JOINT COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT

Transcription

1 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR QUEZON CITY REP. GILBERT C. REMULLA, REP. ROLEX T. SUPLICO, REP. JUSTIN SB. CHIPECO, REP. DARLENE R. ANTONINO - CUSTODIO, REP. LORETTA ANN P. ROSALES, REP. TEODORO A.CASIÑO, REP. FLORENCIO G. NOEL, REP. LORENZO R. TAÑADA III, REP. ALFONSO V. UMALI, JR., REP. MUJIV HATAMAN, REP. IMEE R. MARCOS, REP. ROILO S. GOLEZ, REP. FRANCIS JOSEPH G. ESCUDERO, REP. RENATO B. MAGTUBO, REP. ANA THERESIA HONTIVEROS BARAQUEL, REP. RODOLFO G. PLAZA, COMPLAINANTS, -VERSUS- VIRGILIO O. GARCILLANO, RESPONDENT. I.S. NO. FOR PERJURY, VIOLATION OF PASSPORT ACT OF 1996, AND FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENT. x x JOINT COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT Complainants, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and state: 1. Complainants are all incumbent members of the House of Representatives, with personal details as follows: a. Complainant GILBERT C. REMULLA is of legal age, Filipino, married and a Representative of the Second

2 [ 2 ] District of Cavite, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. N-316 House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. b. Complainant ROLEX T. SUPLICO is of legal age, Filipino, married and a Representative of the Fifth District of Iloilo, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. N-205, House of Representatives, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. c. Complainant JUSTIN SB. CHIPECO is of legal age, Filipino, single and is a Representative of Second District of Laguna, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. N-103, House of Representatives, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. d. Complainant DARLENE R. ANTONINO CUSTODIO is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Representative of the First District of South Cotabato, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. N-105, House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. e. Complainant LORETTA ANN P. ROSALES is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Party List Representative of AKBAYAN, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. S-511, House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. f. Complainant TEODORO A. CASIÑO is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Party List Representative of BAYAN MUNA, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. S-616, House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. g. Complainant FLORENCIO G. NOEL is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Party List Representative of AN WARAY, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. S-216, House of Representatives, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. h. Complainant LORENZO R. TAÑADA III is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Representative of the Fourth District of Quezon, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. N-409, House of Representatives, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. i. Complainant ALFONSO V. UMALI, JR. is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Representative of the Second District of Oriental Mindoro, who may be served with

3 [ 3 ] notice and other process at Rm. S-606, House of Representatives, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. j. Complainant MUJIV HATAMAN is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Party List Representative of AMIN, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. S-408, House of Representatives, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. k. Complainant IMEE R. MARCOS is of legal age, Filipino, single and is a Representative of the Second District of Ilocos Norte, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. N-311, House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. l. Complainant ROILO S. GOLEZ is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Representative of the Second District of Parañaque City, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. S-111, House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. m. Complainant FRANCIS JOSEPH G. ESCUDERO is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Representative of the First District of Sorsogon, who may be served with notice and other process at the Office of the Minority Floor Leader, House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. n. Complainant RENATO B. MAGTUBO is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Party List Representative of PARTIDO NG MANGGAGAWA, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. S-310, House of Representatives, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. o. Complainant ANA THERESIA HONTIVEROS - BARAQUEL is of legal age, Filipino, widow and is a Party List Representative of AKBAYAN, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. S-611, House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. p. Complainant RODOLFO G. PLAZA is of legal age, Filipino, married and is a Representative of the Lone District of Agusan del Sur, who may be served with notice and other process at Rm. N-403, House of Representative, Constitutional Hills, Quezon City. 2. Respondent VIRGILIO O. GARCILLANO, is a former Commissioner of the Commission on Elections who may be served with

