Enrile’s ex-COS Gigi Reyes says Sen. Cayetano’s anger is “rightful” but calls him a liar as well

Below is the full Text of Atty. Gigi Reyes’ just-issued STATEMENT AND PUBLIC APOLOGY.

My thanks @Shanna for providing this. 

Reyes explains why she resigned irrevocably and discloses that her boss, Juan Ponce Enrile, was supposed to have stated in his Monday privilege speech that he was resigning “IRREVOCABLY” as Senate President but didn’t.

She explains why she resigned abruptly:

My resignation is also due to an honest difference of opinion with my principal, the Hon. Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, on how to respond to all these mad and baseless accusations of public fund misuse.

She also discloses that she had “a serious disagreement” with veteran Senate Secretary Emma Lirio Reyes “over her refusal to state the name of the Minority Leader as the one calling for a private audit of the Senate’s funds (which was actually the MOOE of the Secretariat) in the press statement that the Senate President asked her to prepare detailing the Senate’s budget so that the public can be enlightened.”

It seems Gigi Reyes has not only burned her bridges but the adjacent towns as well.

It would seem this is her own version of a senator’s privilege speech.

This photo of Enrile and his Chief-of-Staff Jessica "Gigi" Reyes has gone viral on Facebook. Gigi Reyes sits in the same table with President Noynoy Aquino, Vice-President Jojo Binay and ex-President Erap Estrada during the latter's birthday dinner.

This photo of Enrile and his Chief-of-Staff Jessica “Gigi” Reyes has gone viral on Facebook. Gigi Reyes sits in the same table with President Noynoy Aquino, Vice-President Jojo Binay and ex-President Erap Estrada during the latter’s birthday dinner.

724 Responses to “Enrile’s ex-COS Gigi Reyes says Sen. Cayetano’s anger is “rightful” but calls him a liar as well”

Read below or add a comment...

  1. 119
    hamheld.com says:

    “raissa robles | Enrile

  2. 118
    Mel says:

    JPE top Senate spender in 2011

    By Marvin Sy (The Philippine Star)
    Updated February 24, 2013 – 12:00am

    MANILA, Philippines – Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile recorded the highest expenses among senators in 2011, according to a report released by the Commission on Audit (COA).

    Enrile incurred total expenses of P118,306,463.65 from January to December 2011.

    The figure consists of his salaries in the amount of P1,035,837; extraordinary and miscellaneous expenses, P1.649 million; other miscellaneous and operating expenditures, P66.069 million.

    Enrile was followed by Senate President Pro- Tempore Jinggoy Estrada with P62,122,308.41; Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III, P56,259,173.08; and Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano, P55,039,015.88.

    The COA released a detailed list of the amounts paid to and expenses incurred by the 24 senators in 2011 in response to the calls from various sectors to open the books of the Senate to the public.

    It was unclear why the salaries of the senators recorded for 2011 varied with some receiving P315,000 like Sen. Panfilo Lacson. Nine others received P420,000 pay and 11 others got P905,393.

    Headlines ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1
    Former senator Juan Miguel Zubiri and Sen. Aquilino Pimentel III, who took over Zubiri’s post in August 2011, were 23rd and 24th on the list, respectively. The list was verified by COA supervising auditor Mario Lipana.

    The travel expenses of each senator were practically the same at P272,760, except for Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV who incurred an additional P279,048 for foreign travel.

    For rentals of office space/equipment, four senators topped the list namely Ferdinand Marcos Jr. with P2.205 million; Sergio Osmeña III, P2.162 million; Edgardo Angara, P1.094 million; and Miriam Defensor-Santiago, P840,000.

    Only Trillanes recorded a capital outlay expense amounting to P77,701.78 among all senators.

    Under the item of professional/consultancy fee, only eight senators incurred such expense namely Enrile, P1.472 million; Estrada, P960,000; Angara, P943,750; Sotto, P775,435.48; Lacson, P480,000; Trillanes, P300,000; Pimentel, P206,301.07; and Loren Legarda, P62,106.04.

    Rounding out the top 24 in the total amounts paid to and expenses incurred were Trillanes with P59,977,548.91; Ramon Revilla Jr., P49,832,194.03; Marcos, P49,219,513.85; Escudero, P48,729,719.79; Honasan, P47,185,274.44; Francis Pangilinan, P46,889,065.06; Legarda; P44,107,941.55; Manuel Lapid, P43,565,023.21; Ralph Recto, P42,390,681.54; Pia Cayetano, P42,122,431.08; Angara, P41,789,602.76; Teofisto Guingona III, P41,502,359.45; Santiago, P41,036,900.44; Manuel Villar Jr., P40,312,799.12; Osmeña, P37,680,862.99; Lacson, P37,115,276.55; Franklin Drilon, P34,968,031.74; Joker Arroyo, P31,867, 125.93; Zubiri, P23,955,240.03; and Pimentel, P19,980,236.40.

    The Senate has submitted its financial records to the COA for perusal based on an agreement reached by the senators.

    Part of the agreement was to provide an itemized list of the expenses, something which the COA was not able to get before because of a resolution passed by Congress.

    Many of the expenses incurred by the senators were previously liquidated only through a certification and not itemized as required by law.

    SOURCE: http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/02/24/912474/jpe-top-senate-spender-2011

  3. 117
    Mel says:

    Enrile’s ambush claim ‘defies logic’ – ex-police chief Montaño

    6:19 pm | Monday, February 11th, 2013

    MANILA, Philippines – Retired major general and former national police chief Ramon Montaño has added to the voices contradicting Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile’s claim in a recent memoir that his eventful ambush on September 22, 1972 was not staged.

    Montaño said he and his then superior, the late Major General Prospero Olivas, were at the scene at the time, which was the night before Malacañang announced that President Ferdinand Marcos had imposed martial law.

    “I was the one with General Olivas who conducted an ocular investigation. I questioned the aide-de-camp (of Enrile) who was there. It was impossible to be a real ambush,” he said in an interview Monday.

    Montaño said Enrile’s ambush claim “defies logic” as he recalled observing that the bullet holes on Enrile’s car were “very neatly aligned” and how the gunfire conveniently missed all of the occupants.

    He said such outcome would have been “impossible” had the car really been moving when it was sprayed with automatic gunfire.

    “They allege they were intercepted and there was gunfire. If you do that, the bullets should have been all over (the car). But in this case, they (bullet holes) were very neatly aligned and then no one was hit.

    “If the car was running when hit with an automatic weapon, dapat sabog iyon all over (bullet holes should be scattered). Eh iyon aligned na aligned (Those holes were perfectly aligned),” Montaño said.

    “It defies logic,” added Montaño, who became chief of the defunct Philippine Constabulary-Integrated National Police (PC-INP) in 1986 under the late president Corazon Aquino.

    He said he did not submit a report nor did he meddle with the official report on the ambush.

    He said he preferred to keep his mouth shut in light of martial law’s imposition.

    At the time of the ambush, Montaño was with the police intelligence branch of the Philippine Constabulary’s Criminal Investigation Service (precursor of the present Criminal Investigation and Detection Group).

    Montaño is running for the Senate as an independent candidate.

    In his memoir published last year, Enrile said that on September 22, 1972, his three-vehicle convoy was driving through Wack Wack subdivision on his way home to Dasmariñas Village from Camp Aguinaldo where he had just briefed top military officers on the implementation of martial law.

    Enrile, then defense secretary, said a speeding car rushed by and opened several bursts of gunfire toward his car before it sped away.

    Enrile in effect took back his earlier admission that his ambush was staged to set up martial law. He made the admission on February 22, 1986 when he and then Lt. Gen. Fidel Ramos led other soldiers in defying Marcos that his ambush was fake to set up martial law.

    Marcos used the ambush among the reasons to justify placing the country under martial law which served to perpetuate him in power until his ouster on February 25, 1986.

    Source: newsinfo inquirer net/356565/ex-police-chief-montano-disputes-enriles-claim-on-ambush

    • 117.1
      Mel says:

      Miriam wants probe into JPE’s ‘false claims’ in bio

      by Ira Pedrasa, ABS-CBNnews.com
      Posted at 02/11/2013 3:20 PM
      Updated as of 02/11/2013 3:20 PM

      MANILA – After a long absence due to hypertension, Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago made her presence felt with more promises of charges against Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile.

      In a statement, Santiago said she will file in the beginning of the 16th Congress a probe into the “brazen false claims” of Enrile in his book “Juan Ponce Enrile: A Memoir”.

      She said she has always believed that Enrile faked his ambush while going home to Dasmariñas Village in 1972, an incident that was used to justify the proclamation of martial law.

      She said Enrile may have committed any of several crimes punishable by the Revised Penal Code, such as: unlawful use of means of publication, falsification by a public officer of a document, or falsification by private individual.

      More than these, however, Santiago believes that “Whatever the crime, the basic rule is that the accused should have violated public faith and destroyed the truth, as decided by the Supreme Court in the 1985 case of Gamido, and the separate case of Sabiano.”

      Among those she wants to invite in the probe is senatorial candidate Ramon Montaño. The latter was appointed Philippine National Police chief after the martial law years. He headed a team tasked to probe the alleged ambush. The team later issued a report that the ambush was fake.

      In an article that came out in Yahoo! News, Montaño said he did not finish Enrile’s autobiography since “it was full of lies.”

      Besides the “fake” ambush, Montaño also claimed that Enrile merely pretended to support President Corazon Aquino in the 1986 snap elections. He claimed Enrile wanted a military junta that he himself would lead.

      Santiago said Montaño is willing to testify before the Senate on the matter. “The rule in evidence will apply to Enrile: false in one thing, false in all things. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus,” she said.

      Santiago will also make a public appearance for the first time when she delivers a speech tomorrow, Tuesday, February 12, at the UP Manila. She will discuss, among others, the consequences in international law of the Tubbataha Reef incident involving the US Navy’s minesweeper.

      Source: www abs-cbnnews com/nation/02/11/13/miriam-wants-probe-jpes-false-claims-bio

      - On a civil case pending before Branch 118 of the Pasay City Regional Trial Court, lakay JPE would have to prove his sainthood as F Marcos’ Martial Law enforcer.

      - OFF TOPIC, but related to an ongoing libel case filed by Sen Pres JPE against a Philstar Columnist who was exercising her Constitutional Right of Freedom to (Free) Speech.

  4. 116
    kalakala says:

    gmanetwork.com/news/photo/31604/senate-employees-picket-in-support-of-enrile-gigi-reyes

    from: abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/30/13/senate-employees-happy-kami-kay-enrile:
    Atty. Sergio Garcia, chief of staff of Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada, said the demonstration was decided at the last minute and nobody organized it.

    Among those present were employees from the Senate secretariat, administration, and the offices of senators Enrile, Estrada, Ralph Recto, Lito Lapid, Ramon Revilla Jr., Gregorio Honasan II, and Panfilo Lacson.

  5. 115
    pinay710 says:

    magtanong lang po ako sa mga nasa authoridad na naririto sa blog ni raissa. bakit po ba hindi pa palitan ang konstitusyon ng ating bansa? di ba matagal na ang konstitusyon na ginagmit ngayon. di ba dapat IAGAPAY NA SA PANAHON ang nilalaman ng konstitusyon ng BANSANG PILIPINAS. para yung mga hindi tama at naayon sa ating kapanahunan ngayon ay maisaayos. para mawala na ang mga hindi dapat na ginagawa ng mga nanunungkulan.

    • 115.1
      Parekoy says:

      @pinay710

      Delikado kasi pag binago. Open sa abuso, baka biglang hindi lang baguhin ang partikular na gustong baguhin, baka pati form of govt baguhin. Pano kung maging parliamentary, di pwede na uling si Gloria maging Prime Minister pag nagkaisa ang mga bataan nyag congresista. Hindi na tao ang pipili ng direkta sa presidente.

      Nangangamba lang ang tao, kasi parang forever na nilang hawakan ang pwesto. Karamian pa naman mga Dynasties.

      • 115.1.1
        pinay710 says:

        @parekoy, salamat po. akala ko puede yung lang partikular lalo na sa pagaayos ng pondo ng lahat ng departamento at bawasan ang masyadong garapal na kapangyarihan ng mga namumuno ng mga sensitibong departamento na magpapahirap sa mga mamamayan.katulad ng nangyari sa sendo. sobra ang kapangyarihan ng namumuno ng senado. ang kanilang adhikain ay MAHAL KO SARILI KO!!

        • 115.1.1.1
          AnuBayan! says:

          Basta televised ang proseso ng pagbabago ng Konstitusyon mahihirapan sila na abusuhin ang mga amendments dahil maraming matang nagmamatyag. Sa pamamagitan ng internet, napakabilis maipaparating sa mga tao ang mga self-serving proposals sa pagbabago ng mga probisyon sa Konstitusyon kaya hindi ito magtatagumpay. In the end, ang kagustuhan ng nakararami ang tunay na mamamayani sa pagbabago ng ating saligang batas!

  6. 114
    Parekoy says:

    SENATE IN SESSION
    MAG-INGAT SA MGA MAGNANAKAW

    Bakit kaya si Miriam lang ang nagbalik nong Cash Gift?

    Ibig sabihin okay sa lahat na Senators yung gift?

    Nabanggit ni A. Cayetano na maliit lang yun 250T nya kumpar sa bilyon na pwed nya sanang makuhang pork kay GMA. yun pala bakit hind nya rin isoli muna? Yun din kay Pia nasaan na?

    Mga superyaman ang mga Senators, kung talagang nagkamali sila at nagastos na pwedeng questionable, bakit hindi muna nila abonohan yung pera para lumabas na kahit na papano may natitira pang hiya sila? Ibalik muna sa kaban at pag tama ang kanilang claims na gastos, di bayaran sila. Pero ibalik muna ang mga pera.

    Daming tanong, wala pang mga sagot.

    • 114.1
      Baltazar says:

      As long as the expenses are properly liquidated, it’s OK. Para sa MOOE nman talaga yun. Pride chicken lang naman daw kasi yung kay Tia Miriam kasi unang sinoli daw ni Mamay Juan yung mga soltidos, galletas, otap atbp na inorder pa sa Ilo-Ilo.

    • 114.2
      AnuBayan! says:

      Bigla ngang naging tameme ang mga senador natin ngayon pagdating sa isyu ng cash gift and MOOE eh. Paano lahat sila nakinabang dun.

      Out of topic: Kung nagcreate na lang sila ng mga bagong korte at ang perang napasakamay mga mga senador at kongreso eh ipinangsweldo na lang sa mga bagong judges at court employees baka umayos at mapabilis pa ang sistema ng hustisya natin. Kaya malakas ang loob ng mga kriminal dahil alam nila na napakabagal ng hustisya sa bansa natin. Pero kung maraming judges (at public prosecutors at PAO lawyers), mabilis ang proseso ng mga kaso.

