Skip to main contentdfsdf

Home/ stevenwarran's Library/ Notes/ January 5, 2002, Philippine Daily Inquirer, The Lacson case on deck, by Isagani Cruz,

January 5, 2002, Philippine Daily Inquirer, The Lacson case on deck, by Isagani Cruz,

from web site

January 5, 2002, Philippine Daily Inquirer, The Lacson case on deck, by Isagani Cruz,

SEN. Joker Arroyo called me up the other week to inform me, in answer to the questions I raised in my column of Dec. 16, that the three committees jointly handling the Lacson investigation had terminated their reception of evidence from the parties and were now in the process of examining it.

The three committees are the blue ribbon committee he heads, the committee on local government under Sen. Robert Barbers, and the committee on national defense and security chaired by Sen. Ramon Magsaysay Jr.

I reminded Joker that there were other witnesses besides Victor Corpus and Mary Ong who wanted to testify in the case, but he said the committees felt they had heard enough testimony to reach a decision on Sen. Panfilo Lacson's alleged drug trafficking.

The charge of money-laundering will have to be dismissed pending receipt by our justice department of the requested report from the US government about Lacson's bank accounts, if any, in that country. The dismissal will be without prejudice, meaning that the charge may again be filed when that report is received.

To ensure an objective and impartial decision, the three committees have commissioned an independent law firm to evaluate the evidence submitted at the hearings. Arroyo did not give me the name of the firm, nor did I ask. Its conclusions, while not binding on the committees, could be the basis of their own report that they will submit to the Senate and, I hope, release to the public.

That report, as I understood it from Senator Arroyo, will be ready by mid-January.

His assurance will at least allay the fears of many people that the Lacson case had simply been swept under the rug to be eventually forgotten. Having myself earlier expressed this misgiving, I am glad that the Senate will soon come out with a definite ruling one way or the other on the charge against one of its own.

I cannot speculate on how the committees will decide the case against Lacson although I personally hope they will find him guilty. I followed the hearings assiduously and am convinced that Corpus and Ong were telling the truth, compared to Reynaldo Acop and his fellow defenders of their chief.

As Lacson's star witness, Acop was a disaster. He practically testified against himself and by inference against Lacson as his immediate superior.

There were many holes in his written statement which, to say the least, admitted his own incompetence as former NarcGroup head in combating the massive illegal drug operations of the Hong Kong triad in this country. He blamed the connivance of some persons in various agencies of our government but could not or would not name any of them. He also could not satisfactorily explain his check payments to Ong of admittedly public funds drawn from his personal account.

A legislative investigation is not a criminal case requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt for the conviction of the accused. The probe of Lacson's direct involvement in drug trafficking in his capacity as head of the PAOCTF and later of the PNP is in the nature of an administrative proceeding only. This is true even if the investigators in Congress are of a decidedly higher status than in most other administrative proceedings.

Substantial evidence only, not even the preponderance of evidence required in civil cases, is the criterion in administrative cases. In his excellent work on Evidence, the recently deceased Justice Ricardo J. Francisco, an eminent authority on Remedial Law, defined substantial evidence as "that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion."

Legislative investigations are supposed to be held only "in aid of legislation," but their findings may lead to the indictment of the respondent in a criminal case, where the quantum of evidence required to convict is higher. The proceeding will be judicial, with the technical rules of procedure strictly observed. Such rules are not mandatory in administrative cases where they may be dispensed within the interest of justice and equity.

The issues in the drug trafficking case being mainly factual, much will depend on the credibility of the witnesses. Inconsistencies may suggest inventiveness or mendacity but not when they are only minor lapses and do not impair the veracity of the testimony as a whole. The manner of the witness on the stand may reveal many telltale signs that will not be lost on the observant judge.

The ready answer or the hesitant reply, the steady gaze or the shifty eyes, the flush of face or the sudden pallor, the confident posture or the slumped stance-these and many other clues will draw the line between fact and fabrication and tell the perceptive magistrate if the witness is telling the truth or lying in his teeth.

Factual findings of the trial court are as a rule accepted by the appellate court, which does not have the opportunity to assess the conduct of the witnesses but can rely only on the inanimate and impersonal rollo. The senators who attended the Lacson hearings had the opportunity to personally observe the demeanor of Corpus, Ong, Acop and the other witnesses and can decide for themselves how to separate the goats from the sheep.

Lacson himself did not choose to take the stand in his defense, probably believing the evidence against him was insufficient and did not have to be refuted. He was gambling that his colleagues in the Senate, exercising their own discretion, would agree with him and resolve all doubt in his favor. Pakikisama in the old boys' club could work for him, but there is also the backlash of an unpopular verdict that might break that traditional bond.

I hope the decision of the committees, whatever it will be, will be based on a fair appreciation of the facts and the law, regardless of personal or partisan ties or the compulsions of the "hooting throng."

Would you like to comment?

Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.

stevenwarran

Saved by stevenwarran

on Jan 11, 13