Pastor Apollo Quiboloy, balot ang katawan at mukha nang iharap sa media | Dapat Alam Mo!
Aired (September 10, 2024): Kingdom of Jesus Christ founder Apollo Quiboloy at iba pang akusado, balot na balot ang katawan at mukha nang iharap sa media.
Dapat ba talagang nakatakip ang mukha at kamay ng mga akusado? Bibigyang linaw ‘yan ni Atty. Renjomar Castro Baltazar. #DapatAlamMo
Dapat ba talagang nakatakip ang mukha at kamay ng mga akusado? Bibigyang linaw ‘yan ni Atty. Renjomar Castro Baltazar. #DapatAlamMo
Category
😹
FunTranscript
00:00Sen. Dismissed after he returned to the Philippines.
00:05His hands were covered.
00:07But when he went to the Senate, the mayor covered his face.
00:11He was able to save his answers to the questions of the Senators.
00:14Despite the surrender of the leader of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, Pastor Kibuloy,
00:19his face and body were also covered
00:23when he was presented yesterday and his companions.
00:28Should the faces and hands of the accused really be covered?
00:31Is that still part of their rights?
00:34We will clarify that with the legal expert, Atty. Renjo Marcastro Baldazar.
00:39Good evening to you, Atty. Baldazar.
00:41Good evening to all of our viewers.
00:45Atty., in some videos and photos, we can see that their faces and hands are hidden.
00:49They look like they are possessed.
00:51Why are the faces of the accused allowed to be hidden?
00:53Just like Alice Wu and Apollo Kibuloy.
00:56But why the others?
00:58Their faces are visible.
01:01Because we have the Data Privacy Act, the Republic Act 10173.
01:06Those mag shots are considered personal information
01:10because we will get to know the person.
01:13So, we cannot just process that.
01:16As a general rule, a person should have consent.
01:20Then, it is okay if there is no consent and we post it.
01:24However, we need to meet the three requirements, the PLT,
01:28Proportionate, Legitimate, and Transparent Purposes.
01:33Now, if our government has met their objective,
01:37that if they post it in a blurry way,
01:40we have satisfied the Proportionate, Legitimate, and Transparent Purposes.
01:45Yes.
01:46But we are used to it here in the Philippines,
01:51we are used to seeing the faces of the accused.
01:56All of a sudden, it changed.
01:59Is this a new law, Atty.?
02:01Actually, this law has been around for a long time.
02:04That is why, the public is just informed about this.
02:08That it cannot be done just like that.
02:11Because if we look at it, as an accused,
02:14they still have rights in the Constitution.
02:16Because we see that there is a tendency that if the person is heavy,
02:23they can hide everything.
02:25But if it's just a normal citizen,
02:27the face will be exposed, right?
02:29It will just be pointed like that.
02:30That's why there is a cap, right, Atty.?
02:32I believe that we have what we call a compelling state interest.
02:36So, if in the time of our government,
02:38they have achieved their interest in doing that,
02:43and that is valid and allowed.
02:46We often hear the answer,
02:49I invoke my right against self-incrimination.
02:52When do we have what we call self-incriminating questions to a person?
02:56When is the right use of this right, Atty.?
02:59Okay.
03:00So, when we say right against self-incrimination,
03:03it is used for testimonial compulsion only.
03:06It means, there is a question to you,
03:08and the answer to that will be used against you.
03:11So, you are the one who is being imprisoned.
03:12That is the right against self-incrimination.
03:15But, let's remember that,
03:16as I said, it's just a testimonial,
03:18it's just a statement, okay?
03:20So, it means, if it's a mechanical act,
03:22if you will wear shoes,
03:24if you will get a fingerprint,
03:26that is no longer a right against self-incrimination.
03:29Yes, yes, yes.
03:29So, Atty., what if,
03:31just like what we are seeing in the hearings,
03:34they will always invoke,
03:36the accused will always use that word, right?
03:40How can we get an answer or a statement,
03:42our judges?
03:44Okay, so, when it comes to the Senate hearing,
03:47they have inherent power to contempt a person.
03:51So, a witness can be imprisoned
03:54who does not want to cooperate with the Congress.
03:56Because, what's the point?
03:58Why are we still calling you here
04:00if you will not answer?
04:01But of course, it's a case-to-case basis,
04:04because of course,
04:05in the rules of our Congress,
04:07it is still not justified
04:10the right of our,
04:12the right as a person.
04:14But most of the time,
04:14that's the only thing you hear,
04:16against self-incrimination.
04:18What is the difference between a Senate hearing
04:20and a court hearing, Atty.?
04:21Okay, so, when we say Senate hearing,
04:23the purpose is in aid of legislation.
04:26We will make a law.
04:28So, generally, no one is imprisoned.
04:30Yes, that's right.
04:31That's why, Atty.,
04:33if no one is imprisoned,
04:34because in aid of legislation,
04:35why are you invoking the right
04:38against self-incrimination?
04:39Because,
04:41all that a person will say there,
04:43that's in record.
04:45So, it's okay if he's not used there,
04:47he won't be imprisoned.
04:48However, because he voted,
04:50all that he said is the truth,
04:52maybe he will be used later on.
04:54When it comes to court hearings,
04:56which is having the purpose
04:58of determining the guilt
04:59or innocence of the accused.
05:00I just have a question, Atty.,
05:02because a lot of people go to hearings
05:04in aid of legislation, right?
05:07Is there an obligation for the judges
05:08to make or amend the law
05:11once they go to hearings?
05:13Because, maybe they can be blamed
05:14if they didn't use those things?
05:16That's a political question.
05:19It means,
05:20they have the inherent power
05:21to make a law,
05:22but how will they do that?
05:24What is their priority there?
05:26It's up to them,
05:27because they are the ones we voted for.
05:29Yes.
05:30Atty., the PNP is still in custody,
05:32Guo and Kebuloy.
05:35Why are some accused
05:37going here
05:38and not to regular prisons?
05:40Is this considered a special treatment?
05:42It's different, right?
05:43Quezon City Jail,
05:44Manila City Jail,
05:46Pasay City Jail.
05:47Why are they there?
05:49Their cases,
05:50there are also those who are in prison.
05:52Their cases are the same.
05:53Why are they there?
05:54It's like this,
05:55we need to consider
05:56what the Constitution says.
05:58What is prohibited there
05:59are the secret detention places.
06:02Now,
06:02should we really put people there
06:05in the facilities you mentioned?
06:07We don't have express provisions of the law.
06:09That's why, of course, I said
06:10that our government's objective is good.
06:13Maybe what they are considering here
06:15is the security purposes.
06:18Or the security threats or safety reasons.
06:20Maybe, what is the reason
06:21why we are having a due process?
06:26To achieve justice.
06:28Now,
06:29where are we going to put a person
06:31and later on,
06:32maybe he will just disappear.
06:34So,
06:35much better,
06:35at least he is in that
06:37custodial facility,
06:38he will be more guarded.
06:40So, if the threat is big,
06:42he can be brought there?
06:43Yes, that's it.
06:45But it's not a special treatment?
06:46No, it's not.
06:47Okay.
06:48Thank you so much, Atty. Rene Omar Baltazar.
06:52Have a good evening, Atty.
07:10Atty. Rene Omar Baltazar