About this transcript: This is a full AI-generated transcript of Senate holds hearing on New Anti-Espionage Act — October 15, 2026 from Bilyonaryo News Channel, published October 15, 2026. The transcript contains 14,336 words with timestamps and was generated using Whisper AI.
"slash meeting of the committee of national defense and security peace unification and reconciliation is uh hereby called to order um before we acknowledge uh our colleagues and our guests and resource persons allow me to welcome you all i thank you for taking the time out to out of your busy..."
[2:20] slash meeting of the committee of national defense and security peace unification and reconciliation
[2:27] is uh hereby called to order um before we acknowledge uh our colleagues and our guests
[2:38] and resource persons allow me to welcome you all i thank you for taking the time out to
[2:49] out of your busy schedule to attend this hearing i truly value your presence and insights before i
[2:58] continue i may allow me to acknowledge the presence of senator erwin tulfo thank you uh sp thank you the
[3:09] primary anti-espionage framework in the philippines consists of the commonwealth act number 616
[3:20] espionage act of 1941 and article 117 of the revised penal code act number 3815 which took effect in
[3:31] 1932 these laws were enacted with the traditional wartime setting in mind and did not cover the
[3:45] or interferences during peacetime much more the modern threats that we have at present so in today's
[3:54] rapidly changing world national security is so is no longer threatened only by traditional warfare
[4:04] espionage cyber attacks the theft of confidential information and the illegal sharing of sensitive
[4:14] government data pose serious risks to the safety the sovereignty and independence of the philippines
[4:25] this is why the philippines anti-espionage and foreign interference laws should be updated our laws must
[4:35] keep pace with modern technology emerging security threats and the changing methods used by foreign
[4:43] intelligence operations outdated laws may leave gaps that can be exploited making it more difficult
[4:52] to protect our national interests and hold offenders accountable so updating these laws does not simply mean
[5:02] imposing stricter punishments it also means establishing clear legal standards protecting citizens rights
[5:13] preventing abuses of power and ensuring that national security measures remain consistent
[5:22] with our democratic principles so as filipinos we have a responsibility to protect our country's sovereignty
[5:30] and the confidentiality of information that safeguards our people by modernizing our espionage laws we can
[5:40] build a stronger legal framework that responds to present-day threats while upholding justice and the
[5:47] rule of law with the current tension in the middle east and continuous harassment and threats within our
[5:56] neighboring countries updating the philippines espionage laws is not merely an option it is a crucial step
[6:06] toward ensuring that our nation is prepared to face the security challenges of the present and the future
[6:13] uh at this point we'd like to ask uh center every tour of their opening opening statements that he would like to
[6:22] make thank you mr chair um mr chair distinguished colleagues our national security is paramount in an
[6:31] increasingly complex geopolitical environment we must ensure that our laws are strong enough to
[6:37] protect our country against spionage the unauthorized disclosure of classified information and threats to our
[6:44] sovereignty i agree with our former senate president and we really have to review our anti with our anti-spionage law
[6:55] law if it's still working if it is still uh pwede pa sa panahon na ito or we really have to look back
[7:09] and tinker it but as we strengthen our anti-spionage laws we must also uphold due process protect
[7:17] legitimate journalism and safeguard the rights of our citizens ang layunin po ng batas na ito ay hindi
[7:24] lamang protectahan ang ating mga lihim kundi pangalagaan ng ating soberenya at ang kaligtasan
[7:30] ng bawat pilipino we must strike the right balance between national security accountability and
[7:40] constitutional freedoms maraming salamat po mr chairman thank you senator um thank you very much uh
[7:50] being one of the authors of uh one of the bills that we are uh tackling this afternoon thank you um
[7:58] may we ask the committee secretary uh attorney miloneva to um introduce the resource persons uh
[8:05] that we have this afternoon thank you mr chair good afternoon everyone let me acknowledge the presence
[8:12] of the representatives from the department of national defense the turn lieutenant colonel andrews kabawatan
[8:19] from the armed forces of the philippines probationary second lieutenant pinky alfonso corpus
[8:25] from the department of justice senior state council freddy ganchun state council elani
[8:32] fajardo aspiras from the department of information and communications technology we have colonel
[8:38] colonel alan lito araw-araw department of foreign affairs we have assistant secretary el mercato
[8:46] director joselle joselle mustajo niveira director mark hanzel lao from the philippine national police we
[8:55] have police lieutenant general mary vincent ignacio for this colonel faith kabibihan police lieutenant colonel
[9:03] josen najera junior police lieutenant colonel ron carlo quixote police colonel pitts macariola police
[9:12] major christian azuma from the national intelligence coordinating agency we have attorney roberton lapus
[9:21] for the national bureau of investigation we have supervising agent darcy binayan supervising agent
[9:28] reynaldo gabionza you also have from the national security council useck danilo camonag director jonathan
[9:38] malaya dr jonathan malaya we also have director lisa fidelis canada from the national privacy commission
[9:48] we have attorney vida bokor from the anti-money laundering council we have mr robert daniel arcadio from the
[9:57] bureau of immigration we have attorney arnulfo maminta that will be all mr chair thank you um um i'm sure
[10:11] most of you if not all of you were uh given copies of the the bills the pending bill so we would like
[10:18] to um to hear if there are comments that you would like to place or any um uh positions that you would
[10:26] like to take and inform the committee at this point the national security council we would uh appreciate
[10:39] it much if you uh have prepared say uh position papers on the matter and submit it to us but uh it
[10:47] would also be beneficial for us to hear um the salient points or uh the points that you would like to
[10:55] raise on these measures being uh taken up thank you mr chair to honorable vicente soto the third the
[11:04] chairperson of the committee on national defense and security peace unification and reconciliation
[11:10] to the honorable members of the committee and colleagues in the government a pleasant afternoon to
[11:16] all espionage and foreign interference are crimes against national security as such proposed laws
[11:25] related to these crimes are our priority legislative agenda an updated and strong legal framework is one
[11:35] mechanism in encountering espionage there is a compelling need to upgrade the current legal framework
[11:44] into a powerful and modernized one with punitive teeth to ensure deterrence of all acts of espionage
[11:54] the modernization of our anti-espionage framework is not merely a legal update but an essential act of
[12:03] national defense the aging commonwealth act number 616 as well as the article 117 of the revised penal code
[12:15] designed for a predigital wartime world is fundamentally incapable of safeguarding our state against
[12:26] contemporary threats which now liberates cyber warfare high-tech surveillance and sophisticated
[12:36] foreign interference on the other hand foreign interference and malign influence
[12:42] organizations are present in ways that often appear harmless they rarely announce themselves they do not
[12:50] always look hostile instead they capitalize and enter quietly through relationships narratives incentives
[13:00] and everyday decisions in our jurisdictions we have witnessed efforts to shape public narratives and divide
[13:09] opinion pressure exerted on public officials simply fulfilling their duties and cases involving covert
[13:17] activities and aspirants these incidents span political informational economic technological and even
[13:29] community level engagement often each incident may appear isolated or manageable on its own but together
[13:38] they form a complex interference landscape that demands vigilance coordinations as well as legislations
[13:46] therefore the national security council fully supports the consolidation of the bills and the passage of
[13:55] the new anti-espionage act and counter foreign interference bills into laws rest assured that the national
[14:02] national security council stands ready to render its full assistance and cooperations in making this happen
[14:10] a pleasant afternoon and thank you thank you dr jonathan anything to add okay all right uh thank you mr
[14:22] chairman uh as mentioned by the chairman uh we support fully the modern espionage law and the various bills
[14:29] pending pending in this committee as mentioned the current laws are leave a real gap they focus on wartime
[14:36] and military insulations so they poorly fit peacetime collection by state actors through cyber drone signals
[14:44] and insider means uh the cases cited in the experiment experimentatory note of the bills of senator soto and
[14:51] senators laxon um clearly show the gaps in our legal framework for example the drones that were uh used by foreign actors in
[15:04] the arrests made in subic the arrests made on imsi catchers near the comelec the law should and with
[15:14] will only hold up if the targets are agents of foreign principles acting with intent and not necessarily leakers
[15:24] journalists researchers or critics as mentioned by uh senator tulfo so we support um mr chairman
[15:30] the pending bills that are currently here in this committee and we of course agree that the constitutional
[15:38] freedoms that are meant to be but are meant to protect uh the public should continuously be protected
[15:46] even under this loss and um we reserve the right mr chairman of submitting our position paper on specific
[15:53] provisions of the laws thank you mr chairman thank you we will uh truly appreciate that the um
[16:00] national intelligence coordinating uh authority attorney uh lapos the honorable chairperson and
[16:08] distinguished members of the senate committee on national defense and security peace unification
[16:13] and reconciliation ladies and gentlemen good afternoon uh the nika extends its full support to the
[16:21] various anti-espionage bills introduced which seek to expand the coverage of the crime of espionage and
[16:28] impose stiffer penalties therefore the proposed measures address the limitations of existing laws
[16:35] particularly common commonwealth act number 616 and article 117 of the revised penal code which may no
[16:42] longer adequately address modern espionage activities as pointed out by the chair this includes cyber attacks
[16:49] in infiltration of infiltration of government networks information manipulation and the use of drones
[16:55] as pointed out by dr malaya and the mc catchers to gather sensitive information recent arrests and
[17:04] monitored incidents include the use of surveillance equipment and submersible drones highlighting the
[17:11] evolving threat of espionage amid heightened geopolitical tensions particularly in the west philippine sea
[17:19] of 20 years imprisonment under ca number 616 during peace time may be insufficient relative to the
[17:27] potential harm to national security expanding the scope of espionage and imposing proportionate
[17:33] stricter penalties would strengthen the country's legal framework enhance its capacity to address
[17:40] emerging security threats and protect national interests and sovereignty on the counter
[17:46] foreign interference bills the agency likewise supports supports all of these bills which seek to penalize
[17:53] foreign interference in the philippines and establish a counter foreign interference council in recent
[17:59] years incidents of potential foreign interference in the philippines political and governmental affairs
[18:05] have prompted a deeper examination of the tactics and objectives employed by hostile foreign actors
[18:12] these actors infiltrate key areas of the bureaucracy media and critical infrastructure thereby threatening
[18:19] national security political stability and sovereignty recent developments also involving suspicious
[18:26] activities of foreign nationals in the country particularly chinese nationals highlight the urgent need
[18:34] for updated legislation to counter acts that are detrimental to national interests while individuals engaged in
[18:41] illegal activities may be prosecuted under existing criminal laws there's currently no statute that directly
[18:47] penalizes attempts to interfere or influence the country's domestic political affairs the only existing framework
[18:55] regulating foreign agents enacted in 1979 is outdated to address the evolving threats of foreign interference
[19:02] by contrast several nations have already recognized this danger and enacted robust legal measures to protect their
[19:10] governments businesses businesses and communities from foreign manipulation moreover the modern nature
[19:16] of warfare transcends traditional concept concepts of national defense cyber attacks sabotage of critical
[19:24] infrastructure manipulation of information and interference in political processes now pose equally
[19:31] significant threats espionage no longer targets only military secrets but extends to political institutions
[19:38] critical infrastructure and economic assets that underpin the country's stability
[19:43] and prosperity it is for these reasons mr chair that the agency fully supports the senate in its efforts to
[19:50] expand the scope of the current espionage laws and counter foreign interference legislation
[19:58] to introduce a new legal framework against these threats these reforms recognizes that countering foreign
[20:04] interference and interference and espionage is not just about punishments as also identified by the chair
[20:10] earlier but about safeguarding national interests in a complex vulnerable and rapidly shifting geopolitical
[20:17] environment thank you mr teacher thank you uh mika the secretary judoro was um following up on this measure so
[20:26] let's hear from the uh the front liners the department of national defense uh colonel kababatan um to our
[20:34] cheperson good afternoon sir as for the department we wish to convey our full support also for modernizing
[20:41] our anti-espionage and foreign interference laws in fact the department has been very diligent in
[20:48] submitting our recommendations ever since the 19th congress as to what we think may also may be for the
[20:57] consideration of the senate in to be included in the bills and also we we have reiterated our
[21:04] submission uh by email to the committee secretary last august of this year sir all right thank you yes
[21:16] uh we we we we indeed received it and uh as well we would like to um uh ask that uh our resource person
[21:24] submit their uh position papers on the uh these uh bills that are pending that's um here from uh the
[21:34] department of justice um thank you um mr chair and to the members of the committee and authors of this
[21:43] bill in general uh mr chair the doj supports the passage of these bills updating our laws on espionage
[21:51] in order to address the evolving nature of national defense and security threats which now extend beyond
[21:58] traditional espionage into the digital transnational and influence driven domains
[22:03] the modernization of our legal framework on espionage is both timely and necessary the doj mr chair also
[22:11] supports in general the passage of a bill on foreign interference separate from the bill on espionage
[22:18] and the creation of a counter foreign interference council that would focus on taking actions against
[22:24] the various forms of foreign interference through a whole of government and whole of nation approach
[22:30] at the same time it is the general advice of the department of justice that it is imperative that
[22:36] these legislative measures be crafted carefully in order to pass constitutional master or judicial
[22:42] scrutiny uh for example uh mr chair since this is the first time that congress would criminalize
[22:50] foreign interference with respect to espionage it's already an established crime within our jurisdiction
[22:56] it's just a matter mr chair of updating um our um definition of the crime of espionage but with respect
[23:03] to foreign interference this is actually the first time that congress would criminalize it and so
[23:09] therefore mr chair its definition needs to be improved in order to ensure that it is not considered
[23:15] overly broad or vague which as such might unconstitutionally prohibit legitimate activities
[23:21] or infringing the rights set out in the bill of rights such as the right of free expression it would
[23:27] also be difficult to properly effectively and successfully pro successfully prosecute a crime
[23:33] if its elements are not clear and precise also the provision and access blocking order with account
[23:40] to be the proposed counter interference a counter foreign interference council needs to consider prior
[23:46] judicial authorization in order to ensure its constitutionality overall mr chair the policy
[23:53] direction of this bills and espionage and foreign interference is commendable and aligned with the
[23:59] pressing national defense and national security concerns of our country there's just a need to strike
[24:05] a careful balance between on one hand empowering the state to effectively safeguard our national defense
[24:12] and national security and on the other hand preserving constitutionally guaranteed rights
[24:17] to free expression association due process and privacy with more precise statutory
[24:23] definitions proportionate penalties judicially supervised procedures and clear mechanisms for
[24:29] interagency coordination the proposed laws can better achieve their commendable objectives without
[24:35] the risk of unconstitutional over breath or abuse for the nitty-gritty on the refinements of this bill
[24:42] mr chair we recommend that they be referred to a twg perhaps for the crafting of a consolidated and
[24:50] improved bill uh we will also submit a written position paper containing the specifics of our
[24:56] recommended provisions to these bills thank you very much thank you for that uh precisely that's
[25:02] the reason we want your recommendations to be able to square the bill uh properly and constitutionally
[25:11] uh when you say ssc that's senior state prosecutor senior state council okay anyway we're honored to
[25:21] to acknowledge the presence of the president of the senate the senate president uh chairman um mr senate
[25:29] president uh would there be any remarks uh from your head please thank you thank you uh mr chairman and
[25:36] to our former senate president senator tito soto uh first of all thank you very much for hearing this bill
[25:43] and uh admittedly we all can see the changing landscape of geopolitics in our region and uh
[25:51] a few years back nung namamayagpag pa ang pogo dito sa ating bansa uh ilang beses pong nahuhuli
[26:00] ng kapulisan ho natin ng military ho natin even the nbi mga enforcement agencies ho natin yung mga dayuhan
[26:10] wala na kumukuha nang information at data sa ibat ibang camp po po ng ating bansa at uh
[26:18] yeah nakakabahala po to dahil uh napakabilrocco nilang pumasok napakabilis po kumuha ng information
[26:28] napakabilis po kumuha ng datos at um ah hindi po sila nagdadala straighten ii at napakalakas
[26:36] their own way to do this.
[26:39] And we continue to change
[26:40] our geopolitical landscape
[26:42] in our region and also
[26:44] all over the world.
[26:46] With the internet, everything is connected.
[26:49] And more so
[26:50] that we need to update our anti-espinage
[26:53] law to adapt
[26:55] to the changing technological times.
[26:57] Artificial intelligence
[26:59] is now here
[27:01] with us in our pockets
[27:02] through our cell phones.
[27:03] This is how quickly the change of technology.
[27:08] So,
[27:09] I thank our former Senate President
[27:12] for taking the cudgels of updating this law.
[27:15] It's really timely that we need to
[27:16] take this
[27:20] anti-espinage or espionage
[27:22] concerns very seriously.
[27:25] Thank you very much.
[27:26] Thank you, sir.
[27:28] Thank you very much.
[27:30] May we hear from the
[27:31] Philippine National Police?
[27:32] Thank you, sir.
[27:36] Good afternoon.
[27:37] Especially to the Committee on the National Defense
[27:39] and Security, Peace, Unification
[27:41] and Reconciliation
[27:42] jointly with the Committee on Justice and Human Rights.
[27:45] On the part of the Philippine National Police,
[27:47] we'd like to express our appreciations
[27:49] to this joint committee
[27:51] for the opportunity to convey our support, sir,
[27:53] for this Senate bill
[27:55] and different legislative measures
[27:57] that will be consolidated later on.
[27:59] And I believe it's very important
[28:01] since on the part of the Philippine National Police
[28:03] being on the front line.
[28:05] So, I do believe that those definitions
[28:06] that will be developed later on,
[28:09] it gives us a very clear picture
[28:11] on how we're going to address
[28:12] these various concerns
[28:14] on the interference to our country,
[28:17] especially in protecting also
[28:18] the rights of the Filipino people
[28:20] and all the different instrumentalities
[28:23] and modalities
[28:24] in the protections of our defense
[28:25] and of our rights as well.
[28:30] The PMT also recognized
[28:31] that these legislative measures
[28:33] really have to address various gaps
[28:35] of the existing legal frameworks
[28:38] for these particular legal laws
[28:43] by introducing more comprehensive definitions
[28:46] of spionards and various interference,
[28:49] strengthening the corresponding penalties
[28:51] and enhancing the legal safeguards
[28:53] through protections
[28:54] of our national security.
[28:56] In fact, it really gives us an indicators
[28:58] to determine what are those things
[29:01] we need to look at,
[29:02] especially on the part of the intelligence
[29:04] and other law enforcement effort
[29:06] that we've been doing.
[29:08] So, equally important also
[29:09] is that the PMT underscores
[29:10] the need to ensure
[29:11] that these measures are implemented consistently
[29:13] with the constitution
[29:15] and applicable laws.
[29:17] And in view of that,
[29:18] the PMT respectfully really conveys
[29:20] our support for the passage
[29:21] of the aforementioned legislative measures.
[29:24] With that, thank you so much, sir.
[29:26] Thank you.
[29:28] The National Bureau of Investigation,
[29:30] hear from you, please.
[29:31] Yes, sir.
[29:32] Thank you, sir.
[29:32] Thank you, Mr. Chair,
[29:34] our Senate President
[29:36] and Senator Irwin Tulfo.
[29:38] Good afternoon to everyone.
[29:40] On behalf of our NBI Director,
[29:42] Attorney Melvin A. Matibag,
[29:45] the NBI wishes to manifest
[29:48] its full and unwavering support
[29:50] for these legislative initiatives
[29:53] and stand ready
[29:55] to extend technical assistance,
[29:57] as well as share our knowledge
[29:59] and expertise
[30:01] to assist the Senate
[30:02] in the drafting and promulgation
[30:04] of the necessary implementing protocols
[30:06] and guidelines
[30:07] for the effective conduct
[30:09] of investigations.
[30:11] In accordance with the objectives
[30:12] of the proposed measure,
[30:14] the NBI remains steadfast
[30:17] in its commitment
[30:18] to fulfilling its mandate
[30:20] and play its role
[30:21] as a major partner
[30:23] of the government
[30:24] in the administration of justice,
[30:27] especially in the strict implementation
[30:28] of existing laws
[30:30] and providing a much safer environment
[30:33] to every Filipino,
[30:35] especially those
[30:36] in the most vulnerable sectors
[30:38] of our society.
[30:40] Finally,
[30:41] we would like to extend
[30:42] our sincerest gratitude
[30:44] for giving us the opportunity
[30:45] to participate
[30:46] in this noble undertaking.
[30:49] We will be submitting
[30:50] our position paper,
[30:51] Mr. Chair.
[30:52] Thank you.
[30:53] Thank you.
[30:54] Thank you.
[30:54] We appreciate that.
[30:56] The Department of Foreign Affairs,
[30:58] another frontliner
[30:59] in this issue.
[31:02] Asek Kato, go ahead.
[31:04] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[31:05] Senate President Gachalian,
[31:07] Senator Tulfo,
[31:08] colleagues in government,
[31:09] ladies and gentlemen,
[31:10] good afternoon.
[31:10] The Department of Foreign Affairs
[31:13] would like to express
[31:14] its appreciation
[31:15] to the Committee on Defense
[31:16] and Security,
[31:17] Peace, Unification,
[31:19] and Reconciliation
[31:19] for the opportunity
[31:22] to share its views
[31:23] on the proposed
[31:24] legislative measures
[31:25] that seek to update
[31:26] our espionage laws.
[31:28] We join the National Security Council
[31:31] and other partner agencies
[31:32] in supporting
[31:34] the proposed amendments
[31:35] to our espionage laws
[31:37] as part of efforts
[31:39] to better protect
[31:40] our national security.
