Whistleblower could unveil link between missing sabungeros and drug war —solon
Ridon said this following the revival of the House Quad Committee (QuadComm), the mega panel composed of four committees that investigated the extrajudicial killings during the controversial anti-drug campaign.
Under the adopted House Resolution 106, the QuadComm is tasked 'to conduct a joint inquiry in need of legislation to address emerging and unresolved issues brought forth by the joint investigation of the previous Quad Committee during the 19th Congress.'
"We want to focus on the missing sabungeros and their intersectionality with the Duterte drug war because there were allegations that the kill team for the missing sabungeros is the same for the Duterte drug war," said Ridon, head of the committee on public accounts, one of the panels in the QuadComm.
Whistleblower and co-accused Julie 'Dondon' Patidongan surfaced last month and claimed that the missing sabungeros were buried in Taal Lake.
A total of 34 cockfighting enthusiasts have been reported missing from 2021 to 2022. According to the police, the missing personalities were kidnapped allegedly due to match fixing or cheating in the cockfighting games.
"We would like to be able to talk to the whistleblower during the proceedings. Is this kill team true?' Ridon said.
'I'm sure the mechanics then were different, but if it's the same kill team, I think it's very concerning,' he added.
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla earlier said some people who have been involved in the "death squads" that figured in the drug war under the Duterte administration may also be involved in the deaths related to the e-sabong or online cockfights during the pandemic.
The search for the bodies of the missing sabungeros in Taal Lake, where Patidongan said the bodies were dumped, is ongoing and has resulted in the recovery of hundreds of remains since the search began last month. —LDF, GMA Integrated News
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
8 hours ago
- GMA Network
Carpio: Senate should proceed with Sara impeachment trial if SC reverses decision
The Senate should automatically proceed with hearing the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte should the Supreme Court reverse its decision, retired Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio said over the weekend. According to Carpio, the proceedings should continue if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the House of Representatives regarding its motion for reconsideration. 'Wala nang botohan 'yan because balik tayo doon sa 'Is this Constitutional?' Sinabi ng Supreme Court ngayon, kung mag-reconsider sila, 'Yes, Constitutional,' so balik doon sa provision—The same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed,' he said in a report by Mav Gonzales on GMA's '24 Oras Weekend' on Sunday. (There's no more voting on that because we go back to the question 'Is this Constitutional?' The Supreme Court now says that if they reconsider, 'Yes, it is Constitutional,' so we return to the provision—The same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.) This comes after the Supreme Court ruled that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte were unconstitutional, and barred by the one-year rule. The Senate has since voted to transfer the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte to the archives, with 19 votes for the matter, four against, and one abstention. GMA Integrated News Research has found that a bill that was archived during the 15th Congress—involving the synchronized elections in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)—but was later revived and passed into law. The public is also now awaiting the SC decision on the motion for reconsideration filed by the House of Representatives, saying it should be allowed to perform its exclusive duty to prosecute an impeachable official, and the Senate's to try to the case. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the House of Representatives, Carpio said there is no need for a Senator to file a motion to revive the Articles of Impeachment. 'Wala na. Of course, they will debate. Let's say, the majority will say 'No, we will not revive it,' akyat ang prosecution sa Supreme Court. Sasabihin nila, 'Dapat ba i-approve pa ito ng majority ng Senate bago mag-revive o sundin na lang natin 'yung specific command of the Constitution—trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed. I think klaro naman 'yung Constitution,' he said. (That's it. Of course, they will debate. Let's say the majority says, 'No, we will not revive it,' the prosecution will elevate it to the Supreme Court. They will ask, 'Should this still be approved by the majority of the Senate before being revived, or should we just follow the specific command of the Constitution — trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.' I think the Constitution is clear.) Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. The fourth impeachment complaint, endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives, was later on transmitted to the Senate. Duterte, for her part, entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.' — BM, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
10 hours ago
- GMA Network
Constitution drafter: Impeachment complaints vs. VP Sara did not violate rules
