MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – The House committee on justice on Tuesday, September 2, junked all 3 impeachment complaints against President Benigno Aquino III, effectively ending all further debates on the cases. HINDI AKO NAGULAT! KASE INASAHAN KO NA TO! The committee voted 54-4 to declare the first two impeachment complaints over the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP), as well as the 3rd complaint over the Philippine-US Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, as insufficient in substance. Each complaint was voted on separately. INSUFFICIENT KAPAG KALABAN ANG NAG-FILE Only members of the Makabayan bloc who are members of the committee voted in favor on the impeach raps. They are Bayan Muna Representatives Neri Colmenares and Carlos Isagani Zarate, and Gabriela Representatives Emmi de Jesus and Luz Ilagan. PUWEDENG MGA SENADOR! ME PANININDIGAN The second hearing on the complaints focused on whether there was enough recital of facts or evidence that would justify the 3 main charges brought by the complainants, which are culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, and graft and corruption. Tensions were high as the deliberations neared its end. After the committee voted to dismiss the cases, a protest erupted inside the Nograles hall of the South Wing Annex led by members of the audience who were in favor of impeaching Aquino. They were escorted out. MAS MARAMING NAGWALK-OUT SA LABAS! Just before the committee decided to terminate debates on the first two impeachment complaints, Colmenares clashed with Eastern Samar Representative Ben Evardone over comments he made in his speech. It started when Evardone, a member of the Liberal Party, pointed out that Colmenares himself received funds under DAP. Malinaw po na maganda ang layunin ng DAP fund. Kahit nga po si Congressman Colmenares inamin niya po na nakatanggap siya ng DAP fund pero sinabi niya po fully accounted, Evardone said. An Inquirer report earlier revealed Colmenares received P25 million for projects under DAP. But Colmenares, who, along with his allies in the Makabayan Coalition, led moves to impeach Aquino, said he had merely endorsed the projects and was unaware that the projects were funded under DAP. LIBERAL BA ANG INQUIRER? NAGTATANONG LANG PO! KASE DISINABE NI ABAD NA DAP ANG 25 MILLION! Colmenares said the issue raised by Evardone was irrelevant and reiterated that no funds were coursed through him. What does receiving funding under DAP have to do with this? Is this hypocrisy? To Secretary [Florencio] Abad – did we say you have no right to join Aquino because you benefitted during the time of Gloria arroyo? No, we didnt say that. We said, Welcome, you now know how bad Arroyo is, thats why you wanted to transfer, Colmenares said in a mix of English and Filipino. Congressman Evardone was with Arroyo before. Did we say, Balimbing ka (you are a turncoat)? We did not say that. Did we say, Wala kang prinsipyo (you dont have any principles)? We did not say that. We said, Tama ang position mo na lumipat ka from Arroyo to Aquino, tama si Aquino, dapat ipakulong si Arroyo (We said, You took the right position to shift support from Arroyo to Aquino, Aquno is right, Arroyo should be jailed), he added, amid cheers from the crowd. SINO BA TALAGA ANG INIIMPEACH, SI COLMENARES O SI QUINO? Committee chairman Iloilo Representative Niel Tupas Jr called for a break to calm down the situation. Tupas was seen separately talking to the two lawmakers. In the end, Tupas moved to strike off comments made by Colmenares about Evardone for being unparliamentary. It was approved without objections. SIEMPRE NAMAN, APPROVED YAN! Arguments raised Cagayan de Oro Representative Rufus Rodriguez argued that the filing of the complaint was premature since the SC decision, which the lawmaker said serves as the primary basis of the case, is still the subject of a motion for reconsideration filed by the executive branch. The Supreme Court declared 3 specific executive acts under DAP as unconstitutional. Started in 2011, the executive branch stopped the program even before the SC could release its verdict. The sponsors, meanwhile, used proceedings that were followed during the impeachment trial of former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez in 2010 to counter technicalities raised by lawmakers who opposed the complaint. Colmenares noted that Congress gave a go signal on the impeachment complaint of Gutierrez in the past even if a separate case against her had yet to be resolved by the court. If the committee found substance (to impeach) Gutierrez on the basis of a low conviction rate, what more if the case involves P144 billion (in DAP funds)? Colmenares said. Committee chair Niel Tupas Jr ruled that the case before the court is a separate process from the impeachment complaint filed before Congress. HA?!? SI TUPAS ATTORNEY