2667722922!

REPUBLIC O F TH E PHILIPPINES
Pasay City
Journal
SESSION NO. 15
W ednesday, August 30, 2017
SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND REGULAR SESSION

SESSION NO. 15
Wednesday, August 30,2017
CALL TO ORDER
At 3:22 p.m., the Senate President, Hon. Aquilino
“Koko” Pimentel III, ealled the session to order.
PRAYER
Sen. Richard J. Gordon led the prayer, to wit:
Lord God, we come before You seeking
deliverance for our country so we could
gloriously weather the storms that hit us.
Let us be instruments of Your peace,
and bring light to our country which is being
cloaked under the darkness of drugs, killings,
fractionalism in the past decades.
Liberate us from the sinister claws of
corruption that has our country firmly
ensconced in its clutches for so long.
These we ask in the Holy Name of
Jesus, our Lord and Redeemer.
Amen.
ROLL CALL
Upon direction of the Senate President, the
Secretary of the Senate, Atty. Lutgardo B. Barbo,
called the roll, to which the following senators
responded:
Angara, S.
Aquino, P. B. IV B.
Binay, M. L. N. S.
Drilon, F. M.
Ejercito, J. V. G.
Escudero, F. J. G.
Gatchalian, W.
Gordon, R. J.
Honasan, G. B.
Hontiveros, R.
Lacson, P. M.
Legarda, L.
Pangilinan, F. N.
Pimentel III, A. K.
Recto, R. G.
Sotto in, V. C.
Trillanes IV, A. F.
Villanueva, J.
Villar, C. A.
Zubiri, J. M. F.
With 20 senators present, the Chair declared
the presence of a quomm.
Senators Pacquiao and Poe arrived after the
roll call.
Senator De Lima was unable to attend the
session as she was under detention.
APPROVAL OF THE JOURNAL
Upon motion of Senator Sotto, there being no
objection, the Body dispensed with the reading of the
r / '

288 WEDNESDAY. AUGUST 30, 2017
Journal of Session No. 14 (August 29, 2017) and
considered it approved.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
OF THE PRESENCE OF GUESTS
Senator Sotto acknowledged the presence in the
gallery of the following guests:
• Senior high school students of the University of
the East-Manila;
• Local executives from Taal, Batangas — guests
of Senator Ejercito; and
• Vice Governor Harold Imperial of Albay and
Vice Mayor Oscar Cristobal of Legazpi City —
guests of Senator Zubiri.
Senate President Pimentel welcomed the guests
to the Senate.
ILEFERLNCE OF BUSINESS
The Secretary of the Senate read the following
matters and the Chair made the corresponding
referrals:
BILLS ON FIRST READING
Senate Bill No. 1568, entitled
AN ACT PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE
AND ALTERNATIVE MODES OF
TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER
MOBILITY OPTIONS TO IMPROVE
AIR QUALITY, INCREASE EFFI
CIENCY, REDUCE CONGESTION
AND CONTRIBUTE TO POSITIVE
HEALTH IMPACTS IN OUR
SOCIETY
Introduced by Senator Sonny Angara
To the Committees on Public Services; and
Environment and Natural Resources
AN ACT CREATING A DENTAL UNIT
IN EVERY RURAL HEALTH UNIT
UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AS PART OF THE
PRIMARY APPROACH IN
THE DELIVERY OF HEALTH
SERVICES AND PROVIDING
FUNDS THEREFOR
To the Committees on Health and Demo
graphy; and Finance
AN ACT INSTITUTIONALIZING
NATIONAL INTEGRATED CANCER
CONTROL AND APPROPRIATING
FUNDS THEREFOR
graphy; and Finance
AN ACT AMENDING ARTICLE 83 OF THE
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 442
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
LABOR CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES
Introduced by Senator Joel Villanueva
To the Committee on Labor, Employment
and Human Resources Development
AN ACT ESTABLISHING THE PHILIP
PINE SPACE DEVELOPMENT AND
UTILIZATION POLICY, PROVIDING
FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES
Introduced by Senator Sotto III
To the Committees on Science and Tech
nology; and Finance
RESOLUTIONS
Proposed Senate Resolution No. 477, entitled
RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING AND
CONGRATULATING THE PHILIP
PINE CONTINGENT FOR THEIR
OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE
IN THE 29™ SOUTHEAST ASIAN
r/'

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 30, 2017 289
GAMES HELD IN KUALA LUMPUR.
MALAYSIA
Introduced by Senator Joel Villanueva
To the Conimittce on Rules
RESOLUTION HONOURING AND
COMMENDING THE METROBANK
FOUNDATION OUTSTANDING
FILIPINOS OF 2017
Introduced by Senators Lacson and Escudero
To the Committee on Rules
RESOLUTION COMMENDING THE
AWARDEES OF THE 2017
DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY - NATIONAL
ACADEMY OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY (DOST - NAST)
AWARDS FOR THEIR EXEMPLARY
AND OUTSTANDING WORK IN
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH, TECH
NOLOGICAL APPLICATION, AND
SCIENCE ADMINISTRATION
Introduced by Senator Paolo Benigno “Bam”
Aquino IV
RESOLUTION FOR THE SENATE OF
THE PHILIPPINES TO PROVIDE
SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS
IN SENATE SESSIONS AND
COMMITTEE HEARINGS WITH THE
INTENTION OF IMPROVING
INFORMATION DISSEMINATION
TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
PARTICULARLY INDIVIDUALS
WITH HEARING IMPAIRMENT
Introduced by Senator Maria Lourdes Nancy
S. Binay
ADDITIONAL REIERENCE OI BUSINESS
RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE
SENSE OF THE SENATE OF THE
PHILIPPINES TO SUPPORT THE
APPEAL OF PRESIDENT RODRIGO
ROA DUTERTE TO THE GOVERN
MENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA FOR THE RETURN OF
THE BELLS OF BALANGIGA, THAT
WERE TAKEN AS TROPHIES OF
WAR BY AMERICAN MILITARY
TROOPS IN 1901
Introduced by Senator Aquilino “Koko”
Pimentel III
PimTLEGE SPEECH
OF SENATOR TRILLANES
Availing himself of the privilege hour. Senator
Trillanes spoke on the plight of Senator De Lima and
called on his colleagues to join him in his call for the
release from incarceration of Senator De Lima.
Following is the full text of Senator Trillanes’
privilege speeeh:
Noong nakaraang Pebrero o mahigil anim
na buwan na ang nakalipas, si Senator De Lima
ay ikinulong sa Camp Crame. Ito ay bunga ng
mga kasong isinampa laban sa kanya kaugnay
diumano sa illegal drugs. Pero Hang buwan bago
ang kanyang pagkaaresto, siya ay binastos,
minura, tinakot, hinarass, at niyurakan ang
kanyang pagkatao ni Dulerte at ng kanyang
mga alipores.
Ngunil anu-ano nga ba ang basehan ng
mga paraiang sa kanya?
• Una, ang mga testimonya laban sa kanya
ng mga bilanggo sa Bilibid;
• Ikalawa, ang testimonya laban sa kanya ni
former Bureau of Corrections Chief Rafael
Ragos;
• Ikatio, ang testimonya laban sa kanya ni
convicted drug lord Kerv'in Espinosa;
rA

