Another murder most foul crying out for long-delayed justice - BY THE WAY by Max V. Soliven

One might exclaim: What a macabre topic to bring up on a Sunday morning! The sad truth is that if crime never takes a holiday, neither should the fight against crime declare a "time out" or weekend pause.

Too many Sundays have gone by without a single suspect being arrested although three names had already surfaced over a month ago as possibly (even probably) being connected with the cruel abduction and killing of a brave young student whose "offense" had been to do what most kids are reluctant to do: Blow the whistle on men supposed to be his "instructors" and expose corruption in the cadet corps.

I’m referring to Mark Welson Chua, 19, a second-year mechanical engineering student and ROTC cadet at the University of Sto. Tomas who was kidnapped apparently on the university campus in the evening of March 15 (a Thursday), his face and head wrapped tight in silver packing tape, his hands and legs hogtied, then thrown bodily into the Pasig River.

Mark’s body, already bloated and decomposing, was discovered only about 9 a.m. on March 18 (Saturday) floating in the river beside Jones Bridge leading to the Escolta. It was clear the youth’s corpse had been in the water for a long time. At first, the "missing" boy’s family didn’t pay attention to the earlier police report since the initial summary made by Police C. Inspector Juanito A. Taliban, chief of homicide of the Western Police District, had described the "unidentified male person" as "about 40 years old."

The item was even published in a Chinese daily, World News, with a photograph of the male fished out of the river in a white shirt, black trousers, and whose head appeared wrapped in "bandage", his hands and feet tied. When the victim’s grandmother spotted the article, she decided it couldn’t have been Mark since the recovered corpse was said to belong to a man who was 40 years of age.

Only when the boy’s mother, following a hunch, checked with the police did she learn that the police had, indeed, found a dogtag on the body with the name "Chua" on it. The boy’s father, Welson Chua, rushed to the police morgue. Here’s what he found, in his own anguished words:

"First thing they showed me were the boots, which made me cry because I clearly remember that I had bought them for him. I requested to see the body to be sure it was him. Mark was already wrapped up because he was decomposed. His clothes were not on him and we had to ask them to cut open the tape around his head . . . His face was bulging but still recognizable. My wife and daughter identified his hands, feet, and the mark on his forehead. The clothes that were in a bag were his clothes. And so we went back to mourn."

The victim had already been autopsied. The WPD crime laboratory's medico-legal report no. W-202-2001, signed by Dr. Romeo T. Salen, the medico legal officer, identified the cause of death as "asphyxia by suffocation." This was confirmed by a second autopsy conducted by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI).

What a terrible way to die – and what an agony it was for Mark Welson Chua’s father and mother to find their only son murdered in such a merciless manner!

* * *

If you’re still not shocked at this terrible chain of events, there’s more. Even a former police reporter like this writer, a veteran of the crime beat, was appalled by the callous manner in which Mark’s murderers toyed with the emotions of the frantic family in the two days following his disappearance – and even tried to extract a "ransom" of P3 million after the young man was already dead and obviously had been dumped in the river.

Welson Chua, Mark’s father, recalls he last spoke with his son on his cellphone around 4 p.m. Thursday, March 15, just a few hours before Mark vanished. He asked Mark when he was coming home, and had been assured he would be arriving between 8 and 9 p.m. About 10 p.m. when Mark still had not appeared, Chua texted him with the message that they were going to have dinner in Hossein’s Kebab in Makati avenue. Mark texted him back finally, with the note: "M on my way." He never got to their rendezvous.

Worried, Chua and his younger brother returned to the restaurant, then looked for his son around Makati, then finally to the University of Sto. Tomas Engineering Building at about 2 a.m. in the morning. The guard allowed him to go in to search for Mark, although he informed the anxious father that the building closed at 10 p.m. The only clue they dredged up was provided by Mark’s mother who said she had been informed by one of the boy’s friends, a certain Ma-an, that she had seen him at 7 p.m. that Thursday night in UST and asked him where he was headed. Mark had replied that he was "going to meet an agent at Colayco Park-Law Building, or something of that sort." None of Mark’s other friends had seen him since 5 p.m.

