For more ANC Interviews, click the link below: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm34qRgqWBU4AT2G3LWF27_RErcz0GVd9 For more Rundown videos, click the link below: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm34qRgqWBU43cWAARce9sr7hsv9d0uZR For more ANC Highlights videos, click the link below: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm34qRgqWBU43K1JtKfSzAzho2UExmS3G Subscribe to the ANC YouTube channel! https://www.youtube.com/user/ANCalerts Visit our website at https://news.abs-cbn.com/anc Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ancalerts Twitter: https://twitter.com/ancalerts #ANCNews #ANCHighlights #Rundown

Video Transcript / Subtitles:( AI generated. About AI subtitles » )

* AI ("Artificial Intelligence") subtitles on Tagalog.com are generated using "Whisper" by OpenAI (the same company that created ChatGPT and DallE2). Results and accuracy may vary.
* The subtitles do include errors occasionally and should only be used as a tool to help with your listening practice.
* You can request this website to create a transcript for a video if one doesn't already exist by clicking the "Request AI Subtitles" button below a video. Transcribing usually takes 30-40% of the length of a video to complete if there are no other videos in the queue. For example, a 21 minute video will take 7-8 minutes to transcribe.
* Running a super fast cloud GPU server to do these transcriptions does cost money. If you have the desire and financial ability, consider becoming a patron to support these video transcriptions, and the other tools and apps built by Tagalog.com

Intro music

Intro music

Intro music

The greatest disruptor of all time is actually COVID-19.

Because of limited mobility, people are also not being able to go to physical branches, etc.

It further accelerated the adoption of consumers of digital channels.

Intro music

We are now being able to provide the services needed by our citizens, by our consumers.

Intro music

Intro music

Intro music

Intro music

Mobility will be key to recovery

because we have relaxed some of our quarantine methods

and we have allowed more transportation to come out.

That's going to prove to be better for demand.

If we do follow the health protocols, the ability of people.

Intro music

Good morning, I'm Mike Nafalio.

And I'm Nikki De Guzman.

Join us as we give you the rundown of the news you need to know today.

In the headlines, a U.S. military surveillance drone struck down by Russian fighter jets.

China slams Australia, the U.K. and the U.S.

over their nuclear submarine pact, saying the three countries are going down a dangerous path.

The Philippines formally appeals an international criminal court ruling

that allowed the resumption of its drug war probe.

And Philippine House lawmakers approve on final reading

a measure calling for a constitutional convention to amend the 1987 Charter.

Welcome to the program.

A U.S. military surveillance drone crashes into the Black Sea.

After being intercepted by Russian fighter jets.

It is the first such incident since Russia's invasion of Ukraine over a year ago.

According to the Pentagon, one of the Russian jets struck the propeller of the drone, making it inoperable.

You know, we are continuing to assess exactly what happened,

but I think based on the actions of the Russian pilots,

it's clear that it was unsafe, unprofessional.

And I think the actions speak for themselves.

What we saw, again, were fighter aircraft dumping fuel in front of this UAV

and then getting so close to the aircraft that it actually damaged the propeller on the MQ-9.

We assess that it likely caused some damage to the Russian aircraft as well.

But Russia's defense ministry is blaming sharp maneuvering of the unmanned drone for the crash

and that its jets did not come into contact with it.

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is not convinced.

It is another reckless act by President Putin and his military.

And I want to tell Mr. Putin, stop this behavior before you are the cause of an unintended escalation.

We have seen this behavior from the Russian military before,

and it will not deter the United States from conducting operations over the Black Sea.

These aggressive actions by Russian aircraft are risky and could lead, I repeat, to unintended escalation.

The U.S. has routinely flown over the Black Sea since before Putin's illegal and reckless invasion of Ukraine.

And I'm confident our military will continue to do so.

China, irked by the nuclear submarine pact announced by Australia, the U.K. and the U.S.

Beijing's foreign ministry says the three countries disregarded concerns of the international community,

adding they have gone further down a dangerous road.

It also asserts the U.S. should meet China halfway and bring the bilateral relationship back on track.

Australia, meanwhile, says it offered China a briefing over the nuclear-powered submarine deal.

We watch the global rules-based order being placed under enormous pressure in Eastern Europe,

but also in the Indo-Pacific.

And we are witnessing the biggest conventional military build-up that we have seen since the end of the Second World War.

And it's happening within our region.

And it is not Australia which is doing that.

And we need to respond to this.

A failure to do so would see us be condemned by history.

Thank you, Press.

The deal is part of the so-called AUKUS project, first announced in 2021.

