Atty. Chong to Koko Pimentel’s “No Convincing Proof” Comment Regarding Bautista Issue: "I Beg to Disagree"

advertisement

Atty. Glenn Chong on Facebook recently posted a response contesting Senate President Koko Pimentel’s unpopular comment regarding the issue of ill-gotten wealth involving Comelec Chairman Andres Bautista.

Pimentel, when he had been pressed for comments regarding the scandal, said that there was no convincing proof to doubt the outcome of the 2016 elections.

Known to be a very vocal advocate for clean elections, Atty. Chong expressed his dissent towards Pimentel’s opinion in a Facebook post dated August 16.

In it, Chong said that he would agree with Pimentel’s opinion had the issue only been about Bautista’s wealth and no other issues related to how the elections were run under his lead. 

He then proceeded to enumerate the irregularities noted during the 2016 elections as such as the manipulation of the transparency servers by Smartmatic personnel, adamant denial of the requested independent systems audit of the automated election system after the manipulation was uncovered, Bautista’s connections to both Smartmatic and the “partido ng mga dilawan”, plus a few other important points as well.

These issues, Chong said, are why Congress must conduct a thorough investigation to find the convincing proof if that’s really what they want. The young lawyer also expressed his support towards senators Tito Sotto III and Grace Poe’s call to have Bautista investigated.
In addition to this, Atty. Chong also questioned Bautista’s Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth (SALN).

For those who have heard the term but are not totally familiar with it yet, the SALN is the annual document that all government employees are required by law to submit, declaring their total assets and liabilities (for example, properties and loans), including businesses and financial interests that make up their net (or total) worth.

Chong questioned why the Comelec Chairman’s SALN only detailed precious little if Bautista had indeed amassed the Php 1.3 Billion by earning it (legitimately). He also additionally questioned Bautista’s claim that the amount included money and properties from both his mother and two other siblings.

Here is the full post:

I BEG TO DISAGREE
Ayon kay Senate President Koko Pimentel, ang kayamanan ni Comelec Chairman Andres Bautista – kung kinita man niya ito 20 taon na ang lumipas o malapit sa halalang noong 2016 – ay hindi “convincing proof” upang pagdudahan ang resulta ng nasabing halalan.
Sang-ayon ako sa sinabi ni Sen. Pimentel kung ang isyu rito ay ang kayamanan lamang ni Bautista at wala ng iba pang mga isyu sa pagpatakbo ng halalan sa ilalim ng kanyang pamumuno.
Pero kung ang halalan sa ilalim ni Bautista ay nabalot ng maraming isyu tulad ng:
1. Pagkalikot sa transparency server ng mga tauhan ng Smartmatic;
2. Mariing pagtanggi sa hiniling na independent systems audit ng automated election system matapos kalikutin ito;
3. Maraming paglabag sa batas ng automated elections na nagtakda ng mga mandatory requirements upang mapangalagaan ang integridad ng resulta ng halalan;
4. Pagmaniubra ng lahat ng mga kontrata tungkol sa halalan pabor sa Smartmatic at pagbigay ng monopoliya nito;
5. Koneksyon ni Bautista sa Smartmatic; at,
6. Koneksyon ni Bautista sa partido ng mga dilawan,
ang isyu ng kanyang tagong yaman ay tiyak magkakaroon ng koneksyon sa halalan.
Dahil sa mga isyu at pangyayaring ito, dapat na talagang mag-imbestiga ang Kongreso upang mahalungkat ang hinahanap nilang “convincing proof” kung ito talaga ang gusto nila. Tama sina Sen. Tito Sotto at Sen. Grace Poe sa kanilang panawagan na imbestigahan si Bautista.
At kung kinita man ni Bautista ang P1.3 billion na yaman niya 20 taon na ang lumipas, bakit kapiranggot lang ang nasa SALN niya? Kung totoong kahalo rito ang mga ari-arian at pera ng kanyang dalawang kapatid at ina, ibig bang sabihin si Bautista ang may pinakamaliit na parte sa lahat dahil P173.6 million lang ang idineklara niya sa kanyang SALN o 13.35% lamang ng P1.3 billion? Kung ganun, hindi siya magaling na investment manager para ipagkatiwala sa kanya at pangalagaan ang kayamanan ng mga kapatid at ina niya dahil siya pa nga ang may pinakamaliit na yaman sa lahat. Hindi tumutugma ang kanilang istorya. 



Check out the comment’s section on Chong’s post to gain insight regarding how netizens feel about the issue. Also, feel free to tell us your opinion in the comments below this article!
advertisement
Atty. Chong to Koko Pimentel’s “No Convincing Proof” Comment Regarding Bautista Issue: "I Beg to Disagree" Atty. Chong to Koko Pimentel’s “No Convincing Proof” Comment Regarding Bautista Issue: "I Beg to Disagree" Reviewed by Do It Write Solutions on 6:42:00 PM Rating: 5
Bawal yan ! Magtype ka din