Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson has warned that individuals who gave testimonies and public officials who participated in Thursday’s controversial flood control inquiry could face severe legal repercussions, labeling the event a “bogus” subcommittee hearing.
Lacson clarified that participants—including senators from the newly shifted minority bloc—cannot hide behind parliamentary immunity because the event was not an official, sanctioned Senate proceeding.
“Yes, they can be charged, possibly for cyber libel and other crimes since it was a bogus hearing and no parliamentary immunity may be invoked, not even the senators who participated,” he said.
The unofficial hearing, held at the Senate session hall, was spearheaded by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano. During the session, 18 former Marines gave testimonies accusing several high-profile personalities, including Senators Vicente “Tito” Sotto III and Erwin Tulfo, of receiving suitcases filled with cash.
The development comes as Senator Tulfo, the newly appointed chairperson of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, scheduled the official, legitimate inquiry into the flood control irregularities for Monday, June 8.
According to Lacson, the 18 ex-Marines could face cyber libel charges for their statements, while participating government officials could be prosecuted for usurpation of authority or official functions under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code.
He noted that anyone who executes official duties without proper authorization risks a prison sentence ranging from six months and one day to six years.
Lacson added that the individuals maligned during Thursday’s event have a rock-solid case, provided the Supreme Court upholds the historic Avelino v. Cuenco doctrine, which validated the Senate leadership shakeup executed by the new majority bloc last Wednesday.
The June 3 reorganization took place after Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero allied with 11 minority members, leading to the election of Senate President Pro Tempore Sherwin Gatchalian as the chamber’s acting leader. The new majority cited the Avelino precedent to prove a quorum was met when they declared all leadership seats vacant and elected new officers.
“Only if the SC will overturn the Avelino vs Cuenco ruling and invalidate the action taken by the 12 senators last Wednesday, those who were offended in yesterday’s event have a good case,” Lacson further said.