An affidavit is a written sworn statement of fact voluntarily made by an affiant or deponent under an oath or affirmation administered by a person authorized to do so by law. Such statement is witnessed as to the authenticity of the affiant’s signature by a taker of oaths, such as a notary public or commissioner of oaths. The name is Medieval Latin for he/she has declared upon oath. An affidavit is a type of verified statement or showing, or in other words, it contains verification, meaning it is under oath or penalty of perjury, and this serves as evidence to its veracity and is required for court proceedings. Much has been said about lists in the so-called PDAF scam but much should be said about the Napoles main and supplemental affidavit.
It was supposedly executed aided by counsel and yet what kind of a lawyer signs both affidavits that do not tell you the whole story but present bits and pieces of the so-called truth according to Napoles. The first affidavit is in English dated 12 May 2014 while the second is in Tagalog dated 26 May 2014. You think doing Tagalog will clear things? No, it didn’t help. In fact there were names with too generalized entries that does not tell you much.
The first affidavit was executed just before Napoles had surgery and the second was immediately after when Napoles was still recuperating.
When you try to understand Napoles based on the two affidavits, you end up with the conclusion going around Congress that yes it appears she started to do business in a five–six mode. A legislator needs money, she/he goes to Napoles to borrow and returns the money after, complete with interests. Where did Napoles get the money to begin with? How can she afford to advance billions? Was her source of funds illegal too? How come she is not in the Order of Battle of the PNP?
Then viola, since she is able to advance money, she can be able to advance SARO, so someone designed such a system. And word of mouth was the only way to advertise her services – that there is someone who can advance the money from SARO. What the affidavits didn’t say was who actually followed up and secured from DBM the Notice of Cash Allocation.
From the two affidavits, it appears that the implementing agencies are pre-determined and so are the persons in the agencies who will process the money at the implementation stage.
In all her recitation, it appears someone would always go to her telling her there is a project for this or that via a pool of agents. The agents are all known staff of legislators or people working in Congress or worse, legislators themselves or daughters and sons of a legislator. How come these people have not been called in the congressional hearings? Sacred cows? Or controlled information flow? By whom?
Despite being just a high school graduate, Napoles knew exactly what she was doing because she knew the difference between an SOP, a rebate and a commission from a discount and an advance. She made it a source of income from enterprising agents to bring more clients with a promise of a kitty. She identified who used agents and who transacted personally with her. The latter, I do not know why they are not included in the complaint filed with the OMB by DOJ. So the selective issue begins here and that is why I do agree with Archbishop Socrates Villegas, D.D. who describes such act as “selective justice.”
Those who designed and are executing the Napoles card may want to stop and consider the fact that Archbishop Villegas has been giving spiritual guidance to Napoles.
She exposed PDAF and Commission on Appointments, DOTC, Malampaya allocations but stopped short in discussing “budget insertions” promising the “details will be covered by another affidavit.”
She consistently referred to Butch Abad, as in entry no. 13 of the first affidavit and entry no. 11 of the second affidavit. When Napoles said: “I neither have the power nor the authority to order the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) to release documents as well as command the implementing agencies to choose any foundation of Non-governmental Organization (NGO). Neither can I direct nor control any legislator to give me his of her PDAF and disburse it as I please. I also did not conceptualize the formation of NGOs as well as functions. I am not and was never an elected official nor an accountable government officer or employee.”
What one online news group did is totally wrong. They listed the names of all those named in the various lists and then made a conclusion based on the list and the frequency certain names came out and voila, say the three names came out from all the lists circulating. Would that be correct? Would that be conclusive? Would that be enough to say they are guilty? Would that exercise have probative value? Or they too muddled the process just like another broadsheet is doing by having on its banner the whistleblowers posing?
Lets not miss the points though. How did Baligod ended up with Luy? Did the group he would have worked for as a partner refer Baligod to Luy? Why did Luy fire him? Why did Napoles detain Luy? Who was Luy teaming up with to put up another Napoles like organization? A competitor? No staff can rise above a principal but Luy appeared to have planned that.
The COA report covered 2007-2009 and identified at least 82 NGOs with anomalous or questionable transactions during those years. It has been said that 8 of the 82 belong to Napoles. So what has government done with the 72? Have they cancelled their registrations with SEC? Have they filed cases? How about the other syndicates similar to Napoles? What have they done?
Why not release the 2001-2012 PDAF COA findings? That covers two presidents, five Senate presidents and four speakers. Material to this is who wee the chairpersons of the Senate Committee on Finance and House Committee on Appropriations?
Or dpes the search for truth end on the step of yellow painted gates? The sooner we finish this, the better for all of us. The more it becomes protracted, the more people will believe that Napoles is the wrecking ball for 2016. Those orchestrating for 2016 will have to be very careful for this may be the tide that washes their chances and become the protest card needed to unseat many.
Deconstructing Napoles is just like deconstructing Tuwid na Daan. It’s all failed promises and selective justice. Funny, the very institution that supported the rushed impeachment, the passage every year of the General Appropriations Act (GAA) since 2011 not knowing their power of the purse was trampled upon with DAP. Aquino prides himself in having annual budgets passed unlike GMA where it is said that failure to pass means an automatic reenactment with the majority becoming discretionary. In Aquino’s way, GAAs are passed but DAP allowed Aquino to do discretionary use. Who is worse? So many insults thrown their way are now at the receiving end.
Congress is an elected body. The heaps of dung thrown at it recklessly have resulted in a paralysis as if each member received their PDAF in cash. By how much percentage is the budget of Congress different from that of the Executive? Why is Congress allowing itself to be bamboozled as the dirtiest branch? When Congress’ budget is a pittance compared to the Executive. And no one stands for it. No one questions the King. No one questions the knights of the King!