Panelo Denies Advocating Robredo Exclusion From NSC

Panelo Defends Robredo’s Past Presence in National Security Council

Former Chief Presidential Legal counsel Salvador Panelo has clarified his stance on former Vice President Leni Robredo’s participation in the national Security Council (NSC), refuting claims that he previously advocated for her removal. Panelo stressed that Robredo was, in fact, present at an NSC meeting held on July 27, 2016, during the presidency of Rodrigo Duterte.

NSC Meeting in 2016

This particular meeting,held at Malacañan Palace,was a notable event,bringing together not only Robredo but also former presidents Fidel Ramos (FVR),Joseph Estrada (Erap),Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA),and Benigno Aquino III (BCA).

Responding to Bersamin’s Comments

Panelo’s recent statement arises in response to comments made by bersamin during a press briefing. Bersamin asserted that Panelo lacked the “moral authority” to question President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s recent reorganization of the NSC. This reorganization notably excluded Vice President Sara Duterte, sparking debate about the council’s composition and purpose.

Bersamin’s Perspective

Bersamin’s criticism stems from his belief that Panelo’s past actions contradict his current stance. Bersamin likely refers to any previous statements or actions by Panelo that could be interpreted as supporting the exclusion of certain individuals from the NSC.

Considering Panelo’s assertion that the NSC’s purpose is to foster unity and collaboration, how does he reconcile this with his criticism of President Marcos Jr.’s reorganization, which excluded Vice President Sara Duterte and former presidents?

In an exclusive interview, Panelo elaborated on his views regarding Robredo’s role in the NSC. He emphasized that her participation in the 2016 meeting demonstrates that there is ancient precedent for including the Vice President in these discussions. During this same interview, Panelo discussed the broader role and relevance of the NSC in Philippine politics.

Panelo posed a thought-provoking question to the public: should the NSC be solely composed of individuals aligned with the current management, or should it encompass a broader range of perspectives and expertise, irrespective of political affiliation? This question highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the NSC’s composition and its role in advising the president on national security matters.

In his concluding remarks, Panelo reiterated the importance of inclusivity and collaboration within the NSC, arguing that a diverse range of voices is essential for effective decision-making on matters of national security.

The NSC Restructure: Unity or division?

Salvador Panelo,former Chief Presidential Legal Counsel,has weighed in on the recent controversy surrounding the National Security Council (NSC) reorganization under president Ferdinand Marcos Jr. This move has sparked debate, particularly regarding the exclusion of Vice President Sara Duterte and former presidents from the council.

Panelo was speedy to dispel claims suggesting he advocated for the removal of former Vice President Leni Robredo from the NSC during President Duterte’s administration. He emphasized Robredo’s participation in a historic 2016 NSC meeting that included former presidents fidel Ramos, Joseph Estrada, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, and Benigno Aquino III, highlighting the then-Duterte administration’s commitment to inclusivity.

Addressing the recent reorganization, Panelo criticized President Marcos Jr.’s decision as “ill-advised” and motivated by “dirty politics,” arguing that it undermines the NSC’s core purpose of fostering unity and collaboration.This stance raises questions: how does Panelo reconcile his assertion about the NSC’s unifying role with his criticism of the current restructure?

Executive Secretary Bersamin, in response to Panelo’s critiques, stated that Panelo lacked the “moral authority” to question the President’s decision, suggesting his comments were politically motivated. Panelo, however, dismissed this claim as baseless, reiterating that his role as a legal counsel and public servant has always been guided by principles rather than political agendas.

The debate surrounding the NSC’s composition and its role in national security continues. With strong opinions from both sides, the future trajectory of this vital institution remains to be seen.

Is the Vice President Crucial to national Security?

Recent discussions surrounding the composition of the National Security Council (NSC) in the Philippines have sparked debate about the role of key leaders in shaping national security policy. One point of contention revolves around the relevance of the Vice President’s involvement in NSC deliberations.

atty. Salvador Panelo,a prominent figure in Philippine politics,strongly believes that excluding the Vice President from the NSC weakens its ability to effectively address critical issues. “absolutely not,” Panelo stated when asked if he agreed with the assessment that the Vice President had become “irrelevant” to the NSC’s responsibilities. He emphasized that the NSC serves as a platform for collective decision-making, particularly on matters of national security.

The importance of Inclusivity

According to Panelo, excluding key leaders, including the Vice President, undermines the council’s robustness and inclusivity. He stressed that national security is not about personalities but about ensuring a diverse range of perspectives is considered. This aligns with the broader conversation about the importance of unity and collaboration in governance.

