Transcript of Interview Senate President Vicente C. Sotto III

Accomplishments of the Senate in 2018

SP Sotto: As of December 13, 2018, we have passed 95 bills signed into law. There are 85 for approval of the President. Meron pang pasado na ng Senado pero nasa bicameral conference committee na 19. Pagchineck mo from the previous year's up to now, perhaps even as early as 1987, up to now, ito na ang pinaka-most prolific na Senate this year, in 2018, pinaka-marami ito, sa dami ng mga bills, na naging batas at saka mahahalagang batas na naka-pending, and this is credited to the entire Senate because that includes the leadership from Senator Pimentel, to myself.

Q: Lahat po, of national significance?

SP Sotto: Oo, maraming of national significance. Bangsamoro, the BOL. The Philippine identification system, personal property security act, occupational safety and health standards act, the retirement benefits system in the Office of the Ombudsman, the Filipino sign language act, the national payments systems act, the regulation of the practice of criminology profession, yung kalusugan ng nutrisyon ng mga nanay, magnanay act, just to name a few out of the 95.

For approval of the President, 85 yung nakapending, ang mga noted dito, the rights and responsibilities of migrant workers, creating the coconut farmers industry trust fund, or the Coco Levy Fund, the National Bible Day, the revised corporation code of the Philippines, the amendments to the BSP charter, the expanded maternity leave, telecommuting in the workplace, yung HIV-AIDS prevention act, the motorcycle crime prevention act, mandatory PhilHealth coverage for all PWDs, positive discipline act, the creation of the Department of Human Settlements, the mobile number portability act, the social security act of 2018 increasing the pension of senior veterans, the Universal Healthcare Program, the special protection of child passengers in motor vehicles, strengthening the Philippine Coconut Authority, kakabit ito ng Coco Levy, and then amendments to the Fair Election Act, the quantitative import restrictions on rice or rice tariffication, the special protection of children in situations of armed conflict, the tax amnesty, the amnesty for simulated births. Those are only 23 of the 85 bills for approval of the President already, and then yung mga nakapending sa bicam, 19 yan pero noteworthy would be expanding the coverage of exemptions from revealing the source of information, yung gusto ng mga taga-broadcast at taga-radio dahil hindi kayo kasali dati, Sotto Law dati. The energy virtual one-stop-shop, the national integrated cancer control program, at saka yung supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2018, sa Dengvaxia.

Meron pang already approved on third reading, 46, yun ay wala pa sa bicam pero approved na sa amin. Yun ang pinaka-total niyan, so 95 plus 85, plus 19, plus 46, yun ang output ng Senate for the entire year of 2018 as of December 13, 2018.

Q: Aside from the 85 bills na naapprove ng Senate, isa din sa nag-antala sa deadlines ng institution ay yung mga controversies na napasok or inimbestigahan ng institution. Alin dito yung naging challenging for the Senate?

SP Sotto: BOL would be number 1. The Philippine ID System, ang haba-haba ng explanation diyan kasi may mga nagko-kontra nung una. Perhaps yung dalawa na yun. Fright now, another controversy is the abolition of the Road Board.

On what issues were difficult to address.

SP Sotto: Hindi talaga kami nahirapan kundi very controversial, yung mga investigations by the Blue Ribbon. Yung sa illegal drugs, yung sa Customs, yun ang mga naging controversial.

Q: Yung sa issue ni Senator Trillanes, naging mahirap ba ito sa mga discussion ng mga senators? Yung pagtira dito ni Senator Trillanes? Yung arrest niya?

SP Sotto: Hindi, hindi naging issue sa ibang kasama namin. Ako lang talaga ang naipit doon sa usapin na iyon, as I was responsible for what was happening to the Senate during that time, but none of my colleagues were worried or felt that there was a big issue about it, kasi we were just following the tradition, we were just following the rules, kaya hindi naging controversial sa amin, wala akong narinig. Ang isa lang naman na napagusapan would be yung discussion ko sa aking chairman ng Committee on Accounts, Senator Lacson, na siniguro lang namin na hindi gumagastos ang Senado doon sa nangyaring yun, kaya ang ginagawa natin during that time pag tuntong ng six o'clock, pinapatay na ang aircon dahil centralized tayong lahat, buong building. Kailangan naka-on ang aircon kung may opisina, merong session. Ang ginawa namin, basta pagdating ng six o'clock, pinapatay na yon. Pag weekend, hindi binubuksan.

