Transcript of the interview with Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago

19 November 2007

On the continuation of the ZTE-NBN hearing
This is already a hypothetical case because the President has already ordered the cancellation of the ZTE contract… so wala na tayong pag-aawayan pa, kung hindi sino ang lumabag sa ating batas, dahil ang mga taong iyon—dahil nga napakalaking eskandalo ito—ay dapat idemanda sa Ombudsman. Pero ang Ombudsman ang may kapangyarihan na gumawa ng preliminary investigation, ibig sabihin imbestigahan ngayon kung may suspects tayo. Kaya kung iimbestigahin pa rin ng Senado, magiging doble na kasi hindi naman pwedeng ang Senado and mag-imbestiga para sa Ombudsman. If we conduct the investigation here in the Senate at this point, we will simply be anticipating and duplicating the function of the Ombudsman. In fact, we may even be accused of usurping the powers of the Ombudsman. Anyway, whatever happens at this point, the ultimate result will simply be an endorsement to the Ombudsman. So I believe that the Senate should now turn its attention to other more urgent matters such as the national budget, which is already upcoming.

If Sec. Neri cites executive privilege
In my view, this makes Mr. Neri suspect. We could just include him among those whose names we think the Ombudsman should investigate in a preliminary investigation. But there is no more point belaboring the facts because the Senate is not a fact-finding body. We are merely inquiring so that we will know what law to pass. We already know from all the hearings that have been conducted more or less what will be the shape of the law that is needed so that we can avoid this kind of a scandal in the future.

It will quite also set a precedent because kung ganun rin lang na pababayaan siya ng komite ng Senado ay pwede naman pala na i-subpoena ang mga testigo at sasabihin na lang nila na ayaw nila at may executive privilege sila. This is to set a deterrent to other people who might cover up the truth simply by citing executive privilege because as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said, the principle of executive privilege remains alive and kicking. It is just a question of making sure that the committees of Congress will not abuse this power.

Excerpts from Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago’s interview

18 September 2007

It seems to me that this young man’s behavior is contrary to human nature. He lost in the bidding. The normal reaction is to ask for a re-bidding if you really think that the winning bid was not pursuant to the specifications and if you really think that your own bid would have been better for the country. But instead of making a only a cursory denial, or denunciation of the successful bidder, he is raining automatic gunfire on almost everybody in sight. He is trying to annihilate everybody who has a direct connection with President Arroyo. That is why I say that his behavior is bizarre. And you cannot help but reach the conclusion that he is merely a stool pigeon, he is speaking for a political group that is trying to scandalize the administration.

Who is he speaking for? He is always in the media. The level of political noise he is making is extremely high. You and I know that you won’t get this kind of publicity just making allegations without any proof at all. So this must be a very expensive campaign. My question is: who is funding young this man?

If he is a genuine oppositor, if he is bent on exposing corruption in government, he should have presented his evidence long ago. Instead, he is concentrating on making sensational statements. Where are his witnesses? Or where are the papers that at least implicate these figures? He is a loose cannon but he is not as wild as he seems to be. I think he is merely fronting for a group whose ultimate goal is to create political instability so that President Arroyo will be removed before her term officially ends in 2010, and install another. I have some idea who this “other” is, but again, unlike this person I am criticizing, I’m a trained lawyer. I don’t want to name names unless I have at least some semblance of proof.

[This issue] has to be diligently and conscientiously investigated by the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee. We cannot all just jump when someone makes a sensational statement. We have to show the public that a Senate Committee investigation is a serious, solemn discharge of duty. Whenever any person makes an allegation, he must be immediately asked to produce at least prima facie, the barest minimum, evidence, to support his claims. Otherwise, all Senate Committee hearings here will be nothing but sensationalist circus.

I want to ask the person why is it that he has never answered the objections or criticisms of his bid, or the justifications presented for the winning bid. In the first place, his corporation is charged with being a mere shell. There is nothing inside. It had an original capital of some Php 300,000.00 according to the certificate of registration issued at the SEC. It had a paid up capital of some Php 300,000 and an authorized capital of Php 5M. And he is trying to pursue half a billion’s worth of public funds. How on earth could you have possibly justified his qualifications? He doesn’t even try to prove his qualifications. He is on a warpath. He is on a bloodbath. We will have to make that young man answer if he is lying to the committee.

He is accusing high public officials of graft and corruption, a misbehavior punishable under the Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act. He is making a criminal accusation against them. That certainly, if not accompanied by a modicum of proof, can be libelous. He enjoys no parliamentary immunity… this young man, I am sure, will be facing libel charges or charges of inciting to sedition.

I’m sure that he will be called again, and I hope that by that time, senators will be bent on placing the onus or burden of proof on the accuser, not on the accused. That is the way our judicial or legal system works.

I have advantage over other senators because I have received background information on him. He is not a mere disgruntled bidder. The mere fact that this is so highly publicized and that the angle has always been “who has been corrupt in the Arroyo administration?” … (means that) a lot of money has been spent.

-o0o-

News Release

18 September 2007

MIRIAM: WHO’S FUNDING JOEY?

Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago said that Jose de Venecia III, the accuser in the controversial NBN (National Broadband Network) deal, has to explain what group he is representing, and said she suspects that it is not only his own corporation, AHI (Amsterdam Holdings, Inc.), which lost in the bidding.

“He lost the bid, but he is not even trying for a rebidding. Instead, he is spraying automatic gunfire on the First Gentleman, Atty. Jose Miguel Arroyo, Comelec Commissioner Benjamin Abalos, and DOTC Secretary Leandro Mendoza. This is exceedingly strange,” Santiago said.

Santiago said that she “smells a plot” intended to scandalize President Arroyo, and to create intrigue between her and Jose de Venecia, Jr., Speaker of the House and father of the accuser.

“The political noise has reached a very high decibel level. Producing that kind of noise is very expensive. So where is the money coming from?” she said.

Santiago said that it is possible that the accuser, Joey de Venecia is funded by a group that wants to oust President Arroyo before 2010 and to install someone else.

“The Supreme Court has ruled that he who alleges must prove. We have to conduct a background check on the accuser. Like a good detective story, the Senate hearings should be able to determine what his motive is, and who is funding him, if any,” the senator said.

On the alleged participation in the transaction by the First Gentleman, Santiago said that if it is not satisfactorily explained, it might be difficult to get Senate approval on the 2008 budget on which the Senate is already conducting public hearings.

“That’s got to be the shocker of the month. Someone is telling a very big lie. Which party is peddling the lie will hold the key to Senate approval of the loan,” she said.

Santiago, Senate finance committee vice-chair, said that the NBN project can be completed only with congressional approval through next year’s budget.

“The public officials involved should stop acting as if this were a done deal. It is not, and it is Congress which will have final say,” she said.

Santiago explained that congressional approval is necessary, since the NBN project would create a future debt for the country, which would require payment by the national treasury.
Santiago said that there are five steps that should be taken for the project to be considered completed.

First, the budget department has to issue a FOA, meaning Forward Obligational Authority.

Second, the Office of the President has to issue full powers to the finance department.

Third, the finance department, on behalf of the Philippine government, has to enter into the loan agreement.

Fourth, the Monetary Board has to approve the loan.

Fifth and finally, Congress has to approve the loan through the 2008 budget or the Annual Appropriations Act, in the exercise of the constitutional power to approve the budget prepared by the Office of the President.

Santiago said that her finance subcommittee will conduct a public hearing on the budget for the Office of the President this Friday, September 21, and she will ask the Malacañang representative if the proposed budget includes anticipated payments for the foreign debt that the NBN loan will involve.

-o0o-