Anti-crime group readies ethics complaint vs Enrile

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile. FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines – Senate President Juan Ponce-Enrile must be held accountable for distributing millions of pesos to senators supposedly as additional budget for their offices, Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago said, adding that the P1.6 million given to 18 senators last December was “questionable.”

But while Santiago herself admitted that she might not be able to file a case at the Supreme Court as she might have to start work in the International Criminal Court in the Hague in March, the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption is now readying an ethics complaint against Enrile.

VACC chairman Dante Jimenez said the group would file the complaint in the Senate committee on ethics next week, and would charge the Senate President with violating the Constitution when he gave senators P1.6 million as additional MOOE (maintenance and other operating expenses).

The amount represented the balance of the total P2.2 million MOOE allotted each senator. The first tranche of the budget, which amounts to P600,000, was given in November 2012.

The P1.6 million balance was withheld from four senators – Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano, Senators Pia Cayetano,  Antonio “Sonny” Trillanes IV and Santiago –known Enrile critics, who were given P250,000 each instead.

“It’s immoral, it’s (a) violation of the Constitution with regards to equal protection (and) equal treatment and the best witness that we will have is Senator Santiago and other senators who have openly complained about this,” Jimenez said over the phone, though he admitted that he has yet to talk with Santiago.

But Santiago, in a speech before students of Centro Escolar University (CEU) in Manila yesterday, said she has no plans of filing a case against Enrile before the Senate committee on ethics, as the issue would only “sink to the level of the vulgar.”

Enrile, however, remains “accountable in public opinion,” the senator added.

“Let Enrile be accountable to the people and his cohorts as well,” Santiago said.

“The basic legal and moral issue is when the Constitution provides that savings can be used ‘to augment other items.’ … Can the Senate President use the savings as part of Christmas bonuses to the senators in the guise of the so-called additional MOOE?” she asked.

“The first relevant factor here is why give additional office expenses to a senator when the year is over? Because for the next year, he will get his own MOOE. So very clearly, MOOE is simply a code name for the fact that, in effect, the Senate President is giving to every senator additional pork barrel to be spent at (their) discretion,” Santiago said.

The senator admitted that she accepted additional MOOE in previous years but did not complain about it because the amount then was “modest.”

She added: “I told you I have my own criteria. As long as it’s given to all senators, not just a few, and as long as liquidation is requested.”

While giving additional MOOE was being done in the past, Santiago said there should be a limit to it.

“When will I raise my voice? They’re asking me why didn’t you complain before?  Suppose, for the sake of argument, I didn’t complain before. What stops me now from complaining (when I understand things fully only now)? Kasalanan ko ba yun (Was that my fault)?”

And why didn’t the rest complain about the practice before, including Enrile when he was just an ordinary senador, Santiago added.

Santiago’s attack against Enrile came just a day after he rejected the idea of reconciling with her.

“Ayoko nang batiin yung ayaw sa akin e. Mahirap makipag-usap sa mga lunar minds (I don’t want to reconcile with those who don’t like me. It’s difficult to talk with lunar minds),” Enrile said in a radio interview on Thursday, when asked if he was ready to patch things up with Santiago.

Santiago said she was so mad over the additional P1.6 million funds given to 18 senators last month that she was willing to face down her foes in a debate, a boxing bout or even a contest over who of who has the most beautiful legs.

“Yung mga kalaban kong yan, punong-puno na ako sa kanila (I’ve had it up to here with them),” Santiago said before a packed hall at CEU.

“Hinahamon ko sila na magdebate kami dito sa CEU. O gusto nila mag-boxing na lang kami (I challenge them to a debate or a boxing match),” Santiago said, eliciting laughter from the crowd.

“Let’s compare legs to see who has the most beautiful legs. Mag-shorts sya, mag-shorts din ako (we can wear shorts),” she added.

As “word of advice” to the students, Santiago used an “old man” as example in what may be an apparent reference to Enrile.

“Yung kalaban kong matanda … mahilig manligaw yan e, hanggang ngayon. Minsan nanligaw sinabihan nya yung babae, nasa dugo talaga namin ang pagiging gwapo. Sabi naman ng babae, ‘bakit sa dugo lang, bakit hindi napunta sa mukha mo? (My foe, this old man, still likes to court women. He once told a woman: ‘Being handsome is in our blood.” And the woman said: ‘Why is it only in your blood? Why not in your face, as well?’),” Santiago narrated.

In her speech, Santiago also questioned the criteria used by the Senate leader in choosing the senators who received the P1.6 million MOOE.

“Was it beauty?  Hindi kami magaganda (We are not beautiful)? Or sex appeal? Kulang kami sa sex appeal (We lack sex appeal)?” she asked.

Santiago cautioned students as well against copying in schools lest they end up like a senator who is now copying in the Senate.

One of the senators publicly accused of plagiarism was Senate Majority Leader Vicente “Tito” Sotto III, a known ally of Enrile.

In their planned ethics complaint against Enrile, Jimenez said the additional money given to 18 senators was “very unethical.” Any excess of money or savings must be turned over to the treasury, he added.

Jimenez said he could not understand why the government was imposing more taxes to generate funds when other agencies were giving away their savings.

“Where is justice there? Where is the moral ascendancy as far as (Enrile’s) office is concerned?” the VACC head said.

“If they say they have been doing this before, then why do they tolerate it?” Jimenez added.