RETIRED MARINE Marine Sergeant Orly Guteza who has publicly admitted lying under oath before a Senate committee investigating the notoriously famous flood control scandal, should be prosecuted and perpetually barred from holding public office — so are the people who orchestrated the false testimony.
In September last year, Guteza in his testimony before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee dragged a long list of government officials to whom he claimed to have delivered suitcases of cash.
But barely a year after dropping the “bomb” that directly linked former House Speaker Martin Romualdez, Guteza retracted and admitted to have lied under oath as instructed by Senator Rodante Marcoleta and former Anakalusugan partylist Rep. Mike Defensor.
Following Guteza’s retraction, Senator Panfilo Lacson said that public officials orchestrating false testimonies by inducing others to commit perjury can be prosecuted as principal perpetrators and face a lifetime ban from holding government office.
According to the retired soldier, Marcoleta and Defensor induced him to lie under oath in exchange for cash and educational scholarships for his children.
Lacson pointed out in his social media post the serious criminal liabilities awaiting public servants who mastermind fabricated affidavits.
“SUBORNATION OF PERJURY: a public official who induces another person to commit perjury may be treated as a principal under the conspiracy theory (Art 8 RPC) in the commission of the crime and shall also suffer an accessory penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification,” Lacson posted.
Lacson explained that under Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code, a conspiracy exists when two or more people come to an agreement to commit a felony and decide to execute it.
Article 17 explicitly classifies individuals who “directly force or induce others” to commit a crime as principal perpetrators, the Star reported.
Under the recently amended Republic Act 11594, perjury itself is a felony and a public offense punishable by prision mayor at its minimum.
If the principal offender is a public official, Article 25 of the RPC applies the afflictive penalty of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification from public office.
Rep. Leila de Lima stressed that forcing someone to give a false statement under oath should be a separate crime, recalling how she was a victim of false testimonies.
Marcoleta and Defensor may have another legal problem on their plate for “coaching” the Blue Ribbon committee (BRC) testimony of Guteza last year.
Lacson said Marcoleta and Defensor may be sued by former speaker, Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez, of “subornation of perjury” for helping Guteza draft his claims of alleged flood control kickback deliveries by “maleta” or suitcases.
“If we look at the evidence and the sequence of events, this transpired during the BRC hearing where it is clear that Sen. Marcoleta was coaching (Guteza). Therefore, he is one of those who could be charged with subornation of perjury,” Lacson said over radio DWIZ.
The Department of Justice and Office of the Ombudsman may initiate a preliminary investigation on possible perjury charges against those behind Guteza’s false testimonies.
“They can initiate a preliminary investigation into the perjury case against the people behind it,” Lacson said.
Lacson is pushing for heavier penalties against those who induce or force another person to commit perjury “to teach them a lesson and to curb what he described as a lucrative business.”
“Those who engage in that really ought to be taught a lesson, because we have laws covering it. Yet, no one actually ends up being charged,” Lacson added.
Guteza, after a long absence, resurfaced and recanted his statements, accusing Marcoleta and Defensor of forcing him to “testify” in exchange for money and scholarships for his children.
Lacson said he was no longer surprised after observing that Marcoleta even helped Guteza in his BRC testimony last year.
Marcoleta and Defensor are now detained for plunder before the Sandiganbayan for allegedly undeclared campaign funds.