Chua recounts that about 4 o’clock in the morning (already Friday, March 16) he received a call on his cellphone. The dial read "Mark" (apparently it was from Mark’s cellphone). The father describes what occurred: "I was about to get angry when a mature voice said in Tagalog. "Nasa amin na ang anak mo, huwag kang maingay sa mga pulis. Bibigyan kita hanggang bukas, maghanda ka ng 3 million kung gusto mo pang makitang buhay ang anak mo." (Your son is in our hands. Don’t go crying to the police. Get together P3 million if you want to see your son alive again.)

Chua inquired in a loud voice: "Sino ito? (Who’s this?)." The caller hung up.

Shortly after noon that Friday (about 12:30 p.m.), the kidnappers called Chua on his cell again, using Mark’s cellphone, to ask him if he had gotten the money together yet. "I answered that I didn’t have that much money."

The voice retorted: "Okay. No money, no more son!" Then the caller hung up.

At 3:27 p.m., Chua received a text on the same cellphone, which said: "I am giving you 20 minutes to tell me that you are going to give the money or you will never see your son again." Chua responded, also via text, to tell the abductors they had taken the wrong kidnap victim since, if they had only done their "homework", they would have found that the family had just lost much of their business and was practically bankrupt. "I asked them to permit Mark to come home, since no one had actually spotted them and no one knew yet about the disappearance." There was no immediate response to that.

At 5 p.m., however, the kidnappers sent the following text message: "Sa ngayon nasa kamay mo ang buhay ng anak mo. Ikaw na ang bahalang magdesisyon. Bigyan ka namin ng extension. Kung wala, manghiram ka. Monday, last day, 3 million. (Your son’s life is now in your hands. It’s up to you to decide. We’re giving you an extension. If you don’t have money, borrow it. Monday is the last day for the 3 million)." The same words were later transmitted again a few minutes later.

Frantically, Chua later texted the abductors begging them to let his son go because there was no money and nobody was willing to lend money to someone who is bankrupt.

Welson Chua and his family members believe, in the light of the findings of the two autopsies, that the "ransom ploy" was only a cover-up to disguise the real intent of Mark’s kidnappers and murderers, since apparently the boy had already been murdered and thrown into the Pasig when the so-called "negotiations" were going on.

* * *

What had the youthful victim done to provoke the horrible vengeance inflicted on him?

Last January 8, Mark and another UST cadet, Romulo Yumul, Jr., had written a letter complaining about corruption in the management of ROTC UST unit under the ARESCOM (Army Reserve Command). Their exposé was looked into and published in the university newspaper as well, The Varsitarian, (21 February 2001), which must have further angered those involved in the scandal.

The two cadets charged that a certain officer and at least two retired sergeants handling supervisory and clerical matters were engaged in malpractices. The letter had been addressed to then Secretary of National Defense Orlando Mercado.

Among the irregularities revealed and reported in The Varsitarian were: (1) If students wanted to be exempted from taking the ROTC course, they were alleged to be paying P1,500 each per semester to the Training Staff of the ROTC; (2) There was a questionable collection of P250 per cadet upon enrollment during the first semester of the school year (apart from the normal P300 ROTC fee) and this was supposed to be for patches and shirts but no receipts were issued and the items were never delivered; (3) ROTC manuals were overpriced at P100 per cadet; (4) Sweatshirts were being sold for P300 each; (5) The program of instruction (POI) was not being followed, with cadets "learning nothing" but being made to sit for the prescribed five hours; (6) Cadets were being charged ten pesos each for every major exam they were supposed to take; (7) A civilian employee, brother of one of the sergeants, had distributed envelopes to all cadets "soliciting" funds for amounts averred to be needed for the Mindanao campaign of the Armed Forces (sanamagan!) (8) Hazing was still going on in the School of Cadet Officers and by the Military Police (MPs); (9) There was an incident in which a sergeant drew his weapon and directed it at a cadet et cetera.

