High jinks in Senate / Post-acquittal scenario - HERE'S THE SCORE by Teodoro C. Benigno

While it lasts, while it is ongoing, the Senate impeachment trial remains the best – in fact, the only show in town – blending political drama, vaudeville entertainment and sheer TV magic into one. Even at the barber-shop last Monday where I had my hair sheared, the only talk was about the impeachment proceedings. Poor Miriam got it from barber, manicurist, masseur and customer alike for her performance that led to the eviction of three innocent spectators from the gallery. And all because they looked at her, just that – look. It was uncanny. Talagang tililing, they said. I imagine the senator in boots with riding crop in hand, abbreviated moustache, and piercing, feral eyes. She would have been a Hitler look-alike, in all his shrill and screaming majesty, the guttural voice shattering like shrapnel in the air.

Well, we had another show last Monday.

This time it was defense lawyer Sigfried Fortun who provided the entertainment – except that it got him into hot water. Fortun professed that one Delia Rajas who withdrew P40 million from the Land Bank of the Philippines sometime ago was present at the Senate gallery: Would the witness cashier Maria Caridad Rodenas who serviced the same Delia Rajas be able to identify her? Point to her? Tap her on the shoulder? Go up the gallery and single Delia Rajas out?

Fortun had set a trap. Ms. Rodenas sensed it. It was in her face as she said she would if it was the same Delia Rajas who appeared at her counter with short hair and so-so countenance. But if Delia Rajas had remade herself, wore a wig or wore her hair long and possibly through make-up altered her face, no, Ms. Rodenas could not. Lawyer Fortun – and that is where he got into trouble with the senators-jurors – assured the witness she was one and the same – without any alteration. The thing began to smell of Alfred Hitchcock. And Nick the Greek with his loaded dice.

Presiding Chief Justice Hilario Davide also fell for the trap. It was he who insisted that Ms. Rodenas was a "very intelligent" witness and so she would be able to recognize Delia Rajas. Go up the gallery, Justice Davide insisted. Some senators-jurors thought that was too time-consuming, perplexing even. Wouldn’t it be better if Delia Rajas would be made to join six or seven other spectators in a presumed "rogues’ gallery" and Ms. Rodenas would lose no time identifying? Justice Davide – who can sometimes be persnickety – insisted she go up the gallery.

* * *

And so she did. Senate President Aquilino Pimentel ordered all doors, entrances and exits to be closed. No one was to move or stand up. The whole court was held hostage. Sen. Rodolfo Biazon, his military mien sizing up the slightest movement in the gallery, barked some spectators were changing seats, indicating some form of human beto-beto was going on. We were all wondering what was going to happen next, as Ms. Rodenas went up and down, up and down like Ferdinand Magellan in search of the Spice Islands, like Stanley in search of Livingstone, like Aemilius in search of Florencia.

Once, twice, she stopped and we all said, "Voila!" The search was over. She had found Delia Rajas. Hooray! No, she had not, and eventually she descended to regain her witness seat in the court. She said with the forthrightness of Copernicus saying the planet earth circled the sun that Delia Rajas was nowhere to be found in the gallery. You could see Ms. Rodenas was not mincing her words. What she was actually saying was that she had been had. And she was. And so was the court. So were all of us.

Sigfried Fortun played coy. He snickered. He insisted Delia Rajas was there in the gallery, hadn’t changed her seat. But he wouldn’t produce her right away. There were technicalities to be observed first. That was the time all of us who were watching TV wanted to sock Mr. Fortun in the snoot. The guy was beginning to look like Norberto Manero to the audience, what with his big bald head, thick avoirdupoids, and eyes that must have flickered sometime in NKVD cells.

That was also the time the senators-jurors went to the barricades against Fortun. Earlier, Senators Franklin Drilon, Loren Legarda, Rene Cayetano had expressed their misgivings. This time, Senator Raul Roco flared like a steel blade – the first time I have seen him do so – and gave it to Fortun in spades: "Now, they are saying now, ‘No, this is not the same person.’ That means it was just a trick of mirrors! They (defense lawyers) asserted it is the same person who opened the account. Now they are saying it is not, so it really misled the poor witness. That is terrible, that is contempt of court."