[31:42] As mentioned earlier,
[31:43] Mr. Chair,
[31:44] the proposed measures
[31:44] are timely
[31:45] as there are clear gaps
[31:47] in our laws
[31:48] that the proposed bills
[31:49] would be able to address.
[31:51] Our current laws
[31:52] focus on access
[31:53] to installations
[31:54] and documents,
[31:55] while today's security concerns
[31:57] include cyber intrusion,
[32:00] remote data exfiltration,
[32:03] covert influence,
[32:05] and the exploitation
[32:05] of commercial
[32:06] and academic channels.
[32:08] Early this year,
[32:09] Rappler reported
[32:10] that Filipinos
[32:11] with access
[32:11] to government institutions
[32:13] had been recruited
[32:14] by foreign handlers
[32:15] seeking insights
[32:17] into the country's defense
[32:18] and security operations.
[32:19] This is a cause
[32:21] for serious war.
[32:22] The Department of Foreign Affairs
[32:25] supports the modernization
[32:26] of our espionage laws
[32:28] as an important step
[32:29] in safeguarding
[32:30] national security.
[32:32] We stand ready
[32:33] to provide technical inputs,
[32:35] including specific language
[32:36] and diplomatic functions,
[32:38] and to work with the committee
[32:39] and our partner agencies
[32:41] on this measure.
[32:41] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[32:42] Thank you, sir.
[32:45] Okay.
[32:45] The Bureau of Immigration,
[32:48] Attorney Aminta,
[32:50] you have...
[32:50] For the Bureau of Immigration,
[32:54] in behalf of Commissioner Viado,
[32:57] we would like to reflect
[32:59] the position
[32:59] of the Department of Justice
[33:01] exactly,
[33:02] word for word,
[33:03] as an attached agency,
[33:05] and I think that's very
[33:06] critical that we do
[33:09] and act.
[33:10] That's why we appreciate
[33:11] this kind of action
[33:12] from the Senate.
[33:13] and a little bit
[33:15] off-tangent,
[33:16] Your Honor.
[33:18] The Bureau of Immigration
[33:19] is also in the same boat
[33:20] as this law.
[33:22] We are operating
[33:23] on CA 613 Commission,
[33:26] Commonwealth Act 613,
[33:28] a little bit younger
[33:29] than this 616,
[33:32] 1940, Your Honor.
[33:34] So we know
[33:35] how difficult it is
[33:36] to adopt
[33:38] with this rapidly changing
[33:42] geopolitics
[33:43] and technological advances.
[33:46] But having said that,
[33:48] the Bureau
[33:49] is still doing something,
[33:50] Your Honor.
[33:52] But we have this
[33:53] advanced
[33:54] passenger information system
[33:57] to help
[33:58] and aid
[33:59] in this
[34:00] move against
[34:03] national security
[34:04] or other.
[34:07] But I am sure
[34:08] that you will
[34:09] also help us
[34:11] in this way,
[34:12] having known
[34:13] that we are
[34:14] in the same boat
[34:14] as this 616.
[34:16] Thank you, Your Honor.
[34:17] Yes, sir.
[34:17] Why not?
[34:17] Why don't you submit
[34:19] a proposal?
[34:20] Submit a proposal
[34:22] to the committee,
[34:23] but in that case,
[34:23] that will be referred
[34:24] most probably
[34:26] to the Committee on Justice.
[34:29] We will definitely
[34:31] support and look
[34:32] into the modernization
[34:35] of your current law.
[34:37] Thank you.
[34:38] We hear from the DICT.
[34:40] You're always
[34:40] involved in this controversy.
[34:51] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[34:52] On behalf of the
[34:53] Cybercrime Investigation
[34:55] Coordinating Center
[34:56] and ATAS agency
[34:57] of the DICT,
[35:01] I would like to thank
[35:02] this Honorable Committee
[35:03] for the opportunity
[35:04] to contribute
[35:04] to the discussion
[35:06] on the proposed
[35:06] new Anti-Exponence Act
[35:09] and Counter-Foreign
[35:11] Interference Act.
[35:13] As you know,
[35:14] experience today
[35:15] may involve
[35:15] unauthorized access
[35:16] to government systems,
[35:18] type of sensitive information,
[35:20] compromise of
[35:21] digital infrastructure,
[35:22] and the use
[35:23] of modern technologies
[35:24] to collect information
[35:26] affecting our national security.
[35:28] Foreign interference
[35:29] may be carried out
[35:30] through coordinated
[35:31] online activities,
[35:32] deceptive digital identities,
[35:35] manipulation of information,
[35:37] and covert operations
[35:38] intended to influence
[35:39] public institutions
[35:40] on national decision-making.
[35:43] These developments
[35:44] require laws
[35:45] that recognize
[35:46] the changing nature of threats
[35:47] while protecting
[35:48] the constitutional rights
[35:49] and civil liberties.
[35:52] Under Republic Act
[35:53] 10175
[35:54] or the Cybercrime Prevention Act
[35:55] of 2012,
[35:57] CICC is mandated
[35:58] to coordinate
[35:59] cybercrime prevention
[36:00] and suppression,
[36:02] facilitate cooperation
[36:03] among concerned agencies,
[36:05] and recommend
[36:06] appropriate policies
[36:07] and measures.
[36:09] Through cybercrime complaints,
[36:11] threat monitoring,
[36:11] and digital analytics,
[36:13] CICC can assist
[36:15] in identifying
[36:16] suspicious patterns,
[36:18] requiring digital identifiers,
[36:20] and possible connections
[36:21] among cyber-related activities.
[36:24] However,
[36:26] it's important to emphasize
[36:27] that suspicious
[36:28] digital activity
[36:29] does not automatically
[36:30] establish
[36:31] espionage
[36:32] or foreign interference.
[36:34] Findings must undergo
[36:35] proper validation,
[36:36] lawful investigation
[36:37] by concerned
[36:39] law enforcement agencies,
[36:41] and appropriate assessment
[36:42] by competent authorities.
[36:44] In this regard,
[36:45] CICC respectfully
[36:46] supports this committee
[36:49] in the conduct
[36:52] of its hearing.
[36:53] Thank you,
[36:53] Mr. Chair.
[36:54] All right.
[36:56] By the way,
[36:57] let's also hear
[36:58] from the DKAAP
[36:59] because I understand
[37:01] there were arrests
[37:02] on drones
[37:04] being flown
[37:06] over Palawan.
[37:07] Do you have any position
[37:08] on the matter,
[37:09] Colonel Spino,
[37:10] before we move on?
[37:13] So far,
[37:14] I don't have the position paper,
[37:15] but we will submit, sir.
[37:17] Thank you, sir.
[37:18] Thank you.
[37:19] Thank you.
[37:20] Yes, sir.
[37:20] Can I say?
[37:21] The proposed
[37:22] new anti-espionage
[37:23] will is timely
[37:25] amidst the emerging
[37:26] security challenges
[37:27] that we have today.
[37:29] Our laws must adapt
[37:30] to these challenges,
[37:32] especially that the means
[37:33] and methods of espionage
[37:34] today is likewise
[37:36] adapting to emerging technology
[37:37] as compared
[37:39] to the security environment
[37:40] from way back then.
[37:42] To name a few,
[37:43] we now have
[37:43] cybersecurity challenges,
[37:45] artificial intelligence,
[37:47] unchecked use of drones
[37:48] which could threaten
[37:49] our airspace
[37:50] and even civil aviation.
[37:51] Thereby,
[37:52] on behalf of our
[37:53] Director General,
[37:54] Ravel Del Rosario,
[37:55] I would like to manifest
[37:57] that CAAP fully supports
[37:59] the passage of the bill
[38:00] on Anti-Espionage Act.
[38:02] Thank you, sir.
[38:04] Thank you.
[38:04] Before we hear
[38:05] from the OSG
[38:07] and the National Privacy Commission,
[38:10] let me acknowledge first
[38:13] and listen to what
[38:14] the AMLC has to say
[38:16] because in the House version,
[38:19] it touches the I'm lucky.
[38:22] None of this
[38:23] but I'm sure
[38:25] it'll be sent to us
[38:27] later on
[38:28] so we might as well
[38:29] look into the matter.
[38:30] What is your position,
[38:33] Robert?
[38:34] Yes, good afternoon,
[38:35] Mr. Chair,
[38:36] Senate President,
[38:37] Gachalena,
[38:37] Senator Tulfo,
[38:38] colleagues in government,
[38:39] good afternoon.
[38:40] So at the outset,
[38:42] the AMLC,
[38:42] we fully support
[38:43] the state policy
[38:44] that espionage
[38:44] is inimical
[38:45] to sovereignty
[38:46] and democracy
[38:46] and that it is necessary
[38:48] to fight against espionage,
[38:50] clandestine acquisition
[38:51] of sensitive information
[38:52] and unlawful obtaining
[38:54] of classified information
[38:55] that affects national security
[38:56] or national defense.
[38:58] Likewise,
[39:00] we support as well
[39:02] the objectives
[39:02] for the various bills
[39:03] that are criminalizing
[39:04] foreign interference,
[39:06] particularly in providing
[39:07] reinforcement
[39:08] in the government's commitment
[39:09] of protecting democratic processes
[39:11] from external influence.
[39:12] At the outset,
[39:14] Mr. Chair,
[39:15] the AMLC would like
[39:16] to state
[39:17] that we,
[39:19] in implementing
[39:21] and safeguarding
[39:22] the country's
[39:23] anti-money laundering
[39:24] and counterterrorism
[39:25] financing framework,
[39:27] we are implementing
[39:28] a risk-based approach.
[39:29] So, Mr. Chair,
[39:30] with that being said,
[39:31] the AMLC will be submitting
[39:33] its position paper
[39:34] on these bills
[39:35] in due course,
[39:36] particularly,
[39:37] Mr. Chair,
[39:38] with regard to
[39:39] the inclusion
[39:40] of the
[39:42] various offenses
[39:43] in the espionage bills
[39:44] and the counter-foreign
[39:45] interference bills
[39:46] as unlawful activities
[39:47] as this would relate
[39:48] to the exercise
[39:50] of the remedies
[39:51] of freeze orders
[39:52] and bank inquiry.
[39:54] That will be all,
[39:55] Mr. Chair.
[39:56] Thank you very much.
[39:57] How about the PCG,
[39:59] the Philippine Coast Guard,
[40:00] authority gammas?
[40:01] Good afternoon,
[40:02] Mr. Chair.
[40:03] We will be submitting
[40:05] our opposition paper,
[40:06] but allow me to read
[40:07] the gist
[40:08] of our overall
[40:09] recommendations.
[40:10] Go ahead.
[40:11] The Philippine Coast Guards,
[40:12] express support
[40:14] for the proposed
[40:15] new Anti-Experience Act
[40:16] measures
[40:17] because they respond
[40:19] to modern threats
[40:20] involving
[40:20] electronic communications,
[40:23] cyber systems,
[40:24] and manned
[40:24] and surveillance equipment,
[40:26] critical infrastructure,
[40:27] national defense materials,
[40:29] and foreign directives.
[40:33] The proposed measures
[40:34] may strengthen
[40:35] the PCG's ability
[40:36] to protect
[40:36] maritime facilities,
[40:38] vessels,
[40:39] communications,
[40:40] information systems,
[40:42] weapons,
[40:43] electronic equipment,
[40:43] and maritime law enforcement
[40:45] operations
[40:45] against espionage,
[40:48] cyber compromise,
[40:49] unauthorized surveillance,
[40:50] and other technology-enabled threats.
[40:52] We will be submitting
[40:53] the full position paper.
[40:56] Thank you.
[40:56] Thank you.
[40:57] Well, the position
[41:00] that has been taken
[41:01] by DOJ
[41:02] and the Bureau
[41:03] of Immigration,
[41:04] I suppose,
[41:05] would be
[41:05] more or less
[41:06] the same
[41:07] as the OSG
[41:08] and NPC.
[41:09] OSG,
[41:12] ASEC Medrano.
[41:17] Thank you.
[41:18] Thank you so much,
[41:18] Mr. Chair,
[41:19] Mr. Senate President,
[41:20] the Honorable Tulpo.
[41:21] Good afternoon.
[41:23] On behalf
[41:24] of the Solicitor General,
[41:25] Your Honors,
[41:26] I would like to express
[41:27] the OSG's
[41:31] gratitude
[41:32] for allowing
[41:33] the office
[41:33] to participate
[41:34] in today's proceedings.
[41:35] I am Assistant Solicitor
[41:36] General Gilbert Medrano.
[41:39] For the record,
[41:40] Your Honors,
[41:41] Mr. Chair,
[41:42] the OSG
[41:43] has previously
[41:44] submitted
[41:45] two position papers,
[41:46] one covering
[41:47] the proposed
[41:48] expansion
[41:49] of the anti-espionage laws
[41:50] and likewise
[41:51] as regards
[41:52] civilian supremacy
[41:53] vis-a-vis
[41:55] the so-called
[41:55] reorganization
[41:56] of the DND.
[41:57] But for the record,
[41:58] Your Honor,
[41:59] may I read
[42:00] portions of our
[42:01] position papers.
[42:04] As regards
[42:05] the anti-espionage bill,
[42:07] the OSG expresses
[42:08] its concurrence
[42:09] with special
[42:10] emphasis
[42:11] and the provisions
[42:12] pertaining
[42:13] to technological
[42:14] advancements
[42:14] such as
[42:15] cybersecurity
[42:16] and classified
[42:17] information
[42:18] in electronic form.
[42:21] OSG's concurrence
[42:22] is consistent
[42:23] with the settled
[42:23] principle
[42:24] that the grant
[42:25] of legislative
[42:26] power to the
[42:27] Congress
[42:27] is broad,
[42:28] general,
[42:29] and comprehensive
[42:30] such that
[42:31] it embraces
[42:32] all subjects
[42:33] and extends
[42:34] to all matters
[42:35] of general
[42:36] or common interest.
[42:38] Likewise,
[42:39] Your Honor,
[42:39] with your permission,
[42:41] may I also read
[42:42] a portion
[42:42] of our position
[42:43] paper as regards
[42:44] civilian supremacy.
[42:47] National defense
[42:48] is a primordial
[42:49] state function
[42:49] anchored
[42:50] on Article 2,
[42:52] Section 3
[42:52] of the 1987
[42:53] Constitution
[42:54] which declares
[42:55] that civilian
[42:56] authority
[42:57] is at all times
[42:58] supreme
[42:59] over the military
[42:59] and that the
[43:00] armed forces
[43:01] to the Philippines
[43:02] shall be the
[43:03] protector of the
[43:03] people
[43:04] and the state.
[43:07] Correlatively,
[43:08] Article 7,
[43:09] Section 18
[43:10] of the 1987
[43:11] Constitution
[43:12] vests in the
[43:13] president
[43:14] the power
[43:15] as commander-in-chief
[43:16] of all armed
[43:17] forces in the
[43:18] Philippines.
[43:19] As regards
[43:19] the third
[43:20] subject matter,
[43:21] Your Honor,
[43:21] the so-called
[43:22] foreign interference,
[43:25] may we be given
[43:25] time to give
[43:26] a specific
[43:27] position paper
[43:28] to cover
[43:28] the subject,
[43:29] Your Honors.
[43:31] All right,
[43:31] we will await such.
[43:33] Thank you.
[43:34] Thank you.
[43:34] The National
[43:35] Privacy Commission,
[43:36] Attorney Bokar.
[43:37] Good afternoon,
[43:38] Mr. Chair,
[43:39] Senate President,
[43:40] and Honorable
[43:40] Tulfo.
[43:41] On behalf
[43:42] of the National
[43:42] Privacy Commission,
[43:43] we wish to
[43:44] express our
[43:44] support for
[43:45] the updating
[43:46] of the laws
[43:47] on anti-espionage
[43:49] and as well
[43:50] as other
[43:50] similar offenses
[43:51] and against
[43:52] evolving threats
[43:53] regarding public
[43:54] safety and
[43:55] national security.
[43:56] So consistent
[43:57] with the mandate
[43:57] of the agency
[43:58] to administer
[43:59] and implement
[43:59] the Data Privacy
[44:00] Act of 2012
[44:01] and to monitor
[44:02] and ensure
[44:03] compliance of the
[44:04] country with
[44:04] international standards
[44:05] set for data
[44:06] protection,
[44:07] we at the
[44:08] National Privacy
[44:08] Commission
[44:09] will ensure
[44:09] and maintain
[44:10] interagency
[44:10] collaboration
[44:11] in the development
[44:12] and implementation
[44:13] of policies
[44:14] in line with
[44:14] these measures
[44:15] while ensuring
[44:16] privacy and
[44:16] data protection.
[44:18] We previously
[44:18] submitted a
[44:19] position paper
[44:20] on the,
[44:21] I think,
[44:21] the 19th
[44:22] Congress
[44:22] on the
[44:22] anti-espionage
[44:23] law,
[44:23] but we are
[44:24] currently in the
[44:25] process of
[44:25] finalizing our
[44:26] position papers
[44:26] on the three
[44:27] measures
[44:28] subject for
[44:28] today's meeting
[44:30] and rest assured
[44:31] as soon as
[44:31] these position
[44:32] papers are
[44:33] finalized,
[44:34] we will submit
[44:34] to this
[44:35] Honorable
[44:35] Committee.
[44:36] That's all,
[44:36] Your Honor.
[44:37] Thank you.
[44:37] Yes,
[44:37] considering the
[44:38] number of bills
[44:39] filed on the
[44:40] subject matter,
[44:41] I'm so sure
[44:42] that after
[44:42] receiving your
[44:43] position papers,
[44:44] we will still
[44:45] have to undergo
[44:47] a technical
[44:48] working group
[44:48] discussion
[44:49] to formalize
[44:51] before any
[44:52] consolidated bill
[44:55] is going to
[44:56] be brought
[44:58] out by the
[44:59] committee.
[45:00] The NTC,
[45:01] finally,
[45:02] Commissioner
[45:02] Lopez.
[45:04] Good afternoon,
[45:05] Mr. Chair,
[45:06] good afternoon,
[45:06] Senate President,
[45:07] Gachalian,
[45:08] and Honorable
[45:09] Tulfo.
[45:11] The NTC
[45:12] expresses its
[45:13] support to
[45:14] the proposed
[45:15] measure as
[45:16] it will enhance
[45:17] our national
[45:18] security.
[45:19] As we have
[45:20] submitted our
[45:21] support,
[45:22] Mr. Chair,
[45:22] in 2024,
[45:24] we are again
[45:24] manifesting our
[45:25] support to
[45:26] these measures
[45:27] and we will
[45:28] be submitting
[45:28] more detailed
[45:30] position papers
[45:31] on the subject
[45:31] bills,
[45:32] Mr. Chair.
[45:32] Thank you.
[45:34] All right.
[45:34] Thank you.
[45:35] I have a series
[45:36] of questions,
[45:36] but I would
[45:37] like to give
[45:39] a chance first
[45:40] to our Senate
[45:42] President and
[45:42] Senator Tulfo
[45:43] for any
[45:45] questions or
[45:46] decisions,
[45:47] please.
[45:48] Senator Tulfo.
[45:50] Thank you,
[45:52] Mr. Chair.
[45:53] Thank you.
[45:54] Last September
[45:55] 2026,
[45:58] PBBM said
[45:59] he's open
[46:00] to amendment
[46:01] to anti-spianage.
[46:04] May mga amendments
[46:05] na po ba siya
[46:06] na nasabi?
[46:08] Who can answer
[46:09] that?
[46:09] NSC maybe
[46:10] or NICA
[46:11] or DND?
[46:15] Did the President
[46:15] give any
[46:17] specific amendments
[46:18] na gusto niya pong
[46:19] mabago dito
[46:20] sa anti-spianage law?
[46:22] Or maybe
[46:22] Dr. Malaya?
[46:26] Thank you,
[46:26] sir.
[46:27] We have not
[46:28] yet received
[46:29] or there
[46:30] has not been
[46:31] any message
[46:31] related to us,
[46:33] Senator Tulfo,
[46:34] on the proposed
[46:35] amendments
[46:35] coming from
[46:36] the office
[46:36] of the President.
[46:38] Ano po
[46:39] mga security
[46:39] gaps na nakikita
[46:41] ninyo?
[46:42] Now,
[46:42] we have to find
[46:42] you,
[46:43] other than
[46:43] ito ay 1930s pa
[46:45] pala,
[46:46] kailangan
[46:47] nating baguhin
[46:48] or 1940s,
[46:49] ano po mga
[46:50] pwedeng baguhin
[46:51] kaagad natin
[46:52] na nakikita
[46:52] ho ninyo?
[46:55] Thank you,
[46:56] sir.
[46:56] Thank you,
[46:57] Your Honor.
[46:57] In particular,
[46:59] sir,
[46:59] the old laws,
[47:01] CA-616
[47:02] and Article 117
[47:04] of the revised
[47:05] Penal Code,
[47:07] they mostly refer
[47:08] to military
[47:09] installations.
[47:10] So if there is
[47:11] an espionage act
[47:12] that is not
[47:14] committed against
[47:15] military installations,
[47:16] for example,
[47:17] secrets of the
[47:18] Department of Foreign
[47:18] Affairs,
[47:19] secrets of the
[47:20] Office of the
[47:20] President,
[47:21] and secrets from
[47:22] other civilian
[47:22] government agencies,
[47:23] that would not
[47:24] be covered by
[47:26] Common Wealth Act
[47:27] No. 616
[47:28] or Article 117
[47:30] of the revised
[47:30] Penal Code.
