Gloria Arroyo should be granted bail, says former law dean

Former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo should be allowed to post bail. This is the opinion of Antonio Abad, former law dean of the Far Eastern University. Why?

Here’s why, according to Dean Abad: GMA is charged with plunder, which is nonbailable. But she is alleged to have conspired with officials of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) in misusing the intelligence fund of the government corporation. In a conspiracy, the guilt of one is the guilt of all. All the conspirators must be treated equally. That is guaranteed by the Constitution—the right of all citizens to equal protection of the laws and due process.

Three of her alleged coconspirators, all directors of the PCSO—Manuel Morato, Rey Roquero and Jose Taruc—have been granted bail. So why can’t GMA be allowed to post bail just like her alleged coconspirators? Dean Abad asked the journalists at a press forum at Annabel’s Restaurant last Saturday. That is not equal protection of the laws.

In plunder, Dean Abad continued, it is not enough that the amount malversed is P50 million or more. An accused must be proven to have also benefited from the loot.

What was GMA’s participation in the PCSO scam?

“She merely wrote ‘OK’ on the margin of the document proposing the intelligence fund, that’s all,” Dean Abad explained.

Did she benefit from the loot?

Abad: “There is no evidence, much less proof, that she did.” It would therefore

appear that she is the least guilty.  She can be charged with, and convicted of, malversation of public funds (which is bailable) but not with plunder.

There are decisions of the Supreme Court to the effect that a routine act of a government executive as part of her duties is not actionable, Abad pointed out.

Why did GMA’s lawyers not think of this legal question?

Abad: “Don’t ask me, ask them.”

If you were asked to join GMA’s legal team, will you accept?

Abad: “I will not touch her with a 10-foot pole.”

* * *

On the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro (CAB) that the national government signed with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), Abad doubted its constitutionality. What’s more, the agreement specifies that the Transition Commission which will draft the basic law (or constitution) of the new Bangsamoro state, “may recommend amending our Constitution, if necessary, to (make it) conform to the basic law.” What? Our Constitution will be amended so it will conform to the Bangsamoro basic law instead of the other way around—that is, it should be the basic law that should conform to our Constitution?

Abad continued: The Bangsamoro will have a parliamentary form of government, just like Malaysia. The Philippines has a presidential form of government. Shouldn’t a region of the Philippines have the same form of government?

“I am afraid,” Abad said, that it would be so easy for the Bangsamoro substate to declare independence and join Malaysia which also has a parliamentary form of government.

Then there is the sharing of power, Abad continued. The power of the Philippine government rests on the president and on him alone. He cannot share it with anybody else.

On the provision that the Bangsamoro shall have its own police force, Abad said the Constitution mandates only one Philippine National Police and only one Armed Forces of the Philippines.

And on the disarming of the MILF combatants, why should their firearms be surrendered to Malaysia and not to the Philippine government?

Abad also agreed with Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago’s criticism of the CAB. Santiago said that the executive branch exceeded its powers and infringed upon the powers of the legislature, and misrepresented itself as the Philippine government. The constitutional law expert also said the agreement violated the supremacy of the Constitution and derogates the sovereignty of the central government by putting up a substate, the Bangsamoro.

“When the executive branch misrepresenting itself as the Philippine government enters into an agreement with the rebel group,” Santiago said, “the result is not a mere autonomous region as provided by our Constitution but a substate.”

Rep. Rufus Rodriguez arrived later and made a spirited defense of the CAB. Point by point, he read the provisions of the Constitution that allowed those agreements in the CAB that are being criticized.

All these fears and misgivings will be corrected by the Bangsamoro basic law that will be passed by Congress, he said. It is this basic law, not the CAB, that will govern the Bangsamoro. While the draft will be made by the Transition Commission and certified by President Aquino as urgent, it is the more than 300 members of both houses of Congress who will subject it to close scrutiny. No provision that is unconstitutional will pass Congress, Rodriguez assured.

He was asked what will happen to the Philippine ownership of Sabah. The people of the Sulu archipelago will surely vote to be included in the Bangsamoro. The Sulu sultanate owns Sabah which is being claimed by Malaysia. Therefore the Bangsamoro government should have jurisdiction over Sabah. How will the Bangsamoro government try to get back Sabah? Will it dare offend its principal sponsor, Malaysia? Rodriguez replied that it will be the national government that will pursue the ownership claim.