Harry Roque —Inquirer file photo
MANILA, Philippines — Just surrender to the panel and stop making excuses, the House quad committee challenged former presidential spokesperson Harry Roque on Wednesday, after the Supreme Court denied his plea for a writ of amparo.
In a joint statement, Laguna Rep. Dan Fernandez and Surigao del Norte Rep. Robert Ace Barbers said that with the Supreme Court decision, Roque should simply face the music and answer the allegations against him before the committee.
“Just surrender, Attorney Roque,” Fernandez said. “This is not the time to be evasive. He should not hide behind technicalities or writs that have no legal basis.”
READ: SC denies Harry Roque’s protective writ request
Echoed Barbers: “If he is not hiding anything, then why go into hiding? The public deserves to know the truth.”
“If he believes he is innocent, he should welcome the opportunity to clear his name in a proper legal forum. Trying to escape through technicalities only raises more suspicions,” Barbers added
Authorities have been hunting for Roque after the quad committee cited him in contempt last month and ordered his detention for failing to submit subpoenaed documents, including his tax records and statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth.
Roque sought a protection order from the high court, but on Tuesday, Supreme Court spokesperson Camille Ting said the high tribunal en banc denied his petition as a writ of amparo was limited to extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances.
Named in his petition are the four quad committee chairs: Fernandez, Barbers, Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante, and Abang Lingkod Rep. Joseph Paduano.
But while denying Roque’s prayer for a writ of amparo, the high court required the House quad committee conducting the Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators investigation to comment within 10 days on his petition for prohibition.
The former presidential spokesperson asked the court to stop the quad committee from arresting him, requiring him to attend future hearings and produce documents related to his business dealings and personal assets.
It was Roque who had promised the committee that he would provide these documents but later reneged and called the panel’s inquiry a “kangaroo court.”