|
H |
aving been impeached by the House
of Representatives, Erap, in public, welcomed the opportunity to prove himself
innocent of the accusations leveled against him. So often he told media: “I am sure I will be acquitted. These are
baseless charges.”
Ricardo
Puno, the presidential spokesman, was as emphatic and repetitive when asked by
media on what Erap thought about his indictment: “He
(Erap) is looking forward to finally having the opportunity to respond to all
of these charges.”
Of
course, people would not know how, in private, Erap was reacting to the blows
that hit him. They did know, however, that his lawyers eventually asked the
Senate to quash the case against their client, on the ground that its filing
with the Senate did not follow proper procedures.[1] As
mentioned earlier, the House of Representatives did not vote on the impeachment
complaint prior to its transmittal to the Senate. Then Speaker Villar explained
that a vote “was unnecessary because more than the required one-third of the
members had earlier signed a petition endorsing impeachment.”
A
group of trial lawyers weighed in, asking the Supreme Court to halt the
impeachment proceedings for being unconstitutional, among other defects.
At any rate, Erap went on to
assemble a team of defense lawyers whose badges were enough to terrify the
opposing litigants. The team included Estelito “Titong” Mendoza, former
Solicitor General and Justice Secretary; Andres Narvasa, former Supreme Court Chief
Justice; Raul Daza, former Governor and Representative of Norther Samar and
licensed to practice law in the United States; former public prosecutor Jose
Flaminiano, and sought-after practicing attorney Siegfried Fortun, among
others. Narvasa was the designated lead attorney.
Their courtroom wits would be
pitted against those of the House-designated panel of prosecutors. The panel
consisted of Feliciano “Sonny” Belmonte (Quezon City), as lead prosecutor, Sergio Apostol (Leyte), Antonio Nachura
(Western Samar), Oscar Rodriguez (Pampanga), Joker Arroyo (Makati), Oscar
Moreno (Misamis Oriental), Raul Gonzales (Iloilo), Clavel Martinez (Cebu),
Salacnib Baterina (Ilocos Sur), Wigberto Tanada (Quezon), and Roan Libarios
(Agusan del Sur).
Completing the cast of the show
were the senator-judges.[2]
The newly constituted majority included Nene Pimentel, now Senate President,
Francisco “Kit” Tatad, Anna
Dominique Coseteng, Ramon Revilla, Robert Jaworski, Teresa Oreta, Gregorio
Honasan, Blas Ople, Juan Ponce Enrile, John Osmeña, Miriam Defensor Santiago,
and Vicente Sotto III. Serge Osmeña voted for Pimentel but chose to be
non-aligned. Also opting to be non-aligned were Franklin Drilon, Rodolfo
Biazon, and Ramon Magsaysay. The minority bloc consisted of Tito Guingona,
Renato Cayetano, Juan Flavier, Raul Roco, Loren Legarda, and Ramon Magsaysay.
To
comply with a constitutional provision, the impeachment court required no less
than the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court—Hilarion “Jun” Davide, Jr.—as its
presiding judge when hearing a case that involved the highest official of the
land.
Now the attention of the entire
nation was fixed on the Senate acting as an Impeachment Court.
And, after the niceties of court
proceedings—approval of the rules governing the trial, swearing in of
senator-judges, summons, pleas, replies and all—the show was about to begin.[3]
Outside of the Senate building in
Pasay City, protesters—mostly anti-Erap—seemed far from being mollified. They
threatened to intensify the noise, to multiply their number, and to harangue
the world every day for as long as the Senate hearing was not done.
Nene
Pimentel, who earlier asked the demonstrators to calm down while the
impeachment trial was underway, felt unhappy with what he saw. “The continuing
call for the resignation of President Estrada is a prescription for recurring
instability in the country,” he said.
On
a more immediate concern, he believed that the rallies had the effect of
putting pressure on how the Senate would decide the case. And he was not done
with his lecture, adding:
“The
impeachment process is giving our country a chance to renew itself, to firm up
our commitment to the rule of law and to the democratic tenets of constitutionalism.
“Except
as a reminder that the senators as judges in the impeachment court are being
watched, I do not think that the demonstrations are helping the senators any in
their search for the truth or the country in projecting stability in a rule of
law.
“Allow
us then to do what we have to do as an impeachment court. After that, people
may condemn us to their hearts’ content. Or praise us to high heavens. But for
the moment, please do not hector us. Pray for us. Do not bully us. Help us. Do
not malign us. Work with us.
“…there
are two lessons to be learned from the pain and the anguish the country is
undergoing because of the impeachment trial: Nobody in this country is above
the law, and the sanctity of the ballot as a means of electing good leaders is
vital.
“While
President’s resignation—indeed a constitutional option—may be the swiftest way
out of the mess that we find ourselves in today, it may not be the best that
can happen to our country.
“For
one thing, if the President should resign because 100,000 people are marching
on the streets of Metro Manila and the vice president takes over, what is to
prevent a million people from marching on the streets of Metro Manila and
demand that she also resigns?”
Now back to the unfolding drama
at the Senate.
Followed
live on national television, the impeachment trial in the Senate captured
audiences in numbers enjoyed only by top-rating soap opera. For 23 days, from 7
December 2000 to 16 January 2001 (except Saturdays, Sundays, and the Christmas
break from 23 December 2000 to 1 January 2001, starting at 2 PM and usually
ending at 8 PM, the Senate show’s riveting story line of betrayal, women,
gambling, booze, power, greed and corruption, kept the people glued to their TV
sets.
ABS-CBN Channel 2, the
country's largest TV network, reportedly grabbed half of total audience share
for the 4:00pm to 8:00pm time slot on the first two days of the trial on
December 7-8.
The highest rating prime
time soap opera at the time--Rosalinda--attracted 40-50 percent audience share
at its peak of popularity.
We now relive those 23 days of
drama and revelations.
Day
1
Thursday, December 7, 2000.
At 2:00 p.m., the Philippine
Senate opened its business not as a legislative body. It has been transformed
into a court that was about to hear, and eventually decide on, a case. It was
the first time the Philippine Senate would perform the task. Its members,
majestic in their red-maroon robes, have assumed the role of judges. The
session-hall-turned-courtroom brimmed with spectators.
Kit
Tatad delivered the opening prayer. Then the Secretariat, who also served as
Clerk of Court of the Tribunal, called the roll.
Davide
called the counsels to fire their respective opening statements. The
prosecution would lob the initial salvo; the defense would try to hit back.
For
the prosecution, lead prosecutor Sonny Belmonte, Joker Arroyo, Sergio Apostol,
Wigberto Tanada and Raul Gonzalez delivered opening statements.
Belmonte:
“Our prosecutors will show that during his brief incumbency of barely over two
years, Joseph Ejercito Estrada has violated his oath not once, not twice, but
regularly, like clockwork.”
Apostol:
“The prosecutors will expose ... a criminal syndicate directed from the highest
office of the land. This is the gangland mob that threatens to rule us, the mob
rule that will savage our constitution and the fabric of our society unless we
destroy it before it destroys us.”
Arroyo:
“Your Honors please, I have never given much importance to an oath but all of
us have taken our oath. Our Chair, Congressman Belmonte, has read the oath, but
I will read the oath again of the President because it is only now that I
realized what this oath is all about.
“When
Joseph Ejercito Estrada took his oath, high noon of June 30, 1998, he said, ‘I
do solemnly swear that I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties
as President of the Republic of the Philippines, preserve and defend its
Constitution, execute its laws, do justice to every man and consecrate myself
to the service of the Nation. So help me God.’
“Except
for his name, he violated every word of his oath. That is why the House has
impeached him, that is why the Senate must convict him.”
For
greater effect, Joker flashed on a wide screen inside the session hall images
as he rattled off the details of his charges.
“…we
shall also prove that St. Peter's Holdings paid the P86 million with a BPI
cashier's check and more, which St. Peter's Holdings purchased, using funds
from his newly opened account in BPI. We shall show that St. Peter's account
was funded from Sel Yulo's personal account in BPI. And that Sel Yulo's
account, personal account in BPI, was in turn funded with Check No. 0110714951
issued by a person whose signature appears on the screen.
“We
want you to see this signature. Study very closely. You will notice, look at
the lower portion which says an arrow. Look at the signature. Examine it
carefully. It purports, then look at the signature of the President in a P500
peso bill which is on top. You need not be an expert to see the similarity. The
name may be different but there are unmistakable signs that the signature in
that check is the signature, the handwriting of the President of the
Philippines.
“Imagine,
the President of the Philippines maintaining a fictitious account! How far can
he go or should he go? Look at it closely. We do not want to leave that matter.
Because that is how low the President has gone down in bastardizing and
prostituting even our banking system. Look at the loops, look at the strokes,
they are the same. So who owned? Who paid? We are talking here of P142 million.
Who is Jose Valhalla[4] who
could have P142 million? We do not even know him.”