Under the agreement, America will sell to Australia three nuclear-powered subs with an option to buy two more.

For some analysts, the AUKUS pact raises red flags for the involved countries.

A research fellow of China Institute of International Studies also says the deal violates multiple international laws

and deeply hurts regional peace and stability.

Actually, this is a very bad deal among the three countries.

It's not only a proliferation of nuclear technology.

Actually, it's one part of U.S. strategic deployment in this region.

The United States would like to arm Australia as one partner in this area to enhance the underwater warfare capabilities

and also to give more facilities to support the U.S. deployment of submarines in that region.

So I think such a deal among the three countries is really a challenge for the peace and stability in this region

and also a violation of the international laws.

And to talk more about this, we are joined from Sydney by Justin Burke,

visiting scholar at the Lowy Institute, an Australian-based think tank.

Mr. Burke is also a non-resident fellow at the Center for Maritime Strategy and Security at the University of Kale

and a PhD candidate at the Macquarie University.

Mr. Burke, Justin, good morning. Thanks for joining us.

Good day, Mike.

All right. So, Justin, first off, explain to us what exactly the AUKUS submarine deal is all about.

We know Australia will be purchasing nuclear-powered submarines for the first time from the U.S. in the coming years.

So it will be a shift from diesel-powered ones.

What exactly will happen while these submarines are being constructed?

So there's a couple of stages that have been announced to this AUKUS plan to upgrade Australia

from its conventionally-powered submarines to nuclear ones.

In the first instance, we're going to see routine deployments of U.S. and U.K. nuclear-powered submarines to Australian bases.

You know, the exact details of that we're yet to learn.

Hopefully, it implies more submarines rather than simply redeploying from existing Pacific bases.

Certainly in the case of the U.K., it implies that.

That's very welcome.

The next stage will be the purchase of three to five Virginia-class submarines.

It's a really important achievement of this trilateral pact.

The United States is not a country that shares the crown jewels, as it calls it, of its nuclear propulsion technology lightly.

It's only occurred once before, you know, almost 60 years ago with the United Kingdom.

So it's an amazing diplomatic achievement, an amazing fruit of the security and broader relationship that we have with the United States.

And then, you know, the third and final stage is the design of an AUKUS-class submarine co-designed with the United Kingdom.

It will be a submarine that they replace their existing submarines with.

And, you know, the vision is that it's built both in the United Kingdom and in Australia with American technology involved, with an American combat system, as Australia is accustomed to.

There's a lot of water to go under the bridge before we get to that stage.

But, you know, for naval watchers, for analysts who look closely at this, this is a deal where they've elected to go fast, to go high quality.

The cost is unfortunately much greater than anyone had anticipated.

But on those first two points, fast and good, you know, it receives ticks from the analysts.

Interesting. How important is this deal for Australia? And what prompted this deal in the first place?

So Australia's operated submarines for 100 years or more.

Before World War I, Australia had submarines deployed during that conflict and ever since.

So we have maintained diesel electric submarines and pushed them really to the limits of the physics and chemistry involved.

For a long time, Australia has thought about, you know, the necessity of nuclear propulsion and, you know, had those conversations quietly with our partners and, you know, they didn't progress.

The reason being that Australia doesn't have a domestic nuclear power industry.

We have one nuclear reactor for the purposes of producing chemotherapy and doing basic scientific research, a very limited nuclear reactor in Sydney.

And so the prospect of taking this big step to nuclear propulsion for our submarines requires a whole of nation effort, a big mindset change, a big increase in regulation related to safety and nuclear security,

and a big diversion of resources in terms of workforce and in terms of money to make sure that we are up to the task.

So it's a decision not taken lightly. The United States, United Kingdom have not supported it lightly.

The last 18 months have been one of intense negotiation and discussion and to get to where we've got to, I think, is quite an achievement.

Yeah, you mentioned the cost, Justin, and it's going to cost 368 billion Australian dollars. Will the Australian public actually support such a major investment in defence?

It's a great question. I think there was some sticker shock, as we would describe it in Australia, on seeing that number. It's about 250 million US dollars for your viewers.

It is a number that's very rubbery, if you like. That is to say, it's projected out decades into the future. It involves assumptions about inflation, assumptions about currency, which are notorious.

In the first couple of years of this program, there are billions of dollars involved. They're budgeted for, and that's quite doable. But the 368 has focused people's minds a bit.

The Lowy Institute, where I work currently, is doing a survey, an annual survey. And last year, it sought people's opinions about the AUKUS deal and nuclear propelled submarines before we knew the price.

