The Secretary Of Justice Asks The Secretary Of Foreign Affairs To Cancel The Passports Of Pdaf Case Respondents

[Papa Carl]

Of course the question is, will they? Or as in previous cases, this will be contested and by the time a ruling is given, most will have fled the country.

 

http://pcdspo.gov.ph/2013/10/24/the-secretary-of-justice-asks-the-secretary-of-foreign-affairs-to-cancel-the-passports-of-pdaf-case-respondents/

 

This is a very long document, but check out who the 37 individuals are!

   

 

23 October 2013

 

HON. ALBERT F. DEL ROSARIO

Secretary

Department of Foreign Affairs

Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City

 

 

ATTN        :        Hon. RAFAEL E. SEGUIS

Undersecretary for Administration

 

 

Dear Secretary Del Rosario:

 

 

 

This has reference to the passports of persons implicated in the ongoing investigation on the alleged misuse of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).

 

 

1.  The  National  Bureau  of  Investigation (NBI)  investigated the alleged misuse of PDAF funds by certain Members and employees of Congress, officers and employees of implementing agencies, and private persons acting as officers of spurious Non-Governmental Organizations (hereinafter, collectively, “the subject persons”). Eventually, the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee started its own legislative inquiry on the alleged misuse of PDAF funds where the testimonies of Benhur Luy and other whistleblowers were heard.

 

 

On 16 September 2013, the NBI submitted transmittal letters cum letter-complaints to the Office of the Ombudsman recommending the prosecution of thirty-nine (39) persons implicated in the alleged misuse of PDAF funds. Copies thereof are attached hereto as Annexes “A-1” to “A-8”, inclusive.

 

 

The NBI investigations found clear and convincing evidence that the subject persons participated in the unlawful diversion and misuse of PDAF funds in such amounts as to constitute plunder in some cases. Plunder being a non-bailable offense, the possibility that several of the subject persons will be in detention throughout the trial of their case is high, and therefore there is a strong probability that they will attempt to leave the country in order to evade arrest, detention, and prosecution

altogether. The options for these subject persons are severely limited, and as their time of reckoning with the Ombudsman fast approaches, many will begin to make the hard choice, as some of them already have, of simply fleeing the country, the same being the only real viable option against the certainty of imprisonment once warrants of arrest start being issued.

 

 

Hence, we have also issued an Immigration Lookout Bulletin covering thirty-five (35) persons, a copy of which is attached hereto as Annex “B”. The probability of their flight is further buttressed by the fact that four of the subject persons left the Philippines after the allegations against them were made public and only days prior to the filing of the cases before the Ombudsman, viz.:

 

 

a. REYES, JESSICA LUCILA GONZALES  -         left on 31 August 2013 b. TUASON, RUBY CHAN                             -        left on 26 August 2013 c. PLAZA, RODOLFO GALIDO                    -  left on 11 September 2013 d. ORTIZ, ANTONIO YRIGON                     -   left on 6 September 2013

 

 

Copies of the corresponding Certifications from the Bureau of Immigration (BI) evidencing the fact of their flight are attached hereto as Annex “C-1” to “C-4”, inclusive.

 

 

2. We submit that there is sufficient basis in fact and law to cancel the passports of the subject persons in the interest of national security.   We   recall   that   the   Constitution   expressly   permits   the limitation of the right to travel “in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by law”1; and that Section 4,

2nd paragraph of the Philippine Passport Act of 1996 provides that:

 

 

“In the interest of national security, public safety and public health, the Secretary or any of the authorized consular officers may, after due hearing and in their proper discretion, refuse to issue a passport, or restrict its use or withdraw or cancel a passport xxx”2

 

 

 

We  believe  that  the  above-quoted provision may  be  applied  in relation to the subject persons in view of the direct relation between national  security  and  corruption,  as  acknowledged  in  the  2011-2016

National Security Policy of the Philippines:

 

 

 

1      See CONST., Art. III, Sec. 6, 2nd sentence.

2      Rep. Act No. 8239, Sec. 4 (1996), italics supplied. See also DFA Dept. Ord. No. 11-97, Rules and

Regulations Implementing the Philippine Passport Act of 1996 (R.A. 8239), art. 5. sec. 2.

