Plays video clip of Rep. Marcoleta’s questioning of tax expert Abrea during his latest “Talk to the People”
(Eagle News) – President Rodrigo Duterte cited how a certified public accountant who served as an expert witness in the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearings investigating the Philippine government’s emergency procurement of PPEs at the start of the pandemic, later backtracked on his allegations in a hearing of the House of Representatives.
In his “Talk to the People” on Sept. 27, Duterte particularly cited how House Deputy Speaker and Sagip Partylist Rep. Rodante Marcoleta was able to elicit from the same resource person, Mon Abrea, that there was nothing wrong with how the government secured the PPEs.
The President said Abrea, whom he described as Senator Richard Gordon’s witness, through Marcoleta’s questioning, admitted that in a life and death situation like the pandemic, he would have done the same thing and procured the much needed PPEs immediately to save lives.
During his “Talk to the People”, Duterte asked that the video clip from the House hearing showing how Marcoleta questioned Abrea be played so the public would know the true situation in a public health emergency.
-Question on due diligence-
At first, Abrea insisted there was no due diligence when the Philippine government chose Pharmally as one of the contractors to immediately secure PPEs.
“Mr. Chair, ang due diligence po is basic principle po ng pagiingat para po masigurado natin na may kapasidad ang kahit sino mang kompanya o indibidwal na makikipagtransaksiyon po tayo,” Abrea said during the House hearing.
Marcoleta then asked Abrea if he is lawyer, to which the accountant replied no. The lawmaker then lectured Abrea on the different types of due diligence, citing four examples.
“Oh CPA ka. Iyong due diligence maraming klase ‘yan. Mayroong necessary diligence, mayroong proper diligence, may ordinary diligence, mayroong extraordinary diligence. Alam mo ba ‘yun?” he asked.
Marcoleta then cited Article 1163 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines mentioning “diligence of a good father of the family.”
“Ito ‘yung ordinary diligence, ito ‘yung walang requirement sa batas kung anong gagawin mo. Katulad ng Bayanihan 1, hindi nire-require ang minimum capitalization diyan. Hindi rin nire-require na hanapin mo pa kung saan galing ang pera nila. Ang ginawa ng PS-DBM (Procurement Service-Department of Budget and Management), kahit walang ganoong requirement, nagtanong pa rin,” he explained.
“Ordinary diligence ang ginawa niya. Dapat pinasalamatan mo sila because kahit hindi na kailangan, ginawa pa rin nila,” he said.
He then asked Abrea what was his basis for claiming that there was no due diligence on the part of the government when it immediately secured PPEs under the Bayanihan 1 law at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The lawmaker then questioned how Abrea was used as an “expert witness” at the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing.
He said that under the emergency procurement of a negotiated contract, rules under normal circumstances do not apply.
“So anong batayan mo noong sinabi mo walang due diligence kasi hindi tinanong kung saan nanggaling ang kanilang pera eh hindi naman nire-require ng batas ‘yun?”
“Saan mo binatay? Kasi tinawag ka nilang expert witness. Ang expert witness maski na sa regular court ay tinatanggap sapagkat ang sasabihin mo ay talagang makatutulong, beyond the understanding of the regular court, makatutulong ka talaga. Ngayon, nagtestify ka as an expert witness, naghahanap ka ng due diligence, ‘yung batayan hindi mo alam. Wala ka palang batayan eh.”
Marcoleta then said Abrea had “no basis” to judge that the government did not exercise due diligence in the emergency procurement of PPEs as he had claimed in the Senate hearing under Gordon’s questioning
“Sinasabi ko sa’yo ngayon that Bayanihan 1, including the emergency procurement under PS-DBM, the negotiated contract, do not require minimum capitalization. Those rules do not require also that you will have to ask where the money came from. And there is no basis for you to judge and pass judgment on whether their action came from due diligence or not. Ang sinasabi mo, Mr. Abrea, kina-calculate ko lang, ay ‘yung traditional na ginagawa under normal circumstances,” he said.
To drive home his point, Marcoleta then asked Abrea what he would do in a situation if his family got sick and he needed to buy a medicine prescribed by a doctor immediately to save his life.
If there were three pharmaceutical stores where he could buy the specific medicine, and two offered a lower price for it but has no supplies, while a third offered a very high price for it and has the supplies, what would he do, the lawmaker asked Abrea.
