Trillanes believes Tuason not telling whole truth
Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV and Ruby Tuason. FILE PHOTOS
Ruby Tuason’s “three-point shot” fell short of Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV’s expectations.
A day after grilling the confessed bagman of alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, Trillanes said he was convinced that Tuason was a credible witness and she could testify against the senators allegedly involved in the massive graft that defrauded the government billions of pesos in antipoverty funds.
But Trillanes doubted that Tuason was telling the whole truth.
Trillanes was annoyed that Tuason pinned down Sen. Jinggoy Estrada by admitting that she handed to him millions of pesos in kickbacks from Napoles’ bogus developmental projects, but pulled her punches when questioned about the kickbacks allegedly given to Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile.
But Justice Secretary Leila de Lima said the lack of specifics in Tuason’s testimony that Trillanes wanted made her even more credible.
Tuason’s testimony backs up her claim that she delivered kickbacks to the senators, De Lima said.
Estrada, Enrile and a third senator, Ramon Revilla Jr., are facing plunder charges in the Office of the Ombudsman, along with Napoles and several former members of the House of Representatives and government officials over the pork barrel scam.
Tuason is among the accused in the case. She fled to the United States last year, but returned last week, offering to serve as state witness in exchange for immunity from prosecution.
Personal delivery
Tuason faced the Senate blue ribbon committee on Thursday and told the senators that she personally handed Estrada’s kickbacks to him in his office in the Senate in 2008.
She said she also handed millions of pesos in kickbacks to Enrile’s chief of staff at the time, lawyer Jessica Lucila “Gigi” Reyes, in posh restaurants or her home.
She gave no indication that Reyes turned over the money to Enrile, leaving it to the senators to conclude that the money was intended for Enrile and that Reyes gave it to him.
Despite that, Trillanes said the case “appeared to be already complete.”
But he warned that defense lawyers could exploit the “lack of details” should the case be sent to the antigraft court Sandiganbayan for trial.
Trillanes noted that Tuason appeared to be uncertain about anything during the questioning by Sen. Teofisto Guingona III, chair of the blue ribbon committee.
The street where he lives
For instance, he said, Tuason could not say exactly how much money she delivered to Estrada and admitted to not knowing the name of the street in Greenhills, San Juan City, where the senator lived, although she said she also delivered money to him there.
That will be a problem in court, when defense lawyers grill her, he said.
Her testimony could be thrown out for having no value, he said.
Tuason’s testimony is being evaluated by the Ombudsman. On its value to the prosecution depends her being taken in as state witness.
Trillanes said he went to the Senate blue ribbon committee hearing on Thursday expecting Tuason to tell all that she knew, including specifics of her delivery of kickbacks to Estrada and Reyes.
Suddenly forgetful
But Tuason’s testimony was lacking in those specifics, which would be vital to the prosecution of the accused senators in court.
“She was rather clear in the part about Sen. Jinggoy Estrada. When it came to the part about Senator Enrile, [she] suddenly became forgetful. It was as if she wasn’t interested,” Trillanes said.
In the affidavit she submitted to the Department of Justice, Tuason claimed that she delivered kickbacks from Enrile’s Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) allotment to Reyes.
“I can only presume [that he knows],” was all Tuason could tell Trillanes when he pressed her about whether she believed Enrile knew about the commissions Reyes was collecting from Napoles.
Trillanes expressed doubt that Tuason did not even cryptically tell Enrile about her deliveries of kickbacks from the ghost projects funded by his share of the PDAF.
Tuason said in her affidavit and during the hearing that Enrile sometimes dropped by when she and Reyes were about to end their meetings, usually in posh restaurants in Makati and Taguig cities.
Protecting Enrile
Does he see a scheme to save Enrile from prosecution?
“That was pretty obvious yesterday,” Trillanes said.
“It’s now to each his own. Each one is left to his own devices. In this case, it’s unfortunate for Sen. Jinggoy Estrada. It appears that he’s now being dropped,” he added.
