senate no. 47
TRANSCRIPT
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 1/16
REPUBLIC OF'THE PHILIPPINES
S e n a t ePasayCi ty
Journal
SESSION NO. 47Tuesday, December 5,2006
THIRTEENTH CONG RESSTHIRD REGULAR SESSION
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 2/16
SESSION NO. 47
Tuesday, December 5,200 6
CALL TO ORDER
At 3:49 p.m., the Se nate President, Hon. Manny
Villar, called the session to order.
PRAYER
Sen. Mar Roxas led the prayer, to wit:
God of power and m ight, of wisdom and
justice, we pray that through You, all
authority be rightly adm inistered, all laws be
properly enacted and all justic e be correctly
decreed.
Assist us, Almighty Father, the President,
and all government leaders, and all those
who serve the public.
Assist us with Your spirit of counsel
and fortitude.
May we always seek the ways ofrighteousness, justice a nd mercy. G rant that
we be enabled by Your grace to lead our
country with honesty and integrity.
We ask these through Christ, our Lord.
Amen.
ROLL CALL
Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary of the
Senate, Oscar G . Yabes, called the roll, to which the
following senators responded:
Angara, E. J.
Arroyo, J. P.Cayetano, C. P. S.
Defensor Santiago, M.
Drilon, F. M.Ejercito Estrada, J.
Ejercito Estrada, L. L. P.
Flavier, J.M.
Gordon, R. J.
Lacson, P. M.
Lim, A . S .
Osmefia 111, S . R.
Pangilinan, F. N.
Recto, R. G.
Roxas, M.
Villar, M.
With 16 senators present, the Chair declared the
prsence of a quorum.
Senators Enrile, Lapid, M agsaysay, Pimentel and
Revilla arrived after the roll call.
Senators M adrigal was abroad on official mission.
Senator Biazon was absent.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE
PRESENCE OF GUESTS
At this juncture , Senator Pangilinan acknowledged
the presence of Mayor Rommel Maslog and the
barangay captains of the Municipality of Talisayan,
Misam is Oriental.
DEFERMENT OF THE APPROVAL
OF THE JOURNALS
Upon motion of Senator Pangilinan, there being
no objection, the Body deferred the consideration
and approval of the Journals of Session Nos. 45
(November 27 to 30, 2006) and 46 (December 4,
2006) to a later date.
REFERENCE OF BUSINESS
The Secretary of the Senate read the following
matters and the Chair made the corresponding
referrals:
MESSAGES FROM THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Letter from the Secretary General of the House of
Representatives, informing the Sena te that on 29
November 2006, the House of Representatives
approved the Bicameral Conference Committee
Report on the disagreeing provisions of House
Bill No. 4629 , entitled
AN AC T MANDATI NG THE USE OF
BIOETHANOL OR ETHYL ALCOHOL
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 3/16
930 TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,2006
AS TRANSPORT FUEL AND SUPPORT
THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF
OTHER BIOFUELS, ESTABLISHING
FOR THE PURPOSE THE NATIONAL
BIOFUELS PROGRAM, APPROPRIAT-
ING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES,
and S enate Bill No. 2226, entitled
AN ACT TO DIRECT THE USE OF
BIOFUELS ESTABLISHING FOR T HE
PURPOSE THE BIOFUEL PROGRAM,APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
To the Archives
Letter from the Secretary General of the House of
Representatives, informing the Senate that on 29
November 2006, the House of Representativeselected Representative Cayetano as additional
conferee to the Bicam eral Conference Committee
on the disagreeing provisions of House Bill
No. 5352, entitled
A N A C T A M E N D I N G C E R T A I N
PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT
N O . 8 4 3 6 , E N T I T L E D A N A C T
AUTHORIZING THE COMMISSION
O N E L E C T I O N S T O U S E A N
AUTOMATED ELECTION SYSTEM
IN THE MAY 11 , 1998 NATIONAL
OR LOCAL ELECTIONS AND IN
S U B S E Q U E N T N A T I O N A L A N D
LOCAL ELECTORAL EXCERCISES,
P R O V I D I N G F U N D S T H E R E F O R
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES,
and Senate Bil l No. 223 1, entitled
AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT
N O . 8 4 3 6 , E N T I T L E D A N A C T
AUTHORIZING THE COMMISSIONO N E L E C T I O N S T O U S E A N
AUTOMATED ELECTION SYSTEM
IN THE MAY 11, 1998 NATIONAL
OR LOCAL ELECTIONS AND IN
S U B S E Q U E N T N A T I O N A L A N D
LOCAL ELECTORAL EXERCISES,
P R O V I D I N G F U N D S T H E R E F O R
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
To t he Commi t t e e on Rules
B I L L S O N F I R S T R E A D I N G
Senate Bill No . 2552, entitled
AN ACT MANDATING THE USE OF TH E
PROCEEDS FROM THE DEVELOP-
MENT, LEASE OR USE OF GOVER N-
MENT PROPERTIES FOR VET!3RANS’
PENSIONS AND BENEFITS
Introduced by Senator Manuel “Lito” M.
Lapid
T o the Commit tees on Nat iona l Defense
and Secur i ty ; and Finance
Senate Bill No. 2553, entitled
A N A C T I N S T I T U T I N G A P O L I C Y
FOR NATIONAL ROAD ACCIDENTPREVENTION A N D S AFET Y AWARE;
NESS SCH EME FOR CHI LDREN,
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Introduced by Senator Manuel “Lito” M
Lapid
To the Commit tees on Publ ic Works ; Loca l
Government : and Finance
Senate Bill No. 2554. entitled
AN ACT AMENDING ARTICLES 163,
164 AND 165 OF THE REVISED
PENAL CODE AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
Introduced by Senator Manuel “Lito” M.Lapid
To the Commit tees on Banks , F inanc ia l
Ins t i tu t ions and Currenc ies ; and Jus t ice andH u m a n R i g h t s
QUESTION OF P R I V I L E G E
O F S E N A T O R D E F E N S O R S A N T I A G O
Rising to a question of personal and collective
privilege, Senator Defensor Santiago said that she
already delivered a privilege speech in yesterday’s
session, thus, to deliver another one m ight not be fair
to her co lleagues. How ever, she believed that she
y“
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 4/16
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5 ,2006 93 1
has to read into the Record of the Senate the letter
she sent this morning to President Arroyo.
Following is the full text of the letter:
Dear Presiden t Arroyo:
As an administration senator, I very stronglyappeal to you to desist fiom appointing byDecember 7 a new Supreme Court Chief Justice.I have to perform this duty, on the ground that,as already pointed out by Senator Pangilinan,there has been a failure of the nomination processconducted by the Judicial and Bar Council, ofwhich he is a member.
The Council called all senior incumbentjustices contending for the imminent vacancy, toa public in terview , None went. Only I, as the solenominated “outsider” to the Court, was present.The Council chair - who by provision of law isthe incumbent Chief Justice - caught me bysurprise when he gave instructions, through the
justice secretary, that I should state at the hearingthat I was “waiving” my right to an interview.
