Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
MANILA
COMPLAINT
I, TEODORO CASIÑO, of legal age, Filipino, taxpayer, and with
office address at No. 45 K7 Street, West Kamias, Quezon City, and
BAYAN MUNA PARTY LIST represented by Neri Javier Colmenares, an
accredited political party participating in the party list elections, with
office address at No. 45 K7 Street, West Kamias, Quezon City, state
under oath:
With Mrs. Arroyo’s stepping down from power and lapse of her
immunity from suit, the people now have the opportunity to hold her
accountable for her various crimes & misdemeanors and for justice to
be finally served.
ALLEGATIONS OF FACTS
Verily even the Senate in its Committee Report No. 743 took
serious note of how the Office of the Ombudsman issued a resolution
but failed to satisfactorily resolve the complaints filed before it on this
project, which according to the Senate was meant to preempt the
Committee Report. Clearly, whatever actions that the Office of the
Ombudsman on the instant matter has been tainted by so much malice
and other extraneous considerations.
6. The NBN saga may be deemed to have started with a July 12,
2006 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Philippines’
Department of Trade and Industry through Secretary Peter Favila and
ZTE International Investment Limited (ZTE).2 The MOU awarded
without any public bidding ZTE the right to invest in these
activities: (1) Nationwide Government Broadband Communication
Infrastructure Project; (2) Establishment of Information Technology
School and Training Center; (3) Exploration, Development and
Operation of Mining Areas in North Davao; (4) Exploration,
Development and Operation of Mining Areas in Diwalwal; and (5)
Establishment of a Special Economic Zone in the Davao area.3 The
capital and operating costs for these projects totaled US$4 billion to be
provided by ZTE4 – of course to be collected from the Filipino people in
whatever form or packaging they are to be provided.
7. On August 7, 2006 ZTE submitted with the Commission on
Information and Communications Technology (CICT) their proposal for
2
Id. at 16.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid.
3
the NBN Project.5 By September 2006 the National Economic and
Development Authority (NEDA) was already evaluating the NBN
Project.6 Not surprisingly, with much haste, on September 8, 2006,
Export-Import Bank of China (“China Exim Bank”) already wrote to
NEDA informing them that they are ready to exchange opinions and
explore cooperation opportunities’ after China EXIMBANK and ZTE held
discussions resulting in the conclusion that they may be available for
transactions on the NBN Project.7
(d) Four days before formal talks with ZTE started, respondent
Arroyo even brought the ZTE chairperson to Cotabato City as her
special guest at the joint Cabinet-Regional Development Council
meeting on July 8, 2006.
16. There was undue haste in the other processes for the
approval of the ZTE Project, thus showing that respondent Arroyo used
her powers as then President to rig the essential processes so as to
grant unwarranted benefits to ZTE, to wit:
25
Ibid.
26
Ibid.
27
Ibid.
28
Id. at 30.
6
a. This was admitted by her on February 23, 2008 in her
interview before the radio station DZRH. She said that she first learned
of irregularities in the US$329.48 million broadband contract with ZTE
Corporation on the eve of the signing of the Supply Contract in China
on April 21, 2007.29 ( additionally Attached is a copy of the media
report as as Annex “B” )
9
(i) Directly or indirectly
becoming interested, for personal
gain, or having a material interest
in any transaction or act requiring
the approval of a board, panel or
group of which he is a member,
and which exercises discretion in
such approval, even if he votes
against the same or does not
participate in the action of the
board, committee, panel or group.
(i) Art. 211-A, The Revised Penal Code, for Qualified Bribery,
for refraining from arresting or prosecuting all those
involved in the corrupt acts arising from or in connection
with the NBN-ZTE Project, in exchange for some offer,
promise, gift or present.
(ii) Art. 212, The Revised Penal Code, for Corruption of Public
Officials, as a conspirator in Benjamin Abalos’ endeavors to
give bribes.
(iii) Art. 213, The Revised Penal Code, for Frauds against the
Public Treasury, for entering into the NBN-ZTE contract to
defraud the Philippine Government.
10
(v) Violation of PD 1829 (1981) as amended, “Penalizing
Obstruction of Apprehension and Prosecution of Criminal
Offenders,” particularly for (a) preventing witnesses from
testifying in any criminal proceeding or from reporting the
commission of any offense or the identity of any offender/s
by means of bribery, misrepresentation, deceit,
intimidation, force or threats; and (b) altering, destroying,
suppressing or concealing any paper, record, document, or
object, with intent to impair its verity, authenticity,
legibility, availability, or admissibility as evidence in any
investigation of or official proceedings in, criminal cases, or
to be used in the investigation of, or official proceedings in,
criminal cases – particularly the suppression of Romulo
Neri’s testimony and the loss of the NBN-ZTE contract,
which are both attributable to respondent Arroyo.
24. Since the ZTE proposal does not fall under the provisions of
RA 6975 as amended by RA 7718 on unsolicited proposals, it should
be covered by the provisions for bidding under RA 9184.
__________________________
TEODORO CASINO
Affiant
___________________________
Affiant
_________________________
Administering Officer
12