The
prosecutor was trying to link the money with the properties. Erap, Joker
asserted, having used “a fictitious name, had deposited the check into an
account controlled by a friend. The money went to buy a 50-million-peso estate
for one of Mr. Estrada's mistresses.”
At
one point the screens zoomed in on one of the mansions (also called Boracay
Mansion), and before everybody’s eyes there dazzled a swimming pool with an
artificial white-sand beach and mechanically whipped waves.[5] And then
there was also the master bedroom so spacious that, Joker figured out, it
“could be the dwelling house of 10 to 20 poor families.”
Joker
went on to say that Erap and his government wallowed in the mud of 3 Ms—money,
mansions, mistresses.
“I
wonder who the bigger crook is?” asked Joker. He probably wanted his listeners
to compare Erap with another president. “Twenty years of the Marcos years, he
never had this kind of mansions. Two years of Estrada, you have all these
mansions.”
Marcos—former
President Ferdinand Marcos, also called by media as strongman and dictator—was
the one who left Malacañang in shame, after days of heavy protests (also called
by media as “People Power”) in February of 1986. Reports valued Marcos’
ill-gotten wealth at $2 billion.
Joker
wrapped up his piece with this parting shot:
“Mr.
Chief Justice. Your Honors, because Joseph Ejercito Estrada is guilty of graft
and corruption, culpable violation of the constitutional laws and betrayal of
public trust and he is committing a continuing crime, we submit that President
Joseph Estrada should be removed from office the moment we conclude these
proceedings because we cannot have a country run by a thief like him.”
When
the turn of the defense panel came, Andres Narvasa and Estelito Mendoza took
the floor.
Narvasa
recalled the tragedy that befell Julius Caesar, the Roman Emperor, “whom the
masses admired and wanted to be the leader of their nation. He was assassinated
by a group of plotters who considered him unfit to rule. These plotters, by
spreading rumor and gossip, had poisoned the minds of the people against him.”
Like
Julius Caesar, Narvasa said Erap “is being stabbed in the back by an unfair
conspiracy.”
Mendoza,
on his part, countered by saying that Erap should be acquitted by the
Impeachment Court because the charges relied heavily on the say-so of Chavit
who, to him, had no credibility. He went to the extent of arguing that Chavit,
instead of Erap, should be indicted.
“As
far as the irrefutable documents and papers show,” Mendoza said, “he [Chavit]
was the one who got P170 million from the province of Ilocos Sur, but as far as
whether this went to President Erap, it was only—it is the word of Governor
Singson. After he has falsified 13 documents, does he have any credibility
left? Are you to impeach the President, terminate the mandate of more than 10
million people on the word of someone who has himself admitted and cannot
possibly deny that 13 times he falsified documents?”
Day 2
Friday, December 8, 2000.
The
prosecution presented 2 witnesses in Day 2 of the hearing. One was Emma Lim.
She said she used to work for Chavit Singson. She testified that her task
included collecting Erap’s share of the jueteng money. Her booty amounted to 13
million pesos.
The
second witness was Roberto Lastimoso, whom Ping Lacson replaced as Director
General of the Philippines National Police
He
told the court that Erap called him to Malacañang a few days after being
appointed to the top PNP post in 1998. In Malacañang, he met Erap and Chavit.
The three of them talked. Lastimoso quoted Erap as telling him: “You help him.”
The “him” referred to Chavit. Then Erap addressed both (Chavit and Lastimoso):
“You two coordinate.”
On
many occasions the testimonies of both witnesses had to pause to give way to
debates over technical procedures between the prosecution and defense panels.
Over
objections by the defense, the court also allowed private prosecutors to help
the House-designated panel in the direct examination of prosecution witnesses.
Day 3
Monday, December 11,
2000.
The
court took time to fine tune its procedures with the purpose of speeding up the
trial. Marking of evidence was taking up so much time, Nene Pimentel
complained. Lawyers bickered on the rules, the spectators not familiar with the
technical bends and nuances of court procedures also complained.
The
lawyers and the judges met today to fix the issues.
Also,
Emma Lim was back at the witness stand. She went through a grinding
cross-examination by Titong Mendoza.
Excerpts:
Mendoza:
“Yon bang jueteng, di ba alam mong illegal yan?” (About that jueteng, you know
it is illegal, don’t you?)
Lim:
“Yes, Your Honor.”
Mendoza:
“’Yang pagkokolekta sa jueteng labag yan sa batas?” (That collecting money for
jueteng is breaking the law?)
Lim:
“Yes, Your Honor.”
Mendoza:
“Yong tumutulong sa pagkokolekta ng jueteng gumagawa ng kalokohan sa batas, di
ba?” (That when you help collect money for jueteng you are messing up with the
law, right?)
Lim:
“Yes, Your Honor.”
Mendoza:
“Di ka ba medyo kinabahan na ginawa mo ‘yon?” (Were you not somehow worried
that you did it?)
Lim:
“Kinabahan po ako pero sino ba naman ako para… kasi para kay Presidente naman
‘yang jueteng, sino naman ako…” (I was
worried but who am I… because after all I knew it was for the President, so who
am I...)
Day 4
Tuesday, December 12,
2000.
Both
the prosecution and defense teams claimed victory after 3 days of courtroom
battle.
Belmonte
said 2 hours of Emma Lim’s cross examination by Mendoza did not unsettle her
testimony: “Not a single dent, not a single seed of doubt was sown by Mendoza.”
“The
defense failed to wear down the witness. On the contrary, the witness was the
one which forced the defense to throw in the towel. And the prosecution will be
presenting more Emma Lims in the next few days,” Belmonte gloated.
The
defense, on the other hand, claimed that Lim had a selective memory, casting
doubts on her credibility. A member of the team also said she may have perjured
herself.
In
her testimony, she said that she personally brought jueteng money in the
amount of 5 million pesos to Malacañang in 1999. When asked of what date in
January, Lim said she could not recall exactly when.
Also
in her testimony, Lim said she collected at leat 3 million pesos from Jinggoy
Estrada, one of Erap’s sons and was then mayor of San Juan City, as part of the
bi-monthly collection of jueteng
money intended for Erap.[6] Part of
the collections came in the form of check (worth 1 million pesos), “colored
cream and brown, with Jinggoy's picture and that the check was good.” The
United Overseas Bank Philippines issued the check.
The
defense said Jinggoy produced a certification from United Overseas Bank
Philippines saying that he did not maintain a current account with the bank.
This prompted Raul Daza to comment that “Ms. Lim perjured herself.”
Belomonte,
however, countered that “certifications come cheap.”
Day 5
Wednesday, December 13,
2000.
Chavit
took the witness stand.
Except
for the now common skirmishes among lawyers representing the prosecution and
the defense, not to mention the senator-judges’ often joining the fray,
Chavit’s words were practically a replay of what he already said during the Blue-Ribbon
Committee hearings and in other forums before today.
Excerpts
of Chavit’s testimony:
1) Erap is “Lord of all jueteng
lords.”
2) He gave Erap millions
of pesos as the latter’s share of jueteng protection money. Mostly in
the form of checks, the bribes were in amounts of 5 million pesos twice a
month.
3) He collected for Erap
bribes every other week from jueteng starting in November 1998 until
August 2000.
4) Charlie “Atong” Ang
started to collect money from jueteng operators shortly Erap assumed
office in 1998 upon the latter’s instructions. The marching order was to
collect 3 percent of the total jueteng collection.
5) On and off
misunderstanding between Atong and Erap gave occasion to Chavit’s taking over
Atong’s task starting in August 1998.[7] Chavit
first attempted to personally remit to Erap his collections in October 1998 but
failed when he found Erap and Ang in the middle of an argument over quota
allocation for sugar imports. When Ang and Erap’s verbal row subsided, Chavit
asked Ang what he (Chavit) would do with the money, Ang advised him to just
keep it ready as Erap was sure to look for it later.
“He is addicted to money,” Chavit quoted
Ang as telling him. Since then, Singson said he freely went in and out of
Estrada's residence to deliver money.
6) Chavit
devised and kept a coded ledger that logged the details of jueteng remittances
to Asiong Salonga (Erap), Erap’s sons Jose and Jude Ejercito, presidential
assistants Anton Prieto and Jaime Policarpio.
7) From 1998 to August
2000, Chavit collected around 32-35 million pesos from jueteng protection money.
What
might be considered as fresh information was about a check which Chavit issued
“Pay to Cash” and the looming clash between Equitable-PCI Bank and the
Impeachment Court.
The
check, Chavit said, was meant for Erap, and the prosecution tried to establish
the link between the bribe money and the accused through the examination of
bank records. Erap earlier admitted that his lawyer accepted as much as 200
million pesos without his knowledge but would later know that the full amount
was intact and deposited with the account of Erap Muslim Youth Foundation at
the Equitable-PCI Bank.
The
court issued a December 6, 2000 subpoena to the bank on the account of Erap
Muslim Youth Foundation, particularly with respect to checks amounting to P200
million.
Equitable-PCI
Bank hesitated to comply with the court order, but eventually relented when
Davide threatened its officials with contempt raps.
