldana, Assistant Secretary for Finance and Comptrollership. We also have from the Bureau of Fire Protection, Supt. Leonard R. Bañago, Fire Chief; from the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology or the BJMP, Supt. Deogracias Carreon Tapayan, Deputy

Chief for Administration; from the Local Government Academy, Ms. Marivel C. Sacendoncillo, Executive Director; from the National Police Commission or the Napolcom, Vice Chairman Rogelio T. Casurao, Vice Chairman and Executive Officer; from the Philippine National Police, Gen. Ronald Dela Rosa, PNP Chief; and Deputy Dir. Gen. Archie Francisco F. Gamboa, Deputy Chief for Operations; and from the Philippine Public Safety College, Deputy Dir. Gen. Ricardo F. De Leon, President.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). To the members of the Department of the Interior and Local Government, and the attached agencies family, welcome to the House of Representatives.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the honorable Minority Leader Danilo Suarez for his interpellation.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The distinguished Sponsor of the proposed budget of the Department of the Interior and Local Government including the attached agencies is recognized, and now we are also recognizing the Minority Leader for his interpellation.

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This Representation is now ready to sponsor the budget of DILG.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is the distinguished Sponsor willing to yield the floor?

REP. CUARESMA. Yes. Magandang gabi po.

REP. SUAREZ. This Representation and the Minority have a very, very sensitive concern about non-utilization of funds. Kapag hindi ho kasi nagagamit iyong pera, normally kasi, for example, hihingi po sila ng P100 billion, bibigyan sila ng P80 billion, ka-cut po ng P20 billion, and yet, the P80 billion hindi ho nila nauubos. So, lalo na siguro kung malaki ang non-utilization kung malaki iyong ibinigay sa kanila.

So, I will give a historical data from the Department way back in 2013, Your Honor. In 2013, their proposed budget is P91.16 billion. Please correct me if I am wrong, distinguished Sponsor. Total budget was P140 billion. In 2014, P100 billion; total budget in billion was P163. In 2015, P104 billion; total budget was P176 billion. In 2016, P124 billion. And this year is P148,732,000,000. Are these figures—do you agree with these figures, Your Honor?


REP. CUARESMA. May we ask for a one-minute suspension of the session, Mr. Speaker.



REP DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move for a one-minute suspension of the session.


It was 11:09 p.m.




REP. CUARESMA. Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Your Honor, at the moment, we do not have the data as to the one stated by the Minority Leader with regard to unutilized funds of the DILG as a whole, I think. So, maybe I will ask the one in-charge of our budget to get a copy of that, then may I just request the Minority Leader the next question, if there is any?

REP. SUAREZ. Okay, I will raise the next question.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker. Yes. Sir.

REP. SUAREZ. Distinguished Lady, the utilization rate of DILG is as follows: Per CPBRD, in 2013, it was 92.6; in 2014, it dropped to 83.01; in 2015, it was 91.63 and in 2016, it was 94.6. So you have an average utilization of 90.46 percent.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, with this statement of the Minority Leader, particularly on years 2013, 2014 and 2015, I will try in my level, particularly, in coordination of course with the Office of the OIC-Secretary or Usec., caretaker of the DILG, to...

REP. SUAREZ. Your Honor, we are not faulting the Department. They are new in the job. As I have said, during last year’s hearing ...

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker, we will try to conduct an investigation on this matter, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. No, you do not even need to conduct. What we were saying, Your Honor, is you must understand that these officers were not programmed to be there because they have a reluctant candidate last year. Nanalo po ang Pangulong Duterte nang hindi ho naman kasama sa line-up ng serious candidate. He was not even considered in the early part of the campaign. Ngayon ho, Pangulo siya and these officers were appointed, so ang point ko ho eh, you have to give them the benefit of learning the curve—na hindi ho nila kabisado pa iyong gagawin.

REP. CUARESMA. Yeah. That is why in this present administration, we are trying our best in the DILG to really implement the given allocation for this Department, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. That is why in 2016, one reason why there is like a big percentage of unutilized funds for the DILG is the change of administration.

Now, with the 2013, 2014, and 2015, we will try in our level to see as to why we have these much unutilized funds, Mr. Speaker and Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Well, distinguished Lady-Sponsor, napakalaki po kasi ng budget ng DILG. Understandably, they will have a large amount of unutilized funds. For instance, in 2016, ang hindi ho nila nagamit was P9.7 billion, so siguro gusto ko lang malaman, ito pong P9.7 billion, was this accumulated on the first half or on the second half of 2016?

REP. CUARESMA. I think this is for the year 2016, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. Okay. Your Honor, on their proposed budget, they are proposing that P109.2 billion which will go to the Crime Prevention and Suppression Program of the PNP. This accounts for 75.6 percent of the Department. Am I correct here? Is the figure correct, distinguished Lady?

REP. CUARESMA. The amount for 2018, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, is P170.7 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, no. Let me just rephrase what I have said. They are allocating P109 billion for Crime Prevention Suppression to include the fight against drugs. So, is this the right figure? Maybe, you can ask your …

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker, …

REP. SUAREZ. No, so, if you are going to allocate such an amount for those crimes, illegal drugs, prevention, suppression, ay baka wala na hong matira dito sa iba pang ahensya ng DILG. How does


the DILG plan to maintain and improve the overall LGU performance while bulk of the budget goes to PNP?

REP. CUARESMA. As had been done in the previous years, Mr. Speaker, and Your Honor, the bulk of the fund of the DILG goes to the Philippine National Police, Mr. Speaker, and Your Honor. I think, the DILG, together with the Department of Budget and Management, really had a thorough study, so that the different agencies attached to the DILG will really be able to implement the different programs of their respective agencies, Mr. Speaker, and Your Honor.

REP. SUAREZ. I just would like to shift to a different issue. This Representation had filed a bill on the nature of services and tenure of officers. So, for the information of the distinguished Sponsor, I propose that the men in uniform service—because right now, we retire them at the age of 56 or 30 years of service, whichever will come last—I am proposing that their retirement age be extended to 60 years old or 35 years of service, whichever will come last.

May you ask your principal if they are amenable to this proposal.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, and Your Honor, I asked the DILG, and I think, the PNP are amenable that their retirement age will be 60 years of age, not 56.

REP. SUAREZ. Alam po ninyo, distinguished Lady, there are three professions in this country from which, once in, it is difficult to get out. Isa ho diyan ay iyong priesthood o iyong mga ministro ng simbahan. Kapag naging pari ka, napakahirap na hong lumabas sa pagpapari. Pangalawa po, ang politician, kapag politician ka na, napakahirap hong bumalik sa private sector, very addicting. The men in uniform, kapag ho iyan ay naging pulis o sundalo at nag-retire, and they say that they will be given a second life and they will venture themselves into business, kakanin po iyang buhay sa “asphalt jungle.” Kaya kung bibigyan po natin sila ng mahaba-habang retirement, then they will have a chance to enjoy their retirement, play with their granddaughter or grandson, ganoon.

Pangalawa po, napakalaki na po ng ating ibinabayad sa retirement pay ng ating mga empleyado ng pamahalaan. Alam ninyo, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, ang atin pong retirement benefit ay halos kasinglaki na ng MOOE ng ating pamahalaan. Ganyan na po kalaki ngayon. Kung bibigyan po natin sila ng tatlong taong extension, makakapahinga po iyong ating retirement and separation benefit ng tatlong taon.

What will be the position of the distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, I agree with the recommendation or proposition of the Minority Leader. If ever that in the plenary, a bill will be passed or a resolution will be passed to amend the law, then and I fully support the recommendation of the Minority Leader, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that several months ago, and the Gentleman was present here when we had an executive session with the no less than, I think, the Chief PNP, and I raised the question of how long will it take us to pacify Marawi. The answer then by the Defense Department was, “Maybe a week,” and I said, “I beg to disagree.”

It is very sad that we, in Congress, seem to be correct and up to now, to prove our point that the problem is so serious, we are still fighting there. I will repeat the position, and I will raise this when we hear the budget of the Defense Department that this is a severe intelligence breakdown.

Now, my question here is this, the PNP and the AFP are together in this operation. Am I correct there, Mr. Speaker? They participate in the operations in the …

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. But the body count on the casualty of the PNP is very low as compared to the Armed Forces. Is it because they are better in close-quarter fighting or what we call the …

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform everyone, particularly the Minority Leader, that the PNP has 5 killed and 49 wounded in action, lesser than that of the AFP, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. I am aware of that, distinguished Sponsor. I know the count and I know the number of severely, mortally wounded. So, ang point ko lang po dito is, if this situation will continue, the activities of assault are being given more to the regular Armed Forces. Well, we assume that it is the right statement, Mr. Speaker? Mas sa frontal fight ho …

REP. CUARESMA. Sa frontal po.

REP. SUAREZ. … nandoon iyong regular Army natin or Rangers or the Marines, and support ang PNP.

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the Gentleman that the Philippine National Police that are now in Marawi are 1,200 po. But earlier, and then later on—as of this time, there are 800 PNP personnel that are in Marawi, Mr. Speaker.


REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, in actual combat operation?


REP. SUAREZ. Well, considering that the Marawi incident is unforeseen, it is not within our vision, or in what we call the projection of hostile activities for this year of 2017. I would imagine that the DILG and the PNP had somewhat spent some of their funds for this purpose.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, parang ang nangyayari po, pinagkakasya na lang po whatever they have for 2017.

REP. SUAREZ. Hindi, kasi in-admit na po sa atin ng Defense Department na depleted na iyong kanilang pondo kasi hindi naman natin inaasahan itong kaguluhan sa Marawi. So, wala ho namang problema iyan kung talagang ginagastos na po ng PNP iyong kanilang budget ahead of—I would even assume iyong budget nila for December ay ubos na eh….

REP. CUARESMA. Nagkakasya naman daw po.

REP. SUAREZ. … because of this situation in Mindanao.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, pinagkakasya po at hindi naman daw po naapektuhan iyong iba ho nilang mga program.

REP. SUAREZ. I will not even encourage that we should save or be thrifty when we are in confrontation because winning a war has no tag price, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CUARESMA. We will take note of that, Mr. Speaker. I will discuss that. Anyway, our Chief PNP is here and …

REP. SUAREZ. Sa atin po namang takbo ng budget, distinguished Sponsor, wala naman ho naman tayong limitation and in scenarios like these kasi mayroon po naman tayong unappropriated, may lump sum tayo from where we can tap these funds. Ang sinasabi ko lang ho, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor ay when we fight, hindi ho puwedeng nakatali ang isang kamay natin. It must be an all-out effort to win the battle.

REP. CUARESMA. Well taken po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Okay. I will go to my last concern. We have a report here that—as I have said, please correct this Representation if I am wrong—from the

DND and the DILG, 360 government officials and employees were arrested, most of them due to drug issues and other related illegal activities, and charged accordingly before the courts, including 162 elected officials, 171 government employees, and 30 uniformed personnel. From these data, it seems that drug trade and use are well-entrenched in the community as the leaders themselves are involved in drugs. If the 2018 barangay election will push through—this is the concern of no less than the President himself. Now, may I know, what is the effort being done by the DILG and the PNP about these very alarming statistics? Does the Sponsor agree with those figures that I just said?

REP. CUARESMA. Well, Mr. Speaker, we are not really—hindi po kami sigurado with that figure because the PNP did not separate the operation involving the government employees from that of the private sector, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, no less than the President said that he underestimated the drug problem as it had not been properly confronted or addressed by the previous administration for the last six years. So, kung mismong ang Pangulo na ho ang nagsasabi na hindi niya ini-expect na ganito kaselan ang problema, with this number of officials and elected officials involved dito po sa problema, wala ho namang diperensiya iyon. As I have said, there is nothing that we can do about it. Ang point ko lang is, that it is a wake-up call for the DILG and the PNP to do something about this problem.

As I have said, it is a top statement for this Representation and on the part of the Minority to say na hindi ho natin mapigil masyado ang drugs sapagkat may mga element po ng ating police force na nagpo-protect sa drugs. No less than the PNP official head admitted that. Ika nga, Mr. Speaker, anim na taon po na nag-proliferate iyan. For six years ho, lumaki nang lumaki ang drug industry. And the amount of money that is involved in the trade of drugs is in the billions. And when I say 700 to 800 billion trade—they can buy anyone and everyone.

So, iyon lang ho ang aking gustong iparating, na dito sa hinihingi ninyong budget—in war, I think, my good friend, General Bato, will answer, napakahirap banggain ang isang labanan kung saan alam natin na ang drug industry ay nasa 900 billion na at ang budget mo lang ay P170 billion. And this is not even a direct expenditure for this war against drugs. This is your MOOE. Dito po sa ating rate na ito, napakaliit po ng ating inilalagay sa crime suppression. And it is because, why? Because we have a ceiling. So, as I said, not just to this Department, we should not live by the ceiling. Tanungin po natin ang PNP at ang DILG, magkano ba—how much decent amount does the Department need to confront this problem?


REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, in fact, they requested from the DBM more funds supposedly …

REP. SUAREZ. I know, that is why …

REP. CUARESMA. … to be allocated.

REP. SUAREZ. … they have to come up with a specific program na baka po, gaya ng sinabi—because I am going to maintain, distinguished Sponsor, that we should not be curtailed by a ceiling of what we can spend next year. Kawawa po naman iyong ating mga constituents that will be facing this problem, that we will be tempted to go into drugs just because enforcement is not effective because we lack funds. We are not doing our job if we allow that to happen, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker, well-taken po iyong inyong mga recommendation. In fact, really, P170 million will not really be enough for us to be able to implement, particularly, the realization of President Duterte’s vision of change for the country. That is why in the budget of the DILG, out of the P170 million—I mean, P170.7 billion, P131 billion was allocated for the PNP. They got the lion’s share of the budget of the DILG, Mr. Speaker. But everything that has been stated by the Minority Leader, Mr. Speaker, is well taken by this Representation.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, this Representation, before I terminate my interpellation, would like to express our appreciation for the performance of the PNP in my province. The Governor is my son, and we have a very good working relationship with the PNP. I just would like to relay the message that if there is any need for them, for the hierarchy of the PNP to relay the message, that in the plenary, they were given due appreciation for their services.

REP. CUARESMA. Thank you po.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.I will temporarily yield to some other Members

who may want to interpellate.


REP. CUARESMA. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move to recognize the Hon. Arlene Brosas of the GABRIELA Party-List for her interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Hon. Arlene Brosas is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Magandang gabi po sa Sponsor.

Bago po ang lahat, nais ko sanang magpalabas ng isang video para po sa aking interpelasyon.

(Audiovisual presentation)Umulit na po iyan, Mr. Speaker.Ito po ay iyong floodway, Pasig demolition noong

August 30, noong nagtayo ng barikada ang mga kasapi ng Kadamay ng Floodway, Pasig sa nakaambang demolisyon sa kanilang mga tahanan. Nagkaroon po ng marahas na dispersal matapos hindi humarap ang LGU sa mga mamamayan na humihingi lamang ng dialogue.

Ayon sa ulat, at least 30 persons ang nasaktan, 41 ang naaresto kasama ang 14 na babae at 10 menor de edad, for illegal assembly and direct assault.

Ano po ang partisipasyon ng LGU sa mga demolisyon na kagaya nito?

REP. CUARESMA. When it comes to the implementation of an order coming from the court, it is the sheriff, of course, who shall implement. But that is in coordination with the LGU concerned. With this situation, Mr. Speaker, hindi po natin alam kung ano po ang nangyari. But at any rate, I will ask our Officer-in-Charge of the Office of the DILG, Usec. Cuy, to make an investigation with regard to this, Mr. Speaker, and Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Okay. May ilan pa pong mga katanungan kaugnay dito, Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker. Ang mekanismo po o kung mayroon mang mekanismo, ano nga ba iyong mekanismo na magsisiguro na maximum tolerance pa rin ang napapatupad sa mga katulad nitong sitwasyon ng demolisyon? Iyong maximum tolerance iyong napapatupad ng ating kapulisan.

REP. CUARESMA. Ang nangyayari ho is talaga naman pong SOP na po iyan na iyong atin hong kapulisan ay talagang maximum tolerance din po iyong talagang kanilang ginagawa just so nobody will be o wala hong maaapektuhan or masasaktan when it comes to this kind of demolition. Not only this kind of demolition pero sa lahat po, talagang maximum tolerance po lagi ang ginagawa ng ating mga kapulisan, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Pero, yes, Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, pero kung napansin ninyo po sa video, kung mapapansin ninyo po ay mayroong portion doon kung saan binubugbog ng naka-brown na uniform iyong kanilang hinahatak na tao at sina-side—anong tawag doon? Sina-side beat, sinusuntok sa side.


REP. CUARESMA. Kanina po habang pinapanood ko po iyong ating video, iyon pong iba doon ay hindi po mga pulis. Iyon ho yata ay mga—I do not know ho kung mga volunteer coming from the LGU. But at any rate, …

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, …

REP. CUARESMA. … Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, as I have said earlier, anyway our Secretary, the caretaker of the DILG, is with us. Papaimbestigahan na lang po natin kung ano man po itong nangyaring kaguluhan on that day of August 30.

REP. BROSAS. So, Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, iyong chocolate boys po, iyong naka-brown—ang tawag ko doon, “chocolate boys” e—napapailalim po siya sa anong ahensiya? Pamilyar po ba kayo? Sa LGU po ba iyan?

REP. CUARESMA. As to the information given to me while watching the video, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, ito po ay mga empleyado po yata.

REP. BROSAS. Ng?

REP. CUARESMA. As I have mentioned, hindi ko lang po alam if they are regular employees of the LGU or they are volunteer workers for the local government unit.

REP. BROSAS. Okay. Do we also know, Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, …

REP. CUARESMA. At any rate, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, at the time the DILG will finish its investigation, we will provide you a copy of their report the soonest, immediately after the investigation.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, gusto rin nating malaman kung may sapat bang training o alam nito ang mga usapin sa pagharap sa mga katulad nito na confrontation. Sana po ay lamanin ito ng inyong report. Tapos, ano po iyong ahensiya na under doon sa mga naka-brown? Ano po iyong legal basis ng kanilang pagkakatatag? At ano po iyong kanilang mga mandate doon?

Gusto po nating malaman kung bakit umabot sa ganitong eksena na iyong ibang nakikita natin, wala nang kalaban-laban pero tinuhod saka binugbog. So, kung ito man po ay mula sa enforcers ng mga LGU, ganito po ba dapat makitungo sa mamamayan natin even ang ating mga LGU?

REP. CUARESMA. Kagaya nga po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, ng sinabi ko earlier na bibigyan na lang

po namin kayo ng report because we also do not know as to whether there has really been a dialogue between the local government unit, the court, particularly the sheriff, and that of those affected families in that particular incident. And, as I have said, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we will just provide you a copy of the report immediately after the DILG has investigated on that particular incident.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, thank you, Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, kaugnay pa rin po nito sa 10 menor de edad na nahuli, I was able to visit iyong detention facility po nito sa Bahay Aruga within Pasig. Ano po ang nangyari? Hindi po tayo pinayagan na makapasok para lang tingnan at alamin ang kalagayan ng 10 menor de edad na ito. Ang tanong ko po, ano po ang posisyon ng DILG, bilang kasapi sa Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council, sa pangyayaring ito?

REP. CUARESMA. Kagaya po ng unang pangyayari na nai-present po sa video. Anyway, with that revelation, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, siguro ipapaimbestiga na rin po natin iyan sa ating OIC of the DILG, and then isasama na rin po namin iyan sa pagbigay sa inyo ng report after po sa investigation. But kung Bahay Kalinga po iyong pinag-uusapan, mukhang it is the DSWD which is really in charge of this. But, at any rate, as I earlier mentioned, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, isasama na rin po namin sa report. And, rest assured that this Representation will be the one to give you personally the report that shall be conducted by the DILG.

REP. BROSAS. Maraming salamat po, Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

Iyong karanasan ko po ay malinaw na malinaw sa akin na paglabag sa batas iyong nangyari nang pumunta po ako doon para alamin kung ano ang kalagayan ng 10 bata na menor de edad.