290 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 30, 2017
• Ikaapal, ang testiwonya laban sa kanya ni
Romiie Dayan.
Hihimayin nalin isa-isa yan. Pero hago
'yan, ilalabad ko mum ang maikling back
ground tungkol dito.
1. Bago naupo bilang presidenie si Duterte,
wa/ci ni isang intelligence report man Jang
ng PDEA, NBl, PNP o AFP ang nagsasabing
may kinalaman si Senator De Lima sa ilegal
na droga. Si Duterte Jang, noong siya na
ang nadeklarang nanalo sa cleksyon, ang
nagsimulang magparatang sa kanya na siya
ay isang drug queen diumano ng Bilibid,
without even citing any source.
2. Para sa kaalaman ng iahat, si Senator De
Lima ang kauna-unaiiang Secretary of Justice
sa kasaysayan na naglakas-loob na /-raid
ang illegal drug operations sa Bilibid. Ginawa
ito noong December 14, 2014, kasama ang
mga elemento ng NBI, PDEA, PNP at ISAFP,
at dito na nga nadiskubre ang magarbong
lifestyle ng mga convicted druglords sa loob
ng Bilibid. Doon na nga nakita ang mga
limpak-limpak na pera, droga, baril, pati
na Jacuzzi, recording studio at mga maia-
hotel na kwarto sa loob ng mga kubol.
Sinundan pa ng tatio pang raids personally
led by Secretary De Lima na tuluyan na nag-
baklas ng mga kubol. Again, for the record,
Iahat ng ito ay nabunyag noong panahon
ni Secretary De Lima sa DOJ, contrary sa
propaganda ng Duterte administration na
pinabayaan ito noong panahon niya. Kaya
rin naman matindi ang galit ng mga
convicted druglords sa kanya dahil dito.
Ngayon, base sa report mismo ni
Secretary Aguirre at ng PDEA, nagbalik na
muli ang drug trade sa Bilibid. Katibayan na
Hindi si Senator De Lima ang drug queen
doon o saan man. In fact, sa mahigit na
isang taon sa puwesto ni Aguirre, wala pa
rin silang nadiskubre na shabu laboratory
na sinasabi nila noon na nag-o-operate
daw sa Bilibid. Sa totoo Jang, wala nang
ginagawang mga malakihang raids ngayon
sa Bilibid.
3. Base sa kasong isinampa, wala ni isang gramo
ng droga at wala ni piso na pera ang naipre-
sentang ebidensya. Ang mga ito dapat ang
kaUangang ebidensya sa isang kasong
illegal drug trading. Kung wala naman, dapat
bribery o extortion ang kasong isinampa.
However, these are bailable crimes within the
primary jurisdiction of the Ombudsman, kaya
Hindi ito ang nai-fiie na kaso. Gusto talaga
nilang ikulong si Senator De Lima.
4. Ang mga pangunahing ebidensya na
ginamit ay puro testimonya lamang ng mga
bilanggo at isang picture.
Ngayon, isa-isahin natin ang mga naipre-
senta:
1. Ang mga testimonya ng mga bilanggo. Una,
ang mga ito ay maliwanag na coerced or
compromised witnesses. Laliat sila ay pina-
ngakuan ng mga privileges sa kulungan
kapalit ng kanilang scripted testimonies
laban kay Senator De Lima. Jto ay pina-
tunayan ng isang nadiskubreng BuCor memo
na maliwanag na nakasaad ang kondisyong
ito. Ayan po sa memo na kung saan naka-
lagay na kapalit ng testimonya laban kay
Senator de Lima, ibinilin ni Sec. Vitaliano
Aguirre na magkaroon ng mga electronic
gadgets, aircon, at kung anu-ano pa ang
mga bilanggo sa Bilibid. Ang iba naman na
Hindi pumayag tumestigo ay sinaksak at
pinatay. Ito ay bago nagkaroon ng hearing,
noong ilalabas dapat Hong mga lestigo na
ayaw pumayag na magbigay ng testimonya
laban kay Senator De Lima.
Pangalawa, doon sa hearings sa
Kongreso, scripted na nga ang testimonies,
magkakasalungat pa ang mga testimonya
ng mga drug lords, particularly sina Herbert
Colangco at Jaybee Sebastian. Ang sabi ni
Colangco, si Ronnie Dayan daw ang bagman
ni Senator De Lima. Habang sabi naman ni
Jaybee Sebastian, si Jonel Santos naman
daw ang bagman at Hindi daw niya kilala
si Ronnie Dayan.
Pangatio, sabi ni Jaybee Sebastian,
nag-abot daw siya mismo ng P2 million kay
Senator De Lima noong ito ay bumisita sa
opisina ng BuCor Chief, sa Harap ng Hang
mga tao kasama na ang mga guwardya ng
BuCor, security at staff ni then Secretary De
Lima. Do they expect us to believe na wala
man long nag-inspect o nagtanong man
lamang kung ano ang laman ng kaHon na
ibibigay ng isang bilanggo sa isang
Secretary of Justice sa hob ng Bilibid?
Anyway, kung ikaw nga naman din si Jaybee
Sebastian, pagkatapos ka saksakin ng Hang
beses, palagay ko kaHit anong kuwento
ang gusto nilang ipasabi sa iyo, sasabiHin
mo na Jang.
Pang-apat, gaya ng nasabi ko, ang
karamihan sa kanila ay may tanim na galit
laban kay Senator De Lima dahil sa mga
raids na ginawa niya noong siya ay Secretary
of Justice pa. ^ •
r f

2. Ang leslimonya ni former BuCor Chief
Ragos. Maliwanag sa salaysay ni Ragos na
Hindi niya alam kung kanino gating ang
P5 million na binigay daw niya kay Senator
De Lima through a certain Ablea Paggising
daw niya sa kanyang kuwarto ay nandoon
na yong bag na puno ng pera at may
in.structions daw sa papel na ibigay kay
Senator De Lima or then Secretary De Lima
Kung loloo man itong napakalabong
istoiyang ilo, sino naman ang /j«g-conclude
na gating ilo sa drug lord?
3. Ang leslimonya ni Kerwin Espinosa. Una,
sabi ni Kerwin Espinosa, siya raw ay
nagbigay ng protection money kay Senator
De Lima noong November 2015. Protection
para saan? Eh, nog-resign na siya noong
October 2015 pa tang kasi naghain na siya
ng kandidatura sa pagka-senador. Sabi pa
ni Kerwin Espinosa, ang katibayan niya ay
iyong picture nita sa Burnham Park sa Baguio
City. Ilo po iyon, iyong nasa lower right ang
picture ni Kerwin Espino.sa at ni Senator De
Lima sa Burnham Park. Pero sinamahan
namin ng mga ibang picture na doon din
sa tugar na iyon — parehas ang damit ni
Senator De Lima, kandidato pa tamang siya
noon, ilo ay obvious na nagtagpo tamang
sita sa isang public place. Isang potiliko na
nitapilan ng mga ordinaryong tao. Lahal
layong mga potiliko ay vulnerable sa mga
ganilong picture. Pero Hindi tahal ng picture
ay pare-parehas, pero dito matiwanag na
latagang watang kakone-koncksyon Hong
si Kerwin Espinosa at si Senator De Lima.
Atom n 'yo po, watang potiliko o
kandidato ang magpapo-picture sa isang
drug lord kung kitata niyang drug lord Ho.
At tato nang Hindi ka magpopa-picture sa
isang public place like Burnham Park kung
meron kang itegat na transaksyon. Common
sense tang naman ‘yan. Pero kung ikaw din
naman si Kerwin Espinosa, pagkatapos
patayin iyong tatay mo so hob ng kutungan,
patagay ko tahal ng gusto nitang ipa-
kuwento sa iyo ay sasabihin mo na tang.
4. Ang leslimonya ni Ronnie Dayan. Simpte
tang ang mga butas sa leslimonya ni Ronnie
Dayaa Noong una ang sabi niya ay iniabol
sa kanya ni Kerwin Espinosa iyong pera sa
hotel parking area sa Baguio City. Pero noong
pangaiawang tanong na, sa Burham Park
parking area naman na daw.
Pangatawa, sabi ni Dayan, nangyari
ang abutan ng pera noong November 2014.
Satungal sa claim ni Kerwin Espinosa na
nangyari daw ilo noong November 2015.
Matiwanag na nagkabuhot-buhot na ang
script.
Ngayon, kung Hindi loloo ang mga
paralang sa kanya, bakit nga ba pinag-
diskitahan at ipinakutong ni Duterte si
Senator De Lima? Meron akong naisip na
laltong posibitidad:
1. Ilo ay isang paraan para batikan siya
ni Duterte dahit sa pag-imbestiga niya
dito bitang ulak ng Davao Death Squad
noong siya ay mayor pa ng Davao City
at si Senator De Lima naman ay chairman
ng Commission on Human Rights.
2. Ilo ay isang paraan para batikan siya
ni Duterte sa pog-initiate ng Senate
investiga-tion ukot sa EJK.
3. It is supposed to create a chilling effect
so other oppositionists would be afraid
to stand up to him lest they end up
facing tmmped-up charges like her.
Ultimately, this is a clear case of political
persecution. Pero Hindi tang po ako ang nagsa-
sabi o naniniwata nito kundi ang itan pang
mga lanyag al highly credible institutions and
organizations gaya ng European Parliament,
Human Rights Watch, Global Commission on Drug
Policy, Amnesty International, Inter-Parliamentary
Union, Asia Catalyst al ASEAN Parliamentarians
on Human Rights.
She was even named in Time Magazine’s
2017 Top 100 Most Influential People.
Gaya noting tahal, Hindi perpekto si
Senator De Lima pero atom nalin, deep in our
hearts, na Hindi siya involved sa illegal drugs at
tato nang Hindi siya dmg queen. Hindi po siya
kriminat para Iratuhin na parang isang
kriminat. Mas dobte ang hirap ng pagkakutong
tato na para sa isang babae at ina. Noong kami
ng mga kasamahan kong sundato ay nakulong
sa pag-aktas sa gobyerno, despite our deep belief
about the righteousness of our cause, we never
pretended that we did not break the law. We just
willingly faced the consequences of our actions.
Pero si Senator De Lima, watang ginawang
kahil ano man. Pinaralangan tang siya. There
was no overt action done at all to merit her
incarceration. Kung nag-express layo ng outrage
sa pagpapataya kay Superintendent Marcos at
kanyang mga kasamahan na mati-wanag na
nag-commit ng murder, dapat tato layong magatil
sa ginawa at ginagawa kay Senator De Lima.
By any establi.shed standard, that is injustice.
Kaya ang aking apcta sa aking mga
kasamahan dito sa Senado, panabon na para
iluwid nalin ang mataking pagkakamating Hol i n g I l o
r r