The
prosecution also sought the bank records to show that Erap used plundered money
to buy a mansion for one of his mistresses.
Joker
rued that the bank appeared to be stonewalling the presentation by the
prosecution of its evidence.
“The
President would be convicted on bank records,” Joker stated.
Exchange
of heated words also occurred between the lawyers and judges, and among the
judges themselves.
Narvasa
asked why Guingona, a judge, made it look like he was part of the prosecution.
Narvasa
complained that the prosecution brushed aside an earlier agreement for the
defense to be given a 3-day notice of any deposition-taking process. The
defense, he said, had little time to prepare for the deposition of an
Equitable-PCIBank official.
Enrile,
also a judge, asked Guingona if the later had a dispute with Davide’s ruling on
the 3-day notice.
The
prosecution explained that the depositions were a continuing process, thus
subsequent notifications were no longer necessary.
Narvasa
held his ground. He asserted that failure to follow agreed procedures at the
start made all succeeding depositions void, or words to that effect.
Meanwhile,
another drama outside of the courtroom was taking shape.
The
prosecution panel, through its spokesman, Representative Edmundo Reyes
(Marinduque) disclosed that 2 of its witnesses left for unknown destinations
overseas.
The
two witnesses were former Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chairman
Perfecto Yasay Jr. and Director Ruben Almadro, also of the SEC. Almadro headed
the team that probed an irregularity involving BW stocks. Erap’s alleged
interference in that probe gave rise to one of the four charges constituting
the Articles of Impeachment.
Earlier
the prosecution also aired its concern over threats to the life of Emma Lim,
one of the prosecutions key witnesses.
Day 6
Thursday, December 14,
2000.
The
Senate Tribunal decided not to admit for the time being the bank records as
evidence being presented by the prosecution.
Aside
from the Equitable-PCI Bank records, the prosecution likewise asked the Senate
Tribunal to summon certain documents from the Manila affiliate of Singapore’s
United Overseas Bank (UOB), Westmont Bank (acquired by UOB), and Land Bank of
the Philippines. These banks held the records that could have established the
movement of embezzled funds from the Provincial Government of Ilocos Sur to
Chavit and, finally, according to Chavit, to Erap. The money, amounting to 130
million pesos, more or less, was part (a large chunk) of funds released by the
national government to the Provincial Government of Ilocos Sur as its share
from proceeds of excise tobacco taxes pursuant to the provisions of RA 7171
(please see also Chapter 10).
On
the sealed documents submitted by the Equitable-PCI Bank, the defense objected
to their presentation as evidence, on the ground that they were “immaterial and
irrelevant” to the case.
The
prosecution lawyers said that the bank records linked Erap to the properties
that they alleged were bought using jueteng
money.
The
defense lawyers, on the other hand, argued that ownership of the properties
(the Boracay mansion in particular), being sought to be proven was not
specified in the charge sheets (Articles of Impeachment) transmitted by the
House of Representatives to the Senate for trial.
The
court decided that Davide himself, as presiding judge, would rule on whether
the Equitable-PCI Bank documents would remain sealed or not. That ruling would
be out by Friday, December 15, 2000.
Maria
Carmencita “Menchu” Itchon, Chavit’s accountant, testified that “Mrs. Yolanda
Ricaforte, alleged auditor of President Estrada on the matter of jueteng collection and detailed at
Singson's Manila office,” called through telephone a number of
personalities—such as Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada, presidential counsel Edward
Serapio and suspected Central Luzon gambling lord Rodolfo “Bong’ Pineda—in an
apparent attempt to link Racaforte to Erap.
Day 7
Friday, December 15,
2000.
Over
objections from the defense panel, Presiding Judge Davide allowed the opening
of bank documents submitted by Equitable-PCI Bank. However, he also ruled that
the envelope containing the documents maybe opened only Monday, December 18,
2000.
“Their
[defense lawyers] objection is ‘premature’ since the contents are not known and
that there would be sufficient opportunity to challenge admissibility later”
explained Davide.
The
prosecutors insisted that bank documents would prove Erap’s link to the
fictitious account, from which funds were drawn to buy properties for his
mistresses.
Day
7 also marked the second day of Chavit’s direct testimony. He delved on his
close association with Erap before they parted ways. He testified that he stood
as the godfather of Jacob, Erap’s son by Laarni Enriquez. He also said that
Erap, in turn was godfather at the wedding of his children Randy and Racquel.
He further disclosed that he was one of Erap’s constant companions during mahjong games in many of Erap’s
residences as well as in provincial sorties and even foreign trips.
Members
of the court also discussed the issue of some of the rules not being followed
by senator-judges. Much-abused was the 2-minute rule granted to each senator
judge within which to ask a witness.
Davide
said the issue would be taken by members of the court in a meeting set for
Monday, December 18, 2000.
Day 8
Monday, December 18,
2000.
Two
executives from Equitable-PCI Bank took the witness stand. They testified that
Ricaforte did maintain accounts with the bank. They, however, denied Erap was
in any way associated, or was behind, or in any of the accounts being
maintained with the bank. They swore that only three persons had access to the
accounts, namely: Ricaforte, Chavit, and William Gatchalian.
Gatchalian
was one of Erap’s gambling pals and another bona-fide member of his so-called
“Midnight Cabinet.” His access to Malacañang had been fortified by his
appointment as Presidential Adviser on affairs of Overseas Filipino Workers.
Meanwhile,
as senator-judges mulled the idea of over-ruling Davide’s decision to open the
envelope containing the bank records submitted to the impeachment court by
Equitable-PCI Bank, Jaime Dechaves, reportedly one of Erap’s cronies and member
of the “Midnight Cabinet,” wrote the court to say that he (Dechaves) owned the
Jose Velarde account.
Day 9
Tuesday, December 19,
2000.
Philippine
Daily Inquirer reporters Christine Herrera and Carlito Pablo testified that
Bubby Dacer, the PR guru who, along with his driver, disappeared on November
24, 2000, was one of around 100 individuals being wire-tapped by the
Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Task Force (PAOCTF).
Reports
had also circulated that members of the impeachment court were being monitored
by the Philippine National Police, but which chief—Ping Lacson—has denied.
Lacson also headed the PAOCTF.
Day
10
Wednesday, December 20,
2000.
The impeachment court opened the envelope
containing the bank records submitted by Equitable-PCI Bank.
Lutgardo
“Lutz” Barbo, Secretary of the Senate and ex-officio Clerk of Court, opened the
envelope and read its contents.
Standing
close to Barbo and going over the same material being read in open court were
lawyer Jose Flaminiano for the defense, and private prosecutors Romeo Capulong
and Amado Valdez for the prosecution.
Witnesses
certified to the authenticity of signatures that appeared on the documents.
Capulong
pointed out that “there were erasures on the ‘balance’ bracket of the bank
ledger dated Oct. 1-31, 1999, where the entry of P142 million check was
supposed to have been debited against the account and subsequently entered the
same day.”
From
Day 1, the prosecutors had alleged that Erap used an account at the
Equitable-PCI Bank, opened by Erap himself using a fictitious name, to issue a
check valued at 142 million pesos that in turn found its way to another
presidential crony who bought the Boracay mansion.
However,
Wilfredo Vergara, president of Equitable-PCI Bank, denied that the documents
the bank submitted to the court were altered to hide Erap’s association with
the questioned accounts.
Day 11
Thursday, December 21,
2000
News
of conversion filtered out of Malacañang today. Filipino Reporter quoted
Malacañang officials as saying that “the ‘juetengate’ scandal, the
resignation of key Cabinet members, and the ongoing impeachment trial have
brought the President to his senses.”
Over
at radio dzBB, Ernie Maceda, presidential spokesman on the impeachment trial,
said “the President is now seen working even on Saturdays and Sundays and was
no longer going to Tagaytay ‘or elsewhere’ to have fun with friends.”
This
was a dramatic turn from the depiction of a president who loved to drink,
gamble and party until dawn of the next morning, and hated to perform the
serious duties demanded of his office.
Meanwhile
at the Senate Impeachment Tribunal, five branch managers of the Equitable-PCI
Bank took the witness stand, namely: Shakira Yu (Robinsons-Herran-Pedro Gil);
Virgilio Pabillon (T.M. Kalaw); Edgardo Alcaraz (Quezon Avenue); Emma Gonzales
of Isidora Hills; and (Holy Spirit-Quezon City).
Days
earlier, several bank managers, namely Edelquin Dantes (Scout Tobias-Quezon
city; Rosario Bautista (Diliman-Matalino) also testified as prosecution
witnesses.
On
the controversial envelope which the court opened Wednesday, December 20, 2000,
Oscar Moreno, one of the House-designated prosecutors and a bank executive for
20 years before he joined politics, apologized to the court for talking aloud
about his doubts on the integrity of documents submitted to the Senate by the
Equitable-PCI Bank.
Davide
lamented what he called Moreno’s breach of the canons of professional ethics.
“It is unfortunate that there were comments of alleged doctoring (of the bank
documents that were opened in open court last Wednesday),” Davide said.
