In an interview, Sen. Lacson answered questions on:
– Sec. Panelo’s ‘referral’ for ex-Mayor Sanchez
– Senate Bill 993, repealing RA 10592
– BuCor head Faeldon’s inconsistencies on Sanchez release
Related:
At the Hearing on the Release of Heinous Crime Convicts via GCTA (Sept. 2)
‘Bakit Kailangan Madaliin?’ BuCor Execs Grilled over Hurry to Release ‘Special’ Convicts (Sept. 5)
Facebooking from Maximum Security: Mobile Phones, Drugs and Firearms in Bilibid (Sept. 9)
‘TALAMAK ANG KORAPSYON!’ 7 Major Moneymaking Schemes at Bilibid Bared (Sept. 12)
QUOTES and NOTES:
On Faeldon’s claim he stopped Sanchez release:
“(Sa sinabi ni) Sen. Go and SOJ Guevarra. Hindi yan ang human nature ng nagpapa-stop. Kasi inutusan siya actually. Malinaw naman yan.” *
“Malinaw sa mga sagot niya at sa sagot ni Sen. Go pati ni SOJ Guevarra. Talagang hindi niya pinahinto kundi inutusan siyang ihinto.”
“Maliwanag narinig nyo lahat. At meron siyang interview noong Aug 21 na nagbe-belie sa sinabi niya kanina. May interview sa media na taliwas sa kanyang tinestify kanina.”
On Faeldon’s lack of a document to prove he recalled the release order for Sanchez:
“Isa pa yan. Kaya paulit-ulit ang tanong ko na officially transmitted ba? Pag officially transmitted dapat official din ang recall. Kayo mismo, pag nasa desk kayo, pag may napirmahan kayong mali, agad-agad gagawin nyo shred nyo lang. Bakit kailangan i-transmit mo pa, after 30 minutes recall mo rin pala?”
On Faeldon’s accountability:
“Depende yan. Ipaubaya namin sa committee. Kasi paguusapan namin yan. Caucus namin yan kung ano magiging recommendation ng committee.”
“May accountability definitely especially ang pagpapa-release during election ban. Pointed out ni Sen Tolentino may maliwanag na pag-violate sa batas.”
On Senate Bill 993:
“Maraming dapat baguhin pati sa pagkwenta ng GCTA, sino qualified. Nagkagulo-gulo sa interpretation kasi 2 articles ng RPC ang in-amend. Pinaghalo sa RA 10592 kaya nagkagulo ang application ng GCTA.”
“Pina-co-author lang ako ni Sen Sotto. Siya ang main author. Mas kabisado niya ang bill.”
On Sec. Panelo’s referral of Sanchez’s case with the Bureau of Pardons and Parole:
“It says a lot. I think we deserve an explanation from him. Kung sa context ng pagiging legal officer ng Presidente ok lang yan kasi tumatanggap siya ng complaints. But from the context of being the former defense counsel of Antonio Sanchez, maraming ibig sabihin noon. Depende. Kung ang nanggagaling tayo sa pagiging presidential legal counsel niya ngayon wala tayong iisipin. Pero maski si Justice Harriet Demetriou di ba may pagdududa na sa kanya, maaring may kinalaman siya sa pagka-release?”
“Whether or not official or not ang kanyang intervention, or in his official capacity, alam niya na dati siyang defense counsel, dapat nag-beg off siya sa pag-refer ng sulat ng anak ni Antonio Sanchez.”
On Panelo’s possible conflict of interest:
“You can say that. Kung dati kang defense counsel. It’s up to him to explain.”
On Panelo’s reported use of a Malacanang letterhead:
“Kaya nga he has a lot of explaining to do. Now it’s up to him to convince the people, you, I and the public, kung proper or appropriate ba ang ginawa niya.”
“Kung ako sa lugar niya at dati akong defense counsel magbe-beg off ako. Pasensya na kayo, idaan ninyo sa ibang department dahil dati akong defense counsel.”
“It cannot be denied. You cannot dissociate his personal relationship with the Sanchezes and his being chief presidential legal counsel.”
“Nagkataon lang na (rejected ang referral niya). E what if may nangyari? Let’s not talk of the consequences. Ang pinaguusapan dito the mere act of intervening on behalf of the family, being the presidential legal counsel who used to be the defense counsel.”
“Hindi mo nga ma-dissociate ang personal relationship with the Sanchezes and his official capacity as legal counsel.”
“It’s the mere act of intervening, being the former legal counsel. Yan ang issue rito, hindi kung inaksyunan o hindi.”
*****
* At the second hearing on the release of heinous crime convicts who availed of GCTA, Sen. Lacson found inconsistencies in the claims of BuCor chief Nicanor Faeldon that he stopped the release process for Sanchez.
The transcripts of the Sept. 2 hearing show that while Faeldon said he stopped the release process for Sanchez on Aug. 20 (11:19 a.m.), Sen. Bong Go recalled President Rodrigo Duterte ordering Faeldon not to release Sanchez – on the evening of Aug. 21. (1:19 p.m.)
Faeldon said he signed the release memo (after claiming he believes Sanchez is not entitled to be released) at about 12:30 p.m. of Aug. 20, but recalled it later that day. However, Sen. Go said that when President Duterte learned of the possible release of Sanchez on the evening of Aug. 21, he had Faeldon contacted to instruct him, “Do not release,” to which Faeldon said he “will comply.” “Kung meron na siyang ginawa na (noong) Aug 20, (that) he already recalled without order from higher authorities, siyempre magmamagaling. ‘Hindi Sir, ginawa ko na yan.’ Pero sinabi niya ‘I will comply.’ Hindi niya sinabing actually ni-recall ko na,” Sen. Lacson noted.
Sen. Lacson also questioned Faeldon’s claim that he ordered a recall of his memorandum triggering the release process for Sanchez. “(F)or me to sign then recall, it doesn’t make sense to me. Nagsa-sign tayo, minsan pag nagkamali tayo, we crumple it and shred it until the next draft is presented to us.”
DOJ Secretary Menardo Guevarra said he was not informed that Faeldon stopped the release process or recalled his order.
Also at the hearing, Sen. Lacson proposed a closer look at these possible amendments to laws governing Good Conduct Time Allowance:
1. Correct the defect in RA 10592, which contains articles (29 and 97) that present conflicts in computing good conduct. “Pinaghalo-halo ito sa RA 10592, and there lies the defect in the law. Pag pinaghalo-halo na nagka-confuse na tayo. Sa computation, hindi alam kung isasama ang preventive imprisonment.”
2. Include a feature in the proposed law that disqualifies a convict altogether from GCTA. “Maybe when we craft final version of this law we might as well include administrative offenses (only in the) deduction. But If a criminal offense (is committed while incarcerated) dapat altogether wala na.” Also suggested that if a convict commits a violation, he/she is “back to zero.”
3. For transparency’s sake, include in procedures that before a person can avail of GCTA, authorities should get the comments of the victim/s or their relatives, then the prosecutors.
*****
Watch the entire hearing on GCTA issue here. Video courtesy: Senate PRIB
*****