Vitangcol decries ‘persecution’ in MRT 3 deal

5

Former Metro Rail Transit (MRT) 3 General Manager Al Vitangcol 3rd on Tuesday said he is being persecuted by the prosecution when it opposed his request that he be provided copies of counter-affidavits submitted by Transportation officials.

Advertisements

Vitangcol is facing graft charges at the Sandiganbayan’s Third Division along with five incorporators of the Philippine Trans Rail Management and Services Corporation (PH Trams) in connection with the award of the MRT 3 interim maintenance deal to the joint venture of PH Trams and Comm Builders and Technology Philippines Corporation (CB&T) in 2012.

“The prosecution makes it too plain and simple to claim that ‘the accused-movant failed to show any good cause for the production of the requested documents, nor the materiality thereof to any matter.’ This is a disjointed reasoning of the prosecution!” he said in a reply filed on Tuesday.

Vitangcol added that the papers he is seeking are public documents because these were notarized.

He was responding to the prosecution’s opposition to his plea to the Sandiganbayan to direct the prosecution to provide him copies of the counter-affidavits of several officials including Transportation Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya.

The Ombudsman cleared the Transportation officials but filed charges against Vitangcol and five PH Trams incorporators — Arturo Soriano, Wilson de Vera, Marlo dela Cruz, Manolo Maralit and Federico Remo.

Vitangcol believes that he can use the counter-affidavits of Transportation officials in his defense because in these documents, the officials claimed that the contract was above-board.

“Why is the government, through the prosecution, adamant in releasing such documents to the herein accused? What is the prosecution afraid of if and when the accused gets hold of such material evidence? Is it because these pleadings include averments and defenses favorable to accused Vitangcol?” he said.

Vitangcol then invoked Sections 1 and 14 of Article III, or the Bill of Rights, of the 1987 Constitution in arguing that he is entitled to secure production of evidence in his behalf.
He said the prosecution’s move “is tantamount to persecution.”

“The swiftness and over-eagerness of the Ombudsman to prosecute herein accused, is a clear example of persecution,” Vitangcol added.

“Though originally accused as only one of the sixteen [16] government officials, accused Vitangcol is now charged as a principal, the one and only, and denied access to vital material evidence, through the courtesy of the prosecution,” he said.

Vitangcol reiterated his request to the anti-graft court that he be given copies of the counter-affidavits of Abaya, Undersecretary Jose Perpetuo Lotilla, Undersecretary Rafael Antonio Santos, Undersecretary Rene Limcaoco, Assistant Secretary Dante Lantin, Assistant Secretary Ildefonso Patdu, Land Rail Transit Authority (LRTA) Administrator Honorito Chaneco, negotiating team member Geronimo Quintos and PH Trams incorporator Wilson de Vera.

Share.
loading...
Loading...

Please follow our commenting guidelines.

5 Comments

  1. Vitangcol wanted to see the evidence so he can defend himself, but at the end of it, all the leaders involved in this case should be responsible for its worse case and face the graft charges.

  2. I always get confused on how it works in this country. If you arnt allowed to look at the evidence against you how can you defend against it. He should just wait until it goes to court & im sure then they have to produce this evidence. Then they need to ask for time to prepare a defence as they have only just seen the evidence. That sounds fair to me.

  3. Roralidrakonnis on

    I’m beginning to suspect that there are no affidavits, and that the Ombudsman just exonerated Abaya arbitrarily. It is disgusting how Carpio-Morales likes to rely on sheer number of indictments to strut and crow about what a crusader she is, with all her big talk about how fighting corruption is ‘the reason for my life’. How ‘so many in government are corrupt’, but apparently, none of them include Liberal Party members. Oh, so maybe all LP members are above board like Abaya, Madame? Like I said: Sickening.

  4. opinionated na pinoy on

    This is to show how corrupt the government of my beloved country, Philippines. Why not charge Roxas and Abaya? They are the biggest of everything! biggest violators, biggest law breakers, probably even got the biggest share of the pie. Why charge these little people and let the well politically connected people go? Is it because of PNoy?

    Poor Vitangcol, even his request for public documents to be used for his defense is denied. Probably, Roxas and Abaya used the line that Honorado used during the NAIA Senate investigation–“WE WERE OUT OF THE LOOP”. Sa aking paningin, wala akong nakikitang matuwid na daan.

  5. The Ombudsman cleared the Transportation officials but filed charges against Vitangcol
    ——————————-

    The Ombudsman is part of the corruption problem, How can Morales possibly clear Roxas and Abaya who were in charge of the entire department when the contracts were cancelled and awarded.

    Seen the same pattern for the last 6 years the Liberal Party big wigs are never charged.

    Take the Pork barrel scandal for example.

    20 senators and 100 house of representatives gave their pork barrel millions to Napoles in exchange for kickbacks and campaign funds.

    3 opposition senators charged and arrested by De Lima as head of the Justice Dept.
    The rest no charges and allowed to keep the kickbacks.

    Anyone want to clean up the government should start with the Dept of Justice, the Ombudsman and Congress.