 

 

“Graft and corruption is another national security concern because it saps pub"another forum" resources, undermines the morale of the civil service and affects the delivery of basic services. It has also become a disincentive to foreign investors from establishing business ventures in the country. Worse, it breeds socio-political instability as scandals degenerates into crisis situations that undermine the credibility and effectiveness of government.”3

 

 

 

The link between corruption and security has been explicitly recognized under international law. Thus, the preambular paragraphs of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), to which the Philippines is a party4, declare that the States parties are:

 

 

“Concerned about the seriousness of problems and threats posed by corruption to the stability and security of societies, undermining the institutions and values of democracy, ethical values and justice and jeopardizing sustainable development and the rule of law,

 

“Concerned  also  about  the  links  between  corruption and  other forms of crime, in particular organized crime and economic crime, including money-laundering,

 

“Concerned further  about cases of corruption that involve vast quantities of assets, which may constitute a substantial proportion of the resources of States, and that threaten the political stability and sustainable development of those States,

 

“Convinced that corruption is no longer a local matter but a transnational phenomenon that affects all societies and economies, making international cooperation to prevent and control it essential,

 

“xxx

 

“Convinced that the illicit acquisition of personal wealth can be particularly damaging to democratic institutions, national economies and the rule of law”5

 

 

Pursuant   to   the   law   of   treaties   as   codified   in   the   Vienna

Convention6, the quoted paragraphs constitute an authoritative aid for

 

 

4

According      to      the      database      of      the      United      Nations      Treaty      Collection,

in

 

http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?mtdsg_no=XVIII-14&chapter=18&lang=en,

last

 

accessed 27 September 2013.

 

 

3      2011-2016 NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY: SECURING THE GAINS OF DEMOCRACY, p. 17, formulated in accordance with Memo. Ord. No. 6 (2010).

 

 

 

 

 

5      United Nations Convention against Corruption, UN Doc. A/58/422, 2349 UNTS 41, adopted 31

October 2003, entry into force 14 December 2005.

the interpretation of the substantive provisions of the UNCAC, particularly the obligation of States to maximize the effectiveness of law enforcement measures relating to corruption.7 Considering that the Philippines is committed to implement the treaty in good faith8; and considering, furthermore, that Philippine law deems treaties to be of the same class as statutes,9  the identification of corruption as a threat to national security has direct legal significance in the Philippines.

 

 

The link between corruption and security has also been recognized in the resolutions of international organizations, particularly the United Nations General Assembly10 and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. 11  Thus the 1st  preambular paragraph of General Assembly Resolution 51/59, which adopted the International Code of Conduct for Public Officials, declares that States are:

 

 

“Concerned at the seriousness of problems posed by corruption, which may endanger the stability and security of societies, undermine the values of democracy and morality and jeopardize social, economic and political development”12

 

 

 

These resolutions manifest the international community’s recognition that corruption, which negatively impacts democratic institutions and the rule of law, has a prejudicial effect on the security and stability of societies; for as summarized in the jurisprudence of the United Kingdom, “not only military defence, but the protection of democracy and the legal and constitutional systems of the state, are part of national security”13. We believe that this recognition highlights the fact that  corruption  threatens  national  security,  and  should  inform  the

 

 

 

6      See the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331, entered into force 27 January

1980, art. 31(2), 1st  par., in relation to art. 31(1); and 2 YRBK. INT’L L. COMM. 221 (1966), citing

United States Nationals in Morocco Case, I.C.J. Reports 1952, pp. 183, 184, 197, 198.

7      Art. 30(3).

8      Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, art. 26.

9      Abbas v. Comelec, G.R. No. 89651, November 10, 1989.

10    General Assembly Resolution No. 51/59. U.N. Doc. A/Res/51/59, 12 December 1996; 10  General Assembly Resolution No. 58/4, U.N. Doc. A/Res/58/4, Preamble, 9th  par.; 10  General Assembly Resolution 67/186, U.N. Doc. A/Res/67/186, 12 March 2013.

11  Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Ministerial Council, Declaration On Strengthening Good Governance And Combating Corruption, Money-Laundering And The Financing Of Terrorism, MC.DOC/2/12, 7 December 2012

12    General Assembly Resolution No. 51/59. U.N. Doc. A/RES/51/59, 12 December 1996.

13    Baker v. the Information Commissioner and the Cabinet Office (EA/2006/0045), as quoted by the Information Commissioner's Office, Decision 8 February 2010 (Ref.: FS50198733), par. 34; and Secretary of State for the Home Department v. Rehman, ([2001 ] UKHL 47; [2003] 1 AC 153), L. Slynn, par. 16.

