PINKY WEBB (PW): Joining us tonight is Senate President Francis ‘Chiz’ Escudero. Senate President, it’s so good to see you again. Welcome to the show.
SENATE PRESIDENT FRANCIS ‘CHIZ’ ESCUDERO (CHIZ): Hi, Pinky. Hindi pa nagbibihis.
PW: Hindi ka pa nagbibihis. ‘Wag ho kayong magulat ‘yung nakita niyo kanina ‘yung suot ni Senate President ay ito pa rin. Welcome to the show again.
CHIZ: It’s nice to be back. It’s nice to be here.
PW: And it’s nice to have you and such perfect timing.
CHIZ: Oo nga no. Na-miss kita.
PW: Nawala ako. Nawala ka din ng ilang taon.
CHIZ: Nandiyan nanahimik lang. Hindi naman nawala, nanahimik.
PW: Senate President, what are your thoughts about—
CHIZ: —Parang hindi bagay, ‘Chiz’ na lang.
PW: Hindi puwede. SP, what are your thoughts during yesterday’s hearing just an overall assessment were you satisfied with how it was conducted?
CHIZ: Yes, as best as it could be done. Ito ang unang pagkakataon na nag-attend ang dating Pangulo. Ito ang unang pagkakataon na sumumpa siya, ito ang unang pagkakataon given his personality hindi ba na usually mayor siya, naging presidente siya, siya ang hari, siya ang nasusunod biglang mag-attend ng hearing at tawag sa lahat ay ‘sir/ma’am’ at sumusunod. So as best as could be I was satisfied with the hearing. Watching it afterwards, you could have wished for more of course but I don’t blame him.
PW: Always in hindsight.
CHIZ: Palagi naman, it’s always 20/20.
PW: Pero si Senator Koko Pimentel, were you satisfied with how he handled it? I asked you that because there were instances, for example, when Senator Risa Hontiveros had to ask the chairman Senator Koko Pimentel to, you know, she said this is our house, ‘di ba atin ito, bahay natin ito. Tama ba ‘yung parang pagmumura ni dating Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte that’s one, Sir.
CHIZ: You have to understand Senator Pimentel is the Minority Leader. He does not handle committees and it’s been a while that he handled a committee, unlike Risa, she has committee. Nakita niyo naman ‘yung mga imbestigasyon niya kay Alice Guo but this is the first time I think Senator Pimentel will chairing a committee after nearly or over two years. So kanya-kanyang style ‘yon kung maluwang, mahigpit. But at the end of the day, Senator Pimentel still ruled properly matapos humiling at hilingin si Senator Risa Hontiveros na ganito, ganito, ganito kinatigan naman niya, kinampihan naman niya.
PW: Would you have allowed the former President to use foul language and I think you have it counted no, or asked kung ilang beses?
CHIZ: According to my staff, 21 times. Twenty-one times daw nagmura ‘yung dating Pangulo. As part of the narration, I would agree and allow it but as part of his statements inside the committee that could have been corrected and or removed from the records. Anong pagkakaiba ng as part of the narration? Ikaw ba naman makakita na mayor ako, nagpunta ako doon nakita ko ‘yung bangkay blah, blah, blah nagmura. Kinukwento niya ‘yung nangyari, nagmura siya as part of the narration, yes. Pero kung nagmura siya mismo habang nagsasalita o may kausap o bilang pagsagot sa tanong ibang usapan ‘yon.
PW: So doon sa 21 times—
CHIZ: —Hindi ko pa nabibilang kung ilan ‘yung part of narration at ilan wala pa kami doon.
PW: Would you say half? A little more? Because you said something during the Kapihan—
CHIZ: —Roughly probably roughly a little less than half.
PW: A little less than half is what, Sir?
CHIZ: A little less than half ‘yung hindi part of the narration. Probably but again don’t hold me to it because I haven’t actually counted which ones. Now, ang issue pa nga kanina na pinagusapan naming paano mo ilalagay ngayon sa transcript? So nilagay na lang naming as is kaysa mapintasan pa kami na may ginawa kami doon. So nilagay na lang naming muna as is. Again, we are a plenary body a member can say we should remove it from records and expel it from the records. It will be voted upon and it will be decided accordingly.