Nasasaad po sa batas na ang batang below 15 years old ay dapat ibigay agad sa aruga ng pamilya. Ngunit iyong mga naka-detain doon sa Bahay Aruga ay may edad dose at kahit po naman dapat ito ano, ibinibigay na talaga agad sa magulang, pinapalaya. Hindi ko po maintindihan kung bakit naging matigas ang LGU dahil under ng LGU. Pero dapat ay sumusunod din sa DSWD, tama naman po iyon, sumusunod sa DSWD national, dahil mayroon pong monitoring naman talaga na power ang ating DSWD national. Pero kahit po iyong Undersecretary ng DSWD national na kasama ko noong time na pinuntahan namin iyong naka-detain na 10 bata para makita po ang kalagayan nila ay hindi kami pinayagang pumasok doon sa loob. That is why we are questioning now bakit ganoon at saan kumukuha ng—hindi po maintindihan ng Representasyong ito kung bakit hindi tayo pinayagan na makita talaga iyong mga bata.


Ang pinangangambahan po namin noong time na iyon, because the children, nakita ninyo naman po, hindi ba, na noong kinuha ang mga bata, sila po ay mula sa komunidad. Second, sila po ay nag-aaral. Ngayon, noong ipinasok po sila doon sa Bahay Aruga, mayroon po doon mga recidivist nga. Now, ang pangamba po namin ay isama sila doon sa mga juvenile natin na delinquent na matagal na at paulit-ulit na po na ano, at nalaman po namin iyon noong ipinakita ang mga bata sa fiscal na sila ay hinahampas daw ng tsinelas at ayaw na nilang bumalik doon dahil bagamat may kamera sa Bahay Aruga, sa loob ng CR ay walang kamera at doon daw sila binubugbog at sinasaktan.

Iyong mga paulit-ulit po na recidivist ay hindi po dapat na sumama sa kanila iyong mga bago natin na mga hinuhuli. Kung kaya po hindi maintindihan ng Kinatawan na ito kung bakit ganoon iyong naging paraan ng LGU, partikular dito sa kaso ng mga hinuli doon sa violent dispersal sa Floodway, Pasig.

REP. CUARESMA. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

Thank you very much, honorable Congresswoman Brosas of GABRIELA Party-List for that information. Rest assured, we have taken note of that and kasama mo po kami sa pag-iimbestiga po dito.

REP. BROSAS. Thank you, Mme. Sponsor.

REP. CUARESMA. Rest assured that, really, the Office of the DILG will get in touch with the LGU concerned. At kagaya po ng sinabi ko, we will give you the report. At ako po ay nagpapasalamat, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, at least you have brought out this matter in the plenary during this budget—during this forum. At least, nandito po iyong ating DILG Director or caretaker of the DILG para mabigyan ng pansin po itong mga hindi naman magandang pangyayari.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, thank you, Mme. Sponsor. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Alam po natin na nasa mandato ng DILG bilang kasapi ng Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council or JJWC ang mag-oversee o magpatupad ng RA No. 9344. Ngayon po, dahil sinabi ninyo na ang aksiyon ninyo ay to look into this, umaasa po ang Kinatawan na ito na agad-agad nating malalaman, kasi ito po ay magne-necessitate ng dialogue with the—binanggit ko na rin naman po kanina, nakapag-usap naman po kami, kasi hindi ko na po napigil kanina, kailangan ko po talagang sabihin sa Undersecretary natin na ganoon iyong mga pangyayari.

Meanwhile, on another topic po, sa Barangay Valencia, Quezon City, mayroon pong apat na wooden boxes kung saan puwedeng ilagay ninyo—ninuman pala nang walang kahit anong supporting evidence

ang iniisip nilang drug suspects, iyong name ng drug suspects. In partnership ito with the City Police Station 7. May mga barangay din sa North Caloocan na may kagayang boxes. Paano po pinoproseso ng PNP ang mga pangalan na inilagay sa mga drop box na ito? Nasa watchlist na ba sila agad? At pinagpaplanuhan ba sila ng operasyon?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, iyon pong sinasabi ninyo is, ito ay raw information pa lang po. Kung ilalagay man po dito sa box na ito, ito po ay iva-validate kung itong mga nakalista na inilagay po diyan sa box ay may katotohanan o hindi, Mr. Speaker.

So, in other words, hindi pa po iyan dahil nailagay diyan na wala nang imbestigasyon, pero ito po ay iimbestigahan pa. Hindi naman kaagad-agad na sasabihin na ito iyon, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Sponsor, mayroon na po ba tayong mga pangalan na nakuha mula sa boxes na maaaring na-tokhang?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, at the moment, wala pa po tayong mga listahan dahil talaga namang it is so hard also for the PNP to validate kasi hindi rin naman natin alam, there are boxes there and then somebody na galit pala sa isang tao, ilalagay lang niya iyong pangalan and that is it. Kaya ang ginagawa po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, ng ating PNP, talagang very careful validation po iyong kanilang ginagawa. But at the moment, wala pa po.

REP. BROSAS. Yes, Mr. Speaker, Mme. Sponsor, gusto po nating malaman kung ano pa ang mga plano kaugnay ng boxes na ito. Mayroon pa po bang programa sa barangay kagaya nito na may directive ang PNP at may kagayang boxes din sa mga exclusive villages or communities? Kasi ang na-record lang po namin, ang report lang po sa amin ay ito. Pero mayroon po bang ganoon? May directive ba na may boxes na ganito sa iba’t ibang communities and executive villages?

REP. CUARESMA. Sa ngayon po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, iyon hong boxes ay dito lang po sa Quezon City mayroon tayo.

REP. BROSAS. Kasi sa tingin po namin medyo nakakapangamba po ito kasi kapag inilagay na kaagad sa boxes, baka mayroon na agad na iniisip na nasa listahan ng drug watchlist at delikado po iyong karapatan ng ibang mga mamamayan natin.

REP. CUARESMA. Naiintindihan po namin iyon, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.


REP. BROSAS. Sa website po ng PNP, sinasabi na mula July 1, 2016 hanggang July 26, 2017, mayroong 3,451 drug personalities na napatay dahil sa drugs. Mababa ito kumpara sa mga naunang report na sinasabing umabot na ito sa 7,080. Ilan na po ba talaga iyong napatay sa drug campaign na ito na pinangungunahan ng ahensiya ninyo?

REP. CUARESMA. Up to this date, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, ang namatay na ho in relation to drugs is 3,778.

REP. BROSAS. So iyon na po ang bilang. Mr. Speaker, Mme. Sponsor, nais ko pong balikan iyong tanong ko kanina kaugnay doon sa boxes. Iyong mga drop boxes po ay concerned po kami kasi nakakapagkolekta ng mga name ng suspected drug personalities kahit suspected pa lang po. At sinasabi po ng Commission on Human Rights na ang method na ito may expose an individual to mistaken arrest if the information is not verified and court processes are not involved. According po sa ilang mga list nila ay supposedly these are being used behind extrajudicial killings in the war against drugs.

REP, CUARESMA. Palagay ko naman po, Mr, Speaker, Your Honor, hindi naman po gagamitin ito sa extrajudicial killing dahil in the first place wala naman ho tayong extrajudicial killing. At saka ang purpose po ng ating kapulisan in having these brown boxes particularly in Quezon City, dahil po sa Quezon City lang po mayroon tayo nito, is for the barangays also to identify. Kasi sila po iyong mga nakakaalam. But as of this date, according to our leaders from the PNP, wala naman daw pong action na nagaganap kasi talaga pong medyo mahirap din ito. Iyon po.

REP. BROSAS. Mr. Speaker, Mme. Sponsor, ang Kinatawan pong ito ay hindi naniniwala na walang extrajudicial killings kaugnay ng war on drugs dahil po sa reported cases ng nakaraan ay iyon po iyong pangunahin namin na inirereklamo ngayon, ang iba’t ibang mga killing na nagaganap kaugnay ng war on drugs. Pero, nais ko pong sabihin na sa lahat ng casualty ng drug war na ito, mayroon po ba tayong statistics kung ilan dito iyong mahirap, middle class o iyong elite?

REP. CUARESMA. Sa ngayon po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we do not have data on that kasi medyo mahirap din yatang i-identify as to whether ganyan-ganyan, mahirap or may kaya iyong mga iyan. But, I will try to talk to the PNP, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. Probably, we will provide you the data, if ever.

REP. BROSAS. Mr. Speaker, Mme. Sponsor, wala rin sigurong data nito, but, at least, sabihin ko rin po

kung ilan dito iyong sinasabi natin na medyo small time lang o mayroon ba tayong tinatawag na big fish na nakuha sa drugs?

REP. CUARESMA. Magandang katanungan …

REP. BROSAS. Sa big fish po, ilan iyong sinabi nating nanlaban, at yung naka-avail ng due process? Mga ganoon pong data.

REP. CUARESMA. We will take note of that. Napakagandang tanong po iyan, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. The PNP is presenting me a list, pero mukhang masyadong complicated. Kung anuman po iyong mga pangangailangan, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, you could just request from me, and then, most probably, I will get in touch with the DILG to provide all the data needed by the Hon. Arlene D. Brosas. Ako ay sumasang-ayon din at gusto ko rin po iyong kanyang katanungan dahil ako rin po ay naniniwala sa adhikain ng kanila pong Party-List.

REP. BROSAS. Okay. Mme. Sponsor, thank you, at sana po ay makuha natin sa madaling panahon iyong listahan na iyon na hinihiling natin.

Kaugnay naman po sa budget, sa laki po ng budget increase ng DILG, saan po dito pumapasok ang rehabilitation? Kasi gusto po nating malaman kung saan sa budget ninyo iyon pumapasok.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the fund for rehabilitation of these particular drug dependent or ito pong nagdodroga is not lodged in the Office of the DILG, but it is lodged in the Department of Health.

REP. BROSAS. Okay, Mme. Sponsor, nakikita ko nga po na kapag ni-lump together natin iyong sa national budget, mayroon po dito iyon sa DILG, PNP, iyong Oplan Double Barrel Reloaded. Tama po ba? Iyan iyong nag-a-amount to P900 million.

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. DILG MASA-MASID, P500 million.


REP. BROSAS. DILG Anti-Illegal Drug Information System, P14 million. Regular budget po ng PDEA, P1,448,675,000.

REP. CUARESMA. Sa PDEA po, hindi po under—ang PDEA po is not …

REP. BROSAS. It is okay. Ano po, inilalagay ko po …


REP. CUARESMA. …under the DILG, it is with the Office of the President , Mr. Speaker.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Mme. Sponsor, inilalagay ko po kung saan iyong sa usapin ng war on drugs. Nakalagay iyong iba’t ibang mga programa at iyong badyet kaugnay doon kasi ito-total ko po iyan. Sa Dangerous Drugs Board ay P232 million, sa DOH ay P759, kaya po nag-total ng P3.018 billion para sa 2017 iyong budget. Na-allocate po sa inyo ang amount na P900 million, o sa allocated Oplan Double Barrel Reloaded for 2017, R.A No. 10924, General Appropriations Act po ng 2017, placed under the Central Office, again, in GAB 2018. Pareho lang po ngayon, ano? Iyong the same amount is allocated for Oplan Double Barrel Reloaded.

Ngayon po, nais nating malaman paano ginamit iyong P900 million ngayong 2017, at anu-ano ang pinagkagastusan ng mga ito? Kung MOOE ito, anu-ano ang pinagkagastusan nito?

REP. CUARESMA. Kagaya rin po nitong taon na ito, ito po, at kagaya rin po ng sinabi ninyo, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, we have the different programs: it is utilized for travel expenses, trainings and scholarship expenses, supplies and materials, utilities and some other expenses. I will provide you a breakdown, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. I will provide the Honorable Brosas a breakdown of the expenditure that should be incurred or the proposed budget for this P900 million.

I also would like to inform the honorable Party-List Congresswoman that the P900 million will be distributed to the different Regional Offices of the PNP—18 Regional Offices in the entire nation. Hindi lang po sa office ng Chief, PNP but this will be distributed nationwide.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Mme. Sponsor, gusto nating malaman dito, kung meron man, ano po, kung ilan ang mga trainings na nagawa, may human rights training po ba na component ito? Ilan po iyong intelligence gatherings na budget ninyo dito? Iyong ipinambili po ng bala, gusto nating malaman. Iyong ibinigay, mayroong bang ibinigay para sa mga sibilyang nadamay sa drug war? Maaari po ba kaming bigyan ng very specific na breakdown nito, Mme. Sponsor.

REP. CUARESMA. Now? We have here, I think this Representation already or the DILG has provided a copy to the Hon. Carlos Zarate of BAYAN MUNA, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, but we will be also providing a copy to the honorable GABRIELA Party-List Representative, the Hon. Arlene D. Brosas, of the breakdown of this P900 million as to how these are allocated to the different regional offices of the PNP nationwide.

REP. BROSAS. Yes. Mme. Sponsor, dahil gagawad muli ng P900 million sa ahensiya para sa Anti-drug Program, suma-total na P1.8 billion ang pera ng mamamayan na gagamitin para sa pagsugpo sa droga sa ilalim ng Oplan Double Barrel Reloaded. May pondo po ba rito para sa mga damages? Kasi ang sinasabi lang po ninyo ay iyong sa 18 regional offices na idi-distribute iyong ano. Pero may pondo po ba rito para sa damages, injury at death ng mga sibilyan o iyong sinasabi ninyong collateral damage sa inyong giyera laban sa droga?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, wala pong provided dito sa budget ng DILG for damages.

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Sponsor, nakalagay po according to the Special Provisions, MOOE of the PNP could be used for civilian damages.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, may special provision for damages pero wala po tayong pondo for this particular …

REP. BROSAS. Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, may halaga ba rito na ginamit para bayaran ang informants o bounty para sa drug suspect na pinatay o napatay?

REP. CUARESMA. Sa ngayon po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, wala po tayong reward na ibinibigay o allocated for drugs.

REP. BROSAS. For the record, Mme. Sponsor, wala pong reward na ibinibigay para sa ano.

Anyway, sa drug war po na ito, medyo nag-utilize po ito ng highly irregular terroristic, illegal methods of catching drug suspects mula po sa Oplan Double Barrel Reloaded, Project Tokhang at Oplan Taphang. Hanggang ngayon sa Oplan Double Barrel Reloaded ay may mga unusual activities at operations. Araw-araw po sa balita ang tumatambad sa amin: issuance of secret barangay police AIDU list of drug personalities; forced surrender of those on drug lists; deaths of those on drug lists; found bodies or deaths under investigation; surveillance coping out of houses; slow response to report of EJKs; no or improper crime scene processing; incompetent scene preservation and investigation; improper conduct of operations; not in uniform; wearing masks or bonnets; improperly issued or served warrants; wrong address; different items; inadequate coordination with PDEA and ther agencies; failure to investigate background check suspects; failure of chain custody; seizure; inventory of drugs contrary to R.A. No. 9165; failure to prosecute drug cases; impunity immunity of erring police; private funeral homes for autopsy; charges for closing up a body; non-accredited medico-legal officers; funeral parlors owned by police officers; harassment and intimidation of survivors and families; media and psychological war.


Siyempre, iyong pinakatampok po sa mga illegal modus operandi tulad ng—mayroon pa po kaming mga na-record—extrajudicial killings, murder, vigilante, drug syndicates, deployment of off-duty police, mistaken identity, planting and fabrication of evidence, fake police reports, fake certification of drug personalities, planting of guns, illegal arrests, false information, personal vendetta, extortion for dropping cases, release of arrested suspects, tokhang for ransom, theft of items from house victims, violation of Miranda doctrine, other crimes, perjury by police officers, witnesses, assets, use and sale of illegal drugs. Lahat po ito ay nagdudulot ng mga takot at hindi ng feeling of security sa mga tao. Imbes na ang ating mga kalsada ay maging ligtas sa krimen, kitang-kita na ang kapulisan mismo ang naghahasik ng paglabag sa batas at sa mga batayang karapatan ng mamamayan.

So, sa malaking menos sa drug rehabilitation sa ilalim po ng DOH, ang estratehiya ng ating gobyerno ay i-eliminate ang demand side of the drug problem lalo na at araw-araw ay humahandusay sa kalsada ang mga mahihirap na drug users at pushers kahit pa ang mga menor de edad. Iyan po iyong mga report ng nakaraan. Has the police committed to no violation of human rights, no violation of the rules of procedure? Nagko-conduct po ba ng mga action ang Departamento para ma-address ito?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, iyong atin pong kapulisan ay nagka-conduct po ng investigation. In fact, puwede na rin namin po kayong bigyan ng data. Actually, this is the folder I gave Congressman Carlos Zarate and you can see in here iyon pong mga naka-conduct na investigation na ginagawa ng atin pong kapulisan, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Sana po ay mabigyan ninyo kami ng kopya ng kaugnay diyan.

Last na lang po, sa General Appropriations Bill po ng 2018, Special Provision No. 5 ng PNP budget, sinasabi po ng No. 5 doon:

Use of the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses for Payment of Damages. The Chief of the PNP is authorized, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Interior and Local Government, to utilize MOOE for the payment of damages to property and for injury and death of civilians resulting from police operations, as determined by a competent court.

Ang kuwestiyon ko po ay: May nabayaran na ba mula sa espesyal na probisyong ito? Ilan, magkano na ang halagang nagastos mula dito, at ilan ang drug-related?

REP. CUARESMA. Sa ngayon, po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, wala pa pong nababayaran because it is not that easy na maglalabas na lang po ng ganyan-ganyan ang atin pong kapulisan. We need an order coming from the court before the PNP will release any compensation or any amount for rehabilitation or whatsoever, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Okay, since iyon po iyong ano ninyo, sasabihin ko pa po sana, itatanong ko po sana kung mayroon pang mga—sinabi ninyo po kasi na hindi pa nagagamit, itatanong ko sana kung saan nagamit at ilan ang drug-related, at tapos iyong kung mayroong damages to property, injury or death, alin po doon iyong mga ganoong details. Pero kung wala po kayong detalye, Mme. Sponsor, …

REP. CUARESMA. In the budget, or yes, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, it is not so provided in the budget that there is a specific fund for this particular program that the Honorable Brosas is referring to. So, as I mentioned earlier, there needs to be an order coming from the court, and then the funds that shall be utilized for this purpose will come from the savings of the funds under the PNP, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Okay, thank you, Mme. Sponsor. Hindi ko na po uulitin pa iyong tungkol doon dahil ang gusto ko po sanang malaman, kung maaaring maghabol ang mga biktima, lalung-lalo na iyong tinawag nating collateral damage, sa mga nabiktima ng operasyon, pupuwede ba silang dumulog, parang ganoon, iyon po iyong …

REP. CUARESMA. Ang palagay ko po, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, puwede.

REP. BROSAS. For that fund …

REP. CUARESMA. Iyong korte po, mag-ano po sila sa korte, and the court will decide as to whether they are qualified to or entitled to be given a support, something like that, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. BROSAS. Okay, thank you, Mme. Sponsor. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Panghuling manipestasyon na lang po. Marami pong human rights issues ang kinakaharap

ng war on drugs campaign ng administrasyong Duterte. Nakababahala lamang na may malaking pondo tayo para sa isang support network na para bagang witch hunt, iyong mga hinihinalang users or pushers, tapos tinatanggalan natin ng karapatan for due process ang mga tao.

Noong mga nakaraang linggo po, nagsabi iyong Pangulo na di niya kayang tapusin ang drug war na


inilunsad niya. Marami na ang napatay sa giyera laban sa droga. Sinabi po ninyo na mayroon na tayong naitalang 3,000 mahigit, karamihan ay mula sa maliliit o sa mahihirap. Samantala, halos wala pa tayong naririnig hinggil sa malalaking drug lord, mga ilan pa lang at mga supplier. Parang sinasabi din ng Pangulo na maling giyera ang pinasok niya. Ang inilunsad na drug war ay di giyera laban sa mga pinanggagalingan ng droga o sa tunay na problema sa lipunan; ito ay nagmimistulang giyera sa mahirap.