  7. 113
    baycas says:

    PAGHAHAMBING

    2012 Fight: Chief Executive vs Chief Justice
    2013 Fight: Senate President vs Senators

    2012 Chief Justice
    2013 Senate President (Chief of Staff)

    2012 SC Resolution hiding SALN
    2013 Concurrent Resolution of Both Houses hiding true expenditures

    2012 and 2013 Corruption

    2012 and 2013 :mad: :cry: :shock: :eek: (emotions running high)

  8. 112
    baycas says:

    PAGHAHAMBING

    2012 Fight: Chief Executive vs Chief Justice
    2013 Fight: Senate President vs Senators

    2012 Chief Justice
    2013 Senate President (Chief of Staff)

    2012 SC Resolution hiding SALN
    2013 Concurrent Resolution of Both Houses hiding true expenditures
    2012 and 2013 Corruption

    2012 and 2013 :mad: :cry: :shock: :eek: (emotions running high)

  9. 111
    Mel says:

    FOI Bill finally tackled at House

    MANILA, Philippines — The Freedom of Information Bill was finally tackled at the House of Representatives on Monday.By Karen Boncocan. INQUIRER.net
    6:23 pm | Monday, January 28th, 2013

    Read the article at http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/348509/foi-bill-finally-tackled-at-house

  10. 110
    Victin Luz says:

    To CPMERs: Ang sinasabi ko po sa inyong BONUSES and other PERKs na tinatanggap ng mga DETAILED COA personnels to other Government Agencies ay galing sa PONDO ng Agencies where they are DETAILED. BAWAL po Ito kasi DOBLE ang KUBRA ng BONUS nila, kasi binibigyan din sila ng mga BONUSES ng COA mismo.

    Technical Malversation daw ito sabi ng ating mga ABOGADO… Double Compensation din o GRAFT ang kaso ng taga COA dito……Magtanung po kayo sa inyo inyong SECTOR Kung totoo ang sinasabi ko mga CPMERs.

    tatahimik iyan mga COA assigned kasi halos lahat ay natanggap ng BAWAL na EXTRA BONUS.

    • 110.1
      pelang says:

      During my time, up to 1986, wala talaga kaming tinatanggap. I think from 1980 tinigil na ng mga corporations dahil nagre: reklamo ang mga local and national agencies. But i heard they revived it sometime in the late 90′s. I should know i had contacts with some colleagues who were later on assigned at gsis for example, they were able to collect payback bonuses which were temporary held (bale ina-accrue nila as savings meaning they are continued to be included in the budget of the corporation waiting for the greenlight at the central office to allow it to be given. Siguro, pumayag na ang central office na ibigay ang allowance sa mga coan’s na assigned sa conrporation. I don’t really know. It must be investigated because they’re not supposed to receive these allowances precisely because they are supposed to be independent.

      • 110.1.1
        Victin Luz says:

        Lumala @pelang noong panahon ni GLORYA,…..in order for a resident COA to approved payment of BONUSES for JOB ORDER employees with no employees – employers relationship taken from income of a State University ( not allowed by LAW as it was not one of the power of the Board of Regents to approve/release the same,)

        They ( COA ) were given BONUSES to keep silent on the wrong disbursement. Journalist can call State Universities and ask about this wrong doings. Only a few are following the LAW.

  11. 109
    Victin Luz says:

    To CPMERs: Ang sinasabi ko po sa inyong BONUSES and other PERKs na tinatanggap ng mga DETAILED COA personnels to other Government Agencies ay galing sa PONDO ng Agencies where they are DETAILED. BAWAL po Ito kasi DOBLE ang KUBRA ng BONUS nila, kasi binibigyan din sila ng mga BONUSES ng COA mismo.

    Technical Malversation daw ito sabi ng ating mag ABOGADO… Double Compensation din o GRAFT ang kaso ng tag a COA dito……Magtanung po kayo sa inyo inyong SECTOR Kung totoo ang sinasabi ko mga CPMERs.

    tatahimik iyan mga COA assigned kasi halos lahat ay natanggap ng BAWAL na EXTRA BONUS.

  12. 108
    Mel says:

    Senator P Lacson, who chairs the Senate Accounts Committee, agreed to open up its books and “… “effectively repealed” Concurrent Resolution 10, which allows lawmakers to account for their expenses only through a certification”.

    “We can also formalize the rescission of the concurrent resolution by way of another resolution,” he said.

    ‘Ceasefire’ as Senate agrees to open books for audit

    by Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News
    Posted at 01/28/2013 6:22 PM
    Updated as of 01/28/2013 6:22 PM

    MANILA – After a week of bruising word wars among senators over the use of the Senate’s funds, they have agreed to a “ceasefire,” Sen. Panfilo Lacson said.

    At the same time, they will also comply with a request from the Commission on Audit (COA) to have the chamber’s expenses audited, and begin to liquidate their maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE) through receipts and not just certifications.

    Senators reached these agreements in a closed-door meeting on Monday, January 28.

    “Napag-usapan din na ceasefire na muna,” Lacson said after Monday’s caucus. “Pero ang problema, ang mga wala diyan, baka hindi sila abot ng agreement na may ceasefire.”

    One of those absent in the meeting was Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, who criticized Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile for his distribution of the Senate’s savings allegedly as cash gifts to senators, and against whom Lacson plans to file a case for misuse of Senate funds.

    Lacson said the Senate has no choice but comply with COA’s request, which was made through a letter by its chairperson, Ma. Gracia M. Pulido Tan.

    In the letter, Tan cited COA’s constitutional mandate to audit the expenses of all government agencies.

    “We seek your assistance in making available to us, in the soonest possible time, all papers, documents and information in your possession or care as Chairman of the Committee on Accounts, particularly those bearing on the augmentation and realignment of Senate funds, as well as the use/s to which the MOOE given to members of the Senate have been devoted, so that we can forthwith carry out a ‘no-holds barred’ audit of the Senate finances,” she wrote.

    Lacson, who chairs of the accounts committee, said the required documents have been prepared. The initial batch of documents that will be submitted to COA covers the years 2010 to 2012, while those dating back to 2007 will also be released at a later time.

    “Today or tomorrow, the accounting office will be ready to submit the initial batch of documents,” he told reporters

    “We have to comply, even the House. We’ll all have to comply.”

    CONCURRENT RESO REPEALED

    In deciding to change the way they liquidate their MOOE, Lacson said senators “effectively repealed” Concurrent Resolution 10, which allows lawmakers to account for their expenses only through a certification that says the money was used properly without the need to present receipts. But they would have to inform members of the House, he added.

    “We can also formalize the rescission of the concurrent resolution by way of another resolution,” he said.

    Lacson said the House initiated the resolution in 2011 because it had problems with its resident auditor. Although liquidation through certification is not allowed by law, he said it found “legal cover” through the resolution that both the House and the Senate adopted.

    Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano had earlier called for an audit of the Senate’s expenses by a private firm. He has publicly attacked Enrile because of the latter’s alleged unfair distribution of additional MOOE to senators from the Senate’s savings last year: all but 4 senators, including Cayetano, received P1.6 million in additional funds.

    Lacson pointed out, however, that the budget law does not authorize the Senate to pay for a private auditor. He also said Tan’s letter makes it clear that only COA can audit government agencies.

    “Mahirap talagang i-justify,” he said. “Walang makakapigil kung gustong ipa-audit sa private auditing firm. Pero hindi puwedeng gastusan ng pondo ng gobyerno.”

    Cayetano will file this week a resolution calling for a parallel audit of the Senate’s expenses by COA and a private firm.

    He had argued that COA is susceptible to pressure from lawmakers because their budget goes through Congress for approval and its officials need to be confirmed by Commission on Appointments, which is composed of senators and congressmen.

    • 108.1
      Mel says:

      Above source: ‘Ceasefire’ as Senate agrees to open books for audit by Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News
      Posted at 01/28/2013 6:22 PM
      Updated as of 01/28/2013 6:22 PM

    • 108.2
      curveball says:

      Magandang balita ito kung mag-audit ang COA sa mababa at mataas na kapulungan.
      Ang result ba kaya ay ipapakita nila sa atin pagkatapos? O sila-sila na lang ang maguusap? Kung may anumalya na makita, may kakasuhan kaya?

      • 108.2.1
        Mel says:

        Mas mainam kung parallel audit by COA and one from a blue chip private accounting firm (e.g. SGV).

        Ang audit tingin lang at markado for Senate paper piles, anu ang rules sa mga titles or references of claims? Pa pag aralan pa iyan kung talagang mausisa ang processo ng audit. The Senate may have written or unwritten rules after so many years of wanton claims for reimbursements or payments by mere certification. Loose loose ends.

        JPE as senate pres is alarmed by these development, especially if a private firm is commissioned. Big monies are involved and laid back or relaxed processes of claiming payments.

        JOINT AUDIT NA LANG. Pareho naman din silang mangangapa sa dilim sa umpisa. Iyong irreconcilable volumes, subject for further investigation para mabilis ang preliminary report. Matagal ang field authentication to verify the many claims.

        Cayetano seeks parallel audit of Senate funds

        By Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News
        Posted at 01/29/2013 5:34 PM
        Updated as of 01/29/2013 5:34 PM

        MANILA, Philippines – Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano on Tuesday filed a resolution calling on the Senate to authorize a joint audit by the Commission on Audit (COA) and a private firm of its expenses.

        Cayetano insisted that nothing should prevent the private sector from looking into the Senate’s finances, which recently caused rifts among senators.

        Senate accounts committee chair Panfilo Lacson had said the Senate is not authorized to pay for a private auditor, but Cayetano believes otherwise.

        “We just have to justify it,” Cayetano told reporters. “If it’s for a public purpose, which is accountability and transparency, why shouldn’t it be authorized?”

        In Resolution 934, Cayetano cited the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, which mandates government officials to maintain the principle of public accountability.

        read the rest at http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/29/13/cayetano-seeks-parallel-audit-senate-funds

        @curveball , ang iyong tanong, “Kung may anumalya na makita, may kakasuhan kaya?” I doubt it. A senator can make complaints (SC or Ombudsman), successful prosecution? Slim.

    • 108.3
      Cha says:

      “Although liquidation through certification is not allowed by law, he said it found “legal cover” through the resolution that both the House and the Senate adopted.” – Lacson

      So they gave themselves permission to do something not allowed by law by simply agreeing among themselves that this is the way it will be done henceforth? Why does that sound anomalous to me?

      • 108.3.1
        Mel says:

        IT is anomalous (in my opinion).

        Only by a concurrent resolution by both Houses it gave it a lawful color.
        In their practice and implementation, was it legal?

        Let’s see what COA reports after (with or without a parallel or joint audit with a private firm)

        - ‘COA says MOOE not a discretionary fund’ (from newsinfo inquirer net/345991/coa-says-mooe-not-a-discretionary-fund)

        • 108.3.1.1
          baycas says:

          IT IS REALLY ANOMALOUS.

          As pointed out by @Rene-Ipil which I emphasized in Comment No. 107, a mere Concurrent Resolution CANNOT be enforced as a law.

          Thus, the liquidation by way of certification is WITHOUT legal basis. Also, as can be read in that concurrent resolution (Comment No. 99.3), since time immemorial up to the present, the COA has consistently allowed it.

          Now, the funds aligned and realigned as MOOE of Congress (upper and lower) are WITHOUT receipts.

          According to COA, a staggering 4.9B pesos of MOOE are WITHOUT receipts.

          Either a private auditor or COA will not be able to account for what the lawmakers spent in the past!

          • 108.3.1.1.1
            Mel says:

            True.

            To collect, collate and sort through their Certificates (Certifications) on file over the years is a long, long process. Still, COA may opt to request the House members to justify their Certificates by way of proofs. That remains to be seen and subject to availability. Their Certificates submitted are material documents stored or archived for records keeping.

            By COA’s recent request granted by the Senate thru Sen P Lacson’s initiative, how many did each Senator liquidate their funds by way of Certifications since they commenced office? Follow up question; was it fair and square or even for all Sens, or close with the Reps?

            “According to COA, a staggering 4.9B pesos of MOOE are WITHOUT receipts.” So they did some work previously, and allowed it to continue in spite of… They share the blame, … went unreported (at least publicly for sometime) until the recent squabble of unequal Christmas bonuses that it became public knowledge of the ‘anomaly’.

            Why involve a private auditing firm filed recently by Sen A Cayetano? Did COA’s previous work satisfactory? I rest my case.


            - ‘COA says MOOE not a discretionary fund’ (from newsinfo inquirer net/345991/coa-says-mooe-not-a-discretionary-fund)

  13. 107
    baycas says:

    CONGRATULATIONS, @Rene-Ipil. This is a EUREKA moment…

    A “eureka” moment for the legislators.

    Hats off to @Rene-Ipil in clarifying things. Here is what he pointed out (as copy-pasted from senatedotgovdotph as regards Legislative Process):

    2. Joint Resolutions

    A joint resolution, like a bill, requires the approval of both houses and the signature of the President. It has the force and effect of a law if approved. There is no real difference between a bill and a joint resolution. The latter generally is used when dealing with a single item or issue, such as a continuing or emergency appropriations bill. Joint resolutions are also used for proposing amendments to the Constitution.

    3. Concurrent Resolutions

    A concurrent resolution is usually designated in the Senate as S. Ct. Res. It is used for matters affecting the operations of both houses and must be passed in the same form by both of them. However, they are not referred to the President for his signature, and THEY DO NOT HAVE THE FORCE OF LAW. Concurrent resolutions are used to fix the time of adjournment of a Congress and to express the “sense of Congress” on an issue.

    http://www.senate.gov.ph/about/legpro.asp

    @Rene-Ipil,

    So, does it mean PH Congress (both upper and lower houses) is “out of order” in invoking the law as regards “liquidation by way of certification”?

    Reading the definition of “Concurrent Resolutions”, shall we now say that PH Congress has NO SENSE???

  14. 106
    Vibora says:

    Mithi
    Merong ngayong insidente, nagulat ang mga botante,
    Perang laan sa nabakante, nitong ating Presidente,
    Meron kaya itong basbas, ng DBM o gabinete,
    Mailipat, iaabante, patungo sa MOOE.

    Mago na si Baycas, meron siyang inilabas,
    Nalaman din sa wakas, kung nasaan ang butas,
    Mga apo ni barabas, iyong mga hudas,
    Binubutasan ang batas, pera ng bayan mawaldas.

    Kalesa ba’y kailangan, kung ang kabayo’y lumisan,
    Kutsero lang ang naiwan, pasahero’y naglayasan,
    Meron pa bang dahilan, halal na mga kawatan,
    Lubos na pagkatiwalaan, nitong mga taong bayan.

    Mithiin ko’y wagas, huwag biglang mautas,
    Mga manggagatas, sa kalabaw ng mga pantas,
    Malagyan ng posas, at humalik sa rehas,
    Yumukod sa batas, magbago ng landas.

  15. 105
    baycas says:

    LIQUIDATION BY CERTIFICATION*

    WHEREAS, in recognition of the delicate and unique nature of the functions, operational and organizational structures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Commission on Appointments and the Senate and House Electoral Tribunals, the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification, duly signed by each Senator and Member of the House of Representatives, that such amounts allocatild to each Member of Congress as part of their Maintenance imd Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) were utilized or expenlied in the performance of their legislative functions;

    - CONCURRENT RESOLUTION No.10

    CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MAINTAINING THE PREVAILING SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND LIQUIDATION OF THE RESPECTIVE BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS OF EACH MEMBER OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS CLASSIFIED AND CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING RULES

    This concurrent resolution or joint resolution was signed by SP Enrile and SOTH Belmonte on July 25, 2011.

    —–
    *NASA ibaba na ang web address ng dokumento na ito kaya lang nasa ere pa bago ma-upload dito sa blog.

    Mangyari lang na magkasya muna sa kapirasong sipi ng Joint Resolution na kasalukuyang mainit na pinag-uusapan.

    Ito na marahil ang magsesertipika na i-”liquidate” na ang mga may kagagawan nito. Walang transparency at accountability dito.