PW: How about the heated exchange between the former President and Senator Risa Hontiveros there were times noong nakita niyo ho ba ‘yon, medyo ninerbyos ho ba kayo?
CHIZ: Hindi kasi buo ang tiwala ko kay Senator Risa that she will be able to hold her ground and she actually did to her credit. She would be able to hold her ground and she did. To be fair to both Senator Risa and the former President, sila mismong dalawa medyo hindi naman nila pinaabot sa puntong ‘yon na magsisigawan at mag-aaway na talaga sila.
PW: But the former President raised his voice, at one point, to Senator Risa Hontiveros.
CHIZ: That is correct which happens also in some of the hearings. Minsan pinapaalalahanan ng miyembro ‘yung resource person, minsan pinapaalalahanan ng chairman. I will give you an example Pinky, the former President asked a member of the Senate a question. Usually, kapag may resource person na kinukwestiyon ang isang senador papalag ‘yung senador, hindi ba?
PW: Oo I was going to go there, isa pa po ‘yon.
CHIZ: Ito sumagot siya.
PW: Si Senator Bato. OK, now let’s give them some context, Sir—
CHIZ: —Kung ‘yung tinanong mismo na dapat sana hindi dahil nga resource person sila ay sumagot. Sino ba naman ‘yung ibang miyembro para magreklamo para sa kanya?
PW: But you have rules, you have rules to follow. Resource persons such as the former President cannot ask questions to the senators, hindi ho ba?
CHIZ: That is correct.
PW: So, you have to if there is anything you want to say, you say it to the chairman. What the former President did was ask the question to Senator Bato, two or three questions in successive questions na sinagot po ni Senator Bato. That’s my question, Sir, why did you not follow your rules?
CHIZ: No. It’s not a question of not following rules, Pinky. Walang nakalagay doon sa rules naming, walang specific rule na bawal magtanong ang resource person. Wala naman ganoong rule.
PW: I see. But isn’t that an internal rule, at least, Sir?
CHIZ: Kaya lang since practice and tradition is part of our rules, well, practice and tradition dictate na hindi ginawa ‘yon. So, there is no specific or particular rule violated besides like I told you kapag may ganoon, usually, ‘yung tinatanong na senador. Napanood ko ‘yan noon kay Senator Trillanes kung hindi ako nagkakamali. ‘Yung resource person I think that was now Congressman Pulong Duterte, tinatanong siya si Senator Trillanes mismo ‘yung, Mr. Chairman, walang karapatan ang resource person na tanungin ako, nagreklamo siya. Ito ‘yung tinatanong, hindi naman nagreklamo, sumasagot. So siguro ‘yung ibang miyembro ng kumite, siya nga hindi nagreklamo bakit ako magrereklamo?
PW: It begs the question, shouldn’t Senator Koko Pimentel have called on the former President to say, “I’m sorry Mr. President you are not allowed to ask questions to the Senator.”
CHIZ: He could have, Pinky, but every chairman has his or her way of wielding the gavel being the presiding officer—minsan loose, minsan tight, minsan strict, minsan hindi, depende sa chairman ‘yon.
PW: And overall, you are happy with that?
CHIZ: Ang importante na-preserve niya ‘yung order hindi nagkagulo, walang nag-walk out. Nakapagsalita ng malaya ‘yung mga resource persons, Natanong sila ng mga diretsong tanong. Again Pinky, if there is one, I would say the accomplishment of the Senate as an institution for the first time the President repeated everything he has been saying for the past 6 years when he was president. This time, under oath not jokingly, not as a speech, not as part of an interview. It was sworn to by him. And as a lawyer, he knows exactly what that means.
PW: Very important you said “not jokingly.” We are going to talk about that after the break.
