Filtered By: Topstories
News

Prosecutors: Don’t blame us if govt doesn't get full P303M from Garcia


Officials from the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) on Wednesday said they should not be blamed if the government fails to retrieve the full P303 million allegedly stashed away by ex-military comptroller Carlos Garcia after he benefited from graft-ridden transactions. Lawyer Jose Balmeo Jr. of the OSP reiterated that an estimated P128 million from Garcia’s bank account had already been withdrawn by the time the government moved to freeze the assets of the former Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) official after it filed a plunder case against him in 2005. “You must understand that a big part of it [the P303 million] was already withdrawn prior to the filing of the plunder case… Saan po natin kukunin ‘yun [Where shall we get that]?" he said in a briefing with GMA News' Sandra Aguinaldo and other reporters on Wednesday.

Officials from the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP), led by Special Prosecutor Wendell Sulit (center), said that the P52M that the OSP already retrieved from Garcia are already with the Office of the Ombudsman and will immediately be transferred to the national treasury. Sandra Aguinaldo
Balmeo added that based on their investigation, the $1.4-million-worth properties in United States originally listed in Garcia’s plunder case did not actually belong to the former AFP comptroller’s family. The apartment unit in New York that Garcia allegedly owned was just rented, while “there was no evidence at all" indicating that another house in Ohio belonged to his family, Balmeo said. “When we took over the case, we painstakingly looked for evidence na talagang kanila ito [that these were really theirs]… Wala po talagang ebidensya [There’s really no evidence]," he said. Balmeo added that another house and lot allegedly purchased by Garcia using government funds was bought in 1979 — way before the period covered by the plunder case, which is from 1993 to 2004. Prosecutors earlier entered into a plea bargain agreement with Garcia, who pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of direct bribery and money laundering instead of the crime of plunder as part of the deal. (See: Report: Ex-general Garcia pleads guilty to lesser offenses) After admitting to these offenses, Garcia was allowed to post bail and to temporarily walk out of jail in December last year. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) asked the Sandiganbayan anti-graft court last week to allow it to intervene in the controversial deal. The OSP was given 15 days to comment on OSG’s motion to intervene. (See: Sol Gen moves to intervene in Garcia plea bargain deal) ‘We didn’t pocket anything’ Special Prosecutor Wendell Sulit meanwhile dismissed claims that the difference between the total P303 million allegedly stolen by Garcia and the P135 million that he promised to return to the government has already gone into the pockets of prosecutors who agreed with the plea bargain. “Wala kaming binulsa… Ginagawa kaming napakarumi rito sa Office of the Ombudsman… Strategy yan pero always nasa isip namin yung kapakanan ng gobyerno hindi yung bulsa namin," she said in the same briefing. (We didn’t pocket anything. We are being painted black here at the Office of the Ombudsman… We followed a stratagem but always, what was foremost in our minds was the government’s interest, not our own pockets.) Sulit added that the P52 million that the OSP has already retrieved are already with the Office of the Ombudsman and will be immediately transferred to the national treasury. The special prosecutor likewise said that 11 land titles and four vehicles have already been transferred to the Philippine government from Garcia’s name. She further said that the OSP will continue retrieving questionable assets from Garcia despite the plea bargaining agreement. “It doesn’t follow na kung ‘yung mga assets o civil aspect ng plunder case ay nasama na rito sa plea bargaining agreement, totally wala nang assets na hahabulin sa forfeiture. Different kasi," she said. (It doesn’t follow that if those assets or the civil aspect of the plunder case have been included in the plea bargaining agreement, then totally we can’t go after any more assets in the forfeiture.)—Andreo C. Calonzo/JV, GMANews.TV