|
THE
Senate seems so taken aback by the Supreme Court ruling
in favor of Romulo Neri’s petition that the chamber’s
leaders have issued what at first sounded like
conflicting statements on the fate of the NBN-ZTE
inquiry.
One
senator told this paper the other day that he and his
colleagues were ready to resume their stalled
investigation into the $329-million national broadband
deal with Zhong Xing Telecommunications Equipment Co.
Ltd. (ZTE). Majority Leader Francis Pangilinan confirmed
he would move to have the former socioeconomic planning
secretary summoned to the next hearing.
“I
intend to ask [Neri] other questions on the alleged
involvement of President Arroyo in the ZTE-NBN
transaction,” Pangilinan said. “We will not allow this
legal setback to prevent us from seeking the truth.”
Another
senator, however, was reported by another paper as
saying the Senate “has indefinitely put on hold its 13th
hearing. . . on the NBN deal, which would have alleged
‘Greedy Group plus plus’ bagman Ruben Reyes as the main
witness.”
The
report quotes Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, blue-ribbon
committee chairman, as saying “the joint inquiry had
decided to suspend any hearing until the Senate has come
to grips with the ramifications of the Supreme Court
decision” Tuesday on the NBN deal with China’s ZTE Co.
Whether
or not the senators could immediately resume their
inquiry when Congress resumes session April 28 or would
have to await the outcome of their motion for the High
Court to reconsider its March 25 ruling, it is now
obvious that without Neri, few of them are confident
they would be able to get the goods on Mrs. Arroyo and
others.
Opposition senators have scored the Supreme Court for,
in the words of Senate President Manuel Villar,
“favoring the President’s privilege over the people’s
constitutionally guaranteed right to information to get
to the truth” behind allegations of bribery and
kickbacks in the aborted transaction.
“This is
unfortunate,” Villar continued. “The SC decision is a
historical blot in the nation’s cherished tenets of
democracy, truth and justice.”
Motherhood statements aside, the senators sent the
signal, perhaps unintended, that their inquiry depended
entirely on the oral testimonies of “resource persons”
who may or may not have less than salutary motives.
True,
they extracted an admission from Neri last year that
then-Comelec chairman Benjamin Abalos had offered what
sounded like a P200-million bribe—as well as Mrs.
Arroyo’s instructions to reject it.
Still,
the inquiry has dragged on long enough without producing
solid evidence—documentary or otherwise—that would
affirm many of the senators’ contention that the NBN-ZTE
contract was grossly disadvantageous to the Republic and
that it only became so because of the
multimillion-dollar kickbacks demanded by people closely
identified with the Arroyo administration.
For the
most part, the probe has relied on witnesses who, as it
were, failed to get a piece of the action.
When you
come right down to it, the NBN-ZTE inquiry typifies the
investigations conducted, not just by the Senate, but
also by other government entities. The police, for
instance, invariably rely on the testimonies of
so-called eyewitnesses or confessions from suspects who
are routinely subjected to third-degree interrogation.
Little
effort goes to looking for forensic proof or documentary
evidence which could establish guilt without having to
beat out admissions from witnesses and suspects. No
wonder, then, that such cases are often thrown out of
court.
To be
sure, the Senate is not required to establish guilt
beyond reasonable doubt. All it needs is the propensity
of evidence that demonstrate wrongdoing. But even if the
senators are addressing their case to the court of
public opinion and their final reports will be endorsed
to the formal institutions of justice, they are
nonetheless expected to hold themselves to rigorous
standards of evidence.
The
Supreme Court is now being blamed for affirming the
cloak of executive privilege with which Neri has sought
to shield himself from senatorial harassment. The ruling
has also become a convenient excuse—for either party—not
to pursue the NBN-ZTE probe any further.
As
lawmakers, however, the senators have it in their power
to formulate and adopt legislation that would allow
them—or any truth seeker, for that matter—to slash their
way through the thicket of cover-up by the executive or
any other branch of government. One such bill, in fact,
is already pending in the House of Representatives.
Recently, Cotabato Rep. Emmylou Taliño-Mendoza sought
the help of her House colleagues in expediting the
passage of House Bill 2021, the proposed Freedom of
Access to Information Act, which she said seeks to “give
meaning and substance” to the constitutional right to
information.
“There
is no question that greater access to government
information on matters of public concern will strengthen
public accountability and discourage malfeasance,”
Taliño-Mendoza said in her explanation.
Under HB
2021, all information in the possession, custody or
control of any agency, regardless of its physical form
or the format in which it is stored or contained, is of
public interest, and shall be made available to the
public for its scrutiny. The bill covers the Executive,
Legislative and Judicial branches as well as
constitutional bodies.
“More
than two decades since we installed the 1987
Constitution, we still do not have a law providing the
means for the effective and orderly implementation of
provisions concerning the right to information,” Taliño-Mendoza
noted.
The bill
establishes the procedures for access to information,
including mandatory deadlines for agencies to comply
with requests for information. The bill also provides
“remedies to compel disclosure,” should an agency deny a
request for information.
With
such a law, for instance, the Neda-ICC could have been
obligated to release the minutes of its NBN
deliberations from the get-go.
Over 70
countries around the world have implemented some form of
freedom of information legislation—aptly nicknamed
“sunshine laws.” Ironically, the Philippines, which
habitually calls itself Asia’s oldest democracy, is not
one of them.
HB 2021
probably contains features that need improvement—if only
to strengthen its power to compel disclosure of official
information. In view of the senators’ experience in the
NBN-ZTE inquiry, they should now be in a better position
to pinpoint those areas where a proposed “sunshine law”
could be fortified.
If the
senators are unable to pin down all the culprits in the
NBN-ZTE scandal, let them at least move on with the
resolve to pass a freedom of information law—one that
would help ensure greater government transparency. |
