Imee, ‘Ilocos 6’ seek SC protection
WRIT OF AMPARO Ilocos NorteGov. Imee Marcos shows a copy of the petition for the writ of amparo that she filed in the Supreme Court for her and the Ilocos 6’s protection. —GRIG C. MONTEGRANDE
Ilocos Norte Gov. Imee Marcos on Thursday sought protection from the Supreme Court to prevent the House of Representatives from carrying out its threat to detain her and to release immediately six of her provincial staff currently held in contempt over what she claimed was “ruthless” local politics.
Calling the situation a “hostage crisis,” Marcos and the so-called Ilocos 6 petitioned the court to issue a writ of amparo—a legal remedy against extralegal killings and enforced disappearances for which her father, the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, ironically had gained notoriety.
They also urged the tribunal to stop the House committee on good government and public accountability from proceeding with its inquiry into the allegedly graft-laden purchase of P66.45 million worth of vehicles by the Ilocos Norte provincial government in 2011 and 2012.
The Ilocos 6—planning and development officer Pedro Agcaoili, budget officer Evangeline Tabulog, treasurer Josephine Calajate, accountant Eden Battulayan, and treasury office staff Genedine Jambaro and Encarnacion Gaor—have been held by the House since May 29 after they allegedly evaded answering questions during the committee’s inquiry.
‘Hostage crisis in House’
“If there’s terrorism in Marawi City, there’s a hostage crisis in Congress. They have held hostage the whole finance team of Ilocos Norte,” Marcos told a press briefing.
“It’s a shame that our province had to suffer this. The Congress has been dragged in local politics,” she lamented. “Incarcerating my poor, old, defenseless employees in order to testify against me and against the province is not only illegal, cruel and evil, it is also cowardly,” she added.
Named respondents were Marcos’ political archenemy, Majority Leader Rodolfo Fariñas, committee chair Johnny Pimentel and Office of the Sergeant at Arms chief Roland Detabali.
Accompanied by a group of mayors, vice mayors, village captains and farmers, Marcos stressed that the standoff was caused by Fariñas’ supposed plan to seize political control of the province before the 2019 elections.
“Don’t make this an inquisition. The Congress should craft laws and conduct investigations in aid of legislation, not in aid of persecution of political opponents,” she said.
COA report
The governor showed a report of the Commission on Audit (COA), which declared that the Ilocos Norte capitol had complied with the procurement law in all its financial transactions in 2011.
She dismissed insinuations that the procurement contract was a “ghost project,” insisting that the purchase of the 110 units of minitrucks, multicabs and buses was aboveboard.
In fact, Marcos said Fariñas’ son and nephew were among those who asked her office to provide minitrucks for the local farmers.
She also showed reporters photos of her and Fariñas distributing the vehicles during a formal turnover ceremony at the provincial capitol in Laoag City.
“I’m really hurt by what they have been saying. We have showed them our evidence. They were even claiming there was plunder and malversation. But this has been fully liquidated. There’s no ghost project,” Marcos said.
“You can go to Ilocos Norte and check the minitrucks. They’re all accounted for. The farmers are using them,” she added.
Bayan Quiñones, Marcos’ lawyer, said the petitioners were also asking the high court to assume jurisdiction of the habeas corpus petition of the six in the Court of Appeals, which approved their provisional liberty on June 9.
Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez had ordered the six detained for contempt.
Simple question
Responding to the Marcos move, Fariñas asked why the six had refused to answer the simple question of whether cash advances were used in the transactions.
“Initially, if what she is saying is true, why is she afraid to appear and state them under oath in the House inquiry? Why has she ordered her six subordinates not to remember the three transactions subject of the inquiry?” Fariñas said in a message to reporters.
“Why do they continue to invoke their right against self-incrimination?” —WITH A REPORT FROM DJ YAP
