SMNI suspension an issue of double talk, says Roque | Business and Politics - video Dailymotion

The Manila Times

SMNI suspension an issue of double talk, says Roque | Business and Politics  Sonshine Media Network International (SMNI) host and former presidential spokesman. Harry Roque says the latest indefinite suspension of the network is more of a personal attack than presidential will. National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) initially issued a 30-day suspension order against SMNI last Dec. 21, 2023 on the grounds of propagating false information pertaining to the supposed exaggerated travel expenses by Speaker Martin Romualdez.     Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe   Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net   Follow us:  Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook  Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram  Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter  DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion   Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital   Check out our Podcasts:  Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify  Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts  Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic  Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer  Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcher Tune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein  #TheManilaTimes #SMNIBusinessandPolitics

Transcript

00:00 You're watching Business and Politics. I'm your host, Dante Klingham.

00:03 Tonight's program was supposed to be the first after a 30-day suspension

00:08 imposed on this network by the National Telecommunications Commission.

00:11 But as you know, the NTC recently extended that suspension indefinitely.

00:15 Thankfully, the network's program can still be seen online and on select cable channels.

00:21 The NTC orders were the result of a House Committee recommendation

00:24 that sanctioned two SB&I programs. And during that Congressional hearing,

00:28 two anchors were detained by the House Committee on Legislative Franchises.

00:32 They have since been released, but not before our guest this evening went to the Supreme Court

00:35 to appeal for their liberty. We are referring, of course, to Attorney Harry Roque, himself a host of

00:41 an SM&I program, Pulso ng Bayan. He's perhaps better known as a spokesperson for former President

00:47 Rodrigo Duterte. Attorney Roque's career prior to his service in Malacanang revolved around

00:51 practicing and teaching law. He taught at the University of the Philippines in Diliman,

00:55 and his clients included families of the victims of the Maguindanao massacre.

00:58 Later, he moved on to crafting laws. In 2015, he was elected as a representative

01:04 of Takabayan Partylist. He served in Congress until 2017, when he was named the presidential

01:09 spokesperson. Our discussions tonight will cover politics and law, particularly media rights.

01:15 We'll begin with asking Attorney Roque, how do you assess the political landscape now,

01:19 and what does it mean to press freedom? Attorney Harry Roque,

01:22 thank you for making time for Business and Politics. Thank you. It's my pleasure to be here.

01:25 I think it's my first. Normally, you're the one doing the interview. You're the only in the

01:30 program. But now you're in the hot seat, so to speak. As I said, there are a lot of things happening

01:37 politically. I wanted to start off with how you read things. It's sort of the beginning of the

01:43 year still. Things are very fluid. There were some developments just this week, lots of meetings

01:49 going on. Just from your perspective, how do you see things politically?

01:56 Well, what is clear is we're not sure who's really in charge. I'll give an example. The

02:04 president already gave the order, stop this unconscionable firma, which is the word that he

02:12 used, unconscionable, when he learned that bribes were being paid. He directed the Senate to take

02:19 the lead, either through constituent assembly or through legislation. There was supposedly a heated

02:26 discussion in the presence of the president himself with the House Speaker and Senate President

02:33 Zubiri and Senate President Potempo Ligarda in attendance. It was agreed that the Senate would

02:39 take the lead. But what did we find out days after? That firma did not cease, that they continued to

02:46 gather signatures and they have been submitting these signatures, in fact, to the Comelec.

02:51 This, despite express instructions from the president to stop this firma and for the Senate

03:00 to take the lead. That's one. Now, there's a second issue. Amidst the proclamation and

03:08 declaration of Justice Secretary Remulia, the contrary-

03:12 The ICC.

03:13 Yes, on the ICC, the contrary to the position of the president, which he communicated to the

03:18 country seven months ago that there will be no cooperation with the ICC. Secretary Remulia,

03:23 four days ago, made it very clear that we will now cooperate with the ICC. And when asked why,

03:29 well, Secretary Remulia said, "Well, because there are House resolutions calling on us to cooperate."