[47:31] That's number one.
[47:32] The second gap
[47:33] is the
[47:34] development in
[47:38] espionage.
[47:39] Right now,
[47:40] there's cyber
[47:41] espionage,
[47:42] there's the use
[47:43] of equipment
[47:43] such as drones,
[47:45] there are
[47:46] insider threats,
[47:47] for example,
[47:49] there are advances
[47:50] in technology
[47:51] that are being
[47:51] used by foreign
[47:52] intelligence agencies
[47:54] to collect
[47:55] secrets of the
[47:57] of the Republic.
[47:59] So these are
[47:59] also not covered
[48:00] by the current
[48:02] legislation,
[48:03] the espionage law.
[48:05] And there are
[48:10] so in essence,
[48:14] Mr.
[48:15] Your Honor,
[48:18] those are the
[48:19] basic,
[48:20] basic gaps
[48:21] that we see
[48:22] in our espionage law.
[48:26] Let me go to
[48:27] the NBI.
[48:29] In January
[48:30] 2025,
[48:31] the NBI
[48:32] arrested the
[48:32] Chinese national
[48:33] and two
[48:34] Filipino
[48:35] companions
[48:37] in Makati
[48:37] for alleged
[48:39] espionage
[48:39] after authorities
[48:40] reportedly
[48:41] discovered
[48:41] equipment
[48:42] capable of
[48:43] mapping
[48:44] critical
[48:44] infrastructure,
[48:45] including
[48:46] military
[48:46] installations,
[48:48] and areas
[48:48] near EDCA
[48:49] sites.
[48:51] Halimbawa po,
[48:52] yung isang
[48:52] foreigner
[48:52] ay nahuli
[48:53] na gumagamit
[48:54] ng drone
[48:54] sa pagkuhan
[48:55] ng mga
[48:55] pictures
[48:55] sa mga
[48:56] military
[48:56] installations.
[48:58] Tapos sabi
[48:58] niya,
[48:58] gumagamit
[48:59] ito para
[48:59] sa commercial
[49:00] survey
[49:01] lang daw po.
[49:02] Police
[49:02] mo sufficient
[49:03] po para
[49:03] ma-prosecute
[49:04] ang foreigner
[49:05] sa kasong
[49:08] spionage.
[49:14] I don't know
[49:14] if the NBI
[49:15] can answer
[49:15] that,
[49:16] DOJ
[49:16] or OSG?
[49:18] Yes,
[49:20] Senator
[49:20] Tolfo.
[49:21] We will
[49:21] submit to
[49:23] the opinion
[49:23] of the DOJ.
[49:24] Although for
[49:25] purposes of
[49:26] filing,
[49:28] a case buildup
[49:28] was made,
[49:29] but then we
[49:31] had to defer
[49:31] to the opinion
[49:32] of the DOJ
[49:33] if it is
[49:33] sufficient
[49:34] or not.
[49:36] Thank you,
[49:36] isa pa
[49:37] hong question
[49:38] that I would
[49:38] like to raise,
[49:39] Mr. Chair.
[49:40] Kasi napansin
[49:41] natin,
[49:41] there was
[49:41] one instance
[49:42] na sunod-sunod
[49:43] po yung
[49:43] pagkahuli
[49:44] natin
[49:44] sa mga
[49:45] Chinese
[49:46] nationals
[49:47] na we
[49:48] suspect
[49:48] na taking
[49:49] videos
[49:50] sa mga
[49:51] EDCA sites.
[49:52] After
[49:52] several weeks
[49:53] or a month
[49:54] later,
[49:55] may mga
[49:55] hinuli
[49:56] po ng
[49:56] mga
[49:56] Filipino
[49:57] sa China,
[49:58] kinasuhan
[49:59] po ng
[49:59] spionage
[50:00] din.
[50:01] Ano
[50:02] hong
[50:02] actions
[50:02] kaya
[50:03] dito,
[50:04] DFA?
[50:05] Ano
[50:05] hong latest
[50:06] doon
[50:06] sa mga
[50:06] kababayan
[50:07] natin?
[50:09] Parang
[50:09] in retaliation
[50:10] dahil
[50:10] may mga
[50:10] hinuli
[50:11] tayo,
[50:12] hinuli
[50:13] din po
[50:13] ilang
[50:13] kababayan
[50:14] natin,
[50:14] sinasabi
[50:14] mga
[50:15] espia
[50:15] daw
[50:15] yun.
[50:17] So,
[50:17] ano
[50:17] na
[50:18] nangyari
[50:18] doon?
[50:19] Whatever
[50:19] happened
[50:19] to
[50:20] those
[50:20] kababayan
[50:21] of
[50:21] ours
[50:21] who
[50:22] were
[50:22] arrested
[50:23] at
[50:23] sinasabi
[50:24] nilang
[50:24] espia,
[50:26] parang
[50:26] sa tingin
[50:27] ko
[50:27] naman
[50:27] ganti
[50:28] lang
[50:28] ito
[50:28] dahil
[50:29] may
[50:29] hinuli
[50:30] po
[50:30] tayo
[50:30] na
[50:31] mga
[50:31] nationals
[50:32] nila
[50:32] dito
[50:32] sa
[50:32] atin?
[50:37] Sir,
[50:43] Mr. Chair,
[50:45] finally po,
[50:45] I have
[50:45] one last
[50:46] question.
[50:47] I don't
[50:47] know
[50:48] if anybody
[50:48] can answer,
[50:49] probably
[50:49] Nika,
[50:50] NSC
[50:50] or
[50:51] DND.
[50:52] Where
[50:52] do we
[50:52] draw
[50:53] the
[50:53] line
[50:53] between
[50:55] freedom
[50:56] of
[50:56] expression,
[50:58] freedom
[50:59] of
[50:59] movement
[51:00] versus
[51:01] espionage?
[51:03] Kasi
[51:03] yung
[51:03] baka
[51:04] yung
[51:04] hinuli
[51:04] natin
[51:04] sabi,
[51:05] eh,
[51:06] kinukunan
[51:06] lang ako
[51:07] ng picture,
[51:08] turista
[51:08] ako,
[51:09] or
[51:10] bawal ba,
[51:11] lumapit
[51:11] dito
[51:11] sa
[51:11] EDCA
[51:12] site?
[51:13] So,
[51:13] where
[51:14] do we
[51:14] draw
[51:14] the
[51:14] line?
[51:16] And
[51:16] then,
[51:16] isa
[51:17] pahong
[51:17] kwestiyon,
[51:19] where
[51:19] do we
[51:19] draw
[51:19] the
[51:19] line
[51:20] between
[51:20] foreign
[51:23] business
[51:23] dealings
[51:24] and
[51:25] threats
[51:26] to
[51:27] national
[51:27] security?
[51:30] How
[51:31] do we
[51:32] draw
[51:32] this?
[51:33] Isang
[51:34] company
[51:34] natin
[51:34] sa
[51:34] Pilipinas
[51:35] conducting
[51:36] business
[51:37] dito
[51:37] sa isang
[51:38] country
[51:39] na alam
[51:40] natin
[51:40] critical
[51:41] and
[51:43] then
[51:43] may
[51:44] banta
[51:45] sa
[51:45] national
[51:45] security
[51:46] natin.
[51:47] So,
[51:47] where
[51:47] do we
[51:47] draw
[51:47] the
[51:48] line
[51:48] there?
[51:48] Is
[51:49] it
[51:49] still
[51:49] considered
[51:50] just
[51:51] regular
[51:51] business
[51:52] dealing
[51:52] or
[51:54] can we
[51:54] consider
[51:55] that
[51:55] really
[51:55] a threat
[51:56] to
[51:56] national
[51:56] security?
[51:57] This
[51:57] was
[51:57] tackled
[51:58] already
[51:58] sa
[51:59] impeachment
[52:00] trial.
[52:01] Can
[52:02] somebody
[52:02] explain,
[52:03] please?
[52:08] DOJ,
[52:10] would you
[52:10] like to
[52:11] answer
[52:12] that?
[52:13] Because
[52:13] I understand
[52:14] in your
[52:14] proposal,
[52:15] you're
[52:15] more on
[52:17] the
[52:17] conservative
[52:17] side.
[52:19] Yes,
[52:21] thank you,
[52:21] Mr.
[52:22] Chair.
[52:23] Our
[52:23] conservative
[52:24] opinion
[52:24] or
[52:25] position
[52:25] is with
[52:26] respect to
[52:27] the
[52:27] definition
[52:27] of
[52:28] foreign
[52:28] interference,
[52:29] Mr.
[52:30] Chair,
[52:30] because we
[52:32] have not
[52:33] yet in
[52:33] our
[52:33] existing
[52:34] laws
[52:34] actually
[52:35] define
[52:35] and
[52:36] criminalize
[52:36] foreign
[52:37] interference.
[52:38] We
[52:38] already
[52:39] have an
[52:39] established
[52:40] crime,
[52:41] which is
[52:41] espionage.
[52:42] It's
[52:42] just a
[52:43] matter
[52:43] of
[52:43] modernizing
[52:46] our
[52:46] definition
[52:46] of
[52:47] espionage.
[52:48] Yes,
[52:48] because of
[52:49] the
[52:49] modern
[52:50] technology
[52:50] that we
[52:51] have
[52:51] now.
[52:52] So
[52:52] espionage
[52:53] is an
[52:54] established
[52:54] crime
[52:55] already,
[52:55] but with
[52:56] respect to
[52:56] foreign
[52:57] interference,
[52:58] we have
[52:58] not yet
[52:59] criminalized
[52:59] it.
[52:59] And so
[53:00] if ever,
[53:01] this is
[53:01] going to
[53:02] be the
[53:02] first time
[53:02] that the
[53:03] Philippines
[53:03] will
[53:03] criminalize
[53:04] foreign
[53:05] interference,
[53:06] which is
[53:06] different
[53:07] from
[53:07] espionage,
[53:09] Mr.
[53:10] Chair.
[53:10] Now,
[53:10] with respect
[53:11] to the
[53:11] question of
[53:12] the good
[53:13] senator,
[53:13] Senator
[53:13] Tulfo,
[53:15] with respect
[53:15] to what
[53:16] happened
[53:16] in
[53:17] Makati,
[53:18] the NBI,
[53:19] I took
[53:20] note that
[53:20] the NBI
[53:21] did not
[53:21] have any,
[53:22] was not
[53:23] able to
[53:23] share the
[53:24] results of
[53:25] their
[53:25] investigation
[53:25] on this
[53:26] one,
[53:26] but my
[53:27] understanding
[53:27] because
[53:27] indeed,
[53:28] there are
[53:28] gaps in
[53:29] our laws,
[53:30] Mr.
[53:31] Chair,
[53:31] and my
[53:32] understanding
[53:33] with respect
[53:34] to what
[53:34] happened there
[53:35] is it's
[53:35] mere possession
[53:36] of an
[53:36] equipment
[53:37] for mapping
[53:38] military
[53:39] installations,
[53:40] et cetera.
[53:40] So perhaps
[53:41] it would be
[53:42] difficult if
[53:43] there's no
[53:44] actual
[53:45] obtention
[53:47] or getting
[53:48] of classified
[53:50] information in
[53:51] such a case,
[53:51] and it's just
[53:52] mere possession
[53:53] of this
[53:54] equipment,
[53:54] Mr.
[53:55] Chair.
[53:55] So it
[53:56] did not
[53:56] actually,
[53:57] we're
[53:57] trying to
[53:57] look it
[53:58] up,
[53:58] it did
[53:58] not
[53:58] actually,
[53:59] looks
[53:59] like
[53:59] did
[53:59] not
[54:00] reach
[54:00] the
[54:00] DOJ,
[54:01] Mr.
[54:02] Chair.
[54:02] So would
[54:03] you,
[54:03] okay,
[54:04] would you
[54:05] agree
[54:05] with us,
[54:06] Senior
[54:06] State
[54:07] Council,
[54:08] Tanchon,
[54:10] na kailangan
[54:11] na ho
[54:11] natin,
[54:12] it's high
[54:12] time,
[54:13] that we
[54:13] do
[54:13] something
[54:13] about
[54:14] our
[54:14] laws,
[54:14] kasi
[54:15] yung
[54:15] sinasabi
[54:16] niya,
[54:16] mere
[54:16] possession.
[54:17] Another
[54:17] instance I'll
[54:18] give you,
[54:18] before the
[54:19] elections,
[54:19] 2022
[54:20] elections,
[54:21] may
[54:26] monitoring
[54:29] unit or
[54:30] something.
[54:31] I don't even
[54:32] know what
[54:32] happened to
[54:33] them,
[54:33] ano na ho
[54:34] nangyari
[54:34] doon sa
[54:34] mga yun,
[54:35] yung mga
[54:35] nahuli
[54:36] na sa
[54:36] labas
[54:36] po ng
[54:37] Comelec,
[54:38] main
[54:38] office,
[54:39] na nakalagay
[54:40] po yung
[54:41] equipment nila,
[54:42] monitoring
[54:43] equipment sa
[54:43] likod ng
[54:44] kotse po
[54:44] nila,
[54:45] dalawang
[54:45] Chinese
[54:45] national,
[54:47] ano ho
[54:47] nangyari
[54:47] din doon?
[54:48] At saka,
[54:49] ganun din ba?
[54:50] Because may
[54:51] monitoring
[54:51] equipment lang,
[54:52] wala silang
[54:53] violation sa
[54:54] batas
[54:55] natin?
[54:55] Yes,
[54:58] thank you,
[54:58] Mr.
[54:59] Chair.
[54:59] With respect
[54:59] to that
[55:00] one,
[55:00] I think
[55:01] they were
[55:01] in possession
[55:02] of a
[55:03] SIM,
[55:04] what is
[55:05] a SIM?
[55:06] Yeah.
[55:08] SIM
[55:08] LIDAR,
[55:08] how do you
[55:10] call that?
[55:11] LIDAR
[55:11] equipped car.
[55:12] Yeah,
[55:13] but it
[55:26] did reach
[55:27] the Department
[55:27] of Justice
[55:28] and base
[55:28] G at the
[55:32] house.
[55:33] They have
[55:34] a problem,
[55:36] they have
[55:36] some difficulty
[55:37] prosecuting
[55:38] this particular
[55:38] case,
[55:39] but based
[55:40] on the
[55:40] status that
[55:40] we have
[55:41] preliminary
[55:45] investigation,
[55:46] Mr.
[55:47] Chair,
[55:48] profiling
[55:49] of
[55:49] state
[55:53] of
[55:54] they're
[55:59] in possession
[56:00] of
[56:00] equipments
[56:01] like that,
[56:01] surveillance,
[56:03] military
[56:03] facility,
[56:05] they're
[56:09] really
[56:09] threading
[56:10] kit.
[56:19] So,
[56:21] Mas,
[56:21] would you
[56:21] agree with
[56:22] us,
[56:22] this
[56:22] committee,
[56:23] we really
[56:23] have to
[56:24] amend
[56:24] this law?
[56:25] it's
[56:27] high
[56:27] time,
[56:27] right?
[56:28] She
[56:32] was
[56:32] nodding.
[56:34] Yes,
[56:35] Mr.
[56:35] Chair,
[56:36] because with
[56:36] respect to
[56:36] the
[56:37] COMELEC,
[56:37] they're in
[56:38] the premises
[56:38] outside of
[56:39] the COMELEC,
[56:40] so it's
[56:40] possible that
[56:41] they're really
[56:41] getting
[56:42] information,
[56:43] Mr.
[56:43] Chair,
[56:44] that's why
[56:44] it reached
[56:45] the Department
[56:45] of Justice.
[56:46] With respect
[56:47] to the one
[56:47] in Manila,
[56:48] because it's
[56:48] an equipment
[56:49] that can
[56:51] be used
[56:52] for mapping
[56:52] military
[56:53] installations,
[56:54] I don't
[56:54] know if
[56:55] they're in
[56:55] the area
[56:56] that can
[56:56] be considered
[56:56] as critical
[56:57] infrastructure,
[56:58] et cetera,
[56:59] so that's
[56:59] why perhaps
[57:00] it did
[57:01] not reach
[57:02] the DOJ,
[57:03] perhaps it
[57:03] stayed at
[57:04] the investigation
[57:04] level at
[57:05] the NBI,
[57:06] so we'll
[57:06] coordinate
[57:07] with the
[57:08] NBI on
[57:08] this one,
[57:09] Mr. Chair,
[57:10] but for sure
[57:11] based on the
[57:11] statements of
[57:12] our prosecutors
[57:13] before at
[57:14] the House,
[57:14] at the TWG
[57:15] at the House,
[57:16] they did have
[57:17] some difficulty
[57:18] prosecuting a
[57:19] similar case
[57:20] like that one,
[57:22] Mr. Chair.
[57:22] I think,
[57:23] Mr. Chair,
[57:23] we really have
[57:24] to look into
[57:25] this and
[57:25] this very
[57:25] serious,
[57:26] particularly
[57:27] in the
[57:37] very near
[57:38] future,
[57:39] we can
[57:39] know
[57:40] the foreign
[57:41] countries
[57:41] in the
[57:42] election
[57:42] results.
[57:43] We would
[57:44] never know
[57:45] because we
[57:45] really have
[57:48] to look
[57:48] into this.
[57:50] That's
[57:50] very
[57:50] dangerous
[57:51] other than
[57:51] monitoring
[57:52] military
[57:53] camps
[57:53] natin.
[57:55] The
[57:55] most
[57:55] dangerous
[57:56] is
[57:56] that
[58:01] will
[58:01] be
[58:02] total
[58:03] chaos.
[58:06] Thank you,
[58:06] Mr. Chair.
[58:07] Related
[58:07] to your
[58:08] question,
[58:08] Senator
[58:09] Tulfo,
[58:09] the NBI
[58:10] arrested
[58:13] a
[58:15] Chinese
[58:16] national,
[58:17] Deng
[58:17] Fuang
[58:19] Singh,
[58:20] and two
[58:21] Filipino
[58:21] drivers
[58:21] who were
[58:22] allegedly
[58:23] mapping
[58:24] military
[58:26] sites
[58:26] with that
[58:29] LIDAR
[58:29] equipment.
[58:30] LIDAR
[58:33] equipment,
[58:34] Nika,
[58:34] would you
[58:34] know?
[58:36] Tony Lapos?
[58:39] Mr. Chair,
[58:40] I'm also not
[58:40] familiar with the
[58:41] LIDAR
[58:41] equipment,
[58:42] but just on the
[58:43] point that was
[58:44] raised earlier,
[58:45] I think
[58:46] they were charged
[58:48] with cybercrime
[58:49] violation
[58:51] espionage.
[58:53] And on the
[58:53] matter of
[58:54] espionage,
[58:55] it's possible
[58:58] information
[59:02] about
[59:03] specific
[59:03] sites.
[59:04] I think
[59:05] we can
[59:05] refer to
[59:05] one
[59:06] specific
[59:06] section
[59:07] of
[59:07] one
[59:08] of
[59:08] the
[59:08] espionage
[59:09] bills
[59:09] which
[59:10] provides
[59:10] for
[59:10] designation
[59:11] of
[59:11] prohibited
[59:12] places.
[59:14] According
[59:14] to
[59:15] this
[59:15] proposed
[59:16] section,
[59:18] the
[59:18] president
[59:18] or his
[59:19] duly
[59:19] authorized
[59:20] representative
[59:20] or the
[59:21] secretary
[59:21] of
[59:21] national
[59:22] defense
[59:22] may
[59:23] designate
[59:24] prohibited
[59:24] places
[59:25] where
[59:25] military
[59:25] or
[59:26] classified
[59:26] matters
[59:27] of
[59:28] information
[59:28] relative
[59:29] to
[59:29] defense
[59:30] and
[59:30] national
[59:30] security
[59:31] are
[59:31] conducted
[59:32] prepared
[59:33] manufactured
[59:34] process
[59:35] used
[59:35] or stored.
[59:36] So
[59:36] it can
[59:37] use
[59:38] for
[59:38] EDCA
[59:39] sites
[59:39] purposes.
[59:40] Mr.
[59:41] Chairman,
[59:42] I have
[59:44] just a
[59:44] motion.
[59:45] Siguro
[59:47] it is
[59:47] really
[59:47] high
[59:48] time
[59:48] na
[59:50] yung
[59:50] ating
[59:51] mga
[59:51] agencies
[59:51] po
[59:52] na
[59:53] sa
[59:53] harap
[59:53] natin
[59:54] national
[59:54] security
[59:55] NICA
[59:56] PNP
[59:57] NBI
[59:58] PCG
[59:59] CAAP
[1:00:00] DICT
[1:00:00] especially
[1:00:01] a simple
[1:00:03] equipment
[1:00:03] lighter
[1:00:04] leader
[1:00:05] we don't
[1:00:05] know.
