It was during the presidency of Ronald Reagan that “deniability” became a buzz word in international media. The US Congress attempted to hold Reagan directly accountable for the Iran-Contra scandal, an under-the-table arms-for-hostage deal between the US and Iran, coursed through Israel, that involved a diversion of funds – also under-the-table – for the Contra guerillas in Nicaragua. Several top White House officials were eventually indicted, including Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, but the layers of cover-ups effectively insulated Reagan, allowing him deniability.
Will deniability also spare members of the Senate and House of Representatives, as well as officials under the office of the president, in connection with the alleged P10-billion PDAF scam, as well as other scams now being unearthed? From the statements of those initially implicated by whistle-blowers, they appear to be hoping so.
So far, the most prominent personalities mentioned are known to be members of the opposition, which has raised eyebrows. In fact, administration allies, both in the legislative and executive branches, are well represented in the roster of alleged pork scammers.
Among those specifically named are Senators Bong Revilla, Jinggoy Estrada and Gringo Honasan. Their self-righteous denials and buck-passing are typical of the “defense” being used by the suspects in high office.
Revilla has vehemently denied having benefited from the alleged Napoles scam, blithely blaming the executive branch which, he said, is responsible for ensuring the proper disbursement of government funds.
In fact, he has claimed that if the allegations of the whistle-blowers are true, “he is also a victim of the scheme.”
Like Revilla, Honasan has also used the same wash-my-hands justification. He told the press that, while his office approved the release of pork barrel for livelihood programs for widows and orphans of policemen and the military in Lanao del Sur and Isabela, he had “no way of authenticating if these foundations or entities registered under the Securities and Exchange Commission are bona fide.”
Estrada echoed the same line. After admitting having signed endorsements for the release of PDAF funds, he claimed, “I do not know if those particular endorsements belong to her (Napoles) or to bogus non-government organizations. I wouldn’t have known.”
So, we, the Filipino people, are supposed to believe that millions of pesos, allocated to these three honorable senators, as well as others who have declared their innocence, have been disposed of without their knowledge. Right?
Let’s see now. The PDAF funds are allocated to individual senators and congressmen to the tune of P200 million each for the former and P70 million for the latter. Right? Now, who determines how the funds should be disposed of? The honorable senators and congressmen. Right?
Who goes over the list of projects to which the precious pork is allocated. The legislators. Right? Wrong? Well, who? Their staff? Or characters with a striking resemblance to Napoles?
The request for disposition of the funds is sent to the Senate finance committee or the House appropriations committee. Who signs the letters of request? The legislators. Right? No? Well, who does? Their staff? Surely, not Napoles.
Honasan and Estrada admitted having signed the endorsements for the release of funds. Was it too much to expect them to be familiar with the intended recipients of those funds, considering that millions of the people’s money were involved?
But Estrada protests: “I wouldn’t have known.”
So, whose responsibility was it to KNOW that millions would be used responsibly and legally – and not stolen? The legislative staff? Napoles?
Revilla insists that the onus is on the executive branch, presumably, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM). Of course, he’s right. But doesn’t he realize that it was his responsibility, too? Or did he think he was just dispensing autographs for fans?
It doesn’t take a mind reader to guess what the folks at the DBM will say, when the media spotlight focuses on them.
“Who? Us? But, we just assumed that the Senate finance committee and the House appropriations committee had done their due diligence, based on the due diligence of the office of the respective legislators. How would we have known that the NGOs were bogus or that they would land in the bank accounts of Janet Lim Napoles????”
Of course, given this kind of reasoning, one can only conclude that the folks at the DBM and the hand-washing, buck-passing senators and congressmen are either grossly irresponsible nincompoops or are bare-faced liars.
Let’s proceed to take apart the alibis of these legislators concerning the disposition of their PDAF funds. It is common knowledge that the pork barrel is really intended to give members of congress leverage with their constituents.
By building a basketball court here and a medical clinic or waiting shed there, and a few stretches of concrete highway here and a bridge there, and helping in the development of their respective jurisdictions with the PDAF funds (that’s why they’re called “priority development assistance funds,” remember?), the legislators are able ensure the loyalty of their constituents and of their votes in the forthcoming elections.
So, are we to believe that these seasoned politicians – so concerned about the votes of their constituents – never ever bothered to find out if their precious pork was being doled out to the right parties and not to their political enemies?
According to Estrada: “I wouldn’t have known.”
That kind of denial is as believable as a philandering husband self-righteously declaring, (after being caught in flagrante delicto by his wife and while the other woman is rushing out of the bedroom), “What woman? What woman?”
In the meantime, in spite of the increasing public outcry, Benigno Aquino III continues to offer a dubious rationale for and defense of the pork barrel. With a straight face, palace mouthpiece Abigail Valte tells us that Aquino insists that the pork is “the share of constituents in the budget.” Napoles and her legislative patrons must be doubling up with laughter.
“In theory, PDAF is really a good thing,” one news report quotes Valte. “And what we want to achieve is to make that theory a reality.”
Yeah, sure. As real as the theory, “Kung walang kurap, walang mahirap.”
Meanwhile, some spin specialists, suspiciously sounding like presidential apologists, have begun to play up the magnitude of the stealing under the Arroyo administration. Note the spin in a leading daily concerning the questionable disposal of the Malampaya funds: “The P23.6 billion being audited by the COA out of the government share in the operation of oil and natural gas fields in Malampaya off Palawan is more than twice the P10-billion pork barrel scam allegedly perpetrated by bogus non-government organizations (NGOs) controlled by businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles.”
Are they suggesting that the PDAF scam that continued to flourish even under Aquino’s watch pales in comparison and is, therefore, forgivable?
And so the Game of Deniability and Passing the Buck continues while the NBI and the Department of Justice try to pin down accountability for the Mother of All Thefts.
But, even assuming that Leila de Lima and the NBI will fail to build an airtight criminal case, shouldn’t the legislators and Malacañang officials involved be fired for gross irresponsibility, if not gross stupidity?
Meanwhile, is it too much to expect Aquino, as president of the country, to fathom what President Harry S. Truman meant when he said, “The buck stops here!”?
***