Kung pagbabatayan ang 2018 Budget, killing-spree budget ito laban sa mahihirap na mamamayan. Maliban sa malaking budget sa pagwasak sa mga bahay ng maralitang taga-lungsod ay malaki din ang budget sa pagpatay sa mga napaghihinalaan. Kung gaano po kalaki ang budget sa pagpapalayas at pagpatay ay maliit naman ang para sa rehabilitation at healthcare.

Nangangahulugan po ba ito na wala nang pag-asa ang bansang ito kaya nagfi-finance tayo ng destruction of our urban poor communities at nagte-terminate ng mga drug addicts instead of helping them out of the poverty and rehabilitating them?

Ang Representasyon pong ito ay naniniwala na we cannot fund an institution to kill our people.

Iyon lang po. Maraming salamat po, Mme. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CUARESMA. Maraming salamat din, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, Ph.D., of COOP-NATCCO Party-List for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Anthony Bravo of COOP-NATCCO is recognized to interpellate the Lady Sponsor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good morning to everyone.

REP. CUARESMA. Magandang umaga po.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Will the distinguished Sponsor yield to some questions from this Representation?

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker and Your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). This is just a quick observation, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

This is about the off-budget account of the DILG. Just to give you a background, the DILG in 2013, as

per report coming from the BESF, has an outstanding balance as of December 31, I mean 2013, a balance of P5,998,835,000, and revenues of P5,334,900,000.

There was a report in 2013 on their expenditure of P722,000,000. I just wonder, Mr. Speaker, Mme. Sponsor, what is reflected in 2014 balance was only P1 billion. There are something missing, almost P4 billion. Then, in 2015, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, as of December 31, 2015, a balance of P1,073,441,000; then a revenue again of P5,673,978,000.

Then again, medyo malaki ito, kaya gusto ko pong tawagin ang pansin ng ating DILG. Hindi man po ito nangyari sa panahon ng bagong leadership ngayon, subalit medyo nakakabahala kasi mukhang malayo ang mga pagitan. So, kung titingnan po natin, nagkaroon po ng expenditure po noong 2015. Ito po ay malapit na iyong election kaya medyo nakakabahala ito. There was a huge expenditure under this account, P5,829,666,000.

So, I would like to call the attention of the DILG to look into this matter, maybe iyong mga gumamit po ng pondong ito ay nandiyan pa naman eh. I think this needs to be revisited by the COA. Hindi po nagta-tally iyong mga reports at saka ang lalayo.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker and Your Honor, may this Representation request from the Honorable Bravo to provide a copy, this Representation—I mean, be given a copy of that unutilized portion of the budget for 2013, 2014, and 2015 of the DILG, so that maybe, anyway, our caretaker of the Office of the DILG is with us, so that we can go deep, and maybe we can make some investigations about the statement you just relayed, Mr. Speaker and your Honor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Mr. Speaker.

REP. CUARESMA. So that we have the basis or yes, that it is, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I can provide you the report, but I am confident that the DILG has this report because this is a faithful reproduction—the Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing for 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016. So, I am pretty sure the DILG has the same figure.

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker and your Honor, as been mentioned by Usec. Cuy of the DILG, they will dig into the records of these unutilized budget of the DILG.

REP. BRAVO (A.). For the record, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I would like to request that the Member of this august Chamber be provided with the


report relative to the utilization of the fund and the items that were procured relative to the utilization of P5.829 billion.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker and Your Honor, rest assured that we will be providing you a copy. And, if there is a need for an investigation by the office of the DILG, then the DILG will do it. And if ever there will be an investigation, Mr. Speaker and your Honor, this Representation will provide you a copy of whatever the results of the investigation which shall be conducted by the DILG.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that assurance, distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker. That is all.

REP. CUARESMA. And thank you also, Mr. Speaker and Your Honor, for bringing this out in this forum.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you.

REP. CUARESMA. Maraming salamat po.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Abdullah D. Dimaporo from the Second District of Lanao del Norte for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Abdullah D. Dimaporo is recognized to interpellate the Lady Sponsor.

REP. DIMAPORO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, would the honorable Sponsor yield to some suggestions, Mr. Speaker?

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker and your Honor.

REP. DIMAPORO (A.). Mr. Speaker, we in Lanao del Norte fully support the President in what he is doing for our country, for ourselves. We believe in his sincerity and we believe that his projects and programs are good for all of us. We may set the mandate and the policies for the Departments to implement. But the success of the President will depend on the efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation by the government agencies. And one example is the Philippine National Police. General Ronald “Bato” M. Dela Rosa is being blamed for the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the Philippine National Police. But as we see it, Mr. Speaker, it is not the fault of General

Bato. It is our fault because of the law that Congress has made, creating the National Police Commission and also the Philippine Public Safety College—I think it is the name. What we civilians do not know or we may feel we know, but we do not really realize it because we do not practice it. And it is also the same with the civilian character of the National Police Commission. We may not be able to relate to what the police need to have in order to achieve their mission. I think that what is most important to them is their control of their men. The command responsibility must be given and there must be an appropriate control of his men in order that they can achieve their mission. If we do not give them complete control, and if we do not give them what their command needs, we cannot blame them, Mr. Speaker. We have eroded the command control of the Officers of the Philippine National Police by allowing the National Police Commission to recruit, to appoint, to discipline, to reward or promote, and to dismiss erring members of the Philippine National Police. They also decide on what type of equipment the Philippine National Police should have.

We allow civilians to guide the Philippine National Police when we civilians do not know what the policemen have to go through. We trained them—we allow them to train their men. And they trained their men to follow their officers. And the civilians are not trained that way. They trained their men to die for their brother policemen, and we civilians do not know that. We do not care whether they die or not because it is not us dying. What we civilians have in our mind are ourselves. But in the minds of the policemen, what they have is the achievement of their mission—how to follow their officers. And we have eroded that when we have created the National Police Commission, also, to some extent, when we have created the Philippine Public Safety College.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to suggest to the House leadership, especially the Committee on Appropriations, to help the President be more effective by trying to find ways, immediately, on how to give General Bato more control of the Philippine National Police in order that they can implement the necessary discipline that the Philippine National Police should have had in order to prevent incidents like the killing of a Korean national right in the holy grounds of the General Headquarters of the Philippine National Police and preventing the killing of a boy, such as Kian. If he is given the right authority to discipline his men, I believe that General Bato can do it.

So I would like to suggest, Mr. Speaker, to our leadership in the House, that we ask our policemen-Members, the Hon. Romeo M. Acop, Hon. Leopoldo N. Bataoil and Hon. Amado T. Espino Jr., to join with the NAPOLCOM Vice Chairman, the OIC-Secretary of the DILG, General “Bato” Dela Rosa, General De


Leon, and others who may be deemed necessary by the House leadership to talk on how to improve the command authority of General Bato Dela Rosa over the chain of command of the Philippine National Police in order to improve the discipline in the Philippine National Police.

In the meantime, as we await the cooperation of the National Police Commission, I suggest that we leave only P1.00 in the proposed budget of the National Police Commission and the remaining, we put it under the Philippine National Police. However, if within the time, before we go on a bicameral meeting with the Senate, they were able to agree in the bicameral meeting, we return the amount that we removed from the National Police Commission. This is my suggestion, Mme. Sponsor, and I hope that the honorable Sponsor would accept it and endorse it to the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Appropriations will endorse it to the House leadership for their guidance.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker and Your Honor, we will take note of that manifestation or suggestion of the Hon. Abdullah D. Dimaporo. And, then, this will be discussed with the Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and the leadership, Your Honor.

REP. DIMAPORO (A.). So, do I understand, Mr. Speaker, that the honorable Sponsor will recommend it favorably to the Committee on Appropriations?

REP. CUARESMA. This will be discussed, Mr. Speaker and Your Honor. The suggestion of Hon. Abdullah Dimaporo will be discussed with the leadership and then, maybe, we will give you a report or, that depends whether there will be a meeting and you will also be invited, I mean, Mr. Speaker and Your Honor, the Honorable Dimaporo will be invited.

REP. DIMAPORO (A.). Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker, but, I would like to inform the honorable Sponsor that in case we cannot do this, I would like to reserve my right to stand up during the individual amendments so that if I fail, or Congress has failed me, they will know that there are people who believe in General Bato. And, if he fails to discipline the Philippine National Police, our people will know that it is not because of General Bato, but, it is because of the House of Representatives.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CUARESMA. Well taken, Mr. Speaker …

REP. DIMAPORO (A.). Thank you, Mme. Sponsor.

REP. CUARESMA. … and Your Honor.

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

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Ariel “Ka Ayik” B. Casilao of ANAKPAWIS Party-List for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Hon. “Ka Ayik” Casilao is recognized to interpellate the Lady Sponsor of the proposed budget for the Department of the Interior and Local Government and its attached agencies.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, maayong buntag. Good morning, Mme. Sponsor.

I will not interpellate in the usual manner that I interpellate which is a minimum of one hour. Isang tanong, isang sagot lang po. But, Dep. Majority Leader, Mr. Speaker, allow me to lay down the predicate. I assure you it will not cost an hour, it will not—a minimum of five minutes.

While waiting for the DILG to be up for plenary budget deliberations, two news reports in two different news channels were stating that people in Caloocan, their parents, are now in a state of fear for their children because of what happened to Kian. What happened to Carl and the company of Carl who was recently found with 30-stab wounds, a 14-year-old Reynaldo De Guzman, a.k.a. Kulot.

Iyon po ang balita na ikinatatakot ng mga magulang. This Representation has more than 2,800 ID card —bearing members of ANAKPAWIS in Caloocan City. And, our activities this morning led to a consultation, a brief consultation, that the parents-leaders of my chapter are also signifying similar fears as what happened to Kian and to Reynaldo.

Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I think it is but proper that the amount proposed for Oplan Double Barrel be in a suspended mode just like the proposal of our colleague for a particular item.

I am not stating here that would be similar to the ERC’s fate or to that 1,000 entire item. The PS, the other MOOE for the DILG and the PNP could be considered. But for the program Oplan Double Barrel, this Representation fully believes, in view of what happened to Kian, to Reynaldo and to Carl—makatarungang hilingin na habang hindi pa po natin nakikita ang commitment ni Pangulong Duterte at ni PNP Chief Dela Rosa that they should be held accountable and we will see them behind bars. I think it is but proper for the Appropriations Committee to put a colatilla. Ang term namin ni General Bato in Bisaya, colatilla din—a condition para hindi na. Sa totoo lang, ang imahe at problemang kinakaharap ngayon sa usapin ng kontra-droga, giyera kontra-droga, nawawalan po ng kredibilidad ang ating kapulisan


dahil habang doon sa mga involved sa P6.4 billion, they are still enjoying their lives, nasaan po ang mga pipitsuging pinagsususpetsahan pa lang na mayroong relasyon sa usapin ng droga and petty crimes ay bulagta at patay, and the manner of their deaths is barbaric to describe. Ito po ang direktamente, ang brutally frank na tanong at kahilingan ng Kinatawang ito, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

With regard to the P900 million allotment for Oplan Double Barrel, this Representation, together with my colleagues in the Makabayan bloc, are appealing to suspend and to take into serious considerations for the Committee on Appropriations to put a serious precondition while awaiting the results, because we cannot move on a simple promise. While there is a promise from the President, from the Chief PNP, to deliver justice until and unless hindi ito maulit and to see those perpetrators behind bars, it is the duty of this august Body not to take part in whatever process that we will allow another Kian, another Carl and another Reynaldo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, the manifestation of the honorable Party-List Representative is noted. May I just inform everyone that on the case of Kian Delos Santos, there is already a case filed by the PAO Chief, Atty. Persida Acosta, last August 25, 2017 before the Department of Justice, cases for murder and violation of Section 4 of Republic Act No. 9745. Now on the case of Carl Arnaiz against the PNP involved in that particular incident, investigation is ongoing and so with that 14-year-old companion of Carl.

With the manifestation, Mr. Speaker, of the honorable Representative from ANAKPAWIS Party-List, again, just like the manifestation or suggestion of the Honorable Dimaporo, this will be taken up with the leadership, and then maybe, it is all up now for the leadership to decide. We will take note of that manifestation, Mr. Speaker.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Antonio Tinio of ACT TEACHERS Party-List for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Honorable Antonio Tinio of the ACT TEACHERS Party-List is recognized to interpellate the Lady Sponsor.

REP. TINIO. Thank you. Maraming salamat po, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, katulad ng maraming ibang interpellators, of course, ang isang malaking concern natin ngayon sa badyet ng DILG, partikular ng PNP,

ay kaugnay sa war on drugs at sa maraming mga tumatampok na kaso ng alleged human rights violation, kasama na dito ang malinaw, malakas ang ebidensya na pagpatay ng mga pulis kay Kian Delos Santos, ang bagong isyu sa pagpatay kay Carl Arnaiz, at ang natagpuan lang ngayon na bangkay ng kasama ni Carl Arnaiz, isang 14-year-old na si Reynaldo De Guzman na brutally murdered. At lumalabas na lahat ng mga ito ay may kinalaman sa kasalukuyang giyera kontra-droga.

Ang pinag-uusapan natin dito ang PNP badyet na may nakalaan na P93.9 billion para sa conduct of police patrol operations and other related confidential activities against dissidents, subversives, lawless elements, organized crime syndicates, and campaign against kidnapping, trafficking of women and minors, smuggling, carnapping, gun running, illegal fishing, and trafficking of illegal drugs. Dagdag pa nga dito ang binanggit kanina ni Congressman Casilao na P900 million na hiwalay pang badyet para sa Oplan Double Barrel o ang anti-drug campaign pa rin ng Duterte administration.

Ngayon, alam naman po natin na ang pulisya, ang PNP, ang DILG at ang lahat ng mga ahensya na may kinalaman sa law enforcement ay ginagabayan ng Konstitusyon ng Pilipinas, at mahalagang bahagi ng Konstitusyon ang Article III on Bill of Rights. Ang pinakauna dito, Section 1, upang idiin din ang kahalagahan ng karapatang nito o ang karapatan sa buhay ang nagsasabi, “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.” Kasama rin sa Bill of Rights ang Section 14(1) na nagsasabing, “No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.” Karugtong nito ang subparagraph (2) na nagsasabing, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent, until the contrary is proved x x x.” Iyan po ang mga batayang karapatan na ginagarantiya ng Konstitusyon. Siyempre, inaasahan na lahat ng mga ahensya, lalo na ang kapulisan ay susunod dito.

Kaya may mga tanong po tayo. Paano po natitiyak ng Philippine National Police, partikular sa kanilang Oplan Double Barrel, ang anti-illegal drugs campaign, na nasusunod ang mga batayang karapatan na ginagarantiya ng Bill of Rights, kasama ang right to life, ang right to due process, the presumption of innocence, at iba pa? Nasusunod nga po ba ang mga ito sa anti-drug operations ng PNP?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, ang atin pong kapulisan ay sumusunod sa Police Operational procedure o POP kaya nga po ang Bill of Rights ng ating mga kababayan ay nabibigyan pansin. Nandito sa functions ng ating police officers that they have to observe human rights and the dignity of a person, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.


REP. TINIO. Okay. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, nauulat po sa news reports at kahit mismo sa mga pronouncements ng mga matataas na opisyal ng PNP na ang mga Oplan Double Barrel Operations na nangyayari, minsan gabi-gabi, nagsisimula sa paggawa ng listahan ng mga so-called drug personalities—tama po ba? Mayroon nga po bang mga listahan ng so-called drug personalities na binubuo ang PNP? Na-media po recently na mayroong isang police precint, I think, it was in Quezon City, na naglagay pa ito ng parang dropbox sa kanilang presinto at hinihikayat ang mga miyembro ng komunidad na maghulog daw ng pangalan ng mga so-called drug personalities. That is one example that was highlighted in the media. Totoo po ba na ang police anti-drug operations ay nagsisimula sa mga listahang ito?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, kagaya po ng sinabi ko earlier, sa mga naihulog na papel o pangalan sa brown boxes sa Quezon City, hanggang ngayon po ay wala pa o hindi pa po tapos ang validation, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

As of this moment, wala pa kumbagang investigation that was conducted just because of the list, I mean, the names of those that were dropped in those brown boxes, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. TINIO. So mayroon nga po sa kaso ng Quezon City PNP na talagang puwedeng maghulog ng pangalan sa box. Pero ang sinasabi ninyo, may proseso pa ng validation na pagdaraanan ito.

REP. CUARESMA. Yes, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. TINIO. Pero ang tanong ko po ay hinggil sa mga listahan. Mayroon po bang binubuong mga listahan ng drug personalities within the community?

REP. CUARESMA. Mayroon po tayong mga listahan sabi ng ating mga kapulisan. Pero it does not mean na kung mayroon nang listahan ay validated na ito. Kung magkakaroon man ng search warrant or buy-bust operations, sinusunod naman po ng ating kapulisan ang dapat na procedure, Mr. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. So, mayroon pong mga listahan ang PNP, and these are validated. Ang ibig sabihin, hindi lang…

REP. CUARESMA. Pero, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor ...

REP. TINIO. … information

REP. CUARESMA. … it does not come. Wala pa pong nanggagaling from that brown boxes.

REP. TINIO. Okay. Klaro po. Basta there is a validated list and this validated list is the basis for the anti-illegal drug operations, tama po ba? Tama po. Okay.

Ngayon, nabanggit po ninyo the most recent example, the so-called “one-time, big-time operation,” partikular sa Caloocan at sa Bulacan. Unang nabalita na mayroong 32 na napatay. Sunud-sunod po iyan—ang Bulacan, tapos ang Caloocan, and other areas kung saan naglunsad ng one-time, big-time operation. Ito po ba ay ibinunga rin o nakabatay sa mga sinasabing validated lists of drug personalities?

REP. CUARESMA. Ang pag-serve ng search warrant, hindi po ang pulis ang nagbibigay. Ang ating korte ang nagbibigay ng search warrant na siya namang ini-implement ng ating kapulisan, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. TINIO. Hindi ko pa po itinanong ang search warrant pero dahil nabanggit ninyo, iyon bang one-time, big-time operation ay nakabatay sa warrant? May mga na-issue bang search warrant or arrest warrant sa Caloocan, halimbawa, kagaya sa kaso o sa community ni Kian Delos Santos? Iyong action po ba ng pulis ay nakabatay sa warrant, whether search or arrest warrant? Mayroon po ba?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, ang atin pong Chief PNP ngayon ay hindi naman po niya inaanak ang masamang ginagawa ng ating mga kapulisan. I know that he assured the public that he will punish scalawag policemen. That is why in the case of Kian Loyd Delos Santos, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, it is Chief PAO Atty. Persida Acosta who facilitated the filing of the case against the policemen involved. These cases were already docketed under NPS and were assigned to SAS Tofel Austria and others. In the PNP level, it is the office of the Internal Affairs Service that is initiating an administrative investigation, aside of course from the investigation being conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor.

REP. TINIO. That is good to know, Mr. Speaker, at dapat lang po. Talaga namang ini-expect ng publiko na mayroong ganyang aksyon para panagutin ang mga pulis na involved sa kaso ni Kian dahil napakalakas ng ebidensiya, including the video evidence na talagang extrajudicial killing ito. It was murder. Pero ang itinatanong ko po kung ang mga tokhang operation po ay nakabatay sa warrant, whether search or arrest warrants. Ang actions o ang tokhang operation ba ay on the basis of warrants?

REP. CUARESMA. Kasi po ang Oplan Tokhang, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, talagang kakatok sa pintuan,


at pag ang isang drug suspect ay nanlaban, natural na ang ating kapulisan ay lalaban din.

REP. TINIO. Okay, naintindihan po natin at narinig na natin iyan.

REP. CUARESMA. Kagaya nga po dito sa drug on war, marami na rin tayong kapulisan ang namatay at marami rin po ang wounded. Iyon naman pong mga hindi kapulisan na hindi gumagawa ng tama, marami na rin pong nabigyan ng disciplinary action by the PNP Chief, Mr. Sponsor, and Mr. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Well, we understand that and we received the data. Mayroon nga pong mga datos tayo hinggil sa mga pulis na napatay in all sorts of police operations pero ang concern ko pa kasi para deretsuhin na natin, ano, iyon na nga, whether or not, sabi ninyo iyong “tokhang” kumakatok ang pulis sa tahanan ng isang suspected drug personality. Iyan po ang term na ginagamit ninyo pero alam naman po natin na kung ayaw papasukin ang pulis noong maybahay, hindi talaga puwede unless may warrant, hindi po ba? Saka, hindi rin puwede basta mag-aresto unless may arrest warrant, ano, unless mayroon talagang nagaganap na very clear violation of law, sa harap mismo ng mga pulis.

