WHY I AM OUT OF THE LOOP

By Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago

I have decided to join the new majority, because it still partly consists of the administration bloc to which I belong. I have been absent and silent so far, because I am sick of diarrhea, which could be due to intestinal flu or my old amoebiasis.

I was clueless about the Senate coup. In my entire Senate career, the plotters never consulted me beforehand. Either I don’t count, or I am considered unapproachable.

Thus, when Sen. Enrile called me several times on the Sunday before the coup, I had no clue that he wished me to sign the coup resolution. I had intestinal flu, was in bed, and had requested my husband to field all my phone calls. To say that I was avoiding him is a misimpression. I do not avoid; I confront.

Immediately after the coup, Sen. Mar Roxas very kindly and gallantly invited me to join the majority. I had reservations, because I was ill and just could not deal with the unexpected development. But he was indefatigable on my behalf, and I thank him profusely.

In a jocular way, I was in a dilemma. At the start of this Congress, the Senate administration bloc allied itself with a sector of the opposition, to become part of the majority. At that time, administration senators were accused of sleeping with the enemy. Now, the administration bloc has again allied itself, but this time with a different sector of the opposition, to form the new majority. Hence, it might seem to critics that the administration bloc to which I belong has become a serial adulterer.

I caught a bad cold in New York , and brought it with me to Manila . Instead of resting, I immediately plunged into my Senate duties. Hence, at the Dela Paz hearing shown on TV, I had to stop presiding and leave, because of exhaustion from my deteriorating cold. I even cancelled at the last minute my scheduled trip to Peru with President Arroyo.

On the weekend prior to the coup, in addition to my cold, I succumbed to diarrhea. On my doctor’s advice, I took a course of antibiotics. But then I developed dizziness. And paradoxically, today when I had planned to report to the Senate, I find that my diarrhea has returned.

It is not true that I “demanded” certain committees. I had read that Sen. Enrile was calling for senators to express their committee preferences, and I complied with a brief letter. It is not true that I am feigning illness. My family physicians are Dr. Esperanza Cabral and her daughter Dr. Sandy Cabral Prodigalidad.

It is unfair and malicious to impute these and any other kind of negative actuations to me. I assure my critics that if I were not bedridden, I would educate them physically.

Transcript of Sen. Santiago's interview after the Senate hearing on the 'Euro generals'

There is a very close parallelism with the Bolante case with the Euro generals case. The people who are likely to be accused in a criminal prosecution by the Ombudsman are obviously covering up for people higher up than themselves. That’s why I keep repeating to General Dela Paz that he has to be prepared to go to jail, if he continues to operate in a misplaced sense of esprit de corps or out of a misguided sense of honor. He should not try to cover up for his superiors not only because it is a distorted sense of being a gentleman in a PMA sense but also because it will serve as a bad precedent in the campaign against corruption. 
  
The superior officials can always bribe or threaten a middle-level official to take the rap for them, and in that way we will never be able to clean our country of corruption. I really just feel sorry for Gen. Dela Paz and I wish that he would change his mind because he could do the country a genuine service if he tells the truth. 

There are so many inconsistencies in his testimony and those of his colleagues that altogether there is simply no credibility in the story they have created for themselves. For example, the most telling point there is that, according to the certification of the money changer, money started to be exchanged from pesos to euros before the actual release of the money as testified to by the PNP budget officer. This alone is indicative that the PNP fact-finding report is a cover-up report. It is intended to place guilt on Dela Paz and draw attention away from his superiors who may have issued the orders themselves, or at the very least participated in the scam. 

I have already explained that the money which the PNP report calls “government funds” may not be legal government funds at all but maybe the result of another scam within the PNP which I call the PNP Recruit Scam. They are given money from January to December to recruit young trainees for the police but they will appoint these trainees until after six months to one year and will not return the money either. They will keep it for themselves in the PNP. So I have estimated that from 2005 up to, let’s say, 2010, that would amount to P700 million pesos. Just one fund alone. Ano pa kayang mga pondo sa PNP na pinagtatago and that they keep at their own disposal and exercise full discretion over. 

In the case of Dela Paz, bakit pa siya binigyan ng ganyang kalaking halaga para lang pang-extra baka may mangyari? Iyan ang tinatawag na contingency fund. Una, sabi ng COA, hindi legal magbigay ng contingency fund. At lahat ng mga public school teachers at iba pang empleyado ng gobyerno na nagpunta abroad alam iyon, walang tinatawag na contingency fund. 