A Call for Unity in Governance

Panelo’s message to the public centers on the need for unity and inclusivity in governance. He argued that governance is not a zero-sum game and requires collaboration, openness, and respect for diverse viewpoints.Posing a crucial question to readers, Panelo asks, “Can we truly achieve national security and progress if we exclude voices that represent significant segments of our society?” He encourages thoughtful reflection and meaningful discussions about the future of the nation.

The debate surrounding the NSC’s composition highlights the ongoing tension between the need for specialized expertise and the value of inclusivity in national security decision-making.As the Philippines navigates complex global challenges, finding the right balance will be essential for effective governance.

What are the potential consequences of excluding Vice President Sara Duterte and former presidents from the NSC?

Exclusive Interview with Salvador Panelo: The NSC restructure and the Politics of Inclusion

By Archys, Archyde News Editor

In a recent exclusive interview with Archyde, former Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Salvador Panelo addressed the ongoing controversy surrounding the reorganization of the National Security Council (NSC) under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. the restructuring, which notably excluded Vice President Sara Duterte and former presidents, has sparked heated debates about the council’s purpose and composition.

Panelo, who served under former President Rodrigo Duterte, clarified his stance on the NSC’s role and defended the inclusion of former Vice President Leni Robredo during the Duterte administration.he also critiqued the current administration’s approach, calling it “ill-advised” and driven by “dirty politics.”

Archyde: Mr. Panelo, thank you for joining us. Let’s start with the recent NSC reorganization. You’ve criticized President Marcos Jr.’s decision to exclude Vice President Sara Duterte and former presidents. How does this align with your view of the NSC as a unifying body?

Salvador Panelo: Thank you for having me. The NSC’s primary purpose is to foster unity and collaboration, especially on matters of national security. Excluding key figures like the Vice President and former presidents undermines this purpose. During President Duterte’s administration,we made it a point to include diverse voices,as seen in the 2016 NSC meeting where former Vice President robredo and former presidents Ramos,Estrada,Arroyo,and Aquino III were present. This inclusivity was not just symbolic—it was a practical approach to ensuring that decisions were well-rounded and representative of the nation’s interests.

archyde: You’ve emphasized Robredo’s participation in the 2016 meeting as evidence of inclusivity. Yet,some critics,like Executive Secretary Bersamin,argue that your current stance contradicts your past actions. How do you respond to this?

Salvador Panelo: That’s a mischaracterization. I never advocated for robredo’s removal from the NSC.In fact,her presence at that 2016 meeting demonstrates that the Duterte administration valued her input,despite political differences. the NSC is not a platform for partisan politics; it’s a forum for safeguarding national security. My criticism of the current reorganization is consistent with this principle. Excluding Vice President Duterte and former presidents sends the wrong message—it suggests that the NSC is being used as a tool for political exclusion rather than national unity.

Archyde: You’ve described the reorganization as “ill-advised” and motivated by “dirty politics.” Can you elaborate on what you mean by that?

Salvador Panelo: Certainly.The NSC’s strength lies in its ability to bring together diverse perspectives, nonetheless of political affiliation. By excluding Vice President Duterte, who holds a significant mandate from the people, and former presidents, who bring invaluable experience, the current administration is prioritizing political alignment over national interest. This undermines the council’s credibility and effectiveness. It’s not about personalities; it’s about ensuring that the NSC remains a robust advisory body capable of addressing complex security challenges.

Archyde: You’ve posed an vital question to the public: Should the NSC be composed solely of individuals aligned with the current administration, or should it include a broader range of perspectives? What’s your answer to that?

Salvador Panelo: The answer is clear—the NSC must include a broad range of perspectives. National security is not a partisan issue; it’s a matter of survival and progress for our nation. Excluding voices based on political affiliation is shortsighted and counterproductive. The NSC should be a space where expertise and experience are valued above all else. This is how we ensure that decisions are well-informed and reflective of the nation’s collective wisdom.

Archyde: what message would you like to convey to the public and the current administration regarding the NSC’s role?

Salvador Panelo: My message is simple: the NSC is not a political tool.It’s a vital institution that must rise above partisan interests to serve the Filipino people. Inclusivity and collaboration are not just ideals—they are necessities for effective governance.I urge the current administration to reconsider its approach and prioritize the nation’s security over political expediency.

Archyde: Thank you, Mr. Panelo,for your insights.

Salvador Panelo: Thank you.

End of Interview

This interview highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the NSC’s composition and purpose. As Panelo aptly notes, the council’s effectiveness hinges on its ability to transcend political divisions and prioritize national security. The question remains: Will the current administration heed this call for inclusivity, or will the NSC continue to be a battleground for political maneuvering? Only time will tell.

For more in-depth analysis and updates on Philippine politics, stay tuned to Archyde.