00:30.3
on all matters except confidential
00:33.4
funds so we are now in the Supreme Court
00:36.0
Where we we asking The supreme court to
00:40.1
declare unconstitutional the EO because
00:44.2
the constitution says the people
00:48.0
Uh have a right to
00:50.7
information full disclosure on matters
00:53.7
of public interest and there can only be
00:57.1
an exception If there is a law passed by
00:59.4
Congress providing for reasonable
01:02.0
limitations Congress has not passed a
01:04.2
law for the reasonable limitations yes
01:06.8
so then the the general rule will apply
01:10.2
that you have to disclose fully how you
01:15.2
budget can't Marcus sign a new EO
01:19.4
requires No because the the the
01:21.8
constitution says unless a law that
01:24.9
means Congress must pass a law and EO
01:27.1
will not suffice Uh because That's not a
01:30.3
law and that's our point Uh an EO cannot
01:34.8
substitute for a law because the
01:36.4
constitution says there must be a law
01:38.7
and I think that's a very strong
01:40.6
argument I think we will win there Uh
01:44.4
so the what Congress should do is to
01:47.3
enact a law now Uh rather than
01:56.4
Uh Piatos or this people are Uh are real
02:01.8
or not because there is no Exception
02:04.9
reasonable Exception provided by law so
02:07.9
the general rule applies there is full
02:10.2
public disclosure of how you spent your
02:12.6
money because the constitution says Okay
02:16.2
there can be reasonable limitations But
02:19.1
there must be a law providing for those
02:21.2
reasonable limitations so i think
02:24.4
Congress is a little bit off here
02:26.6
because they're assuming that there is a
02:28.1
law But there is no law in fact they can
02:30.6
demand full public
02:32.8
disclosure and so this Uh Uh and of
02:36.2
course Uh the vice president saying No
02:39.1
I'm not going to explain and that Uh
02:42.0
that runs a fou really with the with the
02:45.3
constitution but of course that case is
02:48.7
still pending in the Supreme
02:51.9
Court aren't they enough
02:54.4
constitutionally minded lawyers in the
02:56.3
Congress to Look at this potential angle
02:57.8
that actually Mahina yung excuse ni
03:00.1
Sarah dahil yung Eon na ito ay hindi
03:01.8
backed Up by a specific legislation on
03:04.9
the on you know legitimate you know
03:09.0
confidentiality Well I don't know why
03:11.5
they have not Uh brought that up
03:14.8
Uh but I think Uh they also want to know
03:19.4
They're probably interested to know if
03:22.0
there's really a person named Mary Grace
03:24.9
Piatos Well I mean the psa has helped us
03:27.4
but just as you were giving them a
03:28.6
chance right sabi mo sa sa Davao may
03:30.3
Piatos na double tea ay wait lang single
03:33.2
tea Sorry single tea with a single tea
03:35.9
single tea Yeah exactly single tea um
03:38.8
medyo mahabang usapan yyung Piatos na
03:41.2
iyan but ngayon meron din yung Sally and
03:43.0
Ano ba Grace ba Ian or something hindi
03:44.6
Sally and something like that na parehas
03:46.3
Iyung signature meron din Iyung isang
03:48.0
taong maraming signature na iba so I
03:49.8
don't know I mean it's it's it's
03:51.2
becoming crazy and ridiculous What is
03:53.0
the coa report talaga on on on Sara
03:55.7
deter fiscal practices From what you it
03:59.4
was this allowed Officially disallowed
04:01.1
that means if it disallowed
04:04.4
Uh You have to pay
04:11.2
um so now speaking of Uh this justice
04:15.2
What do you think um should the Congress
04:18.3
do if malabo itong impeachment na ito
04:20.4
tuloytuloy lang itong mga quc Hearings
04:22.2
na ito until election time is is that Is
04:24.4
that the way forward well Congress can
04:27.8
proceed with their law provid for
04:30.0
reasonable limitations
04:36.3
to Uh bring up something Uh Uh Richard
04:40.8
yes yes There's a difference between