In
explaining himself, Moreno said that “no statements, insinuations, or
motivations were made that the Senate was involved in any way in the alleged
tampering…and if there were insinuations, we beg the (court's) indulgence… I
did not say that it was the court or anyone here who made the alteration, it
must be somebody else, maybe in the bank.”
Day 12
Friday, December 22,
2000.
Something
riveting happened on the witness stand today.
Clarissa
Ocampo, senior vice-president and trust officer of the Equitable PCI Bank,
surprised those who have been following the impeachment trial both live and on
television when she said she saw Erap sign “Jose Velarde” when Erap opened a
trust account with the bank.
In
a testimony that lasted close to 4 hours, she disclosed, among other things,
that—
·
she was about a foot
away from Erap when Erap signed as “Jose Velarde” in the signature cards.
·
the account covered an
initial investment of 500 million pesos; and that
·
present to witness the
signing was Equitable-PCI Bank legal department head Manuel Curato.
“I
just couldn't believe it. He did not sign his real name, so I decided not to
authenticate his signature,” Ocampo said during direct examination by Mario
Bautista, a private prosecutor.
Just
a couple of days ago, Erap vehemently denied in an interview that he and Jose
Valhalla/Velarde was one and the same, as alleged by the prosecution.
The
documents which Erap signed included an investment management agreement, a
directional letter to invest, an investment program, and an authority to debit
from and credit to the trust account.
Ocampo
also revealed that the investment agreement authorized the bank to invest the
amount of 500 million pesos from Erap’s trust account by lending it to a
company owned by William Gatchalian.
With
an annual salary that amounted to less than a million pesos, Ocampo’s testimony
uncovered the extent of Erap’s association with ill-gotten wealth.
Mario
Bautista further offered the information that Erap’s trust account soon swelled
to 1.2 billion pesos. The private prosecutor also drew the contrast to the
amount of 35 million pesos which Erap declared as assets in Erap’s 1999 income
tax returns. The question he proposed to be answered was: how could Erap’s
assets grow from 35 million to somewhere near 500 million in a matter of 2
months?
On
surface, Erap appeared to have violated every law there was, not the least of
which being tax evasion, falsification of public documents, and perjury.
The
problem was, according to the defense, such an array of peripheral allegations was
not part of the Articles of Impeachment.
The
basic contention by the defense lawyers that the information being elicited
from Ocampo by the prosecution was “immaterial and irrelevant” to the hearing
of charges against their client as enumerated in the Articles of Impeachment
gave rise to long debates among opposing counsels and the senator judges.
Davide
agreed with the defense. He ruled that Ocampo’s testimony would be headed to
the trash bin unless the prosecution was able to link it to the charges lodged
with the impeachment court.
In
any event, Ocampo had her moments. Her words were few and far between in
comparison to the torrent of verbiage from the lawyers and senator-judges, but
the meaning and the implications of what she disclosed were, as the succeeding
days would prove, beyond measure.
After
11 days of witfest the score between the contending parties was about even. On
the 12th day, however, with Ocampo at the witness stand, it was hard
not to admit that Chavit and the prosecution team looked better.
The
week before, on Tuesday, 19 December 2000, George L. Go had resigned as
Chairman of Equitable-PCI Bank, following the opening of bank documents that
showed a person with initials of G.L.G. had introduced someone with a name of
Jose Velarde to open an account with the bank.
Day 13
Tuesday, January 2, 2001
The
impeachment court took an 11-day holiday break that started Saturday, December
23, 2000. Trial was set to resume on Tuesday, January 2, 2001.
The
drama generated by the trial had attracted an unexpected number of viewers.
People found themselves glued to their TV sets. Mainstream media networks
scrambled to reposition their programming. Regular programs that competed with
the airtime of the reality show at the Senate—from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m., Mondays
through Fridays—had to be scrapped to give way to the live coverage of the
trial. Otherwise even the likes of “Marimar” risked losing a large chunk of
their viewership shares.
The
trial had commanded quite a following among all classes of Philippine society.
The followers—of the kind that fired up mass hysteria—had turned from kibitzers
to hardcore supporters of opposing camps in the political spectrum. And the
resulting division from within had dragged the country into one of its worst
social, economic and political crises in recent years.
And
yet, in keeping with the good old Filipino trait of being able to laugh in the
middle of his unending bouts with misfortunes, one would assume people in the
main felt relieved they were leaving the year 2000 behind. One would also think
they would try—and try hard—to welcome 2001 with renewed vigor and optimism.
But
what a way for an old, weary year to part with a looming, new one.
On
December 30, a Saturday, Satan-guided bombs exploded and ripped apart several highly
populated areas in Metro Manila.
Almost
simultaneously explosions thundered from inside a LRT train in Manila, also
inside a bus terminal in Quezon City, beneath a bench near the U.S. Embassy
also in Manila, and an airport fuel depot in Paranaque.
At
least 22 people who could have been in revelry mood were killed. These poor
souls were innocent except for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. One casualty, a bomb expert, was trying to
defuse a bomb in a gas station near Dusit Hotel in Makati. Over a hundred more
people were injured.
Police
officials were quick to suggest that the grisly act was part of a terror plot
carried out by Muslim extremists. The Abu Sayyaf, in particular—the Muslim
terror group believed by many (especially government agents) to be responsible
for numerous kidnappings in the past, loomed eerily large in many people’s
minds. Other government officials saw the hand of communist insurgents.
But
Manuel Mogato, a military analyst, doubted the capacity of either Abu Sayaff or
the communists to mount such a coordinated attack. “It’s far more likely that
it is the military than the Abu Sayyaf or the Communists,” he said.
The
December 31, 2000 issue of the Washington Post quoted a military official who
shared Mogato’s view, saying “the prospect of military involvement in the
bombings was ‘very possible because the Estrada administration is desperate for
survival.’”
Seven
days after the bombings, the police said they had an airtight case—not against
the Abu Sayyaf—but against what it called “Afghanistan trained elements of the
Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).”
In
a statement, PNP top gun Ping Lacson said their investigation of the case
revealed “concrete proof of MILF involvement.”
But
Erap himself had showed signs of ambivalence. On January 7, 2001, he cited the
role of the military and the police in containing acts of terrorism and—as if
to justify whatever their role might have been in the bombings as some people
believed—in “their defense of democracy.” He has always maintained, in response
to calls for his resignation, that the impeachment process was the way of
democracy and of the constitution.
There
were those who thought the police seemed to be picking suspects out of
convenience.
Quoting
Muslims and Christians alike, The Christian Science Monitor (CSM) said in an
article that Muslims “are being used as scapegoats by a government under fire
as President Joseph Estrada faces an impeachment trial based on fraud and
corruption allegations that could cost him his job.”
The
article went on:
“When
his [Estrada's] ratings were low, he launched an attack [against the Muslim
rebels in Mindanao] and his ratings went up. And now, because of the
impeachment, he’s trying again,” says Dato Amerol-Gulan Ambiong, chairman of
the Metro Manila Peace Coordinating Council.
“Such
conspiracy theories seem to be gaining currency outside of Muslim groups. Many
here say there seems to have been little motivation for the MILF to start
bombing Manila: The group signed an agreement with the government in 1996, but
suspended talks during this summer’s military crackdown, and was set to resume
negotiations. Veteran observers of Philippine politics recall that Ferdinand
Marcos, who was deposed in 1986, is reported to have been responsible for
violence in Manila as a pretext to declaring martial law in 1972.
“‘What
strikes me is that it's taking place at the very time the impeachment trial is
taking place,’ says Carmen Pedrosa, a columnist and opponent of the Estrada
regime. ‘I can’t accept that in the midst of this trial the Muslims would make
this kind of chaos,’ she says.
“Congressman
Roilo Golez, in a quick break from the impeachment proceedings, offered a
similar analysis. ‘Right now, people are beginning to suspect that they [the
government] are trying to aggravate the feelings of the Muslims in order rile
them up in order to create another war in Mindanao,’ says Mr. Golez. ‘That
would divert attention from the trial and improve Estrada’s ratings.’
The
MILF denied they were involved in the attacks. The same CSM article quoted an
MILF negotiator who said the government “is making a big mistake in pointing
its finger to the MILF.”
The
article also quoted Moner Bajunaid, a professor of Islamic Studies at Mindanao
State University, who said: “We interpret this move as a desperate move on the
part of the government, when they don’t have anything against us. We renounce
any terrorist acts. The MILF does not engage in any moves to harm civilians,
and the MILF itself is not out to bring down the Estrada administration. I
don’t think any other elements based in Mindanao are, because there’s no gain
in trying to make a move in Manila. But now the government is using the MILF as
a way out of its predicament, and this will definitely hamper the resumption of
talks.”
Opposition
Representative Heherson Alvarez issued a statement, saying “these attacks are
coming from people who fear the truth that is coming out at the impeachment
trial.”