Trillanes said he was verifying information that Tuason’s lawyer was once a member of Enrile’s law firm.
Enrile and Estrada are political allies in the Pwersa ng Masang Pilipino party founded by Estrada’s father, former President Joseph Estrada, who is now mayor of Manila.
Estrada considers Enrile a mentor.
Trillanes said Tuason paled in comparison to whistle-blower Benhur Luy.
“He didn’t disappoint. He had details,” Trillanes said.
Trillanes said Tuason should have strained to remember the particulars of her transactions with Napoles, Estrada and Reyes when she decided to turn state witness in the case.
“[Instead], we’d be sprayed with a few details and then she’d say she’s already advanced in age and couldn’t remember. I really doubt that alibi,” Trillanes said.
Praise from Estrada
After the hearing, Estrada praised Trillanes for pressing Tuason for details.
“I have to give credit to Senator Trillanes for whatever its worth. Senator Trillanes and I aren’t that close, but he asked good questions. So, I congratulate Senator Trillanes for asking questions that were truly substantive,” Estrada told reporters on Thursday afternoon.
“I think… Tuason crumbled in questions of Senator Trillanes,” he added.
Asked if he would file a supplemental reply to the charges in the Ombudsman after Tuason’s testimony, Estrada said: “There’s no need. It contains nothing.”
De Lima disagreed.
That’s Napoles’ job
“You must understand that Mrs. Tuason’s only role is the go-between, the one handing out the kickbacks, the share of the lawmakers involved. So, of course, her interest is only her share, the so-called referral fee. So she did not deem it proper or desirable that she would keep track or record her dealings. For her, that’s the job of Mrs. Napoles and her staff, especially Benhur Luy. This is the reason why she can’t state precise details, or remember the exact amounts and dates,” De Lima said.
Tuason’s seemingly inadequate testimony actually makes her more credible because it backs up her claim that she was the one delivering the kickbacks, De Lima said, adding, “For her, when she delivers, she gets a commission. Maybe what she can count exactly is her commissions.”
As for Tuason’s perceived reluctance to directly link Enrile, De Lima said this refuted accusations that the investigators fed Tuason information or coached her about what to say in the hearing.
Overly cautious
“She was just being overly cautious, but we are not worried that she was not that categorical [in her statements]. For us, there’s already the evidence that Senator Enrile knows what’s happening. There’s the documentary evidence—the requests, endorsements, identification of projects and the nongovernment organizations that are the beneficiaries,” she said.
De Lima said Reyes’ accepting the money from Tuason showed that the chief of staff had “ostensible authority to deal with anyone on behalf of Senator Enrile.”
De Lima said the investigators were actually looking into more than two transactions involving alleged misuse of Enrile’s pork barrel allocation.
She also recalled Tuason saying that on two occasions, Enrile dropped by to fetch Reyes as she and the senator’s aide were concluding their transaction.
To divulge in court
De Lima said details about the transactions admitted by Tuason would be divulged and examined during her cross-examination in the Sandiganbayan should the case be sent there for trial.
The most important thing about Tuason’s testimony was that she was able to back up the claims of Luy and other whistle-blowers that lawmakers, particularly Estrada and Enrile, were indeed getting kickbacks from the bogus projects financed from their PDAF allocations, she said.
Asked about other senators, like Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Loren Legarda, whom Luy and the other whistle-blowers claimed may also have been involved in the scam, De Lima replied, “It’s with the (National Bureau of Investigation), I know their evidence gathering is still [going on]. Whatever Luy mentions in his statement or answers during proceedings, [the NBI automatically investigates].”
RELATED STORIES
Tuason is shielding Enrile, says Trillanes
I would die if I were to go to jail—Ruby Tuason
Aquino: Napoles can’t be a state witness
Estrada reveals names of Tuason’s alleged ‘ushers’ to his office
Janet Napoles and the pork barrel scam
First posted 2:49 am | Saturday, February 15th, 2014
