'Conscience bloc' vents over 'extended travel,' a 'figure of speech' Tupas Jr. rebuts

By Florence F. Hibionada

A "figure of speech" thus "no big deal." Nevertheless, he was sorry.

GALLAR

Such summed up the justification of Board Member Niel Tupas Jr. following the unprecedented privilege speeches of four colleagues in the Sanggunian Panlalawigan (SP) practically addressed to him.

In what was seen as a "historical" session, Tuesday's calendar of business had to wait for some two hours before it was finally presented to the floor for deliberation.

The gripings of Board Members Bernardo Silla, Macario Napulan, Manny Gallar and Licurgo Tirador came after Tupas Jr. himself delivered his own privilege speech.

Yet unlike the four known as the 'conscience bloc' who had similar concerns, Tupas Jr. made use of his time to lambast Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez, Sr.

TUPAS JR.

With live coverages and news feeds of the session, Silla opened the 'first round' with his acknowledgment of Tupas Jr. as a "budding statesman" who may have "gone a little too far."

This, he explained, was brought by the earlier speech made on their absence that chided them for an extended travel and labeled them as "opposition."

Statements that Board Member Silla considered, "reckless, careless and irresponsible."

Board Member Napulan followed suit saying he left the city "confident that everything was in place and that my actions were in tuned with what had been decided."

Napulan joined Gallar, Tirador and Silla in an official travel to Manila headed by Vice Governor Roberto Armada to attend the President's State of the Nation Address (SONA). The group went back to the city July 27th after a July 26th luncheon in Malacañang.

SILLA

"I do not have any questions with regards to the sentiments or the politics of the gentleman from Barotac Viejo. I do not want to sound onion-skinned but I do hear a note of sarcasm in those statements. I couldn't help but wonder what the gentleman was trying to imply when he said we were on an extended official travel?," he asked.

Napulan went on to decry the holding of last week's session particularly since a manifesto was passed to defer it to the next day where all of them are to be present.

"Considering the circumstances, I wonder if the issue was deliberately presented during the absence of the members of the conscience block? Was it simply pushed that day to make it appear that we were remiss in our duties as public officials? Was it impelled by some sinister motive? Your guess is as good as mine," he said.

Similar points pushed by Gallar on the 'third round' who opened up his speech with several questions.

NAPULAN

"As a public official in good physical and mental condition, how can I say no to the personal invitation of the President of the Republic of the Philippines?," he asked. "And if the President asks from us an extension of stay for a day or two to have a dialogue with her, who is the public official in his right senses would refuse?"

This, he ended with a stern statement, "there might be some sort of misunderstanding in our course of our duty but I'm sure we have the same wish in common -- that we'd rather be missed than damned when we go away!."

Yet it was to be the final speech of Board Member Tirador that generated the most in emotional rebuttals from Tupas Jr.

Tirador in his statement focused on the manifesto that called on the deferment of the Tuesday session to Wednesday. With his absence, he said, it may have appeared that he has betrayed the trust of his constituents in the Third District. And had it not been for the "sacred document" of the controversial manifesto, Tirador said, "this suspecting act of betrayal could not have been given birth."

The Third District board member went on to refer to a statement "even some members would like to attend they can be back on Tuesday" as "displaced, illogical and absurd rationality." He also labeled an "act of intimate treachery" the fact that the manifesto was not heeded.

"An act of intimate treachery intended solely to deny and deprive the representative of the people of the 3rd District of Iloilo Province from

TIRADOR

participating the legislative proceedings of this August Body," he said while adding, "as God has forgiven all sins, the treachery of Judas was excepted. He took his life so as to vanish from scorn and condemnation of the living. I pray therefore that while others treasure it as a political legacy, people of the 3rd District of Iloilo hold it as the highest crime a mortal can commit."

In the ensuing exchanges after the speeches, Tupas Jr. got the help of Board Member Domingo Oso Jr. in pushing for his defense. The interpelletation, arguments and counter-arguments lasted a full two hours that eventually settled the matter with Tupas Jr.'s assertion that what he said were merely "figure of speech" and not tainted with any malice. Hand shakes were also extended minutes thereafter.

"I'm sorry if it offended you. I stated it with clear and honest conscience on my part," he told Silla.

As for Napulan's assertion questioning the resolution that carried the name of the entire SP inspite of their group not sharing the same, Tupas Jr. said "that's precisely how democracy works -- majority rules!"