Duterte’s executive order about POGOs scrutinized for “encroaching” on Congress

A recent House committee hearing has brought former President Rodrigo Duterte’s Executive Order No. 13 under scrutiny, with claims that it overstepped legislative boundaries by effectively enabling the now-banned Philippine offshore gaming operators (POGOs) to flourish in the country.

Batangas Representative Gerville Luistro, who raised concerns during the hearing of the House committee on public order and safety, argued that Duterte’s executive order essentially “encroached” on the legislative powers of Congress.

Executive Order No. 13, signed by Duterte in February 2017, aimed to “strengthen the fight against illegal gambling and clarify the jurisdiction and authority of concerned agencies in the regulation and licensing of gambling and online gaming facilities.” However, Luistro contends that the order introduced online gambling as part of the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation’s (Pagcor) mandate, despite no mention of it in Pagcor’s foundational laws.

Pagcor, established through Presidential Decree No. 1869 by former President Ferdinand Marcos Sr. in 1977 and later amended by Republic Act No. 9487 in 2007, regulates gaming establishments in the country. Luistro pointed out that these laws do not include any provisions for online gambling, making Duterte’s EO 13 a controversial move that she believes effectively altered the existing law.

“There is a principle in law: when the law does not provide, we should not provide. When the law does not include, we should not include,” Luistro was quoted as saying by the Inquirer during the hearing. “If the substantive law creating Pagcor does not provide for online gaming, then no executive issuances should provide for online gaming.”

She further argued that by issuing EO 13, Duterte had taken on a legislative role, amending and repealing laws. “When the former President issued EO 13, it is the humble submission of this representation, he legislated, he amended, he repealed the law, an act which violates the fundamental principle of separation of powers,” she pointed out.

During the hearing, Luistro questioned former Duterte spokesperson Harry Roque about the legality of the executive order.

“Don’t you think the President encroached upon the power of Congress when he issued EO 13?” Luistro asked Roque.

Roque, who admitted he was not familiar with the specific order, responded that executive orders, like legislative enactments, are presumed constitutional unless successfully challenged in court.

“While it was not my expertise, I will give my candid opinion, and that is under the scheme of things, executive issuances, legislative enactments are all presumed to be constitutional unless proven otherwise.”

The hearing, which took place just a day after Roque and 11 others were placed on a Bureau of Immigration lookout bulletin for being considered flight risks, has sparked further debate about the legality and implications of Duterte’s executive order and its impact on the proliferation of POGOs in the Philippines.

Read related article: Duterte, dela Rosa invited to House hearings on POGOs, drug war deaths