Joey De Venecia III and Jun Lozada have been cast in newspapers, TV, and radio as victims of a corrupt administration.
Touting themselves as being critical observers and purveyors of truth, the Philippine news media spewed out Lozada and De Venecia's cries of "Where is the justice? Where is the justice?"
The slant of the news items on the NBN ZTE deal hearing at the senate favored De Venecia and Lozada, giving greater importance to their histrionics while burying the more sober discussion of facts. It isn't hard to read the signs and figure out that the media has its agenda, politics, and own stories of corruption.
If you are at all interested in the truth, here it is: Joey De Venecia III and Jun Lozada were very much a part of the corruption that reaches all the way to the highest office of the land.
Yes they squealed about the corruption of the NBN ZTE deal and there is no denying that if they didn't squeal about the deal, no one would be the wiser about it. But should we as a people turn a blind eye on their role in the in a heinous and despicable crime just because they acted as reluctant stool pigeons and begrudgingly dealt out the facts as it suited them?
Where is the justice in that? Where is the justice?
If you want to know the facts, go through the slide show presentation here as it narrates exactly how the NBN ZTE deal came about. You will see that De Venecia and Lozada played a pivotal role in the NBN ZTE deal.
They hatched the plan, they looked for Padrinos, made deals with the Padrinos, and when they found out that they were not going to get what they wanted out of the deal, they decided to scuttle the deal.
The very picture of greed is of a thief, being caught in the act, sets about to destroy what he was trying to steal -- thinking that if he can't keep it, no one else should.
Considering this, do you think they ought to have our sympathies? Should we even consider them heroes? Should we even think of considering them as Senatorial candidates?
I've seen posts all over the blogosphere branding Senator Dick Gordon as an administration lackey for bucking the popular sentiment that favors the hysterical duo -- Lozada and De Venecia.
One blogger even ranted that Gordon was letting Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and First Gentleman Mike Arroyo free, as if Gordon were a judge presiding over a court -- not a committee of the Senate.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you are of this opinion, then you ought to read up some more about what the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee's powers really are.
It is this and you don't believe me, look it up at the Senate website:
Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations (Blue Ribbon)Jurisdiction:
All matters relating to, including investigation of, malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance in office by officers and employees of the government, its branches, agencies, subdivisions and instrumentalities; implementation of the provision of the Constitution on nepotism; and investigation of any matter of public interest on its own initiative or brought to its attention by any member of the Senate. Rule X, Section 13 (36)
Moreover, the charge that Gordon is not recommending charges against the First Couple is absolutely false.
In making President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo accountable for her involvement in the NBN ZTE Deal, you would have to consider that the President is immune from all manner of suit. The only thing that can be done is to file an impeachment case against the President and this is something that the Senate or any senator, cannot do.
If an impeachement case must be filed, it should emanate from a complaint filed by anybody at the Lower House.
Senator Gordon cannot file an impeachment complaint against Gloria because in an impeachment proceeding, the senate will have to act as members of a "JURY". To say anything and act in any manner that would show partiality in the case would impair the Senate in rendering a fair and impartial decision on the case of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
Anyone can file an impeachment complaint. So, in my view, if Joey de Venecia III and Jun Lozada or anyone else wishes to do so, they ought to file the impeachment complaint.
As far as recommending that the OMBUDSMAN files charges against the First Gentleman, we have to consider how the OMBUDSMAN has acted in the past. Being the CLASSMATE of the First Gentleman, the OMBUDSMAN has been very shy in leveling charges against him or any of his cronies.
As for charging Joey de Venecia III is concerned, you have to consider the following also:
Mr. Jose De Venecia III can’t declare himself to be a whistleblower and claim certain immunities and privileges.
First, the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee has findings that he seemed to have also violated the law, particularly Sec. 5 of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Second, there is currently no law that defines whistleblowing and grants immunities and privileges to whistleblowers.
While there are existing laws that provide protection and reward to witnesses of crimes, such as Presidential Decree No. 749 and Republic Act No. 6981 , these do not fully cover whistleblowing as intended. There are proposed bills, however.
Perhaps it is about time to pass a whistleblower law that would establish a clear state policy on the matter, assure action on the relevant information disclosed, afford legal protection on the whistleblower, and define the parameters and procedures for disclosure that guarantee due process. This would likewise prohibit certain apparently righteous people like Mr. Jose de Venecia III from unduly calling themselves whistleblowers.