    Hep, teka muna…ang sabi…

    the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification

    COA consistently allowed it…Hmmm…

    • 105.1
      baycas says:

      LIQUIDATION BY CERTIFICATION*

      WHEREAS, in recognition of the delicate and unique nature of the functions, operational and organizational structures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Commission on Appointments and the Senate and House Electoral Tribunals, the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification, duly signed by each Senator and Member of the House of Representatives, that such amounts allocatild to each Member of Congress as part of their Maintenance imd Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) were utilized or expenlied in the performance of their legislative functions;

      - CONCURRENT RESOLUTION No.10

      CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MAINTAINING THE PREVAILING SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND LIQUIDATION OF THE RESPECTIVE BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS OF EACH MEMBER OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS CLASSIFIED AND CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING RULES

      This concurrent resolution or joint resolution was signed by SP Enrile and SOTH Belmonte on July 25, 2011.

      —–
      *The link to this document was already supplied below.

      Is it high time that the public certifies to “liquidate” all wrongdoers?

      Look, the COA consistently allowed such practice. The current system of liquidation by way of certification ESCAPES transparency and accountability.

      Thank you, Gutter, for bringing this up…stinking as it may be, quality improvement on the “bulok” current system must now be done!

      • 105.1.1
        curveball says:

        Pero parang nabasa ko na sinabi ng COA head na simula pa nuon ay ganito na ang gawa nila.

        Nagtuturuan na sila kung sino ang nagsimula? Parang tayo pa mga mamamayan ang pinagiisip nila kung sino ang may sala ano? Kung sino ang nagsimula sya ang dapat sisihin?

        Paano yan dahil sa matagal na pala nakagawian (sa senado at kongreso) ginawan na tuloy ng resolusyon para maging opisyal na ang lahat.

        Di lalo na naging galante ang bawat isa…. PERA NAMIN YANG GINAGASTOS NYO!!
        Kaya wala kayo pakialam kung paano nyo lustayin ang pera ng tao.

        Iimbestigahan ba o hindi? ang sabi ay pagbobotohan pa ng mga senador kung payag na may independent accounting? Teka kinakabahan ako kasi parang ang mangyayari ay… “kukuha sila ng bato na ipukpok sa kanilang ulo” kung meron silang tinatago.

        • 105.1.1.1
          Rene-Ipil says:

          Baycas@105.1Enrile‘s ex-cos . . .

          I saw and heard COA Chairman Tan saying during the Jessica Soho interview that COA accepted the liquidation by certification because it has been a practice for a long time, and that there is a LAW allowing such liquidation by certification. I took her words as true knowing his reputation. I was even ready to defend her. But after reading Concurrent Resolution No. 10 signed by Enrile and Belmonte, I think I cannot defend her anymore.

          COA Chairman Grace Pulido-Tan was intellectually dishonest when she said that there is law allowing such liquidation by certification. This explains my observation of her during the interview about her tentative answer to Soho. While she did mention about a joint resolution by congress, she never mentioned about the particular law. As it is now, there is no such law because a law is enacted by congress through specific procedures and then signed into law by the president. None of these constitutional requisites were followed. CR No. 10 is merely a resolution or a manifestation of intent by congress and never enacted as a law. So that such resolution is not binding to COA and the people. Worse, the resolution is in contravention of the mandate of COA.

          The lawmakers even had the temerity to declare that the liquidation of budget allocation on MOOE as classified – meaning at par with confidential and intelligence funds. Since when did the purchase of paper clips and cleaning of toilets become confidential or form part of gathering, processing and dissemination of timely information. Maybe the paper clip was used as part of a bugging devise or the janitor was utilized to eavesdrop on the conversation of peeing visitors and lawmakers.

          • 105.1.1.1.1
            leona says:

            @Rene_Ipil…concurrent Resolution No. 10. What is a ‘resolution’? How is it different from a law?

            xxx The resolution is often used to express the body’s approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. xxx Wikipedia Dictionary.

            …which they cannot otherwise vote on [ because of a contrary provision in the Constitution]

            …Due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction…meaning a ConConvention via Cha Cha; or

            …being protected by a constitution, [No. 6 SEC. 25 Article VI Constitution on Legislative Department.]

            Another legal fiction and dishonest diversionary squid tactics by Congress. What they cannot do directly is done indirectly. ‘Going around the bush’.

            COA surrendered to Congress! Does it have a good active legal department or none? Congress took it upon itself to ‘audit itself’ by ‘CERTIFICATION!

            Congress extracted all the ‘teeth’ of COA, never replacing it even with false dentures! So, how can COA bite good cooked sweet corns? Lugaw puede!

            COA is all natural gums. No more teeth.

          • 105.1.1.1.2
            Kajames says:

            I think after the Soho interview, the honorable COA Chairperson was interviewed shortly thereafter by another station and there she change her tune somewhat to the effect that COA will do its job as mandated by the constitution. Can’t find interview transcript yet but will keep looking, sorry guys!.

          • 105.1.1.1.3
            pelang says:

            i think, we can consider Ms.Tan-Pulido as mahina ang loob. Talagang takot. Hindi porke nasanayan na, tama na. If it is wrong, then she should have a courage to say this practice is WRONG and it’s got to be STOPPED! If she doesn’t have the courage to do that, then she has to give up the position. Imagine going to national television telling the people, who are we COAn’s to stop this practice of the senate or words to that effect. Aba! Hello Ms. Tan! Head po kayo ng COA! Meron po kayong constitutional power na i-audit ang lahat ng financial activities ng bawat government entity. Before blurting that thing out, dapat pinag-aralan niya muna. Kahit man lang “we’ll look into that” na answer would have been fair enough. Si sir Baycas nga, ang daling naka pag-research na ang resolution ng senado ay hindi tamang batas, at parang i memorandum lang iyon. hindi pa pirmado ng Presidente (buti na lang kundi sabit din si Pnoy).

            • pelang says:

              Excuse me, it was Rene-Ipil who looked it up.sorry.

              • baycas says:

                Thanks, I supplied the link to the Concurrent Resolution No. 10 and posted excerpts and comments.

                @Rene-Ipil said that it’s distinct from a Joint Resolution and is not considered a law.

      • 105.1.2
        Rene-Ipil says:

        Baycas@104

        I saw and heard COA Chairman Tan saying during the Jessica Soho interview that COA accepted the liquidation by certification because it has been a practice for a long time, and that there is a LAW allowing such liquidation by certification. I took her words as true knowing his reputation. I was even ready to defend her. But after reading Concurrent Resolution No. 10 (signed by Enrile and Belmonte), I think I cannot defend her anymore.

        COA Chairman Grace Pulido-Tan was intellectually dishonest when she said that there is law allowing such liquidation by certification. This explains my observation of her during the interview about her tentative answer to Soho. While she did mention about a joint resolution by congress, she never mentioned about the particular law. As it is now, there is no such law because a law is enacted by congress through specific procedures and then signed into law by the president. None of these constitutional requisites were followed. CR No. 10 is merely a resolution or a manifestation of intent by congress and never enacted as a law. So that such resolution is not binding to COA and the people. Worse, the resolution is in contravention of the mandate of COA.

        The lawmakers even had the temerity to declare that the liquidation of budget allocation on MOOE as classified – meaning at par with confidential and intelligence funds. Since when did the purchase of paper clips and cleaning of toilets become confidential or form part of gathering, processing and dissemination of timely information. Maybe the paper clip was used as part of a bugging devise or the janitor was utilized to eavesdrop on the conversation of peeing visitors and lawmakers.

        • 105.1.2.1
          raissa says:

          The joint resolution has the force of a law.

          The Constitution allows Congress to conduct its business its way.

          But in this case, perhaps citizens can question the constitutionality of the joint resolution.

          • 105.1.2.1.1
            Rene-Ipil says:

            Raissa @105.1

            I agree that a joint resolution of congress has the force of law because it bears the approval of the president.But the subject of contention is a concurrent resolution. Thus, it does not have the signature of the president and does not have the force of law.

            According to the website of the Senate of the Philippines, joint resolutions and concurrent resolutions are two types of measures that Congress may consider and act upon. Pertinent portions read, as follows:

            “2. Joint Resolutions

            “A joint resolution, like a bill, requires the approval of both houses and the signature of the President. It has the force and effect of a law if approved. There is no real difference between a bill and a joint resolution. The latter generally is used when dealing with a single item or issue, such as a continuing or emergency appropriations bill. Joint resolutions are also used for proposing amendments to the Constitution.

            “3. Concurrent Resolutions

            “A concurrent resolution is usually designated in the Senate as S. Ct. Res. It is used for matters affecting the operations of both houses and must be passed in the same form by both of them. However, they are not referred to the President for his signature, and they do not have the force of law. Concurrent resolutions are used to fix the time of adjournment of a Congress and to express the “sense of Congress” on an issue.”

            As it is a joint resolution of congress has the force of law if approved by the President. On the other hand, a concurrent resolution (like C. Res. No. 10) does not have the force of law and merely expresses the sense of congress. That is why it is not referred to the president for signature.

            • baycas says:

              CONGRATULATIONS, @Rene-Ipil. This is a EUREKA moment…

              A “eureka” moment for the legislators.

              Hats off to @Rene-Ipil in clarifying things. Here is what he pointed out (as copy-pasted from senatedotgovdotph as regards Legislative Process:

              2. Joint Resolutions

              A joint resolution, like a bill, requires the approval of both houses and the signature of the President. It has the force and effect of a law if approved. There is no real difference between a bill and a joint resolution. The latter generally is used when dealing with a single item or issue, such as a continuing or emergency appropriations bill. Joint resolutions are also used for proposing amendments to the Constitution.

              3. Concurrent Resolutions

              A concurrent resolution is usually designated in the Senate as S. Ct. Res. It is used for matters affecting the operations of both houses and must be passed in the same form by both of them. However, they are not referred to the President for his signature, and THEY DO NOT HAVE THE FORCE OF LAW. Concurrent resolutions are used to fix the time of adjournment of a Congress and to express the “sense of Congress” on an issue.

              @Rene-Ipil,

              So, does it mean PH Congress (both upper and lower houses) is “out of order” in invoking the law as regards “liquidation by way of certification”?

              Reading the definition of “Concurrent Resolutions”, shall we now say that PH Congress has NO SENSE???

              • Rene-Ipil says:

                Baycas@105.1

                Congress is just making a “palusot”. They have lost their sense of what is right or wrong.

            • Mel says:

              @Rene-Ipil

              NICE one! Kudos for your research.

              Hopefully, it raises the ante for COA Chairman Tan to issue a media release to clarify or substantiate what Law was she quoting or referencing it from.

              If there are cross lines (miscommunications) between COA’s mandate with the House of Legislature’s functions on Joint and/or Concurrent Resolutions, then COA has to release what parameters (access and limited authority) it has to audit or exert its mandate to the House.

              Or to put it bluntly, how, where and when are they OFF-Limits from the independent Branch’s financial business accounting affairs.

              Thanks @baycas for flaming the gutter issue.

              BTW, i have been getting these messages again.

              “Error establishing a database connection”

              The cyber cretans and jammers are at work again.

    • 105.2
      pelang says:

      hindi dahilang nakagawiaan na, ipagpapatuloy pa rin. dapat maputol na ito. nakikinig pala ang senado pag tinitira dito. huwag sana natin lubayan hangga’t hindi nagbabago.

  16. 104
    baycas says:

    LIQUIDATION BY CERTIFICATION*

    WHEREAS, in recognition of the delicate and unique nature of the functions, operational and organizational structures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Commission on Appointments and the Senate and House Electoral Tribunals, the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification, duly signed by each Senator and Member of the House of Representatives, that such amounts allocatild to each Member of Congress as part of their Maintenance imd Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) were utilized or expenlied in the performance of their legislative functions;

    - CONCURRENT RESOLUTION No.10

    CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MAINTAINING THE PREVAILING SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND LIQUIDATION OF THE RESPECTIVE BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS OF EACH MEMBER OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS CLASSIFIED AND CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING RULES

    This concurrent resolution or joint resolution was signed by SP Enrile and SOTH Belmonte on July 25, 2011.

    —–
    *NASA ibaba na ang web address ng dokumento na ito kaya lang nasa ere pa bago ma-upload dito sa blog.

    Mangyari lang na magkasya muna sa kapirasong sipi ng Joint Resolution na kasalukuyang mainit na pinag-uusapan.

    Ito na marahil ang magsesertipika na i-”liquidate” na ang mga may kagagawan nito. Walang transparency at accountability dito.

    Hep, teka muna…ang sabi…

    the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification

    COA consistently allowed it…Hmmm…

    • 104.1
      anton says:

      Can a self-serving joint resolution by Senate and Congress supersede COA’s constitutional power, authority and duty to examine, audit and settle all accounts and expenditures of the funds and properties of the Philippine government? Don’t you think the joint resolution is unconstitutional and in violation of the constitutional provision that no law shall be passed exempting any entity of the Government or its subsidiary in any guise whatever, or any investment of public funds, from the jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit?

      • 104.1.1
        Rene-Ipil says:

        Anton@104.1

        It is not a joint resolution but a concurrent resolution which has no force of law. Please see my explanation @105.1 January 28, 2013 at 2:44PM.

        • 104.1.1.1
          curveball says:

          @rene-ipil,

          Maraming salamat sa paliwanag mo at lalo ko nalaman ang tungkol sa issue ng “certification only” na ginagawa ng mga senador at kongresman natin na ibinabatay naman sa ginawa nilang resolution. Na pinagdidikdikan nila na nakagawian na kaya ituloy na lang.

          Pero kung ganito nga ang ibig sabihin nuon ay may karapatan ang COA na magtanong o magimbestiga kung sa tingin nila ay may anumalya ang mga kwenta?

          Pero bakit ang sagot ng COA ay ok na ang “certification only” sa milyon-milyon na gastos/regalo? Ibig ba sabihin di nila nauunawaan ang ibig sabihin ng resolution (o ang sakop lamang nito/o hindi sakop) ?

          Mga taga COA- tanong ko lang sa inyo:
          1. Nang makita nyo ang resolution, naunawaan ba nyo? (na ito ay hindi batas at pwede nyo gawin ang mandato na dapat nyo gawin sa kanila ng walang takot o pangamba)
          2. Natakot ba kayo dahil pirmado ng 2 pinuno ng kapulungan?
          3. O sadyang kasangkot kayo sa mga bigayan ng milyon-milyon kaya hindi nyo pwede isumbong ang patuloy na nangyayari ganito (hindi lang anggi, ulan, bagyo kundi mistulang delubyo sa laki ng pera pinamimigay nyo) taon-taon?

          Nakakainis talaga na malaman na ganito pala sila. Palagi tayong mga tao na nagtratrabaho ng marangal, nasunod sa batas (magbayad ng tamang buwis) ang hindi kasali sa biyaya.

          Manapa, tayo ang ginigisa sa sarili natin mantika… ginagatasan at sinisipsip ang pinaghirapan ng ganuon ganuon lang.

          MAHIYA NAMAN KAYO SA MGA TAO NA NAGPAPASWELDO SA INYO!!!!!!!

      • 104.1.2
        Victin Luz says:

        @Anton ,….with my experience as Board of Regent of distant State University of the South,…..after my retirement in the Government , ……COA’s so as State University’s Implementing Rules Regulations and Procedure’s although signed by the Speaker of the House ,Senate President , even the Secretariat affixed his/her signature and concurred by our President , that IRR and COA’s guidelines/procedure had the Force of a Law , but the legality or illegality and the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the latter remains the AMBIT/PARLANCE of the Supreme Court to decide.