4 [ 4 ] subpoena at Barangay Salimbalan, Baungon, Bukidnon. Respondent may also be served with subpoena at Barangay Kauswagan, Cagayan de Oro City and at the Gotesco Towers, 1958 C. M. Recto, Quiapo, Manila. 3. This complaint is being filed to charge the Respondent with two (2) counts of violation of REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8239, also known as THE PHILIPPINE PASSPORT ACT OF 1996, particularly the following provisions: Sec. 19. Offenses and Penalties. A passport being a proclamation of the citizenship of a Filipino, is a document that is superior to all other official documents. As such, it should be accorded the highest respect by its holder that to do damage to its integrity and validity is a serious crime that should be penalized accordingly: (c) Offenses Relating to Forgery; Penalties. Any person who: 1. Falsely makes, forges, counterfeits, mutilates or alters any passport or travel documents or any supporting document for a passport application, with the intent of using the same shall be punished by a fine of not less than Sixty thousand pesos (P60,000) nor more than One hundred fifty thousand pesos (150,000) and imprisonment of not less than six (6) years nor more than fifteen (15) years; or 2. Willfully or knowingly uses or attempts to use or furnishes to another for use any such false, forged, counterfeited, mutilated or altered passport or travel document or any passport validly issued which has become void by the occurrence of any condition therein prescribed shall be punished by a fine of not less than Sixty thousand pesos (60,000) nor more than One hundred and fifty thousand pesos (P150,000) and imprisonment of not less than six (6) years nor more than fifteen (15) years: xxx (emphasis ours) 4. This complaint also charges the Respondent with at least twenty one (21) counts of Perjury as defined under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code, to wit:

5 [ 5 ] Art False testimony in other cases and perjury in solemn affirmation. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person, who knowingly makes untruthful statements and not being included in the provisions of the next preceding articles, shall testify under oath, or make an affidavit, upon any material matter before a competent person authorized to administer an oath in cases in which the law so requires. 5. The facts antecedent to this complaint are as follows. 6. On several occasions during the hearings on the Hello Garci controversy, the Committee on Public Information, together with the Committees on Public Order and Safety, on National Defense and Security, on Information Communications Technology, and on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms, invited, and later on, subpoenaed, Respondent to appear before them to testify in the investigation regarding electoral fraud in the election of The Respondent had been identified as the official of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) with whom President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo had conversations with, allegedly to perpetuate the electoral fraud, and for which she publicly apologized. 7. Respondent failed to heed the invitations and summonses for him to appear before Congress. As a result of his stubborn defiance, the Joint Committees cited him in Contempt and issued a Warrant of Arrest against him. Despite a massive manhunt, he was never found, leading to reports that he had fled the country. 8. After several months, Respondent appeared before Congress ostensibly to clear his name, because according to him, he was unfairly convicted in the eyes of the public. However, instead of becoming that beacon that would illuminate an otherwise murky scenario, instead of

6 [ 6 ] enlightening the proceedings, the Respondent peddled lies wrapped up in falsehoods in a brazen attempt to mislead and deceive the Joint Committees, as if mocking the integrity of the House of Representatives. 9. At the said hearing of the House of Representatives, Complainant Congressman Remulla requested for the production of the passport of Respondent and after some wrangling, the Respondent was ordered to submit the same within seven (7) days. 10. Respondent Garcillano, thereafter, submitted to the Congressional Committees two (2) passports, one of which bore No. JJ The latter passport bore no entries of departure from the Philippines or arrival in other countries corresponding to the period of the congressional investigations. Through this very passport, Respondent tried to mislead the Joint Committees by creating the impression that he never left the Philippines at any time during the investigation. 11. Evidence however indicates that Respondent Garcillano s passport with No. JJ does not conform with the standards set by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). In a Laboratory Examination Report issued by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), whose printing department manufactures passports and banknotes, it stated that there are discrepancies in Respondent Garcillano s passport with No. JJ The Report, dated 20 March 2006, was jointly signed by Gloria M. Solomon, BSP Securities Production Specialist III; Gloria B. Rodriguez, Manager I; Loida E. Uy Bank Officer II; and Rolando F. Garcia, Deputy Director, respectively.