I did not spontaneously waive my right;
under the circumstances, I was compelled to doso. In fact, after I gave my forced consent, alleight Council members went to the holding roomwhere I was waiting, to thank me for my“cooperation.” Then they proceeded to a voting,during which I got exactly one vote. Thus, thenomination process was a farce conducted inbad faith.
In restrospect, it appears that the Council,nnder Chief Justice Panganiban, had alreadyreached a prior unethical agreement that I wouldnot be inteiviewed in public. The ploy of my“waiver” enabled them to cany their insidious plotto close the nomination process to an outsider,and to secure it for Senior Associate Justice Puno.
It appears to me, as a former trial judge that,the Council members violated the Anti-Graft andCormpt Practices Act, condensed as follows:“Causing any undue injury to any party or givingany private party any unwarranted advantage, in
the discharge of his official and administrativefunctions through manifest partiality and evidentbad faith.”
Further, the entire process was tainted bycomption, as defined thus by Black’s Law
Dictionary: “A n act done with an intent to givesome advantage inconsistent with official dutyand the rights of others. The act of an officialperson who unlawfully and wrongfully uses hisstation to procure some benects for himself orfor another person, contraiy to duty and therights of others.”
If you were to appoint Mr. Puno, the publicwill suspect - with good reason - that he hasunlawfully promised to decide in favor of theadministration, the controversial imminent caseon the constitutionality of a constituentassembly. Thus, the Supreme Court and th e
constituent assembly would both lose allcredibility.
Hence, I respectfully propose that anincumbent who is not in contention should benamed acting Chief Justice, until the Council isable to conduct a valid nomination process,including public interviews. Needless to say, I
now withdraw my own nomination, to avoid anysuspicion of self-interest, which is all too
obvious on the part of the justices and theCouncil members.
In my entire life as a lawyer, I have neverbeen as appalled, as I am now, at the moraldepths to which these public officials could sink.
The utter disregard for the canons of civilizedconduct is so indurated as to defy all humanunderstanding. I am prepared to risk my careerand my life on this proposition, for I believe it anoverriding duty, then as now, to reform theculture of conuption.
Respectfully yours,
(Sgd.)MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO
Senator Defensor Santiago said that since i t was
not her wish to spe nd more of the valuable time of
the Senate on the subject and with the indulgence of
her colleagues, s he wa s begging off from answeringinterpellations on the Ietter since it was addressed to
the President.
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
OF SENATO R R O U S
Senator Roxas d isclosed that as he was speaking,
the Members of th e House of Representatives were
in the process of amending their Rules prior to the
holding of a constituent assembly, to amend and
revise the Constitution with or without th e participationof the Senate, based on their unique interpretation of
the pertinent provision of th e C onstitution.
He said that he has been informed by some
lawyers that amending the Rules of the House ofRepresentative was an internal matter, hence, no
outsider could object to it, a matter that he would
rather leave to those who are schooled in law.
However, he expressed concern that the action
of the House, although preliminary, wa s the opening
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 5/16
932 TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,2006
salvo to a s equence of events that could destroy the
'system of government, democracy and way of life.
He asked what the response of the Senate, as an
institution, would be to what he considers as an
assault to the system of government.
The Chair replied that the M ajority Leader was
preparing a res olution reiterating the previous position
of the Sen ate that as part of a bicameral legislature,the House of Represe ntatives cannot unilate rally call
for a constituent assembly. It informed the Body
that it would call a caucus within the week to discuss
further the course of action the Senate should take
on the matter.
Moreover, the Chair disclosed that the Legal
Service of the Senate was a lso preparing, in case the
Body decides to file a petition in the Supreme Cou rt
questioning the co nstitutionality and legality of the
action of the House of Representatives.
Senator Roxas expre ssed his apprecia tion for the
response of the Chair as he urged that the caucus
be held as soon as possible so that the Sen ate could
move accordingly.
REMARKS OF SENATOR PANGILINAN
Senator Pangilinan affirmed the stateme nt of the
Chair on the a ctions being taken by the S enate on the
plan of the Ho use of Re presentatives to call a
constituent assembly with or without the Senate. He
disclosed that the Senate President, the Senate
President Pro Tempore, the Minority Leader, the
Majority Leader, and the Chairman of the Comm ittee
on Finance have met to coordinate efforts in
responding to the action of the House.
Senator Pangilinan stated that the resolution
reiterating the previous position of the S enate on th e
matter would also be filed within the week.
REMARKS OF SENATOR GORDON
Still on the same matter, Senator Gordon said
that he has been watching with delight the ludicrous
effort being undertaken by certain members of the
House of Representatives to amend or revise the
Constitution on their own, completely ignoring the
Senate resolution adopted two months ago that any
amendm ent or revision to the fundam ental law should
he in accordan ce with the Constitution itself.
However, Senator Gordon commented that the
Senate should not show so much concern over the
matter because up to this time, the H ouse leadership
has not mustered the sufficient number of votes to
call for a constituent assembly.
Senator Gordon recalled that the last time he
talked with his counterparts in the House, he had
requested that he be informed once they have the
number of votes and he would meet with them to
discuss the issue.
COMMITTEE REPORT NO. 34
ON SENATE BILL NO. 2137
(Continuation)
Upon motion of Senator Pangilinan, there being
no objection, the Body resumed consideration, on
Second Reading, ofse na te B ill No. 2137 (Committee
Report No. 34), entitled
AN ACT TO DEFINE AND PUNISH THE
C R I M E S OF T E R R O R I S M A N DCONSPIRACY TO COMMIT
TERRORISM AND OTHER ACTS
INCIDENTAL THERETO, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES.
Senator Pangilinan stated that the parliam entary
status was still the period of individual amendm ents.
Thereupon, the Cha ir recognized Se nator Enrile,
Sponsor of the measure, and Senator Drilon for his
amendments.
WORKING DRAFT
Senator Drilon informed the Body that for
purposes of the Record, the amended copy of the bill
as of November 14, 2006, would be used.
DRILON AMENDMENTS
As proposed by Se nator Drilon and accepte d by
the Sponsor, there being no objection, the Body
approved the following amendments:
1. On page 2 , delete line 17 and reletter the
succeeding subsections accordingly;
At this point, Senator Pimentel asked to be
clarified if the deletion of the item on "sedition"
means that it would no longer be one of the acts of
terrorism as defined. Senator Drilon replied in the
affirmative. Senator Enrile confirmed that even if
one hurled invectives against the government
publicly, it is n ot considered terrorism.
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 6/16
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,2006 933
At this junc ture, Senate President Villar
relinquished the Chair to Senate President Pro
Tempore Flavier.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon motion of Senator Drilon, the session was
suspended.
I t was 4:12 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 4:12 p.m., the session was resumed.
On page 4, reword lines 9 to 15 as follows:
SEC. 4. CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT
TERR0RLSM.- PERSONS WHO CONSPIRETO COMMlT THE CRIME OF TERRORISM
SHALL SUFFER THEPENALTY OF RECLU-SION TEMPORAL IN ITS MAXIMUMPERIOD.