Philippines’ implementation of the United Nations Convention Against

Corruption and the Philippine Passport Act of 1996.

 

 

3. In the case of the subject persons, their investigation shows the massive scale of the alleged plunder and diversion of PDAF funds to their own private accounts. Worse, the present case is only a portion of an estimated P10 Billion plundered and stolen from public coffers using the Napoles NGO syndicate alone. This is yet not to consider the theft of an  additional  billions  of  pesos  in  PDAF  funds  or  other  government funds, such as the Malampaya Fund, using the same Napoles or other NGO syndicates through basically the same modus operandi of coursing public funds to finance ghost projects or, in some cases, projects with underdeliveries,  with  the  funds  ending  up  in  the  pockets  of  public officials who directed the diversion of said funds to the fake NGOs.

 

 

The intended legitimate use of the plundered funds, ironically, is almost always for  purposes of  economic recovery in  the  rural  areas, where the incidence of poverty is high, poverty which is in turn exploited by insurgent forces to recruit adherents and foment rebellion and other forms  of  violent  resistance, if  not  uprisings, against  the  government whose only counter-effort is precisely the delivery of basic services and economic recovery programs to the rural areas. The projects which this money is supposed to fund are agricultural trainings, tools and implements, machineries, fertilizers and seeds, and other resources that if used for the purpose for which they were intended, instead of being stolen, would have greatly alleviated rural poverty conditions and thus seriously impacted on the ability of national security threat groups to recruit from the countryside.

 

 

This  is  how  corruption,  through  the  massive  and  large-scale plunder of billions of pesos in public money, directly threatens national security. Money stolen from the rural poor exponentially drives the incentive for disenchantment if not outright hostility against the government and the State. Those who jeopardize government-spurred economic  revitalization  through  grassroots  projects  effectively undermine the nation’s economic security, and expose Philippine society to all kinds of civil and political unrest. This is how corruption endangers the nation.

 

 

In a sense, politicians and their cohorts who pluck the food away from a hungry child’s mouth are no different from the terrorists who sow physical  insecurity  among  the  populace,  when  they  cause  economic

insecurity among the people by stealing livelihood resources and money intended for calamity relief.

 

 

On another angle, the money stolen by the subject persons could have  also  been  easily  used  for  improving the  country’s external and internal defense infrastructure through the modernization of the armed forces and the national police. The estimated billions of pesos stolen can easily finance the Navy’s requirements for modern frigates and other warships, the  Air  Force’s need for  sophisticated fighter jets, and  the Army’s and Police’s requests for upgraded weaponry, vehicles, communications systems, and protective gear. Instead of going to these security modernization projects, the money went to corruption to feed the luxurious lifestyle of the few social predators among us who masquerade as public servants.

 

 

In summary, these circumstances, considered both singly and in totality, threaten public trust in the government at a time when it must marshal broad-based support to forge an inclusive and long-term peace with internal armed groups, re-align national defense policy towards the protection of the country’s sovereignty from external threats, and protect the national economy from financial shocks and frequent natural as well as   man-made   disasters,   such   as   the   Bohol   earthquake   and   the Zamboanga siege.

 

 

Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that those responsible for aggravating the country’s economic insecurity through unmitigated plundering of its wealth do not travel abroad or leave Philippine jurisdiction, while their cases are undergoing, or about to undergo, preliminary investigation and trial. This would clearly be  in line with the country’s national security interest. If they are eventually proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt and punished accordingly, the public’s faith in the rule of law will be restored. The delivery of justice against the subject persons will convey the singular message that, this time around, crime does not pay. This will serve to reinvigorate public confidence in the government, and further validate the people’s faith in this Administration’s advocacy against corruption.

 

 

4. Wherefore, the foregoing considered, we respectfully request for the expeditious cancellation of the passports of the following persons, consistent with their right to notice and hearing, in accordance with the Philippine Passport Act of 1996 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations:

 

 

(1)   Honorable Juan Ponce Enrile

Member, Senate of the Philippines

Address: Room 601, 6th Floor, GSIS Building

Financial Center, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City

 

(2)  Honorable Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada

Member, Senate of the Philippines

Address: Room 602, 6th Floor, GSIS Building

Financial Center, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City

 

(3)  Honorable Ramon “Bong” B. Revilla, Jr.