        One COA rules I still remember was ” a cash advanced made by a government employee must liquidate the same not later than every first 17th day of the year or not later than January 17th of the New Year ” …Failure to liquidate such an amount the COA can file a case against you but the SC has yet decide a case elevated to the SC, so that such COAs rule become a LAW itself.

        For a State University, the most prostituted IRR was the extension of a University President of his/her 4yrs. Ist term that will prolong their retirement age of 70yrs., only now that CHED chair LICUANAN implemented SC ruling that they can no longer be extended ( their Presidency ) after 70yrs.

        Certification if allowed in the Senate and the House , even if approved by the President , the legality or illegality can be questioned at SC.

  17. 103
    Rene-Ipil says:

    CPMers, Rolly, Rossi @62.9

    I suggest that the election this year be postponed until we have amended the constitution soonest through a constitutional convention. The task of calling a constitutional convention shall be done by the present congress for this purpose only. Current elective officials shall be in hold-over capacity.

    Let’s elect delegates and amend the constitution declaring the position of justices of the Supreme Court vacant, abolishing the present congress and creating a unicameral assembly whose members shall be elected by regions. Other urgent aspects, i.e. economy and security, maybe considered.

    Reorganizing the Supreme Court has been overdue even before the removal of Corona. In electing the assemblymen by regions both the local and national concerns are given attention in lawmaking. Purely local aspects are left to mayors and governors. Pork barrel is abolished and implementation of projects is done by national and local executives. Autonomous regions would be well defined. Economic flaws are corrected.

    Let us amend the constitution while President Benigno S. Aquino III is the chief executive. This is our only chance to ensure progress and preserve the gains achieved by the present administration.

    I am convinced that PNoy would step down in 2016. So we must have a like-minded chief executive after him.

    • 103.1
      raissa says:

      Sorry, I don’t agree that a unicameral assembly is the solution. And a Con-Con is the solution.

      • 103.1.1
        Rene-Ipil says:

        Raissa@103.1

        Do you mean that a unicameral body is not a solution while the con-con is a solution? Please clarify.

        Be reminded that the present bicameral congress is the result of one vote majority in the constitutional commission by Cory. The pros and cons are recorded during the deliberation. It appears now that bicameral body is inappropriate based on our sad experience with the present crop of lawmakers. Btw the party list system should be abolished also.To me the most important function of the legislative body is the enactment of the general appropriations law a.k.a. national budget and tax laws where the people are represented equitably at least by region. Without these laws the government will be paralyzed. On the other hand, we have a surfeit of non pecuniary statutes on gerrymandering, renaming streets, cyber crimes, carabao propagation, etc.

        • 103.1.1.1
          leona says:

          @Rene_Ipil…can do that but ‘one at the proper time’…The idea is good but not ripe.

          FOI…should be ripe!

          • 103.1.1.1.1
            Rene-Ipil says:

            Leona@103.1

            In that case, let my suggestion serve as a beacon.

            • leona says:

              Your ‘beacon’ will when Cha Cha time comes around, one of these CPMers should be there ‘dancing’ the cha cha as a delegate! With the full support of our many here.

        • 103.1.1.2
          Rolly says:

          @Rene-Ipil @leona

          I agree with Rene that charter change should be done this days while Noynoy is the president. His popularity, influence and resolve for a better Philippines would be a component and could be the basis and deciding factor in the minds of the ConCon delegates in crafting a Constitution that is relevant to the times.

          But…….do we really need to change the Constitution just for the sake of change? No matter how good, pertinent and appropriate our Laws are, if the authorities and the people running the governments -be local or national- continue to their wicked ways, our dreams for the betterment of our beloved country shall remain a dream.

          We should draw a Constitution that would be doubly hard to circumvent; must be plain and simple; no catchy words or phrase; no interpretation needed, or minimal if ever. An enabling Law should also be incorporated within to very few selected provisions to free Congress from enacting one that would take decades to fulfill…anti-dynasty for example.

          Below is my reply to Leona 4 days back…at # 13.1 replies…Newbie Senator………

          Rolly says:
          January 25, 2013 at 11:43 am

          @leona

          To me, our Constitution is good enough. Enacting an enabling law is where problem lies, more so, its implementation.

          Radical overhaul of our Constitution is required if ever we decided to change it.
          Maybe, CPMers can draft one and put it up to the ConCon assembly for scrutiny and consideration.

          We dedicate a space…an article of its own that can be visited from time to time in the side, for people to comment , suggest, edit and debate upon. Concurrence of Raissa is of course must be sought first for the needed web space.

          The good starting point could be, the merit and advantages of a Parliamentary system. People (locals or aliens) can voice out their opinions, and further down the track, we bring forth a solid base that would become the foundation of a proposed Constitution.

          My reply to Rene, # 62.9 this article:

          Rolly says:
          January 27, 2013 at 2:56 pm

          @Rene-Ipil

          Or maybe, do away to all the Constitutions we have and edict a new one through a Constitutional Convention.

          Concon Delegates and those who held elective position in the last 100 years shall be precluded from an elective and/or appointive Post 25 years after the ratification of the new Constitution.

    • 103.2
      chit navarro says:

      Let’s just push for the approval of the FREEDOM ON INFORMATION ACT (FOI)

      and let us campaign for TEAM PINOY for the Senate

      para may kasangga si Presidente na maglinis ng baho ng Senado……

      Pwede po ba na magkaroon naman tayo ng mga senador at mga opisyales ng Senado na may puso para sa bayan… at hindi para sa kani-kanilang bulsa lamang…

      • 103.2.1
        Rene-Ipil says:

        Chit @ 103.2

        I agree. As a palliative.

      • 103.2.2
        baycas says:

        may bagong survey. di ko lang maiposte now.

        from SWS-Businessworld…

        • 103.2.2.1
          Cha says:

          TOP 12 SENATORS
          Per latest Buinessworld-SWS Survey

          1. Legarda
          2. Escudero
          3. Cayetano, A.
          4. Ejercito, J.V.
          5. Honasan
          6. Pimentel
          7. Zubiri
          8. Villar, C
          9. Enrile, J
          10. Trillanes
          11. Poe
          12. Binay, N.

          Next 5:

          13. Angara, S
          14. Gordon
          15. Aquino, B
          16. Magsaysay, J
          17. Madrigal

          Tied at 18-19 : Hontiveros and Maceda

          • 103.2.2.1.1
            Rene-Ipil says:

            Cha@103.2

            Maybe we should vote only for Trillanes, Angara, Aquino, Magsaysay, Madrigal and Hontiveros to dislodge Binay and Enrile. Or maybe the the first four only (TAAM). I also want Madrigal and Hontiveros to win but we must employ doable moves to maximize LPs in the senate. Let’s see our options after the last survey prior to Election Day.

            • Victin Luz says:

              Tama ka sir@Rene, …Trillanes,Angara,Aquino, Magasaysay,Madrigal, Hontiveros ONLY para malaglag ang mga ayaw natin na pumasok….ok sir Hontiveros must win….

          • 103.2.2.1.2
            curveball says:

            Sa akin ay mas maraming LP para maituloy ang naumpisahan ni Pnoy. Yung tira ay sa ibang partido para maging opposition(?).

            1, 2, 3, 6, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18

            Sabi nga lesser evil ang pipiliin. Nakakalungkot isipin na ito na lang ba ang pinakamaganda na pagpipilian?

            Wala ba tayo matatawag na 100% na matalino/magaling, marangal, makatao, at may prinsipyo?

            Meron lang isang tao na pwede ko mailagay dito… si Sec Jesse (RIP) sana kung andito pa sya.

  18. 102
    Cha says:

    More on the MOOE , The COA and The Senate : the not so fine print

    From Philstar today (28 Jan)
    Senate barred COA from fund scrutiny
    Christina Mendez
     Headlines, News (link to follow)

    Highlights.: 

    1. The COA raised concern about the practice of certification only for MOOE expenditures in its annual audit in 2011. 

    2. The senators and congressmen adopted resolutions to protect the said practice in 2011 and 2012. In other words, the state auditors were simply barred from looking closely at the way those funds are used. They win. The people lose. 

    Mendez writes:

    On July 25, 2011, the two chambers approved Concurrent Resolution No. 10, recognizing the “delicate and unique nature of the functions, operational and organizational structures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Commission on Appointments, and the Senate and House Electoral Tribunals.

    The resolution declared that the COA “has consistently allowed” Congress to continue “the current system of liquidation by way of certification,” which recognizes that lawmakers have utilized their MOOE “in the performance of their legislative functions.”

    This system, according to Resolution No. 10, “is in keeping with the nature of the performance by the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives and their respective committees of their legislative, oversight, and constituent functions and responsibilities.”

    With the concurrence of the House, which has the power of the purse, the Senate declared that the system of financial accounting and liquidation by each lawmaker is “consistent with applicable accounting and auditing rules” and “shall be maintained.”

    Senators adopted the resolution on Aug. 24, 2011; the House followed on Feb. 1, 2012.

    3. The Senate MOOE budget in 2012 is a whopping P1,462,678,000!!!!  broken down as follows:

    -P442,415,000 was for locally funded projects under the oversight committees 

    -P589,865,000 was for general administration and support

    -P430,578,000 for operations or legislative services.

    More than a billion pesos the senators have at their disposal and all they need to access it is their precious signature. How much is a signature worth?

    4. The MOOE allocation in the budget has doubled during the time of Enrile, as noted by Cayetano in his controversial privilege speech.  From P759 million in 2008 to P1.57 billion for 2013.

    The pig is well and truly fattened.  

    To market to market, to buy a fat pig
    Home again, home again,
    Jiggety jig ….. 

    • 102.1
    • 102.2
      drill down says:

      lawmakers conniving to defeat checks and balances, one of the most important features of the constitution, in the government.

    • 102.3

      THANK you CHA for fleshing out some black bones of contention on
      my posting about COA.

    • 102.4
      curveball says:

      Kaya pala lakas ng loob nila magbigayan ng cash gifts at magastahan ng pera na hindi naman kanila (pero kung sarili nila yan sigurado ako mga tira-tira yan) kasi pala walang pwede mag-kwenta o magtanong sa kanila.
      At kaya din pala walang ingay ang COA para silang mga taga labas lang. Kunwari checking ng mga gastos pero hanggang kwenta at sulat lang pala.
      Sabi nga ng isang poster… tingin lang sa langit. Kahit na punong puno ng anomalya ang kwenta nasa harap mo, tingin lang sa langit kasi ala ka magagawa para kwestyunin ang kagustuhan ng mga senador at kongresman.
      Nakagawa ng Resolution na self serving.
      Mabuhay kayo… mga mandaraya!!!!!!
      Mga kawatan!!!!
      Di pala sila mga bobo tulad ng sinabi ko dati. Mga matatalino pala sila dahil ang galing gumawa ng batas… na sila lang ang makikinabang.
      Mga tuso!!!!!
      PERA NAMIN ANG GINAGASTA NYO… DI BA PWEDENG TIPIRIN NYO NAMAN?
      Kami nga puro pagtitipid ang ginagawa namin para lang may matira sa sweldo at kinaltas na ang tax namin.

      • 102.4.1
        pinay710 says:

        talaga naman sobra sa PINAKA SOBRA na abuso. yung mga ibang empleyado ng pamahalaan talga kayod marino. tapos sila na ang sarap ng kinalalagyan nila na opisina eh mga nagpapasasa ng husto. HINDI MAKATARUNGAN ANG GINAGAWA NG MGA NANUNUNGKULAN SA BAYAN.

        PANGULONG NOYNOY ALAM MO BA NA MASYADONG INAABUSO ANG MGA MAHIHIRAP NA BOSS MO? PINAGHIHIRAPANG BUWIS NA KINAKALTAS NA AGAD SA MGA SUELDO PINAGPAPASASAAN NG IILAN?

        KAYA HINDI UMAASENSO ANG PILIPINAS TAYO TAYO NAGGUGULANGAN. SINASAMANTALA ANG MGA MAMAMAYAN.

        MANGAMATAY NA SANA KAYONG LAHAT NA MGA KURAKOT!!
        DAIG NYO PA AND DIOS SA KAPANGYARIHAN!!

        • 102.4.1.1
          pinay710 says:

          kaya nga ba tama lang ang mga sinasabi ng mga kaibigan ko kung kinukuwentuhan ko sila ng mga pangyayari sa senado. sabi nila. “AY NAKU HUAG NA TAYONG MAKIALAM DYAN!! KAHIT NA ANO PA ANG GAWIN NATIN TULOY PA DIN ANG MGA KATIWALIAN SA PAMAHALAAN NATIN. MATANDA NA TAYO HANGGANG NGAYON GANYAN PA DIN NG GANYAN. DAMI NANG NAGDAAN NA ADMINISTRASYON WALA NAMAN NANGYAYARI. BASTA MAGHAGNAPBUHAY NA LANG TAYO. HINDI NAMAN NILA TAYO PAKIKINGGAN. KAHIT NA SINO PA ANG IBOTO NATIN GANAYAN PA DIN NG GANYAN ANG MANGYAYARI.”

          kaya walang PILIPINO ang nakikialam dahil sa kalakaran na ng Pilipinas ang ganitong uri ng gobyerno. puro PAGNANAKAW SA KABAN NG BAYAN.

  19. 101
    Cha says:

    Tuloy ang boksingan ng mga Senador!
    (with thanks to @Mel for the links he posted at 90.4)

    1. Pre-fight highlights: Lacson Shadow Boxing

    Sabi ni Lacson, sana naman daw pumayag si SP JPE at ang kanyang mga kapwa senador na buksan ng kanilang mga libro upang magkabistuhan na kung paano ba talaga ginagastos ang mga pondo ng mga senador.

    Pulos suntok sa hangin, walang lumalanding. Pakiusap ang dating. Pero sa huli ang sabi, hindi naman daw niya talaga sila kaya pilitin. Epal lang pala. Gusto lang makisali sa usapan at magmukhang kakampi ng bayan.

    2. The Main Event : Lacson vs. Miriam Santiago

    Heto ang mas may bagsik na labanan sana. Mukhang may patama na talaga ang suntok ni Lacson. Hindi lang lucky punch, ika nga.

    Eto daw si Miriam, merong satellite office na ang nagbabagayad ng renta, siyemore taung bayan. Galing sa pondo bilang senador baga. P840,000 a year ang renta. Ang kontratang pinirmahan ng senadora ay para sa taong 2010 hanggang 2014. So aabutin ng kulang kulang sa apat na milyon ang makukubra sa gobyero sa buong kapanahunan ng kontrata. Ang pangalan ng building NARSAN, short for Narciso Santiago! yung kanyang ASAWA. In other words, kaniya rin yung building!!

    Graft daw ito, sigaw ngayon ni Lacson. Oo nga naman, di ba.

    Pero nang tanungin kung sasampahan niya ng kaso ang kapwa senador, saka na raw pag gumaling na sa sakit niya yung huli.

    Ayayay, padaplis lang pala uli ang suntok ni Pilo!

    Suntok sa hangin walang aanihin.

