Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo "Ping" Lacson said Saturday, Nov. 15 that former lawmaker Zaldy Co's recent claims on social media will have to be properly authenticated--that is, made under oath or affirmed in the Philippine consulate of the country where he is now staying--for it to have any probative value.

Lacson, chairman of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, maintained that Co's claims have no weight as evidence, at least for now, because Co was not under oath when he made them and posted them on social media.

He added that this was why the committee did not play Co's first video during its hearing on Friday.

"Ex-Rep. Zaldy Co needs to have his written affidavit properly authenticated by a consul in the place where he is presently located, then testify under oath before the Blue Ribbon Committee while within the premises of the embassy or consulate in order to make his testimony valid and have probative value. Under such condition, we will resume the Blue Ribbon Committee hearing and hear his testimony," he said.

"Otherwise, as I have stated earlier, no matter how many Parts or Episodes his narrations are, they will all remain as such - narrations," he added.

Lacson earlier considered inviting Co to participate in the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing via Zoom, but Senator Ronald dela Rosa voiced apprehension that Co might turn this into a platform for propaganda, and the committee cannot hold him accountable or cite him in contempt of the committee because he is not under oath.

In the meantime, Lacson said he and his staff are reviewing the supposed P100 billion worth of projects that Co claimed were inserted in the Bicameral Conference Committee, allegedly under the instruction of President Marcos through Department of Budget and Management (DBM) Secretary Amenah Pangandaman and Undersecretary Adrian Bersamin.

Several items were confirmed to exist during their initial check, Lacson said.

"We have been reviewing the P100 billion worth of projects that he claimed to have inserted in the bicam allegedly upon the instruction of the President through Sec Pangandaman and Usec Adrian Bersamin to match them with the items under the 2025 GAA. With at least five pages already done so far, several items are confirmed to be existing," he said.

But Lacson pointed out that several dates of the supposed deliveries--as claimed by Co--were done in 2024, thus contradicting his narrations about the insertions in the 2025 budget.

"What I noticed in the video, however, is, while he talks of the 2025 GAA, several dates of the supposed deliveries were done in 2024 which obviously contradicts his narration about the insertions in the 2025 GAA," he said.

On Friday, Lacson noted that Co's claims on the P100-billion project insertion in the Department of Public Works and Highways' (DPWH) budget during the bicam appear to defy common sense, since the President could have done it with the National Expenditure Program (NEP), the precursor of the GAA that emanated from the executive department.

"Hindi siya part ng bicam. Dapat sa NEP pa lang sinabihan ang DBM at DBCC, maglagay ng P100B sa DPWH. And assuming totoong nagpa-insert sa BCC, bakit vineto (The President is not part of the bicam. He could have had the amount inserted in the NEP. And assuming it is true he ordered the insertion, why did he veto it)?" he added.