In the Philippine House of Representatives, the selection of impeachment prosecutors follows a formal legislative procedure where the Majority Leader moves to elect specific members of the House as prosecutors for the impeachment trial, and the motion is approved by the plenary session without objection.
Installieren Sie unsere Erweiterung an, um sofort in jedem Video zu suchen
LIVE: House of Representatives plenary session I May 12, 2026Hinzugefügt:
Welcome to the House of Representatives.
Your safety is our top priority. Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with our emergency exit plan.
First, remember that illuminated exit signs will always show you the way.
Please remain calm and follow these signs in an orderly manner.
Now for your specific location. If you are on the plenary floor, exits are at both ends leading to the north and south wing lobbies.
You may also use the main entrance glass doors which open toward the flagpole area.
If you are in the middle gallery, your primary exit is through the main entrance glass doors located near the flag pole area.
If you are in the second or third floor galleries, in addition to the main door on your level, emergency exits are located at the ends of the seat rows on both the east and west sides.
All these exits will lead you to the main hallway stairways going down to the main entrance and out to the flag pole area.
A quick guide. If you are on the south side of the gallery, turn right as you go through the emergency exit. If you are on the north side, turn left. Both will lead you towards the main hallway stairways.
If you are seated at the rostroom, your nearest exits are on the north and south sides leading directly to the rear entrance lobby and out to the helipad area.
Finally, if you are unable to leave the plenary hall, do not panic. Essential safety items, a hard hat, whistle, bottled water, and flashlight are readily available under your table for your immediate use.
Thank you for your attention. Your safety is our shared responsibility.
session ru majority leader. Madam Speaker, I move to take up additional reference of business and request that the Secretary General be directed to read the titles of bills and resolutions of first reading as well as communications and committee reports.
There's a motion. Is there any objection? The secretary just directed to read the titles of the House will resolutions and committee reports.
Additional reference of business bills on first reading. House bill number 9108, an act revising the animal welfare act strengthening animal welfare standards by establishing an animal welfare bureau under the department of agriculture and for other purposes for representative Ainoai to the committee on agriculture and food. House Bill number 9109, segregating parcels of land located in Padawan, Unasan, Barangai Luwakan proper, Bagya City for military reservation of proclamation 2405 and converting them into aable and disposable public land and declaring the same open for the disposition of Bonafili qualified occupants and/or applicants under RA730 or RA100023 for representative Doman >> to the committee on natural resources.
House bill number 9110 an act creating the national creative industries investment program and for other purposes for representatives Raldes for Martin Ramalda Marie Roaldis Andrew Julian and Midre >> to the special committee on creative industry house bill number 9111 an act providing benefits and incentives to overseas Filipino workers investing in business in the Philippines by representatives Raldes Fordan Martin Raldes de Marie Roaldis Andrew Julian and Aidre to the committee and overseas workers affairs.
House bill number 9112, an act institutionalizing the field health outpatient coverage on diialysis and renal replacement therapy and for other purposes for representatives Raldisin Martin, Ramalda Marie, Ronaldo, Sandra, Julian, and Aidre to the committee on health. House Bill Number 9113, an act creating the Department of Technical Education and Skills Development, defining its powers and functions, repealing for the purpose RA7796, otherwise known as the Tesla Act of 1994, and appropriating funds.
Therefore, for representatives Rmaldas, Perdinan Martin, Rmwald, Seda, Marie, Ronaldo, Andre, Julian, and Aidre to the Committee on High and Technical Education, and the Committee on Government Reorganization. House Bill number 9114, an act institutionalizing the creation of economic and investment promotion officer in LGUs, amending for the purpose RA7160, otherwise known as the local government code of 1991 by representatives Ramaldis Pardin Martin, Roaldis Yadmarie, Raldiser, Julian and Aid >> to the committee on local government.
House Bill number 9115, an act amendating the insurance of all government properties and interest with the GSIS and for other purposes for representatives Ramaldis Ferdinand Martin, Ronaldo Sedari, Ramaldes Andrew, Julian, and Aidre >> to the Committee on Government Enterprises and Privatization.
>> House Bill number 9116, an act granting hazard pay to workers in critical industries during a state of calamity or emergency or public health emergency.
Representatives Raldis for Martin, Ramaldism Marie, Ramaldis, Andre, Julian, and Aidre.
>> To the committee on labor and employment, >> House Bill number 9117, an act increasing the allowances of Barangai officials, granting honoraria and other benefits to the Barangai workers who have served for at least one year and providing funds. Therefore, amending for the purpose the local government code of 1991 by representatives Raldisan Martin, Ramaldes Marine, Ramaldes Andrew Julian and Aid to the committee on local government. House Bill number 9118, an act integrating all provincial and subprovincial jails with the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology, amending for the purpose RA6975, otherwise known as the DIGG Act of 1990 as amended for representatives Raldisan Martin, Raldes, Marie, Roma, Julian, and Aidre to the Committee on Justice. House Bill number 9119 mandating the deployment of licensed allied health professionals to geographically isolated and disadvantaged areas and underserved regions and providing incentives.
Therefore by representatives Ramaldes Cardin Martin Raldes Marie Raldes San Julian and Aid >> to the committee on health.
House Bill number 9120, an act declaring the Philippine Maharika Highway as the national food highway, providing an integrated system for the processing, storage, transport, distribution, and monitoring of food products and appropriating funds. Therefore, for representatives, Ramados Ferdin and Martin, Ramadar, Ronaldo, Sandra, Julian, and Aidre >> to the Committee on Agriculture and Food. House Bill number 9121, an act mandating the establishment of persons with disability affairs offices and all LGUs, further amending for the purpose section 40 of RA7277 as amended by RA 1000070 otherwise known as an act establishing institutional mechanism to ensure the implementation of programs and services for persons with disabilities in every province. for representatives Rmaldoes Ferdinand Martin, Ronaldo Sedar, Ronaldo South and Aidre to the Special Committee of Persons with Disabilities. House Bill number 9122, an act institutionalizing the participation of civil society organizations in the preparation and authorization process of the annual national budget providing effectively mechanisms therefore and for other purposes for representatives Ramadosan Martin, Ramadan Marie, Ramados, and Juliana Cedre to the Canadian people's participation. House Bill number 9123, an act providing for the legal framework and mechanisms for the creation, operation, administration, and coordination of special agricultural growth zones in the Philippines.
Creating for this purpose the Philippine Agricultural Growth Zone Authority and for other purposes for representatives Ramadan Martin, Ramadarie, Ramald, Julian, and Ace >> to the Committee on Government, Enterprises and Privatization, and the Committee on Agriculture and Food. House Bill number 9124 enact rating in the depth ed the plantilia positions of guidance counselors in every elementary school and additional plentilia positions of guidance counselors for high school increasing the salaries of guidance counselors and guidance related positions and appropriating funds therefore by representatives Ramaldis Ferdinand Martinaldari Raldis Jugen and Ait >> to the committee on appropriations house bill number 9125 an act upgrading all provincial and district hospitals by providing modern medical equipment ambulance services and establishing specialty units appropriating funds there for and for other purposes for representatives Ramadas Fdillan Martin Ramadari Raldis Andrew Julian and Aidre to the committee on health bill number 9126 an act strengthening the animal welfare protection by increasing the penalties prescribed therein and by banning those invicted of animal cruelty from owning any kind of animals amending for the purposes specific sections of Republic Act number 8485 5 amended by RA 10631 otherwise known as the animal welfare act of 1998 by representative Almario Chino Miguel >> to the committee on agriculture and food. House bill number 9127 an act creating a new municipal trial court for the municipality of Himenez situated in the province of Misamis accidental in the 10th judicial region amending for the purpose Basabilang 129 otherwise known as the judiciary reorganization act of 1980 is amended and appropriating funds therefore by representatives Henry Almote and Wal Sancho Fernando >> to the committee justice house bill number 9128 an act amending R73 305 otherwise known as the Magna Carta of public health workers and for other purposes by representatives Elago and Co.
>> to the committee on health. House Bill number 9129 an act providing for the Magna Carta of private health workers by representatives elago and co >> to the committee on health. House bill number 9130 announc establishing the national financial inclusion and MSME credit access program and for other purposes for representative >> to the committee on micro small and medium enterprise development. House Bill number 9131, an act establishing a national framework for the rights, care, and integration of persons with autism, creating the inter agency council on autism, instituting a national autism care plan, and providing funds.
Therefore for representative Daza >> to the committee on health and the special committee on persons with disabilities house bill number 9132 an act creating the national coordinating council for education defining its mandate powers and functions and appropriating funds therefore by representative reto the committee on basic education and culture in the committee and higher technical education. House Bill number 9133, an act establishing the Bureau of Halal Industry, mandating the inclusivity of halal certifications in food, consumer products, healthcare, and services, and appropriating funds. Therefore, by representatives Duterte, Omar, Vincent, and Duterte Paulo, >> to the committee on trade and industry.
>> House Bill number 9134, an act excluding system losses from VAT in the sale of electricity to residential household consumers, representatives, DNO, Ismula, and BA. to the committee on ways and means.
>> House Bill number 9135, an act strengthening and expanding the Philippine Sports Hall of Fame, amending for the purpose RA8757 entitled an act establishing the Philippine Sports Hall of Fame and appropriating funds therefore representative D. Fostino Michael Carlos >> to the Committee on Youth and Sports Development.
>> House Bill number 9136, an act exempting drugs and medicines prescribed for mental health condition from VAT by Representative Ako >> to the committee on ways and means.
House Bill number 9137, an act promoting mental health and well-being in the workplace and instituting measures to prevent burnout and for other purposes for Representative Aqual.
>> To the committee on labor and employment.
>> House bill number 9138, an act establishing the National Youth Mental Health and Digital Well-being Program, providing mental health professionals in schools, regulating harmful digital practices, and strengthening early intervention for Filipino students by Representative Ako. to the committee on basic education and culture and the committee on higher and technical education. House bill number 9139 an act institutionalizing political party development and governance ensuring internal democracy and accountability prohibiting political turnism and for other purposes for representatives Aidra Teves Mendoza Abalos Aino Magisai Arbison Monourir Jr. Bernos Ching, Biones, Esparez, Legospi, Po Lopez, Orlanes, Tan, Aean, Soraniano, Yato, Woman, Henry, Makaset, and Odicado >> to the committee on suffrage and electoral reforms.
>> House bill number 9140, an act institutionalizing budget reform that will ensure the equitable distribution of funds for all municipal and Barangi LGUs for the purpose of implementation of ecological solid waste management act of 2000. appropriating funds. Therefore, for Representative Teves, >> to the committee on ecology, >> House Bill number 9141, enact creating a system for timely and scientific based cancellation of classes in public and private schools by Representative Tez.
>> To the Committee on Basic Education and Culture, >> House Bill Number 9142, an act requiring all candidates for elective public office to execute a sworn undertaking of non-engagement in government contracts within 5 years prior to the filing of certificate of candidacy. amending for the purpose relevant provisions of batasang 881 or the omnibus election code and supplementing RA 9184 government procurement reform act and RA 3019 anti-graft and corrupt practices act and for other purposes per representative tees >> to the committee on suffrage and electoral reforms >> house bill number 9143 an act establishing in the municipality of kataran province of Kagayan a a b a basic comprehensive multipety center under the kagayan valley medical center to be known as the Dr. Thomas Nolasco senior multispety multi-p specialty center and appropriating funds therefore by representative Nolasco >> to the committee on health bill number 9144 an act reducing the VAT from 12% to 10% amending for the purpose the national internal revenue code of 1997 as amended by representative Montes >> to the committee on waste and means >> house bill number 9145 an act mandating the alignment of the national youth development plan with the sustainable development goals requiring the NYC to publish youth development indicators and institutionalizing SDG's localization for youth and appropriating funds.
Therefore, by Representative Montes >> to the Committee on Youth and Sports Development, >> House Bill 9146, an act mandating the NYC to formulate, implement, and monitor a national youth mental health strategy and appropriating funds. Therefore by representative Montes >> to the committee on youth and sports development >> house bill 9147 declaring November 4 of every year a special non-working holiday in the province of Quzon in commemoration of the death anniversary of revolutionary hero Aolinario de la Cruz popularly known as Hermanopuli by representatives Montes and Veratan Keith Mah and Aroancha >> to committee on local government bill 9148 an act establishing the Kolinga program to shield Filipino households workers farmers fisher folk transport operators and MSMES from fuel-driven inflation energy supply disruptions and essential goods price shocks and for other purposes by representative escodero >> to the ad hoc committee on legislative energy action and development. House Bill 9149 an act establishing the Philippine open finance framework ensuring consumer financial data portability enhancing competition and innovation in the financial sector strengthening data privacy and security and for other purposes by representatives Ramaldes Ferdin Martin Ramaldes yadari Ramaldes Andrew Julian and Aidre >> to the committee on backs and financial intermediaries >> house bill 9156 an act reducing the VAT from 12% to 10% amending for the purpose sections 106A 107A and 108A of the national internal revenue code of 1997 as amended Ed by representatives Dionos and Daniel Ismoola and Bagaw to the committee on ways and means.
