‘Don’t send in your clowns’

11

Cayetano ridicules Binay’s representatives

A member of the Senate blue ribbon sub-committee on Friday said they are not denying Vice President Jejomar Binay his right to air his side on the allegedly overpriced Makati City Hall Building 2 and defend himself against other allegations, but they would not allow the 2016 presidential aspirant to mock scheduled hearings by sending in his “clowns” to represent him.

Senate Majority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano was reacting to claims made by lawyer JV Bautista, interim secretary general of the United Nationalist Alliance (UNA), that he has been flip-flopping on his statement about allowing representatives of the Vice President to speak in his behalf during hearings on the issue.

Cayetano maintained that his statement was very clear that the committee would welcome any evidence submitted by Binay that would shed light on the overpricing allegations as well as on his supposed hidden wealth.


According to the senator,  the Vice President could also send in witnesses who could give testimonies to prove that there was no overpricing or that he is not the owner of an agricultural estate in Rosario, Batangas.

He, however, said the subcommittee would not allow the Vice President to send in his “clowns” whose only intent, Cayetano added, is to disrupt proceedings.

The senator was referring to the Vice President sending  his representative and spokesperson to the hearing on Thursday, the same day set by the blue ribbon mother committee to hear Binay’s testimony.

The Vice President himself  was expected to attend the hearing but he instead sent Bautista and Navotas City Rep.Tobias Tiangco, interim president of UNA, to represent him and read his prepared statement and signed affidavit before the committee.

“The camp of the Vice President has been calling our proceedings a circus, but it is he who is sending in clowns to the hearing,” Cayetano said in a news conference held at Fort Bonifacio in Taguig City (Metro Manila).

According to the senator, the committee was willing to accept an affidavit sent by the Vice President and have it included in the records of the sub-committee but Bautista refused to give a copy of the affidavit to them after he was not allowed by the committee to read it during the proceedings.

Cayetano said the committee needs someone who could speak for the Vice President and answer questions on issues at hand,  not Binay’s spokesperson, who, he added, only wants to debate and question the proceedings.

He announced that  he expects the hearings of the sub-committee to last until February next year, citing budget deliberations.

Meanwhile, the Senate blue ribbon mother committee is  set to start its inquiry into the allegedly overpriced P700-million Iloilo Convention Center  (ICC) and the P900-million Malampaya fund scam.

In a statement issued by the office of Sen. Teofisto Guingona 3rd, chairperson of the blue ribbon committee, the hearing on the ICC, which involves Senate President Franklin Drilon, will be held on November 13,  and on the Malampaya fund scam, December 1.

Sen. Joseph Victor Ejercito had  noted Guingona’s apparent disinterest in conducting the probe, expressing suspicion that the committee might be protecting officials allied with the administration.

Share.
.
Loading...

Please follow our commenting guidelines.

11 Comments

  1. really strange argument from cayatano. i think he lost it! read the portion of the article -“According to the senator, the Vice President could also send in witnesses who could give testimonies to prove that there was no overpricing or that he is not the owner of an agricultural estate in Rosario, Batangas.” i thought binay already said he is not the owner. the ball in now in cayetano’s court to prove otherwise by presenting testimonies back by documental evidences. and best documents are the deed of sale (conditional or absolute) of the property and receipts of payment of capital gains tax.

    what sort of testimonies cayetano needs to prove that there was no overpricing (it is a function of COA not binay) and that he is not the owner of the property in Rosario Batangas (function of Register of Deeds)? cayetano can not even produce any documental evidence to back up the claim of the witnesses to show ownership of the property by binay -and now he wants binay to produce testimonies (or documents) proving he is not the owner? twisted logic/antics of a lawyer!

    • it is not twisted logic/antics of a lawyer.

      No need to drag the legal profession into it.

      It is simply Cayetano being himself.

      Enough said.

    • Honorable Saguitsit on

      Mr. ed1151

      I would like to answer your own questions here and to quote..what sort of testimonies does Sen. Cayetano need that there is no overpricing, it is a function of COA and not Binay, end of quote. Precisely, Sen Cayetano needs VP Binay’s witness that will rebut what has been revealed by Messrs. Mercado, Hechanova and a hosts of resource persons like the valuation man who have given their testimonies backed up by documentary evidence. The testimonies of these people have until this time have remained unanswered from the camp of VP Binay. Even COA in the person of it’s Chairwoman had expressed that there are ‘red flags’ on the Makati Bldg in question. The Chairman of the Bids and Awards committee had also given his own testimony that the bidding and awarding of this Makati Bldg. was rigged. And all of these have as I wrote above have not been answered and addressed by VP Binay or any of his supporters.

  2. hey don’t talk about clowns being sent to you. you are all clowns, you are!!!! but you, you three are clowns, not for circus but for mars.

  3. I am certaim that Cayetano will keep all other clowns out of the Senate’s 3 ring circus, popularly know as the Kangaroo Court. He does not want the three star clowns already there to have to compete with other clowns.

  4. These two clowns had to run their mouth everytime Mr.13% fart,if not they will lose their goodboy allowance.

  5. The Binay stance is simple: just deny and deny, and no need to dispute or refute any evidence, most people won’t hear or care anyway. But really, its easy for anyone to see that, an honorable and innocent person, especially one who claims to be hurting from all the shame, embarrassment, invectives, insults, and degradation and disrespect inflicted, will not take all of it sitting down and just putting up lame excuses like “they have already prejudged me” or “I will not dignify the hearing ….” or “I will not throw myself into the Lions’ den” or “its all a demolition job that is politically motivated”. Instead, I’d expect him to come straight forward charging in gung-ho, come hell or highwater, regardless of risks to life and limb, to curse upon them, even challenge them to a duel like the days of yore, call them names who falsely accuse him until he vindicates his name and honor with proofs and counter documents, head held up high. Only then could he walk away and turn his back, to ignore and disregard whatever else is thrown at him, but not before..

    • best documents to show ownership are absolute deed of sale of the property and receipts on the payments of capital gains tax. these documental evidences will nail the coffin (so to speak) and end the investigation!

      evidence does not lie but people lie – especially under certain circumstances (influenced by money or threat).