PW: Welcome back you are watching “On Point.” Still with us Senate President Chiz Escudero. Before I leave pala that conversation and ask your thoughts about what the president said and you said not jokingly, balikan ko lang ito. Let’s put up that message or that text from former Senator Ping Lacson where he said that yesterday, “the Upper Chamber was invaded by the former President of the Republic.” This came out in X formerly Twitter, “only one consistently and steadfastly stood up to preserve the dignity of the Philippine Senate. She happens to be a woman who answers “present” during a rollcall, her name: Risa Hontiveros”. I like you to react to that. Imagine saying one, invaded by the former president. I was actually thinking about it, Senate President, and I was saying he did invade it but one way or another he is really the central figure here. I mean everyone was waiting for him to actually, will he make it to the Senate yesterday or not.
CHIZ: You are putting me in a difficult spot, Pinky, because Senator Ping, former Senator Lacson is a senior member of the Senate. But OK lang naman na purihin si Senator Risa pero hindi naman siguro bagay na tirahin niya ang ibang miyebrong nandoon. Puwede namang pumuri ng wala kang hinihila pababa. And having said that, again, this is the first time that the president actually spoke. Give him some break baka naman. Unang beses niyang magsalita, ginanahan ng kaunti at maraming sinabi. If the definition of that is “in-invade ang Senado,” well I disagree with that.
PW: Wait a minute. Why did you disagree with the word “invaded?”
CHIZ: Hindi, kasi nagbigay kami ng pagkakataon. Ang tagal na niyang hinihintay sa Kamara, Pinky. Ang tagal ng hinihintay siyang magsalita under oath kaugnay sa mga bagay na ito. Nangyari lamang ‘yan sa Senado kahapon. The Senate provided a venue.
PW: Right. But did he invade it or not?
CHIZ: I don’t see, ‘di sana hindi na lang namin pinagsalita. ‘Di sana ‘wag ka ng magsalita, hintayin mo na lang na may itatanong kami. For two hours, Pinky, walang nagtanong sa kanya.
PW: Sa umpisa.
CHIZ: Hindi, ang punto ko nga, walang nagtanong sa kanya for the first two hours of the hearing.
PW: Actually, I was wondering if he was still there in the beginning.
CHIZ: Exactly the point, ‘di ba? So nasaan, gusto mong pasalitain, pinagsalita, Noong una, akala ko nga, walang magtatanong. ‘Di ba nakalimutan mo ngang nandoon siya?
PW: Tight ‘yung mga shots, Sir, so I didn’t have—
CHIZ: —No. He was there all throughout, so nasaan ‘yung invade? Nabigyan siya ng pagkakataon magsalita sa second half na nga, actually.
PW: Una, ‘yung opening statement niya na nagkaroon ho ng a little bit of problem, ‘no. It seemed between Senator Koko, kasi Senator Koko wanted the family’s victims to start, kasi sabi niya we wanted to talk about. Ano nga ba ‘yung mga illegal terms malfeasance, nonfeasance, ‘yun ang sinabi niya.
CHIZ: Misfeasance, malfeasance, nonfeasance. Three types of crimes.
PW: ‘Yon. So, he wanted to start with that and start with the families of the alleged victims and then it was Senator Bato, I believe, and Senator Tolentino, who said—or maybe Senator Jinggoy Estrada—who said in deference to the former President, he looks, baka inaantok. ‘Yun pa nga ang ginamit na salita na baka inaantok na siya paunahin na muna natin siya at pasalitain.
PW: Well, una, ‘yung opening statement niya na nagkaroon ho ng little bit of problem, it seemed between Senator Koko kasi Senator Koko wanted the family of the victims to start. Kasi sabi niya we want to talk about, ano nga ba, legal terms, malfeasance, nonfeasance, ‘yon ‘yong sinabi niya.
CHIZ: Misfeasance, malfeasance, nonfeasance, three types of crime.
PW: ‘Yon. So, he wanted to start with that and start with the families of the alleged victims and then it was Senator Bato, I believe and Senator Tolentino or maybe Senator Jinggoy Estrada with reference to the former president, he looks—baka inaantok. ‘Yun pa nga ‘yung ginamit na salita, baka inaantok siya, paunahin na muna natin siya at pasalitain.