REP. CUARESMA. Ganito po iyan, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, kung kakatok naman po iyong ating mga kapulisan ay hindi ibig sabihin na huhulihiin na ho iyong kung sino man po iyong nasa loob ng bahay. Makikiusap lang po iyong ating kapulisan. Ganoon po ang …

REP. TINIO. Well, ang concern po natin is whether or not, you know, the so-called “One-time, Big-Time” operations, na iyong may nanlalaban, iyong paglaban po ba nila is paglaban in the context of resisting legal arrest, an arrest backed by a warrant, ano, kasi, otherwise, kung walang warrant, baka, ano ito, iyon na nga, tawag diyan warrantless arrest na obviously ay violation ng Bill of Rights. Alam naman natin, puwede lang gawin iyan in certain, under our law, specific instances. halimbawa, suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.

So, paano po, binigyan po tayo ng datos ng PNP, nagpapasalamat tayo at ang sabi dito, “Accomplishment on Anti-Illegal Drug Campaign. Period covered, July 1, 2016 to August 29, 2017.” So, very comprehensive po, mula sa unang araw ng Duterte administration up to, at least, the end of August, at ang sabi po rito, sa total o out of 6,591 operations in the anti-illegal drug campaign, mayroon pong arrested total na 102,612, and also nandito iyong data on the total of those who were killed in pulis operations, iyong mga namatay, 3,378. Ang tanong ko po ngayon dito sa inarestong 102,612 ay covered ba ng mga warrant iyong mga inaresto na ito? Lahat ba ng mga ito ay mga caught in the act, kung baga, puwede na?

REP. CUARESMA. Iyong iba pong hinuli ay base sa search warrant o kayà sa buy-bust operation po pero hindi ibig sabihin na kung buy-bust operations, kaagad-agad na mabibigyan na ho ng parusa, kundi ito po ay pupunta pa rin po korte, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. TINIO. May number po ba tayo ng arrested on the basis of warrants? Can we be provided with that number para magka-ideya tayo kung ilan iyong sa buy-bust, ilang yong binanggit ninyo po are on the basis of warrants and the like?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker , Mr. Sponsor, at the moment we do not have the data, …

REP. TINIO. Could we be provided with that information?

REP. CUARESMA. … but we can provide this to the Honorable …

REP. TINIO. Iyon lang para magka-ideya po tayo.

REP. CUARESMA. … ACT TEACHERS Party-List Representative.

REP. TINIO. As I said, nasa konteksto po ito noong pagtiyak lang na nasusunod iyong Bill of Rights.

REP. CUARESMA. Opo, naiintindihan po namin iyon, Mr. Speaker , Mr. Sponsor.

REP. TINIO. Okay. Ngayon, hindi ko na po tatanungin iyong sa “died in police operations.” Iyong mga ibang kasamahan natin ay nag-raise na ng mga concerns dito. In the Committee level, I expressed my grave concerns regarding these killings highlighted by Kian Delos Santos case and now, the Carl Arnaiz case.

Sa data, again, na ibinigay ng PNP, ito po iyong gusto kong malaman. Dito po sa data, again, sa Accomplishment on the Anti-Illegal Drug Campaign—a total of 102,612 were arrested, at mayroon pa pong paghahati ng data dahil of those 102,612, ang users ay 47,401, tapos, 55,211 ang pushers. So, it is a very thorough breakdown. Ang tanong ko po, ito na po ba ang accomplishment ng mahigit isang taon ng Oplan Double Barrel ng anti-illegal drug campaign? Marami kayong naarestong user at marami kayong naarestong pusher. Okay, so, in other words, kung ibabatay sa na-present na datos, iyong sa tokhang, ang tinatarget ay iyong street level, hindi ba? Ibig sabihin, iyon na nga, using your own terms—the user and the pusher.

Sa Dangerous Drugs Act po, hindi lang naman iyong user at saka iyong pusher ang pinaparusahan. In


fact, mas mabigat ang parusa doon sa mas nakatataas at tatawagin nating “supply chain,” at siyempre, ang pinakasimula niyan, iyong source noong droga. Walang user, walang pusher kung walang pinanggagalingan noong droga. Sa Dangerous Drugs Act, again, mayroong isang mabigat na offense doon—importation of illegal drugs and precursor chemicals and so on, iyong mga ingredients, kumbaga. Tapos, isa pa doon, iyong manufacture, so, in other words, iyong aktwal na gumagawa. In other words, kinikilala noong Dangerous Drugs Act na ang supply ng droga sa Pilipinas ay may dalawang pinanggagalingan—isa, locally manufactured, so may mga laboratoryo dito, at kung pinag-uusapan natin ay shabu, may mga laboratory dito sa Pilipinas na gumagawa iyong shabu mismo. Tapos, iyong importation—ibig sabihin, ginawa sa labas ng bansa, tapos, pinapasok sa loob. Na-highlight ang reyalidad na iyan doon sa, iyon nga, naging kontrobersiyal ngayon, na iniimbestigahan pa iyong pagpasok ng P6.4 billion worth of shabu mismo sa port of Manila na nanggaling sa China. So, iyon klarong-klaro kung saan nanggagaling—sa China.

Ang tanong ko po, wala pong binabanggit dito sa Accomplishment Report ng Anti-Illegal Drug Campaign regarding the number of importers of illegal drugs or manufactures or producers of illegal drugs. Bakit wala po rito?

REP. CUARESMA. Anyway, Mr. Speaker …

REP. TINIO. Pusher and usher lamang. Kung ganyan po ang approach, ay talagang hindi po masusugpo ang droga kasi habang nandiyan ang supply, magkakaroon tayo ng mga pusher at user.

REP. CUARESMA. Okay. So, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, siguro ang rason bakit iyan lang po iyong isinabmit sa inyo ng ating DILG is that iyan lang po iyong under DILG, kagaya po noong sinasabi ninyo na may mga ibang agency kasi po na in-charge sa mga ganito. At any rate, narinig naman po ng ating mga namumuno ng DILG at kapulisan so they shall get in touch with attached agencies which are also attached under this kind of program of the government and then we will submit to you the data later as soon as we have them, Mr. Speaker , Mr. Sponsor.

REP. TINIO. Mr. Speaker, gusto ko lang po malinawan. Parang ang sinasabi po ng Sponsor ay hindi na papel ng PNP at papel na ng ibang ahensiya iyong pag-target sa mga importer at saka sa mga producers or manufacturers ng droga. In other words, iyong nagsu-supply ng droga. Parang hindi ko naman matanggap na walang papel ang PNP bilang pangunahing law enforcement agency sa buong bansa at saklaw din naman nila iyong illegal drugs.

REP. CUARESMA. So, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, we will provide you those big—I mean, iyong sinasabi niyong mga malalaking big fish, kung baga, who died in police operations and arrested at saka ho iyong mga nag-surrender.

REP. TINIO. Sa ngayon ho, of course, may high-profile incidents involving the PNP, at alam natin iyon, halimbawa, iyong pagpatay kay Mayor Espinosa ng Albuera, Leyte, tapos recently, iyong operation which led to the killing of the Ozamis City Mayor Parojinog and his wife, and a number of other individuals, although ako, ang understanding ko, ang mga ito ay politicians serving as protectors of the drug trade at hindi sila mismo iyong importer or producer. At least, iyong ang pagkakaalam natin at pagkakaalam ng publiko, so hindi pa rin talaga iyong, in fact, hindi well-known sa atin. I mean, let me just compare.

For example, in the case of Latin American countries where, you know, kung ikukumpara iyong problema natin sa droga sa mga bansa sa Latin America, doon talaga, ibang level iyong tinatawag na narco-politics at saka iyong lawak at saklaw at yaman ng mga drug cartels. For example, in Columbia and Mexico, doon, you know, bahagi noong anti-drug campaign nila iyong talagang identified at kilalang-kilalang target ng kanilang buong law enforcement—iyong mga well-known drug lords. I mean, some of them are globally famous or notorious like Pablo Escobar, hindi ba? Dito sa ating war on drugs, parang identified ang ilang mga politicians serving as protectors. pero iyong mga drug lord mismo, for the most part, they remain anonymous, hindi sila identified. Hindi pinapakilala sa publiko and therefore, hindi rin nai-involve ang publiko sa kampanya para mahuli sila.

So, bakit po ganoon? Sino po ba ang mga kilalang drug lord at ano ang ginagawa ng PNP kontra sa mga drug lord na ito? Labas ito sa mga pulitiko na protector, iyong mga aktwal na nagdadala o nagpo-produce mismo ng droga, sino-sino po ang mga iyan? Mayroon na po bang naaresto na—or to use the terminology of the police, na-neutralize na ba ang mga ito?

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor, when we talk of iyon pong laboratories, mayroon po tayong 161 dens na...

REP. TINIO. Dens?

REP. CUARESMA. ...dismantled—170 number of dismantled dens and clandestine laboratories. Iyon po, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, as I have said earlier, we will just furnish a copy of the data of all those matters which had been presented by the Honorable Tinio. We will be giving him all the data that he is presenting or manifesting in this budget forum.


REP. TINIO. Well, we will appreciate that, Mr. Speaker, na mabigyan kami ng mas kumpletong impormasyon hinggil sa accomplishments ng anti-illegal drug campaign ng Duterte administration, kasi nga ang pangamba natin ay, si Pangulong Duterte na nanalo sa pagka-Pangulo, sa pangunahing kampanya niya na sa loob ng tatlo hanggang anim na buwan ay tatapusin daw niya ang problema ng iligal na droga. Ngunit matapos ang mahigit isang taon ay hindi pa rin natatapos at si Pangulong Duterte na mismo ang nagsabi na inaamin na niya na hindi raw matatapos ang problema kontra sa droga kahit pa sinasabi ng iba na umaabot na sa mahigit 13,000 ang namamatay kaugnay ng anti-illegal drug campaign ng Duterte administration.

Ang nais po nating idiin dito ay, well, kung ang approach ay ang pag-target sa street level na mga user at pusher, samantalang hindi pinapatampok iyong pag-aresto at pagtigil sa supply ng droga, partikular iyong mga nag-i-import at iyong mga nagmamanupaktura, nag-i-import ng droga mula sa ibang bansa, papasok ito dito, at iyong nagmamanupaktura ng droga dito mismo, partikular iyong shabu, ay talagang hindi matatapos ang problema ng droga. Lalong magiging malinaw na walang saysay iyong patuloy na mga operasyon sa antas ng user at pusher.

Kaya po kaisa ako ni Congressman Casilao sa kanyang mungkahi kanina na habang maraming mga kuwestiyon kaugnay sa bisa ng kampanya kontra droga, na si Pangulong Duterte mismo ang nagsabi na hindi matatapos o hindi makakapagwakas sa problema ng droga, bagkus, ay nagreresulta sa pagpatay ng marami nating mga kababayan, at lumalabas na kasama roon, kabilang doon ang mga inosente. Tapos, habang hindi rin naipapakita ng PNP na seryoso at puspusan ang kanilang kampanya kontra sa mga malalaking isda, ibig sabihin, iyong mga nagpapasok mismo o gumagawa noong iligal na droga dito sa Pilipinas, kaya kaisa ko po si Congressman Casilao sa panawagan na tanggalin natin ang dagdag na budget na hinihingi na P900 million para sa Oplan Double Barrel. At the proper time, I will make that motion, Mr. Speaker.

Magiging bukas po ba ang ating Sponsor kung habang hindi naipakikita ng PNP at ng DILG na mabisa nga ang kanilang approach at nagagarantiya na napangangalagaan ang right to life, right to due process and presumption of innocence ng mga mamamayang Pilipino, ay huwag nating dagdagan ang budget para sa Oplan Double Barrel? Tanggalin ang P900 million, Mr. Speaker. Bukas po ba kayo doon?

REP. CUARESMA. Kagaya po ng sinabi ko sa katanungan din po ng ating Party-List Congressman ng ANAKPAWIS, ay atin pong idudulog ito sa liderato po ng Kongreso iyong inyo pong mga suhestiyon, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sponsor.

REP. TINIO. Maraming salamat po sa inyong tugon, at diyan na po natatapos ang aking interpellation.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move instead that we recognize the honorable Minority Leader.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Minority Leader, the Hon. Danilo E. Suarez, is hereby recognized.

REP. SUAREZ. Before I move for the termination, just one question, may I know the role of the DILG and the PNP in the nightmarish traffic problem in the National Capital Region. Is it this Department’s call, is it the DOTr’s, is it the MMDA’s? Just that question.

REP. CUARESMA. Mr. Speaker, according to our leaders from the DILG, traffic, particularly in the NCR, is mainly in Metro Manila, thus, the MMDA.

REP. SUAREZ. This the turf of the MMDA, assisting lang ang PNP?


REP. SUAREZ. After the deliberations on the budget, I am going to ask for a tripartite meeting so that, maybe, we can come up with some solutions.

In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, thank you very much for your answer.

REP. CUARESMA. Maraming salamat po.

REP. SUAREZ. In behalf of the Minority, we interpose no more questions on the proposed budget of the DILG and the PNP. I therefore move to close the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the DILG, including its attached agencies.



REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in its motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of


the Department of the Interior and Local Government, including its attached agencies.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chairs hears none; the motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the Department of the Interior and Local Government, including its attached agencies, is hereby approved.

REP. CUARESMA. So, in behalf of the family of DILG, maraming salamat po at magandang umaga sa inyong lahat.



REP. DEFENSOR. I move for a suspension of the session, Mr. Speaker.


It was 1:22 a.m.




REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the Commission on the Filipino Language.

COMMISSION ON THE FILIPINO LANGUAGE

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). There is a motion to open the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Commission on Filipino Language. Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to greet the head of the Commission who is in the gallery today, Chairman Virgilio Almario.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Welcome to the House of Representatives.

The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.The distinguished Sponsor, is the Chairman of the

Commission on the Filipino Language present?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Mr. Speaker, the Chairman is present.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Okay, the Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Sponsor, the Hon. Maria Carmen S. Zamora.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Sponsor of the proposed budget of the Commission on the Filipino Language, the Hon. Maria Carmen S. Zamora, is recognized.

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Tony Bravo, the Deputy Minority Leader, is recognized.

REP. BRAVO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.There being no member from the Minority who

wishes to ask questions, I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Commission on the Filipino Language. I so move, Mr. Speaker.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in its motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget on the Commission on the Filipino Language.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the Commission on the Filipino Language is hereby approved.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Maria Carmen S. Zamora so that she may discuss the budget of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts.

NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR CULTURE AND THE ARTS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We now open the period of interpellation and debate on the


proposed budget of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is the Chairman of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts present?

REP. DE VENECIA. I am sorry, let me amend my motion, Mr. Speaker. I move that we acknowledge the presence of the head of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts, Chairman Virgilio Almario.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The distinguished Sponsor is recognized.

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The Chairman is present, Mr. Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Okay. The Floor Leader is recognized.

REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move to recognize the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We first recognize the Hon. Maricar Zamora to sponsor the proposed budget of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts. And now, we recognize the Deputy Minority Leader, the Hon. Tony Bravo.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There being no member from the Minority who wishes to ask questions, I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts.



REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, in behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in terminating the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts is hereby approved.



REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines.


NATIONAL HISTORICAL COMMISSION OF THE PHILIPPINES

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We now open the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget for the National Historical Commission of the Philippines.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move to greet the head of the NHCP, Chairman Rene Escalante.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Welcome to the House of Representatives.

Mr. Floor Leader, is he present?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The Chairman is present, Mr. Speaker.

REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Sponsor, the Hon. Maricar Zamora.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Maricar Zamora is recognized to sponsor the proposed budget for the National Historical Commission of the Philippines.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Tony Bravo for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Tony Bravo, the Deputy Minority Leader, is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There being no member from the Minority who wishes to ask questions, I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines.




REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in terminating the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to terminate the period of sponsorship and debate on the proposed budget of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines is hereby approved.



REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the National Library of the Philippines.

I so move.

NATIONAL LIBRARY OF THE PHILIPPINES

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We now open the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the National Library of the Philippines.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we acknowledge the presence of the head of the National Library of the Philippines, Director Ceasar Gilbert Q. Adriano.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is the Director of the National Library of the Philippines present?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The Director is present, Mr. Speaker.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Maricar Zamora to sponsor.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We recognize the good Sponsor, the Hon. Maricar Zamora, to sponsor the proposed budget of the National Library of the Philippines.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Deputy Minority Leader, the Hon. Tony Bravo, is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There being no Member from the Minority who

wishes to ask questions, I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the National Library of the Philippines.

I so move.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in terminating the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the National Library of the Philippines.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the National Library of the Philippines is hereby approved.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Majority Leader.

REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider the budget of the National Archives of the Philippines.


NATIONAL ARCHIVES OF THE PHILIPPINES

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We now open the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the National Archives of the Philippines.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we acknowledge the presence of the head of the National Archives of the Philippines, Executive Director Victorino Mapa Manalo.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is the head of the National Archives present?

REP. ZAMORA (M.). The Director is present, Mr. Speaker.



REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Maricar Zamora to sponsor the budget.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We recognize the Hon. Maricar Zamora to sponsor the proposed budget of the National Archives of the Philippines.



THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Dep. Minority Leader, the Hon. Tony Bravo, is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor on the proposed budget of the National Archives of the Philippines.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker.There being no member from the Minority who

wishes to ask questions, I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the National Archives of the Philippines.

I do so move, Mr. Speaker.


REP. DE VENECIA. Mr. Speaker, in behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in terminating the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the National Archives of the Philippines.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budget of the National Archives of the Philippines is hereby approved.



REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we take up and consider the budget of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We now open the period of interpellation and debate on

the proposed budget of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, may we acknowledge the presence of the President and CEO of the BCDA, Vivencio Dizon, and the Clark Development Corporation President and CEO, Noel F. Manankil.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Are the officers of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority present, Mr. Dep. Majority Leader?

REP. GULLAS. Yes. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Joey Sarte Salceda of the Second District of Albay to sponsor.

BASES CONVERSION AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We recognize the Hon. Joey Salceda to sponsor the proposed budget of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Ariel “Ka Ayik” B. Casilao for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Ka Ayik Casilao is hereby recognized to interpellate the good Sponsor for the proposed budget of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This will be very short.

Last year po, I requested several documents, the blueprints of a military reservation area which already had development plans on the way. Unfortunately, I was only given one page. I would like to be very specific—the Clark Green City, 36,000 hectares.

This Representation still has the patience to require and wait for the BCDA, the CGC to furnish a blueprint, a clear development plan, because there are thousands of farmers who will be affected. This Representation also requests that a meeting be conducted together with our local leaders. Last year, after the budget deliberations, there was no communication, naputol na po iyong komunikasyon.

I would like to present this in this specific deliberation, for the distinguished Sponsor to guarantee and to make sure that the requested document, the blueprint, that it be ensured that prior to the bicameral conference, this will be provided to this Representation. We do not want to repeat the Fort Magsaysay massacre


wherein four farmers who were tilling the lands, were shot upon by armed men, by security personnel.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, this is not a question actually, this is a manifestation that the request of this Representation be complied with clearly. I do not want to receive another one-page document, for compliance purposes, from the BCDA. The specific request is the blueprint or the development plan so as to initiate a dialogue with the farmers. Although there had been previous dialogues, there were no clear-cut resolutions.

REP. SALCEDA. Yes.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Mr. Speaker. The blueprint has been approved by the Board last September 1 and by tomorrow morning, at 9:00 a.m., it will be submitted to the Gentleman’s office, Mr. Speaker.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you very much, distinguished Sponsor.

REP. SALCEDA. Thank you.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the honorable Minority Leader for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Minority Leader, the Hon. Danilo E. Suarez, is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor on the proposed budget of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.Is the distinguished Sponsor willing to yield the

floor for some questions?