>> House bill 9158, an act mandating a 14th month pay for employees in the private sector by representatives San Fernando.
>> To the committee on labor and employment. House Bill 9159, an act providing exception to the confidentiality of bank deposits for public officials, amending for the purpose RA1405, otherwise known as the secrecy of bank deposits law, requiring the disclosure and verification of certain bank deposits and investments of such officials and prescribing penalties for violations thereof by Representative San Fernando >> to the committee on banks and financial intermediaries. House Bill 9160, an act establishing a national groundwater preservation and management program providing for the sustainable use protection and restoration of groundwater resources and for other purposes by Representative Olivarez.
>> To the committee on public works and highways, >> House Bill 9161, an act establishing the National Center for Cooperative Development in the PUP and appropriating funds therefore by Representative Olivarez. to the committee on Iron Technical Education.
>> House Bill 9162, an enact institutionalizing affordable funeral services for indigent families and appropriating funds therefore by Representative Olivarez >> to the Committee on Social Services.
>> House Bill 9163, an act mandating the establishment of the Philippine online library and the digitalization digitization of all prescribed references for public education, providing funds for and for other purposes by Representative Olivarez. to the committee on basic education and culture.
>> House Bill 9164, an act providing for natural flood management and erosion control mechanisms, strengthening ecosystem based approaches to disaster reduction, and for other purposes by representative Oliver.
>> To the committee on disaster resilience, House Bill 9165, an act exempting the system loss charge component in the sale of electricity by distribution companies and electric cooperatives from the coverage of the VAT amending for the purpose section 109 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997 as amended by representatives, Elago, and Co. to the committee on ways and means resolutions. House resol resolution 990 a resolution commending Dr. Irwin Ken Anqual Partaso for ranking first in the March 2026 physicians lenture examination and for bringing honor to the Lysium Northwestern University the Gupan city and the province of Pangasinan by representative Deanesha >> to the committee on civil service and professional regulation. House Resolution 991, a resolution commending the Philippine Maritime Industry Authority and Philippine Maritime Ataché Attorney Sharon De Chavis Alto for the country's election as chair of the subcommittee on human element training and watchkeeping of the International Maritime Organization and recognizing the Philippines leadership in global maritime governance by Representative Odokado >> to the committee on transportation.
House resolution 992 resolution strongly condemning the live fire testing during the Balikatan 2026 exercises of a tomhawk land attack missile of the United States from Takloban airport upon a target in lower AIA both civilian sites in violation of Philippine sovereignty the constitutional state policy renunciating war as an instrument of national policy and international humanitarian law prohibition of the use of civilian objects for military purposes by representatives do Elagoeno >> to the committee on national defense and security house resolution 993 resolution calling for the appropriate house committees to conduct an investigation in aid of legislation into the systemic failures of the national solid waste management framework in light of landfill incidents in Cebu City, Nevada city and Razal province with the envying sustainable infrastructure and rigorous regulatory oversight by representatives and Bagaw to the committee on rules.
House resolution 994 resolution condemning the baseless malicious and irresponsible allegations against executive secretary Ralph G. Reto and Governor Vil Masantis Reto made by Representative Leandre Elvis Vista in his privileged speech before the House of Representatives on May 5, 2026 by Representatives Recto, Balia, Kientes, Demakua, and Luis. to the committee on rules.
>> House resolution 995, resolution directing the House Committee on Energy to conduct to conduct an inquiry in aid of legislation into the recent surge in electricity bills and the impact of the lifeline rate subsidy and other pass through charges on Filipino consumers for the purpose of ensuring equitable, transparent and sustainable electricity rates and protecting consumers from undue financial burdens where representatives do and to the committee on rules. House Resolution 996, a resolution calling the House Committee on Labor and Employment to conduct an inquiry in a native of legislation into alleged labor violations and unfair labor practices committed against workers across companies under the Lopez group, including ABS CBN Corporation, Sky Cable Corporation, and related contractors such as Third Generation Services, Inc. and Source Tech Solutions, Inc., and to determine accountability, enforcement gaps, including in labor inspection and regulation by the Department of Labor and Employment and necessary legislative measures to strengthen worker protection by Representative San Fernando. To the committee on rules, messages from the Senate. message dated May 5, 2026 informing the House of Representatives that on even date the Senate designated senators Aino, Gachalan, Camille Ailar, Villaina, and Alan Peter Kitano as members of the conference committee to reconcile the disagreeing provisions of Senate Bill 1981 titled an act establishing the private basic education voucher program and appropriating funds.
Therefore, repeating for the purpose RA6728 or the government assistance to students and teachers in private education as amended and House Bill number 4744 titled an act establishing the private basic education voucher program writing for the creation of the Bureau of Private Education and appropriating funds. Therefore, repeating for the purpose sections 234-243 56 71 121 13 and 15 of RA8545 otherwise known as the expanded government assistance to students and teachers in private education act which amended RA 6728 otherwise known as the government assistance to students and teachers in private education act to the committee on rules message dated May 596 informing the House of Representatives on an even date the Senate approved the conference committee report on the disagreeing provisions of House Bill 5939 and Senate Bill 1899 titled an act allowing the Department of Education the flexibility to determine the pedagogical approaches to be implemented in the basic education curriculum amending for the purpose section 5 of RA 10533 or the enhanced basic education act of 2013 to the committee rules message dated May 5, 2026 informing the House of Representatives that an even date. The Senate approved the conference committee report on the disagreeing provisions of Senate Bill 1937 and House Bill 4745 titled an act institutionalizing support for public basic education schools in geographically isolated and disadvantaged areas and underserved communities and appropriating funds.
Therefore >> to the committee rules subpoena duskum pursuant to section 153 rule 24 of the provisional rules of the house of representatives transmitting the subpoena duskum dated April 28 206 issued by the office of the ombbudsman FF-jan-26-57 FF-J-6-0058 and FF- C-Jan-6-0063 Committee report Committee report 269 submitted by the special committee on creative Industries on House Resolution 101, committee report number 270 submitted by the committee on flagship programs and projects on House Resolution 103 >> to the committee on rules.
>> Madame Speaker, >> yes honorable Toby Chango, your record.
>> Madam Speaker, can I know the nature and the title of the subpoena destudsman?
Secretary General, Majority Leader, >> move to suspend.
>> Session suspended.
session resume.
The secretary general will be providing you a copy. The honorable Toby Jango. Um Madame Speaker, I want it to read out in session because um first of all, Sabina Teham shouldn't be referred in the order of Mistress because this is an administrative matter that should be acted upon by the Secretary General's office. So it should not be included in the um additional reference of business because it should be acted upon by the office of the secretary general and should not be referred to the plenary.
>> Session suspended.
directed to section.
Just a notification.
That's your response.
What's going to be I will just call you and then you will mention and then you will I'll Amen.
We'll wait.
session resume. Majority Leader, Madame Speaker, uh in relation to the motion and the the inquiry of the honorable uh Tanko, uh we just wanted to clarify that the item being referred to earlier, Madame Speaker, is not a referral to the plenary. It is only a notification of the House, Madame Speaker, pursuant to rule 24, section 153 of the rules of the house. Honorable Toby Tranco.
>> Yes, Madame Speaker. The um explanation is well noted and accepted. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Majority Leader.
Madam Speaker, under the calendar of business for the day, I move to consider House Bill number 4706 as contained in the committee report number 141 submitted by the committee on people's participation. And for this purpose, may I request the secretary general be directed to read the title of the bill.
>> There's a motion. Is there any objection? The chair hears none. The secretary general's directed to read the title of the bill.
>> House Bill number 4706, an act amending Republic Act number 9418, otherwise known as the Volunteer Act of 2007 to declare the month of December as National Volunteer Month and December 5 as National Volunteer Day and for other purposes. Majority Leader.
>> Madam Speaker, I move to open the period of sponsorship and debate and that the chairperson and of the committee of people's participation, the honorable Maria Angela S. Garcia be recognized to begin the sponsorship of the measure.
>> There's a motion. Is there any objection? The chair hears none. The motion is approved and the honorable Maria Angela Garcia of the third district of Batan is recognized for her sponsorship speech.
Madame speaker, honorable leaders of this chamber and distinguished colleagues, good afternoon. On behalf of the committee on people's participation, I rise to sponsor committee report number 141 and respectfully seek the approval of House Bill number 4706 entitled an act declaring the month of December of every year as National Volunteer Month in the entire country and institutionalizing the celebration of December 5 as National Volunteer Day.
amending for the purpose Republic Act number 9418 otherwise known as the volunteer act of 2007.
This measure seeks to institutionalize two important national observances.
The declaration of December as National Volunteer Month and the observance of December 5 as National Volunteer Day aligned with a globally recognized international volunteer day.
This proposal is especially timely as the United Nations has declared 2026 as the international volunteer volunteer year or IV 2026 recognizing volunteerism as a vital force in building stronger and a more sustainable communities.
Volunteerism has long been deeply rooted in the Filipino identity. The spirit of Bayanihan reflects our enduring culture of solidarity, compassion, and collective action. Across our communities, volunteerism continues to thrive, not only during times of calamity and crisis, but also in everyday acts of service that uplift our people and strengthen our nation.
Despite reports of declining global generosity in recent years, the Philippines continues to rank among the countries with high levels of volunteer participation.
This reflects the generosity of the Filipino people and our shared commitment to helping one another and in serving the common good. Our government likewise recognizes the important role of volunteers in nation building through partnerships among government agencies, civil society organizations, schools, faith-based groups, and the private sector. Volunteerism continues to contribute significantly to education, health care, environmental protection, disaster response and community development by institutionalizing national volunteer month and national volunteer day. This measure seeks to seeks to further strengthen the culture of volunteerism in our country, encourage greater participation, especially among the youth, and formally recognize the invaluable contributions of Filipino volunteers.
This proposal also builds upon earlier national initiatives recognizing volunteerism.
Proclamation number 194 signed by President Corasonino in 1987 declared every fifth day of December as International Volunteer Day for Economic and Social Development in the Philippines. Meanwhile, proclamation number 55 signed by President Joseph Ehersito Estrada in 1998 declared the month of December as National Volunteer Month.
House Bill number 4706 now seeks to instit institutionalize these observances through legislation, ensuring their continuity and lasting significance for future generations.
Through this measure, we honor the countless Filipinos who freely give their time, skills, and compassion in service to others. Madame Speaker, I respectfully seek the support of this August chamber for the approval of House Bill number 4706.
Thank you very much, Madame Speaker.
>> Majority Leader.
>> Madame Speaker, there being no member who wishes to interpret the sponsor, I move to close the period of sponsorship and debate.
>> An objection hearing none. The period of sponsorship, debate, and interpolation is hereby terminated.
Majority leader, >> Madame Speaker, I move to open the period of amendments.
>> Any objection? Hearing none, the period of amendments is hereby opened.
Majority leader, >> Madame Speaker, there being no individual amendments, I move to close the period of amendments. Any objection hearing? None. The period of amendments is hereby closed. Majority leader.
Madam Speaker, I move to vote on second reading House Bill number 4706.
>> There is a motion to approve House Bill 4706 as contained in committee report 141.
All those in favor say I.
>> I. All those who are not in favor say nay.
The eyes have it. House bill 4706 is hereby approved on second reading.
Majority leader.
>> Madame speaker, I move to recognize the guests of representative Jer Luistro of the second district of Batangas. They are from the Batangas 2 Electric Cooperative Incorporated.
Danilo M. Gulfo Sirako B. Kalinisan, Editha Zara, Fernando C. Ambal, Dolores A. Bolano, Norberto M. Maliban, Alma M. Mendoza, Mary Jean M. Ramos, Wilfredo F. Rosario, Agnes B. Valencia, Isagani M. Villanovva, Luella Leica N.
Delmundo, and engineer Octavius M.
Mendoza >> to the guests from Batanga's 2 electric cooperative incororated batel 2 headed by Mr. Danilo Gulfo, the guests BBwan Sabong Batangas, the guest of the legal luminary and our pride, the chairwoman of the committee on justice, the honorable attorney, Jerville Jinki Bitrix Luisagpal.
Welcome to the House of the People.
Majority Leader.
