Counter-Affidavit Mario Joel Reyes Aka JTR

Republic of the Philippines DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Manila
PATRIA GLORIA ORTEGA Complainant,

-versus-

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-ll-A-00005

ROMEO M. SERATUBIAS, ET AL.

Respondents.

x ---------- --------------- -------- ------------- x

COUNTER-AFFIDA VIT

I, MARIO JOEL T. REYES, of legal age, Filipino, and with residence at c/o 1363 Caballero St., Dasmarifias Village, Makati City, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and state:

1. I was Governor of Palawan for three (3) consecutive terms from

2001 until 2010.

2. In this case, I am being charged with murder in connection with the

death of Dr. Gerry Ortega last 24 January 2010. From the records provided me by the Investigating Panel of Prosecutors, the allegations against me are found in the following:

a) Supplemental Complaint-Affidavit of Patria

Gloria A. Inocencio-Ortega, dated 14 February 2011;

b) Affidavit of Rodoldo Edrad, Jr. dated 6 February 2011.

3. Other than the above affidavits, there is no evidence showing my

alleged involvement in the crime.

I. Supplemental Complaint-Mfidavit of Patty Ortega

4. In her Supplemental Complaint-Affidavit, complainant stated that

her husband Dr. Gerry Ortega was the foremost critic of my administration as r'''",co",nnt' of Palawan and that I was the principal target of his criticisms. In

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v. Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-OOOOS DOL Manila

particular, Patty Ortega cites the commentaries and criticisms of Dr. Ortega on the twin issues of corruption in the award of mining concessions in Palawan and the alleged misuse of the Malampaya gas funds.

5. According to complainant, Dr. Gerry Ortega's commentaries on

these two issues had contributed to my loss in the last congressional election. She then ascribes this to me as motive to have her husband killed. But as will be shown below, complainant's attribution of motive to me is completely misplaced and bereft of any factual basis.

Re: Issue on Mining

6. In 1992, Republic Act No. 7611, otherwise known as the "Strategic

Environmental Plan (SEP) for Palawan Act," was enacted. The law provides for a comprehensive framework plan for the continued existence of the unique ecological system found in Palawan. The said law called for the creation of the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD). The PCSD is a council tasked to govern and implement the policy direction of the SEP.l

7. Section 16 of RA 7611 provides for the composition of the PCSD.

The said provision states:

USEe. 16 Palawan Council for Sustainable Development. - The governance, implementation and policy direction of the Strategic Envirorunental Plan shall be exercised by the herein created Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD), hereinafter referred to as the Council, which shall be under the Office of the President. It shall be composed of the Members of the House of the Representatives representing the province of Palawan, the Deputy Director General of the National Economic and Development Authority, the Undersecretary of Environment and Natural Resources, the Undersecretary for Special Concerns of the Department of Agriculture, the Governor of Palawan, the Mayor of Puerto Princesa City, the President of the Mayor's League of Palawan, the President of the Provincial Chapter of the Liga ng mga Barangay, the Executive Director of the Palawan council for Sustainable Development Staff as provided in Section 20 of this Act, and such other members from the public or private sectors as the majority of the council may deem necessary." (Underscoring supplied.)

''--UWI'l~'1-'J:llllUaVIl 'UI \':>UV. JUO::l tXO::Y'C<>' Ortega v. Seratubias, et al.

NPS DocketNo.IV-17-1NQ-l1A-00005 DOJ, Manila

8. By virtue of the above provision, I was made a de oficio member of

the council when I was Governor from 2001 to 2010. Prior to this, I was also made a member of the council by virtue of my position as Vice Governor and representative of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan. I was also voted Chairman of the PCSD by the other members of the Council.

9. In her Supplemental Affidavit, Patty Ortega alleged that despite --,

losing in the 2010 elections, I was unlawfully appointed as member of the PCSD "in \ an apparent effort to retain (my) influence in PCSD that presides over the mining concerns and approval of mining applications in the province."? This malicious

allegation has no merit. --?f(}j,d u\"\ .. 1<;tl:e~(,\_\\j \\} f( ~\) r It V()uF', ---- - ~ .----~-

10. It should be noted that the last phrase of Section 16 allows the J

inclusion of n such other members from the public or private sectors as the majorihj of the council may deem necessary." Thus, the Members of the PCSD may expand the members of the Council by virtue of a majority vote.

11. Recently, majority of the council members voted to include the past

chairmen of the PCSD and the author of RA 7611 as members of the PCSD. As a former chairman of PCSD, I was made a member of the council together with other past chairmen Alfredo Abueg, Jr. and Vicente Sandoval. The author of RA 7611, David Ponce de Leon, was also included as a member of the council.

-_

12. There is no truth that I was made a member to retain my influence

in PCSD that presides over the mining concerns and approval of mining applications in the province primarily because, contrary to the insinuations of

complainant, the PCSD dnes not approve IMge scale mining applications in the -\1>

province of pa1awan. __/ ;tNtyv:' 7 , (),0'~V'~

l ~'t--'

0'''

13. All ~n~rals fO~ld in the co~ntry are owned by the. S~ate.3 It i~ ~~

only the State which IS authorized to exploit such resources .. Thus, It IS only th~ ! ~,,"~'?J. State, through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DE R),

which is authorized to enter into financial or technical assistance agreements (

with rrurung operators in order to undertake large-scale exploration, I development and utilization of mineral resources in the Philippines .. 4

fino 'iu.rw~ 8f d-<(t.,(ll\(£J·~ I)\..·I'\I~-IN,..

14. /I'll the case of Palawan, however, before any application for largescale mining in the province is granted by the DENR, a Strategic Environment

2 Supplemental Affidavit, par. 16, p. 3.

3 Section 2 Article XII of the 1987 Constitution.

4 Section 33 of the Republic Act 0.7942 or the Philippine Mining Act of 1995 provides:

"Sec. 33 Eligibility. Any qualified person with technical and financial capability to undertake large-scale exploration, development, and utilization of mineral resources in. the Philippines may enter into a ·financial or technical assistance agreement directly with the Government through the Department."

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v , Seratubias, et aL NPS Docket o. IV-17-II Q-llA-00005 DOL Manila

Plan (SEP) Clearance must first be obtained from the PCSD,5 Without this clearance, mining companies would' not be granted their Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) which is a requirement in conducting large scale mining in the Philippines.

15, Macro Asia lining Corporation owned by Lucio Tan, and the-, \\ {i( .

Ipilan Nickel Mining Corporation (I C) owned by the Zamora Group applied I c\{~-r\v for the issuance of their respective SEP clearances to conduct exploration - large :'\~\( '.L scale mining in Palawan. The application was referred to a committee of the Id11.~~'~ PCSD. The Committee issued the SEP clearance to the companies. The matter ~"'(~ ,

was then elevated to the plenary council for deliberations. Last 21 December "'''\,. c . 2010, the peSD rendered a decision to affirm the decision of the committee and J '\l~> .. ,\\",-I,.

issue the SEP clearances to these mining companies. '

16. It is the granting of the SEP Clearance which spurred Bantay

Kalikasan and Dr. Ortega to launch its Ten Million Signature Campaign against mining in Palawan.

<::» -;;:. '>\' 17, Despite being a member of PCSDj I was not a member of the

(JD~~L'~"'\ committee which deliberated on and allowed the issuance of the SEP Clearance .. ,f.J;!! When the committee action was elevated to the council, I also did not participate {\<~~, in the actions of the plenary. As proof, the minutes of the PCSD would show -,~'V !~~that I 'lffi:ot ~sent when the Council voted to affirm the commi~ee'.s de.cision.

',' . sentiment.s:t-w.ere, however, adequately expressed by my wife, Incumbent

....... ..s-

,; ~, +.'.\'-\ Ice Governor Clara M. Reyes, who vehemently voiced her opposition to the

iJ~:- granting of the SEP Clearance.s She was the lone dissenter in the council. For her stand against the issuance of the SEP Clearance, Vice Governor Reyes was even praised by Dr. Ortega for having the "halls" to express her dissent.

18. As I said, the actions of my wife reflect my own personal sentiment

on the issue of mining in the Province of Palawan. Unlike most of the people who now claim Palawan as their own, I was actually born and raised in Palawan. Throughout my life, I have relished its culture, traditions, and its expressions. Most of all, I remain an admirer of its natural beauty. When I became Governor, 1

made it my personal mission to protect Palawan and preserve it for the future l( J,;~(

generation of Palawefios. -1 C\vG 'f CV~ 6fV!~..,_1 \J\~

-~-. i / . -~ 0(-\'Ij

19. ~y personal stand on minin~ is also shown by the fact that dUring!

my tenure as Governor, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Palawan unanimously passed Resolution No. 7728-08 /I declaring a twenty-five (25) year moratorium in the issuance of x x x indorsements for new applications for small mining activities in the Province of Palawan x x x:" In addition, the Resolution also expressed the Sangguniang's "firm resolve to oppose at any time any new large scale mining application or to press for the nullification of existing mining agreements and the cessation of their mining operations for incompatibility with the strategic environmental plan for Palainan:"

s PCSD Administrative Order NO.6: Revised Guidelines in the Issuance of a SEP Clearance System.

6 The Minutes of the PCSD meeting showing the Vice-Governor's objection is attached

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v . Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOJ, Manila

20. It should be noted that, similar to large scale ffilrung, before applications for small scale mining are acted upon by the Mines and GeoSciences Bureau of the DENR, the indorsement of these applications is needed. By reason of Resolution No. 7728, however, no new applications for small scale mining would be indorsed by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Palawan,

effectively putting a stop to the proliferation of small scale mining in Palawan. f\ £Io._;,,-V

21. As can be seen, Resolution No. 7728 expressed my administration,:l

str<?Eg stand against small scale mining in the province of Palawan. With my stand- agaInst bOTIl- small and Tar-ge- scale mining in Palawan, it is simply incongruent for me to take offense at or feel adverted to by Dr. Ortega's efforts against mining in the province of Palawan.

Re: Malampaya Funds

22. In Patty Ortega's Supplemental Affidavit she seems to insinuate that Dr. Ortega was murdered because he had "access to information and documents about the widespread corruption in the provincial goverrunent of Palawan," in particular with regard to the use of the so-called Malampaya funds. According to Patty Ortega, it was I who bore the brunt of the criticism of Dr. Ortega since as Governor, I "presided over the management and disbursement of the funds during (my) incumbency as governor from 2003 to 2010." Nothing can

be further from the truth. 5\·,J·'

_ --I o-[~ f'

23. As Governor. I had no conh'ol nor did. I preside over thj , .yv

management and disbursement of funds receiyed~~-f.ro-m~he \-e,-t ~\~ Malanl.paya Gas ~roject as can be seen from the following brief discussion on the T~~'(,A

source of the alleged "Malampaya funds": iJ

23.1 Sometime in 1990, the Republic of the Philippines and Shell Exploration B.V,fOccidental Philippines, Inc. (SEBVOPI) executed Service Contract No. 38 (SC 38). Pursuant to this contract, Shell Exploration B.V., Shell Philippines LLC, Chevron Malarnpaya LLC and PNOC-EC Exploration Corporation would be engaged by the Republic of the Philippines as a contractor for the exploration, development and production of petroleum resources discovered offshore, Northwest Palawan.

23.2 Pursuant to the Contract, the National Goverrunent would receive sixty percent (60%), while the Contractor consortium would receive the remaining forty percent (40%) of the net proceeds of the petroleum operations.