NI AQUINO? Even if the high court declared certain acts under DAP, a government spending program meant to pump-prime the economy, as unconstitutional, Aquino allies argued that the SC also recognized operative fact, a doctrine which recognizes that even if a law is declared void, its effects prior to its declaration of nullity is left undisturbed. HA?!? But sponsors countered that the SC only recognized operative fact on projects under DAP but acknowledged that there is liability from the authors and implementors of the now defunct program. Aside from citing the same issues raised in the SC decision as basis for the impeachment complaint, such as the cross-border transfer of P144 billion worth of funds under DAP, the 2nd impeachment complaint sponsored by youth and student leaders used as evidence declarations made by Senator Jinggoy Estrada that DAP was used to bribe senators to impeach former chief justice Renato Corona. Isabela Representative Giorgidi Aggabao hit the complainants for using Estradas allegations as factual basis since they do not identity who, when and where the bribery attempts were made. If we take away the high-flying rhetorics of the complaint, it would fall short of what a fiscal would require from a case, Aggabao said. The impeachment complaints did not have enough evidence to prove its allegations, said Marikina City Representative Miro Quimbo. ANO BA? KASE NGA, AYAW IPASA ANG FOI!!! Mayroon bang ebidensiya na may ninakaw ang Pangulo, bahay na naipatayo, bank accounts tulad ng dati? Wala kahit isa. Walang itinago, inilista lahat, Quimbo said. FOI ANG SAGOT NG BAYAN!!! On the matter of EDCA, a deal that gives US troops wider access to Philippine bases and allows joint activities between the two countries militaries, complainants alleged that Aquino committed culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust by sacrificing the sovereignity of the Filipino people without even consulting Congress. But lawmakers said impeaching the President may not be the best recourse to sort out grievances against the deal. If we oppose EDCA, the right venue to raise this is the Supreme Court. This is not enough basis to impeach the President, said Ako Bicol Representative Rodel Batocabe. No public support At the beginning of the hearing, Colmenares appealed to the committee to approve the substance of the impeachment complaints to allow Aquino to answer the allegations presented in the complaint. Let the President defend himself. Its not the committees role to lawyer for him, Colmenares said. OO NGA! Administration allies opposed this stand. Ilocos Norte Representative Rodolfo Fariñas raised a counter-argument against Colmenares statement that the committee was lawyering for the President. This is not lawyering. Just like [in trial courts], we just want to see to it that no useless action is brought to trial. We are protecting the unnecessary dragging of an impeachable official here, Fariñas said. WEEEE! TALAGA BA? Administration allies took the opportunity to highlight indications showing that there was lack of public support for the impeach moves. Kataka-taka po sa akin na sa unang pagkakataon ng kasaysayan, sa mga ibang miyembro ng minorya pati po ng independent bloc, wala po kahit isa man lang na sumusuporta dito. Pagpapakita po na hungkat - empty - itong impeachment complaint, Quimbo said. SIYANGA?!? (Its curious why for the first time in history, even with other members of the minority bloc and the independent bloc, not one expressed support for this. This only goes to show that this impeachment complaint is empty.) KASE NGA, PURO KAPARTIDO ANG MIEMBRO! Even the man who stands to gain the most from Aquinos impeachment opposes the move, said Cavite Representative Elpidio Barzaga. When we say that the people want this, what is your basis? Even the Vice President who will be the biggest beneficiary does not want this complaint to push through, Barzaga said. With all 3 complaints now dead even before Aquino could answer the allegations, Kabataan Representative Terry Ridon said they are eyeing to file technical malversation and possible plunder charges against Aquino when he steps down from office in 2016. BABABA BA? MAGTATAGO NA YAN! Quick reaction Malacañang noted the “transparent” House proceedings on the impeachment complaints against the President. “The Committee on Justice of the House, after a thorough review of the allegations in terms of its substance, has dismissed the complaints against the President. We take note that the process took place with transparency, not just according to the rules, but to give the proponents every opportunity to make their case,” Deputy Presidential Spokesperson Abigail Valte said in a statement. – Rappler OO NGA, KITANG-KITA ANG KRIMENG NANGYARE!!!!
Posted on: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 07:34:35 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015