    • 101.1
      romy says:

      Tama naman ang paliwanag ni Sen. Lacson — pabayaan na munang gumaling sa sakit si Sen MDS bago sampahan ng kaso. Sa gayon, palagay ko’y tatagal ang sakit ni Sen MDS upang matapos na ang termino ni Sen Lacson… at saka na siya gagaling ang babalik sa Senado upang inisin muli si SP JPE.
      Madagdag ko naman ang tanaw ko sa ipinipilit ni Sen. APC na dapat private auditor ang mag-audit ng Senado. Ipinalalabas niya na sangkot din ang COA sa mga katiwalian sa paggasta ng mga senador kasi napagtatakpan ang tunay na maling paggamit ng mga pondo. Sa paliwanag naman ni Sen Lacson, hindi maaaring gamitin ang pondo ng gobyerno sa pag-audit, kasi nga naman nandiyan ang COA na ang talagang dapat gawin ay mag-audit ng gobyerno. Kung talagang ipipilit ni Sen APC na pribadong autit ang kailangan, bakit kaya hindi mag-volunteer ang mga mayayamang corporation na sila ang gagasta sa ilalim ng kanilang CSR (corporate social responsibility) at hingin ang pahintulot ng Senado sa ganitong paraan. (May tututol din sa paraang ito, kasi parang magiging daan din ito ng paggigipit ng mga corporation sa Kongreso.)
      Sa kabuuan, kailangang bigyan ng tiwala ang COA sa kanilang gagawin. Ang panukala ni Sen APC ay tuwirang sinisira ang tiwala sa lahat ng sangay ng gobyerno. Sino pa ang ating paniniwalaan?.

  20. Mel says:

    JPE top Senate spender in 2011

    By Marvin Sy (The Philippine Star)
    Updated February 24, 2013 – 12:00am

    MANILA, Philippines – Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile recorded the highest expenses among senators in 2011, according to a report released by the Commission on Audit (COA).

    Enrile incurred total expenses of P118,306,463.65 from January to December 2011.

    The figure consists of his salaries in the amount of P1,035,837; extraordinary and miscellaneous expenses, P1.649 million; other miscellaneous and operating expenditures, P66.069 million.

    Enrile was followed by Senate President Pro- Tempore Jinggoy Estrada with P62,122,308.41; Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III, P56,259,173.08; and Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano, P55,039,015.88.

    The COA released a detailed list of the amounts paid to and expenses incurred by the 24 senators in 2011 in response to the calls from various sectors to open the books of the Senate to the public.

    It was unclear why the salaries of the senators recorded for 2011 varied with some receiving P315,000 like Sen. Panfilo Lacson. Nine others received P420,000 pay and 11 others got P905,393.

    Headlines ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1
    Former senator Juan Miguel Zubiri and Sen. Aquilino Pimentel III, who took over Zubiri’s post in August 2011, were 23rd and 24th on the list, respectively. The list was verified by COA supervising auditor Mario Lipana.

    The travel expenses of each senator were practically the same at P272,760, except for Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV who incurred an additional P279,048 for foreign travel.

    For rentals of office space/equipment, four senators topped the list namely Ferdinand Marcos Jr. with P2.205 million; Sergio Osmeña III, P2.162 million; Edgardo Angara, P1.094 million; and Miriam Defensor-Santiago, P840,000.

    Only Trillanes recorded a capital outlay expense amounting to P77,701.78 among all senators.

    Under the item of professional/consultancy fee, only eight senators incurred such expense namely Enrile, P1.472 million; Estrada, P960,000; Angara, P943,750; Sotto, P775,435.48; Lacson, P480,000; Trillanes, P300,000; Pimentel, P206,301.07; and Loren Legarda, P62,106.04.

    Rounding out the top 24 in the total amounts paid to and expenses incurred were Trillanes with P59,977,548.91; Ramon Revilla Jr., P49,832,194.03; Marcos, P49,219,513.85; Escudero, P48,729,719.79; Honasan, P47,185,274.44; Francis Pangilinan, P46,889,065.06; Legarda; P44,107,941.55; Manuel Lapid, P43,565,023.21; Ralph Recto, P42,390,681.54; Pia Cayetano, P42,122,431.08; Angara, P41,789,602.76; Teofisto Guingona III, P41,502,359.45; Santiago, P41,036,900.44; Manuel Villar Jr., P40,312,799.12; Osmeña, P37,680,862.99; Lacson, P37,115,276.55; Franklin Drilon, P34,968,031.74; Joker Arroyo, P31,867, 125.93; Zubiri, P23,955,240.03; and Pimentel, P19,980,236.40.

    The Senate has submitted its financial records to the COA for perusal based on an agreement reached by the senators.

    Part of the agreement was to provide an itemized list of the expenses, something which the COA was not able to get before because of a resolution passed by Congress.

    Many of the expenses incurred by the senators were previously liquidated only through a certification and not itemized as required by law.

    SOURCE: http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/02/24/912474/jpe-top-senate-spender-2011

  21. Mel says:

    Enrile’s ambush claim ‘defies logic’ – ex-police chief Montaño

    6:19 pm | Monday, February 11th, 2013

    MANILA, Philippines – Retired major general and former national police chief Ramon Montaño has added to the voices contradicting Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile’s claim in a recent memoir that his eventful ambush on September 22, 1972 was not staged.

    Montaño said he and his then superior, the late Major General Prospero Olivas, were at the scene at the time, which was the night before Malacañang announced that President Ferdinand Marcos had imposed martial law.

    “I was the one with General Olivas who conducted an ocular investigation. I questioned the aide-de-camp (of Enrile) who was there. It was impossible to be a real ambush,” he said in an interview Monday.

    Montaño said Enrile’s ambush claim “defies logic” as he recalled observing that the bullet holes on Enrile’s car were “very neatly aligned” and how the gunfire conveniently missed all of the occupants.

    He said such outcome would have been “impossible” had the car really been moving when it was sprayed with automatic gunfire.

    “They allege they were intercepted and there was gunfire. If you do that, the bullets should have been all over (the car). But in this case, they (bullet holes) were very neatly aligned and then no one was hit.

    “If the car was running when hit with an automatic weapon, dapat sabog iyon all over (bullet holes should be scattered). Eh iyon aligned na aligned (Those holes were perfectly aligned),” Montaño said.

    “It defies logic,” added Montaño, who became chief of the defunct Philippine Constabulary-Integrated National Police (PC-INP) in 1986 under the late president Corazon Aquino.

    He said he did not submit a report nor did he meddle with the official report on the ambush.

    He said he preferred to keep his mouth shut in light of martial law’s imposition.

    At the time of the ambush, Montaño was with the police intelligence branch of the Philippine Constabulary’s Criminal Investigation Service (precursor of the present Criminal Investigation and Detection Group).

    Montaño is running for the Senate as an independent candidate.

    In his memoir published last year, Enrile said that on September 22, 1972, his three-vehicle convoy was driving through Wack Wack subdivision on his way home to Dasmariñas Village from Camp Aguinaldo where he had just briefed top military officers on the implementation of martial law.

    Enrile, then defense secretary, said a speeding car rushed by and opened several bursts of gunfire toward his car before it sped away.

    Enrile in effect took back his earlier admission that his ambush was staged to set up martial law. He made the admission on February 22, 1986 when he and then Lt. Gen. Fidel Ramos led other soldiers in defying Marcos that his ambush was fake to set up martial law.

    Marcos used the ambush among the reasons to justify placing the country under martial law which served to perpetuate him in power until his ouster on February 25, 1986.

    Source: newsinfo inquirer net/356565/ex-police-chief-montano-disputes-enriles-claim-on-ambush

    • Mel says:

      Miriam wants probe into JPE’s ‘false claims’ in bio

      by Ira Pedrasa, ABS-CBNnews.com
      Posted at 02/11/2013 3:20 PM
      Updated as of 02/11/2013 3:20 PM

      MANILA – After a long absence due to hypertension, Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago made her presence felt with more promises of charges against Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile.

      In a statement, Santiago said she will file in the beginning of the 16th Congress a probe into the “brazen false claims” of Enrile in his book “Juan Ponce Enrile: A Memoir”.

      She said she has always believed that Enrile faked his ambush while going home to Dasmariñas Village in 1972, an incident that was used to justify the proclamation of martial law.

      She said Enrile may have committed any of several crimes punishable by the Revised Penal Code, such as: unlawful use of means of publication, falsification by a public officer of a document, or falsification by private individual.

      More than these, however, Santiago believes that “Whatever the crime, the basic rule is that the accused should have violated public faith and destroyed the truth, as decided by the Supreme Court in the 1985 case of Gamido, and the separate case of Sabiano.”

      Among those she wants to invite in the probe is senatorial candidate Ramon Montaño. The latter was appointed Philippine National Police chief after the martial law years. He headed a team tasked to probe the alleged ambush. The team later issued a report that the ambush was fake.

      In an article that came out in Yahoo! News, Montaño said he did not finish Enrile’s autobiography since “it was full of lies.”

      Besides the “fake” ambush, Montaño also claimed that Enrile merely pretended to support President Corazon Aquino in the 1986 snap elections. He claimed Enrile wanted a military junta that he himself would lead.

      Santiago said Montaño is willing to testify before the Senate on the matter. “The rule in evidence will apply to Enrile: false in one thing, false in all things. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus,” she said.

      Santiago will also make a public appearance for the first time when she delivers a speech tomorrow, Tuesday, February 12, at the UP Manila. She will discuss, among others, the consequences in international law of the Tubbataha Reef incident involving the US Navy’s minesweeper.

      Source: www abs-cbnnews com/nation/02/11/13/miriam-wants-probe-jpes-false-claims-bio

      - On a civil case pending before Branch 118 of the Pasay City Regional Trial Court, lakay JPE would have to prove his sainthood as F Marcos’ Martial Law enforcer.

      - OFF TOPIC, but related to an ongoing libel case filed by Sen Pres JPE against a Philstar Columnist who was exercising her Constitutional Right of Freedom to (Free) Speech.

  22. kalakala says:

    gmanetwork.com/news/photo/31604/senate-employees-picket-in-support-of-enrile-gigi-reyes

    from: abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/30/13/senate-employees-happy-kami-kay-enrile:
    Atty. Sergio Garcia, chief of staff of Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada, said the demonstration was decided at the last minute and nobody organized it.

    Among those present were employees from the Senate secretariat, administration, and the offices of senators Enrile, Estrada, Ralph Recto, Lito Lapid, Ramon Revilla Jr., Gregorio Honasan II, and Panfilo Lacson.

  23. pinay710 says:

    magtanong lang po ako sa mga nasa authoridad na naririto sa blog ni raissa. bakit po ba hindi pa palitan ang konstitusyon ng ating bansa? di ba matagal na ang konstitusyon na ginagmit ngayon. di ba dapat IAGAPAY NA SA PANAHON ang nilalaman ng konstitusyon ng BANSANG PILIPINAS. para yung mga hindi tama at naayon sa ating kapanahunan ngayon ay maisaayos. para mawala na ang mga hindi dapat na ginagawa ng mga nanunungkulan.

    • Parekoy says:

      @pinay710

      Delikado kasi pag binago. Open sa abuso, baka biglang hindi lang baguhin ang partikular na gustong baguhin, baka pati form of govt baguhin. Pano kung maging parliamentary, di pwede na uling si Gloria maging Prime Minister pag nagkaisa ang mga bataan nyag congresista. Hindi na tao ang pipili ng direkta sa presidente.

      Nangangamba lang ang tao, kasi parang forever na nilang hawakan ang pwesto. Karamian pa naman mga Dynasties.

      • pinay710 says:

        @parekoy, salamat po. akala ko puede yung lang partikular lalo na sa pagaayos ng pondo ng lahat ng departamento at bawasan ang masyadong garapal na kapangyarihan ng mga namumuno ng mga sensitibong departamento na magpapahirap sa mga mamamayan.katulad ng nangyari sa sendo. sobra ang kapangyarihan ng namumuno ng senado. ang kanilang adhikain ay MAHAL KO SARILI KO!!

        • AnuBayan! says:

          Basta televised ang proseso ng pagbabago ng Konstitusyon mahihirapan sila na abusuhin ang mga amendments dahil maraming matang nagmamatyag. Sa pamamagitan ng internet, napakabilis maipaparating sa mga tao ang mga self-serving proposals sa pagbabago ng mga probisyon sa Konstitusyon kaya hindi ito magtatagumpay. In the end, ang kagustuhan ng nakararami ang tunay na mamamayani sa pagbabago ng ating saligang batas!

  24. Parekoy says:

    SENATE IN SESSION
    MAG-INGAT SA MGA MAGNANAKAW

    Bakit kaya si Miriam lang ang nagbalik nong Cash Gift?

    Ibig sabihin okay sa lahat na Senators yung gift?

    Nabanggit ni A. Cayetano na maliit lang yun 250T nya kumpar sa bilyon na pwed nya sanang makuhang pork kay GMA. yun pala bakit hind nya rin isoli muna? Yun din kay Pia nasaan na?

    Mga superyaman ang mga Senators, kung talagang nagkamali sila at nagastos na pwedeng questionable, bakit hindi muna nila abonohan yung pera para lumabas na kahit na papano may natitira pang hiya sila? Ibalik muna sa kaban at pag tama ang kanilang claims na gastos, di bayaran sila. Pero ibalik muna ang mga pera.

    Daming tanong, wala pang mga sagot.

    • Baltazar says:

      As long as the expenses are properly liquidated, it’s OK. Para sa MOOE nman talaga yun. Pride chicken lang naman daw kasi yung kay Tia Miriam kasi unang sinoli daw ni Mamay Juan yung mga soltidos, galletas, otap atbp na inorder pa sa Ilo-Ilo.

    • AnuBayan! says:

      Bigla ngang naging tameme ang mga senador natin ngayon pagdating sa isyu ng cash gift and MOOE eh. Paano lahat sila nakinabang dun.

      Out of topic: Kung nagcreate na lang sila ng mga bagong korte at ang perang napasakamay mga mga senador at kongreso eh ipinangsweldo na lang sa mga bagong judges at court employees baka umayos at mapabilis pa ang sistema ng hustisya natin. Kaya malakas ang loob ng mga kriminal dahil alam nila na napakabagal ng hustisya sa bansa natin. Pero kung maraming judges (at public prosecutors at PAO lawyers), mabilis ang proseso ng mga kaso.

  25. baycas says:

    PAGHAHAMBING

    2012 Fight: Chief Executive vs Chief Justice
    2013 Fight: Senate President vs Senators

    2012 Chief Justice
    2013 Senate President (Chief of Staff)

    2012 SC Resolution hiding SALN
    2013 Concurrent Resolution of Both Houses hiding true expenditures

    2012 and 2013 Corruption

    2012 and 2013 :mad: :cry: :shock: :eek: (emotions running high)

  26. baycas says:

    PAGHAHAMBING

    2012 Fight: Chief Executive vs Chief Justice
    2013 Fight: Senate President vs Senators

    2012 Chief Justice
    2013 Senate President (Chief of Staff)

    2012 SC Resolution hiding SALN
    2013 Concurrent Resolution of Both Houses hiding true expenditures
    2012 and 2013 Corruption

    2012 and 2013 :mad: :cry: :shock: :eek: (emotions running high)

  27. Mel says:

    FOI Bill finally tackled at House

    MANILA, Philippines — The Freedom of Information Bill was finally tackled at the House of Representatives on Monday.By Karen Boncocan. INQUIRER.net
    6:23 pm | Monday, January 28th, 2013

    Read the article at http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/348509/foi-bill-finally-tackled-at-house

  28. Victin Luz says:

    To CPMERs: Ang sinasabi ko po sa inyong BONUSES and other PERKs na tinatanggap ng mga DETAILED COA personnels to other Government Agencies ay galing sa PONDO ng Agencies where they are DETAILED. BAWAL po Ito kasi DOBLE ang KUBRA ng BONUS nila, kasi binibigyan din sila ng mga BONUSES ng COA mismo.