CHIZ: Actually, doon lang ako nag-disagree. Hindi siya inaantok. Hindi siya inaantok na inaantok pa, kasi noong bandang hapon, gusto na nga niya magtuloy-tuloy hanggang madaling araw.
PW: Sabi nga niya, “Wag niyo na ko pabalikin dito, tapusin na natin ‘to.”
CHIZ: Sanay ‘yan. ‘Yan kasi ang body clock niya. He usually wakes up—but anyway to answer your question directly, no.
PW: OK, so you evaded, you don’t agree with—
CHIZ: I don’t agree, that may be his opinion of what happened but as a member of the institution right now, I cannot agree because again, the Senate provided a venue and opportunity by which the President can be heard, can be asked questions, can be face-to-face with some of the victims’ families and as well as his accusers.
PW: It’s not a question, Sir, of whether he was invited or he didn’t show up or you provided a venue, that was obvious. But I think from the time the questions were asked to the former President; it was mostly him.
CHIZ: But that was his personality, Pinky. Again, that’s his personality. He usually takes control of any conversation.
PW: And did he, Sir? Would you say he did?
CHIZ: With some yes, with some no. With Senator Risa, clearly no. With his allies, probably yes. Right? But with the Chairman, I would disagree. Senator Jinggoy asked him direct questions which cannot be interpreted as simply friendly but asked him direct questions about EJK, about the war on drugs aside from his questions for Senator Leila, which he answered.
PW: OK, let’s go to the second part before we move on to the statements made by the former president. When Senator Ping said, “stood up to preserve the dignity of the Philippine Senate,” sabi po niya, “only one consistent.”
CHIZ: Siguro nire-refer niya ‘yung pagmumura. Siguro nire-refer niya ‘yong pinoint-out ni Senator Risa na pagmumura. I think you better ask Senator Ping what he meant by those things because I cannot comment—
PW: —Right, I will. But I wanted you to react to that.
CHIZ: On what he—Well, my reaction is that I think he’s referring to the pagmumura. But again, we talked about it earlier. As part of the narration, probably puwede, but as part of his answer to the questions, no.
PW: You don’t agree with that?
CHIZ: Again, we should not be desensitized with that. Hindi dapat tayo mamanhid sa ganoon.
PW: Yeah, I think you said that also during the Kapihan this morning.
CHIZ: Yes.
PW: Hindi dapat tayo masanay sa ganon pananalita din. Let’s talk about what he said, ito na po. Kasi ganoon pa rin may nagiisip na umamin na ang dating pangulo. Meron din namang nagsasabi na joke lang ‘yan. Sabihin po natin, let’s listen to some of what the former president said:
RODRIGO DUTERTE ON AUDIO (RDOA): Lahat itong sa right side ko, dumaan ito ng chief of police, police director. Puro commander ng death squad ‘yan. ‘Yung isang senador, ayan ‘yang nakaupo diyan si Senator dela Rosa, death squad rin ‘yan because they were police directors handling the, controlling crimes in the city. So, ‘pag sinabi mong “death squad,” it’s a very loose term na ginagamit mo lang parang ganon easier, lahat ‘yon sila—ayan, nagdadasal kasi kasalanan niya siguro. ‘Wag ka na bang—ilan ba ang pinatay mo?
PW: SP, doon sa naging statement ni former President Rodrigo Duterte, how do you digest or understand?
CHIZ: Hindi siya ‘yung may problema ‘don, Pinky. Ang may problema don ‘yung mga kababayan nating na nandoon sa loob ng Senado na tumatawa kasi marami naman siyang dalang kasama doon, who have been I think desensitized at namanhid na doon. I agree with the point raised during the hearing that killing said by the priest. I believe, killing is a serious matter, it is not something to be trifled with much less laughed about. Now, if you listen to the former president’s statement better yet as I said earlier, Pinky. If you read it, actually, it would have more meaning, he’s not joking.
