The Daily Tribune
It’s now the other senators, current and former, who should be on the carpet for the same accusations hurled by the current blue ribbon committee (BRC) chairman and members against the three senators, Jinggoy Estrada, Juan Ponce-Enrile and Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr.
Self-confessed agent of Janet Lim Napoles, Ruby Chan, was “dealing” with other senators, both former and current, in the past and not so recent past, allegedly for “allocation” of their respective pork barrel funds or Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).
It was Estrada who squealed on Tuason’s alleged under the table deals with some of his peers concerning their PDAF project allocations as he and Sen. Teofisto “TG” Guingona nearly came to blows yesterday during the afternoon plenary proceedings in a face-off.
Estrada had earlier promised to do battle with Guingona, if the BRC chairman insists on prejudging his guilt.
The matter stemmed from Estrada assailing Guingona last Monday for prejudging the pork barrel scam issue implicating the former as well as the Minority Leader Enrile and Senator Revilla on their supposed collusion with Napoles, the alleged brains of the pork barrel scam, in the light of the testimony given by Tuason in the last BRC hearing.
The matter stemmed from Estrada assailing Guingona last Monday for prejudging the pork barrel scam issue implicating the former as well as the Minority Leader Enrile and Senator Revilla on their supposed collusion with Napoles, the alleged brains of the pork barrel scam, in the light of the testimony given by Tuason in the last BRC hearing.
Tuason, who confirmed the alleged Napoles’ payoffs of supposed kickbacks to Estrada and Enrile was described by Guingona, overall lead in the probe, as already a “three-point shot, buzzer-beater with a winning shot yet.”
Guingona took the floor yesterday to rebut Estrada’s pot shots a day earlier, but Estrada confronted the BRC charman for failing to put to a test the credibility of Tuason, whether she was being upfront in all of the revelations she had made during Thursday’s blue ribbon hearing.
“The issue here is if she is lying or not because I have received information and I can support that, she has been asking our colleagues here, former and incumbent colleagues here, for projects and she has also asked for their PDAF projects to give them to her, peddling for these projects, apparently for her commissions, as agent of Napoles. Why have none of you questioned it? Why focus the hearing and the testimony of Ruby Chan on me and Senator Enrile who are being demonized?” Estrada decried.
“How sure are you that she’s not lying? Because time and again, in several of my interviews, I’ve said in the media that which she brought to the Senate were trays of sandwiches. It was not a duffel bag brought here in my office. In fact, I challenged the Senate leadership or the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms (OSAA) to produce the CCTV footage wherein Tuason allegedly delivered money to this representation,” Estrada said.
“In fact, Mr. President, I am really surprised why she only mentioned me and Atty. Gigi Reyes (Enrile’s former chief of staff) in her affidavit when she has a lot of senator-friends to whom she goes and peddles their PDAF? Why didn’t you even bother to ask her? Who are the senators whom she knows and visits, aside from the office of Senator Enrile and my office. Who are the other senators to whom she goes and peddle for their PDAF? Why didn’t you even bother to ask her about it?” he shot back at Guingona.
“We did ask her. She denied that she knew any other,” Guingona retorted, adding that issue being raised by Estrada is best addressed to Tuason herself.
There was no mention, however, in the affidavit and testimony at the hearing where these questions were raised by Guingona or the panel.
“What is your pleasure? So what do you want to happen?” Guingona pressed Estrada, prompting Senate President Franklin Drilon to call for a recess as tension was already running high then.
As cooler heads led by Drilon and Deputy Minority Leader Vicente Sotto III intervened and tried to prevail over the warring colleagues. The two managed to settle their differences behind closed doors an hour and a half after.
Estrada himself announced on the floor, upon the resumption of their plenary session, the result of the “lengthy” talk he had with Guingona.
“I expressed all my sentiments and I think he is aware of all the sentiments I mentioned to him and all I advised him, all I requested is to have a fair committee hearing in the blue ribbon. And I also advised him not to prejudge the outcome of the hearing and to refrain from making statements that tend to influence the outcome of the hearing. I think on the part of Senator Guingona that has already been well-taken,” Estrada said.
Prior to their heated exchanges on the floor, Guingona rose to air his side on the issues hurled at him by Estrada but stopped short of apologizing for the phrase that he used, saying that it was mainly to describe and underscore the possible impact and value of the testimony of a witness.
