Solons divided on Bolante; old issue, says DoJ
By Leila Salaverria, Edson C. Tandoc Jr.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 03:38:00 09/04/2008
MANILA, Philippines—An old issue, the Department of Justice secretary Wednesday said of former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn Bolante and his alleged fertilizer fund scam.
Bolante could be back in the Philippines anytime should the United States deport him after denying his plea for asylum.
He would pose no problem to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, according to Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez.
Gonzalez Wednesday said that the issue which Bolante was embroiled in—the alleged diversion of P728 million in fertilizer funds to finance Ms Arroyo’s campaign in the 2004 presidential election—was an old one.
“This has been pounded for so many years. This has been beaten to a pulp. This is an old issue,” he told reporters.
But not to Sen. Panfilo Lacson, who first exposed the alleged diversion of fertilizer funds during the 2004 election campaign, said Bolante should be summoned to the Senate again because he left many questions unanswered.
Prosecute immediately
The Office of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice should immediately prosecute Bolante the moment he flies back to the country, Sen. Edgardo Angara said Wednesday.
Angara said the Senate committee on agriculture had long completed its inquiry into the fertilizer fund scam in which Bolante was involved.
“The (case) is ready for filing and prosecution. If he comes back, the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice should prosecute (him),” Angara told reporters.
The Senate committee on agriculture, which former Sen. Ramon Magsaysay Jr. chaired during the 13th Congress, had recommended the filing of plunder charges against Bolante.
Sen. Joker Arroyo, who helped prepare the committee report in 2006, agreed that the report was already complete and there was no need to reopen the Senate inquiry.
Bolante’s right
Sought to comment on whether the Senate should question Bolante again, Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago said that would be “fair” to Bolante.
She said that since the Senate inquiry was completed in his absence, it was Bolante’s right “to be given his day in the committee.”
But Sen. Jamby Madrigal doubted if the Senate could take hold of Bolante the moment he returned to the country because “he will be under the protection of the administration.”
“If (Ms Arroyo) is really trying to show she is against corruption, let her prosecute Jocjoc to the hilt and bring him to jail,” Madrigal said referring to Bolante by his nickname..
Bolante left the country at the height of the Senate’s investigation on the fertilizer fund scam. He was detained by immigration officials in Los Angeles after the US Embassy canceled his visa.
US court ruling
Bolante then sought political asylum, but the Immigration Court and the Board of Immigration Appeals denied his plea. The ruling was upheld recently by the US Court of Appeals.
In its ruling on Aug. 27, the US court noted that he was not in danger of persecution in the Philippines, but, in fact, feared prosecution for his alleged part in the fertilizer fund scam, hence his reluctance to return to his home country.
“It is by no means a stretch to suggest that the core of Bolante’s fear is, in fact, a fear of prosecution for his alleged role in a corruption scandal,” the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit said.
The court added that prosecution for a crime could not be automatically considered persecution.
“Though prosecution can become persecution, courts uniformly recognize that a foreign state’s prosecution of its citizens for violating its own laws does not automatically equate with persecution. We have held that prosecution for activities that would be held illegal under our own laws is not grounds for asylum,” it said.
The court also ruled that Bolante’s fear of persecution was “objectively unreasonable.”
Unsubstantiated
“Bolante has not produced enough specifics or details about the fear of persecution that he faces in the Philippines to carry his burden,” the court said.
It agreed with the findings of the immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals that though Bolante had presented several witnesses, including his own son Owen, Assistant Secretary Felix Montes from the Department of Agriculture and retired Philippine Air Force officer Adolph Estrada, none of them were able to substantiate their claims that Bolante’s life was in danger should he return to the Philippines.
As for Bolante’s citation of an alleged P200,000 reward for his capture as offered by several members of the Philippine Senate, the US court failed to be convinced that this posed any real threat to him. It said details of the bounty and its use in the Philippines were not very clear.
“Even if the bounty still exists, it does not show any threat of long-term harm to Bolante; the sole purpose of the bounty is to secure Bolante’s testimony before the Senate committee,” it said.
Warrant of arrest
Gonzalez said that should Bolante return to the Philippines, he would be arrested only if there was a warrant against him.
“When he arrives, I don’t think we can arrest him unless the Senate can impose the order to arrest him before,” he said.
If there was no warrant, then Bolante would not be touched. Bolante would also be accorded all the rights of a Filipino, the justice secretary said.
Senate should step in
If the Office of the Ombudsman would not act on the charges against Bolante, then the Senate could again step in, Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr. said.
“My understanding is that the committee report was still incomplete. It was a preliminary committee report which triggered the case pending with the Ombudsman,” Lacson said.
He said the Senate could provide Bolante “ample security” but only if he would say everything he knew about the scam.”
|
