Mark Jimenez: I feel betrayed by government

Manila Rep. Mario Crespo, better known as Mark Jimenez, said yesterday he felt betrayed by the Department of Justice, the Supreme Court and the Philippine government as a whole.

"Ironically, yung kapwa natin Pilipino ang mainit sa akin (our fellow Filipinos are the ones putting the heat on me). They are the ones pushing for my extradition to the United States. The Americans are not as hot on me," he told reporters at a press conference in his office at the House of Representatives.

He said the constitutional right to bail of a Filipino should prevail over any extradition treaty.

Jimenez said that in his case, he is not facing criminal charges in the Philippines and the crimes he is accused of committing in the US are bailable.

The crimes include 47 counts of tax evasion, mail fraud and illegal campaign contributions to the Democratic party during the term of former US president Bill Clinton. Reports said the charges could earn Jimenez an aggregate prison term of hundreds of years.

Jimenez, however, maintained he could not understand why he was being denied the right to bail, with the Philippine government going along with the denial.

"If the government cannot protect a member of Congress, how can we expect it to protect the lowly, ordinary Filipino? It won’t be able to protect the Filipino worker abroad," he said.

Jimenez also said the Supreme Court engaged in "speculation" when it called him a "flight risk" who could jump bail and flee the country.

"That is speculation. It has no factual basis. The fact is I have been here since May 10, 1998 and have not left the country. If I wanted to flee, I could have done it during the time of Erap (former President Joseph Estrada, his friend) when I was holding a diplomatic passport as presidential adviser for Latin American affairs," he said.

He said he never used the diplomatic passport until its one-year life expired.

He also disagreed with the high tribunal that its decision was designed to prevent the country from being perceived as a "haven for criminals."

"I beg to disagree with the Court. I am not a criminal. Yes, I am an accused, not here but in the US," he said.

Jimenez said the tribunal should have given more weight on a Filipino’s constitutional right to bail than on the RP-US extradition treaty.

"I urge the justices to revisit their decision and remove speculation from their minds," he said.

He pointed out that his case is precedent-setting in that it is the first since the extradition treaty was signed in 1996.

"I hope this serves as a catalyst. We can learn many things from this," Jimenez said.

Asked if he smells politics in the fact that five of the justices who want him jailed are appointees of President Arroyo, the Manila solon said: "I don’t want to accuse anybody of politics. That would border on speculation. I want to stick to facts."

He said he believes in and trusts the country’s justice system.

As for his planned motion asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision, he was leaving the matter to his lawyers.

House colleagues of Jimenez insisted that the Supreme Court justices erred in denying the Manila lawmaker, who is facing extradition to the US, his right to bail. The voting was 8-6 against the neophyte legislator.

"I think the justices erred. They are not infallible. Mga tao din yang mga yan (They are also humans)," said Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II.

He said the right to bail granted to every Filipino citizen by the Constitution should prevail over any extradition treaty.

If people accept the proposition that the high tribunal cannot make a wrong decision, the nation would have to live with "judicial tyranny," he added.

For his part, Deputy Majority Leader Francis Escudero said Jimenez cannot be arrested because he has no cases in the country.

He said under the Constitution, a congressman facing charges can be detained only if the punishment for his alleged offenses is imprisonment of more than six years.

He also said the authorities will face a dilemma if they try to arrest the Manila congressman.

"In the wake of all these legal questions, who will have the courage to serve the arrest warrant?" he asked.

Another colleague of Jimenez advised him to follow the Supreme Court decision.

"He should face the music," said Emmanuel Joel Villanueva of the party-list group Citizens’ Battle Against Corruption.

"This way, we follow the law and at the same time protect the integrity of the House. It will eliminate the notion that it is a haven of criminals," he said.

Other congressmen, who did not want to be quoted, said they are thinking of filing impeachment charges against the eight Supreme Court justices who want Jimenez jailed.

In a related development, Deputy Speaker Raul Gonzales asked the Supreme Court to allow the House of Representatives to take custody of Jimenez.

"I suggest that the House may offer itself as recognizance to guaranty the appearance of Congressman Jimenez in court for the extradition hearings. This is a recognized process under Section 1, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court and under Section 13, Article III of the Constitution," he said.

He said it would also allay the fears of government prosecutors and the justices that the Manila solon might flee the country.

He added that he was making the suggestion as an alternative to Jimenez’s possible detention elsewhere and because of the Manila solon’s "special circumstances."