REP. SALCEDA. Certainly.

REP. SUAREZ. I am somewhat impressed with the BCDA presentation to this Body. Are they asking for a budget, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. How much?

REP. SALCEDA. A subsidy of P6.5 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. How much are they asking?

REP. SALCEDA. It is 6.5.

REP. SUAREZ. It is 6.5?

REP. SALCEDA. It is 6.568, actually, to be exact, P6.868 billion.

REP. SUAREZ. Billion?

REP. SALCEDA. That is right, P6,868,400,000.

REP. SUAREZ. They have fantastic earnings. Why do they need government assistance?

REP. SALCEDA. Well, Mr. Speaker, …

REP. SUAREZ. If you will look carefully, distinguished Sponsor, at the projected receipts, it seems they do not need the money.

REP. SALCEDA. I think, eventually, Mr. Speaker. They raised P85 billion before but remitted P35 billion for the bases at the same time. So, essentially, Mr. Speaker, in order for us to generate those revenues, we need to invest and we cannot sell raw lands, so we need to develop them. So, the P6.868 billion is actually necessary to develop the land so that we do not sell it raw and therefore cheap. In other words, based on their mandate in the Republic Act which created them, it is very clear that they need to optimize the economic potential, not only for government revenues, but as well as the economic potential with respect to Central Luzon and the national economy.

So, we need the money, essentially, Mr. Speaker, to fully optimize the revenue potential of the land.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, in the Subic-Clark Cargo Railway Project, they are somewhat gung ho about this particular program. May I know the feasibility of this concept of connecting Subic and Clark by rail. Is there a possibility that a private corporation might be willing to do this under a PPP concept?

REP. SALCEDA. Actually, Mr. Speaker, I think the BCDA is very willing to consider PPP. At the moment, the general strategy, if the Gentleman read the Philippine Development Plan as well as the pronouncements of the economic managers—although Congress, being the chief economic policy-making Body of this country, can certainly impinge on this strategy of the economic managers—the principal funding instrument is still through revenues as embedded in the GAA or through the ODA, and PPP is only a third option, Mr. Speaker. But certainly, I think they will welcome any unsolicited proposal with respect to the Railway Project although this project has already been submitted to NEDA with


an economic IRR of 11.8 percent, Mr. Speaker, the cargo rail linking Clark and Subic.

REP. SUAREZ. Distinguished Sponsor, …

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Sir.

REP. SUAREZ. …the SCTEX, how many years is the life span or can that be operated by the private sector?

REP. SALCEDA. It is 28 years remaining, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. How many years?

REP. SALCEDA. It is 28 po remaining.

REP. SUAREZ. How many years have lapsed already?

REP. SALCEDA. Two years have lapsed, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. So, 18 years to go and then, it will be turned over …

REP. SALCEDA. Two years have lapsed, so 28 more to run.

REP. SUAREZ. Afterwards, it will be turned over to the BCDA?

REP. SALCEDA. Transferred to the government, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker. Back to us.

REP. SUAREZ. Back to the BCDA?

REP. SALCEDA. That is correct.

REP. SUAREZ. So, the earnings, will they be continuing imposing toll fees?

REP. SALCEDA. I think, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, to the extent that we borrowed a lot of money for this from the JBIC. In fact, the original plan was really to pre-terminate the JBIC loan except that the Japanese would not like a pre-termination of those loans.

So, in other words, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, that would have empowered the BCDA to essentially allow all sorts of other options that …

REP. SUAREZ. I am aware that it was the Japanese who built this road.

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, but they do not—our plan was to pre-terminate it. It is only P22 billion now.

REP. SUAREZ. Was it borrowed money?

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, JBIC, long-term loan, one percent.

REP. SUAREZ. And the guarantor is the Philippine government.

REP. SALCEDA. That is right, 40 years to pay, I think, at two percent.

REP. SUAREZ. What is the participation of the private sector?

REP. SALCEDA. Essentially, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, it is …

REP. SUAREZ. MVP for that matter.

REP. SALCEDA. In fact, right now, it is actually the model for the so-called hybrid PPP. We build, borrow and spend our own money and then, we essentially privatize the O&M or the operations and management of …

REP. SUAREZ. And they do the amortization of the loan.

REP. SALCEDA. We continue—okay. It is self-liquidating. The revenues from the tolls pay for the loans.

REP. SUAREZ. So, it is enough to amortize for the loan.

REP. SALCEDA. Mukhang kulang. Feeling ko, ito ay mukhang kulang kasi iyong toll rate na ibinigay naman natin sa kanila ay mukhang hindi naman ho kasing-agresibo noong ginawa dito sa SLEX. So, kulang.

REP. SUAREZ. So, just please educate this Representation, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.


REP. SUAREZ. We are talking here of two links, ano? Iyong extension ng NLEX, hindi ba?

REP. SALCEDA. Opo. Tapos, iyong SCTEX papasok ng Subic.

REP. SUAREZ. And then you have the portion of TPLEX …

REP. SALCEDA. No, Mr. Speaker.


REP. SUAREZ. Iyong TPLEX ay kay Ramon ano iyon, hindi ba?

REP. SALCEDA. Iyong SCTEX lang po ang nilagyan ng fund ng BCDA kung saan po ang corporate …

REP. SUAREZ. Ang SLEX—ang TPLEX ay BCDA.

REP. SALCEDA. Hindi po.

REP. SUAREZ. Ano ang BCDA?

REP. SALCEDA. SCTEX po, papasok Subic-Clark.

REP. SUAREZ. SCTEX.

REP. SALCEDA. Opo.

REP. SUAREZ. But there is a short stretch of highway that connects to the SCTEX.

REP. SALCEDA. Ninety-five kilometers po iyon, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Is that privately owned?

REP. SALCEDA. No, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Who owns it?

REP. SALCEDA. It is us, the government, through the BCDA. So, pina-manage lang natin sa private sector para …

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). May I remind the Gentlemen to direct the question to the Chair.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, how many years do you think they need to be self-sufficient and will not be seeking …

REP. SALCEDA. Kung ibenta natin, Mr. Speaker, actually people will go after it because interest rates now are very low pero mukhang two years lang, Mr. Speaker, break-even tayo diyan. Well, of course, the private sector did not get it for a song. All I am saying is that, I think, it has a reasonable and just return to the private sector, and the government will recover everything that it has paid—that it has borrowed to essentially finance the road.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor, for the response.

I just have a parting request for the BCDA management …


REP. SUAREZ. … that, maybe, they can hasten and accelerate, entice further locators so that they will be more profitable and earn enough so they will not be seeking budget anymore from the national government.

REP. SALCEDA. Parang nakabenta na ho sila, Mr. Speaker, kasi kung gawin natin ito, by 2019 tapos na po iyong road to CGC. Marami na pong mga potential na gustong bumili niyang …

REP. SUAREZ. So, it is doable, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SALCEDA. Yes, Mr. Speaker.It is probably the crown jewel of the industrial

complex—of industrialization in this country as well as property development. It is 33,000 hectares, and …

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I do not have any more question to raise with the proposed budget of the BCDA.

REP. SALCEDA. Thank you very much, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Mr. Speaker, I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in its motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budget of the BCDA.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the period of sponsorship, interpellation and debate on the budgetary support to the Bases Conversion and Development Authority is hereby approved.



REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of House Bill No. 6215.





CONSIDERATION OF H.B. NO. 6308ON SECOND READING


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider House Bill No. 6308, contained in Committee Report No. 368, as reported out by the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms.

May I ask that the Secretary General be directed to read only the title of the measure.

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

The Secretary General is directed to read only the title of the measure.

With the permission of the Body, and since copies of the measure have been previously distributed, the Secretary General read only the title thereof without prejudice to inserting its text in the Congressional Record.

THE SECRETARY GENERAL. House Bill No. 6308, entitled: AN ACT POSTPONING THE OCTOBER 23, 2017 SYNCHRONIZED BARANGAY AND SANGGUNIANG KABATAAN ELECTIONS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9164, AS AMENDED BY REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9340, REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10656 AND REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10923.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, as Sponsor of this measure, I move that we recognize the honorable and esteemed Chairman of the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms, the Hon. Sherwin N. Tugna.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Chairman of the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms, the Hon. Sherwin N. Tugna, is recognized to sponsor House Bill No. 6308 under Committee Report No. 368.

REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, earlier, the Chair of the Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms has indicated that the Explanatory Note of this measure serve as its sponsorship speech.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any

objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion is approved.


REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, for her interpellation, I move for the recognition of the Representative of the Party-List KABATAAN, the Hon. Sarah Jane I. Elago.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Sarah Jane I. Elago from KABATAAN Party-List is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor of House Bill No. 6308.

REP. ELAGO. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker.Hindi po ito isang interpelasyon kundi isang

manipestasyon hinggil sa pagtutol ng Makabayan Bloc sa muli na namang postponement ng barangay at Sangguniang Kabataan elections.

Mr. Speaker, ito ay pangalawang pagkakataon na na ating ipo-postpone ang pagpili ng ating mga kababayan ng kanilang mga akma na mga lider sa barangay at sa Sangguniang Kabataan at hindi po tayo makakapayag na muli na naman natin itong ipo-postpone, sa pangalawang pagkakataon, sa susunod na taon.

Ang mga nasabing mga batayan kung bakit dapat na maipasa ang panukalang batas na ito para sa representasyon ng kabataan ay hindi sapat na dahilan iyan para ating itulak at mai-postpone. Unang-una diyan, ang hinggil sa droga, na nababahala ang ating mga kasama na ang pera mula sa droga will seep into the electoral process. Sa presentasyon po ng DILG kanina, nasa 40 percent daw ng ating mga barangay ang apektado ng droga. Mr. Speaker, kung 40 percent naman pala ng ating mga barangay ay apektado ng droga, bakit hindi po natin palitan, hindi ba? Bakit hindi natin palitan iyong mga dapat na nagtitiyak na drug-free ang ating mga barangay at ang mga kabataan po natin are even willing to volunteer diyan to help decide that the administration adhere to the rule of law and uphold the right to due process pagdating po sa ating drug war.

Nariyan din ang dahilan ng pagtitipid. Sa tingin ko po, Mr. Speaker, hindi po isang bagay—napakabigat na bagay ang paggalang at pagtitiyak, pag-a-uphold doon sa karapatan na pumili ng mga lider, at sa karapatang bumoto ng ating mga kababayan ang nakasaalang-alang dito.

Kaya muli, nagpapahayag ang Makabayan ng pagtutol at sa mga susunod na mga pagkakataon tayo po ay magpapasa pa ng mga mas malaliman na pag-aaral hinggil sa pagtutol natin at pagpapahayag po ng pagtutol dito sa postponement ng barangay at SK elections.

Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker.

* See MEASURES CONSIDERED (printed separately)



REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, we move to close the period of sponsorship and debate on House Bill No. 6308.




REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move that we open the period of amendments. However, there being no Committee or individual amendments, I move that we close the period of amendments on House Bill No. 6308.




REP. BONDOC. Mr. Speaker, I move for the approval on Second Reading of House Bill No. 6308.


VIVA VOCE VOTING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). There is a motion for the approval of House Bill No. 6308 on Second Reading.

As many as are in favor, please say aye.

SEVERAL MEMBERS. Aye.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). As many as are against, please say nay.

FEW MEMBERS. Nay.

APPROVAL OF H.B. NO. 6308 ON SECOND READING

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The ayes have it; the motion is approved.

House Bill No. 6308 under Committee Report No. 368 is hereby approved on Second Reading.



PERIOD OF SPONSORSHIP AND DEBATE REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we

consider House Bill No. 6215 and direct the Secretary General to read the title of the Bill.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Secretary General is hereby directed to read the title of House Bill No. 6215.



REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary status of the Bill is that we are in the period of sponsorship and debate.

I move that we consider the budget of the Commission on Higher Education.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). We now open the period of sponsorship and debate on the proposed budget for the Commission on Higher Education.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the honorable Sponsor, the Hon. Paolo Everardo S. Javier of the Lone District of Antique.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Before we recognize the distinguished Sponsor, may we know if the officers of the Commission on Higher Education are present, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. JAVIER. Okay, everybody is present.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we acknowledge the presence in the gallery of the Chairperson of the CHED, Patricia Licuanan; Commissioner Ronald Adamat; Commissioner Perfecto Alibin; Commissioner De Vera; Commissioner De las Llagas; Executive Director Yee; Deputy Executive Director Imperial—all Central Office directors and all regional directors.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). May I request the officers and the names mentioned to please stand up to be recognized. (Applause)

Thank you.The Dep. Majority Leader is recognized.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I reiterate my previous motion to recognize the honorable Sponsor, the Honorable Javier.

COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Honorable Javier, the distinguished Sponsor of the proposed budget of the Commission on Higher Education is recognized.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD of COOP-NATCCO Party-List for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Dep. Minority Leader, the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor on the proposed budget of the Commission on Higher Education.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the good Sponsor yield to some questions from

this Representation?

REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, distinguished Sponsor.

Distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, in 2016, there was an appropriation approved by this august Chamber amounting to P5,635,834,000 for the CHED. Do you concur with this Representation?

REP. JAVIER. I beg your pardon, Congressman Anthony Bravo, Mr. Speaker. Can you repeat the question?

REP. BRAVO (A.). I wll begin with a review of the prior budget of the CHED, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. JAVIER. What budget of the previous fiscal year, Mr. Speaker?

REP. BRAVO (A.). In 2016, there was a regular budget appropriated amounting to P5,635,834,000. Do you agree with this Representation?

REP. JAVIER. May we know, P5 billion from 2016?

REP. BRAVO (A.). Yes, 2016. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, we are deliberating on the budget for 2018 and the National Expenditure Program reflects the report on actual expenditures for 2016.

REP. JAVIER. Yes, for 2016 Fiscal Year, we had P5.6 billion. Yes, it is correct, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). There was a Total Available Appropriations of P8 billion, but there was an Unused Appropriations of P1,565,066,000. Am I correct with the figures?


REP. BRAVO (A.). Will you please educate us on such Unused Appropriations. It was, in fact, released to the DBM. It was reflected in the report that it is an Unobligated Allotment, meaning, it was already released to the agency but it failed to utilize the fund.

REP. JAVIER. The bulk of the fund, Mr. Speaker, napunta po sa K to 12 Program.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Come again? Please repeat.

REP. JAVIER. K to 12.

REP. BRAVO (A.). K to 12. So, this was intended for the K to 12 Program.


REP. BRAVO (A.). What particular items of expenditures in the K to 12 Program?

REP. JAVIER. For scholarships.

REP. BRAVO (A.). For private?

REP. JAVIER. For both SUCs and private.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Is it not for the Support Facilities for K to 12?

REP. JAVIER. I think that would cover also the K to 12.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, only for scholarships and not for Support Facilities.

REP. JAVIER. Not only the K to 12 but we have the HEDF. So, under the P1.2 unused funds, napunta po sa operations po ng ating K to 12 sa ating mga regions, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, meaning, this P 1.5 million has been downloaded to the regional offices and they failed to obligate? Am I correct in my understanding?


REP. JAVIER. There is also a program of the CHED, the PCARI program?

REP. BRAVO (A.). In the interest of time, will you please kindly provide this Representation the details of the P1.565 million.


REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that.

REP. BRAVO (A.).. May I go back. There is an item, Special Account, amounting to P2,145,075,795. Would you please educate us on this?

REP. JAVIER. That would be under the Higher Education Development Fund or the HEDF Special Account that is under the DBM.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Come again? What are the items of expenditures that will be covered in this particular fund?

REP. JAVIER. Various MOOEs, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, MOOEs. May I proceed to the Calendar Year or Fiscal Year 2017.


REP. BRAVO (A.). So, in 2017, P18,704,975,000 was appropriated, am I correct?

REP. JAVIER. Under the MOOE, Mr. Speaker?

REP. BRAVO (A.). That was for the General Appropriations.


REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleague.

There was a Continuing Appropriations amounting to P1,266,000,000. Am I correct on the figure?

REP. JAVIER. Yes, P1.2 billion, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). With a Total Available Appropriations of P20,822,279,000?


REP. BRAVO (A.). What is the utilization rate of the fund of the CHED in 2017, the cut-off June 2017?

REP. JAVIER. As of August 15 of Fiscal Year 2017, the utilization rate is 50.82 percent.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Fifteen, 1-5?

REP. JAVIER. It is 50—50.82 percent.

REP. BRAVO (A.). The cut-off as of …

REP. JAVIER. As of August 15, 2017.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, meaning, we are confident that they will be fully utilizing the fund as appropriated?


REP. BRAVO (A.). I am asking this, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker, because I had seen in your Expenditure Program that as proposed out of P11 billion for the MOOE is P610 million. What is being appropriated as proposed for the Regional Office is only P84 million—I mean, P976 million for 2018.

REP. JAVIER. For the region, yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Why is that so, Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleague? Meaning, more than P10 billion will be a centrally managed fund.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, it is for the operations on the scholarships.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Scholarship for?

REP. JAVIER. For the undergraduates.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Then, why is that not being downloaded to the SUCs?

REP. JAVIER. The recipients are in the region, not in the SUCs, or in the private, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Come again, I am sorry.

REP. JAVIER. The recipients are in the region, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, it cannot be downloaded to the regional offices.


REP. BRAVO (A.). As such, it is centralized, it is in the Central Office.


REP. BRAVO (A.). I am asking this, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor, because we have experienced with the


CHED in the last Congress that the processing for scholarships was very slow. In fact, some of the students had graduated already, but unfortunately, they were not able to enjoy the appropriated amount for them.

REP. JAVIER. Yes.

REP. BRAVO (A.). That is why I am bothered, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, about how the fund is being proposed to be allocated in the regional offices.

REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker. It is a perennial problem of the Commission on Higher Education, the absorptive capacity of the regions. For this year, for Fiscal Year 2017, I think they have improved their absorptive capacity.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Is it the central office that improved or the regional offices?

REP. JAVIER. Both; the entire CHED, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, again, we are assured by the CHED that as far as utilization of the fund is concerned, we will not be expecting a huge unused appropriation by 2018.

REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker, because before, in

2016, we had a utilization rate of 88 percent. In 2017, actually, it decreased to 73.64 percent but it still within their quota, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that assurance.May I proceed to the Special Provisions.


REP. BRAVO (A.). On item no. 6, this is about the K to 12 Transition Program, amounting to P3,902,000,081,000. What are the details of this item of expenditure for appropriation?

REP. JAVIER. For 2017 targets, Mr. Speaker, we have a physical target of 5,776 for the Undergraduate Studies and for Personal Advancement, with the amount of P2.376 million. The Senior High School Training package has 4,052 with the amount of P104 million. On the Faculty and Staff Development Grants, we have 625 with the amount of P171,921,000. On the Research Grants, we have 50 projects in the amount of P300 million. On the Innovation Grants for HEIs, we have 59 projects with P450 million; for a total of P3.5 billion.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, that is P3.5 billion.

REP. JAVIER. Yes, P3.5 billion, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). The proposed appropriations is P3.9 billion.

REP. JAVIER. The target, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Three point nine or three point five?

REP. JAVIER. It is P3.5 billion.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, it is P3.5 billion. So, why is there a missing figure?

REP. JAVIER. I stand corrected, Mr. Speaker, but the total is around P4 billion.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, even more than the amount that is being appropriated as specified in the Special Provision No. 6.


REP. BRAVO (A.). If it will be more than that amount, why is that so? Where are you going to source the …

REP. JAVIER. There is an excess of P115 million.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, meaning, the Continuing Appropriations.

REP. JAVIER. For administration cost, P115 million.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Okay. Now, let me proceed, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. Will you please educate us on item No. 7, Rationalization of SUCs Programs and Course Offerings. What is this all about?

