CEBU CITY—President Aquino on Monday said his administration was pursuing the prosecution of corruption cases in spite of the Supreme Court decision allowing Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile to post bail and gain temporary freedom while his plunder case is on trial.
In an interview with reporters after a briefing on a road project here, Aquino said the health and the age of 91-year-old senator were the reasons the high court allowed Enrile to post bail when plunder was supposed to be a nonbailable offense.
He said a person charged with plunder could pose bail if the evidence against him was weak.
But such was not the case with Enrile, he added.
“It is important when we look at the decision of the Supreme Court, there was no mention about the evidence but the decision seemed to center on the age and health of Enrile,” the President said.
He stressed that his administration’s campaign against corruption would not be affected by the court ruling.
“Our campaign goes on,” he said, pointing out that the Department of Justice and the National Bureau of Investigation recently filed the third set of cases involving the alleged P10-billion racket involving the diversion of the congressional Priority Development Assistance Fund in the Office of the Ombudsman.
He admitted that there were sectors that questioned the court’s decision.
“I am not a lawyer. I would like to reiterate the questions they raised that the grounds seemed to be not in accordance with the law,” Aquino said of the court ruling.
Cases of clemency go to him as President and usually, he could interfere once there is a final conviction.
Aquino said he did not see a need to call for a review of the court’s decision on Enrile.
According to the President, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima had “spoken rather eloquently on the topic, including the dissenting opinions expressed by the honorable justices of the Supreme Court.”
‘Banana republic’
He appeared to agree with De Lima’s opinion that the high court’s order to release Enrile while on trial for the nonbailable offense of plunder had set the state of the Philippine justice system back to that of a “banana republic.”
“Banana republic” is defined by the Macmillan English Dictionary as a tropical country with a weak economy, a dishonest or cruel government and public service that do not work.
De Lima said the court’s majority decision “gives the impression that the court is capable of being partial to the so-called elite, and that its decisions can be grounded not on what the law is but on who the party is.”
Asked about renewed calls for the Supreme Court to also let former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, now a Pampanga representative, post bail or be placed under house arrest, Aquino said, “Let’s not forget, the hospital arrest in itself is a privilege and she is under hospital arrest to ensure that whatever available remedies, cures, therapies needed are given in a timely fashion.
“Now, if she is allowed to go home, does it mean that her health is no longer an issue? If this is not an issue, why is she still in the hospital? So I think I’ll have to ask for an update but the way I understand it, everything that is needed to be done is already being done to ensure her good health.”
Arroyo, 68, is facing plunder charges in connection with the alleged misuse of Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) funds. PCSO officials charged with her are out on bail.
Not a flight risk
The 91-year-old Enrile left the Philippine National Police General Hospital in Quezon City on Thursday after he posted bail for P1.4 million at the Sandiganbayan and was promptly released.
The senator won temporary liberty from the Supreme Court through an 8-4 vote, noting his age and health problems and his voluntary surrender that showed he is not a flight risk.
Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, in his dissenting vote supported by Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno and two other magistrates, called the decision a “special accommodation” that reeks of the court’s undue favor for one petitioner.
Aquino noted that “plunder is not bailable.”
“There is a Filipino trait that is forgiving, understanding, quick to sympathize with people with health problems,” he said. “My question is, what do we show to our people and especially the next generation. For me, what is important is that those who commit a crime should be made to pay for it.”
He said that “success in terms of fighting crime is making the rule of law felt… not only being able to file cases but also securing convictions.”
“It is necessary that if you commit a major crime, the corresponding penalty should be imposed,” he said. “Otherwise, it is like sending a message that you can do whatever you want because you are powerful, you have money and you can get away with it. If that is the message, how can we change society?”–With a report from Jerry E. Esplanada