04:43.0
intelligence fund and confidential fund
04:46.7
now in in in the case of pa amari Uh The
04:52.2
supreme court and I wrote The decision
04:57.2
Uh funds spent for or Uh intelligence
05:01.8
funds Uh are protected by the doctrine
05:08.6
communication because Uh that involves
05:11.4
National Security or military secrets
05:14.6
but this is for the military only and
05:18.2
for Uh for our diplomats They they have
05:23.3
a form of privileged communication if
05:26.1
they spend money to to get information
05:30.0
involving military secrets
05:32.7
Uh that cannot be revealed I mean Oo
05:35.4
kasi ma- reveal yung procedures nila
05:39.1
assets but this is only Uh on
05:42.6
intelligence matters or diplomatic
05:44.6
matters iba Iyung
05:47.1
uh what the VP is saying
05:50.9
Uh she has some safe houses etc but she
05:55.0
has no military function she has no
05:57.5
intelligence function so Uh difficult
06:00.3
for her to justify that no And why they
06:04.2
call it confidential fund But there is
06:06.5
no law that's the problem so what I'm
06:09.2
saying is Uh the the the President's
06:14.2
intelligence fund is protected here
06:17.3
because we have that decision already we
06:19.7
have carved out an exception for
06:22.7
intelligence fund used for military
06:27.2
secrets you cannot inquire into that
06:29.6
that the expenditure of those funds but
06:33.0
Uh it's only the President who can do
06:35.6
that because he's the commander in Chief
06:38.2
the the vice president has no military
06:42.6
command so it's only the commander in
06:45.3
Chief who can authorize Uh the
06:47.6
expenditure of funds Uh to Gain military
06:51.2
secrets intelligence funds to for
06:54.0
military secrets so Uh it cannot be
06:56.7
invoked by the vice president unless
06:59.6
there is a law and there is no law
07:02.3
unless the is again but the excuse that
07:05.4
was that as dep at secretary because may
07:08.1
NPA infiltration daw ng Education
07:10.4
sectors kailangan ni protektahan iyung
07:12.0
mga bata so in a way naging auxiliary
07:14.5
defense department ang ang DepEd ayon sa
07:16.8
kanila ' ba iun iun ung argument nila '
07:18.7
ba justice yeah but But it turns out
07:22.1
that Uh they really had no
07:25.6
Uh intelligence operations I mean
07:30.3
Uh even they tried to link Up with the
07:33.8
AFP but the AFP said no we did not get
07:36.1
money from you we spent it ourselves so
07:39.8
it's difficult really for them Uh to to
07:44.5
to justify because based on their
07:48.9
Uh statutory function and constitutional
07:52.7
function as dep ed Uh They don't conduct
07:56.4
Uh Uh intelligence operations hindi nila
08:00.1
mandato yan Yes it's not their
08:02.8
mandate Yun nga eh I mean dami nilang
08:06.4
palusot and and all of them are so
08:08.6
flimsy but of course the reality here is
08:11.0
that umaasa pa rin sila dahil sa
08:13.0
kanilang political capital at saka takot
08:14.8
ng ibang senadors for this not to move
08:18.7
um now last week when we were discussing
08:21.6
Justin Scorpio a certain religious group
08:24.2
was was signaling that they could get Uh
08:27.1
involved here in behalf of Sara but it
08:29.2
looks bati yun nagtap off din Parang
08:31.3
parang lahat yata
08:43.4
in a in a legislative function of a
08:48.2
involving legislative inquiry I think
08:51.6
it's already interference There's a I
08:54.1
mean there's separation of church and
08:55.8
state and they cannot say that Congress
08:58.4
should not conduct a
09:01.0
hearing can we exp on that justice Yeah
09:04.0
can we expound on the doctrine of
09:05.6
separation of church and state kasi I I
09:08.0
Hear A lot of interpretations on that in
09:10.2
a sense that I mean It's like
09:11.3
historically For instance the Catholic
09:12.7
Church has been influential right in
09:15.0
