Drilon’s ‘kalbaryo’

“It was none of my doing, and yet I cannot do anything about it” was how Senate President Franklin Drilon expressed his frustration over the current blue ribbon committee hearings on the pork barrel scam.

The investigation and the ensuing controversy, including a string of protests and exposés, Drilon describes as his particular “kalbaryo” or Calvary—a form of penance, or punishment, if you will—for being Senate President at a time when the entire legislature is being held up for censure for the abuse of the PDAF (Priority Development Assistance Fund) as well as for the newly-revealed DAP (Disbursement Acceleration Program).

He was at the hearing when “Typhoon Jenny,” with a serving of “Monsoon Miriam,” held the nation in thrall even as much of the Visayas and Bicol were being battered by the actual Supertyphoon “Yolanda.” And if he were so uncouth as to declare “I told you so,” he probably would do so because things played out as he predicted.

If you recall, Drilon was excoriated in the media, and even by Sen. TG Guingona, chair of the blue ribbon committee, for initially refusing to sign an order demanding the presence of Janet Lim Napoles before the committee. The reason, he told our group of media women a few days ago, was that he believed it would simply be a waste of time, money and passion because Napoles has consistently denied her involvement in the scam.

Drilon was inclined to treat with utter seriousness threats to Napoles’ life, which necessitated her transfer to and detention at Fort Santo Domingo in Laguna. The threat was likewise echoed at the start of the committee hearing by Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, who used the perceived danger to Napoles’ life to try to convince the “businesswoman” to finally talk and name names.

Despite the risks taken, the expenses in terms of transporting the witness and her bodyguards—plus the whistle-blowers—to and from the Senate, the public heard nothing but a lot of “I don’t know” and “I invoke my right against self-incrimination” from “Ma’am” Jenny.

* * *

Still, “that is what the public wanted,” concedes Drilon. “They wanted to see her, hear her, even if we all knew she would keep quiet.”

But not all is lost. Napoles may not have said a word to confirm her involvement in, if not her masterminding, the (at least) P10-billion scam. But other witnesses, like Benhur Luy and Marina Sula, not only contradicted Napoles’ denials but also offered details (including the names of legislators and intermediaries), amounts in kickback, dates and locales. The Senate is set to file charges of perjury against Napoles, given her blanket denials that fly in the face of the whistle-blowers’ affidavits. And then there’s the upcoming trial before the Sandiganbayan where, so Napoles promises, she will tell all she knows, because she would be facing the “proper court.”

“But the damage has been done,” rues the Senate President. “The way I see it, all of us, senators and congress people, have been condemned as thieves and cheaters. But I for one can say in all honesty that I can account for every centavo spent for my PDAF.”

* * *

Neither is he fazed by the forced linking with the pork barrel scam of the DAP, which, he insists, is entirely constitutional and within legal, proper and ethical bounds.

“The realignment of existing items within the budget of the various branches of government is fully legal and allowed in the Constitution,” says Drilon. The reason the different branches of government and constitutional bodies are allowed to transfer amounts from one budget item to another “is to allow for flexibility,” he says, and to allocate funds for projects that are urgently needed. And when the DAP was conceived, he says, “the government needed to speed up public spending not just because the projects were urgently needed, but also because government spending makes up to 18-20 percent of the GDP.”

Still, says Drilon, despite what appears to be an orchestrated campaign to distract public attention from the PDAF scandal and spread the blame, he believes the public attention focused on the abuse of the pork barrel system has “put fear in the hearts of people,” especially legislators, who will from now on be even more careful of how they treat public money.

* * *

In the Senate, at least, there is a move among the senators to distance themselves, if not refuse outright, their usual PDAF allocations.

Already, along with Drilon, Senators Chiz Escudero, Tito Sotto, Loren Legarda and Juan Ponce Enrile (though not yet in writing) have expressed their plans not to avail themselves of their share of the PDAF. “I have yet to talk to the other senators, but I believe the rest will follow likewise,” says the Senate President.

Drilon makes clear that early on, as early as a few days after news of the pork barrel controversy broke, he was among the first to declare that he is in favor of abolishing this system.

And though his frustration at the current imbroglio is evident, Drilon has been through a lot worse in the course of his almost-30 years of service in government. First serving as a deputy minister of labor, and then as labor secretary, at a time when the restoration of democracy provoked countless labor disputes, he moved on to serve as justice secretary and executive secretary at a time when coup threats and assassination attempts were common “breakfast fare,” as Senator Miriam put it.

Turning 68 later in the month, Drilon has certainly put in more than his proper share of service to the nation. And he doesn’t look or sound like he has much to regret for this choice of vocation, except perhaps for having to put up with the slings and arrows of innuendo and ridicule. But that’s nothing, he says, compared to having a grenade tossed into his front yard.