Q: At one point medyo na-demonize ang Senate as an institution, kung mauulit yung ganitong insidente, will the Senate take a stand?

SP Sotto: Perhaps. If I can use the word that you used, demonized, hindi lang nila naintindihan kasi. Kung naintindihan nila wala silang dapat ireklamo sa Senado, sa leadership ng Senado sa nangyari sapagkat sinusunod lang namin kun ano yung kahit sino ang personality na involved, sinusunod lang namin yung patakaran. Kaya nila naiisip yun at merong hindi magandang sinasabi tungkol sa Senado or sa leadership ng Senado during that time, ay hindi nila naiintindihan ang sitwasyon at mga patakaran. Kung alam lang nila yun, I am sure they will just keep quiet about it.

Q: There are also observations na yung Senate leadership ngayon is mas maka-administration compared to the previous administration, is that a fair assessment? SP Sotto: It depends on their perspective. Perhaps nagkakaroon sila ng ganoong pananaw sapagkat alam nila siguro na karamihan sa amin ay kaibigan ni President Duterte pero hindi kami magka-partido, at meron kaming hindi pagkakaintindihan din, at meron din kaming hindi pagkaka-sundo tungkol sa mga nakapending na batas sa amin. Perception lang nila yun pero hindi siguro. As a matter-of-fact, malala siguro nung panahon ni Gloria, nung leadership noon. Even nung panahon ni Erap, magkakasama talaga ang leadership noon at saka ang Malacañang. Lalo na nung panahon ni Senator Aquino, ni President Noynoy, di ba? Dahil kapartido niya yung Senate President at saka yung mga leaders ng Senado during that time, except the time of Senator Enrile, but thereafter, di ba? So hindi nila pwedeng sabihin yun sa ngayon, ang makapag-sasalita lang niyan, malamang ayaw kay President Duterte o kaya ayaw na kami ay sumasang-ayon. Hindi naman pwedeng kontra kami sa lahat ng bagay, hindi naman kami opposition. Hindi kami magkapartido, pero on a personal level lang ang pagkakaibigan namin, walang kinalaman sa pulitika.

Q: Where do you draw the line?

SP Sotto: If it's good for the people, if it's good for the country, we support. If it's not, we do not.

Q: For instance?

SP Sotto: TRAIN 2, very good example dahil kung yung House naipasa na nila kaagad, sa amin hindi pa naghehearing. Maraming instances na hindi kami basta-basta sumusunod sa Executive. We have our own rules and our own interpretation of things.

Q: Come 2019, magkakaroon ng bagong composition ang Congress, ano yung mga assurance na pwede ninyo ibigay sa public as far as the institution is concerned?

SP Sotto: The Senate has always been independent minded. Most of the members of the Senate are independent minded, kaya napapagbintangan kung minsan na Kapag naging senador gusto maging presidente, hindi naman totoo yun. Kahit na ikaw ay kapartido ng Executive department, usually the Senate acts independently. That is what most of the senators would like with their leadership, with their leaders. Gusto nila, pino-proteksyunan ang kung ano ang mabuti para sa bansa o sa taong bayan, at kung ano ang mabuti para sa Senado, so I expect the same thing, even with the new composition of the Senate in 2019.

Q: You also expect to retain the seat?

SP Sotto: I'll leave it to the members of the Senate. I am here because of their trust and confidence, so I am here at their pleasure. I will leave it to the pleasure of the new composition of the Senate.

On the abolition of the Road Board

SP Sotto: Basta kami naniniwala na as far as we are concerned, abolished na yun sapagkat yung House version na pinasa nila on third reading na matagal ng panahon, nakarating sa amin, nagpasa rin kami nung aming version nung una pero later on binawi namin yung version namin, ayaw na naming magbicam, sapagkat nakita namin na maayos yung version nila. So para wala ng bicam, inadopt namin en toto. Therefore, wala ng bicam. In other words, enrolled copy na dapat yun, submitted na to the president for signature.

Q: Paano kung Speaker Arroyo refuse to sign the enrolled bill?