>> Madame Speaker, may we also recognize the guests of the Honorable Amado Carlos Bolia IVth of the fourth district of Batangas. They are from the Batangas Electric Cooperative, namely Mr. Danilo Gulfo, Mr. Alberto Luna, Mr. Marlino Braga, Mr. Sriyako Kalinisan, Miss Aditha Zara, Mr. Fernando Ambal, Mr. Henry Aretta, Miss Dolores Bulano, Miss Claire Landicho, Mr. Norberto Maliban, Miss Alma Mendoza, Mr. Cesar Oena, Miss Mary Jean Ramos, Miss Mr. Wilfredo Rosario, Miss Agnes Valencia, Mr. Isagani Villainva, Engineer Octavius Mendulsa, and Miss Luella Leica Delmundo. Madame Speaker, >> the guests of the honorable Amado Carlos Bulia IVth, please rise to be acknowledged.
Pagal, welcome to the House of Representatives.
Majority Leader, Madame Speaker, under the calendar of business for the day, I move to consider House Bill number 8420 as contained in committee report number 148. And for this purpose, may I request that the Secretary General be directed to read the title of the bill.
The Secretary General is hereby directed to read the title of House Bill 8420.
>> House Bill 8420, an act defining technology facilitated violence against women and their children, providing protective measures, and prescribing penalties for violations thereof, amending for the purpose Republic Act number 9262, otherwise known as the Antiviolence against women and their children act of 2004. Majority Leader.
>> Madame Speaker, I move to open the period of sponsorship and debate and that the chairperson of the committee on women and gender equality.
Any objection be recognized to begin the sponsorship of the measure. Hearing none, the period the period of sponsorship debate and interpolation in so far as House Bill 8420 is hereby opened. And for this purpose, we recognize the hardworking chairman of the committee on gender equality who never rests and who never sleeps, the honorable an Matibag of the first district of Lagona. Please proceed.
>> Madame Speaker, distinguished colleagues, good afternoon. As chairperson of the committee on women and gender equality, I rise today with a deep sense of duty and urgency to sponsor and seek for the approval of committee report number 148 on House Bill number 8420 entitled an act defining technology facilitated violence against women and and their children, providing protective measures and prescribing penalties for violations thereof. Amending for the purpose republic act number 9262 otherwise known as the antiviolence against women and their children act of 20 2004. Madame speaker our society today exists in two worlds. The physical and the digital. Technology has transformed the way we live learn communicate and build relationships. It has connected people across distances and created new opportunities for education, business, governance and social participation.
But alongside these advancements comes a harsh reality. Technology has become a weapon. A weapon used to threaten, to humiliate, to control, to exploit, to destroy dignity. Today, abuse no longer ends when the door closes. It follows women and children into their phones, their social media accounts, their private messages, their workplaces, and even their homes. This is the reality that House Bill number 8420 seeks to address. Republic Act number 9262 has long stood as a landmark law in protecting women and children from violence. But 20 years after its passage, we are confronted with new forms of abuse that were once unimaginable.
The law must evolve because violence has evolved. This measure recognizes and defines technology facilitated violence against women and their children or TF vows acts committed to digital platforms, information and communication technology, data misuse, online harassment or other technological means that cause emotional, psychological, sexual, economic or physical harm.
Madame Speaker, this bill is not merely about technology. It is about human dignity. It is about safety. It is about ensuring that women and children are protected in every space including the digital space. And this call resonates even more strongly today following the participation of President Ferdinand R.
Marcus Jr. At the 70th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women in New York, in his national statement before the United Nations, our dear President Marcus reminded the world, "Women must be present wherever decisions are made in government, in business, in science, in diplomacy, and in peace building." He further emphasized if women are educated, safe, able to work, able to lead, able to decide the course of their own lives, then a society is moving forward. And most importantly, he said when women lead, nations move forward. Madame Speaker, these are not just words of aspiration. They are called to action because women cannot lead if they are silenced. They cannot thrive if they are constantly threatened. They cannot participate equally in society if fear and abuse follow them even in the digital world. This is why this measure is necessary. Among the salent features of this proposed law are the following.
Defining new and emergent online offenses. This bill finally recognizes modern forms of digital abuse, including the unauthorized recording, creation, alteration, or sharing of intimate images or videos, including AI generated deep fakes, the creation of fake social media accounts to harass, shame, or impersonate victims, cyber stalking through hacked accounts, location tracking, or unauthorized access to personal data, online threats, sexual exploitation, digital blackmail, and other forms of of technology enabled abuse. Madame Speaker, the pain caused by these acts does not disappear with a click. The damage can spread rapidly, remain online indefinitely, and leave life trauma.
This bill imposes penalties or of reclusion temporal and fines ranging from 300 to 500 pesos recognizing the severe and longlasting impact of digital violence. This sends a clear message.
The digital space is not a safe haven for abusers.
This bill empowers courts to direct digital platforms, internet service providers, and other entities to remove, block, or take down harmful content. For victims of online abuse, time is critical. Every hour of exposure can mean further humil humiliation, further harassment, and further trauma. This law provides a quicker and more responsive mechanism for protection. The measure also includes the paid leave benefit for employed victims from 10 days to 20 days. This gives survivors the necessary time to seek medical attention, psychological support, legal assistance, and personal recovery without fearing the loss of their livelihood. The bill mandates the Department of Justice to implement measures to protect the identity, location, and personal information of victims. In an age where information can be easily tracked, leaked, or exploited, protecting a victim's privacy is also protecting their safety. Madame Speaker, this proposed law is the result of years of consultation, study, and legislative work. It consolidates 10 related House bill reflecting the collective efforts of advocates, lawmakers, women's groups, legal experts, law enforcement agencies, digital rights advocates, and survivors themselves. This measure has been discussed across several congresses. The problem has already been studied. The need has already been established. The time to act is now. Every day that this measure is delayed is another day that women and children remain exposed to digital abuse without adequate legal protection. Violence is violence.
Whether it is committed inside the home, on the streets, or through screen, as legislators, we cannot allow our laws to fall behind the realities faced by the people we are sworn to protect. The digital world should be a space for learning, connection, opportunity, and empowerment, not a place of fear, abuse, and silence. By passing House Bill 8420, we affirm that the rights, safety, and dignity of women and children shall be protected in every space, physical or digital. And in doing so, we answer the call of this generation, to build a society where women are not only empowered to lead, but are also safe enough to live, speak, and participate. and mostly drive. Madame Speaker, distinguished colleagues, I therefore respectfully and earnestly seek your full support for the immediate approval of committee report number 148 on House Bill number 8420.
Majority Leader.
>> Madame Speaker, we'd like to recognize Representative Kaka J. Bagawa from the Lone District of Dinagat Islands for her sponsorship speech.
>> The strong advocate who never seesed to fight for women rights. The honorable Kakapaka is hereby recognized to sponsor House Bill 8420.
Thank you, Madame Speaker. I stand today to sponsor committee report number 148 or House Bill 8420 or the expanded antiviolence against women and their children act. This measure updates Republic Act number 9262 or the VOC to meet the digital age, ensuring our laws protect women and children where they live today, not just in physical homes, but in digital spaces. This measure is a lifeline for women, especially in geographically isolated and disadvantaged areas. In the farthest islands of Ginagat or in the highest mountains of the Cordilleras, a woman may be miles away from a courthouse, but she is often only a click away from her abuser.
Data from plan international digital violence report 2020 shows that 58% of girls have experienced online harassment and in rural settings this often leads to digital silencing where women withdraw from public life entirely.
Locally, the Philippine National Police in 2023 reported a 152% increase in recorded cyber crimes against women and children compared to the previous years. For a woman in a remote area, digital harassment can lead to total social isolation with no physical sanctuary to turn to. House Bill 8420 addresses this by number one expanding jurisdiction. A survivor in a remote province no longer has to travel to the capital so so she can file a case where she resides at the time she learns of the offense.
Number two, empowering local support. It mandates LGUs and the DSWD to provide not just shelter but counseling, psychosocial services and livelihood assistance. It it uh provides for identity protection. The DOJ will administer an identity location confidentially program providing survivors with substitute addresses to keep their actual whereabouts hidden from abusers. And lastly, paid leave.
We're granting survivors a 20-day paid leave to attend to legal and medical needs, ensuring that seeking justice doesn't mean losing a paycheck. We are telling every Filipina wherever she lives in the heart of Manila or the most distant CTO in the Nagat Islands that her safety is non-negotiable.
We're updating our shields for the digital age. Madam Speaker, let us pass House Bill 8420 because in our fight for a vow Philippines, Speaker, I move to now recognize the representative uh Renee Luis Mco of Party List Kabatan for her sponsorship speech.
The Honorable Renee Luis Kof Party List Kabatan is recognized for her sponsorship speech.
Thank you, Madame Speaker. Madame Speaker, esteemed colleagues We stand today to sponsor the expanded antiviolence against women and their children act.
victim survivors, patriarchal abuse, Republic Act number 9262, 2004.
Back then, the internet was not the all-encompassing arena it is today.
semicolonial at semifudalan technology has been weaponized to treat women's bodies as commodities and targets of systemic oppression.
Despite our previous victories with the Safe Spaces Act, glaring gaps remain in protecting women within the context of intimate or dating relationships. In this bill, we highlight that electric violence against women has emerged as a significant global issue carrying serious economic and societal consequences.
Video scandals at online harassment deliberate acts to silence and dominate women using information and communications technology.
With this, Madam Speaker, we propose to redefine psychological violence to explicitly include acts committed through ICT devices. We define electronic violence or ICT related violence as acts causing mental or emotional distress through the use of data and electronic media.
One, criminalizing unauthorized media.
So recording, reproduction or distribution of media showing the victim's private parts or sexual conduct without consent. Number two, targeting cyber harassment, harassing, intimidating or vilifying a woman through text messaging or creation of fake social media accounts with malice and stalking or hacking. Stalking through GPS tracking or unauthorized hacking of personal social networking accounts.
We demand that these acts be punished by electrusion temporal. Furthermore, we propose that ICT related violence be imprescriptible as the digital footprint of these crimes causes indelible and permanent harm.
Rights are empty words. If a survivor must choose between her safety and her livelihood, The EVOC bill introduces 20 days of paid leave, location confidentiality program and administrative accountability.
Our constitution mandates that the state shall prioritize education and well-being for total human liberation and development.
Madam Speaker, the youth and women are watching.
We demand a reality where our dignity is non-negotiable.
Madam Speaker, let us prove that this Congress serves the people's interests and not that of perpetrators. Let us pass the expanded anti- vowy act to ensure that no Filipina ever has to face her abuser alone again.
Majority Leader.
>> Madame Speaker, I would like to recognize I move to recognize Representative Sarah Jane Ilago of the Party Lista. Gabriella for her sponsorship speech.
>> The Honorable Sarah Jane Elago of Party List. Gabriella is hereby recognized to sponsor House Bill 8420.
internet.
for technology facilitated violence against women.
Online or offline Social media messaging apps, artificial intelligence, email, smart devices, cyber stalking, unwanted messages, smart devices, location data. Technology makes the harm faster, wider, and harder to escape, but accountability has not kept up. This is why this representation from Gabriella Women's Party is proud to likewise principally author and sponsor House Bill number 8420, defining technology facilitated violence against women and their children, providing protective measures, and prescribing penalties for violations thereof. This bill defines technology facilitated violence against women and their children as all forms of violence committed through information and communication technologies, electronic devices or digital media. Ensuring accountability for physical, sexual, psychological, and economic harm, including recording and distributing unauthorized intimate photos, videos, or deep fakes, harassing or threatening through text, cyber or multimedia means, stalking by hacking accounts, or exploiting location data, creating fake social media accounts with malicious intent.
Injury from this TF vow is often minimized because there are no visible bruises. But the injuries are real from panic attacks, loss of sleep and fear for safety among others.
House Bill number 8420 awareness raising education at empowerment efforts. House Bill number 8420 also imposes penalties of of reclaim temporal and stiffer fines from 300,000 to 500,000 pesos. It authorizes courts to issue protection orders for immediate blocking, blacklisting, shutdown, removal or disabling of harmful uploads programs subject to due process.
Madam Speaker, one particular amendment primarily forwarded by this representation from Gabriella Women's Party is extending the grant of paid leave for victims from the maximum of 10 up to the maximum of 20 days which can be extendable as necessary. Likewise, we shall oblige employers to act on these applications the same day. Superiors who deny or fail to act on applications of 20-day paid leave shall be penalized.
Victims, shelter, counseling, rehabilitation, livelihood, medical and legal assistance, House Committee on Women and Gender Equality, allies from all genders.
