Napoles: De Lima spared 97 mayors in Malampaya gas scam

8

AT least 97 local chief executives who supposedly benefited from the Malampaya gas fund scam were spared from criminal charges by Justice Secretary Leila de Lima in exchange for their support for her senatorial bid in the 2016 elections, according to an unsigned affidavit made by Janet Lim-Napoles.

Advertisements

Napoles, in her 30-page affidavit submitted by former senator Panfilo Lacson to the Senate, claimed that lawyer Levito Baligod, who used to represent Benhur Luy, talked to the 97 mayors implicated in the Malampaya fund scam and told them that they will be excluded from the charges if they will support the Senate dream of de Lima.

The P900-million Malampaya fund released by the government in 2009 was intended to assist local government units affected by typhoons.

The fund represents royalties of the Philippine government from the natural gas exploration project in western Palawan province.

It was Ruby Tuason who allegedly approached Napoles in 2009 and told her that she will get money from Malacañang from the Malampaya fund and that a portion of the money will be used for the 2010 elections.

Tuason has since turned state witness against the alleged pork scammers.

Napoles in her unsigned affidavit narrated that Tuason was asking for a 60 percent commission from the transaction that she intends to share with other individuals.

The businesswoman agreed to the proposal as she expected to get five percent commission from the P900-million fund excluding the 35 percent production cost for agricultural equipment that will be distributed to local government units affected by Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng.

Napoles said it was Tuason who provided her the list of 97 mayors and their respective municipalities.

“There is an urgent need to release the Malampaya fund before the end of the year [2009] because of the 2010 elections. We are also pressured to do it considering that we have given the advance payment of 60 percent commission as agreed upon,” she stated in her affidavit.

When the group of Napoles was ready to deliver the supposed materials to the local chief executives, Tuason said the deliveries should be made in cash instead because the mayors would use the money to fund their campaign.

Napoles initially refused but was later prompted to comply because she has to make sure that she will get her investment back, meaning the cash advances she had released to Tuason.

After the Malampaya fund transaction was completed, Tuason was able to build a house in Dasmariñas Village in Makati City amounting to P300 million, she said.

“Aside from the P900-million Malampaya fund, Ruby was also able to bring in different project insertions of other politicians amounting to P50 million and P300 million,” the affidavit said without elaborating.

Napoles found out later that none of the 97 local chief executives who supposedly benefited from the Malampaya fund were included in the case filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) before the Office of the Ombudsman.

She was referring to the plunder complaint filed by the DOJ in October 2013 against 22 individuals including former President Gloria Arroyo, her former executive secretary Eduardo Ermita and Napoles in connection with their supposed involvement in the Malampaya fund mess.

Also included in the complaint were former Agrarian Reform Secretary Nasser Pangandaman, his former Undersecretary Narciso Nieto and finance officer Teresita Panlilio and several heads of non-government organizations (NGOs) linked to Napoles.

But Baligod in a chance interview at the Senate said the affidavit was full of lies and deceit.

He denied Napoles’ claims that he talked to the 97 mayors and asked them to support de Lima on her plan to run for the Senate.

In fact, Baligod said, field investigators of the Office of the Ombudsman personally visited the 97 municipalities and their respective chief executives who supposedly benefited from the Malampaya fund scandal and found that their signatures were forged.

Share.
loading...
Loading...

Please follow our commenting guidelines.

8 Comments

  1. Magic Ni Ping on

    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. This supposed affidavit is unsigned and therefore has no value whatsoever legal or otherwise and should be treated as such. Anybody including myself could have written on that piece of paper claimed to come from Napoles.

  2. Why spare those Local Officials who abused and took the taxes of all of us Filipinos. Aba naman kung tutuo itong naririnig nating kay Sec.De Lima na gusto daw na tatakbo bilang senator sa darating na halalan sa 2016 eh di ba just taking advantage na naman upang manalo siya. Ha ha ha ha. Puro palabas na naman at wala ng pag pab babago sa ating lipunan. All THE SAME BANANA.

    Mahiya na kayo mga Honorable na tinatawag nading mga leaders sa ginagawa ninyo.
    Walang naniniwala sa inyo. Kailangan may bagong partido na itatatag na at mga bagong mga leaders from top to bottom na tunay mag silbe sa taong bayan. Hindi mga politika na gusto nanaman mag buo ng bagong partido . Marami naman diyan kayalang walang pondo. May paraan dahil sagad hangang buto na ang pag durusa na ating ordinaryong tao. Lalong lalo na mga squatters na ginagamit nitong mga mandarambong.

  3. I am just wondering why the senate is wasting thier time about the list of Napoles. By naming personalities on that list is already a ground for comtemp. She denied anything about the PDAP during the Senate hearing. She lied under aoth what else are you waiting to prove? put her in a regular detaintion or jail like everyone! why are you giving her protection Sec. Delima? If she is ill there is a hospital for convicts not OSmak or st. Luke. Why are you using the tax payers’ money for janet napoles? She stole the tax payers’ money and now the same is being spent for this beast. Is it not double jeopardy.

  4. ang mas magnanakaw pala dyan si ruby tuazon,siya pala ang mata ni janet napoles -kapag meron siyang na-amoy na pera-she reports to janet so they can plan to divert the funds to themselves-the commission and kickbacks. dapat isoli ni ruby tuazon lahat ng mga nakuhan niyang kickbacks,says b4 she got P300M at yon ang ginamit niyang pagpa gawa ng mansion niya, and I remembered she only returned or will ret P40M , wow meron pa siyang malaking dekwat tapos free pa siya being jailed? can’t be. dapat ikulong siya and the govt has to get all what she had taken from the govt funds,wag pa-loloko ang officials who investigates her. and same with janet napoles- no state witness for them -para ma free sila sa jail and also get all what she got fr those funds.

  5. all you reporters keep calling the napoles unsigned statement an affidavit. It cant be an affidavit if its unsigned. An affidavit is a legal document, an unsigned statement is just that an unsigned statement, anyone could have made it & attributed it to anyone. So now we have a few lists & all should be shown to us all to avoid a cover up. Then an investigation into who from that list used their money to invest in these bogus or fake ngo’s, then we will know who is guilty. If you used them you are guilty. Ignorance is not an excuse. Its their job to know where the taxpayers money goes to. If they cant be trusted to do it then we will put that trust in others. But trust alone is no good, checks should always be made to verify its gone where intended & did what it was meant to do.

  6. Sen. Miriam Santiago’s who is a lawyer made a comment that it’s only Benhur Luy who would be the most credible witness to Janet Lim Napoles scam exposee. Ruby Tuason who willingly participated with Janet Lim Napoles for numerous years forging and stealing from the gov’t coffers, both of them should not be considered the least guilty and therefore should not be given the immunity instead it should be Benhur Luy .

  7. Paul de Guzman on

    Dada ka lang ng dada, di ba inembistagahan nga yang mga mayor na dapat nakatanggap ng project kuno at karamihan sa kanila walang alam na may dapat pa lang matanggap. Either you don’t understand this case diligently or you are just plain critic of this administration. Kaya napapahamak kayo dahil Mali ang gamit nyo sa freedom of press.