23.3 Since the location of the project was within the territorial boundary of Palawan, as defined in RA 7611, the Palawan Provincial Government claimed forty percent (40%) of the sixty percent (60%) share of the National Government. Palawan's claim is based on Section 290 of

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v , Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DO], Manila

USEe. 290. Amount of Share of Local Government Units. - Local goverrunent units shall, in addition to the internal revenue allotment, have a share of forty percent (40%) of the gross collection derived by the national government from the preceding fiscal year from mining taxes, royalties, forestry and fishery charges, and such other taxes, fees, or charges, including related surcharges, interests, or fines, and from its share in any co-production, joint venture or production sharing agreement in the utilization and development of the national wealth within their territorial jurisdiction."

23.4 In 2001, however, at her speech at the inauguration of the natural gas project, then president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo described the Malampaya project as "off Palawan." This sent an alarming message to me that the National Government would not recognize Palawan's share in the proceeds of the gas project. As a result, I wrote the President a letter reiterating the Province of Palawan's legal right to forty percent (40%) of the National Government's share in the proceeds of the Malampaya gas project."

23.5 In 2002, the National Government proposed a "financial assistance package" equivalent to twenty percent (20%) of its share from the proceeds of the project. Pursuant to this, a multi-sectoral consultative meeting on the draft memorandum for the financial package was held in March of 2002. The meeting was attended by members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the province of Palawan, then Congressman Abraham Mitra of the First District and a representative of Congressman Vicente Sandoval of the Second District, together with Municipal Mayors of Palawan and members of the media.

23.6 The draft memorandum that resulted from the meeting was presented by representatives from Palawan to representatives of the National Government. Over time, several meetings were held until both sides finally came up with a draft memorandum for the financial package.

23.7 A total of eight (8) public hearings were held to solicit public sentiment and opinion on the provisions of the draft memorandum. The draft memorandum was also submitted to the Sangguniang Panialawigan for their reconunendations and comments.


NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-OOOOS DOJ, Manila

23 .. 8 The draft memorandum was revised in accordance with the result of the public hearings, opinion of the people of Palawan and the findings of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan. The new draft memorandum was presented to the National Govermnent on 8 October 2002.

23.9 In a letter to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, the National Government, through then Department of Energy Undersecretary J.Y .. Errunanuael de Dios, stated, among other things, that it prefers to retain the provisions of the original draft of the memorandum.

23.10 Sensing the failure of negotiations between the National Government and the Province of Palawan, I announced in a press conference in 2003 that the Provincial Government is seriously considering legal action to confirm Palawan's legal right to its share in the profit of the gas project.

23.11 Pursuant to this, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan issued Resolution No. 5340-03 entitled: A Resolution Calling Off Further Negotiations on the Proposed Memorandum of Agreement on Palawan's Natural Gas Claim and Authorizing the Hon, Joel T. Reyes, Governor of Palawan, to undertake the Engagement of Legal Services to Prosecute the Said Claim by Judicial Action.:"

23.12 On 7 May 2003, I filed a Petition for Declaratory Relief on behalf of the Province of Palawan in order to ascertain and finally settle Palawan's legal claim to its share in the profits of the Malampaya gas project.

23.13 In a Decision dated 16 December 2005,9 the Regional Trial Court Branch 95 of the Province of Palawan upheld Palawan's legal right to its share in the profits of the Malapaya Gas Project. The dispositive portion of the Decision provides:

"WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court declares that the province of Palawan is entitled to the 40% share of the national wealth pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 7, Article X of the 1987 Constitution and this right is in accord with the provisions of the Enabling Act, R.A. 7160 (The local Government Code of 1991), computed based on revenues generated from the Carnago Malampaya Natural Gas Project since October 16, 2001."

23.14 The Decision of the Regional Trial Court was appealed to the Supreme Court by the Office of the Solicitor General where it remains pending resolution to this day.

8 A copy of the Resolution is attached hereto as Annex "3."

9 A "...,("\"""O',....~ i-\...,.., n ........ !~;-- _!_ - II 1 1 '. • •

.._" ''''0'' v , J~ni1.:u.OIaS, et al,

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOJ,Manila

....., J-I r" :~"

23.15 In the meantime, a Provisional Implementation Agreement .-: .. -.- E.!

was executed by the National Government and the Provincial ", [ :'l i' ~<Goverrunent of Palawan.l? The Agreement is to be applied while the case [ . c .... C('-~,,1 remains pending. In the Agreement, both parties mutually agreed to an: ~.; II'

equitable sharing of the profits subject of the Supreme Court case. __, o--~

23.16 I signed the Agreement on behalf of the Province of Palawan with the conformity of Congressman Antonio C. Alvarez of the First District of Palawan and Congressman Abraham Mitra of the Second District of Palawan. The National Goverrunent was represented by then Budget and Management Secretary Rolando Andaya, [r., then Energy Secretary Raphael Lotilla, and then Finance Secretary Margarita Teves, through a Special Authority signed by then President Gloria Arroyo.

23.17 The Agreement provides for the equal sharing of the proceeds from the Malampaya Gas Project between the National Government and the Province of Palawan. Palawan's share, on the other uhand, will be equally cfu_tributed among the Provincial Government of 1"Palawan (Governor Joel T. Reyes), _ the First District of Palawan (Congressman Antonio C. Alvarez), and the Second District of Palawan (Congresnunan Abraham Kahlil Mitra). Puerto Princesa City (Mayor Edward Hagedorn), which is part of the Second District, will receive thirty percent (30%) of the profits received by the said District.

23.18 The Agreement also limits the nature of the projects for which the funds would be utilized. The funds will be released to various implementing agencies of the National Government for specifically determined projects within the Province of Palawan. The procedure for the disbursements of funds is provided by Paragraph 4 of the Agreement, which states:

"The Palawan Share, shall, in furtherance of the Province's strategic role in preserving, monitoring and safeguarding the disputed as well as the National territory adjacent to Palawan and its responsibilities under the SEP, be spent exclusively for (i) development infrastructure projects which shall be equitably distributed throughout the Province to split the social and economic condition of the people of Palawan , and to protect and conserve their environment and enhance their capability for sustained development and progress, consistent with the annual investment Plan adopted by the Palawan Development Council and approved by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan such as, but not limited to the North and South National

10

A copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as Annex "5,/1

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v. Seratubias, et aI.

PS Docket _ o.IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOL Manila

·1 ¥L~~1

... t:\w¥t,\1 .

Highways of the Province. (ii) the access to J r>o

electrification in the 431 barangays of Palawan by December 2008, (iii) the establishment of facilities

to enhance the security of the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone and the ecological resources therein, including but not limited to the Natural Gas Project, and/ or (iv) development projects identified in the development plans of the

ational Government or its agencies.

"The DBM, based on the certification of the Implementing Agency that the projects fall under the Palawan Investment Program or the Investment Program of the National Government or its agencies shall cause the release of funds to the implementing agencies which shall be accountable for the implementation of the projects and the expenditure thereof subject to applicable laws and existing budgeting, accounting and auditing rules and regulations.

"The National Government or its implementing agencies are hereby authorized to open and maintain a special account for recording purposes only of the releases out of the Palawan Share." (Emphasis supplied.)

24. When the Agreement was finally executed, the Provincial

Government consulted different sectors in Palawan to come up with a list of priority projects to which the proceeds received would be applied. This list was submitted to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan for approval and then to the various implementing agencies for certification. My only participation in this process was to give my final approval to the list of projects submitted to the implementing agencies. '

25. It was the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) which handled and released the funds for these projects, and only after the Implemen~g Agencies certified that the projects fall under the Palawan Investment Program.

26. Pursuant to the Agreement, around Three Billion Pesos

(P3,OOO,OOO,OOO.OO) was released by the DBM to Palawan. This amount was shared by the Provincial Government, and the First District and the Second District of Palawan. The share of the Provincial Government was utilized for various projects including the installation of 4000 Solar Home Systems in thirty-nine (39) barangays, construction of the Southern Palawan and Northern Palawan Provincial Hospitals, the construction of one hundred fifty nine (159) classrooms and a permanent building for the Department of Education in Palawan, and many others.

" .

tJnr--~ ~

/\

27. I reiterate that the funds received by the Provincial Goyernme:ut

~ere ~_~1!tiHzed for th~bene£iLo£ the~~QP-le of Palawan. Patty Ortega seems to question the propriety of these projects when she mentioned in her Supplemental Affidavit that it was only "sometime in 2009 to early 2010" that the Commission on Audit (COA) had conducted a Special Audit of the said funds released to the Provincial Government of Palawan. She, however, failed to mention that the funds were released by the DBM only on 6 February 2008 .. The audit conducted by COA was also not limited to the funds released to the Provincial Government, but also included the audit of those released to the First District, Second District and Puerto Princess City.

....... ·U"u...J:.LL'''''",.I,-"'', l...I...l.,J.UU: V J.IL 'UJ_ '\.;J,U'V" JLlt:"11'\.'e'Y'~

'Ortega v, Seratub.ias, et al.

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 D'DJ, Manila

28. During the audit, the Provincial Government of Palawan, under my

administration, complied with all the requirements of eGA with regard to the submission of documents .. AU additional documents requested by eOA were also promptly submitted.

29. Patty Ortega mentioned that in 2010, Dr. Ortega and his group!

repeatedly m .. ade follow ups to the eOA to issue the Special Audit Repo.rt It is,. however, stressed that eOA had only recently conduded its audit and only had its exit conference in Palawan last 9 February 2011, or more than two weeks after I Dr. Ortega's death. The request for a Special Audit report had, therefore, noJ basis

30. I reiterate that there is no truth to any allegation of corruption or l ~ involvjgg__these fun~s. As already explained, I had no control over the i

management or use of the saId funds. -

31. According to Patty Ortega, Dr. Ortega had II access to information, Old , "')

and documents about the widespread corruption in the provincial government of I rvl .. d'+<tl'f, Palawan'T' when he ran and won as Provincial Board Member. Dr. Ortega was 1

Board Member of Palawan from .2001 to 2004. At that time, however, there was j

still no Malampaya Fund to speak of since the release of the proceeds from the j Malampaya Gas Project was only done in 2008.

32. If Dr. Ortega really believed I had done something wrong or had misused the Malampaya Gas Funds, he could have taken me to court. But despite all the claims and allegations he made against me, Dr .. Ortega has not presented any document to prove any wrongdoing I have done. ~iled any-case for graft or corruption against me before ~ Office of the_Ombudsman,

0..-- . . .. - I..,.. 5"'w~~ ..J, V<. ?

__,

Re: Dr, Ortega as causing my loss in the 2010 elections

33.. Patty Ortega also mentioned in her Supplemental Affidavit that Dr.

Ortega's commentaries and criticisms against me regarding the twin issues of mining and corruption in Palawan contributed to my losing bid to be elected Congressman of the Second (2nd) District of Palawan.P There is no truth to this statement.

11' Supplemental Affidavit, par, 4, p. 1,

12 Supplemental Affidavit, par .. 16, p, 3.

'-v .... uu:a-n::ruu,av-u VI \JUV. J'U~11\.~yt:1:i Ortega v. Seratubias, et al, NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOl, Manila

34. By Patty Ortega's own admission, Dr. Ortega has been making

these allegations against me since his election as Board Member in 2001. Since that time, however, I have been re-elected twice - first in 2004 and again in 2007. In 2004, Dr. Ortega himself ran against me. His criticisms against me even increased as the election period approached. However, I still emerged victorious. Th.i§J§~ucta~e __p_IQQ.£. that Qr_:_9_!~ega' s tirades against me did not affect my

per~ll§.J\'V·""" ",.),~,.:1 f't ';ZDlo'7 -

35. I lost in the 2010 elections simply because I ran for a different

position. I had three terms as Governor, but it was the first time I ran for -y{~~ ~~ Congress. The Second District also included Puerto Princesa City, a highly \' -f'd.*:

urbanized city. Puerto Princesa has around 40% of the voting population of the T/11.)

