Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. sought to dismiss the unethical conduct complaint filed by lawyer Roel Pulido in claiming the allegations made against him took place before the present Congress.
Through counsel Raul Lambino, the Speaker submitted a 35-page reply before Romblon Rep. Eleandro Madrona, chairman of the ethics committee of the House of Representatives, to refute Pulido’s complaint.
Pulido filed a complaint for unethical conduct against De Venecia for granting the legislative franchise of the firm of his son Jose “Joey” de Venecia III during his term as Speaker of the 10th Congress in February 1995 to June 1997.
De Venecia said he could have filed a “one-page-one-paragraph pleading by way of a motion to dismiss” on the basis that the allegations “have taken place before the term of the present Congress.”
Nonetheless, De Venecia opted to refute the charges point by point.
De Venecia said he could have invoked technicalities to have the complaint thrown out, for its “failure to state cause of action, lack of jurisdiction and speedy disposition of cases” on the franchise granted to his son’s Multi-Media Telephony Inc. (MTI).
De Venecia claimed Pulido “maliciously made use” of a copy of MTI’s general information in the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2005 “to create a false and wrongful impression with an apparent intent to mislead the committee that Joey was already connected with MTI.”
“Joey was not an incorporator, much less chairman and chief executive officer of MTI in 1993,” he said.
The five-time Speaker said he cannot be held administratively liable under the anti-graft and corrupt practices act (RA 3019) since his son Joey was not yet a shareholder nor an officer of MTI when it applied for and was granted a legislative franchise.
“JDV (De Venecia) has never used his office, either as an incumbent representative of fourth district of Pangasinan or Speaker in 1995 and 1997 to extend and give any special privileges to his son in relation to the grant of legislative franchise in favor of MTI,” Lambino said.
“There is no basis for Pulido’s claim that JDV failed to remove any appearance of his office being a peddler of undue advantage because in the first place, no law was violated when MTI secured a franchise from Congress,” Lambino explained.
Pulido alleged De Venecia had lied when he declared that Joey “did not have any interest” in MTI when the telecommunication firm applied and was granted a congressional franchise during the 10th Congress.
“The MTI web site, which operates under the trade name Broadband Philippines, clearly identified De Venecia III as the company’s founder,” Pulido pointed out.
The “Investors/Key Officers” page also bore that Joey was not only chairman/CEO (till 2007) but creator as well, he said.
“The term founded clearly proves that De Venecia III had an interest in MTI from the very start – that he in fact established the company – contrary to his father’s claim,” Pulido said.
De Venecia earlier defended himself from insinuations of being liable for graft for intervening on behalf of his son whose company lost in the $329-million national broadband network (NBN) contract to China’s ZTE Corp.
He stressed there was no conflict of interest in the first place.
De Venecia reiterated Joey was already “of age” when he became the CEO of MTI.
Under the law, a high-ranking government official can only be held accountable for conflict of interest if he has “personal interest, including the interest of his wife and emancipated children, but excluding the interest of brothers, sisters, mother, father and a child of age.”
“Very clearly, Jose de Venecia III is of age and independent of his father,” a statement from the Speaker’s office read.
A portion of the document also stated that when MTI’s franchise was approved, the younger De Venecia “was not a shareholder or officer at all.”
“He did not mention the involvement of children as indirect much less direct financial interest on the part of the legislator,” the statement said.
The younger De Venecia became the principal whistle-blower in the scandal surrounding the canceled NBN contract with ZTE.
Joey’s allegations forced the resignation of Benjamin Abalos as chairman of the Commission on Elections (Comelec), who he claimed had brokered the deal with ZTE.
Joey’s revelations also prompted the Senate to investigate the anomaly but also soured his relations with his father.
The Speaker also found himself having a political fallout with administration allies and the President stemming from the bribery-tainted NBN contract.