    Technical Malversation daw ito sabi ng ating mga ABOGADO… Double Compensation din o GRAFT ang kaso ng taga COA dito……Magtanung po kayo sa inyo inyong SECTOR Kung totoo ang sinasabi ko mga CPMERs.

    tatahimik iyan mga COA assigned kasi halos lahat ay natanggap ng BAWAL na EXTRA BONUS.

    • pelang says:

      During my time, up to 1986, wala talaga kaming tinatanggap. I think from 1980 tinigil na ng mga corporations dahil nagre: reklamo ang mga local and national agencies. But i heard they revived it sometime in the late 90′s. I should know i had contacts with some colleagues who were later on assigned at gsis for example, they were able to collect payback bonuses which were temporary held (bale ina-accrue nila as savings meaning they are continued to be included in the budget of the corporation waiting for the greenlight at the central office to allow it to be given. Siguro, pumayag na ang central office na ibigay ang allowance sa mga coan’s na assigned sa conrporation. I don’t really know. It must be investigated because they’re not supposed to receive these allowances precisely because they are supposed to be independent.

      • Victin Luz says:

        Lumala @pelang noong panahon ni GLORYA,…..in order for a resident COA to approved payment of BONUSES for JOB ORDER employees with no employees – employers relationship taken from income of a State University ( not allowed by LAW as it was not one of the power of the Board of Regents to approve/release the same,)

        They ( COA ) were given BONUSES to keep silent on the wrong disbursement. Journalist can call State Universities and ask about this wrong doings. Only a few are following the LAW.

  29. Victin Luz says:

    To CPMERs: Ang sinasabi ko po sa inyong BONUSES and other PERKs na tinatanggap ng mga DETAILED COA personnels to other Government Agencies ay galing sa PONDO ng Agencies where they are DETAILED. BAWAL po Ito kasi DOBLE ang KUBRA ng BONUS nila, kasi binibigyan din sila ng mga BONUSES ng COA mismo.

    Technical Malversation daw ito sabi ng ating mag ABOGADO… Double Compensation din o GRAFT ang kaso ng tag a COA dito……Magtanung po kayo sa inyo inyong SECTOR Kung totoo ang sinasabi ko mga CPMERs.

    tatahimik iyan mga COA assigned kasi halos lahat ay natanggap ng BAWAL na EXTRA BONUS.

  30. Mel says:

    Senator P Lacson, who chairs the Senate Accounts Committee, agreed to open up its books and “… “effectively repealed” Concurrent Resolution 10, which allows lawmakers to account for their expenses only through a certification”.

    “We can also formalize the rescission of the concurrent resolution by way of another resolution,” he said.

    ‘Ceasefire’ as Senate agrees to open books for audit

    by Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News
    Posted at 01/28/2013 6:22 PM
    Updated as of 01/28/2013 6:22 PM

    MANILA – After a week of bruising word wars among senators over the use of the Senate’s funds, they have agreed to a “ceasefire,” Sen. Panfilo Lacson said.

    At the same time, they will also comply with a request from the Commission on Audit (COA) to have the chamber’s expenses audited, and begin to liquidate their maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE) through receipts and not just certifications.

    Senators reached these agreements in a closed-door meeting on Monday, January 28.

    “Napag-usapan din na ceasefire na muna,” Lacson said after Monday’s caucus. “Pero ang problema, ang mga wala diyan, baka hindi sila abot ng agreement na may ceasefire.”

    One of those absent in the meeting was Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, who criticized Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile for his distribution of the Senate’s savings allegedly as cash gifts to senators, and against whom Lacson plans to file a case for misuse of Senate funds.

    Lacson said the Senate has no choice but comply with COA’s request, which was made through a letter by its chairperson, Ma. Gracia M. Pulido Tan.

    In the letter, Tan cited COA’s constitutional mandate to audit the expenses of all government agencies.

    “We seek your assistance in making available to us, in the soonest possible time, all papers, documents and information in your possession or care as Chairman of the Committee on Accounts, particularly those bearing on the augmentation and realignment of Senate funds, as well as the use/s to which the MOOE given to members of the Senate have been devoted, so that we can forthwith carry out a ‘no-holds barred’ audit of the Senate finances,” she wrote.

    Lacson, who chairs of the accounts committee, said the required documents have been prepared. The initial batch of documents that will be submitted to COA covers the years 2010 to 2012, while those dating back to 2007 will also be released at a later time.

    “Today or tomorrow, the accounting office will be ready to submit the initial batch of documents,” he told reporters

    “We have to comply, even the House. We’ll all have to comply.”

    CONCURRENT RESO REPEALED

    In deciding to change the way they liquidate their MOOE, Lacson said senators “effectively repealed” Concurrent Resolution 10, which allows lawmakers to account for their expenses only through a certification that says the money was used properly without the need to present receipts. But they would have to inform members of the House, he added.

    “We can also formalize the rescission of the concurrent resolution by way of another resolution,” he said.

    Lacson said the House initiated the resolution in 2011 because it had problems with its resident auditor. Although liquidation through certification is not allowed by law, he said it found “legal cover” through the resolution that both the House and the Senate adopted.

    Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano had earlier called for an audit of the Senate’s expenses by a private firm. He has publicly attacked Enrile because of the latter’s alleged unfair distribution of additional MOOE to senators from the Senate’s savings last year: all but 4 senators, including Cayetano, received P1.6 million in additional funds.

    Lacson pointed out, however, that the budget law does not authorize the Senate to pay for a private auditor. He also said Tan’s letter makes it clear that only COA can audit government agencies.

    “Mahirap talagang i-justify,” he said. “Walang makakapigil kung gustong ipa-audit sa private auditing firm. Pero hindi puwedeng gastusan ng pondo ng gobyerno.”

    Cayetano will file this week a resolution calling for a parallel audit of the Senate’s expenses by COA and a private firm.

    He had argued that COA is susceptible to pressure from lawmakers because their budget goes through Congress for approval and its officials need to be confirmed by Commission on Appointments, which is composed of senators and congressmen.

    • Mel says:

      Above source: ‘Ceasefire’ as Senate agrees to open books for audit by Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News
      Posted at 01/28/2013 6:22 PM
      Updated as of 01/28/2013 6:22 PM

    • curveball says:

      Magandang balita ito kung mag-audit ang COA sa mababa at mataas na kapulungan.
      Ang result ba kaya ay ipapakita nila sa atin pagkatapos? O sila-sila na lang ang maguusap? Kung may anumalya na makita, may kakasuhan kaya?

      • Mel says:

        Mas mainam kung parallel audit by COA and one from a blue chip private accounting firm (e.g. SGV).

        Ang audit tingin lang at markado for Senate paper piles, anu ang rules sa mga titles or references of claims? Pa pag aralan pa iyan kung talagang mausisa ang processo ng audit. The Senate may have written or unwritten rules after so many years of wanton claims for reimbursements or payments by mere certification. Loose loose ends.

        JPE as senate pres is alarmed by these development, especially if a private firm is commissioned. Big monies are involved and laid back or relaxed processes of claiming payments.

        JOINT AUDIT NA LANG. Pareho naman din silang mangangapa sa dilim sa umpisa. Iyong irreconcilable volumes, subject for further investigation para mabilis ang preliminary report. Matagal ang field authentication to verify the many claims.

        Cayetano seeks parallel audit of Senate funds

        By Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News
        Posted at 01/29/2013 5:34 PM
        Updated as of 01/29/2013 5:34 PM

        MANILA, Philippines – Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano on Tuesday filed a resolution calling on the Senate to authorize a joint audit by the Commission on Audit (COA) and a private firm of its expenses.

        Cayetano insisted that nothing should prevent the private sector from looking into the Senate’s finances, which recently caused rifts among senators.

        Senate accounts committee chair Panfilo Lacson had said the Senate is not authorized to pay for a private auditor, but Cayetano believes otherwise.

        “We just have to justify it,” Cayetano told reporters. “If it’s for a public purpose, which is accountability and transparency, why shouldn’t it be authorized?”

        In Resolution 934, Cayetano cited the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, which mandates government officials to maintain the principle of public accountability.

        read the rest at http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/01/29/13/cayetano-seeks-parallel-audit-senate-funds

        @curveball , ang iyong tanong, “Kung may anumalya na makita, may kakasuhan kaya?” I doubt it. A senator can make complaints (SC or Ombudsman), successful prosecution? Slim.

    • Cha says:

      “Although liquidation through certification is not allowed by law, he said it found “legal cover” through the resolution that both the House and the Senate adopted.” – Lacson

      So they gave themselves permission to do something not allowed by law by simply agreeing among themselves that this is the way it will be done henceforth? Why does that sound anomalous to me?

      • Mel says:

        IT is anomalous (in my opinion).

        Only by a concurrent resolution by both Houses it gave it a lawful color.
        In their practice and implementation, was it legal?

        Let’s see what COA reports after (with or without a parallel or joint audit with a private firm)

        - ‘COA says MOOE not a discretionary fund’ (from newsinfo inquirer net/345991/coa-says-mooe-not-a-discretionary-fund)

        • baycas says:

          IT IS REALLY ANOMALOUS.

          As pointed out by @Rene-Ipil which I emphasized in Comment No. 107, a mere Concurrent Resolution CANNOT be enforced as a law.

          Thus, the liquidation by way of certification is WITHOUT legal basis. Also, as can be read in that concurrent resolution (Comment No. 99.3), since time immemorial up to the present, the COA has consistently allowed it.

          Now, the funds aligned and realigned as MOOE of Congress (upper and lower) are WITHOUT receipts.

          According to COA, a staggering 4.9B pesos of MOOE are WITHOUT receipts.

          Either a private auditor or COA will not be able to account for what the lawmakers spent in the past!

          • Mel says:

            True.

            To collect, collate and sort through their Certificates (Certifications) on file over the years is a long, long process. Still, COA may opt to request the House members to justify their Certificates by way of proofs. That remains to be seen and subject to availability. Their Certificates submitted are material documents stored or archived for records keeping.

            By COA’s recent request granted by the Senate thru Sen P Lacson’s initiative, how many did each Senator liquidate their funds by way of Certifications since they commenced office? Follow up question; was it fair and square or even for all Sens, or close with the Reps?

            “According to COA, a staggering 4.9B pesos of MOOE are WITHOUT receipts.” So they did some work previously, and allowed it to continue in spite of… They share the blame, … went unreported (at least publicly for sometime) until the recent squabble of unequal Christmas bonuses that it became public knowledge of the ‘anomaly’.

            Why involve a private auditing firm filed recently by Sen A Cayetano? Did COA’s previous work satisfactory? I rest my case.


            - ‘COA says MOOE not a discretionary fund’ (from newsinfo inquirer net/345991/coa-says-mooe-not-a-discretionary-fund)

  31. baycas says:

    CONGRATULATIONS, @Rene-Ipil. This is a EUREKA moment…

    A “eureka” moment for the legislators.

    Hats off to @Rene-Ipil in clarifying things. Here is what he pointed out (as copy-pasted from senatedotgovdotph as regards Legislative Process):

    2. Joint Resolutions

    A joint resolution, like a bill, requires the approval of both houses and the signature of the President. It has the force and effect of a law if approved. There is no real difference between a bill and a joint resolution. The latter generally is used when dealing with a single item or issue, such as a continuing or emergency appropriations bill. Joint resolutions are also used for proposing amendments to the Constitution.

    3. Concurrent Resolutions

    A concurrent resolution is usually designated in the Senate as S. Ct. Res. It is used for matters affecting the operations of both houses and must be passed in the same form by both of them. However, they are not referred to the President for his signature, and THEY DO NOT HAVE THE FORCE OF LAW. Concurrent resolutions are used to fix the time of adjournment of a Congress and to express the “sense of Congress” on an issue.

    http://www.senate.gov.ph/about/legpro.asp

    @Rene-Ipil,

    So, does it mean PH Congress (both upper and lower houses) is “out of order” in invoking the law as regards “liquidation by way of certification”?

    Reading the definition of “Concurrent Resolutions”, shall we now say that PH Congress has NO SENSE???

  32. Vibora says:

    Mithi
    Merong ngayong insidente, nagulat ang mga botante,
    Perang laan sa nabakante, nitong ating Presidente,
    Meron kaya itong basbas, ng DBM o gabinete,
    Mailipat, iaabante, patungo sa MOOE.

    Mago na si Baycas, meron siyang inilabas,
    Nalaman din sa wakas, kung nasaan ang butas,
    Mga apo ni barabas, iyong mga hudas,
    Binubutasan ang batas, pera ng bayan mawaldas.

    Kalesa ba’y kailangan, kung ang kabayo’y lumisan,
    Kutsero lang ang naiwan, pasahero’y naglayasan,
    Meron pa bang dahilan, halal na mga kawatan,
    Lubos na pagkatiwalaan, nitong mga taong bayan.

    Mithiin ko’y wagas, huwag biglang mautas,
    Mga manggagatas, sa kalabaw ng mga pantas,
    Malagyan ng posas, at humalik sa rehas,
    Yumukod sa batas, magbago ng landas.

  33. baycas says:

    LIQUIDATION BY CERTIFICATION*

    WHEREAS, in recognition of the delicate and unique nature of the functions, operational and organizational structures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Commission on Appointments and the Senate and House Electoral Tribunals, the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification, duly signed by each Senator and Member of the House of Representatives, that such amounts allocatild to each Member of Congress as part of their Maintenance imd Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) were utilized or expenlied in the performance of their legislative functions;

    - CONCURRENT RESOLUTION No.10

    CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MAINTAINING THE PREVAILING SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND LIQUIDATION OF THE RESPECTIVE BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS OF EACH MEMBER OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS CLASSIFIED AND CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING RULES

    This concurrent resolution or joint resolution was signed by SP Enrile and SOTH Belmonte on July 25, 2011.

    —–
    *NASA ibaba na ang web address ng dokumento na ito kaya lang nasa ere pa bago ma-upload dito sa blog.

    Mangyari lang na magkasya muna sa kapirasong sipi ng Joint Resolution na kasalukuyang mainit na pinag-uusapan.

    Ito na marahil ang magsesertipika na i-”liquidate” na ang mga may kagagawan nito. Walang transparency at accountability dito.

    Hep, teka muna…ang sabi…

    the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification

    COA consistently allowed it…Hmmm…

    • baycas says:

      LIQUIDATION BY CERTIFICATION*

      WHEREAS, in recognition of the delicate and unique nature of the functions, operational and organizational structures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Commission on Appointments and the Senate and House Electoral Tribunals, the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification, duly signed by each Senator and Member of the House of Representatives, that such amounts allocatild to each Member of Congress as part of their Maintenance imd Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) were utilized or expenlied in the performance of their legislative functions;

      - CONCURRENT RESOLUTION No.10

      CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MAINTAINING THE PREVAILING SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND LIQUIDATION OF THE RESPECTIVE BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS OF EACH MEMBER OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS CLASSIFIED AND CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING RULES

      This concurrent resolution or joint resolution was signed by SP Enrile and SOTH Belmonte on July 25, 2011.

      —–
      *The link to this document was already supplied below.

