Palace: Special court for scammers OK
Presidential Spokesperson Abigail Valte. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines—Malacañang favors the creation of a special court to try all the cases related to the P10-billion pork barrel scam.
Recalling an earlier statement by President Benigno Aquino III, Palace deputy spokesperson Abigail Valte said Mr. Aquino was open to the suggestion although it would be the judiciary’s call.
“We don’t have any problem with this (suggestion). But, in this instance, we’re hopeful that if this would be granted by the Supreme Court, this could really help hasten the process,” said Valte in a radio interview.
Senate Majority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano is pushing for daily hearings once the pork barrel cases reach the Sandiganbayan.
In a statement, Cayetano said a protracted court battle for those involved in the P10-billion pork barrel scam would “practically deny the justice being sought by the Filipino people for the corruption of public funds.”
In pushing for daily trials, Cayetano said political and legal maneuvers might happen if the cases were subjected to the country’s slow-paced criminal justice system.
The senator said his proposal needed no legislation from Congress, as the high court could designate special criminal courts on its own, which happened during the Ramos administration.
The Supreme Court in 1996 designated special criminal courts in Metro Manila and other cities to hear and resolve cases involving heinous crimes within 60 days.
These special courts were designated to try and decide cases of kidnapping, robbery, dangerous drugs, carnapping and other heinous crimes “in the interest of the speedy and efficient administration of justice,” said Cayetano.
“A speedy resolution of the pork barrel scandal and other high-profile cases is important in restoring the faith and confidence of the people in the government, amid fears that politics may hinder the full prosecution of those involved in graft cases,” he said.
Barking up the wrong tree
Interviewed by Radyo ng Bayan, Valte disagreed with the claim of the United Nationalist Alliance (UNA) that the Aquino administration was engaged in the “selective prosecution” of the political opposition because no administration ally in both chambers of Congress has been charged.
UNA also decried the move of the Office of the Special Prosecutor of the Ombudsman to revive three dismissed cases against former Makati Mayor Elenita Binay, the wife of Vice President Jejomar Binay.
The filing of new cases by the special prosecutor brought to four the number of cases against the former mayor.
The case against Mrs. Binay stemmed from the alleged overprice of hospital beds at Ospital ng Makati.
Binay was originally included, along with several city officials, in complaints filed more than 10 years ago, but the cases against her were dismissed in 2011.
But her coaccused, disagreeing with the dismissal order, filed a motion for reconsideration. The special prosecutor then reinvestigated the cases and again included Binay in a resolution dated Aug. 29, 2013.
Binay’s lawyers said the move was improper amid the “final and executory” dismissal of the cases against her two years ago.
In a statement, Rep. Tobias Tiangco, the UNA secretary general, accused the government of “selective prosecution,” insinuating that the coming “2016 election is the sole motivation for the special prosecutor’s unusual interest in digging up decades old charges against the wife of Vice President Jejomar Binay.”
Sought for comment, Valte said:
“You know, when it comes to the three senators that were mentioned, I have to make a disclaimer. I don’t have any information on the case the wife of the Vice President, Dr. Elenita Binay, is currently facing. I don’t have any information on that. So my response is only good for as far as the three senators that were mentioned are concerned,” she said.
Independent entity
Valte said the Office of the Ombudsman was an independent entity.
“The Office of the Special Prosecutor is under the Office of the Ombudsman, which is an independent entity, which is separate from the executive branch,” said Valte, adding:
“So I don’t know why he (Tiangco) is blaming and accusing us of selective prosecution when in fact … we don’t have a hand in running the affairs of the Office of the Ombudsman, much less the Office of the Special Prosecutor.”
Valte said Tiangco should direct his complaints to the Office of the Ombudsman.
“So perhaps his ire, for lack of a better word, would be better directed (at), or responded to, by the Office of the Ombudsman,” she said.
Valte also disagreed with UNA’s oft-repeated claim that Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr. had become the administration’s favorite whipping boys.
“With respect to the charges—the cases filed by the DOJ—the basis is clear. There are documentary evidence and witnesses pointing to the three senators, linked to the alleged modus operandi which saw billions in taxpayer money siphoned off to fake NGOs run by Janet Lim-Napoles.”
The senators are under investigation by the Ombudsman for allegedly receiving kickbacks from their shares of the pork barrel.
RELATED STORIES
Witness Dennis Cunanan’s appeal: I’m here; spare my children
De Lima says attacks on Cunanan hatchet job
Poe wants lifestyle check on senators
Janet Napoles and the pork barrel scam