THERE IS CONSPIRACY WHENTWO OR MORE PERSONS COME TOAN AGREEMENT CONCERNING THECOMMISSION OF THECRIMEASDEFINFl)IN SECTION 3 HEREOF AND DECIDE TOCOMMIT THE SAME.;
On page 5, delete lines 1 to 9 and in lieuthereof, insert the following:
SEC. 5. ACCOMPLICE -ANY PERSONWHO, NOT BEING A PRINCIPAL UNDERARITCLE 170FTHEREVISEDPENALCODENOR A CONSPIRATOR AS DEFINED INSECTION4HEREOF, COOPERATES IN THE
EXECUTION OF EITHER THE CRIME OFTERRORISM OR CONSPIRACY TOCOMMIT TERRORISM BY PREVIOUS ORSIMULTANEOUS ACTS SHALL SUFFERTHEPENALTY OF RECLUSIONEA@ORAL
IN ITS MEDIUM PERIOD.;
On the same page, delete lines10 to 24;
On page 6, as modified by Senator Pimentel,delete lines 1 to 5 and in lieu thereof, insertthe following:
SEC. 6 .ACCESSORY. -ANY PERSONWHO, HAVING KNOWLEDGE OF THECOMMISSION OF THE CRIME OFTERRORISM OR THE CRIME OFCONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TERRORISMAND WITHOUT HAVING PARTICIPATEDTHEREIN, EITHER AS PRINCIPAL OR
6.
ACCOMPLICE UNDER ARTICLES 17AND
18OF THEREVISEDPENAL CODE, TAKESPART SUBSEQUENT TO lTS COMMISSIONIN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MANNER(A) BY PROFITING HIMSELF ORASSISTING THE OFFENDER TO PROFITBY THE EFFECTS OF THE CRIME; (B)BYCONCEALING ORDESTROYlNG BODYOF THE CRIME, OR THE EFFECTS OR
INSTRUMENTS THEREOF, IN ORDER TOPREVENT ITS DISCOVERY; (C) BYHARBORING,CONCEALING OR ASSISTINGIN THE ESCAPE OF THE PRINCIPAL OR
CONSPIRATOR OF THE CRIME, SHALLSUFFER THE PENALTY OF PRISIONMAYOR IN ITS MAXIMUM PERIOD.
Delete lines 14 to 24 on page 6 up to line 4
of page 7 and in lieu thereof, insert the
following provision:
SEC. 7. S U R W W C E OFSUSPEClS
AIVDD TERC EPlTON AND RECORLXNG OFCOMMUNICATIONS.-THE PROVISIONSOF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 4200 (ANTLWlRE
TAPPING LAW) TO THE CONTRARYNOTWITHSTANDING, A POLICE ORGOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTOFFICIAL AND THE MEMBERS OF HISTEAM MAY, W O N A WRITTEN ORDEROF THE COURT OF APPEALS, LISTEN TO,INTERCEPTAND RECORD,WlTHTHEUSEOFANY MODE. FORM. KIM). ORTYPE OFELECTRONIC OROTHER SURVEILLANCEEQUIPMENT OR INTERCEPTING AND
TRACKING DEVICES, OR WITHTHE USEOF ANY OTHER SUITABLE WAYS ANDMEANS FOR THAT PURPOSE, ANYCOMMUNICATION,MESSAGE, CONVER-SATION, DISCUSSION, OR SPOKEN ORWRITTEN WORDS BETWEEN MEMBERSOF A JUDICIALLY DECLARED ANDOUTLAWED TERRORISM ORGANIZA-TION, ASSOCIATION, OR GROUP OFPERSONS OR OFANY PERSON CHARGEDWITH OR SUSPECTED OF THE CRIMEOF TERRORISM OR CONSPIRACY TO
COMMIT TERRORISM.Upon query of Senator Pimentel, Senator Enrile
confirmed that the one to be proscribed in a judicial
decision is the association itself, so that if a person
continues to be a member thereof, he could be
placed by the police or law enforcement agents
under surveillance provided there is authorization
from a division of the Court of Appeals. In effect,
he added, by being a member of a proscribed
association, the person is abetting its objectives.
He said that AI-Ghozi, for instance, was not a
I*
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 7/16
934 TUESDAY. DECEMBER 5.2006
member of an association but he was suspected of
having committed the crime of terrorism and so he
was placed under surveillance.
13. On the same page, line 19, replace the phrase“a Regional Trial Court” with THE COURTOF APPEALS;
7.
8.
9.
10
1 1
12
Replace the words “Regional Trial Court”
with DIVISION OF THE COURT OFAPPEALS on page 7, lines 6 and 11; on page8, lines 2, 10 and 11; onpage 9, lines 11, 13,15, 18 and 21; on page IO, lines 6,10, 14,15
and 16; on page 11, lines 1, 17 and 18; on
page 12, lines 2, 5, 11 and 14; on page 20,lines 1, 2, 16 , 24 up to line 1 ofpage 21; onpage 21, lines 15, 19 , 21 and23; onpage 22,lines 2, 10,23, 24 up to line 1 of page 23; onpage 23, lines I8 and 23; onpage 24, lines 7,10, 14 and 16; and on page 26, line 12;
On page 7, line 7, and wherever it appears in
Following the change in the title of Section 16 ,
Senator Pimentel suggested that on line 19, after the
word “authorized,” the words “or malicious” be
inserted. Senator Enrile clarified that a person
unauthorized to conduct s urveillance or interceptionis subject to penalty. He asked whether the proposed
amendment sugge sts that a person could maliciously
intercept communication even if h e is authorized b y
the appellate court. Senator Pimentel explained that
his proposal seeks to align the content of the provision
with the change in the title; nonetheless, he withdrew
his proposed amendment.
the bil l, change the word “overhear” toLISTEN TO, 14.
On page 8, line 14, and wherever it appears
in the bill, change the word “overheard” toLISTENED TO,
On page 10,after line 7, insert the following
15 .
proviso:
PROVIDED, THAT THE APPLICANTPOLICJ! O R G O W % ” T L A W E N F O R BMENT OFFICIAL SHALL FILE ANAPPROPRJATE CASE BEFORE THE PUBLICPROSECUTOR’S OFFICE FOR ANYVIOLATION OFTHISACTWIT”THIRTY(30) DAYS AFTER THE TERMINATION OFTHE PERIOD GRANTED BY THE COURTOF APPEALS AS PROVIDED IN THEPRECEDING PARAGRAPHS.