“Mayroon ngayong tatlong botika ang nagsabi sa’yo: iyong isa 10 piso lang ‘yung gamot; ‘yung isa naman 50 pesos pero wala silang supply; iyong isa 1,000 pesos, siya lang ang mayroong supply. Anong gagawin mo, Mr. Abrea? Naghahanap ka ng gamot at naghahabol ka ng panahon because you are trying to save life ng kaanak mo. What will you do?” Marcoleta asked.
“Bibili po ako, Mr. Chair, doon sa may supply, Mr. Chair,” Abrea answered.
“Iyong 1,000 pesos? Kahit na ‘yung — kahit na ‘yung kalaban niya 10 pesos and 20 pesos lang because they don’t have the supply at the time you needed most that particular drug, tama?” Marcoleta asked.
“Tama po, Mr. Chair,” Abrea answered.
“Tama ka talaga. Ngayon, ibig mo bang sabihin doon sa nagbigay sa’yo ng gamot na ‘yun na 1,000, tatanungin mo ba siya, ‘Teka muna, tingnan ko nga ‘yung capitalization mo kung tunay ka talaga.’ Itatanong mo ba sa kanya ‘yun?” Marcoleta said in his follow-up question.
“Hindi po, Mr. Chair,” Abrea replied.
“Oh, iyon. Ngayon ka lang tumama, Mr. Abrea,” Marcoleta said.
“Ang sinasabi natin dito, hindi tama na husgahan mo sa pamamagitan ng financial statement. Titingnan mo ang maraming bagay. Ano ba ang panahon natin? ‘Di ba peligroso tayo? May batayan ba ako para sabihing ‘walang due diligence’ dahil hindi ba tinanong ng PS-DBM kung saan niya kinuha ‘yung pera? Kung nanghiram siya ng pera, wala ng due diligence? Hindi ba pinaguusapan natin kung sinong nakapag-deliver? Kagaya nung halimbawa natin, ‘yung nakapag-deliver sa iyo ‘yung pangatlo. Medyo mahal nga lang pero nagkataon siya ang may supply at nag-aagaw buhay ‘yung kamag-anak mo. Kukuwestiyunin ba ng pamilya mo sapagkat ‘hindi ka man lang kaagad nagtanong’? Sino ba ‘yung binilhan mo na ‘yun? Tinanong mo ba ‘yun kung maraming utang ‘yun? Tinanong mo ba ‘yung kanyang stockholders kung mga may criminal records ‘yang mga ‘yan? Gagawin mo pa ba ‘yun, Mr. Abrea?”
“Hindi po, Mr. Chair,” Abrea said.
After that, Marcoleta said he has no more questions for the witness.
-Duterte warns Gordon on conduct in Senate hearings-
After the video of that hearing was played during his latest “Talk to the People,” Duterte said the hearing elicited the true situation of the emergency procurement of PPEs.
He then warned the Senate, particularly Senator Gordon, commenting that his style of questioning witnesses and making immediate conclusions, was not appropriate.
Duterte then criticized the Senate for putting in jail one of Pharmally’s executives just because he did not give the answer expected by Gordon.
“So ang Human Rights, gusto kong marinig kung ano rin ‘yung sinasabi. The Constitution really provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Is there a due process of law if you already have the conceived — the preconceived answer and if it does not dovetail your frame of mind, you send him to jail? If — you know, just piece of an advice, I think sino ‘yung tao na ano? Sabi ko nga, durugin na ninyo, ‘yung Pharmally, durugin na ninyo pero not at the expense of the constitutional rights of whoever is testifying there. Hindi ko nidedepensahan, nagsasalita lang ako bilang abugado kasi nakikita ko dito sa briefer ko kinulong na ninyo.”
-Pharmally exec transferred by Senate to Pasay City Jail-
Last Friday, Senate Blue Ribbon Committee chair Gordon ordered the transfer of Pharmally Pharmaceutical Corp. Director Lincoln Ong to the Pasay City Jail for his refusal to answer the senators’ questions on Pharmally.
“The chair orders upon the motion of Senators (Panfilo) Lacson, (Franklin) Drilon, (Francis) Pangilinan as approved by the Senate President.
The chair orders the OSAA (Senate Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms) to transfer this man to Pasay City Jail,” Senator Richard Gordon, chairman of the committee, said.
Ong was previously placed under “house arrest” at the Senate building.
The Senate previously issued separate warrants of arrest against Ong and businessman and former presidential economic adviser Michael Yang in connection with Pharmally.
The firm is being probed in the Senate for getting the P8 billion worth of contract to immediately secure PPEs for the government at the start of the COVID pandemic.
(Eagle News Service)