EDITORIAL - Lying under oath

In certain quarters, the timing is suspect, especially since the offense was committed way back in 2011. Still, seeing someone actually being convicted and punished for lying under oath is a welcome development.

Jonathan Morales was initially presented as the star witness of Sen. Ronald dela Rosa in the so-called “PDEA leaks” linking President Marcos to the illegal drug scourge. Last Wednesday, the San Fernando Municipal Trial Court Branch 4 in Bulacan convicted Morales of perjury for providing false testimony against two Chinese defendants in a case before the San Fernando Regional Trial Court in 2011.

Morales, a former agent of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, later recanted his testimony against the Chinese, saying he was merely forced to implicate them in drug trafficking by the PDEA chief at the time, Lyndon Aspacio. But Morales was unable to present evidence that he had testified under duress.

In May this year, Morales was presented by Dela Rosa as the anti-narcotics agent who allegedly signed the PDEA pre-operation report in 2012 that linked Marcos and actress Maricel Soriano to illegal drugs and substance abuse. Morales, however, was later cited in contempt for lying about his personal data sheet, and was detained at the Senate on May 20. He was released five days later ostensibly for humanitarian considerations.

This time, Morales was sentenced to four months in prison for lying before the San Fernando RTC, and fined P1,000, with subsidiary imprisonment in case he fails to pay the fine.

Considering the consequences of lying under oath, Congress should consider raising the penalties for perjury. Especially since both the Senate and the House of Representatives have often been venues for providing false testimony.

Perjury can destroy reputations and put the innocent behind bars, and allow the guilty to get away with the crime. Lying under oath undermines the effort to ferret out the truth about wrongdoing. In this age when technology has facilitated the spread of disinformation and misinformation, ensuring the truthfulness of statements given under oath gains more importance.