‘Cancel passports of JPE, Bong, Jinggoy’

MANILA, Philippines - The Department of Justice wants the passports of three senators and 34 others cancelled to prevent them from leaving the country while being investigated – or possibly tried – for plunder and graft in connection with the pork barrel fund scam.

In a 10-page letter, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima asked the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) to cancel the passports of Senate Minority Leader Juan Ponce Enrile, Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr., and the others including alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles.

Enrile and Estrada declined to comment on the DOJ request, while Revilla – through his lawyer – called it “ridiculous” and without basis.

In making the request, De Lima invoked Article III Section 5 of the Constitution, which allows limiting citizens’ right to travel “in the interest of national security.”

De Lima said there is a “direct relation between corruption and national security.”

She said the DFA has the power to implement this provision under Section 4 of Republic Act 8239, or the Philippine Passport Act.

“Graft and corruption is a national security concern because it saps public resources, undermines the morale of the civil service and affects the delivery of basic services… Worse, it breeds socio-political instability as scandals degenerate into crisis situations that undermine the credibility and effectiveness of government,” she explained in the letter.

Such link, she pointed out, had international legal bases including the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, which requires signatories – including the Philippines – to “maximize the effectiveness of law enforcement measures relating to corruption” due to “insidious effects of corruption on national security.”

De Lima, in her letter, even likened “politicians who pluck the food away from a hungry child’s mouth” to “terrorists who sow physical insecurity among the populate, when they cause economic insecurity among the people by stealing livelihood resources and money intended for calamity relief.”

She also stressed that the three senators are considered “flight risks” considering their “capacity and resources.”

“Are we going to just wait until those charged have all left the country to evade prosecution? We don’t want that to happen,” she later told reporters in an ambush interview.

De Lima also pointed out that while the three senators are under a separate, independent branch of government, inter-branch courtesy should not be an issue.

“We’re just doing our mandate under the executive department to make sure those responsible for corruption will be prosecuted. That’s exactly what the President said (Wednesday),” she added.

DFA’s call

Asked how she expects the DFA to act on her request, De Lima said it would all depend on the latter: “But maybe the DFA can consider canceling first the passports of those who already left the country.”

DFA spokesman Raul Hernandez, for his part, said the department has yet to receive a formal request from the DOJ regarding the cancellation of passports.

“When we receive one, we will assess such and proceed from there,” Hernandez said.

The DOJ’s request came after four respondents in the criminal case – Enrile’s chief of staff Gigi Reyes, former socials secretary Ruby Tuason, former Technology Resource Center head Antonio Ortiz and former Agusan del Sur Rep. Rodolfo Plaza – had left the country.

Bureau of Immigration records showed that Reyes left the country last Aug. 31 and Tuason on Aug. 29. Ortiz and Plaza, on the other hand, reportedly left last month.

Also yesterday, De Lima said that no member or ally of the ruling Liberal Party would be included in the second batch of complaints being prepared by the National Bureau of Investigation. The NBI is expected to file the second batch of complaints before the Office of the Ombudsman next week.

She explained that the NBI probe is limited to the testimonies of whistleblowers against Napoles and to supporting evidence gathered by investigators.

“The NBI cannot investigate everything in the COA (Commission on Audit) report due to limited resources,” she said, referring to a COA report on the alleged misuse of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) from 2007 to 2009 by some lawmakers in connivance with Napoles.

The DOJ chief revealed that the lawmakers and non-government organizations included in the COA report – apart from those linked to Napoles – would be subject of the investigation by the Inter-Agency Anti-Graft and Corruption Council (IAAGCC).

“I can tell you that the IAAGCC has already started its work. But this is being done silently,” she said.

De Lima was reacting to an earlier allegation of Sen. Estrada that the DOJ had been “selective” in its investigation of the PDAF controversy.

“It is not our fault, it was not deliberate on our part that only opposition lawmakers were included in the first batch of charges. We don’t look at political affiliations of respondents. We only based our findings on evidence gathered,” the DOJ chief stressed.

Ridiculous

But Revilla’s lawyer Joel Bodegon said it’s “ridiculous” for De Lima to cite “national security” as basis for her request for the cancellation of the passports of the senators and the others.

“Unless we are now under martial law, it is ridiculous for this government to resort to cancellation of passports of those they wrongfully charged as part of the pork barrel scam,” Bodegon said.

“They have already filed their report to the Ombudsman, and by that, they have no authority any longer to declare those they charge as ‘national security risk,’” he added.

Bodegon said that under the Philippine Passport Act, a citizen loses passport privileges only if he or she is “a fugitive from justice, or convicted of a crime” or if the document “was fraudulently acquired or tampered with.”

Bodegon explained that the Ombudsman has not even yet determined if the NBI-DOJ report should be submitted for preliminary investigation.

“Therefore, there is no basis to declare anyone among those charged by the NBI-DOJ as national security risk,” he said.

Sen. Francis Escudero, a lawyer, also said he personally thinks that there is no basis yet to cancel the passports of the senators and the others named in the complaint.

“It is another matter if the cases are filed before the court,” Escudero said. He explained that the “right to travel is still a basic constitutional right guaranteed by our Constitution that can only be limited under certain circumstances, including the filing of charges against a person.”

Right priorities

Meanwhile, Sen. Miriam Santiago said President Aquino “is mostly correct” when he voiced his wish for prison terms for senators and officials found guilty of embezzling their PDAF.

“President Aquino’s priorities are correct,” she said, adding that it is a “more efficient and bloodcurdling” message to have senators found guilty of plunder behind bars. Aquino made the pronouncement in a speech recently.

“Analyzing and retrofitting the pork barrel system should come later, because it will take more time and requires highly technical skill,” Santiago said. “Justice delayed is justice denied,” she added.

Santiago also urged public support for the Ombudsman in its preliminary investigation into the case. She said the DOJ should do its part in ensuring that the case proceeds without delay.

Santiago said that as a former trial court judge herself, she knows that a preliminary investigation should not be treated as a full-scale trial, but basically as an examination of affidavits and counter-affidavits.

“The justice secretary should no longer entertain any motion for reconsideration, because the justice department already reviewed at length the NBI evidence,” Santiago said.

“And if public pressure continues, the moment the persons in interest are charged in the Sandiganbayan, it can immediately order their suspension from office and bail hearings can begin right after new year,” she added.

On concerns that preventive suspension against senators might restrict the Senate’s function to constitute a quorum, Santiago said the Senate itself can change the rule on quorum.

“Dura lex sed lex. If that is what the law provides, the lack of a quorum is not a reason for disobeying the law,” she said.

Santiago, who is on a prolonged sick leave, said her colleagues implicated in the PDAF have lost their moral ascendancy to cast accusations against the others being linked to alleged misuse of funds drawn from the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

“The senators suspected of plunder have lost their moral right to steer the debate from the PDAF to the DAP. I myself believe that the DAP should be abolished for being unconstitutional,” she said.

She also said she would not allow her colleagues “to deflect their criminal liabilities concerning PDAF by harping on the DAP system from which they themselves profited.”

“They can shout to high heavens about how useful their projects were, but that is begging the issue. The issue is whether the DAP is constitutional, whether those senators received kickbacks from their bonanzas, and why those three were favored over the rest by receiving double the amount,” she said. with Christina Mendez