Senators push for evidence-based probe as key witnesses skip Blue Ribbon meeting

Members from the Senate majority bloc on Monday called for the need for credible evidence and witness accountability amid controversy surrounding alleged anomalies in flood control projects.

Leading the call for stricter scrutiny of allegations was Senator Erwin Tulfo, who stressed that witnesses appearing before the committee must be able to support their claims with verifiable proof.

"It's easy to make up a story and it's very easy to ruin a person's reputation. That's why the Blue Ribbon Committee's goal is to ensure that every allegation is based on solid evidence and credible testimony," Tulfo said.

"We are not here to pass judgment based solely on speculation. We are here to find out the truth," he added.

The meeting was overshadowed by the absence of 18 individuals described as former bodyguards, their lawyer Atty. Levito Baligod, and former Congressman Mike Defensor, despite having received official invitations from the Senate.

Senate President Pro Tempore and Acting Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian expressed disappointment over their failure to attend, saying their absence hindered efforts to clarify issues surrounding the allegations.

"It is unfortunate that the 18 bodyguards, their lawyer Atty. Baligod, and Mr. Mike Defensor did not heed our invitation. This is an official call," Gatchalian said.

He revealed that the committee had prepared extensively for the consultation and that they intended to give the invited individuals an opportunity to explain inconsistencies in their previous statements.

"I personally prepared many questions because I noticed several inconsistencies and gaps in their sworn statements. I wanted to clarify these issues," he said.

Gatchalian maintained that individuals claiming to possess information about the controversy should be willing to present their accounts before the Senate regardless of political affiliations.

Senator Risa Hontiveros echoed the call for the witnesses to appear before the committee once it is fully constituted, warning that continued refusal could result in subpoenas and show-cause orders.

"Evidence should prevail, not just stories. That's what we wanted to know today. But the 18 ex-bodyguards did not appear in the Senate today," Hontiveros said in Filipino.

"This should have been an opportunity to find out what the truth is, but the resource persons are not here to verify their stories. It's a pity," she added.

Sen. Francis "Kiko" Pangilinan in agreement said, "We hope that with this proceedings we will be able to get to the bottom of the truth," Pangilinan said.

He clarified that Monday's session was primarily intended to ensure continuity in the committee's operations while its reorganization and membership are being finalized.

Questions about the credibility of the allegations also surfaced during exchanges with representatives of the Office of the Ombudsman.

Senator Bam Aquino asked whether the affidavits submitted by the former bodyguards had become part of any formal investigation and underscored the need for independent verification by the proper authorities.

"There should be corroborative evidence and additional inquiry," Aquino said.

"Of course, many claims and denials are made here, but ultimately the best course is for the proper agency to investigate and determine whether the allegations have merit."

Responding to Aquino's inquiries, Ombudsman official Atty. Karen Batu explained that the anti-graft office had required individual affidavits from each of the former bodyguards before any meaningful assessment could be conducted.

"When these documents were evaluated by our lawyer-evaluators and reviewed and approved by our officials, we sent a notice to Atty. Levito Baligod stating that the office requires individual affidavits from the marines so that each can personally state what they know regarding the allegations," Batu said.

Sen. Raffy Tulfo also questioned the reliability of the witnesses' claims, pointing to what he described as inconsistent and unsupported testimonies.

"Of course we want the real culprits to be charged and held accountable, whoever actually received the money," Tulfo said.

However, he noted that the affidavits lacked supporting evidence such as documents, screenshots, or recorded conversations.

"Their statements keep changing, pushing forward and pulling back... It is nothing but hearsay. So how will the Ombudsman handle that to make the case tight against anyone who actually received the money?" he asked.

Batu reiterated that the Ombudsman requires first-hand testimony and verifiable information before pursuing further action.

Sen. Vicente Sotto III sympathizes with the former bodyguards, saying they may have been used and could end up taking the blame for wrongdoing in the preparation of a joint affidavit linked to the flood control scandal.

He said he was named and “somehow inserted” into the thick affidavit, but noted that in the sworn statements of the individuals involved, particularly five of them, his name was not mentioned.