03:37 Now, this is the same formula used on us, SM&I. Technically speaking, the House resolutions

03:43 to revoke or suspend our franchise has no legal value because it was not concurred in by the

03:49 Senate. And yet, that was enough to be taken by the executive branch of government as a sense of

03:55 the House, and therefore they could not ignore it. In fact, the NTC cited the House resolution

04:01 as a basis for first putting us on a 30-day preventive suspension, and then now an indefinite

04:07 suspension. So now I wonder, with the latest pronouncement of the president that we will not

04:14 cooperate with the ICC, will the Speaker again defy the president? Now, take note that, of course,

04:21 I went to school with the House Speaker and Justice Secretary Remulia. We're all contemporaries.

04:27 We're all friends, even from law school, even from pre-law, in fact. And I know for a fact that

04:32 although I consider myself as an intergenerational friend of Justice Secretary Remulia because our

04:38 parents are very close friends, as we are, the reality is he is not only a schoolmate of the

04:46 House Speaker, he's also a fraternity brother in Upsilon Sigma Phi. And therefore, I could very

04:53 well understand why Secretary Remulia, despite his personal closeness to President Duterte,

04:58 later on, just four days ago, said, "We will not cooperate with the ICC." But with the president

05:05 saying that we will not cooperate with the ICC, will the same thing happen as PIRMA? Obviously,

05:12 House Speaker and his allies, and Justice Secretary Remulia is one of the Speaker's closest allies,

05:19 I would say, will they defy also the president? Which made me think, is this really an issue of

05:26 defiance or is it an issue of double talk? I was going to ask you, are you being rhetorical or do

05:32 you think that there is a grand design here that people are saying, "Well, this must have something

05:38 to do with 2025 or 2028." What's your take? You see, on the one hand, there's a possibility it's

05:45 an open defiance. If it is, the question is, why is the president taking this sitting down? What

05:51 does the Speaker have on him, which gives a sense of entitlement to the Speaker to defy him on very

06:00 fundamental and major issues that have divided this nation? At the same time, it makes you wonder,

06:05 is this really a defiance or pursuant to a grand plan of good guy, bad guy, where the president

06:12 says, "I'm against it, but go ahead and do it anyway because we want it done." We can never

06:17 know. Or is it an instance of, is the president really in charge? Could it be that there are times

06:24 when the president, in fact, is not in charge and that because there are times when he's not in

06:29 charge, the House Speaker and other individuals have to fill up? That's a loaded question.

06:38 Yes, you said you know some of the personalities very well, the Speaker one and, of course,

06:43 the Secretary of Justice. What's your take? I mean, do you, and of course, you have, I'm sure

06:50 you have your ear on the ground, so to speak, talking to different people. What is your set?

06:55 Do you think there is a grand design or do you think this is an evolution of something, maybe

07:03 the rise of different forces or something else? What's very clear is that the House Speaker wants

07:09 to be president or head of state. He seems frustrated because this early, the numbers

07:15 probably make it appear that it's impossible for him to be president in 2020. Okay, so maybe

07:20 prime minister. Yeah, so now, obviously, the PIRMA with the amendment that they want being to

07:26 silence the Senate is obviously intended to introduce revisions that would make us into a

07:32 parliamentary form of government and remove the bicameral system of legislation. So that, to me,

07:39 is a very viable explanation behind this move. Why else would they want to shut up Senate on any

07:45 proposed revisions or amendments to the Constitution? But I think it goes beyond that.

07:50 Because number one, you don't understand why he did it so early. We're not even done with midterm

07:56 elections. Midterm election is only a barometer of how influential the current administration is.

08:02 Okay. Because the performance of the candidates for senator will more or less give us an indication

08:06 of how popular the administration is. So why was it so premature? Wouldn't you say that maybe it's

08:14 done early because the president is precisely popular? That maybe it's, you know, this is his

08:21 time to capitalize on, you know, a major initiative such as what we're seeing right now?

08:28 I mean, isn't there a political strategy explanation for that sort of initiative, you think?

08:34 But then I forgot that in citing the instances where the House Speaker defied the president,

08:38 this was the first issue where he defied the president. Because he said, "We don't need

08:43 charge a change for economic development." That's what I wanted to-

08:46 He said so, no? Yeah.

08:47 So I forgot that there are three instances already where he defied, no? So it makes me wonder now,

08:52 whether or not it's coincidental or is it because House Speaker knows that the president is really

09:00 not in charge and he can get his way any which way. It's the only explanation.

09:05 Are you surprised that, as you said, these things are happening this early in the presidential term?