shaping our political Uh you know
09:18.1
landscape importantly in the case of et
09:20.4
doos For instance right Uh among other
09:22.8
things What does really the separation
09:25.2
of church and state preclude because
09:27.8
obviously it means they cannot be a
09:29.6
state religion the state cannot Uh you
09:32.2
know prioritize or privilege one
09:33.6
religion over the others so it's about
09:35.6
the pluralistic fabric of a Democratic
09:37.9
society but obviously our separation of
09:39.7
church and state is not like France
09:41.4
right when it's more like Uh parang
09:43.8
Freedom from religion right like in
09:45.7
France They're very strict to make sure
09:47.1
There's no expression whatsoever of
09:49.0
religious Uh sensibilities within public
09:51.4
space etc Ours is more American system
09:54.0
but can you explain Anong ibig sabihin
09:55.8
ng separation of church and state aside
09:57.9
from the fact na hindi nagbabayad ng is
09:59.8
human religious groups some of the
10:01.2
privileges are enjoying under that well
10:03.2
the the basic is that Uh the state
10:05.2
cannot Uh Officially support a religion
10:08.1
Uh you cannot establish state religion
10:12.0
and you cannot spend money for state
10:15.5
religion and Uh you cannot Uh give
10:21.0
benefits to a state religion
10:25.4
Uh of course Uh We have a problem there
10:30.5
there are two religions Uh that Uh have
10:33.5
acquired have Uh have Uh Uh acquired the
10:38.4
licenses TV licenses radio licenses so
10:41.3
unon yeah but nobody has questioned it
10:44.3
so far no so but actually actually yeah
10:47.7
yeah that could be a problem
10:50.2
Uh because they're the They're using the
10:54.6
the airwaves Uh to to propagate their
10:58.6
Faith no the religion Uh but Uh there's
11:02.7
many gray areas but basically
11:05.8
Uh one religion one group cannot say
11:09.4
Congress should stop its legislative
11:11.8
inquiry I think Uh that's clear
11:14.4
interference he has nothing to do with
11:17.4
religion Uh stopping Congress from doing
11:20.9
that has nothing to do with
11:23.7
religion um according to the robin hood
11:27.1
School of constitutional law Uh justice
11:29.6
Scorpio Um yung pag-aar kay Kiboy back
11:33.2
in the day was a form of violation of
11:35.5
separation of church and state I think
11:36.8
even Uh The Great Cynthia Villar was was
11:40.9
you know making arguments along those
11:42.2
lines Anong basa niyo on the Kiboy case
11:44.4
like For instance
11:46.6
well the charge against him is a
11:49.5
violation a criminal cri a crime
11:53.4
violation of the revised Penal Code so
11:56.2
there's nobody Who is exempt I mean a PR
11:59.5
cannot be exempt or Cardinal cannot be
12:01.3
exempt for violating the revised Penal
12:04.2
Code so i don't think that that will
12:07.1
pass now Uh J This is totally unrelated
12:11.5
to to the topic and all but speaking of
12:14.3
lawyers Ano bang latest ulit Ito na
12:17.1
naman every week Nasaan si because
12:20.1
according to um Congressman Percy hindi
12:23.8
siya magtataka kung Morocco na sabi niya
12:26.1
ay I'm sure It will be a great place si
12:29.2
senator jilan kahapon sabi niya baka
12:30.9
Dubai Hindi na Abu Dhabi pero Dubai so
12:35.0
kasi wala na siyang nag-live ngayon eh
12:36.8
so iba Siguro yung time zone niya Hindi
12:38.6
na kami magkakatapat justice meron baong
12:41.3
balita kay x human rights lawyer kung
12:43.7
ano na anong I really don't have info on
12:46.7
that on his whereabouts dapat Gawa tayo
12:49.7
ng tiktok series na sansi parang yung
12:53.2
Where is Doris parang mga Gan Where is
12:56.0
Doris Where in the world is the world
12:59.3
like Gawa tayo ng ganyan series justice
13:02.2
tapos tawag ako every series justice
13:04.6
bitan ko may ganyan ganyan ' ba Asan po
13:06.7
yung mga extradition '
13:09.6
ba I have already a tiktok idea justice
