Lawmakers puzzled by Duterte’s ‘inconsistencies’

MANILA, Philippines — Members of the quad committee of the House of Representatives have noted several inconsistent or contradictory statements made by former president Rodrigo Duterte when he faced the panel last Nov. 13.

“I myself have actually been puzzled by his inconsistencies. I can’t explain why … he’s like that. We should probably have an in-depth assessment and evaluation of the context of his replies,” overall quad chairman Rep. Robert Ace Barbers said.

“It’s very difficult to determine whether he is joking, serious and truthful or just being witty and humorous. He is very difficult to read,” Barbers added.

Among the most notable self-contradictions Duterte made were his challenge to the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate him the soonest, but pushed this back by saying he will not yield to any foreign agent or judge, preferring to be judged by Filipino jurists and incarcerated domestically.

Another was Duterte’s supposed straightforward vow to sign any and all bank waivers with regard to his alleged P2.4 billion bank accounts, as exposed by his critic, former senator Antonio Trillanes IV, only to backtrack later by invoking the conjugal nature of his financial transactions

There was also the excuse or alibi that Duterte has “no money” being an elderly retiree, to the point where he asked lawmakers to fund his travel to The Hague where the ICC is headquartered, but yet offered an initial P1-million seed money for his cops facing criminal and administrative suits on alleged extrajudicial killings or EJKs.

Representatives Zia Alonto Adiong of the first district of Lanao del Sur and Gerville Luistro of Batangas’ second district made similar observations, particularly on the former president’s flip-flopping stand on the absolute bank waiver he promised to execute regarding his accounts.

“Is it now the understanding of the committee that when the former president was asked by chairman (Romeo) Acop, that the President be willing to sign any waiver, would that be safe to assume, Mr. Chair, that that would be ‘conditional,’” Adiong clarified.

The House assistant majority leader wanted to be doubly accurate he heard it right when the former Davao City mayor assured his colleague, quad comm senior vice chairman Acop, that he will sign the absolute bank waiver at first instance, without any conditions.

According to Adiong, he made this assumption on the basis that “when the former president right away answered the question of Acop, I presume that it was actually in the affirmative and it was actually in all candidness and all honesty.”

Luistro – a lawyer by profession – likewise noticed the “inconsistencies” in the testimony of the former Davao City mayor, who, unfortunately, is also a member of the Bar, and was a prosecutor for nine years in his province.

“The president made his testimonies inconsistent. I don’t know why,” she said in a TV interview.

Initially, Duterte was very straightforward in his statements. “I’ll sign the waiver tomorrow (Nov. 14),” he originally offered.

When Adiong first mentioned the word “waiver” in his interpellation, he replied: “The waiver? Yes, right away.”