Guingona insists on Napoles appearance in Senate hearing
Senator Teofisto Guingona III. RYAN LEAGOGO/INQUIRER.net
MANILA, Philippines—“No logical and legal reason exists why caution, timing and prudence are now being used to prevent Janet Lim-Napoles from attending the hearings of the Senate blue ribbon committee.”
In a formal letter, Sen. Teofisto Guingona III, the committee chair, pressed Senate President Franklin Drilon to stand down on his position respecting the advice of Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales that calling Napoles to the Senate hearing would prejudice her investigation into plunder charges against the alleged brains behind the P10-billion pork barrel scam.
Drilon, whose photographs with Napoles in her lavish parties have been widely publicized, has refused to sign a subpoena for the businesswoman to appear in the inquiry of the committee on the accountability of public officers and investigations.
Named in the plunder charges filed in the Ombudsman last week by the National Bureau of Investigation with the 49-year-old Napoles were Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr. Another 34 people, including five former congressmen, have likewise been charged with either plunder or malversation of public funds.
“Government officials and even whistle-blowers have been summoned pursuant to this investigation,” Guingona said in his letter.
Senate’s power
Guingona, who was also the chair of the blue ribbon panel in the 15th Congress, said a total of 22 subpoenas had been signed by former Senate President Enrile and the incumbent Drilon. “There is no reason why Janet Lim-Napoles’ subpoena must be treated differently,” he said.
“Caution, timing and prudence should not be used to diminish and destroy the constitutional power of the Senate to conduct investigations in aid of legislation,” Guingona said. “The Senate’s power has been upheld by the Supreme Court in several cases.”
But on the last session day, Drilon said he decided not to issue the subpoena and that there was no scheduled caucus to further discuss the issue. Hearings are allowed despite the two-week session break.
“The Ombudsman advised us that in the meantime, we can defer the testimony of Janet Napoles. We deferred to her judgment. We would rather err on the side of prudence because what is important is that the justice system must be able to work and the Ombudsman advised us to defer,” Drilon said.
Letter to Drilon
In his letter to Drilon, Guingona cited the Supreme Court decisions related to the power of the Senate to summon resource persons.
These include Romero v. Chavez that said “[ongoing] judicial proceedings do not preclude congressional hearings in aid of legislation” and Senate blue ribbon committee v. Majaducon and Flaviano that ruled that a regional trial court “had no authority to prohibit the committee from requiring respondent to appear and testify before it.”—With a report from Christine O. Avendaño
SEE ALSO:
Drilon asked to reconsider Napoles subpoena
