|
FORMER
elections chairman Benjamin Abalos Sr. was a no-show on
Wednesday’s continuation of the hearing on the
controversial $329-million national broadband network (NBN)
deal with China’s ZTE Co. at the Office of the
Ombudsman, creating tension among lawyers of the
contending parties.
But
before more tension developed, the Ombudsman intervened
and instructed Abalos’s lawyer to tell his client that
he has five days to explain why he did not attend the
hearing or be cited in contempt.
The next
hearing is scheduled on June 18.
Upon
learning that Abalos was not present, lawyer Ernesto
Francisco immediately asked the Ombudsman to cite the
former elections chairman in contempt.
Francisco is the counsel of Senate witness Rodolfo Noel
“Jun” Lozada Jr.
But the
motion was immediately opposed by Abalos’s lawyer,
Gabriel Villareal, saying the subpoena was served while
his client was on vacation abroad.
Those
who also attended the hearing were columnist Jarius
Bondoc, Lozada, businessman Jose de Venecia III and
Dante Madriaga, also a witness in the Senate
investigation.
They
said nothing has changed in their commitment to
reaffirming their testimonies in the Senate regarding
the controversy.
Their
lawyers also requested to the Ombudsman to grant them
immunity as witnesses in the ZTE mess.
But this
was protested by lawyers of the camp of the President’s
husband, Mike Arroyo.
The
Ombudsman gave the four witnesses seven days to submit
their affidavits on what part of the 5,000-page
documents from the Senate hearing they want to reaffirm.
Lozada,
for his part, urged other potential witnesses to come
out in the open and speak what they know about the
scandal.
“My call
is not just for former Speaker [Jose] de Venecia but for
anyone who knows the truth. Please have fear of God.
This is what Filipinos need, fear of God,” he said.
In the
series of his testimonies in the Senate, Lozada told the
hearing about the alleged $130-million kickback asked by
the camp of Abalos from ZTE.
Recently, the camp of de Venecia hinted he would testify
in connection with the ZTE mess.
Meanwhile, Deputy Special Prosecutor Robert Kallos
warned the witnesses to be careful against
self-incriminating testimonies that they will submit
before the investigating body.
“It’s
better if [witnesses] will have to go over the
transcriptions, each and every page, so that you can
choose in the transcripts [which statements to affirm].
If you affirm each and every page, there is a danger
that some incriminatory answers to incriminating
questions might be reaffirmed. We are cautioning the
witnesses— Senate’s is a different investigation,” he
said.
Francisco invoked Rule 5 of the Administrative Order 7,
or the Ombudsman’s rules of procedure, and Presidential
Decree 749 to grant Lozada immunity from prosecution.
But the Ombudsman panel clarified that it is the
agency—not the panel—that grants it. |