Malacañang
brushed aside the fingers pointing at it. Addressing the media, presidential
spokesman Micheal Toledo said: “Let me say that is really a pathetic statement.
A number of innocent lives have already been lost because of this cowardly and
dastardly act, yet some people continue to play politics.”
Against
this backdrop, Erap’s impeachment trial at the Senate resumed.
It
must be recalled at this point that the prosecution bombed, as it were, the
trial before it went on an 11-day break with the testimony of Equitable-PCI
Bank Senior Vice President Clarissa Ocampo. The prosecution witness declared
under oath that Erap on February 9, 1999, signed as “Jose Velarde” on documents
related to the opening of a trust account with her bank. The account associated
with Jose Velarde, the prosecution said, had, at one time or another,
maintaining deposits in amounts as big as 3 billion pesos. Portions of these
funds were used to buy properties—like mansions—that were in the possession of
Erap’s mistresses.
Also,
during the break, Executive Secretary Ronnie Zamora said something to the
effect that Prod Laquian—early on Erap’s sira-ulo
of a Chief of Staff—told him that Ocampo lied when she said Erap signed as
Jose Velarde. Responding to a question, Ocampo on the witness stand had said
that Laquian, among others, witnessed the signing.
Zamora,
not Ocampo, lied, according to Federico Pascual in his column at the Philippine
Star. Laquian, Pascual said, emailed to him in reply to his (Pascual) request
for clarification on the Zamora claim. “I have not talked to Zamora since I
left Malacañang,” Pascual quoted Laquian as saying.
The
Zamora chicanery prompted Pascual to comment that “one reason why the Estrada
Administration is sure to crumble is that it is built upon lies upon lies… A
regime built on the sands of falsehood may be able to stand for a while, like
cinematic props, but it cannot last. The onslaught of truth will eventually overwhelm
it.”
More
attempts to advance falsehood would be revealed today, the 13th day
of the trial.
Clarissa
was back at the witness stand. She said that seven days before she testified on
December 22, 2000, “there was an attempt to assign the Velarde trust account of
P500 million to presidential crony Jaime Dichaves in a bid to take the heat off
Mr. Estrada.”
Ocampo
told the court that “replacement documents were signed Dec. 13 by Dichaves in
[Estelito] Mendoza's office on Rada Street in Makati City.”
One
would recall that Dichaves on December 18 wrote the impeachment court to say
that he owned the Velarde account with a check deposit in the amount of 142
million pesos.
Ocampo
told the court “her former boss, George Go, at the time the chairman of
Equitable-PCIBank, ordered her to cover up Mr. Estrada’s ownership of the bank
account under the name Jose Velarde.”
“He
directed me to prepare documents to replace the original papers on the
P500-million Velarde trust account,” she said.
She
also said that “Go told [me] that the principal (Mr. Estrada) wanted the date
of the second set of documents antedated to Feb. 4, the same date that the
President signed the original documents as ‘Jose Velarde’ at Malacañang.”
There
was a little problem, however, with the plan: There was no letter of authority
from the principal. Ocampo, in her testimony on December 22, said she did not
authenticate some of the Velarde documents after she saw Erap signing them.
“The
directional letter never came so we have no authority to assign the Jose
Velarde account to Jaime Dichaves,” she said.
On
December 21, Oscar Moreno, one of the prosecutors, told the court that he
suspected some people from Equitable-PCI Bank had altered the documents the
bank submitted to the impeachment court and opened by the court the day before,
December 20.
At
any rate, she also said “there were also broad hints from a lawyer of the
President that she should seek to ‘protect’ [Erap] in the new documents she
prepared.”
She
also stated that she feared for her life, saying the bombings that occurred 8
days after she showed up as a witness have made it scarier for her.
“I
now live in hiding,” she said.
She
went on to say she was afraid because she was up against a powerful adversary.
“This is the government...this is Malacañang.”
The
defense lawyers, maintaining that her testimony was irrelevant to the case,
chose not to cross-examine her.
The
day’s hearing, as in most others that preceded this, had long and frequent
bouts among lawyers debating on why some questions being asked by the
prosecution should be answered by the witness, or even why the witness should,
at all, be allowed to testify or not.
Day 14
Wednesday, January 3,
2001
For
4 hours the defense lawyers cross-examined Chavit. When they were through with
him, both the defense and the prosecution claimed some sort of winning points.
The
defense was able to show that Chavit could not remember some details of his
testimony. The prosecution, on the other hand, maintained that overall, the
cross-examination bolstered, rather than undermine, Chavit’s credibility.
A
sideshow emerged in the person of defense lawyer Estilito “Titong” Mendoza.
Clarissa Ocampo earlier testified that then Equitable-PCI Bank Chair George Go
directed her to prepare documents that would replace ownership of the Jose
Velarde account from Erap to Dichaves, and that the signing of the dubious
documents was done at Mendoza’s office.
With
that disclosure, eyes turned from the accused (Erap) to the counsel (Titong).
A
group of lawyers threatened to file a disbarment case against Mendoza.
Senator
Drilon weighed in. He remarked: “Attorney Mendoza has a lot of explaining to
do.” He asked: “What were George Go (then the chairman of the Equitable-PCI
Bank) doing in his office. If they were not his clients as he had said
previously, why did they suddenly appear in his office without any previous
agreement?”
Mendoza
dismissed the diatribe directed at him. “They [the prosecution] should file
charges against him if they think I committed any wrongdoing,” he said.
Day 15
Thursday, January 4, 2001
There
were times when exchanges of words among lawyers and senator-judges could get
personal. This day saw one of those exchanges.
On
the witness stand was Jasmine Banal, a lady lawyer. She testified that she
worked for Edward Serapio at the time the latter put up shell companies for
Erap. These companies, according to the prosecution, served as conduit for
transfer of illegally acquired money and properties.
Miriam
Santiago found it odd that Banal, who admitted during cross-examination that by
associating with Serapio her professional fee suffered as a result, would go
against the norm of high-driving lawyers who were always on the look-out for
better-paying opportunities.
Raul
Roco interjected. He got Banal to admit that the law was a noble profession,
unmindful of monetary rewards as it was mindful of service to society.
Santiago
got Roco’s drift and, almost by reflex, barked to say how she resented the way
one senator was undercutting another senator.
The
crowd loved the unfolding play. One or two tried—but failed—to contain the
burst of their laughter. Some rose to give themselves a better view of the
stage and the cast of characters, while others were content to strain their
necks upward, side ward or forward.
From
the corner of her eye Miriam spotted at least three wayward fans—over-stepping
the line that separated the audience from the stage, she said—and asked the
court to eject them from the session hall.
The
court obliged, with a lecture to boot:
“Anyone
disrupting the impeachment proceedings will be barred from entering the Senate
Hall and the Senate security is directed to escort them out and prevent them
from ever entering the rest of the session days of this impeachment
proceedings,” Senate President Nene Pimentel warned the gallery.
Over
at Malacañang, Erap could not hide his disgust over actions being carried out,
or at least tolerated, by the new leadership of the Equitable-PCI Bank.
“They
don’t want me to succeed because my priority is helping the poor,” Erap
grumbled, referring to the Makati Business Club whose chair, Ricardo Romulo,
was also the new chair of Equitable-PCI Bank, vice the resigned Georgo L. Go.
Romulo
fired back:
“That
there is a conspiracy between Equitable PCI Bank and the Makati Business Club
(MBC) to oust President Estrada exists only in his mind.
“I
must stress that the testimony of Ms. Ocampo resulted from a subpoena issued by
the Impeachment Court. The documents and events described by Ms. Ocampo all
predate my assumption of the Chairmanship.
“While
I was informed about the trust account I refused to see it. I also purposely
refused to talk to Ms. Ocampo about it, since I knew the administration would
precisely attempt to lay the blame on me. However, when I was advised that Ms.
Ocampo was to testify by virtue of the subpoena, I interposed no objection.”
Day 16
Friday, January 5, 2001
The
prosecution presented witnesses from the Land Transportation Office, Social
Security System and Land Bank of the Philippines to establish the identities of
people involved in the encashment of checks, with an aggregate amount of 130
million pesos, that, after going through several consignees and over a
labyrinth of bank branches, supposedly ended up in the hands of Erap—via Atong.
The amount was part of 200 million pesos released by the national government to
Ilocos Sur as the latter’s share from the tobacco excise tax.
Day 17
Monday, January 8, 2001
Maria
Cristina Rodenas, cashier of Land Bank (Shaw Boulevard, Mandaluyong City
branch), took the witness stand. She told the court that three people who
identified themselves as Alma Alfaro, Eleuterio Tan, and Delia Rajas opened
separate accounts with her bank on August 28, 1998. The three then used their
respective accounts to withdraw funds transferred from the Land Bank (Vigan
branch) account of the Provincial Government of Ilocos Sur.
According
to Rodenas, the three account holders were able to withdraw a total amount of
130 million pesos in three batches on the same day (August 28, 1998).
She
also testified that as soon as the withdrawals were completed, one Yolanda Uy
called her up thrice to ask that bank records relating to the 130-million-peso
transaction be shredded. Rodenas said she did not grant Uy’s request.