Most of all, our deepest tribid tribute is for the women, the survivors, the advocates, the organizers, the unwavering voices who have refused to let violence against women be normalized. They have bravely fought fought through the shame, the fear, the indifference, demanding justice, demanding equality, demanding accountability and striving to dismantle the climate of impunity with their collective persistence.
Violence against women of House Bill number 8420 system upgrade protection system upgrade system Change bill number 8420.
Majority leader.
Madam Speaker, I now move to recognize Representative Laya M. D Lima of the ML party list for her manifestation.
The honorable Laya D Lima of Mamameayang party list and her legal luminary the former secretary of justice >> defender of women is recognized for manifestation.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. This is not an interpolation. It is a manifestation of support.
I stand before this body to support a measure that strikes at the very heart of contemporary injustice.
With profound conviction, I manifest my unwavering and steadf steadfast support for this bill, House Bill number 8420 or the expanded vow act.
Imperative response at digital interface, social media, electronic communications, digital platforms Theaters of violence, psychological torment, sexual harassment, economic coercion, reputational destruction, digital abuse.
By formally recognizing and penalizing technology facilate facilitated violence against women and their children or TF vowc. This bill accomplishes what was long overdue. It closes a dangerous legal gap that has allowed abusers to exploit exploit technological loopholes with impunity. This measure strengthens existing legal protections under RA9262, transforming a a static law into a living instrument responsive to contemporary realities. It appropriately expands the definition of psychological violence to encompass acts perpetrated through electronic and information and communications technology or ICT devices. establishing unambiguous mechanisms for protection, accountability, and enforcement. Equally commendable and transformative are the bill's provisions authorizing the issuance of protective orders for the blocking, removal, or disabling of harmful online content and malicious applications. More profoundly still, this measure recognizes the humanity of victim survivors by granting them additional live benefits during the pendency of protection orders, investigations, and criminal proceedings. These provisions acknowledge a truth that statistics cannot capture the severe and lasting psychological toll of online abuse. They provide victims not merely legal recourse but the space and support necessary to pursue healing, recovery and justice. In passing this measure, we send a resolute message that our nation will not tolerate the weaponization of technology against our most vulnerable citizens and that the law will stand as their shield and sword. In view of the compelling imperatives outlined, I manifest full and equivocal support for the immediate passage of House Bill number 84220 and urgently call this honorable body to advance a swift approval into law.
Majority Leader.
Madam Speaker, there being no other member who wishes to interpate the sponsor, I move to close the period of sponsorship and debate.
>> Any objection? Hearing none, the period of sponsorship, debate, and interpolation on House Bill 8420 is hereby terminated.
Majority leader, >> Madam Speaker, I move to open the period of amendments.
>> Any objection? Hearing none, the period of amendments is hereby opened. Majority leader, >> Madam Speaker, there being no committee nor individual amendments, I move to close the period of amendments.
>> Any objection hearing? None. Motion is carried. Majority leader, >> Madam Speaker, I move to vote on second reading House Bill number 8420.
>> There is a motion to vote on second reading House Bill 8420 as contained in committee report number 148. All those in favor say I. I.
>> All those who are not in favor say nay.
The eyes have it. House Bill 8420 is approved on second reading.
Majority leader.
Madame Speaker, I would like to recognize and welcome the guests of uh Representative Jefferson F. Kong Hun of the first district of Zambales. Uh the officials and members of Scatoda, zone 4 and five and three officials of Barangay Kawwag from Subi Zambales headed by Renand Bao, the president of zone 4 and Omar A. Pbanko the president of zone 5.
Speaker >> to the officials and members of Scatada zone four and five and the officials from Barangi Kawag of Subsubik Sambales.
Please rise to be acknowledged. Headed by respective presidents Renan Bao and Omar A. Pabango.
They are the guests of our deputy speaker honorable Jefferson Kungun.
welcome to the House of the People.
Majority Leader Move to suspend for a few minutes.
Session suspended.
session resumed.
>> Majority leader. Madam Speaker, under the calendar of unfinished business, I move to resume consideration of House Bill number 8389 contained in committee report number 143 submitted by the committee on suffrage and electoral reforms and that the chairman of the committee, Honorable Zia Alonto be recognized. Madam Chair, >> Secretary General is hereby directed to read the title of House Bill 839 89 as contained in committee report 143.
House Bill 8389, an act prohibiting political dynasties in national and local elective offices.
>> Madame Speaker, >> Madam Speaker, >> was the pleasure of the honorable Eric.
>> Uh, may I call for a roll call?
We don't have a quum.
session resumed.
May we request the secretary general to resume the reading of House Bill the title the reading of the title of House Bill 8389.
>> House Bill 8389, an act prohibiting political dynasties in national and local elective offices.
There was a pending motion to recognize the sponsor of said measure, the honorable Zia Adyong of the first district of Lano Delsour. The honorable Adong is hereby recognized.
Thank you uh majority leader. Thank you Madam Speaker.
Uh Madam Speaker, I am now uh it's my distinct privilege to sponsor House Bill uh 8389 and I am now ready to welcome interpolation from the floor.
>> Majority Leader, >> Madam Speaker, I move to recognize the lady from party list ML, Representative Leila M. D Lima for her interpolation.
The honorable deputy minority leader from party list Mamaya ML Mama Mayang Liberal, the honorable Laya De Lima is hereby recognized for her interpolation.
Salamat po. Madam Speaker, and I thank my partymate, Congressman Ega, for accommodating my interpolation today and uh withdrawing for today his uh question on the uh on on the quorum.
Will the very esteemed sponsor yield to questions?
>> Of course. Uh Mr. Speaker, I will welcome the questions from the honorable lady from the ML Party list, Congresswoman Dimma.
There's one fundamental question.
Does this bill, the substitute consolidated bill, House Bill 8389, actually prohibit political dynasties, or does it merely create the appearance of doing so?
The records would show that's my preliminary statement. It's not yet the questions spot. Ma madam madam speaker we held three consult three public consultations.
We received 23 position papers. We invited several resource persons including two retired Supreme Court justices, a former KMAC chairman and the country's foremost political scientists to the committee hearings. They all spoke. The question is whether the committee listened for preliminaries.
Madam Speaker, distinguished sponsor, I wish the confirmation the confirmation of this fact.
In the Bhuuba, there were 25 originally 25 bills on anti-political dynasty.
>> Yeah, Mr. Spe, Madam Speaker, your honor, that is correct. Um I am not certain with the numbers with the actual numbers of the correspond the the versions uh referred to the committee but more or less m madam speaker your honor the 25 is uh is probably correct in terms of the different versions that were sub submitted and referred to the committee on electoral reforms >> and out of the 25 withdraw ultimately at the committee level That is correct. Uh Madam Speaker, Madam Speaker, your honor, as a consequence of the consolidated and the adopted version of the committee, Madam Speaker, uh eight of the original authors of the measure withdrawn uh their sponsor and their authorship on the said measure. Madam Speaker, your honor, >> the records would show that third round of deliberations at committee level, which is actually the last the final round of committee deliberations.
There was a motion to consolidate the 25 measures on antipolitical dynasty and use House Bill 6771, the one filed jointly by Speaker Bojid and Majority Leader uh Sandro Marcos as the working draft.
Madam Speaker, your honor, >> but it was objected to by two members of the minority, representatives and objected to the consolidation of the 25 measures and use the uh House Bill 6771 and let and for uh easy reference, let us just refer to it as the D and Marcos bill.
M yes I could not recall exactly what happened but what I can actually madam speaker your honor can remember is that eight of the original authors of the different versions submitted to the committee on electoral reform withdraw their uh authorships and therefore in effect also withdraw uh withdrawn their uh bills and so madam speaker as to uh the objection probably madam speaker I can I can surmise Madam Speaker, that there were few members of the electoral committee that objected uh to the adoption of a working draft as a version of the committee to be submitted to this plenary. Madam Speaker, your honor, bills, po 209, uh authored by representatives coin, House Bill 2037, authored by Congressman Eric.
House Bill 2131 authored by this representation.
House Bill 4784 authored by Representative Elago. House Bill 5905 authored by Representatives Bagau and Da Jono and Ismula.
House Bill 6925 authored by Representative Yap. House Bill 7096 authored by Montes, Representative Montes and Ant and Tan and House Bill 7513 authored by Representative Abante. Would the uh distinguished sponsor confirm that those were the eight withdrawn bills? Madam Speaker, I uh have full trust and confidence in the list of uh House bills that were mentioned by the uh good lady from ML and I believe I don't have the exact house uh numbered bills right with me but uh they were quite the the exact house bills that were withdrawn. Madam Speaker, your honor, >> it was confirmed the distinguished sponsor confirmed that it was the D and Marcos bill that was adopted as a working draft. May we know what is the standard for choosing the D and Marquus bill? Is it because it had the most number of co-authors?
>> Uh yes, Madam Speaker. Uh the one that we anticipate, Madam Speaker, in trying to forward or to deliver a committee report is based on the version of the House bills that garnered the most number of co-authorships because we want to anticipate, Madam Speaker, that this would go through the process of adopting it in its final version, Madam Speaker.
And so the uh presumption of this honor of this humble representation along with the members of the committee is that since it has garnered the most number of co-authorships then that would also translate into actual votes in the plenary. Madam speaker your honor >> and that was the only standard because it has the most number of co-authors standard ginamit standard for example it contains the uh features the exact features the uh authentic features that would really show that it is an anti-political dynasty bill. Yeah, m Madam Speaker, there are also other considerations. Madam Speaker, first is the degree of consanguinity. As uh the good lady from ML Partalis, Representative D Lima can also recall that during the first hearing that we conducted by the committee on electoral reform, we asked uh straight uh forward question to come if fourth degree or second degree would be most preference pre would be more prefer uh preferable to them uh in so far as how they can actually conduct the election efficiently. uh to them. Madam Speaker, the response from the comic, Madam Speaker, is that it would be a logistical uh nightmare if we extend uh from the from the degree of prohibition from second degree uh uh to the fourth degree of consanguinity. Also, Madam Speaker, there are als uh there were also um members from the Con, delegates from the Con, Madam Speaker, who also argued that it would be more practical, Madam Speaker, to hold the second degree of consanguity rather than the fourth degree consanguity. These are madam if I if the good lady from ML Party list would allow me to continue on responding to her question. These are also part of the consideration madam speaker because many of the versions the 25 versions actually do have similarities in the similarities madam speaker is dominantly within that proposal of second degree of conanguinity and affinity and not the fourth degree as many as some of the bills that were also referred to the committee that were later on withdrawn.
Uh Mr. speaker by by the authors themselves which is fourth degree madam speaker and this these are the consideration madam speaker >> thank you I will also go into that supposed issue that the uh issue of supposed practicality or easy enforcibility of limiting it only to second degree if the marcos bill was the one chosen to be the working draft we know that that bill HB6 6771 fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity. So you replace the fourth degree of consanguinity or a affinity in that bill which is a working draft to second degree easier enforcability. Yes.
>> Yes madam speaker. Um that is correct because number one if I may elaborate further madam speaker because the good lady from ML partis touched on the issue of pract practicability and efficiency.
In fact, madam speaker, the come when they argued that this would be part of the consideration by which the come conducts election because practicality and the logistical uh uh possibility it would be more convenient for the come is not only a position taken by kaleik in some of the uh guests that we had uh we had we had invited to name a few madam speaker your honor the former justice uh of the supreme court justice asuna saying that second degree is more practical and more easier for Kalech.
Apart from the apart from that taken into the position of the comm it is actually also anchored madam speaker u on the exact ruling of the supreme court pamatong versus kalech where it says madam speaker that the logistical consideration could also be a basis for kalech uh to formulate a much expedient much much convenient more convenient more effective and more efficient delivery uh of number one items paraphernalia and to ensure madam speaker that those who are to vote in an election scheduled in every three years madam speaker will have a more convenient safe and orderly manner by which they will cast their votes. So these are madam speaker the things that I think to me in my humble opinion why kale also came out with the position that second degree would be more practical and more convenient for kaleik to um schedule in actually effective in conducting an election every 3 years or six years for the national positions.
