Dear Kevin,I am so glad of your being very active at your age in the choice of our new president in 2010. I've read all the updates or events that were sent to me through the ' MAR ROXAS for PRESIDENT in 2010', as we need these informations during our gatherings and interaction with other people. You didn't go wrong picking up on ' MAR ROXAS ', for he's the perfect choice.His untainted image as a 'person' has put him on top, over all other presidential wannabees. Filipinos are already sicked and tired of dirty, controversial, and opportunistic people in government.Barring all unforeseen situations in 2010, Villar is not only a possible opponent of our candidate, MAR ROXAS. Definitely he will be one of them, for he has to hang on his name as senate president, though by many, he was labeled as a 'non-performing asset' of the upper house.Keep up the good job, Kevin. We need more energetic young people like you. I have e-mailed Senator Mar Roxas about the sending of his activities in my e-mail through the ' MAR ROXAS for PRESIDENT in 2010', and we look forward to establishing more support groups in his behalf, in this very critical 2010 battle.It's nice to know you and more to our E-mail communications. GOD bless.................
“Ipinapakita lang nito na ang pamahalaan ngayon ay bising-bisi sa pag-cover up ng mga kontrobersiya, samantalang hindi naman nito naaatupag ang pagbibigay ng agarang ginhawa sa taumbayan sa kabila ng nagtataasang presyo ng langis at ng iba pang bilihin,” he said.The reported 2.5% rise in poverty incidence from 2003 to 2006 from 24.4% to 26.9%, he said, clearly showed a disconnect between the financial markets and the grass roots economy, and a widening gap between rich and poor. From 4 million poor families in 2003, this went up to 4.7 million in 2006.
“I urge the government to look at these statistics seriously and not brush off the issue by harping on the rising stock market and rising peso, which has also been hurting our exporters and dollar earning OFWs,” Roxas said.
He said his Senate Bill No. 1962, seeking a suspension on the value-added tax (VAT) on oil products, could provide relief to the people by reducing costs in the consumption of oil products, which are a necessity in the daily life of Filipinos. The measure would remove P4 of VAT per liter of diesel and P65 of each LPG tank.
“Maantig na sana ang pamahalaan sa araw-araw na hinaing ng taumbayan na dulot ng pagtaas ng presyo ng langis, at makita nilang hindi sapat ang ginagawa nito ngayon, na nauuwi lang sa “token-ism,” he said.He noted that world crude reached a record $103 per barrel last week, and local companies have raised their prices by P0.50 per liter, with the government also raising oil tariffs from 1% to 2%.
“Let’s push for real and relevant solutions to aid Filipinos and boost their weakened spending power,” Roxas said.
“It was only last month that the government committed to finding ways to cope with the problems of high oil prices. They apparently have resorted to tokenisms such as tariff reductions that have had little impact on alleviating the plight of our people,” he said.Roxas’ bill is being deliberated at the Senate Committee on Ways and Means, and a counterpart bill has been filed at the House of Representatives by fellow Liberal Party stalwart and Cavite Rep. Joseph Emilio “Jun” Abaya.
“I also have strong feelings about the need to uphold the Senate's institutional independence and autonomy, especially at this time when it remains as one of the last bastions of accountability. But these are extraordinary times requiring extraordinary solutions that may demand flexibility and inter-branch consensus.
“It is rare for the Supreme Court to propose such a compromise to help both itself and the Senate to resolve a dilemma, sharpen the issues and lead the people to a proper understanding of the legal and political landscape. Unlike the executive branch, it is apparent that the SC acted on good faith in offering this compromise.
“We must work together with the Supreme Court to remove all obstacles to arrive at the truth soonest and enforce public accountability with an administration that is already reeling from high levels of mistrust from our citizenry.
“Let us not summarily reject a legitimate compromise with the High Court that would ultimately cast light on the intricate issue of Executive Privilege, especially as it impinges upon the commission of a crime, covering up a crime, or the imperatives of national security and high diplomacy.
“Our most immediate objective is to have former NEDA Secretary Romulo Neri testify in the Senate and strengthen the thread of stories already credibly told by Jun Lozada.This is logically the next chapter in the Senate probe and should not be delayed at the risk of more public disillusionment.
“Yes, we are not assured that Neri, this time around, will tell the whole truth. However, we leave it to his conscience to block the truth through executive privilege. Justices of the SC have clearly stated that this presidential privilege cannot be used to cover-up a crime.
“The ZTE-NBN debacle has opened a learning process for Philippine democracy and let us grasp every opportunity to make the system work. Because if we do not, the result is a nation in a state of paralysis, with three branches of government preoccupied with the multi-million dollar ZTE scandal.”
Roxas, co-chair of the Joint Senate Committees probing the NBN deal, said he believes the high court offered a “reasonable and practical way forward” by offering a compromise: to let the former Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Neri appear before the Senate, but the “three questions” where Neri previously raised executive privilege would be “deemed asked.”
“I find this a reasonable, practical way forward. This is an assertion of the Senate’s right to call on resource persons in the conduct of its hearings. It also prescribes a sound process for the Court to look at how the Office of the President uses executive privilege,” Roxas said, adding that this spares everyone the need to keep coming back to the Supreme Court for guidance every time executive privilege is invoked.
“I appreciate the desire of the Supreme Court to prescribe a fair and transparent process in anticipation of further questions that Secretary Neri will likely refuse to answer. Dahil malinaw ang proseso, lalong titibay at lalalim ang resulta ng hearings ng Senado,” he said.
“We hope that Secretary Neri will supply more missing pieces in the jigsaw puzzle. It is now his turn to show he is worthy of the considerations given to him and not botch this opportunity to come clean,” he said.
“Kataka-taka na kahit ang mismong abogado ni Secretary Neri ay hindi pa nakikita ang kontrata ng ZTE deal at hindi alam ang proseso na pinagdaanan nito,” he said.
The compromise deal, which was discussed in a closed-door session late Tuesday night among the Supreme Court justices, the senators and their counsels, and the counsels of Neri, will be taken up with all senators today to come up with a common stand.
Neri would also be allowed to once more invoke executive privilege in refusing to ask questions, but the Senate will be free to cite him in contempt. The Senate will also be allowed to contest all of Neri’s other claims of executive privilege, for these to be decided once and for all by the Supreme Court.
Q: What is your reaction to Chief Justice Reynato Puno’s proposal for Neri to attend a hearing on Friday, without being asked three questions pertaining to his conversations with the President on the NBN deal?
MAR: I was there when it was proposed last night, and at about 10:00, we asked to be taken in to the justices’ chamber in order to clarify this. Senators Cayetano, Pangilinan and myself, together with Senators Pia Cayetano and Noynoy Aquino, clarified exactly what the contents of the proposal were, and to a layman, this is basically what it is: The three questions are already before the Supreme Court, Neri having invoked executive privilege. So the Supreme Court is saying: If there are other questions, we will ask these and allow Neri to answer them or not answer them, invoking the right against self-incrimination or executive privilege or whatever, and then if we disagree with those invocations,we take them back to the Supreme Court, for them to decide all these questions including the original three all at the same time. That in essence is the compromise.
In other words, the Supreme Court is saying, “Look, if you’re going to wait for us to rule on these three questions, it might take us a week, two weeks, three weeks, one month, we don’t know.” Meanwhile, no other questions are being asked.” So they said, “Why don’t you already ask all your other questions. Anyway, these three questions are already before us, you have already objected to them, they’re now before the Supreme Court, and we will rule on these three questions. Why don’t you ask all your other questions so that when we rule on these three, we will not only be ruling on these three but on all other invocations of executive privilege that Secretary Neri may do in the course of answering other questions.
We tried to contact our colleagues last night to get a consensus on the proposal, but we were unable to contact many of them because it was already 10:30 at night, so we will present it to the Senate this afternoon.
Q: But aren’t your other questions premised on the first three questions?
MAR: That is possible, but there are also a whole host of other questions that we can ask that are not related thereto or that are leading up to those three questions and the rest. We are not precluded from asking the follow-up questions once the Supreme Court rules on the three questions.
When I went home midnight last night, I sat down and reflected on it, and I thought, what are some of the questions that I will ask? Before I fell asleep at around 1:30 or 2 a.m. this morning, I was able to come up with 30 questions different from the three. So in fact, through your program, let’s ask the citizenry to ask all the questions that you want asked of Neri other than those three, and we will see how many times he invokes executive privilege, how many times he hides behind that cover, so will see whether in fact the invocation is part of a coverup or really a sincere effort to protect private conversations. I myself have 30 questions, I’m sure those listening now might come up with five, ten, 15, 20 questions.Send them all in, you can send them to me, and we will ask them.
Q: Does this mean you’re inclined to accept the compromise?
MAR: The counsel for Neri gave assurances without committing that Neri is agreeable. We in the Senate will present it to the senators this afternoon. From my point of view, as you can imagine, I find this to be a reasonable, practical way of moving forward. We will just present it to the Senate, it’s very easy, yes or no. On the face of it, I think there is basis to be confident that we will agree.
Q: Would you really need to furnish the Supreme Court all these questions? Won’t it prolong the process?
MAR: It really doesn’t. Let’s say we don’t agree to the compromise. Basically the Supreme Court takes one month, so it’s also prolonged for another month. If they rule on the three questions a month from now, when Secretary Neri once more appears, and we ask him a fourth question, he will invoke executive privilege and we will go back to the Supreme Court.
