ANC Dateline Philippines

Interview with Congressman Teddy Casino November 18, 2008

Ricky Carandang: Welcome back, lawmakers have just wrap up Day 1 of the House Justice Committee’s hearing on the impeachment complaint. Joining us live from the Batasan Pambansa is Bayan Muna Representative Teddy Casino. Congressman, good afternoon sir!

Teddy Casino: Good afternoon, Ricky!

Ricky Carandang: Sir, sufficient in form, tomorrow the vote on substance but there was a bit to do about whether or not the intervention filed by number of people would be included in the house. That wasn’t in the complaint… that wasn’t resolved. Was it?

Teddy Casino: No, it wasn’t resolved. In fact, we requested the committee to provide us copies of that intervention so that tomorrow we will have a more informed debate on whether to accept or not this intervention from various complainants.

Ricky Carandang: Okay, but as everybody loves to say in the House, Sir. It’s a numbers game and it doesn’t look like the majority is inclined to allow it in.

Teddy Casino: Well, the committee has to make a decision. What we are against is that it was a unilateral action by the committee chairperson Matt Defensor to consider the intervention as prohibited and to return the same to the complainants. We just want that thorough discussion be made because we think that the complainants also have right to be heard in this committee especially the importance of the issue that they are trying to bring out which the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain.

Ricky Carandang: But what was the argument why they wanted to exclude it? And did they exclude it without hearing the arguments of the intervenors? Or did they vote to exclude it on a mere procedural matter?

Teddy Casino: Well it was a mere procedural matter on the technicality that the first complaint was already referred to the committee and therefore one-year ban was already in place. And the chair of the committee considered the intervention as a new complaint. But as was clarified as the chair of the committee on rules Art Defensor, this is not a new complaint. This is an intervention or more generically an amendment to the first complaint which the Justice committee would have jurisdiction over that.

Ricky Carandang: So you seem to be implying that there’s some inconsistencies here with the application of their rules.

Teddy Casino: Yes, because under the rules of criminal procedure, which is supposed to be supplementary to our rules, you can amend the complaint before arraignment. And the president has not be arraigned yet. We have not reached that stage. So our theory in the minority, is that any complaint can be amended by the Justice committee and there is no prohibition on amendments, interventions or any other matter. It’s just that the committee will have to deliberate and decide on this issue. This is a long established point of the minority, which in the previous impeachment proceedings have always been denied. But we think that it is in keeping with the rules.

Ricky Carandang: Well sir tomorrow then based on what you’re saying I anticipate a lot of discussion again about the rules about whether that intervention can be heeded or not. Just out of curiosity sir… will you…

Teddy Casino: But at the end of the day, it will come to a vote.

Ricky Carandang: Yeah, now this is what I was wondering. I mean, we all know where that votes gonna go sir, nobody has any illusion about this. But my question is, will you guys be even given a chance to talk about the substance of the allegations or is that not gonna happen?

Teddy Casino: Well that’s the bigger debate tomorrow not the intervention but whether we will be allowed to present the case. There was already a proposal earlier by the chair himself na maglima-lima na lang tayo. Get five guys from the minority, five guys from majority and let them debate. After that, we decide. We think that it’s unfair to the complainants that it’s unfair to the complaint itself. The minority or at least the endorsers and the complainants should be given a chance to at least present the case in its entirety. And then after that we can debate. That there’s where the five five can come in for purposes of speediancy. But the minority should be allowed to present the case because if you listen to the opening remarks of the chairperson we are determining probable cause here and without the presentation of the cases including the evidences of that cases the committee cannot possibly decided whether there is probable cause or not.

Ricky Carandang: Do you think you will be given a chance to present some of the substance of the case, Sir?

Teddy Casino: Well that is what fairness dictates, that is what justness dictates. And, I think it would not look good on the committee for it to prevent even the presentation of the case. This is a very basic thing of course, you and I know that our colleagues in the majority probably would rather look the other way. But I hope that they listen to reason. And I hope that they be fair enough to at least allow us to present the case so that they will have an informed decision. And that they will not be perceived as simply towing Malcanang’s alliance. Of course, we have no illusion but that is what should be done.

Ricky Carandang: Sir you can throw this question to the majority but I’m gonna throw it to you. Whether you present your case or not the outcome has been predetermined. Hasn’t it? So at the end of the day, what difference has it make?

Teddy Casino: Well I think the difference is that the process has been followed and that not only members of Congress but the public are allowed to see systematically what the complaint is. And that is the very important matter because when we go to Plenary the debates will have to be reopened and you can say that as far as numbers are concerned, at this point we don’t have it. But we are still going to Plenary this is where the public will come in. If we are able to present our case we are allowed to present our case in logical, coherent manner without the usual attempts to sabotage it. We think that the public themselves / itself will provide added probably pressure on Congress to do what is right on this issue. But of course that is the hope and we cannot hope otherwise.

Ricky Carandang: So at least the public will know what [is] being voted on.

Teddy Casino: That’s true. That’s true. And it’s important because the public will eventually decide whether these representatives of theirs in Congress deserve another term in 2010 or if they deserve their continued support.

Ricky Carandang: Alright sir what time is the hearing going to be tomorrow? Same time 9- 10 in the morning?

Teddy Casino: It’s at 9:30 in the morning. Of course, the schedule is another issue that will be debated on tomorrow. We are of the feeling that the majority is rushing this. They have scheduled a very tight daily schedule and we’re hoping that it can be modified, it can be changed probably 2 or 3 hearings a week would be good enough.

Ricky Carandang: Alright well sir I hope you can let us know because we are covering these proceedings. So, Congressman Teddy Casino thank you very much sir for spending time with us.