[1:00:07] Kung
[1:00:07] hindi
[1:00:08] natin
[1:00:08] alam
[1:00:08] ito
[1:00:08] paano
[1:00:09] na
[1:00:09] malalaman
[1:00:10] kung
[1:00:10] minomonitor
[1:00:11] tayo
[1:00:11] kung
[1:00:12] hindi
[1:00:12] naman
[1:00:12] natin
[1:00:12] alam
[1:00:13] kung
[1:00:13] itong
[1:00:13] equipment
[1:00:14] na
[1:00:14] ito
[1:00:15] baka
[1:00:16] alam
[1:00:16] na
[1:00:16] pinpointed
[1:00:17] nakatutok
[1:00:18] sa
[1:00:18] ating
[1:00:18] satellite
[1:00:19] na
[1:00:19] lahat
[1:00:19] tayo
[1:00:19] nag-uusap
[1:00:20] dito
[1:00:21] di ba
[1:00:22] natin
[1:00:22] naisip
[1:00:23] na
[1:00:24] alam
[1:00:24] na
[1:00:24] kung
[1:00:24] sino
[1:00:24] kung
[1:00:25] nasaan
[1:00:25] ang
[1:00:25] pangulo
[1:00:25] natin
[1:00:26] at this
[1:00:26] very
[1:00:26] moment
[1:00:27] that's
[1:00:27] what's
[1:00:27] happening
[1:00:28] in the
[1:00:28] war
[1:00:29] in
[1:00:30] Iran
[1:00:30] in
[1:00:31] Israel
[1:00:31] natatarget
[1:00:33] po
[1:00:34] yung
[1:00:34] mga
[1:00:34] tao
[1:00:34] alam
[1:00:35] kung
[1:00:36] saan
[1:00:36] yung
[1:00:36] pwesto
[1:00:37] ng
[1:00:37] mga
[1:00:38] leader
[1:00:38] ng
[1:00:38] isang
[1:00:39] bansa
[1:00:39] saan
[1:00:40] yung
[1:00:40] mga
[1:00:40] terrorista
[1:00:41] na
[1:00:41] pinpoint
[1:00:42] na
[1:00:42] bubomba
[1:00:43] and
[1:00:43] we
[1:00:44] don't
[1:00:44] know
[1:00:44] I believe
[1:00:46] Mr. Chairman
[1:00:47] Mr.
[1:00:48] Senate
[1:00:48] President
[1:00:49] it is
[1:00:49] high time
[1:00:50] for our
[1:00:51] agencies
[1:00:52] Ika nga
[1:00:53] pag-aralan
[1:00:54] po itong
[1:00:54] mga
[1:00:54] equipment
[1:00:55] na ito
[1:00:56] parang
[1:00:56] wala po
[1:00:57] silang
[1:00:57] alam
[1:00:57] we
[1:00:58] ask
[1:00:58] the
[1:00:58] NNC
[1:00:59] and
[1:01:00] NICA
[1:01:01] PNP
[1:01:02] parang
[1:01:02] walang
[1:01:03] idea
[1:01:03] ko itong
[1:01:04] leader
[1:01:04] na ito
[1:01:04] leader
[1:01:05] baka po
[1:01:06] pwede
[1:01:06] naman
[1:01:06] at least
[1:01:08] mag
[1:01:08] effort
[1:01:08] na
[1:01:09] we
[1:01:09] research
[1:01:09] we
[1:01:10] tell
[1:01:10] our
[1:01:10] people
[1:01:11] hindi
[1:01:11] po
[1:01:11] tayo
[1:01:12] mga
[1:01:12] general
[1:01:12] mga
[1:01:13] kernels
[1:01:13] yung
[1:01:14] mga
[1:01:14] tao
[1:01:14] natin
[1:01:15] mga
[1:01:15] undersecretary
[1:01:17] USEC
[1:01:18] na pwede
[1:01:19] siguro
[1:01:19] pag-aralan
[1:01:20] ano ba
[1:01:20] mga
[1:01:20] types
[1:01:21] of
[1:01:21] equipment
[1:01:21] na
[1:01:22] pang
[1:01:22] surveillance
[1:01:23] ngayon
[1:01:23] pang
[1:01:24] monitoring
[1:01:26] espionage
[1:01:27] kasi
[1:01:28] sari-sari
[1:01:29] na po
[1:01:29] kagaya
[1:01:30] yung
[1:01:30] sinasabing
[1:01:31] leader
[1:01:31] ni
[1:01:31] former
[1:01:32] senate
[1:01:32] president
[1:01:33] hindi
[1:01:33] natin
[1:01:34] alam
[1:01:34] kung
[1:01:34] ano
[1:01:34] ba
[1:01:35] ito
[1:01:36] hindi
[1:01:36] ba
[1:01:36] kayo
[1:01:37] nagtataka
[1:01:37] I think
[1:01:37] we're
[1:01:38] left
[1:01:38] behind
[1:01:39] yung
[1:01:40] ibang
[1:01:40] countries
[1:01:41] na
[1:01:41] pinpoint
[1:01:42] na nila
[1:01:42] as
[1:01:43] we
[1:01:43] speak
[1:01:43] right
[1:01:44] now
[1:01:44] nakikita
[1:01:44] na tayo
[1:01:45] ng
[1:01:45] Amerika
[1:01:45] kung
[1:01:46] sino
[1:01:46] nasaan
[1:01:46] si
[1:01:47] senator
[1:01:47] soto
[1:01:47] nakaupo
[1:01:48] si senator
[1:01:49] Tulpo
[1:01:49] senator
[1:01:50] Gatchelian
[1:01:50] baka
[1:01:51] meron
[1:01:51] din
[1:01:51] ganoon
[1:01:52] ang
[1:01:52] China
[1:01:52] kung
[1:01:53] saan
[1:01:53] nakaupo
[1:01:54] si
[1:01:54] dr.
[1:01:55] malaya
[1:01:55] dr.
[1:01:56] pamanong
[1:01:57] general
[1:01:58] lieutenant
[1:01:59] general
[1:01:59] ignacio
[1:02:00] lahat
[1:02:01] to tayo
[1:02:02] na
[1:02:02] nandoon
[1:02:02] pala
[1:02:03] sila
[1:02:03] lahat
[1:02:03] we
[1:02:04] have
[1:02:05] to
[1:02:05] study
[1:02:06] now
[1:02:07] kung
[1:02:07] ano
[1:02:07] itong
[1:02:08] mga
[1:02:08] equipment
[1:02:08] na ito
[1:02:09] and
[1:02:09] anong
[1:02:10] paraan
[1:02:10] para
[1:02:11] ikaw
[1:02:11] ma
[1:02:11] counter
[1:02:12] na ito
[1:02:12] dr.
[1:02:13] malaya
[1:02:13] go
[1:02:14] ahead
[1:02:14] mr.
[1:02:15] chairman
[1:02:16] in answer
[1:02:17] to the
[1:02:17] question
[1:02:17] about
[1:02:18] the
[1:02:18] light
[1:02:18] lidar
[1:02:19] lidar
[1:02:20] is
[1:02:20] mapping
[1:02:23] equipment
[1:02:24] lidar
[1:02:25] stands
[1:02:26] for
[1:02:26] light
[1:02:27] detection
[1:02:27] and
[1:02:27] ranging
[1:02:28] it's
[1:02:29] a
[1:02:29] mapping
[1:02:30] equipment
[1:02:30] used
[1:02:31] to
[1:02:31] map
[1:02:32] land
[1:02:32] surfaces
[1:02:33] vegetation
[1:02:34] and
[1:02:34] buildings
[1:02:35] so
[1:02:35] dun po
[1:02:35] sa
[1:02:35] sinasabi
[1:02:36] nyo
[1:02:36] mr.
[1:02:37] chairman
[1:02:37] chinese
[1:02:40] national
[1:02:40] together
[1:02:41] with
[1:02:41] filipinos
[1:02:41] who
[1:02:42] put
[1:02:43] the
[1:02:43] lidar
[1:02:44] equipment
[1:02:44] in
[1:02:45] their
[1:02:45] vehicle
[1:02:46] umiikot
[1:02:47] sila
[1:02:47] sa
[1:02:47] mga
[1:02:47] buildings
[1:02:48] at
[1:02:49] sa
[1:02:49] mga
[1:02:49] kung
[1:02:49] saan
[1:02:49] sa
[1:02:49] lugar
[1:02:50] strategic
[1:02:50] locations
[1:02:51] and
[1:02:51] they
[1:02:52] were
[1:02:52] mapping
[1:02:52] the
[1:02:54] area
[1:02:54] using
[1:02:55] remote
[1:02:56] sensing
[1:02:56] technology
[1:02:57] so
[1:02:58] nung
[1:02:58] nahuli
[1:02:58] po
[1:02:58] ng
[1:02:59] ating
[1:02:59] NBI
[1:03:00] at
[1:03:00] kapulisan
[1:03:01] yung
[1:03:01] taong
[1:03:01] yun
[1:03:02] dun po
[1:03:02] natin
[1:03:03] nakita
[1:03:03] na
[1:03:04] minamap
[1:03:05] niya
[1:03:05] yung
[1:03:05] lugar
[1:03:06] at
[1:03:06] pinupuntahan
[1:03:07] niya
[1:03:07] yung
[1:03:07] mga
[1:03:07] sensitibong
[1:03:08] mga
[1:03:09] locations
[1:03:10] sa
[1:03:10] ating
[1:03:10] bansa
[1:03:11] will
[1:03:12] will
[1:03:12] the
[1:03:12] NBI
[1:03:12] give
[1:03:13] senator
[1:03:14] tulpo
[1:03:14] a
[1:03:15] background
[1:03:16] on
[1:03:16] what
[1:03:17] happened
[1:03:17] to
[1:03:17] that
[1:03:17] but
[1:03:19] siyempre
[1:03:19] alam
[1:03:20] niyo
[1:03:20] kung ano
[1:03:20] yun
[1:03:20] yes
[1:03:21] mr.
[1:03:24] chair
[1:03:25] our
[1:03:25] apologies
[1:03:26] that we
[1:03:26] did not
[1:03:27] intercede
[1:03:28] earlier
[1:03:28] as to
[1:03:29] what
[1:03:29] is
[1:03:29] lidar
[1:03:30] we
[1:03:30] are
[1:03:31] trying
[1:03:31] to
[1:03:31] think
[1:03:32] of
[1:03:32] layman's
[1:03:33] terms
[1:03:33] to
[1:03:33] explain
[1:03:34] the
[1:03:35] equipment
[1:03:35] so
[1:03:36] the
[1:03:37] purpose
[1:03:37] of
[1:03:37] the
[1:03:38] equipment
[1:03:38] is
[1:03:38] to
[1:03:39] build
[1:03:39] three
[1:03:40] dimensional
[1:03:40] images
[1:03:41] or map
[1:03:42] for
[1:03:43] purposes
[1:03:43] of
[1:03:44] maybe
[1:03:45] planning
[1:03:45] by
[1:03:46] someone
[1:03:46] who
[1:03:47] is
[1:03:47] the
[1:03:47] recipient
[1:03:47] of
[1:03:48] the
[1:03:48] information
[1:03:49] so
[1:03:50] for
[1:03:52] this
[1:03:52] case
[1:03:53] what
[1:03:53] they
[1:03:53] did
[1:03:53] was
[1:03:53] to
[1:03:54] hire
[1:03:55] the
[1:03:55] Filipinos
[1:03:56] to
[1:03:57] go
[1:03:57] around
[1:03:57] certain
[1:03:58] targeted
[1:03:59] areas
[1:03:59] to
[1:04:00] collect
[1:04:00] information
[1:04:01] and
[1:04:01] use
[1:04:02] the
[1:04:02] lidar
[1:04:03] equipment
[1:04:03] to
[1:04:05] map
[1:04:06] out
[1:04:06] the
[1:04:07] targeted
[1:04:08] areas
[1:04:08] what
[1:04:12] is
[1:04:12] the
[1:04:12] status
[1:04:12] of
[1:04:13] those
[1:04:13] people
[1:04:14] you
[1:04:14] arrested
[1:04:15] we
[1:04:18] had
[1:04:22] challenges
[1:04:22] on
[1:04:23] the
[1:04:23] cases
[1:04:24] that
[1:04:24] should
[1:04:25] be
[1:04:25] brought
[1:04:26] up
[1:04:26] so
[1:04:27] this
[1:04:27] was
[1:04:27] deliberated
[1:04:28] together
[1:04:28] with
[1:04:29] other
[1:04:30] law
[1:04:30] enforcement
[1:04:30] and
[1:04:31] intelligence
[1:04:31] agencies
[1:04:32] as
[1:04:35] to
[1:04:35] the
[1:04:35] final
[1:04:36] outcome
[1:04:38] we
[1:04:39] have
[1:04:39] to
[1:04:39] check
[1:04:39] and
[1:04:40] report
[1:04:40] we
[1:04:42] don't
[1:04:42] have
[1:04:42] the
[1:04:42] answer
[1:04:43] right
[1:04:43] now
[1:04:44] essentially
[1:04:45] again
[1:04:47] yung
[1:04:47] sinasabi
[1:04:48] ko
[1:04:48] Mr.
[1:04:48] Chairman
[1:04:48] may
[1:04:50] problema
[1:04:50] talaga
[1:04:51] tayo
[1:04:51] paano
[1:04:52] natin
[1:04:52] madedetect
[1:04:53] itong
[1:04:54] mga
[1:04:54] spionage
[1:04:57] na mga
[1:04:57] kaso
[1:04:57] labas
[1:04:58] pasok
[1:04:58] na yung
[1:04:58] mga
[1:04:58] tao
[1:04:59] sa
[1:04:59] atin
[1:04:59] mga
[1:05:00] simple
[1:05:00] equipment
[1:05:01] and
[1:05:01] did
[1:05:02] you
[1:05:02] know
[1:05:02] that
[1:05:02] sir
[1:05:03] Mr.
[1:05:03] Chair
[1:05:04] 1961
[1:05:05] na
[1:05:06] develop
[1:05:06] itong
[1:05:07] lidar
[1:05:07] na ito
[1:05:08] I am
[1:05:09] sure
[1:05:09] may
[1:05:09] mga
[1:05:09] bago
[1:05:10] na
[1:05:10] ngayon
[1:05:10] at
[1:05:10] high
[1:05:11] tech
[1:05:11] na
[1:05:11] yung
[1:05:12] sinasabi
[1:05:12] yung
[1:05:13] mapping
[1:05:13] baka
[1:05:14] yung
[1:05:14] mga
[1:05:14] equipment
[1:05:15] na
[1:05:15] enhanced
[1:05:16] na
[1:05:16] pwede
[1:05:17] na
[1:05:17] makita
[1:05:17] yung
[1:05:18] mga
[1:05:18] tao
[1:05:18] sa
[1:05:18] loob
[1:05:19] kunwari
[1:05:20] magparada
[1:05:21] ako
[1:05:21] ng
[1:05:21] equipment
[1:05:21] lidar
[1:05:22] sa
[1:05:22] parking
[1:05:22] lot
[1:05:23] mamin
[1:05:23] na
[1:05:23] senado
[1:05:23] makikita
[1:05:24] na tayong
[1:05:25] lahat
[1:05:25] dito
[1:05:25] yung
[1:05:26] sinasabi
[1:05:26] nyo
[1:05:27] 1961
[1:05:27] pa
[1:05:28] yun
[1:05:28] building
[1:05:29] vegetation
[1:05:30] pero
[1:05:31] yung
[1:05:31] pinakabago
[1:05:32] pong
[1:05:32] lidar
[1:05:32] equipment
[1:05:33] ngayon
[1:05:33] nakikita
[1:05:34] na po
[1:05:34] yung
[1:05:35] tao
[1:05:35] parang
[1:05:36] x-ray
[1:05:37] vision
[1:05:38] yun
[1:05:39] yung
[1:05:39] problema
[1:05:40] natin
[1:05:43] siguro
[1:05:44] we have
[1:05:45] to
[1:05:45] upgrade
[1:05:45] our
[1:05:45] equipment
[1:05:46] siguro
[1:05:47] Mr.
[1:05:48] Chair
[1:05:48] I guess
[1:05:49] we really
[1:05:50] have to
[1:05:50] this is
[1:05:50] very
[1:05:51] important
[1:05:51] kung pag-uusapan
[1:05:52] po natin
[1:05:53] itong
[1:05:53] espionage
[1:05:54] na ito
[1:05:55] e kung
[1:05:55] lagi
[1:05:55] po tayo
[1:05:56] one
[1:05:56] step
[1:05:56] behind
[1:05:57] yung
[1:05:57] mga
[1:05:57] equipment
[1:05:58] sinasabi
[1:05:58] lidar
[1:05:59] hinuli
[1:05:59] hindi
[1:06:00] natin
[1:06:00] makasuhan
[1:06:01] dahil
[1:06:01] possession
[1:06:01] lamang
[1:06:02] sila
[1:06:03] e
[1:06:03] paano
[1:06:04] ko
[1:06:04] pero
[1:06:06] that's
[1:06:09] what I'm
[1:06:09] saying
[1:06:09] Mr.
[1:06:10] Chair
[1:06:11] we really
[1:06:11] have to
[1:06:11] do
[1:06:12] something
[1:06:12] about
[1:06:12] this
[1:06:13] we
[1:06:13] have
[1:06:13] to
[1:06:13] ikang
[1:06:14] yung
[1:06:16] research
[1:06:18] study
[1:06:23] we
[1:06:26] can
[1:06:26] help
[1:06:26] out
[1:06:27] we
[1:06:27] need
[1:06:27] to
[1:06:28] really
[1:06:28] at
[1:06:29] least
[1:06:30] how
[1:06:31] to
[1:06:33] detect
[1:06:34] that
[1:06:35] we
[1:06:35] are
[1:06:35] being
[1:06:35] monitored
[1:06:36] that
[1:06:37] we
[1:06:37] are
[1:06:37] being
[1:06:37] ikang
[1:06:38] meron
[1:06:39] mga
[1:06:39] espionage
[1:06:40] sa
[1:06:41] ating
[1:06:41] bayan
[1:06:41] thank
[1:06:41] you
[1:06:42] Mr.
[1:06:42] Chair
[1:06:42] thank
[1:06:43] you
[1:06:43] Mr.
