LET’S talk about the issue of decorum, especially among our legislators, both local and national.
Former Senator Franklin Drilon recently voiced out his concern about senate decorum following the controversy of a senator who was seen openly brushing his moustache and loudly scolding those heckling him for doing so (Robin Padilla) and another senator who was seen kneeling before police officers and pleading that they tell the truth (Bato dela Rosa) during the hearing of the PNP-busted billion peso shabu deal.
Naturally, that observation of Drilon sparked a debate. And that raises the question of how should the senators do their thing while in session, both in plenary and in committees?
* * *
Supposing a senator “actively” participates in the “grilling” of a resource person, is he acting in decorum?
By acting, I mean, somebody who passionately pursues his line of questioning to the point that the resource person is already incoherent, trembling with dread, nervousness and all that, and has become a laughing-stock among the audience. Now, can we call that attitude as acting in decorum?
Under the rules, senators have but limited grill time, they are not permitted to exceed the allotted time but sometimes, in their passion, and in their quest for public attention, they go beyond their allotted time. When the presiding officer is not firm, or too kind (for whatever reason) the grilling senator is permitted to continue. And that results to a longer grilling time, and that also results to other senators asking for similar accommodation.
And the result of course, is, nobody will now stick to their allotted time for grilling.
There are even instances when the resource person is not permitted to fully explain his or her position because the senator will interrupt and pose another question or observation.
Perteng luoya sa resource person nga perte lataa na kaayo sa wala ug tuo nga pangutana, samot kon di patiwason sa iyang explanation.
* * *
Supposing a senator is just silent, barely participating in the discussion and keeps on using his cellphone, either texting or answering calls, is he acting in decorum?
Of course, the rules prohibit the use of cellphones, in fact, the public is even required to put them on silent mode.
So when the senator keeps on using his cellphone while on session, is he acting on decorum? Another question, are the senators exempted from the silent mode requirement, so they can freely use their cellphones and the public cannot?
I suppose it is very hard to put a “fence” or “borders” on the word “decorum.” As in, the rules apply only on a case to case basis.
* * *
Okay, let’s shift to the local scene.
I once witnessed a session of a provincial board, no need to tell the year or the place because that is immaterial.
I understand that the rules provide for the use of official language during sessions or committee meetings. And I learned that the rules provide for the use of either English or Tagalog/Pilipino.
The use of the local language or binisaya is not provided, or more specifically, not permitted.
So it became a big surprise when the presiding officer responded to a query using the local lingo.
Nagbinisaya og tubag sa pangutana nga iningles, susmariosep.
Misamot ka-bibo sa dihang mi-ininglis na pod siya pero gakabali-bali pod ang ininglisan. I could only imagine the pain and the grief of his English Teacher.
Ageh.
Was there an observance of proper decorum?
* * *
In my Political Science days from my good ole Silliman University days, we were made to understand the significance of the Robert’s House Rules on Parliamentary Procedure.
This book is like the bible for all legislators, for both the presiding officer and the members of the august body. The book details on how the session is to be conducted, how motions are to be treated and all that.
In other words, we were made to understand back then that understanding the book was a MUST for all aspiring legislators.
But given my personal experiences, I really doubt if my understanding on the need for that book was really accurate.
* * *
Nindot ba paminawon kon ang sesyon sa sanggunian himoon mostly in the local dialect?
Okay, never mind the House Rules, maayo ra ba paminawon kon magbinisaya ra pirmi ang mag-preside apil ang mga sanggunian members kon mag-session sila?
They’re they are in their barong tagalog, looking serious in their respective tables or spaces, with their individual name plates, identifying them as “honorable,” their respective staffs hustling to and fro seemingly busy in their jobs, while the audience is there, including high school and college students waiting and observing (and trying to learn and understand something because they are required to submit a reaction paper later) and fully expecting their representatives to really do their job as what they promised during the campaign.
And when the presiding officer, after the prayer, the hymn and checking of attendance, starts the session with a little English language and then shifts to Binisaya all the way, including the members, how do you think the audience, especially the students, will react?
Will they “enjoy” their “learning” experience in the sanggunian?
Ma-impressed ba sila sa ilang mga kagawad kon mao na ang ilang masaksihan samtang nag-session ang mga “honorables”?
* * *
One time, the members of the sanggunian from another province visited and participated in the joint session of a provincial sanggunian. Again, never mind the year or the provinces involved.
Just by personal appearance, the visiting Vice Governor of that province appeared to be a comic, with his shiny, pony-tailed hair imprisoned by a colorful rubber band. No doubt about it, he was slick even when he paired his barong tagalog with maong pants and shiny pointed boots.
But when he opened his mouth, his litany of correct and appropriate English words coupled with a baritone voice was in deep contrast to his local counterpart’s carabao English and incorrect grammar. I don’t know if my reading of the situation was correct, but I observed that the members of the local sanggunian were uniformly bowing their heads as if focusing on something more important than listening to their own presiding officer. Proud ba kaha sila sa ilang presiding officer or “medyo” naulaw sab, like them?
On the flipside, what do you think were the members of the visiting sanggunian thinking at the time the presiding officer of the local sanggunian was “reciting” his piece for the joint session?
Susmariosep, lainang paminawon oi.
This is decorum of another level of course, but the question stands, was there proper decorum?
Don’t you think that while in the sanggunian, in session, everybody especially the presiding officer, should fully understand the rudiments of parliamentary procedure?
* * *
Bisan asa diay ning “budol-budol” noh? The word “budol-budol” is in quote, unquote, because even the CEO of the company that owns the vessel perished.
Anyway, take a look at the incident involving the deep sea submersible Titan which imploded deep in the ocean where the Titanic is lying and killed the 5 occupants.
Accordingly, they paid US $250,000 each for the ride and when it submerged, radio contact was immediately lost. Reports said that instead of a traditional control system, the experimental vessel used a gaming controller that costs only $29.99. The Logitech F710 wireless PC game controller from 2010 was employed to navigate the submarine.
But the crazy part of the budol is that the scam submarine had bolted panels instead of doors, no safety cable to the mothership, and no tracking system in place.
Were the occupants even informed about the parameters of the trip, especially safety concerns prior to their boarding? What government agency checked/accredited/registered the submersible before the dive? Was it even checked for its seaworthiness?
Lisora espilingon tong byahea oi. But just the same, Longcuts joins in praying for their eternal repose.
