Participants in the disputed Blue Ribbon Committee hearing held last Thursday may face legal consequences after questions were raised over the authority and official status of the proceeding.
The event, led by former Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano and members of the now-minority bloc, was described by Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson as a “bogus hearing,” saying those who took part may not be covered by parliamentary immunity.
“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,” Lacson said.
The June 4 proceeding was held at the Senate session hall, where 18 former soldiers gave testimonies linking several personalities to the alleged delivery of cash through suitcases.
However, questions over the hearing’s validity emerged after Senate Blue Ribbon Committee chairman Erwin Tulfo had set the official hearing on the flood control controversy for Monday, June 8.
Because of this, the testimonies made during the disputed proceeding could expose the former soldiers to possible cyber libel complaints, particularly from individuals named or implicated during the event.
Public officials who participated may also face possible complaints for usurpation of authority or official functions if it is established that they performed official acts without lawful authority.
Under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code, any person who knowingly carries out official functions without authority may be punished with prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
Lacson said those affected by the allegations raised during the June 4 event may have legal grounds to pursue cases, unless the Supreme Court overturns the Avelino v. Cuenco ruling and invalidates the actions of the new Senate majority.
The leadership change on June 3 happened after Senator Francis Escudero joined the 11 then-minority senators during session. The new majority cited the Avelino v. Cuenco ruling in asserting that a quorum existed, allowing them to declare all positions vacant and elect new Senate officers.
“Only if the SC will overturn the Avelino v. 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 said.