[1:06:46] I
[1:06:47] just
[1:06:48] wanted
[1:06:48] to
[1:06:48] make
[1:06:48] a
[1:06:48] clarification
[1:06:49] on
[1:06:49] the
[1:06:50] response
[1:06:50] I
[1:06:50] made
[1:06:51] earlier
[1:06:51] to
[1:06:51] the
[1:06:51] question
[1:06:52] of
[1:06:52] senator
[1:06:53] I
[1:06:53] was
[1:06:54] just
[1:06:54] saying
[1:06:54] sir
[1:06:55] that
[1:06:55] I
[1:06:55] was
[1:06:55] not
[1:06:56] familiar
[1:06:56] with
[1:06:57] the
[1:06:57] specific
[1:06:57] equipment
[1:06:58] that
[1:06:59] was
[1:06:59] used
[1:06:59] but
[1:06:59] the
[1:07:00] concept
[1:07:00] of
[1:07:00] lidar
[1:07:01] we
[1:07:01] are
[1:07:01] familiar
[1:07:01] with
[1:07:02] it
[1:07:02] sir
[1:07:02] but
[1:07:03] since
[1:07:03] the
[1:07:03] was
[1:07:04] not
[1:07:04] the
[1:07:05] one
[1:07:05] involved
[1:07:06] in
[1:07:06] that
[1:07:07] there
[1:07:08] are
[1:07:10] many
[1:07:10] types
[1:07:10] of
[1:07:11] lidar
[1:07:12] and
[1:07:12] including
[1:07:13] the
[1:07:13] sensors
[1:07:13] that
[1:07:14] are
[1:07:14] being
[1:07:14] used
[1:07:14] and
[1:07:15] the
[1:07:15] purposes
[1:07:15] some
[1:07:16] of
[1:07:16] them
[1:07:16] are
[1:07:16] being
[1:07:16] used
[1:07:17] for
[1:07:17] drones
[1:07:18] some
[1:07:18] of
[1:07:18] them
[1:07:19] are
[1:07:19] being
[1:07:19] used
[1:07:19] for
[1:07:19] vehicles
[1:07:20] and
[1:07:20] equipment
[1:07:21] I
[1:07:22] understand
[1:07:25] I'm
[1:07:26] not upset
[1:07:27] with you
[1:07:28] what I'm
[1:07:28] saying
[1:07:28] is that
[1:07:29] the
[1:07:30] message
[1:07:30] is like
[1:07:31] for us
[1:07:32] in the
[1:07:33] legislative
[1:07:33] we need
[1:07:35] to fund
[1:07:36] our
[1:07:36] agencies
[1:07:37] to be
[1:07:39] at
[1:07:39] par
[1:07:39] with
[1:07:43] super
[1:07:43] powers
[1:07:44] the
[1:07:44] US
[1:07:45] China
[1:07:45] Israel
[1:07:46] at
[1:07:46] least
[1:07:46] kaya
[1:07:47] papano
[1:07:47] makaintindi
[1:07:48] man
[1:07:48] lang
[1:07:48] tayo
[1:07:49] or
[1:07:49] how
[1:07:49] we
[1:07:50] will
[1:07:50] be
[1:07:50] able
[1:07:50] to
[1:07:50] detect
[1:07:51] na
[1:07:51] tayo
[1:07:52] po
[1:07:52] minaman
[1:07:52] man
[1:07:53] na
[1:07:53] ngayon
[1:07:53] siguro
[1:07:54] it's
[1:07:54] also
[1:07:54] the
[1:07:55] fault
[1:07:56] of
[1:07:56] the
[1:07:56] legislative
[1:07:57] kailangan
[1:07:57] natin
[1:07:58] ng
[1:07:58] funding
[1:07:58] when
[1:07:59] you
[1:07:59] ask
[1:07:59] for
[1:08:00] funds
[1:08:00] I guess
[1:08:00] we
[1:08:01] really
[1:08:01] have
[1:08:01] to
[1:08:01] pay
[1:08:01] attention
[1:08:02] now
[1:08:02] and
[1:08:03] ponduhan
[1:08:03] po
[1:08:04] yung
[1:08:04] NSC
[1:08:04] NICA
[1:08:05] DND
[1:08:06] PNP
[1:08:07] NBI
[1:08:08] lahat
[1:08:08] po
[1:08:09] ng
[1:08:09] national
[1:08:10] security
[1:08:11] umbrella
[1:08:12] siguro
[1:08:13] pakinggan
[1:08:13] namin
[1:08:14] din
[1:08:14] dito
[1:08:15] and
[1:08:15] then
[1:08:15] pag
[1:08:15] humingi
[1:08:16] po
[1:08:16] ng
[1:08:16] budget
[1:08:16] and
[1:08:17] we
[1:08:17] have
[1:08:17] to
[1:08:17] really
[1:08:17] listen
[1:08:18] if
[1:08:18] we
[1:08:18] are
[1:08:19] really
[1:08:19] serious
[1:08:19] dito
[1:08:20] sa
[1:08:20] anti
[1:08:21] spionage
[1:08:22] bill
[1:08:22] na
[1:08:22] ito
[1:08:23] at
[1:08:23] the
[1:08:23] same
[1:08:23] time
[1:08:23] hindi
[1:08:24] lang
[1:08:24] po
[1:08:24] batas
[1:08:24] kasi
[1:08:25] batas
[1:08:26] will
[1:08:26] not
[1:08:26] work
[1:08:26] kung
[1:08:27] wala
[1:08:27] naman
[1:08:27] pong
[1:08:27] pondo
[1:08:28] kailangan
[1:08:29] nating
[1:08:29] ponduhan
[1:08:30] ang
[1:08:30] various
[1:08:30] agencies
[1:08:31] para
[1:08:32] makahabol
[1:08:34] naman
[1:08:34] tayo
[1:08:35] alam
[1:08:36] naman
[1:08:36] natin
[1:08:36] yung
[1:08:36] kapitbahay
[1:08:37] natin
[1:08:37] masyadong
[1:08:38] high
[1:08:38] tech
[1:08:39] na
[1:08:39] advanced
[1:08:39] mga
[1:08:39] equipment
[1:08:40] na
[1:08:40] at
[1:08:41] least
[1:08:41] tayo
[1:08:41] madetect
[1:08:42] man
[1:08:42] lang
[1:08:42] po
[1:08:42] natin
[1:08:43] but
[1:08:43] I
[1:08:43] think
[1:08:43] it's
[1:08:45] on
[1:08:45] our
[1:08:45] side
[1:08:46] siguro
[1:08:47] yung
[1:08:47] funding
[1:08:48] lamang
[1:08:48] po
[1:08:48] and
[1:08:49] that's
[1:08:49] what
[1:08:49] I'm
[1:08:49] trying
[1:08:50] to
[1:08:50] tell
[1:08:51] the
[1:08:51] chairman
[1:08:52] siguro
[1:08:53] next
[1:08:54] time
[1:08:54] or
[1:08:55] next
[1:08:55] year
[1:08:55] probably
[1:08:56] we
[1:08:56] can
[1:08:56] add
[1:08:56] funding
[1:08:57] po
[1:08:58] sa
[1:08:58] ating
[1:08:58] national
[1:08:59] security
[1:09:00] umbrella
[1:09:01] thank
[1:09:01] you
[1:09:02] po
[1:09:02] thank
[1:09:03] you
[1:09:03] well
[1:09:05] attorney
[1:09:05] labo
[1:09:06] may
[1:09:07] mga
[1:09:07] iba't
[1:09:08] ibang
[1:09:08] klase
[1:09:08] nung
[1:09:08] lidar
[1:09:09] or
[1:09:09] lidar
[1:09:10] whatever
[1:09:10] may
[1:09:11] iba
[1:09:11] yung
[1:09:12] klase
[1:09:12] may
[1:09:12] portable
[1:09:13] merong
[1:09:13] hindi
[1:09:14] apparently
[1:09:15] it's
[1:09:16] principally
[1:09:17] consists of
[1:09:19] a laser
[1:09:20] scanner
[1:09:21] and specialized
[1:09:21] GPS
[1:09:22] receiver
[1:09:22] sa ngayon
[1:09:23] hindi naman
[1:09:24] talaga
[1:09:24] bawal
[1:09:25] yung
[1:09:25] equipment
[1:09:25] pero
[1:09:26] bawal
[1:09:26] kung paano
[1:09:27] mong
[1:09:27] gagamitin
[1:09:28] the point
[1:09:29] of
[1:09:29] senator
[1:09:29] tool
[1:09:29] boys
[1:09:30] yung mga
[1:09:31] campsite
[1:09:31] bidala
[1:09:33] dala
[1:09:33] silang
[1:09:33] ganun
[1:09:34] at
[1:09:34] ang mabigat
[1:09:35] comelec
[1:09:35] bakit
[1:09:36] bakit
[1:09:37] mo kailangan
[1:09:37] ng
[1:09:38] topographic
[1:09:39] or
[1:09:41] whatever
[1:09:42] sa
[1:09:42] comelec
[1:09:43] so
[1:09:43] talaga
[1:09:43] yung
[1:09:44] merong
[1:09:44] ibang
[1:09:44] lalim-lalim
[1:09:45] yan
[1:09:45] lalong
[1:09:46] dumidiin
[1:09:47] yung
[1:09:47] pangangailangan
[1:09:48] natin
[1:09:48] na
[1:09:48] i-upgrade
[1:09:49] natin
[1:09:49] yung
[1:09:49] ating
[1:09:50] laws
[1:09:53] on
[1:09:53] espionage
[1:09:54] mr.
[1:09:55] senate
[1:09:55] dito
[1:09:58] you
[1:09:58] former
[1:09:59] senate
[1:09:59] president
[1:10:00] this is
[1:10:02] just a
[1:10:03] coincidence
[1:10:03] but i'll
[1:10:05] take it
[1:10:05] up
[1:10:05] ms.
[1:10:08] chairman
[1:10:08] dito
[1:10:09] In the Senate, we upgraded our internet equipment, communication equipment, and I was told that in our equipment, we need to be able to find out what type of equipment are we buying because we might be unknowingly buying equipment that will open the doors for data gathering and espionage.
[1:10:39] Kasi nga, very technical itong equipment na ito. Or, knowingly, baka sinasadyang bumili rin ng ganitong equipment. So, I was going through the bills kanina pa, Mr. Chairman. Meron ba tayong to NSC and to DND?
[1:10:55] Kasi nga, do we need to also include in the bill something to the effect that we have to be very meticulous in buying equipment, especially for government use?
[1:11:16] Or, maybe insert a language here wherein government officials who knowingly voice equipment that will create espionage or that will open the doors for espionage be penalized.
[1:11:39] So, ang punta ko lang naman dito is, espionage is one thing, but enabling it is another thing.
[1:11:48] So, gusto ko lang makuha yung opinion ng NSC and DND about that.
[1:11:52] Kasi, I just came across that this past few weeks lang.
[1:11:56] And apparently, because we're upgrading some of our equipment here,
[1:12:01] ang sabi sa akin ng mga technical na dapat maging mapanuri, maging meticuloso dun sa mga equipment.
[1:12:10] In fact, they told me there's such a thing as NDAA-compliant.
[1:12:24] Hindi ko na sulat dito yung exact, but it's apparently NDAA, it's a law in the US,
[1:12:32] and in-identify nila kung ano yung mga companies na pwedeng gamitin sa US,
[1:12:40] and therefore, pwede rin gamitin sa atin.
[1:12:43] Because apparently, it's a compliance mechanism.
[1:12:47] So, my question is, do we need to include that in our bill?
[1:12:54] And do we also need to penalize officials who will not be meticulous in choosing equipment
[1:13:04] that can be detrimental to the offices, to our sensitive offices?
[1:13:11] So, anyone can answer for an NSE and DND?
[1:13:17] Kasi dito, dinefine lang yung espionage.
[1:13:19] But, of course, kagaya ng sinabi ko ngayon,
[1:13:24] in equipment, pag binili mo, pwedeng maging daan para sa espionage.
[1:13:29] Pwede mo sadya na binili yun, pwede mong hindi sinasadya na bilin yun.
[1:13:34] But, yun yung gusto ko sana makuha sa DND-NSE about that angle.
[1:13:48] Any comments, DND?
[1:13:51] Colonel Kabatuan?
[1:13:54] Kabawatan pala.
[1:13:55] Kabawatan, sir.
[1:13:56] Kabawatan.
[1:13:56] As for the department, sir, I would just like to also convey part of our submission, sir,
[1:14:07] particularly with equipments that are being put forward by companies that are used for espionage or foreign interference.
[1:14:16] Part of our recommendation and position, sir, is that amendments to the foreign interference and anti-espionage law should also cover those not only natural persons,
[1:14:31] but also juridical persons, whether it be they act in their own capacities or in conspiracy with one another,
[1:14:38] so that even companies that are putting forward those kinds of equipments to government that eventually may or may have the capacity to spy on us
[1:14:54] or also interfere with their actions can also be covered by the law, sir, eventually.
[1:15:05] Mr. Senate President, your question could probably be addressed by Section 11 of the bill,
[1:15:11] which is unlawful possession or control of surveillance or mapping equipment.
[1:15:17] The provision in the bill states it shall be unlawful for any person to possess or control any surveillance equipment,
[1:15:26] system, equipment, or software, including but not limited to drones, cameras, listening, or tracking devices,
[1:15:32] or any other means for the purpose of surveilling, monitoring, or spying.
[1:15:36] So what this means, Mr. Chairman, is that if a certain equipment is bought by the Senate, for example,
[1:15:42] and that equipment contains a tracking device inside it or any software used for surveilling or monitoring
[1:15:50] the actions of senators or the actions of staff, the person who put it there or the person who controls it is, I think,
[1:16:02] of the U.S., and apparently this law identified all the possible suppliers.
[1:16:23] It's like a positive list.
[1:16:26] So there's a positive list, and you can only choose among those suppliers.
[1:16:32] And that positive list, apparently, they bet that that equipment is safe to use for critical infrastructure
[1:16:42] as well as national security facilities.
[1:16:47] So you can only think about it if you need to look at that angle.
[1:16:56] Yes, Attorney Lapos.
[1:16:59] Mr. Chair, Senate President, as far as the Section 889 of the NDA is concerned,
[1:17:07] there is a specific protocol that they follow and specific procedures that they undergo
[1:17:12] before they can ban specific—actually, it's not the equipment, but it is the companies that provide those equipment.
[1:17:22] So, sir, ang focus po nun ay companies.
[1:17:26] And I'm not familiar with how they do it, but perhaps within the Philippine context,
[1:17:31] we could pull together the resources of various agencies, maybe perhaps the ICT at the helm,
[1:17:36] because eventually this will all have to look into the different products of these companies.
[1:17:43] But it's not per se the equipment, but the ban is against the company producing the equipment.
[1:17:50] So something similar could be possibly adopted in the Philippine setting,
[1:17:54] but we just have to make sure that all the relevant agencies are there to contribute to the whole process.
[1:17:59] And I think the espionage should, I think, over time is going to evolve.
[1:18:08] Yung nakikita natin rumoronda sa kampo, nagtitake ng picture, nagtitake ng LiDAR,
[1:18:15] baka ano lang yung sa palabas nila ngayon is all digital.
[1:18:19] So hacking into your email, hacking into our email, or hacking into our facilities,
[1:18:28] or even the internet connectivity dito, I think that is a more realistic threat right now.
[1:18:37] So that's why I'm getting your opinion kung kailangan ba natin lagay sa batas yun,
[1:18:44] kasi tingin ko ganun papunta ang mundo.
[1:18:46] Yung espionage kayo yun is all digital.
[1:18:50] Your Honor.
[1:18:51] Yes, Mr. Chair.
[1:18:53] Si Neil pala dito.
[1:18:54] Go ahead, Neil.
[1:18:55] Sorry, Your Honor, Mr. Chair.
[1:18:58] Mr. President, Your Honor, thank you very much for the invitation.
[1:19:02] I just want to note, in reference to the question of whether or not it is necessary,
[1:19:06] and also to add to the earlier observations by Dr. Malaya concerning the gaps,
[1:19:11] this is one of the gaps really, that espionage has expanded in scope
[1:19:15] as well as in form.
[1:19:18] For example, and regarding the specific question of equipment,
[1:19:21] it's both hardware and software.
[1:19:25] For example, there are concerns, for example, in the United States
[1:19:28] over the procurement of hardware, specifically laptop manufacturers,
[1:19:32] who are no longer allowed to be procured in certain government agencies
[1:19:36] because of the fact that the hardware themselves is constructed,
[1:19:40] is made in certain countries of concern.
[1:19:45] But also it's a question of software, because, for example,
[1:19:48] we see in the SolarWinds hacking, SolarWinds attack,
[1:19:51] where there's actually an upstream supplier.
[1:19:54] Because for certain very sophisticated software,
[1:19:56] the software is not made by a single company or entity.
[1:19:59] Rather, it is outsourced to different sources.
[1:20:02] And sometimes it is the source, it is the upstream source of one component
[1:20:07] of the software that then becomes part of the larger software,
[1:20:13] and then the procurement is from that final software,
[1:20:17] not from the upstream sources.
[1:20:19] And that is what led to the SolarWinds attack,
[1:20:21] and very recently the introduction of malware that came with the CC Cleaner,
[1:20:25] I think, one of the open source software.
[1:20:31] So it's software and hardware, and, Your Honor,
[1:20:34] I don't know as to the wisdom of whether it should be in this
[1:20:37] or a different legislation,
[1:20:38] but definitely it becomes a question of national security,
[1:20:42] but would have effects, number one, on the procurement law,
[1:20:45] because that means the procurement law has to take into account
[1:20:47] national security considerations,
[1:20:49] other than as a basis for negotiated procurement
[1:20:51] or limited source procurement.
[1:20:53] And the other one is, as noted by the NICA,
[1:20:55] a certification system, similar to that in the NDAA,
[1:20:58] which is actually an appropriations law for the U.S.
[1:21:00] And another one, Your Honor, is for communications,
[1:21:03] because one of the weaknesses of the communication system we have,
[1:21:07] if you look at the cybercrime law,
[1:21:10] illegal interception means interception without right.
[1:21:14] The problem is the word without right allows, for example,
[1:21:18] for ISPs, internet service providers, and telecom communicators,
[1:21:22] as well as servers, providers of messaging apps like Meta and Google,
[1:21:27] to have the right to enter it.
[1:21:29] So part of it also, Your Honor, will be a hardware and software response
[1:21:33] by which we create parallel secure government communications
[1:21:36] like they have in the United States,
[1:21:38] where they have specific email servers,
[1:21:42] specific communication networks for the defense sector,
[1:21:45] parallel to that used by the civilian network.
[1:21:52] That is one of the problems, Your Honor,
[1:21:53] because as noted by Your Honor, technology has changed.
[1:21:56] And in fact, Your Honor,
[1:21:57] one of the concerns that was noted in the House,
[1:22:00] because we have attended House committee hearings,
[1:22:03] is that some of them call for not so much a penal response
[1:22:07] as it is an administrative response,
[1:22:09] because sometimes it is not so much punishing,
[1:22:12] but rather making sure that the administrative and approval process
[1:22:16] goes through a dedicated agency,
[1:22:18] which goes to another gap.
[1:22:20] We don't have a dedicated counterintelligence investigation agency.
[1:22:24] NICA, for example, is recently empowered in a 2024 executive order
[1:22:28] to have a new counterintelligence arm.
[1:22:31] However, Your Honor, it is not per se a law enforcement arm,
[1:22:36] unlike the United States,
[1:22:37] which has a foreign counterintelligence section
[1:22:40] of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
[1:22:42] So there are multiple gaps,
[1:22:43] as noted by Dr. Malaya as well as NICA.
[1:22:46] Thank you, Your Honor.
[1:22:47] So, in suggestion mo, Attorney Nili,
[1:22:49] hindi dito sa batas.
[1:22:51] It should be somewhere else.
[1:22:55] Depends, Your Honor.
[1:22:55] If the purpose of the law, Your Honor,
[1:22:57] is merely to cover kinds of espionage not covered in the law,
[1:23:01] then it would be outside the title of the bill.
[1:23:05] It might require a much,
[1:23:07] it has to be a much larger law, Your Honor,
[1:23:08] that would be concerned with procurement.
[1:23:10] And also including,
[1:23:12] it might even cover private entities running critical infrastructure.
[1:23:16] Because one of the new phenomena that has happened
[1:23:19] is that the companies which are tied to the government
[1:23:22] because of their hold on critical infrastructure
[1:23:24] are themselves the victims of espionage.
[1:23:27] And that is also reported in the United States
[1:23:30] where certain defense contractors themselves
[1:23:33] are the ones which are subject to espionage.
[1:23:36] So that may require further reform.
[1:23:39] But I defer, Your Honor, to experts like Your Honors
[1:23:41] and Dr. Malaya on this one.
[1:23:45] Mr. Chair, Senate President,
[1:23:48] this might be a point of interest and information
[1:23:51] that I'd like to share.
[1:23:52] On the part of the Chinese, for example,
[1:23:56] the espionage law contains a similar provision.
[1:24:00] However, the difference with the U.S. section of the NDAA
[1:24:04] is that the Chinese version
[1:24:06] looks at specifications of the equipment
[1:24:10] and not the company that provides it.
[1:24:13] What that answers,
[1:24:14] which might be a problem for us also,
[1:24:16] if we just consider the companies
[1:24:19] that a lot of times the companies
[1:24:21] who invest in the Philippines, for example,
[1:24:24] they change very quickly,
[1:24:26] but they're still the same company
[1:24:28] and they assume a different nature.
[1:24:32] And that will circumvent our laws
[1:24:35] if our laws are focusing on the companies themselves,
[1:24:39] not the specifications of the equipment
[1:24:41] for your consideration, Mr. Chair.
[1:24:45] Thank you.
[1:24:45] Thank you for that feedback.
[1:24:47] We'll study that.
[1:24:50] There's some specifics in the bill
[1:24:51] that I want to ask NSC or DND again.
[1:24:57] Yung Counter Foreign Intelligence Council.
[1:25:00] I think there's a proposal here to create a council.
[1:25:05] Or Nika.
[1:25:07] I'll ask Nika,
[1:25:08] anong ang difference nito sa ginagawa ng Nika?
[1:25:13] Because we already have
[1:25:17] a National Intelligence Coordinating Council.
[1:25:20] And then we're also creating
[1:25:21] another Counter Foreign Intelligence Council.
[1:25:27] What's the difference?
[1:25:30] And can we,
[1:25:33] whatever the responsibilities of this,
[1:25:35] can we pull this in to Nika?
[1:25:39] Ako kasi I always like streamlining.
[1:25:41] We keep on creating,
[1:25:44] baka sobrang dami ng my agency,
[1:25:47] sometimes nag-overlap and magulo.
[1:25:49] Mr. Chair,
[1:25:51] if I may be allowed to make
[1:25:53] a short parallelism between existing councils,
[1:25:58] I'd like to mention the Anti-Terrorism Council
[1:26:02] in relation to the possible establishment
[1:26:06] of this new council.
[1:26:08] While the Nika has a directorate
[1:26:10] that focuses on countering terrorism
[1:26:15] in all its forms,
[1:26:17] it's never sufficient to address
[1:26:19] the problem of international terrorism.
[1:26:23] Because first of all,
[1:26:25] the Nika is merely on the intelligence aspect of things.
[1:26:29] And we're not really on the action side of things,
[1:26:34] which is left to the law enforcement agencies.
[1:26:37] Similarly,
[1:26:38] if we take a look at the problem
[1:26:40] of addressing foreign interference,
[1:26:44] the Nika's responsibility
[1:26:45] will be the generation of intelligence
[1:26:47] and the assessment of all of those information.
[1:26:50] However, in terms of action,
[1:26:52] in countering this,
[1:26:54] this will be within the realm of the mandates
[1:26:56] of the law enforcement agencies.
[1:26:58] And therefore,
[1:26:59] we will necessarily have to include
[1:27:01] all of those layers
[1:27:03] to ensure that what we assess as a threat
[1:27:07] can be an actionable item
[1:27:10] that can be pursued
[1:27:11] by the law enforcement agencies.
[1:27:14] There's therefore always that wisdom
[1:27:17] in having a council
[1:27:19] that will not just look at the threat,
[1:27:23] but will take action against it.
[1:27:26] At the moment,
[1:27:27] the Nika is just within the realm of intelligence.
[1:27:32] We do engage in disruption operations,
[1:27:38] but in so far,
[1:27:39] only as our intelligence allows us to do so
[1:27:44] and our mandate allows us to do so.
[1:27:45] There are many other things
[1:27:47] that the agency alone cannot do
[1:27:49] and is within the respective mandates
[1:27:52] of the member agencies, Mr. Chair.
[1:27:55] In other words,
[1:27:56] itong counter-foreign intelligence council,
[1:27:59] siya yung action,
[1:28:01] implement enforcement?
[1:28:02] Lahat-lahat na po.
[1:28:03] May policy na po doon
[1:28:04] and then my intelligence
[1:28:06] and then the measures
[1:28:07] that need to be taken
[1:28:09] will be decided by the council
[1:28:11] in a similar way
[1:28:12] if we parallel it
[1:28:14] with the anti-terrorism council, Mr. Chair.
[1:28:17] And who will be the members of this?
[1:28:20] I have not seen that,
[1:28:21] but we are,
[1:28:22] I think we were proposed
[1:28:25] to be the secretary at Mr. Chair.
