‘Tanda’ and ‘Lola’
Not once did I say the suspended BuCor chief masterminded those crimes. I have no personal or professional animosity toward Bantag.
Daily TribuneNot once did I say the suspended BuCor chief masterminded those crimes. I have no personal or professional animosity toward Bantag.
Three things come to my mind regarding the case of beleaguered former Bureau of Corrections Director-General Gerald Bantag. He is presumed innocent until otherwise proven beyond reasonable doubt. Former President Duterte has nothing to do with the issue. Ex-senator Leila de Lima should quit politics and become a full-time fictionist.
I want to disabuse some of Bantag's vociferous online supporters of the notion that I have prejudged his guilt vis-à-vis the death of radio personality Percy Lapid (né Percival Mabasa) and inmate/alleged intermediary Jun Villamor. Since I abide by his constitutional right to due process of the law, I have explicitly stated in my social media content that he enjoys the presumption of innocence.
Not once did I say the suspended BuCor chief masterminded those crimes. I have no personal or professional animosity toward Bantag. We were both Duterte appointees though I never personally met him during my term as presidential spokesman. I hope this clarifies the matter.
'Tanda' and 'Lola'
Meanwhile, it seems the idle mind and hands of a former public official have become the devil's stomping ground. Ex-senator De Lima has been detained since 2017 while facing court charges for her alleged involvement in the BuCor drug trade. As a politico, she has sadly become "all sound and fury signifying nothing." She has been reduced to a dark version of the benign, celebrated "Lola Basyang" who periodically spins tales to attack former President Duterte.
In her latest diatribe, she said PRRD could be the real "Tanda" behind Lapid's killing. That is foul. I have been close to the former president for many years. I have not heard any of his friends, associates, colleagues, or subordinates refer to him as "Tanda." Our former chief executive does not stand to gain anything from this matter. He has retired from politics after serving the nation very well. He left office in June with a 75 percent approval rating, becoming the most popular post-EDSA president, according to Publicus Asia.
Similarly, the 7.6 percent third-quarter growth of our gross domestic product is attributable to the sound economic and fiscal policy of the Duterte administration. To the credit of President Marcos Jr., he has continued the good programs of his predecessor like the "Build, Build, Build" that has morphed into "Build, Better, More" infrastructure projects. So, why would PRRD throw away the overwhelming support of Filipinos by becoming involved in a murder case?
I doubt whether the ex-justice secretary can substantiate her allegations. It is merely her fictionalized version of the case. Incarcerated at the PNP Custodial Center in Quezon City, I do not think she has personal knowledge of the crime which involves people in BuCor and the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa City. I advise the former senator to put all her energy into her legal defense instead.
The benefit of the doubt
It is right to give Bantag the benefit of the doubt. But it is wrong to summarily dismiss the joint investigation of the Philippine National Police and National Bureau of Investigation, which directly linked Bantag and his subordinate Ricardo Zulueta to the Lapid-Villamor slay case. The NBI and PNP have filed murder charges against Bantag, Zulueta, and several inmates before the Department of Justice.
The justice department has issued subpoenas to Bantag and his co-accused for preliminary investigation hearings. It is the appropriate forum for him and other case respondents to file their counter-affidavits. The public prosecutors would determine whether there is probable cause against the accused. The Supreme Court states that probable cause only needs to rest on evidence that a crime was committed and the respondents are probably guilty of the crime and should face trial.
Our legal system has a low threshold for probable cause. I believe the testimonies of three witnesses, which include confessed gunman Joel Estorial, are enough for murder cases to be filed against Bantag and other case respondents.
On the other hand, would these testimonies suffice to secure a conviction for the accused? It will depend on the corroborating physical evidence. In this case, the confirmation from the Anti-Money Laundering Council that Estorial received money to kill the hard-hitting broadcaster is a strong corroboration. It would be good if state prosecutors could present other witnesses that have no criminal convictions to buttress their case against Bantag and company. If they fail to establish proof beyond reasonable doubt, the court will dismiss the charges against him and his co-accused.
Again, Bantag and other respondents have the presumption of innocence. Let us all wait for them to present evidence before the three-man panel of prosecutors later this month.