Day 18
Tuesday, January 9, 2001
The
defense blocked an attempt by the prosecution to present bank records as
evidence, contending that they were not relevant to the case being tried.
The
bank records had something to do with a number of various accounts which,
according to the prosecution, were being maintained at the Citibank-Greenhills
by Erap and Loi Estrada as well as those of Erap’s mistresses.
Having
failed to resolve the issues being raised by the defense on the admissibility
of its offer of evidence, the prosecution proceeded to introduce the hearing of
Article 3 of the charge sheet.
Day 19
Wednesday, January 10,
2001
The
prosecution turned to Article 3 of its complaint—betrayal of public trust. It
presented as witnesses the late Ruben Almadro, former chief of the compliance
and surveillance group of the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) and Jose Luis
Yulo, former president also of the PSE.
The
witnesses testified that Erap had tried on many occasions to influence them in
the conduct of investigations on the BW stock manipulation scandal. They said
they were made to understand that Dante Tan was a Palace friend and therefore
should be cleared of any wrongdoing.
Almadro
said that the investigation his group conducted, along with the one the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) conducted, established the fact that
“Tan and his associates engaged in schemes and questionable practices like
‘wash sale,’ ‘kiting,’ and ‘insider trading’ to push up the sales of the BW
shares.”
Almadro
also said that Erap learned about Tan’s bribing then SEC chairman Perfecto
Yasay—also with the aim of freeing Tan from complicity—but did nothing about
it.
Sometime
in February 2000, Almadro said, he and Yulo briefed Erap in Malacañang on the
findings of the investigations. The president remarked, after the briefing,
that Tan was actually a victim, having lost millions of pesos from the trading.
Yulo
testified that Erap called him up by phone several times during the PSE
investigations to intervene in behalf of Tan. He also said he met several times
with and received calls from Yasay, who he said consistently complained about
being pressured by Malacañang and not having any choice but to absolve Tan.
“It
looks like we have no choice [but to clear Tan],” Yulo quoted Yasay as telling
him in one of those meetings.
Yulo
narrated some of the instances during which time Erap reached him by phone. On
November 17, 1999, Erap intimated his concern for BW. Erap told him about a
directive he would issue shortly to address the negative stories BW had been
getting from media. The president also assured Yulo of Tan being a good man.
Erap
was back on the line the next day. He asked Yulo to restore the 50 percent
trading bandwidth and—on a matter that perhaps really mattered—a plea for a
good friend. “He is a nice guy,” Erap told Yulo, in reference to Tan. “He has
been helping me for a long time.”
Then
again, on November 22, 1999, Erap nudged Yulo to wind up PSE’s BW probe, even
volunteering the information that SEC has concluded its own investigation on
the issue.
The
next day, November 23, Yulo said Erap pushed further his intervention for Tan.
“He is innocent and lost a lot of money,” Erap insisted in his defense of Tan.
Yulo
offered to let Erap know what the investigation team had to say as soon as its
report was completed. The president probably had an inkling of what the report
would say. He assured Yulo: “Sabagay,
kung may kasalanan, wala talaga tayong magagawa riyan. Pero kaibigan ko ‘yan,
tinulungan ako niyan, senador pa lang ako.” (Anyway, there is nothing we
can really do if he is found guilty of wrongdoing. But he is a friend. He has
been helping me even from the time I was a Senator.)
The
February 2000 meeting with Erap at Malacañang (also narrated by Almadro on the
witness stand) was the time Erap was briefed about the PSE report.
Erap
grumbled. “Bakit di sinabi sa
akin ni Dante ito? May problema pala siya. Sabi niya, nalugi raw siya.”
(Why didn’t Dante tell me this. He told me he lost money.)
Yulo told the president that on the
contrary, Dante Tan earned millions. “What he did was gross. He should not get
away with it.”
In the presence of Yulo and Almadro,
Erap then lambasted Yasay. “This Yasay was ‘walang
hiya’ (has no shame.” Erap said Tan told him “ayos na si Yasay” (Yasay has been fixed) with a hand language that
suggested “money was all it took to fix it.” And yet, with the report, it
looked like Yasay did not clear Dante Tan. Furious Erap went farther to call
Yasay “hindi lalake ‘yan” (not a
man).
Yulo said Erap did advise him to
charge Tan in court if evidence warranted it.
Outside of the impeachment court,
Dante Tan made some noise himself. He disclosed in a radio interview that
Senator-Judge Rene Cayetano asked, and received, from him 4 million pesos worth
of BW stocks, and profited around 60- to 70-million pesos from them. Tan said
Cayetano paid him 4.5 million pesos, but only when the Senate conducted its own
investigation in early 2000 on the BW insider trading scandal.
“Not true,” Cayetano replied,
dismissing Tan’s charges. “I profited around 49 million pesos only.”
Day 20
Thursday,
January 11, 2001
Former
Finance Secretary Edgardo Espiritu told the impeachment court that he believed
Erap “was a part owner of and made a lot of money during the questionable surge
in the price of the stocks of BW Resources.”
BW
Resources was subject of investigations separately by the PSE, SEC and the
Senate.
Espiritu
was one of Erap’s cabinet appointees when the latter took office as President
in 1998. He also served as president of the State-controlled Philippine
National Bank.
Espiritu
disclosed that in November 1999 he argued with Lucio Tan, another presidential
friend, on the issue of PNB’s privatization.
“I
was angry, and we raised our voices because the commitment I made to the
president is (that) I will help Lucio Tan, but (the bank privatization) must go
through public auction ... but (Tan) wanted a merger,” Espiritu said. “I was
called by the president, and he told me, ‘Ed, whatever Lucio wants, give it to
him.’ Because of that I made up my mind to resign.”
Espiritu
also told the court that Erap had a hand in PNB’s extending a loan of 600
million pesos to BW Resources in 1999 despite the corporation’s inability to
comply with the Bank’s collateral requirements.
Day 21
Friday, January 12, 2001
Espiritu
returned to the witness stand. Yasay also showed up as a witness for the
prosecution.
Espiritu
told the court that he feared for his life not so much because of Erap, but
rather because of smugglers he mentioned in his testimony that frequented the
presidential palace especially during social gatherings.
On
Thursday, January 11, Espiritu testified that one of the reasons he resigned
from Erap’s cabinet was his inability to contain corruption at the Bureau of
Customs and the Bureau of Internal Revenue. As Finance Secretary, both bureaus
were under his supervision.
Yasay,
on the other hand, testified that the President called him up several times in
an apparent attempt to intervene on behalf of Dante Tan. He said Erap told him
that “Tan had not engaged in insider trading and price manipulation at the
stock market to create an artificial atmosphere for BW stocks (so that their
price would appreciate).”
Day 22
Monday, January 15, 2001
Yasay
was back on the witness stand and was cross examined for more or less 5 hours.
Raul
Daza, the cross-examining defense laywer, tried to raise doubt upon the court
Yasay’s credibility as a witness. Among other questions, Daza wanted Yasay to
explain why the latter issued contradictory statements in relation to the BW
controversy.
Records
showed that Yasay, in an earlier Senate Committee hearing on the BW scandal,
implicated Erap of interference in the investigation being conducted then by
the PSE and SEC. But when interviewed later by media, he cleared Erap. Yasay
explained that as a subordinate, he could not openly defy Erap’s orders; but he
could do so under the Senate hearing because he was under oath.
The
defense played a video recording of one of Yasay’s media interviews. After the
video was played, Davide, the presiding judge, asked the defense lawyer if he
had further questions.
Daza:
“No further questions on cross examination. We close the cross examination.”
Davide:
“Redirect, Prosecutor Gonzalez?”
Gonzalez:
“Yes, a few redirect questions.”
Davide:
“You may now proceed.”
Gonzalez:
“Mr. Witness, you have heard the replay of the tapes. You confirmed the
transcript of the same tape. Can you make a comment on this?”
Yasay:
“Let me just make this observation with respect to the tapes that were played.
First,
contrary to what the defense had mentioned earlier, these were interviews
conducted not on the 19th of January in the evening. The interview conducted by
Tina Monzon Palma came after that. The interview also of the tapes that was
played also of Mr. Coco Alcuaz referred to tapes where I was interviewed on the
19th of January at about nine o’clock in the evening. But that tape itself was
not made on the 19th of January. The “Pulso” tape which is part of the Coco
Alcuaz tape was made on the 19th of January.
So,
I would like to explain why…”
Gonzalez:
“Can you please explain?”
Yasay:
“…precisely these statements were made by me. Right after I stood up at the
Senate Committee hearing and on my way home in my car, my cellular phone rang
and there was a man’s voice at the other end of the line and this person…”
Gonzalez:
“Who was that person?”
Yasay:
“He did not identify himself to me, Your Honor, but when the call was made, he
said very foul language. If I may be allowed at this point in time to quote
verbatim, Your Honor, the caller said, ‘Putang
ina mo! Masuwerte ka na Pangulo na siya ngayon, kung hindi, pupulutin ka na sa
kangkungan!’ (Son of a bitch! You’re lucky he is president now, otherwise
you would now be in the dump!)
