Press Release
September 12, 2013

TRANSCRIPT : Sen. Alan Cayetano Q&A, Blue Ribbon Hearing
on Pork Barrel

"Sexy" (guy) Senator

ASC: Benhur, welcome back to the Senate... Dahil sabi mo kanina nakapasyal ka na dito dati. What year did you visit the Senate?

Luy: Mga 2011 po ata. Noon din pong 2004, kasi sinasamahan ko po si Ms. Napoles kapag pumuputa siya sa offices.

ASC: So hanggang 2011-2012, meron pa din (kayong koneksyon sa senado)?

Luy: Noong 2011, may kinuha lang po akong dokumento...

ASC: Noong pagpunta mo dito, nag-log ka ba sa baba o sinundo ka ba ng COS sa baba?

Luy: Meron pong sumusundo pero nagla-log po ako.

ASC: What floor?

Luy: I don't remember, sir.

ASC: Hindi mo pwedeng sabihin ang pangalan (ng taong pinuntahan mo)? Kahit palayaw?

Luy: Sexy

ASC: Lalake o babae?

Luy: Lalake po

"Hatian" / Ghost Projects

ASC: Two days ago, the media already reported the names of involved individuals, quoting the whistleblowers or your lawyer. I just wanted to see if you are really familiar with the Senate and the people here. Ikwento mo lang talaga sa amin ang nalalaman mo.

Sinabi mo kanina, ang pinakamaliit na porsyento ng PDAF na napupunta sa mga mambabatas ay 40%. Kapag sinasabi mong 50-50, ibig sabihin kapag may request, kalahati muna ang nakukuha niyo, at kapag nakuha na ang SARO, saka makukuha ang kalahati. Saan napupunta ang ibang porsyento?

Luy: Ang 10% napupunta sa IA (implementing agency), sa actual na opisyal, (hindi sa proyekto). Yung tinatawag pong SOP

ASC: Pero sa kasong ito, lagay siya.

Luy: Pero mabibigay lang po yun kapag nakolekta na ang lahat ng pondo.

Ang ibang porsyento naman po, na kay Ms. Napoles na po lahat.

ASC: That would mean that these were really ghost projects? No fund goes to the project itself. Tumutugma ang sinabi mo sa sinabi ng COA na ang ilang beneficiaries ay nagsasabing wala silang natanggap na benepisyo galing sa mga proyekto.

ASC: Mayroon din kayong kits, ayon sa mga report?

Luy: Opo. Ang laman po ng mga ito ay mga sprayers, fertilizers, seeds, gardening tools.

ASC: Noong napanood mo noong naunang mga hearing ang ibang opisyal ng mga ahensya na nagsasabing bilang napirmahan naman na ang mga papeles, hindi na nila kailangan pa idaan ito sa proseso ng pag-verify. Ano ang masasabi mo doon?

Luy: Kung ano po ang hiningi ng mga ahensya sa amin, yun po ang ibibigay namin. Hindi ko..

ASC: Pero alam naman nila na wala kayong dineliver.

Luy: That I do not know po. Hindi ko din po alam kung alam ba ng lahat ng tao sa ahensya ang 10% na lagay sa ahensya nila, pero alam po nung kausap namin.

ASC: Maybe one of the reasons why you decided to be a witness is because you don't want this kind of scam to happen again. You recently said that this controversy is not limited to the PDAF, but also extend to other special funds. Ibig sabihin hindi lang sa PDAF nangyayari ito. Ibig sabihin pwede ding mangyari ang ganitong kalaking lagayan sa regular na pondo. Noong huling hearing, kompleto naman ang lahat ng dokumento ng mga IAs, pero nung tiningnan ng COA, wala naman (lahat)... Kaya ang tanong ko, paano nangyayari yun? Ibig sabihin, nagkakaayusan ng papeles.

Luy: Opo

ASC:Pero hindi ba dapat iniinspeksyunan din ito ng COA?

Luy: In my experience po, the COA inspects the agency.

ASC: How will they inspect the ghost projects?

Luy: Hindi ko na po alam. All I know is when we submit a liquidation to the IAs, they will check the documents themselves.

ASC: Nagbibigay din ba kayo sa COA o hinde?

Luy: Hindi ko po alam kung paano na ang hatian sa 10%

Funds from Fertilizer Scam

ASC: You said that in the fertilizer scam, you were also involved. Were you able to get funds from the project as well?