PW: He’s not.
CHIZ: I saw the hearing; the debate was about nomenclature and even though he’s accusing the former president admitted it na Davao Death Squad is simply a nomen—a name given to it. Ikaw, Pinky, kung magtatayo ka ng sindikato, gagawin mo bang “Pinky Crime Syndicate”, “Pinky Drug Syndicate”? ‘Yon ba ‘yung ipapangalan mo? Papangalan mo siguro “Lucky South” o kung ano man, ‘di ba? Whatever. But you will never call it what it is. Sa tingin mo ba ‘pag nagmi-meeting ‘yung mga miyembro ng Davao Death Squad, kung meron ba talaga, may tarpaulin sila sa likod? First meeting of the DDS, wala naman. For you to say na may Davao Death Squad. ‘Yon basically ang sinasabi niya. But there’s no such thing as a Davao Death Squad, but if you say that killings were done, then yes.
PW: So, you’re saying that the president, the former president that there is no Davao Death Squad pero may killing?
CHIZ: He said in later clips if you have it—
PW: Hindi, we will go there. I wanted to cut, hihimayin ko ‘to para sa inyo. ‘Yung una niya pong sinabi na may “Davao Death Squad” but it’s a term, it’s a loose term.
CHIZ: Which he said himself.
PW: So, if anong ibig sabihin non?
CHIZ: Watching it now, again, reading it would be better, I think. But well, meaning killings, which he admitted later on: may mga pinatay, may mga namatay, ‘di ba? Ang sabi niya noong una, tinanong siya kung may reward ba? Sinagot niya ay wala, may mga pera itong mga ito.
PW: Pulis sila, bakit sila bibigyan ng reward?
CHIZ: Sinabi niya rin ‘yon. Again, if you read it, it’s going to be different.
PW: With that statement made by the president, ‘yung pito dito sa kanan, may Davao Death Squad. Davao Death Squad is a loose term how do you understand that, because kayo po’y abogado.
CHIZ: Again, I refuse to answer that earlier when I was asked, Pinky. Why? Because I don’t want to sit as judge on that issue, why? Prosecutors listened to it; this is a sworn statement. There’s a saying, there’s a Latin maxim that basically says: “confession is the queen of evidence,” An admission is the queen of evidence. ‘Yan ang pinakamataas na ebidensya, pag amin. Ngayon, nasa mga prosecutors, nasa mga abogado na, nasa state lawyers kung paano nila iimpretahin ‘yon. On the other side, the argument will be, I’m trying to be a lawyer here now, not advocating a side, there is no purpose delicately, there is no body of the crime. Sino ba ‘yung sinasabing pinatay? Nasaan ‘yung katawan? Nasa prosecutors na ‘yan kung paano na nila iha-handle ‘yan kung gusto nilang i-handle. Nasa defense na rin kung paano nila iha-handle ‘yan.
PW: Kaya ko gusto sanang himayin, SP, kasi nga ‘yon ang una niyang sinabi and then he said something after that. Kasi kung pagbabasehan mo ‘yong una niyang sinabi, Davao Death Squad is a loose term so, it means nothing really, parang ganoon po. So—
CHIZ: —Either it’s a loose term or again, you don’t call it as such. I mean kung may Davao Death Squad, kung may death squad ka, Pinky, you won’t call it the “Pinky Death Squad.” You might not call it a “Death Squad”. ‘Di ba I think in the testimony of Lascanas before, he said they were called “Lambada Boys,” that was in the previous, previous hearing of the Senate pa. So, DDS was I think a term coined by media, if I remember correctly, not really by—wala namang sigurong umamin siya ‘yong author nun, na nagpangalan nun. I don’t think they thought of that or did that.
PW: Let’s move forward to the second statement that the president said that I want you to hear and get your reaction on that. Let’s listen.
RDOA: “Niyayari ako, pero wag mo naman—pulis kawawa naman ‘yan. Meron akong death squad, death squad, pito, pero hindi ‘yon mga Pulis. Sila rin ‘yong mga gangster. Utusan ko patayin mo ‘yan kaya kung ‘di mo patayin, ‘yan patayin kita ngayon.”