      Is it high time that the public certifies to “liquidate” all wrongdoers?

      Look, the COA consistently allowed such practice. The current system of liquidation by way of certification ESCAPES transparency and accountability.

      Thank you, Gutter, for bringing this up…stinking as it may be, quality improvement on the “bulok” current system must now be done!

      • curveball says:

        Pero parang nabasa ko na sinabi ng COA head na simula pa nuon ay ganito na ang gawa nila.

        Nagtuturuan na sila kung sino ang nagsimula? Parang tayo pa mga mamamayan ang pinagiisip nila kung sino ang may sala ano? Kung sino ang nagsimula sya ang dapat sisihin?

        Paano yan dahil sa matagal na pala nakagawian (sa senado at kongreso) ginawan na tuloy ng resolusyon para maging opisyal na ang lahat.

        Di lalo na naging galante ang bawat isa…. PERA NAMIN YANG GINAGASTOS NYO!!
        Kaya wala kayo pakialam kung paano nyo lustayin ang pera ng tao.

        Iimbestigahan ba o hindi? ang sabi ay pagbobotohan pa ng mga senador kung payag na may independent accounting? Teka kinakabahan ako kasi parang ang mangyayari ay… “kukuha sila ng bato na ipukpok sa kanilang ulo” kung meron silang tinatago.

        • Rene-Ipil says:

          Baycas@105.1Enrile‘s ex-cos . . .

          I saw and heard COA Chairman Tan saying during the Jessica Soho interview that COA accepted the liquidation by certification because it has been a practice for a long time, and that there is a LAW allowing such liquidation by certification. I took her words as true knowing his reputation. I was even ready to defend her. But after reading Concurrent Resolution No. 10 signed by Enrile and Belmonte, I think I cannot defend her anymore.

          COA Chairman Grace Pulido-Tan was intellectually dishonest when she said that there is law allowing such liquidation by certification. This explains my observation of her during the interview about her tentative answer to Soho. While she did mention about a joint resolution by congress, she never mentioned about the particular law. As it is now, there is no such law because a law is enacted by congress through specific procedures and then signed into law by the president. None of these constitutional requisites were followed. CR No. 10 is merely a resolution or a manifestation of intent by congress and never enacted as a law. So that such resolution is not binding to COA and the people. Worse, the resolution is in contravention of the mandate of COA.

          The lawmakers even had the temerity to declare that the liquidation of budget allocation on MOOE as classified – meaning at par with confidential and intelligence funds. Since when did the purchase of paper clips and cleaning of toilets become confidential or form part of gathering, processing and dissemination of timely information. Maybe the paper clip was used as part of a bugging devise or the janitor was utilized to eavesdrop on the conversation of peeing visitors and lawmakers.

          • leona says:

            @Rene_Ipil…concurrent Resolution No. 10. What is a ‘resolution’? How is it different from a law?

            xxx The resolution is often used to express the body’s approval or disapproval of something which they cannot otherwise vote on, due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction, or being protected by a constitution. xxx Wikipedia Dictionary.

            …which they cannot otherwise vote on [ because of a contrary provision in the Constitution]

            …Due to the matter being handled by another jurisdiction…meaning a ConConvention via Cha Cha; or

            …being protected by a constitution, [No. 6 SEC. 25 Article VI Constitution on Legislative Department.]

            Another legal fiction and dishonest diversionary squid tactics by Congress. What they cannot do directly is done indirectly. ‘Going around the bush’.

            COA surrendered to Congress! Does it have a good active legal department or none? Congress took it upon itself to ‘audit itself’ by ‘CERTIFICATION!

            Congress extracted all the ‘teeth’ of COA, never replacing it even with false dentures! So, how can COA bite good cooked sweet corns? Lugaw puede!

            COA is all natural gums. No more teeth.

          • Kajames says:

            I think after the Soho interview, the honorable COA Chairperson was interviewed shortly thereafter by another station and there she change her tune somewhat to the effect that COA will do its job as mandated by the constitution. Can’t find interview transcript yet but will keep looking, sorry guys!.

          • pelang says:

            i think, we can consider Ms.Tan-Pulido as mahina ang loob. Talagang takot. Hindi porke nasanayan na, tama na. If it is wrong, then she should have a courage to say this practice is WRONG and it’s got to be STOPPED! If she doesn’t have the courage to do that, then she has to give up the position. Imagine going to national television telling the people, who are we COAn’s to stop this practice of the senate or words to that effect. Aba! Hello Ms. Tan! Head po kayo ng COA! Meron po kayong constitutional power na i-audit ang lahat ng financial activities ng bawat government entity. Before blurting that thing out, dapat pinag-aralan niya muna. Kahit man lang “we’ll look into that” na answer would have been fair enough. Si sir Baycas nga, ang daling naka pag-research na ang resolution ng senado ay hindi tamang batas, at parang i memorandum lang iyon. hindi pa pirmado ng Presidente (buti na lang kundi sabit din si Pnoy).

            • pelang says:

              Excuse me, it was Rene-Ipil who looked it up.sorry.

              • baycas says:

                Thanks, I supplied the link to the Concurrent Resolution No. 10 and posted excerpts and comments.

                @Rene-Ipil said that it’s distinct from a Joint Resolution and is not considered a law.

      • Rene-Ipil says:

        Baycas@104

        I saw and heard COA Chairman Tan saying during the Jessica Soho interview that COA accepted the liquidation by certification because it has been a practice for a long time, and that there is a LAW allowing such liquidation by certification. I took her words as true knowing his reputation. I was even ready to defend her. But after reading Concurrent Resolution No. 10 (signed by Enrile and Belmonte), I think I cannot defend her anymore.

        COA Chairman Grace Pulido-Tan was intellectually dishonest when she said that there is law allowing such liquidation by certification. This explains my observation of her during the interview about her tentative answer to Soho. While she did mention about a joint resolution by congress, she never mentioned about the particular law. As it is now, there is no such law because a law is enacted by congress through specific procedures and then signed into law by the president. None of these constitutional requisites were followed. CR No. 10 is merely a resolution or a manifestation of intent by congress and never enacted as a law. So that such resolution is not binding to COA and the people. Worse, the resolution is in contravention of the mandate of COA.

        The lawmakers even had the temerity to declare that the liquidation of budget allocation on MOOE as classified – meaning at par with confidential and intelligence funds. Since when did the purchase of paper clips and cleaning of toilets become confidential or form part of gathering, processing and dissemination of timely information. Maybe the paper clip was used as part of a bugging devise or the janitor was utilized to eavesdrop on the conversation of peeing visitors and lawmakers.

        • raissa says:

          The joint resolution has the force of a law.

          The Constitution allows Congress to conduct its business its way.

          But in this case, perhaps citizens can question the constitutionality of the joint resolution.

          • Rene-Ipil says:

            Raissa @105.1

            I agree that a joint resolution of congress has the force of law because it bears the approval of the president.But the subject of contention is a concurrent resolution. Thus, it does not have the signature of the president and does not have the force of law.

            According to the website of the Senate of the Philippines, joint resolutions and concurrent resolutions are two types of measures that Congress may consider and act upon. Pertinent portions read, as follows:

            “2. Joint Resolutions

            “A joint resolution, like a bill, requires the approval of both houses and the signature of the President. It has the force and effect of a law if approved. There is no real difference between a bill and a joint resolution. The latter generally is used when dealing with a single item or issue, such as a continuing or emergency appropriations bill. Joint resolutions are also used for proposing amendments to the Constitution.

            “3. Concurrent Resolutions

            “A concurrent resolution is usually designated in the Senate as S. Ct. Res. It is used for matters affecting the operations of both houses and must be passed in the same form by both of them. However, they are not referred to the President for his signature, and they do not have the force of law. Concurrent resolutions are used to fix the time of adjournment of a Congress and to express the “sense of Congress” on an issue.”

            As it is a joint resolution of congress has the force of law if approved by the President. On the other hand, a concurrent resolution (like C. Res. No. 10) does not have the force of law and merely expresses the sense of congress. That is why it is not referred to the president for signature.

            • baycas says:

              CONGRATULATIONS, @Rene-Ipil. This is a EUREKA moment…

              A “eureka” moment for the legislators.

              Hats off to @Rene-Ipil in clarifying things. Here is what he pointed out (as copy-pasted from senatedotgovdotph as regards Legislative Process:

              2. Joint Resolutions

              A joint resolution, like a bill, requires the approval of both houses and the signature of the President. It has the force and effect of a law if approved. There is no real difference between a bill and a joint resolution. The latter generally is used when dealing with a single item or issue, such as a continuing or emergency appropriations bill. Joint resolutions are also used for proposing amendments to the Constitution.

              3. Concurrent Resolutions

              A concurrent resolution is usually designated in the Senate as S. Ct. Res. It is used for matters affecting the operations of both houses and must be passed in the same form by both of them. However, they are not referred to the President for his signature, and THEY DO NOT HAVE THE FORCE OF LAW. Concurrent resolutions are used to fix the time of adjournment of a Congress and to express the “sense of Congress” on an issue.

              @Rene-Ipil,

              So, does it mean PH Congress (both upper and lower houses) is “out of order” in invoking the law as regards “liquidation by way of certification”?

              Reading the definition of “Concurrent Resolutions”, shall we now say that PH Congress has NO SENSE???

              • Rene-Ipil says:

                Baycas@105.1

                Congress is just making a “palusot”. They have lost their sense of what is right or wrong.

            • Mel says:

              @Rene-Ipil

              NICE one! Kudos for your research.

              Hopefully, it raises the ante for COA Chairman Tan to issue a media release to clarify or substantiate what Law was she quoting or referencing it from.

              If there are cross lines (miscommunications) between COA’s mandate with the House of Legislature’s functions on Joint and/or Concurrent Resolutions, then COA has to release what parameters (access and limited authority) it has to audit or exert its mandate to the House.

              Or to put it bluntly, how, where and when are they OFF-Limits from the independent Branch’s financial business accounting affairs.

              Thanks @baycas for flaming the gutter issue.

              BTW, i have been getting these messages again.

              “Error establishing a database connection”

              The cyber cretans and jammers are at work again.

    • pelang says:

      hindi dahilang nakagawiaan na, ipagpapatuloy pa rin. dapat maputol na ito. nakikinig pala ang senado pag tinitira dito. huwag sana natin lubayan hangga’t hindi nagbabago.

  34. baycas says:

    LIQUIDATION BY CERTIFICATION*

    WHEREAS, in recognition of the delicate and unique nature of the functions, operational and organizational structures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Commission on Appointments and the Senate and House Electoral Tribunals, the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification, duly signed by each Senator and Member of the House of Representatives, that such amounts allocatild to each Member of Congress as part of their Maintenance imd Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) were utilized or expenlied in the performance of their legislative functions;

    - CONCURRENT RESOLUTION No.10

    CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MAINTAINING THE PREVAILING SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND LIQUIDATION OF THE RESPECTIVE BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS OF EACH MEMBER OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS CLASSIFIED AND CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING RULES

    This concurrent resolution or joint resolution was signed by SP Enrile and SOTH Belmonte on July 25, 2011.

    —–
    *NASA ibaba na ang web address ng dokumento na ito kaya lang nasa ere pa bago ma-upload dito sa blog.

    Mangyari lang na magkasya muna sa kapirasong sipi ng Joint Resolution na kasalukuyang mainit na pinag-uusapan.

    Ito na marahil ang magsesertipika na i-”liquidate” na ang mga may kagagawan nito. Walang transparency at accountability dito.

    Hep, teka muna…ang sabi…

    the Commission on Audit has consistently allowed the current system of liquidation by way of certification

    COA consistently allowed it…Hmmm…

    • anton says:

      Can a self-serving joint resolution by Senate and Congress supersede COA’s constitutional power, authority and duty to examine, audit and settle all accounts and expenditures of the funds and properties of the Philippine government? Don’t you think the joint resolution is unconstitutional and in violation of the constitutional provision that no law shall be passed exempting any entity of the Government or its subsidiary in any guise whatever, or any investment of public funds, from the jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit?

      • Rene-Ipil says:

        Anton@104.1

        It is not a joint resolution but a concurrent resolution which has no force of law. Please see my explanation @105.1 January 28, 2013 at 2:44PM.

        • curveball says:

          @rene-ipil,

          Maraming salamat sa paliwanag mo at lalo ko nalaman ang tungkol sa issue ng “certification only” na ginagawa ng mga senador at kongresman natin na ibinabatay naman sa ginawa nilang resolution. Na pinagdidikdikan nila na nakagawian na kaya ituloy na lang.

          Pero kung ganito nga ang ibig sabihin nuon ay may karapatan ang COA na magtanong o magimbestiga kung sa tingin nila ay may anumalya ang mga kwenta?

          Pero bakit ang sagot ng COA ay ok na ang “certification only” sa milyon-milyon na gastos/regalo? Ibig ba sabihin di nila nauunawaan ang ibig sabihin ng resolution (o ang sakop lamang nito/o hindi sakop) ?

          Mga taga COA- tanong ko lang sa inyo:
          1. Nang makita nyo ang resolution, naunawaan ba nyo? (na ito ay hindi batas at pwede nyo gawin ang mandato na dapat nyo gawin sa kanila ng walang takot o pangamba)
          2. Natakot ba kayo dahil pirmado ng 2 pinuno ng kapulungan?
          3. O sadyang kasangkot kayo sa mga bigayan ng milyon-milyon kaya hindi nyo pwede isumbong ang patuloy na nangyayari ganito (hindi lang anggi, ulan, bagyo kundi mistulang delubyo sa laki ng pera pinamimigay nyo) taon-taon?

          Nakakainis talaga na malaman na ganito pala sila. Palagi tayong mga tao na nagtratrabaho ng marangal, nasunod sa batas (magbayad ng tamang buwis) ang hindi kasali sa biyaya.

          Manapa, tayo ang ginigisa sa sarili natin mantika… ginagatasan at sinisipsip ang pinaghirapan ng ganuon ganuon lang.

          MAHIYA NAMAN KAYO SA MGA TAO NA NAGPAPASWELDO SA INYO!!!!!!!

      • Victin Luz says:

        @Anton ,….with my experience as Board of Regent of distant State University of the South,…..after my retirement in the Government , ……COA’s so as State University’s Implementing Rules Regulations and Procedure’s although signed by the Speaker of the House ,Senate President , even the Secretariat affixed his/her signature and concurred by our President , that IRR and COA’s guidelines/procedure had the Force of a Law , but the legality or illegality and the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the latter remains the AMBIT/PARLANCE of the Supreme Court to decide.

        One COA rules I still remember was ” a cash advanced made by a government employee must liquidate the same not later than every first 17th day of the year or not later than January 17th of the New Year ” …Failure to liquidate such an amount the COA can file a case against you but the SC has yet decide a case elevated to the SC, so that such COAs rule become a LAW itself.

        For a State University, the most prostituted IRR was the extension of a University President of his/her 4yrs. Ist term that will prolong their retirement age of 70yrs., only now that CHED chair LICUANAN implemented SC ruling that they can no longer be extended ( their Presidency ) after 70yrs.

        Certification if allowed in the Senate and the House , even if approved by the President , the legality or illegality can be questioned at SC.

  35. Rene-Ipil says:

    CPMers, Rolly, Rossi @62.9

    I suggest that the election this year be postponed until we have amended the constitution soonest through a constitutional convention. The task of calling a constitutional convention shall be done by the present congress for this purpose only. Current elective officials shall be in hold-over capacity.