Pangalawa, maliban diyan, pagkatapos mag-swear under oath si Gen. Versoza in the first hearing na sabi niya “I swear under oath na ang pera na iyon ay para sa contingency purposes, pang-extra lang.” Afterwards sumulat ba naman sa atin na “Puwede ba tayong mag-executive session kasi ang pera ay pambili ng military equipment.” Kaya ayoko nang mag-executive session dahil ibig niyang sabihin nagsinungaling pala siya either in the first hearing or when he wrote his letter to me dahil hindi naman puwede na contingency fund na, pang-military equipment pa. Pagkatapos meron tayong kasunduan sa Amerika na kapag bumili ng military equipment, kailangan galing lang sa Amerika. Ngayon sasabihin nila na hindi naman nakalagay doon ay ‘police equipment’. Maski totoo iyon, bakit si Gen. Versoza mismo ang nagsabi na puwede naming ipaliwanag sa inyo na ito ay pambili ng military equipment. So napakarami ng inconsistencies. 

The saying in Latin when you are evaluating evidence as a trial judge is falsus in unum, falsus in pluribum. If you tell a lie at one point, the judge is justified in presuming that you are lying in all other points. For me, itong mga deklarasyon nila are all self-interested, that is to say it is all meant to protect certain people even at the cost of their own liabilities. 

Dapat imbestigahan diyan si Gen. Versoza at si Sec. Puno dahil sa ilalim ng mga Administrative Orders ng Office of the President, sila lamang ang may karapatan na mag-apruba ng official travel. Kaya imbestigahan kung bakit sila nagbigay ng sang-ayon sa mga travels na ito na kuwestiyonable ang pagdala ng P700 million. Alalahanin niyo sa umpisa nitong eskandalo, itong sina Sec. Puno at Gen. Versoza ay nagsabi na wala naming eskandalo iyon, pang-emergency lang naman nila iyon, at ibabalik naman nila iyon. Ngayon, sinasabi nila sa kanilang fact-finding committee report na hindi sila nagbigay ng pahintulot maski kanino para sa contingency fund. Nagpalit ang kanilang sinabi. Kung palit-palit, iyan na ang sinasabi ko: falsus in unum, falsus in pluribum. Kaya kawawa itong si Dela Paz, nagiging scapegoat lang sa paningin ko. 

What should be done to Gen. Versoza? 

Dapat i-preliminary investigation dahil wala naman kaming ganyang kapangyarihan. Ang gusto ko ay i-preliminary investigation hindi lamang si Dela Paz, Gen. Rentoy at itong mga accountable officers, kundi isali na rin sa preliminary investigation rin si Sec. Puno at Gen. Versoza. Otherwise, the public will again complain. There will be a big public howl that we’re only running after the small fish and the big fish keep getting away. 

Should they both be suspended while being investigated? 

Nasa Presidente iyan. It is not a finding of guilt. It is simply a way to prevent the superior officials from manipulating the situation and taking certain documents, or threatening or bribing certain people to testify in a certain way. They can do it out of a sense of delicadeza. 

Should Dela Paz be held under house arrest? 

Hindi na, dahil kawawa. Halos naiiyak na kanina. Nakikita niya ang kinabukasan niyang napakalabo dahil inaamin niya laha na kanya lahat ng kasalanan. Ewan ko kung natatakot siya o nagkamali lang siya, akala niya ay marangal na paraan. Pero nakikita mo na naiiyak na siya dahil naaalala niya ang mga anak niya at ang asawa niya. Humiling siya na huwag na lang pilitin na tumestigo ang asawa niya, pinagybigyan ko naman. Naaawa na lang ako sa kanya. 

In fact, we issued an order right now the Sergeant-at-Arms ng Senate na gumawa na ng affidavit of recognizance na ang ibig sabihin ay lifted na ang warrant of arrest, kahit kailangan pa siya sa mga susunod pang mga hearing. Palayain na at pauuwin na siya basta mangako lang sila ng abugado niya na kung kailangan ay pumunta siya dito at huwag siyang umalis ng bansa hanggang matapos ang imbestigasyon. 

Are the savings from the trainee fund used as a gift for retiring generals? 

 Maaari dahil alam ko sa militar at sa police meron silang sistema na kapag magre-retire na, hindi lamang pondo ng gobyerno ang ibibigay sa magre-retire na opsiyal, kundi may kostumbre sila na alam naman ng lahat ngunit lingid sa publiko na kailangan ang mga kasunod nila na mga ranking officials na mananatili ay gumawa ng so-called ‘retirement fund’. Nangongolekta sila sa mga parokyano nila—mga drug lords, jueteng lords—at milyon ang binibigay sa kanila. Halimabawa sa AFP Chief of Staff, ang pagkasabi sa akin ay P50 milyon. Ganoon rin siguro sa PNP Chief.  

