You are on page 1of 6

3 February 2011

TRANSCRIPT OF SEN. DRILON’S INTERPELLATION ON GARCIA PLEA BARGAIN


DEAL

DRILON: I keep on hearing ‘The evidence is weak’ etc etc. All of this happened before we heard
the testimony of Mrs. Mendoza and Rabusa. Now, we note that a few days after the plea
bargaining agreement was signed, the Office of the Ombudsman stated in the opposition to the
petition for bail that the evidence of guilt was strong, but that’s beside the point at this point.
First, the plea bargaining agreement is still pending approval. Is that correct Madam
Ombudsman?

GUTIERREZ: Yes your honor.

DRILON: As it is pending approval, given all these testimonies that you heard now, could you
withdraw the plea bargaining agreement and now present as witnesses Rabusa and Mendoza?
Can you do that?

GUTIERREZ: We have not yet received any formal statement from Col. Rabusa, from Heidi
Mendoza…

DRILON: Madam Ombudsman, the testimony of Mr. Rabusa was under oath. The statement of
Mendoza was under oath. Do you need to have a formal complaint? Can you not secure copies of
the transcript of the statements made under oath and now withdraw the motion to approve the
plea bargain and proceed to present these two witnesses together with the documents that they
have in possession, in order to continue the prosecution? Can you not do that now? Withdraw the
plea bargain?

GUTIERREZ: Mr. Chairman, I created a panel and I ordered them to get all the documents and I
think they are already getting all the documents. Please allow us to assess the evidence and the
corroborating evidence because right now, you have to understand that of course there will be
findings. As head of the Office of the Ombudsman, I don’t want to preempt the findings or
whatever recommendations the investigators will have on this particular case. We do not want to
rush…

DRILON: On that basis, can you not just withdraw first the motion to approve the plea
bargaining agreement while you are reassessing everything, so that the Sandiganbayan does not
have that pleading on that desk which they can approve at anytime? Can you not withdraw the
motion for the approval of the plea bargaining agreement while you are reviewing? Because
Madam Chair, unfortunately, you remind me of instances in the past where in the fertilizer scam,
we gave you the evidence six years ago, up to now there is nothing filed. I am afraid that in that
attitude that you will be reviewing everything, it will take three Congresses afterwards to have
these things settled. My only request is, can you not withdraw the motion to approve the plea
bargain? Withdraw it in the meantime while you are assessing again your evidence.

GUTIERREZ: Mr. Chairman, in the fertilizer scam…


DRILON: No, no just answer me directly.

GUTIERREZ: As of now, I cannot say that we will withdraw because we have a process. Mr.
Chair, as much as I would like to do but we have a process.

DRILON: I am not even saying that you now decide to rescind the plea bargaining agreement.
I’m just asking you, given all these testimonies that you heard, just to withdraw the motion for
the approval of the plea bargaining agreement. That you are not even willing to do.

GUTIERREZ: Mr. Chairman…

DRILON: Answer me, yes or no.

GUTIERREZ: Because Mr. Chair…

DRILON: I’m asking, is she willing to do that?

GUINGONA: Please respond to the question.

GUTIERREZ: Mr. Chairman, please reconsider. It is not a matter of saying yes or no because
nanonood po ang ating publiko. Kung sasabihin ko pong wi-withdraw ngayon, dapat po naman
may justification.

DRILON: Yung justification eh narinig mo rito yung testimony under oath. And we are not even
saying ‘rescind the plea bargaining agreement’. We are just saying ‘withdraw the pending
motion to approve the plea bargaining agreement’.

GUINGONA: I think Madam Ombudsman the good senator is saying na habang nagmumuni
muni ka kung itutuloy ba o hindi mo na itutuloy, pwede ba alisin mo muna sa desk ng mga
Sandiganbayan justices para sa ganun ay hindi ma-approve ng Sandiganbayan habang
nagmumuni-muni pa kayo. Pwede po ba yun? We’re not saying that you approve it, disapprove
it...

SOTTO: The question is, ‘Can you?’ ‘Not’; ‘Will you?’ ‘Yes’

MDS: Mr. Chair, more equitable for the Ombudsman to file a manifestation, not file a motion,
just manifest that there has been an official request, if any, for reinvestigation and that you are
submitting the information to the judge so that he will know that you are being diligent… you
don’t need to do this in the form of a motion. You can just enter it into the record.

GUINGONA: Well whether withdrawal or stated by the good senator, a manifestation. I guess
Senator DRILON would ask also that. Are you willing to file a manifestation?

GUTIERREZ: Mr. Chairman, we will file a manifestation to that effect…


DRILON: To the effect that?

GUTIERREZ: To the effect that this recommendation coming from this body that we should
withdraw the plea bargain agreement.

DRILON: And therefore the approval of the plea bargain should be held in abeyance?

GUTIERREZ: We will leave it up to the discretion of the court.

DRILON: During the last hearing, I requested the AMLC to furnish the committee with certified
copies of the bank records involving Garcia in relation to the plea bargain that was signed. Did
the representative of the AMLC produce these records?

AMLC’s AQUINO: We produced these records and submitted to the Blue Ribbon secretariat.

DRILON: In those records that you submitted, we counted at least 124 bank accounts spread to
about 10 financial institutions. These accounts were in the name of Gen. Garcia and members of
the family. For the record, would the record that you submitted confirm the existence of these
124 bank accounts?

AQUINO: Yes Mr. Chairman the records do confirm, and we confirm that.

DRILON: Does Gen. Garcia also confirm this?

GARCIA: That was the report submitted by AMLC and this was discussed during…

DRILON: Very simple question: The 124 accounts appeared in your name and the names of the
members of your family. Would you confirm this?

