Misor board moves to gag own members

By SHIELA MAE BUTLIG
Correspondent .

PROVINCIAL board members Frederick Khu, Boris Olivier Actub, and Gerardo Sabal have frowned over a proposal that they see as a move to gag members of Misamis Oriental’s legislature from speaking out.

“Unsay pasabot nila? I-screen nila ang privilege speeches?” Khu asked rhetorically over the provincial board’s move to task its committee on laws and rules to go over the proposal.

The proposal was made by provincial board member Nancy Madjos as an offshoot of the Khu’s allegation that the provincial board has been spending public funds on “ghost employees” or nonexistent workers, an accusation which majority of the legislature’s members decried as being “baseless” and “irresponsible.”

Khu has yet to keep his promise last month to show proof that “ghost employees” exist in the provincial board.

He said the proposal, if approved, would allow the provincial board to screen privilege speeches of its members first.

“I-agi pa sa ila ayha ka maka-privilege speech,” he said.

Khu said the proposal “is not right,” citing the case of the Senate where senators are allowed to speak out and openly debate on issues.

He said the provincial board has given him the impression that it was afraid of his privilege speeches.

“Unsa na nahadlok sila sa atong privilege speech?” Khu asked. “Nahadlok ba sila unsa atong istorya sunod? Mas maayo pa tingali walaon nalang ang privilege speech o basin sunod, wala nay session.”

He said it would be an embarrassment for Misamis Oriental to have the only provincial board in the country to gag its own members. “Murag dako kaayo nga ulaw kung mahitabo na.”

Provincial board member Actub frowned over the proposal. “Ga-martial law ta sa atong kaugalingong Sanggunian,” he said.

Actub said the move was “out of order” even as he asserted that no member of the provincial board can be dictated on his or her privilege speech topic during the Sanggunian’s privilege hour.

Sabal, another provincial board member, said the provincial board was complicating matters, pointing out that while it should be guided by the internal rules it approved on July 5, 2016, it would be improper for the legislative body to prevent any of its members from speaking his or her mind.

But the balance is on the responsibility of provincial board members, pointing out that the legislators would need to be accountable for anything that they say during provincial board sessions.

Incidentally, it was Sabal who suggested that the provincial board refer Madjos’s proposal to the laws and rules committee for further study.

Madjos, in her proposal, moved to revisit the provincial board’s internal rules on matters pertaining to legislative measures, actions, inquiry, recommendations, and investigations.

She blamed the controversy sparked by Khu’s allegation on “ghost employees” on the failure of the provincial board to adhere to its internal procedures.

Provincial board member Wayne Militante agreed with Madjos, saying that the Sanggunian members “forgot” their agreed internal rules.

Militante also expressed dismay over what he said was the abuse of the “privilege hour” in attacking provincial board members and the Sanggunian istelf as an institution.

“Ipaagi sa unta sa usa ka agenda or i-invite ang office nga involved. At least, ma-notify,” said Militante, adding that there may be a need to amend their internal rules.

Provincial board member Vincent Pelaez, whose laws and rules committee was tasked to look into Madjos’s proposal, said privilege speeches, if meant to attack the Sanggunian as an institution, should be properly presented first to the committees concerned.

This, according to Pelaez, would allow anyone being accused of wrongdoing to prepare his or her answers.