Entire Garcia family could go to prison

"I signed with a heavy heart," Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo confided of his plunder charge last week against the entire family of Maj. Gen. Carlos Garcia. It is unprecedented. Since the Plunder Act was enacted in 1991, only unrelated persons have been convicted or indicted, except in the 2001 case of former President Joseph Estrada and son Jinggoy. The offense carries the death penalty. If proved, not only Garcia will be put away, but also his wife Clarita, and sons Ian Carl, 26, Juan Paulo, 23, and Timothy Mark, 21.

That grim prospect weighs heavy on Marcelo, an ex-seminarian, and Special Prosecutor Dennis Villa-Ignacio, a Catholic charismatic. Yet they must temper emotion with the cold neutrality of law. "Our evidence show that they conspired to amass ill-gotten wealth of P303 million," Marcelo said Saturday on radio (Sapol, DWIZ 882-AM). All sons are of legal age. From case files, the Garcias committed a series and combinations of illegal acts to stash more than P50 million – to constitute the heinous crime under R.A, 7080.

Plunder carries no bail. Their trial alone may see all five Garcias in detention. Criminal Case No. 28107 was raffled Friday to a Sandiganbayan division. Three magistrates will examine the evidence in the coming days to determine probable cause. In case of doubts, they will call in Marcelo and Villa-Ignacio for amplification. Once satisfied, the division will issue arrest warrants.

The general already is detained at Camp Aguinaldo, facing court martial for conduct unbecoming of an officer and acts inimical to the State. His wife and sons, all US citizens, could be thrown into the Quezon City jail. Timothy Mark is studying in New York; reports are that Ian Carl joined him there weeks ago. Ombudsman prosecutors believe Clarita and Juan Paulo are in town, having visited the general very recently. Nevertheless the anti-graft court has instructed the immigration bureau to hold the Garcias’ departure from any port.

If they’ve left for the US, the Ombudsman will file for extradition. The US usually does not turn over its citizens if the case commands death. It’s iffy, though. President George W. Bush had launched in 2002 Oplan PEP (Politically Exposed Persons) against foreign politicians and generals suspected of filching US military aid. Under it, at least half a dozen persons have been indicted for money laundering.

US agents had helped collect evidence against the Garcias, notably of frequent US trips to stash hundreds of thousands of dollars, Clarita’s sworn admission that the money came from kickbacks and illicit gifts, and posh condos in New York and a house in Ohio. Two weeks ago, two US embassy officers testified in Garcia’s court martial about his holding a permanent resident card and immigrant visa.

Embassy sources also have talked about possibly rapping the Garcias under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. When Ian Carl and Juan Paulo were caught in December 2003 smuggling $100,000 cash at the San Francisco airport, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents dug deeper into the family background. Consequently they drew up a table of organization normally done on crime syndicates. Imelda Marcos had been charged in New York in the late ’80s under the RICO Law, but was acquitted. The jury ruled that the former first lady had not been proved back then to have broken corruption laws in Manila, and by consequence could not have engaged in racketeering in America. Any RICO indictment against the Garcias would thus rest on the outcome of the plunder charge.

Gen. Garcia is accused of amassing unexplained wealth beyond his declared incomes from the Army in 1993-2003. Ombudsman investigators noted that he held a crucial position as Armed Forces deputy chief of staff for comptrollership in 2002-2004. Aside from real estate in the US, he and his family hold titles to huge farms and residential lots in various provinces and cities. They also own, individually or jointly, dozens of peso and dollar bank deposits, as well as multimillion-peso investments in military officers’ cooperatives. Each has more than two cars registered in their name, again jointly or individually. In conspiracy, the act of one is deemed to be the act of all. The charge sheet states that the individual and joint ownership of the wealth makes the Garcia family members equally liable.

John, James and Jane Does are listed as confederates. Marcelo explained that they refer to persons and entities whom investigators have yet to identify but who, by Clarita’s statement to US-ICE agents, gave them the kickbacks and travel money from military contracts. Or, they could be other military officers who assisted in the plunder. "The investigation is still going on," he said. "We intend to identify all those who connived. We filed the case against the Garcias ahead because we already have sufficient evidence against them."

Will detention and the outlook of going to prison by themselves elicit from the Garcias the names of supposed bribers and accomplices? Clarita had sworn to ICE agents that her husband dutifully listed each of the gift-givers to thank them properly. Congress inquirers concluded that Garcia was but one of many from the brass who benefited from loose handling of military finances, and that his predecessors had started it all.

Then again, an Ombudsman insider whispered hesitance to ask the Sandigan to move the general from camp detention, where he is safer, to a less secure civilian jail, where somebody might attempt to silence him. The tribunal is superior to regional, metropolitan or municipal courts, and certainly to the court martial, and thus can demand custody in a more serious offense. "I prefer to let the justices decide that," Marcelo sai

* * *

E-mail: [email protected]