PW: How would you appreciate that statement made by the former president? OK, tinanggal na ‘yung mga pulis. Ngayon gangsters daw pero uutusan niya ‘yong isang gangster patayin ito kung hindi ako ang papatay sa iyo. What is that, Sir?
CHIZ: What do you mean by what is that?
PW: What did the former President mean by that, does it mean that there was a group? Does it mean there was a Davao Death Squad, Sir?
CHIZ: Again, Pinky, I will repeat, admission is the queen of evidence. So, is that an admission? Is that admission sufficient to file a case and to convict? Do you need the body of the crime? Sino ‘yon? Sino ‘yon? O ang gagawin mo ba lahat ba ng namatay noong mayor siya, babato mo na lang sa kaniya? ‘Yon ba ang gagawin ng prosecutor? I do not know. Kasi kung wala namang tao, you can’t accuse a person of murder without alleging who he murdered. I mean paano kita aakusahang nagnakaw kung hindi ko alam kung sinong ninakawan mo at magkano. Paano mo aakusahan ang isang tao ng pagpatay kung hindi mo alam kung sino.
PW: OK, then let me summarize this part of our conversation. Was it an admission?
CHIZ: Yes, I think so. Is it sufficient?
PW: Ibang usapan na po ‘yon?
CHIZ: Ibang usapan na ‘yon.
PW: Ibang usapan na po ‘yon pero it was an admission.
CHIZ: And I think he has no qualms about it, I think he’s proud of it, whether you agree with it or not. I don’t but he was proud of the fact he gave that admission.
PW: We’re going to take a short break, stay tuned. This is “On Point.”
PW: Welcome back, you’re watching “On Point.” I’m Pinky Webb. Still with us is Senate President Chiz Escudero. So, another point I wanted to ask you, you being a lawyer is that when the former president said I take full moral, and legal responsibility for the drug war, I think he must’ve said for the policemen involved in the drug war. Doon po kasi nagtanong si Senator Risa, do you take, full moral, and legal responsibility of Kian, for the death of Kulot, ‘yung mga ‘yon. Ano ang ibig sabihin at puwede ba na ang presidente would take full moral and legal responsibility for the deaths of, let’s just say, 6,000.
CHIZ: For a speech, probably, but legally, if he admits complicity in the commission of those crimes then he is a co-conspirator. If he admits that he’s the most guilty that does not make the least guilty innocent nor the least guilty be acquitted. Naga-apply lang ‘yan, Pinky, kapag ka lima kayong gumawa ng krimen at bumaliktad ‘yong isa, umamin, siya ‘yung nag-state witness. So, baka maabsuwelto siya, mas mababa ‘yung parusa niya, ito hindi. But I throw the question back to the former president, how will he operationalize that statement? It’s good copy, why not? I take full responsibility, kawawa naman ‘yung mga pulis. How does he intend to operationalize that, Pinky?
PW: And can it be operationalized?
CHIZ: He’s a lawyer, then he should know why would he say that if he has no plans of doing it. That’s why—
PW: —Maybe that’s why it’s a good copy as you mentioned a while ago. It’s something nice to say, it’s something nice to hear.
CHIZ: But then again, so the question, let me be more specific, ‘yung mga nag-attend sa hearing, magandang tanong ‘yan, ‘yung mga dating chief of police daw ng Davao, mga dating PNP chief daw may iisa ba sa kanila may kaso for the EJKs and the drug war during the six years of former President Duterte? Si Pangulong Duterte ba may kaso? Ang alam ko wala, ang may mga kaso, Pinky, ay ang mga nakakulong, ang mga dinismiss sa service na mababang pulis na akala ko ba’y kawawa? Kawawa talaga sila, kung pikit mata silang sumunod sa isang bagay na akala nila ay legal o mapoprotektahan sila.
PW: So, walang pong kinahihinatnan ang sabihin ng dating Pangulo na I take full moral and legal responsibility unless he says more to that? ‘Yun nga I’m complicit, I am guilty of this.