SP Sotto: Kasi it emanated from the House, kailangan sila ang mag-transmit. Meron kaming version namin, pinirmahan ko yung sa Senate na inadopt iyon, at meron kami, pirmado ko yun. Ang nangyari ngayon, it's good as abolished dahil alam nu Executive department na inabolish namin, inabolish din ng House. Inabolish ng Congress in other words. Ngayon, alam din naman nila na ang Pangulo nagsabi sa amin din na gusto niyang iabolish yan noon pa, last year pa. So it is as good as abolished dahil hindi na irerelease yung funding nun, dahil ang nangyayari nga ay graft-ridden yung pondo. So, it's good as abolished. Kung ipipilit pa rin nila, perhaps somebody should bring it to the proper venue, kung courts ang kailangan dito para iresolve yan, let it be. Now, pag ayaw ng Executive niyan dahil ang pagkakaintindi ng Executive ay abolished na ito, wala na rin yan. So pagdating ng July 1, magfile tayo ng bagong abolition kung ayaw pa rin nilang maniwala na abolished na ito iabolish natin uli. Sa July 1, magpasa tayo ng bill.

Q: (Unclear) magpass ng version nila sa House?

SP Sotto: Yung mga may gusto ng Road board, tanggal na lahat sa June 30.

Q: Hindi na yun pwedeng bawiin?

SP Sotto: Sa amin ang tingin namin hindi na dapat pwedeng bawiin yun pero kung ipipilit nila, sabi ko nga dalhin nila sa tamang venue, or dapat may magdala sa tamang venue para desisyunan yun.

Q: Hindi pwedeng Senate yung magtransmit?

SP Sotto: As far as we are concerned, it's abolished. We adopted the House version, it's as good as a bill that is supposed to be transmitted to the President already and I'm sure the President will sign it.

Q: Sino ang magtatransmit?

SP Sotto: Tingnan namin kung ano ang mga possibilities na pwede. Kung ayaw pirmahan ng Speaker ng House, tingnan ko ang possibility kung ang Senate ang magtransmit.

Q: Wala kang intention na kausapin si Speaker Arroyo about this?

SP Sotto: Nagusap na kami noon, nung bagong upo sila. Binanggit niya sa akin na gusto nilang bawiin.

Q: Why?

SP Sotto: Hindi ko na tinanong, basta sabi ko pasado na sa amin.

Q: Sabi ni Secretary Panelo hinahanap din nila yung kopya ng bill so the President can support it?

SP Sotto: Yun pala. Kung eksakto yung sinabi ni Secretary Panelo, I will submit it today.

Q: Kahit walang pirma ng House Speaker?

SP Sotto: Basta gusto nilang makita yung kopya na pirmado ko, papadala namin today.

Q: On the matter of bringing it to the courts (unclear)?

SP Sotto: Anybody from the House siguro. Anybody actually. I don't think it's proper for the Senate to do so because we have a stand, and our stand is it's abolished. Kuwestiyunin ninyo kami.

Q: But you still have the bicam...

SP Sotto: Wala ng bicam.

Q: Sa budget, as far as the budget is concerned?

SP Sotto: Hindi pa, medyo madugo pang kontrobersiya yan sa budget ng DPWH pagdating ng January 14. Mabigat yan, siguradong mapapagusapan yan at siguradong ipipilit ng Senado yan na ilagay sa GAA yung budget ng road user's tax.

Q: Possible deadlock on the Road Board issue?

SP Sotto: I hope not. I don't think they should. If there is a deadlock that will be a reenacted budget for the entire 2019. They don't want that.

Q: Sa 2019 meron pang budget for Road Board?

SP Sotto: Sa House version ng budget? Pwedeng icheck, hindi ko kayang sagutin yun.

Q: Sa Senate na ipapasa ninyo, wala na?

SP Sotto: Wala na, siguradong wala.

Q: Bakit po inooppose yung Road Board abolition?

SP Sotto: Siguro because of the projects that the Road Board can give.

Q: Pwedeng campaign funds?

SP Sotto: Your guess is as good as mine. I'd rather not say something about that.

Q: Dapat bang hikayatin ni Presidente ang mga allies niya sa house para wag ng ioppose yung abolition?