REP. JAVIER. Well, it is written in the budget that the CHED shall evaluate and rationalize all existing programs and course offerings of the SUCs to ensure that they are directly aligned with the SUCs’ core mandate, and this is consistent with its supervisory and regulatory functions. The CHED shall likewise evaluate requests for the opening of new programs and course offerings if these are within the core mandate of the SUC and/or fall under the fields of science, technology, engineering, agriculture and mathematics which are considered as engines of agro-industrial growth. In all cases, the CHED shall ensure that there is no duplication of programs and courses among the SUCs within the same region, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Does it mean, Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleague, that we will be expecting, in the


succeeding years from now, that there will be curricular offerings in State Colleges and Universities that will be closed because of this rationalization to ensure that there will be no duplication of the programs?

REP. JAVIER. I think so, Mr. Speaker, we will delete or remove the duplication of offerings of the SUCs.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, meaning, the academic freedom of each SUC is already being curtailed by the CHED. What can you say, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, I do not think that that would violate the mandate of the Commission on Higher Education because, with the rationalization of the SUCs, that would even solidify, unify or integrate the courses for the students.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Was there any consultation relative to this program involving these SUCs as far as rationalization is concerned?

REP. JAVIER. There will be, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Can we get information from the PASUC President relative to this matter?

REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker. There will be consultation among the SUCs in the regions to rationalize the SU programs and the courses being offered.

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, meaning, this is not yet in effect?

REP. JAVIER. Not yet, Mr. Speaker.

REP. BRAVO (A.). This is still a plan? Am I correct?


REP. BRAVO (A.). As you made mention, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, there will be consultation relative to this matter and so, this is not yet in effect?


REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that answer, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor. I would like to encourage the CHED to have that consultation open to the public so that, once and for all, our stakeholders would be able to know the changes in the coming years.

Next, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, this is about operations. I have seen here, Higher Education Development Program, operation No. 2, amounting

to P236 million. Is this a lump sum, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor? What will be covered by this P236 million? What particular item or expenditure is under Capital Outlays?

REP. JAVIER. The P236 million has a breakdown, Mr. Speaker, so it is not a lump sum. That is for the PCARI, Mr. Speaker, for research and development.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Along that line Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleague, may I request for a report coming from the CHED relative to the implementation of the PCARI because every year, there is an appropriation being incurred. I hope that this Representation and the rest of the Members of this august Body will be given the report so that we will be able to see for ourselves the status of its implementation.

REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker. We will provide the report on the PCARI project.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that assurance, Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleague.

That is all, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much.

REP. JAVIER. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Sarah Jane I. Elago of KABATAAN Party-List for her interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Sarah Elago from the KABATAAN Party-List is recognized.

REP. ELAGO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Gentleman Sponsor yield to a few questions

on just two concerns?


REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker. First is on the matter of tuition and other school fee increases in our private higher education institutions. Mr. Speaker, during the Committee deliberations, we requested the CHED to furnish the Committee on Appropriations a copy of another report on the yearly tuition and other school fee increases, but this Representation has not received any report on that matter.

REP. JAVIER. Well, Mr. Speaker, we sent, on August 23, the updates, scholarship guidelines and a copy of the CHED memorandum order providing guidelines for drug testing.


REP. ELAGO. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Natanggap po natin ang tungkol sa guidelines ng mandatory drug testing at hinggil doon sa scholarship guidelines para doon sa ating mga katanungan hinggil sa mga ghost beneficiaries na naiulat sa Representasyong ito sa iba’t ibang mga scholarship programs ng CHED, ngunit manghihingi na lang din po tayo ngayon, na sila ay mag-submit ngayon ng report on the unit tuition and other fee increases.

Mr. Speaker, tayo ay nagtatanong hinggil sa bagay na ito dahil doon sa nakaraang limang taon ay tumataas ng 8 hanggang 10 porsiyento ang tuition sa mga private HEIs natin. Hindi pa diyan kasama ang pagtaas naman sa other school fees. In fact, for this year alone, dumoble iyong increase sa tuition, at maski sa other school fees, on the average sa ating mga HEIs. Iyan ang tanong at ang hinihingi na assurance ng Representasyong ito ay paano na po gumugulong ang naging commitment, nitong nakaraang taon pa during plenary deliberations, na talagang magkaroon ng istrikto na regulasyon sa mga increases na ito at matiyak natin na talagang kung saan ito mapunta dahil 70 percent niyan ay para sa salaries, wages and benefits ng ating mga faculty. Mayroon ding porsiyento na dapat mapunta sa mga improvement ng mga facilities ng ating mga eskuwelahan, at kakarampot lang dapat iyong mapunta doon sa kikitain ng ating mga eskuwelahan.

Ang CHED na rin po mismo ang nag-ulat na talagang sila ay hirap doon sa monitoring at evaluation ng yearly tuition increases. Mr. Speaker, nagkaroon din ng efforts, ng initiatives ang CHED hinggil sa pagkakaroon ng supplementary guidelines sa kanilang CHED memorandum order on tuition and other school fee increases. Para naman doon sa pagdami ng mga paulit-ulit, pagkalaki-laki at mga dubious na other school fees sa ating mga eskuwelahan, kumusta na po ang mga ginagawa ng CHED hinggil sa paglobo ng matrikula at mga bayarin sa ating mga pampribadong HEIs?

Mr. Speaker, the CHED is mandated to promote quality, relevant and accessible education. Kung hindi po natin nare-regulate ang paglobo ng napakaraming mga bayarin, iyan po ay ipagkakait sa marami nating mga kabataan ng kanilang karapatan sa edukasyon.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, ang CHED ay mayroong mekanismo, ang education deflator na nagpapatunay na may isang gabay o isang regulatory system para sa mga SUC—sa mga private, I beg your pardon, Mr. Speaker, para ma-monitor kung may increase ba o wala ang isang pribadong eskuwelahan. Kung nag-increase ang isang pribadong eskuwelahan, ito ay kailangang may justification na manggagaling sa kanila para ire-report sa CHED, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, may we know from the Gentleman Sponsor, what is the highest increase for the past year of an HEI?

Mr. Speaker, tayo ay nagtatanong hinggil dito dahil hindi natin alam kung ano na ang bisa nitong ginagamit na education deflator ng CHED dahil taun-taon pa rin ay hindi nagbabago at nasa 7 percent, 8 percent, 9 percent up to 10 percent iyong average tuition increase. Kahit ba maliliit lang ang bilang o hindi pero lahat ng mga paaralan ay nagtataas, ito naman iyong mga pinakamalalaking mga pamantasan at kolehiyo sa buong bansa.

Karamihan niyan ay nandito sa National Capital Region, kung saan talagang dinadayo ng mga estudyante at kung hindi sila nakakapasok sa SUC, ay naga-apply sila sa ating malalaking private universities dito sa Manila.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, around mga 6.7 percent average.

REP. ELAGO. Saan po itong 6.7 percent? Ito na po ba iyong pinakamataas?

REP. JAVIER. Sa private schools, iyan na po ang pinakamataas based sa records po ng Commission on Higher Education.

REP. ELAGO. Itong 6.7 percent, saan pong eskuwelahan? Iyon po ba ay sa tuition lang?

REP. JAVIER. Average po iyan, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, ang tinatanong ko po, ano po ang pinakamataas na eskuwelahan doon sa ating listahan?

Mr. Speaker, maaaring magbigay na rin ang ating Sponsor ng update doon sa supplementary guidelines sa CMO 3, series of 2012, para malaman din ng ating constituents ang mga ginagawang hakbang ng CHED hinggil sa napakarami pong other school fees. Mayroon pa tayong mga other school fees na ang pangalan talaga ay “Other Kees.” So, malabo ito, hindi alam ng ating mga estudyante kung saan ba talaga ito napupunta.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, ang pagkaalam po natin—susuriin po namin kung ano ang pinakamataas ang increase po ng tuition fee sa private. Susuriin po namin.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, iyong atin pong hinihinging update hinggil sa supplementary guidelines para sa other school fees ay para sa regulation ng other school fees sa ating mga eskuwelahan. Noong nakaraang taon din, Mr. Speaker, ang CHED ay nagbigay ng commitment na pag-aaralan nila iyong pagdami ng koleksiyon ng development fees at energy fees sa ating mga pribadong paaralan. Dapat, Mr.


Speaker, ang ginagamit nila sa pagpapatayo ng bagong building, sa pambili ng mga equipment, ay iyong kanilang mga kinikita, ngunit ang nangyayari, maski iyong pambili ng mga bagong equipment, pagpapatayo ng bagong building, ay kinkukuha na mismo sa mga estudyante, and, Mr. Speaker, that is on top of the already burdensome tuition.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, I think there will be a public consultation regarding the increases in tuition fee, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, kada proposal sa mga increase ay dumadaan sa mga konsultasyon sa mga eskuwelahan ngunit sa CHED na rin mismo nanggaling na hindi naman sila makakapunta sa kada konsultasyon sa mga eskuwelahan para talagang matiyak na papakinggan talaga ang ating mga estudyante. Imbis na consultation, ang nangyayari po diyan, Mr. Speaker, ay information dissemination na lang o kaya naman presentation ng mismong proposal.

Despite this strong opposition of the stakeholders in the HEIs, kahit po lahat ng mga stakeholders ay mag-“no” pa sa increase na iyan, kapag sinabi talaga ng administration na itutulak ang pagtaas ng matrikula, ito ay nagpapatuloy pa rin kaya wala po tayong bilib sa mga konsultasyon na iyan. Kaya nanghihingi po tayo muli ng commitment, Mr. Speaker, at para hindi na po tayo maabutan pa ulit ng isa pang taon, maaari bang magbigay na sila ngayon, kailan po tayo magkakaroon ng tiyak na updates hinggil dito sa mga hakbangin? Kasi sa ngayon, Mr. Speaker, wala po tayong nakukuha na malinaw na report tungkol sa mga hakbangin sa OSF o sa pagre-regulate ng ating Other School Fees bukod po sa public consultation na sa ngayon ay wala pang tiyak na date.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, sa sinabi po ni Congresswoman Elago regarding sa problema na hindi nangyayari ang consultation ay mayroon isang mekanismo ang Commission on Higher Education na you can file a complaint kung hindi tama ang ginagawa ng Commission on Higher Education na sistema ang public consultation para malaman natin, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, nasabi na lamang ng ating Gentleman Sponsor ang mga complaints. Noong 2013 at 2014, nagkaroon ng filing ng mga complaints ang mga estudyante mula sa National University, Far Eastern University, University of the East, De La Salle University, Araneta University, hinggil dito sa mga bogus na consultation na ito. Maaari po ba silang makapagbigay ng update hinggil sa mga complaints na ito? Mr. Speaker, ganoon po kapursigido ang ating mga stakeholders sa ating private HEIs para tiyakin na talagang napapakinggan ang kanilang boses.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, mayroon nang nangyari na public consultation pagkatapos mag-complain ang mga estudyanteng taga National University and De La Salle at na-settle naman po ang mga hinihingi ng ating mga kabataan, Mr . Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, manghingi po lang tayo ng case update hinggil diyan, kung na-settle na nga, at maigi na balitaan po natin na iyong mga estudyante, na marami po sa kanila ay naka-graduate na rin, para makita nila na napakinggan talaga at nagawan ng aksiyon iyong complaints na na-file nila before the Commission.

Hinggil naman sa pangalawang concern sa mandatory drug testing, the CHED gives its commitment to revisit the guidelines in the CHED Memorandum Order No. 64. Kamusta na po ang pagre-revisit natin sa guidelines na ito? Nakita natin na maaari ito ay tumatapak sa karapatan ng ating mga estudyante, lalong-lalo na tayo ay nababahala doon sa potential harm nito doon sa ating scholars ng bayan, lalong-lalo pa ay nangyari iyong abuso sa authority ng mga pulis na nakikita natin na diumano nangyari doon sa mga naging biktima na si Kian, andiyan si Carl, at ayaw pa nating mangyari pa iyan sa iba pang mga scholar ng bayan, at sa lagay, Mr. Speaker, nang kahit sino pa sa ating mga kababayan.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, sa ngayon po ay hindi pa po naman na-implement ang mandatory drug testing. So, ito po ay sa ngayon ay nagkakaroon ng random drug testing sa mga SUC at HEI, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, kailan na po ito? Nagbigay po ng commitment ang CHED na magkakaroon ng public consultation, kailan po ito? Mr. Speaker, nandito na rin lang naman ang ating officials ng mga SUCs at mainam na marinig na rin nila at mabalitaan po sila hinggil sa konsultasyon na ito.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, ang mandatory drug testing, ito po ay mangyayari sa ating admissions pero sa ating mga estudyante, ito ay magkakaroon ng random selection. So far, wala pa naman po araw kung kailan mangyayari ang drug testing, Mr. Speaker, for both.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, linawin ko lang po—ang mandatory drug testing ay gagamitin for admission or hindi mangyayari sa admission? Ang nasasaad po sa ating batas, dapat random drug testing at dapat wala pong gastusin ang ating mga estudyante, whether public or private. Ito ay gusto ng gobyernong mangyari sa ating mga eskuwelahan kaya dapat po gobyerno din ang gumastos.

Mahirap po iyong gagawing mandatory ito sa admission kasi kung alam na noong mga mag-a-undergo


ng drug testing kung kailan iyong period kung kailan ho sila magpapa-drug test ay maaari din po iyang madaya o ma-manipulate ang results.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, ang basehan po ng pag-implement ng drug testing ng CHED ay base sa isang opinyon po ng DOJ. May I just read, Mr. Speaker:

With regard to drug testing as a requirement for admission, we view this as a requirement for screening of new student-applicants. It is the declared policy of the State to protect and promote the rights of the citizens to quality education at all levels and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, huli na lang. Kailan po iyong update ng ating public consultation on this matter? Maaari po ba ito gawin ngayong Setyembre bago magsimula ang susunod na semestre? Para sa marami lang po.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, tapos na po ang public consultations. So, I think ang mangyayari po sa susunod ay orientation na po para sa ating mga kabataan.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, manghingi na lang po tayo ng minutes, ng report ng CHED hinggil sa conduct ng public consultations.

REP. JAVIER. The request is noted, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Minority Leader, the Hon. Danilo E. Suarez.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Minority Leader is recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor.

REP. SUAREZ. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.Is the distinguished Sponsor willing to yield?


REP. SUAREZ. Can I be educated here, because this would be the first time that I will be raising questions on these two institutions, what is the function of the CHED

and what is the function of the SUC? Who do they govern and who do they run, who do they administer?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, the creation of the Commission was meant to formulate and recommend development plans, policies, priorities and programs on higher education.

REP. SUAREZ. That would be the CHED.


REP. SUAREZ. Okay. How about SUC, Your Honor? Let me just intervene and cut short on my question—can they be rightsized and can they be converted to just one body?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, they have their own functions but they can be …

REP. SUAREZ. I know but what I am saying is, is there no redundancy, that maybe these two offices can be merged into one?

REP. JAVIER. Well, the CHED is like an umbrella, Mr. Speaker, kaya it is more of the higher education institutions.

REP. SUAREZ. Okay.

REP. JAVIER. The SUC is more of state universities and colleges, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. We have a university in my province, the Southern Luzon State University. Which agency heads that university, the one in Lucban, Quezon, Your Honor.

REP. JAVIER. I think, the Board of Regents, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Of?

REP. JAVIER. Of the university, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. I know but hindi ho sila––they do not report to any of this institution, the CHED or the SUC?

REP. JAVIER. They do, Mr. Speaker, the Board of Regents––the programs of the Board of Regents should be in compliance with the programs of the CHED, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. We just passed into law, the Free Tertiary Education Act. Will these two institutions be playing a role in that law, distinguished Sponsor?


REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker, but they have different roles.

REP. SUAREZ. Which one?

REP. JAVIER. The powers …

REP. SUAREZ. Which particular institution will be benefited by our Free Education Act?

REP. JAVIER. On R.A. No. 10931, para sa mga SUC po iyan, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. I can see here the tertiary cross-enrolment ratio in the ASEAN, and we are number six out of nine. We are just talking here of numbers, Your Honor.


REP. SUAREZ. Do we have a gauge of the quality education in terms of learning, in terms of grades? How are we in terms of teaching compared with Thailand, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam? We are number six and so, it might be a self-serving question if you will say that we are good. So, I would just like to have a clear answer because, obviously, in all of these things, if we want to improve, we will need money.


REP. SUAREZ. We need better facilities, and I will go to that question—how much money are you asking for? So, ang point ko lang po, if you will compare, or I can ask the other sector to answer that question for me, iyong system ng pagtuturo as compared to Thailand, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam. In the Philippines, how do we rate our country?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, sa ngayon po, we have a substandard or low quality of education and that is why we are trying to transition the K to 12 Program to improve the quality of education in the Philippines, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. With my limited knowledge, we were or I was somewhat informed before that the UP can be compared to any other institution in the world. Do you agree with me on that, Mr. Sponsor?

REP. JAVIER. I agree with you, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. So, iyong problema lang natin ay iyong ibang eskuwelahan.


REP. SUAREZ. So, how much money are they asking for?

REP. JAVIER. For what, Mr. Speaker?

REP. SUAREZ. For the CHED.

REP. JAVIER. The CHED is asking for P13,522,966,000.

REP. SUAREZ. For the SUCs?

REP. JAVIER. For the SUCs, it is P61 billion, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. How much are we providing, Your Honor, Mr. Speaker? Is this what we are giving them already?


REP. SUAREZ. Is this what we are appropriating already?


REP. SUAREZ. How much did they ask originally? I suppose that we already cut on what they are asking for.

REP. JAVIER. I think the ballpark figure is P85 billion, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. They are asking for P85 billion and we only appropriated P61 billion.

REP. JAVIER. Yes, P61billion, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. This is one particular institution or branch of the government wherein we are not supposed to cut.

REP. JAVIER. Yes, I know, Mr. Speaker, because I think one requirement in the system of the DBM right now is the utilization rate base. As the funds given to the SUCs sometimes were unobligated or unreleased, so the DBM decided to cut down on their Capital Outlays or MOOE, Mr. Speaker.

REP. SUAREZ. Precisely, I am going there, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. Just like what we have done with the TESDA, they were saying that they can employ more trainings and seminars, more attendees, but they do not have funds for transportation or meal allowances for the attendees supposedly for those seminars and workshops. I move that we increase their budget by P1 billion.



REP. SUAREZ. I understand that we will be living on a pie and this pie will have to be divided among the different agencies as being proposed by the Department of Finance, practically telling us that we can only live on a certain amount of money in circulation, to which I definitely will object. In the event that the appeal of the Minority— on his part and, maybe, with the support of the other Members of the House, I think there are institutions whose budgets should not be cut because we do not really mind a slight inflation on money that has to be circulated. Neither do we want to be dictated upon by the IMF, the WB, on how much money we should spend.

With that, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, may I suggest that the two heads of agencies meet at the office of Minority Leader for their requested budget or their wish list. Sigurado naman, may wish list sila kaya gusto nila ang amount na iyon pero hindi lang natin maibigay. Who knows, with one stroke of luck, baka makuha natin. So, can I expect the wish list of these two institutions to be submitted to the office by next week?


REP. SUAREZ. With that, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, the Minority has no more question to raise on the proposed budget of the CHED and SUCs and moves for the termination of the period of interpellation and debate on the same.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, in behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in terminating the period of interpellation on the budget of the Commission on Higher Education.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to terminate the period of sponsorship, interpellation and debate on the proposed budget for the Commission on Higher Education is hereby approved. (Applause)


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we consider the budgets of the State Universities and Colleges, except for Pangasinan State University and Sulu State College.


We are now in the period of sponsorship and debate on the proposed budgets of the State Universities and Colleges, except for Pangasinan State University and Sulu State College.


STATE UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the distinguished Sponsor, the Hon. Paolo Javier.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Paolo Everardo S. Javier is recognized to sponsor the proposed budgets of the State Universities and Colleges, except for Pangasinan State University and Sulu State College.

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, may we acknowledge the presence of our guests in the gallery, and we have the presidents of all SUCs in the country except for the two aforementioned institutions.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The members of the Board of Regents and other officers of the different State Universities and Colleges, please rise. Welcome to the House of Representatives for your proposed budget deliberations. Thank you. (Applause)


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I reiterate my motion to recognize the Sponsor, the Hon. Paolo Javier, and also the Hon. Ariel “Ka Ayik” B. Casilao for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Ariel “Ka Ayik” B. Casilao from ANAKPAWIS Party-List is hereby recognized to interpellate the distinguished Sponsor on the proposed budgets of the State Universities and Colleges.

