‘Hello, Garci’ report: More questions than answers

AFTER seven months of high-profile televised hearings, the House of Representatives failed to establish the authenticity of the "Hello, Garci?" tapes and the identities of those involved in the allegedly wiretapped conversations.

In its 18-page draft report, the Joint Committee said unresolved issues still surround the biggest controversy faced by the Arroyo administration last year. The single most important issue whether the President asked an elections official to cheat for her in the 2004 elections remains unanswered.

"It must be admitted that, while Philippine elections are profoundly suspect, if not held in the deepest contempt by the public, the Joint Committee hearing was never able to determine how exactly allegedly corrupt Comelec (Commission on Elections) officials committed fraud in the last election at the alleged behest of the President," the report said.
 
The Joint Committee said the refusal of its star witness, former elections commissioner Virgilio Garcillano, to answer questions such as whether or not it was his voice on the tapes has deemed his testimony “irrelevant.”  Garcillano finally appeared before the Committee on December 7, 2005, after many months of ignoring summons.

Similarly, the refusal of Atty. Samuel Ong — former National Bureau of Investigation deputy director who claims to be the source of the "mother of all tapes" — to appear before the body also did not help in shedding truth on the matter.  

The Committee said Malacañang could have given its assistance during the congressional inquiry. But, the committee said, “No sincere cooperation was ever extended by the administration,“ adding that, "it could not and would not confront the tapes and contributed nothing towards arriving at the truth about them."

But while the inquiry failed to resolve major issues, the committee said that at the very least, it was able to obtain enough information to be able to make recommendations on certain legislation.

The draft report highlighted the deficiencies in the Anti-Wiretapping Law (Republic Act 4200) and recommended that the law be updated to "cover the areas of applicable technology, address modern day crimes, and augment and tap the intercept capabilities of telecommunications companies."

It added that the new law or the amendments to the existing law should include the admissibility of wiretapped material as evidence in judicial and quasi-judicial and legislative or administrative hearings or investigations.

The Committee also stressed the “compelling” need to conduct a review of the intelligence-gathering capabilities of law enforcement agencies, particularly in the way they conduct surveillance and how they handle classified information or intelligence materials.

"The wiretapped material in question, if authentic, may have been leaked, sold and otherwise illegally disclosed," the report stated, referring to the "Hello, Garci?" tapes.

It added that Technical sergeant Vidal Doble, an agent of the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, should be held liable for his actions. Doble allegedly sold the tapes to Ong for P2M but later denied this and said it was Ong who approached him to "own up" to the wiretapping for the said amount.

"The wayward manner intelligence agencies handle intelligence material screams for major correction," the Committee said.

It further recommended the removal of officials in concerned government agencies that might have "intentionally or negligently" allowed Garcillano to escape congressional inquiries. The report also said, however, that whether Garcillano was in the country or abroad at that time is irrelevant but what mattered was he went into hiding. "Indeed, flight is a sign of guilt," it said.

The Committee also wants Congress to cite Ong for contempt for refusing to testify, and to issue a warrant for his arrest. Last year, Ong said he feared for his safety and asked his lawyer instead to submit a copy of the "mother of all tapes" to Congress.

Moreover, the report stated, there might be a need for a special law penalizing officials "for deliberately making false statements even in circumstances that do not amount to perjury."  The Committee was referring to what it said were “inconsistencies” between the testimony of Press secretary Ignacio Bunye before Congress and his earlier statements to the media.

In a June 6, 2005 press conference where he first made public the existence of the tapes, Bunye said the President "was illegally wiretapped, the conversation was spliced, and that it was the President’s voice." But when he appeared before Congress in June 21, he said "he was not sure whether or not the voice in the CDs was that of the President."

"Even a Press secretary may not use his office to conceal the truth or mislead the public," the Committee said.

Read the full draft report here.