SP Sotto: That's not his style. The President has not officially used his influence or power to tell Congress or the Senate what to do and what not to do. He has never done it, kaya nga doon sa question kanina na merong mga nagsasabi ran na masyadong pro-admin daw kami, hindi nila alam ang nangyayari. Hindi nila alam ang nangyayari sa loob ng Senado, hindi nila alam ang nangyayari sa Malacañang. Kahit minsan, hindi pa ako tinawagan at kahit minsan hindi pa rin niya tinawagan si Senator Pimentel about any legislation, even membership or chairmanship of any committee, yung mga ibang presidente, ginawa yan at ginagawa nila yun. Ito never, not even once kaya sabi ko it's not his style. Hindi niya gagawin yun, hindi siya tatawag sa mga congressman para sabihin na abolished na yan. His opinion when we were discussing it over a year ago, panahon pa ni Bebot Alvarez, alam niya, alam namin narinig namin sa kanya dahil may nagsusumbong sa kanya na ang tindi ng corruption diyan. Hindi napupunta sa tama yung budget. Sabi ni President, dapat abolish yan, which is his opinion. He didn't say Congress, you abolish. Dapat iabolish yan, ika niya.

Q: If you submit the bill to the President may implication na mapakilos ang house or maybe the president will decide on the matter if you transmit the bill.

SP Sotto: Well I don't know, I rather not venture into that but what I'm doing is based on your reports, sabi ninyo Sec. Panelo, was saying that they have not even seen a copy of the bill or of the enrolled copy, na dapat kung tatawagin yun, well, I'm sending it to the President today.

Q: Enrolled copy sir?

SP Sotto: Yung kopya na pinirmahan naming inadopt naming yung house version nung road board abolition.

Q: Act of transmitting yun?

SP Sotto: Yes.

Q: Sir pag ginawa ninyo yun mapupunta na kay president yung burden to resolve? Kapag pinirmahan ninyo yun?

SP Sotto: Hindi naman, I'm just reacting to what the executive department has said na hindi pa nila nakikita yung copy at wala silang kopya. Ipapadala ko yung Kopya ng bill, na ito ay pirmado ng Senate President.

Q: Are you ready for a possible scenario na baka magtalo ka ng house leaders kasi nga for them binawi na nila rescinded na.

SP Sotto: Kaya nga perhaps there should be a proper venue where we can find a solution. Kasi... Time and the executive department is on our side. They're not going to release the budget anyway it is as good as abolished.

Q: Nagkaroon ba ng instance before the binawi na ng isang chamber yung aprubado na nila na bill at adopted.

SP Sotto: Wala akong natatandaan eh. Ang natatandaan ko lang there was a bicameral conference committee report approved already by both house but the speaker of the house refused to sign it ayaw pa nya, drinibble nya hanggang maabutan na ng sine die adjournment. Yun ang alam ko.

Q: So technically hindi nakapasa?

SP Sotto: Oo. Ulitin the following congress. I'd rather not say who it was, kayo na mag investigate.

Q: May directive si President kay Sec. Diokno not to release any fund sa road board diba?

SP Sotto: Oo

Q: So technically wala na din silang function?

SP Sotto: Yah. Wala talaga kasi the DBM is the architect, the origin of the budget. So kung hindi nila ipa-rerelease yun (inaudible)

Q: Sir may sinsabi si Sen. Recto na dun sa bill yung fund is still a special off budget fund...

SP Sotto: As of now yun. Pero once we tackle it in the budget for the GAA of 2019 we will resolve that. We will be able to resolve it then. What he is saying is pertaining to what is the situation right now.

Q: Kung i-tatransmit nyo sa palace yung copy ng enrolled bill na may pirma ninyo diba dapat after 30 days magiging batas na iyun?

SP Sotto: Oo. Unless qu-questionin ng house na ano...Dipende tingnan natin kung ano gagawin nila.

Q: Sir pero walang legal issue yun. Kung walang endorsement yung counterpart? Kung halimbawa kayo lang ang nakasign?

SP Sotto: We'll cross the bridge when we get there. Basta we will do the process.

Q: Sir nung ipinadala sa inyo yun pirmado naman na?

SP Sotto: Oo transmitted eh. Transmitted nila Speaker Alvarez. Ang problema kasi okay na okay na nung congress na yun eh .. nung mag change ng leadership biglang...

Q: Sir di ba prerogative din ng pumalit na speaker?

SP Sotto: Naka pasa na eh. Nasa amin na eh. That's a very good question diba? You answer it. Pinasa ninyo nung congress (house) ah kahit sino pa yung speaker nun, Ipinadala ninyo sa Senado tinanggap ng Senado at nag agree ang Senado. Porke nagpalit kayo ng leader babawiin ninyo ngayon.