7 [ 7 ] 12. The examination revealed the following discrepancies: Size (123mm x 85 mm), smaller than standard, which is 125 mm x 88 mm. Inside front cover (data page) and inside back cover: paper and print. Stitching: additional stitch along the seam. Pages 1 to 32: presence of cuts and joints along the seam which should not have been there. Page 32: the text BISA-VISA on the upper portion of the page should not have been there. Print quality of the text: Sakaling maaksidente o mamatay and the lines on Page 32 do not conform to standard. A copy of the Laboratory Examination Report issued by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas is attached hereto and made an integral part hereof as Annex A. 13. The foregoing findings of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas leads to no other logical conclusion but that the subject passport is counterfeit. 14. The fact that Respondent s passport bore no entry regarding his arrival in other countries is also strongly belied by a Note Verbale issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Singapore. The Note Verbale states that Respondent Garcillano did in fact arrive in Singapore on 14 July 2005 on board a Lear Jet 35 with Registration No. RP-C 1216 and departed the country on 15 July 2005 on board Singapore Airlines Flight SQ 320 bound for London, England. A copy of the Note Verbale is attached hereto and made an integral part hereof as Annex B. 15. This Note Verbale was officially sent to Complainant Congressman Gilbert Remulla in his former capacity as Chairman of the

8 [ 8 ] Committee on Public Information by no less than Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez. A copy of the Transmittal Letter from the Department of Justice is attached hereto and made an integral part hereof as Annex C. 16. Considering that Respondent Garcillano is the person who stood to benefit by the falsification of the documents in question, it is presumed that he is the material author of the falsifications in line with the rulings of the Supreme Court. (Sarep vs. Sandiganbayan, 177 SCRA 440; 449). Stated differently, since Respondent Garcillano had in his possession a falsified document and which he subsequently used, taking advantage of it and profiting thereby, the clear presumption is that he is the material author of the falsification. 17. Since Respondent Garcillano is the presumed author of a counterfeit passport and he actually used the same, the respondent should be held liable for violating Section 19 (C), Paragraph 1 and 2, quoted above, of Republic Act 8239 also known as the Philippine Passport Act of As to the charge of Perjury, the following excerpts of the transcripts of the Congressional investigations, vis-à-vis the Note Verbale from the Singaporean authorities, will clearly show perjury, to wit: Transcript of Joint Committee Hearing 07 December 2005, p. 46 REP. CAGAS. You have never gone to Singapore? Hong Kong MR. GARCILLANO. Ah I have not gone to Singapore Your Honor.

9 [ 9 ] Transcript of Joint Committee Hearing 07 December 2005, pp REP. J.C.C. REMULLA. Mr. Garcillano, you are under oath and you submitted a sworn statement, which says that you never left the country. Are we saying here that the government of Singapore and the Department of Foreign Affairs were wrong in coming up with the documentation regarding your going to Singapore? MR. GARLCILLANO. I m sorry, Your Honor, I m not competent to answer that. If the government of Singapore can testify that I was really the one who was there, then it s okay, Your Honor. But we have already presented an affidavit for purportedly supporting my having not left the country. REP. J.C.C. REMULLA. So, for the record, you are saying that you never left the country, you never left Singapore, and you are willing to suffer the pain of perjury MR. GARCILLANO. I have already answered that. REP. J.C.C. REMULLA. if ever it is found out that you left the country. MR. GARCILLANO. I have already answered that, Your Honor. Transcript of Joint Committee Hearing 07 December 2005, p. 82 REP. G.C. REMULLA. Commissioner, bakit po kayo umalis papuntang Singapore noong July 14, 2005? MR. GARCILLANO. I beg your pardon, sir? Actually, I did not leave the country. REP. G.C. REMULLA. Ah, hindi ho kayo umalis ng bansa. MR. GARCILLANO. Hindi ako umalis ng bansa. REP. G.C REMULLA. Kasi ho may hawak ho akong note verbale ho ditto na mula sa Singapore na sinasabing isang Commission on Elections Commissioner Virgilio Virgilio O. Garcillano, Jr. ay pumunta sa Singapore. Pero mamaya ko na ho tatanungin ito, tungkol ho dito. I would like to ask then, kung hindi po kayo sa pumunta sa Singapore, saan ho kayo pumunta ng limang (5) buwan noong nagserve ho kami ng mga invitations at subpoena ho sa inyo? MR. GARCILLANO. Nandito lang ako sa Pilipinas, Your Honor. And I would say that I ve just been around the Philippines during those days.