Madam speaker your honor >> the good sponsor has mentioned the name of former Supreme Court Justice Askuna.
my I my recollection of that deliberations that committee hearing I think it's on the second the second committee hearing in February 10 2026 yes he did mention that he is for the second degree of uh consuity or affinity I sense that he was not really very firm about it and that he was just saying that it can be considered because again the reasons of practical practicality or easier confrontation. I want to know more about the committee's analysis showing why the fourth degree is uninforcable because this analysis is not in the committee report. It is not in the fact sheet. It was not presented in her in any hearing. The practicality argument was asserted during the during the hearing and also now we we heard it from the good sponsor but it was never really demonstrated. Why enforcable? Why easier? Why more practical? What's the u evidentiary basis for this? Is there any any any empirical data with respect to the enforcability >> of of the of uh the difficult enforcability if not unenforcability but we have not tried it yet. Madam Speaker, your honor, um since we don't have an exact antip-olitical dynasty uh featuring these restrictions, Madam Speaker, it is safe to assume and it is safe to uh to say, Madam Speaker, that we don't have an actual empirical data that we can base our consideration, Madam Speaker, as to the practicality of the second and fourth degree. The basis for that madam speaker as I've cited earlier is that come also came out with the position because it is also backed up by a ruling by the Supreme Court pomatong versus kale that logistic logistical uh consideration could also be a basis madam speaker for the kale to conduct a more expedient more convenient safest way to conduct an election and to make sure that electorates can actually go to the polling places and cast their votes the orderly and safe that's number one number two madam speaker is that the kale anticipating that there will be certain degree of prohibition madam speaker it would also cost the kalech additional for them madam speaker additional um additional uh it would be burdensome uh this is according to them it will be burdensome because it it would cause additional um leg work not only b not only formulating a certain policy but leg work on the down to the barangi level madam speaker say for example there's a cousins Fourth degree is actually um the fourth degree of consu and affinity actually reaches to to a so first degree uh first degree cousin. Madam Speaker, your honor, say for example, one is residing in Pampanga and the other one is residing in in in Mindanao, somewhere in Mindanao and they chose to run simultaneous in an election, one maybe probably run for a different office. But since by virtue of their relationship and their fourthderee relationship, it would be according to Kalech a logistical nightmare to to even trace um you know these uh uh candidates who have shared the same family name. Not to mention, Madam Speaker, the con the consanguity. We're not talking about the affinity alone, but we're also about talking about the conanguinity of those degree that by virtue of marriage can also be captured by this prohibition.
That is number two, Madam Speaker. And number three, to give you a much clearer much clearer example, Madam Speaker, the current mayor of Pasik City is cousin to the vice mayor of Keson City. Of course, Madam Speaker, we do not want we do not want to deprive Pasig City of the mo of their mayor mayoral mayor. We probably allow fourth degree of degree of affinity.
ofuity and affinity Santos. We know for a fact, Madam Speaker, that by virtue of their relationship if, for example, implemented the fourth degree of consanguinity and affinity, we will deprived of good leaders of possible good leaders, m Madam Speaker, who can actually join public service uh in and and serve their respective communities.
Madam Speaker, your honor, >> thank you.
Uh, distinguished sponsor, >> I'm sorry if I have a lengthy response to that, Madam Speaker.
>> Yes, those are the arguments in fact.
>> I'm sorry. And >> of those are the arguments in fact for that the practicability the logistical supposed logistical nightmare that a come would encounter. But you will agree with me that if we put it into the law, if it is really fourth degree of consequenttor affinity choice mechanisms, enforcability of uh of this provision on the fourth degree of conuinity or affinity.
intent. Framers of the Constitution within the second degree of consanguinity lang or within the fourth degree of conquinity or affinity because you know uncle auntie and we are such a close you know our families are close clans and therefore the power is still there. the concentration of power is still there.
So in terms of being faithful to the spirit and intent of the constitution prohibiting anti-political dynasty spirit extend the fourth degree of consequential affinity. I must confess um distinguished sponsor that my bill actually originally placed it at second degree of consequito affinity. I was also thinking about those supposed logistical nightmare. But on second thought on deeper reflection spirit and intent of the 1987 constitution in prohibiting political dynasties. Madam Speaker, your honor, just to just because uh the good lady from ML Party list mentioned about the framers of our constitution. In fact, when we had uh the sideline discussion, Madam Speaker, during the committee hearing, um it was actually uh it was admitted no less than those who have actually sat in the comm in the commission in uh you know, formally you know um adopting the 1987 Philippine Constitution that we have right now that the degree of consanguity was never Madam Speaker was never resolved. In fact, the reason why they are now leaving that definition, Madam Speaker, to the House of Representative to Congress for that matter is they they haven't actually uh satisfactoryy decided on which uh degree of consanguity would be applied in and will be reflected in the constitution. Number two, Madam Speaker, they have admitted, Madam Speaker, that the original original intent was to place a first degree of consanguinity, meaning magawang at Magna. There was no there was actually even a attempt, Madam Speaker, to really remove the antip-olitical dynasty. That's why we say that the antipolitical dynasty is not really a prohibition, but a regulation. Madam speaker, your honor. Now going back to the issue, what is really is the exact um intention of the spirit of the constitution uh under section 26 uh article 2 of the 1987 constitution. The very clear answer madam speaker is even the framers of the constitution have not really agreed on that. they just placed there in order to you know in order to counter the possible building up of political power uh per jurisdiction madam speaker but as to the degree of consanguinity the original version in the original uh proposal was actually to place it first degree of consanguinity so if we compare the pro current proposal right now madam speaker that is even a better version of what they have already initially discussed and approved and eventually >> uh could not even resolved. Madam Speaker, your honor, >> Madam Speaker, I take that answer but with reservation. I'll go to another point.
>> Okay. Thank you.
This bill addresses only the simultaneous holding of positions with you're not within the second degree of consequentity affinity simultaneous holding within the same level of governance within the same province within national position and then uh within the representative house of representatives within the same province within the same city within the same barangi therefore so so wang success session ban just the simultaneous holding. Therefore, a governor may be succeeded by the spouse, then by his child, then by his sibling indefinitely so long as they do not hold office at the exact same time. I wonder is that an anti-political dynasty bill? If its very definition legalizes the arrangements our constitution set out to dismantle, can the sponsor explain how a bill with no succession prohibition fulfills the constitutional mandate designed precisely to stop that pattern prohibition on succession when it happens all the time. So how can that stop the cycle of uh power power power concentration within the same families?
>> Madam speaker, your honor, again the um the appreciation of the committee, Madam Speaker, is not whimsical. Um it's not whimsical. It's not arbitrary. In fact, our consideration, Madam Speaker, is this is actually an improvement of the current system that we have. We do not have an antipolitical dynasty.
That's number one. Number two consideration, Madam Speaker, is that based on the very definite, we want to balance it out, Madam Speaker, between the right to vote and the right to be voted upon. As a chairperson of the human rights commission, Madam Speaker, I believe, Madam Speaker, the good lady from ML Partalis is very much aware that not only it was enshrined in our constitution, section uh section one uh paragraph two of the constitution, Madam Speaker, in also uh separate article madam speaker and the constitution article 5 which is the right to suffrage because we cannot separately appreciate the right to vote and the right to be voted upon. Number three, Madam Speaker, is that based on uh international covenants and treaties, the right to be voted upon under, Madam Speaker, uh under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and as well as um Madame Speaker as well as uh article 5 of the convention on elimination of all forms of racial discrimination.
It is placed there that the right to vote and the right to be voted upon madam speaker are preferential rights.
Since we are madam speaker a democratic republican country we also give value to the right of every citizen to participate in an electoral reform or any form of service public service.
Madam speaker it's e either uh through an elective position or otherwise madam speaker. So these are considerations madam speaker that we also take into into account madam speaker we want to balance it out because running madam speaker for elective office does not necessarily mean winning a political dynasty only happens when there is a concentration of power within juris uh locality madam speaker say for example a sitting mayor is uh partner or spouse to a vice mayor uh or one of his siblings or or his father or his five is also serving uh in the city council that is to us madam speaker is a concentration of power because it will also number one threatens transparency accountability and check and balances madam speaker so we allow others who are willing to participate madam speaker in an electoral uh exercises without necessarily madam speaker trying to curtail again trying to cail their right uh to uh be to to vote vote and to be voted upon. And I'm sure, Madam Speaker, the good lady from ML Party list being a human rights advocate do understand that the right to suffrage and the right to be voted upon, Madam Speaker, uh is a preferential right because that is the basis of a Republican democratic country which we we we have. Madam Speaker, your honor, >> indeed, Madam Speaker, the right to vote and be voted upon is a prefer preferential if not a fundamental right.
There no debate on that. But that particular right can be cannot be treated in isolation of other provisions of the constitution other principles or precepts in the constitution about banning political dynasties strictly if it's if you don't want to use banning or prohibiting regulate if if you prefer the word regulation then it has to be strictly regulated. Mr. Madam Speaker, your honor, again, we we also do a do have these principles, Madam Speaker, as our primary basis to to balance between what we are proposing, restricting um uh families to dominate a political unit, Madam Speaker, from that of the right to suffrage and to be voted upon.
Again, Madam Speaker, I've I've also said it in my previous interpolation that the way our government is structured in design is based on juris based on jurisdiction. Madam Speaker, so meaning to say they have separate constituencies and again the belief that one uh if one is belongs to a similar the same family, Madam Speaker, um automatically they will be voted and they will actually be declared winner in a particular election. But that is not the case, Madam Speaker. What we want to avoid here, Madam Speaker, is the buildup of monopoly of uh power within a within a specific locality. But we also do not want we also do not want to deprive citizens madam speaker beyond the second degree of consequentity and affinity to exercise their right as as uh you know to be to exercise the right to participate in an electoral exercises because that is in fact in compliance with our constitution and also in compliance with other uh treaties uh madam speaker your honor uh that is recognized uh by our country madam speaker in your honor and So again going back to the second degree because this has been the contention of the good lady from uh uh ML party list we also do give credence and value to the position of Kle Madam speaker because again it is the it is the commission that handles the actual election madam speaker so we derive our appreciation by which we are actually guided in formulating a policies because we also do not want in real time that come would be burdened with logistic ical support and there's no other agencies that we can actually ask and inquire to other than come when it comes to the issue of electoral exercises madam speaker your honor that's why we've give value and credits to their prop to the um proposal madam speaker of kale that instead of fourth degree of consanguinity which would cost them too much um expenses uh in trying to really assess and trace the family in familial connection of one candidate in Lison and the other candidate in visa It will be more practical according to them, Madam Speaker, your honor, to have and settled with a second degree of consanguinity because it would be more faster to trace, more um convenient and more faster uh to implement. Madam Speaker, your honor, in an election, electoral exercises, your honor, >> Madam Speaker, the distinguished sponsor has tackled several points or several issues. Now, on the matter, she he did tackle the matter of that this bill is addressing monopoly of power or concentration of power. But my point madame chair, madame speaker, is that how can there how can this address power concentration? Why we are not precluding power concentration if we stand by a provision not prohibiting a provision not prohibiting succession. precisely when there's succession there is still concentration of power in one family. The next point that struck me in the statements of uh the very distinguished uh sponsor is that well this bill what we're tackling now is an improvement because there's never been an anti-political dynasty effort or anti-political dynasty bill that has reached this particular stage at a plenary. It they they were >> there was there was one yeah one version during the 16th congress. Madam speaker >> yeah correct you madam speaker.
>> Thank you for that information. The distinguished sponsor now is saying that this is is essentially saying that this is a good starting point now but we have heard the starting point argument before in previous congresses 16th 17th 18th and in the 19th. And my question is at what point does a starting point become an ending point? Because this bill once enacted will be cited for decades as proof that a constitutional mandate has been satisfied even as dynasties continue uninterrupted.
Dynasties would continue uninterrupted if we don't ban succession. If we limit only to second degree. If uh we do not we do not cover and we we we we remove that the same level of governance standard in the same only within the same within the same province is the prohibition applicable is the ban applicable but if you have another relative running as governor in another province that is no longer political dynasty that is what this bill is saying. So how can the dynasties continue uninterrupted if we don't start the proper way at this point altogether being very strict about political dynasties. Madam Speaker, if we again uh uh allow me, Madam Madam Speaker, to again go back to my earlier uh to my earlier uh explanation, Madam Speaker, is that because of a certain because of the duly recognized not only within our country but even internationally uh that the right to run and to right to be voted upon upon is a preferential right. Madam Speaker, that's why it's not even a issue of political and civic right. It's an issue of human rights of a basic right. Madam Speaker, so we want to be compliant with the uh with the uh with this with with the spirit of the constitution. At the same time, we also want to balance it balance with other uh madam speaker with other um uh sections or articles in the constitution so that we would have an antipolitical dynasty at the same time recognizing the inherent and basic right of one to be to vote and to be voted upon. Again, Madam Speaker, there is no guarantee that once a certain family members run for a certain positions, respective positions differently, there's no guarantee, Madam Speaker, that they will all win. Why?
