|
WE thought we would ask the Senate some questions as the senators
enjoy the rest of their Lenten break (the third of four in the
legislative year) and ponder the work ahead.
The Senate approved 23 important bills before
adjournment last month. Many would consider that an accomplishment
but they pale in comparison to the publicity enjoyed by the
high-profile investigations. Even the approval and signing of the
very important national appropriations act made little news and was
under-reported.
In the public perception, inquiry into real or
imagined scandals, not lawmaking, is the more important function of
the Senate (and the House). Attendance is higher in these
investigations than in normal committee hearings. Media attention of
course is a great motivation. There is greater public discussion on
investigations, not on measures affecting the national interest. The
public seldom learns the pros and cons of important measures.
For these considerations, it is reasonable to
ask how congressional probes have improved lawmaking and the
national good. A rhetorical question, you say, and difficult to
answer. The senators however may consider the following questions:
Name at least three major Senate inquiries that
resulted in, or that produced, meaningful, important legislation.
Many Senate probes started and ended with great
publicity, but the results have not been announced or released to
the public. When can the public expect to read the reports?
When does the Senate plan to end the national
broadband deal inquiry and report on its findings?
The list of congressional investigations is a
very long one. All that time and energy expended on uncovering
executive scandals are considerable. Nobody has counted the expense
paid for by the taxpayers on those probes.
Remember the PEA-Amari land deal, “the
mother”—in the words of a former senator—“of all scams”?
The senators uncovered and followed the IMPSA
money trail. What happened to the probe on the expensive Macapagal
Highway along Roxas Boulevard? Who remembers the Jose Pidal
money-laundering scheme?
That was a big stir the Joc-Joc Bolante P2.8
billion fertilizer fund scam created. The Commission on Elections
counting machines scandal produced a long-running show. How can we
forget the “Hello Garci” extravaganza?
The Senate has long terminated its hearing on
the Kuratong Baleleng Gang killings in May 1995 along Commonwealth
Avenue, Quezon City. The committee chairman owes us an official
report. Please remind us: was there an investigation into the NAIA
Terminal 3 project and the $503-million Northrail track-building and
relocation program?
Now we have the ZTE-NBN deal that seems to
expand as if the Senate has all the time for it. The search for
every witness continues, but the public demand for documentary
evidence and the required proof for guilt or accountability remains
unfulfilled. At some point, the committee chairmen must agree on a
reasonable timeframe with a fixed deadline and express satisfaction
that all parties have been heard, that a final report is coming and
that purposeful legislation, based on the hearings, will be drafted
and introduced.
Following a constitutional mandate, the
lawmakers have invoked “in aid of legislation” as a ground for
calling an inquiry. The scams, the genuine ones, are unpardonable.
The inquiries were justified. But many did not live up to
expectations or failed to deliver on their objectives. Loose ends
seem to be everywhere.
If there had been recommendations for
prosecution, becoming rebuke for the officials or agencies
identified as perpetrators, official reports released on the
outcomes, or if meaningful bills saw the light of day because of the
lawmakers’ interest in executive wrongdoing, all the expense, time
and the energy behind all the exertions would have been acceptable
and should earn public praise.
|