[1:28:30] Minsan kasi,
[1:28:31] attorney,
[1:28:32] pare-pareho rin ni members,
[1:28:34] to be honest about it.
[1:28:35] At that's also our concern
[1:28:38] a lot of times.
[1:28:39] Minsan,
[1:28:40] limang council,
[1:28:41] pare-pareho yung members,
[1:28:44] kapag nagme-meeting sila,
[1:28:45] sila-sila rin eh.
[1:28:47] Minsan naman po,
[1:28:48] nagkakaiba
[1:28:49] sa specific unit
[1:28:51] within the agency.
[1:28:52] For example,
[1:28:53] member po natin
[1:28:54] the NBI,
[1:28:55] the DOJ,
[1:28:56] but a different unit
[1:28:57] within the NBI
[1:28:58] and the DOJ
[1:28:59] attends, Mr. Chair.
[1:29:01] So, kagaya po sa amin,
[1:29:02] ibang directorate po
[1:29:03] ang mag-a-attend.
[1:29:04] If it's
[1:29:05] foreign interference,
[1:29:07] that will be our directorate
[1:29:08] for counterintelligence,
[1:29:10] but for terrorism,
[1:29:11] it will be our directorate
[1:29:12] for counterterrorism.
[1:29:15] So,
[1:29:15] kahit po pare-pareho yung members,
[1:29:17] iba naman po yung
[1:29:18] specific unit na mag-a-attend.
[1:29:21] Ito yung members,
[1:29:22] executive secretary,
[1:29:25] national security advisor,
[1:29:27] secretary of justice,
[1:29:29] DFA,
[1:29:30] DILG,
[1:29:32] DND,
[1:29:33] department of DICT,
[1:29:35] and anti-AMLAC.
[1:29:36] Yes, Mr. Chair.
[1:29:37] I have the copy already, sir.
[1:29:39] But normally,
[1:29:40] when the council meets,
[1:29:42] that's the time
[1:29:43] when the administrative
[1:29:44] things are settled.
[1:29:46] Who within those members,
[1:29:48] member agencies,
[1:29:49] which unit within
[1:29:51] that member agencies
[1:29:52] will be the primary
[1:29:53] representative, Mr. Chair?
[1:29:55] It will always be
[1:29:57] the head of unit
[1:29:58] who attends as principal,
[1:29:59] but they can always
[1:30:00] send the appropriate
[1:30:02] representative
[1:30:03] depending on
[1:30:05] the nature of the discussion.
[1:30:06] Mr. Chair.
[1:30:07] Sa NICA,
[1:30:08] I would assume it's
[1:30:10] DILG,
[1:30:11] NSC,
[1:30:13] national security advisor,
[1:30:15] NSA.
[1:30:16] Yes, for you,
[1:30:17] sa principal po.
[1:30:20] But for the specific unit,
[1:30:21] because a lot of times,
[1:30:22] Mr. Chair,
[1:30:23] these councils
[1:30:24] will create technical
[1:30:26] working groups
[1:30:27] or committees
[1:30:28] or subcommittees
[1:30:29] to do the legwork,
[1:30:31] Mr. Chair.
[1:30:31] The ones attending
[1:30:33] as principals,
[1:30:34] they sit down
[1:30:34] as policymakers,
[1:30:35] Mr. Chair.
[1:30:36] Okay.
[1:30:37] Okay.
[1:30:37] Now,
[1:30:38] I'm also trying to see
[1:30:40] if we can streamline
[1:30:41] maybe instead
[1:30:44] of creating
[1:30:44] many councils,
[1:30:46] we can
[1:30:48] just empower,
[1:30:49] let's say,
[1:30:50] NICA
[1:30:50] or NSC.
[1:30:54] Kasi parang
[1:30:55] tingin ko,
[1:30:56] para-pareong members.
[1:30:57] Like, for example,
[1:30:58] I'm sure member nyo,
[1:30:59] DOJ.
[1:31:00] Tama?
[1:31:01] Member nyo rin,
[1:31:03] DILG.
[1:31:05] Member nyo rin,
[1:31:07] DND.
[1:31:09] D-I-C-T ba,
[1:31:10] member nyo?
[1:31:12] Yes, sir.
[1:31:12] D-I-C-T.
[1:31:14] AMLOC member nyo rin?
[1:31:15] Yes.
[1:31:15] Yes, so
[1:31:16] more or less
[1:31:17] pareho rin ni members.
[1:31:20] Yes,
[1:31:20] actually,
[1:31:22] yun nga po
[1:31:22] yung sinasabi ko kanina.
[1:31:24] The membership
[1:31:24] remains...
[1:31:25] Kasi pag-upo mo nun,
[1:31:26] di mo alam kung
[1:31:26] anong council eh.
[1:31:27] Ano ba ito?
[1:31:29] NSC ba ito?
[1:31:30] Or NICA?
[1:31:32] Kaya,
[1:31:33] anyways,
[1:31:34] it's just,
[1:31:34] I just noticed
[1:31:35] in creating laws
[1:31:37] kasi
[1:31:37] if we can,
[1:31:39] as much as we
[1:31:40] can streamline
[1:31:41] using existing
[1:31:43] agencies,
[1:31:44] mas prefer
[1:31:46] natin ganun.
[1:31:46] So hindi nagiging
[1:31:47] redundant.
[1:31:49] But just,
[1:31:50] ano lang to,
[1:31:51] just an observation
[1:31:52] and a thought.
[1:31:53] Thank you,
[1:31:54] Mr. Chairman.
[1:31:55] All right.
[1:31:56] Thank you,
[1:31:58] Mr. Senate President.
[1:32:02] You wanted the floor?
[1:32:04] Yes?
[1:32:07] Yes, Mr. Chair.
[1:32:09] If I may be allowed,
[1:32:10] I manifested
[1:32:12] on the status
[1:32:14] of the two Filipinos
[1:32:15] and the Chinese
[1:32:17] who were arrested,
[1:32:19] the good senator
[1:32:21] Tulfo already left,
[1:32:22] but if we'll be allowed
[1:32:24] to update
[1:32:26] as part of the record
[1:32:27] of the committee.
[1:32:29] Yes,
[1:32:29] I asked the question anyway.
[1:32:32] Thank you, sir.
[1:32:34] The case is now pending
[1:32:35] before the regional trial court
[1:32:37] of Makati City.
[1:32:39] The charge is
[1:32:40] violation of Commonwealth
[1:32:42] Act 616
[1:32:43] in relation to the
[1:32:44] cyber crime law
[1:32:46] or RA-10175.
[1:32:48] Of the two Filipinos,
[1:32:50] one was charged,
[1:32:51] the other was discharged
[1:32:52] as a state witness.
[1:32:54] And the trial
[1:32:56] is ongoing
[1:32:56] against the Chinese national,
[1:32:59] sir.
[1:32:59] That's all, sir.
[1:33:01] Right.
[1:33:02] All right.
[1:33:03] To the DOJ
[1:33:04] and perhaps NBI,
[1:33:06] if you have records,
[1:33:07] since 2024,
[1:33:09] how many espionage cases
[1:33:15] have been filed
[1:33:16] under our 1932
[1:33:20] and 1941 laws?
[1:33:23] Do you have,
[1:33:23] how many ended
[1:33:27] in conviction?
[1:33:35] Thank you,
[1:33:36] Mr. Chair.
[1:33:37] Yes,
[1:33:37] so with respect to,
[1:33:39] I took note
[1:33:40] of what NBI said
[1:33:42] that it's usually,
[1:33:45] our prosecutors
[1:33:46] would usually use
[1:33:47] not the espionage law itself.
[1:33:50] For example,
[1:33:50] in this case,
[1:33:51] it's the cyber crime law.
[1:33:53] So,
[1:33:54] based on the matrix
[1:33:55] that we have,
[1:33:57] we don't have
[1:33:58] current cases
[1:33:59] filed on espionage,
[1:34:02] Mr. Chair,
[1:34:03] in the last three years,
[1:34:06] the last three years,
[1:34:08] Mr. Chair.
[1:34:09] That's why,
[1:34:11] based on our coordination
[1:34:12] before with the prosecutors,
[1:34:14] really,
[1:34:15] really need to address
[1:34:16] the gaps in our law,
[1:34:18] Mr. Chair.
[1:34:19] For example,
[1:34:20] as we discussed before,
[1:34:21] mere possession
[1:34:22] is not considered
[1:34:23] really as espionage,
[1:34:25] Mr. Chair,
[1:34:27] because the equipment
[1:34:28] can have other uses,
[1:34:29] so you need to establish
[1:34:30] that it's actually
[1:34:32] used to commit
[1:34:33] the crime of espionage,
[1:34:35] Mr. Chair.
[1:34:35] Thank you.
[1:34:37] Oh, incidentally,
[1:34:38] you know,
[1:34:39] just for the,
[1:34:40] for everyone,
[1:34:41] for our resource persons,
[1:34:43] the position papers
[1:34:45] that they have
[1:34:46] asked you to submit
[1:34:47] also,
[1:34:48] aside from
[1:34:48] your manifestations,
[1:34:49] if possible,
[1:34:52] cover the two issues,
[1:34:55] the two bills
[1:34:56] that we are tackling,
[1:34:58] no?
[1:34:59] The Anti-Espionage Act
[1:35:02] and the Foreign Interference Act.
[1:35:06] Hindi naman,
[1:35:07] natin pwedeng pagsamahin yun,
[1:35:09] eh.
[1:35:09] So we would like
[1:35:10] your positions on the matter,
[1:35:11] then,
[1:35:12] before we try to come up
[1:35:14] with a technical working group
[1:35:15] and look at all these submissions
[1:35:17] that you have given.
[1:35:18] Yung mga penalties,
[1:35:28] there is a,
[1:35:29] there is a proposed bill also,
[1:35:32] this time by Senator Escudero,
[1:35:34] updating the revised penal code,
[1:35:42] but keeps a penalty
[1:35:43] of up to six years,
[1:35:44] which still allows probation.
[1:35:46] The other bills
[1:35:47] impose life imprisonment
[1:35:49] without parole.
[1:35:51] Is six years enough
[1:35:53] to deter a trained agent?
[1:35:55] And is life imprisonment
[1:35:57] too much for every case?
[1:36:00] Where,
[1:36:00] where would the agencies
[1:36:03] set the penalty?
[1:36:05] Kung kayong tatalangin.
[1:36:12] Nika?
[1:36:15] Mr. Chair,
[1:36:15] one of the earlier comments
[1:36:17] that we submitted
[1:36:19] was that
[1:36:20] the,
[1:36:21] the 20 years penalty
[1:36:23] under CA 116,
[1:36:25] I don't know,
[1:36:26] 616,
[1:36:27] is
[1:36:28] no longer
[1:36:30] sufficient
[1:36:32] because
[1:36:33] this time around,
[1:36:35] unlike in the past
[1:36:36] where
[1:36:36] the focus is just defense,
[1:36:39] we're now talking
[1:36:39] of national security.
[1:36:41] The concept of
[1:36:42] national security
[1:36:43] is now
[1:36:44] more broad.
[1:36:45] It used to be
[1:36:46] national defense,
[1:36:48] but since
[1:36:49] the NSC
[1:36:50] was established,
[1:36:52] they have expanded
[1:36:52] the concept
[1:36:53] of national security
[1:36:54] and now counter
[1:36:55] espionage
[1:36:57] as well as
[1:36:57] foreign interference
[1:36:59] has a big impact
[1:37:02] on national security.
[1:37:04] So we feel that
[1:37:05] 20 years
[1:37:07] is not enough.
[1:37:09] Maybe life,
[1:37:11] Mr. Chair,
[1:37:11] might be
[1:37:12] a better
[1:37:13] dissuasive
[1:37:14] legislative
[1:37:15] framework.
[1:37:19] Well,
[1:37:20] what about
[1:37:21] the DOJ?
[1:37:22] What do you think?
[1:37:24] Kayong
[1:37:24] po-prosecute nito?
[1:37:27] Oh,
[1:37:28] sorry,
[1:37:28] Mr. Chair,
[1:37:29] I was looking at
[1:37:29] the matrix.
[1:37:30] What's the
[1:37:31] specific question
[1:37:33] about?
[1:37:33] Well,
[1:37:34] the proposals
[1:37:35] on penalties.
[1:37:37] Yes,
[1:37:37] on penalties,
[1:37:38] Mr. Chair,
[1:37:39] on espionage
[1:37:40] and
[1:37:40] counterinterference,
[1:37:42] foreign interference.
[1:37:45] When we
[1:37:46] first
[1:37:47] read the bill,
[1:37:49] Mr. Chair,
[1:37:49] of course,
[1:37:50] we took note
[1:37:50] of the
[1:37:51] severity
[1:37:52] of the
[1:37:53] punishment
[1:37:54] or
[1:37:55] fees
[1:37:56] that were
[1:37:56] imposed
[1:37:57] in the bill
[1:37:57] and we took
[1:37:58] that as
[1:37:59] the seriousness
[1:38:00] of the
[1:38:01] Congress,
[1:38:02] that they're
[1:38:04] serious really
[1:38:05] in fighting
[1:38:06] these crimes,
[1:38:07] Mr. Chair,
[1:38:08] so they provided
[1:38:08] these severe
[1:38:09] penalties.
[1:38:10] But of course,
[1:38:11] although
[1:38:13] deterrence
[1:38:14] is a legitimate
[1:38:15] aim for
[1:38:16] providing
[1:38:17] for severe
[1:38:18] penalties,
[1:38:19] the DOJ
[1:38:19] was actually
[1:38:20] thinking before
[1:38:21] of supporting
[1:38:23] a graduated
[1:38:23] penalty,
[1:38:24] Mr. Chair,
[1:38:25] proportionate
[1:38:26] to the
[1:38:27] actual
[1:38:27] offense
[1:38:28] that is
[1:38:28] being
[1:38:29] penalized.
[1:38:31] For example,
[1:38:32] in the case
[1:38:33] of espionage,
[1:38:34] you have
[1:38:34] conspiracy
[1:38:35] to commit
[1:38:36] espionage,
[1:38:37] you have
[1:38:37] proposal
[1:38:37] to commit
[1:38:38] espionage,
[1:38:39] etc.
[1:38:40] They don't
[1:38:40] have the
[1:38:41] same penalties,
[1:38:42] Mr. Chair.
[1:38:43] So with
[1:38:44] respect to
[1:38:45] foreign
[1:38:45] interference,
[1:38:46] we do
[1:38:47] have a
[1:38:48] problem
[1:38:49] with how
[1:38:50] broad it
[1:38:51] was defined
[1:38:52] in the
[1:38:52] pending
[1:38:53] bills.
[1:38:53] That's
[1:38:53] why
[1:38:54] you
[1:38:54] would
[1:38:54] like
[1:38:54] to
[1:38:55] revise
[1:38:56] the
[1:38:57] definition
[1:38:57] of
[1:38:58] counter
[1:38:58] interference.
[1:38:59] And there
[1:38:59] are various
[1:39:00] forms of
[1:39:01] foreign
[1:39:01] interference,
[1:39:02] Mr. Chair.
[1:39:03] You can
[1:39:04] commit
[1:39:04] foreign
[1:39:04] interference
[1:39:05] in so
[1:39:05] many ways
[1:39:06] and you
[1:39:07] cannot
[1:39:08] just
[1:39:08] provide
[1:39:09] one
[1:39:09] penalty
[1:39:10] for the
[1:39:11] crime of
[1:39:11] foreign
[1:39:12] interference.
[1:39:12] It would
[1:39:13] depend
[1:39:13] on the
[1:39:14] actual
[1:39:14] act
[1:39:14] being
[1:39:15] penalized,
[1:39:16] Mr. Chair.
[1:39:17] So in
[1:39:18] that sense,
[1:39:18] a graduated
[1:39:19] system of
[1:39:20] penalty
[1:39:21] would be
[1:39:22] helpful
[1:39:22] because then
[1:39:23] if it's
[1:39:24] a very
[1:39:25] high
[1:39:25] penalty,
[1:39:26] it might
[1:39:30] not be
[1:39:30] proportionate
[1:39:31] to the
[1:39:31] actual
[1:39:32] act
[1:39:32] being
[1:39:33] criminalized
[1:39:35] or prosecuted,
[1:39:36] Mr. Chair.
[1:39:37] So we can
[1:39:38] adopt a
[1:39:38] graduated
[1:39:39] system of
[1:39:40] penalties
[1:39:41] depending on
[1:39:42] the actual
[1:39:42] act being
[1:39:43] penalized
[1:39:44] under
[1:39:45] foreign
[1:39:46] interference.
[1:39:47] Now,
[1:39:49] any other
[1:39:50] comments on
[1:39:51] that issue
[1:39:52] on the
[1:39:52] penalties?
[1:39:53] Tony Silva?
[1:39:55] Your Honour,
[1:39:56] on this
[1:39:57] point,
[1:39:57] As noted
[1:39:59] by both,
[1:40:00] there are
[1:40:01] kinds of
[1:40:02] espionage
[1:40:03] and kinds
[1:40:03] of
[1:40:04] interference
[1:40:04] that merit
[1:40:05] the severest
[1:40:05] penalty
[1:40:06] possible.
[1:40:07] We can
[1:40:07] look at
[1:40:07] the
[1:40:08] Rosenberg
[1:40:10] theft of
[1:40:11] atomic
[1:40:11] secrets in
[1:40:12] the United
[1:40:12] States.
[1:40:13] That
[1:40:13] actually
[1:40:14] merited,
[1:40:15] I think,
[1:40:15] the death
[1:40:15] penalty in
[1:40:16] the case
[1:40:16] of the
[1:40:16] United
[1:40:17] States.
[1:40:17] However,
[1:40:18] there are
[1:40:18] other
[1:40:19] areas
[1:40:19] where
[1:40:19] lighter
[1:40:20] penalties
[1:40:21] are
[1:40:22] merited.
[1:40:22] For
[1:40:22] example,
[1:40:23] there was
[1:40:23] this
[1:40:23] recent
[1:40:23] arrest
[1:40:24] of
[1:40:24] a
[1:40:24] Chinese
[1:40:25] person
[1:40:26] in
[1:40:26] California
[1:40:27] who
[1:40:27] was
[1:40:28] caught
[1:40:28] spying
[1:40:28] on
[1:40:29] the
[1:40:29] family
[1:40:29] of
[1:40:29] the
[1:40:29] Taiwanese
[1:40:30] leader.
[1:40:31] That
[1:40:32] kind
[1:40:32] of
[1:40:32] espionage
[1:40:32] might
[1:40:33] merit
[1:40:34] a
[1:40:34] lower
[1:40:34] penalty.
[1:40:35] I
[1:40:35] concur
[1:40:36] with
[1:40:36] the
[1:40:37] NICA
[1:40:37] that
[1:40:38] some
[1:40:38] severe
[1:40:39] forms
[1:40:39] need
[1:40:40] the
[1:40:40] highest
[1:40:40] penalty,
[1:40:41] but
[1:40:41] there
[1:40:41] are
[1:40:42] other
[1:40:42] forms
[1:40:42] that
[1:40:43] are
[1:40:43] spying
[1:40:44] on
[1:40:45] the
[1:40:45] family
[1:40:45] of
[1:40:45] a
[1:40:45] foreign
[1:40:46] leader
[1:40:46] might
[1:40:46] require
[1:40:47] a
[1:40:47] different
[1:40:47] kind
[1:40:48] of
[1:40:48] penalty
[1:40:48] which
[1:40:49] would
[1:40:49] require
[1:40:49] a
[1:40:49] graduated
[1:40:50] approach.
[1:40:51] I
[1:40:51] would
[1:40:51] also
[1:40:51] like
[1:40:52] to
[1:40:52] note
[1:40:52] the
[1:40:52] approach
[1:40:53] in
[1:40:53] different
[1:40:53] countries
[1:40:54] where
[1:40:54] there
[1:40:55] are
[1:40:55] different
[1:40:55] penalties
[1:40:56] as
[1:40:56] well.
[1:40:57] I
[1:40:58] don't
[1:40:59] have
[1:40:59] it
[1:40:59] with
[1:41:00] me
[1:41:00] right
[1:41:00] now.
[1:41:01] For
[1:41:01] example,
[1:41:02] we
[1:41:02] can
[1:41:02] look at
[1:41:02] the
[1:41:02] official
[1:41:03] Secrets
[1:41:03] Act
[1:41:03] of
[1:41:03] the
[1:41:04] United
[1:41:04] Kingdom
[1:41:04] which
[1:41:05] has
[1:41:05] different
[1:41:05] penalties,
[1:41:06] but
[1:41:06] I
[1:41:06] would
[1:41:06] refer
[1:41:07] the
[1:41:07] body
[1:41:08] to
[1:41:08] that
[1:41:08] as
[1:41:09] well
[1:41:09] as
[1:41:09] in
[1:41:10] the
[1:41:10] United
[1:41:10] States.
[1:41:16] Some
[1:41:16] are
[1:41:16] severe
[1:41:17] enough
[1:41:17] to
[1:41:17] merit
[1:41:18] the
[1:41:18] death
[1:41:18] penalty.
[1:41:19] I
[1:41:22] concur
[1:41:22] with
[1:41:23] the
[1:41:23] DOJ's
[1:41:23] approach
[1:41:24] that it
[1:41:24] needs
[1:41:24] to be
[1:41:25] weighed
[1:41:26] based
[1:41:26] on the
[1:41:27] severity
[1:41:27] of the
[1:41:28] effect
[1:41:28] on
[1:41:28] national
[1:41:29] security.
