Getting away with it, and how!

The raging intra-chamber wrangling among Senators over the “double-entry” of the pork barrel-funded road project and those of the alleged bribery charges among several justices at the Court of Appeals have one thing in common. As my favorite resident punster Jesse Paredes aptly described it: “…And sinners turn against sinners.”

The Jesuit-educated Jesse — he’s a product of Ateneo de Manila — could not help but turn biblical in his admonition: “He who is without sin may cast the first stone.” Many people share his jaded views on these two controversies. However, there are certain characters in both cases that were left out but should be held, in fact, equally accountable as well.  

On the questioned “double-entry” of a P200-million worth of road project, opposition Sen. Panfilo Lacson singled out Senate president Manny Villar as behind this alleged “insertion” into the Congress-approved 2008 General Appropriations Act. Lacson discovered the “double-entry” and questioned this during last Monday’s Senate hearing on the proposed 2009 GAA. Under oath at the Senate hearing, Department of Budget and Management Secretary Rolando Andaya Jr. confirmed that there was indeed a “double-entry” of the same road project but claimed it was a “congressional insertion.” Andaya, however, did not name names as to who were behind such “congressional insertions.”

Andaya was less than candid when he blamed the “double-entry” of this particular road project to the members of the bicameral conference committee, composed of Senators and Congressmen who consolidated the Senate and House versions of the 2008 GAA. Before the enrolled copy of any GAA is submitted to President Arroyo for signing into law, the DBM pours and scrutinizes each and every page of this voluminous document. This is precisely the procedure that is strictly followed to sieve and screen out such illegal “insertions” so that it can still be remedied through presidential veto.

Had Andaya exercised due diligence in the performance of his duties as DBM secretary, such “double-entry” would have been spotted right away and vetoed. But what did Andaya do? He offered the lame excuse at the Senate budget hearing that Malacañang Palace had nothing to do with it. If these “double-entry” provisions were indeed surreptitiously inserted by Villar and the rest who were behind it, why were these not vetoed by the President? If there’s anyone who has to account for this grievous lapse, the DBM secretary himself should be the first to explain why it passed his scrutiny.

I heard Andaya say in a TV interview after the Senate hearing that he practically begged the members of the bicam that he be allowed to attend their closed door sessions. As a former chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, I find it odd that Andaya would insist to be present during the closed-door deliberations of the bicam when he knew very well this is a no-no. What Andaya was obviously trying to project was that his presence inside the bicam could have prevented such hanky-panky insertions in the 2008 GAA. Really?

When he confirmed the existence of the “double-entry” of this road project in the 2008 GAA, then Andaya knew it all along. His mere excuse was that no funds were actually released for this road project. But this does not exculpate him for such oversight of a “double-entry” provision in the budget law that was not even vetoed by the President. Had Sen. Lacson not discovered it, then the P200 million allocation for this road project could have been released by the DBM secretary because it was validly provided for in the 2008 GAA.

The Machiavellian strategy to divide and rule is apparently paying off. The Senators like Villar and Lacson, both having moist eyes toward the May 2010 presidential elections, are now at each other’s throat this early in the game.

The allies of Villar, who heads his own Nacionalista Party (NP), are now circling the wagon for their presidential standard-bearer. Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano (NP) wants the Senate to investigate all the infrastructure projects in the 2008 GAA. Naturally, their House counterparts balked at this planned Senate investigation since it will expose all of their pork barrel allocations. That’s how this cock-and-bull story will degenerate.

On the bribery scandal at the CA, the Supreme Court finally handed down its verdict and sanctions against the five CA justices, along with Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) chairman Camilo Sabio who were all implicated in alleged acts of impropriety in office. Called on the carpet were: CA Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez Jr., Associate Justices Vicente Roxas, Jose Sabio, Myrna Dimaranan Vidal and Bienvenido Reyes. The five CA Justices were embroiled in the controversial handling of the corporate dispute involving the Lopez-owned Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) and the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS).

Roxas was dismissed from the judiciary and got the most severe punishment as the ponente of the questioned ruling that favored Meralco. Breaking his silence for the first time since this bribery scandal erupted, Roxas claimed yesterday he was a victim of “political bullying.” But he stopped short of naming who were the bullies. As a magistrate, he said he felt sorry for his colleagues in the judiciary who were rendered vulnerable to the “unseen hands” behind the fate he met. The plot thickens.

Sabio, who blew the whistle on alleged bribery attempt on him and revealed about his older brother’s calling him to vote in favor of the GSIS, was merely suspended for two months without pay. Sabio’s publicity blitz to portray himself as the do-gooder, paid off. The SC reprimanded Vasquez, Vidal and Reyes. The SC, on the other hand, recommended to the Bar confidant the case against the PCGG chairman for possible disbarment. Delicadeza, unfortunately, is a rare virtue in our officialdom. The PCGG chairman shrugged off calls for his resignation from office.

One of the principal characters implicated in this bribery scandal was lawyer and GSIS director Jesus Santos. He was actually the original sinner in this case. Santos called up the PCGG chairman and asked the latter to tell his younger brother at the CA to vote for a ruling favorable to the GSIS. He got away with it. Some guys have all the luck.