Sen. PING LACSON Questions Railroading of Move to Allow Remote Participation in Senate Proceedings

Added: 2026-05-26

[00:00:00]Mr. President.

[00:00:01]Uh, this is a parliamentary inquiry.

[00:00:04]What is the status of the motion introduced by the honorable Marcoleta last May 11?

[00:00:13]Has it been referred to the committee on rules?

[00:00:17]I am told that it's been referred to the committee on rules majority leader.

[00:00:20]Okay.

[00:00:21]>> Yes, it has been referred to the committee on rules and uh, that's why in this particular uh, uh, deliberation, the committee on rules is giving it back to the floor for a plenary action Madam President.

[00:00:35]Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, has the committee on rules been uh, been constituted?

[00:00:44]I believe that Senator Joel Villanueva is the acting majority leader >> Yes.

[00:00:48]>> and would be the best position to answer the question.

[00:00:51]>> President. In the meantime, I recognize Senate President Cayetano. Madam Chair, with the permission of Senator Villanueva, so the committee on rules is not reporting out the No, my my question, Mr. President, I'm sorry, uh, Madam President. Uh, with your permission, my question is, has the committee on rules been constituted? Yes.

[00:01:12]So, Madam President, the answer there is the same answer to the question of uh, Senator Pangilinan and Senator uh, former Senate President Soto, that in accordance with Section 19, uh, it's the same.

[00:01:29]Uh, they continue to function. Having said that, I was explaining that the motion of Senator Villanueva was not for the committee on rules to report out what was referred to them, but to return to the plenary, because if you look at Section 136 uh, of our rules, the rules may be amended by means of a motion which should be presented at least 1 day before its consideration, and a vote of majority senators present shall be required for its approval. So, you do not need the endorsement nor the forwarding of the committee of rules for the amendment of the committee on for the amendments of the rules. So, the only requirement is that it is put on the floor at least 1 day before or the proposal is made and that a majority of the senators present will will vote for its approval.

[00:02:28]So, I just wanted to clarify that just so that we don't have any miscommunication that whether or not the rules committee met, who are the members, etc. because right now that's irrelevant because we have given back to the plenary the proposal.

[00:02:45]Yeah. Very clear. Thank you, Senate President. Madam President. Senator Lacson's recommendation.

[00:02:50]>> Does it mean that we are now disregarding the committees of the Senate?

[00:02:54]So, I the the committee chairman or the chairman of any committee, including the rules committee, may just report out any any motion or any resolution referred to [clears throat] it in plenary and then just you know, it is within his power to just report it out by himself without any deliberation in the committee, without any committee report.

[00:03:21]Is that the new rule now, Mr. President Madam President? Madam President.

[00:03:25]Yes. There's there's no new rule. I read the rule.

[00:03:28]Senator Lacson is referring to resolutions or communications or anything referred to the committee on rules. We're talking about a motion to amend the rules. We had the option of taking it up, but since everyone asked for 1 more day, it was given to the committee on rules. The committee on rules has an option to take it up but the acting majority leader or acting chairman of the committee gave it back to plenary and the plenary is more how do I put it?

[00:04:04]supreme supreme. Thank you Senator Lacson over the committee. So we didn't disregard the committee. It is our choice from the start whether we want to give it to the committee or not. So when we give it so for example I have a motion now to >> [clears throat] >> to extend the session to June 12 instead of June five.

[00:04:29]That could be given to the committee on rules or upon coordination with the house the plenary can decide it directly or we can give it to the committee on rules and after he talks to the house of representatives he can even report it out or he can easily legally morally just say that I am tossing it back to the plenary which is what's happening today. Thank you Mr. President. That is assuming that there there was no referral.

[00:04:58]But in this case and I'd like to to invite the attention of the body to journal number 62 dated May 11, 2026 and if I may read the the the particular portion of this journal proposed at 6:25 p.m. the session was to resume.

[00:05:22]Proposed amendment to the rules of the Senate. Senator Marcoleta proposed an amendment to rule 14 Senate sessions of the rules by inserting a new paragraph C under rule 41 which reads A or C allow a senator for justifiable reasons to attend and participate in the session through teleconference, video conference or other reliable forms of remote or electronic means using appropriate information and communications technology.

[00:05:54]Now, here's the portion, Mr. President or Madam President, while expressing no objection to the proposal, Senate President Cayetano A suggested giving the Committee on Rules time to discuss the matter. Now, my question is was there any discussion by the Committee on Rules? Apparently, there was none.

[00:06:14]Because now being reported out by the acting majority leader without consultation with any of the members.

[00:06:21]And by the way, Mr. Madam President wala pa ang Committee on Rules eh.