Second Congressional District. The results of the election would show that I had r--r

won every municipality except for two. It is, however, in Puerto Princesa where I f.'~1C GJ' .. ·.J

1 b b !?·ef~\

ost adly against my opponent: I only 0 tained 34.79% of the votes compared to

Sc:w..J.u-l the 57.47% of the eventual winner, Dermis Socrates. In the end, I lost by a mere H"~~ I'-.

2,811 votes - I obtained 91,105 votes compared to Socrates' 93,916 votes. U

36. In addition to this, I had actively campaigned for my good friend

and party mate Abraham Kahlil Mitra who ran for Governor. Baham Mitra was a congressman for the 'past years and was not that well known in Northern Palawan. Having been Governor of Palawan for almost eleven yearst I shared my experience and existing political machinery to assist Mitra. As a result, I somehow neglected my 0\'\'11 campaign. This fact is corroborated by the affidavit of Governor Mitra'> which states:

"3. I personally recall that before the start of the campaign period for the 2010 elections, members of the PMP Coalition conducted a province-wide consultation with our political leaders municipality by municipality, and JTR joined us in the said consultations in ALL municipalities, even those outside of the Second Congressional District where he had filed his certificate of candidacy for Congressman.

"4. During the 201 0 electoral campaign staged by PMP, which necessarily covered the entire province of Palawan, JTR showed his unconditional and outstanding concern and support, not only for hirnselfand his wife but to the entire PMP Coalition and, particularly for me. Such unqualified support of JTR extended as far as campaigning way beyond the territorial boundaries of the Second District where he was supposed to campaign for his candidacy. In fact, because of his concentration on the welfare of the PMP Coalition, JTR neglected to campaign for himself

13

A copy of the affidavit of Governor Abraham Kalil Mitra is attached hereto as Annex "6."

'Ortega v .. ~eratubias, et al, NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DO], Manila

in the City of Puerto Prinoesa City which has forty percent (40%) more or less, of the voting population of the Second Congressional District of Palawan.

"5. As I recall, during the PMP Coalition's May 3 or 4,2010 major rally in Coron, Palawan, which is no longer in the Second Congressional District where JTR was running for a Congressional seat, but was within the First Congressional District, JTR was present the entire rally when conventional wisdom dictated that he should be campaigning hard in his own district, as it was then the homestretch of the campaign period.

1/6. It is also my personal recollection that during our political meetings, JTR would spend fifteen (15) minutes of the twenty (20) minutes allotted to his speech, campaigning for me and defending me from the unjust accusations of my political opponents, only allocating around five (5) minutes talking about himself and his programs for the Second District if he is elected to Congress, as well as refuting the unfounded allegations against him."

37. As can be seen, it is a combination of the above factors which

contributed to my loss in the last elections. I would like to reiterate that the criticisms.and aHegations of Qr Qrtega never affected me or my political career.l_ never considered him a true at when I was Governor. As explained by Governor Mitra in his affidavit,14 Qr. Ortega's radio program was not effectiv,e at all in inQuencing the voters of Palawan" thus:

"8 .. In the case of the late Dr, Ortega, with all due respect, an indicator that his radio program was not effective at all in influencing the voters of. Palawan was the fact that he himself, when he ran for Provincial Board Member for the Second District in 2001, did. not even top the race but only ranked number three or four out of five. In 2004, when he ran for Governor, he was not even the rUlmer-up, Another indicator is that Mr. Pepito Alvarez and his running mate Leoncio Ola, whom Dr. Ortega rabidly supported in 2010, lost against me and Vice-Governor Reyes. Dr. Ortega was a block-timer whose airtime was paid for by Pep ito Alvarez or his company ..

14

Id at par. 8.

~.

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v. Sera tubias, et aL NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOl, Manila

38. In truth I respected Dr. Ortega and considered him as a good

fri~nd. It is thus absurd that I am now being implicated as the mastermind of his murder.

II. Affidavit of Rodolfo Edrad, Jr.

39. In support of her complaint against me, Patty Ortega included as

annexes to her Supplemental Affidavit, the affidavits of three (3) persons: Arturo Regalado, Rodolfo Edrad, Jr. and Armando Noel. In addition, the affidavits of the purported gun man, Marlon Ricamata, his alleged lookout, Dennis Aranas, and another alleged witness, Arwin Arandia, were included in the formal Complaint against me. But it is only Rodlfo Edrad, Jr. alias II Bumar" who has directly implicated me in this crime.

40. His affidavit, however, should not be given any weight by the

Honorable Prosecutors .. First of ail, any confession or statement he may have made as an instigator and conspirator in the murder of Dr. Ortega is binding only on himself and should not prejudice me or any other person. Second, in order for a statement to be worthy of belief, it should be credible in itself and must come from a source that it is credible. In the case of Bumar's statement, neither is true. This is evident from the following:

Re: Principle of Res Inter Alios Acta

41. In his affidavit, Bumar has confessed to having organized the hit on

Dr. Ortega, purportedly under pw orders. His confession is, however, binding only on himself and should not prejudice me or any other person.

42. My lawyers have explained to me that there is a principle in law

called res inter alios acta which provides that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another. Thus, an extrajudicial confession is binding only upon the confess ant and is not admissible against his co-accused. This principle was discussed by the Supreme Court as follows:

"The res inter alios rule ordains that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another. An extrajudicial confession is binding only upon the confessant and. is not admissible against his co-accused. The reason for the rule is that, on a principle of good faith and mutual convenience, a man's own acts are binding upon himself and are evidence against him. So are his conduct and declarations. Yet it would not only be rightly inconvenient, but also manifestly unjust, that a man should be bound by the acts of mere

. -~-

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v . Seratubias, et aI.

NPS Docket o. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOJ, Manila

unauthorized strangers; and if a party ought not to be bound by the acts of strangers, neither ought their acts or conduct be used as evidence against nim/:» (Emphasis supplied.)

43. It was also explained to me that although there is an exception to

the res inter alios acta principle applicable to conspirators, such exception does not apply in this case. In order for such admission to be admissible against a coaccused, Section 30, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court requires that there must be independent evidence aside from the extrajudicial confession to prove conspiracy.tv In this case, apart from the affidavit executed by Bumar, there is no other evidence of my participation in the crime. There being no independent evidence to prove it there can be no probable cause to hold me liable for the murder of Dr. Ortega.

44. Likewise inapplicable is the rule that an extrajudicial confession

may be admissible when it is used as a corroborative evidence of other facts that tend to establish the guilt of his co-conspirators. The implication of this rule is that there must be a finding of other circumstantial evidence which, when taken together with the confession, establishes the guilt or liability of a coconspirator.'? As earlier stated, however, there is no other independent evidence, direct or circumstantial, which the affidavits of the confessed conspirators may corroborate. In fact, it is stressed that, with the exception of Burnar, there is no other evidence showing my involvement in the crime.

45. The fact that Bumar's statement is uncorroborated clearly makes

the same binding only on himself, not on the other respondents, and also not on me. To hold otherwise would be to put an innocent person in jeopardy of prosecution solely on the say-so of another. Surely, this is not the intendment of the law .

Re: Bumar's statement is not credible and comes from a source without credibilitu

46. Even assuming that the affidavit of Bumar may be admitted as

evidence against me, his statements are not worthy of belief. In law, for testimonial evidence to be worthy of belief, it must not only corne from the mouth of a credible witness but must be credible in itself.18 In this case, Bumar's statement should not be given any weight because it is not credible in itself and more importantly, Bumar is not credible, he being a polluted non-witness. Consider:

15 16

Tamargo tis. Aunngan, G.R. 0.177727, January 19, 2010. People vs. Guiitap, G.R. No. 144621, May 9, 2003.

People v. Francisco, G.R. No. 138022,363 SeRA 637, 649 (2001), citing People v. Aquino, 369 Phil. 701,725 [1999].

\.. .

17

- ~.J ._. -- .. _, - ~,- J .........

Ortega v. Seratubias, et al.


46.6 After our lunch, I left Palawan Center with only my driver as my companion. As confirmed by my driver, "[s]alungat sa pinalalaoas ni Bumar, nakatitiyak ako na di namin siyu kasama noong ika 4 ng Hulyo 2010 sa Palaioan Center."23 It is not true that Bumar was with me when I left Palawan Center, moreso that I brought him to a mall in Makati.

46.7 I also vehemently deny Bumar's allegation that I gave him One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,OOO.00) at MarTiot Hotel in December 2010,24 and One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,OOO.OO) at my mother-in-law's house on 8 January 2011.25

46.8 First of all, I am a frequent visitor of Marriot Hotel and well known to its staff. I am also aware that Marriot Hotel, being part of the casino entertainment complex of Resorts World Manila, is closely monitored by several Close Circuit Cameras. It would be absurd for me to discuss the murder of Gerry Ortega and give Bumar One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,OOO.00) in such a place.

46.9. I also deny that I gave Bumar One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,OOO.OO) in the sala of my mother-in-law's home in Dasmarifias Village. When I arrived in Manila from Palawan on 8 January 2011, it was only my driver, Nemesio Cabalsa, Jr., who fetched me at the airport. Bumar was not with me when I went to my mother-in-law's house, and I did not bring him to Ayala Alabang. This is corroborated by my driver, when he stated in his affidavit that:

''7, Hindi rin tatoo and sinasabi ni Bumar sa parehong Salaysay niya na, diumano, noong ika 8 ng Enero 2011 kasama raw siya sa pagsundo ko kay Gov. Reyes sa Terminal 3, na noon ay kagagaling pa lang sa Coren, Palawan; _

"8. Lalu nang hindi totoo na pumunta si Bumar sa bahay ni Atty. Clara Espiritu sa Damarinas Village, Makati City, at diumano'y tumuloy pa kami sa pinapagawang bahay ill Gov. Reyes sa Ayala Alabang( at burnalik uli kami sa Dasmarinas Village ;t doon siya natulog;"

46.10. There is also no truth to Bumar's allegation that I gave him One Hundred Thousand Pesos in the sala of my mother-in-law's house in Dasmarifias Village on 08 January 2011 .. On that day, I arrived from Cor on, Palawan and we had a little despedida party for my daughter, Jackie, who was leaving for Switzerland on 10 Ianuary 2011, to study. My wife and I also cclebrated, in advance, our Twenty Fifth (25th) Wedding

24

Annex "7" hereof.

Affidavit of Rodolfo Edrad, Question 47, p. 7. Id., at Question 72, p. 10 - 11.

(\'

25

- ~.J ._. -- .. _, - ~,- J .........



46.6 After our lunch, I left Palawan Center with only my driver as my companion. As confirmed by my driver, "[s]alungat sa pinalalaoas ni Bumar, nakatitiyak ako na di namin siyu kasama noong ika 4 ng Hulyo 2010 sa Palaioan Center."23 It is not true that Bumar was with me when I left Palawan Center, moreso that I brought him to a mall in Makati.

46.7 I also vehemently deny Bumar's allegation that I gave him One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,OOO.00) at MarTiot Hotel in December 2010,24 and One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,OOO.OO) at my mother-in-law's house on 8 January 2011.25

46.8 First of all, I am a frequent visitor of Marriot Hotel and well known to its staff. I am also aware that Marriot Hotel, being part of the casino entertainment complex of Resorts World Manila, is closely monitored by several Close Circuit Cameras. It would be absurd for me to discuss the murder of Gerry Ortega and give Bumar One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,OOO.00) in such a place.