at sumcima sa aking panawagan lui palayain si
Senator Leila De Lima. Nananawagan din ako sa
chainnan ng Committee on Public Order and
Dangerous Drugs na mog-conduct ng hearing
ukol sa mga paratang ng mga drug lords laban
kay Senator De Lima nang sa ganoon ay
maipalawag sila dilo at makita ng taong bayan
kungpapaano ginamit ng Duterte administration
ang mga bilanggo para gumawa ng istorya
nang sa ganoon ay makulong ang isang
inosenleng tao na kalaban nila sa pulitika.
I know Senator De Lima may have offended
some of you, personally, during her tenure as
Secretary of Justice. I had my own run-ins with
her when she opposed our amnesty then. Quite
ironic because here 1 am now, standing by her,
standing for her, fighting for her. Ganito rin ako
makipaglaban para sa iba sa inyo noong
nakaraan. Ganito tayo dapat sa isa't isa, lalo
na kung para sa tama. Six months no siyang
nakakulong, mabigat na parusa ‘yan para sa
isang taong walang pagkakasala. My
colleagues, it is time to do the right thing.
Nang binisito ko siya nitong nagdaang .
linggo sa Crame sa kanyang kaarawan, ang
mensahe ko sa kanya ay ang mga pagsubok na
ito ay lilipas din. Ako ay naniniwala na siya ay
makalalayang muli, malilinis ang kanyang
pangalan at higit sa lahat, siya ay makaka-
pagsilbi muli sa ating bayan. There is no doubt
about it, sooner rather than later, she will be
freed. And this time with a purified soul, renewed
vigor, more wisdom, a stronger spirit and a much
clearer sense of purpose to serve our country
and people. When that day comes, I hope all of
us here in this august Chamber would be warm
heartedly remembered by Senator Leila De Lima
as among those who fought for her freedom.
REFERRAL OF SPEECHES
TO COMMITTEES
objection, the Chair referred the privilege speech of
Senator Trillanes to the Conunittee on Rules and to the
Committee on Public Order and Dangerous Drugs.
In addition, upon motion of Senator Sotto, there
being no objection, the Chair referred the privilege
speech of Senator Lacson on August 23, 2017, on the
issue of corruption in the Bureau of Customs to the
Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and
hivestigations.
MANIFESTAI ION OF SENAIOR SOTTO
Senator Sotto stated that Senator Escudero would
sponsor six House bills pertaining to the establishment
and conversion of local high schools in various parts
of the country. He said that similar to the previous
House measures. Senator Escudero would deliver
an omnibus sponsorship on the measures, but each
measure, he clarified, shall separately be subject to
interpellations, amendments and approval on Second
Reading and Third Reading.
SPECIAL ORDERS
objection, the Body approved the transfer of the
following from the Calendar for Ordinary Business to
the Calendar for Special Orders:
1. Committee Report No. 149 on House
Bill No. 4598;
Bill No. 5051;
Bill No. 5183;
Bill No. 4524;
Bill No. 5052; and
Bill No. 4599.
EDUCATION BILLS
With the consent of the Body, upon motion of
Senator Sotto, the following bills were considered,
on Second Reading, one after the other:
Bill No. 4598, entitled
AN ACT ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL
TECHNICAL-VOCATIONAL HIGH
SCHOOL INBARANGAY NASISI, CfTY
OF LIGAO, PROVINCE OF ALBAY TO
BE KNOWN AS LIGAO CITY
NATIONAL TECHNICAL-VOCA
TIONAL HIGH SCHOOL AND APPRO
PRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR;
2. Committee Report No. 150 on House Bill
No. 5051, entitled
SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS HIGH
SCHOOL IN BARANGAY HULONG-
DAGAT, CITY OF MALABON TO BE
KNOWN AS MALABON CITY

NATIONAL SCIENCE AND MATHE
MATICS HIGH SCHOOL AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR;
No. 5183, entitled
HIGH SCHOOL IN BARANGAY
HAMPANGAN, MUNICIPALITY OF
HILONGOS, PROVINCE OF LEYTE TO
BE KNOWN AS HAMPANGAN
NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL AND
No. 4524, entitled
AN ACT CONVERTING THE SAN RAFAEL
NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL IN THE
CITY OF NAVOTAS INTOANATIONAL
TECHNICAL-VOCATIONAL HIGH
SCHOOL TO BE KNOWN AS SAN
RAFAEL TECHNOLOGICAL AND
VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL AND
No. 5052, entitled
HIGH SCHOOL IN BARANGAY
BANAHAO, CITY OF BAYBAY,
PROVINCE OF LEYTE TO BE KNOWN
AS BANAHAO NATIONAL HIGH
SCHOOL AND APPROPRIATING
FUNDS THEREFOR; and
No. 4599, entitled
HIGH SCHOOL IN THE CITY OF
PAGADIAN, PROVINCE OF ZAM
BOANGA DEL SUR TO BE KNOWN
AS PAGADIAN CITY SCIENCE HIGH
SCHOOL AND APPROPRIATING
FUNDS THEREFOR.
Pursuant to Section 67, Rule XXIII of the Rules
of the Senate, with the pennission of the Body, upon
motion of Senator Sotto, only the titles of the bills
were read without prejudice to the insertion of their
full texts into the Record of the Senate.
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon motion of Senator Sotto, the session
was suspended.
It was 3:50 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 3:51 p.m., the session was resumed.
SUSPENSION OF CONSIDERATION
OF HOUSE BILL NOS. 4598, 5051,
5183, 4524, 5052 AND 4599
objection, the Body suspended consideration of
the bills.
SPECIAL ORDER
objection, the Body approved the transfer of
Committee Report No. 159 on Senate Bill No. 1561
from the Calendar for Ordinary Business to the
Calendar for Special Orders.
COMMITTEE REPORT NO. 159
ON SENATE BILL NO. 1561
objection, the Body considered, on Second Reading,
Senate Bill No. 1561 (Committee Report No. 159),
entitled
AN ACT PROVIDING THAT ALL CON
TRACTUAL AND CASUAL EM
PLOYEES IN THE GOVERNMENT
SERVICE BE PAID CORRESPOND
ING WAGES DURING SPECIAL
PUBLIC AND LOCAL HOLIDAYS,
AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS
THEREFOR.
Pursuant to Section 67, Rule XXUl of the Rules
of the Senate, with the permission of the Body, upon
motion of Senator Sotto, only the title of the bill was
read without prejudice to the insertion of its full text
into the Record of the Senate.
The Chair recognized Senator Trillanes for the
sponsorship.
SPONSORSHIP SPEECH
Senator Trillanes, chairperson of the Committee
on Civil Service, Government Reorganization, and
Professional Regulation, submitted for plenary
consideration Senate Bill No. 1561 under Committee
r