“I understand that the offense and the perception were apparently the result of the use of an analogy from the favorite national pastime – basketball. True, I have made such reference.
“For the record, I have no intention of prejudging the guilt or innocence of any of our peers allegedly involved in the issue now under probe by the Senate blue ribbon committee,” Guingona said.
“The transcripts of the hearings should prove this fact. And, I believe I speak for myself as well as for our peers who have attended the hearings when I say that we have done our utmost best to ensure that the dignity and honor of our colleagues involved in this issue are preserved and protected.
“I am aware, however, that a recent statement I have made both at the last committee hearing and press conference has caused offense and the perception that I may have, quote-unquote, ‘prejudged’ the guilt of one of our peers.
“Mr. President, let me assure you as well as our colleagues that to, quote-unquote, ‘prejudge’ has never been my intention. Let me assure you and our colleagues, that the phrase did not refer to a state of guilt on the part of any person,” he added.
Guingona said that the task of being the chairman of the said committee, admittedly, is already an extremely difficult one, compared to other regular panels, and becomes more problematical as the issue at hand allegedly involve three of their peers.
“I am not sure, Mr. President, if this has a precedent in the history of Congress of our Republic. I am inclined to believe, at this point, that there is none.
“It is a difficult task because its (committee’s) mandate is the search for truth, and, in the process, pinpoint accountabilities. Searching for truth, one might say, is like searching for honey,” he said.
Guingona lamented that his capability of handling the probe at the start of the proceedings was under a cloud of doubt, given its sensitivity as they will be practically placing under investigation some of their own ranks.
Yet, despite the distrusts of some sectors, the blue ribbon chairman claimed that he has managed to steer the conduct of an orderly proceedings.
Yet, despite the distrusts of some sectors, the blue ribbon chairman claimed that he has managed to steer the conduct of an orderly proceedings.
He said that it’s just unfortunate one of his colleagues had some misgivings in his handling of the probe.
“There are questions the committee is attempting to answer. The witness had surely helped in the search for the answers. I repeat – in the search for answers. Not in the determination of guilt or innocence,” he said.
“I believe that there is a battle we must all fight together – as one. And this is the battle to restore our people’s trust in the Senate of the Republic of the Philippines,” he added.
“There are questions the committee is attempting to answer. The witness had surely helped in the search for the answers. I repeat – in the search for answers. Not in the determination of guilt or innocence,” he said.
“I believe that there is a battle we must all fight together – as one. And this is the battle to restore our people’s trust in the Senate of the Republic of the Philippines,” he added.
Meanwhile, Press Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. brushed aside the statement of Vice President Jejomar Binay that the ongoing investigation of PDAF is obviously being done for a trial by publicity.
Aquino and his aides have been demonizing the allies of Binay in the opposition who could be a contender for the coming 2016 election for President and Vice President.
“On the concern of trial by publicity, it is the reason that right from the start it has been the position of the President: We have to be evidence-based. There should be evidence or documents against those who may have participation. That is the basic rule being followed by the Department of Justice to file the complaint in the office of the Ombudsman,” Coloma said.
Coloma said denied that the investigation of the Justice Department was focused only on the non-government organizations (NGOs) allegedly created by Napoles, had not given any attention to the NGOs organized by some lawmakers themselves that cornered their own pork barrel.
“All allegations of corruption in the use of public funds would be investigated, reviewed, and would be given the due process to determine if there was violation of the law,” Coloma said.
Coloma claimed that the the focus of the agents of the National Bureau of Investigation has been on the case of Napoles-related NGOs and the alleged pork barrel irregularities.
Coloma said the created Inter-Agency Anti-Graft Commission which is composed of the Department of Justice, Commission on Audit, and the office of the Ombudsman has been conducting investigation on similar other cases of pork barrel.
“This can be traced through the normal financial audit of CoA,” Coloma said.
Coloma assured that the Aquino administration and his investigators would not cease to pursue its probe against the pork barrel scandal.
“We should remember, this administration is elected because of the advocacy that “if there are no corrupt, there are no poor’,” Coloma said.
Coloma said that the Aquino administration maintained the principle that “Good governance is essential to attaining the political and economic development objectives of this administration.”
Paul Atienza
No comments:
Post a Comment