Loss of civility in the Senate

The recent exchange of harsh words between Sen. Raffy Tulfo and Sen. Pia Cayetano over the alleged shortcomings of Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano in his legislative responsibilities showed the depths at which professional civility in the Senate has sunk.

In reply to Tulfo’s allegation that her brother’s inaction on the membership of the minority senators in the committee on public services, which Tulfo heads, has prevented the conduct of its hearings, Pia Cayetano said Tulfo should stop being dramatic in saying that her brother was holding hostage the organization of that committee. And that if he had any problems with his brother, he could talk to her instead.

In May, after a shooting incident inside the Senate premises marred the abortive arrest of Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, Pia Cayetano tearfully decried the failure of her colleagues to empathize with her during that time.

Article continues after this advertisement

But as it turned out later, some senators had sent her text messages expressing their concern for her safety after the incident. She did not apologize for her earlier statements.

The following month, hardly had the dust settled on that tearjerking scene, Alan Peter Cayetano raised questions about the sudden increase in the 2025 net assets of Sen. Panfilo Lacson after his term ended in 2022.

Lacson hit back and said that he, and later his sister Pia, were involved in anomalous flood control projects worth billions of pesos that merited his confinement in jail, rather than presence in the Senate.

Before that, Sen. Rodante Marcoleta and Lacson delivered speeches at the Senate floor, with both physically present, about the investigation by the blue ribbon committee of the flood control projects scandal.

Article continues after this advertisement

Lacson accused Marcoleta of lawyering for the spouses Curlee and Sarah Discaya who allegedly cornered a big chunk of those projects, while Marcoleta claimed Lacson was protecting former House Speaker Martin Romualdez by refusing to subpoena the latter in the committee’s hearing.

The incidents mentioned, which are only the latest examples, show the serious decline, if not loss, of parliamentary professionalism and civility in the Senate, reputed to be the training ground of future presidents.

Time was when senators debated legislative issues and interacted among themselves with respect and courtesy. They treated each other as peers who had earned the people’s mandate to look after their interests through the legislative process.

Article continues after this advertisement

When addressing their colleagues on the floor, they used the third person, e.g., the gentleman or gentle lady from, say, Tarlac or Manila, and not the first person or given name.

That manner of address was in keeping with long-standing parliamentary tradition of showing that statements directed to their colleagues are given in their capacity as duly elected representatives.

Referring to them by their given names on the floor was frowned upon because it was considered informal, if not rude.

Rare were senators then who used unparliamentary language, or words that were not expected of highly educated or well-mannered people, inside or outside the Senate hall. And in case they were used on the floor, deliberately or otherwise, they were quickly deleted from the records.

To those who can still remember, the genteel ways of senators remained after Congress reopened in 1987 after the 1986 Edsa Revolution. They continued for several session years, then they started to go downhill.

As if discourteous behavior and unparliamentary language were not enough, there had been incidents of near fisticuffs or banging of the lectern when floor discussions became heated.

Nowadays, it is not uncommon for some senators to throw insults at each other in public or openly belittle the comprehension capacity of some of their colleagues because they supposedly did not have the right education.

Remember what Alan Peter Cayetano said during a proceeding in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte—“it is useless to argue a legal point with nonlawyers,” quoting the late former Sen. Joker Arroyo?

That pejorative statement drew pushback from Sen. Vicente Sotto III who noted his decades of lawmaking experience despite not having a law degree, and from several prominent lawyers who described that statement as grossly inappropriate that tarnished the image of the law profession.

So what may explain the evident deterioration of parliamentary decorum inside and outside the Senate?

Simple. In times past, the senators elected were highly educated, well-trained in their respective professions and, if they were public officials in their life, served with integrity and distinction. They carefully guarded their words and actions because they knew they were looked up to by the people.

Not anymore. The standards that were once used as criteria for election to the Senate have primarily evolved to popularity in the movies or the media where rude behavior is considered par for the course and acceptable conduct.

—————–

raul.palabrica@inquirer.net