Do you agree that former President Arroyo should not testify on the NBN-ZTE deal because she is a subject of the same probe?

Robert Young Jr., San Juan: No. Arroyo should be obliged to testify but she won’t do it for fear that her testimony may incriminate her. What is the axiom? Less talk, less mistake.

Johann Lucas, Quezon City: Yes, any person under investigation has the right to remain silent. GMA need not answer any question asked of her and she may not be summoned unless she waives that right.

Right vs. self-incrimination

Josh Pacatang, Dipolog City: Yes, of course, I agree that Rep. Gloria Arroyo should not testify. The Constitution and statutes tell her to keep her peace and remain silent.

R. Los Baños, Las Piñas City: Agree. She has a constitutional right against self-incrimination. In this land of endless litigations, I would invoke the same right if I were similarly situated.

Carmela Ramento, Cagayan de Oro City: I am no lawyer but I know what self-incrimination is all about. Agree.

Dennis Montealto, Mandaluyong City: And implicate herself? That would be asking too much.

Pedro Alagano Sr., Vigan City: Yes. It is her constitutional right to remain silent and to not incriminate herself. What the government can only do is to gather and provide enough evidence to prove her guilt in this case. Otherwise, the probe would only be regarded as a politically motivated move against her by the opposition as scapegoat for a possible failure of the present regime. Hence, a waste of time and government resources.

Quest for justice

Lucas Banzon Madamba, Laguna: Let justice prevail.

Reynaldo Joaquin, Las Piñas City: Truth shall prevail. As a public servant, GMA must testify. Her battery of ace lawyers can come up with non-incriminating statements, for sure.

Qualified to be a witness

Cris Rivera, Rizal: No. Since she is not one of the respondents, she is not being probed. Therefore, she is qualified to take the witness stand.

What for?

B What’s the use, it would just be a futile endeavor. As the alleged mastermind of this scandal, do you honestly think she would admit her wrongdoing?

Richard Decena, Quezon City: Bale wala po kung mag-testify man ang dating Pangulo, kasi wala naman sa bokabularyo niya ang katotohanan.

State witness

Ed Alawi, Davao City: Yes, unless she is a state witness.

Day in court

Elizabeth Oximer, Negros Occidental: Give ex-President GMA her day in court whether as a witness or the accused. The truth will set her free. Anyway, somebody is watching from above.

Leonard Villa, Batac City: I disagree. Let GMA testify. She must undergo due process of law. Not letting her testify will be an injustice to the former President.

Mary Grace Carolino, Ilocos Sur: I totally agree. How could you testify in a probe if you are the subject of that same investigation? But if her statement can also be used or could be help resolve the controversy on the NBN-ZTE deal, then let us give her a chance to speak.

Hiding truth

Raymar Gurrea, Bacolod City: She can testify if she wants to. But it seems that she chooses to keep silent, which makes people think there might be truth to the alleged anomaly in the NBN-ZTE deal.

Convenient scapegoat

Rey Onate, Palayan City: I agree, for her testimony will provide the present administration a convenient scapegoat to cover up their incompetence. Mahusay ang gobyerno ni Noynoy na mang-intriga at pumorma.

Rule of law

Rey Ibalan, Antipolo City: If GMA’s testimony is in accordance with the law, then why not?

Ruben Viray, Antipolo City: Former President Arroyo should not testify on the NBN-ZTE deal, unless the court says so and if she will be summoned in accordance with the rule of law.

No more immunity

Roger Caravana, Bulacan: Ex-President Arroyo should testify on the NBN-ZTE deal whether as witness or accused. She no longer has immunity from suit.

Smart enough

Leandro Tolentino, Batangas City: I agree. GMA is smart enough to know that a person should not be allowed to testify on a case wherein her statements might be used against her.

Jose Fabello Jr., Cagayan de Oro City: I agree. She and her lawyers know that by heart. Is there any lawyer who does not know that?

Desuel Pardo, Mandaluyong City: Ex-President Fidel Ramos submitted himself to a senatorial inquiry years after his term ended but nothing valuable came out of the hearings except insults from his rude detractors whose obsession was to embarrass him. But FVR just kept his cool and did not mind those impolite senators. On the other hand, ex-President Arroyo used to say, “I was not born yesterday” so she will do her best to avoid unnecessary rhetorics from people who have long been waiting to tear her down to pieces.

GMA is the subject

Nestor Chan, Metro Manila: Yes, I agree that former Pres. Arroyo should not testify on the NBN ZTE deal. She is the one that must be investigated. This question is similar to the question being raised against our incumbent DILG Secretary on why he is part of the IIRC when he is among those investigated with regard to the Aug. 23 Quirino Grandstand hostage crisis.

Elpidio Que, Vigan: No, GMA should not be made to testify on the NBN-ZTE deal because she is also the principal accused in the case. It is not because she will incriminate herself but because according to our law, an accused is not compelled to testify in a case where he or she is involved.