IF NO CASE IS FILED WITHIN THETHIRTY (30) DAY PERIOD, THEAPPLICANT POLICE OR GOVERNMENTLAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL SHALLIMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE PERSONSUBJECT OF THE SURVEILLANCE,INTERCEPTION AND RECORDING. THEPENALTY OF PRISION MAYOR IN ITSMAXIMUMPERIOD SHALL BE IMPOSEDUPON THE APPLICANT POLICE ORGOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTOFFICIAL WHO FAILS TO NOTIFY THEPERSONSUBJECrOFTHE S W ” C E ,INTERCEPTION AND RECORDING.;
On Daze 13. line 13. reolace the ukase “notIin accordance with” with IN ViOLATIONO F
On the same page, line 20 and wherever itappears in the bill, change the word“overhears” to LISTENS TO;
On page 14, after line 2, inserta new paragraphto read as follows:
IN ADDITION TO THE LIABILITYATTACHING TO THE OFFENDER FOR THE
COMMISSION OF ANY OTHER OFFENSE,THE PENALTY OFPIUSIONMAYOR IN ITS
MAXIMUM PERIOD SHALL BE IMPOSEDUPON ANY POLICE OR GOVERNMENTLAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL WHOMALICIOUSLY OBTAINBD ANAUTHOIWYF R O M T H E C D L R T O F A P P E T O T R A C K
DOWN, TAP, LISTENTO,NIERCEm, ANDRECORD IN WHATEVER MANNER ORFORMANYCOMMUNICATION,MESSAGE,CONVERSATION, DLSCUSSION, OR SPOKENOR WRITTEN WORD OF A PERSONCHARGED WITH OR SUSPECTED OF THECRIME OF TERRORISM OR CONSPIRACYTO COMMIT TERRORISM: PROVIDED
THAT, NOTWITHSTANDING SECTION 13OF THIS ACT, THE PARTY AGGRIEVEDBY SUCH AUTHORIZATION SHALL BEALLOWED ACCESS TO THE SEALEDENVELOPE OR SEALED PACKAGE ANDTHE CONTENTS THEREOFASEVIDENCEFORTHEPROSECUTION OF ANY POLICEOR GOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTPERSONNEL WHO MALICIOUSLYPROCURED SUCH AUTHORIZATION;
SUSPENSION OF SESSION- - ,
Upon motion of Senator Drilon, the session w as
suspended.n the same page, line 17, between the
words “Unauthorized” and “lnterceptioi~s,”
P
insert the words OR MALICIOUS; It was 4:37 p.m.
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 8/16
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,2006 935
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 4:38 p.m., the session was resumed.
On page 14, line 16, Senator Drilon proposed the
deletion of the words “R egional Trial”.
Senator Drilon clarified that the am endment is a
matter of style and besides, the term “Regional Trial
Court” already appears on lines 12 and 13.
Asked by S enator Pimentel for a clarification of
the term “Regional Trial Court” on page 13, Senator
Drilon said that Section 17 is on the proscription of
terrorist organizations, association, or group of persons,
while Sec tions 15 and 16 are related to surveillance.
Senator Enrile clarified that the term “Court of
Appeals” on line 19, page 1 3, refers to a division of
the Court of Appeals.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon m otion of Sena tor Drilon, the session was
suspended.
It was 4:41 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 4:41 pm., the session was resumed.
Thereupon, Senator Drilon withdrew his proposed
amendment to line 16,page 14.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon m otion of Se nator Enrile, the session was
suspended.
It was 4:43 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 4:43 p.m., the session was resumed.
Senator Drilon explained that he agreed with
Senator Enrile’s position that the Regional Trial
Court should have jurisdiction over proceedings for
the proscription of terrorist organizations, associa tions
or group of persons.
On page 14, Senator Drilon proposed the deletion
of Section 18 which proposes to impose a penalty
for membership in a terrorist organization on the
ground tha t me re mem bership should not give rise to a
penalty of imprisonment as proposed in Section 18
considering that the law that pe nalizes membership -Republic Act No. 1700 (Anti-Subversion Law ) -was already repealed. Senator Enrile accepted the
amendment because anyway a member who is an
active participant in a conspiracy to commit terrorism
would be penalized.
At this juncture, Senator Pimentel asked whetherfinanciers of a terrorist organization are covered by
Section 18, Senator Enrile explained that even if a
financier of an unproscribed organization would not
be liable for the crim e of terrorism, he could still be
penalized as a co-conspirator under the bill.
Asked what the consequence would be when an
organization is eventually declared as a terrorist
group, Senator Enrile stressed that if there is a
showing in surveillance hat the contributoror financier
was in conspiracy with an organization not proscribed
but engaged in terrorist activities, he would he a co-
conspirator. He added that if the person continues to
be a contributor after the organization has been
proscribed, he could be charged under the law.
Senator Pimentel stated that he merely wanted
to point out that in the U.S. and the UK, contributors
to Islamic charity foundations are susceptible to
being placed under surveillance even if the organization
does not appear to be a terrorist organization.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
On page 14, delete Section 18 and renumberthe succeeding sections accordingly;
On page 15, line 2, change “25” to 125;
On the same page, line 4, after the word“who,” insert 3 comma (,) and the phraseHAVING BEEN DULY AUTHORIZED IN
WRITING BY THE ANTI-TERRORISMCOUNCL;
On the same page, line 7, delete the words“arbitrary detention” and n lieu thereof, nsertthe phrase DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF
DETAINED PERSONS TO THE PROPERJUDICIAL AUTHORITIES;
On the same page, line 1 1 , change the period(.) to a colon (:) and insert the followingproviso: PROVIDED, THAT THE ARRESTOF THOSE SUSPECTEDOFTHE CRIME OF
TERRORISM OR CONSPIRACY TOCOMMIT TERRORISM MUST BE AS ARESULT OF THE SURVEILLANCE UNDERSECTION8 AND EXAMINATION OF BANKDEPOSITS UNDER SECTION 27 OF THISACT.; b
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 9/16
936 TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,2006
Senator Drilon explained that the amendment
would provide a reasonable basis for an arrest
without a warrant.
21.
22.
On the same page, between lines 11 and 12,
insert the following paragraphs:
IMMEDIATELY AFTER TAKINGCUSTODY OFA PERSON CHARGEDWlTH
OR SUSPECTED OF THE CRIME OFTERRORISM OR CONSPIRACY TO
COMMIT TERRORISM, THE POLICE ORGOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTPERSONNEL SHALL NOTIFY IN W I N GTHE JUDGE OF THE COURT NEARESTTHE PLACE OF APPREHENSION ORARREST PROVIDED, THAT WHERE THEARREST IS MADE DURING SATURDAYS,SUNDAYS, HOLIDAYS OR AFTER OFFICEHOURS, THE WRITTEN NOTICE SHALLBE SERVED AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE
JUDGENEARESTTHEPLACEWHEREWACCUSED WAS ARRESTED.
THE PENALTY OF PRISIONMAYOR
IN ITS MAXIMUM PERIOD SHALL BEIMPOSED UPON THE POLICE ORGOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTPERSONNELWHO FAILS TO NOTIFY THEJUDGEAS PROVIDEDIN THEPRECEDINGPARAGRAPH.;
On the same page, delete lines 12 to 20, and
in lieu thereof, insert the following:
SEC. 20. PENA LTYFO R FAILURE TODELIVER SUSPECT TO TH E PROPER
JUDICIAL AUT HOR IlY WITHIN FIVE (5)
DAYS. - THE PENALTY OF PRISION
M Y O R IN ITS MAXIMUM PERIOD SHALL
BE IMPOSED UPON ANY POLICE ORGOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTPERSONNEL WHO HAS APPREHENDEDOR ARRESTED, DETAINED AND TAKENCUSTODY OF A PERSON CHARGEDWITHOR SUSPECTED OF THE CRIME OFTERRORISM, OR CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT
TERRORISM, AN D FAILS TO DELIVER
SUCH CHARGED OR SUSPECTED PERSONTO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITYWITHIN THE PERIOD OF FIVE (5 )DAYS.;
Asked by Senator Roxas to clarify if the person
subject to the penalty of prision mayor is the same
person who arrested and detained a suspect or the
arresting officer and/or the detaining officer, Senator
Enrile stated that both are liable.