This year, it will be interesting to see with all of this additional detail and the potential price where the Australian public comes down. But we'll learn that in the coming months.

But this deal, Justin, isn't just about purchasing submarines, isn't it? I mean, what are the implications of the deal for Australia in particular, the Indo-Pacific in general, and what will the US and the UK actually gain out of it?

They're all great questions. So I think this reflects a deepening seriousness about security and defence in Australia. That's a transition that's occurred really in the last 10 years or so.

And there have been several inflection points and several triggers for that, not least of which the economic coercion that Australia experienced at the hands of China, seeking all sorts of concessions in return for Australia being able to import a whole range of or export a whole range of commodities to China.

So, you know, Australia has been awakened to the coercive actions in our region. And I think that the speed, the seriousness, the high tech nature of this and the cost that we're willing to bear, really, you know, the bipartisan nature of it too.

Remembering, of course, that it was a conservative government that inaugurated this process a year and a half ago, and it's a Labor government that has emphatically brought it over the line to this point. So I think it really just is the signature response to the deteriorating security environment in which we're in.

You know, our friends and allies in the region, you know, I'm thinking of India as one example, a country I visited and spoke to people extensively late last year, are eager for us to be a stronger friend.

They see that as a good thing. Going so far as to support Australia's position in international organizations like the IAEA, you know, justifying the, you know, the legitimacy of going down this path in those international forums.

There are going to be others in the region who are more implicitly pleased with this, but unable for domestic political reasons to come out in support of it.

And there are always people who've got concerns that are more aligned with China, and they often find their way to a microphone or a microphone finds its way to them.

And they will express those concerns. And I think in 18 months ago, when AUKUS began, there was a real failure to engage with the region to explain, to reassure.

That's a really important thing. And naturally, it was a very secretive process and, you know, we couldn't bring everyone inside the tent before the announcement.

This time it's being done differently. And we've got high profile Australian Defence Force leaders speaking and touring the region.

And I know our political leadership has done similarly to reassure that this is Australia's effort to sustain peace in our region.

You know, there is a lot of talk about Australia starting an arms race or proliferation, nuclear proliferation concerns. Really from the sources from which those accusations come, it's quite laughable.

If you are watching the region, you can see that there's been an enormous arms build up from China, now having the biggest navy in the world, building its nuclear arsenal as fast as it possibly can.

There are real nuclear proliferation concerns in the region, like North Korea. If China is sincerely concerned about it, there's a country where they've got some ability to influence.

And if they're serious, we would see some action there. But there's a lot of accusations being levelled in Australia's direction.

Currently, Australian diplomats will be assiduously trying to reassure against those things. But I guess the bigger picture is that it's a tell.

It's a tell that Australia has chosen a path that concerns China, that scares China. They should be concerned about Virginia class submarines.

They are opposing capability. I think their reaction shows that they understand that.

All right. And Mr. Justin, are you still with us?

Yes, I am.

Nikki, I don't think there are truth to those claims. I think that there's a great deal of misinformation involved in accusations like that. And to the extent that they're repeated and amplified, it's a great shame.

China obviously has an interest in Australia not arming itself, not defending itself in an emphatic, credible way. I think that's most likely behind these kind of responses.

I would not believe China's characterization of the international community having some overwhelming concerns. I'd say that if the director general of the IAEA is satisfied that Australia's progressing in a reasonable, responsible and safe way, if it's good enough for them and it's good enough for India and many other nations.

Besides, the United States and the United Kingdom have got, as President Biden said, a spotless record of nuclear stewardship in their naval programs. And Australia intends to live up to that standard.

Right. And we also have a China-based analyst saying that the deal violates multiple international laws and regulations. Does it? Are we seeing a nuclear proliferation? Although U.S. President Joe Biden has clarified that the submarines are nuclear-powered, not nuclear-armed, what's the difference between the two? Your thoughts?

So, the nuclear propulsion that Australia will be provided with will be a closed system. So, we will receive submarines with nuclear fuel that's contained. They won't be refueled. Australia won't be handling the fuel. The proliferation concerns are kind of theoretical from that point of view.

Again, the IAEA has expressed support for Australia's position and so I think the concerns around it are overblown. It is, as President Biden, Prime Minister Albanese, everyone involved from the beginning of time has said, not about nuclear weapons. So, Australia isn't seeking nuclear weapons, won't seek nuclear weapons.

And, you know, again, I don't need to remind viewers in the Philippines that China's view of abiding by international laws. It's extraordinary for Australia to be accused of such things, considering its behavior in the West Philippine Sea and its willingness to ignore international legal rulings.

So, I think Australia stands on its reputation, on its performance and behavior and would argue those points any day of the week.

