CA defers confirmation of De Lima, Soliman, Mendoza

MANILA, Philippines - After intense grilling, the Commission on Appointments (CA) yesterday deferred the confirmations of Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, Social Welfare Secretary Corazon Soliman and commissioner Heidi Mendoza of the Commission on Audit.

In her first appearance before the CA, De Lima was treated to intense scrutiny by Sandra Cam, the head of a whistle-blowers’ organization, and Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, accused of plunder by the justice department.

Since her appointment in 2010, De Lima has not been to the CA for her confirmation hearing.

She finally got her opportunity yesterday but it was not as smooth as she would have wanted.

Cam started things off with her opposition to the nomination of De Lima, who she called a liar and unfit for her position as justice secretary.

Cam accused De Lima of gross incompetence in pursuing cases brought before her office, particularly that of Kabungsuan Makilala, former head of the bids and awards committee of the Bureau of Corrections, who came out with various anomalies at the New Bilibid Prison (NBP) in Muntinlupa City.

She said the DOJ did not file charges against former prisons director Gaudencio Pangilinan even after the report of a fact-finding committee confirmed the claims of anomalies within the NBP.

Cam said Makilala was also removed from the witness protection program.

She added De Lima ignored information provided through text message that former Palawan governor Joel Reyes and his brother Mario, both accused of murder, were leaving the country in spite of the warrants of arrest issued against them.

De Lima said she acted on the complaint of Makilala and the report of the task force – which she created –  and even triggered the resignation of Pangilinan, now being investigated by the Office of the Ombudsman.

On the issue of the Reyes brothers, De Lima said she could not recall receiving the text message from Cam.

Cam replied De Lima was lying and denounced how she allegedly treated the whistle-blowers as inutile.

Estrada, for his part, said De Lima was close to former governor Reyes, who was her former client when she was still an election lawyer.

Estrada said he received information that it was Reyes who recommended De Lima to head the Commission on Human Rights during the Arroyo administration.

De Lima said she was not aware of the claim of Estrada while admitting Reyes had been a client.

“When you were already the chairman of the CHR, didn’t you give a call to Gov. Reyes and told him, gutom pala dito, wala pala akong kikitain dito (it’s starvation here, there is no opportunity for me to earn here),” Estrada asked De Lima.

De Lima denied this and said she did not know where Estrada got the information.

Asked by Estrada how much she received when she was still CHR chairman, De Lima said that it was in the range of P60,000 to P80,000 after taxes.

Citing a close aide of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as his source, Estrada said De Lima received P1 million a month in additional allowance, which was taken from the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation.

De Lima denied this and said the only other funds her office received was in the form of confidential or intelligence funds in various amounts.

She said sometimes her office received P500,000 on a quarterly basis.

Estrada went on to say he did not believe De Lima, but admitted having no documents to prove his claims because the person who kept them, former deputy executive secretary for finance and administration Susana Vargas, already passed away.

Estrada also raised the issue of the letter sent by alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim- Napoles to President Aquino regarding the serious illegal detention case filed against her and her brother Reynald by whistle-blower Benhur Luy.

Estrada pointed out the letter was referred to her by the President and that there was a marginal note on it.

De Lima confirmed the receipt of the letter but said that she was not sure about the marginal note mentioned by Estrada.

Estrada directed De Lima to produce the letter for the CA.

De Lima said she prepared herself for her appearance before the CA, particularly to respond to the allegations made against her by Cam.

“I psyched myself before I appeared today, that I will not respond to issues that are already foul,” she said.

There were some personal issues raised by Cam against De Lima in her affidavit, which she submitted to the CA.

Cam earlier said in a radio interview that she was going to reveal the illicit affairs of De Lima to the CA.

However, Sen. Aquilino Pimentel III, the chairman of the Committee on Justice and Judicial and Bar Council of the CA, did not take up the matter and allowed De Lima to just submit a written response to the allegations of Cam.

De Lima’s confirmation hearing was suspended and would resume next Wednesday.

Thwarted

It was a different story for Soliman, whose appointment is headed for confirmation despite attempts of Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago to block it.

Santiago’s effort to stand in the way of Soliman’s confirmation by invoking Section 20 of the rules of the CA was effectively thwarted by her colleagues, who decided to set the last step of her confirmation next week.

Santiago invoked Section 20 of the CA’s rules that states: “Any member may move for the suspension of action by the Commission on any nomination or appointment favorably recommended by a standing committee and the Chairman shall suspend the consideration of said nomination or appointment.”

That particular section also states that “such suspension may be taken up on the next succeeding session of the Commission; Provided, further, that this section shall not apply to nominations or appointments taken up by the Commission during the last session prior to a sine die adjournment of Congress.”

Congress will adjourn sine die on Friday next week, but the last session day would be on Wednesday, June 11.

Last Tuesday, Santiago informed the CA that if Soliman were endorsed for confirmation, she would attend the plenary session and invoke Section 20 of the CA rules.

In spite of Santiago’s objections, the CA committee endorsed the confirmation of Soliman in plenary session after tackling a few issues about her appointment and the confirmation process.

Abono party list Rep. Conrado Estrella III, chairman of the committee on labor, employment and social welfare of the CA, said it was the right of Santiago to invoke Section 20 but he had to defer the confirmation of Soliman in plenary because there was already a long list of individuals scheduled for confirmation yesterday.

“There was just too many who already reserved,” Estrella said when asked about the reason for the deferment of Soliman’s confirmation.

In a letter to Senate President Franklin Drilon, Santiago denounced what she described as the circumvention of rules by rescheduling the plenary confirmation of Soliman.

Drilon said Santiago could still voice her opposition to Soliman during the plenary session of the CA on June 11 and this would be subjected to a debate and voted upon.

Since she was appointed in 2010, Soliman has been bypassed 15 times by the CA.

Revisiting

Mendoza was not spared either, with Estrada confronting her over supposed nonpayment of taxes, properties and travels abroad.

Estrada asked Mendoza why no income taxes were levied for the period of 2007-2010, when she earned approximately P7.5 million, before Mendoza joined the government. Mendoza was still an anti-corruption consultant of an international development agency.

Mendoza said she paid P836,000 in taxes last October 5, 2011 to cover the period, long before the Bureau of Internal Revenue issued the regulations concerning the taxes for consultancies. She added taxes were also paid in 2006. – Christina Mendez, Edu Punay