Report No. 159, otherwise known as the “Contractual
and Casual Employees’ Wages During Special Public
and Local Holidays.”
Following is the full text of Senator Trillanes ’
sponsorship speech:
SUSPENSION OE CONSIDERATION
OE SENATE BILE NO. 1561
the bill.
Section 9, Article II of the 1987 Philippine
Constitution states that “The State shall promote
a just and dynamic social order that will ensure
the prosperity and independence of the nation
and free the people from poverty through policies
that provide adequate social services, promote
full employment, a rising standard of living, and
an improved quality of life for all.” However, up
until now, the rising cost of living, basic health
care and decent education still continue to be a
burden to our government employees.
AH casuals and contractual government
employees work under the principle of “no work,
no pay” basis. It is a sad truth that during non
working special public and local holidays,
tenured employees are paid a full day’s wage but
said “marginalized” government employees are
deprived of the same privilege. This situation is
most certainly very unfair and unjust considering
that our casual and contractual government
employees face the same problems and economic
hard.ships as the regular employees.
To help alleviate the plight of our casual and
contractual employees in the government, we
must extend any and all means of helping them,
including providing them with the right to be
paid their corresponding wages during special
public and local holidays. This is one way of
helping them endure the economic challenges
brought about by the rising cost of living in
the country.
The amount necessary for the implementa
tion of this Act shall be sourced from the respec
tive government agencies where the concerned
casual and contractual employees are employed.
Thereafter, such sums as may be necessary for
tlie continued implementation of this law shall be
included in the General Appropriations Act.
The Committee recognizes the vital role of
every government worker as tliey are the back
bone of a prosperous nation. Hence, the Com
mittee is pushing for this measure which would
give them proper motivation and incentives in
order to safeguard their right to an improved
quality of life.
In view of the foregoing, I hope that our
colleagues will support the immediate passage
of this measure.
SPECIAL ORDER
entitled
AN ACT GRANTING DISASTER SER
VICE VOLUNTEERS PAID LEAVE
DURING PERIOD OF DISASTERS.
sponsorship.
SPONSORSHIP SPEECH
Senator Trillanes, chairperson of the Committee
on Civil Service, Government Reorganization and
consideration Senate Bill No. 1560 under Committee
Report No. 158, otherwise known as “An Act
Granting Disaster Service Volunteers Paid Leave
During Period of Disasters.”
Following is the full text of Senator Trillanes's
sponsorship speech:
Disaster preparedness is a very important
component in nation-building. It prevents an
unfortunate situation from becoming worse by
aiming to prepare the vulnerable communities in
r | ^

the event of calamities and help limit the number
of victims and casualties in case of inevitable
disasters. The Philippine Red Cross (PRC) has
been in the forefront of our country’s disaster
readiness efforts, offering a wide array of
humanitarian services that include general and
special relief operations in times of disasters in
the country.
In the past years, our country has experienced
a number of tragic and devastating calamities
such as the Tacloban storm surge brought about
by super typhoon Yolanda, the devastating
floods triggered by typhoon Ondoy, and the
dreadful earthquake which hit Bohol and parts of
Cebu. With the help of volunteers from PRC,
among others, who willingly participated in
disaster rescue operations, disaster relief and
emergency response, the plight of many of the
victims of said tragedies had somehow been
alleviated.
In response to the commitment, dedication
and perseverance shown by PRC volunteers, it is
timely and appropriate to come up with legis
lation granting paid leave credits for employees
who choose to volunteer and devote their time
to help our countrymen in times of disasters.
Under this proposed measure, all public and
private employees who are certified disaster
service volunteers shall be granted leave from
work with pay for up to an aggregate of fifteen
(15) days, consecutively or non-consecutively,
in any twelve-month period in order to participate
in specialized disaster relief service for the PRC.
To be covered by this Act, the employee’s
services and participation should be upon the
request of the PRC and upon the approval of the
employing office or agency.
The covered employees shall be compen
sated by the employing office or agency at
the regular rate of pay for regular working
hours during which tliey are absent from work
while performing volunteer work. They shall
also not lose seniority rights or accumulated
vacation time, sick time or earned overtime due
to such leave.
However, subject employees are not entitled
to receive overtime pay, night shift differential
pay, hazardous duty pay and/or any other form
of pay of compen.sation in addition to their
regular pay. In ca.se an employee undergoes the
completion of any training towards certification
as a disaster service volunteer, such employee
shall not be entitled to pay unless he or she used
personal or earned leave credits.
Likewise, duties performed while on disaster
leave shall not be considered a work assignment
by any department or agency. The employees’
activities and job functions while on leave shall
not be directed by the government but shall be
determined and controlled solely by the PRC.
Moreover, the government shall not be
liable for workers’ compensation claims arising
from accident or injury while an employee is on
assignment as a certified disaster service
volunteer for the PRC.
The Civil Service Commission, in coordina
tion with other concerned agencies such as the
National Disaster Risk Reduction and Manage
ment Council (NDRRMC), the Philippine Red
Cross (PRC) and the Department of Labor and
Employment (DOLE) and the Department of the
Interior and Local Government, shall promulgate
and issue the appropriate rules and regulations
in the implementation of this act.
The Committee earnestly believes that it is
essential for the State to grant disaster service
leave to employees who choose to volunteer
relief operations during times of calamities and
disasters. Needless to state, our PRC volunteers,
who leave their homes and families behind in
times of disasters and calamities, for the noble
purpose of helping and serving others at great
peril to their own health and well-being, deserve
this simple benefit in exchange for their selfless
dedication.
It is also the hope of the Committee that this
grant, apart from serving as a small token of our
appreciation for our PRC volunteers, would also
encourage them, as well as others to continue
doing humanitarian work for our countrymen in
times of calamities and disasters.
colleagues will support the immediate passage
of this measure.
SUSPENSION OF CONSIDEILATION
O F SEN.NTE BIEL NO. 1560
the bill.
SPECIAL OICDER
r/r

entitled
AN ACT GRANTING HAZARD PAY TO
COVERED EMPLOYEES OF THE
GOVERNMENT AND APPROPRIAT
ING FUNDS THEREFOR.
sponsorship.
SPONSORSHIP SPEECH
Senator Trillanes, on behalf of the Committee on
Civil Service, Government Reorganization and
consideration Senate Bill No. 1559, entitled “An Act
Granting Hazard Pay to Covered Employees of the
Government and Appropriating Funds Therefor” under
Committee Report No. 157.
Following is the full text of Senator Trillanes's
sponsorship speech:
Consistent with our aim to protect and
promote the welfare of our public servants and
boost their morale, this measure seeks to provide
all covered employees and officials of the
government an additional benefit, taking into
account the nature of their work and their
exposure to hazards or possible dangers
pertaining to their positions.
Under this measure, all employees and
officials of the government, regardless of the
nature of their appointment, shall be paid a
hazard pay particularly when stationed or
assigned to work in or under the following
circumstances:
• Hazardous or less hazardous areas, as may
be declared as such by the Secretary of
National Defense;
• Difficult areas or hardship po.sts characterized
by distance, inconvenience of travel due to bad
roads and conditions of the terrain, isolation,
inaccessibility and extreme weatlier conditions;
• X-ray units, clinics, laboratories, sanitaria,
leprosaria, observation posts and other
similar stations which offer risks to health
and safety due to exposure to radiation,
contagious diseases and volcanic activity;
• Institutions that tend or care for mentally-
deranged patients;
• Places that are subject to depredation by
criminal elements as those in prison reserva
tions and penal colonies without adequate
police protection;
• Plants and installations of arsenal;
• Aboard aircraft and watercraft in crossing
bodies of water; and
• Other similar work conditions which the
Department ofBudget and Management (DBM)
shall consider hazardous on the basis of expo
sure to environment, health and social risks.
Government employees receiving similar
benefits under existing laws shall also be covered
under this Act provided that they shall only be
entitled to one pay or benefit, either the hazard
pay provided in this Act or the benefit provided
under the said existing law, whichever is higher.
The amount necessary for the initial imple
mentation of this Act shall be sourced from the
respective government agencies where the covered
government officials and employees are employed.
Thereafter, such sums as may be necessary for
its continued implementation shall be included in
the General Appropriations Act (GAA).
Your Committee believes that it is only fair
and reasonable that the officials and employees
of the government be provided with appropriate
compensation for the risks they assume in
connection with the perfomiance of their duties.
After all, it is the government’s responsibility to
protect and look after our government officials
and employees whose lives are constantly at risk
in order to serve our people.
colleagues will support the immediate passage of
this measure.
OF SENATE BILL NO. 1559
the bill
r f