46.9. I also deny that I gave Bumar One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,OOO.OO) in the sala of my mother-in-law's home in Dasmarifias Village. When I arrived in Manila from Palawan on 8 January 2011, it was only my driver, Nemesio Cabalsa, Jr., who fetched me at the airport. Bumar was not with me when I went to my mother-in-law's house, and I did not bring him to Ayala Alabang. This is corroborated by my driver, when he stated in his affidavit that:

''7, Hindi rin tatoo and sinasabi ni Bumar sa parehong Salaysay niya na, diumano, noong ika 8 ng Enero 2011 kasama raw siya sa pagsundo ko kay Gov. Reyes sa Terminal 3, na noon ay kagagaling pa lang sa Coren, Palawan; _

"8. Lalu nang hindi totoo na pumunta si Bumar sa bahay ni Atty. Clara Espiritu sa Damarinas Village, Makati City, at diumano'y tumuloy pa kami sa pinapagawang bahay ill Gov. Reyes sa Ayala Alabang( at burnalik uli kami sa Dasmarinas Village ;t doon siya natulog;"

46.10. There is also no truth to Bumar's allegation that I gave him One Hundred Thousand Pesos in the sala of my mother-in-law's house in Dasmarifias Village on 08 January 2011 .. On that day, I arrived from Cor on, Palawan and we had a little despedida party for my daughter, Jackie, who was leaving for Switzerland on 10 Ianuary 2011, to study. My wife and I also cclebrated, in advance, our Twenty Fifth (25th) Wedding

24

Annex "7" hereof.

Affidavit of Rodolfo Edrad, Question 47, p. 7. Id., at Question 72, p. 10 - 11.

(\'

25

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v , Seratubias, et al, NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DO], Manila

Anniversary. The day of our anniversary is actually on 12 January, but since I would accompany our daughter to Switzerland, we decided to have a little celebration before we left. There was nQ..mention of any party in Burner's affidavit when he mentioned that I gave him the money. This is precisely because he was not in my mother-in-law's house at that time.

\ 46.11. I recall that the last time I gave Bumar money was when I \ asked my brother to give him Five Thousand Pesos (P5,OOO.OO) to help him pay his debt I remember that I was in Switzerland at that time when I received a text message from Burnar. He was borrowing money from me to payoff a debt. I was initially hesitant to reply since I was out of the country, but according to him "maiilii yung tricfcle nya" if he doesn't pay. I sent him a text message informing him that I was out of the country, but that I'll see what I can do. After sending the text message to Bumar, I sent a text message to my brother, Mario T. Reyes, and asked him if he could give Five Thousand Pesos (P5,OOO.OO) to Bumar who will go to his place to get it. My brother said '10k". After that, I did not think of the matter again.

46.12. This matter was only brought back to my attention after I was implicated by Bumar as the mastermind in the murder of Dr. Ortega. In his affidavit, he made it appear that I gave him Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,OOO.OO) through my brother, Mario Reyes. There is no truth to this allegation. As I explained, Bumar asked my help to pay off his debt, and I asked my brother to give him Five Thousand Pesos (P5,OOO.OO).

46.13. It would appear that Bumar used this incident to implicate me and my brother in the murder of Dr. Ortega. Bumar has not shown any proof that he was given Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,OOO.OO). Evidence of the said money was even conveniently disposed when Bumar claimed that he was chased by armed men as he was about to check out of a hotel in Lucena, and /I nahulog po iyong belt-bag ko na may Iamang pera na humigit kumulang mga P300,OOO.OO pesos sir.26"

Re: The testimony of Bumar does not conform to reason and normal human experience

47. The testimony of Bumar does not inspire belief considering that it does not conform to reason and normal human experience. Consider the following:

47.1. In his affidavit Bumar would have us believe that Governor Carrion told him that "may ipapatrabaho akong dalawang tao at may budget na six hundred thousand pesos (P600,OOO.OO) at inenegoiiate ko pa na ito ay madagdagan pa ng one hundred thousand pesos (PlOO,OOO.OG) para maging



seven hundred thousand pesos (PlOO,OOO.DD) x x X."27 It was at this point that Burnar claimed Governor Carrion tried to call me in order to indorse Bumar to me. This is patently absurd.

47.2. First of all, Bumar served as the close-in security personnel of G~nor Carrion for two (2) vears.28 He is clearly identified with Governor Carrion since I myself personally witnessed Bumar acting as the close-in security of Governor Carrion many times in the past. It would be absurd for 'Governor Carrion to recommend and indorse Bumar as a hitman to another person considering that it would inevitably implicate him in the murder. Bumar would have us believe that Governor Carrion even acted on his behalf in trying to negotiate a higher pay for the job. The absurdity is appalling.

47.3. Bumar claims that I hired him to be my 1/ close in security" starting 4 July 2010. However, it is apparent from his affidavit that he never accompanied me to Palawan from the day I allegedly hired him until I left for Switzerland on 10 January 2011. In fact, he did not even know that I left the country. According to Bumar, he only found out that I had left for Switzerland through my Driver.e?

.____.,

47.4. It is likewise absurd and inconsistent for me to hire Bumar to kill Dr. Ortega, and at the same time, I allowed him to accompany me to several conspicuous places where we can be seen together and in which I am known. In particular, he says I allegedly met him in Palawan Center, and that I brought him inside a mall in Makati, and that he would frequent my mother-in-law's house in Dasmarifias Village, a gated community where guests are screened and registered before they are allowed to enter. The records of the security at Dasmaripas Vmage. ~er, has no entry that Bumar even entered the g9.tes of theViJ]:age from l~01Q to 10 JanUary 2Q11, the day I left with my daughter for Switzerland. Bumar also claimed that I even met him in Resorts World, a place I often visit and where I am well known to the staff. Again, if I really hired Bumar to murder Dr. Ortega, I would not bring him to these conspicuous places where he would be seen with me. It is simply absurd for me to parade Bumar as my companion or close-in security if I hired him specifically to kill Dr. Ortega. It simply makes no sense.

47.5. In his affidavit, Bumar mentioned that after he went to

Palawan Center, we went to a mall in Makati where I allegedly asked about the job mentioned by Gov. Carrion. According to the story of Bumar, it was essentially the first time I was able to speak with Bumar, and yet I already supposedly brought up the "job" I allegedly wanted him to do. This is contrary to human experience. '-1,("~:~(l;;/I\H\'k. I.

__ -~--"------~"--. _ III' Y L~( M ~ 1l t'1

- i ~ , ".".1 il'_ l' ?\,,\ 1

28

Affidavit of Rodolfo Edrad, Question 24, p. 4. Affidavit of Rodolfo Edrad, Question 15, p. 3. Affidavit of RodoIfo Edrad. Question 70. D. 10.

29

~!l L'1C5Cll Y ~ o.J~l Cl'LUUJ,Qbl' t;;'l W.


47.6. Even more questionable is the place where I asked him about it. According to Bumar, we spoke about the "job" in a restaurant inside a mall in Makati while I was waiting for the food and "pasalubong" I bought." According to Bumar, I discussed the murder of a person with the hitman in a restaurant in full view of the public. This is patently absurd.

'-..../.

47.7. The most absurd allegation is my alleged instructions for him to murder Dr. Ortega since he was "sakit na ng UlOfl31 As already explained, there is no reason or motive for meJo have Dr. Ortega killed. As I earlier explained, I was not affected by his comments, allegations and tirades against me. I do not consider him a reason for my losing bid in the 2010 elections. He had been criticizing me since 2001 yet I won three (3) elections since that time. Most of all, at the time the plan to murder Dr. Ortega was allegedly conceived, I was already a private citizen without any elected position in the goverrunent. If the testimony of Bumar is to be believed I was riskin m life and m career to have somethin done for which -1 ad nothin to ai

Re: The statements in Bumar's Affidavit is inconsistent with the other Affidavits

48. It is also stressed that Bumar's narration of the events surrounding the death of Dr. Ortega is inconsistent with the narration of the other respondents in this case. His narration is filled with obvious inclusions and omissions not found in the other respondents' affidavits. These inconsistencies include the following:

48.1. According to Bumar, when he was searching for a person to do the hit, he first spoke with a certain Armando Noel alyas Salvakota, Salvakota agreed to do the hit, but Bumar requested that Salvakota bring another person to help him out. Salvakota then recruited Arwin Arandia, In his affidavit, Bumar referred to Arandia as a person he did not know. This is, however, belied by the testimonies of Salvakota and Arandia who both said that Burnar knew Arandia well since Arandia was the son of Bumar's godmother. The following is a comparison of the statements of Bumar, Salvakota and Arandia on this matter:

Rodolfo Edrad, Jr .. Armando Noel alyas Arwin Arandia
alyas "Bumar" "Salbakota"
On 16 December On 14 December "He spoke with Bumar
2010, Salvakota 2010, he went to around the first week
arrived at Bumar's Bumar's house of December about the
house "na may together with Arwin plan to kill Dr. Ortega. 30 31

Supplemental Affidavit, par. 41, p. 6. Supplemental Affidavit, Question 41, P: 6.

urtega v. :::>erarublas, et a'l.

NPS Docket No. N-17-IN_Q-llA-DDD05 DO}, Manila

kasamang lalake hindi leo po alam ang pangalan pero kilala ko siya sa mukha x x x" (Emphasis and underscoring supplied.)

(Question 51, p. 8)

(he doesn't know the (Question 16, p. 3) full name),

Arandia lived near the However, he knew house of Bumar and that Arwin was "lagi po akong napunia "kinakapatid po siya doon at naka istambay ni 'Tunjul1 Bumar'ai dahil toala akong trabaho malapit lang ang at habang naka istambay kanyang iinitirahan sa aka doon ay dumaiing si bahay ni [un fun Bumar at kinausap niya Bumar sir." ako sir." (Question 21, (Emphasis supplied.) p. 3)

(Question 15, p. 3)

Bumar told him that "kailangan may kusama pa akong tsa pa sir." (Question 17, p. 3)

Arandia then went to the house of Salbakota where "ikinuuenio ko po sa kanya ang lahat ng pinag-usapan namin m

Bumar tungkol sa

planong pagpatay sa

lsang tao x x x" (Question 27, p. 4)

Salbakota responded 1.ISige pre pwede aka doon tamang-tama at magpapasko" (Question 28, p. 4)

Arandia IS related to Burnar, "bale kinakapatid ko po s1ya dahi! tnaanak srya ng nanny ko sa kasal. II (Question 22, p. 3)

48.2. The gates when Bumar allegedly spoke with Armando Noel and Arwin Arandia are ~t. According to Bumar, I told him about the plan to kill Ortega sometime in the middle of December 2010. In Arandia's affidavit, he mentioned that Bumar informed him about the job on Ortega and the price of One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PIOO,OO.OO) in the first week of December. Noel, on the other hand, even stated that

Burnar already talked to him about the murder as early as 17 November t\ .

2010. This inconsistency in the dates betrays the fact that Burnar had l"

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v . Seratubias, et al, NPS Docket No. IV -17 - INQ-llA-00005 DOL Manila

already communicated to Arandia and Noel the plan to kill Gerry Ortega even before I allegedly spoke to him about it.

Rodolfo Edrad, Jr. alyas "Bumar"

Armando Noel alyas II S alb akota"

Arwin Arandia

"November 17, 2010 "Mga unang lingo po sa bahay ni 'Tun [un ng December 2010 mga Bumar' sa Barangay banding hapon na sir."

