“Did I commit graft?”
This was the question that Solicitor General Jose Calida posed as a response to Senator Kiko Pangilinan’s call for his resignation over the multimillion peso deals that Calida’s family-owned security agency struck with the government.
“I was wondering why the good Senator Kiko Pangilinan is asking for my resignation. Did I commit graft?” Calida said in an interview with CNN Philippines on Thursday.
“The issue should be if I committed graft. No, I did not,” he added.
Aside from Pangilinan, other lawmakers have also called for Calida’s resignation after a complaint was filed at the Office of the Ombudsman, alleging that his family-owned security agency Vigilant Investigative and Security Agency, Inc. (VISAI) had entered into multi-million peso deals with various government agencies.
READ: More lawmakers join calls for Calida’s ouster as SolGen
However, Calida insisted that there was no conflict of interest and that he did not have to divest his shares from the company.
“There is no need to divest if there is no conflict of interest. Under the law, I have the choice either to resign or to divest (my shares),” he stressed.
“There are also decided cases, where a court stenographer did not disclose that she had a business. What did the Supreme court say? Well, the courts do not regulate the operations of markets and therefore, on that score, there is no crime and conflict of interest there.”
“However the fault of the accused was that she did not disclose that he had a market stall. Me? I disclosed in my SALN that I have financial interests with Vigilant,” he added.
READ: No conflict of interest in family firm contracts with gov’t agencies – Calida
Calida also decried Pangilinan’s comparison between him and former Department of Tourism Wanda Teo, who resigned amid the P60 million advertisement controversy that hounded the agency during her stint.
“The comparison is erroneous. Where did the money come from—from the Department of Tourism, and she is the head of that department,” Calida said, pointing out that unlike his office, DOT directly deals with contractors.
“Where was the money invested—it was given to the company of her brother, who is a block timer in PTV-4,” he said, referring to earlier reports that the DOT ad supposedly went to the media outfit, Bitag Media Unlimited Inc., of Teo’s brother, Ben.
“That is not the case with Vigilant (security agency). The Office of the Solicitor General does not give money to whatever (companies),” Calida pointed out. /vvp