And when Fortun continued to prevaricate, Roco exclaimed: "No, no, no, Counsel. Attorney Fortun, this was one dirty trick . . . Under our code of responsibility, as an officer of this court, you owe us candor."

And now Attorney Fortun could face contempt proceedings. Serves him right. He thought he was going to play hero, exploded a big, big bomb that would reduce the opposition to scattered clay. He thought he would administer exemplary lessons in impeachment law and tower over everybody. All he succeeded in administering was the discredited poison of the Borgias.

* * *

And when finally, the real Delia Rajas came down to be presented as a witness, the whole thing had collapsed – again – for the defense. Lead lawyer Estelito Mendoza faces possible disbarment for covering up laundering of President Joseph Estrada’s Jose Velarde account into that of Jaime Dichaves right in his law office. Now Fortun could be, and deserves to be, cited for contempt. Even Miriam Defensor-Santiago admitted indirectly she had been had and described Fortun’s behavior – to put it mildly – as "unconventional."

The "real" Delia Rajas was a lulu. No offense meant. We expected Delia to be a looker, her name alone suggested she could be up there with the moneyed class. She turned out to be the unscrubbed cook of the mother of Charles ‘Atong" Ang, dusky, bespectacled, her profession as a cook showing in her simple attire, her voice, her accents. Delia was just one of the many whose names were allegedly used by Atong Ang in the jueteng shake-up that has pinned Erap Estrada against the wall, a butterfly wriggling helplessly in the delicate fingers of a lepidopterist.

* * *

And if I might add, and I say this with some sadness. I had always thought Da. Loi Ejercito was a martyr, a dedicated wife and mother, wanting nothing, seeking nothing, desiring nothing, honest, sincere, intrepid as all-get-out, suffering all the pain and indignity in the world because she was and remains married to Erap Estrada and all he stands for. Now we find out, at least the evidence tells us, that Loi Ejercito is the recipient of jueteng money in the millions. And this the supporting documents of her bank accounts show.

Well, live and learn. We have learned a lot from the presidential impeachment trial. The defense threatens to strike out from the records all the statements and revelations of Ms. Clarissa Ocampo because "they are immaterial and irrelevant." I’d like to see them attempt that. And I’d like to see presiding justice Hilario Davide accede to that. There’s one thing about this trial. All the lawyers, including Katrina Legarda on ANC, can say we the public, not being lawyers, can never really understand what the trial is all about unless we know the esoteric intricacies of the law. Katrina would understand and agree if Clarissa Ocampo’s testimony is tossed by the court to the junkyard. "Because it is immaterial and irrelevant" not being wedged squarely into the original Articles of Impeachment.

* * *

Hell, we don’t. You strike Clarissa Ocampo out and you strike the whole nation out. Suddenly, we have a heroine and Clarissa is it.

I know, I know. They are now beginning to talk about a post-acquittal period. And this scenario would maintain Mr. Estrada in power. I have always argued the criminal and other charges against the president would be settled and resolved in the streets, and not by the impeachment process. This was flawed from the very beginning because Mr. Estrada had the numbers. And not all the evidence in the world – that in other courts would have sent the president to prison for life – could and would convict him. For this, you need at least 15 votes. Eight would acquit him.

Let’s follow the other commentators and name names. The anti-Estrada faction reportedly or allegedly lists the following: Senators Teofisto Guingona, Loren Legarda, Rene Cayetano, Raul Roco, Franklin Drilon, Juan Flavier, Serge Osmena, and Rodolfo Biazon. Maybe Nene Pimentel (Cory Aquino is quoted to have said she has faith in Nene). That makes nine only. The pro-Estrada cabal is often cited as comprising the following: Senators Blas Ople, Juan Ponce Enrile, Tessie Aquino Oreta, Miriam Defensor Santiago, Francisco Tatad, John Osmeña, Tito Sotto, Anna-Maria Coseteng. Two other names in a grey list – namely, Ramon Revilla and Robert Jaworski – are said to be in the pockets of Erap Estrada.

A conscience vote? That’s a laugh. And so I repeat: The future of the Philippines is writ in the streets. Let the floods come. Let’s see who wins.