In generality the Supreme Court is saying you can not use executive privilege to cover up a crime, but they were also quite firm in saying the invocation of executive privilege is on a case-to-case basis, question to question or specific conversation to conversation basis. It can not be just “What did you talk about?” open-ended. That’s why rather than risk every question going up to the Supreme Court, on whether this is covered by proper executive privilege or not, the Supreme Court is saying “Ask all your other questions, not just the three questions but 20, 50 questions upon which Secretary Neri invoked.”
Q: How will the Senate decide this afternoon?
MAR: We will be consensus-building, but I understand we will be going into a caucus shortly after session starts. By the way, last night, we already had 12 [senators], but it was a very soft 12, because it’s very hard to convey on telephone what the parameters of the compromise were, so we decided that rather than agree based on a soft 12, let’s present it to everyone, make sure everyone agrees so that we have a firmer agreement that we can bring to the Supreme Court. Assuming that this is accepted this afternoon, and there is agreement with Secretary Neri, Friday is the scheduled appearance [of Neri].
Senator Mar Roxas and the Senate's counsels march to the Supreme Court to defend the people's right to know the truth behind the anomalous National Broadband Network (NBN) deal. Roxas co-chairman of the Joint Senate Committees investigating the ZTE-NBN anomalies, said he believes that the Supreme Court will not side with attempts to conceal a crime committed against the people.
With him are Attorneys Jose Anselmo Cadiz and Carlos Medina, counsels of the Senate during the oral arguments on Tuesday on the executive privilege claim of former Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Romulo Neri over his conversations with the President regarding bribery attempts in relation to the ZTE-NBN deal.
Liberal Party stalwarts attended Tuesday's oral arguments before the Supreme Court on the executive privilege claim of former Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Romulo Neri over his conversations with the President on bribery attempts in relation to the National Broadband Network (NBN) deal.
Aside from Senators Mar Roxas and Rodolfo Biazon—who chair the Joint Senate Panel investigating the NBN with Senator Alan Peter Cayetano—also in attendance are: Senator Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III, (second row) Cavite Rep. Joseph Emilio Abaya, Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupaz, Jr., Oriental Mindoro Rep. Alfonso Umali and former Bukidnon Rep. Nereus Acosta. Liberal Party Chairman and Former Senate President Franklin Drilon, who is not in the picture, also attended the oral arguments.
Roxas said he believes the Supreme Court will not side with attempts to conceal a crime against the people. Also in attendance during the oral arguments are Liberal Stalwarts Senator Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III, former Senate President Franklin Drilon, Cavite Rep. Joseph Emilio Abaya, Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupaz, Jr. and Oriental Mindoro Rep. Alfonso Umali.
MAR: We are petitioners here in this case to define really when Executive Privilege can be properly used. As it is right now, we believe that Executive Privilege is being used to cover up information or to keep information from coming out to the public relative to the anomalies of ZTE-NBN.
Q: Sir, while Senators are coming in full force, we receive word from the lawyer of Secretary Neri that he will not be attending this afternoon’s proceedings, your reactions to that, sir?
MAR: Well, it’s up to him. We are here to fight for our right, our right to know the truth, our right that Executive Privilege not be abused in order to cover up anomalies, our right to ensure that the public interest prevails over personal or individual interests.
Q: Why is it significant Senator Roxas for the Supreme Court to be able to decide on this matter as soon as possible, would you asked SC to decide on this case within the day?
MAR: Well, we don’t expect that they’ll decide this within the day but we would expect and we would hope that they will decide this at the soonest time, in order to avoid precisely the stalemate or the deadlock as between the executive branch and the legislative branch. We have the beginnings of a Constitutional crisis here and this is all burn out because the executive will not release information that properly belongs to the public domain. This information, for example, is the NEDA transcripts on how they were able to decide to go ahead with this NBN-ZTE deal even if it is the complete opposite of what the President herself said was the policy of the government, as recently as October before the approval of this. At that time when the President said that it must be BOT, there must be no government loan, there must be no government guarantee, and the government must not be the principal customer of this project. And then, four or five months later, Abrakadabra bumaliktad na ito. Naging government project ito, nagging government utang ito, nagging may government guarantee ito, at government ang siyang pinakamalaking customer nito. Ano ang nangyari? Anong mirakulo ang nangyari na napaligtad itong government policy na ang Pangulo ang mismong nagsasabi, dumedepensa noong Oktubre at noong pagdating noong Pebrero at Marso ay nabaligtad na?
Q: The discussion on the policy of the government in terms of the ZTE-Broadband deal is actually what Sec. Neri is saying as included in the privilege communications between him and the President which is apparently the Senate is contesting.