GARCIA: I confirm your honor that that was the report submitted by AMLC.

DRILON: Would these accounts yours and that of the members of the family?

GARCIA: As found during the trial, there were double entries.

DRILON: There were double entries. I will not go into that detail but just on a general point,
based on these records, as of Sept. 30, 2004, the accounts’ balance was of the following amounts:
P77,161,957.29 and the number of the accounts in dollars was $1,702,477.07. This is roughly
P173 million converted to P56.33 to a dollar. Would you confirm this Atty. Aquino?

GARCIA: I do Mr. Chairman.

DRILON: So the total amount was approximately P77,161,957,29 and $1,702,477. Now, does
the AMLC know what happened to these accounts?
AQUINO: Yes Mr. Chairman. The bulk of these funds was withdrawn by the accused—Major
Gen. Garcia, his wife and children—from October 5-8 prior to the issuance of the freeze order by
the Court of Appeals.

DRILON: So they were able to withdraw these amounts. Is that correct?

AQUINO: Yes.

DRILON: How much were withdrawn?

AQUINO: In 2004, the amounts withdrawn totaled about P128 million in four days time.

DRILON: In four days time, Gen. Garcia and his family withdrew a total of P128 million?

AQUINO: That’s correct.

DRILON: Now, did you look for these amounts Madam Ombudsman when you signed the plea
agreement?

GUTIERREZ: May I ask Prosecutor Balmeo to respond to that?

DRILON: Did you find out from Gen. Garcia where these amounts went?

BALMEO: We tried to ask the accused of the whereabouts of the P128 million that was
withdrawn but we did not get any response.

DRILON: Did you ask him to restitute the amounts?

BALMEO: Yes, and that was the fact that we ask him for a condition before we agree to the plea
bargain.

DRILON: And the condition was not complied with?

BALMEO: Yes your honor.

DRILON: And notwithstanding the fact that the condition was not complied with, you proceeded
to enter into this plea bargain?

BALMEO: Yes your honor.

DRILON: Now, Gen. Garcia, where did you withdraw these amounts?

GARCIA: With due respect, this case is still pending with the Sandiganbayan. I would like to
invoke my right against self-incrimination.
DRILON: Are you saying that these amounts were not withdrawn? The records show otherwise,
it was withdrawn.

GARCIA: Again with due respect… (audio cut)

MDS: … At the outset of the hearing, no person in interest can excuse himself by saying ‘I have
a right against self-incrimination’. He has to appear, so his behavior is correct so far. But, as
every question is thrown to him, and he prefers to say ‘I cannot remember’ or ‘This is self-
incriminating, I don’t wish to answer it’, it is for this committee to decide whether he is correct
or not. Mere invocation of self-incrimination does not bind for the committee. The chair may just
call for a recess and decide whether he should be granted the privilege or not. But in any event,
we can proceed.

DRILON: We can take that. In the meantime while we continue with the hearing and then later
on the committee is not precluded from convening as suggested by Sen. Santiago then we decide
whether or not we accept that. In any case, for the AMLC, when did you find out about these
withdrawals?

AQUINO: We learned about these massive withdrawals in the course of the bank inquiry
conducted by our financial investigators.

DRILON: You froze a certain amount after that. How much was frozen?

AQUINO: Through the Court of Appeals’ freeze order, US dollar deposits of about $726,000
plus more than P11 million.

DRILON: More or less that is the amount reflected in the plea bargain agreement, which is, just
in round figures, P135.4 million.

AQUINO: A portion of that Mr. Chairman.

DRILON: Therefore apart from the P135.4 million, it is clear from your records that the amount
of P128 million –in dollars and in pesos—were withdrawn before you were able to freeze it?

AQUINO: Well that’s correct.

DRILON: Now, other than the funds, was there anything else covered by the freeze order?

AQUINO: Yes Mr. Chairman. There were some motor vehicles in the name of some of the
accused and there was also this Trump Park Avenue unit at the Trump Plaza Condominium, Park
Avenue, New York City.

DRILON: Which was valued over $700,000?

AQUINO: Roughly about $765,000.


DRILON: After all of this inquiry, what did you do?

AQUINO: After the bank inquiry, we prepared an investigation report which contained our
findings regarding the bank inquiry.

DRILON: What did you do with this report? Did you submit this to the Ombudsman?

AQUINO: We did submit it to the Ombudsman together with supporting documentary evidence,
including bank records.

DRILON: It is clear therefore that the amount being restituted of P135 or so million, clearly, is
grossly insufficient if you consider the fact that prior to the freezing of the accounts, P128
million were withdrawn from these accounts and at this point could no longer be traced and
certainly, we presume and conclude that it is in the possession of Gen. Garcia. Would you agree
to that statement?

AQUINO: We could no longer trace the amounts or funds withdrawn from their accounts.

DRILON: (To the prosecutors) Did you review all of these records presented by the AMLC?

BALMEO: We in fact presented documents from the AMLC…

DRILON: And you saw that P128 million was missing?

BALMEO: Yes Mr. Chair, your honors.

DRILON: Did you ever take this into account when the plea bargain was being discussed?

WENDELL BARRERA-SULIT: When the plea bargain was being discussed, they told me that
there is this P128 million… but they assured me that they can recover that in the forfeiture cases
still pending with the Fourth Division.

DRILON: If they cannot recover it as part of the plea bargain, I cannot imagine how they can
recover it in the forfeiture cases. Did you ever make any search on the admissions made by Mrs.
Garcia in the United States? Did you ever research?

SULIT: The prosecutors did a research on that. So they needed to establish another predicate
crime.

DRILON: I just want to establish on the record that P128 million, based on bank records, was
withdrawn and was never returned to the national coffers; that the plea bargain was entered into
even without this P128 million.

You might also like