‘In aid of legislation’

By Al S. Mendoza

 

WHAT is the politically correct way to define anyone invited to a Congress probe?

Resource person?

Witness?

Whatever, but what is the difference?

Kuya Leonie Galvez, the kindly sage who is Los Angeles-based for years now, has the indisputable answer: “The difference is the same.”

A resource person/witness is anyone that is supposed to be an information provider.

Either the Senate or the Lower House could subpoena a resource person/witness “in aid of legislation.”

Ah, this animal called “in aid of legislation.”

What is “in aid of legislation” again?

Anything a resource person/witness will say in a Congress probe can be used by a senator/congressman as aid to legislate a new law.

Makes sense.

Crucial, therefore, is the appearance of any resource person/witness as his/her testimony could become crucial in the drafting of a bill preparatory to enacting it into law.

That is why the Congress “guest” is put under oath to make sure he’d tell the truth.

If the “guest” tells a lie, he could be in trouble.

What I don’t like is, many Congress “guests” are sometimes treated rudely, if not arrogantly, by our lawmakers.

At times, a resource person/witness even gets scolded, if not utterly dressed down.

Aren’t “guests” supposed to be special, given importance—almost royally?

For example, in one recent Senate hearing, Gen. Bato De La Rosa was tersely cut off by Sen. De Lima.

And all Bato said, while pursuing his point, was:  “Ma’am, what about if we switched places?”

De Lima, evidently piqued, retorted quickly:  “Do not argue with me!”

She was virtually shouting at Bato.

Her eyes on fire, her teeth gnashing.

Sen. Lacson butted in and said, “Bato, Bato.”

And Bato, being Lacson’s former subaltern when Lacson was still the country’s Police chief, could only retreat.

If Bato had seethed in anger, could we blame him?

Like Bato, I was angry, too.

Why can’t a witness not allowed to drive home his point?

Is driving home one’s point arguing?

And why is arguing disallowed?

Chaos might ensue?

But aren’t we old enough to know what is proper and what is not proper?

Aren’t senators/congressmen honorable so that arguing a point with them could be done in a most polite manner?

What is the use of constantly addressing the legislators “your honors” if they’d be the first to act dishonorably by chastising a “guest” at the slightest opportunity?

Why can’t a resource person/witness debate with a lawmaker?

And all along, I thought Congress was the custodian of democracy, protector of free speech.

Share your Comments or Reactions

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments