Marcos crony claims US court vindication in BNPP mess

MANILA, Philippines - The lawyer of 74-year-old Marcos crony Herminio Disini claimed that a US court already vindicated his client regarding the corruption charges involving the $2.1-billion Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) in 1976.

Disini’s lawyer Jose Bernas told The STAR recently that his client was already vindicated by Judge Dickinson Debevoise of the United States District Court of New Jersey in a judgment dated July 15, 1993, on charges that he illegally pocketed $18 million in commissions from the project, a case that was filed at the Sandiganbayan.

Bernas said the case was resolved by the US court on “trial by jury” and that “the issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.”

“It is ordered and adjudged be entered in favor of the defendants Westinghouse Electric Corp., Westinghouse International Projects Co., and Burns and Roe Enterprises Inc. and against plaintiff Republic of the Philippines on Count 3 of the Complaints (Tortions interference with fiduciary duty) and on so much of count 8 as alleges a conspiracy to interfere with fiduciary duty.”

Bernas claimed that the Supreme Court under former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban maliciously misquoted an opinion on an interlocutory motion rendered by the same US district court on Sept. 20, 1991 on the case in ordering his indictment before the anti-graft court in 2003.

“The opinion was an interlocutory order which resolved a motion for summary judgment filed by Westinghouse, which moved for a dismissal order without trial. Mr. Panganiban’s misrepresentation was achieved by citing only the phrase ‘there (was) sufficient evidence of bribery’ and omitting the rest of the sentence from which the phrase was taken,” he argued.

Bernas also questioned the assertion of Panganiban that the BNPP was constructed at US$2 billion and challenged him to quote the source of information.

He said Disini was already cleared thrice by former Ombudsman Aniano Desierto and now wants an apology from the former SC chief justice.

Bernas cited an award sentence rendered by the International Court of Arbitration on Dec. 19, 1991, which concluded that “there is no evidence either of any agreement between Marcos and Westinghouse, or that Mr. Disini acted as agent for Marcos.”

He said the tribunal held that “the Republic has been supplied with access to information on the Disini accounts, and substantial documentation and testimony concerning these accounts were

presented to the Tribunal. Significantly, there is no evidence before the Tribunal that shows any transfers from the accounts of Disini, which the Westinghouse commissions were deposited to any Marcos or Marcos-related account.”

“At most, the evidence indicates that some Westinghouse employees thought that Marcos owned some (shares) of Herdis and that Marcos had documents in his possession that outlined the commissions Herdis was supposed to receive for the contracts.

“However, there is no evidence that Marcos received any share of those commissions. 

“Although defendants argue that the circumstantial evidence establishes that Marcos must have received a share of the commissions, the Tribunal is not persuaded,” the ruling concluded.

Government lawyers said in their complaint that Disini, husband of Imelda Marcos’ cousin Pacencia Escolin who was also the Marcoses’family doctor, had received $18 million in illegal commissions for allegedly cornering the BNPP contract for American firms Westinghouse Electric Corp. and Burns and Roe.

They added that Disini used his close relationship with the late former President Ferdinand Marcos in cornering the deal for the 620-megawatt nuclear power plant.

In 1974, Disini was asked by representatives of Westinghouse and Burns and Roe to act as their go-between with Marcos.

On representation of Disini, Marcos awarded the nuclear power plant contract to Westinghouse and Burns and Roe without the benefit of public bidding.

Based on findings of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) and the Ombudsman, Westinghouse and Burns and Roe subcontracted portions of the project to two firms reportedly owned by Disini and Marcos - Power Contractor Inc. and Engineering and Construction Company of Asia.

Panganiban had said that the anti-graft court could not resolve the case up to now because the accused had allegedly migrated to Austria and that several witnesses - especially the American officials of Westinghouse - are nowhere to be found.