Because the constitution and our whole system that is designed is that we give preference to the in to the voters to choose their own uh leaders. Madam Speaker, that is ex in fact the discussion that they had during the preliminary deliberation uh when the framers of the constitution was actually discussing the proposal of antipolitical dynasty. How can we balance the right of the people to choose the leaders versus that of restricting or imposing uh a mechanism wherein there won't be any monopoly of power. Second, Madam Speaker, um the issue, Madam Speaker, of succession. Again, um is entirely uh Madam Speaker, does not happen every now and then in every election. I'm I'm sure, Madam Speaker, the good lady from ML Partalist would agree with me that there are a couple of times that political families, Madam Speaker, were outvoted in one particular election.
Madam Speaker, because we believe, Madam Speaker, and the Constitution believes that the right to select their leaders would be given and will be secured and will be given uh to the people themselves, Madam Speaker, in honor. And the way that we decide our the structure of our governance, Madam Speaker, is that it is jurisdictional.
Even in the local government code, Madam Speaker, it is jurisdictional. A governor does not have control over a congressman. A congressman does not have a control a direct control over the mayors. These are they may belong to the certain geographical location but in each particular respective positions one does not have a direct control over uh one polit political unit and and vice versa. Madam speaker your honor.
>> Madam speaker I'll go to my next question.
Can this bill be truly called anti- political dynasty bill if a family can simultaneously control three provincial governorships and this bill would have nothing to say about about it because as I see it under this bill a family may simultaneously hold the governorships of Ilas Norte Ilocasur and Lun, three contiguous provinces. The bill's own fact sheet explicitly states it allows spouses and relatives to run in other provinces except in the province where they have incumbent relatives in power. So is that a a genuine anti-political dynasty bill?
Family simultaneously controlling three provincial governorships.
difference is that deserve of the different territory.
>> Well, that's a rhetorical that's a uh that's a rhetorical question. Uh Madam Speaker, um so I would also answer my uh respond to the good lady from the ML party is with my own personal interpretation. Yes, it is anti-political dynasty mechanism this version madam speaker because it actually weakens a possible buildup concentration of family political family within locality as to whether they would be allowed again number two that is that is a possibility but there's a second possibility that they may not be able to win in an election madam speaker so so which one actually has um that concrete probably basis for us to say that you know in one particular region um different individuals can actually um you know occupy different offices of different provinces that that's a possibility but the possibility number two which actually happens all the time is that the point here madam speaker is occupying an actual occupancy does not necessarily mean or running for an office does not necessarily necessarily translate in an actual occupancy of a candidate to that position once uh the election is done. Number three, Madam Speaker, is that we give preference to the right to suffrage to vote and to be voted upon.
So we I I personally, if you ask my humble opinion, m Madam Speaker, we cannot substitute our own discernment and translate it into law. Madam Speaker, uh for that for the specific voters in a particular election or in a particular locality, Madam Speaker, what we're trying again to prove to this uh to the honorable body, Madam Speaker, is this is an attempt to finally address and resolve the issue of power cons concentration in one locality. Whether or not we are willing to sacrifice the right of the populace uh to vote and to be voted upon that is again an issue Madam Speaker which I personally does does not reflect the sentiment of my co- members in the committee. This does not willing actually to be uh questioned Madam Speaker before any of our standing courts. Madam Speaker, your honor, >> I respectfully disagree Madam Speaker. I do believe that if a family can legally hold the governorship, the mayorality, and a congressional seat over the same territory all at the same time, then that is not a genuine anti-political dynasty bill. At this point, Madam Speaker, I want to draw the body's attention to a structural flaw that is, I believe, the most consequential in this bill, and it lies in the relationship between section 5 and section 3, sub paragraph C. Madam Speaker, may I ask the lady if is she referring to the draft bill? Madam Speaker, >> yes. Yes, Madam Speaker. Section 3C and section five of uh the bill 8389.
>> Yes, Madam Speaker, your honor.
>> Thank you, Madam Speaker. Section 3C defines elective positions by sorting them into separate distinct categories.
National positions, legislative district, provincial level, city municipal level and barangi barangai level.
>> That is correct, Madam Speaker.
>> Section five then uses the same separate categories as a unit of prohibition. It forbids relatives from simultaneously holding positions within the same level of local government. For me, the result is what I would call an engineered blind spot. Under this bill, a father can be governor while his son is mayor of a city within that very province and his daughter is a district representative covering the same territory level government provincial city municipal bill. The point of reference in this bill is government level, not territory, not constituency.
Does the distinguished sponsor agree that under this wording, a political dynasty can legally concent concentrate power over an entire province, governor, mayor, and district representatives so long as relatives simply avoid being elected to the same level of local government. We're not we're not uh talking here now about the chances of winning, you know, and and especially if they all win. If they all win, then absolutely there is political dynasty.
Madam Speaker, again I respect the position of the good lady from part uh the uh ML partist that these are since we don't have an actual restriction on antipolitical dynasty.
Madam speaker again and I'm sure she would agree with me that this is something that something uh as a reform is a pro it's a progress move from the one that we don't have right now. This is actually the introduction of this is a leap towards that vision of restricting monopoly of power and I'm sure she would agree with me madam speaker but that that is again a rhetorical question that that can happen that can happen and that can also not happen madam speaker but let me just say to you madam speaker um again the concentration madam speaker of power is jurisdictional meaning to say in one locality if there is uh um elected officials say for example in a province or in a city that actually shares uh this uh not only family but goes home to the same household madam speaker that is to me madam speaker would give them a due advantage in abusing the resources of their locality and that would actually be a way to formulate or to build up their own concentration of power madam speaker that is what this bill trying is trying to address. Now, Madam Speaker, as to the effect of this, Madam Speaker, and I'm sure the good lady from uh earlier, the good lady from uh ML Partis want me to give an concrete uh empirical data that we could possibly derive our conclusion in this plenary whether this antipolitical dynasty effective or not.
Then I will give her madam speaker an exact data on the effect of the second degree of consanguinity in affinity.
Number one, Madam Speaker, there are about 700 um 2,000. Just to give you if if the good lady from Mil Partners would allow me, just to give you some perview of what would be the possible and these are based on the empirical data. Madam Speaker, you're >> I would go with that that if that can just be furnished to me in the interest of time instead of going over it.
>> Okay. Yes, I will I will give the uh provide the good lady that uh this data madam speaker.
So again, Madam Speaker, Mr. Speaker, your honor, again, this is a a leap from the current status that we have right now with the absence of antipolitical dynasty mechanism, this is in fact an improvement of the current status that we have. Um, and number two, Madam Speaker, your honor, again with the rhetorical possibility within that possibility, one possibility it might happen, the other possibility it will not happen. And number two, Madam Speaker, um we can argue all day long about whether the government is designed structurally or designed in a way uh or jurisdictionally. We can argue uh all day, Madam Speaker, your honor. But the point is one constituency has a certain nuances and a certain um uniqueness, Madam Speaker, from that of a different locality. That's why you have madam speaker uh different sets of officers voted in different jurisdiction voted in different respective positions madam speaker your honor so that we can actually um ensure madam speaker that one jurisdiction or one political position does not interfere or intervene directly with the affairs of one polit of one uh jurisdiction or political unit. Madam speaker your honor. So that can possibly happen but it can also be not happen madam speaker. That is my point that I'm trying to co to argue madam speaker and to explain to the good lady from ML party list madam speaker which by the way have a legal basis and constitutional basis for us to promote and uphold and and safeguard the right of these people to choose their leaders in different jurisdictions in different localities in an electoral exercises.
Madam speaker your honor.
>> Thank you. I do not wish to further belabor that point especially in the light of the divergence in our views on the matter. So I wish to go to another point distinguished sponsor addressing dynastic adaptation through the party list system. Under this bill, nothing prevents the relative of a governor, senator, or congressman from being nominated as a party list representative. The bill is completely silent on it. Was this an oversight or a deliberate feature?
>> Yeah, Mr. Speaker, >> no mention about the party list.
>> I understand, Madam Speaker, your honor.
I understand. Um and Madam Speaker, the reason for this, Madam Speaker, is there is a separate um bill uh that bills that were referred to the committee uh Madam Speaker, your honor. And so we would try to uh specifically and particularly put uh emphasis on the party list by treating it as a separate discussion altogether. Madam Speaker, so in order that we can actually uh uh we can actually um uh uh vote or or decide or explain or discuss or deliberate on a certain provisions in the constitution which has no definition. We intend madam speaker to provide legal and technical definition by virtue of the declare you know by by citing a specific conity on affinity. But as to the party list report in the party list >> yes there's there is in there is a separate discussion madam speaker on that and we can assure the good lady from the ML party list >> that we will tackle in the reform party list act because uh number one it is included in the leadup priority of the president madam speaker your honor >> madam madam speaker that is on the assumption or premise that are going to have a party list reform law there is nothing wrong if we tackle it already include it already in this antipolitical dynasty bill and have another similar uh provision in the anti-political and in the party list reform bill.
>> Yeah, Mr. >> So why not here when this is supposed to be the overarching overarching bill with respect to political dynasties and dynastic relationship certainly exists also in party list. Mr. Speaker, again the party list system Mr. speaker is represented by per party organization.
Um the nomination for party list representatives is actually based on the nomination of per party. The elector one that's one of the striking difference between the one that we are actually proposing here which is a direct voting of a particular candidate in every election. The party list system madam speaker is those who have gathered the highest number of votes per party in individual uh uh individual candidates.
Madam Speaker, and so because of that striking difference, Madam Speaker, your honor, um it is my humble opinion since there were also there were also other bills that tackles the Reform Party list act because this could this this should be a more comprehensive discussion on this, Madam Speaker. Uh and so, Mr. Speaker, we decided since it is a separate bill that was uh introduced by some of our colleagues here, Madam Speaker, we also tend to separately discuss the Reform Party list act. Madam Speaker, uh and we also do not want we also do avoid madam speaker our the rules uh by that governs madam speaker uh legislation in introducing a certain measure madam speaker that one bill must have a one particular subject matter Mr. speaker your honor >> but the subject matter is still anti-political dynasty so special provision is separate provision also about prohibiting political dynasties in so far as a party list is concerned >> if that is if that's would that would be that simple madam speaker then I would agree to the lady from ML partyist if one section alone can suffice the intricacy of choosing a candid choosing a winner of a partyist system which by the way madam speaker guided by the nomination of each parties madam speaker then I would agree but the partless reform act madam speaker is more in in intricate in its discussion there are several layers of legal the technical madam speaker consideration that the committee needs to labor it on because we're talking about reforming the partless system and not only targeting a restriction between a candidate directly the elected in an a candidate directly elected by district and that of a candidate that candidate of a party that is nationwide elected by, you know, subject for a nationwide vote uh election. Madam Speaker, the candidate of a party that is nationwide elected by, you know, subject for a nationwide vote uh election. Madam Speaker, >> his representation, Madam Speaker, certainly hopes that you will have that party list reform. I can guarantee 100% madam speaker assure the good lady from uh the ML party list that we will tackle right away madam speaker the reform party list acts again because this is not only uh the intention of some of our members here but this is also part of the leak priority of this administration madam speaker >> next point madam speaker anti-political dynast bill or does this bill prohibit political dynasties if it leaves open every indirect and alternative pathway to elective office that dynastic families can exploit. May I invite the attention of this uh buddy to uh section 13 of the Senate bill, Senate Bill 1901, which contains a provision that is conspicuously absent from the House bill that we're taking up now. SB1901 expressly prohibits political dynasties under any other mode of holding and elective office other modes. It includes nomination or substitution under the party list system. It also includes designation as a legislative caretaker.
Also substitution in case of death, disqualification or withdrawal. Although we are pushing for that that the substitution will happen only in cases of death but that's not yet is that a law already that's not yet that's not yet a law under section 77 of the omnibus election code substitution death disqualification and withdrawal or any other applicable law has no equivalent provision. It regulates only the direct filing of certificates of candid candidacy. It says nothing about substitution, nothing about caretaker designation, nothing about the backdoor routes through which a dynastic family member can assume office without ever running in a covered election. Does a good sponsor agree that a provision like section 13 of Senate Bill 1901 is necessary to ensure that political dynasties will not exploit all these other or alternative pathways to elective office.
Following the basic legal maxim, Madame Speaker, what cannot be done directly should not be allowed to be accomplished indirectly. Otherwise, the spirit of a law banning political dynasties will be subverted the moment it is enacted because the families it targets will simply use the routes the bill or the law forgot to close.
Are you open? Is the good sponsor open >> madam? Yeah.