And all things considered then, how will this submarine deal and the bigger trilateral relationship between the US, the UK and Australia affect us, the Philippines?

I'd like to think that the Philippines would see it as a positive. Again, our friends and partners in the region should be reassured that Australia is seeking to become a more credible friend. Australia's engagement with the Philippines is going from strength to strength.

There are exercises going on now and exercises coming up and indeed maritime initiatives that have been announced that are very encouraging. And so I think things like the Visiting Forces Agreement that Australia's had with the Philippines for some time has built a pattern of cooperation, which is really very, very useful.

And it's also a very strong signal. Our potential adversaries are watching such things and patterns of interoperability and cooperation are really important signals.

And I'd point out that this AUKUS Agreement is really the fruit of long cooperation between Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom. So, as security situations change, it is these relationships where there's trust, where we can develop responses as required.

So, I think the Philippines should be reassured that Australia is taking regional security seriously and we do it as a friend.

That's good to know. I think my partner, Mike, is back.

Apologies for the technical problems, Justin. Third world country problems.

Now, let me shift the discussion now to the US and the Philippines launching an army-to-army exercises this Monday with plans of holding the biggest joint military drills next month, which according to some reports, this will involve some live fire exercises in the South China Sea.

Now, this comes on the heels of the US being able to access additional military bases in the Philippines. How significant is this development for you? And won't this actually further stoke China?

Well, to answer it first, I think it's deeply impressive. We've seen and detected from Australia, watching the Philippines with great interest, a real sea change with your new president, new administration.

And we're seeing the kind of advances in your security posture, which are very welcome. Of course, the United States is always going to be a more intense partner for you.

Australia will be participating in these exercises and activities, but we do look to the United States in this particular relationship. And I think that observers are really pleased with the advances going on.

When academics think about exercises, whether they're on land or at sea, they're a way of demonstrating with whom you are friends and what you are capable of doing and where. So I think to the extent that military exercises are held on bases and done so in a kind of safe, uncontested environment, the signal is weaker to the extent that they are held at sea.

And involving live fire demonstrates a much greater confidence and sends a much stronger signal. So it's very welcome. I know that Australia has discussed and is planning joint patrols in the West Philippine Sea. And I certainly hope that comes to fruition. Every hope and expectation it does.

How likely is that to happen, Justin? And how significant would that be if Australia actually does conduct joint military patrols in the West Philippine Sea or the South China Sea with the Philippines?

I think it would be highly significant. I think it involves some risk. And I think people will be considering it seriously. I wouldn't, you know, nothing occurs without our friend and ally, the United States. And so in the background, I'm sure that in a diplomatic, in an operational sense, in terms of backup, in a tactical sense, all of those things will be being discussed.

So, you know, to mitigate those kind of risks, Australia has had a concern in the past that overt actions such as freedom of navigation operations, as the United States will typically do, is something we haven't done.

The publicly available reason for that is the concern that we would be picked off by China as a smaller partner of the United States. They wouldn't obviously dare to take that kind of action with the United States Navy. But, you know, a solitary Australian ship might be kind of picked on in that sense.

I think that we're moving past those concerns. And I think that's, I think it's really important. If you are not doing joint patrols, if you are not exercising at sea and demonstrating, you know, what you could do, what you're willing to do, you know, then you're on the back foot.

And we've seen a decade of being on the back foot in the South China Sea, in the case of many countries. And China will continue to slice away at different nations' sovereignty, changing facts on the ground, ignoring international law, unless and until we stand up to them.

All right, Andarno, thank you so much for joining us this morning and for sharing your insights with us. Justin Burke, Visiting Scholar at the Lowy Institute in Sydney.

Thanks for having me.

...to suspend the ruling and reverse the pre-trial court's decision. The Philippines claimed the probe would infringe upon the country's sovereignty. It also reiterated that its argument that the ICC has no jurisdiction over the country after it withdrew from the broad statute. The formal appeal was signed by Solicitor General Leonardo Guevara, five Assistant Solicitor Generals, and an international criminal lawyer.

Suspended Philippine Prison's Chief General Bantag, formerly charged with the murder of veteran journalist Percy Lapid and an inmate who allegedly arranged Lapid's death in October last year. More in this report.

Five months after the gruesome killings of radio commentator Percival Percy Lapid Mabasa and Bilibid inmate June Villamor, Department of Justice prosecutors have filed murder charges against those behind the killings.

Separate murder charges were filed on Tuesday against Suspended Bureau of Corrections' Chief General Bantag and his deputy Ricardo Zulueta before the Lespinas and Muntilupa Regional Trial Courts. Prosecutors called them principles by inducement who allegedly offered money in exchange for the killing.