Luy: Meron din po.

ASC: Then why did Catherin Mae Santos certify that the funds you misused came from the PDAF and not from the fertilizer funds, which is why Napoles was able to get away with the fertilizer scam?

Luy: Hindi ko po alam. That time, I was not yet aware of the workings of Napoles. I only know information about the three foundations (NGOs) of Napoles

ASC: Pakiulit ang mga pangalan ng mga ito.

Luy: Phil. Social Development Foundation (Pres. Evelyn De leon ); POPDFI (Pres. Merlina Sunas); MAMFI (Pres. Luy). Ang alam ko pong kasama sila sa fertilizer scam dahil kwinekwento naman po nila.

ASC: Medyo marunong din sila. Because they were able to foresee that three years after the foundations were created, Napoles would be able to make use of them.

When did you find out that the foundations were bogus?

Luy: Nitong huli na lang po.

ASC: That's why your testimony is only part of all of these (issues). That's why it's also important to hear from the other whistleblowers to know the whole truth.

Napoles didn't use to be rich

ASC: Noong bata ka, ganoon na ba kayaman si Napoles?

Luy: Hindi po, mahirap lang. Kasi ang bahay nila doon sa Binan, malit lang po yun eh. Noong 2002 po, nagulat n lang ako na nasa Alabang Village na siya. Kaya nagtaka din po ako kung ano talaga ang negosyo ni madam

ASC: Before 2002, do you know if she had any other businesses?

Luy: Wala po. Dati po, nagbebenta pa kami ng mga anak niya, sinasamahan ko pa sila sa pagbebenta ng mga bolpen, etc.

NO to Napoles as state witness

Ikaw ba ay papayag na maging state witness si Napoles?

Luy: Hindi po.

ASC: (to De lima) Ma'am, can I ask you the same question? Alam ko pong napakabigat ng mga kaso na napupunta sa inyo matapos ang huling administrasyon. At alam ko ding napakabigat ng mga nakakaaway niyo. There had been reports that the government is considering to make Janet Lim-Napoles a state witness. May I know categorically if this is a possibility?

De Lima: It's always within the realm of possibility. But as of this very moment, we are not even discussing that yet. Insofar as DOJ and NBI are concerned, there are no discussions yet.

ASC: (to De lima) I know you personally ma'am, even before you became the DOJ Secretary. And I know that you do not file cases unless you think the cases will stand up in court.

When you file the cases (against those involved in the PDAF scam), I assume that you will be consistent with your track record and you would not file the case if you think it will be thrown out by the court.

Isn't it a requirement "that there is no direct evidence available for prosecution of the offense committed except the testimony of the accused"? Meaning, if there are whislteblowers, if all documents are intact, the court will not make Napoles a state witness.

De lima: Yes. That's really an essential component. Kung may testimonya ng ibang mga kasali sa isyu, hindi na kailangan ang testimonya o kooperasyon ni Ms. Napoles.

Filing the case will protect whistleblowers

ASC: That's one of the reasons why we are really pushing for this investigation and why we are urging the whistleblowers to testify. If the truth comes out, there will be no more threat (on the part of the witnesses). As soon as the truth is revealed, it is also a form of protection for all. Kapag kompleto na ang lahat ng dokumento at testimonya ng mga whistleblowers, makasisiguro tayo na hindi na magiging state witness si Napoles. Kung hindi, wala na sigurong magboboluntaryo na maging whistleblower...

Napoles is mastermind - Luy

(To Luy) In recent reports, Napoles claims that she was not the mastermind. May alam ka ba dito?

Luy: Siya po ang mastermind. Kasi sya po ang boss ko.

ASC: Hindi ba talaga pwedeng banggitin ang mga pangalan (of lawmakers involved)?

De lima: Ilang araw na lang po, pwede na nating banggitin ang mga pangalan.

After filing on Monday, Senate expects a "Tell All" Session

ASC: After the filing of cases, I would expect that we would be able to have a tell-all session. I think the (DOJ) Secretary knows some things that we do not know or there are some considerations that we do not know. And she does not want this to affect the filing of cases.

The investigation may be confidential, but all the affidavits of the witnesses will now be public documents (after the filing of the cases)...

News Latest News Feed