>> To this >> madam speaker there are several points that were raised in a form of a question madam speaker. So let me just one by one tackle that that number one is we don't have the exact version of the Senate uh uh in so far as their the political tidasty bill that we don't unfortunately madam speaker I have to apologize to the lady from ML party we don't have in hand an exact version and number two madam speaker as to the question of the substitution and many other possible uh scenarios that might happen during a campaign or an election period madam speaker there we have a separate we have a separate bill uh on the substit stitution. Madam Speaker, this is House Bill 7487, Madam Speaker, which actually tackles those points that were raised by the good lady from ML Party list. And yes, again, uh once we know the process, Madam Speaker, after we have approved, uh our own version and the Senate also approves their own version, we know for a fact, Madam Speaker, that the final stage by which the antipolitical dynasty will be discussed is the bicameal conference. And I would agree with the good lady from ML Partis. there are strong features uh that may be uh that may improve the current draft of our house bill then this humbles representation would be more willing to sit down with our counterpart in the senate and after that adopt other possible in uh possible uh introduction of uh from their version madam speaker to be accommodated in our own version madam speaker so again yes I agree for the improvement of this draft bill there will be some sort of an adjustment in a period of adjustment if the good lady from ML Partalis also wishes to propose some some amendments further then this humble impresentation would be more than willing to consider it. This representation notes with appreciation that statement from the good sponsor actually I can just choose the a few maybe at two more two more points.
>> Thank you very much.
One other point, is this an effective and a strong anti-political dynasty bill if if it has no provision whatsoever in the consequences of violating the prohibition either administratively, electorally or criminally. Madam Speaker or Mr. Speaker, House Bill 8389 is conspicuous for the complete absence of any provision on the effect of violating the pro prohibition on political dynasty relationships. Compare this to three other measures. Senate bill Senate bills 1901 section 7.
Com is empowered to deny due course or cancel a certificate of candidacy mtopropio or upon verified petition by any registered voter without prejudice to criminal liability under its penal provision in section 14 which treats violations as election offenses under the omnibus election code.
to miss Marcos and D bill 6771 which is supposed to be the working draft of this bill. Now uh section 7 it provides that in cases of violation com shall moto proprio or upon verified petition deny due course to the certificate of candidacy and the votes cast shall not be counted. The candidate shall not be proclaimed nor be qualified to assume office. Bill representation House Bill 2131.
The common motoropio may suspend giving due course to the certificate of candidacy. If a violation is apparent from the documents filed upon investigation and a finding of substantial evidence, the certificate shall be denied due course. any person may file a any such verified petition.
Bill 8389 has none of this. Doesn't the complete absence of any provision on the effects both administratively and criminally of violating the prohibition on political dynasty relationships make this bill weak? No. No, especially in terms of accomplishing it supposed goal of detering and punishing the very conduct it seeks to remedy.
>> No, Madam Speaker, but I would agree that this is not a perfect bill, Madam Speaker, it does not render weakness to the bill. In fact, Madam Speaker, I agree uh Madam Speaker, that there will be other amendments that could possibly be introduced during the period of amendment. The reason why, Madam Speaker, that this uh bill, Madam Speaker, has certain um absences of certain features that the good lady from ML Partis would wish to have to be present or to be reflected in the current bill. Is that those that were mentioned already under omnibus election code can still be effectively implemented and be exercised by Com should there be any obl any violations uh uh that could be apparent during an election. For example, if we have the second degree prohibition, then automatically we give way for the common to adopt their own IRR and implementing uh right away, Madam Speaker, in spelling out how they can administratively um implement certain sections uh in in the proposed bill uh you know to be effectively um uh to be effectively implemented. Madam Speaker, by the way, >> is a good sponsor telling us that you would leave it to the common?
>> No, no, no. And what I'm trying to explain madam speaker is that uh number one madam speaker uh we also give elbow room for kale to adopt their own irr.
Secondly, Madam Speaker, there's a reason why separ separability clause, Madam Speaker, is introduced in the form of the bill, Madam Speaker, so that those existing laws that still be implemented and inconsonants with the sections and provisions or in the proposed law can still be effective.
Madam Speaker, when it comes to disqualification, Coale can also disqualify for certain violations. Madam Speaker, so long, Madam Speaker, as we're talking about, for example, second degree of consanguity if this provision and section is prohibited in an election that can automatically implement, Madam Speaker, certain penalties. But again, just to give you, Madam Speaker, the good lady from ML Party is a shorter answer. again for the it's it's it's unfortunate that the good lady from ML Party withdrew her proposed uh measure but we can actually uh accept and consider if there will be an amendment or reintroduction of certain uh penalties that the good lady wishes to introduce in the period of amendment then again this representation is more than willing or more will consider these proposals of the good lady from ML parties your honor >> this representation Mr. speaker shall endeavor to do that. I must point out however that uh it there has to be a provision on that on because an IRR can only be based on the law. If the law does not have any such provision, then it cannot be a proper subject of an irr.
>> Mr. Speaker, we're talking about citing the example of by violation in the proposed bill that we are currently discussing. Mr. speaker the prohibition that may be committed by a certain individual is within the second degree of consanguinity and affinity madam speaker I'm just citing to an example in a certain section madam speaker as proposed under the current draft of the bill madam speaker if there's a candidate that actually within that restriction of consanguinity affinity familiar restriction then automatically the commale can actually implement that by virtue of that adopting their own irr that is the frame of uh mind that I would like to impart to the good uh of ML party list. But then again if there are other issues violations succession again I would like to reiterate that uh number one um the this representation uh would also consider if there are reintroduction of other of their uh reintroduction of possible amendments that the good lady would wish to introduce in the period of amendment then this representation is more is would be willing to consider them since we're talking about improving the current draft of this measure. Mr. Speaker, your honor, >> thank you. Uh, distinguished sponsor, I must highlight the fact that a bill without enforcement is not a law. It is simply a declaration. I just wish to point that out.
>> Mr. Speaker, if I may, may I respond to that very very quickly. Madam Speaker, again, the good lady from the ML Party list has also cited the omnibus election code and there are certain provisions in that particular code, Madam Speaker, that speaks about penalties in vi for certain violations, Madam Speaker. And these violations would still be implementable even if we adopt this version of the house. Secondly, Madam Speaker, the p the the the the other madam speaker violations that I would like to introduce or would like to explain to the good lady from the ML party list is with is giving the exact example of the second degree of consanguinity. I'm just basing that madam speaker as an example that every by violation of that provision of that restriction within a certain familiar connection madam speaker of blood relation then automatically we allow the com to adopt their own IRR but then again I would agree that in order to improve this current version draft draft version of this bill then there should be any penalties that the good lady would wish to introduce again I would state into record that this representation is more than willing to consider those reintroduction of possible amendments from the ML good lady from ML Park list.
>> Mr. Speaker, I am dispensing with the other points for my interpolation, but may I just be allowed to give a closing some sort of a closing manifestation or statement especially with respect to the key points that I raised in the course of the uh interpolation. It was rather interesting to be uh debating with uh this distinguished uh >> exchanging ideas. Exchange >> exchange of ideas. Yes, that that's more like it as a closing manifestation.
Does this bill prohibit political dynasties or does it do something far more damaging, create the permanent legal fiction that we already have? Mr. Speaker, in 1987, the framers wrote section 26, article 2 with one purpose, to ensure that the accident of birth would never again be sufficient qualification for public office.
And today we finally have a bill. But consider what this bill actually does with due respect to the good sponsor. It permits succession. It permits cross-level dynasties. It permits multi-province family control. It permits the partless system to be colonized by political families. It has no penalties or sanctions.
three consultations, 23 position papers, a retired Supreme Court justice and a former member of uh the constitutional commission disregarded unheeded.
Objections from different organizations and networks generally also ignored. The most entrenched dynasties in this country operate exactly the way this bill permits. A patriarch as governor, a son as congressman, a wife as mayor, a cousin in the party list. All of it legal under this bill. All of it untouched. I close with a question that I believe history will ask of every member who would eventually vote on this bill. Are we passing a law that prohibits political dynasties? Or are we passing a law that by appearing to prohib prohibit them, makes them permanent, makes them legitimate and forecloses or makes it now difficult for any future Congress from trying again?
Because if it is the latter, then this is not reform. This is its opposite. And we will own that for the rest of our political lives.
Mr. Speaker, distinguished sponsor.
Thank you.
Although many of our many of our uh statements do not do not uh do not resonate quite fairly, Madam Speaker, the position of the of the bill, but we do understand and respect her position on the subject matter. Madam Speaker, your >> majority leader, Mr. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend consideration of House Bill number 8389.
>> Is there any objection? Chair is none.
Motion is approved. Majority leader.
>> Mr. Speaker, with leave of the house, I move to open the privilege hour.
>> Is there any objection? The chair is none. The privilege hour is now open.
>> Mr. Speaker, I move to recognize the distinguished gentleman from Partilist, Representative Jude A. Acidre to avail of the privilege hour. The honorable Assidre is recognized. Please proceed.
>> Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleagues, barely a week ago, I stood here in this chamber to deliver a privileged speech on the question that I believe goes to the heart of our democracy.
Can we disagree better?
I spoke then about the growing negativity, hatred, and lies that now shape too much of our public conversation, especially on social media. I said that disagreement in a democracy is normal, criticism is normal, opposition is normal, accountability is normal.
Today I rise once again on this issue because recent events have made that question even more urgent.
The reported arrest of Franco Mabanta, founder of Peanut Gallery Media Network, together with four others during an entrapment operation by the National Bureau of Investigation should make all of us pause. According to reports, the arrest stem from an alleged demand of 300 million from Lee first district representative and h former house speaker Ferdinand Martin Rwaldez in exchange for withholding online content supposedly linking him to corruption and flood control anomalies.
Reports also state that the NBI recovered entrapment money and mobile phones allegedly used in coordinating the transaction.
Let me be very clear. The case against Franco Mabanta must be decided by facts, evidence, due process, and the rule of law. The accused have rights.
The investigation must be fair. The courts must decide. We should not replace legal proceedings with trial by social media.
But we must also say plainly what is at stake.
When a group allegedly prepares damaging material, holds it back, and demands money in exchange for not releasing it, that is not journalism.
That is not commentary.
That is not democratic criticism. That is alleged extortion.
Congressman Martinald statement.
That distinction is very consequential to our democracy.
A journalist investigates to inform the public. An extortionist threatens to profit from fear.
A commentator criticizes to persuade.
An extortionist pressures to collect.
A citizen demands accountability for the common good. An extortionist accuse uses accusation as leverage.
A free press exposes the truth. An extortionist weaponizes the possibility for one political controversy.
It affects the credibility of journalism.
It affects the integrity of public discourse.
It affects the trust that our people place in genuine media institutions, responsible commentators, and honest content creators.
Journalists already carry a heavy burden. They verify, they investigate, they check sources, they give subjects the chance to respond, they publish because the public has a right to know.
They take risk because the truth matters.
But when a social social media personality or an online network allegedly use content as a bargaining chip, they damage the work of legitimate media. They make citizens ask whether expo exposees are done for truth or for payment. They make honest journalism suffer because of those who use the language of media without the discipline of journalism.
This is why we must return to the central question.
Can we disagree better?
Can we criticize without lying? Can we investigate without extorting?
Can we expose wrongdoing without manufacturing stories? Can we demand accountability without using threats? Can we use social media as a tool for truth instead as a weapon for intimidation?
Mr. Speaker, we must now move from rehetoric to action.
For this reason, I will be together with 40 members of the House filing a resolution calling for an investig influencers and online political operators.
The resolution will also seek to address a larger and long overdue questions whether standards of conduct expected of legitimate media institutions and professional journalists should also apply in appropriate ways to political commentary made on social media.
This is not about requiring every citizen to be a journalist. This is about limiting ordinary polit. This is not about limiting ordinary political opinion.
This is about asking whether those who shape regularly shape public opinion, present themselves as sources of information, publish political accusation and influence. Public discourse should be guided by basic standards of truth, fairness, verification, accountability and respect for human dignity.
Because when social media commentators then the question becomes unavoidable.
Should they not only also carry some measure of the responsibility that comes with that influence must remain the minimum standard of any public discourse that claims to inform the people.
The purpose is not to undermine free speech. The purpose is to protect it.
The purpose is not to silence criticism.
The purpose is to separate criticism from criminal coercion.
The purpose is it is time, Mr. Speaker, to determine the boundaries between journalism and social media commentary, between public interest reporting and political blackmail, between legitimate criticism and criminal extortion.
We need a policy framework that affirms freedom while demanding responsibility.
First, truth must remain the minimum standard of public debate. Criticize hard, but do not lie. Disagree strongly, but do not fabricate. Expose wrongdoing, but do not invent it. demand accountability but do not treat rumors as evidence.
Second, online platforms, digital media networks, and content creators must observe clearer standards of transparency and responsibility.
