For instance, we’re not getting angry or indignant enough about what happened to the young matron who got brutally raped, she charges, by the very agent of the Witness Protection Program (WPP) supposed to be "protecting" her. The 29-year-old victim alleged that last March 26 (you’ve already, perhaps, seen her on TV relating her ordeal), guard Gerry Lintan of the WPP Intelligence and Special Operations Group dragged her into his room in the "safehouse" where she and another witness and their families lived and sexually assaulted her. When the WPP operative tried to molest her again two days later, that’s when the terrified woman managed to fight him off, and later lodged a complaint.
Lintan, it’s said, claimed that he hadn’t forced himself on her but that they were having an affair. Sanamagan. Haven’t we heard that "excuse" over and over again, bandied about by guys caught with their pants down? When I was a police reporter a century ago, that was the persistent refrain of bullies accused of rape – namely, that the victim had "consented" to sex and that she was his sweetheart or syota.
What should get us sore is the casual and irresponsible manner in which WPP Director Leo Dacera treated the unfortunate woman’s complaint. I heard him on TV petulantly insisting that he had acted on it by "disarming" the suspect, Lintan, and sending him to the Cordilleras. Why to the Cordilleras? So he could get away and hide? Dacera should have placed Lintan, until the matter was properly investigated, under technical arrest – and confined him to headquarters.
Why should the tearful victim have invented the story of her violation and, with apologies to the gender-sensitive, her "disgrace"? It rings so true. It sounds familiar, too. I’ve heard cops who forced themselves on women – whether detainees or bar girls, or rounded-up "prostitutes" – sing a similar song: "She’s trying to frame me!" or "It’s blackmail," or "She is my syota, but she wants to get back at me because she’s jealous."
There’s a virus of male chauvinist hoodlumism and savagery afflicting too many of our so-called "law enforcers" that must be expunged. In the above-mentioned case, any WPP protection officer who has sex with a woman under his "protection" already commits a crime, whether it was violent or "consensual" – that of invoking superior "authority", if not brute force. It’s not enough for Justice Secretary Hernando Perez to direct National Bureau of Investigation Director Reynaldo "Wycke" Wycoco to probe the matter.
Dacera must be immediately suspended: and if found to have been negligent, fired from his job.
As for the Witness Protection Program, why are female witnesses, supposed to be defended from harm, being placed in the custody of male WPP agents or bodyguards? In civilized countries, women officers or guards are always present to make sure things are kept on the level at all times. Hollywood grade-B motion pictures have as their perennial theme abuses inflicted on defenseless girls by hicktown "deputies" or bad-ass state troopers. In the end, the bad guy gets his comeuppance, however. That’s in "reel" life, movie-style.
What about in real life here? From what we hear, there have been other "incidents" involving the Witness Protection Program. If true, it’s not a program then – it’s a horror movie.
Fraport AG, in disappointment, has stopped putting money into the project – and the terminal’s construction has apparently ground to a halt. But that’s not the really bad news. The German firm’s gigantic financial exposure (amounting by latest reckoning to 300 million euros in interim financing and interim financing guarantees) won’t be a "loss" to Fraport AG itself, pushing its balance sheet (as German media asserts) into negative figures (in contrast to a net profit of 128.7 million euros in the year 2000).
Why not? Because under existing export insurance guarantees, the German Federal Government itself will have to "reimburse" Fraport AG’s losses.
This development, naturally, will put Berlin’s nose out of joint with regard to the Philippines, and queer relations between our two countries.
In a recent issue, Der Spiegel, one of the most influential and hard-hitting German newsmagazines (which, if you will recall, once savaged former President Estrada and his Chief Negotiator Robert Aventajado on issue of "ransom" on the Sipadan hostages of the Abu Sayyaf), took a hard swing at the Terminal 3 disaster.
It ran an acerbic article in its LuftFahrt (Air Travel) section caustically headlined: "Bruchlandung in Manila." Which means, "Crash-landing in Manila."
The subtitle of the piece was even more direct. It went: "Der Chef des Frankfurter Flughafens möchte im Ausland expandieren. Bei seinem bislang ehregeizigsten Projekt droht nun ein gewaltiger Flop."
