MANILA, Philippines — President Rodrigo Duterte expressed doubt Wednesday that businesswoman Janet Napoles could become a state witness on the cases filed in connection with the multibillion-peso pork barrel scam.
Duterte noted that under the law, a suspect can become a state witness if they are the “least guilty” among the accused.
“As to the question of whether or not she could be utilized as a state witness, there’s a law which says that one of the requirements at least she appears to be the least guilty. If you are a major player, I don’t know if you can do it,” the president said.
“There is no other witness to prove your case, that’s one. Second is that the proposed witness must appear to be the least guilty. So, if you are asking for an expanded explanation, it’s just that she appears to be the minimal player not the major player in the commission of the crime,” he added.
Duterte stressed that it would be up to the court to decide if Napoles is qualified to be state witness. He declined to comment when asked if he sees Napoles as the least guilty among the accused.
“It is pending in court. We lawyers are always advised never to comment because – especially that I am the president – I will be liable for contempt,” Duterte said.
“I might be arrested and I am busy now with my job, dispense money for the Filipinos. And I do not want to go to prison upon my return, unless you are ready to liberate me,” he said in jest.
Napoles has been accused of conniving with lawmakers to divert congressional funds to ghost projects and non-government organizations.
Aguirre: Napoles could be state witness
Earlier, Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II said Napoles could be a credible state witness and his agency is planning to meet with her for the review of the pork barrel cases.
He said he and former Manila City Councilor Greco Belgica have started discussions about the reinvestigation of the pork barrel cases.
Belgica questioned the legality of the pork barrel, formally known as the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), before the Supreme Court.
The court ruled in 2013 that the PDAF system was unconstitutional for allowing legislators to influence budget spending after enactment of the general appropriations bill.
Duterte reiterated that his administration is not lawyering for Napoles, whose illegal detention charge was dismissed after the Office of the Solicitor General had recommended her acquittal before the Court of Appeals (CA).
He also defended the appointment of former Napoles lawyer Lanee Cui-David as internal revenue deputy commissioner.
“You know you must understand lawyering as we understand you whatever you publish and say. Trabaho lang po ‘yan (We’re just doing our job). We have to earn our keep,” Duterte said.
“As a lawyer, when we accept a case, the only promise there is that we will do our best. But we will not corrupt the truth. That is the line that we have to be conscious of,” he added.
The Makati Regional Trial Court found Napoles guilty of serious illegal detention and sentenced her to a 40-year jail term in 2015. Pork barrel scam whistleblower Benhur Luy had accused his second cousin Napoles of detaining him to prevent him from exposing the anomalies in the handling of congressional funds.
Early this year, the Office of the Solicitor General recommended Napoles’ acquittal before the CA, saying Luy was not really detained and was even allowed to meet his family three times
The CA acquitted Napoles from the serious illegal detention charge last Monday. The court cited arguments made by Solicitor General Jose Calida, who told the court in January that "finds that the evidence presented does not support beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant committed the crime of serious illegal detention."
READ: Duterte's SolGen moves to acquit Napoles in illegal detention of Luy
Despite the acquittal, the alleged pork barrel scam mastermind remains in jail because her plunder charges are non-bailable.
Duterte: Case was 'crazy'
Duterte said the illegal detention charge against Napoles was “crazy.”
“As a former prosecutor, I cannot think of how a person could be a victim of being hostage when he (Luy) had all the while all the opportunity to go out and never come back, and he was allowed to go home,” the president.
“It was I think — no offense intended — sadya na ano, sadyang nagpa-preso (he allowed himself to be detained),” he added.
“If I were the fiscal (proescutor), I would not file it. It’s crazy. In and out, in and out and several times he was left alone.”
In July 2016, the Supreme Court ruled on a petition for certiorari that Napoles filed against the Court of Appeals, that "Napoles has been found guilty of serious illegal detention with proof beyond reasonable doubt, a quantum of evidence higher than probable cause. Resolving whether there was probable cause in the filing of information before the trial court and in the issuance of an arrest warrant would be 'of no practical use and value'."
It said in the same decision that "it appears that there is sufficient evidence to establish that complainant Benhur Luy was actually deprived of his liberty."