GREAT expectation the public had this week when the three-member Independent Commission for Infrastructure announced it would start livestreaming its hearings as earlier planned and announced.
This appeared as its response to the people’s outcry for its hearings to be made public, just like committee hearings in both houses of Congress, to ensure transparency and accountability.
Some gave phrase to the frustration and disappointment of many that ICI’s earlier decision to prevent the public from monitoring its proceedings online was ill-thought-out.
The ICI members, chaired by retired Supreme Court Justice Andres B. Reyes, took their oath of office in mid September and immediately formally began its mandate to investigate irregularities in infrastructure projects and ensure accountability in the use of public funds, after it was tasked to investigate flood control corruption within the last 10 years.
But in a rapid volte-face, the ICI said livestreaming its hearings will not begin next week as planned, citing the need to first draft rules to protect the rights of witnesses and resource persons.
Brian Hosaka, ICI’s executive director, told reporters the other day the procedures for broadcasting the hearings have yet to be finalized, plus there are also no hearings scheduled next week due to the unavailability of Commissioner Rogelio Singson.
“We would have to draft the rules for livestreaming. But definitely when we draft the rules we will also show this to the public,” Hosaka said.
The ICI’s clarification of non-livestreaming is meant to soothe high expectations following Reyes’s remarks at a Senate hearing when he said the commission would begin livestreaming “next week, once we have the technical capability.”
But the public is now told that livestreaming the proceedings to the public must also consider the rights of invited resource persons and sensitive information shared.
Reyes’s explanation: “Previously, we stated the proceedings of the Commission would be confidential to avoid ‘trial by publicity,’ political grandstanding, sensationalism, and disinformation.”
While we are persuaded to agree with the ICI chair’s observations these concerns remain valid and that “protecting the integrity of the investigation is still paramount” we are one with the people in pushing for public access to the investigations.
We think the people, at this point, know if some will slide down to political grandstanding, know precisely if the inquiries will be hatted by sensationalism and disinformation.
We think the people, who have been brazenly cheated by the insatiably corrupt, know what trial by publicity means, when the people themselves were tried by the wrongdoers sans publicity.