23. On page 16, line 1, delete the phrase “a legalcounsel or counsels of his choice” and in
lieu thereof, insert the following: REMAINSILENTANDTOHAVECOMPETENTANDI NDEPENDENTCOUNSELPREFERABLYOFHIS OWN CHOICE. IF THE PERSONCANNOT AFFOIU! THE SERVICES OFCOUNSEL,HE MUST BE PROVIDED WITH
ONE.THESE RIGHTS CANNOT BEWANED
EXCEPT IN WRITING AND IN TH EPRESENCE OF COUNSEL.;
Senator Drilon stated that the amendment
incorporates Section 12, Article III of the Bill of
Rights in the Constitution:
24
25
26
On the same page, lines 1 to 4, deletesubsections (b) an d (c), and reletter thesubsequent subsections accordingly;
On the same page, line 21, between thewords “be” and “opened,” insert the phraseMADE PUBLIC AND,
On page 17, after line 18, insert a new
paragraph to read as follows:
THEPOLICE OROTHERGOVERNMENTLAW ENFORCEMENT CUSTODIAL UNITWHO FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THEPRECEDING PARAGRAPH T O K EEP ANOFFICIALLOGBOOKSHALLSUFFERTHEPENALTY OF PRISION MAYOR IN ITSMAXIMUM PERIOD.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon m otion of Senator Drilon, the session was
I t wa s 5:09 p.m.
suspended.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 5:19 pm., the session was resumed.
RECONSIDERATION OF SECTION 21
Upon motion of Senator Drilon, there being noobjection, the Body reconsidered the amendments to
Section 21.
DRILON-ENRILE AMENDMENT
O n page 15, as proposed by Senator Drilon and
accepted by the Sponsor, there being no objection,
the Body approved the rewording of lines 21 to 24 up
to line 1of page 16, as follows:
SEC. 21. FUGHTS OF A PERSON UNDER
CUSTODIAL DETENTION. -THE MOMENT APERSON CHARGED WITH OR SUSPECTED OFTHE CRIME OF TERRORISM, OR THE CRIME
i”
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 10/16
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,2006 937
OF CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TERRORISM, ISAPPREHENDED ORARRESTEDANDDETAJNED,HE SHALLF 0 R ” H B E (A) INFORMED O FHIS RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT AND TOHAVE COMPETENT AND INDEPENDENTCOUNSEL PREFERABLY OF HIS CHOICE. IFTHEPERSON CANNOT AFFORD THE SERVICESOF COUNSEL, HE MUST BE PROVIDED WITHONE. THESE RIGHTS CANNOT BE WAIVEDEXCEPT IN WRITING AND IN THE PRESENCEOF COUNSEL.
Senator Enrile clarified that the rest of the
provisions of Section 21, from letters (b) to (e) are
retained.
OMNIBUS AMENDMENT
OF SENATOR PIMENTEL
As proposed by Senator Pimentel and accepted
by the Sponsor, there being no objection, the Bodyapproved the deletion of the word “counsels” wherever
it appears in the bill.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon motion of Senator Drilon, the session was
suspended.
It was 5:25 p .m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 5:25 p.m., the session was resumed.
FURTHER DRILON AMENDMENTS
As proposed by Senator Drilon and accepted by
the Sponsor, there being no objection, the Body
approved the following amendments, one after the
other:
1. On page 18, put a period (.) following theword “perpetun” on line 19 and delete the
rest of the sentence up to the word “Court”on line 20;
On the same page, modify lines 21 to 24 upto line 3 of page 19 as follows:
2.
SEC. 26. JUDICIAL AUTHORIZATIONREQUIRED TO EXAMINE BANK DEPOSITS,
ACCOUNTS , AND RECORDS. - TH EPROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACTNO. 1405, AS AMENDED, TO THE CON-TRARY NOTWITHSTANDING, A POLICEOR GOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
OFFICIAL AND THE MEMBERS OF HISTEAM MAY, UPON A WRITTEN ORDEROF THE COURT OF APPEALS;
On page 19, line 3, delete the word “to”before the word “examine”;
On the same page, line 9, delete the word“to” before the word “gather”;
On the same page, delete the word“authorizing” at the end of line 14;
On the same page, line 15, replace the words“Regional Trial Court” with COURT OF
APPEALS;
On the same page, line 17, delete the words“Regional Trial Court,” and in lieu thereof,insert the phrase COURT OF APPEALS;
On page 22 , after line 11 , replace the period(.)with a colon (:) and insert the followingprovision:
PROVIDED, THAT THE APPLICANTPOLICE OR GOVERNMENTLAW ENFORCSMENT OFFICIALSHALLFILEANAPPRO-PRIATE CASE BEFORE THE PUBLICPROSECUTOR’S OFFICE FOR ANYVIOLATION OFTH SACTWITHIN THIRTY
(30) DAYS AFTER THE TERMINATION OFTHE PERIOD GRANTED BY THE COURTOF APPEALS AS PROVIDED I N TH EPRECEDING PARAGRAPHS.
IF NO CASE IS FILED WITHIN THE30 -DAY PERIOD,THEAPPLICANT POLICE
OR GOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTO F F I W SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTLFYTHE PERSON SUBJECT OF THE BANKEXAMWATIONAND REEZWGOFBANKDEPOSITS, PLACEMENTS, TRUSTACCOUNTS, ASSETS AND RECORDS. THEPENALTY OF PRISION MAYOR IN ITSMAXIMUM PERIOD SHALL BE IMPOSEDUPON THE APPLICANT POLICE ORGOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTOFFICIAL WHO FAILS TO NO TIFY THEPERSON SUBJECT OF THE BANK
EXAMPJARONAND FREEZING OF BANKDEPOSITS, PLACEMENTS, TRUSTACCOUNTS, ASSETS AND RECORDS.
Senator Drilon affirmed that the 30-day period
would apply only when the person is the subject of
a surveillance such as wiretapping a nd or examination
of bank accounts; if he was arrested after the
surveillance was done, the team that conducted the
surveillance and the examination of bank accounts
should file the information during the five days of
warra ntless detention, and it has up to 30 days, at the
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 11/16
938 TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5 , 2006
GOVERNMENT WITNESSES TESTFYINGUNDER THIS AC T SHALL BE GOVERNEDBY SECTIONS 17AND 18OF RULE 119 OF
THE RULES OF COURT; PROVIDED,
HOWEVER, THAT SAID WITNESSESSHALL BE ENTITLED TO BENEFITSGRANTED TO WITNESSES UNDER SAIDREPUBLIC ACTNO. 6981.
Senator Drilon explained that under Republic Ac tNo, 6981, the discretion to convert someone into a
state witness is lodged in the Secretary of Justice.
