Palace: 'Late' charges will reinforce case vs Merci

Instead of diminishing the impeachment case against Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, the “late" filing of plunder charges versus two former agriculture officials for the P728-million fertilizer fund scam may even bolster the case against her, Malacañang said on Saturday. Presidential deputy spokeswoman Abigail Valte said that the filing of the charges —which came some six years after the scam was uncovered— actually highlights the Ombudsman’s inaction against graft. “I think it doesn’t diminish but highlights the inaction that had gone on before. The fertilizer fund scam happened in 2004. It was discovered in 2005 (and) now it’s 2011. Given all that has happened, it’s too little too late," she said on government-run dzRB radio. Valte was referring to the Ombudsman’s order on Friday to file plunder charges against former Agriculture Secretary Luis Lorenzo Jr. and former undersecretary Jocelyn “Jocjoc" Bolante. Even as this developed, militant umbrella group Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) voiced fears that the late filing of charges may be a deliberate ploy to have the two former agriculture officials dismissed. Bolante had been tagged as the engineer behind the scam, which allegedly channeled funds originally meant for fertilizers to the presidential campaign of then administration bet Gloria Arroyo in 2004. While Valte declined to say whether or not the Palace believes the late filing of charges was meant to score points for Gutierrez at her impeachment trial, she said that it is already clear to the public just how long it took before the Ombudsman took action on the case. “Siguro wala tayo sa position para sabihin kung ano ang pakay nila. Hindi tayo ang naroon sa kanilang lugar. Pero nakikita natin kailan nangyari kailan nadiskubre, kailan na-file ang kaso (We may not be in a position to speculate about their motives for this late filing. We cannot claim to be in their shoes. But we have seen how long it took between the time this was discovered and when the case was filed)," she said. On Friday, the Office of the Ombudsman finally recommended the filing of plunder charges against Bolante and Lorenzo. Lorenzo, who was not included in the original complaint, has since been charged for "allegedly giving Bolante a free hand in the disposition of the funds," said Assistant Ombudsman Jose de Jesus Jr. "On the other hand, Bolante was charged for having prepared a list of proponents; however, the farming zones where the funds should be allocated were not followed," he added. Apart from Lorenzo and Bolante, also ordered charged were nine others, mostly former Agriculture officials, for "conspiring with one another." They were: Ibarra Poliquit, Joselito Flordeliza , Jaime Eonzon Paule, Maritess Aytona, Jose Barredo, Leonica Marco-Llarena, and Marilyn Araos. Nine regional Agriculture officials were likewise recommended to be charged with malversation for violation of Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code and violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The nine regional officials were Guimersindo Lasam, Cesar Rodriguez, Dennis Araullo, Ricardo Oblena, Leo Cañeda, Oscar Parawan, Roger Chio, Sumail Sekak, and Eduardo Lecciones. When it was still in its investigation stages, the Ombudsman's Field Investigation Office (FIO) in July 2010 recommended the filing of charges of malversation of public funds and violation of RA 3019 against Bolante and Lorenzo. Also charged with technical malversation and violation of the anti-graft law were former Representatives Nanette Daza (Quezon City), Federico Sandoval (Navotas), Oscar Gozos (Batangas), and Carmencita Reyes (Marinduque). Lorenzo and Bolante repeatedly denied committing any anomalies in connection with the implementation of the fertilizer fund project. Bayan: plunder raps vs bolante designed to fail Bayan voiced fears that the "inordinate delay" of the filing of plunder raps against Bolante and Lorenzo shows the case may be designed for dismissal. “If five years isn’t an inordinate delay, then what is? The belated filing of cases vs Bolante et al only strengthens the impeachment case against Gutierrez. What was the difference between the evidence the Ombudsman had in 2006 and the evidence they have now, that it is only now that they decided to file plunder raps against Bolante and others?" said Bayan secretary general Renato Reyes Jr., in an article posted on the Bayan website. Bayan said that the worst thing that can happen is that the case filed before the Sandiganbayan was weak and that it was only filed so that the Ombudsman can establish a defense against the impeachment against her. “We are certainly not convinced that the Ombudsman has had a change of heart. We are not just about to give her the benefit of the doubt. There is danger that the case filed was weak and was filed only as a defense in the impeachment. We have to see if the complaint is designed to be dismissed," Reyes said. “We won’t be surprised if the respondents use the inordinate delay by the Ombudsman as basis for asking for the dismissal of the complaint,“ he added. Bayan added that the latest actions of the Ombudsman highlight the fact her inaction on the fertilizer fund scam is the strongest among the cases in the impeachment trial. “She’s going all out for her defense and really focusing on the fertilizer fund scam because it is the strongest case and it is the one where GMA will be implicated," Reyes said. — TJD, GMA News