To be sure, the accusations were indeed investigated by Major Emmanuel C. Sison, Inf. PA, from the headquarters of the NCR Regional Community Defense Group, Army Reserve Command, Fort Bonifacio. In his report, Major Sison unearthed the fact that, in truth, 66 cadets "who signed attendance cards from 1st to 16th training days" by their testimony had paid a certain sergeant P2,000 each "in exchange of passing grades."

Stern recommendations for disciplinary action were made by Major Sison and, in conclusion, he wrote: "The two brave men C/Pvt. Romulo Yumul and C/Sgt Major Mark Welson T. Chua who gathered and revealed the ROTC anomalies be encouraged and convinced to join the cadet officers rank."

Instead, young Mark Welson Chua was thrown by the merciless ghouls who seized and killed him – into the ranks of the dead.

* * *

The only cheering bit of news is that Defense Secretary and former AFP Chief of Staff Angelo T. Reyes has now personally taken over the investigation of the murder case.

When the victim’s father, Mr. Chua, appealed to him at our Greenhills Walking Corporation forum last Wednesday, Reyes picked up the folder on the investigative findings and promised Chua and this writer to follow this kidnap-murder inquiry to the very end – no matter who gets it in the neck.

Let’s see what happens. For too long, I fear, the investigation has limped along. I suspect the seal of "comradely" omerta has hampered a full inquiry and action on the part of the military. If you’ll recall, the motto of the US Military Academy at West Point is "Honor, Duty, Country." In our own Philippine Military Academy (PMA), the slogan is "Courage, Integrity, Loyalty." My question centers on the last quality: "Loyalty."

One might ask: Loyalty to what? Or "to whom?" Is it loyalty to justice, honor, the Constitution, and the rule of law? Or the loyalty of PMA’s graduates and so-called "cavaliers" to each other? To protect each other, right or wrong? I hope this is not the case, since it would then be a warped sense of loyalty, indeed.

I still have to get the NBI autopsy or medico-legal report on the young PMA cadet, barely two weeks into his entry into the Academy, who died under strange and very suspicious circumstances of "heart failure" resulting from a sudden rise in blood pressure triggered by water kuno in his lungs. Did the unfortunate plebe die of brutal injuries sustained from hazing instead? Or natural causes? Has there been a cover-up or whitewash?

I would like NBI Director and former PNP General Reynaldo "Wyck" Wycoco, himself a PMA graduate, to answer me on this.

As for that young martyr, Mark Welson Chua, here’s what his father, in his plea to Secretary Reyes, so touchingly wrote: "My son Mark represents a growing number of our youth who have had enough of our culture of graft and corruption and are willing to give their lives to cause change no matter how little or insignificant it may seem. My son was a willing sacrifice. He knew that there were consequences to his decision to bring the truth out in the open, but he still did it. He did not have to care – but he did.

"Our youth cannot afford to be discouraged. They are the hope of our nation. Their idealism must be protected. We must show them that it is unacceptable for our government to coddle these criminals . . . We must show that our Armed Forces, especially the Philippine Army, will not tolerate these men.

"My son Mark loved the ROTC and the military . . . I hope that we do not destroy the institution that my son loved so much. My son gave his life to restore its integrity . . . I hope that the sacrifice of his life is a spark that will ignite a fire that will slowly consume the ills of our society.

"As for me and my family, we do not understand why this happened and we may never be given full understanding, but we believe in the sovereignty of God in our lives, that nothing happens without His permission, that God has a purpose for all of this and that in the midst of this we reaffirm our trust in His will.

"We also believe that God is a God of Justice. We will not overcome evil with evil, but rather with good. But we must all fight that justice is served."

In conclusion, he said to Reyes: "May our Lord make you an instrument of His peace and His justice."

Here a grieving father speaks with the same courage his only son manifested. Now we all know where young Mark got his strength of character. It’s now up to Secretary Reyes and his generals to manifest theirs.