GMA Could Get 23 ½
Years in Jail
President also committed four impeachable offenses,
lawyer says
The contents of
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s taped conversation with an election
official – widely believed to be Election Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano
– could get her as much as 23 ½ years in jail.
BY ALEXANDER MARTIN
REMOLLINO
Bulatlat

EMBATTLED: President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo |
The contents of
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s taped conversation with an election
official – widely believed to be Commission on Elections (Comelec)
Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano – could get her as much as 23 ½ years in
prison.
And those are only
the jail terms. In an interview with Bulatlat, lawyer Neri Javier
Colmenares, a convenor of the Pro-People Lawyers Network (PLN) and the
Committee for the Defense of Lawyers (Codal), said Macapagal-Arroyo also
committed four impeachable offenses: graft and corruption, bribery,
betrayal of public trust, and culpable violation of the Constitution.
|
A conviction in any
or all of these constitutional offenses could cost her graver punishment.
Press Secretary
Ignacio Bunye had released June 6 two CDs containing audio files of what
he said was a taped conversation between the president and a political
leader of the administration Lakas-CMD in Mindanao, southern Philippines.
One of them, Bunye said, was a version purportedly altered by the
opposition to make it appear that Macapagal-Arroyo had cheated in the 2004
presidential election.
Both “original” and
“tampered” have portions in which a woman – said to be Macapagal-Arroyo –
was asking a man (“Gary” in the alleged original version, “Garci” in what
Bunye called the tampered version) if she would still win by a million
votes. Official election results showed Macapagal-Arroyo won by a million
votes over her closest rival, Fernando Poe, Jr.
A few days after
Bunye’s press conference, Alan Paguia, a former counsel for deposed
President Joseph Estrada, came out with a longer tape, and after a few
days he would be followed by Samuel Ong, former deputy director of the
National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), who claimed to possess the “mother
of all tapes.”
Macapagal-Arroyo, in
a television appearance June 27, admitted that the voice on the tape was
hers.
According to
Colmenares, Macapagal-Arroyo committed “various violations” of the Omnibus
Election Code and the Revised Penal Code.
Election offenses
In the conversation
of May 26, 2004, for example, Macapagal-Arroyo is heard asking a man on
the other line: “Hindi kaya puwedeng ma-delay yung
senatorial canvassing until after the voting on the rules tonight?”
(Can’t we delay the senatorial canvassing until after the voting on the
rules tonight?)
“Under Sec. 231 of
the Omnibus Election Code,” Colmenares told Bulatlat, “canvassing
should be continuous subject to the availability of election returns or
statements of votes and certificates of canvass. Any candidate who tries
to delay the canvassing is guilty of an election offense. That is
punishable by six years’ imprisonment.”
Colmenares, who has
done work for a Ph.D. in Law at the University of
Melbourne,
also pointed out that Macapagal-Arroyo committed undue influence on an
election official by asking the election official – said to be Garcillano
– to delay the senatorial canvassing.
Colmenares said, “It
is she who appointed Garcillano. Whenever Garcillano is bypassed she
reappoints him. So she has a hold on Garcillano. Under the Election Code,
that is undue influence on an election official. In fact, that violates
the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act or Republic Act 3019, which
provides that unduly influencing another public officer is a crime
punishable by 10 years’ imprisonment and permanent disqualification from
holding public office.”
Under the Omnibus
Election Code, undue influence on a public official is punishable by
imprisonment of not less than one year but not more than six years.
According to
Colmenares, it does not matter whether Garcillano delayed the canvassing
or not as long as the president tried to influence him to do the act.
Criminal offenses
Colmenares also said
that Macapagal-Arroyo is also guilty of “abetting or tolerating a crime”
under Art. 238 of the Revised Penal Code.
He cited a portion of
the series of conversations in which the man believed to be Garcillano
offered to prevent an election officer from testifying to electoral fraud
in Pagutaran, Basilan, southern
Philippines. Macapagal-Arroyo did
not comment. “If the Pagudaran election officer was forcibly taken, that
is kidnapping,” Colmenares said. “Still, if the election officer
cooperated, that is still an election offense. Macapagal-Arroyo was a
conspirator there.”
“The fact that she
didn’t report or file a case against Garcillano but, instead, reappointed
him – despite the bare-faced admission of a crime – that is a criminal
offense,” Colmenares added. “That is tolerating the commission of an
offense.”
Colmenares mentioned
two other instances in which she committed the same offense: the portion
where she asked whether she will win by a million votes and the election
official said “Pipilitin natin” (We will try our best to see to
that) and the part in which the election official talked of vote-padding
for Macapagal-Arroyo as having been done “cleanly” in two Mindanao
provinces, Basilan and Lanao del Sur. On both cases, Macapagal-Arroyo did
not comment.
Jail
Under the Revised
Penal Code, public officials evading or abandoning the duty of preventing,
prosecuting, or punishing a crime are to be meted out the punishment of
arresto mayor or imprisonment of one month and one day to six
months. If convicted of the three counts of abetting or tolerating a
crime, Macapagal-Arroyo could get 18 months or one and a half year in
prison.
All in all,
conviction of all the offenses cited by Colmenares could get the President
a total of 23 ½ years in prison. Bulatlat
BACK TO
TOP ■
PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION ■
COMMENT
© 2004 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications
Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided
its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.