What is the prosecution afraid of?
This was the statement of sacked Metro Rail Transit (MRT 3) General Manager Al Vitangcol who cried foul over the prosecution鈥檚 refusal to give him copies of the counter-affidavits of Transportation Secretary Jun Abaya and others who were acquitted of graft in the MRT maintenance contract mess.
Vitangcol made a reply to the Office of the Special Prosecutor鈥檚 opposition on his motion to allow production of material evidence and admissions by adverse party.
搁贰础顿:听After graft rap due to MRT fiasco, Vitangcol pins down Abaya听
The prosecution opposed Vitangcol鈥檚 request, saying he failed to present good cause for the production of documents and 鈥渋s not entitled to the production of the subject counter-affidavits and joint-affidavit, nor demand admissions of certain statements contained therein.鈥�
Vitangcol blasted the prosecution鈥檚 鈥渄isjointed reasoning鈥� and said the requested documents have been notarized and thus should have been declared public documents.
鈥淎nybody for that matter, not only the herein accused, should be allowed access to such materials. The prosecution is obviously ignorant of such fact,鈥� Vitangcol through his lawyers said.
Vitangcol questioned the prosecution鈥檚 perceived fear that the principal accused may be acquitted of his charge if he was given copies of the counter-affidavits.
These counter-affidavits showed that Abaya听told the Ombudsman that the maintenance contract was above board and that the MRT 3 had to enter into a negotiated procurement with contractor Philippine Trans Rail Management and Services Corp. (PH Trams).
Abaya in the counter-affidavit also admitted听signing the notice of award to PH Trams, that the Bids and Awards Committee and the negotiating team followed the procedure and complied with the requirements, and that the contract with PH Trams did not cause injury to government.
鈥淲hy is the government, through the prosecution, adamant in releasing such documents to herein accused? What is the prosecution afraid of if and when the herein accused gets hold of such material evidence?鈥� Vitangcol鈥檚 motion said.
鈥淚s it because these pleadings include averments and defenses favorable to accused Vitangcol?鈥�
Vitangcol said the prosecution鈥檚 refusal to give him copies of the counter-affidavits was tantamount to 鈥減rosecutorial misconduct that effectively deprived herein accused of his constitutionally guaranteed right to due process.鈥�
Vitangcol said the prosecution should have the duty to investigate all officials in an offense, not just the perceived opponents of the current administration.
鈥淎ccused Vitangcol believes that his prosecution now is tantamount to persecution. The prosecution of an accused must not be made to depend on who is perceived as an enemy by those who sit in power but on the sacrosanct duty of prosecutors to bring to justice those believed to be offenders of the law while ensuring that their rights under the Constitution remain inviolable,鈥� Vitangcol said.
鈥淭he swiftness and overeagerness of the Ombudsman to prosecute herein accused, to his mind, is a clear example of persecution,鈥� he added.
In his motion for reconsideration on the Ombudsman鈥檚 graft indictment against him,听Vitangcol听asked why Abaya, despite his signatures on the documents, was not indicted for the alleged graft-ridden maintenance contract with PH Trams.
Abaya is the acting president of the ruling Liberal Party.
搁贰础顿:听Why spare Abaya?听Vitangcol听asks Ombudsman
鈥淭he award of the contract was the product of a collegial determination. However, it was subject to the approval of DOTC Undersecretary (Jose) Lotilla and Secretary Abaya 鈥� The contract would not have been awarded to PH Trams and CB&T JV had it not been for the subsequent approval of Lotilla and Abaya,鈥澨齎itangcol鈥檚 motion said.
The Ombudsman charged听Vitangcol听of graft for awarding without public bidding the interim maintenance contract for MRT 3 to PH Trams.
搁贰础顿:听Ex-MRT chief, 5 others indicted for graft听
The Ombudsman also charged听Vitangcol听for failing to disclose that one of the incorporators of PH Trams鈥擜rturo Soriano鈥攊s his wife鈥檚 uncle. Soriano is now a provincial accountant of Pangasinan.
Vitangcol听was charged with PH Trams incorporators Wilson de Vera, Arturo Soriano, Marlo dela Cruz, Manolo Maralit, and Federico Remo.
They are charged of violating Sections 3(e) and 3(h) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and Section 65(c)(1) of the Government Procurement Reform Act arising from the MRT 3 interim maintenance contract.
Amid a graft-ridden contract, the MRT is beset with operational breakdowns, delays, and long lines of passengers daily.