Tiangco defies House, testifies for Corona

VOLUNTEER WITNESS Rep. Tobias Tiangco takes his oath on Monday before testifying for the defense at the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona at the Senate. SENATE POOL

With his colleagues watching behind him, Navotas Representative Tobias Tiangco on Monday broke ranks and appeared as a witness for the defense panel in the resumption of the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Tiangco testified on what defense lawyer Dennis Manalo called a “pattern or scheme” in the House of Representatives “to intimidate or exert undue influence” on a member to support moves such as the filing of the Corona impeachment complaint.

According to  Tiangco, the administration may exert pressure on a lawmaker by delaying or withholding his pork barrel.

A first-term congressman, Tiangco recounted how the House led by Speaker Feliciano Belmonte cooked up the impeachment complaint during a majority caucus on December 12, the same day Corona was impeached.

Under direct examination by Manalo, Tiangco said he had “psyched” himself up to sign the complaint “with eyes closed” ahead of the caucus. But he said he still did not do so after finding no “probable cause” to impeach Corona.

“I was not convinced that there was probable cause,” the witness told the impeachment court. “I understand probable cause as the probability that the accused did what he is being accused of. How could I be convinced if there was no document or proof being presented?”

Tiangco recalled the previous impeachment case against then Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez when his “Priority Development Assistance Fund” (PDAF) was allegedly withheld after he refused to sign the complaint prepared by the stalwarts of President Benigno Aquino III.

“I don’t want to catch the ire of the most powerful man in the country who has a very high popularity rating, that is, the President of the Philippines,” he said.

“The President can make life miserable for you,” Tiangco added, recalling his experience as a member of the political opposition during the nine-year regime of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

Tiangco took the witness stand despite the risk of further antagonizing his colleagues. He earlier lost key committee posts after refusing to sign the impeachment complaint against the Chief Justice.

The congressman downplayed the possibility of angering fellow congressmen because of his decision to testify. “It’s OK. They’re supporting me,” he told the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

“No,” Tiangco replied when asked about the awkward situation of testifying against his colleagues, many of whom were sitting in the VIP section of the Senate session hall.

Zero pork threat

House prosecutors were generally cordial to Tiangco, who even engaged in light banter with Representative Rodolfo Fariñas during his direct examination. Fariñas, the deputy chief prosecutor, later briefly cross-examined him.

But Cavite Representative Jose Emilio Abaya, chair manof the House committee on appropriations, did not look amused, especially when Tiangco brought up the Gutierrez impeachment case.

Tiangco recalled that a text message had circulated claiming that congressmen who would not support the Gutierrez impeachment would receive “zero” PDAF, more popularly known as “pork barrel.”

Senate Juan Ponce Enrile, the presiding officer, stressed he was giving the defense a lot of “leeway” but appeared impatient about the relevance of the Gutierrez impeachment to the Corona trial.

Manalo said Tiangco’s testimony would prove that the Corona impeachment was “politically motivated.”

“We are obviously proving that there is a pattern or scheme or plant or modus operandi with the majority of the House of Representatives to intimidate or exert undue influence upon their other members to approve their measures such as this impeachment case filed against Chief Justice Renato Corona,” the defense counsel said.

Tiangco recalled getting a text message from Budget Secretary Florencio “Butch” Abad in reaction to his press release complaining about the nonrelease of his PDAF.

“Cong. Tiangco, read your PR today re PDAF. On my own, I cannot withhold any legislators’ PDAF. I suggest you find a way to talk to PNoy (President Aquino). The Speaker can help you along this line,” the message read, a copy of which was marked as exhibit for the defense.

Tiangco said his PDAF was eventually released shortly before he was about to discuss the matter with Abad during a budget briefing at the House.

Last year, he said he received a text message informing congressmen about an “all-majority caucus” on December 12 but with no agenda.

“I tried to psyche myself up. I tried to force myself to vote ‘yes’ in case the matter to be tackled would be impeachment,” he recalled, noting his supposedly negative experience with the Gutierrez impeachment case.

In an ABS-CBN report, however, Abad denied that it was the administration’s policy to withhold the pork of lawmakers who did not toe the line.

Fariñas objected to Tiangco’s testimony about the caucus, claiming legislative privilege. But he was overruled.

In the caucus, Tiangco said Belmonte informed some 120 to 130 congressmen at the Andaya Hall: “We will impeach the Chief Justice today. Chief Justice Corona is a protégé of GMA (Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) and he would do nothing else but to protect (her)…”

“He will be an obstacle to the good intentions of President Noynoy. Think about it. What could the President do in his six years in office if the Supreme Court would block his good intentions?” Belmonte added.

Tiangco said Representative Niel Tupas Jr., chairman of the House committee on justice, later made a 20-minute PowerPoint presentation discussing the eight articles of impeachment. But he said the presentation contained only “bullet” points and short “narratives.”

Tiangco noted that Tupas showed no document such as certifications when he discussed, for instance, Article 2, which alleged that Corona did not publicly disclose his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth. “I cannot sign (the complaint) without reading it (first),” he said.

Besides the absence of proof, Tiangco said he went against the House leadership because “I felt it was an attempt to control or to scare the Supreme Court. It’s not a simple impeachment of the Chief Justice,” he added.

Enrile later sustained the prosecution’s objection that Tiangco was expressing an “opinion.”

Tiangco said he particularly did not like that Belmonte told the caucus that the Corona impeachment was “nondebatable.”

“No questions will be entertained,” the group was supposedly told.

“To me, it was a veiled threat,” the witness said, noting that the House was supposed to be a “deliberative body.”

Before the presentation, Tiangco said Muntinlupa Representative Rodolfo Biazon took the floor and complained in a “high voice” that while media people knew that a caucus had been called to impeach Corona the congressmen were not even given a copy of the impeachment complaint that they were to sign.

Tiangco also said that similarly disturbed, Cagayan de Oro Representative Rufus Rodriguez purportedly asked if congressmen could not raise “clarifications” after Tupas’ presentation. He said Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II then told Rodriguez that if he had questions he should raise them on the floor.

Belmonte supposedly replied only to Biazon’s query and said that lawmakers could secure copies of the impeachment complaint later.

Harmless rantings

In an interview with reporters, Belmonte dismissed Tiangco’s “rantings” and said his testimony was “harmless.”

“What is he complaining about? He got what is due him,” he said. “Tobias is just making himself important.”

Gonzales indicated that Tiangco could be subjected to disciplinary action for unethical behavior, pointing out that he had a duty to defend the integrity of the House.

He denied he was threatening Tiangco with expulsion. “It’s just a matter of stating what is provided for by the rules and the Constitution,” Gonzales said.

“If ever there will be expulsion proceedings, I am ready to face it,” Tiangco told reporters later. “What I said is the truth. That institution must live on truth. It cannot live on lies so it must survive on what is true.”

Corona’s defense lawyers condemned the expulsion threat against Tiangco. “That is an attempt to interfere in the administration of justice,” said Jose Roy III. With reports from Cynthia D. Balana, Gil C. Cabacungan and Marlon Ramos