MANILA, Philippines — Senator Jinggoy Estrada on Monday told the Office of the Ombudsman that there is no reason for his indictment based on the "pork barrel" fund scam.
Estrada filed a 26-page motion for reconsideration at the Ombudsman, which elevated the plunder complaint filed against him by the Department of Justice to the Sandiganbayan.
In his appeal, Estrada said there is no direct proof that he amassed hundreds of millions from his Priority Development Assistance Funds (PDAF) through ghost projects with alleged bogus non-government organizations linked to businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles.
The petition said said that even the ledgers of scam whistleblower Benhur Luy could not be used as proof of his supposed involvement in the multi-billion peso fraud.
"There is nothing on record which established that Sen. Estrada received kickbacks of around ‘50 percent of the PDAF amount involved.’ Benhur Luy and other witnesses never claimed to have personally handled and / or witnessed the delivery of ‘around 50 percent of the PDAF amount involved’ to Sen. Estrada," the document stated.
The petition also explained that Luy's ledgers do not support the National Bureau of Investigation's findings that lawmakers receive at least 50 percent cut from the scheme.
Estrada also rejected the Ombudsman's move to indict him along with fellow senators Juan Ponce Enrile and Ramon Revilla, Jr. for plunder, denying that there is "probable cause" established on record.
"Charges based on mere suspicion and speculation, on bare and unsubstantiated allegations and on hearsay evidence cannot become basis of probable cause," he said.
Estrada stressed that neither Luy nor other witnesses are privy to his participation in the scam, as their statements were based "merely on what they heard from Mrs. Janet Napoles."
"Provisional" state witness Ruby Tuason, however, said that she personally handed to Estrada bags containing cold cash in his Senate office.
The legislator dismissed Tuason's testimonies as "unsubstantiated and untrustworthy" and alleged that she was only after immunity as she is among the respondents in the pork barrel case.
The embattled lawmaker lamented that he was not given the opportunity to contradict statements of the witnesses, despite being solicited his counter-affidavit.
"We were not provided copies of the affidavits of the additional witnesses, thus, we were not properly apprised of the evidence offered against us, which were eventually made the bases of the finding of probable cause for indictment," Estrada said.
He also said that lawmakers cannot be faulted for "manifest partiality" in repeatedly endorsing the same non-government organizations purportedly connected with Napoles.
Estrada explained that the organizations were accredited by the implementing agencies such as the Technology Resource Center and the National Agribusiness Corporation.
"Given that the NGOs endorsed were accredited at the time of endorsement, it cannot be said that there was no rhyme or reason for such endorsement. Given the factual basis for such endorsement, evident bad faith cannot be imputed," he said.
He also noted that the agencies, and not the senators, have the final say in the actual selection of NGOs.
"If at all, the act of endorsement by the legislator concerned is merely recommendatory, with the decision to award or not to the discretion of the implementing agency," Estrada said.
The Department of Budget and Management and not lawmakers controls the releases of the PDAF with the implementing agencies as conduits, he added.