Sitio Kalawit,

Pagbilao, Quezon (Question No .. 16, p. 3)

sir. /I (Question 20, p,

3/ Emphasis

supplied)

When asked when he first spoke with Bumar about the plan to kill Dr. Ortega, Arandia answered:

"Noong humigit

kumulang kalagttnaan ng buwan ng December 2010 pumunta kami m dating Gouernor Joel Reyes sa Resort World (sic) x x x nag-

usap kami ni

Governor Reyes

tungkol doon sa

papataying tao at

biniguan. niya ako ng

halaganag one

hundred thousand

Pesos (PlOO,OOO.DO) para sa mobilization ng tao at pagkatapos ay dumukot uli szya ng halagang fifty

thousand pesO's

(PSG,DOO.GG) na

pambili ng baril x x x kasama ng tatlong pzcure ni Gerry Ortega x x x at sinabi my a sa akin ni Governor Reyes at ito ang taong papatayin at sinabi niya ang pangalan niya nas si Dr. Cern} Ortega sir."

(Question 47, p. 7, Emphasis supplied)

When asked when he first spoke with Bumar about the plan to kill Dr. Ortega, Noel answered:

"May titirahing tao pero wala siyang binanggit na pangalan at malalaman lang daui namzng pagbalik my a sa unang lingO' ng December 2010 sir"

(Question 21, p.3)

48.3. According to Bumar, Armando oel and Arwin Arandia told him that a person by the name of Nonoy Regalado was helping them. while they were in Palawan. However, in his affidavit, Armando Noel never mentioned anyone helping them in Palawan. Neither did he mention the name Nonoy Regalado. Arwin Arandia, on the other hand,

only referred to a person named "Nonoy" as the one who allegedly gave ~.

hiITl thp hll11pt.c,;: for thp:\R caliber thev brouvht to Palawan. He did not I\,

- ,

Ortega. v. Seratubias, et al.


personally know "Nonoy" but only learned of his name when Bumar mentioned it to him.

Bumar knew what they were doing in Puerto Princesa because "x x x lagi po silang kumukontak sa akin at sinaeabi nila na nugmumatuag sila doon at katulong 1'tila ang isang lalake na aug pal'lgalan . at( si Nonoy Regalado pero hindi po sila magkasama hiwalay daw po sUa sir." (Emphasis and underscoring supplied . .) (Question 59, p. 9)

Arwin Arandia

Rodolfo Edrad, Ir .. alyas "Bumar"

Salvakota called Burnar and informed him that they were already in Puerto Princesa City .. They stayed at the apartment of a soldier, but they did not tell Burnar h.is name. (Question NO'. 58, P .. 9)

He later received a text message from Burnar instructing him to go to Ignacio restaurant where someone will give him the bullets for their .38 caliber. A man later appeared and gave him a brown envelope with six bullets .. (Questions 106 -110, pp.12-13.)

When asked if he knew the person who gave him the bullets, Arandia answered: liAng pagkakaalarn ko all si JNonoy' kasi sinabi po ni Burnar Nonoy_ daw pa aug katagpuin ko sir. IF (Emphasis and underscoring supplied.) (Question 111, p. 13)

48.4. In Bumar's affidavit, he narrated that the day after he was allegedly given Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,OOO.00) by Mario 1. Reyes, he was suddenly chased by six (6) armed men when he was about to check out of their hotel in Lucena City. This is the time when he conveniently dropped his belt bag containing Three Hundred Thousand pesos (P300,OOO.OO). This unusual and .unforg,ettable incident was nat mentioned by both Armando Nael ,or .4.nvin Arandia who were with Burnar when h,e checked out of the hotel. According to both Noel and Arandia, they all left the hotel together and Bumar dropped them off at Padre Burgos, Quezon without incident.

Rodolfo Edrad, [r .. alyas "Bumar"

Armando Noel alyas "Salbakotah"

Arwin Arandia

VVhen asked if they stayed long at the hotel in Lucena, Burnar responded: II Hindi po at kinabukasan Enero 25, 2011 ay naghiwa-hiwalay na po kami at bago katni umalis ay binigyan ko silang dalauia ng P20,000.00 oauia: isa at ako naman ay nag check

When asked if they When asked where he stayed long at the fresh went after checking Air Hotel at Lucena out of the hotel in City, Armando Noel Lucene City, Arandia responded: "Hindi po responded: "lnihaiid po umatis po kami doon mga kami 11.1 Bomar sa Bgy. 11.:00 Or;lock ng JanuanJ Sipa, Padre Burgos, 25, 2011 pero bago Quezon tapas ay naghiwalay ay binigyan sumiJkay naman kami m kami ni fun Jun Bumar Salbakota ng bus ng tig-P20,OOO.00 sa papuniang Brgy. Yawe,

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v, Seratubias, et al.


out na rin pero habang akin at P20,OOO.OO kay Padre Burgos. x x x" papalabas aka ng gate Anoin pagkatapos ay (Question 163, p. 19) hotel ay hinabol po ako magkasabay kaming

ng anim na tao na may lumabas ng hotel sakay

dalang mga baril at naka ng van at inihatid po

sibilyan po sila pero hindi my a ako sa Padre

po nila ako naabutan sa Burgos, Quezon kasama

aking pagtakbo ay ko si Arwin do on sir. /I

nahuiog po lyong belt- (Question 139, p. 15)

bag ko na may lamang

pera na humigit

kumulang mga

P300,OOO.OO pesos sir. 1/ (Question 109, p, 16)

48.5. According to Burner's affidavit, when he heard that the gtlluuan he hired to kill Dr. Ortega was captured, he immediately fetched Armando Noel and Arwin Arandia and the three of them went to the Fresh Air Hotel in Lucena City, When asked if Bumar brought his family along, he answered in the negative and stated that it was only him, Noel and Arandia. This is in contrast with the testimonies of Noel and Arandia who both said that Bumar brought his family along when they went to Lucena City. This fact is Significant because in his affidavit Bumar even mentioned that he received a text message saying, "Kapag susuko ako ay kukunin nila ang pamilya ko. "32 However, it appears that Bumar already had his family with him when he made his escape to Lucena.

-"--'

When he was asked if he brought his family along, he answered:

Rodolfo Edrad, Jr. alyas "Bumar"

When asked what he did after he received a text message saying that Marlon Ricamata was captured, Bumar responded: "Agad po akong nag-impake ng mga damii ko at pinasundo ko si Armando Noel alyas 'Salvakota sa kanyang bahay at kami ay umalis para magtago sir," (Question 97, p" 14)

Armando Noel alyas II Sal bakotah"

Armando Noel was asked to enumerate the people with him inside the van when they went to Mayor Marje Reyes' home in Alabang. He answered there were six (6) people induding the driver: II Ako, si Arwin, fun Jun Bumar, at kanyang mag-ina at ang driver sir. /I (Question 129, p. 14)

Arwin Arandia

Arandia narrated that when they went to Alabang, Bumar's wife also went inside the house to urinate. "»: x x. Bago po slya nakapasok ng Van ay nagpasama po ang asauia ru Bomar para umihi kaya muli po slyang pumasok sa bahay kasama ang kanyang

asawa para umihi.

Pagkatapos po pong

maka-ihi ng asawa ni Bumar ay umalis na po kami pabalik ng Lucena Cihj. /I (Question 158, p.

A ffirlavi+ nf Rndnlfn Rdrad , nar. 11:i. n, 1 h.

32

'''_UlJlHter'·fimaaVlt 01 L:.Ov, joei l<eyes Ortega v, Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No, IV-17-INQ-l1A-00005 DOJ, Manila

"Hindi po si Saioakot« at 18)
tsa pang kasama my a
sir." (Question 98, p.,
14) 48.6. The above inconsistencies are too glaring and so beyond reconciliation that the statement of Bumar is rendered unbelievable.

49., My lawyer has informed me that, in the case of People vs. Mirantes}3 the Supreme Court categorically ruled that inconsistencies and material discrepancies in the testimony of a witness engender serious doubts as to its reliability and veracity. The case provides:

"Nonetheless/ we have heretofore held that inconsistencies and material discrepancies in the testimony of a witness engender serious doubts as to its reUabilityand veracity. Irreconcilable and unexplained contradictions in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses cast doubt on the guilt of appellant, and we may add, such contradictorq statement will not sustain a judgment of conuiction." (Emphasis supplied.)

Re: Bumar has 110 credibility, being a polluted non-witness.

50'. Aside from not being credible in itself, the statement which links me to this crime comes from a s?urce that equally lacks credibility. By his own admission, Bumar was a co-conspirator and a wiHing participant in the murder of Dr. Ortega. The Supreme Court has already held that the testimony of a coconspirator proceeds from a polfuted source .. It must he received with caution because, as is usual with human nature, a culprit, confessmg a crime, is likely to' put the blame as far as possible Q1n others rather than himself. 34

51. It was also claimed that Bumar was an ex-marine officer who was discharged from service following the failed Oakwood Mutiny in 20'03 .. However, the Marines, through Captain Gwyn T. Amargo of the Public Affairs Office of the Philippine Marine Corps/ has denied that Bumar was a Marine and that there is no Marine named as such, whether in the past or at present.P

35

209 SCRA 179, 187 (1992).

People VS, Alvarez [C.R No. 121769. November 22, ZOOO] citing ~eople us. Cuya, [r. 141 SCRA 351, 354 (1986) citing People vs. Sarmiento, 69 Phil 740,742 (1940),

A copy of Capt. Amargo's letter to the editor of the Philippine Star as sourced from http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?artideld=661625&pu blicationSubCa tegory Id =13 5 is attached hereto as Annex "9."

33 34


NPS Docket No. IV-17-lNQ-llA00005 DO}, Manila

52,. My lawyers have informed me that the Supreme Court has described a credible witness as one who can be trusted to tell the truth, usually based on past . .;:.~\{experiences with him. His word has, to one who knows him, its weight in gold.36

,,;,~v·:.:~}~t '{-W. it, h. Bum . ar'.s .un~thf.UI statement ~e. ?ar. ~ing.his .. b. e.ing an ex-rna.r. 'ine officer, his '\ l' testimony regardmg my alleged participation In the murder of Dr. Ortega should be disbelieved,

{_

roc'" e 53. In addition, it was recently brought to my attention that Bumar has

- 6"-1 'l outstanding warrants of arrest for the crime of murder and estafa. Far from being '~ . a credible witness, Bumar is a fugitive from justice unworthy of belief.

54. I would also like to stress that Bumar is under detention for his participation in the killing of Dr. Ortega. He made his statements after his arrest, and, in his affidavit, essentially admitted his voluntary participation in the \"TJ murder of Dr. Ortega. Testimonies of persons in such situations should not be \\/\",.:0 given much weight and belief. In the case of People vs. Bayubay,37 my lawyers (("~:4.l'~~~c have informed me that the Supreme Court held that the testimony of a convict is <,~\ -J'u: r unworthy of belief since /I a convict like him had practically nothing to lose but plentu

- '-.....--,(-~"c,\ to gain by allowing himself to be an instrument of other criminals in order that the latter

&:(J'J\ l may save themselves, II

.:-.,l" .",,,

)'~

'l' 55. In this case, being under detention and having admitted his voluntary

participation in the murder of Dr. Ortega, Bumar's testimony should likewise not be accorded much weight. Having nothing to lose and everything to gain, he is at the mercy of unscrupulous individuals and used as an instrument to implicate others in this crime.

III.