Q: Sir going back dun sa court. Who would question or compel the house to actually transmit.

SP Sotto: I think anybody. Maganda kung executive department ang magbato ng problema sa amin. Maganda sila ang magtanong.

Q: Hindi Senado ang magtatanong?

SP Sotto: Hindi because as far as we are concerned it's abolished. Wala kaming dapat question eh.

Q: Sir kung two or three independent branches of government do not want to change their position hindi ba bordering sa constitutional crisis?

SP Sotto: Not really because it's resolvable later on, we can resolve it later on. Kung ito nangyari ito nung kauupo pa lang naming lahat, ay mabigat yan kasi mahaba-haba ang labanan. Eh ito maikli na lang eh we are talking of 3 ½ weeks of the next congress the next congress is left with less than four weeks. Kaya mareresolve at mareresolve ito.

On legalization of medical marijuana

SP Sotto: I'm glad you asked that kasi ilan beses ko na sinasabi ito, parang hindi naiintindihan ng ibang kasama natin, pero si Cong. Rodito naintindihan na e. Hindi kailangan e kasi allowed already e. Remember I am the principal author of Republic Act 9165, which is the Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. It's allowed. Napaka rami iniisip na kailangan raw illegalize ang medical marijuana. Diba nabanggit pa ni Miss Universe tuloy na pag medical pwede, pagka recreational hindi. Correct, that is what's in the law already. It's allowed already. May proseso lang. So dapat malaman nila. At marami naman nakakaalam e. Ang problema may mga hindi nakakaalam, mga legislator pa naman.

Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act, Republic Act 9165, Section 2, under the Declaration of Policy, mahaba yung umpisa pero: it is the policy of the state to safeguard the integrity of its territory and the well-being of its citizenry, particularly the youth, from harmful effects of dangerous drugs on their physical, mental, etc., etc. Towards this end the government shall pursue an intensive and unrelenting campaign against the trafficking and use of dangerous drugs and other similar substances through an integrated system of planning, implementation, enforcement of anti-drug abuse policies, programs and projects.

Ito na maliwanag: the government shall however, aim to achieve a balance in the national drug control program so that people with legitimate medical needs are not prevented from being treated with adequate amounts of appropriate medications, which include the use of dangerous drugs. Ang linaw nito.

Ngayon, ano kakombinasyon nito? Ang combination nito, meron FDA compassionate special permit, Circular No. 2014-009. Nakalagay, the FDA law, right now, provides access to drugs and medicines that are not registered in the Philippines for compassionate use. But it is the attending physician's responsibility to apply for the substance permit from the FDA. Meron din ang Dangerous Drugs Board na policy to that effect. Pwede kang mag apply ng permit.

Ito, report ng FDA ito, as of October 2017, wala pa yung bago ngayon e, it has received an average of 50 applications a month for compassionate special permits, mostly for cancer medication. So as of September 30, 583 out of the 585 were granted. 558 out of the 565 in 2016 applications were approved. So it's really a matter of information campaign. Including marijuana and other dangerous drugs that might be beneficial to you.

In other words, in the Dangerous Drugs Act, combined with the FDA circular, we have a compassionate use provision, it's allowed already. So what are they talking about? They just don't know the law. So in other words, hindi illegal. Ito tanungin ko sa inyo, meron na ba kayo nabalitaan na sa PNP hinuli ang medical marijuana? Wala dahil hindi bawal e. ano ilelegalize mo e legal?

Q: There are safeguards embedded in the law?

SP Sotto: Oo. kaya nga ang pinaguusapan dito at ang bibigyan ng permit sigurado ng doctor at ang yung bininigyan ng FDA, yung medical cannabis. Hindi medical marijuana ang hinihithit. Because ibig sabihin nun recreational use na.

Q: Kulang ang FDA sa information campaign?

SP Sotto: Hindi rin, it's not their job. Yung mga may sakit alam e. Yung mga mahihilig sa recreational marijuana ang hindi nakakaalam. Kasi ang dami nagaapply e so yung mga may medical problem alam nila at binibigyan sila ng permit ng mga doctor nila.

Q: May bill din dito on medical marijuana?

SP Sotto: Wala.

Q: Kay Sen. Risa?

SP Sotto: E apparently hindi din nabasa ni Sen. Risa yung 9165.

Q: Medical marijuana is legal?