Member, Senate of the Philippines

Address: Room 506, 5th Floor, GSIS Building

Financial Center, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City

 

(4)  Honorable Rizalina L. Seachon-Lanete

Governor of Masbate; Former Representative, 3rd District of Masbate

Address: Provincial Capitol Building

Barangay Ibinggay, Masbate City

 

(5)   Edgar L. Valdez

Former Party-List Representative, APEC Party

C. Brion cor. Balagtas Blvd., San Pablo City

 

(6)  Rodolfo “Ompong” G. Plaza

Former Representative, Lone District of Agusan Del Sur

Address: Agusan Del Sur

 

(7)   Samuel M. Dangwa

Former Representative, Lone District of Benguet

Address: Province of Ilocos Norte

 

(8)  Constantino “Tinnex” G. Jaraula

Former Representative, Lone District of Cagayan De Oro

 

(9)  Atty. Jessica Lucila “Gigi” Reyes

Former Chief of Staff, Office of Senator Juan Ponce Enrile

Address: Room 601, 6th Floor, GSIS Building

Financial Center, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City

 

(10) Atty. Richard Cambe

Address: Room 506, 5th Floor, GSIS Building

Financial Center, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City

 

(11) Ruby Chan Tuason

Address: Senate Office, GSIS Building

Financial Center, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City

(12) Pauline Labayen

Address: Senate Office, GSIS Building

Financial Center, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City

 

(13) Jose R. Sumalpong, a.k.a. Joy Sumalpong

Chief of Staff, former Representative Lanete

Address: c/o Office of Hon. Scott Davies

Representative, 3rd District of Masbate Room N-408, House of Representatives Constitution Hills, Quezon City

 

(14) Jeanette Dela Cruz

Address: c/o Office of Hon. Scott Davies Representative, 3rd District of Masbate Room N-408, House of Representatives

Constitution Hills, Quezon City

 

(15) Erwin Dangwa

Chief of Staff, Office of Former Rep. Samuel M. Dangwa

 

(16) Carlos Lozada

Staff, Office of Former Rep. Samuel M. Dangwa

 

(17) Alan A. Javellana

Former President, National Agribusiness Corporation (NABCOR) Address: 361 Kaimito Street, Valle Verde II, Pasig City

 

(18) Gondelina G. Amata

President, Nacional Livelihood Development Corporation (NLDC) Address: 7th Floor, One Corporate Plaza

845 A. Arnaiz Avenue, Makati City

 

(19) Antonio Y. Ortiz

Former Director General, Technology Resource Center (TRC) Address: Jacinta Building, 2 Guadalupe Nuevo

EDSA, Makati City

 

(20)Dennis L. Cunanan

Director General, Technology Resource Center (TRC) Address: Jacinta Building, 2 Guadalupe Nuevo

EDSA, Makati City

 

(21) Salvador S. Salacup

Assistant Secretary, Department of Agriculture

Address: Department of Agriculture

Elliptical Road, Quezon City

 

(22) Jocelyn D. Piorato

President, Agricultura para sa Magbubukid Foundation, Inc. (APFMI) Address: 5270 Romero Street, Brgy. San Dionisio

Paranaque City

 

 

(23) Mylene T. Encarnacion

President, Countryside Agri and Rural Economic and Development

Foundation, Inc. (CARED)

Address: B4-110, A1, Ph-6, Golden City Subdividion

Barrio Dolores, Tayatay, Rizal

 

(24) John Raymund S. De Asis

President, Block 20, Lot 9, Phase 111, Gladiola St. T.S. Cruz, Almanza 2, Las Pinas City

 

(25) Evelyn D. De Leon

President, Philippine Social Development Foundation, Inc. (PSDFI) Address: Block 10, Lot 5, Daet Street

South City Homes, Binan, Laguna

 

(26) Ronald John B. Lim

President, Ginintuang Alay sa Magsasaka Foundation, Inc. (GAMFI) Address: 311-A R Jabson St., San Joaquin, Pasig City

 

(27) Victor Roman Cacal

NABCOR Employee

Address: 2602D West Tower Philippine Stock Exchange Center Ortigas Center, Pasig City

 

(28)Romulo M. Relevo

NABCOR Employee

Address: 2602D West Tower

Philippine Stock Exchange Center

Ortigas Center, Pasig City

 