Marami silang pribelehiyo pagkatapos nilang magretire. But the most appalling is that the institution itself gives them an ‘underground’ retirement fund. Of course this is all raised through extortion from those who have been protected during the term of that exiting official. 

Siguro dine-deklara nila savings iyan at ire-realign. It is legally possible to realign it to another legitimate purpose but actually it could be a slush fund, an unknown secret fund from which they withdraw for personal reasons and for devious purposes. 

Transcript of Sen. Santiago's interview after the Senate hearing on the fertilizer scam involving Jocelyn Bolante

It does not compute at all. Even if you use common sense, the story just does not coincide with reality. 

Una, meron siyang solong kapangyarihan sa halagang halos isang bilyong piso. Walang undersecretary na may ganoong kapangyarihan. Katangi-tangi siya. 

Pangalawa, sabi niya wala siyang pakialam sa supplier, kasi ang supplier diyan kikita. Pero sa halos buong Pilipinas, iisa lang ang supplier, ang FESHAN suppliers. And I have to tell you that according to my records, he is intimately connected with FESHAN suppliers, in fact he admitted on the stand that his family is in the agriculture business. It’s not impossible that he would have a working relationship with FESHAN suppliers. Incidentally, that supplier does not exist.  

Ngayon, ang problema natin ay wala man lamang fertilizer dahil ang buong halaga ng fertilizer fund ay napunta at pinagparte-parte sa mga kickback ng lahat ng involved: si Bolante, ang local government officials, ang runner, at supplier. Sila lang naman ang kumita doon, walang dumating sa mga magsasaka na fertilizer. 

On Bolante’s performance in the hearing 

He was lying under oath out of sheer necessity. That is the problem. As I have said, he was defending the indefensible. In fact, if the Senate were to be strict about the rules, he should be cited for contempt. When I was a trial judge and the witness was blatantly lying under oath, I simply call the sheriff to put him to jail. If you keep on consistently lying under oath that is already contempt of court because it shows you do not respect the judge or the court enough to tell the truth. 

  He should be cited for contempt and his lawyers as well for coaching him in that manner. I think that they already pushed the envelope so far. There is a very thin line between performing your function as a lawyer to defend your client with all your might and conniving with your client to tell an outright barefaced lie.  

He is just intractable, meaning he just took a position and stuck to it, as if he were cemented to that platform. You cannot blame the person because, as I’ve said, the law always considers if the person if faced with a question of survival. Sometimes he is forced to lie and secondly we take account of feelings even in the crafting or the design of our laws, we know that he will likely commit perjury. Although it is reprehensible to lie under oath—and that actually is a crime called perjury—still, we take into consideration all these inclinations of human nature. 

Does PGMA have any involvement in this? 

The president of course is the Chief Executive. A cabinet member acts as her alter ego. Puwede rin na ang alter ego niya, which was the secretary of agriculture, could have been acting, or maybe even using her name. But I have no basis. I don’t want to speculate. 

What cases can be filed against Bolante? 

Madami. Violation of the Anti-graft Law, malversation of public funds, violation of the Anti-plunder Act, and violation of the Procurement Law, to say the least. 

Should Bolante return for questioning for another hearing? 

Oo. He raised more questions than he answered. 

Is the Senate inviting local officials in the next hearing? 

We are not investigating the local officials. We are investigating the process by which government funds disappear. 

Is this hearing a useless exercise? 

This is not useless because it is useful for the judge and the public to see the demeanor of the witness. Gusto ko talagang Makita siya para Makita ko and demeanor niya, ang pagmumukha niya, dahil ang trained na judge ay makikita kung nagsasabi ng totoo o hindi

MIRIAM WANTS RP IN ICC

 Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today filed a resolution urging President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to transmit the Rome Statute to the Senate for ratification proceedings. 

Santiago said that the change in US leadership will likely pave the way for US ratification of the Rome Statute. 

Like the US , the Philippines has yet to ratify the Rome Statute. Malacañang still has to transmit the treaty to the Senate for ratification even though the Philippines has been a signatory of the treaty since 28 December 2002. 

Under the Constitution, before the Rome Statute can be valid and effective in the Philippines , it is necessary that the Statute be concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate. 

“Though the US , under the Bush administration, did not ratify the Rome Statute, President-elect Barack Obama’s statements on the International Criminal Court (ICC) suggests that he is open to working closely with the Court,” Santiago said. 

