• Rep. Edcel C. Lagman
• Independent-Albay
• 14 May 2012
• 0916-6406737 / 0918-9120137

          A legislative postponement of the barangay elections is not unconstitutional because the Constitution itself does not prescribe the nature of the election and terms of office of barangay officials, and on the contrary it gives to Congress the plenary authority and discretion to fix the term of office of barangay officials.

         This is the categorical position of Rep. Edcel C. Lagman (Independent-Albay) to refute the statement of election lawyer Romulo Macalintal who said that the “proposed law calling for postponement of the barangay elections scheduled in October is unconstitutional.”

       Lagman stated that any proposed statute postponing the barangay elections is constitutional and consistent with the constitution which provides under Section 8 of Article X “the term of office of elective local officials, except barangay officials, which shall be determined by law, shall be three years”.

         In other words where the Constitution has prescribed a three-year term for local officials and Members of Congress, the determination of the term of barangay officials has been left to Congress.

         Lagman cited the latest Supreme Court decision in COMELEC vs. Cruz (2009) where it was ruled that “the Constitution has left to Congress the discretion to determine the length of term and term limitations of the barangay officials.”

        Consequently, there is no constitutional provision which is violated if the barangay elections scheduled in October will be postponed or reset.

         Historically and invariably it was the Congress which for many instances has postponed previous barangay elections and changed the term limitations of barangay officials.

          The postponement of barangay elections does not extend the term of office of the incumbent but only allows them to hold over pending the election of their successors in order to preserve the continuity of government services.

          The application of the hold over principle of barangay officials has been sustained by the Supreme Court in ADAP vs.COMELEC (2007). In fact, Section 5 of RA9164 providing for synchronized Barangay and Sangguniang elections provides that “all incumbent barangay officials and Sangguniang Kabataan officials shall remain in office unless sooner removed or suspended for cause until their successors shall have been elected and qualified.”

        The proposal to increase the term of barangay officials from three to five years has precedent in law. It is completely immaterial for barangay officials to have longer terms than municipal officials since municipal officials are not the superiors of barangay officials and have no control over them.

           Under R.A. No. 6679 the term of office of barangay officials was five (5) years.

• Office of Rep. Edcel C. Lagman
• Independent-Albay
• 25 April 2012
• 0916-6406741 / 0918-9120137

The Supreme Court has ruled with finality on the distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries of the Hacienda Luisita lands as well as on the social justice valuation for computing the just compensation to the landowners, and perforce the sugar barons of the hacienda must comply.

 This was stressed by Rep. Edcel C. Lagman (Independent-Albay) who is one of the three remaining original authors of House Bill No. 400 who are still members of the House of Representatives in the 15^th Congress. HB 400 became RA No. 6657, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) which was approved on 10 June 1988 during the 8^th Congress. The two others are Rep. Orlando B. Fua and Rep. Thelma Z. Almario.

Aside from the late Rep. Bonifacio H. Gillego, who was then the Chairman of the Committee on Agrarian Reform, the other co-authors included former Rep. Florencio B. Abad, the incumbent Budget Secretary, and former Rep. Herminio S. Aquino, a close relative of President Benigno Aquino.

 Lagman also principally authored the CARPER (RA No. 9700) which extended for five (5) years or up to June 30, 2014 the Land Acquisition and Distribution (LAD) component of CARL.

 Lagman lauded the Supreme Court’s decision for giving verity and fulfillment to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) which was the centerpiece agenda of the late President Corazon C. Aquino.

 The decision also upheld the constitutional mandate that land, not shares of stock, be distributed to the landless tillers, Lagman added.

• REP. EDCEL C. LAGMAN
• Independent, Albay
• 22 March 2012
• 0916-6406741 / 0918-9120137

HOUSE PASSES DESAPARECIDOS BILL

          “The Philippines may soon hold the singular distinction of having enacted the first domestic law in Asia that criminalizes enforced or involuntary disappearance,” enthused Rep. Edcel C. Lagman, principal author of House Bill No. 98, the proposed “Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012”.

           The House of Representatives passed the desaparecidos bill on third and final reading with 234 affirmative votes, zero negative, and no abstention on 21 March 2012, the last session day before the Lenten recess.  

           Essentially adopting the United Nations’ definition of enforced disappearance, House Bill No. 98 defines the offense as the “arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty committed by government authorities or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of such persons in authority, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared person, which places such person outside the protection of the law.”

           According to Lagman “a two-decade gestation for this invaluable human rights legislation is not only inordinately long. It is a grave injustice to the desaparecidos and their families who are also victims as they suffer interminable pain and anguish over the unknown fate and whereabouts of their disappeared loved ones.”

           “This measure reaffirms the principles of State accountability, justice and the rule of law. It is envisioned to help government prevent, suppress, investigate and penalize enforced disappearance as well as provide victims and their families effective machinery for reparation and redress,” Lagman stressed.

           Members of the Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance (FIND) who were in the session hall gallery yesterday hailed the long awaited plenary approval.

           Lagman, who is also the Honorary Chairperson of FIND, said that although the Philippines has not yet signed the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED), the country is already poised to comply with a vital provision of the Convention that mandates States Parties to enact domestic laws penalizing enforced disappearance as an autonomous or separate offense.

           “With the approval of H.B. No. 98, the Congress is laying the groundwork for the country’s compliance with the landmark international human rights convention,” the Albay solon said.

           The ICPAPED entered into force on December 23, 2010 and to date has 91 signatories and 31 States Parties.

           “I see no reason for the Philippines’ temporizing on the ICPAPED which is the basis of the proposed anti-enforced disappearance law,” Lagman said.

           Lagman urged President Benigno Simeon Aquino III, whose father was a victim of grave human rights violations, to champion the cause of the disappeared by ensuring the enactment and full implementation of the complementary domestic and international laws on enforced disappearance.

           As a human rights advocate, Lagman is also the principal author of RA 9346 prohibiting the imposition of the death penalty, RA 9745 penalizing torture as a separate offense, and HB 5990 proposing compensation to victims of human rights violations during the Marcos regime, which was also approved on third reading on 21 March 2012.