PHILIPPINE PRESIDENT ARROYO:

Another Plunder Case In The Offing?

Many Filipino observers believe another Philippine President is bound to be tried for “plunder”. Allegations abound that the First Gentleman, Miguel Arroyo, is somewhat involve in the $130 million kickback from the ZTE (A Chinese multi-national corporation engage in computer and internet services) national broadband project believed to have been brokered by Comelec Chair Benjamin Abalos and Aroyo’s Transportation and Communications (DOTC) Secretary Leandro Mendoza.

With the Senate investigation of this latest scandal, the Arroyo administration has plunged anew into another media spectacle, albeit negatively.

A few days ago in the Senate, Jose De Venecia III, son and namesake of incumbent Philippine House of Representatives Speaker Jose De Venecia, dragged the First Gentleman as the “mystery man” he referred to who bullied him into “backing off” from the government’s multi-billion peso broadband project.

The incident, according to the young De Venecia, took place in the plush Wack-Wack Golf and Country Club in Mandaluyong City and during a “meeting” that Abalos hosted for Sec. Mendoza and Finance Sec. Gary Teves. It was in that meeting where the First Gentleman was brought by Chairman Abalos, ostensibly to dissuade the young De Venecia from pursuing his bid to get the national broadband deal.

The first time this bombshell went off, practically all the President’s men denied the involvement of their First Gentleman and even went on to say, the “meeting” at Wack-Wack never took place. They are all aware, perhaps, that if these allegations are proved Mrs. Arroyo will certainly be the second president in Philippine history to be tried for Plunder.

Here’s what the law on Plunder (R.A. 7080) says:

“ Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder, Penalties. Any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, xxx xxx xxx . . . subordinates or other persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts . . . xxx xxx xxx . . .in the aggregate amount or total value of at least Seventy-five million pesos (P75,000,000.00), shall be guilty of the crime of plunder . . . xxx xxx xxx ”

“Ill-gotten wealth” is also defined as asset, property or material possession of any person acquired by him directly or indirectly through his subordinates and/or business associates.

The ill-gotten wealth may be in the form of receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, kickbacks from any government contract or project or by reason of his office or position.

Or by taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people.

Unknown to the President’s men, however, Sen Jinggoy Estrada was holding an ace up his sleeves. He reportedly has a witness in the First Gentleman’s “bullying” incident in Wack-Wack who happens to be a waiter in the restaurant where the “meeting” took place.

Reason enough for the President’s men to rethink their positions.

But whoever advised Mike Arroyo to fly to Hongkong on the eve of De Venecia’s testimony in the Senate failed to foresee the negative effects of such a move. More people now are inclined to believe he is hiding something from the Senate, you know – flight means guilt! At least that’s what the law says.

At the continuation of the Senate inquiry last Wednesday (Sept. 19) many were surprised to see a battery of Arroyo officials present. They all showed up, apparently to put up a “not guilty” mask on their faces. But as the inquiry progressed on, however, the appearances showed more guilty faces than innocent ones.

For one, Finance Secretary Gary Teves (always a gentleman that he is) contradicted Mendoza and told the senators, not only that the controversial “meeting” took place, he even surprised them with his revelation that some ZTE officials were also present at the meeting together with the First Gentleman, Chairman Abalos, Sec. Mendoza and himself.

If there was one unified stand the President’s men made during that afternoon in the Senate, it was their resolve to hoodwink the Filipino people and pass the “shady deal” they entered into with ZTE as nothing but a “conditional contract” where no public funds were lost.

Sec. Mendoza and his cahoots took turns in telling us that no law was violated. Public bidding, according to them, is not required in this project since it is a government to government transaction and that the project will be financed by a loan extended by the Chinese government to the Philippines. Asked, however, to produce the loan agreement and/or the Executive Agreement entered into between the two governments all the President’s men could say is that, it will follow!

The President’s men are obviously attempting to skirt the issue of Plunder in this case:

First. They would have us believe that Mike Arroyo had nothing to do with the “ZTE-Abalos deal” contrary to Joey De Venecia’s claim that he was bullied by the First Gentleman into “backing-off” from the project.

Second. Even if Mike Arroyo did really bully De Venecia it was for good reasons, to prevent him from entering into a prohibited contract since he is the son of Speaker De Venecia, a public official. (Whew! How magnanimous!)

Third. A government project subject of an Executive Agreement is exempt from bidding requirements therefore, Mendoza et. al. did not violate the law when they awarded without public bidding the contract to ZTE.

For eight grueling hours all the President’s men did was to deny any wrongdoing. They denied Abalos brokered for the Chinese firm ZTE. They denied receiving $130 million dollars bribe. They denied the First Gentleman’s involvement. And worse, they denied placing the Philippine government in a disadvantageous position when they contracted out the national broadband project to ZTE – when even experts from the UP School of Economics decried this project as overblown to unimaginable proportions.

In law, there is what is considered as “An answer pregnant with denials is actually a confirmation.” Or, if you prefer algebra, “negative plus negative equals positive”.