Changing the words in MIF bill ‘behind closed doors’ is ‘tampering’ — Pimentel
Senate Minority Leader Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III speaks during a Senate session. (File photo by Bibo Nueva España/Senate PRIB)
MANILA, Philippines — Changing the words in the Maharlika Investment Fund (MIF) bill “behind closed doors” is tantamount to “tampering” with the proposed measure, Senate Minority Leader Koko Pimentel said on Thursday.
This is the description given by Senate Minority Leader Koko Pimentel to the act performed by Senate Secretary Renato Bantug Jr.
Pimentel on Thursday rebutted the assertion of Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri.
Zubiri had said there was “no sinister move to tamper with the measure.”
Pimentel, however, does not agree with him.
“What they did with Maharlika is not usual. It is tampering. They changed the wording, amounting to changing the substance. Behind closed doors,” Pimentel said in a message to INQUIRER.net.
“They changed the wording, amounting to changing the substance. Behind closed doors,” he stressed.
Senate Secretary Renato Bantug Jr. earlier said the double provisions on the prescriptive period of crimes and offenses were addressed by merging Sections 50 and 51.
In doing so, Bantug had noted, the 20-year prescriptive period of Section 51 was dropped and 10 years of Section 50 was retained.
No bicam was held
Pimentel, a former Senate president, pointed out that in the legislative journey of Maharlika bill, Congress skipped an important step when it failed to conduct a bicameral conference committee.
He specified this was “the last opportunity to amend the differing versions of the House and the Senate.”
Pimentel questioned Zubiri’s argument when the latter cited examples of bills that had previously been corrected after they were ratified by Congress.
“In Senate President Zubiri’s examples, there were bicams held. Hence, there were amendments, because that’s the purpose of the bicam – to ‘harmonize’ differing versions,” the minority leader explained.
The senator said reconciling the Senate and House versions of a bill is done “with participation and agreement” of representatives from both chambers.
The bicameral conference committee, then, submits its signed report to have it separately ratified in Senate and House during plenary, Pimentel stated.
“With Maharlika, there was no bicam. There was, therefore, no opportunity, no chance, no avenue to make any change in the Senate version approved on third and final reading,” he said.
“There was, therefore, no opportunity, no chance, no avenue to make any change in the Senate version approved on third and final reading,” he observed.
The minority lawmaker urged his colleagues: “We should give importance to the word ‘final.’ Compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges.”
After the Maharlika bill was approved by Senate in the wee hours of May 31, members of both chambers of Congress, including Zubiri and Pimentel, met at the Manila Golf and Country Club for what was deemed as a “pre-bicameral meeting.”
During the last Senate session before Congress adjourned sine die, Zubiri said the meeting turned out to merely be a “lunch break.”
The Senate President said this because the House had already decided to adopt the reconstructed Maharlika bill of the upper chamber.
The Maharlika bill seeks the creation of a wealth fund that government can supposedly use for investments.
The measure was certified urgent by President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.
Marcos said he would immediately sign the bill into law once it reaches the Palace.
Marcos, who had claimed the investment fund was his idea, said he would immediately sign the bill into law once it reaches the Palace.
RELATED STORIES:
No malicious intent to tamper; Maharlika bill unscathed— Zubiri
Maharlika bill’s conflicting provisions merged for economy of words – Bantug