[1:41:30] There
[1:41:30] are
[1:41:30] some
[1:41:31] that
[1:41:32] do
[1:41:32] merit
[1:41:32] the
[1:41:32] severest
[1:41:33] possible
[1:41:33] effect.
[1:41:34] With
[1:41:34] regard
[1:41:35] to
[1:41:35] interference,
[1:41:36] we
[1:41:36] might
[1:41:36] need
[1:41:37] to
[1:41:37] make
[1:41:37] a
[1:41:37] distinction
[1:41:37] between
[1:41:38] interference
[1:41:39] and
[1:41:40] mere
[1:41:40] influence.
[1:41:41] Because
[1:41:41] interference
[1:41:42] per
[1:41:42] say,
[1:41:43] for
[1:41:43] example,
[1:41:43] in
[1:41:43] sovereignty
[1:41:44] acts
[1:41:44] like
[1:41:45] elections,
[1:41:46] might
[1:41:46] require
[1:41:46] severe
[1:41:47] penalties,
[1:41:48] but
[1:41:48] merely
[1:41:49] acting
[1:41:49] as a
[1:41:49] conduit
[1:41:50] for
[1:41:50] foreign
[1:41:50] influence
[1:41:51] might
[1:41:53] again
[1:41:53] demand
[1:41:54] a
[1:41:54] different
[1:41:55] kind
[1:41:55] of
[1:41:55] treatment.
[1:41:56] Because
[1:41:56] one
[1:41:56] might
[1:41:56] be,
[1:41:57] for
[1:41:57] example,
[1:41:57] be a
[1:41:58] conduit
[1:41:58] for
[1:41:58] influence
[1:41:59] on,
[1:42:00] for
[1:42:00] example,
[1:42:01] on
[1:42:01] matters
[1:42:01] of
[1:42:01] economic
[1:42:02] policy
[1:42:02] rather
[1:42:03] than
[1:42:03] national
[1:42:03] security.
[1:42:04] So
[1:42:05] again,
[1:42:05] a
[1:42:05] different
[1:42:05] approach
[1:42:06] might
[1:42:06] be
[1:42:06] merited
[1:42:07] depending
[1:42:07] on
[1:42:08] the
[1:42:08] act
[1:42:09] itself,
[1:42:10] the
[1:42:11] effect,
[1:42:11] as
[1:42:12] well
[1:42:12] as
[1:42:12] the
[1:42:12] character
[1:42:13] of
[1:42:13] the
[1:42:13] actor,
[1:42:13] whether
[1:42:14] the
[1:42:14] actor
[1:42:14] is
[1:42:14] a
[1:42:14] member
[1:42:15] of
[1:42:15] the
[1:42:15] public
[1:42:15] service,
[1:42:16] whether
[1:42:17] the
[1:42:17] actor
[1:42:18] is a
[1:42:18] member
[1:42:18] of
[1:42:19] the
[1:42:19] armed
[1:42:19] forces,
[1:42:20] or
[1:42:20] whether
[1:42:20] the
[1:42:21] actor
[1:42:21] is a
[1:42:21] civilian
[1:42:22] acting
[1:42:22] as
[1:42:22] an
[1:42:23] influencer
[1:42:23] for
[1:42:24] a
[1:42:24] foreign
[1:42:24] body.
[1:42:26] But I
[1:42:27] defer to
[1:42:28] the
[1:42:28] body.
[1:42:28] All right.
[1:42:31] Well,
[1:42:32] somehow
[1:42:32] related to
[1:42:33] that.
[1:42:34] Thank you,
[1:42:35] by the
[1:42:35] way.
[1:42:35] Thank you.
[1:42:36] Thank you.
[1:42:37] In
[1:42:37] March
[1:42:38] 2026,
[1:42:39] this year,
[1:42:40] the Navy
[1:42:41] revealed
[1:42:43] that
[1:42:44] there
[1:42:45] were
[1:42:45] three
[1:42:45] Filipinos,
[1:42:47] a
[1:42:47] former
[1:42:47] defense
[1:42:48] employee,
[1:42:50] a
[1:42:50] security
[1:42:50] analyst,
[1:42:51] and a
[1:42:51] contact
[1:42:51] with
[1:42:52] Coast
[1:42:52] Guard
[1:42:52] ties
[1:42:53] were
[1:42:55] recruited
[1:42:56] by
[1:42:57] handlers
[1:42:58] believed
[1:42:58] to
[1:42:59] link
[1:43:01] to
[1:43:01] China.
[1:43:03] They
[1:43:03] talked
[1:43:03] through
[1:43:04] a
[1:43:04] Tetris
[1:43:05] game
[1:43:06] app,
[1:43:07] somebody
[1:43:07] DICT
[1:43:09] and
[1:43:09] NTC,
[1:43:10] by the
[1:43:11] way.
[1:43:12] They
[1:43:12] talked
[1:43:13] through
[1:43:13] a
[1:43:13] Tetris
[1:43:14] game
[1:43:14] app,
[1:43:15] which
[1:43:16] turned
[1:43:17] into
[1:43:17] a
[1:43:17] chat
[1:43:17] app.
[1:43:19] And
[1:43:20] were
[1:43:20] asked
[1:43:20] about
[1:43:20] troops
[1:43:21] on
[1:43:22] the
[1:43:22] BRP
[1:43:22] Sierra
[1:43:23] Madre.
[1:43:25] In
[1:43:25] the
[1:43:25] United
[1:43:26] States,
[1:43:26] a
[1:43:26] sailor
[1:43:27] recruited
[1:43:28] the
[1:43:28] same
[1:43:28] way
[1:43:28] on
[1:43:29] social
[1:43:29] media,
[1:43:30] got
[1:43:30] 16
[1:43:31] years
[1:43:31] imprisonment
[1:43:32] in
[1:43:34] January
[1:43:34] 2026.
[1:43:37] So,
[1:43:37] have
[1:43:38] charges
[1:43:39] been
[1:43:40] filed?
[1:43:42] Wala
[1:43:42] pa?
[1:43:46] As
[1:43:46] to
[1:43:46] that
[1:43:47] specifics,
[1:43:48] I'm
[1:43:48] not
[1:43:49] personally
[1:43:49] privy
[1:43:50] as
[1:43:50] to
[1:43:50] the
[1:43:50] details,
[1:43:51] but
[1:43:51] we'll
[1:43:52] be
[1:43:52] giving
[1:43:53] updates
[1:43:54] to
[1:43:55] the
[1:43:55] Chair
[1:43:56] President
[1:43:57] the
[1:43:57] status
[1:43:58] of
[1:43:58] those.
[1:43:58] Can you
[1:43:58] ask the
[1:43:59] Navy to
[1:43:59] look into
[1:43:59] that?
[1:44:00] Yes,
[1:44:00] sir.
[1:44:04] Well,
[1:44:05] the
[1:44:05] 16
[1:44:06] years
[1:44:06] imprisonment
[1:44:07] to
[1:44:07] the
[1:44:07] US,
[1:44:08] that
[1:44:08] classic.
[1:44:09] So,
[1:44:10] something to
[1:44:12] look up to.
[1:44:14] Look at,
[1:44:14] I mean.
[1:44:16] Graduation,
[1:44:17] eh.
[1:44:17] graduating
[1:44:19] yung
[1:44:20] sinasabi
[1:44:20] ninyo.
[1:44:25] We're
[1:44:30] looking at
[1:44:31] the
[1:44:31] other
[1:44:31] countries
[1:44:32] also,
[1:44:33] like,
[1:44:34] so,
[1:44:36] Department
[1:44:36] of
[1:44:37] Justice,
[1:44:37] siguro.
[1:44:40] In
[1:44:40] September
[1:44:41] 2025,
[1:44:43] Britain
[1:44:44] dropped
[1:44:45] its case
[1:44:45] against a
[1:44:46] parliamentary
[1:44:47] researcher
[1:44:47] in an
[1:44:48] academic
[1:44:49] accused
[1:44:49] of
[1:44:50] spying
[1:44:50] for
[1:44:50] China.
[1:44:53] It's
[1:44:53] old law,
[1:44:55] yung
[1:44:55] old law
[1:44:56] nila,
[1:44:56] required
[1:44:57] proof
[1:44:57] that
[1:44:58] they
[1:44:59] helped
[1:44:59] an
[1:44:59] enemy,
[1:45:01] quote,
[1:45:01] in quotation
[1:45:02] marks,
[1:45:03] enemy.
[1:45:04] And the
[1:45:04] government
[1:45:05] would not
[1:45:05] say China
[1:45:06] was one.
[1:45:08] They would
[1:45:08] not say
[1:45:09] that China
[1:45:09] was an
[1:45:10] enemy.
[1:45:10] So,
[1:45:11] our 1941
[1:45:13] law has
[1:45:14] the same
[1:45:14] wartime
[1:45:15] idea.
[1:45:18] Do the
[1:45:18] bills
[1:45:19] pending
[1:45:19] now,
[1:45:20] what do
[1:45:20] you think?
[1:45:21] Does it
[1:45:21] fully
[1:45:22] fix this?
[1:45:24] Or would
[1:45:25] our government
[1:45:25] be ready
[1:45:26] to name
[1:45:27] the foreign
[1:45:27] country
[1:45:28] in case,
[1:45:29] in court?
[1:45:31] What do
[1:45:32] you think,
[1:45:32] DOJ?
[1:45:33] I think
[1:45:33] this is a
[1:45:34] DOJ issue
[1:45:35] that should
[1:45:36] be addressed.
[1:45:38] Yes.
[1:45:38] Thank you,
[1:45:39] Mr. Chair,
[1:45:40] and thank you
[1:45:40] for this
[1:45:41] example that
[1:45:43] we can
[1:45:43] really consider
[1:45:44] when
[1:45:45] drafting
[1:45:46] an improved
[1:45:47] definition of
[1:45:49] foreign
[1:45:49] interference.
[1:45:51] Because here
[1:45:51] you said
[1:45:52] it's a
[1:45:52] case of
[1:45:53] the UK
[1:45:54] against an
[1:45:55] academic
[1:45:56] researcher,
[1:45:57] Mr. Chair,
[1:45:58] but the
[1:45:59] proof there
[1:46:00] is needed
[1:46:00] that he
[1:46:01] actually helped
[1:46:02] an enemy
[1:46:03] of the
[1:46:04] state.
[1:46:05] So for
[1:46:05] sure,
[1:46:06] if that
[1:46:08] is what
[1:46:09] your law
[1:46:09] says,
[1:46:10] there should
[1:46:10] be a
[1:46:10] definition
[1:46:11] of
[1:46:11] ways
[1:46:12] considered
[1:46:12] an
[1:46:12] enemy,
[1:46:14] Mr. Chair,
[1:46:14] for proper
[1:46:15] prosecution.
[1:46:16] But in
[1:46:18] our case,
[1:46:19] talking about
[1:46:21] foreign
[1:46:21] interference,
[1:46:22] Mr. Chair,
[1:46:23] and our
[1:46:23] definition of
[1:46:25] foreign
[1:46:25] interference
[1:46:26] with respect
[1:46:26] to the
[1:46:28] bills that
[1:46:29] we have
[1:46:29] now,
[1:46:30] it says
[1:46:30] that any
[1:46:32] person who
[1:46:32] engages
[1:46:33] in covert,
[1:46:34] deceptive,
[1:46:35] coercive,
[1:46:36] or threatening
[1:46:37] conduct,
[1:46:37] whether alone
[1:46:38] or on
[1:46:39] behalf of
[1:46:40] or in
[1:46:40] collaboration
[1:46:41] with or
[1:46:42] directed,
[1:46:43] funded,
[1:46:43] or supervised
[1:46:44] by a
[1:46:45] foreign
[1:46:45] principle,
[1:46:46] its agent
[1:46:47] or proxy,
[1:46:48] with the
[1:46:48] intention and
[1:46:49] without regard
[1:46:49] that such
[1:46:50] conduct will
[1:46:51] influence the
[1:46:51] political or
[1:46:52] government
[1:46:52] process,
[1:46:53] affect the
[1:46:54] exercise of
[1:46:55] democratic or
[1:46:56] political rights
[1:46:57] or duties in
[1:46:58] the Philippines
[1:46:58] or any
[1:46:59] part thereof,
[1:47:00] support the
[1:47:01] intelligence
[1:47:01] activities of
[1:47:02] a foreign
[1:47:02] principle or
[1:47:03] prejudice and
[1:47:04] national security
[1:47:05] shall be guilty
[1:47:06] of committing
[1:47:06] interference.
[1:47:07] So you must be
[1:47:08] doing an
[1:47:09] action,
[1:47:09] Mr. Chair,
[1:47:10] that is either
[1:47:11] covert,
[1:47:12] deceptive,
[1:47:13] coercive,
[1:47:13] or threatening
[1:47:14] on behalf
[1:47:15] or upon the
[1:47:17] direction or
[1:47:18] you're being
[1:47:18] funded or
[1:47:19] supervised by
[1:47:20] a foreign
[1:47:20] principle,
[1:47:21] agent,
[1:47:22] or proxy.
[1:47:22] It doesn't
[1:47:23] say enemy,
[1:47:25] Mr. Chair,
[1:47:26] so that's why
[1:47:26] in our bill,
[1:47:27] we have a
[1:47:27] definition of
[1:47:28] who can be
[1:47:29] considered your
[1:47:30] foreign
[1:47:30] principle who
[1:47:31] can be
[1:47:32] considered a
[1:47:33] foreign agent
[1:47:34] or a
[1:47:35] foreign
[1:47:35] proxy.
[1:47:36] So as long
[1:47:36] as you're
[1:47:36] doing these
[1:47:37] things on
[1:47:38] behalf of a
[1:47:38] foreign entity,
[1:47:39] principal,
[1:47:40] proxy,
[1:47:41] agent,
[1:47:41] then it can
[1:47:42] be considered
[1:47:42] as foreign
[1:47:43] interference.
[1:47:44] So we
[1:47:44] don't use
[1:47:44] the word
[1:47:45] enemy in
[1:47:46] this case,
[1:47:47] Mr. Chair.
[1:47:50] Well,
[1:47:50] apparently,
[1:47:51] the old
[1:47:52] law is like
[1:47:52] that.
[1:47:53] So they
[1:47:54] can't
[1:47:54] declare it.
[1:47:55] But anyway,
[1:47:56] it's almost
[1:47:57] old
[1:47:58] law.
[1:47:59] The
[1:48:00] war
[1:48:00] time
[1:48:00] thinking.
[1:48:05] Sa DFA,
[1:48:09] makakatulong
[1:48:10] din sa
[1:48:10] pagbuo
[1:48:11] natin
[1:48:11] ito.
[1:48:11] In May
[1:48:13] 2024,
[1:48:15] the
[1:48:15] Chinese
[1:48:15] embassy
[1:48:16] released a
[1:48:17] transcript
[1:48:17] of a
[1:48:19] call
[1:48:19] with our
[1:48:20] Western
[1:48:21] command
[1:48:21] chief
[1:48:22] claiming
[1:48:23] that he
[1:48:23] agreed
[1:48:24] to a
[1:48:25] new
[1:48:25] model
[1:48:25] for the
[1:48:26] Ayungin
[1:48:27] shawl.
[1:48:29] Ayungin
[1:48:29] shawl
[1:48:29] resupply.
[1:48:30] The NSA
[1:48:32] said the
[1:48:35] call was
[1:48:35] recorded
[1:48:36] illegally
[1:48:36] and called
[1:48:37] for the
[1:48:38] diplomat's
[1:48:39] expulsion.
[1:48:42] None
[1:48:42] was reported.
[1:48:44] So since
[1:48:45] diplomats have
[1:48:46] immunity,
[1:48:47] what is our
[1:48:48] protocol?
[1:48:50] Should officials
[1:48:51] be required
[1:48:52] to report
[1:48:53] security-related
[1:48:54] contacts with
[1:48:55] foreign diplomats?
[1:48:56] Sir,
[1:49:04] I wasn't there
[1:49:06] yet when
[1:49:06] that happened,
[1:49:08] but normally
[1:49:08] in other
[1:49:09] countries,
[1:49:10] we would
[1:49:10] declare the
[1:49:11] diplomat-involved
[1:49:13] persona ng
[1:49:13] grata.
[1:49:15] But we're
[1:49:16] not aware
[1:49:17] as of now
[1:49:17] what action
[1:49:18] was taken,
[1:49:19] so we'll
[1:49:19] check with
[1:49:19] the concerned
[1:49:20] office of
[1:49:21] the
[1:49:21] department.
[1:49:21] Yes,
[1:49:24] please,
[1:49:25] let us
[1:49:25] know.
[1:49:28] Include it
[1:49:28] in your
[1:49:29] submissions.
[1:49:31] And then,
[1:49:34] may mga
[1:49:34] iba-ibang
[1:49:35] mga
[1:49:35] sample
[1:49:35] na nakikita
[1:49:36] natin
[1:49:36] sa ibang
[1:49:37] countries.
[1:49:37] I'm sure
[1:49:38] you're
[1:49:38] familiar
[1:49:39] with this
[1:49:39] already.
[1:49:40] So,
[1:49:41] I need
[1:49:42] not
[1:49:42] read it
[1:49:46] out to
[1:49:46] you.
[1:49:49] I'm sure
[1:49:49] you're
[1:49:50] researching
[1:49:50] on your
[1:49:50] own.
[1:49:51] So,
[1:49:52] at this
[1:49:53] point,
[1:49:53] we would
[1:49:54] really
[1:49:56] appreciate
[1:49:57] the
[1:49:58] position
[1:49:58] papers
[1:49:59] that you
[1:49:59] will be
[1:50:00] submitting.
[1:50:00] to
[1:50:01] address
[1:50:01] both
[1:50:02] issues,
[1:50:04] the
[1:50:04] issues
[1:50:05] on
[1:50:05] espionage
[1:50:07] and
[1:50:08] the
[1:50:08] interference.
[1:50:11] Mr.
[1:50:12] President,
[1:50:13] anything
[1:50:13] else?
[1:50:14] A few
[1:50:15] more
[1:50:15] questions,
[1:50:16] Mr.
[1:50:16] Chairman.
[1:50:18] Sa
[1:50:18] DOJ,
[1:50:22] foreign
[1:50:22] interference
[1:50:23] can
[1:50:24] come
[1:50:25] in the
[1:50:25] form
[1:50:25] of
[1:50:34] electronic
[1:50:35] it.
[1:50:35] fanalizes
[1:50:45] publishing,
[1:50:47] altering,
[1:50:48] or deleting
[1:50:49] electronic
[1:50:49] information.
[1:50:51] So,
[1:50:51] it can
[1:50:51] come in
[1:50:51] the form
[1:50:52] of
[1:50:52] electronic.
[1:50:53] How do
[1:50:54] we now
[1:50:54] distinguish
[1:50:55] between,
[1:50:56] ito yung
[1:50:56] sinabi
[1:50:57] ni Neil,
[1:50:58] whether
[1:50:59] it's
[1:50:59] information,
[1:51:02] a
[1:51:03] foreign
[1:51:05] entity
[1:51:06] publishes
[1:51:07] information
[1:51:08] about
[1:51:09] politics,
[1:51:15] or about
[1:51:16] the system
[1:51:18] of government,
[1:51:19] it's an
[1:51:19] opinion
[1:51:19] piece,
[1:51:21] versus
[1:51:21] it's
[1:51:23] interfering
[1:51:24] with our
[1:51:25] political
[1:51:27] rights or
[1:51:28] governmental
[1:51:28] process.
[1:51:29] How do
[1:51:30] we define
[1:51:30] that
[1:51:31] line?
[1:51:32] Lalo
[1:51:33] na
[1:51:33] with
[1:51:33] the
[1:51:33] age
[1:51:33] of
[1:51:33] internet,
[1:51:34] it
[1:51:34] can
[1:51:34] come
[1:51:35] from
[1:51:35] anywhere
[1:51:35] around
[1:51:36] the
[1:51:36] world.
[1:51:37] It
[1:51:37] can
[1:51:37] come
[1:51:37] from
[1:51:38] the
[1:51:39] west,
[1:51:39] can
[1:51:39] come
[1:51:39] from
[1:51:40] the
[1:51:40] east.
[1:51:41] But
[1:51:41] how
[1:51:41] do
[1:51:41] you
[1:51:41] now
[1:51:42] differentiate
[1:51:42] whether
[1:51:43] it's
[1:51:43] an
[1:51:43] opinion
[1:51:43] piece,
[1:51:45] or
[1:51:45] whether
[1:51:45] it's
[1:51:45] become,
[1:51:46] it
[1:51:46] has
[1:51:46] become
[1:51:47] an
[1:51:47] interference
[1:51:47] to
[1:51:48] our
[1:51:48] political
[1:51:49] and
[1:51:49] governmental
[1:51:50] processes?
[1:51:52] Under
[1:51:53] this
[1:51:53] proposal.
[1:51:58] Thank
[1:51:59] you,
[1:51:59] Mr.
[1:52:00] Chair
[1:52:00] and the
[1:52:01] Senate
[1:52:01] President.
[1:52:02] Yes,
[1:52:02] it's
[1:52:03] actually
[1:52:03] very
[1:52:04] difficult.
[1:52:05] We are
[1:52:05] a
[1:52:05] democratic
[1:52:06] society.
