MANILA — Senate Majority Leader Francis Tolentino reinforced his position on Wednesday that the Senate maintains custody over dismissed Bamban, Tarlac Mayor Alice Guo.
During Tuesday’s Senate session, Tolentino referenced a letter from the Office of the Ombudsman, dated August 29, 2024, to the Executive Clerk of Court of the Capas, Tarlac Regional Trial Court. The letter instructed the court to determine the appropriate judicial region to handle the graft charges against Guo.
“Ibig sabihin po, Mr. President, wala pong jurisdiction. Sang-ayon po dito, wala pong jurisdiction yung Capas, Tarlac, at binibigyan po ng poder ang Executive Judge na pumili ng pinakamalapit na judicial region,” Tolentino said in his manifestation.
(This means, Mr. President, that Capas, Tarlac has no jurisdiction, and the Executive Judge has been given the authority to choose the nearest judicial region.)
Tolentino pointed out that under Republic Act 10660, cases involving public officials should be tried in judicial regions other than where the official holds office.
“I am stressing this, Mr. President, to highlight again that as of today, the Senate’s warrant of arrest should be considered as the only valid warrant of arrest in existence today,” he asserted.
The Senate issued an arrest order for Guo in July after she repeatedly ignored its hearings. She was arrested in Indonesia on September 3 and was initially expected to be detained in the Senate facility. However, she was brought to the Philippine National Police Custodial Center in Camp Crame after the Capas, Tarlac RTC Branch 109 issued a warrant for her alleged violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The court later committed her to the Custodial Center.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ronald Dela Rosa expressed support for holding an executive session with Guo, though some senators opposed this idea.
“Ayaw nila dahil gusto nila to obtain the information that they want in open hearing para the public also deserves to know kung ano talaga yung bagay na yun,” Dela Rosa explained.
(They don’t want an executive session because they want to obtain the information so the public can know the matter.)
Dela Rosa noted that if information were gathered in an executive session, it could only be disclosed with the committee’s decision and clearance from the chairman, in the interest of transparency.
“Kung ma-obtain namin yan through executive session, individually we are not allowed to divulge the information, but kung mapag-usapan sa komite at magkakaroon ng desisyon ang komite, magkakaroon ng clearance from the chairman na puwede ilabas ang information in the interest of transparency, puwede naman siguro, that is possible,” he added.
(If we obtain the information, we are not allowed to divulge it, but if the committee discusses it and the chairman gives clearance, then it can be released in the interest of transparency.)
Dela Rosa also suggested suspending the rule on executive sessions to encourage Guo to tell the truth, stating that the rule should only be used in cases involving national security or public interest.
“Baka may threat sa kanya. Puwede rin siyang magsinungaling, gagawin niyang rason to evade questions that may possibly implicate her. Puwede rin siguro, kaya nga ako nagsabi na suspend natin rules on executive session,” he said.
(There might be threats against her, or she might lie to avoid questions that could implicate her. That’s why I suggested suspending the rules on executive sessions.)