    Let’s elect delegates and amend the constitution declaring the position of justices of the Supreme Court vacant, abolishing the present congress and creating a unicameral assembly whose members shall be elected by regions. Other urgent aspects, i.e. economy and security, maybe considered.

    Reorganizing the Supreme Court has been overdue even before the removal of Corona. In electing the assemblymen by regions both the local and national concerns are given attention in lawmaking. Purely local aspects are left to mayors and governors. Pork barrel is abolished and implementation of projects is done by national and local executives. Autonomous regions would be well defined. Economic flaws are corrected.

    Let us amend the constitution while President Benigno S. Aquino III is the chief executive. This is our only chance to ensure progress and preserve the gains achieved by the present administration.

    I am convinced that PNoy would step down in 2016. So we must have a like-minded chief executive after him.

    • raissa says:

      Sorry, I don’t agree that a unicameral assembly is the solution. And a Con-Con is the solution.

      • Rene-Ipil says:

        Raissa@103.1

        Do you mean that a unicameral body is not a solution while the con-con is a solution? Please clarify.

        Be reminded that the present bicameral congress is the result of one vote majority in the constitutional commission by Cory. The pros and cons are recorded during the deliberation. It appears now that bicameral body is inappropriate based on our sad experience with the present crop of lawmakers. Btw the party list system should be abolished also.To me the most important function of the legislative body is the enactment of the general appropriations law a.k.a. national budget and tax laws where the people are represented equitably at least by region. Without these laws the government will be paralyzed. On the other hand, we have a surfeit of non pecuniary statutes on gerrymandering, renaming streets, cyber crimes, carabao propagation, etc.

        • leona says:

          @Rene_Ipil…can do that but ‘one at the proper time’…The idea is good but not ripe.

          FOI…should be ripe!

          • Rene-Ipil says:

            Leona@103.1

            In that case, let my suggestion serve as a beacon.

            • leona says:

              Your ‘beacon’ will when Cha Cha time comes around, one of these CPMers should be there ‘dancing’ the cha cha as a delegate! With the full support of our many here.

        • Rolly says:

          @Rene-Ipil @leona

          I agree with Rene that charter change should be done this days while Noynoy is the president. His popularity, influence and resolve for a better Philippines would be a component and could be the basis and deciding factor in the minds of the ConCon delegates in crafting a Constitution that is relevant to the times.

          But…….do we really need to change the Constitution just for the sake of change? No matter how good, pertinent and appropriate our Laws are, if the authorities and the people running the governments -be local or national- continue to their wicked ways, our dreams for the betterment of our beloved country shall remain a dream.

          We should draw a Constitution that would be doubly hard to circumvent; must be plain and simple; no catchy words or phrase; no interpretation needed, or minimal if ever. An enabling Law should also be incorporated within to very few selected provisions to free Congress from enacting one that would take decades to fulfill…anti-dynasty for example.

          Below is my reply to Leona 4 days back…at # 13.1 replies…Newbie Senator………

          Rolly says:
          January 25, 2013 at 11:43 am

          @leona

          To me, our Constitution is good enough. Enacting an enabling law is where problem lies, more so, its implementation.

          Radical overhaul of our Constitution is required if ever we decided to change it.
          Maybe, CPMers can draft one and put it up to the ConCon assembly for scrutiny and consideration.

          We dedicate a space…an article of its own that can be visited from time to time in the side, for people to comment , suggest, edit and debate upon. Concurrence of Raissa is of course must be sought first for the needed web space.

          The good starting point could be, the merit and advantages of a Parliamentary system. People (locals or aliens) can voice out their opinions, and further down the track, we bring forth a solid base that would become the foundation of a proposed Constitution.

          My reply to Rene, # 62.9 this article:

          Rolly says:
          January 27, 2013 at 2:56 pm

          @Rene-Ipil

          Or maybe, do away to all the Constitutions we have and edict a new one through a Constitutional Convention.

          Concon Delegates and those who held elective position in the last 100 years shall be precluded from an elective and/or appointive Post 25 years after the ratification of the new Constitution.

    • chit navarro says:

      Let’s just push for the approval of the FREEDOM ON INFORMATION ACT (FOI)

      and let us campaign for TEAM PINOY for the Senate

      para may kasangga si Presidente na maglinis ng baho ng Senado……

      Pwede po ba na magkaroon naman tayo ng mga senador at mga opisyales ng Senado na may puso para sa bayan… at hindi para sa kani-kanilang bulsa lamang…

      • Rene-Ipil says:

        Chit @ 103.2

        I agree. As a palliative.

      • baycas says:

        may bagong survey. di ko lang maiposte now.

        from SWS-Businessworld…

        • Cha says:

          TOP 12 SENATORS
          Per latest Buinessworld-SWS Survey

          1. Legarda
          2. Escudero
          3. Cayetano, A.
          4. Ejercito, J.V.
          5. Honasan
          6. Pimentel
          7. Zubiri
          8. Villar, C
          9. Enrile, J
          10. Trillanes
          11. Poe
          12. Binay, N.

          Next 5:

          13. Angara, S
          14. Gordon
          15. Aquino, B
          16. Magsaysay, J
          17. Madrigal

          Tied at 18-19 : Hontiveros and Maceda

          • Rene-Ipil says:

            Cha@103.2

            Maybe we should vote only for Trillanes, Angara, Aquino, Magsaysay, Madrigal and Hontiveros to dislodge Binay and Enrile. Or maybe the the first four only (TAAM). I also want Madrigal and Hontiveros to win but we must employ doable moves to maximize LPs in the senate. Let’s see our options after the last survey prior to Election Day.

            • Victin Luz says:

              Tama ka sir@Rene, …Trillanes,Angara,Aquino, Magasaysay,Madrigal, Hontiveros ONLY para malaglag ang mga ayaw natin na pumasok….ok sir Hontiveros must win….

          • curveball says:

            Sa akin ay mas maraming LP para maituloy ang naumpisahan ni Pnoy. Yung tira ay sa ibang partido para maging opposition(?).

            1, 2, 3, 6, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18

            Sabi nga lesser evil ang pipiliin. Nakakalungkot isipin na ito na lang ba ang pinakamaganda na pagpipilian?

            Wala ba tayo matatawag na 100% na matalino/magaling, marangal, makatao, at may prinsipyo?

            Meron lang isang tao na pwede ko mailagay dito… si Sec Jesse (RIP) sana kung andito pa sya.

  36. Cha says:

    More on the MOOE , The COA and The Senate : the not so fine print

    From Philstar today (28 Jan)
    Senate barred COA from fund scrutiny
    Christina Mendez
     Headlines, News (link to follow)

    Highlights.: 

    1. The COA raised concern about the practice of certification only for MOOE expenditures in its annual audit in 2011. 

    2. The senators and congressmen adopted resolutions to protect the said practice in 2011 and 2012. In other words, the state auditors were simply barred from looking closely at the way those funds are used. They win. The people lose. 

    Mendez writes:

    On July 25, 2011, the two chambers approved Concurrent Resolution No. 10, recognizing the “delicate and unique nature of the functions, operational and organizational structures of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the Commission on Appointments, and the Senate and House Electoral Tribunals.

    The resolution declared that the COA “has consistently allowed” Congress to continue “the current system of liquidation by way of certification,” which recognizes that lawmakers have utilized their MOOE “in the performance of their legislative functions.”

    This system, according to Resolution No. 10, “is in keeping with the nature of the performance by the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives and their respective committees of their legislative, oversight, and constituent functions and responsibilities.”

    With the concurrence of the House, which has the power of the purse, the Senate declared that the system of financial accounting and liquidation by each lawmaker is “consistent with applicable accounting and auditing rules” and “shall be maintained.”

    Senators adopted the resolution on Aug. 24, 2011; the House followed on Feb. 1, 2012.

    3. The Senate MOOE budget in 2012 is a whopping P1,462,678,000!!!!  broken down as follows:

    -P442,415,000 was for locally funded projects under the oversight committees 

    -P589,865,000 was for general administration and support

    -P430,578,000 for operations or legislative services.

    More than a billion pesos the senators have at their disposal and all they need to access it is their precious signature. How much is a signature worth?

    4. The MOOE allocation in the budget has doubled during the time of Enrile, as noted by Cayetano in his controversial privilege speech.  From P759 million in 2008 to P1.57 billion for 2013.

    The pig is well and truly fattened.  

    To market to market, to buy a fat pig
    Home again, home again,
    Jiggety jig ….. 

    • drill down says:

      lawmakers conniving to defeat checks and balances, one of the most important features of the constitution, in the government.

    • THANK you CHA for fleshing out some black bones of contention on
      my posting about COA.

    • curveball says:

      Kaya pala lakas ng loob nila magbigayan ng cash gifts at magastahan ng pera na hindi naman kanila (pero kung sarili nila yan sigurado ako mga tira-tira yan) kasi pala walang pwede mag-kwenta o magtanong sa kanila.
      At kaya din pala walang ingay ang COA para silang mga taga labas lang. Kunwari checking ng mga gastos pero hanggang kwenta at sulat lang pala.
      Sabi nga ng isang poster… tingin lang sa langit. Kahit na punong puno ng anomalya ang kwenta nasa harap mo, tingin lang sa langit kasi ala ka magagawa para kwestyunin ang kagustuhan ng mga senador at kongresman.
      Nakagawa ng Resolution na self serving.
      Mabuhay kayo… mga mandaraya!!!!!!
      Mga kawatan!!!!
      Di pala sila mga bobo tulad ng sinabi ko dati. Mga matatalino pala sila dahil ang galing gumawa ng batas… na sila lang ang makikinabang.
      Mga tuso!!!!!
      PERA NAMIN ANG GINAGASTA NYO… DI BA PWEDENG TIPIRIN NYO NAMAN?
      Kami nga puro pagtitipid ang ginagawa namin para lang may matira sa sweldo at kinaltas na ang tax namin.

      • pinay710 says:

        talaga naman sobra sa PINAKA SOBRA na abuso. yung mga ibang empleyado ng pamahalaan talga kayod marino. tapos sila na ang sarap ng kinalalagyan nila na opisina eh mga nagpapasasa ng husto. HINDI MAKATARUNGAN ANG GINAGAWA NG MGA NANUNUNGKULAN SA BAYAN.

        PANGULONG NOYNOY ALAM MO BA NA MASYADONG INAABUSO ANG MGA MAHIHIRAP NA BOSS MO? PINAGHIHIRAPANG BUWIS NA KINAKALTAS NA AGAD SA MGA SUELDO PINAGPAPASASAAN NG IILAN?

        KAYA HINDI UMAASENSO ANG PILIPINAS TAYO TAYO NAGGUGULANGAN. SINASAMANTALA ANG MGA MAMAMAYAN.

        MANGAMATAY NA SANA KAYONG LAHAT NA MGA KURAKOT!!
        DAIG NYO PA AND DIOS SA KAPANGYARIHAN!!

        • pinay710 says:

          kaya nga ba tama lang ang mga sinasabi ng mga kaibigan ko kung kinukuwentuhan ko sila ng mga pangyayari sa senado. sabi nila. “AY NAKU HUAG NA TAYONG MAKIALAM DYAN!! KAHIT NA ANO PA ANG GAWIN NATIN TULOY PA DIN ANG MGA KATIWALIAN SA PAMAHALAAN NATIN. MATANDA NA TAYO HANGGANG NGAYON GANYAN PA DIN NG GANYAN. DAMI NANG NAGDAAN NA ADMINISTRASYON WALA NAMAN NANGYAYARI. BASTA MAGHAGNAPBUHAY NA LANG TAYO. HINDI NAMAN NILA TAYO PAKIKINGGAN. KAHIT NA SINO PA ANG IBOTO NATIN GANAYAN PA DIN NG GANYAN ANG MANGYAYARI.”

          kaya walang PILIPINO ang nakikialam dahil sa kalakaran na ng Pilipinas ang ganitong uri ng gobyerno. puro PAGNANAKAW SA KABAN NG BAYAN.

  37. Cha says:

    Tuloy ang boksingan ng mga Senador!
    (with thanks to @Mel for the links he posted at 90.4)

    1. Pre-fight highlights: Lacson Shadow Boxing

    Sabi ni Lacson, sana naman daw pumayag si SP JPE at ang kanyang mga kapwa senador na buksan ng kanilang mga libro upang magkabistuhan na kung paano ba talaga ginagastos ang mga pondo ng mga senador.

    Pulos suntok sa hangin, walang lumalanding. Pakiusap ang dating. Pero sa huli ang sabi, hindi naman daw niya talaga sila kaya pilitin. Epal lang pala. Gusto lang makisali sa usapan at magmukhang kakampi ng bayan.

    2. The Main Event : Lacson vs. Miriam Santiago

    Heto ang mas may bagsik na labanan sana. Mukhang may patama na talaga ang suntok ni Lacson. Hindi lang lucky punch, ika nga.

    Eto daw si Miriam, merong satellite office na ang nagbabagayad ng renta, siyemore taung bayan. Galing sa pondo bilang senador baga. P840,000 a year ang renta. Ang kontratang pinirmahan ng senadora ay para sa taong 2010 hanggang 2014. So aabutin ng kulang kulang sa apat na milyon ang makukubra sa gobyero sa buong kapanahunan ng kontrata. Ang pangalan ng building NARSAN, short for Narciso Santiago! yung kanyang ASAWA. In other words, kaniya rin yung building!!

    Graft daw ito, sigaw ngayon ni Lacson. Oo nga naman, di ba.

    Pero nang tanungin kung sasampahan niya ng kaso ang kapwa senador, saka na raw pag gumaling na sa sakit niya yung huli.

    Ayayay, padaplis lang pala uli ang suntok ni Pilo!

    Suntok sa hangin walang aanihin.

    • romy says:

      Tama naman ang paliwanag ni Sen. Lacson — pabayaan na munang gumaling sa sakit si Sen MDS bago sampahan ng kaso. Sa gayon, palagay ko’y tatagal ang sakit ni Sen MDS upang matapos na ang termino ni Sen Lacson… at saka na siya gagaling ang babalik sa Senado upang inisin muli si SP JPE.
      Madagdag ko naman ang tanaw ko sa ipinipilit ni Sen. APC na dapat private auditor ang mag-audit ng Senado. Ipinalalabas niya na sangkot din ang COA sa mga katiwalian sa paggasta ng mga senador kasi napagtatakpan ang tunay na maling paggamit ng mga pondo. Sa paliwanag naman ni Sen Lacson, hindi maaaring gamitin ang pondo ng gobyerno sa pag-audit, kasi nga naman nandiyan ang COA na ang talagang dapat gawin ay mag-audit ng gobyerno. Kung talagang ipipilit ni Sen APC na pribadong autit ang kailangan, bakit kaya hindi mag-volunteer ang mga mayayamang corporation na sila ang gagasta sa ilalim ng kanilang CSR (corporate social responsibility) at hingin ang pahintulot ng Senado sa ganitong paraan. (May tututol din sa paraang ito, kasi parang magiging daan din ito ng paggigipit ng mga corporation sa Kongreso.)
      Sa kabuuan, kailangang bigyan ng tiwala ang COA sa kanilang gagawin. Ang panukala ni Sen APC ay tuwirang sinisira ang tiwala sa lahat ng sangay ng gobyerno. Sino pa ang ating paniniwalaan?.

  38. -->

Do share your thoughts:

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>