Divergent reports

E·N·Q·U·I·R·Y
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL

Divergent reports
Sunday, 12 15, 2002

Our country has had its ample share of public discussions and debates, both for resolving burning issues of the day and for the crafting of laws to govern our nation. The Congress, a bicameral legislative body composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives, is the principal institution of our government where meaningful debates take place. The quality of the debates conducted in either chamber and the resolutions, reports and/or legislative enactments that ensue from such deliberations reflect on either the level of importance of the issues under consideration or the degree of emotional and intellectual attachment of the contending parties to said issues, or both.

One issue that has preoccupied both chambers and consumed a great part of their time, both at the committee level and in plenary, is the Piatco contract to build and operate the NAIA Terminal 3. The first BOT project in air transportation, the controversial Piatco project has been in the limelight for sometime now. Records show that this issue has gone through all investigative forums, such as the House of Representatives, the Office of the Ombudsman, the courts and, lately, the Senate.

In the Senate, three committees had been called upon to investigate the irregularities that allegedly attended the crafting of the contracts and the implementation of the project, namely, the Blue Ribbon Committee, the Committee on Constitutional Amendments, Revision of Codes and Laws, and the Committee on Public Works.

Three resolutions filed by Senator Angara, Legarda and Recto, respectively, prompted the conduct by these three committees of the joint investigation, in aid of legislation. The inquiry which started in the third week of August this year took seven extended hearings that were all marked by heated debates.

It was the expectation that the three committees would issue a joint report as called for under the Senate Rules, but for an unfortunate (but deliberate) leak of the draft report which the media carried last Dec. 5, it now appears that three separate reports will come from the joint investigation. The leak drew harsh criticism aired in plenary from Senators Angara, Pimentel and Legarda, who were at the receiving end of the trademark ad hominem accusations from the suspected author of the leak, who in turn was accused as lawyering for Malacañang and for an unseen powerful hand out to benefit immensely from a declaration of nullity of the contracts. The senators deplored this serious and unprecedented breach of protocol. They ruled the shameful haste with which the signatures were solicited in order to justify the premature release of the report.

Already, the first report prepared by the Blue Ribbon Committee has eight, out of 18 members – in full agreement. Four senators did not sign, while six others signed but expressed their reservations on the findings. This report declared the Piatco contracts null and void. Several alleged onerous provisions were cited, and the report recommended that the public officials responsible be investigated. The Blue Ribbon Committee, by reason of its objective to check on acts of malfeasance or nonfeasance that attended the making of the contract and the execution of the project, can certainly badger the ombudsman to investigate officials perceived to have been tainted in relation to the contracts. But curiously, the report does not mention the investigations conducted by the Ombudsman in four separate, but related, complaints, dismissed for lack of merit. Which, in a sense, means that the suspicions of the committee are unfounded.

The second report was issued by the Committee on Constitutional Amendments, Revision of Codes and Laws headed by Sen. Angara, which ruled there had been no violation of the Constitution and the BOT Law or its Implementing Rules and Regulations. With seven out of 12 members of the committee concurring, this report could carry much weight and negate the declaration of nullity of the contract made by the Blue Ribbon committee. Notably, the findings of the Angara committee jibe with the findings of two committees in the House of Representatives which conducted their own investigations on the matter.

The report likewise recommended reformation of certain provisions and renegotiation for the sake of public interest, relying in the main on the declarations by the solicitor general, government corporate counsel, Neda Director General and DoTC secretary that the contracts are valid and enforceable. While it did find that some provisions may possibly be disadvantageous to the government, the committee declared these do not suffice to invalidate a contract which has been substantially (98 percent) implemented. And insofar as it urges the contracting parties to arbitrate their differences, this report is supported by the order of the Supreme Court issued last Dec. 10 after the oral arguments on the petitions for nullification of the Piatco contract.

The Public Works Committee is reportedly preparing a separate report, awaiting the return of its chairman from his sick leave.

Speaking of diversity, this one on the Piatco contract is a classic example. But what is important for us now is whether this development will help to stabilize our democratic institutions or it only proves we have not yet reached political maturity.

The suspected author to the leak on the Piatco report was described as a “petty exhibitionist” lacking in civility and decorum. Senators Angara, Pimentel and Legarda agreed. Indeed, the public display of a meter-high stack of documents claimed as the basis of a 69-paged report only heightens the absurdity of the claim. Did the other senators who are in full agreement with the report also have the luxury to read and digest all the documents in 24 hours?


For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph

The Daily Tribune © 2002