AFP chief denies whitewash in Glorietta blast probe

(Updated 6:47 p.m.) Armed Forces of the Philippines chief of staff Gen. Ricardo David denied on Thursday that the investigation into the Glorietta 2 blast in 2007 was whitewashed. At the time of the blast on Oct. 19, 2007, David headed the Army's Support Command. He was the direct superior of now retired Army Col. Allan Sollano, who claimed that an explosive device, not methane gas, caused the blast that claimed 11 lives. Sollano also said the investigation was whitewashed to cover up for the administration of then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. David and Sollano were both present at the Department of Justice's reinvestigation on Thursday. Sollano stood by the contents of his affidavit, claiming that he was authorized not to tell anything to the media about his findings that the scene of the explosion contained traces of a C-4 bomb. But David said he only made this directive because it will be "unethical" for Sollano to speak with the media because the Philippine Army has an official spokesperson. "I told him, 'Do not give any statement [to the media]. Tell everything to the PNP. You are not the spokesman of the Army,'" David quoted himself as telling Sollano. Asked by reporters later whether he suppressed the information given by Sollano, David denied this and said the spot report he forwarded to the AFP hierarchy included Sollano's conclusion that an explosive caused the blast. "In fact, I reported it as an explosive. I was not given instruction that it was methane (that caused the blast). I reported what Sollano told me, that there's an explosion," said David. Sollano: An explosive device did it It was Sollano's Explosive and Ordinance Disposal team that inspected the Glorietta 2 basement right after the blast on Oct. 19, 2007. In his affidavit, he claimed the "nature of the destruction in Glorietta indicated the detonation of a high explosive device." In his testimony on Thursday, Sollano affirmed his earlier findings. "Only a high explosive can inflict the petalling effects on metals… the cratering is a result of the pressure, the blast pressure. Once the high explosive detonates, it will produce cratering effect," said Sollano. He added that the explosive detonated inside the lower portion of the diesel gas tank. He likewise brought with him a plastic bag which he claimed was used to wrap the explosive. He said he found the bag near Luk Yuen restaurant. PNP bomb experts: Methane gas did it Philippine National Police bomb experts, however, contested Sollano's claim and said the elements constituting a bombing were not present. "Nag-sifting tayo. Walang mahanap na collaborative evidence para yung IED [improvised explosive device] ay ma-prove natin," said police Superintendent Albert Ferro, head of the PNP's Philippine Bomb Data Center. (We did sifting, and there was no collaborative evidence to prove an IED caused the blast.) Retired police Inspector Edilberto Capecete Jr., who was part of the Philippine Bomb Data Center at that time, also said methane gas caused the explosion. "I'm still consistent with the gas explosion... What happened in Glorietta was a case of gas explosion. Kung explosive, dapat may traces of explosive, unless we have contamination of the area," he said. He said that what happened at the basement was "pushing." "But C-4 (bomb) will cause cutting," he added. Police Director Arturo Cacdac, who used to head the PNP's Criminal Investigation and Detection Group, also pointed out inconsistencies in Sollano's testimony. Cacdac said that in Sollano's affidavit, the retired colonel claimed he found the plastic bag near Luk Yuen restaurant. However, Sollano's affidavit said the bag was found on top of the diesel tank in Glorietta's basement. "The first time, he said it was in Luk Yuen, at the back of a parked car. But when he issued the affidavit, he said it was recovered on top of the tank," said Cacdac, who now heads the PNP's investigation and detective management. Next hearing Senior State Prosecutor Peter Ong, who chairs the DOJ panel conducting the reinvestigation, asked Sollano to bring the bag when the hearing resumes on November 26. He likewise said that even if Sollano's statement is not yet corroborated, it is too early to conclude what indeed caused the blast. "Just because a person has not been corroborated by anyone, it does not mean he is not credible. We're not here for the number of witnesses. He can be the only one, but he can be believable," Ong told reporters. Arroyo admin cover-up? Ong added that apart from determining whether a bomb or methane gas caused the blast, the panel will also check if there were orders to cover up the blast. "Assuming that a bomb caused it, we will first find out if someone made orders [to bomb Glorietta]," he said. Sollano had earlier told the media that the explosion was deliberate and that the investigation had been whitewashed to cover up for the previous government under then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Justice Secretary Leila de Lima earlier said she wanted to find out whether the explosion was planned to draw public attention away from other controversies at that time, particularly the NBN-ZTE scandal. The blast happened at the height of the NBN-ZTE controversy, in which the government signed an overpriced $329-million national broadband contract with China's Zhong Xing Telecommunications Equipment (ZTE) Corp. Arroyo scrapped the deal on Sept. 22, 2007 when allegations of anomalies cropped up. The blast also happened a few days before Arroyo pardoned her predecessor, former President Joseph Estrada, who was convicted of plunder in September that year.—JV, GMANews.TV