FULL TEXT: INQ&A with Senator Leila De Lima

Sabillo: It’s very interesting, ma’am, you mentioned in your speech about the things you’ve done with Bilibid when you were still the Justice secretary. I do remember that we had a Justice reporter. She would sometimes text us in the middle of the night, there would be a raid in bilibid, they would be confiscating a lot of things. It’s true, I think a lot of people forgot that it was during your term that those kinds of things…

De Lima: Sabi ko nga, binabaliktdad na nila lahat, bakit ganoon? Eh ako nga nag-simula niyan. And you know, kinasuhan pa nga ako ng mga yan until now, those cases are still pending including an anti-graft case before the Office of the Ombudsman filed by one of those Bilibid 90. One or two of those Bilibid 90. Anti-graft daw because I had no authority daw to transfer them from Bilibid temporarily to the NBI Detention Facility. And nandiyan yung death threats, and in fact, right now there’s still the security threat coming from…..

Nery: I can only…

De Lima: Ito ngayon ang napapala ko?

Sabillo: You’re now in cahoots with them.

De Lima: Naging protector nila (drug pushers and users). It’s so unfair, it’s crazy.

READ: Leila hurt after being tagged as drug lord coddler

Nery: I want to respond to that. I have a question, specifically about that.  Why are they doing this?

De Lima: I don’t know. Marami naman sigurong puwedeng dahilan. Maybe they want the senate inquiry to push through for some reason.

Nery: Is it possibly connected to what you mentioned earlier. Yung death penalty bill?

De Lima: I don’t know, hindi pa naman siguro. Baka ito lang nga. Because ang perspective kasi nila, ang mindset nila is that, kung iimbestigahan  yan then mawawala yung momentum ng law enforcers. Ngayon, highly-motivated sila ngayon with the backing of the powers that be. So kung iimbestigahan daw, made-demoralize, it would dampen their resolve.

I actually disagree. Kasi kaya nga gusto ko po magkaroon ng inquiry, para malaman natin ang buong sitwasyon. Alamin natin kung may problema nga ba talaga. Bakit ganon? May mga namamatay na hindi nlalaman kung ano ‘yung mga dahilan. Basta sasabihin na lang it’s either nanlaban or nag-agaw. Lalo na ‘yung mga cases of salvaging na hindi alam kung mga sinu-sino ang gumawa niyan. Nasusunod ba ‘yung mga dapat nasusunod sa mga batas, sa mga patakaran, ‘yung mga operational guidelines? Ginagawa ba ng authorities specifically internal affairs unit? That was a good point raised by Senator Dick Gordon. He pointed to a particular law which actually mandates whenever there is someone killed, there is a casualty in law enforcement operations.

Automatic dapat na dapat imbestigahan. Ganun din kasi sa other jurisdictions. Like the United States, tatanungin po natin ‘yan. Inquiry, ginagawa ba ‘yan ng internal affairs unit? May kulang bas a kapasidad nila sa resources nila? Sa mga tao nila na gawin ‘yung trabaho nila? So kasama po dapat dyan lahat. This one, they should welcome this inquiry. Gusto ko lang makatulong na above board, ang man yan, alam ‘yung ginagawa para hindi ma-taint ‘yung mukha ng buong kampanya against drugs. So bakit tayo mapaparanoid sa mga iniisip kung hindi naman ‘yun ‘yung pakay, pakay ko.

Nery: I’m trying hard to think of a previous instance na a speaker of the House actually pinpointed a senator of the republic who said “I want to investigate her” tapos ang kasama pa ‘yung Justice Secretary and now, he Solicitor General.

De Lima: That’s why I have to raise for the personnel and collective privileged. It is certainly breached of inter-parliamentary and courtesy. Kasi as I said nga, hindi naman ito ang pinakadefense ko. Gusto ko sila mismo, kapwa ko senador mismo, ang mag-raise niyan. Not in defense of Leila de Lima but in defense of the Institution. Di dapat naman talaga nila ginagawa iyan nang basta-basta na lang. Because we are have co-institutions. We are inter-parliamentary. Courtesy. And look at that, hindi lang naman si speaker ang tumitira sa’kin at kung anu-anng insinuations. Si Solicitor General, at ang latest, is the secretary of Justice. These are the President’s men. Now what am I supposed to think and say about that? These are the President’s men trying to discredit a certain senator.

Sabillo: Senator, that’s the question now. When you said a while ago that they don’t know what they’re up to, who are you referring to? Do you know who is behind this campaign to discredit you?