One of the drafters of the 1987 Constitution over the weekend said the initiation of impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte did not violate the charter, as these were all filed on the same day and did not exceed the 'once a year' limit set by law. In a post on his Facebook account, former Supreme Court Justice and 1987 Constitution drafter Adolfo Azcuna said the Constitution indicates that impeachment complaints are limited to 'not more than once a year,' and not 'more than one a year.' Citing the Civil Code definition of a year as 365 days, this would mean that more than once a year would be equivalent to more than one day a year, as a day is the smallest unit of a year. 'Initiation proceedings all occurring WITHIN ONE DAY IN THE SPAN OF A YEAR DO NOT VIOLATE SEC 3, SUBSEC 5, ART XI OF THE CONSTITUTION,' Azcuna said in his post. 'The reason for this is the purpose of the once a year rule… It is to limit the amount of TIME taken away from official duties of both the official and the House of Representatives,' he added. Azcuna also noted that even with the new definition of initiating, the four complaints initiated on one session day—February 5, 2025—did not violate the 'more than once a year' rule. Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) national president Allan Panolong, meanwhile, said that the group is of the view that the provision means not more than one a year. 'Our position is that of the prevailing interpretation that not more than one a year. This is so to avoid unnecessary or harassment complaints against the impeachable officers,' he said in a statement aired in Ian Cruz's report on GMA's '24 Oras Weekend' on Sunday. Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. The fourth impeachment complaint, endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives, was later on transmitted to the Senate. The Supreme Court then ruled unanimously to declare that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional and imposed a one-year ban, as it said these violate the right to due process. SC spokesperson Camille Ting noted, however, that the SC is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her, but any subsequent impeachment complaint may only be filed starting February 6, 2026. The decision is in relation to the petition filed by Duterte and lawyer Israelito Torreon, among others, seeking to declare the Articles of Impeachment against her null and void. The House of Representatives has since filed a motion for the SC to reverse its decision, saying it should be allowed to perform its exclusive duty to prosecute an impeachable official, and the Senate's to try to the case. Duterte, for her part, entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.'
GMA Network
13 hours ago
- GMA Network
Tito Sotto files bill seeking full public disclosure of gov't. records, transactions
Senate Minority Leader Vicente 'Tito' Sotto III has filed a measure seeking to implement a policy for full public disclosure of government records and transactions concerning public interest. The proposed 'People's Freedom of Information Act of 2025' aims to recognize the right to information on matters of public concern. 'Transparency is the cornerstone of good governance. To foster accountability, trust and citizen participation, our Government shall provide ready and complete access to key information to the discerning public' Sotto said in a statement on Sunday. The proposed measure mandates the disclosure of specific information. particularly the annual Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) of the following public servants: President Vice President Members of the Cabinet Members of Congress Justices of the Supreme Court Members of Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional offices Officers of the Armed Forces with General or Flag Ranks All government agencies are also directed to upload certain information on their respective websites. This includes, subject to monthly updates, a register of transactions, documents and records of its annual budget, monthly collections and disbursements, summary of income and expenditures, procurement plan and list, items to bid, and procurement contracts. However, the proposed measure noted that sensitive personal information such as race, ethnicity, origin, health records, religion, political affiliations, education, and tax returns will be kept classified. Access to information may also be denied if it compromises national security and the country's foreign affairs, among others. Government agencies are mandated to prepare a Freedom of Information Manual within six months from its effectivity. Public officials who conceal, deny, destroy, alter, tamper with, or modify information will face a penalty of imprisonment of one month to six months and a fine ranging from ?10,000 to ?100,000. 'In this modern world where data is readily available online, information about government transactions, processes and actions shall likewise be accessible to our countrymen as a matter of right,' Sotto said. Members of the Liberal Party (LP) in the House of Representatives had also refiled the FOI bill, which mandates the disclosure of SALN of the country's president, vice president, and other high-ranking government officials. — Mariel Celine Serquiña/RF, GMA Integrated News
