Q: Doon sa compromise agreement with the Marcos, ano ba yung role ng Congress dito?
SFMD: Sa ilalim ng batas, ang PCGG (President Commission on Good Government) ay may kapangyarihan na pumasok sa compromise agreement for any ill-gotten wealth. Sa katunayan, ilang compromise agreements na ang pinasukan ng PCGG - doon kay Jose Campos v. Sandiganbayan, Mr. Benedicto. At ito ay mga kasong umabot sa Korte sa Suprema. The Supreme Court sustained the power of the PCGG to enter into compromise agreements. If there is a pending civil case for forfeiture of ill-gotten wealth, then the compromise agreement must be approved by the court. That is the rule. Ngayon the President has asked congress for authority; honestly I do not know what authority he is requesting. We would rather wait for him to come up with a proposed legislation that will grant him that authority, because as of today, the PCGG is authorized to enter into such compromise agreements.
Q: On the SC decision on the former Sen. Marcos' motion
SFMD: It is on the first ground because he is questioning the integrity of the election. The certificate of canvass is the same document used for proclaiming the candidates including the President. The integrity of the 2016 election is upheld. The PET directed Mr. Marcos to present his evidence on specific pilot province na sinasabi niya na nagkaroon ng dayaan. Ngunit sa kabuuan the SC correctly upheld the vaolidty of the 2016 elections. A contrary ruling would have created chaos and confusion in our system.
Source: Senate of the Philippines