Also charged was self-confessed gunman Joel Escorial who admitted to shooting Mabasa and his three other companions who remain at large, Israel Dimaculangan, Edmond Dimaculangan, and a certain Orly. Five inmates were also tagged in the killings because of their indispensable cooperation in the commission of the crime.

The inmates supposedly acted as the bridge between the gunman and Bantag and Zulueta in the shooting of Mabasa in Lespinas on October 3 last year. The inmates testified talking to Zulueta.

Despite having no direct link to the other accused, Bantag was included in the charge due to circumstantial evidence allegedly pointing to him as the alleged mastermind with inmates supposedly referring to him as the higher-up. Prosecutors gave way to Escorial's statement that Villamor allegedly confessed to him two days before his death that it was Bantag who was behind Mabasa's killing.

Meanwhile, Bilibid gang leaders Alvin Labra and Aldrin Agalicia were identified as principles by inducement in the killing of Villamor inside the new Bilibid prison on October 18 last year. Six other inmates were alleged to be involved in suffocating Villamor who died of asphyxia. Prosecutors considered Villamor's supposed dying declaration made before his death through a Facebook chat to his sister which supposedly identified who were behind his death.

Based on the testimonies of the inmates, it was Zulueta who allegedly ordered Villamor's killing as a form of cover-up since Escorial had already identified him as a middleman in Mabasa's death. While there is no direct evidence against Bantag, Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remullia believes there are sufficient evidence against him.

The lawyer of the Mabasa family welcomed the DOJ prosecutor's resolution, although they had long expected the outcome.

Sought for comment, Bantag's lawyers said they will just file the necessary pleadings after going over the resolution. Bantag and Zulueta had earlier denied involvement in the killings of Mabasa and Villamor. With the charges filed, it is now up to the courts to decide whether to order their arrest.

COVID-19 has declared a pandemic. In the years that passed, lives are reshaped and normalcy redefined. Rafael Bosando gives us a look back into how the Philippines coped with the ongoing health crisis.

We have therefore made the assessment that COVID-19 can be characterized as a pandemic.

It was this statement that shook the entire world to take the threat of COVID-19 seriously. But a month before this, on January 30, the World Health Organization has already declared the novel pathogen as a public health emergency of international concern.

DOH is confirming that a 38-year-old female... It was also on the same day that the Philippine Department of Health confirmed the first case of COVID-19 in the country. For the novel coronavirus, 2019 does end COVID.

The days that followed would test the mettle of two medical fellows who faced the Chinese couple tagged as patients one and two.

It was also scary but it wasn't a big deal at that time in January because it wasn't really spreading. It was challenging also because the protocols kept changing every day.

Dr. Mai Vigalon was a senior fellow then at the San Lazaro Hospital, the country's referral facility for infectious diseases. With her was another fellow, Dr. Bren Dagok, who attended to the male patient in the intensive care unit for an entire week.

Despite his anxiety, he recalls it was the adrenaline that took hold of him. But fear began to envelop him when he was tasked to perform a medical procedure.

At the time the male was intubated, I was the one who intubated him. We had to intubate him because he's big, he's obese. We had a hard time so we had to remove him. So we intubated the patient again until we sedated him.

The disease progressed fast based on the patient's x-ray results. From visible infiltrates in the lungs on January 27, only a portion of the left lung was left visible three days later.

Dr. Dagok was removed from ICU duties a week later to be quarantined after developing symptoms of the disease.

When he expired, I wasn't the one who declared death to him. Although my test turned negative, they tested me again. Of course, I was scared. But you can't do anything because that's your job.

He eventually tested negative for COVID, but the following months would pass and the number of healthcare workers afflicted with COVID-19 would increase. Some wouldn't even make it.

Data from the DOH show that more than 32,000 healthcare workers have already fallen ill. 127 of them succumbed to the disease.

In the last three years, the country has lived through at least four surges of COVID-19. In August 2020, at least 14,000 cases were reported per week, prompting a group of healthcare workers to call for a timeout and recalibration of government response.

A more transmissible variant of the SARS-CoV-2 also began to emerge, causing a rapid rise in infections.

In April 2021, the surge was driven by the Alpha and Beta variants. But things were about to get worse by September, after the most virulent variant Delta made its way to Philippine shores.

It was this variant that overwhelmed hospitals. Tents were eventually set up, but even these weren't enough, forcing patients to agonizingly wait until a bed was available. Some died while waiting to be admitted.

