Sandiganbayan hits ‘unprepared’ prosecutors in Budget exec’s ‘pork’ case
Budget Undersecretary Mario Relampagos. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines — Over the confusion between two budget release documents, the prosecutors took the ire of Sandiganbayan justices hearing the plunder case of Senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. and Budget Undersecretary Mario Relampagos over the pork barrel scam.
This after the Office of the Special Prosecutor could not explain why, on one hand, they said in the case information that Relampagos signed Special Allotment Release Orders (Saro) for Revilla’s Priority Development Assistance Funds (PDAF) for the scam.
But on the other hand, the prosecutors took a back turn when they said in the Ombudsman joint resolution indicting Revilla and Relampagos, that the Cabinet official signed what the defense deemed a “different animal” — the sub-allotment release order or SubAro
Relampagos’ lawyer Arnold Caga said a Saro is issued by the Department of Budget and Management while a SubAro is prepared by line agencies that would implement the pork funded projects.
“How can they be accused of signing SubAros when they weren’t prepared by the accused?” Caga told the court.
Associate Justice Rafael Lagos noted the defense’s claim, saying that he went through the joint resolution and the case information and that Relampagos seemed to have been accused of signing two different documents according to each of the case files.
“I was looking at the information. You indicated the number of the disbursement vouchers. But the SubAros or the Notice of Cash Allocations, you could not indicate the numbers,” Lagos said.
“In the joint resolution, you only listed the Saros,” he added.
A dead air ensued after Justice Lagos’ comment as the Office of the Special Prosecutor led by Jacinto Dela Cruz took a few minutes going through their documents to find an answer.
Amid the silence, Justice Lagos butt in: “The issuance of a SubAro necessarily [means] that they had participation. Who are the signatories of the SubAro? You don’t know? I’m going to help you.”
Lagos went on to say that based on the records of the case, Relampagos only signed five Saros, not SubAros. “You don’t know that?” the Justice pointedly told the prosecutor.
To which Prosecutor Dela Cruz merely said: “Your honor, the accusation is based on the testimony of Luy.” Benhur Luy is the principal whistleblower in the scam.
Lagos continued: “The way it’s presented (in the joint resolution), it’s tied up with the Saros. You said Relampagos signed the Saros. But in the information, iniba niyo (you changed it) to SubAros, which their office has nothing to do with.”
Lopez only managed to express their request to be given time to answer the Justice’s comment.
To which Justice Lagos replied: “So you’re saying you’re not prepared?”
Lagos said Relampagos was accused of approving 12 Saros for the release of senators’ pork barrel funds for the scam.
But in the records, Relampagos only signed five at the behest of then Budget Secretary and now Camarines Sur Rep. Rolando Andaya Jr.
The other seven were signed by Andaya, Lagos said.
“I find it ridiculous that Relampagos signed the Saros but your allegation is he signed SubAro,” Lagos said.
The anti-graft court is hearing three senators’ plunder and graft cases over the pork barrel scam. The first division is hearing Revilla’s one count of plunder and 16 counts of graft.
Relampagos, the only incumbent Cabinet official accused in the scam, face 42 counts of graft in all the cases of the three senators. His staff members Marilou Bare, Lalaine Paule, and Rosario Nunez are also co-accused.
RELATED STORIES
Palace: Cases not bungled; solons say trial will last longer
Budget exec linked in ‘pork’ scam can’t be automatically suspended—Palace
