Where legislative investigation ends
At the time when I discussed, in my constitutional law class, the theory on which is anchored the power of Congress to conduct legislative investigation, the vice president of our republic was already reeling from the serious accusation of his alleged acts, done while he was the chief executive of the country's premier city, which amounted to, of all despicable deeds, corruption. I was candid to my students that in the last election, I could not remember having cast my vote for the beleaguered leader.
The senators, who were (and still are) the central figures of the supposed legislative inquiry, might have actually been propelled by their own personal political plans, in exposing the purported plunder perpetuated by now the country's second highest ranking official. In other words, they had the kind of selfish motivation that presently conveniently hides under the canopy of public service. To me, as it is to most, that was discernible in the way they made declarations, protected by the parliamentary immunities, pointing to the culpability of the vice president.
And to the misfortune of the nation's number two citizen, there had been a phalanx of resource persons, euphemistically called witnesses, who had been allowed to string together their perceptions of his corruptibility. As former co-conspirators, those "witnesses" were presumed to know the entire gamut of the odious transactions. The welter of their testimonies, albeit moored on what I imagine to be technically flawed presentation, is tied to their being erstwhile allies of the former city mayor. Because of such adverse comments from friends-turned-foes, the minds of some of our fellowmen have been canalled into believing the monetary pillage by such high-strung official on the funds of Makati City.
So, I wrote, very briefly, in this column, my perception that the reason why there is such a thing as legislative investigation has already been approximated. Up to that point, we congratulated the members of the senate for courage to navigate thru difficult political waters. Additionally, we must recall that "legislative investigations", are to be done in aid of legislation. The utterances made by some resource persons identified the salient aspects of the procurement process that were apparently violated and how. I surmised that, with the data on hand, it was time for the investigating lawmakers to wrap up their inquiry.
Since prosecuting criminal offenders is not a function of legislators, the senators in the body's sub-blue ribbon committee were supposed to endorse to appropriate bodies whatever pieces of admissible evidence against the vice president they uncovered along their legislative investigation. They could not even pronounce him guilty because that is the domain of the judiciary. To me, the continuing investigation into areas not within the original context of the resolution would serve no legislative purpose but to hang the vice president to his political death.
More importantly, as proof that the senate blue ribbon committee members were not just trying to bring down a probable presidential opponent in the 2016 elections, they should have filed bills incorporating remedies against what they thought were the legal loopholes that could be used and were so used by corrupt officials, including perhaps, the subject of the inquiry. It would have educated all of us to know what measures they have drafted in order to prevent the recurrence of over-pricing the construction of public buildings.
Of course, the senators, want more. That is becoming very clear in the continuing examinations into hitherto unannounced issues. Suddenly, it is not just the Makati Building II. The ownership of large tracts of lands get highlighted. The triumvirate of legislators Cayetano, Pimentel III and Trillanes, by going for the jugular, is exceeding their constitutional mandate. What is seemingly important to them is to nail the vice president to his alleged corrupt acts rather than institute statutory reforms to cleanse the government of corrupt ways. Why would Senator Trillanes go on public debate with Vice President Binay, but for the coup de grace?
Indeed, I write again of this issue here because we are spending public funds in a legislative investigation that is adrift from its constitutional foundation of "in aid of legislation."
- Latest
