Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. and Jinggoy Estrada. They are but three among lawmakers recommended to be charged for plunder, after the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) compiled evidence which proved that some legislators received kickbacks in the P10-billion pork barrel scam, devised and orchestrated by Napoles.
In all, Department of Justice Sec. Laila de Lima said the initial batch of respondents identified before the Office of the Ombudsman in the Napoles case named 38 people.
Janet Lim Napoles was tagged as the “mastermind” and “co-conspirator” in the plunder and malversation cases. Two former congressmen were also included among those accused of plunder.
De Lima explained that what differentiated those accused of plunder from those facing malversation charges was simply the amount of funds and kickbacks involved. Under the law, plunder charges require a minimum plundered amount of P50 million.
Also included in the list of respondents are eight former or current chiefs of staffs and staff members of the legislators, six presidents of the alleged bogus NGOs set up by Napoles, and some officials of government-owned corporations and agencies.
According to Sec. De Lima, these charges brought to the Ombudsman are anchored on the testimonies of whistleblowers (primarily former associates of Napoles), documents from various government agencies, which include the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commission on Audit (COA).
The next step in this long road to justice is for the Office of Ombudsman to look into the charges, and determine whether there is sufficient basis to proceed with a preliminary investigation.
De Lima also said they are now studying ways to freeze the assets of the lawmakers accused of plunder and malversation.
While kababayans from all over the world, who are following the pork barrel scam case felt relief and hope with this new development, many still have substantive questions which deserve serious discernment and response.
First of all, why were the filing of charges done in increments? While many Filipinos laud the Aquino administration for finally stepping up to heed their call for justice, some could not help but ask more questions regarding the DOJ’s impartiality in filing such charges.
“We commend the DOJ for taking the plunder case to Ombudsman vs. the ‘initial batch(38) of people’ accused of conspiring to defraud the Filipino people of billions in public funds,” says Washington D.C.-based Fil-Am organization, Migrant Heritage Commission (MHC).
“But we believe that they may have in their control the same charges vs. other senators and congressmen and other public officials in the administration who are also included in this heinous crimes.”
MHC Co-Executive Director Atty. Arnedo Valera says: “The Aquino government should not do these filings in batches. Do not do selective filings…You need to file them all at the same time. The Filipino people and our nation must know the extent and damage of the conspiracy to plunder our economy of the billions of public funds that should have been used for foods, jobs and justice.”
“Let the indictments of all co-conspirators, accessories whether in the public and private sectors be filed all at the same time…… We will come out as a stronger and respectable nation in the international community, when we allow the wheels of justice to run fast with objectivity and impartiality!”
Many Filipinos also question the statement of Senate President Franklin Drilon, who initially contended that even if they are criminally charged before the Ombudsman, the senators implicated in the pork barrel scam may continue to discharge their duties as legislators and cannot be suspended until they are convicted.
While some kababayans do acknowledge that “a person is deemed innocent until proven guilty in court,” this case is different. First of all, we are talking about public officials, who have allegedly violated and abused public trust.
Secondly, plunder is a non-bailable offense, which means those charged should be locked in jail.
In my social media discussion on this issue, my good friend Fil-Am Betty Abrantes commented: “Sen. Santiago, a constitutional law expert, also said that a provision cited by Drilon was not contained in the Constitution, but only in the Senate rules.
She said that Drilon’s statements suffered from ‘doctrinal confusion.’”
Abrantes further shared what the law says, as stipulated in The Plunder Law: R.A. 7080
Sec. 5.: “Suspension and Loss of Benefits. Any public officer against whom any criminal prosecution under a valid information under this Act in whatever stage of execution and mode of participation, is pending in court, shall be suspended from office.”
“Should he be convicted by final judgment, he shall lose all retirement or gratuity benefits under any law, but if he is acquitted he shall be entitled to reinstated and to the salaries and other benefits which he failed to receive during suspension, unless in the meantime, administrative proceedings have been filed against him.”
Upon the inquiry of Sen. Francis Escudero, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales clarified that it is not up to her office to suspend these legislators, who were charged with plunder. She said that only the Sandiganbayan (the anti-graft court) has the capability to do so. The question lies on whether the Sandiganbayan can automatically suspend them.
“I take it that that refers only to cases when the information has been filed in court. But as far as the ombudsman is concerned, I have said it publicly before that the ombudsman has no administrative, disciplinary jurisdiction over members of Congress,” Morales said.
According to Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, based on the Anti-Plunder Act, suspension would be automatic.
However, Ombudsman Morales, also referring to the Anti-Plunder Act, said: “The use of the word ‘it shall,’ I don’t think it will be automatic on the part of the Sandiganbayan to suspend. I really don’t know… that’s really debatable. Of course the ombudsman will move for the suspension of the defendant-congressman or senator.”
“Whether or not the Sandiganbayan can motu propio (on its own) suspend a defendant in a plunder case who is a member of Congress, I’m not in a position to say with authority whether it should or it should not,” she added.
Sen. Drilon, on the other hand, said that the Supreme Court has ruled before that preventive suspensions “should only be within a 90-day period and not for the duration of the trial,” reported Philstar.com.
According to Drilon (via Philstar.com) “a suspension for the duration of the trial could already mean a virtual removal from office of a legislator if the case drags on longer than the lawmaker’s term.”
Drilon added that a senator could also be suspended by filing a formal complaint and going through the process before the Senate ethics committee.
But as of yet, no complaint has been filed and according to Drilon, the Senate ethics committee is still yet to be organized.
“It would be better to just leave this matter to the courts, anyway this case is already with the ombudsman. The ombudsman will decide if cases will be filed before the Sandiganbayan. The moment cases are filed that would be the end of the matter,” Drilon said.
According to Morales, she expects the review of the cases to be completed in a year or shorter, depending on the amount of documentary evidence submitted.
“The DOJ filed cases by batches and if that is the case, then we can also file cases by batches. In other words, we will not wait for the entire case, the subject of fact-finding by the NBI to come over to us before we refer with finality the cases which were filed on September 17. So that one year that I gave is only just an estimate. It could be less. I don’t expect it to be more. It could be less. I will see to it that it won’t be more,” she said.
The fact that these lawmakers have been implicated in such a deplorable crime against the people they have sworn to serve is bad enough. Don’t they have the delicadeza to at least take an administrative leave, pending the final outcome of the investigation and the case?
If they do not have delicadeza, I hope the Senate and House leadership will exercise their sense of propriety and ethics, and suspend these lawmakers.
What is at stake here is the faith of the Filipino people in government. That, to me, supersedes any rights these accused lawmakers may wish to invoke for whatever reason.
* * *
Gel Santos Relos is the anchor of TFC’s “Balitang America.” Views and opinions expressed by the author in this column?are are solely those of the author?and not of Asian Journal and ABS-CBN-TFC. For comments, go to www.TheFil-AmPerspective.com, https://www.facebook.com/Gel.Santos.Relos
