House panel OKs early voting for media bill

Tuesday was a good day for press freedom at the House of Representatives. The House committee on suffrage and electoral reforms has passed a consolidated measure allowing media practitioners to vote ahead of scheduled elections, while the House committee on public information conducted its first hearing on the Freedom of Information bill. Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga, suffrage committee chairman, said the approval will give media people the flexibility to cast their votes ahead of scheduled polls. “We believe on the necessity of giving media persons the opportunity to vote as they cannot usually exercise their right to suffrage because of their coverage during the polls," he said. The committee consolidated the bills filed by Bayan Muna Reps. Teddy Casiño and Neri Colmenares, Gabriela Representatives Luz Ilagan and Emmi de Jesus, Anakpawis Rep. Rafael Mariano, Kabataan Rep. Raymond Palatino and ACT Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio and Cagayan de Oro City Rep. Rufus Rodriguez and Abante Mindanao party-list Rep. Maximo Rodriguez. The panel will prepare a report on its approval of the consolidated measure that will be presented in the plenary. The lawmakers will then discuss and vote on the measure on the floor. Once the chamber approves the measure, it will submit the bill to the Senate for consideration. The Senate can either pass its own version of the bill or adopt the bill passed by the House. After this, the bicameral conference committee will be convened to reconcile the respective versions of the House and Senate. Once the bicameral committee approves the bill, it will be returned to the House and Senate for approval on third reading. It will then be submitted to Malacañang for the signature of the President. In the 14th Congress, both the House and the Senate approved separate bills calling for advance voting in certain areas and of certain sectors, including the media, detainees yet to be convicted, and uniformed personnel. The Congress, however, failed to pass a reconciled version of HB No. 6928 and Senate Bill (SB) 3570. FOI bill On the other hand, Deputy Speaker Lorenzo Tañada III expressed hope the Freedom of Information (FOI) bill will be up for plenary debates before the First Session of the 15th Congress adjourns on June 2011. “We have high hopes that this measure will be passed under the new administration. There is no lawmaker who strongly opposes the measure. The controversial provisions have been identified before. It will hit plenary before we adjourn in June, or even earlier," he said at a press conference before the start of the hearing. In the 14th Congress, the FOI bill was approved by the bicameral conference committee and was even ratified by the Senate. The House, however, failed to approve it due to lack of quorum on the last day of session. “We can see now that the House attendance is way beyond what is required for a quorum. The House leadership is in favor of the bill and the House Speaker (Feliciano Belmonte, Jr.) has already said that the FOI is a part of the legislative agenda that should be passed in the 15th Congress," said Tañada. He further said the House would approve the measure with or without President’s certification of the FOI as an urgent bill. “If it (certification) comes, it will be welcomed. It will hasten the process because this FOI measure is in line with his vision of being transparent with the contracts that our government enters into. But with or without it, the Congress can move for the passage of this piece of legislation," he said. “Fake" FOI bills? At the same press conference, lawyer Nep Malaluan of the Right to Know, Right Now Network warned against bills that he said were masquerading as FOIs but in reality will only restrict the law. He mentioned House Bill 59 of Rep. Karlo Nograles of the 1st District of Davao City and House Bill 830 of Camiguin Lone District Rep.Pedro Romualdo. Malaluan cited Section 18 of Nograles’ House Bill 59 which states that the FOI would not apply in the government transactions that happened prior to the enactment of the FOI bill into a law. “We believe that this is a step backward, and not a step forward. There is no such distinction in our Constitution. That is why we have records so that we can be properly informed," he said. He said Romualdo’s proposal, on the other hand, provides an overly discretionary provision of providing access to information except if it concerns national sovereignty. “That is a very vague, overly broad provision because all the things that the government does, may it be on taxation or the exercise of police power concern national sovereignty," Malaluan said. - KBK, GMANews.TV