Dr. Galon and Dr. Dagok admit there were times they thought of turning their backs on their profession.

Honestly, there are times when you just want to stop. It's like you're forcing yourself to go to the hospital. But then, of course, one factor is that this is what we were chosen for, so we hung on to that all.

As 2022 opened, the virus shocked the world yet again with the Omicron variant. But while this variant caused the highest surge globally, the disease was less severe.

It was at this time when a lot of Filipinos have already received the primary series of COVID-19 jabs, with some even doubling their protection with a booster. Eventually, the virus debilitating effects decreased.

Sa ngayon, we can say that everything is manageable. Our hospitals are being able to manage our cases. Wala pong masyadong mga kasong naitatala na mula sa ibang-ibang lugar dito sa Metro Manila.

While the COVID-19 situation in many areas has improved, thereby sparking economic activity and even making the use of face masks optional, one question remains unanswered. Has the COVID-19 pandemic ended?

Rafael Bosano, ABS-CBN News.

Ed, we are taking a quick break. Up ahead, the Philippine House of Representatives approves a final reading of the calling for a constitutional convention to amend the 1987 Constitution.

And House Lawmaker Bienvenido Valdez, Jr. defends the proposed Human Rights Defenders Act. He will join us for a discussion on that. Please join us for the rundown. Stay tuned.

Up ahead, the Philippine House of Representatives approves a final reading of the calling for a constitutional convention to amend the 1987 Constitution.

And House Lawmaker Bienvenido Valdez, Jr. defends the proposed Human Rights Defenders Act. He will join us for a discussion on that. Please join us for the rundown. Stay tuned.

Up ahead, the Philippine House of Representatives approves a final reading of the calling for a constitutional convention to amend the 1987 Constitution.

Hi guys, this is Big Boy Che. Dito makipagpwentuan tayo sa mga Big...

Welcome back to The Rundown, the headlines across the web.

In Quarres Vanner's story online, the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology launches a project that would establish libraries in prison as a plan to include reading in the rehabilitation program for persons deprived of liberty.

Philippine Star's top story, the House of Representatives approves a third and final reading, a priority bill of President Marcos, which seeks to right size by way of streamlining the 1.6 million strong bureaucracy.

At topping JMA News' website, the Philippine Weather Bureau declares the end of La Nina or the cold phase.

And CNN Philippines' Vanner story, the Philippine Health Department says the arrival of bivalent vaccines in the country would be delayed due to the lifting of the state of calamity for COVID-19.

A measure to amend the Philippine Constitution overwhelmingly approved by House lawmakers on final reading, Tuesday, RJ Cruz reports.

With 301 members voting in the affirmative, seven members in the negative, and zero abstentions, House Bill Number 7352 is hereby approved on third and final reading.

That's more than enough for the House to meet the two-thirds vote of all of its members required by the Constitution to call for a constitutional convention.

The approved bill mandates the election of delegates by districts simultaneous with the 2023 Barangay and Sanggunian Kabataan elections, while empowering the Senate President and the House Speaker to appoint sectoral delegates equivalent to 20 percent of the district delegates.

The bill spells out qualifications and prohibitions, including banning delegates from running in the election after the convention.

The convention's term of office runs from December 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024, entitling delegates to a P10,000 per diem for every day of the convention and travel and lodging expenses.

It will have its session in the Philippine International Convention Center.

In a statement, House Speaker Martin Romualdez emphasized the need to encourage more foreign investments in the country to create additional job and income opportunities for the people.

The speaker adds increased investments will sustain the country's economic growth, but those who voted no are worried it will also amend political provisions.

While casting doubts on its viability, African senators indicated it may not have enough numbers there.

We cannot pin all our hopes on the prospect that foreign investment alone would be the key to escaping our economic rot.

Sustainable growth would not be possible if we fail to address the pressing concerns already threatening to overwhelm us.

Let us not blame the people of Concon for what happened to ECON.

This is our only goal, to appease and calm the opposition of the public in Chacha.

Even before the voting, Camarines Representative Elrey Vidafuerte and House Committee on Constitutional Amendments Chair Rufus Rodriguez already urged the Senate to give charter change a chance.

Rodriguez asserts the Senate cannot and should not ignore the initiative of the lower house, which is an expression of the people's consensus they gathered in recent nationwide public hearings.

President Juan Miguel Zubiri previously said pursuing charter change does not have the support of the majority of senators.

RG Cruz, ABS-CBN News.

Philippine House Lawmaker Bienvenido Avante, Jr. refutes the claim of government's anti-insurgency task force that the proposed Human Rights Defenders Act will protect the New People's Army and its supporters.