SP Sotto: Yes. It's legal based on the use of appropriate medication.

Q: They want it spelled out that indeed marijuana is allowed for medical?

SP Sotto: Ginagawa nung ibang bansa yun siguro dahil wala silang ganito. E ito 2002 pa meron na tayo e. Kasi nung pinagaralan namin yung dangerous drugs act na yan ng 10 taon, nilagay na namin lahat ng maaaring maging problema.

Q: Since 2002, those who are actually in need of medical marijuana have been availing of that provision?

SP Sotto: Of course. Ito nga e, ang FDA nga are giving permits to them.

Q: No need for public hearing because Sen. JV wants a public hearing?

SP Sotto: Hindi rin niya alam.

Q: Waste of time na magsulong pa?

SP Sotto: Oo. Waste of time.

Q: Nung pinasa niyo yan gaano karami nangangailangan ng medical marijuana?

SP Sotto: Naisip lang namin nung panahon na yun na pinaguusapan na sa America yung use ng medical marijuana or medical use ng dangerous drugs. Noon pa lang pinaguusapan na namin ito. So nung pinaguusapan yan, teka lagyan natin yan ng provision na in case na magagamit in the future... why did we put that? Mabuti na malaman niyo. Because at the time when I was writing the book Vision for a Drug-Free Philippines, I came from the Quezon City Anti-Drug Abuse Council, as Vice Mayor ako ang head ng Anti-Drug Abuse Council, we found out na noong araw, bawal na bawal ang opium. Masamang masama talaga, bawal na bawal yung opium. Nagkaroon ng opium wars sa China dahil yung dalawang anak ng emperor naging addict ng opium, nagpakamatay yung isa, napatay yung isa, galit na galit yung emperor binan lahat ng British na traders na nagdala doon ng opium poppy flower at kaya sila, kasama ang British armada umurong sila ng Hong Kong. That's the reason nagkaroon ng Hong Kong, doon nagpunta ang British na pinalayas sila ng China. Pero later on nalaman natin na ang morphine pala malaki ang pakinabang and morphine is derived from the opium poppy flower. So yun iniisip namin during that time. 1968 pa nagreresearch na ang Israel, one of the most powerful research institutes in the world, including United Nations, nagreresearch na sila on marijuana leaf. There are 26,000 elements in a marijuana leaf and they were trying to find a use na baka pakinabangan for cure; of course even until now, there is no empirical data that will prove that marijuana can cure anything. But it is used to alleviate pain or alleviate situations or the neurological issues or problems of the patients. So to alleviate pwede, yun ang finding. At hindi nagagamit yung tapang ng THC. Yung THC kasi yung Tetrahydrocannabinol, yun yung nakakapag hallucinate, yun ang hindi magandang element ng marijuana. So with that out, yung elements na nagagamit nila for medical cannabis, which is cannabis oil and that stuff, its allowed e. So naisip namin yun during that time, in 2002, na kung ang opium napakinabangan, nakuha ang morphine, baka later on itong marijuana makakuha ng element na makakatulong din and that's the reason we placed that.

Q: Somehow ang Philippines will be one of the few countries na nauna na magkaroon ng that kind of provision?

SP Sotto: Siguro isa tayo sa unang naglagay ng provision na yan pero even before us meron na talaga sa States, meron sa Canada, meron sa Spain. In the early 90s or late 80s I'm not sure, Spain legalized Marijuana itself per se. But ang problem I think after five years, they criminalized it again. For medical purposes lang pwede pero yung recreational inalis nila dahil dumami ang addict, dumami ang addict sa Spain.

Q: Planting for personal use allowed?

SP Sotto: Hindi. Because, ito dapat din malaman ng legislators natin na gustong pagusapan yung version nila ng legalization ng marijuana. It's included in the schedule either 1, 2, 3 or 4 ng psychotropic substances convention na signatory tayo. So in order for us to allow planting and all that stuff., they have to remove in the schedule, sa United Nations convention, they have to remove marijuana from that, otherwise we will be violating. Kaya every year, may nagpepetition sa United Nations, even in the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, every year may nagfifile ng petition to remove marijuana from the schedule. Ang hinihingi lagi ng United Nations Research Institute, the most powerful research institute, kasama yung sa Israel, sinasabi nila lagi, you have to present empirical data that it can cure something, if it can cure anything. If it can cure anything that we can remove it from the schedules.