MAR: We are contesting that because what possible military, diplomatic or national interest can be protected here? This is a conversation as between Sec. Neri and the President when Sec. Neri informed the President that a bribe was offered into him. So there is no diplomatic, or military, or national interest here. He reported a crime under our Penal Code, the attempted bribery is already a crime. He reported the crime and we wanted to know what’s the President’s response and what was the President’s reaction relative to that report of the crime, that’s the first. Second, what were the deliberations in NEDA? What was the recommendation? What were the considerations that were made that a government policy was overturned in a matter of months in order to accommodate a contract that we are now seen as imbued with anomaly.
“The government—the most potent force to bring change to the lives of people—is locked in a stasis. The three branches of government are now caught in the mess that is the ZTE broadband deal,” he said.He continues to be optimistic that the Supreme Court will decide in favor of the truth and accountability. Roxas, with his co-chairmen in the Senate’s investigation into the NBN, has sought the court to nullify the erroneous invocation of executive privilege by former Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Romulo Neri.
“Sinimulan ito ng ehekutibo, na ngayo’y itinatago ang dumi sa ilalim ng kama. Ang lehislatura, sa pamamagitan ng Senado, inuungkat ang katotohanan. Ngayon, ang Korte Suprema ay kinakailangang magdesisyon para ituwid ang sitwasyon at ibalik sa ayos ang pamahalaan at ang bansa,” he stressed.
“After hearing all the oral arguments, we hope that the Supreme Court will lift the status quo ante order, which will then lead to Secretary Neri’s appearance before the Senate. Kung ano ang sabihin ng Korte Suprema, iyon ay batas,” he said.The co-chairman of the Joint Senate Committees investigating the NBN scandal, said that the administration’s preoccupation to stonewall the truth has also put the economy and the general welfare at risk.
“Secretary Neri can always bank on the Senate’s assistance for his security once he is compelled to testify,” he added.
“The Cabinet is also too preoccupied with managing the Palace stonewall that they have then failed to look after the people’s needs. They have also led economic activity to lean on the side of caution,” he said, noting that bankers are now demanding higher interest rates for treasury bills.Roxas renewed his call to the President to “save the Republic” by telling the truth; revoking Executive Order 464 and ordering all her officials to attend the Senate hearings and submit all documents on the ZTE-NBN deal; and replacing the Ombudsman with a person of credibility and independence.
“Ang presyo ng langis, patuloy pang tumataas, pero walang nagagawa ang pamahalaan para pigilan ito. Itinaas pa ang taripa sa krudo! Gayun din ang presyo ng mga bilihin, tulad ng pan de sal, na inanunsyo nang tataas ang presyo,” he added.
Senator Mar Roxas expressed optimism that the Supreme Court, which is set to hear tomorrow oral arguments on the executive privilege claim of former Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Romulo Neri, will decide in favor of truth and accountability.
This, as the co-chairman of the Senate panel investigating the botched National Broadband Network (NBN) deal with China’s ZTE Corp. continues to call on to the President to “save the Republic,” to “come clean” and stop stonewalling the truth behind alleged anomalies in the ZTE-NBN deal.
“Sa Senado man, sa Korte Suprema o sa anumang larangan, patuloy tayong mananawagan sa administrasyon na tigilan na ang pagiging balakid sa katotohanan,” he said, while stressing that the people would not settle for anything less than a more truthful and transparent government.
“Clearly, the administration could have saved the Supreme Court this undue burden to decide on this case had it simply allowed the truth to come out in the open. But it instead decided to stonewall the people’s righteous demand for the truth,” he stressed.
“Nananawagan ako sa Pangulo: kagyat nang kanselahin ang E.O. 464. Kung wala namang kinatatakutan ang pamahalaan at handa naman itong harapin ang panawagan ng taumbayan para sa katotohanan, bakit kinailangan pang magtatag ng isang komite para ito’y pag-aralan?” he said.
Roxas—together with Senators Alan Peter Cayetano and Rodolfo Biazon, his co-chairmen in the ZTE probe—has filed comments to the petition filed by Neri, and is preparing for oral arguments tomorrow. In their comments, they prayed to the court to nullify Neri’s claim of executive privilege and compel him to testify before the Senate.
“We believe that Secretary Neri erroneously invoked executive privilege, and by doing so, has compromised the independence and powers of the Senate in line with its duty to the people to craft laws to ensure that none of these anomalies will ever take place again,” he said.
Roxas said that the administration has, in many instances already, tested the extent and limits of its powers instead of exercising prudence, compromising the people’s rights in the end. These include the application of Calibrated Preemptive Response to mass protests and the issuance of Presidential Proclamation 1017, which limited the people’s right to expression and the freedom of the press.
