{"id":81603,"date":"2016-09-29T05:48:04","date_gmt":"2016-09-29T09:48:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=81603"},"modified":"2016-09-29T05:48:04","modified_gmt":"2016-09-29T09:48:04","slug":"lp-senators-showing-de-limas-alleged-video-house-probe-illegal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2016\/09\/29\/lp-senators-showing-de-limas-alleged-video-house-probe-illegal\/","title":{"rendered":"LP senators on showing of De Lima\u2019s alleged video in House probe: It\u2019s illegal"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"De<\/a>
De Lima earlier denied that she was the woman on the intimate video and noted that her detractors merely edited the video to appear like it was her in it. (Facebook photo)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

MANILA \u2013 Liberal Party (LP) senators on Thursday vehemently opposed the proposal of presenting the alleged intimate videos of Senator Leila De Lima before congressional hearings on the alleged illegal drug trade inside the New Bilibid Prison (NBP).<\/p>\n

\u201cWe vehemently oppose the plan of the House of Representatives to show the alleged videos as disrespectful, deplorable, and illegal,\u201d the LP senators said in a joint statement.<\/p>\n

\u201cRegardless of the authenticity of the alleged videos, viewing it is disrespectful to a sitting senator, to her person, and to the office she holds, and is violative of the law,\u201d the statement further said.<\/p>\n

Senators Paolo Benigno \u201cBam\u201d Aquino IV, Franklin Drilon, Fracis \u201cKiko\u201d Pangilinan are all senators who are LP members.<\/p>\n

The senators said a number of laws should be considered before the videos are shown including the Anti-Voyeurism Law (RA 9995) which prohibits the recording or broadcast of videos of a sexual act, among others, with or without the consent of the persons featured in the material. Such recordings are also inadmissible even in legislative hearings.<\/p>\n

Also for consideration is the Anti Wiretapping Law (RA 4200) which prohibits and penalizes the playing of recordings of any private communication without the consent of those involved. Such recordings are also inadmissible as evidence even in legislative hearings.<\/p>\n

They also warned of the Revised Penal Code on Crimes against Honor including slander by deed and incriminatory machinations.<\/p>\n

De Lima\u2019s fellow LP members meanwhile appeal to the members of House of Representatives to be more cautious of their larger roles as legislators.<\/p>\n

Senator Panfilo \u201cPing\u201d Lacson, although not an LP member, said that showing De Lima\u2019s video was \u201chighly inappropriate.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIn the first place, while that\u2019s a fact-finding investigation, it might lead to filing of charges,\u201d Lacson said.<\/p>\n

He further said that if there is no probative value because nobody can authenticate the video, there was no point in showing it.<\/p>\n

De Lima earlier denied that she was the woman on the intimate video and noted that her detractors merely edited the video to appear like it was her in it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

MANILA \u2013 Liberal Party (LP) senators on Thursday vehemently opposed the proposal of presenting the alleged intimate videos of Senator …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":80644,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1145,16,95],"tags":[6175,2407,1146,1147],"class_list":["post-81603","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-headline","category-news","category-news-ph","tag-de-lima","tag-leila-de-lima","tag-liberal-party","tag-lp","mauthors-azer-parrocha","mauthors-philippines-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81603","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=81603"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81603\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/80644"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=81603"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=81603"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=81603"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}