13:12.5
Let's make something soon um Nasaan si
13:14.8
ano n Saan si Doris
13:17.5
um kung kasi justice the reason I'm
13:20.5
asking it because tuwang-tuwa si panelo
13:22.8
ngayon panelo is having a a great moment
13:25.8
i mean He's shining he's in the Congress
13:28.3
he's in the Senate
13:29.8
and he's giving weird interviews Hindi
13:32.2
ba illegal for him to come out and say
13:34.7
essentially na gusto may magung mga nasa
13:38.4
military I remember there was one
13:39.6
interview he had with I think bonar or
13:41.4
something na parang sabi niya na na
13:44.2
maraming discontent diyan sa military
13:46.3
ganyan ganyan isn't that incitement to
13:48.6
sedition justice I mean or is that just
13:50.7
normal expression of Duterte freedom of
13:53.1
expression me what's going on there well
13:55.8
inciting to sed is very strict meaning
14:00.9
Uh by uttering words you immediately Uh
14:06.6
inciting people to commit lawless
14:09.7
violence eh wala namang nakikinig sa
14:12.1
kanya iun ang problema he cannot be
14:15.1
inciting to sedition because nobody
14:19.6
seriously that's the problem there and
14:22.2
that's a in fact That's a
14:26.4
Actually um senor tran who comes from a
14:29.9
military background and and you know he
14:31.7
has his way of think Sen was even more
14:34.2
unvarnished in his legal anal well he's
14:36.8
a clown So it can never be taken
14:40.3
seriously so ipso facto is disqualified
14:42.9
from inciting to sedition like but I'm
14:46.8
just saying just k Anong klaseng bansa
14:49.3
na someone just goes Hindi gusto magcut
14:51.5
ang mgaan like it's this ' ba kasi back
14:54.1
in the day They were accusing all of us
14:55.8
of being destabilizers sasabihin lang
14:57.7
natin Bakit ang tamad ni digong
14:59.4
destabilizer na tayo Bakit si digong
15:01.3
Nasa Davao na naman destabilizer in he
15:03.7
open you know So what you're saying
15:05.8
justice is if no one takes you seriously
15:07.8
you can say whatever you want because
15:11.8
incited I mean your words your
15:15.0
utterances must cause immediate action
15:18.1
on the part of the one who hearing you
15:21.0
Oh my will violence So kaya nobody is
15:29.2
so pala ganun yung mga tao ni digong so
15:31.3
strategic pala yan kasi walang seseryoso
15:34.8
sa kanila si agire Nasan na si
15:37.6
agire just well He's Quiet now he qui
15:42.3
I'm just saying Oo nga no no one Ang
15:45.3
sakit naman n justice No one takes
15:47.6
seriously parang ag if what about If si
15:50.4
Harry ro nagsabi ng justice you think
15:52.7
he'll be taken more seriously para para
15:54.8
ma-hurt si panelo Sabihin mo na lang na
15:56.9
mas serious si Harry well but if nobody
16:02.0
is incited to commit a lawless violence
16:05.6
wala rin I mean that that will be their
16:07.9
defense nobody really reacted yun
16:11.9
lang tama rin pala eh Meron palang le
16:15.4
ito si panelo ang laki pala ng room for
16:19.5
maneuver Basta yun na guys finding
16:22.3
dories meron tayong series every week
16:24.8
tinatanong ko now J um transition a
16:28.3
little bit to less depressing things but
16:30.9
still depressing Kamusta ang West
16:32.9
Philippines in terms of itong bagong
16:35.0
baselines Uh Uh legislation na pinasa ng
16:38.2
China Anong kinalaman nito sa atin Ito
16:40.6
ba ay nagpakita ng China ay nagre-recite
16:43.3
Ito ba ay nagpapakita ng China ay more
16:45.2
agresibo Ano pong basa niyo dito well
16:48.6
it's a very clever move by China because
16:52.2
Uh Chin say saying that we have drawn
16:55.5
straight baselines around scar rosol Now
17:00.2
you can draw straight baselines if you
17:04.8
Sovereignty ngayon if we if we engage
17:08.8
China Oh you cannot draw straight
17:10.9
baselines because under own CL only
17:13.8
normal baselines can be
17:16.0
drawn then we impliedly accept that they
17:19.1