(29) Maria Ninez P. Guanizo

NABCOR Employee

Address: 2602D West Tower Philippine Stock Exchange Center Ortigas Center, Pasig City

 

(30)Ma. Julie A. Villaralvo-Johnson

NABCOR Employee

Address: 2602D West Tower

Philippine Stock Exchange Center

Ortigas Center, Pasig City

 

(31) Rhodora B. Mendoza

NABCOR Employee

Address: Lot 2, Block 63, Bright Homes Subd. Brgy. Caypombo, Sta. Maria, Bulacan

(32) Alexis G. Sevidal

NLDC Employee

Address: 7/F One Corporate Plaza

845 A. Arnaiz Avenue, Makati City

 

(33) Sofia D. Cruz

NLDC Employee

Address: 7/F One Corporate Plaza

845 A. Arnaiz Avenue, Makati City

 

(34) Chita C. Jalandoni

NLDC Employee

Address: 7/F One Corporate Plaza

845 A. Arnaiz Avenue, Makati City

 

(35) Gregoria G. Buenaventura

NLDC Employee

Address: 7/F One Corporate Plaza

845 A. Arnaiz Avenue, Makati City

 

(36) Francisco B. Figura

TRC Employee

Address: Jacinta Building, 2 Guadalupe Nuevo

EDSA, Makati City

 

(37) Marivic V. Jover

TRC Employee

Address: Jacinta Building, 2 Guadalupe Nuevo

EDSA, Makati City

 

 

 

The  Department of  Justice  stands  ready  to  provide  such  other documents as may assist your office in the resolution of our request.

 

 

With assurance of our continued support and solidarity, we remain

 

 

 

Very truly yours,

 

 

 

LEILA M. DE LIMA

Secretary

[MikeB]

The Secretary is on slippery legal ground, there have been complaints filed with the Office of the Ombudsman but these people have not yet been formally charged. It's a very long process, likely to take years. As the article says, some of those named have already fled the country or taken "extended vacations" outside the Philippines. Sen Estrada has said that he intends to go to the US to seek a 2nd medical opinion on his wife's condition and the Secretary stated he can do so because the ruling is pending.

[Jake]

Same old chit.  Those honorable members who may be charged and sentenced, some of them will be pardoned

by the next administration.  The bigger the fish, the more persuasion money to distribute under the table which

will expedite their early release.  And then they could be reelected again or better yet become the next president

or mayor of Manila.....he, he.

[MikeB]

Those honorable members who may be charged and sentenced, some of them will be pardoned by the next administration.

Maybe, I don't have a crystal ball. But there's a big difference in the crimes; the individual you cited was convicted of taking gambling proceeds, money that was acquired illegally. The current PDAF scandal used taxpayer funds 100%, monies that were intended to help people decimated by the various natural disasters. There is a tremendous amount of anger directed at these people. 

[paulus]

A very public letter of request written with rather emotional wording and argument. Begs the question; is this an elaborate exercise to appease the large 'angry public' that affirmative action is being taken in this matter, whilst knowing nothing much can result from it in the longer run? . Leila de Lima is to be congratulated for her bulldog tenacity in the prosecution of this case against senators and congressmen, in spite of some criticism of her premature release of information. But is it not her department that is responsible for justice in this country, where in many cases judicial opinion and judgements are so blatantly subject to cor........damn what's that word I'm looking for?.

 

Ah well.  Bahala na.

 

Disclaimer: the foregoing is influenced by chronic cynicism developed over too many years. 

[i am bob]

As an outsider (foreigner) who has been following Philippine politics and what is being done to protect the people of the country who rely on their politicians to do what is right, I feel like standing up and applauding this bold move! Nothing is going to change until somebody with the power stands up and days "No! You can't do that!". I believe this is just the tip of what we are seeing here.

Sent by Gaseous Monkeys using tin cans, a very long string and Tapatalk...

[Thomas]

These resolutions manifest the international community’s recognition that corruption, which negatively impacts democratic institutions and the rule of law

According to a big research concerning how good/bad the life is for the citizens in a country, among other things they found out

low corruption* is much MORE important than democrazy!

 

*In low corruption they included e g things as jobs DON'T go to relatives and friends, but to the most qualified,

and don't need to bribe to get permits...

 

So it's EXTRA important for the Philippines, they solve the huge corruption problem...