[1:52:07] We
[1:52:08] value
[1:52:08] the
[1:52:09] Bill
[1:52:09] of
[1:52:09] Rights
[1:52:10] set
[1:52:10] out
[1:52:10] in
[1:52:10] our
[1:52:11] constitution
[1:52:11] and
[1:52:11] included
[1:52:12] there
[1:52:12] is
[1:52:13] the
[1:52:13] freedom
[1:52:15] of
[1:52:15] expression.
[1:52:16] You
[1:52:16] can
[1:52:16] write
[1:52:17] your
[1:52:17] opinion
[1:52:18] anywhere.
[1:52:20] Even
[1:52:21] foreign
[1:52:22] entities.
[1:52:23] Even
[1:52:24] foreign
[1:52:24] entities
[1:52:25] can
[1:52:25] actually
[1:52:26] criticize
[1:52:26] the
[1:52:27] way
[1:52:27] we
[1:52:27] do
[1:52:27] business.
[1:52:29] The
[1:52:29] way
[1:52:30] we
[1:52:30] conduct
[1:52:31] our
[1:52:31] elections.
[1:52:31] Yes,
[1:52:33] your
[1:52:33] honor.
[1:52:34] Or
[1:52:34] may
[1:52:34] vote
[1:52:35] buying,
[1:52:36] they
[1:52:36] can
[1:52:36] criticize
[1:52:36] that
[1:52:37] may
[1:52:37] vote
[1:52:37] buying.
[1:52:38] So
[1:52:39] where do
[1:52:40] we
[1:52:40] now
[1:52:40] define
[1:52:42] the
[1:52:42] line
[1:52:42] between
[1:52:43] interference
[1:52:43] and
[1:52:44] also
[1:52:44] an
[1:52:46] opinion
[1:52:47] piece?
[1:52:48] That's
[1:52:48] why
[1:52:48] Mr.
[1:52:50] Chair,
[1:52:50] Senate
[1:52:50] President,
[1:52:51] I said
[1:52:52] in our
[1:52:52] statement
[1:52:53] of
[1:52:53] support
[1:52:53] at
[1:52:54] the
[1:52:54] start
[1:52:54] of
[1:52:54] this
[1:52:55] hearing
[1:52:55] that
[1:52:55] it's
[1:52:56] really
[1:52:56] a
[1:52:56] balancing
[1:52:56] act.
[1:52:58] We
[1:52:58] need
[1:52:58] to
[1:52:58] empower
[1:52:59] our
[1:52:59] agencies
[1:53:00] to
[1:53:00] be
[1:53:01] able
[1:53:01] to
[1:53:02] go
[1:53:03] after
[1:53:03] people
[1:53:05] who
[1:53:05] commit
[1:53:05] unlawful
[1:53:06] foreign
[1:53:07] interference.
[1:53:09] But
[1:53:09] at the
[1:53:10] same
[1:53:10] time,
[1:53:10] we
[1:53:10] need
[1:53:11] to
[1:53:11] make
[1:53:11] sure
[1:53:12] that
[1:53:12] the
[1:53:12] law
[1:53:12] that
[1:53:13] actually
[1:53:13] empowers
[1:53:14] them
[1:53:14] is not
[1:53:16] vague,
[1:53:17] is not
[1:53:17] broad,
[1:53:18] that
[1:53:18] would
[1:53:19] lead
[1:53:19] to
[1:53:20] infringement
[1:53:21] of
[1:53:21] the
[1:53:22] Bill
[1:53:22] of
[1:53:23] Rights.
[1:53:23] Or
[1:53:24] in the
[1:53:24] case
[1:53:24] of
[1:53:24] the
[1:53:24] foreigners,
[1:53:25] they're
[1:53:25] also
[1:53:26] covered
[1:53:26] by
[1:53:26] the
[1:53:28] Universal
[1:53:28] Declaration
[1:53:29] of
[1:53:30] Human
[1:53:31] Rights,
[1:53:31] etc.,
[1:53:32] which
[1:53:32] include
[1:53:32] freedom
[1:53:33] of
[1:53:33] expression,
[1:53:34] of
[1:53:34] course,
[1:53:35] Mr.
[1:53:36] Chair.
[1:53:36] And so
[1:53:36] therefore,
[1:53:37] there's a need
[1:53:38] really to
[1:53:38] establish the
[1:53:39] element that
[1:53:40] that particular
[1:53:41] person is not
[1:53:42] just writing
[1:53:43] his own
[1:53:44] personal
[1:53:44] opinion,
[1:53:45] because he
[1:53:45] believes
[1:53:46] that his
[1:53:49] own study,
[1:53:50] for example,
[1:53:51] and there's a
[1:53:52] need to
[1:53:52] establish that
[1:53:53] he's actually
[1:53:53] acting on
[1:53:54] behalf of a
[1:53:55] foreign
[1:53:55] principal,
[1:53:56] agent,
[1:53:57] or proxy,
[1:53:58] for what
[1:53:58] reason?
[1:53:59] With the
[1:53:59] intent that
[1:54:00] it would
[1:54:01] influence
[1:54:01] political or
[1:54:02] governmental
[1:54:02] processes.
[1:54:03] So there
[1:54:04] is a need
[1:54:04] to connect
[1:54:05] and be
[1:54:05] very precise
[1:54:06] in our
[1:54:07] definition
[1:54:07] of what
[1:54:08] do you
[1:54:09] really
[1:54:09] consider
[1:54:09] as a
[1:54:10] crime
[1:54:10] of
[1:54:11] foreign
[1:54:11] interference,
[1:54:12] Mr.
[1:54:13] Chair,
[1:54:14] and
[1:54:14] your
[1:54:14] honor,
[1:54:15] Senate
[1:54:15] President.
[1:54:17] And proxies
[1:54:18] can be
[1:54:18] Filipinos.
[1:54:21] Yes,
[1:54:22] proxies can
[1:54:23] be Filipinos,
[1:54:24] but they're
[1:54:24] the proxy
[1:54:24] of a
[1:54:25] foreign
[1:54:25] entity.
[1:54:27] And that
[1:54:29] happens.
[1:54:30] Actually,
[1:54:31] hindi lang
[1:54:31] natin
[1:54:31] masyadong
[1:54:32] ma-pinpoint
[1:54:34] kung sino
[1:54:34] yung
[1:54:36] mga
[1:54:38] tao,
[1:54:39] pero I'm
[1:54:40] sure
[1:54:40] mayroon tayong
[1:54:41] mga
[1:54:41] idea
[1:54:43] kung sino
[1:54:44] sino yung
[1:54:44] mga yun.
[1:54:45] But to
[1:54:45] connect
[1:54:46] them,
[1:54:47] medyo
[1:54:47] mahirap
[1:54:48] at may
[1:54:48] mga
[1:54:48] idea
[1:54:49] tayo.
[1:54:49] And that
[1:54:49] happens
[1:54:50] at this
[1:54:50] setting,
[1:54:51] current
[1:54:51] setting
[1:54:52] right now.
[1:54:52] So
[1:54:52] pwede yung
[1:54:53] proxy,
[1:54:54] pwede
[1:54:54] siyang
[1:54:54] maging
[1:54:55] a
[1:54:55] Filipino
[1:54:56] journalist,
[1:54:57] a
[1:54:57] Filipino
[1:54:57] writer,
[1:54:58] a Filipino
[1:54:58] political
[1:54:59] analyst,
[1:55:00] acting
[1:55:02] on behalf
[1:55:02] of a
[1:55:03] foreign
[1:55:03] entity.
[1:55:05] Undead
[1:55:06] or acting
[1:55:06] on behalf.
[1:55:07] Under the
[1:55:08] law,
[1:55:08] that's what
[1:55:09] it says.
[1:55:11] And that's
[1:55:12] what it's
[1:55:12] trying to
[1:55:13] prevent
[1:55:13] under the
[1:55:14] law.
[1:55:14] Among
[1:55:15] many
[1:55:15] other
[1:55:15] things.
[1:55:16] Because
[1:55:17] foreign
[1:55:17] interference
[1:55:18] can take
[1:55:18] several
[1:55:18] forms.
[1:55:19] Your
[1:55:20] Honor.
[1:55:20] But
[1:55:20] I use
[1:55:21] that as
[1:55:22] an
[1:55:22] example.
[1:55:23] Because
[1:55:23] how do
[1:55:23] we
[1:55:24] now
[1:55:24] differentiate
[1:55:25] whether
[1:55:25] my
[1:55:26] journalist
[1:55:27] wrote a
[1:55:29] piece
[1:55:29] about
[1:55:31] our
[1:55:31] political
[1:55:32] system,
[1:55:33] our
[1:55:33] political
[1:55:33] governmental
[1:55:36] process.
[1:55:38] But
[1:55:38] there are
[1:55:38] stories that
[1:55:41] this is a
[1:55:41] proxy for
[1:55:42] a foreign
[1:55:43] entity.
[1:55:44] So
[1:55:44] how do
[1:55:44] we now,
[1:55:46] where is
[1:55:46] the fine
[1:55:47] line between
[1:55:47] it's an
[1:55:48] opinion
[1:55:48] piece and
[1:55:49] it's
[1:55:50] an
[1:55:50] interference?
[1:55:52] And
[1:55:52] opinion
[1:55:52] piece can
[1:55:53] be very
[1:55:53] rude
[1:55:54] and
[1:55:55] very
[1:55:56] aggressive.
[1:55:57] It's
[1:55:59] correct.
[1:55:59] You need
[1:56:00] to
[1:56:00] determine
[1:56:01] whether
[1:56:01] it's
[1:56:01] an
[1:56:01] honest
[1:56:02] opinion
[1:56:03] piece or
[1:56:04] you need
[1:56:04] to
[1:56:04] establish
[1:56:05] really
[1:56:05] the
[1:56:05] connection
[1:56:06] between
[1:56:07] that
[1:56:07] person
[1:56:07] and
[1:56:07] a
[1:56:08] foreign
[1:56:08] principle
[1:56:08] or
[1:56:09] proxy.
[1:56:09] That's
[1:56:10] why
[1:56:10] our
[1:56:10] prosecutors
[1:56:10] would
[1:56:11] like
[1:56:11] a
[1:56:12] very
[1:56:12] clear
[1:56:12] definition
[1:56:13] of
[1:56:13] foreign
[1:56:14] interference
[1:56:14] so
[1:56:15] that
[1:56:15] they
[1:56:16] would
[1:56:16] have
[1:56:16] an
[1:56:17] effective
[1:56:17] and
[1:56:18] successful
[1:56:18] prosecution
[1:56:19] of the
[1:56:20] crime.
[1:56:20] Your
[1:56:21] Honor.
[1:56:21] The
[1:56:22] local
[1:56:22] who's
[1:56:25] voicing
[1:56:25] out
[1:56:26] their
[1:56:26] opinion
[1:56:26] it's
[1:56:27] not
[1:56:27] enough
[1:56:28] that
[1:56:28] the
[1:56:29] law
[1:56:30] will
[1:56:30] penalize
[1:56:31] them.
[1:56:31] This
[1:56:31] connection
[1:56:32] between
[1:56:32] a
[1:56:32] foreign
[1:56:33] interference
[1:56:34] so
[1:56:34] it's
[1:56:34] a
[1:56:35] foreign
[1:56:37] entity
[1:56:37] that
[1:56:38] should
[1:56:38] be
[1:56:39] a
[1:56:40] very
[1:56:40] important
[1:56:41] element.
[1:56:46] That's
[1:56:46] right.
[1:56:47] Your
[1:56:47] Honor
[1:56:47] because
[1:56:48] it
[1:56:48] says
[1:56:48] you
[1:56:49] must
[1:56:49] be
[1:56:49] doing
[1:56:49] this
[1:56:50] interference
[1:56:50] in
[1:56:51] collaboration
[1:56:51] with
[1:56:52] or
[1:56:52] directed
[1:56:53] by
[1:56:53] funded
[1:56:54] by
[1:56:54] or
[1:56:55] supervised
[1:56:55] by
[1:56:56] a
[1:56:57] foreign
[1:56:57] principal
[1:56:57] agent
[1:56:58] or
[1:56:58] proxy
[1:56:59] with
[1:57:00] the
[1:57:00] intention
[1:57:00] of
[1:57:01] influencing
[1:57:02] political
[1:57:03] or
[1:57:04] governmental
[1:57:04] processes
[1:57:05] to the
[1:57:06] detriment
[1:57:06] of course
[1:57:06] of the
[1:57:07] national
[1:57:07] security
[1:57:08] of the
[1:57:08] Philippines.
[1:57:09] So
[1:57:09] there are
[1:57:10] vague words
[1:57:10] there.
[1:57:11] Mr.
[1:57:12] Chair,
[1:57:12] for
[1:57:12] example,
[1:57:13] Your
[1:57:13] Honor,
[1:57:13] what do
[1:57:14] you mean
[1:57:15] by
[1:57:15] influence
[1:57:15] political
[1:57:16] or
[1:57:16] governmental
[1:57:17] process?
[1:57:18] What
[1:57:18] do
[1:57:18] you
[1:57:18] mean
[1:57:19] by
[1:57:19] it
[1:57:19] affected
[1:57:20] the
[1:57:20] exercise
[1:57:20] of
[1:57:21] democratic
[1:57:21] or
[1:57:21] political
[1:57:22] rights
[1:57:22] or
[1:57:22] duties?
[1:57:23] So
[1:57:24] there's
[1:57:24] just a
[1:57:24] need
[1:57:25] to
[1:57:25] trash
[1:57:25] out
[1:57:25] the
[1:57:28] definition
[1:57:28] of
[1:57:28] this
[1:57:29] term
[1:57:29] used
[1:57:29] here
[1:57:30] so
[1:57:30] that
[1:57:30] it's
[1:57:31] not
[1:57:31] vague
[1:57:31] or
[1:57:32] overbroad.
[1:57:33] Mr.
[1:57:34] Chair
[1:57:34] and
[1:57:35] Your
[1:57:35] Honor,
[1:57:36] Senate
[1:57:36] President.
[1:57:37] Thank you,
[1:57:41] Mr.
[1:57:41] President.
[1:57:41] Thank you.
[1:57:43] Can I
[1:57:44] just take
[1:57:45] this
[1:57:45] opportunity
[1:57:45] to
[1:57:46] update
[1:57:47] the
[1:57:48] body?
[1:57:48] Because
[1:57:49] I did
[1:57:49] say that
[1:57:49] based on
[1:57:50] the
[1:57:50] matrix
[1:57:50] that we
[1:57:51] have,
[1:57:51] we don't
[1:57:52] have a
[1:57:52] pending
[1:57:52] espionage
[1:57:53] case.
[1:57:54] But
[1:57:54] last
[1:57:55] year,
[1:57:55] in 2025,
[1:57:57] we do
[1:57:57] have,
[1:57:57] and we
[1:57:58] will submit
[1:57:58] an updated
[1:58:00] matrix,
[1:58:01] Mr.
[1:58:01] Chair,
[1:58:01] to provide
[1:58:02] the body
[1:58:02] of the
[1:58:03] status of
[1:58:04] these cases
[1:58:04] because my
[1:58:06] understanding was
[1:58:07] these are
[1:58:07] cybercrime-related
[1:58:08] cases,
[1:58:08] but it also
[1:58:09] says that
[1:58:10] it's
[1:58:10] espionage,
[1:58:11] cybercrime-related
[1:58:12] cases in
[1:58:13] relation to
[1:58:14] espionage,
[1:58:15] Mr.
[1:58:15] Chair.
[1:58:16] So there
[1:58:16] would be
[1:58:17] at least
[1:58:17] pending
[1:58:19] with the
[1:58:19] RTC,
[1:58:20] Makati,
[1:58:21] Pasay,
[1:58:22] and Manila,
[1:58:23] one,
[1:58:23] two,
[1:58:24] three cases,
[1:58:27] five cases
[1:58:28] of espionage,
[1:58:29] Mr.
[1:58:30] Chair,
[1:58:30] in relation
[1:58:31] to cybercrime.
[1:58:33] Thank you.
[1:58:33] Because our
[1:58:34] prosecutors use
[1:58:34] cybercrime
[1:58:35] because of
[1:58:35] the method
[1:58:36] that was
[1:58:36] used,
[1:58:37] Mr.
[1:58:37] Chair.
[1:58:38] And
[1:58:38] because
[1:58:38] they think
[1:58:43] it doesn't
[1:58:43] fall under
[1:58:44] the category
[1:58:44] of the
[1:58:45] old law.
[1:58:47] Yes,
[1:58:48] it's possible.
[1:58:48] That's why
[1:58:49] they use
[1:58:49] the cybercrime
[1:58:50] law,
[1:58:50] Mr.
[1:58:51] Chair.
[1:58:51] Anything
[1:58:52] else from
[1:58:53] the others?
[1:58:54] Well,
[1:58:55] I have
[1:58:56] other questions,
[1:58:57] but apparently
[1:58:59] it has been
[1:59:00] some,
[1:59:01] most of them
[1:59:02] have been
[1:59:02] answered by
[1:59:02] the interchange.
[1:59:04] So the
[1:59:06] submissions
[1:59:07] that we expect
[1:59:09] from you
[1:59:09] will be very
[1:59:10] important.
[1:59:11] We will try
[1:59:12] to come up
[1:59:12] with a technical
[1:59:13] working group
[1:59:14] and a consolidated
[1:59:15] version.
[1:59:16] Then we would
[1:59:16] probably ask
[1:59:17] you to comment
[1:59:19] on the
[1:59:19] consolidated
[1:59:20] version after
[1:59:21] that before
[1:59:22] we report
[1:59:23] it out
[1:59:23] on the
[1:59:23] floor.
[1:59:24] So if
[1:59:25] there's
[1:59:25] nothing else,
[1:59:27] Mr.
[1:59:27] Senate
[1:59:27] President,
[1:59:28] we wish
[1:59:28] to thank
[1:59:29] everybody
[1:59:29] for joining
[1:59:31] us this
[1:59:31] afternoon.
[1:59:32] And in
[1:59:33] the meantime,
[1:59:34] the hearing
[1:59:35] or the
[1:59:36] meeting of
[1:59:36] the Committee
[1:59:37] on National
[1:59:37] Defense is
[1:59:38] hereby
[1:59:39] adjourned.
[1:59:39] Thank you.
[1:59:40] All right.
[2:00:15] Joining us
[2:00:16] this morning
[2:00:16] is
[2:00:17] Attorney
[2:00:17] Michael
[2:00:18] Poa,
[2:00:18] the
[2:00:19] spokesperson
[2:00:19] for the
[2:00:20] defense
[2:00:20] team.
[2:00:21] Attorney
[2:00:21] Poa,
[2:00:22] thank you
[2:00:22] for joining
[2:00:22] me on
[2:00:23] the Head
[2:00:23] Start.
[2:00:24] I appreciate
[2:00:24] this.
[2:00:25] Thank you
[2:00:25] for inviting
[2:00:25] me once
[2:00:26] again,
[2:00:26] Ms.
[2:00:26] Karen.
[2:00:27] It's always
[2:00:27] a pleasure
[2:00:27] to be
[2:00:28] here.
[2:00:28] Okay,
[2:00:28] so I'll
[2:00:29] start first
[2:00:29] with this.
[2:00:30] When the
[2:00:31] prosecution
[2:00:31] suddenly
[2:00:32] decided
[2:00:33] to drop
[2:00:34] all three
[2:00:36] articles,
[2:00:36] you were
[2:00:37] expecting
[2:00:37] bribery
[2:00:38] to be
[2:00:39] dropped
[2:00:39] because at
[2:00:40] some point
[2:00:40] they were
[2:00:40] talking about
[2:00:41] it in
[2:00:41] the media.
[2:00:42] But the
[2:00:43] other two
[2:00:43] that they
[2:00:44] had already
[2:00:45] presented,
[2:00:46] grave threats
[2:00:47] and the
[2:00:47] confidential
[2:00:48] funds,
[2:00:49] in the
[2:00:49] 39 days,
[2:00:51] were you
[2:00:51] surprised?
[2:00:53] Well,
[2:00:53] it was
[2:00:53] really
[2:00:54] unexpected
[2:00:55] to begin
[2:00:55] with.
[2:00:56] Surprised,
[2:00:57] well,
[2:00:57] I would say
[2:00:57] in a way,
[2:00:58] sa totoo lang,
[2:00:59] as I've
[2:00:59] said,
[2:01:00] yung bribery
[2:01:00] wala tayong
[2:01:01] problema
[2:01:01] because there
[2:01:02] was already
[2:01:02] a formal
[2:01:03] manifestation
[2:01:03] filed and
[2:01:04] served upon
[2:01:04] the defense
[2:01:05] about a
[2:01:05] week before
[2:01:06] all of
[2:01:07] this
[2:01:07] happened.
[2:01:08] Doon naman
[2:01:09] sa two
[2:01:09] other articles,
[2:01:10] as I've
[2:01:11] mentioned in
[2:01:11] other programs
[2:01:12] also,
[2:01:12] may mga narinig
[2:01:13] nao na
[2:01:13] chismes
[2:01:14] here and
[2:01:14] there,
[2:01:15] the couple
[2:01:15] of days
[2:01:16] leading up
[2:01:16] to it.
[2:01:17] But,
[2:01:17] of course,
[2:01:18] you never
[2:01:18] know,
[2:01:18] kasi yung
[2:01:18] chismes,
[2:01:19] karamihan,
[2:01:20] di naman
[2:01:20] totoo eh,
[2:01:20] di ba?
[2:01:21] So,
[2:01:21] I could
[2:01:22] say,
[2:01:22] we were
[2:01:23] still
[2:01:23] surprised,
[2:01:24] we weren't
[2:01:24] expecting
[2:01:25] for...