CertainJnconsist,enci.es in the. other affidavits of the other respondents and witnesses, as well as peculiarities in the circumstances before, during and after the _de.ath of Dr. Ortega, would show that. there is a deHberate attempt to ~mplkate me as the mastermi.nd i.n this case.

Re: Inconsistencies in the statement of other witnesses

56. In addition to the statements of Bumar, the testimony of the other respondents undeniably show the orchestrated effort to implicate me in this case, as can be seen from the following:

56.1. According to the statements of Bumar, Armando Noel and Arwin Arandia, they already had a .45 caliber pistoI and a converted .357 when they made their way to Palawan. These weapons were supplied by Bumar .. If that were true, then there was no need to buy a firearm. Yet, in spite of having two firearms available, Bumar still asked Regalado to purchase another gun at a cost of Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,OOO.OO). As it turned out, the weapon that he purchased was a licensed firearm which just happened to be owned by Atty. Romeo Seratubia&, former Provincial

36

Lelano vs. People a/the Philippines, G.R. No. 176389, December 14, 2010 (Emphasi!s ours).

.- ...... -....... T , ... .."..-...-..-1'.-. • 1 _ .;n 1'1111'-1

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Keyes Ortega v. Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-OOOOS DOJ, Manila

C \'" u~· ~ ",...

\l t . 6· . .,!:.

. ~<.._, L x- .~~,..

r. \. . ,,). x

~)V -e

. <..f Administrator of the Province of Palawan when I was Governor. The

~"t ~ i"'---. urmecessary purchase ofa licensed gun was obviously done to link me to \ Atty. Seratubias. I would, however, like to clarify that Atty. Seratubias

\ was already tho e Provincial Administrator duro ing the t.ime of former Governor Salvador Socrates. When I assumed the position of Governor upon the disappearance of Governor Socrates in 2000, Atty. Seratubias was retained in his position as Provincial Administrator.

56.2. Another obvious attempt to implicate me is found in the affidavit of Dennis Aranas. Aranas was the supposed lookout of Marlon Recamata when he shot and killed Dr. Ortega. He was supposedly arrested in Coron, Palawan on 28 January 2011 or just four (4) days after the killing. The next day, 29 January 2011, he was brought to the Puerto Princes a Police Station. Yet his Sinumpaang Salaysay was only obtained on 22 February 2011, or almost three (3) weeks after his supposed surrender. By comparison, another respondent in this case, Armando Noel, who surrendered to authorities on 10 February 2011, was brought to NBI Manila on 12 February 2011 and on the same day issued his statement on his involvement in the crime.

56.3. When the statement of Aranas is compared to that of Marlon Ricamata, several glaring inconsistencies are also apparent, as can be seen from the following:

• According to Ricamata, they rested on 19 January 2011, the day they arrived in PaIawan, as well as the following day, 20 January 2011. In the statement of Aranas, both he and Recamata had a busy day going around the city on 20 January 2011.

Marlon Ricamata

Dennis Aranas

In his Affidavit, Recamata stated that after they arrived on 19 January 2011, II (n)agpahinga lang po kami magdamag at maghapon ng ika-20 ng Enero 2011"

According to Aranas, on 20 January 2011, /I mga 7 AM ay isinama aka ni Salbakuia sa Pet Shop at dinala din niya ako sa terminal ng Van sa San Jose papuniang El Nido. x x x. Bumalik ulit kami sa Pet Shop dahil ipapakita daw niya sa akin si Doctor Gerry Ortega para Makita ko siya ng personal mga lOAM ito nuong Januanj 20, 2011, Mga isang oras lamang kaming nag intay dun at hindi dumating si Doctor Gerry Ortega kaya bumaiik na si Salbakuta sa Capitol Inn. Sinabihan din niya ako na sunog na datu siya sa Lugar kayo ako na raw naman ang magturo kay Tagar ng mga itinuro niya sa akin. Mga 12 ng tanghali ng Januanj 20, 2011 ay pinapunia ko naman si Tagar (Recamata) sa area ng pet shop at pati yung sa Terminal sa San Jose. Matapos kong ipa alum kay Tagar ang mga itinuro sa akin ni Salbakuta all umuuii na kami sa


NPS Docket No. IV-17-TNQ-llA-00005 DOL Manila

I Capitol Inn. II

• According to Ricamata, he was given specific instructions by Aranas to throw the gun after he has shot Dr. Ortega. Aranas did not mention this in his affidavit. Ricamata's affidavit provides:

II X X x bandang ika-6:30 ay nagising kami at kami ay naggayak at aka ang unang umalis sa inn at bandang ika-7:.30 ng umaga ding iyon ay dumating aka sa area n gaming target at banding 8:30 ay nag text sa akin si Dennis na 'Tal bantayan rna ng mabuti kung positive na diyan na ang sasakyan birahin rna na, basta pagputok sabay takbo at ihagis rna ang gami t "'

• According to Ricarnata's affidavit, Aranas was calling and sending him text messages while they were waiting for Dr. Ortega in the morning of 24. January 2011. Aranas, on the other hand, stated that he was merely forwarding to Ricamata the text messages of a certain "Val." Moreover, both Ricamata and Aranas gave a detailed narration of the text messages they sent and received from each other. They both gave differing accounts. This is seen from the following:

Marlon Ricamata

Dennis Aranas

Ricamata narrated the events of 24 According to Aranas, he was merely January 2011, the day of the murder as receiving text messages from a certain follows: "x x x ban dang ika-630 ay "Valli and that he was merely nagising kami at kami ay naggayak at ako forwarding these messages to ang unang umalis sa inn at banding ika- Ricamata. Thus: "Kinabukasan January 7:30 ng umaga ding iyon ay dumaiing ako 24, 2011 mga 8:30AM ay nakuha ko ang sa area ng aming target at bandang 8:30 ay pem sa MLluillier San Pedro Phpl,500.00 nag text sa akin si Dennis na 'Tal ay ibinigay ko kay Tagar at Phpl,500.00 sa bantayan mo ng mabuti kung positive na akin. Tapos ay pumunta ko sa kainan diyan na ang sasakyan birahin mo na, malapii sa Pet Shop para kumain at habang basta pagputok sabay takbo at ihagis rna kumakain ako ay nag text sa akin si Val na ang gamit" sinagot ko si Dennis na 'Tal 'Pare malapit ng dumaiing ang target, may sasakyan ngunit hindi ang target ang pagnakiia nyo tirahin mo na wag kcmg target ang may-art at nag reply si Dennis matakoi at aka ang bahala sa pulis. "' na 'OK at pag nag positive birahin rno na'. (Question 26, p. 8)

Na nagtitiiexi lang kami ni Dennis habang

aka ay naghihintay kung saan nakapuioesto "Kaagad ko naming pinorward ang text ni aka sa puno ng talisay sa kabilang gilid ng Val kay Tagar. Tapos ay sinuoukan kong kalsada sa iapat ng pet Station. Muling kontakin ang landline ni Doctor Gerry nagtext sa akin S1 Dennis bandang ika 9:30 Ortega ng dalauiang beses para ipaalam na na "Tol darating na iyon baka makalingat may papatay sa kanya pero hindi ko ka' at makalipas ang samopung minute ay makontak ang kanyang landline." tumauiag sa akin si Dennis at sinabihan (Question 27, p. 8)

aka na 'Ayan na toll na sinago! ko na

Counter-Affidavit of Gov .. Joel Reyes Ortega v. Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No. N-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOT, Manila

'walang sasakyan dito na ABS CBN

tinanong ako ni Dennis kung nasaan aka at "Tumakas aka sakay ng triCljcle papuniang sinabihan. ko diio ako sa puno ng talisay at San Jose at habang ako ay papunta dun ay sinabihan ako ni Dennis pumunia ka sa tumanggap aka ng text message kay Val na ukay-ukay dahil naroroon ang target, 'nandqan na paraiing na, iirahin mo na.' dikiian mo na, lapitan mo na at sigurado at pinonoard ko narnan it okay Tagar. na iyan. Pumunta ako sa tindahan ng Nakatanggap uli ako ng iauiag mula kay ukay-ukay na mayroon akong saklob ulo na Val at sinobi na 'Pare tirahin mo nat pag damit at mukha ko lang ang nakalabas at hindi mo tinira ay ako ang Mira sayo.'11 nakiia ko na ang taong target naming ay (Question 28, p. 9)

naglalakad pa ako paikot sa sasokuar: ng

ABS eBN dahil pinag iisipan ko kung sa

100b mismo ng tindahan babarilin at

tinawagan aka ni Dennis at sinabihan na

'PARE BAKlT 01 MO PA BINIBlRA.

BlRAHIN MO N' At sinagot ko ng okey x

x x." (Question 21, pp. 4 -5)

• H should be noted that Ricamata never mentioned "Val" in his affidavit. Yet, Aranas points to "Valli as the source of the text message he was sending to Ricamata. Aranas never mentioned the full name of this certain "Val." However, one Percival Lecias, who is working as a photographer of my wife, Vice-Governor Clara Reyes, is also included as a respondent in this case. Aranas, or some other people, are making it appear that this certain "Val" is Percival Lecias in order to link me to this crime.

• When asked if Aranas knew this certain "Val," he answered in the negative. He even admitted that he does not know how "Val" obtained his 'number. However, Aranas proceeded to tell an incredible and unbelievable story on how he managed to obtain Val's number. According to Aranas:

"x X x. Mga 4PM ay naligo si Salbakuta at pinasok ko ang kuwarto niya at nakita ko ang celphone niya at tiningnan ko ang call register niya at nakita ko si 'Val' at 'Nonoy' na lagi niyang kausap. Nakita ko rin ang mga sent items niya na nagtatanong siya kay Val gaya ng 'pare kumusta yung target natin'. Binasa ko rin ang inbox at nakita ko ang text ni Val na 'Bukas I tetext ko na lang sayo mag ingat ka sa dalawang kasama rno baka tumakbo yan' .. Nakita ko rin ang text ni Nonoy na 'Pare baka magagawan mo ng paraan na maipabura iyong serial number ng baril' Natandaan ko Tin ang

Counter-Affidavit of Gov, Joel Reyes Ortega v . Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No, IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOT, Manila

numbers nila Val at Nonoy kaya nilagay ko iyon sa phone book ko."38

• Aranas' narration is simply absurd and contrary to normal human nature, Aranas made it appear that Noel was frequently speaking with these two people that it piqued his curiosity. It should, however, be noted that in his affidavit, Armando Noel did not mention any "Valli or "Nonoy" he was speaking with .. Based on Noel's Affidavit, he was only speaking with Bumar about the murder and no other. This is merely an obvious attempt to link people associated with me to this crime in order to support their allegation that I was the mastermind in the killing of Dr. Ortega.