10 [ 10] Transcript of Joint Committee Hearing 13 December 2005, pp REP. MARCOS. Yes, in fact, checks with the DFA indicate that the only Virgilio O. Garcillano is the Commissioner. May we require as to the reaction of the witness with the report of the Secretary of Justice, pending an investigation with the DOA (?) and the Bureau of Immigrations that three passengers departed on July 14 on an Lear Jet 35, known to be owned by a certain Ricky Razon and that disguised as a flight crew, the Honorable Commissioner was on board that plane? That was the explaination of the DOJ Secretary Raul Gonzales. My Question to the witness, what is your comment as to the Secretary s finding that you were aboard that plane that departed the Philippines on July 14? MR. GARCILLANO. I do not know about that, Your Honor. REP. MARCOS. As we were saying, the if I may reiterate, the Secretary Raul Gonzales has already said that you departed on 14 July finding, in fact, following his internal investigation with the Bureau of Immigration and the DOJ. May the witness please comment? MR. GARCILLANO. I do not know, Your Honor. I do not know the report of the Secretary, Your Honor. REP. MARCOS: It is an official It s official document, Madam Chair, and if the Committee so decide, I think that it is patent that the witness is not being entirely truthful. But if I may proceed, there is also a note verbale dated August 8 where the Singapore Ministry of Foreign Affairs informed the post and the Department of Foreign Affairs that Commissioner Virgilio O. Garcillano, Jr., entered Singapore on 14 July 2005 and departed the following day. May we know from the witness what is his comment on these official communications between two allied governments, Singapore and the Philippines? Is he to tell us that this is not true either? MR. GARCILLIANO. It is of no moment Your Honor, that it is government-to-government transaction. But as far as I m concerned, I am not aware of the existence of the report and I am not say I, saying that I am not the one who is referred to in that report. REP. MARCOS. Yes, the report further indicates that 15 July 2005 having transitted in Singapore, Singapore Airlines manifest indicates that the said witness also boarded SQ320 for London 12:40 departure arriving in Heathrow at 7:10 of the same day in the evening. Can the Honorable Garcillano please reply?

11 [ 11 ] MR. GARCILLANO. I I do not know that, Your Honor. REP. MARCOS. Yes, thereafter there are indications also, Mr. Garcillano, that you went to Brazil and, thereafter, to the Republic of Malaysia, to the Kingdom of Malaysia in KL. Are we saying that all these official communications from the Department of Justice, our own Bureau of Immigration, the Republic of Singapore and its Ministry of Foreign Affairs, our own DFA are all a parcel of lies? MR. GARCILLANO. I have no knowledge as far as these information are concerned, Your Honor. REP. MARCOS. Mr. Garcillano, you are the only one being refered to, how can you have no knowledge when it was you who boarded this aircraft? MR. GARCILLANO. I m repeating my answer, Your Honor. I have no knowledge and I cannot competently answer that question. Transcript of Joint Committee Hearing 13 December 2005, pp CHAIRPERSON LOCSIN. Madam Chair, may I ask Commissioner Garcillano? Commissioner Garcillano, the question that is really being posed to you is may I be the one to pose the questions? I m not asking you whether you are aware of the findings of the Department of Justice or of the note verbale of Singapore. It may well be you are not competent to answer that, but you are surely competent to answer where you were at any point in time. The question being asked is did you go to Singapore? I don t think you can answer, I am not competent to answer that, unless you were hallucinogenic. You can either say, No, I was not or whatever; so the question to be asked of you is did you go to Singapore? MR. GARCILLANO. Your Honor, it is already in my affidavit that I did not go to Singapore. CHARIPERSON LOCSIN. So what is your answer? MR. GARCILLANO. My affidavit says that I did not go to Singapore. CHAIRPERSON LOCSIN. You can could you tells us whether or not, without referring to your affidavit, could you tell us whether or not you went to Singapore? MR. GARCILLANO. I did not go to Singapore, Your Honor.

