Napoles mum on scam: I am innocent – Janet

MANILA, Philippines - Before a packed Senate session hall and with the nation glued to television sets yesterday to hear Janet Lim-Napoles tell all, the alleged pork barrel scam mastermind spilled no beans.

It was a disappointing outcome for what senators said could have been the chance for Napoles to clear her name and shed light on the controversy, which sparked national outrage and put the Aquino administration on the defensive.

“I invoke my right against self-incrimination,” was all Napoles would say whenever confronted with tough questions from members of the Blue Ribbon committee chaired by Sen. Teofisto Guingona III.

To every accusation brought up in detail before the chamber by her second cousin and former employee Benhur Luy, Napoles repeatedly said, “It’s not true.”

Napoles, in a bulletproof vest and under heavy security, was the main resource person at yesterday’s hearing on the pork barrel scam she had allegedly perpetrated in collusion with lawmakers.

During the hearing, Napoles also vehemently denied that she had established 20 bogus non-government organizations (NGOs) to serve as conduits for the transfer of millions of pesos to her accounts from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) of lawmakers.

She also denied ordering her employees to fake signatures on documents to facilitate the release of public funds to her accounts.

Of the 21 NGOs linked to her, Napoles admitted to knowing only one – the Magdalena Luy-Lim Foundation named after her late mother. She said the foundation has been used as the vehicle for outreach projects of her corporation.

Aside from Luy, the other whistle-blowers present in the hearing were his mother Gertrudes Luy, Mary Arlene Baltazar, Marina Sula, Merlina Suñas and Simmonette Briones

“I would just like to remind you that you are under oath… and that you swore to tell the truth… there are consequences for perjury, you know that,” Guingona reminded Napoles.

She acknowledged Guingona’s warning by saying “opo” repeatedly.

Instead of spilling the beans on the three senators implicated in the pork barrel scam, Napoles said she even pitied them for having been dragged into the controversy because the accusations against them were not true.

Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr. were her co-respondents in the plunder and graft complaints filed by the National Bureau of Investigation before the Office of the Ombudsman.

She denied that she personally knew the three senators, who had inhibited from the Blue Ribbon probe.

She also claimed being clueless about the “Tanda,” “Sexy” and “Pogi” monikers of the three senators revealed earlier by Luy.

Advice and wrath

Napoles appeared to have taken Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago’s advice to heart that she invoke her right against self incrimination if necessary.

It was the same mantra she invoked during intense grilling from Guingona, Santiago, and other senators including majority leader Alan Cayetano and Sen. Francis Escudero.

“She is totally distant of the entire proceedings… But her answer is to be expected,” Santiago said in a press briefing during a break in the hearing.

Napoles was represented by lawyers from the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) during the hearing, which lasted from about 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., interrupted only by almost 45 minutes of closed door meeting with her lawyers and a brief lunch break.

Santiago also reiterated the need for Napoles to issue an affidavit that would detail all she knows and implicate the other senators in the scam.

“You are protecting the person who might be the most guilty,” Santiago said.

Santiago also said that based on the Rules of Court, an accused may be saved from prosecution unless he or she is the most guilty.

Among the other criteria for somebody to qualify as a state witness are: the necessity of the testimony, there is no direct evidence against the potential state witness; and testimony is corroborated by other witnesses.

“The most important is that you should not be the most guilty,” Santiago said. “Do you admit that you are the most guilty? Of course not.”

If found guilty, Napoles faces 20 to 40 years in jail, the senator said.

Santiago even encouraged Napoles to tell all because many would want her killed.

“If you won’t admit it, then you should say who is the most guilty… Down the road you reveal all, you will be endangered,” Santiago said.

“It may become a dying declaration for all you know, because a dying declaration has very strong probative value,” Santiago told Napoles.

Santiago also took potshots at her detractors during yesterday’s hearing.

The lawmakers being implicated in the scam have all the motives to kill her, she said without naming names.

“These people are murderous. They are planning your murder. So tell it right now. So who do you think is most guilty?” Santiago said, to which Napoles again responded that she did not know.

In Santiago’s crosshairs were Enrile, Sen. Sergio Osmeña IV, and even former interior secretary Ronaldo Puno.