When content is used for coordinated harassment, manipulation, impersonation, or alleged extortion, there must be effective reporting systems, preservation of digital evidence and cooperation with lawful investigation.
Third, public officials, journalists, influencers, campaign teams, and citizens must accept one shared standard. Speech is free but coercion is not. Criticism is protected but threats are not. Accountability is democratic but extortion is criminal.
Speaker media.
But let us also draw the line where democracy itself draws the line.
Journalism must never become a cover for intimidation.
Social media must never become a marketplace where reputations are held hostage for money.
Disagreement is normal in a democracy.
Strong criticism is part of public life.
Public officials must be ready to answer hard questions.
But no democracy can remain healthy where lies are monetized, where hatred is rewarded, and when accusations, especially baseless accusations, become a business model.
Social media can be a platform for anything you want it to be. It can be a platform for truth or a platform for threats. It can be a platform for accountability or a platform for abuse.
It can be a platform for journalism or a platform for extortion.
The choice before us is clear. Let us choose truth over manipulation.
Let us choose accountability over intimidation.
Let us choose journalism over blackmail.
Let us choose democracy over digital lawlessness.
And above all, let us choose to disagree better.
Speaker, Majority Leader, Mr. Speaker, I move to defer this speech of the honorable Jude Acidre to the committee on rules for its appropriate action.
>> Is there any objection? The chair here is none. The motion is approved.
Majority Leader.
>> Mr. Speaker, I move to recognize the gentleman from the party list TUCP, the Honorable Raymon Democrat, Mr. Speaker and dear colleagues.
May one was Labor Day.
Happy Labor Day.
But Mr. Speaker, happy the workers are not happy.
I rise today on a matter of personal and collective privilege because every Filipino worker, their family do demand and deserve accountability especially from this government.
This April the inflation has surged to mass 7.2 fastest in three years blowing past both the BSP the banko central nilipina projection of 6.4 and far from the target of two to 4% by our economic managers.
Mr. Speaker, this is the highest inflation in 38 months, three years, eroding the purchasing power of our peso to just 73 centavos, the lowest in 8 long years.
Remember in 2023 inflation was also at 8.7.
Worse, it turned out that in the wage hike, it's corruption flood control scandal.
It turned out that corruption and inaction, not wage legislation as wrongly warned against by by these economic managers because wage increase, inflationary doubt It's the mismanagement of these economic managers dragged the Philippine gross domestic product GDP growth down to 2.8% Mr. speaker in the first quarter, its lowest post pandemic level in five years and among the weakest economic performances recorded in more than a decade outside the pandemic itself.
Octa research now reports that one in every three believe that wage increase is the most urgent national concern that the this administration should address.
WR numero goes even further. Nearly half echoed that wage hike wage hike should be prioritized.
Clearly, Mr. Speaker, the Filipino people expect that their government, this government can and must do more. And indeed there are many ways many ways to act. Through wage increases, through tax relief, through temporary price controls, and through reforms in key industries like oil and power that drive costs after decades of deregulation and privatization. Instead, our highest paid economic managers are steering during this country towards a collision course with us social upheaval while continuing to pander to corporate greed. At a time when workers are told to sacrifice and endure stagnant starvation wages, the country's billionaires grew even richer this April with their combined wealth combined wealth reaching to 37.3 billion not pesos dollars 30 37 rather 37.3 billion matas dollars while ordinary Filipinos are steadily being pushed into becoming the new poor especially hospital.
Mr. Mr. Speaker, if they always say if the workers are truly are and will always be the backbone of this republic, then we appeal to and trust our president will issue marching orders to mobilize this entire administration to ramp up efforts to restore real wages and protect the purchasing power of Filipino working families.
or else tens and thousands of workers and ordinary Filipinos will continue to march not only to Mindola as we did in last labor day but to the Senate and supposedly the House of the Representatives of the House of the People at every hearing even across our central business districts to make our voices our voices impossible to ignore any longer.
All that the workers of this country you mangagawa sir is asking of this country meaningful engagement with the president coupled with equally meaningful social labor legislation.
Mr. Speaker, in the previous administrations, the Aoya administration enacted RA Republic Act 9504 granting income tax exemption for minimum wage earners. The Aino administration enacted the Batas Kasam Bahai Tratarite Law, Republic Act 10653 increasing the tax exempt ceiling of our 13 month pay and other benefits.
The Duterte administration enacted the OSH the occupation occupational rather occupational safety and health law. They expanded maternity maternity leave law from 60 days to 120 days and of course in which I will I chair the department of m migrant workers DMW law among others.
today now deputy speaker for the past four years nothing to well there is this uh master plan employment enacted in 2023.
Yet as of March, more than 2 million Filipinos remain unemployed where while undermployment stubbornly persists at the doubledigit levels.
And this does not even account for the absurdity of both our national and international definitions of employed where working for just a single hour is already enough to be counted as having a job or employed.
Millions of overseas Filipino workers, OFWs, continue to face growing uncertainty even as another wave of over half a million fresh graduates enter to the increasingly tight labor market still unable to generate enough stable, decent, and well-paying jobs. Thus, we must ask what will and should define this administration.
Two years 2028 is approaching because accountability, Mr. Speaker, is not only about fighting corruption at the highest levels of government.
Accountability is also about confronting and answering or in action.
As the house of the people, we always say a house of the people.
Let us not betray the trust bestowed upon us by our people to legislate higher wages. We did it. We did it last time in 19 Congress.
We can have a section 43 to fast track it. Let us have hearings. One year almost one year. One year has passed hearing. We appeal.
PUCP appeals.
Higher wages, quality jobs, and better lives. Let us finally fulfill not neglect our constitutional duty to ensure that every worker in this country not only possesses these rights on paper but genuinely genuinely enjoy security of tenure, humane conditions of work and a living wage. A living wage.
Together let us restore not only the value of wages but the dignity of labor and the confidence of our people in this government. in their government. As they say, Mr. Speaker, public office after all is public trust first and foremost in service of the workers who keep this nation moving forward.
Finally, to end, Mr. Speak, Mr. speaker.
Hopefully next year I'll be reading a different speech and more positive than this one. That is my hope.
Deputy Speaker Mendoza, Majority Leader.
>> Mr. Speaker, uh we would like to um refer the speech of the honorable deputy speaker Mendoza to the committee and rules for its appropriate action.
>> Is there any objection? The chair hears none. The motion is approved. The speech of Deputy Speaker Mendoza is referred to the committee on rules for his appropriate action.
>> Majority leader, >> Mr. Speaker, we'd like to acknowledge the guests of the Honorable Jacel Mary Meda, the fourth district of Manila.
Um, officials of the Philippine Dermatological Society, namely Dr. Maria Jasmine Amora, the president of of the Philippine Demological Society, Dr. Oreno LSE Ada Gray, Dr. Cynthia Tan, Dr. Lisa May Paz Tan and Dr. Arnold U.
>> To the distinguished guests of the Honorable Gazelle Marya, MD, our colleagues in the medical profession, Dr. Maria Hasmine Hamura, President of Philippine Dermatological Society, Dr. Arenol Adoway Board of Board of Trustees, BDS.
Dr. Dr. Cynthia Zeryakutan, immediate past president, PDS. Dr. Lisa Marie Pasan, first vice president, and Dr. Arnold U, chairman, legislative committee. Welcome to the House of Representatives.
Majority Leader, Mr. Speaker, we would like to recognize the representative of Bayan Partilus, the honorable Dada Ismula to avail of privilege hour.
>> The honorable Ismula is recognized.
Please proceed.
Mr. Speaker and dear colleagues, how would the rep house of representatives react if Chinese government's erects its flag along Commonwealth Avenue and claims it as theirs? Ang batasan to Commonwealth Avenue is about the same distance between Pagasa Island and Sanday.
Sanday is an integral part of our territory. That's why it's also called Pagasake.
And yet we've seen in the news in the past week, China landed in Sandy, unfurled their flag and spread this information about our civilian mission.
I had the privilege of joining the civilian mission of the coalition to the West Philippine Sea as the first congressperson to do so.
West Philippinipino artist members media volunteers. years.
Fore at 7:20 a.m. on May 1 on Labor Day, no less Chinese Coast Guard vessel.
At that time, we were just 16 nautical miles west of Muro. That's roughly the distance of a short drive from here to Tanawan Batangaso, West Philippine Sea.
Video Mr. speaker.
We discovered later dronemounted cameras to take videos and pictures of our peaceful mission. If China has their own laws restricting access to drones, they should only do that in their own territory.
Access airspace within the West Philippine Sea. If a Filipino wants to fly a drone kan that we have to seek approval from the Chinese government, China should never be allowed to impose its laws on Filipinos, especially on Filipino territory.
Mr. Speaker, on the morning of May 3, I went to Sandy Kay with volunteers of the eto coalition. proud sand is an integral part of island group.
Mr. Speaker, they brazenly landed on Sunday and showed their flag clearly mocking our sovereignty fake news. Fore for years. They destroy our coral reefs.
They destroy our marine ecosystems.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to draw attention to the state of Pagasa Island.
Pagasa Island is home to 400 Filipino Familia at frontlininers don Fore if you remember Mr. Speaker, my dear colleague, sometime in February, 16 local government officials from the Klayan municipality were declared banned in China by the Chinese government.
Their offense, West Philippine Sea. This was clearly an attempt by China to scare and intimidate our LGU officials.
LGO officials now with what little they have.
Mr. Speaker, surely we can do our part in the House of Representatives to ensure our Filipino our fellow Filipinos in the West Philippine Sea are not abandoned. My experience with Chinese China's threat and scare tactics was briefers Philippine Sea.
Infrastructure training at education municipality.
Philippines mission.
Philippines joint exploration deals China Philippines accountability House of Representatives.
Shukran.
>> Thank you honorable Ismula Majority Leader.
>> Mr. Speaker, I move to refer the speech of the honorable Dada Ismoola to the committee and rules for its appropriate action.
>> Is there any objection? The chair hears none. The motion is approved. The speech of the honorable Ismula is referred to the committee on rules for its appropriate action.
Majority leader.
>> Mr. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend session for a few minutes.
>> Is there any objection? Chair here's none. Session is suspended for a few minutes.
>> Yes.
session is issue. Majority leader Mr. Speaker, there being no other member who wishes to avail of the privilege hour, I move to close the privilege R.
>> Is there any objection? The chair hears none. Motion is approved. The privilege hour is now closed. Majority leader.
>> Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend session for a few minutes.
>> Session suspended.
Why don't you do that next?
is the one who water session is resumed. Majority leader, Mr. Speaker, in accordance with section 16, rule six of the rules of procedure in impeachment proceedings, I move to elect the following members of the House of Representatives as prosecutors in trial on the impeachment against Vice President Zar Sara Z Duterte.
Representative Gerville Jinky bit Bitrix Ruistro representative Terry Lidon representative Rammon Rodrigo El Gucherz representative Isabel Maria J. Samura Representative Lawrence R. Defensor representative Jose Manuel Pado Shell Jookno representative Leila M. De Lima Representative Kaka J. Bagau, Representative Jonathan Keit T. Flores, Representative Lorden G. Suan, and last but not the least, Representative Joel R. Chua.
There is a motion to elect the aforementioned members as prosecutors and the trial on the impeachment against vice president Zara Z doerte. Is there any objection? The chair here is none.
Motion is approved. Majority leader.
>> Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the session until tomorrow 3 p.m.
>> Is there any objection? The chair is none.
The session is suspended until 3:00 p.m.
tomorrow, May 13, 2026.
Ähnliche Videos
BREAKING: Judge Kathleen Issues Emergency Arrest Warrant After Trump Defies Order
Frontora
2K views•2026-05-29
Trump Impeachment STORM IGNITES as 29 Judges Vote for Conviction!!
DanielBriefDaily
2K views•2026-06-02
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में 5 जजों का शपथग्रहण समारोह #supremecourt #judges #oathceremony #shorts #ytshorts
Bharat24Liv
4K views•2026-06-02
THE STREISAND EFFECT AT BARBARA STREISAND’S HOUSE! - First Amendment Audit
KULTNEWS
1K views•2026-05-30
EBK Jaaybo Won’t Be Going To Trial?! | Criminal Lawyer Reacts
floridadefenseteam
404 views•2026-05-29
OFFICE HOURS: The Theft of Black Brilliance... AI and Intellectual Property (w/ Lisa E. Davis)
marclamonthillnetwork
2K views•2026-05-29
Monkton family worries husband who murdered wife could inherit all of her assets
WMAR2news
152 views•2026-06-02
Jury seated in the Frisco Track Meet stabbing trial — opening statements set for tomorrow
Wfaa8
343 views•2026-06-03