[00:06:27]I believe that it was mentioned and I will reiterate from my understanding that there was no Committee on Rules meeting because that motion is reverted back to plenary. Madam Chair >> Meaning we are not uh ignoring the fact that of course committees must hold meetings, but this particular motion is being referred back to plenary. And may we just put on record, it says in rule or section 136, the rules may also be amended by means of a motion which should be presented at least 1 day and we're complying with that before its consideration and the vote of the majority of the senators present in this session shall be required for its approval. I believe that is what the Senate President had Evidently, Madam President, action was taken.

[00:07:19]And the action was to refer it to the Committee on Rules since the position of majority floor leader was uh vacated.

[00:07:27]So, how can the Committee properly function in the absence of a committee uh Yeah, of the committee members. Madam President Madam Chair >> I had stated >> Let me finish, Madam President.

[00:07:42]>> of a continuing operations of the But there were vacated, Madam President.

[00:07:47]Wala ng members ang Committee on Rules.

[00:07:50]So, we cannot invoke continuity because we vacated all committees, all positions, including the members. And may I invite you to Section 24 of our rules, Madam President. The committees shall hold meetings to discuss, decide, and submit a report on all matters transmitted to them. This was transmitted to the Committee on Rules.

[00:08:13]So, the committee shall hold, including the Committee on Rules, shall hold meetings to discuss, decide, and submit a report. There's no report, Mr. President or Madam President.

[00:08:23]>> Madam President. So, we're violating our own rules.

[00:08:27]We recognize Senate President.

[00:08:28]>> Yes, Mr. President.

[00:08:30]The chair already made a ruling and it's not appropriate to argue with the chair because, as explained to Senator Lacson, the committee did not report it out. He read the journal of May 11, but he did not read the motion of Senator Joel today. His motion today was pursuant to Rule 136 of the rules, a motion to amend the rules, meaning if Joel was no longer the majority leader, if I was the majority leader now, or even an ordinary member, that motion was carried. No one objected that we take it up because, Madam Chair, we're bringing it back to plenary. So, natural po, walang discussion sa Committee on Rules. Kasi wala naman po sa rules natin na kailangan i-discuss sa Committee on Rules. We did that on May 11 so that everyone will have an opportunity to study the rule. It's a very simple amendment. So, we should go to the discussion of the amendment if anyone is objecting to the amendment. But definitely, the the right to propose an amendment is a right guaranteed by our rules. Senator Marcoleta has an amendment. We should go to discussing the merits or demerits of having that rule.

[00:09:48]You You already ruled that it is proper for the plenary to take it up. So, may I request or move that we If there are any objection, we discuss their objection.

[00:09:58]I'm objecting. That that's the uh effect of my manifestation, Madam President.

[00:10:03]I'm objecting because I'm invoking Section 24 of our rules. And as I uh read into the records, the Journal of May 11, 2026. Na-refer po ito sa Committee on Rules.

[00:10:16]And there was no discussion. Action was taken actually by uh by the uh by this body. Then, Madam Chair, if there's an objection, may I move that we divide the house? It's a objection >> On the On the On the On that On that issue, not on the issue of whether or not the rule is good. That Your issue is whether or not it's proper to take it up on the floor.

[00:10:39]Uh the The position of the majority is that there's no rule being violated.

[00:10:45]So, we will vote the uh Presiding Officer has already ruled, but the gentleman continues to object.

[00:10:53]So, we have to vote on it. We're not voting on the amendment yet. We're voting on whether the amendment is proper or not.

[00:11:01]Yes, interjection, uh Madam President.

[00:11:03]>> Yes, Minority Leader Senator Sotto. The we will have to support that uh uh that um resolution or or thinking of uh Senator Lacson, which is we did not constitute the Committee on Rules.

[00:11:22]So, what are we discussing right now? I I I suggest that we we constitute the Committee on Rules and discuss it there.

[00:11:29]How do I know this? Eh ako minority leader, eh. Hindi ako member ng rules.

[00:11:34]Ex-officio, eh. Tumawag ba? Hindi.

[00:11:37]Ano 'to?

[00:11:39]Binabaraso? Point of order, Madam Chairman.

[00:11:43]Wherein the rules does it say that an amendment has to pass the committee on rules?

[00:11:48]Section 24, Madam President. Anong sabi po sa Section 24? The committee shall hold meetings to discuss, decide, and submit a report on all matters transmitted to them. Madam Chairman, that's not the rule. The rule is 136.

[00:12:04]>> 136. Can you please, for the third time, may we request the Senate President to read into the record The rules may be amended by means of a motion, which would be presented at least 1 day before its consideration, and the vote of the majority of the senators present in the session hall shall be required for its approval. So, I respect their uh objection. But, how do we determine objections in this Senate? We vote.

[00:12:31]So, if there is an objection, uh they have uh already explained their position. We have explained our position. I move that we divide the house, Madam Chair. May May I, Mr. President?

[00:12:44]Uh We We are several members of the minority here, and only Senator uh Lacson has spoken. Why are we railroading this process, Mr. President?

[00:12:55]I have a number of issues that I'd like to raise regarding this motion, Mr. President.