He said that the purpose o f amendment is to transfer
that discretion to a court, under Rule 119 of the
Rules of Court, so that it is now the court - not the
Secretary of Justice - hat determines who is the
state witness.
max imum , to file the information. If no case is filed
’after the 30-day period, he said that the police officer
is under obligation to notify the person whose bank
account was examined and to answer for his act of
applying for authority to conduct surveillance and/or
examination of bank accounts without any probable
basis.
9. On page 25, line 16, between th e words“Unauthorized” and “Examination,” nsert thewords OR MALICIOUS;
IO. On the same page, line 24, replace the phrase“a Regional Trial Conit” with THE COURTOF APPEALS;
11. On page 26, aRer l i e 2, insert a new paragraphto read as follows:
IN ADDITION TO THE LIABILITYATTACHING TO THE OFFENDER FOR THECOMMISSION OFANY OTHER OFFENSE,THE PENALTY OF PRISIONMAYOR IN ITSMAXIMUM PERIOD SHALL BE IMPOSEDUPON ANY POLICE OR GOVERNMENTLAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL WHOMALICIOUSLY OBTAINED AN AW O R lTYFROM THE COURT OF APPEALS TOEXAMINETHEDEPOSITS, PLACEMENTS,TRUST ACCOUNTS, ASSETS, OR RECORDSIN A BANK OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONOF: (1) A PERSON CHARGED WITH ORSUSPECTED OF THE CRIME OF TERROR-ISM OR CONSPIRACY TO COMMITTERRORISM, (2) A JUDICIALLYDECLARED
AND OUTLAWED TERRORIST ORGANIZ-ATION, ASSOCIATION, OR GROUP OFPERSONS, OR (3) A MEMBER OF SUCHORGANIZATION, ASSOCIATION, ORGROUP OF PERSONS: PROVIDED, THATNOTWITHSTANDING SECTION 32 OFTHIS ACT, THE PARTY AGGRIEVED BYSUCH AUTHORIZATION SHALL BEALLOWED ACCESS TO THE SEALED
ENVELOPE OR SEALED PACKAGE ANDTHE CONTENTS THEREOFASEVIDENCEFOR THE PROSECUTION OFANY POLICEOR GOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT
PERso”ELwH0 w a 0 u s L Y RCXXJREDSUCH AUTHORIZATION.;
12. On page 29, delete lines 19 to 24 up to line3 of page 30, and in lieu thereof, insert a newSection 44 to read as follows:
SEC.44. IUM(/NITYAND PROTECTION
OF GOVERNMENT WITNESSES. - THEPROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6981
(WITNESS PROTECTION, SECURITY ANDBENEFIT ACT) TO THE CONTRARYN O W S T A N D I N G , THE OF
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon m otion of Senator Drilon, the session was
suspended.
It was 5:46 p . m .
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
A t 5:48 pm., the session was resumed.
13. On page 30, delete lines 4 to 10, and in lieuthereof, insert a new Section 45 to read asfollows:
SEC. 45. P E N A L T Y F O R U N -
AUTHORIZED REVELATION OF CLASSIFIEDM2TERl.Al.S. -THE PENALTY OF PRISON
M 2 YOR IN ITS MAXIMUM PERIOD SHALLBE IMPOSED UPON ANY PERSON, POLICEOR GOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENTAGENT, JUDICIAL OFFICER OR CIVILSERVANTWHO,NOT BEING AUTHORIZEDBY THECOURT OF APPEALS TO DO SO,REVEALSINANYMANNEROR FORMANY
CLASSIFIED INFORMATION UNDER THIS
ACT.;
14. On the same page, delete lines 11 to 15, and
in lien thereof, insert a new Section 46 toread as follows:
SEC. 46. PENALTY FOR FURM SHING
FADEEVIDENCE,FORGED DOCUMENI: OR
SPURIOUS EVIDENCE. - THE PENALTYOF RECLUSION TEMPORAL SHALL BEIMPOSED UPON ANY PERSON WHOKNOWINGLY FURNISHES FALSETESTIMONY, FORGED DOCUMENT ORSPURIOUS EVIDENCE IN ANYINVESTIGATION OR HEARING UNDERTHIS ACT.;
F-
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 12/16
TUES DAY, DECEMBER 5,2006 939
15. On page 31, line I , delete the phrase “be thesupreme body to”;
16. On the same page, line 2, delete the word
“to”;
17. On the same page, line 8, delete the phrase“In addition to its present function,” and thecomma (,) and thereafter, capitalize the letter
18. On the same page, line 21, after the period,add a new sentence to read as follows:
NOTHING HEREIN SHALLBE INTER-PRETED TO EMPOWER THE ANTI-TERRORISM COUNCU TO EXERCISEANYJUDICIAL OR QUASI-JUDICIAL POWER
OR AUTHORITY.;
19. On page 32, delete lines 13 to 16 ;
Senator Enrile stated that the provision on lines
13 to 16, authorizes the Council to freeze the funds,
property or assets suspected of being related toterrorism, which is a proper function of the Anti-
Mo ney Laund ering Council.
“ I ’t in the word “the”;
20. Renumber the succeeding paragraphs
21. On page 33 , recast line 2 as follows:
accordingly;
TO DESIGNATE SPECIFIC DIVISIONOF THE COURT OF APPEALS ANDREGIONALTRIALCOURTS AS CASEMAY BE;
22. On the same page, delete lines 6 to 12 ;23. On page 34 , delete lines 16 to 22;
Senator Drilon explained that there is no need
fo r an initial funding of P500 million because the
Council, which shall be composed of government
officials as ex oficio members, shall be served by
the Sec r e t a r i a t o f t he Na t i ona l I n t e l l i gence
Coordinating Agency. He said that should there be aneed for appropriation, the President could alway s
use part of the contingent f h d for this purpose.
24. Renu mb er the succeed ing s ection saccordingly.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
suspended.
Upo n mo tion of Senator Drilon, the session was
l t was 5:58 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 559 p.m., the session was resumed.
25. Insert the following provision, whereverapplicable in the bill:
SEC._. CONTINUOUS TRIAL. - NCASES OFTERRORISM OR CONSPIRACYTO COMMIT TERRORISM, THE JUDGESHALL SETTHECASE FOR CONTINUOUSTRIAL ON A DAILY OR OTHER SHORT-TERM TRIAL CALENDAR SO AS TO
ENSURE SPEEDY TRIAL.;
Senator Drilon proposed the insertion of the
following provision, wherever app licable in the bill:
SEC. . A P P L I C A B I L I T Y OF
CHARGED WITH OR SUSPECTED OF THECRIMEOFTERRORISM OR CONSPIRACYTO COMMIT TERRORISM SHALL BESUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OFREPUBLIC ACT NO. 9344, OTHERWISE
KNOWN AS THE JUVENILE JUSTICE ANDWELFARE ACT OF 2006.
On Senator Enrile’s concern that the proposed
provision might defeat the very purpose of the
measure, Senator Drilon explained that the provision
was being proposed to emphasize that Republic Act
No. 9344 shall apply to persons who are below 18
years of age and charged with the crime of terrorism
or conspiracy to commit terrorism.