CHIZ: Wala akong nakikita pero how, if it takes again, madadamay lang siya sa kanila. Hindi niyo sila maabsuwelto. Hindi porke’t inamin na siya ‘yung nag-utos, kunwari lang, absuwelto na sila. Sino bang nagkalabit ng gatilyo? Hindi naman siya, so the participation of each was necessary. So, again that’s why I ask the question earlier, how does he operationalize that? Kasi ‘yong mga guest namin kanina wala sa kanila ang nakakulong, ‘yung matataas na opisyal ng PNP noong panahon niya wala sa kanilang may kaso.
PW: Yesterday—OK, maybe siguro to put another question on this is, does the policy of the former president on the war on drugs and his subsequent statements make him accountable in terms of possibly being jailed? Ganoon na lang.
CHIZ: The only way to do that—
PW: —‘Yung policy kasi.
CHIZ: The only way to do that is for cases to be filed and for the court to determine the existence of probable cause and after such determination to issue a warrant of arrest. That’s the only way to do it. There’s no other legal way to do it. I’ll give you an example, ‘yung pumirma ng memorandum on the double barrel was not the former president. It’s former PNP Chief Dela Rosa, so it’s not him. So, natanong ba siya or did he say: I ordered then Chief PNP Bato to issue that I was the one who wrote it as a lawyer. Walang ganoon, so kung inaabsuwelto niya ‘yong mga pulis kabilang I guess ‘yong mga PNP Chief niya dati, ano ang ibig sabihin nun? Kaya nga sabi ko, how does he operationalize that? I, as a lawyer too, he’s far older probably a better lawyer with more experience in the courtroom than I did when I was practicing, how does he operationalize taking full responsibility? Legal and moral responsibility for all the policemen, wag ‘yong mga laya, Pinky. ‘Wag ‘yung mga walang kaso, ‘yung mga pulis na may kaso, ‘yung mga pulis na nakakulong, ‘yung mga pulis na natanggal sa serbisyo. How does he operationalize taking responsibility for that?
PW: Then that question should have been asked by some of the senators.
CHIZ: Probably.
PW: Maybe you should’ve shown up.
CHIZ: But probably, but it’s not the first hearing. It’s not the first and last hearing.
PW: When is the next hearing, Sir?
CHIZ: Wala pa, Pinky, kasi Undas, natiyempuhan ng Undas. at pag-resume namin moring and afternoon session ang budget namin for two weeks. So, the earliest the next hearing would be siguro ko mga late November. Ngayon kapag sinabi mong bakit ang tagal naman, well kalahati ng sambayanan, Pinky, nagrereklamong puro kami imbestigasyon wala na kaming ginagawang trabaho daw.
PW: Tsaka nasa kalendaryo niyo talaga ‘yung—
CHIZ: We balance the functions of the Senate. We have legislative functions involving the crafting of laws like the budget. We also have oversight functions which include, ito, ‘yung pag-iimbestiga.
PW: Very quickly though, let’s talk about the budget and especially flood control projects. Because of the recent rains specially that hit the Bicol region, ano po, and even CALABARZON. Kailangan ho ba talaga, is there a need to look into the totality of why this is happening to many parts of the country? For example, is it climate change, is it urbanization, is it still our kababayan in high-risk, living in high-risk areas? Are the flood control projects not efficient; do we not pump enough money into flood control projects?
CHIZ: Those are the exact same questions, Pinky, I would like to ask the departments. And hopefully they will be able to answer, but I doubt it. The executive has to meet, discuss, what is the answer to those five questions of yours. For sure it’s a combination of all. ‘Yung design natin na mga flood control projects, iisa lang, whether it’s a river control, a sea wall, a canal, isa lang. One size fits all. Hindi puwede ‘yung ganoon. Depende sa size ng river, sa lawak ng river, sa history ng river. ‘Yung kapal, taas, at lalim niyan. Hindi puwedeng one size fits all lang. Pangalawa, with climate change you need climate adaptations. So kailangan ba natin mas makapal na, mas mataas, mas makapal na bakal ba ang kailangan o yung dating bakal ang gagamitin ulit.