 

Office of the Ombudsman

I suppouse, a word borrowed from Swedish!   :)

(Through United Nations, Swedish human right support system is spread over the world. One of my closest friends have organized them e g in some African countries and in Kosovo soon after the civil war there.)

[Papa Carl]

10 more ex-lawmakers in pork barrel scam

 

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/534767/10-more-ex-lawmakers-in-pork-barrel-scam

 

 

The second set of charges in connection with the theft of public funds through the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), pork barrel that the Supreme Court recently ruled as unconstitutional, is set to be filed on Wednesday against at least 10 lawmakers, according to lawyers of whistle-blowers in the P10-billion pork barrel scam.

 

Those recommended to be charged with malversation by the National Bureau of Investigation included former Representatives Arthur Pingoy of South Cotabato, Maite Defensor of Quezon City, Douglas Cagas of Davao del Sur and Isidoro Real of Zamboanga del Sur, according to a list of names lawyer Levito Baligod provided the Inquirer.

 

Six lawmakers were not included in the case because they are now dead.

 

“The charges against the lawmakers would be malversation and not plunder because the government funds involved did not reach the threshold for plunder of P50 million,” Baligod told the Inquirer in an interview.

 

Malversation is a bailable offense unlike plunder, which is nonbailable and is punishable with life imprisonment.

 

The second set of lawmakers will also be charged with misuse of the PDAF, Baligod said.

 

The PDAF is a lump-sum fund that financed the pet projects of senators and members of the House of Representatives. Before the Supreme Court declared the PDAF unconstitutional, a senator was allotted P200 million and a member of the House P70 million every year.

 

Lourdes Benipayo, another lawyer of the witnesses to the alleged pork barrel scam, said the basis of the charges was the “series of transactions entered [into] by the lawmakers and the dummy nongovernment organizations allegedly controlled by JLN CEO Janet Napoles.”

 

On Sept. 16, the NBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed plunder and other charges in the Office of the Ombudsman against 38 people including Napoles, Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr., former Representatives Rizalina Seachon-Lanete, Edgar Valdez, Rodolfo Plaza, Samuel Dangwa and Constantino Jaraula and their senior staff, department heads and other agency officials for the misuse of the PDAF.

 

On Oct. 3, former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, three of her Cabinet secretaries and 20 others were also charged with plunder in connection with the alleged theft of P900 million from the Malampaya gas fund meant for storm victims in 2009.

 

Among those charged in the Malampaya case were alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Napoles, her brother Reynald Lim, nephew John Lim and longtime assistant Evelyn de Leon.

 

 

Baligod said that like the first set of PDAF cases, the second set would have the NBI and DOJ use as evidence the testimonies and documents submitted by the whistle-blowers, former employees of Napoles led by principal witness Benhur Luy.

The documents from the Commission on Audit (COA) would also form part of the evidence. A COA special audit of the allocation and use of the PDAF from 2007 to 2009 found that a total of P6.15 billion was coursed through 82 NGOs, including eight Napoles NGOs.

 

“Just like before, the basis for the charges would be the documentary and testimonial evidence of the witnesses,” Baligod said.

The first set of people was charged with allegedly diverting P10 billion in PDAF funds to dummy aid organizations and ghost projects to obtain kickbacks.

 

Others on the charge sheet were Jessica Lucila Reyes, Enrile’s former chief of staff; Richard Cambe, Revilla’s senior staff member; Ruby Tuason, Enrile and Estrada’s liaison officer; Pauline Labayen, Estrada’s former appointments secretary; Jose Sumalpong, Lanete’s chief of staff; Jeanette de la Cruz, Lanete’s district staff member; Erwin Dangwa, former congressman Dangwa’s chief of staff; and Carlos Lozada, Dangwa’s staff member.

 

The former heads of government corporations charged were Alan Javellana, former president of National Agribusiness Corp.; Gondelina Amata, president of National Livelihood Development Corp.; Antonio Ortiz, former director general of Technology Resource Center (TRC); Dennis Cunanan, former deputy director general and now director general of TRC; and Salvador Salacup, former head of ZNAC Rubber Estate Corp.

 

An Inquirer series on the P10-billion pork barrel starting July triggered widespread calls for the scrapping of the pork barrel and the filing of cases against the PDAF that led to the Supreme Court ruling on Nov. 19 that the lump-sum fund was unconstitutional.

 

I am glad that they are not letting this "slide", and are continuing to prosecute. There may be hope yet?

 

Papa Carl