For more on this issue, let's now talk to the congressman himself, Congressman Avante, Chairperson of the House Committee on Human Rights.

Good morning, Representative. Thanks for joining us as always.

Good morning. Magandang maga po, Nikki.

So, first off, sir, you maintain that the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act or HRDPA will protect human rights advocates and not terrorists.

What are the provisions under it and why the need for it in addition to the laws that we currently have in place?

Well, we understand that some of our friends in the security sector are actually concerned about this measure.

But we just would like to allay their misgivings about the bill and also assure the public that the passage of this measure will not compromise or hinder government's efforts to combat terrorism.

Sabi ko sa aking statement kahapon na mayroon tayong Section 4, the distinction between human rights defender and a terrorist.

In Section 4 of the HRDPA or the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act, dinify namin dito ang human rights defender.

Sinabi namin, and I quote, any person who individually or in association with others acts or seeks to act to protect, promote, or strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms and welfare of the people at the local, national, regional, and international levels.

Ngayon, makikita nyo rin, mayroon tayong dinatawag na Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. Dinifine dito kung sino ang mga terrorist. Nakalagay dito, number one, acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to any person.

Number two, acts intended to cause extensive damage or destruction to a government or public facility or public place or private property. Number three, acts intended to cause extensive interference with damage or destruction to critical infrastructure.

Number four, development, manufacturing, possession, acquisition, transportation, supply or use of weapons, explosive or biological, nuclear, radiological, or chemical weapons. And number five, release of dangerous substances. Nakalagay lahat dito.

Makikita nyo talagang napakalagay na distinction between the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act and Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. Hindi pwede ito. If someone who claims to be a human rights defender commits a terrorist act or provides material support to terrorist groups,

then he or she will be considered a terrorist and if not covered by the HRDPA.

I think the LTF-ALCAC, masyado naman silang mag-accuse. Siguro kinakailangan nilang pag-aralang mabuti itong Human Rights Defenders Protection Act. I mean kailangan natin ito. Our country needs this.

The advancement of human rights and the security of the state are not mutually exclusive. Neither are they anathema to each other. We do not have to choose between human rights and security. The promotion of the former does not erode the latter. But we do not promote human rights. Hindi ibig sabihin na we are trying to go against the security of the nation.

Our democracy is strengthened when we promote human rights side by side with efforts to ensure the security of our citizens. Kinakailangan lang. Kasi pagkapitan itong LTF-ALCAC, sobra kumag-accuse. I think they should be more objective on this.

I think that the LTF-ALCAC should, they should just, they can dialogue with us if they want to. They can tell us. The thing is this, what will they do with more than 300 congressmen who will support the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act?

Nainiwala sila that this is very much needed by our country today. Ilan ba yung LTF-ALCAC na yan? How many are they? I mean who are the people behind it? You see? As against the whole congress, as against even the senate.

You see? Kung kami, nainiwala kami that the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act is very much needed by our country today as much as security is, then I think the LTF-ALCAC should be objective and should begin to learn that in a way, mali sila. They are wrong.

I don't know why they're opposing it now. But I think they also opposed the last administration. But because most congressmen have supported it, their opposition would be nothing.

So we are invoking Provision 48 of the Rules of the House that we should now let it go to the plenary and voted upon. It is up to the majority of congressmen if they will support the issue. Kung hindi naman, for example, ayaw maniwala ng mga ibang congressmen that this is not actually needed, they will not actually support it.

But the thing is I would like to perhaps give a warning to the LTF-ALCAC that they should be careful in their words and statements. Why? Because the House of Representatives is the house of the people. We are representing the country for that matter. You see? And so we're not just going to put our country in jeopardy because of this bill.

And Congressman, I think it's also important to highlight or to make clear that the proposed law does not repeal the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, the Anti-Money Laundering Law, and the Terrorism, Financing, Prevention, and Suppression Act of 2012. Will these statutes remain enforceable in the proper cases with due respect and protection to authentic HRDs?

No, it does not. In fact, this was already stressed by my fellow member in the Human Rights Committee, Rep. Esther Legman, who clarified that it does not in any way repeal the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 or the Anti-Money Laundering Law or the Terrorism, Financing, Prevention, and Suppression Act of 2012.

Ibig sabihin ito, kung ikaw ay terrorist or criminal, batay sa mga batas na binanggit ko ngayon na hindi ka pwede magtago sa likod ng HRDPA at damitin ang sanctuary provision nito. Hindi pwede yan.

And the proposed law also does not diminish, but in fact augments the jurisdiction of the Commission on Human Rights. Can you expand on this?

