More muddling on PDAF

Actually, the muddling was done pretty early in the game, almost as soon as the first three senators were named as having gained from their deals with (Janet Lim) Napoles. Damage control mechanisms were set into motion, as only big PR funds can make possible. And once again, media have only been too willing to be assigned their parts.

The sudden shift of media attention to the issue of the (Disbursement Acceleration Program) DAP moved the discourse to another issues. The swift implication of executive officials and other members of Congress enlarged the circle of guilt. This had devastating effect on the public focus necessary for effective protest and criticism. It seemed more important to expand the net for more guilty ones, all the more so if these proved to be allies of President (Benigno S. III) Aquino. The latter is not above being questioned, and his political allies should be held accountable as well. But this should not sideline the importance of getting those already investigated and found wanting to face judgment in court.

The muddling has been so effective as to mute even the calls that the first three should go on leave, or resign their seats in the Senate. The refusal to do so and the determination to ignore these calls indicate that our senators are confident that people are no longer so angry with them.

Indeed, the public should not lose sight of these three cases, because these have passed through the scrutiny of no less than the Ombudsman. Unfortunately, even this process from hereon will be slow and arduous.

At this point, we are short just a few months of a year since the (Priority Development Assistance Fund) PDAF scandal was reported in July 2013. The slow pace of the justice system in both the executive department and the judiciary does take its toll and diminish the quality of public attention and engagement. It can cause the passion for prosecution to wane.

The news about the lists has had the same effect. People have this desire to know who else is guilty and to know this quickly; because who has the time to wait for the legal process?

Alas, following the evidence trail is never easy and requires great patience. The Commission on Audit which is one of the agencies reviewing the paper trail remains at this stage falls five years behind current years. The three senators recommended for indictment in the Sandiganbayan have filed their motions for reconsideration. There has been no indication that the Ombudsman is coming close to rule on these motions.

Even when the authorized agencies do find sufficient evidence to file charges against elected officials and their cohorts, there is little confidence now that these cases will be resolved in due time, as due process can go on indefinitely. Public disappointment has deepened even as the media have gone on a frenzy to present lists, perhaps as a way to suggest that there is relief to be found in the revelation of these lists.

So we have three lists now running through public consciousness. Unfortunately, the lists without real review and evaluation are only lists, and cannot be taken as the measure of actual culpability. But what the lists do is to immediately taint names. Unfortunately, the lists are not all alike. Some names are in one list and not in another. And quick conclusions are made about officials purging the lists they hold. More muddling.

I am not overprotective of politicians. The undeserved defamation of some seems part of the bargain they make when they decide to seek public office. But justice does require critical evaluation of evidence, and media must take care that they publish suspects identity only after serious review, checking media tendency to quickly out-scoop the competition. I think some of the media raised the furor about the lists, without first evaluating these, their sources and without making the informed judgment about the validity of the information these hold.

Perhaps, the hype was intentional along with the seemingly orchestrated release of differently sourced lists. The intent may be more about distracting or defusing public outrage, rather than providing information that has real value. The lists are important as starting points of more complex investigation. I would caution against release before submitting these to journalistic validation, weighing the value of information against the destructive effect it can have on various levels.

Another question looms, given so many names. This is a stopper for some—what do we do when so many are involved in this mother of all scams? Somehow the peanut butter argument seems to have worked: If there are so many involved, is the crime still such a serious one? Recall Jinggoy Estrada’s cocky riposte – “Bakit kami lang?”

It took close to six months for the Ombudsman to evaluate evidence as sufficient to recommend indictment of Senators Enrile, Estrada and Revilla at the Sandiganbayan. We can only imagine then how long we can get to the same point for all the other names in the list.

Where then do we go for clarity? Public vigilance needs this to sustain citizen energy and resolve. I can understand how people already burdened by their daily obligations can want quick relief with just even a little knowledge that will allow them to separate the innocent from the rest. We can ask for speed, for swift investigation, indictment and prosecution. But due process prevents this from happening quickly enough.

The Former Senior Government Officials (FSGO), has called members of the Senate and the House of Representatives, past and present, to voluntarily disclose where they assigned their PDAF funds, along with the supporting documentation, suggesting this information be posted on the web.

Maybe a CSO group can create the platform and police the process of uploading to guard against its misuse.

The suggestion opens one path out of our despairing mood and inclination. Those with clean hands can lead the way. And let us hope that indeed there are clean hands left in Congress.

 

(In the interest of full disclosure, my husband, Edilberto C. de Jesus, former Secretary of Education and Presidential Adviser for Rural Development, is a member of the FSGO.)