|
Republic of the Philippines
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
Law Department
Manila
ALAN F. PAGUIA, EO
Case No. __________________
Complainant, For:
Investigation under Section 2, Article IX-C of the 1987
Philippine Constitution/Rule 34
(Comelec Rules of Procedure)
-versus-
VIRGILIO GARCILLANO
and GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO,
Respondents.
x---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT
COMPLAINANT
1. I, ALAN F. PAGUIA, of legal age, married, Filipino, lawyer, with
residential address at 17 Dr. Lazcano Street, Quezon City, under oath, hereby state that:
RESPONDENTS
2. Respondent VIRGILIO GARCILLANO, of legal age, married, Filipino, with residence
at Bukidnon, whose specific address is within the quasi-judicial notice of the
Honorable Commission, is impleaded in this complaint for acts he had committed
in his capacity as COMELEC Commissioner before, during and after the May 2004
presidential elections.
3. Respondent GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO, of legal age,
married, Filipino, with residential address at Malacañang Palace, Manila where
she may be duly served with legal process, is impleaded in this complaint in
her capacity as the apologetic Chief Executive and answering respondent in the
complaint for impeachment filed against her by Atty. Oliver O. Lozano before
the House of Representatives in 2005.
NATURE OF ACTION
4. This complaint seeks the Honorable Commissions official investigation of the
respondents for violation of election laws, including acts or omissions
constituting election frauds, offenses, and malpractices under Article IX-C,
Section 2, sub-par. 6, second clause (“The Commission on Elections shall
exercise the following powers and functions: … investigate and, where
appropriate, prosecute cases of violations of election
1
laws, including acts or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses, and
malpractices.”) in relation to Section 3, Rule 34 of the Comelec Rules of Procedure.
MATERIAL FACTS
5. On June 8, 2005, Rep. Francis Escudero delivered a privilege speech before
the House of Representatives citing recorded telephone conversations between
respondent Garcillano and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, wherein the two (2) communicants
talked about and agreed to ensure the electoral victory of Mrs. Arroyo by at
least one million (1,000,000) votes over her closest rival, Fernando Poe, Jr.
(FPJ). A copy of the privilege speech is submitted herewith as Exhibit “A”.
6. On June 27, 2005, the recorded telephone conversations were publicly
admitted and apologized for by Mrs. Arroyo in a speech aired over national
radio and television, the complete text of which is submitted herewith as
Exhibit “B”. On the same date, a complaint for impeachment against Mrs. Arroyo
was filed with the House of Representatives by Atty. Oliver O. Lozano, a copy
of which is submitted herewith as Exhibit “C”.
7. On June 28, 2005, Atty. Lozano filed with the House of Representatives his
Supplemental Complaint for Impeachment versus Mrs. Arroyo, a copy of which is
submitted herewith as Exhibit “D”. Congressional records show Atty. Lozanos
complaint (Exhibit “C”) and supplemental complaint (Exhibit “D”) were endorsed
by Rep. Rodante D. Marcoleta by way of an undated one-page Resolution of
Endorsement, a copy of which is submitted herewith as Exhibit “E”, and another
one-page verification of his endorsement subscribed and sworn to on June 29,
2005, a copy of which is submitted herewith as Exhibit “F”.
8. On June 30, 2005, the joint committee hearing of the House of
Representatives (Committees on Public Information, on Public Order and Safety,
on National Defense and Security, on Information Communications Technology, and
on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms) officially played the compact disc (CD) of
herein complainant which contained the recording of the aforementioned
telephone conversations between respondents Garcillano and Mrs. Arroyo. A copy
of the said recorded telephone conversation made by herein complainant is submitted
herewith as Exhibit “G”.
9. On July 4, 2005, complainant received a subpoena duces tecum, dated June 30,
2005, submitted herewith as Exhibit “H”, and a letter of invitation from the
Committee on Public Information of the House of Representatives, dated July 4,
2004, submitted herewith as Exhibit “I”, which required complainant to testify
and provide inputs to the joint committee hearings.
10. On July 18, 2005, Mrs. Arroyo duly filed her verified 13-page ANSWER EX
ABUNDANTE AD CAUTELAM with the House of Representatives, with the following
prayer for specific remedies:
“WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed
that the Complaint for Impeachment dated 27 June 2005 and the Supplemental
Complaint for Impeachment dated 28 June 2005 filed by Atty. Oliver O. Lozano,
and endorsed by Rep. Rodante D. Marcoleta of the Alagad Party List in his
Resolution of Endorsement dated 29 June 2005, be dismissed.
Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.”
11. The recorded voice of respondent Garcillano was positively identified: (a)
by Rep. Jun Macarambon during the official House proceedings where he admitted
having had telephone conversations during the same material period with
respondent Garcillano whom he referred to several times as “Commissioner
Garci”; and (b) by respondent Mrs. Arroyo herself who referred to Commissioner
Garcillano as “Garci” in Exhibit “G”.
