Let them keep their mouths shut!

Teaching Constitutional Law for over two decades has helped me into a degree of learning over some things many of us, because of varying disciplines, do not have time to reflect on. Modesty aside then, I like to think that I have a fairly good understanding of the freedom of speech among the parliamentary privileges enjoyed by lawmakers. In the words of Sen. Franklin Drilon, senators can say anything they want to say. Sen. Drilon, must, of course, have in mind Section 11, Article VI of the 1987 Philippine constitution. A part of this section reads: "No member (of the Philippine Legislature) shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof."

From an abundance of jurisprudence, the theory is that this constitutional proviso enables and encourages a legislator, being a representative of the public, to discharge his public trust with firmness and success. This constitutional protection guarantees to a senator or a congressman complete freedom of expression without fear of being made responsible in criminal actions before the courts or any other forum outside the session hall. A lawmaker should be protected from the resentment of everyone, however powerful, to whom the exercise of that liberty may occasion offense. Thus, his freedom of speech.

Yes, I am prepared to hear and listen to our distinguished senators and congressmen argue, debate or even harangue within that constitutional protective mantle. In fact, in the few occasions that their sessions were shown on television, like the impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, I was entertained by the seeming impertinence of loquacious lawmakers who should have instead sat quietly. But, most of the time, I was awed by the wisdom of many of them and overwhelmed by their patriotic undertones.

Really, I thought that the freedom of speech enjoyed by our legislators is to be used fully in aid of legislation. Whatever it is that a senator or a congressman wants to say in his attempt to help perfect a bill, must be said without fear or favor. Nothing should stop him from opening his mouth. In fact, the fierceness of the debates among senators and congressmen, at times, needs words or phrases that may not otherwise be resorted to or ordinarily be availed of because of moral parameters, although, in the interest of intelligently crafting a legislative measure, they just have to be used. Differently said, I perceived that the freedom of speech legislators enjoy should be reconciled with their legislative work.

Lately though, this modest reconciliation of constitutional provisions was thrown out of their common, maybe, usual, predilection. And for which I felt an unpardonable insult of the academic kind. It could be just personal to me although, it is plausible that some of our citizenry may have also been sickened by two of our supposed learned senators when they, under the cover of freedom of speech, violated the sanctity of the Senate hall with a kind of uncouth language expected only from the uneducated and less cultured.

The language used by these two senators, on different occasions, was scurrilous beyond imagination. Their vile could be felt where I was seated hundreds of miles away from the action. Using the time to malign and counter-malign each other, time which could have been devoted to more substantive matters, was more wasteful than the damage wrought by the killer 7.2-magnitude October 15, earthquake in Bohol or the November 8 Yolanda.

If our senators cannot think of doing something good for our country, if they cannot use their freedom of speech for more purposeful directions, if their language is not aimed at improving a bill subject to any debate or if they have only personal hatred at anybody, they, for heaven's sake, must avoid wasting their saliva. Let them keep their mouths shut.