IN THE PHILIPPINES, crooks can easily get away with criminal liabilities, just like what a dismissed government official did — return a small chunk of what has been stolen, and keep the rest from anomalies that have yet been uncovered.
Taking cue from what has been reported in various newspapers, former Bulacan District Engineer Henry Alcantara surrendered P110 million of an estimated P300 million plundered from the flood control funds.
Immediately after the so-called partial restitution, Alcantara who has been tagged as mastermind by his subordinates, applied to become a state witness.
GO SLOW ON HENRY
Acting Justice Secretary Fredderick Vida during a press conference emphasized that the cash represents “a portion of the P300 million kickbacks he received from the flood control projects.”
“This is a portion of the amount. Basically, the restitution amount is based on… we look at the averments, their statements on how these amounts accumulated from certain transactions. This P300 million is only for those particular cases,” Vida was quoted by the Inquirer.
While Vida did not specify which cases he was referring to, he cited Alcantara’s sworn statement and the complaints undergoing preliminary investigation before the Department of Justice (DOJ), to wit malversation, graft under Republic Act 3019, and perjury.
CASH BASIS ONLY
The DOJ chief said the total restitution amount of P300 million is based on transactions Alcantara admitted to.
“If the applicant states: I delivered a total of P1 billion, and I earned two percent kickbacks, the panel will total the kickbacks received from every transaction,” Vida explained.
For the remaining P190 million, Vida said, it should also be paid in cash.
The returned money, he said, is considered “money unlawfully obtained by Engr. Henry Alcantara. This is the recovery of the people‘s money.”
From the DOJ, the money was turned over to the Bureau of the Treasury, where representatives from the Land Bank of the Philippines will help count and validate the bills to determine whether the bills are genuine or otherwise.
“Then, they will issue a certification that they received this particular amount and an official receipt,” he said.
SIGN OF GOOD FAITH
“Returning the money is a sign of good faith, proof of their desire to help the government,” Vida said.
Alcantara has been provisionally admitted to the Witness Protection Program (WPP), meaning he only receives government protection. Once fully admitted, he will be immune from suit only in connection with the cases he testified on.
Vida stressed that restitution is only one factor in determining whether a person can become a state witness.
Under Republic Act 6981 or the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act, the final say on whether a person will become a state witness lies with the court.
The law states that the DOJ shall issue a certification that a certain person is admitted to the WPP, then the prosecutor shall file a petition in court for the person’s discharge.
“The court shall order the discharge and exclusion of the said accused from the information,” stated under the law.
COMPELLED TO TESTIFY
The Justice Secretary further said that the successful admission of a state witness hinges on their honesty and commitment to testify truthfully in court.
Vida said Alcantara is the first to turn over cash to the government. Previously, fellow Engr. Brice Hernandez and the Discaya couple turned over their luxury vehicles to the government.
As DPWH Bulacan district engineer, Alcantara approved several flood control projects, including the P55 million reinforced concrete river wall in Barangay Piel, Baliwag, Bulacan.
ALCANTARA LEAST GUILTY?
Granting state witness status to a plunderer involves careful evaluation of their potential to provide crucial testimony against other offenders, while they are still potentially subject to prosecution.
Key factors include the gravity of the offense, the witness’s willingness to testify, and their potential role in the crime, which can be controversial and is subject to public and legal scrutiny. The ultimate decision requires balancing the need for evidence against the seriousness of the crime.
Considerations for state witness include:
- Eligibility– if a person has participated in the crime and is willing to testify for the state
- Grave felony – the crime in question, like plunder, must be a grave felony as defined by the Revised Penal Code or its equivalent law
- Evaluation– the DoJ carefully evaluates potential state witnesses to determine if their testimony is necessary to prove a case. This process involves analyzing different violations and their potential impact on the case
- Controversy– granting state witness status to someone accused of plunder is often controversial, as it can be seen as giving leniency to those who are potentially the most guilty
- Public sentiment is a factor in such decisions, especially when the accused’s involvement is significant and has been widely publicized.
The potential outcome of being a state witness is an exemption from prosecution for plunder but this is not a guaranteed outcome and is subject to the court’s approval.
The Witness Protection Program applies to a state witness to ensure his/her safety.
If the witness’s testimony is not deemed necessary or if the process is challenged, they may still face prosecution.