Mr. Obama has acknowledged in media interviews that the ICC has “pursued charges only in cases of the most serious and systematic crimes and it is in America ’s interests that these most heinous of criminals, like the perpetrators of the genocide in Darfur , are held accountable. These actions are a credit to the cause of justice and deserve full American support and cooperation.” 

The Rome Statute provides for the establishment of the ICC, which exercises jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, namely genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. 

In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Pimentel v. Office of the Executive Secretary that neither the Senate nor the Supreme Court can compel the President to transmit the signed text of the Rome Statute to the Senate. The President has sole discretion in initiating the ratification proceedings of a treaty.  

MIRIAM’S PLOY TO GET DELA PAZ

Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that she has agreed with Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, chair of the Blue Ribbon Committee, for their two committees to hold a joint hearing on the “Euro generals” case. 

  Former PNP comptroller Eliseo Dela Paz, thru counsel, has filed a petition in the Supreme Court to challenge the jurisdiction of the foreign relations committee. 

  Though issued a subpoena, Dela Paz failed to appear at the hearing last October 23, and argued that jurisdiction does not belong to the foreign affairs committee, but to another committee where he would be willing to testify. 

  After overruling the challenge to the jurisdiction of her committee, Santiago issued an arrest warrant against Dela Paz. 

  Senate Pres. Manny Villar has signed the arrest warrant, which so far has been signed by eight senators. 

  According to Villar, at least 10 members of the foreign relations committee should sign the arrest warrant. 

  “To avoid all these technicalities, it would be better if the two committees hold a joint hearing, so that Dela Paz can no longer make a pretense of challenging jurisdiction on the arrest warrant,” Santiago said. 

  She said that if the Senate schedules the Bolante hearing this week, then the Dela Paz hearing will be held next week.  

WITHOUT MIRIAM, ICJ HAS NO WOMAN JUDGE

By a hairsbreadth, feisty Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, missed election as judge of the International Court of Justice, after winning in the popular General Assembly, but losing in the elite Security Council. 

  Her narrow and colorful defeat makes the 15-member ICJ and all-male enclave, despite repeated UN advocacy of gender balance. 

“It was a hard campaign, but ultimately it was a power game. The developed states tend to vote for countries where they have interests to protect, such as foreign investments, use of natural resources, and a big export market. As a developing state, we have no such cards to play,” Santiago said, after arriving Friday midnight from the UN New York. 

  The Philippine delegation led by Foreign Affairs Sec. Alberto Romulo and UN Amb. Hilario Davide put up such a brave battle that after the first round of voting, after four judges had already been elected, Santiago ’s votes compelled the voting to reach four rounds. 

  “Big countries like China and France refused to support the Philippines while small countries like Indonesia and Vietnam remained staunch Philippine allies up to the end. Probably none of the Big Powers voted for the Philippines ,” Santiago said. 

  The Big Powers, who are the five permanent members of the Security Council, are US, UK , France , Moscow , and China . 

  “Reportedly, the US considers the Philippines negligible in world affairs. UK and France prefer to support former colonies, where they have big investments. China has big investments to protect in Jordan . Moscow is sore at the Philippines , because we did not vote for it in the last Security Council elections. All this is realpolitik,” Santiago said. 

  Santiago , a former UP international law professor, said realpolitik is politics based on the national interest and on power, in other words, practical politics. 

  “The United Nations keeps advocating gender balance but now in the ICJ there are 15 judges without a single woman judge. This shows that the UN does not advance international interest, as much as the national interests of powerful countries,” Santiago said. 

  Santiago , who is chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that her recent practical lesson in realpolitik has colored her perception of treaties between the Philippines and certain developed states. 

  “Powerful states promote international law only when it works in their favor. For example, they advocate gender balance on paper, but reject it when it hinders their own national interests,” she said. 

  Santiago noted that while in the General Assembly some 143 states promised in writing to vote for the Philippines , she got only 107 votes, still the required majority, but showing that some states cannot be trusted to keep their promises. 

  “In the same manner, the Philippine mission received nine written promises to vote for the Philippines in the Security Council, but only five voted for me. Fortunately, I was already warned that UN diplomacy can be accompanied by betrayal, because of the practice of secret balloting,” she said. 

  Santiago said that if the Philippines plans to nominate another candidate for the ICJ three years from now, the government should already start the process of mutual exchange of favors at this time. 

  “One strategy is that each time a country approaches the Philippines for a favor, immediately our government should ask for a commitment to the ICJ or any other international organization. Another strategy is to strengthen solidarity among the 10 Asean member states so that we shall form a united power bloc. But the best way is to work at increasing Philippine power in international terms,” she said.