“When
I arrived home, Your Honor, about 5:30 in the afternoon, we received another
call at home, another call from an unidentified caller, and this time he said, ‘Putang ina mo! Mag ingat ka!’ (Son of a
bitch! Be warned!)
“Just
before six o’clock that evening, Your Honor, Mr. Dante Tan called me up. And
Mr. Dante Tan in an angry voice said, ‘Bakit
mo naman sinangkot si Presidente doon sa testimony mo sa Senado ngayong hapon?’
(Why did you implicate the President in your testimony at the Senate this
afternoon?)
“And
I told Mr. Dante Tan, ‘Mr. Dante Tan,
wala akong magawa, I was under oath, napipilitan lang akong magsabi ng
katotohanan.’ (Mr. Dante Tan, there was nothing I could do, I was under
oath and therefore obliged to tell the truth.)
“And
then, Mr. Dante Tan replied to me, ‘Pero
iyong tanong naman ni Senator Roco sa iyo hindi naman dapat ganoon ang sagot
mo. Bakit ganoon ang sagot mo?’ (But the questions Senator Roco asked you
could have been answered differently. Why were your answers like that?)
“If
you look at the tapes, the transcript of the tape of the Senate Committee
insofar as the questions of Senator Roco at that time of the 19th of January,
you will see, true enough, Mr. Roco did not ask me specific questions that
would evoke the kind of answer that I gave him during that time. But this was
precisely my way of trying to avoid the Memorandum Order which the President
issued on November 19 November 17 of 1999 where I felt that I could not violate
it because of what I was told was the propensity of the President to do harm if
I would disobey his orders. So I only made sure that my statements with respect
to what he called me about will only be said in an atmosphere where I had the
legal compulsion to say it.
“And
then Mr. Dante Tan told me, ‘Hindi puwede
iyan. Mas galit na galit si Pangulo sa iyo. Kaya baguhin mo iyang statement mo,
baguhin mo iyan.’ (That’s not acceptable. The president is now much madder
at you. You must re-tract your statement. Change it!)
“And
so, that evening when I was called upon to attend that interview, I had to make
those statements that I did.
“But,
Your Honor, this only happened for a few days because shortly thereafter, when
Senator Roco reconvened or resumed the hearing at the Senate Committee at that
time, he asked me, ‘On the basis of what you’ve said insofar as media reports,
are you going to change your statements here at the Senate today that you made
at the last hearing?’ And I told him ‘No, Your Honor, the statements I made at
the last hearing were the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and
I will not change it, Your Honor.”
Gonzalez:
“That will be all, Your Honor.”
Davide:
“Recross.”
Daza:
“Recross, Mr. Chief Justice.
“From
January 19, 2000, to now, which is January 15, 2001, it’s been almost a year.
My question to you is this: Did you at any time, especially during that
subsequent hearing of the Senate Committee on Banks, divulge these allegedly
threatening calls that you had which you claimed prompted you to make
contradictory statements in three interviews that were public, that were being
heard by the people? Did you in particular — My question is: Did you or did you
not in that subsequent hearing?”
Yasay:
“I did not, Your Honor, because the senators who were there did not ask me that
question. I was only asked the question whether or not I will change my
statement, in the light of the previous statements I made not under oath in
media. And I told the senator, ‘No, I am not going to change my statement
because what I said there was the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
truth, and I said it under oath, Your Honor.”
Daza:
“No further questions.”
More
questions from Senator-judges sounded like they were intended to make sure
nobody forgot the gist of Yasay’s testimony: Erap intervened to save a friend.
Roco:
“On November 17, according to you, he called again. Did he ever say it was
because he was worried about the economy or because he was worried about his
friend?”
Yasay:
“He did not say anything about his worry about the economy, Your Honor.”
Roco:
“What did he say?”
Yasay:
“He told me, specifically on the third call, Your Honor, if I have to quote it
again, trying to be faithful to what the President said in his own language, he
said: ‘Kumusta na ‘yong imbestigasyon
n’yo sa BW?’ (How is the BW investigation going along?) And I told him
that, ‘Iyong imbestigasyon namin ngayon
ay inihinto namin dahil tapos na ‘yong objective ng aming imbestigasyon. Pero
‘yong imbestigasyon with respect to sino ang may kasalanan kung may
manipulation or insider trading, ay ginagawa na po iyan ng Philippine Stock
Exchange.’ (We have completed our investigation. But the investigation with
respect to who is guilty of manipulation or insider trading is being conducted
by the Philippine Stock Exchange and is still on-going.) Galit na galit siya sa akin sa tono ng kanyang boses at sinabi niya sa
akin, ‘Sinabi ko na sa iyo, bilisan ninyo ‘yang imbestigasyon and clear Dante
Tan.’ (From the tone of his voice I could sense that he was livid, and he
told me ‘I already told you to expedite that investigation and clear Dante
Tan.’) Tapos sabi niya, ‘Sino bang
tatawagan ko sa Philippine Stock Exchange?’ (Then he said ‘Who should I
call at the Philippine Stock Exchange?) So ang
sagot ko sa kanya, ‘Eh, kung gusto mo, tawagan ninyo si Mr. Yulo. Siya ang
presidente ng Philippine Stock Exchange.’ (I replied, ‘If you wish, you can
call Mr. Yulo. He is the president of Philippine Stock Exchange.)
From
Senator-judge Juan Flavier’s questioning, observers could also surmise that
Erap said one thing to one person and said another thing to another person.
Flavier:
“Naalala ko, Mr. Yasay, na sinabi ni
Presidente na si Dante Tan ang kakausap sa inyo bilang tagapamagitan tungkol sa
problema ng BW. Tama ba iyong pagkarinig
ko noong last week’s hearing?” (I recall, Mr. Yasay, that you said the
President told you that Dante Tan would act as your go-between on all matters
concerning the BW problem. Am I correct of what I heard from last week’s
hearing?)
Yasay:
“Ang sinabi ko po at
last week’s hearing ay, inutos po ni Pangulong Estrada na kung
mayroong isang—kung may mga bagay na gusto niyang ipapagawa sa akin tungkol …
na relating to my job as Chairman ng SEC o tungkol sa SEC ay ipapadaan niya po
kay Mr. Jaime Dichaves. Hindi ho Dante Tan ang binanggit niya.” (What I
said last week, President Estrada told me that if there is anything he wants me
to do as SEC Chairman, the orders would go through Mr. Jaime Dichaves. He did
not mention Dante Tan.)
Flavier:
“I see. Eh, nangyari ba iyon na kinausap
ka ni Jaime Dichaves?” (So did it ever happen that Jaime Dichaves talked to
you.?)
Yasay:
“Sa pagkakaalala ko, Your Honor, nangyari
iyan ng dalawang beses.” (From what I recall … happened twice.)
Flavier:
“At ano naman ang (And then
what)—Whose interest was purportedly represented? Was this problem of the
President, problem of Dichaves or a third party?”
Yasay:
“Iyong una, Your Honor, ay tinawagan ako
ni Mr. Dichaves tungkol sa isang problema ng isang tao. Iyong tao po ay
tinawagan ako (The first instance … Mr. Dichaves called me up to inform me
about somebody’s problem. This somebody called me) much earlier, I think this
happened sometime in July or August of 1999, and this person’s name is Mr.
Bobby Ongpin. Tinawagan po ako ni Mr.
Bobby Ongpin at sinabi po ni Mr. Bobby Ongpin sa akin, ‘Sabi ni Pangulong
Estrada, tatawagan raw kita dahil tulungan mo raw ako sa problema ko.’ (Mr.
Bobby Ongpin called me up and he told me ‘President Estrada advised me to call
you because he said you can help me fix my problem.’) At that time, Your Honor,
sinabi rin ni Bobby Ongpin sa akin,
tatawag daw si Pangulong Estrada (Bobby Ongpin also told me that I can
expect a call from President Estrada) to confirm what Mr. Bobby Ongpin had
said.
“True
enough, Your Honor, tumawag si Jaime
Dichaves sa akin at sinabi ni Jaime Dichaves sa akin na tatawag daw si
Pangulong Estrada sa akin tungkol sa bagay na ‘yon. (Jaime Dichaves called
me and he told me that President Estrada will also be ringing me up on that
problem.)
“And
at 5:30 in the afternoon po, tinawagan ako ni Presidente at sinabi ko kay
Presidente, ‘Sinabi ho ni Bobby Ongpin ay tutulungan ko raw siya dahil ‘yon daw
ang utos mo sa akin.’ (the President called me up and I told the President,
‘Bobby Ongpin told me that I should help him because that’s what you wanted.’)