De Lima: Alam niyo, I’m actually giving them, the President’s men, the benefit of the doubt. I suspect na merong mga element diyan na sila ang nagfi-feed ng mga kasinungalingan na iyan; those fabricated lies that were manufactured. Nakikipag-jamming ako sa mga drug lords, party ako sa kanila, tumatanggap daw ako sa kanila, these must be coming from—Alam mo ‘yun, mahirap din naman kasing magturo.

READ: De Lima names Alvarez, Calida, Aguirre behind hatchet job

Sabillo: So you’re not yet sure po? Hae you considered the possibility that it came from a higher office like Malacanang?

De Lima: I wouldn’t say that at this point. In fact, sana hindi nakakarating ‘yung mga ganyan sa pangulo. O sana kung nakakarating po sa kanya, sana hindi siya naniniwala. You know what I call them agents of vengeance. It could be any of those of some of those na natapaka ho natin. Alam niyo na ang dami nating hinandle na high-profile cases. It can be a confluence of any of these but there may not be a deliberate grouping to get me. But it just happened na meron na silan commonality of objective.

Nery: Senator, maybe just one more question about this drug lord coddler thing. We have a question here. It may sound a little unfair but maybe we’ll give a chance to convince this guy. “Aside from the death threats that you’ve received, how can you convince us that you are not the protector of the base-scale drug lords?”

De Lima: May I just tell you, if you’re here. Whoever he is, I will look at you straight in the eye and I will tell you that’s a complete lie. Why should I be a coddler of these? SInabi kona po sa inyo kanina, ako nga po ang nag-raid sa kanila, ako ang nagahirap sa kanila. Ako ang nag-isolate sa kanila at kinasuhan nila ako. And then now I’m a coddler? Lininis naman po ang bilibid pero hindi pa completely malinis. Pero there have been successive operations: galugad. Under the former director and the current director. Doon po nagsimula lahat niyan.

Nery: And you said something in your privileged speech about not finding something?

De Lima: I had to say that. Madalas po nating naririnig iyan—merong shabu lab. Eh iyon nga po ang unang ipinahanap ko. Nagraid kami kasi narinig ko na rin po iyan na meron di umanong shabu lab mismo sa loob. So we had to look for it in the first major raid and in the successive raids. Until now, may raid under the operation galugad. Wala naman pong mahanap na shabu lab. Unless every each and every soul in that penitentiary are in cahoots with each other, hidni naman po basta bastang matatago ‘yung shabu lab kasi aamoy siyempre iyan. Kasi there’s no such thing. Anong naging problema sa bilibid? Kasi this drug lord were controlling the drug trade from within. They did not manufacture those drugs from within. If they had to manufacture those drugs, they had to be in volumes. May ilan ilan na nakapasok na mga sachet sachet. You know dahil sa paikipagkunchaba sa mg prison guards na madali lang naman gawin, madali silang nabibili at naba-bribe. Nakakapasok ang ilan ilan for personal use of joint inmates which are drug addicts. Pero to say na nanggagaling ang droga sa loob, at yun ang binibenta sa labas, ang mnamanifacture, they don’t need that. Kasi nga dati nang may drug sa labas. ‘Yun yung sinasabi ng pangulo na these drugs come from somewhere else, from another country. Kaya nga iniinsist niya na walang big time drug lord. Hindi po ako masyadong nag-aagree dun maliban na lang siguro sa perspective.

Nery: Senator, I think a much as this issue is concerned we’d like to make a paid to that ‘no. Okay, we’re gonna get a short break and this is INQ and A with the woman of the hour, Senator Leila de Lima.

(commercial break)

Nery: Nagsimula ‘yung privilege speech niya, she was really clear of her support for President Duterte’s war on drugs and then after that she spoke against the demolition jobs against her. Meron din ‘yung pinag-usapan yung well-oiled machine ng social media operatives and then after that she talked about the dehumanization kasi nga ang daming namamatay na parang sanay na tayo. Dun siya natatakot, culture of impunity. And then she asked, is there another way to do this? To wage this war against cardboard justice? And then she ended by explaining why she needed to file Senate Resolution No. 9. Senator, welcome back, ‘no. I don’t want to put you on the spot but anong sense mo dun sa mga colleagues mo in the Senate? Do they have a stomach on the Senate Inquiry on the war on drugs?

