PAGC recommends charges vs Nani

Over the objections of his two colleagues in the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC), chairman Dario Rama has recommended the filing of obstruction of justice charges against former justice secretary Hernando Perez.

In a 38-page "resolution," PAGC chairman Dario Rama said Perez should be held liable for violating Presidential Decree No. 1829 after he denied public access to travel information of government officials.

But the two other PAGC commissioners contested Rama’s recommendation and held the opinion that Perez should not be indicted for obstruction of justice.

Commissioner Teresita Baltazar said that the former DOJ chief should be held liable only for misconduct and for violating the code of conduct for government officials.

Commissioner Cesar Buenaflor, for his part, wrote a 16-page dissenting opinion on the issue.

The PAGC resolution, which was not yet forwarded to President Arroyo, was attached in the documents sent to the Court of Appeals, which ordered PAGC to stop the probe until April 4.

The resolution also recommended, among others, the suspension of Perez for one year, but this has since been mooted after the former justice chief resigned from his post last Jan. 2.

"By arrogating to himself the power to deny access to these documents, Perez effectively undermined the organic law of the country, which is the Constitution," Rama said, referring to Perez’s Nov. 16 memo barring Immigration Commissioner Andrea Domingo to disclose the travel records of the President, Vice President, and members of Congress and Cabinet citing potential threats to their lives and the national interest.

The anti-graft body reiterated that Perez’s memorandum to Domingo "denied the people’s right to information and access to official records of public concern."

"If Perez is truly concerned with the welfare of the country’s highest ranking public officials, and it is his sincere objective to protect them from the threat of terrorism by securing their travel records, then, he could have issued the controversial memorandum shortly after the 9-11 attack, and not have waited for more than a year to do so," Rama reasoned out.

Rama also noted that Domingo received a copy of the controversial memo only on Nov. 26 or ten days after it was issued, which was a Saturday, a non-working day. Incidentally, it was the very day the Ombudsman began its probe on Perez’s travel records.