Q: So hanggang ngayon wala pa?

SP Sotto: Wala e.

Q: Kung isang patient may sakit, gusto gumamit ng marijuana, ano dadaanan niya sa doctor niya?

SP Sotto: Nandoon sa FDA circular kung papaano e.

Q: (Inaudible)

SP Sotto: Nakita mo naman marami may alam e lalo na yung mga may sakit, marami may alam. Yung mga hindi alam kasi o yung nagsasabing dapat illegalize yan, hithit ang gusto e, hindi naman cannabis oil ang gusto e. Kung cannabis oil ang gusto pwede e, for medical purposes e. Even up to now I tell you, itong Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, meron dissemination of information naman yan sa mga enforcers e. So even up to now sabihin mo sa akin kung meron na hinuli ng medical cannabis.

Q: Bill ni Cong. Albano ensures affordable and safe access to quality medical cannabis, kailangan pa ba yun?

SP Sotto: How do we do that? You have to build a center, you have to build a research institute. You have to plant, ayun ang delikado, nagplaplant ka na, magtatayo ka ng research institute, pamigay na lang natin sa taongbayan ang pagtatayo ng research institute na napaka mahal sapagkat kung yung Israel o yung United Nations na ang lalakas at ang gagaling ng mga research institutes ay walang Makita, magtatayo ng sarili natin? Ano meron tayo na napakagaling natin over these research institutes?

Q: It's prone to abuse?

SP Sotto: Ay sigurado. Not only prone to abuse, you will be allowing planting e, you will be going against already the psychotropic substances convention.

Q: Ano kailangan ng PDEA or concerned agencies to come up with info drive?

SP Sotto: I don't think it's necessary e. why, kung wala ka naman sakit na sa tingin mo e... at kung may sakit ka naman, may gamut na dapat, why go to marijuana? Bakit ka mag mamarijuana? Unless ang lahat ng gamot, na sinasabi nga dito ng FDA din, kung lahat ng gamot nasubukan mo hindi tumatalab at gusto mo subukan yung marijuana, yung medical cannabis or cannabis oil kasi pag sinasabi natin marijuana iba connotation sa iba kaagad e. Di ba ilang beses na meron nahuli na celebrity, diba may nahuli sa Pampanga celebrity, nung tinanong siya bakit siya may isang kilo na marijuana ang sabi niya e kasi raw for medical use raw niya. Meron ngayon, ngayon lang nakita ko sa dyaryo ngayon, 16 years old nahuli nagbebenta ng isang kilo ng marijuana, tinatanong siya e kasi raw binebenta niya kasi raw meron may sakit. Hindi pupwede. Tama na itong batas natin ngayon. Tama ito. 1961 United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as amended by 1972 Protocol. Schedule 1 kasama ang lakas. Pag Schedule 1 nandoon yung cannabis and cannabis resin and extracts of cannabis kasama sa Schedule 1. In other words bawal na bawal nga e.

Q: Piñol said mawawala raw ang P27/kg na NFA rice dahil sa rice tariffication law dahil hindi sila makakabenta ng ganyang kamura?

SP Sotto: Hindi ako naniniwala. If ever ask Cynthia Villar because she will show you the computation. It can be lower. Even the high-rated or yung commercial rice na mahuhusay ang klase baka bumaba pa nga e. The farmers will this time be given P10 billion a year na subsidy so mas kapakipakinabang ito. Pero hindi kakapusin ng bigas ang Pilipino. Yun ang pinakamahalaga doon. Syempre meron magrereklamo na mga traders dahil ang dating kopong kopong nila yung NFA hindi na nila hawak ngayon so ganyan yan. I think he (Piñol) should look at the computation first.

Q: Blue ribbon report on drugs, walang nababanggit about Lapeña, Aquino?

SP Sotto: Hindi ko pa nababasa e.

Q: Dapat may issue ng command responsibility sa shabu shipments na dapat na-cite man lang doon?

SP Sotto: Bakit hindi ba na-cite? I'm sure na-cite.

Q: Wala? No mention about Lapeña?

SP Sotto: I better read muna so that I can react intelligently. Ang command responsibility is everywhere. Kung may sumabit doon sa hawak mo talagang responsibilidad mo yun unless ikaw yung nakatuklas at ikaw ang mag action. Then you become responsible and you do your responsibility. Basahin ko muna.