REP. CASILAO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.This will be very brief. This Representation and

his predecessors have been the crusaders with regard to the SUCs on the their existing land disputes with farmers. May I know from the distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, if he has in his possession the list of SUCs located in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao with existing land disputes with farmers or indigenous peoples.

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, the document that the Gentleman is asking for is they are planning to submit this list to his office.

REP. CASILAO. For the information of the distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, I have in my


possession at least 15 SUCs in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. This is a 2016 data on the existing disputes with regard to certain claims of farmers tilling agricultural lands within the specific perimeters of State Solleges and Universities, which were issued exemptions under the provisions of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program or Republic Act No. 6657, as amended by Republic Act No. 9700.

Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I already raised this in the Commission on Higher Education budget briefing and we are currently deliberating on the SUCs now. Apart from the document that this Representation would like to be furnished with, may I know also if the status of these cases or disputes is also a priority concern of the SUCs in possibly achieving a settlement and resolution. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, I would just like to focus on one, the BTL or the Buffalo-Tamaraw-Limus, where the three major farmers organization in Bukidnon are currently marching from Bukidnon to Manila to join a major event or activity in October, it being the peasant month.

Now, I believe that the distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, has a background on this dispute, where out of the 3,080 hectares awarded to CMU, there are about 400 hectares occupied by more than a thousand farmers tilling the 400 hectares. Hindi ko na po papalawigin ang kasaysayan nito pero dumaan po ito sa madugo na sagupaan o engkuwentro sa pagitan ng administration ng CMU at ang mga magsasaka which led to litigation in court.

Now, with the same calls from our farmers, the recent update or development is, one, certain areas were declared part of the ancestral domain, if not the entire 3,080 hectares. Despite the mixture of physically occupying and physically tilling the said land by farmers and indigenous peoples in Bukidnon within the area of CMU, still the CMU administration, and like all other existing disputes where the administration and the farmers and indigenous peoples are in conflict, it seems that there is a hardline policy and the hardline policy being invoked by the administration is the lack of budget and for that purpose, the award of the exemption lies on the objective of developing these lands for educational purposes. However, certain limits had already expired, the five years, that there were no developments. The circumvention in general, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, led to current disputes of the administration vis-à-vis farmer claimants and the indigenous peoples.

Lastly, to end this interpellation, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, please provide this Representation a clear policy that it is a reality that the school or the administration of each SUCs with current disputes, if we trace the records, it is very clear that they cannot put development in the entire land area, especially those lands with disputes, and especially if those farmers

physically occupying and physically tilling the land are agriculturally productive.

Ayaw po nating mangyari na tuloy-tuloy ang mga banggaan na pinagsasabong kasi alam naman natin ay magkaparehang interes iyan. Hindi po natin sinasagasaan ang interes ng edukasyon ng mga kabataan, and at the same time, dapat ring kilalanin ang karapatan, kakayanan at kabutihan ng ating mga magbubukid. In fact, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, ang mga benepisyaryo po ng SUCs at mga mag-aaral nito, 90 percent ay nanggagaling sa mahihirap na pamilyang magsasaka. They will be very thankful if our government, especially with the recent approval of free tertiary education, will be the very beneficiaries of this law.

With the existing conflicts or disputes with the SUCs and the other stakeholders, and to a point wherein there were already some violent confrontations, tayo po ang talo dito. At the end of the day, we are all the losers. Tayo po ang talunan sa labanang ito dahil gustuhin man nating magkaroon ng malawak na espasyo ang mga paaralan para sa educational utilization of these lands for educational purposes, there are cases that should also be considered not only for humanitarian reasons but for purposes of food production, food security, and all that we can invoke on matters of agriculture and agrarian reform.

May mga reyalidad po na may mga banggaan ang mga batas natin pero huwag naman po sanang umabot sa mga puntong nagkaroon na ng madugong pagbubuwis ng mga buhay dito. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, this Representation and my predecessors have always been consistent in requesting the SUCs, the administrations thereof especially, to resolve these disputes, that there should always be a balance, although this Representation has a bias on the welfare of our farmers. Notwithstanding that, there should be no disregard for the benefits also of our educational institutions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Sarah Jane I. Elago of KABATAAN Party-List for her interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Hon. Sarah Elago from KABATAAN Party-List is hereby recognized.

REP. ELAGO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Gentleman Sponsor answer or yield to several questions on matters regarding our State Universities and Colleges?



REP. ELAGO. To begin my interpellation, Mr. Speaker, let us go over the Special Provisions governing the budget of the SUCs. Section 1 of the Special Provisions on the SUCS pertain to tuition fees and school charges. Mr. Speaker, hindi pa po nakikita dito or hindi pa po reflected dito ang batas natin hinggil sa UNIVERSAL ACCESS TO QUALITY TERTIARY EDUCATION. Tama po ba, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?


REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, maasahan ba natin na mababago ang provision na ito kasi ang nakalagay lang po dito, ang mga SUCs natin ay pinapayagan na mangolekta ng tuition fees and other necessary school charges in accordance with R.A. No. 8292.


REP. ELAGO. Hindi pa po mentioned anywhere in this section ang R.A. No. 10931.

REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Because of R.A. No. 10931, I think everything will change in the provisions of the free tuition.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, on tuition and other school fees in our SUCs, what percentage of the total internal operating budget of our State Universities and Colleges is sourced from tuition and other fees?

REP. JAVIER. I beg the Lady’s pardon, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, what percentage of the internal operating budget of our SUCs is sourced from the collection of income from tuition and other fees?

REP. JAVIER. For three years, Mr. Speaker, for Fiscal Year 2016, we have P8.1 billion; for Fiscal Year 2017, we have P7.8 billion; and in Fiscal Year 2018, the proposal is P9.1 billion.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, anong porsiyento nitong income ang ginagamit para sa kabuuang pangangailangan o internal operating budget ng ating SUCs, nasa kalahati po ba?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, around 24 percent to 23.6 percent.

REP. ELAGO. Nasa 23.6 percent. Ito po ba ang average figure natin?

REP. JAVIER. Yes, the average, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. The average percentage at 23.6 percent. All right. Mr. Speaker, let me go to the second section. Section 2 of the Special Provisions refers to hospital incomes. This section states that all income-generated from hospital operations of medical centers or hospitals in the SUCs shall be used to augment the hospitals’ MOOE and Capital Outlays.

Mr. Speaker, this Representation is worried about this provision as it is apparently pushing our state hospitals to earn internal income to sustain operations. May we know from the Gentleman-Sponsor, what is its percentage of the operating budget of these hospitals? Medyo marami-rami po ito. Doon na lang po tayo sa isa sa may pinakamalaking panukalang budget na P2.7 billion para sa susunod na taon.

Sa PGH, anong porsiyento po ng kanilang kabuuang internal operating budget ang sourced from their income?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, sa sobra pong dami ng datos, we will submit them to your office, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, hinggil dito sa UP-PGH, gaano karami, for Fiscal Yeasr 2016 and 2017, ang pondo na natanggap nito mula sa iba’t ibang sources at doon sa mga pondo na ginagamit para sa ating indigent patients? Mr. Speaker, itong mga ospital, medical centers sa ating mga SUCs ay takbuhan din. Kung paanong takbuhan ng mga pinaka-nangangailangan ng ating SUCs para mag-aral dito sa mga State Universities and Colleges natin sa mga rehiyon at probinsiya, ganoon din naman sila sa ating medical centers at sa mga ospital. How much was utilized po sa DOH Medical Assistance Program, gayundin sa Lingap sa Masa ng DSWD? Mayroon bang nanggagaling na pondo rin para sa indigent patients mula sa Office of the President?

REP. JAVIER. As of December 31, 2015, Mr. Speaker, for the hospitals, ito ay umabot po ng P755 billion—million, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Itong P755 million po ay naubos ng UP-PGH?

REP. JAVIER. Yes.

REP. ELAGO. One hundred percent?

REP. JAVIER. Yes, it was fully utilized, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, manghihingi po tayo ng detalyadong ulat hinggil dito sa paggamit ng P755 million.


REP. JAVIER. Okay. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. All right. Mr. Speaker, naitanong natin ang hinggil sa hospital incomes dahil sa pagpasok ng probisyon na ito na nagtutulak sa ating mga ospital na kumita para mayroon po silang panggastos sa Capital Outlays, sa MOOE, ay nakakabahala, very frustrating and engaging ito sa ating panahon, at ang Presidente mismo natin ang nagsabi, hindi ba, na sa mga pampublikong ospital na ito ay talagang dapat matatamasa ang mga serbisyo nila ng ating mga pinakamahihirap. Kaya kung mayroon sa kanilang push to earn, push to generate their own income para sa MOOE, sa Capital Outlays, at kung hindi natin bibigyan sila ng sapat na pondo, maaari pong mangolekta sila mula sa iba’t ibang mga sources, pati itong ating mga nangangailangan na mga kababayan.

Sa Section 3 ng ating Special Provisions, hinggil naman ito sa Income from Intellectual Property, it states that:

Income derived from the sale, marketing and commercialization of intellectual property created by the faculty and personnel of SUCs shall accrue to the SUCs in accordance with Sections 30 and 178 of R.A. No. 8293.

Now, what is worrying about this provision, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, is again, the government is blatantly pushing for commercialization, this time, of intellectual property. Can the Gentleman-Sponsor report on the income of SUCs in the past year from intellectual property? Magkano po ang kinita niya?

REP. JAVIER. Actually, Mr. Speaker, hindi pa po nagagawa iyan dahil ngayon pa lang po iyan, at nasa developing stage pa rin ang sinasabi ninyo pong intellectual property sa SUC.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, mula pa lang sa Fiscal Year 2016, ang probisyon na ito ay nasasaad na sa ating General Appropriations Act. Hindi po ito isang bagong probisyon o hindi isang bagong panukala para sa ating mga SUCs.

REP. JAVIER. Nandiyan na po ang intellectual property pero ang commercialization po ay medyo matatagalan pa ho.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, ibig sabihin ba nito, wala po tayong kinita mula sa intellectual property? Wala po tayong income derived from a new sale, marketing and commercialization of intellectual property? Zero po ang income mula dito.

REP. JAVIER. Wala po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. All right. Maganda po na narinig natin iyan dahil ang mahirap po diyan, kung ang orientation sa ating intellectual property sa paggamit niyan ay kung ano iyong mabenta, ang magta-thrive na lang na research and development outputs ay kung ano rin iyong may presyo na, not necessarily iyong kung saan makikinabang din ang ating bayan. Maaaring ang makinabang lang diyan ay kung sino iyong makakapagbayad na mga korporasyon, mga negosyo, mga foreign corporations. Iyon lang po ang ating kinababahala kung ang orientation nitong ating pagpapayabong ng ating intellectual property ay para maibenta ang mga ito.

Now, let us proceed to Section 4 of the Special Provisions—ay hindi pala, lalagpasan ko na po iyon. Section 6, this pertains to SUCs Programs and Course Offerings, states for the record that “SUCs shall maintain only programs and courses that directly support their core mandate and may open only programs and courses aligned with global innovation platforms...”

Mr. Speaker, this provision, again, reflects the worrying trend in the Philippine Higher Education System wherein the SUCs’ program offerings are being downsized or even closed due to the ongoing Rationalization Program of the government.

Tell us, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, how has the rationalization of SUC program offerings affected our state schools? Ang rationalization po, isa iyan sa mga pangunahin din na nakapaloob sa Roadmap for Public Higher Education Reform ng nakaraang administration. Have there been instances when our state schools were forced to downsize program offerings or even close course offerings due to the rationalization policy, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, the rationalization of the SUCs on the programs and course offerings ay hindi naman po nakakasama para sa ating mga SUCs. Ini-integrate po ang mga kurso o mga programa para hindi po mag-overlap o magkaroon ng double compensation o double funding, para naman po ang rationalization po natin ay maisatama ang lagay ng pondo para maayos ang programa ng SUCs ang mga kurso.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, this Representation would just like to note, for the record, that the ongoing program of rationalization on our program and course offerings is, again, one of the dictates of World Bank. Ang ganitong polisiya po ay nagmula sa isang ulat na nailabas ng naturang institusyon noong 2011 na may pamagat na “Putting Higher Education to Work: Skills and Research for Growth in East Asia.” We are all for skills development and growth for our SUCs ngunit kung ito ay nakabatay doon sa dikta ng World Bank, sa kanilang paliwanag kung saan isinasaad ng pandaigdigang institusyon po na dito na


nararapat magsagawa ng rationalization ng program offerings ang SUCs upang makatipid at makasunod sa pangangailangan ng global labor market, again, ang kagustuhan po natin na iyong mga repormang ating isusulong ay iyong hindi lamang sana global competitive, kung hindi talaga iyong tutugon din doon sa mga lokal na pangangailangan, sa pambansang at makabayang pangangailangan ng ating bayan.

Section 10 of the Special Provisions, Mr. Speaker, pertains to the maintenance of laboratory classes. Marami po sa ating mga SUCs ay kasalukuyang nag-o-offer ng Senior High School Program. May we know ilan po sa ating mga SUCs ang kasalukuyan na may senior high school ngayon? Ilan dito iyong magpapatuloy ng kanilang Senior High School Program? Mayroon bang temporary lang? Mayroon bang exit program ang mga SUCs na ito na temporarily nag-offer ng senior high school just to cushion the impact of the K to 12 Transition Program? Lahat po ba na ini-offer ngayon ng mga SUCs ay magpapatuloy sa offering nitong senior high school?

REP. JAVIER. As long as kailangan po sa senior high school, ito po ay mabibigay for the Transition Program of the K to 12.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, ilan sa ating mga SUCs ang nag-offer po ng senior high school, lahat po ba iyon ay temporary lamang na nag-o-offer o permanente na po ito?

REP. JAVIER. Temporary lang po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Temporary lang. So lahat po ng laboratory classes natin ay hanggang Grade 10 lamang ang i-o-offer sa mga SUCs?

REP. ELAGO. Hanggang Grade 11. Walang Grade 12?

REP. JAVIER. Ang Grade 12, kasama na rin po.

REP. ELAGO. So kumpleto na po? So, mag-o-offer ng senior high school? Hanggang senior high school, tuloy-tuloy na po ito?


REP. ELAGO. Okay. Mr. Speaker, may we know from the distinguished Sponsor, what are the policies po of the CHED governing the regulation of school fees in our senior high school? Would CMO No. 3, series of 2012, apply or would it depend on the decision made by the Board of Regents or Trustees of these SUCs?

REP. JAVIER. I think, Mr. Speaker...

REP. ELAGO. Nakadepende po...

REP. JAVIER. Wala pong tuition fee but voucher po ang..

REP. ELAGO. Ang voucher po ay para lang sa hanggang ngayong taon na ito? So, paano na po doon sa mga susunod na taon?

REP. JAVIER. Wala din po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Libre? Ang pondo ay manggagaling saan, Mr. Speaker?

REP. JAVIER. Sa DepEd, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. DepEd?


REP. ELAGO. Saang item po sa DepEd, from what item?

REP. JAVIER. The Senior High School Voucher Program, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. From the Senior High School Voucher Program. So, magpapatuloy ito na libre sa mga SUCs?


REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, so, bawal po na maningil kahit ano na Other School Fees sa ating mga senior high school?


REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, sa isa pong eskuwelahan, mayroon pong naiulat sa amin na mayroon din namang sinisingil na other school fees sa ating senior high school sa mga SUCs. Sa PUP Lab High, mayroon din naman po diyang other school fees, so, ano po ba ang ating pamantayan natin sa paniningil ng other school fees. dahil ang sabi po natin ay libre ito ngunit hindi naman totoo? Mayroon pa ring sinisingil na other school fees sa ating senior high school students. Hindi po talaga ito libre. Mali po na sabihin natin na libre dahil mayroon pong binabayaran pa rin ang ating mga estudyante.

REP. JAVIER. So far, Mr. Speaker, as far as the CHED is concerned, sa tingin po nila ito ay libre pero this is under the DepEd. I think hindi po ito under sa CHED. So far, ang pinag-uusapan po natin ngayon ay ang Commission on Higher Education.


REP. ELAGO. Opo. Mr. Speaker, tinatanong po natin ito dahil ang mga laboratory classes po na ito ay nasa ilalim ng ating State Universities and Colleges at kung anuman ang mga regulasyon na pinapatupad diyan, mayroon din pong weight ang decision ng mga Board of Regents or Trustees sa mga naturang paaralan.

Let me proceed to my next question. Hinggil naman po ito sa Section 11 ng naturang Special Provisions. This Section 11 tackles the Vocational and Practicum Training of Students, and it states thereat:

SUCs are authorized to avail of the voluntary services of their students in the construction or repair of buildings and the fabrication or repair of buildings and equipment subject to the payment of hourly rate as may be determined by the SUCs but not to exceed four (4) hours a day.

Sa inyo pong tala, distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker, magkano po ang ibinabayad ngayon sa ating mga SUCs, iyong pinakamataas at iyong pinakamababa, para dito sa ating vocational and practicum training ng mga estudyante? Mr. Speaker, tinatanong natin ito dahil ayaw naman natin na mapagsamantalahan iyong lakas-paggawa ng ating mga iskolar ng bayan para dito, at tayo ay nananawagan ng makatarungan na sahod sana para suporta sa ating mga estudyante.

REP. JAVIER. Well, the maximum, Mr. Speaker, is around P25 per hour, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. It is P25?

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, kung iyan ay dito sa NCR, nasa P60 per hour na ito, bakit naman wala pa sa kalahati iyong ibinabayad po natin sa ating mga iskolar ng bayan? Ibig sabihin po ba na mas maliit iyong halaga nang kanilang lakas paggawa samantalang pareho naman iyong oras na kanilang ginugugol para sa mga kailangan po natin. Hindi po biro ito na trabaho, itong construction at repair ng mga buildings at fabrication ng equipment.

Mr. Speaker, manghihingi na lang po ang Representasyon na ito ng pamantayan na ginagamit ng mga Board of Trustees or Regents hinggil sa determination po ng hourly rate para sa ating mga estudyante, para sa ating mga iskolar ng bayan.

Ngayon, sa iba naman po na concern, sa budget ng ating SUCs, wala pong katanungan, talaga po ang tumaas ang budget ngayon para sa kabuuan ng ating mga SUCs. Sa ngayong taon, nasa P61 billion iyan. However, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, marami pa rin po sa ating mga SUCs ang makakaranas ng cuts at kabilang diyan iyong 49 SUCs na may malalaking mga kaltas sa kanilang MOOE, ganoon din sa Capital Outlays.

Sa Capital Outlays naman, maraming nakaranas ng talagang napakaliit lang na porsiyento iyong maibibigay sa ating mga SUCs. Ang katanungan po natin hinggil dito, gusto ko pong magtanong patungkol sa MSU. Sa MSU po, mayroon silang P300 plus million na cut. What is the reason behind this very big budget cut?

REP. JAVIER. Based po ito sa DBM at since ang DBM ay nagbabase sa pag-utilize po ng pondo, ...

REP. ELAGO. Ng MSU.

REP. JAVIER. … so, sa tingin ko po, ang binabanggit po ng ating Congresswoman Elago, na hindi po nagagamit ang pondo kaya po siguro na-cut po ng DBM ang kanilang MOOE, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Ito ho, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, the reduction in the budget of Mindanao State University will have a great impact on our students in Mindanao, especially in light of the declaration of martial law and the Marawi Crisis. Lahat po iyan, mayroon talagang malaki na impact sa ating mga estudyante, hindi lang sa Marawi, hindi lang doon sa mga karatig-probinsiya kundi sa buong Mindanao na kung saan marami po sa mga estudyante diyan ay talagang mga iskolar ng bayan, ng Mindanao State University. Kaya nag-a-apela ang Representasyon na ito na i-restore iyong budget cut sa Mindanao State University.