Senator Enrile believed that for the safety of the
State, a person, who is below 18 years of age and
charged w ith the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to
commit terrorism, would be excepted from the
coverage of he Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of
2006. Senator Drilon suggested that the proposal be
held in abeyance because this is a matter of policy to
be decided by the Body.
Senator Enrile agreed, saying that it is a major
policy issue which involves a balancing of national
interest against individual rights.
26. Insert the following provision, wherever
applicable in the bi l l
SEC. _ . JUDGMENT IN CASE OF
VARIANCE BETWEEN ALLEGATION AN D
PROOF. -WHEN THERE IS VARIANCEBEIWEENTHEOFFENSE OF TERRORISMCHARGED IN THE COMPLAINT OR1NI;ORMATION AND THAT PROVEDDURING THE TRIAL,ANDTHE OFFENSEOF TERRORISM NECESSARILY INCLUDESTHE OFFENSE OR FELONY PROVED,THEACCUSED SHALLBE CONVICTED OF THE
P
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 13/16
940 TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,2006
OFFENSE OR FELONY PROVED WHICH IS
INCLUDED IN THE OFFENSE OFTERRORISM
Senator Drilon explained that this provision was
based on Section 4, Rule 120, Judgment of tlze
Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure , which
became effective in December 2005.
To Senator Enrile’s concern that under the
Constitution, the person charged has to be informed
of the offense for which he is being tried and that he
should be arraigned only for that crime, Senator
Drilon said that the accused would be sufficiently
informed because when the information is read, the
elements of the crime of terrorism he comm itted are
likewise read.
Further, Senator Drilon pointed out that in
People vs Ortega, G. R. No. 116736, July 24, 1997,
the S upreme Court ruled that:
An accused cannot be convicted of an
offense not charged or included in the inform-ation because the Constitution guarantees that:In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shallenjoy the right to be informed of the nature andcause of theaccusation against him. It mattersnot how conclusive and convincing the evidenceof guilt may be. An accused person cannot beconvicted o f any offense unless it is charged in
the complaint or information on which he is
tried, or necessarily included therein.
INQUIRIES OF SENATOR PIMENTEL
Senator Pimentel asked why a person should be
charged under the Anti-Terrorism Law and not
directly for the crime of arson or murder. He
commented that the Anti-Terrorism Law provides
more leeway to the prosecution to cause the arrest
of people and detain them on the basis of probable
cause. He said that a Filipino citizen could be subjected
to an “either or” charge by the prosecution thatwould place him at a disadvantage in planning his
defense because he would not know in advance
under what law he has been charged.
Senator Enrile explained that the amendment
would cover a situation where the elements ofterrorism like murder have been proven but the
prosecution failed to prove that the murder was part
of a terrorist act like coercing the government to
accede to a given demand.
Senator Pimentel informed the Body that in the
United Kingdom , terrorists are not charged under ananti-terrorism law but for specific acts in violation of
existing criminal laws. Se nator Enrile said that it was
unfortunate that the Philippines is still operating under
the Codigo Penal of the Spanish system.
Senator Drilon explained that the amendment
was proposed to emphasize the provision in the Rulesof court .
Accep ted by the Sponsor, there being no
objection, the Body approved the amendment.
27. Insert the following provision, whereverapplicable in the bill
SEC- PROSECUTION WDER THISACT SHALL BE A BAR TO ANOTHERPROSECUTION UNDER THE REVISEDPENAL CODE OR AN Y SPECIAL PENALLAWS.- WHEN A PERSON HAS BEEN
PROSECUTED UNDER THIS ACT W O N AVALID COMPLAINT OR INFORMATIONOR OTHER FORMAL CHARGE SUFFICIENTINFORM AND SUBSTANCE TO SUSTAINA CONVICTION AND AFTER THEACCUSED HAD PLEADED TO THECHARGE, THE ACQUITTAL OF THEACCUSED OR THE DISMISSAL OF THECASE SHALL BE A BAR TO ANOTHERPROSECUTION FOR ANY OFFENSE ORFELONY WHICH IS NECESSARILYINCLUDED IN THE OFFENSE CHARGED
UNDER THIS ACT.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upo n motion of Senator Drilon, the session was
suspended.
It was 6:16 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 6:17 p.m., the session was resumed.
28. Insert the following provision wheneverapplicable in the bill:
SEC.-, APPLICABILITY OF THEREVISED PENAL CODE.-TEE PROVISIONSOFBOOKIOFTHEREVISEDPCODE
SHALLBE APPLICABLE TO THIS ACT.
REQUEST OF SENATOR DRILON
Senator Drilon requested the Secretariat to
prepare a clean copy of the bill incorporating all the
approved amendments.
v
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 14/16
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,2006 94 1
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon motion of Senator Drilon, the session was
It was 6:19 p.m.
suspended.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 6:20 p.m., the session was resumed.
SUSPENSION OF CONSIDERATION
OF SENATE BILL NO. 2137
Upon motion of Senator Pangilinan, there being
no objection, the Body suspended consideration of
the hill.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon m otion of Senator Pangilinan, the session
It was 6:20 p m .
was suspended.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 620 p.m., the session was resumed.
SUBCOMMITTEES
After conferring with Senate President Villar,
Senator Pimentel and the chairman of the Comm ittee
on Education, Arts and Culture and pursuant to
Section 18 of the Rules of the Senate, SenatorP a n g i l i n a n m a n i f e s t e d t h e c r e a t i o n o f t w o
subcommittees under the Committee on Education,
Arts and Culture: 1) A subcommittee that would
conduct hearings on Se nate Bill No. 1089 (promoting
the protection and creation of the National Heritage
Comm ission) with Senator Angara as chairman; and
2) A subcommittee to conduct hearings on Senate
Resolution Nos. 570, 108, 116, 183 and other matters
pertaining to the production, procurement and
distribution of textbooks in all public schools.
COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
Upon nomination by Senator Pangilinan, there
being no objection, Senator Lacson was elected
member of the Committee on Education, Arts an d
Culture.
Senator Pangilinan manifested that Senator
Lacson shall chair the subcommittee to conduct
hearings on Senate Resolution Nos. 570, 108, 116,
183 and other related matters.
COMMITTEE REPORT NO. 59
ON SENATE BILL NO. 2232
(Continuat ion)
Upon motion of Senator Pangilinan, there being
no objection, the Body resumed consideration, on
Second Reading, o f Senate Bill No. 2232 (Committee
Report No. 59), entitled
AN ACT REVISING REPUBLIC ACT
N O . 9 1 3 6 E N T I T L E D A N A C T
O R D A I N I N G R E F O R M S I N T H E
ELECTRIC POWER INDUSTRY,
AMENDING FOR TH E PURPOSE
CERTAIN LAWS AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES.
Senator Pangilinan stated that the parliamentary
status was still the period of interpellations.
Thereupon, the Chair recognized Senator Enrile,
Sponsor of the measure, and Senator Osmefia for the
continuation of his interpellation .
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon m otion of Senator Pangilinan, the session
was suspended.
It was 6:26 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 6:28 p.m., the session was resumed.
