#PingSays: On actions at Philippine (Benham) Rise, impeachment matters | May 15, 2018

In an interview, Sen. Lacson answers questions on:
– Philippine (Benham) Rise and West Philippine Sea
– impeachment matters

Quotes from the interview…Β 

On actions at Philippine (Benham) Rise:
“Sa West Philippine Sea naroon ang problema. Ang Philippine Rise wala pang problema. So mas maganda symbolically nagpunta siya roon to assert sovereignty issue na talagang sa atin. Di natin ma-foresee baka mamaya meron din mga intrusion. So mainam ginawa yang ganoon.”
“Sa West Philippine Sea tapos na yan. Nanalo tayo sa arbitration. Meron nang rule, di nga lang ma-implement kasi napaka-powerful ng China. But in the case of Philippine Rise, I think maganda rin na mismong presidente nagpunta at nagdala ng researchers para ma-assert talaga very clearly na hey, sa amin talaga ito. Ito hwag nyo pakialaman. Di naman nangyari sa West Philippine Sea yan.”

On what PH can do on the West Philippine Sea:
“Kasi may structure siya roon. Makipag-gyera tayo. Ang tanong, kaya ba natin makipaggyera? Mabuti rin nanalo tayo sa arbitral ruling, nanalo tayo. And based on previous experiences in the past, eventually, yung country na nag-intrude, na natalo sa arbitration, nag-gi-give-in. Ang kailangan lang dito international pressure. Now dahil under this administration, wala namang pressure o lobby na ginagawa. So sino makakasama natin to pressure China to withdraw or to comply with the ruling sa arbitration? Yan ang problema.”
“Kung may administration say under the administration of PNoy na talagang assertive pwede tayo makakuha ng tulong na pressure from other superpowers. Yan ang naging difference lang. Pero based on history, kasi nagbasa ako nang lumabas ang ruling, maraming pangyayari in the past na eventauly ang country na natalo nagko-comply, di nag-insist. Pero di advisable na ipilit natin ang ruling favoring us kasi mauuwi tayo sa gyera. Ang susunod na tanong, kaya ba natin makipaggiyera sa China?”
“In the course of time nag-ca-cave-in ang country na natalo sa ruling. Sana if we would like to learn our lesson from history yan ang gawin nating reference para ang pressure hwag natin bitiwan. While we cannot implement the ruling at least sige lang ang pagpapakita natin na tayo mismo naghahanap ng kakampi sa pressure sa China.”

On potential provocation if PRRD goes to the West PH Sea:
“Ang attitude niya ngayon is to maintain good and harmonious relationship sa China.”

On reported calls for Senate to take a stand on Sereno removal:
“Unang una wala kaming jurisdiction. Why? Because the Articles of Impeachment hindi naman na-transmit. Depende yan kung ang House mag-transmit ng Articles of Impeachment sa Senado, that’s another matter we have to discuss as a collegial body. Sa ngayon wala kaming dapat paguusapan kasi nasaan ang Articles?”
“Sa amin that’s a political process. Sa court it’s a judicial process. Ngayon kaya tayo nagkakaroon ng constitutional crisis kung mag-clash ang judicial process ng SC at ang political process ng Congress, in this case, the Senate, involving one and the same person. Just imagine. Iba proseso ng SC and we cannot question the SC because we are not authorized. There is no authority. Ang pwede lang mag-reverse o mag-check ng legislative action or even executive action, SC, due to grave abuse of discretion. Ang Senado di pwede sabihin sa korte in-abuse nyo ang discretion nyo because we are not empowered, we are not authorized to do that under existing laws.”
“Assuming dinala sa amin at itutuloy namin meron tayong constitutional crisis kasi tinanggal ng SC tapos try pa natin dito. What if ma-acquit siya rito? Yan ang maliwanag na constitutional crisis. Now, are we willing to go through that process para magkaroon ng constitutional crisis?”
“I’d rather we cross the bridge when we get there kasi wala pa naman talaga wala pa na-transmit sa amin. And all indications mukhang di sila mag-transmit kasi sila mismo kinikilala nila ang ruling ng SC.”

*****

Leave a Reply