Senate witness Guteza in Marine custody?

MANILA, Philippines —  Where in the world is Orly Guteza?

According to former lawmaker Mike Defensor, the “surprise witness” who testified during the Senate Blue Ribbon committee hearing is currently under the protection of the Philippine Marines.

The Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine Marine Corps have yet to comment on Defensor’s statement.

Defensor, who introduced Guteza to Sen. Rodante Marcoleta, told “Storycon” on One News yesterday that the former Marine is ready to appear if summoned by the Senate, Department of Justice (DOJ) or the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI).

“Sergeant Guteza – I’m saying this publicly – is under the Philippine Marines. He’s with them. No one can talk to him, and no one is allowed to approach him. But any time there is an official summons, it can be sent to the Marine commandant,” Defensor said.

He clarified the reported non-appearance of Guteza at the NBI, saying there was an initial discussion for him to be placed under the witness protection program.

But Guteza later decided not to push through with that and opted to seek the protection of the Marines, the former lawmaker said.

“After that hearing, he went to the Philippine Marines compound,” Defensor claimed. “The last message relayed to us – through our contact, since I don’t talk to him directly – was that if there’s an official summons from the NBI, the DOJ or the Senate committee, he will go and he will cooperate.”

Defensor maintained that Guteza was telling the truth when he testified on the alleged deliveries of suitcases containing millions to the residences of resigned congressman Zaldy Co and former speaker Martin Romualdez.

The DOJ has committed to act accordingly on the recommendation of a Manila court to investigate the possible falsification charges against Guteza on his sworn statement with a forged notarization.

Prosecutor General Richard Anthony Fadullon said they have yet to receive a copy of the order of Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 18 Executive Judge Carolina Icasiano-Sison, who referred the case to the DOJ for further investigation.

The court found that the signature of lawyer Petchie Rose Espera, which was affixed to the sworn statement of Guteza, is fake, affirming the lawyer’s claims that she did not notarize the document.

Fadullon said the court’s finding that the notarization is falsified only means that “it cannot be binding” and cannot be used in proceedings.

However, the court did not rule on whether the contents of the sworn statement are false.

“As far as Guteza is concerned, what he was saying will not change, whether it was notarized or not. The truthfulness or veracity is different from the fact that it’s binding as far as he’s concerned and insofar as third persons are concerned,” he noted.

Fadullon added that when Guteza testified before the Blue Ribbon committee, he also swore an oath there and his testimony is still “something that can be used or it can be useful.”

“I think the case that’s filed before the RTC was for the benefit of the notary just to note that I did not notarize that document. But it does not say that just because I did not notarize, it means that the things that I stated there are lies,” he said.

Meanwhile, DOJ spokesman Polo Martinez said the Manila court’s ruling on the notary falsi fication only pertains to Guteza. Senator Marcoleta, who present ed Guteza as a surprise witness to the Senate Blue Ribbon com mittee, is not affected.

Defensor maintained that the notarization was authentic, but the notary whose signature ap pears on the document might have been pressured to distance herself from it. He said he wel comed a probe into the issue.

Sen. Panfilo Lacson has said that regardless of the status of the notarization, Guteza’s sworn testimony before the Senate remains valid. – Daphne Galvez, EJ Macababbad, Michael Punongbayan, Delon Porcalla, Jose Rodel Clapano