SPECIAL ORDER
entitled
AN ACT GRANTING NIGHT SHIFT
DIFFERENTIAL PAY TO THE
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INCLUD
ING THOSE IN GOVERNMENT-
OWNED OR CONTROLLED CORPO
RATIONS AND APPROPRIATING
FUNDS THEREFOR.
sponsorship.
SPONSORSHIP SPEECH
Senator Trillanes, on behalf of the Committee
on Civil Service, Government Reorganization and
consideration Senate Bill No. 1562, entitled “An Act
Granting Night Shift Differential Pay to the Govern
ment Employees Including Those in Government-
Owned or Controlled Corporations and Appropriating
Funds Therefor,” under Committee Report No. 160.
Following is the full text of Senator Trillanes’s
sponsorship speech:
It is a universally recognized fact that the
normal work is performed during the day and
the work done at night is exceptional and is
justified only on grounds of inevitable necessity.
Generally, government employees work for eight
hours a day between 8;00 a.m. to 5;00 p.m.
Services rendered beyond the eight-hour work
schedule are paid overtime pay in accordance
with existing laws.
However, there are government employees
whose regular working hours fall between 10:00
p.m. to 6:00 a.m. of the next day. In a sense, work
at night is more strenuous and more taxing than
work done during the day. Hygienic, medical,
moral, cultural, and socio-biological reasons,
moreover, show that night work entails various
inconveniences as well as health risks.
It is in this light that your Committee seeks
to provide premium pay for government
employees who work late at night and until the
wee hours of the morning, when they are
supposed to be asleep.
Under this proposed measure, a night shift
differential pay at a rate not exceeding twenty
percent (20%) of the hourly rate of an employee
shall be given to government employees, includ
ing those in govermnent-owned or controlled
corporations, regardless of their nature of employ
ment, whether permanent, contractual, temporary
or casual. This shall be in addition to and shall
not in any way diminish the existing benefits and
allowances being presently given to them.
Not covered by this measure are govern
ment personnel, such as public health workers,
who were already given night shift differential
pay under Republic Act No. 7305; and govern
ment employees whose services are required,
or are on call, twenty-four (24) hours a day, such
as uniformed personnel of the Armed Forces of
the Philippines (AFP), Philippine National Police
(PNP), Bureau of Jail Management and Penology
(BJMP), and the Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP)
due to inconsistent working hours and different
salary rate.
The Civil Service Commission (CSC), in
coordination with the Department of Budget and
Management (DBM), shall promulgate the neces
sary rules and regulations of this mea.sure.
Moreover, the amount necessary for the
implementation of this measure shall be funded
as follows:
• For national government entities, the initial
amount shall be charged from the savings
generated from the different departments,
bureaus, offices, and agencies;
• For local government units, the amount
shall be charged again.st their respective
funds; and '

• For government-owned or -controlled
corporations and their subsidiaries, the
amount shall come from their respective
corporate funds.
This Committee recognizes the sacrifices of
our government employees who work late at
night and in the wee hours of the morning. It is
only fair that they should be given substantially
the same benefits as those given to employees
in the private sector. Our government workers
have long suffered neglect and poor working
conditions. This Act is just a simple effort to
repay them for their service and to recognize
their role as the backbone of our government.
colleagues will support the immediate passage of
this measure.
the bill
SECOND ADDITIONAL
REFERENCE OF BUSINESS
The Secretary of the Senate read the following
matters and the Chair made the corresponding
referrals:
BILL ON FIRST READING
AN ACT INSTITUTIONALIZING AN
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
SYSTEM, PROVIDING FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT, SUPERVISION
AND REGULATION OF EMER
GENCY MEDICAL SERVICES PRO
FESSION, AND APPROPRIATING
FUNDS THEREFOR
graphy; Local Government; and Finance
COMMITTEE REPORT
Committee Report No. 161, prepared and submitted
jointly by the Committees on Energy; Science
and Technology; and Finance, on Senate Bill
No. 1574 with Senator Win Gatchalian as author
thereof, entitled
PINE ENERGY RESEARCH AND
POLICY INSTITUTE, DEFINING ITS
OBJECTIVES, POWERS AND FUNC
TIONS, PROVIDING FUNDS THERE
FOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES,
recommending its approval in substitution of
Senate Bill No. 1290.
Sponsor: Senator Win Gatchalian
To the Calendar for Ordinary Business
SPECIAL ORDER
entitled
PINE ENERGY RESEARCH AND
POLICY INSTITUTE, DEFINING ITS
OBJECTIVES, POWERS AND FUNC
TIONS, PROVIDING FUNDS THERE
FOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Pursuant to Section 67, Rule XXlll of the Rules
The Chair recognized Senator Gatchalian for the
sponsorship.
SPONSORSHIP SPEECH
OF SENA FOR GATCHALIAN
Senator Gatchalian, on behalf of the Committee

on Energy, submitted for plenary consideration
Senate Bill No. 1574, entitled “An Act Establishing
the Philippine Energy Research and Policy Institute,
Defining Its Objectives, Powers and Functions,
Providing Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes”
under Committee Report No. 161.
Following is the fu ll text of Senator
Gatchalian's sponsorship speech:
If there is one thing I have learned during
my tenure as chairman of the Senate Energy
Committee, it is this - the energy sector is one
of the most research-intensive fields within the
public policy arena. Characterized by rapidly
changing technologies which redefine the
parameters of the game at a blistering pace, it is
a challenge for even the most well-funded and
fully-equipped energy sector players to keep
abreast with the latest research.
This challenge is even more burdensome for
Philippine energy stakeholders who suffer from
severe limitations in research capacity and
technical know-how.
The bill I am sponsoring today - Senate Bill
No. 1574 - seeks to address diese limitations by
establishing an institution which will bridge
research and policy gaps in the Philippine
energy sector to foster greater energy security,
equity, and sustainability within our archipelago.
The Philippine Energy Research and Policy
Institute, or PERPl for short, is in.spired by
similar energy think-tanks hosted by top
American universities, such as the Energy Policy
Institute at University of Chicago, Columbia
University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, the
Cornell Energy Institute, Stanford’s Precourt
Institute for Energy, Boston University’s
Institute for Sustainable Energy, and the Energy
Institute of the University of Michigan, among
others. Currently, there is no one government
entity providing all the services envisioned to
be provided by PERPl. We envision the PERPl
to stand at the forefront of Philippine energy
research and policy development, as an institu
tion solely devoted to these pursuits.
Attached to the prestigious University of
the Philippines Diliman, PERPl will serve as an
independent body which will undertake multi
disciplinary research, explore and develop cutting-
edge technologies, and provide autonomous
policy output for the benefit of private and
public energy players alike. Essentially, PERPl
will be a think-tank, a laboratory, an innovation
incubator, and a sparring partner of the govern
ment energy policy apparatus, all in one. As a
publicly-funded institute, PERPl will be charged
with ensuring that the results of its energy
research and policy development activities are
used to craft energy sector reforms for the
benefit of the national economy and the lives of
the Filipino people.
To achieve the worthy motivations for its
establishment, PERPl will exercise the follow
functions;
a) Conduct research and development on
energy, public policy issues in energy
markets, and other pressing issues and
problems, all backed by rigorous empirical
evidence;
b) Establish research and policy development
programs and capacity-building trainings on
energy;
c) Provide common research support facilities
while maximizing the utilization of its expert
support staff;
d) Enhance the masters and doctoral pool
of researchers and faculty in the field of
energy;
e) Establish local and foreign linkages in energy
research and policy development; and
f) Serve as the repository of all energy-related
research and studies to be generated by
the Institute, as well as academic, public, and
private groups, organizations, and institutions.
The functions of the Institute will be carried
out by an illustrious team of seasoned acade
micians and energy sector professionals under
the direction of the Executive Director, who will
be a recognized expert in energy policy and
research development. Further guidance will be
given by the Advisory Council, composed of
senior academic leaders from the university
faculty. Meanwhile, to fund PERPl’s research,
the government will allocate an annual budget
of P200 million, to be further supplemented by
an Endowment Fund to manage contributions,
donations, grants, and other financial aid to
power the institute’s research.
It is my sincere belief that the development
of a stable, affordable, and sustainable energy
supply will be critical to meeting the country’s
ambitious long term socio-economic goals. The
research output of the Philippine Energy
Research and Policy Institute, in turn, will be
essential to turning this vision into a reality.
With this in mind, distinguished peers, 1
urge you to support the passage of this
legislation.
v f