REP. JAVIER. Sana po, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, at this juncture, this Representation would like to inform the Body that we have filed House Resolution No. 127 which seeks to restore the P602.1-million budget slashed by the Department of Budget and Management from the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses of 49 of our SUCs, and to study furthen options on how we can augment budget for the Capital Outlays and Personnel Services of our SUCs.

This Resolution has been co-authored by no less than a hundred of our colleagues and counting, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, including po several senior Members of this august Chamber. That is why we appeal to the distinguished Sponsor to really push and urge the Committee on Appropriations to restore these cuts and augment the budget of our SUCs, lalong-lalo na po sa Capital Outlays.

Ang kadalasan po na nasasakripisyo diyan, katulad po ng natanggap na mga ulat ng Representasyon na ito, ay gymnasium, dormitory, mga faculty housing. Iyan po ay mga pangangailangan ng ating mga universities bilang isang komunidad, hindi ba? Hindi lang ito mga lugar ng pagpapaunlad ng kaalaman kung hindi pati


ang pagpapaunlad din ng katauhan at ng pagiging makabayan ng ating mga kababayan. Kaya mainam na suportahan natin ang increase sa budget ng ating State Universities and Colleges, distinguished Sponsor, Mr. Speaker.

REP. JAVIER. We will deal with the Resolution in the proper time, Mr. Speaker.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, maghahapag na lang po tayo sa period of amendments natin hinggil dito sa ating panukala. Bilang panghuli, ang katanungan ko po, sa pagpapasa natin ng isang batas hinggil sa libre na edukasyon, ano po ang impact nito sa ating mga SUCs na nagpapatupad ngayon ng socialized tuition system? Ilan po ba sa ating mga SUCs ang kasalukuyang nag-implement ng isang STS o ng socialized tuition scheme?

REP. JAVIER. Ang isa po ay ang University of the Philippines. I think another one would be in West Visayas. Mr. Speaker. A maximum of three, I think, practices the socialized tuition fee system.

REP. ELAGO. Mr. Speaker, nawa ay makasama rin natin ang ating distinguished Sponsor at ang buong Kapulungan na ito para pag-aralan kung paaano natin talagang mapapatupad at makakadikit tayo doon sa intent ng ating bagong batas na libreng edukasyon para sa lahat. Ang socialized tuition system, sa karanasan sa UP, ay naging smokescreen na lamang para sa tuition increases. Kung noong 2001, one in every five iskolar ng bayan ang nakaka-receive ng stipend, ng libreng edukasyon, ngayon, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor, one in every 100 na lamang. Napakaliit na bilang na lang ang nakakapasok dahil sa bawat pagkakaroon ng revision, ng pagbabago sa socialized tuition system, mayroon ding kaakibat na tuition increase at bagong Other School Fees, at iyan po ay ang hindi natin gustong maranasan sa ating mga SUCs.

Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker, distinguished Sponsor.

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

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Antonio L. Tinio for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu.). The Hon.

Antonio L. Tinio from the ACT TEACHERS Party-List is recognized.

REP. TINIO. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, unang puntong nais kong ipaabot sa

interpellator, commitment ko po ito sa PNU, Philippine Normal University, at sa kanilang Pangulo, si President Ogena, na nandiyan ngayon. Mayroon po silang request na buuin iyong funding na ginarantiya ng Republic Act No. 9647, iyong PNU Modernization Act, partikular, mayroong proyekto na 12-story building, training center with 100 classrooms, with the estimated cost of P604.6 million at napondohan na ito noong 2015 and 2016 pero partial release lang po, P272.5 million. Kailangan pa po, for 2018, ng P332.1 million para makumpleto at maitayo na ang naturang building.

So, kasama po doon sa nabanggit ng ating kasamahang si Congresswoman Elago na paghingi o pagbalik sa MOOE at maging sa Capital Outlays ng ibang mga state universities and colleges, nais ko pong ipaabot ito, na magiging bukas ba ang Sponsor na tanggapin bilang amendment ang pag-pondo ng P332.1 million para sa NCTE Building ng Philippine Normal University?

REP. JAVIER. I think, Mr. Speaker, during the proper time, in due time, Mr. Speaker, we will attend to the Gentleman’s amendments, Mr. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Maraming salamat, Mr. Speaker. Ngayon, ang isang mahalagang isyu po na nais

nating buksan ay iyon pa ring employment status ng mga teaching and non-teaching personnel ng state universities and colleges sa buong bansa. Noong nakaraang term ko po ay isang malaking laban po ang kampanya para gawing regular na mga empleyado ng mga state univeristies and colleges ang mga faculty at staff, na napakaraming sa bilang nila ay naka-contract of service or job order. Naging makasaysayan po ang tagumpay noong 2016 dahil noong 2016 po, for the first time in decades, ay lumikha po ng 9,000 new plantilla positions sa mga state universities and colleges para po, at least, iyong signipikanteng bilang ng mga faculty na naka-job order or contract of service sa mahigit na 110 state universities and colleges ay maging regular. At, well, kung maaari po ay magbigay lang ang Kinatawan ng update sa implementation ng newly created positions na ito. Naibaba na po ba sa lahat ng mga state universities and colleges at na-fill up na po ba ang mga posisyong ito? In other words, iyong mga faculty na dati ay naka-job order or contract of service, nabigyan na po ba sila ng regular item, at dahil dito, nakatatanggap na ba sila noong tamang suweldo at tamang benepisyo bilang mga pinakamahalagang propesyonal, sabihin nga natin, sa ating tertiary education system?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, as of June 2017, sa 9,000 na bagong faculty plantilla ay nakaka-ano na po tayo, 65.30 percent, so that is 5,257. So, by the end of the year, I hope, Mr. Speaker, na magkaroon na ng 100 percent at mailagay na iyong 9,000.


REP. TINIO. So, to clarify, 65 percent na po iyong na fill-up, tama po ba?


REP. TINIO. Okay. Hopefully, bago matapos ang taon ay mapi-fill up na iyong buong 9,000?


REP. TINIO. Okay. Well, magandang balita po iyan at sabi ko nga, isang tagumpay. In other words, may ibinubunga iyong mga ganitong pagpupuyat natin sa pag-deliberate sa budget dahil ang ibig po sabihin nito, 9,000 lives will be changed. Kung dati mga job order ang mga professional po ito na may mga MA, may mga PhD pero napakasaklap—hindi ko talaga makalimutan at binanggit ko na ito noon pero gusto ko paring banggitin ngayon—hindi ko talaga makakalimutan noong kaharap ko iyong mga job-order faculty ng Bulacan State University, tapos, sinabi sa akin noong kanilang propesor doon na he has spent the best part of his career as an academic, na naka-job order siya. So, talagang napakasaklap nito, malaking injustice po sa mga faculty natin ito, at natutuwa tayo na kahit papaano ay mayroong tayong naipanalo.

Hindi pa po tapos ang laban kasi kanina lang ay may kausap akong president ng isang state university sa Cotabato City, if I am not mistaken, at sabi niya ay mayroon silang 134 na job-order faculty. Ang kaibahan po ngayong 2017—at, again, bunga na rin ito noong continued advocacy natin against the abuse of job orders and contracts of service not just in state universities and colleges but throughoutthe government, in national government, GOCCs, SUCs, and local governments—finally, this year, naglabas ng Joint Circular ang Civil Service Commission, Commission on Audit, at Department of Budget and Management, entitled: “Rules and Resolutions Governing Contract of Service and Job Order Workers in Government.” So, napakahalaga po nito.

While we are not 100 percent in agreement with all of the provisions, at least, it has addressed a policy vacuum, kasi nga before the issuance of this Joint Circular ay wala po talagang malinaw na patakaran na gumagabay sa paggamit ng iba’t ibang ahensiya ng gobyerno sa job order and contract of service. Nagtuturuan po ang Civil Service Commission, ang COA at ang DBM kapagka nire-raise natin iyong issue sa pag-abuso ng job order, as there are over 600,000 job order and contracts of service of personnel in the national and local governments.

So, ngayon, bakit ko binabanggit ito? Mayroon na pong bago, issued just this June 15, 2017, at dito po sa Section No. 7 ng Joint Circular na ito ay mayroong “Limitations.” Malinaw po iyong “Limitations ” and

the “Limitations” includes, sinasabi dito, “Hiring under contract of service shall be limited to consultants, learning service providers and/or other technical experts to undertake special project or job within a specific period.”

Now, during the earlier deliberation on the budget of the Civil Service Commission, I asked the Civil Service Commission to clarify on record, through the Sponsor, what was meant by “learning service providers, ” and the Sponsor very clearly stated na hindi kasama po rito iyong mga teachers. So, iba po iyong tinutukoy diyan. This is more within the context of human resources, iyong training of personnel, ganoon po, at hindi po iyong teaching.

So, further, included in the Limitations, “the project or job is not part of the regular functions of the agency, or the expertise is not available in the agency.” In other words, malinaw po na sa bagong guidelines na ito na hindi na po pinapahintulutan iyong pag-hire ng faculty performing the regular functions of a state university faculty, teaching on a contract of service basis. Puwede iyong mga lecturer, you know, iyong may mga special expertise or knowledge, puwede silang magturo on a part-time basis pero iyong practice po na ginagawa sa mga SUCs ngayon, katulad iyong binanggit ko kaninang example na 134 faculty ng isang state university, hindi na po pupuwede iyan ayon sa guidelines na ito.

Tapos, malinaw din po sa guidelines na ito na mayroong sanctions. Ano ang sabi sa sanctions?

Heads of agencies and/or responsible officers found to violate the provisions of these rules and regulations may be charged before the proper administrative bodies (Office of the Ombudsman, Office of the President, or Civil Service Commission) for violation of existing Civil Service Law and rules of serious nature or conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.

In other words, kung mag-hire po ng naka-contract of service or job order ang isang state university or college na labag sa guidelines na ito ay makakasuhan po iyong president ng SUC at puwede po silang––well, kapag conduct prejudicial to the best interest of service, puwede silang matanggal sa serbisyo diyan. So, nililinaw po natin iyong guidelines na ito.

Kaya po, in other words, Mr. Speaker, hindi pa tapos ang issue. Mayroon 9,000 new teaching or faculty items that have been created, 65 percent has been filled, pero mayroon pa at kailangan pa magdagdag. Pangalawa, paano po iyong non-teaching personnel? In our earlier ampaign, we were successfully able to push for the creation of 9,000 new teaching items. Actually, kasama din doon sa nilaban natin ang 6,000 new non-teaching items. Originally, kasama iyan sa commitment ng DBM pero ang binigay lang nila ay iyong 9,000.


Unfortunately, nagbago na po ng administrasyon, iba na ang nasa DBM, and I have a feeling na hindi na basta-basta kikilalanin ni Secretary Diokno ng DBM iyong pinaglaban natin at naipanalo na natin under the previous dispensation. In fact, alam naman natin ang framework ngayon ni Secretary Diokno is rightsizing and, by that, usually ang ibig sabihin, sa halip na mag-regularize, nagbawas pa nga lalo.

So, kaya po ang unang tanong ko kaugnay nito, Mr. Speaker, para maunawaan din ng Kongreso, gaano karami po ba iyong mga naka job order o contract of service sa non-teaching personnel sa ating mga state universities and colleges?

REP. JAVIER. Mga 20,000, Mr. Speaker.

REP. TINIO. Mga 20,000 employees, Mr. Speaker. Sabi ninyo, 20,000, and I hope mabibigyan po tayo––puwede po bang makahingi, kahit hindi ngayon, ng mas exact na figure?

REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker. I think it is 19,271.

REP. TINIO. So, nineteen thousand?

REP. JAVIER. Two hundred seventy-one.

REP. TINIO. So, 19,271, and, if I am not mistaken, that number covers just 99?

REP. JAVIER. Mr. Speaker, 105.

REP. TINIO. A hundred five? In other words, hindi pa lahat. Ilan nga ba ang SUCs natin ngayon?

REP. JAVIER. We have 111.

REP. TINIO. So, 111, kaya mayroon pang ilang hindi nakakapag-submit ng figures. Of the 105, there are 19,000 mahigit na job order o contract of service na non-teaching personnel. So, napakalala po noong problema.

Tapos, sa Joint Circular po, in the Transitory Provisions therein, I would like to make it of record na nakasaad po rito that for 2018, ano ang mangyayari:

Agencies may renew the individual contracts of existing Contract of Service and Job Order workers until December 31, 2018. Thereafter, hiring of Contract of Service and Job Order workers shall be in accordance with the provisions of this Joint Circular.

Kung baga, may concession po na ibinibigay itong Joint Circular—sige, at least, until next year ay puwede

pang manatili iyong mga job-order or contract-of-service workers. After this, hindi na puwede at puwede na, for example, kasuhan iyong mga administrador. So, either, matatanggalan ng trabaho iyong almost 20,000 na non-teaching na iyan, or mananatili silang naka job order pero makakasuhan naman iyong mga administrador or—at ito po ang gusto natin mangyari siyempre, gawin nang regular iyong mga job-order or contract-of-service employees na ito. So, we have a one-year breathing space pero ngayon pa lamang po, I am already putting forward na kailangan na po ito ay simulan na natin. Kung maaari ay singilin natin iyong previous commitment ng DBM that they would provide 6,000 items for non-teaching personnel. Susuportahan po ba ito ng Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?

REP. JAVIER. Sana po sa susunod na taon ay maisama ng DBM ang budget para maging regular ang mga non-teaching.

REP. TINIO. Well, sana nga po. Ako nga, hindi ko na hihintayin ang next year at ako po, itutulak ko na kahit ngayon ay maglaan sila, kung hindi man 6,000, you know, at least a significant number. At the proper time, I will push for the amendments, and I am sure we will get the support of the PASUC—Dr. Rotoras and all the presidents of state universities and colleges. So, ilalaban po natin ito.

Before I conclude, Mr. Speaker, gusto ko na ring banggitin ito dahil sumulat po sa amin, in particular, iyong mga personnel sa West Visayas State University Medical Center. Isang ospital po ito pero ang budget nila ay nasa ilalim ng West Visayas State University. Iyong particular na kaso nila ay directly may kinalaman doon sa issue ng mga contract of service. Sabi po rito:

We are the contractual employees of West Visayas State University Medical Center in Iloilo City who were employed to supplement the insufficient number of personnel of the medical center but were affected by a new and unprecedented provision that was inserted in the 2016 General Appropriations Act, Special Provisions, Section 2, which is applicable to State Universities and Colleges on hospital income which states that, ‘In case shall said amount—referring to hospital income—be used for the payment of salaries, allowances and other benefits.’ The passage of such provision led to the demotion of 34 contractual employees with employer-employee relationship to mere contract of service.

So, dati po, contractual sila, yes, pero contractual na may employer-employee relation at binabayaran iyong


kanilang compensation from the income of the hospital. With the inclusion of that proviso in the Special Provisions of State Universities and Colleges, ipinagbawal na po na gamitin iyong income ng ospital para sa compensation noong mga contractual employees. Kaya ang nangyari, naging contract of service sila. So, for many years, contractual employees sila, with an employer-employee relation to the West Visayas State University. Ngayon, naging contract of service. Ibig sabihin, no employer-employee relationship, no benefits, and so on and so forth. So, 34 po sila and, of course, they are appealing that they be reinstated as regular employees.

In other words, ito po iyong kongkretong halimbawa kung paanong naaapektuhan ang buhay at katayuan ng mga indibidwal at mga pamilya nila dahil sa mga patakarang ito. So, to conclude, Mr. Speaker, sa palagay ko isang malaking laban po na dapat tugunan ng Kongresong ito ang patuloy na paglaganap at pag-aabuso sa pamamagitan ng sistemang contract of service at job order sa mga state universities and colleges natin at sa buong national and local government.

Sinasabi ni Pangulong Duterte na nais daw niyang wakasan ng pribadong sektor ang paggamit ng sistemang endo, iyong kontraktwalisasyon sa mga kompanya, pero sabi nga, bago singilin ang iyong kapitbahay, tumingin ka muna sa sarili mong bakuran at malinaw po na sa bakuran ng national government, isang bahagi lang po itong state universities and colleges, ay napakahalaga na po noong paggamit ng endo, iyong job order at contract of service.

Kaya po, I am moving and at the proper time, I will propose an amendment that funding be provided for the regularization through additional plantilla positions for non-teaching personnel of the state universities and colleges.

Iyon na lamang po, Mr. Speaker. Maraming salamat.

REP. JAVIER. Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Before I recognize the Dep. Majority Leader, I would like to recognize the guest from my very own university, the Batangas State University, the Board of Regents and the other officers are here.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we recognize the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD of COOP-NATCCO Party-List for his interpellation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The Dep. Minority Leader from COOP-NATCCO Party-List, the Hon. Anthony M. Bravo, PhD is recognized.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker.Will the distinguished Sponsor accept some

clarifications from this Representation?


REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Sponsor.

There are 111 SUCs in the country. Am I correct?


REP. BRAVO (A.). These SUCs have been created by separate laws. They have their own charter already. Am I correct?


REP. BRAVO (A.). And because of this, they operate under an autonomy.


REP. BRAVO (A.). And because of this autonomy in their operation, there is not much interference from the CHED. Am I correct?


REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that answer.Out of 111 SUCs, there are two that will be excluded,

namely the Sulu State College and Pangasinan State University. Am I correct, Mr. Sponsor, Mr. Speaker?


REP. BRAVO (A.). However, in fairness to these two, let me check if the remaining 109 supposed to be SUCs are represented here by their presidents.


REP. BRAVO (A.). Mr. President of the PASUC, as you are asked whether or not …

REP. JAVIER. Yes, Mr. Speaker, well, we have the list…

REP. BRAVO (A.). So, except only two SUCs.

REP. JAVIER. …except the Pangasinan State University and Sulu State College.

REP. BRAVO (A.). Thank you for that assurance.Mr. Speaker, there being no other Member from

the Minority who wishes to ask questions, I move to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budgets of the SUCs except the Sulu State College and Pangasinan State University.

I so so move, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)



REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Majority, we join the Minority in its motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the budgets of State Universities and Colleges except the Pangasinan State University and Sulu State College.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to terminate the period of interpellation and debate on the proposed budgets of the State Universities and Colleges, excluding the Pangasinan State University and Sulu State College, is hereby approved. (Applause)



REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we suspend the consideration of House Bill No. 6215.



APPROVAL OF THE JOURNAL

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we approve Journal No. 17, dated September 4, 2017.


REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move for the change of referral of the following measures:

House Bill No. 3696, from the Committee on Higher and Technical Education, to the Special Committee on Reforestation;

House Bill No. 3964, from the Committee on Higher and Technical Education, to the Committee on Basic Education and Culture;



House Bills No. 5729 and 5889, from the Committee on Higher and Technical Education, to the Committees on Higher and Technical Education, and Labor and Employment;

House Bill No. 4025, from the Committee on Health, to the Committee on Higher and Technical Education;

House Bill No. 4722, from the Committee on Information and Communications Technology, to the Committee on Labor and Employment;

House Bill No. 5017, from the Committee on Public Works and Highways, to the Committee on Basic Education and Culture;

House Bill No. 5460, from the Committee on Public Information, to the Committees on Government Enterprises and Privatization, and Public Information;

House Bill No. 5672, from the Committee on Natural Resources, to the Special Committee on Climate Change;

House Bill No. 5836, from the Committee on Social Services, to the Committee on Welfare of Children;

House Bill No. 6041, from the Committee on Youth and Sports Development, to the Committee on Welfare of Children; and

House Bill No. 5974, from the Committee on Rural Development, to the Committee on Banks and Financial Intermediaries.

I so move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the motion to change the referral of the measures that had been read is hereby approved.

ADJOURNMENT OF SESSION

REP. GULLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move that we adjourn the session until later at ten o’clock in the morning.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (Rep. Abu). The session is adjourned until later at ten o’clock this morning, September 7, 2017.

It was 3:50 a.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.ph ddc/gic/ltn/09192017/1833

Documents

SR E P REENT A T I S V E PLENARY PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17th ... · 6/9/2017 · Jalosjos Javier Labadlabad Lagman Lanete Laogan Abayon Abu Abueg ... TO THE COMMITTEE ON PEOPLE’S PARTICIPATION