Delicadeza at the Sandiganbayan

In several past columns, we have said that the time-honored value of delicadeza is important in the bid to save the reputation of the judiciary, particularly in relation to the recent Court of Appeals (CA) row on the Meralco case.

We lamented the apparent disregard of this value by some parties and how this placed some personalities in the judiciary in extremely difficult situations where their integrity and credibility have come under fire. Delicadeza could have saved many from major embarrassment.

Now the question is being asked whether or not the Sandiganbayan is actually in the same boat as the CA.

The view is that it might also benefit from some exercise of delicadeza in the light of issues that could dent the esteem and faith that the public has for this institution. The issue – which we feel must be validated – is that the Sandiganbayan, or at least some of its members, are being perceived as highly vulnerable to political pressure or to the lure of favors from political quarters.

And we do hope our justices at the Sandiganbayan act quickly to quell this issue.

The issue has allegedly been triggered by an apparent disappointment on the part of the Ombudsman regarding the case of Rodriguez, Rizal town mayor Pedro Cuerpo.

It will be recalled that since 2006, the special prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman had already ruled that there is probable cause to charge Cuerpo for violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

In the wake of findings of probable cause, Ombudsman Special Prosecutor Janine Hidalgo asked the Sandiganbayan’s Fifth Division to suspend Cuerpo “pendent lite” or during the pendency of the case.

But Ombudsman insiders say that until now, Hidalgo is still waiting for the special court to act on her petition even if a suspension pendente lite is provided for by law and is merely ministerial on the part of the Sandiganbayan. It now wonders why the Sandiganbayan has not acted on the petition.

Media has noted the high conviction rate marked by the Ombudsman’s office recently – a major boost to the country’s anti-graft campaign. Unfortunately, it has to deal with political maneuvers, which is the biggest enemy of its mission to battle corruption, such as what many feel is happening at the Sandiganbayan.

We hope the Sandiganbayan’s Fifth Division is aware of speculations that the apparent reluctance to implement what the law provides is due to political pressure from the Palace, since the Rodriguez mayor is purportedly a Malacañang ally.

We are concerned about Justice Peralta’s situation most especially. Talks are he does not want to touch the Cuerpo issue because of an impending nomination to the Supreme Court where several seats are slated to be vacated next year.

This “inaction for an SC seat” rumor is most unfair to Justice Peralta. Many believe that Justice Peralta could qualify for that SC seat without having to bow to political pressure. All he has to do is to assert the independence of the Sandiganbayan.

Meanwhile, we hope everyone would desist from further speculations. It is unfair to the Sandiganbayan justices concerned. It is not too late for them to implement the law as requested by the Ombudsman. They should be given the chance to do so.

Not so hidden agenda

Many find it funny that certain news reports seemed to have misinterpreted Security Bank Corp.’s disclosure with the Philippine Stock Exchange and have cited the bank as among those with investments in Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.

The disclosure clearly states that Security Bank “does not have any exposure direct or indirect to Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.” It couldn’t be more straightforward than that.

For purposes of transparency, Security Bank has also disclosed that it has “a $10-million exposure to Merrill Lynch”, which assuredly remains safe and intact, more so now that Merrill Lynch has been acquired by the largest bank in the US, Bank of America.

A misunderstanding

 There were some people having a field day railing at the P4.3 billion in supplemental fund releases by Malacañang to the Department of Agriculture last year, using as basis the 2007 report of the Commission on Audit (COA) which had surprisingly questioned such disbursements on the ground that these “over and above” the approved annual budget of the DA.

A detailed explanation from both DA and Department of Budget and Management officials would show that COA had apparently erred in questioning the release of these augmentation funds. DBM Secretary Rolando Andaya had explained that such releases are allowed provided that such allocations are for existing programs spelled out in the General Appropriations Act.

Unless such augmentation is allowed, the government would be left with its hands tied whenever emergencies crop up, like whenever there is a necessity to provide assistance to calamity victims or help farmers recoup crop losses or rehabilitate their lands battered by typhoons.

The bulk of P4.3-billion fund was actually used for intervention programs of the DA to guarantee high palay yields during the wet planting season in 2007 and the dry crop this year, while other supplemental releases were used to set up facilities to widen the access of low-income families to affordably priced basic goods.

Andaya had already explained that of the nine projects covered by the P4.3- billion fund released to the DA, six were requested and given in November and December while the two were made in July and the last one in February, all in 2007.

The P1.5-billion fund released to the DA in February last year went to the DA’s Ginintuang Masaganang Ani (GMA) program. The release coincided with the start of the summer planting season, in which intervention measures were necessary to guarantee high yields. So militant party-list representatives and their allies were off tangent in putting malice behind the move by stressing that this particular fund release was made prior to the May 2007 elections. It would have been ridiculous for Malacanang to spend more on farm intervention measures like seed and fertilizer support and yet give such inputs to farmers at the end of the planting season.

Another release, amounting to P482 million for postharvest facilities, was made upon the “strong endorsement” of the government’s economic managers, “in order to pare down postharvest losses which in turn will reduce the country’s rice imports.

Partly as a result of these additional fund releases, the DA was able to reach and even slightly surpass its palay production target of 7.1 million tons during the dry crop for 2008 despite a global food crisis and spiralling farm production costs triggered by the sky-high fuel prices.

As for the other issues raised by COA in its report, government bashers have wrongly blamed the DA, although some of the projects that were under question were mostly implemented at the local level, while the others were already explained by regional officials of the Department to COA auditors in their respective areas.

One of these issues, the so-called “rice scam” which supposedly involved ghost farmer-beneficiaries and the non-delivery of seeds and other inputs, concern municipal agricultural officers or MAOs, which are no longer under the administrative control of the DA but are instead under the supervision of LGUs.

For most of us unfamiliar with the way programs and projects are implemented by the DA at the local level, it would be easy to point an accusing finger at the Department given the charges raised by the COA on this so-called rice scam. But as agriculture officials have already explained, the DA does not purchase inputs like seeds and fertilizers but only gives the subsidies or program funds to accredited suppliers after a thorough verification process based on the master lists of farmer-beneficiaries that had been submitted by the MAOs to the Department.

After the LGUs have prepared both the master lists of farmer-beneficiaries and farm input suppliers, the suppliers then deliver the inputs to designated drop-off points. The farmers acquire the inputs after complying with the requirements and signing the master lists, indicating the inputs received, in the presence of LGU representatives. Only after the LGUs have certified the signed master lists indicating the actual inputs received will the DA regional offices pay the subsidies to the accredited suppliers.

For comments, e-mail at [email protected]