On the Guilty Verdict on ERAP

As one of the convenors of the ERAP Resign Movement in Isabela Province in 2000, the guilty verdict on ERAP came to me as a triumph of justice and the Philippine Judicial System. As anticipated, there were different reactions to the verdict. I was particularly dismayed to hear Senator Villar say that he is disappointed because he hoped for ERAP’s acquittal. When asked by media people why was he for ERAP’s acquittal while as a matter of fact he was instrumental for the transmission of the impeachment case of ERAP from the House of Representatives to the Senate in 2000, he said that the impeachment was “not meant to convict but only to clarify certain matters”. Coming from a Senator and a senate president at that, such ignorance of the law is deplorable. Article XI section 2 of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines states: “The President, the Vice President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office, on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office, as provided by law, but not by impeachment.” Based on this, the impeachment proceeding is certainly not a mere “clarification of certain matters”. Obviously, Senator Villar said those words only to appease the Estradas and earn their support/endorsement in the 2010 Presidential Election. Should he be elected President in 2010, their wishes will be his command.

From among the topnotch lawyers of ERAP it was only Estelito Mendoza who gave a logical reaction based on the verdict and based on law. Others, most notably Rene Saguisag, were fallacious. He showed a book to prove that all special courts like that of the special Sandiganbayan Court that tried ERAP were created to convict the accused. It was like saying that they (ERAP’s lawyers) knew from the very beginning that he will be convicted as guilty. If that was the case, then why did they still argue in the said court for six long years? They also continued to pound on the credibility of Chavit Singson. I think that Chavit Singson was right when he said that ERAP’s lawyers are to blame because instead of presenting evidences to prove ERAP’s innocence, they used media propaganda to counter the prosecutors’ various witnesses and voluminous documentary evidences.

Senator Jinggoy Estrada and some of his father’s lawyers have questioned the conviction on the basis of Jueteng Payola and the kick back on the Bell Corporation stocks sold to to GSIS and SSS. They said that these are not government money as if to impute that the plunder case is confined to public funds. I am a Canon Lawyer not a civil lawyer. But, one does not have to be a civil lawyer to be able to understand the following Provisions of Section 1, d no. 2 of the Republic Act No. 7080 (An act Defining and Penalizing the Crime of Plunder) which states: “By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason of the office or position of the public officer concerned;”

Others have also reacted and said that there are more government officials (GMA included) who should be charged with plunder. To them, I say, gather evidences and file cases. If there is something good that should come out from the guilty verdict on ERAP aside from the triumph of our judicial system, it should be that it stands as a warning to those who hold power and use it to enrich themselves because no matter how powerful they are, the long arms of law will eventually catch them. Our justice system should now be consistent in punishing the guilty no matter how powerful he/she is and no matter how unpopular the decision may be. Dura lex, sed lex.