‘Tiangco’s testimony, Gonzales being cited for contempt meant to delay trial’
MANILA, Philippines—Reacting on the defense’s motion to have him cited for contempt, Majority Floor Leader Neptali Gonzales II on Tuesday said that Chief Justice Renato Corona’s lawyers were just trying to delay the proceedings by raising issues which he deemed to be irrelevant to the impeachment case.
Speaking to reporters at the Senate before Day 28 of the trial, Gonzales maintained that the issue which the court should be focusing on should be whether Corona should be impeached. “Ang defense nililigaw tayo sa side issues, ipinasok nila si Toby [Navotas Representative Tobias Tiangco], pinag-aaway nila kami, tapos ngayon ako [ay] iko-contempt… in the mean time, nakakalimutan ng mga tao [kung ano talaga ang issue] (The defense is diverting us from the issues by having Navotas Representative Tobias testify for them. They want us to fight each other and now they want me cited for contempt…in the meantime, the people forget about the [rea] issue).”
He said he could defend himself if he would be cited for contempt, adding in jest “siguro gusto lang ni Roy [lawyer Jose Roy III] ng makakadamay (perhaps defense lawyer Roy only wants someone to sympathize with him).”
The defense might be raising the said issues “hoping that [the public] would lose interest during the break [and] turn the tide in their favor,” he explained.
“Pilit ipinepresent ang mga congressmen [but] will it change anything? (The keep on presenting congressmen but will it change anything?)” Gonzales asked, saying that instead of having the chief magistrate entertain interviews with media outfits, the defense should instead have him speak under oath during the proceedings.
Asked for comment on Tiangco’s testimony on Monday, Gonzales stressed that he was not threatening the witness when he said that Tiangco could face suspension or expulsion for his actions. He said that those were some of the sanctions allowed by the constitution and “may happen [to Tiangco].”
“Will it result to a formal investigation? It may or may not happen. Siguro this will come to pass but it only takes one to file [a complaint].”
“For his sake, I hope he won’t demean the members of the House,” he said, adding that personally, he thought that it was fine for Tiangco to testify given that he won’t say anything that would tarnish the integrity of the House of Representatives. He explained that being on his second term, he was “conscious about the unwritten rules [at the House]: huwag magpapogi at the expense of others. [Tiangco] revealed things taken up in our caucus, that is a no-no. You don’t kiss and tell.”
Tempers flared at the House of Representatives Monday as Tiangco revealed what happened during their December 12 caucus, Gonzales said. “Kumukulo ang dugo sa opisina [kahapon],” he revealed, saying that several representatives aired their displeasure at Tiangco’s testimony since it alleged that the release of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or the pork barrel was being used to influence the decisions of the members of the House of Representatives.
The majority floor leader further explained that they were not afraid of what Tiangco would reveal to the impeachment court since the only thing the Navotas representative succeeded in doing was show his “angst over his delayed pork barrel.”
He however said that Tiangco’s testimony in fact did more good for the prosecution because it showed that “he was at the caucus which was attended by at least 130. A PowerPoint presentation on the articles of impeachment was shown [before the representatives signed the complaint].”
Furthermore, discussions on the impeachment complaint were made even before the said caucus, Gonzales revealed, stating that Tiangco may not have been privy to the said “informal” discussions since he was not part of the majority coalition.
