By Jose Cielito Reganit
MANILA – The House Committee on Justice, chaired by Batangas 2nd District Representative Gerville Luistro, will launch a motu proprio inquiry into the United States’ extradition request for controversial pastor Apollo Quiboloy to clear up what lawmakers described as “insufficiencies and ambiguities” in the process.
A news release on Tuesday said the upcoming inquiry was prompted by a written request from Akbayan Party-list Rep. Perci Cendaña, who urged the Justice panel to conduct an inquiry in aid of legislation on Quiboloy’s case.
“There is an overwhelming public interest and concern over the process by which extradition requests are received, evaluated, and acted upon. It is imperative that Congress, through your Committee, provide a forum where concerned agencies may clarify the status of the present request, explain the legal and procedural steps involved, and identify any gaps or ambiguities in our existing laws and treaties,” Cendaña stated in his letter, which was read by Luistro during the panel’s organizational meeting Tuesday.
Committee vice chairman, Bukidnon 2nd district Rep. Jonathan Keith Flores, made the formal motion to carry out the investigation, and Luistro carried the motion after hearing no objection from the members.
Luistro said the two significant laws on the matter that must be taken up are the 1994 extradition treaty between the US and the Philippines, and Presidential Decree (PD) 1069 or the Philippine Extradition Law enacted in 1977.
She said the two laws are “silent” to some pertinent details.
“There are questions which answers could not be found in both laws,” she added.
Luistro said the following arguments or issue with respect to the existing laws on extradition in the Philippines were raised: whether an extradition process may be initiated by a foreign country when the extraditee has pending cases as well in the Philippines; and what is the timeline between the request by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the transmittal the Department of Justice (DOJ).
“In the same manner, what is the timeline between the receipt by the DOJ [and] the filing of the petition for extradition with the proper regional trial court,” she said.
“It was also raised which court shall acquire jurisdiction over the request for extradition… whether the court which has jurisdiction over the local cases or the court where the extraditee is a resident of as mentioned in the treaty or PD 1069.”
During the discussions, Flores said the existing laws do not say who will exercise authority to choose between temporary surrender and deferred surrender of the extradite.
Luistro said in an interview that Quiboloy’s involvement in the investigation was merely incidental.
“This is not about prejudging anyone’s guilt. It is about upholding the rule of law, honoring our treaty commitments, and ensuring that victims see swift, fair, and transparent action,” she said.
“Our message is simple: no one is above the law. We will ask the DOJ and DFA to walk the public through the precise legal options –temporary or deferred surrender– and the concrete timeline so justice is neither delayed nor denied.” (PNA)