INTERPELLATION OF SENATOR OSMERA
(Continuat ion)
Senator Osmefia observed that the prices at the
WESM, where there is theoretically one owner and
one bidder, went up on a weekly average from P3.00
per k w h in the early days to P10.00 per kWh. in the
recent weeks. Se nator Enrile stated that this happen edbecause of the distorted nature of the power market
where the biggest buyer of pow er for distribution is
Meralco which, under the IPP agreements, has its
own suppliers - First Gas with its Sta. Rita and San
Lorenz o plants, Quezon Power, and two other smaller
companies, one being Duracom. Combined, he said
that these IPPs supply 52% of Meralco’s power
requirements for distribution. He pointed out that
while 48% of Meralco’s supply needs should have
been contracted with NPC, it did not happen in spite
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 15/16
942 TUESDAY. DECEMBER 5 . 2006
of the law that mandates transition supply contracts
and/or bilateral contracts should be obtained by the
NPC power plants primarily with Meralco. He
underscored that the price distortion that resulted
from this situation should be corrected by C ongress
by imposing as a mandate on Meralco to cooperate
and enter into transition supply contracts with NPC
to ensure the stability of power prices.
I n reaction, Sena tor Osmeiia pointed out that the
law provides that from the establishment of the
WESM, no distribution utility should source more
than 90% of its total demand from bilateral power
supply contracts, meaning, the 10% could be source d
from the WESM .
But Senator Enrile stated that Meralco refused
to enter into bilateral power supply Contracts and
opted to buy its power needs from the WESM and
so it could almost dictate the price of power.
Senator Osrnefia disagreed, saying that there
was o nly one supplier, NPC, w hich is why the rates
went up to P10.00 per kw h. Meralco, he contended,
was willing to sign a contract with NPC so long as
it matched the price it sold to Meralco at the WE SM;
and when Mera lco was willing to buy at P4.90 per
kwh, NPC turned around and sold to consumers
within the Meralco franchise area at P4.60 per kWh.
However, he disclosed that Meralco just recently
signed a transition supply contract with NPC with
terms fair to both sides. He m aintained that as long
as there is one supplier of power, there would be amonopoly, for which reason, he has supported the
privatization of 70% of the NPC assets because
even when it controlled only 50% of the supply
market, it was such a dominant force.
Senator Enrile countered that in the same manner,
Meralco could control pricing on the demand side
since it distributes 60% of the national dem and.
Senator Osmeiia pointed out that the rates of M eralco
have to approved by the ERC , unlike the rates in the
WE SM. Anybody, he added, could go to the SupremeCourt to question the ER C-approved Meralco rates.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upo n motion of Se nator Enrile, the session was
suspended.
I t was 6:39 p .m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 6:40 pm., the session was resumed.
Senator Enrile insisted that the other side of the
story is that the NF'C wante d to e nter into a transitio n
supply contract with Meralco so that they could
arrive at a mutually beneficial pricing system rather
than have an ERC-regulated pricing system. He
stated that Mera lco opted to get its additional supply
from the spot market and so the price of power
became unstable. He pointed out that Meralco paid
a higher price that it wan ted to pass .on to itsconsumers so it went to the ERC to recover the
difference between the negotiated price and the spot
market price.
Senator Osmeiia maintained that regardless of
the buyer, NPC, being the only supplier, can quote its
own price at the WE SM. H e stressed that it is hard
to discipline the market unless there is competition.
Fo r his part, Senator Enrile maintained that both sides
have a responsibility - NPC, on the supply side
because it sells a bigger volume; an d Meralc o, on thedistribution side because it can also dictate its own
buying price. Sena tor Osmeria disagreed , saying that
Meralco has to buy power to supply its customers
and therefore, it is at the mercy of the prevailing
price in the market.
Senator Enrile asked why M eralco did not enter
into a contract with NPC when it was supposed to
benefit its consumers. In reply, Senator Osmeiia
stated that precisely, NPC offered a contract under
which it was allowed to sell to the very clients of
Meralco. He recalled that all that Meralco asked
NPC to do was to m atch the price it offers Meralco
when it sells at the W ESM. He pointed out that NPC
and PSALM have advanced the argument that once
the price of power is lowered, everybody would buy
excess electricity and experience proved this wrong.
Further, Senator Osmeila stated that even if power is
offered at P3.50 tomorrow, consumers would still
shut off their air-conditioners when they leave the
house. Power, he said, is not really price elastic in
the short term but in the long term, with a steady low
price, an investor would be encouraged to put up afacto ry somewhere . He sa id that con t rary to
expectations that an open access would encourage
more sale of excess power, there is no expansion of
demand when power is sold at the WESM at zero
price.
Asked by Senato r Enrile how he w ould solve this
dilemma, Senator Osmefia stated that according to
businessman Jaime A ugust0 Zobel, government should
finish the privatization of the pow er ind ustty because
P
7/29/2019 Senate No. 47
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/senate-no-47 16/16
TUESDAY, DECEMBER5,2006 943
unless there is competition, here would be no realistic
power rates to encourage the building of world-class
infrastructure.
Senator Osmefia noted that NPC and Credit-
S u i s se F i r s t B o s to n b o th r eco m m en d ed th a t
government reorganize seven generating companies
with varied types of plants, and when that did not
work, they were bundled by category, and again,that also failed to work. He said that the buyers
bidded for variable, low-cost plants such as Masinloc,
rather than oil-based plants which remained with
the government. This, he said, is the reason why he
believed that the government’s 70% privatization
program, while not sufficient, was a giveaway to
NF’C because w hoever buys mid-me rit plants would
have to compete with NPC which has the advantage
of not paying taxes and duties on im ported materials
like coal, and can readily bring its rates down as well.
Asked by Senator Enrile whether he believed
that the government should rethink its policy of
hurriedly disposing assets of Napocor and/o r PSALM
even at giveaway values to attain its goal of having
70% privatization, Sena tor Osmefia said that there is
no such thing as a giveaway value since in a
legitimate bidding process, every bidder makes the
others honest. On a related matter, he noted that the
price for the assets of Mirant that has over 2,000
megawatts continues to go up as seven or eight
companies are bidding for them.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upo n motion of Senator Enrile, the session was
suspended.
It was 6:53 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 7:11 p,m., the session was resumed
Senator Enrile stated that after conferring with
Senator Osmefia and the resource persons, it was
agreed that the Body would discuss the bill in
January, at w hich time, a comm on position could be
presented to the Body.
Senator Osmeiia said that it would depend upon
the plan to privatize the NP C assets that PSALM-
NF’C has been instructed to draw up. He pointed out
that one of the reasons foreign investors do not
invest in the country is the high power rates.
SUSPENSION OF CONSIDERATION
OF SENATE BILL NO. 2232
Upo n motion of Sen ator Pangilinan, there being
no objection, the Body suspended consideration ofthe bill.
ADJOURNMENT OF SESSION
Upon motion of Senator Pangilinan, there being
no objection, Senate President Pro Tempore Flavier
declared the session adjourned until three o’clock in
the afternoon of the following day.
It was 7:14 p.m.
I hereby cert ify
foregoing.
to the correctness of the
Secretary o the Senate
k i pApproved on December 11, 2006