Maletas

Even without yet seeing the joint affidavit of the 18 ex-marines, or going into its contents, Senator Panfilo Lacson’s refusal to dig deeper was an ominous sign of things to come.

As chairman of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, Lacson could have called all those who claimed they delivered billions in cash inside the maletas, or extra-large trolley bags, to different personalities. The senator could have scrutinized if the pictures attached to the joint affidavits were AI-generated, edited, or original. He could have checked the plate numbers of the cars used to deliver the maletas and the hotels where the transactions were done. The senator could have grilled them. But he did not choose that path. Instead, he tried to cast doubt on the integrity of the ex-marines.

Look at the Office of the Ombudsman. We have always known that the office once entertained anonymous letters or complaints against government officials and employees. The Ombudsman can even investigate a complaint written on a mere scrap of paper or based on newspaper reports. But compare that to the detailed joint affidavit of the 18 ex-marines, who in fact appeared physically during a press conference. What else is the Ombudsman waiting for?

What happened to our government offices that when evidence may lead to the doorstep of Malacañang, they drag their feet to investigate? What is happening to our country that nobody would dare investigate the former house speaker Martin Romualdez in relation to the flood-control projects scandal?

Worse, instead of giving the ex-marines their chance to be heard, the Senate, the ombudsman, and the National Bureau of Investigation have given us the impression that they are protecting somebody. They all gang up on the ex-marines, questioning their records and integrity. They want to destroy the credibility of the 18 marines by making big issues of their backgrounds, especially those who did not exit gracefully from the service.

But they do not see the irony of embracing the testimony of Ramil Madriaga, who is in jail because of a heinous crime. It becomes obvious that if the testimony is against a Duterte, then the witness is acceptable. But if it is against Marcos, the witness is not.

Have you ever heard of any government agency or official who assured any whistle-blower of protection? No. The people have been given the impression that exposing corruption does not pay. In this kind of environment, how can we expect active citizenship?

But let us imagine we exist in another world. In that world, the ex-marines accused the Dutertes or those allied with them. The government would have thrown a wide net. The Lower House and the Senate would have investigated it to their full satisfaction. NBI and Ombudsman would not have wasted a single minute. The whole government bureaucracy would have been used to pin down the target.

In an interview during my radio program over dyHP RMN Cebu, Atty. Levi Baligod, the lawyer for the ex-marines, assured that they have the evidence, such as receipts, to prove their claim. He also expressed concern for the safety of his clients.

But how can truth come out if, instead of leaving no stone unturned, the ombudsman, the Lower House, the Senate, and the entire government bureaucracy seem uninterested in turning even a single stone?

Quo vadis, Philippines?