By Angie M. Rosales
10/07/2009 [ tribune.net.ph ]
Sen. Manuel Villar Jr., who is being probed by his peers for alleged improper acts, was among the proponents of a feasibility study for the construction of the controversial C-5 road extension project, an official of the Department of Public Works and Highway (DPWH) said yesterday.
DPWH-National Capital Region (NCR) director Edilberto Tayao affirmed the information presented by lawyer Ernesto Francisco on the C-5 road extension study during the continuation of the Senate committee of the whole inquiry into Villar’s alleged questionable funding of the project.
Francisco, counsel for Sen. Jamby Madrigal, complainant in the case, said Villar’s participation in the C-5 project can be gleaned from the feasibility study made sometime in 2006 by DPWH director Jerome de la Rosa.
He made Tayao read into the records of the proceedings a portion of the study that provided the background of the project stating that "conceptualization and the initial release of funds for the C-5 project was initiated by
Sen. Manuel Villar, whose efforts also paved the way for the funding of the Las Pinas-Parañaque link road."
That stretch of the C-5 road will be linked to South Luzon Expressway (SLEX) upon the completion of C-5 and the main idea behind this project is the linking of Coastal Road to C-5 effortlessly connecting the cities of Taguig, Paranaque and Cavite as well.
Based on the said feasibility study, Tayao noted that the road project will eventually link the Quirino Ave. in Parañaque City to Coastal Road.
Although the study was made years ago, the DPWH official also admitted that conceptualization of the program of work the Quirino Ave. to Coastal Road portion, took place only in Feb. 2008.
"Prior to Feb. 2008, the Quirino Ave. to Coastal Road portion was not yet discussed and the DPWH had yet to consider a fly over that would cross the Coastal Road," he said.
The project was conceptualized when (DPWH) Secretary (Hermogenes) Ebdane made a visit and this took place February 2008," said Francisco, to which he received an affirmative answer from Tayao.
Francisco then made a motion for the committee to issue a subpoena duces tecum on copies of the Special Allotment Release Orders (Saros) and other pertinent documents summarizing the fund releases for the construction of the project as well as civil works and road right of way (RoW) payments.
He noted to the committee that the documents submitted by Tayao were incomplete.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, however, denied his request, pointing out that the records to be culled from the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) were not disputed, in the first place.
"Second there is already ample evidence to establish those facts and rather than go and wrangle with the DBM, the chairman felt that we have enough, sufficient evidence to draw a conclusion already from the record," he said.
"This is not a criminal case where we are actually proving the guilt of the accused, beyond reasonable doubt. This is an ethics case. Now, as far as the ethical conduct of the witness is concerned, we have already, in the opinion of the chairman, sufficient evidence to draw a conclusion from the evidence presented. As far as the Saros are concerned, those are only corroborative evidence to indicate the conduct of the witness. But the fact that the ethical norm to be observed by the respondent in the performance of duty as a senator, has been bridged. There ius already enough evidence on that. One of which is the very document that was presented by the counsel awhile ago, the feasibility study," Enrile added.
"That is why, the chairman decided to deny the request for a subpoena duces tecum calling for the representation of this request, for funding and so called or so forth because we are dealing with an ethical conduct. I don’t think the Sarosthat has been submitted by the DPWH dealing with payments done for the construction and RoW of that project would be denied," he said.
"If they will present, if the respondent (Villar) will present a rebutting evidence against those, maybe at that precise time the motion that the counsel presented to the chairman would be proper and material to obtain a rebuttal evidence," Enrile explained.
But Sen. Panfilo Lacson backed up Francisco’s motion, by inquiring from the lawyer if it will help the committee in accounting for the excessiveness of the payment by government to respondent as far as road ROW is concerned.
"If we are able to secure the request. We will be able to prove that these funding were requested by Villar or at least most of them," Francisco said.
"I think, the chairman does not think that that is necessary because I don’t think these Saros will be controverted because these are public documents and even they are only copies, it is up to the respondent to rebut the authenticity and the admissibility of this evidence presented. Now if they are not questioned, and then they don’t think they can question unless they appear here to present a rebutting evidence. This will be admissible evidence already," said Enrile.
"Now with respect to amounts of damage to the government, whether the damage is only P10 or P20 pesos or P20-million or P1 billion, the ethical conduct if ever there is a misconduct and unethical conduct was done, would be already established not by the magnitude of the amount by the fact that indeed an act was done to transgress the ethical conduct of the respondent," Enrile added. "The unethical conduct was not spawned by the issuance of the SARO. The unethical conduct was spawned by the fact that he himself made the request and without disclosing it to the House," Enrile further said.
____________________________________________________________________________________