have territorial Sovereignty so we what
17:21.7
we should attack Is You don't have
17:24.0
territorial Sovereignty you cannot any
17:27.2
kind of baseline straight Crooked or
17:30.1
normal or archipelagic you cannot do
17:32.7
that so iun dapat ang attack natin kasi
17:36.2
the moment We accept their premise Uh
17:39.1
that they can draw straight baselines
17:41.3
Although the baselines are not correct
17:43.6
it should be normal not straight patay
17:46.9
na tayo we admit So what we should play
17:49.0
into their narrative already Yeah we
17:51.6
that's what I'm saying Uh we should be
17:53.9
very careful because uh what we are
17:56.4
attacking Really Is that they cannot
17:59.5
St baselines only normal baselines but
18:03.1
the point is they cannot draw anything
18:05.6
there Because they don't have
18:06.9
territorial Sovereignty So this is the
18:10.4
chance for us in our reply when we
18:13.8
submit our response to the un in a note
18:16.4
verbal To Explain why we have
18:18.6
territorial Sovereignty maiipit sila
18:21.8
because they have open up the issue of
18:24.3
territorial Sovereignty so we will say
18:26.3
we have territorial Sovereignty because
18:28.3
that was in the map of the Philippines
18:32.8
173473 that it's part of Uh and the US
18:37.4
said It's part of the session Uh by in
18:40.6
the treaty of Washington of 1900 so we
18:43.8
will put all our arguments already
18:46.2
historical legal everything mapipilitan
18:51.2
reply so we can engage them because they
18:54.1
don't want to submit this to arbitration
18:56.0
this is the nearest thing that we can do
18:59.2
to bring them to this a legal discussion
19:01.7
on Why They're claiming territorial
19:04.6
Sovereignty so a response should be that
19:08.5
you cannot draw any baselines whether
19:11.5
straight normal or anything because you
19:14.4
don't have territor Sovereignty we have
19:16.4
territorial Sovereignty because of this
19:18.7
we've claimed that since 134 etc etc and
19:23.8
wait for the reply they'll be forced To
19:27.2
Explain why They're claiming territorial
19:29.6
Sovereignty So essentially what you're
19:31.5
saying is that yung baselines na ginawa
19:33.8
nila was to trap us into their narrative
19:36.7
so that we argue on their terms Yes we
19:39.3
can do is we question the very
19:40.9
foundation of narrative which is wait
19:43.5
what claim are you talking about because
19:45.8
they always say we have inherent and
19:47.9
indisputable and now we Question that
19:49.9
inherent and indisputable by coming
19:52.1
counter argument that's that's a very
19:53.8
nice way of putting it people are
19:56.4
communicating along those lines so far
19:58.0
you respond from our government agencies
20:00.2
Uh not exactly along those lines so I'm
20:03.0
trying to Uh Explain that we we just
20:07.1
have to attack their the very basis
20:10.2
premise Oo Yeah premise nila because
20:12.6
that This is a clever way for
20:16.0
them they are very subtle in fairness
20:19.0
I'll give that to China unlike the
20:20.2
russians right the russians are not
20:21.8
subtle At All right um but at least the
20:24.2
Chinese are very subtle so accordingly
20:26.4
this could be this could be a response
20:28.0
parang oh gusto mo makipagdebate ng
20:29.9
territory let's go Actually kami may
20:31.7
ebidensya kayo ngang Wala eh puro kayong
20:34.4
indisputable kasi Mambo Jumbo exactly so
20:38.0
we can now push them into our game and
20:40.1
say Oh thank for opening the space we
20:41.9
can Actually come from here that's very
20:44.0
clever counter punch no Uh justice What
20:47.2
about in terms of precedence do you see
20:49.3
this as a beginning of similar mumbo
20:52.4
jumbos around on other disputed features
20:54.2
Sabina shol For instance I don't want to
20:56.4
ideas to China But you know I'm just
20:58.0
thinking ahead Yes well