09:13 Of course. Of course. You know, I also dabble in politics and I know that timing is everything in

09:21 politics. And it seems to me that it's out of sync, really, out of tune to aspire to be president

09:26 now, unless he feels that he's already running government as of now. And it's just a matter of

09:32 crowning him as president or prime minister, as chief executive. So now I'm thinking, perhaps

09:37 he's really calling the shots. And that's why it's not an issue of defiance. It's the fact he's just

09:42 doing everything as if it's business as usual, because he makes the decisions and not the

09:47 president. What would be the implications of that? Say if it's true.

09:51 Your theory is true. What would be the serious implications of that? I mean,

09:55 having the speaker, as you said, running the show and the president allowing him to do so?

10:01 Well, the problem, of course, he was only elected by a few individuals in one district

10:05 out of 318 seats in Congress. He only holds one of them. Whereas 31 million people or 30

10:13 million people, I stand corrected, voted for the president. So he does not have the same

10:18 mandate that the president has. And therefore it is the president who should be ruling and not him.

10:23 Have you had a chance to sit down and maybe take a phone call or phone the speaker and say,

10:29 you know what's going on? Have you had a chance to maybe talk to people around him?

10:33 What have you been hearing? As you said, you were close at one time.

10:37 Yeah. And he did say so as well, that we were good friends because, you know, when we were students,

10:43 he had just returned from Hawaii from the exile. And of course, no one was talking to him in the

10:49 UP College of Law because, you know, UP is UP. So I thought, I really don't care who you are,

10:53 for as long as you're a good person, I'll talk to you. So I gambled. It was a gamble because,

10:58 of course, you could be unpopular talking to all of this in UP Diliman. But I don't care less. And

11:04 I found him to be personable enough. And, you know, I would say I became friends with him.

11:08 A lot of people say he's funny. He's very personable. He's very likable.

11:11 He's very sociable. But the things that are happening now are completely unexpected.

11:17 I did not expect that he had this personality, that he would want the position of president or

11:23 chief executive of the country so badly, so early. To the extent that, you know, in the campaign,

11:28 and I joined the Campaign of Unity team, he was there at every rally and his only chore

11:34 was to introduce the vice president. And look what happened now. He's the number one nemesis

11:40 of the vice president. So it makes you wonder, really. Maybe they say, well, anything is possible

11:44 in politics, but it makes you really wonder what happened, no? What happened? And until now,

11:50 I can't find the answers. And if we assign these developments as purely political, going back to

11:56 SM&I, do you think this is a phase that will pass maybe after the critical time has gone? I mean,

12:04 the election of 2025, 2028, or is this, do you think a more long-term challenge that's facing

12:12 this network, and in a sense, Philippine press freedom in general? Well, of course, what they

12:19 did to us is an outright suppression of freedom of the press and freedom of expression. No doubts

12:25 about it. Let's not even discuss why. Because the Constitution says that the guarantee of freedom

12:30 of expression is number one, a guarantee against prior restraint, censorship, and number two,

12:37 is subsequent punishment. And of course, in the case of SM&I, they did both. They had prior

12:43 restraint because they suspended us without according us opportunity to be heard, which is

12:48 also denial of our due process rights. And secondly, we're being punished for daring to question

12:53 whether or not it is true that the travel expenses of the speaker has amounted already to an

12:59 extent of a billion. That was a question, but we have to go on break. But let me just ask this

13:04 question real quick. A lot of people are saying that, in a sense, SM&I is being hypocritical

13:08 because when ABS-CBN was facing its problems with its franchise in Congress, there were some people

13:16 who said that SM&I had supported that. But now that SM&I is going through a period of difficulty

13:23 that it all of a sudden is crying press freedom, do you think there is legitimacy to that criticism?

13:29 Forgive the language, but that's horse crap. Why? Because ABS-CBN's franchise had lapsed.

13:36 It no longer had the privilege to broadcast. We have that privilege, and jurisprudence says,

13:42 particularly in Danz, that even if government has more leeway or more control over broadcast media

13:49 because they own the airwaves, still, freedom of expression and freedom of the press take precedence

13:56 over any regulatory concern that government may have. In fact, the current jurisprudence is any

14:02 suppression of freedom of expression comes to court with a very, very heavy presumption of

14:07 unconstitutionality. It's for government to justify the suppression.

14:11 [silence]

SMNI suspension an issue of double talk, says Roque | Business and Politics

Category

Transcript

Comments

Recommended