PW: What is being done, Sir?
CHIZ: That’s the question we will be asking.
PW: Is that something you can find out?
CHIZ: That’s the question we will be asking Pinky. Because you know why it changes from time to time. But usually, let’s say kapal ng kalye. It changes, iba ang barangay road, iba ang municipal road, iba ang provincial road, iba ang national road. But these specs have been there for the longest time.
PW: Is it time to revisit them?
CHIZ: It should be, actually, ginawa ko na ‘yan noon pa tungkol sa highway natin kaya kumapal ‘yan. Kumapal na yung highway natin.
PW: Which highway?
CHIZ: ‘Yung mga national roads natin.
PW: I see.
CHIZ: Makapal ‘yan hindi tulad ng dati. Dati ang kapal niyan six inches lang. Ngayon mahigit doble na yata ‘yung kapal niyan para tumagal. Tsaka alam naman natin overweight lahat ng trucks. Wala naman tayong mga weighing bridges. So pakapalin na lang natin kaysa magbibitak-bitak yung semento. At aakusahan pa na may nagnakaw diyan sa infrastructure project na ‘yan. But the same is true for flood control projects. Now, a flood control project unlike a bridge should be treated I guess the same. You never build half a bridge, it’s useless. So, if it’s a flood control project. You don’t build half a dike too. It has to be the whole dike for it to work. Kung hindi, masisira lang ‘yung kalahati ng ginawa mo, sisimulan mo na naman ulit.
PW: At sayang ang pera, sayang ang pagod.
CHIZ: Pero minsan—
PW: —At perwisyo.
CHIZ: Minsan hindi naman kasi kasya ‘yung pera para gawin ‘yung buo. Pangalawa, hindi rin kasya ‘yung absorptive capacity noong agency yung ganong kahaba two years gagawin ‘yan, three years.
PW: But that’s not acceptable. Isn’t that not?
CHIZ: No, but I’m saying, again, are they planning for that? Are they looking at that? Those are the things you would want to know.
PW: It would be interesting to find out more details, Sir.
CHIZ: It will be in the plenary debate. I assure you.
PW: Because that’s really something. Kumbaga kasi, Sir, parang palala nang palala ‘yung sitwasyon. It could be so many factors obviously not an expert on this. I would like to find out more about it but. What we see is ‘yung paghihirap ng ating mga kababayan na patuloy na binabaha.
CHIZ: I think it’s the influence of factors, to be fair. Under designed ‘yung ating mga flood controls. Hindi naglilinis o hindi nililinis yung mga daluyan ng tubig. Hindi nagde-dredge during summer which we do in Sorsogon, for example. Kulang ‘yung ginagawa. Kalahati na-river control lang o one-fourth na river control. Sinabi may nagawa pero ganoon pa rin. Climate change has occurred, mas mataas mas maraming tubig. And fourth, which what happened to Sorsogon, kaya nagbaha kami ng ilang oras, kasi sumabay yung high tide sa buhos ng ulan, which nobody could actually predict.
PW: You can’t predict that but you can assume the worst-case scenario, hindi ba?
CHIZ: Yes, but the flood control projects and the canals weren’t built that way yet, weren’t built for that situation way back. Kasi if it ain’t broke why fix it? Hindi mo naman gagawin ‘yon. Nandoon pa yung kanal. Nandoon pa yung flood control, hindi naman nasira.
PW: Parang kailangan talaga, Sir, master plan.
CHIZ: Kailan pa?
PW: Kahapon.
CHIZ: Kahapon pa talaga. So, in the mean time—
PW: —Ten years ago, dapat.
CHIZ: Exactly.
PW: All right, Senate President Escudero, a pleasure to have you, Sir. And again, good to see you and good luck, Sir.
CHIZ: I miss this kind of engagement.
PW: Thank you, Sir. And thank you for joining us tonight.