MANILA — The House of Representatives’ decision to swiftly suspend Cavite’s Cong. Francisco Barzaga for 60 days has triggered a rare and outspoken backlash from within its own ranks, with a handful of lawmakers accusing the chamber of prioritizing internal punishment over more pressing national concerns.
Although the plenary voted overwhelmingly — 249-0, with 11 abstentions — to adopt the ethics committee’s recommendation, five lawmakers broke away from the consensus, warning that the rush to penalize Barzaga undermines fairness, legislative priorities, and even free speech in Congress.
Batangas’ Cong. Leandro Leviste, Quezon City’s Cong. Bong Suntay, Sagip’s Cong. Paolo Henry Marcoleta, Kamanggagawa’s Cong. Eli San Fernando, and Bagong Henerasyon’s Cong. Robert Nazal rejected the sanction, saying the manner and speed in which the case was handled “set a troubling precedent.”
Leviste assailed the House leadership for fast-tracking the case at the expense of more urgent issues confronting the chamber.
“Ang boto ko ay ‘no’ hindi dahil perpekto si Cong. Barzaga, pero dahil kuwestyunable para sa akin na minadali natin itong desisyon. Ngayong hapon lang natin nakuha ang committee report na ito at si Cong. Barzaga lang ang sinampahan ng kaso ng committee on ethics,” he said.
He then questioned why the ethics committee moved faster on Barzaga than on other controversies involving House members.
“Ang boto ko ay ‘no’ lalo na dahil inuuna natin ang kaso niya kaysa sa mga mas seryosong isyung kinakaharap ng isa sa mga kasamahan natin. Isang kapwa ko Batangueño na nandito ngayon na bumoto sa kaso ni Cong. Barzaga,” he added.
“At para lang walang mali sa ginagawa ng isa sa ating kasamahan at tayo mismo ngayon ay sumisira sa imahe ng Kongreso. Mahiya naman tayo!” stressed Leviste.
Kamanggagawa’s Cong. Eli San Fernando also warned that ethical rules must not be weaponized to muzzle dissent inside Congress.
“While we agreed that lawmakers are expected to uphold a higher standard of ethics and decorum, such standards ‘should not work as to stifle free speech and debate,’” he said.
He stressed that legislators must retain the freedom to challenge prevailing narratives, especially on matters of national consequence.
“Lawmakers must be free to say what we want, especially on issues involving national importance.”
“Barzaga’s actions and words may not fit the usual mold of a traditional lawmaker, but who decides if the mold or what mold is correct?”
He further asked: “Ganito ba tayo kabalat-sibuyas at allergic sa mga naiibang pananaw? Should our subjective judgments of Cong. Barzaga’s ethics supplant the will of the electorate?”
Despite the dissent, the suspension stands — but the unusually vocal resistance from within the House has amplified concerns that the chamber’s disciplinary processes may be shifting toward swifter, harsher enforcement that could chill debate and deepen divisions among lawmakers./PN