[00:13:01]They are citing Section 136. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that uh their position is correct. The second paragraph, Mr. President, says the rules may also be amended by means of a motion, which should be presented at least 1 day before its consideration.

[00:13:19]We submit, Mr. President, that the earlier motion that was uh entered or was uh uh was referred to the committee on rules.

[00:13:29]This is a new motion, Mr. President. And therefore, we have to take consideration of the one-day requirement before we can act on it, Mr. President. And that should be, if not tomorrow, because we don't have any session tomorrow, that should be on Monday, Mr. President.

[00:13:45]Madam President Again, let me let me let me reiterate, the rules may also be amended by means of a motion, which should be presented at least one day before its consideration. We submit that the motion that was uh uh mentioned uh last May 11 was referred Yes.

[00:14:04]>> to the committee on rules. Yeah. This is a new motion, Mr. President, that is being presented on the floor, which requires that it be presented one day before it is considered. And therefore, we have to consider this motion on Monday, Mr. President. Madam President >> by the acting majority leader, the motion of Senator Marcoleta has been brought to the plenary, and Referred.

[00:14:32]>> both the majority and the minority had mentioned rule section 136, and it says that the vote of the majority of the senators present in session shall be required for the Madam President >> I believe that this rule has been mentioned more than five times.

[00:14:47]>> Madam President Uh I believe also that the interpretation of the rule uh is different. So, I take note of the manifestation of Senator Pangilinan. Mr. President, if if if if I if I may just continue, Mr. President.

[00:15:03]All in previous Uh Senator Lacson actually has the floor. I think >> Yes, with the permission of Senator Lacson. Uh Senator Lacson has the floor.

[00:15:10]May we continue with the uh manifestation of Senator Lacson, and then he after him, he will yield to Senator um Pangilinan. Madam President, the invocation of the Senate President uh of rule 136 is premised on the assumption that there was no action taken.

[00:15:31]But we took action. We referred it to the Committee on Rules. So, Section 24 now applies.

[00:15:38]Madam President, you cannot just ram down our throat something that numbers can dictate, Mr. President.

[00:15:47]Yes, Senate President.

[00:15:48]>> Chair. First of all, we're just repeating the arguments. I respect his argument, but I disagree with it.

[00:15:55]Secondly, they've used already three words: ram down their throat, railroaded, binabráso.

[00:16:04]In this democratic institution, we when we disagree, we vote.

[00:16:12]When we have rules, we follow the rules.

[00:16:15]The particular rule in amending the rules is 136. We're following that. So, why are we using unparliamentary language to express or try to provoke the kind of argument we don't want between the majority and minority. You have your opinion, we respect that, we have our opinion. So, how do we resolve that? By voting. Now, if you think we violated the rule, then go to court.

[00:16:48]But we do not think that we violated the rule. It is very clear. So, my point of order, Madam Chair, they're out of order by insisting that there's another rule except for 136. So, I move that we vote on it, Madam President. We divide the house.

[00:17:02]>> Objection.

[00:17:03]Objection. There's an objection, then we vote. So, may we proceed with the vote, Madam President? Mr. Mr. Mr. President, I was earlier it was the manifestation of the Presiding Officer, Uh, Madam Chairperson, that after Senator Lacson, I be allowed to speak, Mr. President.

[00:17:20]Are we now curtailing my right to speak, Mr. President? Madam Chairperson >> We are not able to ask questions as to why we are amending the rules.

[00:17:28]We are not able to ask questions as to who they wish >> Madam Chair, may I answer? Who will benefit from the amendment to the rules?

[00:17:35]Is this rule, Mr. President, is this rule, Mr. President, uh, for Senator Bato, who is not here?

[00:17:42]We would like to raise these valid questions, Mr. President, before we go into a vote, Mr. Madam Chair, yes. Yes, these we should not be How can the Presiding Officer recognize Senator Pangilinan? Uh Uh, please, no. That I would never curtail your right to speak. Just as in 2004, I believe you were seated.

[00:18:08]And I was a vice presidential candidate of FPJ then, and my microphone was closed, and my right to speak was closed.

[00:18:16]Was not given.

[00:18:18]I remember that time now, and the word noted was said to me. That will not happen now. I will not do that to you. And I'm not curtailing your right to speak, Senator Pangilinan, except that you were speaking at the same time, and I was about to recognize you because Senator Lacson had the floor.

[00:18:40]Thank you, Madam President, for that clarification.

[00:18:41]>> I just wanted to be clear on record because I If I If recognize your being emotional, but it will go on Senate record that the Presiding Officer was curtailing your right to speak. I would never do that, and I would not do what I experienced in 2004 in the House of Representatives in the canvassing of the votes Mr. Mr. President >> Thank you. Madam President, uh, with due respect, Mr. President, I was not referring to the Presiding Officer.

[00:19:12]>> Yes, thank you, Senator Lacson. We recognize