Jinggoy won’t ask for special jail

MANILA, Philippines - Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr. are ready to face whatever action the Sandiganbayan takes against them as individuals accused of plunder in the pork barrel scam, with Estrada saying he would not ask for a special detention facility.

In a telephone interview with reporters yesterday, Estrada, who is currently in Los Angeles, said that he will subject himself to whatever the Sandiganbayan decides regarding his case.

Estrada said that his lawyers will file a motion for reconsideration on Monday on the resolution of the Office of the Ombudsman recommending the filing of plunder charges against him.

However, Estrada said that he expects this would be junked by the Office of the Ombudsman.

“I am prepared for any eventuality,” Estrada said.

Once the case is filed before the Sandiganbayan, arrest warrants would be issued against the accused senators.

Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago said that the senators should be detained in regular detention facilities just like any other person accused of a crime.

Estrada said that it would be up to the court to decide where they would be detained and that he would not ask to be placed in a special facility.

“Do I have a choice? Wala naman kami choice (We don’t have any choice here). I’m not thinking of it,” he said.

Lawyer Joel Bodegon, the legal counsel of Revilla, aired the same opinion, saying that once the court decides on where the senator would be detained, he would have no choice on the matter.

“It is the discretion of the court to determine in which detention facility he would be placed,” Bodegon said.

However, he said that the court could extend some degree of consideration to the three as senators and send them to a special detention facility.

He cited the case of former President Joseph Estrada, who was allowed to stay at his rest house in Tanay, Rizal and even alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, who is currently detained at Fort Sto. Domingo in Laguna.

“This is a provisional detention. While facing trial, the court may extend them some consideration. There is still a presumption of innocence even if they are facing trial before the court,” Bodegon said.

The three senators were urged to go on leave while their cases are pending, which Estrada and Revilla have both rejected.

Estrada insisted that he did not commit any crime and that his conscience is clear so “why would I go on a leave of absence?”

On the part of Revilla, Bodegon said that his client has no reason to go on leave because he believes he is innocent of all the charges raised against him.

Bodegon said that the petition filed by Revilla’s camp before the Supreme Court for certiorari prohibition against the Office of the Ombudsman is still pending and they are counting on this to be resolved in their favor.

The senators could also face suspension once the arrest warrants are issued by the Sandiganbayan.

Senator Santiago said that the suspension is automatic upon the issuance of the arrest warrant.

Bodegon did not dispute this and noted that both the Plunder Law and the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act contain provisions that once a valid information is filed, then the accused can be suspended from office.

He pointed out that this has happened before in the case of Santiago, who was suspended by the Sandiganbayan for 90 days in 1995.

Santiago’s case at the time was for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, which was filed when she was still immigration commissioner.

She brought the case up to the Supreme Court, which came out with a resolution in 2001 stating that the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act “does not exclude from its coverage the members of Congress and that, therefore, the Sandiganbayan did not err in thus decreeing the assailed preventive suspension order.”

“Attention might be called to the fact that Criminal Case No. 16698 has been decided by the First Division of the Sandiganbayan on 06 December 1999, acquitting herein petitioner (Santiago). The Court, nevertheless, deems it appropriate to render this decision for future guidance on the significant issue raised by petitioner,” according to the ruling.

Estrada said that he would return to the country on the evening of April 21 via Cathay Pacific.

He said that he would be speaking at the graduation rites of the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Manila the following day.

Estrada said that he has never tried to run from any charge made against him and this was true even in 2001 when he faced several charges.

“The last time I left the country, a lot of people were also saying that I would not come back. But I came back, didn’t I?” he said.

Revilla is with his family in Israel for a pilgrimage in the Holy Land.

Up to senators

It is up to the senators implicated in the pork barrel scam to decide whether they should go on leave after the Office of the Ombudsman filed plunder and graft charges against them before the Sandiganbayan, Malacañang said yesterday.

On their detention, the Palace said it would be up to the Sandiganbayan to make a decision after warrants of arrest are issued.

Presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda said Senate President Franklin Drilon had made known his opinion that it would really be up to the senators concerned to take a leave of absence or not.

“I think he (Drilon) is a better person to respond to this. Part of the requirement of being charged is the opportunity to be heard. The call for the senators to go on leave is best addressed to their own judgment,” Lacierda said.

“But there are rules and procedures in the Senate as to when a particular senator may be suspended and those rules have been mentioned by Senate President Frank Drilon,” he said.

If the Sandiganbayan finds probable cause in the case filed by the Ombudsman, Drilon said the situation could change because then warrants of arrest would be issued.

Since this is a non-bailable offense, Drilon said they would be under detention by the Sandiganbayan, and they would be ordered suspended from the Senate by the Sandiganbayan.

The Office of the Ombudsman’s decision to file charges against Enrile, Estrada and Revilla is a test on the fairness and trustworthiness of the country’s judicial system, Vice President Jejomar Binay said yesterday.

“In the event that the ombudsman denies the motions for reconsideration and proceeds with the filing before the Sandiganbayan, I am confident that our courts will accord the three senators their right to a fair trial as provided for by the Constitution,” Binay said.

He said the case would also test if the drive for reforms will be blind to political motives.

“If it stops with the filing of the plunder cases against three senators who are not political allies of the President and confines it to the Napoles case, it will create the impression of being selective, and that political partisanship – not justice – is the sole motivation behind these charges,” Binay said.

Binay noted that the Commission Audit (COA) has mentioned other legislators and other fake NGOs in a comprehensive report last year.

“We hope the concerned government agencies will act on these findings with the same determination and focus displayed in the Napoles case. The public would want no less than full accountability from its public officials. The rule of law must prevail regardless of stature or political affiliations,” Binay said.

A senior administration lawmaker said yesterday the multibillion-peso pork barrel scam would be among the main issues that will dominate the 2016 presidential elections.

Quezon City Rep. Winston Castelo said prospective presidential candidates would be scrutinized on their stand or how they handled the pork barrel scam controversy.

“It (stand on pork barrel scam) could even be the determining factor of his (presidential aspirant) ability to win in the next polls,” Castelo said.

Gabriela party-list Rep. Luzviminda Ilagan said Enrile, Estrada and Revilla might request the Sandiganbayan to place them in the custody of the Senate under Senate President Drilon once the anti-graft court issues warrants of arrest against them.

Ilagan said there is a precedent for this when “protective custody” was given to the so-called “Batasan 5” lawmakers led by then Bayan Muna

Rep. Satur Ocampo when they were charged with rebellion in 2006.

She said being granted protective custody should not be considered special treatment for the three senators.

“This will allow them to continue carrying out their duties as legislators, after all, they are not yet convicted. Besides they were elected by the people to serve. And serve they must. So seeking custody, like staying in the Senate, can be done,” she said. With Jose Rodel Clapano, Aurea Calica, Paolo Romero