“Ang sagot po ni Pangulo sa
akin, ‘Huwag mong tulungan ‘yan, patagalin mo ‘yong kaso niyan at i dribble
mo na lang.’ ‘Yon po ang unang sinabi ni Pangulo sa akin na pinadaan niya kay
Jaime Dichaves as a first instance,
pero tumawag si Pangulo sa akin after
that. (The President replied,
‘Don’t help him [Ongpin’s], stall his case and dribble[8] it.’
That’s what the President told me, the message being conveyed first through
Jaime Dichaves and later by the President himself.)
“Yong pangalawa po ay
nangyari ito noong (The
second call happened in) December of 1999, around the first week of December, na tumawag uli si Jaime Dichaves sa akin at
sinabi ni Jaime Dichaves sa akin na mayroon daw TRO ex parte na (that Jaime
Dichaves called again and Jaime Dichaves told me about the existence of ex
parte TRO) application na kailangan hindi
ko raw aksiyonan ay itong TRO (and that I must not act on the TRO which)
had something to do with PLDT po, at ‘yon
daw ang utos ni Pangulo sa akin. (and that this is upon orders of the
President.)
“The
next day, sinabi ni Jaime Dichaves sa
akin na tatawag daw si Pangulo sa akin (Jaime Dichaves told me that the
President will call me) on that day. True enough po, tumawag si Pangulong Estrada sa akin (President Estrada called
me) on that day, but he called me at 7 o’clock already in the evening at ang tawag niya sa akin ay doon na sa
bahay ko. At sinabi ni Pangulong Estrada, huwag ko raw i grant ‘yong TRO na
hinihingi ng minority stockholders (and I was already in my house when the
called me. And President Estrada told me that I should not grant the TRO being
sought by the minority stockholders) doon
sa PLDT dahil daw po ay may commitment siya sa mga (of PLDT because he
already made commitments to) foreign investors.”
Flavier:
“Salamat (Thank you). According to Mr. Almadro and Yulo, the President
made a statement to the effect that naayos
ka na ni Tan (Tan had fixed you), with the fingers forming a circle. What
can you say about this statement?”
Yasay:
“Sa palagay ko po, ‘yong sinabi ni
Pangulong Estrada na naayos na ako (I guess when President Estrada said
something about about my having been fixed), he made reference to that with one
occasion na Dante Tan attempted to bribe me po. This happened sometime in the early part of October of 1999 na kinausap ako ni Dante Tan at sinabi ni
Dante Tan sa akin, ‘Mayroon na kaming itinabi na 350,000 shares sa iyo tungkol
sa BW. Pirmahan mo na lang itong mga dokumento na ito at pirmahan mo itong
signature cards na ito para naman kung gusto mong ibenta ‘yong shares of stock
na ‘yan ay malaman ng broker na sa iyo nga ‘yan at saka mabenta mo at makukuha
mo ‘yong proceeds’ (that Dante Tan talked to me and Dante Tan told me that
‘we have set aside 350,000 BW shares for you.
Just sign the documents and the signature cards so that in case you want to
sell the shares the broker would know that they are yours and you can collect
the proceeds’).
“I
had to politely decline that offer of Dante Tan, Your Honor.”
Flavier:
“Sinabi rin ni President Estrada na kung
ikaw daw ay magsinungaling ay tatamaan ka ng kidlat. Ikaw ba ay tinamaan na ng
kidlat?” (President also told you that if you were lying you would be hit
by lightning? Have you been hit by lightning?)
Yasay:
“Alam ninyo po, ang sinabi naman ni
Pangulong Estrada sa akin, na ‘yong nagsisinungaling ay tatamaan ng kidlat. (You
know, what President Estrada said was that whoever was lying will be hit by
lightning.)
So,
I only prayed at that time, Your Honor, na
sana hindi tatamaan si Pangulo ng kidlat” (that he will not be hit by
lightning).
Yasay’s
day in court, grueling as it was, had its light moments too. It happened when
Tito Guingona asked questions. Excerpts:
Guingona:
“At iyan sinabi mo na tinawagan ka,
nagtestigo ka (And you said that you were contacted by phone, you
testified) under oath, in the investigation of the Committee on Banks. Totoo ba iyan?” (Is it the truth?)
Yasay:
“Tama po iyon.” (That’s correct.)
Guingona:
“Under oath?”
Yasay:
“Under oath po.”
Guingona:
“Ngayon, nagtetestigo ka naman (Now,
you are again testifying) under oath?”
Yasay:
“Tama po iyon.” (That’s correct.)
Guingona:
“Okay. Si Bubby Dacer ba, eh, kailan
iyong panghuling communication ninyo ni Bubby Dacer?” (About Bubby Dacer,
when was the last time you communicated with Bubby Dacer?)
Daza:
“Mr. Chief Justice, I would raise rigorous objection to the question of the
distinguished Senator Judge.”
Guingona:
“Mr. Chief Justice, Bubby Dacer was a PR of BW Resources. BW Resources is under
investigation, as a shoot off…”
Davide:
“What was the first statement of yours? What was Bubby Dacer to…”
Guingona:
“PR.”
Davide:
“PR?”
Guingona:
“Yes, he was the PR man of BW Resources.”
Daza:
“There’s no evidence presented to show that.”
Guingona:
“No, that was already…”
Davide:
“The objection has to be sustained.”
Guingona:
“No, Mr. Chief Justice, I ask for a reconsideration because that was already
asked. As a matter of fact, admitted by the witness.”
Davide:
“The ruling before was there was an unreasonable objection.”
Guingona:
“But Bubby Dacer, Mr. …”
Davide:
“Yes, there is a motion to reconsider, the motion is submitted to the body
under the Rules.”
Guingona:
“Mr. Chief Justice, we are investigating the BW Resources. I do not wish to ask
for reconsideration because … at this stage. But I would like to just appeal to
the good reason of the Chief Justice because what is being investigated is the
intervention of the President regarding the BW Resources.”
Davide:
“That is correct.”
Guingona:
“Mr. Dacer was a vital public relations man of the BW Resources. There has been
evidence and answers given in connection with Bubby Dacer. All I want was what
is the last communication between them before he disappeared several weeks
ago.”
Davide:
“Since there is a motion to reconsider, the motion is submitted to the body.
“Anyone
seconding the motion? Under the Rules, a contra is allowed.”
Enrile:
“I will second the motion and support the ruling of the Chair.”
Guingona:
“Thank you for supporting me.”
Enrile:
“No, no, no. I … (Laughter.) I am supporting the ruling of the Chair.”
Guingona:
“Oh, Mr. … Well …”
Enrile:
“May I …”
Davide:
“Honorable Senator Judge Drilon for a while, with the permission of the two
gentlemen.”
Enrile: “Mr. Chief Justice, may I request the
audience to consider this Court as a court. Evidently, they come here to see a
comedy. This is not the place to see a comedy. Please go to the movies if you
want to see a comedy.”
[1] Some lawyers commented that the Defense
Counsel filed a Motion to Quash (applied in criminal cases) rather than a
Motion to Dismiss to highlight the contention that the impeachment trial should
be conducted in a manner similar to a criminal proceeding where conviction is
based on evidence “beyond reasonable doubt.”
[2] With much of Philippine government
institutions patterned after American models, including the rules of
impeachment which the Senate adopted for the Erap trial, the senators should
have been called jurors and the Senate constituted as jury, with the presiding
officer—Davide—as the judge. But since the Senators allowed themselves to ask
questions during the trial, they in effect likewise became judges.
[3] Heading to the trial itself, the senators
could not yet agree on the number of votes required to convict the respondent.
The Constitution required that at least two-thirds of all members of the Senate
must vote to convict the respondent to remove any impeachable official from his
or her post. Some said it was enough to convict with 15 affirmative votes
(based on 22 senators); others contended that at least 16 votes were needed to
convict (based on 24 senators). The Senate at the time had only 22 members. While
the Constitution mandated that the Senate at any given time must have 24
members, one of them (Gloria Arroyo) was elected Vice President along with Erap
in 1998, and another one (Robert Barbers) was undergoing medication in the
United States. This issue, however, needed no resolution as the trial did not
reach a point where the juror-judges had to vote for either conviction or
acquittal.
[4] Eventually established as Jose Velarde.
[5] Media labeled this property as “the
Boracay Mansion,” allegedly owned by Erap but in the possession of Laarni
Enriquez, one of his mistresses, to describe its resemblance to the
world-renowned beaches of Boracay Islands.
[6]
When Chavit’s turn to take the witness stand came, he said that Jinggoy had a
hand in jueteng operations in the
whole province of Pampanga and was the one collecting the share of protection
money intended for Erap.
[7] In my interview with Chavit, he explained
that Erap felt it was more convenient for all if Chavit himself would hand all
the money to Erap, ostensibly to attend to official functions, because Chavit
was, as Governor, a government official. Brazen as Erap was in his disregard of
ethical standards for government officials, the President thought that Atong
seeing him much too often was a recipe for attracting media attention.
[8] A Philippine slang like “freezing the
ball” (usually in a basketball game), which means to do nothing when one is
ahead in the scoreboard until the regulation time expires or runs out.
No comments:
Post a Comment