The COA report on the use of pork barrel funds was disturbing in its description of the recklessness with which public funds were dispensed. Even more disturbing, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) seems to have records so sloppy they will not pass the grade in a second-rate company.
Either that or there is an orchestrated effort to cover up the mess and massage the outcomes for partisan purposes.
For instance, a staggering P3 billion in pork barrel expenditure was attributed to former representative Manuel “Way Kurat†Zamora of Compostela Valley. The attribution floored Way Kurat. It tarnished the reputation of a provincial politician who once caught national attention for reporting to work on a bicycle.
It turns out the attribution was the result of what the DBM calls a “clerical error.†The P3 billion represented the DPWH allocation for the maintenance of national roads all over the archipelago.
The COA did report that pork barrel funds were released to one “Luis Abalos†who was not even a congressman. It turns out the money was allocated to Mandaluyong Mayor Benhur Abalos when he served as representative of his district.
Former Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile called a press conference last Friday to dispute the COA report’s attribution to him of a staggering P727 million in 2009 alone.
After reviewing his own office records, it turns out that the amount attributed to him included pork barrel releases to other legislators which his office endorsed. Among these are pork allocations to Rodolfo Biazon (P20 million), Chiz Escudero (P20 million), Jinggoy Estrada (P50 million), Lito Lapid (P42 million), Loren Legarda (P33 million), Mar Roxas (P20 million) and Miriam Santiago (P50 million).
By inserting the pork barrel drawdowns of some of the stalwarts of the present administration into Enrile’s account, they are spared the brutal scrutiny of an enraged public. To date, we have seen no records of the pork barrel spending of one Benigno Simeon Aquino III who served three terms as congressman and half a term as senator.
In addition, some P90 million in additional pork barrel was endorsed by Enrile’s office for congressmen who were members of the powerful Commission on Appointments (CA). It turns out members of this committee are rewarded with additional allocations, further sweetening the tremendous power membership in the CA accords. This is new, even more scandalous information.
Former budget secretary Rolando Andaya confirms this. He says the P70 million allocation per congressman and P200 million per senator represents only the minimum they may access. Depending on how supportive of the Chief Executive the legislator is, additional payouts may be made.
Now we know why the pork barrel is important for the Chief Executive. It is a sumptuous method for rewarding obedience from legislators and distributing political favors. That implies the pork barrel is a powerful tool for undermining the independence of the legislative branch.
We all know the pork barrel has been a source of corruption. We must now contemplate the fact that this manner of distributing public funds eroded the principle of checks-and-balances on which our supposedly democratic system is anchored.
The new “mechanism†suggested by President Aquino when he announced the abolition of the PDAF, although not yet detailed, appears to enhance the powers of the presidency over the Congress even more than the PDAF did. That enlarges the threat to our democratic system much more than the traditional pork barrel did. It gives the presidency monopoly of the means for patronage politics.
Enrile, in the twilight of his political career, now calls for the end to the pork barrel. He should enhance that position by calling for an end to pork barrel politics no less. That should include ending the tremendous war chest for patronage controlled by the presidency.
Only by doing so can we step out of the moral quagmire that long kept our politics captive.
Bribery
We all realize the NBI has its hands full with all the things passed on to the agency for investigation, ranging from the Coast Guard’s shooting of a Taiwanese fisherman to plumbing the depths of the pork barrel scandal. The temptation to archive other items for investigation and case build-up will be great.
One item for investigation that seems to be on its way to the archives is the allegation that some officials of the Pagcor received bribes from Japanese gambling magnate Okada’s Universal Azure company.
So far, the NBI established the basic facts of the case.
In November 2009, a Pagcor delegation travelled to Las Vegas to watch a Pacquiao match. Okada’s company spent for the fabulous excursion. Shortly after, in January 2010, a Rodolfo Soriano is said to have received an advance of $5 million from the gambling magnate. The next month, by way of an executive order, Okada’s company was granted 100% ownership of casinos along with tax relief for whatever investments are made. Sometime after that, $15 million was supposedly transferred from Okada to Subic Leisure company.
The NBI is convinced that the “$40 million payments actually transpired.†However, the targets of the investigation invoked their rights against self-incrimination. On that basis, the investigative agency decided their efforts reached a dead-end. The investigation is now suspended.
Surely, the investigators have other options available apart from extracting outright confessions. That might involve applying greater creativity and assiduousness in gathering evidence.
Dropping a case on the grounds the subjects of an investigation invoked their rights against self-incrimination is too lazy an excuse.