De Lima: I want to think they have. I think they have the stomach but are they willing is another question. They can do it. I mean, to be honest about it, the fact that may nag-eexpress ng reservations about the senate for various reasons like being premature or katulad ng sinabi ko nga na it might dampen them and the spirit of the law and enforcers, ‘yung momentum nila masisira, o kaya “oh, puro lang naman allegation, may proof na ba kayo?” That’s why it’s called a senate inquiry not a court of law na kailangan first ma complaint kasi kailangan ‘yun sa iba. Ako na ang nagsasabi na wala pa raw complaints pero meron na. Unti unti na meron nang nagfa-file pero nung una halos wala. They are putting various reasons not to proceed to the senate inquiry. We’re just talking about a handful of senators. I would like to believe that the majority of the senators would like this senate inquiry to push through because the matter is so important. You have to scrutinize everything, what is happening, really, in the war against drugs. Why are there so many killings?

READ: De Lima: Some senators gave ‘reasons’ for bucking probe

Sabillo: Ma’am, have you discussed this with the Senate President? Have you sat down and actually discussed the issue? Is he supporting you in this resolution?

De Lima: I’d like to believe that he is supportive of the resolution.

Nery: Something you said earlier, ngayon ko lang talaga naintindihan yung consequence non ‘no. You said earlier that Koko Pimentel had actually talked to the President about his plan to name you the Justice Committee Chair. So the President knew?

De Lima: Yes.

Nery:  Which, if reading between the lines correctly, gives you the courage to—he demolition job, its not going all the way to the President kasi parang alam naman niya na (unclear).

De Lima: Yes. Kung meron man na ginagawa ang pangulo, ay balik po ako sa sinasabi ko kanina, na baka nga meron lang na mga nagbibigay sa kanya ng maling impormasyon. Maybe there are personalities around him na feeding him the wrong information. Kasi ang ang impression talaga ng ilan sa kanila especially those na not personally know me, in their minds I think I’m the enemy of the President; that I’m a pain in the ass of this administration. In their minds so therefore, sa tingin nila they are doing a favor for to the President by putting me down.

Nery: How would you describe yourself, Ma’am? Your relationship with the President, are you a pain in the neck or?

De Lima: No, I’m not. Kasi kung alam lang sana ng karamihan, na marami naman po sa mga planno ng Pangulo ay suportado ko. Dito lang kami “nagkakainitan.” Dito sa mga issues na ito. Death penalty, summary killings, and well, di ko pa nga naartculate masyado ‘yung tungkol sa lowering of wage; criminal responsibility. But all other plans of this administration, gusto ko naman. You know the peace talks, of course the FOI, and then no to endo, although hindi naman complete. And then ‘yung anti-illegal mining especially black sand mining. I recently filed a bill prohibiting black sand mining. And also anti-human trafficking and whistleblowers protection. And no demolition without relocation. Marami akong gusto sa mga plano niya, sa mga sinabi niya. That’s why I support him sa mga bagay na ‘yun. So simply because I disagree on these three issues, kalaban na ako? ‘Yun kasi yata’yung nasa mind ng mga nakapaligid sa kanya eh. And I hope the President realizes that.

Nery: One last question na lang about sa privileged speech and maybe we can go on to other legislations you are preparing. Question from Weng… Do you think the Filipinos have become apathetic to the killings?

De Lima: Yeah, to a great extent. That’s why we need to do something at this point and not wait you know until kasi ang sinasabi ko nga national sociopathy and then hindi pwede po, hindi pwede na wala na lang. It would have irreversible effect on the psychology particularly on the young people, of the children na growing under atmosphere or environment that it’s okay to kill, its okay to see dump dead bodies in whatever corner, so mali po yun. I don’t want to be blamed later by the future generation that you didn’t do something about it, at the time that you could still do something. Yun naman po ang cliché, but that’s how I take things.

Sabillo: There are people who decry what is happening right now, but there are people who are not just apathetic but are supportive of the killings ang they probably feel that through that it’s faster to deal with the drug problem. Actually there is one person asking how would you respond to those critising in social media that you are undermining the good anti-drug campaign.

De Lima: Again may I correct that, I’m not at all undermining, I want to strengthen this campaign by making sure that the law enforcers are not violating the law, are not violating the rights of others. Hindi pwede po isakprisyo yung mga prinsipyo natin, yung mga nasa saligang batas nasa bill of rights in the name of fighting criminality.

Nery: Senator, as promised we move on to other topics. Meron po kayong Senate Bile No. 369, an act institutionalizing a criminal investigation system repealing for a purpose and so on, prescribing a uniformed system of preliminary investigation.