Yes. Well, nagiging concerned din ito. Sinasabi nila, the HRDPA, the Human Rights Defender Protection Act, encroaches upon the jurisdiction and powers of the CHR with the creation of the committee.

Please let me emphasize that these are, iyong ninominate na Karapatan, FLAG, PARA, and NUPL, they are nominees. And ultimately, it will be the CHR that will appoint the members of the HR Defenders Committee.

Let me also stress that the CHR was consulted during our deliberations on this bill. Aside from this, representatives from the Armed Forces of the Philippines, Department of National Defense, Department of Justice, the Philippine National Police were invited and consulted regarding this bill, the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act.

At the meetings we had, called by my own committee, and subsequent technical working group sessions, their input was welcomed and taken into account in the process of creating this measure.

Kaya na nasali ko nga na the advancement of human rights and the security of the state are not mutually exclusive. They do not in any way oppose each other, but they ought to be partners in protecting the rights of our own people and promoting peace in our land.

Sir, the House Committee on Human Rights is expected to submit the bill to the whole House for action. What are your expectations for this hereafter? Meron po ba tayo gine-expect na counterpart bill din?

In fact, we have already, I think, approved in the committee level, the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act. So we're just waiting for the Committee on Rules to submit to the plenary debate.

I don't think that we're going to have any problem, actually, because as has been said, it has been approved for third reading in the 17-18 Congress. So I don't think we have any problem as far as approving it in the House. I do not know the counterpart in the Senate if they have actually talked about this.

All right. On that note, Congressman Abante, thank you, as always, for speaking to us. Maraming salamat po sa aras niyo. Stay safe, sir.

Salamat. Thank you. Maraming salamat sa iyo.

Ill-fated plane was a mother and her three children.

Hindi po kami natatulungan sa Libby. Yun lang sana po inihina. Pero sinang magpapiligay. So yung lockdown po, pilanggulay manamin.

It tells employees the company needs to operate more efficiently to prepare for what he described as this new economic reality. Meta in November slashed more than 11,000 jobs, or 13% of its workforce at that time. One analyst warns Meta's layoffs are just the tip of the iceberg.

The clock struck midnight for hyper growth in tech. And you're seeing slowing growth. And now we're seeing cost cuts across the valley for the first time since 2009. It's not just Meta. You're seeing it from Microsoft, Amazon, others. And I think it's really the sign of just a softening environment where tech no longer is immune to a macro environment.

Hey, look now. The financial markets on Wall Street US stocks staged a rebound Tuesday. This as largely on-target inflation data, easing jitters over competition in the banking sector, cooled expectations regarding the size of the rate hike at the Federal Reserve's policy meeting next week. All the major indices gained more than 1%.

Inflation in the US slowed to 6% in February. European markets also in the green as investors digested the latest US inflation trend. The pan-European stock 600 index closed 1.5% higher. Now here in Asia, markets ended mostly in the red amid concerns over the collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank. The PSE index tumbled another 151 points to close back at the 6300 level.

Now here are some economic data releases that we are monitoring this Wednesday, March 15. The Philippines will report its latest data on cash remittances. It increased 5.8% to an all-time high of $3.16 billion in December. China, meanwhile, will release its unemployment rate for the month of February. The number of jobless people in China remained unchanged at 5.5% in January. And Indonesia's balance of trade figures in February will also be released. Indonesia's trade surplus surged to $3.87 billion.

And back here at home, the Philippine Maritime Industry Authority says the sunken tanker that caused the massive oil spill in Oriental Mindoro was not authorized to set sail. In a Senate hearing Tuesday, the owner of Empty Princess Impress said it had a pending application to amend its Certificate of Public Convenience. The ship was able to sail nine times before it sank on February 28.

Senator Cynthia Villar says the company may have a problem claiming the insurance since the vessel had no permit to operate. Senator Rafi Tulfo, meanwhile, slammed the Philippine Coast Guard, which was supposed to inspect deporting vessels.

After the hearing, the Philippine Coast Guard released a copy of the Certificate of Public Convenience of the Empty Princess Empress, issued by the Marina de Canto reports that it allowed the ship to sail without a certificate.

Citing its principle of holiday economics, the palace has moved the celebration of the Day of Valor, or Araw Magpaglitingan, from April 9 to April 10. That's a Monday. That means a five-day long weekend with April 6 and 7, Maury Thursday and Good Friday, declared as regular holidays.

And I'm Nikki De Guzman. Subscribe to the ANC YouTube channel, like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter. Head Start comes your way next. Stay with ANC.

Thank you very much.