• In his affidavit, Dennis Aranas also mentioned that he was informed by Salbakuta (Armando Noel) that I was the one who had ordered the hit on Dr, Ortega. He stated that:

"x X x. Habang nag inuman na kami ay tinanong ko S1 Salbakuta kung sino ang gobernador na nagpapatrabaho. Hindi niya muna ito sinabi sa akin sa simula ngunit kalaunan ng inuman naming ay sinabi din niya na si 'Governor Joel Reyes ang nagpapatrabaho pero wag mong sabihin kay kuya na sinabi ko ito sa iyo,1I39

• It should however be noted that in his affidavit, Noel did not once mention my name or my involvement in the murder of Dr. Ortega. In fact, according to Noel, Bumar merely mentioned that the only reason for the hit on Dr, Ortega was because he raped the daughter of Bumar's friend, This is evident from the following:

"Binanggit ko po sa kanya na si Gerry Ortega ang titirahin at tinanong ako niya kung ana ang atraso ng taong iyon at sabi ko po ay ni-rape po niya ang anak ng kaibig,an ni fun Jun Bumar at ito din pO' ang sabi ni fun Jun Bumar sa akin at saaming pag-uusap x x x" (Emphasis ours)

56..4. There were also glaring inconsistencies in the names by which the other witnesses were called, In his affidavit, Noel and Bumar refer to Marlon Ricamata as alyas uPusa,"40 It should be noted, however,

3.8 39

Affidavit of Arwin ranas, Question 24, p. 7. Affidavit of Arwin Aranas, Question 19, P: 5,

'" r·ro_j' _ _j' "-"'_~~ __ r.__! __ 0" _ 1r)_ A£'L:..--l~irT~L...-.! A .... __ .............. ....t...._1\T ............. 1 .- .. ''h~''''''nh ...... __ 71 _.O


PS Docket No. N-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOl, Ianila

that Recamata only admitted that his alias is "Tagar."41 Dennis Aranas, Recamata's alleged companion when he went to Palawan, actually calls him "Tagar" and never "Pusa.4211

56.5. On the other hand, only Recamata refers to Armando Noel Jr. as "Jun Loria."43 Armando Noel, [r., himself, however, only admitted that his alias was "Salbakuta." Bumar. and Arandia likewise refer to Armando Noel as "Salbakuta" but never as IIJun Loria,"

57. The attempt to manipulate and coerce witnesses in order to implicate me in this crime is also apparent in the situation of Arturo Regalado and Percival Lecias.

58 .. Arturo "Nonoy" Regalado is being implicated in this case because of his participation in purchasing from Atty. Seratubias the weapon that was allegedly used in the murder of Dr. Ortega.

59. On 7 February 2011, he executed his "Ganting Sinurnpaang Salaysay" which he made in response to the subpoena he received on 3 February 2011 .. On 9 February 2011, however, he was made to sign a "Karagdagang Sinumpaang Salaysay ng Paglilinaw." In the said Sinumpaang Salaysay, it was made to appear that he gave his statement freely before Atty. Ross Bautista of the .BI and Atty. Christian Libiran, his purported legal counsel.

60. In his "Karagdagang Sinumpaang Salaysay ng Paglilinaw," Regalado stated that he forgot to mention in his initial "Ganting Sinumpaang Salaysay" that sometime in December 2010, he was asked by Bumar to purchase six (6) bullets for a .38 caliber. He subsequently delivered these bullets to a person in Ignacio Restaurant. In making these statements, Regalado essentially corroborated the statements of Arwin Arandia who stated in his affidavit that that it was a person named "Nonoy" who he met at Ignacio Restaurant and gave him the bullets for their .38 Caliber.

61. In addition, Regalado also mentioned that it was his opinion that the "Boss" mentioned by Burnar as the person who ordered the hit on Dr. Ortega was me.

"T : Mabalik tayo doon sa sagot mo sa tanong ko bilang 18. Ang sabi rna walang binanggit sa iyo si "Bumar" kung sino ang tinutokoy niyang 'Boss'. Sa iyong pagkakaalam, smo ang tinutukoy niyang 'Boss'?

"S : Si dating Governor Joel T. Reyes sir.

41 42

Affidavit of Rodolfo Edrad, Question 10, p. 3. Affidavit of Dennis Aranas, Question 16, p. 4.

A ft1...:1~",[T~f- ro'~ ~..fo:., ... l',.,n nQ""Q,i"T'I!:lf-~ nl1iPli::,f-if""'''' ')1 1'"'1 Ll.

43


NPS Docket No. rv-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOl, Manila

"T

:Bakit mo naman nasabi as sa pagkakaalam ay si dating Governor Reyes ang 'Boss' na tinutukoy?

iyong Joel T.

"S : Dahil pareho kaming naging security ill dating Governor Joel T. Reyes sir."44

62. On 28 February 201t however, Regalado executed his third affidavit he called his "Dagdag na Malayang Sinumpaang Salaysay." In this third affidavit, he stated that he was forced to sign a letter replacing his legal counsel, Atty. Aban, and that he was subsequently coerced into signing the "Karagdagang Sinumpaang Salaysay ng Paglilinaw." In his "Dagdag" na Malayang Sinumpaang Salaysay, he disowned the statements mentioned in his second affidavit, stating that:

"13. Na takot na takot na ang aking asawa dahil kung sino-sino nalang ang dumarating sa akin sa NBI kahit hindi ko kakilala at ako ay kanilang ipinakikiusap at ako ay nagugulat nalang pag may biglang pumapasok sa aking pinto.

"14. Na dahil na rin sa pakiusap ng aking asawa sa sobra niyang takot na baka kung ana ang gawin sa akin aka ay napapirma nila kinabukasan, Pebrero 10, 2011 ng isang sulat na tinatanggal ko na si Atty. Aban bilang aking abugado at akin ng ipinapalit si Atty. Libiran.

"15. Na matapos kung pirmahan ang nasabing sulat ng pagpalit ng abogado ay ako ay muling pinapirma nila sa isang 'Karagdagang Sinumpaang Salaysay' bandang alas-sais ng hap on, x x x. Kaya hindi totoo na ako ay kusang loob na pumunta sa tanggapan ng NBI Puerto Princesa para magbigay ng kusang loob na salaysay bagamat ako ay at ang aking asawa ay 'pressured' na at takot kaya kahit ano ang ipagawa sa amin habang kami ay nasa kustodiya ng NBI ay amin ng ginagawa. Maliban ditto (sic) ang aking asawa at anak ay nagtatrabaho.

1116. Wala ring katotohanan ang aking sa got sa pahina ika-apat, tanong ika-Zf na ang tinutukoy na 'Boss' ni Bumar ay si dating Gov. Joel T. Reyes. Vnang-una wala kaming nagging (sic) ganong paguusap ni Bumar at ang katotohanan ay ang nakalaad

44

"Karagdagang Sinurnpaang Salaysay ng Paglilinaw" of Arturo Regalado dated 9

r._L "0""


NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOt Manila

sa nauna ko ng Salaysay na may petsang ika-7 ng Pebrero, 2011."45

63. Another person who was pressured and cajoled into implicating others in the murder of Dr. Ortega is Percival Lecias. Lecias was employed as a photographer for my wife, Vice Governor Clara Reyes. He is being linked in this case because he signed a receipt showing that he paid Twenty Thousand Pesos for the gun of Atty. Romeo Seratubias, which allegedly was the same weapon used to murder Dr. Ortega. In his affidavit.w he claimed that he was cajoled by agents of the National Bureau of Investigation into implicating Arturo "Nonoy" Regalado in this crime. His affidavit provides:

{/11. Noong ikatlong araw ko na sa NBI, ika 27 ng Enero 2011, bandang alas diyes (10:00) ng umaga, at hindi 26 ng Enero tulad ng nakasulat sa aking salaysay, kinuha ni S.I. Cedric Caabay ang aking Salaysay. Ngunit sa pagtatanong niya ay nagmumungkahi siya kung ano ang isasagot ko. Pinasusulat aka sa papel ayon na rin kung ana ang sasabihin sa akin.

"12. Dahil na rin sa galit ko kay Nonoy at dahil sa sinabini Cedric Caabay na alam niya kung ana ang makakabuti sa akin, ay sumang-ayon ako na isulat ang mga sumusunod sa nasabing Salaysay:

"'10.. T. Ano ang sumunod na nangyari?

IllS. Noong January 19, 2011 .... may tumawag sa celphone ill onoy, ayon sa narinig k okay Nonoy, sinabi niya sa kausap niya sa cellphone "KABA Y AN,

DUMATING NA BA MGA

MANDIRIGMA? SAAN SILA?

NAKADEPLOY NA BA? BUNDAL INN? At pagkatapos ay pinatay nya na ang Cellphone niya. Tinanong ko si Nonoy kung sino ang kausap niya, ang sabi niya si Bomar daw ...

11111. T: Ano ang sumunod na nangyari?

illS:. Noong January 22, 2011, hurnigitkumulang sa alas doce y medya ng hapon (12:30pm), muling pumunta si

45

A copy of the "Dagdag na Malayang Sinumpaang Salaysay" of Arturo Regalado dated 28 February 2011 is attached hereto as Annex "10"

A copy of which is attached hereto as Annex "ID-A." ~

46

l....oUmer-AIIlaaVIt or I..;iov. joei xeyes Ortega v. Seratubias, et al.

PS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DO], Manila

Nonoy sa bahay naming, tinanong niya ako kung magsasabong aka sa Brgy. San Jose nang may biglang tumawag sa kaniya ngunit sinabihan niya ito ng 'KABAYAN, HUWAG KA MUNA ,G MAGTAWAG SA AKIN MAY MGA HAPON', tinanong ko si Nonoy kung anong ibig sabihin ng 'MA Y MGA HAPON,' and sabi niya "MGA PULIS YON PAY," hindi na ako nags alita, pumunta na kami sa San Jose at nagsabong na kami.

1"12. T: Ana ang sumunod na nangyari?

illS: Noong January 24, 2011, humigit kumulang sa alas onse y media ng umaga, muling pumunta sa bahay namin si Nonoy at ibinalita niya sa amin na patay na si DR. GERRY ORTEGA. Nabigla po kami sa binalitaniya sa amino Tinanong kpo siya kung ano angf nagyari kay DR. ORTEGA. Ang sabi ni Nonoy ay boinaril daw si DR. ORTEGA sa San Pedro. Habang nagkukwento siya, ay may tumawag sa cell phone niya. Sinabihan ni Nonoy ang kausap niya sa cell phone na "KABA YAN, BURAHIN MO NA NAG NUMBER KO SA PHONE BOOK MO AT MAGT AGO KA NA." Nung narining ko ang sinabi niyang iyon ay minura ko siya, ANg sabi niya sa akin JlW ALA lYON P AREJI at mabilis na siyang lumabas ng bakuran namin.'

"13. Ang mga nabanggii na bahagi ng aking unang salaysay ay hindi kusang naggaling sa akin ngunit ibinigay lamang ni S.!. Cedric Caabay. Hindi totoo na nanning ko mismo ang nasabing mga pananalita mula kay Nonoy. Hindi ko ugali na makinig at usisain ang usapan ng ibang tao sa telepono dahil alam kong hindi iuon tama:" (Emphasis supplied)

64. The inconsistencies and circumstances surrounding these affidavits not only render them unworthy of belief, but also lends credence to the fact that I am falsely being implicated as the mastermind of the murder of Dr. Ortega.

plc{ 1I .

fr (pi, mClft;:

r.J'fti v\Cu ,1(\

',C'1 dttA ib J ",Z'\(P Ovi +,)-{

C ~i, V

v-, ~

<::>

-~ -- .. .,----.-J--

Ortega v.Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-OOOOS DO], Manila

Re: Peculiar Circumstances Before, During and After the Crime

65. In addition to the incredible statements of Bumar and other Respondents, the peculiar circumstances before, during and after the commission of the crime, would show that I am being set-up as the mastermind of the murder of Dr. Ortega. Consider:

65.1. Dr. Ortega was shot inside an ukay ukay store along the National Highway at around 10:00 A.M. The National Highway was busy at that time considering it was Monday morning. A number of different side streets and dirt roads lined the National Highway. In fact, a small

(Side street was located just a few meters from where Dr. Ortega was

m, urdered. In, stead of prOCCCdj~g, to these si,ctestreets" ai, ter, he .had, shot Dr, . Ortega, the gunman, Marlon Ricamata, nonchalantly made hIS way along

the National Highway, ran across the street to where a grocery store, Cost Plus, is located. He then threw the murder weapon away at a trash can in

plain view of all bystanders in the streets, He then continued to make his

way along the main highway where CeTV cameras are located. '

( 65.2 .. At almost the exact moment Dr .. Ortega was shot, a fire truck

fro~fire station passed by. There was no report of any fire that claY, nor was there any indication that the fire truck was reporting to an alarm, The driver of the fire truck used his siren and loud speaker to draw attention to Ricamata as he made his way along the national highway. At

, some point, he turned left at Ponce de Leon St., a side street where he

,;>_ ,I (j\'iP'\[ could have made his escape from the fire truck which was tailing him.'