12. The recorded voice of respondent Mrs. Arroyo and her recorded conversation
with respondent Garcillano was admitted by her in Exhibits “B” and “J”.
13. The voices of both respondents are matters of public knowledge.
14. The voice of respondent Garcillano is personally known to his former
co-Commissioners in the Comelec. It is within the mandatory quasi-judicial or
judicial notice of the Honorable Commission.
SOLE ISSUE
15. WHETHER THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ON THE BASES OF EXHIBITS “A” TO “J”,
SHOULD INVESTIGATE THE RESPONDENTS FOR ELECTION FRAUDS, OFFENSES AND
MALPRACTICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS DUTY UNDER SECTION 2, ARTICLE IX-C OF THE
1987 PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION?
COMPLAINANTS LEGAL POSITION
16. Complainant respectfully submits the issue should be resolved in the
AFFIRMATIVE.
ARGUMENTS
17. When the respondents came to an agreement and decided to ensure the electoral
victory of Mrs. Arroyo by at least one million (1,000,000) votes over her
closest rival presidential candidate, they conspired by misrepresenting the
final result of the elections in her favor.
18. Mrs. Arroyo has publicly admitted the existence of the issue of the tape
recordings (Exhibit “G”).
19. She has officially admitted the public deserves an explanation from her
(Exhibit “B”, second par.).
20. She has admitted having telephone conversations during
the election canvassing process with Comelec official Garcillano whom she
referred to in the recorded conversations as “Garci”.
21. Mrs. Arroyo has not denied it was her voice which was
recorded conversing with respondent Garcillano in Exhibit “G”, in spite of so
much opportunity to do so.
22. Her defense - to the effect that it was not her intent
to influence the outcome of the election – is immaterial. Election offenses are
covered by special laws which are mala prohibita. It is elementary in law that
in mala prohibita offenses, intent is not an element.
23. Mrs. Arroyo has publicly admitted having committed the wrongful act of
making a telephone call to respondent Comelec official Garcillano and
discussing with him the protection of her votes and ensuring her margin by at
least one million (1,000,000) votes over FPJ. She characterized her wrongful
act as “a lapse in judgment” and publicly apologized as follows:
“Nagagambala ako. Maliwanag na may
kakulangan sa wastong pagpapasya ang nangyaring pagtawag sa telepono.
Pinagsisisihan ko ito ng lubos. Pinananagutan ko nang lubusan ang aking mga
ginawa at humihingi ako ng tawad sa inyo, sa lahat ng mga butihing mamamayan na
nabawasan ng tiwala dahil sa mga pangyayaring ito. …”
24. The verified answer (Exhibit “J”) was signed jointly by Mrs. Arroyo and her
legal counsel, Atty. Pedro Ferrer. In other words, she had:
(a) publicly joined issues with Atty. Lozanos complaint/supplemental complaint;
and
(b) voluntarily submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the House of
Representatives.
She has thereby waived any legal immunity from investigation; and is further
estopped from invoking any such immunity.
25. The playing of Exhibit “G”, or the recorded telephone conversation between
the respondents, in Congress constitutes an official act of the legislature,
which is within the mandatory quasi-judicial notice of the Honorable
Commission.
26. The public interest over the subject recorded telephone conversations
necessarily prevails over any private interest.
PRAYER
PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is respectfully prayed that the Honorable Commission
investigate the respondents in accordance with its duty under Section 2,
Article IX-C of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and Rule 34, Comelec Rules of
Procedure.
Complainant prays for other proper or just reliefs.
March 6, 2007.
ALAN F. PAGUIA
Complainant
17 Dr. Lazcano Street, Quezon City
Roll of Attys. No. 32673
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING
I hereby certify that: I am the complainant in the foregoing complaint; I
prepared the said complaint; I have read and understood its contents; and the
same are true and correct of my own personal knowledge and based on authentic
documents.
I further certify that I have not commenced any similar action involving the
same parties, facts and issues, nor is there any similar proceeding pending,
before any court or administrative agency. Should I learn of any such pending
proceeding, I undertake to report the same and its status before this Honorable
Commission within five (5) days therefrom.
ALAN F. PAGUIA
Complainant
Republic of the Philippines)
Quezon City, Metro Manila) s. s.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6th day of March 2007 by Alan F. Paguia
with CTC No. 0755739, issued at Q.C. on January 19, 2007.
Doc. No. ______________;
Page No. ______________;
Book No. ______________;
Series of 2007.
LIST OF EXHIBITS
A - Rep. Francis Escuderos privilege speech, dated June 8, 2005
B - GMAs "I am sorry" speech, dated June 27, 2005
C - Atty. Lozanos complaint, dated June 27, 2005
D - Supplemental Complaint, dated June 28, 2005
E - Resolution of Endorsement, undated
F - Verification of Endorsement, dated June 29, 2005
G - "Hello Garci" CD, 36-minute recording
H - Subpoena duces tecum, dated June 30, 2005
I - Letter of Invitation, dated July 4, 2005
J - GMAs answer ex abundante ad cautelam, dated July 18,
2005
|
