Ruby Tuason. Photo by INQUIRER.net
MANILA, Philippines — Could Ruby Chan Tuason be part of the defense strategy?
The counsel for three whistleblowers on Sunday raised questions on Tuason’s motivation to come home and testify on two senators’ role in the P10-billion pork barrel scam.
Lawyer Stephen Cascolan wondered aloud about who sent Tuason abroad in 2013 in the middle of the riveting pork barrel scandal, and who was talking to her before she agreed to cooperate with the government.
But otherwise, Cascolan said his clients – Marina Sula, Arlene Baltazar and Monette Briones – were thrilled to meet Tuason.
“Is Ms Tuason here for the long haul? We admit we have doubts, in the same way there were doubts when our witnesses started to cooperate,’’ Cascolan said in a radio interview Sunday.
“We don’t know what happened in the past few months. What’s the real motivation? Who sent her there? Is this voluntary? Is this part of the plan? Was she consulted? Is this part of the defense plan before she cooperated? We don’t know where Ms Tuason is coming from. Please try to understand if we have some doubts,’’ he added.
Cascolan said Tuason’s reasons for coming home to tell all about the scam — her love for her grandchildren and desire to right a wrong — were valid.
“But at what point did she have conscience?’’ he said, adding that the thought that she could be part of defense strategy crossed their minds. “But we’re not accusing her. What if she was part of the defense strategy? What if? But I’m sure the Secretary (Leila de Lima of the Department of Justice) and the NBI have more than enough safeguards against this.’’
The government sees Tuason’s affidavit and eventual testimony as bolstering the plunder complaint filed against Senators Jinggoy Estrada, Juan Ponce Enrile and Ramon Revilla Jr., Janet Lim Napoles and several others over the scam before the Ombudsman.
If at all, President Aquino said Tuason could reaffirm the affidavits of the whistleblowers, and “tie up’’ the conspiracy behind the funneling of P10-billion pork barrel to questionable non-government organizations.
Tuason said she played the role of Napoles’ bagwoman and personally delivered kickbacks from the racket.
She said she delivered bags containing millions of pesos to Estrada’s office in the Senate. On the other hand, Enrile’s former chief of staff, Jessica Lucila “Gigi’’ Reyes, received the money for him in restaurants and in her house.
Estrada, Enrile and Revilla have denied playing a role in, or pocketing money from the scam.
Estrada called Tuason’s act an attempt to “save her skin’’ and dared her to present proof she delivered the money to his office. Enrile has yet to comment on Tuason’s move.
Cascolan, however, said that the three whistleblowers were “excited’’ and “looking forward’’ to meeting Tuason personally.
“They feel vindicated because they have the same statements. There’s collaboration. In effect, this will help the case,’’ he said.
If at all, Cascolan reckoned that Tuason’s testimony would be valuable only to the Ombudsman’s preliminary investigation of the plunder complaint.
After all, the National Bureau of Investigation had filed the complaint, and the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee already got an idea what legislation to craft to plug loopholes in the system, he said.
“It will strengthen the case, but it’s not needed in speeding up the charges,’’ he said.
Cascolan said that only the Ombudsman, which has been conducting the preliminary investigation, could grant Tuason immunity.
Like the whistleblowers, Tuason has been provisionally admitted into the Witness Protection Program. Meantime, the whistleblowers’ request for immunity has yet to be granted, he said.
“They’re still respondents. While they’re giving statements, they have to respond to the charges. Which we find irregular because it’s hard for a witness to answer charges based on her statement. This should be cured this early,’’ he said. “They have no immunity as of now.’’
RELATED STORIES
Ruby Tuason: I have to do this
Ruby Tuason has ‘slam dunk’ evidence vs Enrile, Estrada, says DOJ