Napoles maintained she did not know that Enrile was nicknamed “Tanda,” in the same way that Estrada and Revilla were dubbed by the whistle-blowers as “Sexy” and “Pogi” respectively.

Santiago failed to get Napoles to admit that Enrile was the “most guilty” in the pork barrel scam. She warned Napoles of Enrile’s allegedly being treacherous, having been one of the most powerful men during martial law. The senator also tried but failed to link Napoles’ husband to Enrile, who launched a coup during the first Aquino administration.

“I know he joined the coup but not that so-called ‘queen’,” she said, referring to the Oplan God Save the Queen in late 1986.

Napoles noted that she has not read the affidavits of the whistle-blowers.

Santiago also raised questions on the credentials of lawyer Rene Villa, now head of the Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA), who had represented Napoles in her international trading business and coal businesses abroad.

Villa was among those invited during the hearing but he was not questioned by senators.

Santiago did not directly name Osmeña during the hearing but the senator hinted she had been at the receiving end of his personal insults.

The senator named Enrile and Osmeña during a televised press briefing when senators took a break to let Napoles take lunch after her blood sugar dropped after hours of grilling.

Since Justice Secretary Leila de Lima had publicly announced that more lawmakers and senators would be charged in connection with the pork barrel misuse, Santiago did not discount the possibility that the Senate may have to amend its rules on quorum during plenary and committee hearings.

No executive session

At the start of the hearing, the Senate Blue Ribbon committee turned down Napoles’ request for an executive session.

In rejecting Napoles’plea, the senators said the controversy involving her did not concern national security.

During the hearing, Luy identified Estrada’s former staff Pauline Labayen, one Ruby Tuason, and Richard Cambe, a former employee of Revilla, as among the senators’ staff members who had received the “50 percent” share in pork barrel allocations.

Luy said he had compiled accounting records and vouchers, which were basis for computations of “rebates” and commissions given to agents and the NGO representatives.

“Our office wanted to make sure that there was evidence to reflect the millions of funds which were distributed to the lawmakers vis-à-vis their shares, and commissions of representatives,” he said.

Guingona repeatedly asked Napoles if Luy’s allegations were true. Napoles denied them all.

Sula, for her part, testified that the vouchers and other incriminating documents were ordered shredded and destroyed by Napoles early in January when the NBI started its probe into the pork barrel scam.

Sula said Napoles, her sister-in-law, and sometimes Napoles’ children helped in shredding the evidence so that authorities would come up empty trying to establish the link between Napoles and the lawmakers.

Sula recalled that Napoles had even bought heavy duty shredding machines.

“You are under oath and you vowed to say the truth,” Guingona reminded Napoles. Guingona also reminded her that bank accounts can be traced by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC).

Not totally useless

While Napoles’ silence had undoubtedly disappointed many, Guingona said it’s different in his case.

“I am not dismayed. In fact we all expected it, that she will cry ‘self-incrimination.’ But what is clear is that she was very evasive and in some point she was lying. There was a stark contrast between what the whistle-blowers were saying and what she was saying,” Guingona said in a press briefing afterwards.

He said that the general denial made by Napoles during the hearing when compared to the positive assertions of the whistle-blowers would show a clear picture to the committee and the public.

It was not just Luy but the other whistle-blowers who had also provided consistent details about the activities of NGOs linked to Napoles.

“So faced with that, who would you believe?” Guingona said.

“She doesn’t want to answer. She invokes her right, karapatan niya yon (that’s her right). But the point is we were able to show a contrast between general denials and very specific, positive assertions by the whistle-blowers. So, you don’t have to let her talk for the truth to come out because we have other whistle-blowers who are so credible,” he added.

Sen. Juan Edgardo Angara said that he decided not to ask questions anymore because Napoles clearly did not want to disclose any details.

“Clearly, Napoles missed a golden opportunity to explain her side to the public,” Angara said.

Sen. Cynthia Villar also opted to pass on grilling Napoles.

Senate President Franklin Drilon, who was also present during the hearing, did not raise any questions.

Guingona said that the committee would evaluate if it would still summon Napoles for another hearing.

What he was certain of though was that the husband of Napoles, Jaime, would be invited to shed light on his businesses and those of his wife. With Marvin Sy