OE SENATE BILL NO. 1574
the bill,
SUSPENSION OF SESSION
Upon motion of Senator Sotto, the session was
suspended.
It was 4:20 p.m.
RESUMPTION OF SESSION
At 5:12 p.m., the session was resumed.
{Continuation)
objection, the Body resumed consideration, on Second
Reading, of Senate Bill No. 1532 (Committee Report
No. 142), entitled
AN ACT PROVIDING BENEFITS AND
PROGRAMS TO STRENGTHEN, PRO
MOTE, AND DEVELOP THE PHILIP
PINE STARTUP ECOSYSTEM.
Senator Sotto stated that the parliamentary status
was the period of interpellations.
Thereupon, the Chair recognized Senator Aquino,
sponsor of the measure.
INTERPELLATION
OF SENATOR SOTTO
Asked by Senator Sotto on the perspective of the
Innovative Startup Act, Senator Aquino said that the
bill seeks to support a startup ecosystem in the
Philippines, similar to the incentives and business
enviromnent of Silicon Valley in the U.S. or that of
Israel. He said that the bill would unlock the potentials
of a number of promising of startups in the country
— Filipino innovators, scientists and entrepreneurs
— that are looking for more support.
Asked on the meaning of “startup,” Senator
Aquino said that it is a colloquial or commonly used
tenn for a newly-opened company and connotes a
field of technology or innovative space. He cited
Facebook, Google, and Viber from Israel, and even
Uber and Grab, which initially took off as startups.
He lamented, however, that in the Philippines,
a number of startups have difficulty growing due to
the environment. Still, he hoped that the bill, which
features support for startups in tenns of funding,
co-working spaces, and allowing individuals of various
nationalities to assist them, would be able to create a
conducive ecosystem that would make it easier for
these startups to grow.
Asked how a startup business becomes “inno
vative,” Senator Aquino said that as in other countries,
a startup usually refers to a technology startup which
uses the internet as its main driver of business. He
pointed out, however, that startups should not be
limited to pure technology, the reason agricultural-
based innovative startups were included in the bill.
He then referred Senator Sotto to the definitions in
the bill of irmovative product, innovative process and
innovative business model.
To Senate President Pimentel’s suggestion that
startup businesses should also be located or started
in selected areas nationwide to encourage Filipino
and foreign entrepreneurs staying in the country.
Senator Aquino agreed.
Asked by Senate President Pimentel if a
PEZA-type organization concentrated in certain
locations is possible. Senator Aquino said that in the
period of amendments, he would include a provi
sion authorizing the PEZA to designate locations
for startups so that they could enjoy the benefits of
being in an economic zone. He said that at present,
there are several startup communities in Cebu,
Cagayan de Oro, Davao and Metro Manila which
could be utilized to spur the startup environment
further.
At this juncture. Senator Sotto thanked Senator
Aquino and said that he would await the proposed
amendments to the measure at the proper time.
TERMINATION OF THE PERIOD
OF INTERPELLATIONS
There being no further interpellation, upon motion
of Senator Sotto, there being no objection, the Body
closed the period of interpellations.
rf

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 30. 2017 301
the bill.
(Continuation)
No. 143), entitled
AN ACT INSTITUTIONALIZING THE
BATIK SCIENTIST PROGRAM, APPRO
PRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
was still the period of interpellations.
MANIFESTATION
OF SENATOR AQUINO
Senator Aquino stated that Senate Bill No. 1532
(Innovative Startup Act), Senate Bill No. 1533 (Balik
Scientist Act) and Senate Bill No. 1534 (Magna
Carta for Scientist, Engineers, Researchers), were
all supported by the Department of Science and
Technology. In fact, he said that DOST Secretary
Fortunato de la Pena was in the gallery to show
support for these initiatives.
OE INTERPELLATIONS
There being no interpellation, upon motion of
Senator Sotto, there being no objection, the Body
the bill.
(Continuation)
No. 144), entitled
AN ACT AMENDING REPUBLIC ACT
NO. 8439, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
THE “MAGNA CARTA FOR SCIEN
TISTS, ENGINEERS, RESEARCHERS
AND OTHER S&T PERSONNEL IN
THE GOVERNMENT.”
OF INTERPELLATIONS
There being no interpellation, upon motion of
Senator Sotto, there being no objection, the Body
SUSPENSION OF CONSIDER.TION
the bill.
(Continuation)
No. 115), entitled
AN ACT PROMOTING POSITIVE AND
NON-VIOLENT DISCIPLINE OF
CHILDREN, PROHIBITING ALL
FORMS OF CORPORAL PUNISH
MENT, HUMILIATING AND DEGRAD
ING TREATMENT, APPROPRIATING
FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES.
r

302 WEDNESDAY. AUGUST .^0, 2017
Thereupon, the Chair recognized Senator
Hontiveros, sponsor of the measure.
INTERPELLATION OI SENATOR SOTTO
At the outset, Senator Sotto stated that while he
was very supportive of the bill, he would want more
clarification as regards its objective especially since
he came from a school with strong disciplinary
measures where students were subjected to corporal
punisliment.
Asked by Senate President Pimentel whether all
students - not just the naughty ones — experienced
corporal punishment. Senator Sotto replied that while
the naughty ones mostly received corporal punishment,
even the good ones experienced the same. He cited
Commission on Appointments Secretary Hector
Villacorta, his classmate and class valedictorian at
Colegio de San Juan de Letran, who was made to
kneel in front of the class for one hour for refusing
to name him (Senator Sotto) as the one responsible
for placing a chewing gum on the teacher’s seat
even if he saw him did it.
Senator Hontiveros pointed out that the examples
cited by Senator Sotto are now considered inappro
priate or excessive forms of corporal punishment
which the bill seeks to improve upon from the pers
pective of positive discipline.
To emphasize where he was coming from.
Senator Sotto mentioned that his favorite teacher
in high school, Mr. Simplicio “Powie” Flores, broke
a two-meter stick on his butt, but he did not
consider it as a punishment as he believed that
experiencing such fomi of discipline could serve
the child right.
On the contrary, Senator Hontiveros explained
that corporal punishment as a fomi of discipline has
already been proliibited in schools since 1992 through
the Manual of Regulations of Private Schools (8lh
Edition), DECS Order No. 92 (series of 1992) as
well as in Public School Service Manuals, and further
reiterated by DepEd in its National Child Protection
Policy released in 2012 which was echoed in both
the Philippine National Plan of Action on Violence
against Children and the ASEAN Regional Plan of
Action on the Elimination of Violence against Children,
Asked on the three most common methods of
corporal punishment in the Philippines, Senator
Hontiveros said that the most common form of
punishment accounting for 54.5% of children who
received corporal punishment in the home is spank
ing with bare hands, rolled paper or small stick,
followed by pulling of the hair and pinching or
twisting of ears; on the other hand, 30.3% suffered
from more severe forms of abuse such as slapping,
kicking, smothering, tying, drowning or burning,
while 4.6% were physically hamied such that they
required hospitalization. She said that making the
child stay in a comer was not included among such
forms of discipline and the reason, she surmised,
could be that it was not considered a form of
punishment. However, she pointed out that three in
five children experienced psychological violence,
the most common of which are verbal abuse and
threats of abandonment which include threats to
make the child leave his own home or subjecting
him to hurtful language that tlireatens his sense of
security in his own home or school.
Asked how many parents, guardians or persons
legally responsible for the child resort to corporal
punisliment as a means ofdisciplining children. Senator
Hontiveros cited a 2011 Pulse Asia Survey which
reported that 66% or two in three parents discipline
their children through corporal punishment, while
another study conducted at about the same time
found that only one-third of parents believed that
corporal punishment should be used as part of
child-rearing. She stated that since only one-third
saw the absolute need to use corporal punishment
as a form of child discipline, there is reason to use
positive discipline as a concrete alternative.
To the observation that parents resort to corporal
punishment to discipline their children only in the
midst of anger but have second thoughts of doing so
once they have calmed down. Senator Hontiveros
believed that the comment goes to the heart of the
positive discipline bill which seeks to promote
standards of children-rearing in support of the primary
role of the parent in child-rearing, including discipline
based on an increased understanding of child
psychology and development, as well as determining
the reason behind a child’s good or bad behavior
and seeking to correctly discipline him based on this
understanding. She explained that the measure seeks
to uphold the rights of the parents to rear and
discipline their children as well as uphold and protect
the most vulnerable sectors in society by proposing
( r