De Lima: That’s again one of my contributions to the fight to the campaign of the administration against criminality kasi alam naman ho natin kaya ito nangyayari dahil nga frustrated ang mga tao sa takbonng ating justice system, particulary criminal justice system masyadong mabagal, and yung walang swift delivery of justice. Maraming bottlenecks and it takes an average of 7 to 8 years to prosecute criminal cases, sometimes it’s more than 8 years. Issa pong nakikita kong bottleneck ay yung delay sa preliminary investigation. Why not diretso na na tinutulungan ng mga prosecutors the investigators in the case build-up of cases. The fusion of the role of the prosecutors on one hand and the police investigators, yan ang sistema sa ibang bansa eh, And then pag sapat na yung ebidensya diretso na na ifi-file ng prosecutors sa korte. And the court will make the preliminary determination. Gusto ko nga taasan yung probable cause threshold eh, masyadong mababa yun. Pwede sanang prima facie or preponderance of evidence something higher than the current threshold of probable cause, but of course lesser than the guilt beyond reasonable doubt threshold. That will hold, that should be the standard during the trial itself.

Nery: Can you talk about how much time would be taken away, for in sense, the average is 7 to 8 years for criminal case. Pag naging batas po to how many years will be taken away.

De Lima: There will be a significant reduction. Baka two years pwede na as an average. Although ideally, dapat mga one year lang pero kung mga 2 to 3 years that should be an improvement, a much improvement.

Sabillo: So it would be more of streamlining the investigation it wouldn’t like doing away with a necessary step because they would be doing together anyway.

De Lima: Kasi yung pag iimbistiga naman ng isang krimen is either may mag-file ng complaint na biktima or to propio because under the law our law enforcement authorities like PNP and NBI can motu propio or initiate an investigation with or without complaint. So sometimes, so marami nga akong pinapa-imbestiga sa NBI walang complaint basta ba nababasa sa diyaryo nire-refer ko na, ito pakitingnan ito, lalo na yung mga high profile and the NBI would investigate and they would file the complaint with the national prosecution service. Why not at the first instance pa lang pag imbestiga pa lang ng NBI kasama na yung prosecutors because prosecutors would know what type of evidence are needed, what evidence is strong or not, what evidence is admissible and competent or not. Tinutulungan na agad dapat yung mga investigators para by the time that the case is filed in court, malakas na siya.

Nery: Senator you also filed Senate Bill No. 197 to abolish the penalty of imprisonment in libel cases, music to our ears. Can you talk about this?

De Lima: Well we all know that under the current law revised penal code and even cyber crime prevention act libel is punishable by imprisonment and or fine. Now, I’m proposing the abolition of imprisonment as a penalty. That’s why it’s loosely called decriminalization, but it is actually a misnomer. Because you are not totally decriminalizing libel, you’re still imposing a fine. So instead of imprisonment fine na lang because you know kailangan naman talaga palakasin ang freedom of information, ang media freedom. But we cannot conceive na hindi na dapat pinaparusahan ang libel kasi mayroon naman talagang excesses on the part of media practitioners. So in those cases na talaga na sumobra ang mga media practitioners, then there is still a remedy. The offended party can still file a case but this time, kung found guilty wala na dapat imprisonment.

Sabillo: Matagal na pong prinopropose yung bill nay an, but do you think what of the prospect of it passing into law especially like some of the legislators are the ones usually the target of some media practitioners.

De Lima: I would push for the passage of the bill into law, because that has been referred to committee on justice and human rights. So I would just have to convince my colleagues first in the committee and in the plenary to adopt that. But of course I need to ask whether there is a counterpart bill or similar bill at the House of Representatives.

Nery: Ma’am I forgot to ask, to go back to the privilege speech, you filed Senate resolution number 9. The committee on rules has referred it back to your committee. Can you talk about timetables? When will your first meeting be? Do you have some people in mind?

De Lima: This is already first week of August. Originally I was looking at 2nd and 3rd week of August, we might have to move it a bit because we will still discuss it first preliminarily within the committee kasi under the rules on inquiries in aid of legislation, it has to be calendared also for discussion within the committee. In other words magdedecide pa kung itutuloy yung Senate Inquiry, but I cannot yet call for that initial meeting ng committee because wala pa kaming committee secretary. So im just waiting for somebody in the Senate secretariat to be appointed as the committee secretary for the committee on justice and human rights kasi siya yung gagawa ng notices