Pagcor deal prompts Alvarez to want death for plunder

Rep. Pantaleon “Bebot” Alvarez. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO / RICHARD A. REYES

Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez on Tuesday said he wanted plunder back on the list of offenses to be meted out the death penalty following a congressional probe into an anomalous lease agreement by the Philippine Amusements and Games Corp. (Pagcor) for a ghost facility.

The House of Representatives committee on good government and public accountability on Tuesday held its first investigation into the allegedly irregular lease deal between Pagcor and the Vanderwood Management Corp. for a 6,500 square meter complex at the Museo ng Maynila.

Vanderwood in 2015 leased to Pagcor a property in Manila even when it was in itself only a sub-lessee of the real estate, according to a resolution filed by Pampanga Rep. Juan Pablo Bondoc and 1-Ang Edukasyon Rep. Salvador Belaro Jr.

Bondoc and Belaro filed the resolution that sought an investigation of the deal.

According to the resolution, it was the city of Manila that owned the property which it had leased to Oceanville and Spa Corp. which in turn subleased the property to Vanderwood.

Alvarez scored officials involved in the deal for allegedly cheating the government in a disadvantageous lease agreement.

He noted that Pagcor paid Vanderwood P234 million in advance rental for 12 months and a six month security deposit even though there was still no building to be leased at the time when the contract was signed.

Alvarez fumed when he found out that Pagcor paid P13 million monthly even though there is no structure yet to be used.

‘Yung Pagcor, umuupa doon ng hangin for one year,” Alvarez said. (It’s as if Pagcor rented air for one year.)

Former Pagcor chair Cristino Naguiat Jr. defended the lease agreement and the payment of advance rental as “within government rules.”

Transportation Undersecretary Raoul Creencia, who headed the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel at the time of the deal, said the advance payments served as the “condition precedents” in the contract.

But Alvarez pointed out a violation of the Government Procurement Reform Act, when Pagcor disqualified Vanderwood in the first round of bidding, only to grant an appeal and award the contract later on.

Alvarez said granting the appeal of Vanderwood despite its failure to submit the documentary requirements in the first round of bidding indicated undue favor to the corporation, even under a negotiated procurement, a violation of the procurement law.

“Even sa negotiated procurement, hindi kayo nagcomply sa rules,” Alvarez said, citing a Commission on Audit report on the irregularities in the negotiated procurement with Vanderwood. (You did not comply with the rules even under the negotiated procurement.)

Alvarez said the contract was disadvantageous to the government, warning the officials that the allegations could compel the Ombudsman to file a case against them.

At one point, Alvarez urged Creencia to accompany the Pagcor officials in jail.

“Kailangang imbestigahan ito dahil masyado namang unconscionable yung ginawa, talagang talong-talo ang gobyerno,” Alvarez said. (We need to investigate this because it was too unconscionable, too disadvantageous to government.)

Told that the officials had been sued for plunder and graft over the anomaly, Alvarez said he hoped to be a complainant in the complaint lodged before the Department of Justice.

READ: VACC files plunder, graft raps vs ex-Pagcor execs

Alvarez finished his interpellation by surmising that plunder should be included on the list of heinous crimes punishable with death.

The majority bloc in the House of Representatives had wanted to remove plunder from the death penalty bill and limit the punishment only to the most heinous of crimes, rousing criticisms of conflict of interests against the lawmakers.

This would make life sentence the maximum penalty for the crime of amassing at least P50 million in ill-gotten wealth, with some lawmakers saying plunder was not as heinous a crime as murder or rape.

Alvarez said the allegations of plunder in the deal prompted him to support death penalty for plunder.

“With more reason that I will pursue the offense of plunder in the death penalty,” Alvarez said during the hearing.

READ: Alvarez: Plunder already punishable with death under law | Congress hit for plan to remove plunder from death penalty bill

Speaker Alvarez earlier said plunder was still punishable with death because the Plunder Law imposes capital punishment, even though plunder would be removed from the list of heinous crimes under the death penalty bill or House Bill 4727.

Plunder is defined in the law as the criminal act of “amass(ing) accumulat(ing) or acquir(ing) ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts… in the aggregate amount or total value of at least P50 million,” punishable with reclusion perpetua to death, according to Republic Act 7080 as amended by Republic Act 7659.

But the penalty of death was abolished for all heinous crimes (including plunder) after former President Gloria Arroyo in 2006 signed Republic Act 9346, which repealed all laws imposing the penalty of death. CBB/rga