Implicate Neri

Jesus Mendoza, Pangasinan: It’s a smart legal maneuver to make former Pres. Arroyo testify on the NBN-ZTE deal. To defend herself, she has to implicate former National Economic and Development Authority director general Romulo Neri who might in turn incriminate her.

Call of duty

Ricardo Tolentino, Laoag City: No, she should testify for as a former President, it’s her duty to help shed light to an alleged anomaly where she was supposedly involved.

Joe Nacilla, Las Piñas City: As the former President of this country, it is impossible to assume that PGMA is innocent about the cancelled NBN-ZTE deal, thus, she must be forced to testify on what she knows about the transaction. And, having been elected President by the people before, she has the moral obligation to tell Filipinos the whole truth on the matter.

Investigate first

Dan Adviento, Ilocos Sur: I totally agree. They should concentrate on the investigation first before putting people on the spot.

Proper forum

Germi Sison, Cabanatuan City: Sad to say, no congressional probe has resulted in anything conclusive. If I were former President Arroyo, I would not give the investigators a damn. Only the proper court can conduct proceedings that merit the former President’s testimony.

Ishmael Calata, Parañaque City: I agree because GMA has been accused of many wrongdoings and because of repeated reports about her supposed guilt, she has been pictured as guilty in the eyes of the people. To be fair to her, she should only speak before the proper forum.

Leave it to the counsels

Elmo Cruz, Manila: If I were in the shoes of ex-President Gloria Arroyo, I will just let my lawyers represent me in court proceedings.

Felix Ramento, USA: I’m not a lawyer so I think this matter is better left to the counsels of GMA. They better focus on her defense when her day in court comes. However, it behooves her to carefully arrive at a decision whether to testify or not especially if her testimony is material to defend her allies. That’s what’s friendship is all about.

It’s up to the probers

Lolong Rejano, Marinduque: Yes, because she has been presumed to be the alleged mastermind along with her husband, First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo. The picture of the couple in China at the time the NBN-ZTE deal was in the making is enough evidence of the charges filed against them. The Filipino people were not born yesterday. Now, the ball is in the hands of the investigators.

For the sake of transparency

Deo Durante, Camarines Sur: I agree that former President Arroyo should not testify before the court on the NBN-ZTE deal as this is a privilege of any person, including the former President, that is stated in the Bill of Rights. However, if she adheres to transparency, then perhaps there is nothing wrong with testifying in order to prove that she never had a hand in the controversy that rocked her administration.

Rudy Tagimacruz, Malaybalay City, Bukidnon: I don’t agree because her testimony might even enlighten us on what really went wrong with the NBN-ZTE deal.

Manny Cordeta, Marikina City: With due respect to former President Arroyo, I respect her stand not to testify since she herself is a subject of the NBN-ZTE deal probe. However, if constitutional bodies or the courts summon her, the incumbent Pampanga congresswoman has no recourse but to testify. After all, if the former Chief Executive has nothing to hide or fear, I don’t see any reason for her not to face whatever probe panel that would cross-examine her. It’s a rare and golden opportunity to clear your name, Madam, and in the process, spoil the party of your seemingly endless band of accusers.

Court of public opinion

Jimmy Donton, Palawan: Whatever is her decision relative to the NBN-ZTE fiasco, the majority of the people still believe that she is guilty of the scandal.

Where is closure?

Concepcion Gaspar, Laoag City: I don’t agree at all. How come she should not take the witness stand when she was allegedly the main beneficiary of the botched ZTE-NBN deal? If she is really innocent, why can’t she face the music? After all, the suspects involved in this scandal are still presumed innocent until proven guilty. The whole nation wants to know the truth yet GMA refuses to cooperate just like her brother-in-law Iggy Arroyo, invoking instead their right to remain silent. How can there be a closure to this case?

Amnesty to rebel soldiers

Ric Vergara, Calamba: I am totally against granting amnesty to those soldiers. These mutineers and the NPA have one thing in common: the objective to overthrow the government.

C.B. Fundales, Bulacan: Such amnesty can erode the basic concept of military discipline. It even preempts the normal system of dispensing justice.

P-Noy: SC decisions difficult to understand

Bryan Kevin Tung, Iloilo City: Pres. Aquino doesn’t have to understand SC decisions, as these simply need to be followed. He should get a lawyer so that they can interpret the decision of the court, and fire his own lawyers.

Choy Zablan, Pasig City: Look who’s talking. As if the amendment of the IIRC report was easy to understand.

Donny Misa, Metro Manila: Noy is an Atenean who was not able to pass any law in his Senate days as senator, so what can we expect? It’s really difficult for him.

From Ruel Merca, Baguio City: Personally, what have you done for your community or your country in the last 100 days?

Views expressed in this section do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of The STAR. The STAR does not knowingly publish false information and may not be held liable for the views of readers exercising their right to free expression. The publication also reserves the right to edit contributions to this section as it sees fit.

NEXT INBOX QUESTION: From Ruel Merca, Baguio City: Personally, what have you done for your community or your country in the last 100 days?