Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr.
(The Philippine Star)
“Remember, we have had two exhaustive inquiries already. This is just to wrap up. Certainly, we have no intention of inviting him to the inquiry, but would welcome any information he would give,” Belmonte said in a text message.
Belmonte was referring to the Feb. 11 hearing of the committee on public order and safety and the committee on peace, reconciliation and unity, and the proceedings in the ad hoc committee on the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law chaired by Cagayan de Oro City Rep. Rufus Rodriguez.
The three committees have heard testimonies on the clashes between Muslim guerillas and Philippine National Police-Special Action Force (PNP-SAF) troopers on Jan. 25 in Mamasapano, Maguindanao.
The encounters left 44 policemen dead. Eighteen Muslim fighters and five civilians also died.
Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II said he does not think Aquino would attend even if invited.
For his part, Isabela Rep. Rodolfo Albano III supported his minority colleagues’ suggestion for the House to invite the President to its hearings.
“Why not, there is no harm in trying. For all we know, the President is just waiting for another opportunity to explain himself on this tragic incident in Mamasapano. If he accepts the invitation, we will accord him all the courtesy due him and his office,” he said.
Eastern Samar Rep. Ben Evardone said there is no need for the President to appear before the House.
“He is willing to cooperate with us by giving us the information we need,” he said.
In fact, Malacañang has announced that it would send the House a transcript of text messages exchanged between Aquino and suspended PNP chief Director General Alan Purisima on Jan. 25, he said.
“He is giving us his text messages. He has told the nation what he knows about the SAF operation in three nationally televised speeches. What more do we want?” Evardone asked.
For Rep. Rodel Batocabe of party-list group Ako Bicol, the minority’s suggestion for Aquino to testify before the House “is just a publicity stunt.”
“Out of respect for the President and his office, we should not invite him. The Senate did not and the House should not,” he said.
Batocabe said the hearing committees could just write Aquino if they need additional information from him.
On Friday, Rep. Carol Jane Lopez of party-list group You Against Corruption and Poverty said she and colleagues from the minority bloc would ask the hearing committees to invite Aquino.
Lopez said the hearing would give the President the opportunity to clarify and tell all that he knows about the police operation in Mamasapano.
She said the people are not satisfied with his previous explanations.
Lopez said the April 7-8 hearings would not touch on what the Senate and the PNP Board of Inquiry (PNP-BOI) have already investigated and tackled in their reports.
She added that she and her colleagues would focus on the gaps in the Senate and BOI reports on the carnage in Mamasapano.
Malacañang, however, expressed caution against the suggestion to have President Aquino appear before a congressional inquiry.
“There are various ways to go about it,” deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte said when asked how the President could answer the questions of the lawmakers, particularly on the role of Purisima in the operation in Mamasapano.
“If that’s one of the things that they intend to take up in the hearings in the House, then again we leave it up to the responsible congressmen to come up with the proper methodology by which to ask the President that particular question,” Valte said.
“You have to consider that not because he’s President Aquino, but also…it’s the Office of the President that we’re talking about and that is the office of the head of the executive branch, which is separate and independent and co-equal from Congress. You also have to afford the office the courtesy and the respect that office demands,” she added.
Valte said congressmen would still have to discuss whether it would be necessary for Aquino to personally appear before them and vote on it.
“Even in the Senate – as we talked about (it Friday) – the Senate coursed its request through a written letter, and obviously, you can see that the President responded favorably,” she said.
Valte pointed out the possibility that Aquino appearing before the hearing would afford the opportunity for some groups to use the issue by criticizing the President.
“It doesn’t take much of a stretch to really understand that there are groups that would like to use this, this incident, to heighten negative sentiments about the President,” she said.
Earlier, Valte said the President agreed to a Senate request for a transcript of his text messages with Purisima in the early hours of Jan. 25.
The release was in response to a March 3 letter from the Senate committee on public order and dangerous drugs to Aquino and Smart communications’ chief executive officer for the telecommunications company to submit the President’s conversations with Purisima from 5 a.m. to 7 a.m. on that day.
Valte said there was no reason to worry about the President’s cellphone number getting revealed to the public because it was not the one he was personally using.
Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa Jr., in reply to the Senate request, asked Senate President Franklin Drilon that the text messages be covered specifically by executive privilege and generally by the privacy of communications because Purisima was still a member of the police force.
“Nevertheless, in the interest of transparency and considering that the SMS conversations being sought have already been testified on by Mr. Purisima during the 23 February 2015 public hearing of the Committee, the President has given his consent to the release of the requested transcriptions by Smart, excepting any and all portions which have no relation to the subject of the inquiry or matters involving national security,” Ochoa’s letter read.
Malacañang maintained the President has been judged both in the Senate and the Board of Inquiry (BOI) report without hearing his side of the story.
The BOI said Aquino broke the chain of command by dealing with Purisima and relieved SAF commander Director Getulio Napeñas with regard to the operation but later clarified it did not mean he violated anything.
The Senate, on the other hand, found the President ultimately responsible for the incident even if Malacañang had been saying that his orders were disobeyed by his subordinates.
The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), on the other hand, said it would evaluate the Senate findings on the Mamasapano operation.
“We will also evaluate their findings on top of the PNP findings,” NBI director Virgilio Mendez said. – Aurea Calica, Aie Balagtas See, Janvic Mateo
No comments:
Post a Comment