a very concrete means of raising them through
positive discipline.
She also cited results from the 2016 National
Baseline Study on Violence Against Children which
found that corporal punisliment was the main driver
for violence against children. This, she said, might
explain why only one-third of the respondents in the
study believed in the need to use corporal punisliment
while the rest find themselves in the uneasy situation
ofresorting to physical discipline due to the link between
corporal punislunent and violence against children.
On whether it is reasonable to conclude that
since 66% of parents used corporal punishment, the
remaining 34% used positive discipline in rearing
their children. Senator Hontiveros replied in the
affirmative, saying that these parents may be working
to share their experiences of positive and non-violent
discipline and may have profited from local and
international studies about the benefits of this method
like good behavior, good academic performance in
schools, and more loving and peaceful relationships
with their siblings.
Asked to wliich social class or classes the majority
of parents practicing corporal punishment belong.
Senator Hontivers said that the use of corporal punish
ment and the need for positive discipline would cut
across all classes.
Asked which factors lead parents or guardians to
resort to corporal punishment. Senator Hontiveros
explained that studies have shown that the educational
attainment of the parent is linked to the degree of
corporal punishment practiced, so tliat the more educated
the parent, regardless of social or economic class, the
less the practice of corporal punishment is observed.
However, she noted that even in the lower socio
economic status - when there is striving for formal
or informal education - the more educated parent
would be less at ease with using corporal punishment
and would have more openness to positive discipline.
hi a related matter. Senator Hontiveros pointed
out that while the parent or guardian’s inability to
control stress and anger and their lack of infonnation
on other ways of discipline are other drivers for using
corporal punisliment, those who resort to such physical
means of discipline on their children are also pained
by having to do so. Again adverting to a study she
earlier cited, she said that the fact that only one-third
of parents believed in using corporal punishment
even though it is practiced by two-thirds of the
respondents would substantiate the theory that one of
the reasons behind the use of corporal punishment
is the lack of information on alternative ways of
effective child-rearing.
Adverting to Section 3(b), which defines “corporal
punisliment’’as “an act or acts which involve physical
force and humiliating or degrading acts imposed upon
a child as punisliment for an alleged or actual offense
inflicted by an adult or by another child, who has
been given or has assumed authority or responsibility
for punishment or discipline,’’ Senator Sotto asked
whether the provision meant that the child who was
given the responsibility for punishment or discipline of
another child could be held liable under the bill.
Senator Hontiveros replied that this was possible, on
the assumption that the child given this responsibility
is either an older sibling or an older immediate family
member. However, she stressed that under the bill
the main subject and co-participants are the parents,
guardians and teachers who should take on positive
discipline. She expressed willingness to subject
Section 3(b) to amendments at the proper time.
Senator Hontiveros further explained that Senate
Bill No. 1477 bill is not primarily a punitive measure;
rather, it seeks to empower and enable parents to
learn positive discipline as an alternative means of
rearing children.
Asked to clarify whether the phrase “by another
child” should be still be retained or removed since
it was not mentioned in Section 5 {Prohibitions of
Corpora! Punishment) or in any part of the bill as
among those who could be held liable for using
corporal punishment. Senator Hontiveros pointed out
that line 22 of Section 5 which states that “relatives
who have custody of the child or other persons
legally responsible for the child,” in principle might
extend to a similar older child as mentioned in
Section 3. However, she said that she was open to
an amendment since the main desired participants in
the implementation of the law would be the parents,
legal guardians and teachers.
As regards Senator Sotto’s suggestion that persons
legally responsible for the child, including those exer
cising special or substitute parental authority, cannot
be a minor. Senator Hontiveros replied that she would
consider the proposal during the period of amendments.
Asked how Section 3(b) differs from the definition
of “child abuse” under Republic Act No. 7160 which

includes reasonable deprivation of a child’s basic
needs for survival such as food and shelter, Senator
Hontiveros explained that Section 3(b)(4) of the bill
includes the deprivation of food, clothes, shelter and
communication with siblings done within the context
of disciplining the child.
Senator Sotto observed that the definition of the
term “physical needs’’is subjective if it would depend
on the parents’ or guardians’ financial capacity. He
gave a hypothetical scenario wherein the parents
would provide only instant noodles, which contains
unliealthy ingredients like sodium, for their children
to eat as it is the only food they could afford. Asked
if the parents would be held liable under the bill as
it could be considered bringing harm to children.
Senator Hontiveros answered in the negative, as she
explained that corporal punishment, as contemplated in
the bill, is child abuse done in the context of discipline.
Therefore, she said that refusal to provide the meal
as a fomi of discipline is corjx>ral punishment. Senator
Sotto said that the clarification is very important as
some people might abuse the provisions of the bill.
In another hypothetical scenario wherein a child
is transferred from a private school to a public school
for the purpose of disciplining. Senator Sotto asked if
such act could fall under the definition of corporal
punishment considering that the child would feel
degraded or humiliated because fomier classmates
and friends would look down on him for enrolling in
a public school. Senator Hontiveros replied that if the
act was done as a punishment, then it would be
considered corporal punishment under the proposed
measure. Senator Sotto pointed out that such kind of
punishment is similar to disciplining by witliholding
privileges since it would teach children that privileges
come with responsibility and, thus, need to be earned.
He also mentioned grounding as a similar case.
But Senator Hontiveros said that the act of trans
ferring the cliild from the public school to the private
school cannot be considered an example of witliliolding
privileges because education is a basic need, but if the
transfer of school would be in the context of punish
ment, then it would be considered corporal punishment.
Regarding grounding as a form of discipline, she
pointed out that she personally supports and practices
it as it is a fonn of withholding privileges, like going
out with friends or anything wliich requires pemiission.
Senator Sotto cautioned against making definitions
too strict or vague as it could be interpreted in
various ways. Senator Hontiveros pointed out that
there is a thin but real line between disciplining a
child with love and punishing. She explained that
there are situations where parents would do sometliing
for the benefit of their children which they would not
like doing, and also situations where parents punish
and inflict pain on their children. She said that some
examples could fall on either situation.
Senator Sotto stressed that there must be clear
definition and distinction between punishment and
disciplining. Senator Hontiveros agreed, pointing out
that the bill is focused on positive discipline, or
disciplining the child in the proper context; it is not
punishment-based towards the child, nor punishment-
based towards the parents who may commit some
infractions.
Senator Sotto recalled that Senator Hontiveros
had mentioned spanking as the primary example of
corporal punishment based on surveys or statistics.
He asked if mild spanking, a common mode of
disciplining children, would be considered as corporal
punishment. Senator Hontiveros replied in the
affirmative, saying that the emotional and psychological
effect of spanking, or even the threat of spanking, on
the child is more than the physical effect. She stated
that studies have shown that positive discipline, not
spanking, teaches appropriate behavior; on the other
hand, corporal punishment erodes parent-child relation
ships because according to a study conducted by De
la Cruz, Protacio, Balanon, et al, children would
learn to view their parents as givers of pain which
would lead them to mistrust and avoid their parents.
Furthemiore, she said that children might also interpret
the punishment as a form of rejection from their
parents. She stated that apart from the physical pain,
there are emotional and psychological effects to be
considered that could inflict more damage to the
children than shape them to be good individuals.
Senator Sotto said that he does not concur that
spanking would not teach children, as he himself had
experienced it and had learned from it. He said that
the definition of corporal punishment must be qualified
and should depend on the gravity of the act, like
beating, kicking, slapping, lashing, twisting joints or
amis, pinching, dragging or throwing, but not spanking.
Senator Hontiveros admitted that she was also
spanked when she was a child, but she believed that
children are resilient and able to cope with and
recover from whatever negative experience they
might have had when growing up. Regardless of how
children would turn out, she said that she would still
adhere to non-violent ways of disciplining the children
r /

