House panel pauses probe so VP Duterte can also face NBI

STEADY PRESENCE The gathering of Duterte supporters outside Edsa Shrine as of 5 p.m. on Thursday. The first groups come in trickles on Monday. —GRIG C. MONTEGRANDE

The House of Representatives panel looking into Vice President Sara Duterte’s alleged misuse of public funds has postponed its hearing on Friday to give way to the National Bureau of Investigation’s probe.

The chair of the House committee on good government and public accountability, Manila Rep. Joel Chua, said that the panel members did not want Duterte to use the congressional inquiry as an “excuse” to skip her appearance for the NBI’s investigation.

At a press conference on Thursday, Chua said that the postponement of the committee’s Nov. 29 hearing was to “pave the way to the NBI investigation so we wouldn’t be used as an excuse.”

“We believe that (Duterte’s) issue with the NBI is very important because it concerns national security,” he stressed.

READ: NBI preparing for Sara Duterte’s appearance in view of subpoena

Deputy Majority Leader Francisco Paolo Ortega V pointed out that the NBI’s investigation and the House panel’s hearings were “equally important proceedings, especially our hearings but it’s very important for the questions of the NBI to be answered because [these] are no joke” as they involved a grave threat.

“National security is at stake and this is concerning and scary,” he emphasized.

Must appear today

The NBI summoned the Vice President last Monday to answer questions at its main office on Friday morning and to explain her alleged grave threats, which are covered by Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code, in connection with Section 6 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10175) and “possible violation” of the Republic Act No. 11479, the controversial Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) signed in 2020 by her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte.

During an online news conference on Saturday marked by rants, tirades, and profanities, Duterte revealed that she had contracted a person to assassinate President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and Speaker Martin Romualdez should an alleged plot to kill her succeed.

She said she wasn’t joking and that if she were killed, the attacks on Marcos, his wife, and the Speaker would be her “revenge from the grave.”

Malacañang considered her disclosure as an “active threat” against the President, who vowed to fight it. The Presidential Security Command heightened its protection for the President and his family, declaring that Duterte’s statement was a “national security” threat.

Close to wrapping up

According to Chua, the panel’s inquiry, which is in aid of legislation, might be close to wrapping up. “By next week we would be filing House bills which are the products of our investigation,” he said.

The lawmaker pointed out that while several grounds for impeachment have come up in the course of the inquiry, it has “never been discussed.”

The House panel has been looking particularly closely into the alleged misuse of some P612.5 million in confidential funds by the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd) during Duterte’s tenure as education secretary.

Duterte’s designated special disbursing officers—Gina Acosta for the OVP and Edward Fajarda for DepEd—have said they were ordered by the Vice President to turn over the agencies’ confidential funds to the commander of the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group, Col. Raymund Dante Lachica, and Col. Dennis Nolasco.

Not designated ‘terrorist’

A Department of Justice (DOJ) official on Thursday clarified that the government was not designating Duterte a “terrorist” although authorities would be investigating her for a possible violation of the Anti-Terrorism Act.

“That is not being done to the Vice President. Please do not preempt the government. Nothing like that is happening. She is being held accountable for her act of intimidation,” Undersecretary Jesse Andres said in a dzBB radio interview.

The ATA is facing criticism due to its broad and vague definition of terrorism, which critics fear could criminalize legitimate dissent and free expression. The Supreme Court, acting on petitions questioning the law’s constitutionality, removed protests, strikes, and advocacy work among those that may be considered terrorist acts.

The law’s broad definition of terrorism and provisions for prolonged detention without charge have raised fears of abuse and targeting of activists.

She already ‘acted on it’

Andres earlier pointed to Section 4(a) of the law, which defines terrorism as any act intended to cause death, serious bodily injury, or endanger a person’s life, in implicating Duterte.

The law specifies that when such acts are carried out to intimidate the public, create fear, or spread a message of terror, the offender would be deemed guilty of terrorism and face life imprisonment.

Andres said that Duterte’s threat went beyond mere words because “she has already begun to act on it.”

In a press briefing on Wednesday, Duterte laughed off the investigation of her alleged violation of the antiterror law.

“This violation of the antiterrorism law was also applied to Congressman Arnie Teves, so they have a playbook on how to handle someone charged under the anti-terrorism law,” she said.

Difference

But Andres said that Duterte’s case differed from Teves’ because the latter was designated a terrorist due to his alleged involvement in extrajudicial killings in Negros Oriental and the murder of former Negros Oriental Gov. Roel Degamo in 2023.

He explained that the crimes committed over several years were considered together when designating Teves a terrorist.

Andres said that the ATA not only punishes actual acts of terrorism but also criminalizes the conspiracy to commit terrorism, threats to commit terrorism, and even proposals to carry out terrorist acts.

Such actions are already considered criminal under the law, he added.

In a separate interview on government television, Andres said the Vice President’s father, former President Rodrigo Duterte, may be held liable for the violation of the ATA for his statements and actuations that seem to provoke the military’s political intervention.

He said the NBI and the Philippine National Police may also summon the former President to allow him to explain his statements.

“We are all monitoring these utterances of the past president. He has given several statements urging the military to intervene, and that is another dangerous action that is threatening possibly national security,” he said.

‘Out of order’

Last Monday, the ex-President called on the military and the police to “protect the Constitution” and intervene to mend a “fractured” government.

According to the justice official, anyone calling on the military to be a “remedy to a fractured governance” was “out of order.”

But Andres said he was confident that as professional organizations the PNP and the AFP “will never interfere [in] civil affairs and civil governance.”

“All of these things are being taken together and if it’s necessary for us to pursue the case we will have to do it—that is the obligation of the Department of Justice—to investigate offenses, to enforce criminal laws, and possibly prosecute if the evidence warrants,” he said.

“We keep on saying that ‘we should not take the law into our hands and revenge is a type of extrajudicial killing if [a complaint] does not undergo a judicial process and the judicial process requires everyone the opportunity to be heard,” he said. —WITH A REPORT FROM INQUIRER RESEARCH 

READ: Sara’s threats and theater, a smokescreen to P125M confi fund mess?