Enrile: First Gentleman-contractor link hearsay at the moment

Sen. Panfilo Lacson’s story linking First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo to one of the contractors blacklisted by the World Bank for “collusive practices” could be considered hearsay at the moment, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said yesterday.

He said Lacson’s story was “hearsay” because the alleged rigging of bids for a road project funded by the international financial institution was only narrated to him.

Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri agreed, saying there must be more evidence other than the First Gentleman’s appointments book presented by Lacson during Tuesday’s hearing on the WB blacklist of contractors for collusion in the bidding for the National Roads and Improvement Program 1 that the WB was supposed to fund.

Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, on the other hand, said she was giving Senator Lacson at least two weeks to produce a witness that could prove the link between the First Gentleman and contractor

Eduardo de Luna, president of the blacklisted E.C. De Luna Construction Corp. and who allegedly met with Mr. Arroyo at least 20 times in 2002.

Lacson said he was still talking to the witness and maintained that what he disclosed was relevant because it would show that contractors could afford to conspire and rig a bidding because they were bribing some people to protect and help them secure government projects.

Lacson also turned the tables on Malacañang and said it should be the one to belie that the meetings between the First Gentleman and De Luna occurred.

“What else is there to prove when the contractor met with him (First Gentleman) 20 times with secretary of public works and highways (in some instances). If they are looking for proof, I don’t know what that is,” Lacson told reporters.

Santiago said the hearing would be terminated if there would be no more witnesses and evidence to be presented.

Both Enrile and Santiago also said the story about the P70 million bribe supposedly delivered to the First Gentleman’s office at LTA Building in Makati City by the contractor was not yet established. The P70 million cash contained in a box allegedly spilled and was given for the approval of another project.

“I concur with Senator Lacson if he has evidence. I will give Senator Lacson a reasonable period, maybe two weeks to produce his witness, then we will submit a report to the plenary session, which is the usual procedure,” Santiago said.

Enrile said De Luna was supposed to be the one to have carried the money which fell on the stairway.

“But De Luna if you remember denied that money was (meant) for anyone. He did not mention the person to whom it was going to. So far there is no evidence. These are the only facts that have been brought out. The proof will have to lie (on) the person making the allegation,” Enrile said.

Enrile said the purpose of the meetings between the First Gentleman and De Luna was also not disclosed.

Lacson said his witness was mustering enough courage to come out and had not closed the door on the possibility of testifying before the Senate.

The senators maintained that the WB blacklisting of firms must be looked into and that those who were negligent of their duties must be punished.

Santiago earlier called for the resignation of Finance Secretary Margarito Teves and Public Works Secretary Hermogenes Ebdane Jr. as well as the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez for failing to act on the WB report in November 2007.

But Santiago said Teves apologized and she accepted it. Teves also explained that he immediately sent the copy of the WB initial report to the Ombudsman because his department had no legal jurisdiction over it.

Meantime, stressing that an August 2007 ruling of the Supreme Court clearly states that right to information or access to it has limits, the Office of the Ombudsman yesterday belied reports that it has failed to act on the issue of alleged rigged bidding of World Bank-funded road projects.  

Assistant Ombudsman Jose de Jesus, in an interview with The STAR, stressed that a fact-finding investigation is being conducted to determine if those tagged should be subjected to preliminary investigation and administrative adjudication.

He explained that based on an SC ruling promulgated in August 2007, the High Tribunal declared limitations in the disclosure of information during the fact-finding stage of a probe.

“Why are we not revealing personalities and details of the probe – because we’re still in the fact-finding stage and yet to be known if it will be submitted for preliminary investigation and administrative adjudication,” he said. – With Michael Punongbayan, Helen Flores