12 [ 12] REP. MARCOS. Maybe just to follow up on Chairman Locsin s line of questioning and inquire from our witness, where were you on July 14 and July 15 of this year? MR. GARCILLANO. I had always been in the Philippines, your Honor. Transcript of Joint Committee Hearing 25 January, 2006, p. 51 REP. GOLEZ. That means you never left the country since 1996? MR. GARCILLANO. Yes, Your Honor. Transcript of Joint Committee Hearing 25 January, 2006, p. 66 CHAIRPERSON LOCSIN. I did not ask the question yet. Have you traveled in the past five (5) years? MR. GARCILLANO. No, Your Honor. CHAIRPERSON LOCSIN. Outside the country? MR. GARCILLANO. None, Your Honor. Copies of the pertinent pages of the Transcripts of the hearings of the Joint Committees in Congress are attached hereto and made integral parts hereof as Annexes D-4 to F Everything considered, Respondent Garcillano made at least twenty (20) untruthful replies during the congressional hearings. 20. On top of his false and perjurious answers to the questions of the members of the Joint Committees in Congress, Respondent committed one (1) more count of Perjury as he also submitted a Sworn Statement subscribed and sworn to before the members of the House of

13 [ 13] Representatives stating that he did not leave the country, the pertinent paragraph of which is as follows: There is no truth, therefore, to the rumors that I left the country. These rumors were politically motivated and obviously designed to falsely imply that the administration was the one who allegedly financed and facilitated my departure from the country. Again, I would like to state that I did not leave the country. 21. The above paragraph is a complete and utter lie considering the Note Verbale issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Singapore which categorically stated that the Respondent passed through Singapore on his way to London. A copy of Respondent Garcillano s Sworn Statement is attached hereto and made an integral part hereof as Annex G. namely: 22. There are four (4) elements that comprise the crime of Perjury, a. The accused made a statement under oath on a material matter; b. The statement was made before a competent officer, authorized to receive and administer oaths; c. The accused made a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood in the statement and, d. The sworn statement containing the falsity is required by law or made for a legal purpose. 23. The statements of Respondent Garcillano in reply to the query of the Joint Committee members and the statements in his Affidavit (Sworn Statement) constitute the crime of Perjury when the statements are taken against the elements of the crime, to wit:

14 [ 14] a. Considering that the investigation focused on whether or not Respondent Garcillano attempted to evade the summons of the joint committee by leaving the country, his untruthful statements under oath that he did not both during the hearings and through his Sworn Statement constitute material matter; b. The statements were made before the Joint Committees of the House of Representatives, which consists of competent officers authorized to receive and administer oaths, and in the case of the Sworn Statement it was made before a competent officer authorized to receive and administer oaths; c. When taken against the Note Verbale, the Respondent made a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood when he said he was never in Singapore during the hearings and in his Sworn Statement and, d. Respondent Garcillano was required to answer the queries of the members of the joint committee for lawful purposes and likewise, the Sworn Statement was required to be submitted to the Joint Committees. 24. Under the law and as a matter of public policy, there is a concomitant and commensurate penalty that should be meted out to witnesses that break their vow of speaking only the truth during proceedings before the House of Representatives. No one deserves such penalty more than Respondent Garcillano. 25. All told, there is definitely probable cause to warrant the prosecution of Respondent VIRGILIO O. GARCILLANO of violation of Section 19 (C), Paragraph 1 and 2 of the Republic Act 8239 also known as The Passport Law of 1996 and twenty one (21) counts of the crime of Perjury under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code. AFFIANTS FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT.

15 [ 15] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this 3 rd day of April 2006, in Quezon City. REP. GILBERT C. REMULLA REP. ROLEX T. SUPLICO REP. JUSTIN SB. CHIPECO REP. FLORENCIO G. NOEL REP. LORETTA ANN P. ROSALES REP. TEODORO A. CASIÑO REP. DARLENE. ANTONINO CUSTODIO REP. LORENZO R. TAÑADA III REP. ALFONSO V. UMALI REP. MUJIV HATAMAN REP. IMEE R. MARCOS REP. ROILO S. GOLEZ REP. FRANCIS JOSEPH G. ESCUDERO REP. RENATO B. MAGTUBO Complainant/ Affiant REP. ANA THERESIA HONTIVEROS- BARAQUEL Complainant/ Affiant REP. RODOLFO G. PLAZA Complainant/ Affiant

16 [ 16] SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, this 3 rd day of April 2006 at Quezon City. Asst. City Prosecutor This is to certify that I have personally examined the herein affiants and that I am satisfied that they voluntarily executed and understood their statements herein. Asst. City Prosecutor