Discord

FTER speculations circulated that he has gone into hiding, former military comptroller Carlos Garcia made an appearance at the House of Representatives on January 25 for a congressional inquiry to investigate the controversial plea bargain agreement made between Garcia and the Office of the Special Prosecutor.
However, Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez was a no-show at the hearing. She sent a letter to the House Committee, headed by Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr., explaining that ‘“since the purpose of the inquiry is to determine the validity of the plea bargaining agreement and the possible liability of those involved in or behind said agreement, should it be illegal, the inquiry may not be in aid of legislation and not within the legitimate province of the legislature.”
Gutierrez also said that the agreement “is still pending before the second division of the Sandiganbayan.” Besides, she said, the Office of the Ombudsman “is a constitutional and independent office.”
Six of her officials – Deputy Ombudsman Orlando Casimiro, Special Prosecutor Wendell Sulit, Deputy Special Prosecutors Robert Callos and Jesus Micael, and Special Prosecutors Joseph Capistrano and Jose Balmeo Jr. – also skipped attending the inquiry.
The House Committee on justice, who is also handling two impeachment cases against the Ombudsman, has voted unanimously to issue subpoenas to Gutierrez and her cohorts to ensure their mandatory attendance on the next hearing. Failure to comply to the subpoenas may lead to their arrest.
However, due to the impeachment case against Gutierrez, Congress has allowed her to send a representative to the hearing on her behalf.
Another absentee was AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Ricardo David who, according to Ilocos Norte Rep. Rodolfo Fariñas, should be compelled to attend the hearing since “the AFP is the offended party in the case.”
Rep.Tupas revealed that Congress will take action against the government’s anti-graft prosecutors for “possible irregularities” in coming up with the plea bargain agreement with Garcia, saying that lawmakers find it questionable why Garcia was able to escape plunder charges and why he gets to keep some of his contested assets. Under the plea bargain agreement, Garcia has admitted to the crimes of bribery and money laundering in exchange for returning only P135 million from the P302 million kickbacks which he allegedly received when he was still an AFP major general and comptroller.
According to Rep.Tupas, the P135 million plea bargain “confirms the strength of the evidence because there was admission and the admission was not to the amount lesser than P50 million (the minimum amount for a plunder case).”
The House has two objectives in doing the probe – to determine the government’s specific policy on plea bargain agreement involving plunder cases; and determine who should be liable if irregularities were found in the making of the plea bargain.
It’s a battle of wits and power at this point. And while truth and justice are yet to be served, the discord between the prosecutors who made the plea bargain agreement with Garcia and the House Committee on justice are still telling signs of political unrest in the government – between those who make the law and those who are tasked to implement it.
While we all agree to disagree, a conflict in governance, especially in matters pertaining to corrupt acts done by government officials, speaks volumes about what endemically ails our nation. Will we everwe find a cure?
(www.asianjournal.com)
(LA Midweek Jan 26-28, 2011 Sec A pg. 6)