You don’t have to be fluent in German to understand that paragraph. It points out that the Frankfurt airport group’s ambitious overseas expansion project was a big flop!
What an embarrassment for us. Indeed, it was of an even worse kind for the Germans: a financial embarrassment.
There’s an April 18, 2002, news item from the German financial news website, www.handelsblatt.com, which raises some interesting questions about Fraport’s local "partners", the Philippine International Air Terminal Corp. (Piatco).
The Handelsbatt report says that "Fraport AG has sent a new executive to Manila to try to save its project to build and operate (the) new passenger terminal . . . after the Philippine government refused to hold further discussions with its local representatives."
It seems that Manfred Schölch, the deputy to Fraport Chief Executive Wilhelm Bender, is taking over from Chief Finance Officer Johannes Endler and the former project manager, Bernd L. Struck.
According to Handelsblatt, Fraport "has been negotiating with the government of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, which refused to recognize some key passages in the contract." The report stated that GMA had "commissioned a member of her government, Gloria Tan-Climaco, with the task of examining the background to the highly-favorable operating conditions awarded to Piatco" (during the previous Estrada administration).
The report did not specify Ms. Tan-Climaco’s rank. She is the GMA Cabinet’s Secretary for Strategic Projects.
Handelsblatt asserted it "has seen a four-page letter dated 13 March in which Climaco makes it clear to the Chengs and Fraport’s Struck that the government expects fundamental changes in some key areas. For example, it will not accept the agreed airport tax of $20 per passenger, twice as much as normal."
Wow! Twenty US dollars per passenger? I hear that it is the second highest terminal fee in the world. Certainly not an "invitation" for any traveller to come to the Philippines.
In a previous column, I asked who were the Cheng family who have the majority "say" in Piatco and Terminal 3. Jeffrey Cheng, of course, is the frontrunner in the Piatco deal, and the Chengs first entered the picture as partners of Lufthansa, the German airline, in a joint venture called People’s Air Cargo (or PAIR cargo), a general handling company, and in Pags, or Philippine Air Ground Servicing. (This is the Pags to which a payment of $23 million was made, and which Secretary Climaco is questioning.)
The Chengs had a big stake in Security Bank according to the business community (a bank in which, by the way, Manny Zamora was once chairman). They were mainly in the freight forwarding and warehousing business.
Handelsblatt drops a second bombshell. It avers: "Another mystery is the identity of Alfonso S. Liongson, who is unknown in Manila financial circles but whom Piatco’s president, Cheng Yong, has taken on as a special adviser at the unusually favorable rate of $200,000 per month plus a $200,000 initial fee. And under the terms of a contract signed by Cheng and Struck on 21 June 2001, Liongson is to receive a further sum totaling $2.2 million in return for carrying out a total of nine tasks, e.g. getting the Transport Ministry to approve the contract for the terminal operating company, for which he was to be paid $600,000. On 2 July 2001, Liongson invoiced Piatco for no less than $1 million."
Wow again!
My Deep Throat (okay, so I’m not original) actually saw the contract, confirming the Handelsblatt article. The mystery man, Mr. Liongson, gets a success fee of US $200,000 for having contracts signed or executed, including the third supplement to the Piatco-GRP contract regarding access roads. Aside from his monthly $200,000, if he delivers all the contracts, he will get another $2 million (more than P100 million). All he has to is "convince" some government big shot to sign a contract, and he gets paid P10 million each time.
Who is this lucky fellow, Liongson? Digging a little deeper, Deep Throat uncovered the fact that he is "a Pampangueño" born in Bacolor. He was an AVP (asst. vice president) in a pharmaceutical company and belongs to three Rotary Clubs. (Does he pass the "Four-way Test"? ) Based on his resumé, he doesn’t appear to have any government experience. His academic background and limited work experience don’t seem to warrant a monthly stipend of $200,000 – which is bigger than the monthly salary of the President of the Philippines.
All these "new" arrangements were made in mid-2001, or well into the administration of President GMA. Did DOTC Secretary Pantaleon "Bebot" Alvarez know about this? Did Ninoy Aquino International Airport General Manager Ed Manda, one of GMA’s faithful acolytes and her NAIA appointee, know of this?
Who art thou, truly, Alfonso S. Liongson?