MANILA, Philippines - San Juan Rep. Joseph Victor Ejercito clarified yesterday that Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. did not coerce or threaten any member of the House of Representatives to sign the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Renato Corona last Dec. 12.
“Hindi sapilitan at walang pananakot (There was no coercion or threat),” said Ejercito, a son of former President Joseph Estrada.
Ejercito, who joined 187 other House members in signing the complaint, said the House impeached Corona to support President Aquino’s good governance campaign.
He said the President believes that Corona is an obstacle to his crusade to rid the bureaucracy, including the judiciary, of graft and corruption.
Ejercito also said some congressmen are moving to punish his Partido ng Masang Pilipino (PMP) partymate, Navotas Rep. Tobias Tiangco, who testified for the defense panel in the Senate impeachment court last Monday.
“But I don’t think he (Tiangco) will be expelled. I will oppose it. Navotas should not be deprived of representation in the House,” Ejercito said.
Ejercito’s half-brother, Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, who also belongs to the PMP founded by their father, has said he did not think Tiangco’s testimony at the Senate impeachment court benefited the defense panel as it was not related to the remaining three impeachment complaints.
Tiangco told the impeachment court that the congressmen were pressured to vote for the impeachment of Corona during a caucus.
He said House leaders threatened the congressmen that their Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or pork barrel funds would not be released if they would not vote for the impeachment of Corona.
The charges deal with Corona’s alleged nondisclosure of his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth, his failure to declare some properties and bank accounts, and his supposed partiality for former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who appointed him justice and later chief justice.
Tiangco is in hot water with his peers for claiming the release of pork barrel funds was used to force congressmen into signing the impeachment complaint against then Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez in early 2011.
But pork barrel was not used in Corona’s impeachment in December since funds had already been released, he said.
He also alleged the existence of a “modus operandi” in the House to “control or scare” the judiciary.
Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II has warned Tiangco that he should expect some of his peers to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him.
“Congressman Tiangco must be referring to himself when he claimed that Corona’s impeachment was motivated by PDAF,” he said.
“The 188 congressmen who signed the impeachment complaint were only motivated by the desire to hold a high official accountable for his manifest partiality to his patron and for amassing undeclared and unexplained wealth,” he said.
“Any congressman who ascribes sinister motives to this move is probably one who is uncomfortable with reforms being pursued by the present administration,” he added.
Gonzales lashed out at Tiangco for opposing a proposal by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) to stop the Supreme Court from converting into fat bonuses savings from a bloated payroll.
He said the neophyte congressman merely “unmasked himself as an enemy of budget reforms and a friend of graft and corruption.”
“The High Court has been able to get away with it by invoking fiscal autonomy. The latter simply means that it be given a blank check by Congress and it is up to the lords of Padre Faura to use it as they wish,” he said.
“When P-Noy (President Aquino) assumed office, he stopped this military-style of fund conversion. This was the reason why the DBM sought a disbursement system in which only actual personnel strength of the Supreme Court will be funded based on a verifiable headcount and not on the mere say so of the court that it has this number of workers when the real number is lower,” he added.
‘Pork’ disbursed to mayors
Meanwhile, Malacañang admitted yesterday that it did not release the pork barrel funds to some lawmakers, especially those who do not support the programs of the President, and disbursed these straight to local executives like mayors.
Presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda cited the case of Zambales Rep. Milagros Magsaysay, an ally of former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who belongs to the opposition in the House of Representatives.
“That’s being done right now (releasing PDAF to mayors in lawmaker’s district). (Like for example) Congresswoman Magsaysay she is against the administration, she is against the policies,” Lacierda explained.
“So our concern is: If you’re not helping us in our programs, in our policies, we might as well go straight to your constituents and help the constituents,” he said.
“But did we violate her PDAF, did we deprive her constituents? I think the whole situation is we will not leave your constituents high and dry,” Lacierda said.
He said the constituents were not deprived of assistance from the national government.
“What is the role of the legislature when it comes to PDAF? The role of the legislature when it comes to the PDAF is to identify projects,” he explained.
Rep. Tiangco told the Senate impeachment court that his PDAF was withheld by the administration.
Tiangco, however, admitted during cross-examination by prosecution lawyers that he had received his pork barrel funds in full but it was much delayed, unlike his other colleagues who belong to the majority coalition. With Delon Porcalla
Continue Reading at The Philippine Star