develop to help them a sense of responsibility and
respect for others.
Citing the study of Alampay and Garcia, entitled
“Parenting and the Context of Child Discipline
in the Philippines: Implications for Policies and
Inten’cntions," Senator Hontiveros said that Filipino
parents talk to their children, set rules and guidelines
for behavior, show them that they are loved, and
perform other acts that are considered positive
discipline, or non-harsh discipline associated with
positive outcomes for children. She likewise cited a
study conducted by Dr. Liane Alampay, a develop
mental psychologist, which jx)inted out that the severity
and frequency ofcorporal punishment do not moderate
its negative effects. She explained that develop
mental psychology is a field where positive discipline
came from and which highlights people’s stages of
development and how children are disciplined positively
and without the use of corporal punishment.
Senator Sotto cautioned that corporal punishment
could be interpreted as any type of physical
punishment that could be punishable under the bill, as
could be gleaned from page 4, line 5 wherein the
definition of corporal punishment includes “other
analogous acts” which could be subject to abuse.
Senator Hontiveros said that since the bill aims to
reduce abuse against children, the law itself should
not be abused. She clarified that “other analogous
acts” pertain to acts not included in the enumeration
which may cause physical hami, humiliation and
degradation, or more extreme acts like children tied
and hanged from trees or posts. She emphasized the
non-punitive nature of the bill as it encourages a new
way of disciplining children and seeks to proactively
reach out to and help parents. She said that the bill
aims to set the standards of behavior to use non
violent means of disciplining children and help parents
utilize positive discipline instead of punishments.
At this point. Senate President Pimentel asked if
there are penal provisions in the bill. Senator Sotto
noted that it includes counseling and that the different
laws covered would be operational also. Senator
Hontiveros pointed out that there are infractions and
corrective measures to be implemented, as well as a
citation system to call the attention of parents and to
enable them to replace their corporal punishment
methods with positive discipline methods over time.
Senate President Pimentel pointed out that if the
measure has penal provisions, then the acts that are
sought to be punished should be very clear. Senator
Hontiveros replied that there are no penal provisions
in the positive discipline bill. She said that should
there be worse cases, they would be punished under
RA 7610.
Asked by Senator Sotto on the differences
between the proposed measure and RA 7610 or the
Special Protection of Children Against Abuse,
Exploitation and Diserimination Act, Senator
Hontiveros explained that the positive discipline bill
explicitly protects children from corporal punish
ment and other humiliating and degrading punish
ment, while in RA 7610, it is not explicitly provided.
She said that while cruelty is seen as a fonn of child
abuse under RA 7610, it does not consider corporal
punishment as a form of abuse as long as it is
“reasonable, moderate and does not cause physical
or psychological injury.” However, she noted that
“reasonable and moderate” punishment was not
clearly defined in the current law.
Senator Hontiveros further said that Section 2 of
the IRR of RA 7610 does not consider as cruelty
any form of discipline that does not result in visible
or very obvious signs of physical and psychological
injury such as bone fractures, lacerations, internal
injuries, severe anxiety, withdrawal and depression.
Senator Sotto said that Section 3(a) of the positive
discipline bill defines and provides four (4) cases of
corporal punishment which are already included
in the definition of child abuse in Section 3(b) of
RA 7610, which he read into the record:
(b) “Child abuse” refers to the maltreatment,
whetlier habitual or not, of the child which
includes any of the following:
(1) Psychological and physical abuse,
neglect, cruelty, sexual abuse and
emotional maltreatment;
(2) Any act by deeds or words which
debases, degrades or demeans the
intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as
a human being;
(3) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic
needs for survival, such as food and
shelter; or
(4) Failure to immediately give medical
treatment to an injured child resulting in
serious impairment of his growth and
development or in his permanent
incapacity or death.
To Senator Sotto’s proposition that the foregoing
provisions would be redundant or would duplicate the
r

intent of RA 7610, Senator Hontiveros replied that on
the contrary, the provisions would further enliance
the policy environment to prevent violence against
children by promoting an alternative form of discipline
and to replace corporal punishment.
She said that the definition of child abuse in RA
7610 does not include corporal punishment but it is
sought to be enshrined into law by the proposed
Positive Discipline Act. She recalled that as pointed
out in the national baseline study of government in
2016, corporal punishment is one of the drivers of
violence against children. She hoped that the eventual
passage of the Positive Discipline bill into law would
be a way of nipping in the bud the more dire
situations addressed by RA 7610 by reducing the use
of corporal punishment and replacing it with positive
discipline, weakening one of the identified drivers of
violence against children which is one form of abuse
addressed by RA 7610.
Senator Hontiveros also explained tliat the bill
would be adding to and strengthening the policy environ
ment protecting the rights of children and empowering
the parents by telling them not to use corporal
punishment and sharing with them techniques of cliild
rearing and disciplining not relying on punishment but
relying on positive discipline. She stressed that at the
heart and soul of the Positive Discipline bill is to
progressively relinquish the use of corporal punishment
as one of the parenting tools and to completely take
up positive discipline in homes and schools.
Senator Sotto posited that if it was obvious that
corporate punishment was a form of child abuse, RA
7610 should be amended instead of coming up with
another law. He noted that under the declaration of
policy of the proposed measure, “the aim is to
promote the principles of restorative justice in cases
involving parents”; however, in Section 6 thereof, the
acts committed by parents against their children in
violation of the Revised Penal Code would be
penalized in its maximum period. He said that the
two provisions seem to be conflicting.
Senator Hontiveros said that the Committee,
together with positive discipline advocates, decided to
propose the bill instead of simply amending RA 7610
because while there may be potentially some
overlapping areas, large parts of what are addressed
by RA 7610 and the proposed bill are different. For
instance, she said that RA 7610 seeks to provide
special protection to children from all forms of abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation, discrimination and other
conditions or address negative setting hamiful to the
child; under the Positive Discipline bill, however, the
premise is to look at current parenting practices
which include corporal punishment and to look into a
more positive environment setting for the child. She
said that the declaration of policy of the Positive
Discipline bill is plirased in a very positive way
because it recognizes the vital role of children and
youth in nation-building, promoting and protecting
their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social
well-being. She said that cases of child abuse not in
the context of child-rearing and discipline, whether
committed by a child’s parent or other adults, is
addressed by RA 7610, while the positive discipline
bill looks at continuing to work with parents in rearing
and disciplining the children by progressively letting
go of corporal punishment and using positive discipline.
Furthemiore, Senator Hontiveros said that if the
Committee would only amend RA 7610, it would not
be able to expound on the comprehensive program of
positive discipline. She said that the bill is not a
predominantly punitive measure like RA 7610. She
said that she would be open to accept amendments
at the proper time with regard to parents who may
commit infractions as contemplated under Section 6,
line 3 of the bill.
Senator Sotto recognized that the real intent of
the bill was to promote positive discipline. At this
point, he asked Senator Hontiveros to be given more
time to study the bill and requested that his
interpellations be continued on another day.
the bill.
ADJOURNMENT OF SESSION
objection, the Chair declared the session adjourned
until three o’clock in the afternoon of Monday,
September 4, 2017.
It was 6:24 p.m.
1 hereby certify to the correctness of the
foregoing.
ATTY. LUTGARDO B. BARBO
Secretary o f the Senate
r '
Approved on September 4, 2017
benati
f

2667722922!

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 2667722922!

Similar to 2667722922! (20)

More from rodelhenrysynavarro_phsenate_journals

More from rodelhenrysynavarro_phsenate_journals (8)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2667722922!