\ J '\\J' / After making his way along Ponce de Leon St. for a few meters, he

A"t"" () ..... i .. inexplicably turned around and went back to the National Highway. He

\')r.\~\'-- continued to nonchalantly make his way along the National Highway towards the SJD Center where coincidentally two (2) police officers were)~(ttt standing beside an ATM Machine. ' yZl!U n

65.3 .. It should be noted, however, that these two police officers were not from Puerto Princesa, but from a town called San Vicente, which is around four hours away from Puerto Princesa. San Vicente is also the home town of Jose "Pepito" Alvarez, the candidate whom Abraham Mitra defeated in the elections of 2010 .. San Vicente is also the town wherein Atty. Seratubias ran for Mayor in the 2010 elections, and lost to Pepito Alvarez's daughter Carmela Alvarez.

65.4. ~~ w~~lso i~~ e~~whaLponce officers from San Vicente, dressed irtJiJ.llGOA at:tjL~:w~re doing near the crime scene. According to the affidavit of PSI Emmeline S. Herrera and POl Glenn Z. Abonillo, they were at the BPI Bank ATM Booth at the SJD Complex at around 10:40 AM. in order to withdraw money. However, employees from stores within SJD Complex attested to the fact that these police

Lounter-Atlldavlt at Gov. joel Reyes Ortega v. Seratublas.et al.


officers, and their patrpl car, were alreacjy in thearea as early as 8:30 of that morning. ~/ \;\,he"r(~ ""l1\e ~tl1olt/r'l\!nf.t lC'n+o1l€\\1._!

65.5. Another intriguing coincidence was the presence at the crime scene, just a few minutes after Dr. Ortega was shot, of former San Vicente Mayor Antonio Gonzalez, first cousin of Alvarez, and incidentally the same mayor whom I suspended for illegal quarrying in 2009, and who was

the same person who filed poll disqualification cases against Gov .. Baham t5h~rs~' -y..Q ~n:'~\1 Mitra, my wife Clara, and me, on 03 December 2009. Gonzalez later . ,\1!'{ tt~\(qlJo,_q:'::<thlW"( assisted in bringing the body of Dr, Ortega to the Medico-Legal for

yo " ~ Ith.l F 'I I autopsy.. Like .. the presence of the police officers from San Vicente, his

h vO presence at the crime scene just a few minutes after the crime is

unexpl~~ned. . '-._ _.-'_ --._. -- ...

.1\](')') ((TV Of "f-

i'\_JC1. .B,(t\Oll-( '-n wI .~\f~ j\[ {. ~.( ~

Re: Exiraordinaru interest afmy political rivals in this case

66 .. It is also worth noting that my known political adversaries showed extraordinary interest in this case even before I was even implicated in this case,

J ~ ;\.1 : (h -~fn6J1 ~.p/f 66.1. ,~irst .. of all, Puerto. Princesa .City Ma~or Ed~ard Hagedorn

flit "'\\.l'11 ( Hagedorn) quickly ded~ed ill the media that he IS ?Hermg a reward for

(,V 0 the capture of the conspirators and the mastermmd of the murder, Hagedorn initially put up P500/000.00 as reward .. Palawan businessman Jose "Pepita" Alvarez also contributed a similar amount. The reward was subsequently raised to P2/000/000.00.47

66.2. Mayor Hagedorn is a known any of Jose "Pepito" Alvarez, whom, with my assistance, Abraham Mirra beat in the 2010 gubernatorial elections. Mayor Hagedorn is also my known political rival whom I defeated in the elections for Governor in 2001.

) (\~ie ~, fl~o(Yo..fo(t 0\ L '''n-(

J .: iff ~" (h y

66.3.. The circumstances surrounding Bumar's surrender to authorities is also worth noting. According to his affidavit, Bumar is from Pagbilao, Quezon. He stated that his residence was at Barangay Pinagbayanan, Sitio Kalawit, Pagbilao, Quezon. After the murder of Dr. Ortega, he admitted that he went to Lopez, Quezon to hide until he surrendered on 5 February 2011. It is therefore dear that Burnar is not from Palawan. Yet, when Burnar surrendered to authorities, he surrendered to Mayor Edward Hagedorn of Puerto Princesa. T~re was no explanation why: Bumar chose to surrender to Hagedorn. Bumar was in Quezon at thetime of his surrender, a place far removed from the jurisdiction or influence

of Hagedorn. It was thus peculiar why Hagedorn was needed to be involved in Bumar's surrender.

66.4. Curiously, at the time of Bumar's surrender and even before Bumar made. any statement about the killing, Mayor Hagedorn was

47 www.mb.com.ph February 4, 2011, "Reward for capture of Ortega slay suspects raised to P?M"


NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 001, Manila

66.4 .. Curiously, at the time of Bumar's surrender and even before Bumar made. any statement about the killing, Mayor Hagedorn was already linking Bumar to me .. This is apparent from the report of the Inquirerv which provides:

"Hagedorn said Rodolfo Edrad Jr. alias '[unjun Bumar', a former Marine soldier, peacefully surrendered to him and a team from the National Bureau of Investigation in-front of an eatery along Maharlika Highway in the boundary of Gumaca and Plaridel towns at around 10:00 p.rn.

"He was afraid. He gave himself peacefully, That was good of him." Hagedorn told the Inquirer in an interview in a hotel and restaurant here in Lucena City shortly before Saturday midnight.

"The mayor described Bumar as the 'missing link' that could lead the investigators to the brain behind the bloody murder of Ortega, a hard-hitting radio broadcaster and a noted environmentalist in Palawan.

"He (Edrad) is important to the solution of the crime. He could lead the investigators to the mastermind," Hagedron said.

"When newsmen asked the Palauian mayor if he was referring to former Marinduque Governor Jose Antonio 'Bong' Carrion, Edrad's former employer, Hagedorn said: Waf his boss now is Joel Reyes. 1FT (Emphasis ours)

66.5. Soon after Bumar had executed his affidavit, Hagedorn, as if handing down a final verdict, declared in national news that THE CASE HAS BEEN SOLVED..49

66.6. Despite the fact that it was only Bumar who implicated me in the crime, Hagedorn stated that II All leads in Ortega slay point to Reyes.llso In the same article, Hagedorn was quoted as saying that:

"Reyes has a lot to answer for, including the purchase of a multimillion-peso yacht docked at the Manila Yacht Club, the alleged railroading of mining permits in Palawan and the construction of a new

48

http://globalnation.inquher,net/ cebudailynews/metro/view /2()l10206- 318740/ Missing-link -in-OTtega-sla v-surrender s-in-Quezon. www.mb.com.ph. February 8, 2011, "Ortega slay solved, says Hagedorn."

_ ....... _ .. _L __ L __ ~_ .. ~ I 11 .. ~_~"~~~ ~.11 1'~~"~ ~_~~_~ nl~ •• ~~~.~~ _~"nn

49'

fIlA JI U £\;1\ [c<J

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joe] Reyes Ortega v. Seratubias, et al.

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOT, Manila

"Ortega was a uocal critic of Reyes and derided the Palauian governor for railroading the approval oj mining permits in the province.

"Grabe kasi ang banat ni Gerry Ortega, uialang pigil ang batikos niya kay [oel Reyes. This would not have happened if Reyes won the election. He felt really bad after losing." (emphases supplied)

66 .. 7. Yet in another article, Hagedorn, was also quoted saying:

"Reyes lost the (2010) elections. What is there for me to gain by destroying him politically? The fact, is that all of the suspects were his men and none is remotely connected to me. "51 (Emphasis supplied)

66.8. I would like to emphasize that I had never lost a gubernatorial elections since I assumed office in 2000 .. I defeated Mayor Hagedorn in 2001 .. In the 2004 elections, I faced former Palawan congressman Vicente Sandoval. Sr. and Dr .. GeIrY Ortega .. In this recent election, my influence over voters was still apparent as I aided Abraham Mitra in his victory

over Palawan businessman Jose "Pepito" Alvarez. Modesty aside, the balance of power in Palawan politics would surely shift if I am removed from the picture. This is perhaps a possible motive to implicate me in the crime.

67. Both Alvarez and Hagedorn's peculiar interest in this case was confirmed by Percival Lecias, In his affidavit, Percival Lecias explained that while he was detained for questioning by the NBt Hagedorn and Alvarez gave him money and told him "Diio ka na kumampi sa katotohanan. If He also saw a companion of Alvarez and Hagedorn leave two attachecases inside the Anti:

Terrorism Division Office of the NBI. From the statements of Lecias, it would also seem that Hagedorn and Alvarez freely interacted with the other respondents and witneses in this case even if they have no appropriate right, authority, or interest to' do so, According to Lecias:

"k. Noong ika 28 ng Pebrero 2011, bandang ala-una (1:00) ng hapon, sa NBI Manila, habang hinihintay ko na ako'y dalhin sa DOJ upang sunlpaan ang aking unang salaysay, pinuntahan ako ni Mayor Hagedorn at ni Don Jose Pepita Alvarez sa loob ng Anti-Terrorism Division Office ng NBI Manila at kinamayan ako at kinumusta. Noong abutin ni Mayor

51 Ex-Palawan gOY denies charges as aide confesses, 11 february 2011, inquirer.net {with reports from Madan Ramos, Jeannette I. Andrade and Julie M. Aurelio in Manila; and

I'\_l£!_ 'Jf;A_11' __ .:: 1'_ T_~ ...... ~ .. ": ......... _ C ...... ~~I ... .'h ...... ,..."F"I. T ~~.,........._"""'\

Lounter- Atftdavit ot Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v. Seratubias, et aI.

NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-OOOOS DOL Manila

Hagedorn at ni Don Jose Pep ito Alvarez sa loob ng Anti-Terrorism Division Office ng NBI Manila at kinamayan ako at kinumusta. Noong abutin ni Mayor ang kamay ko ay may Laman itong pera na limang fig-PIOOO at dalawang P500.00. 0 halagang P6000.00, sabay sinabi pa niya sa akin na "Dito ka na kumampi sa katotohanan." Matapos nito ay kinamayan din ako ni Jose Pepita Alvarez.

'Id. Kitang-kita ko ang isang kasama (kilala ko sa pangalan na Clinton) ni Mayor Hagedorn at Pepita Alvarez na maydala-dalang dalauiang malalaking att,~_§g_1:l£L-"uJay-silver_aLang mga ito ay iniuian sa opisina ng Anti Terrorism Division Office habang nasa loob sina NBI Head Agent Rosauro Bautista. May isang agent ng NBI na hindi ko alam ang pangalan ang kumuha sa dalawang attache case at ipinasok sa kuwarto kung sa an nandodoon sina Mayor Hagedorn, Pepita Alvarez, apat na tao na nakaposas.

... __ /

II e. Pagkatapos nito, habang nandoon pa sina Mayor Hagedorn at Pepito Alvarez, ako ay ipinasok ni S.I. Roger Susoseo sa kuwarto kung saan nandudoon ang apat na lalaki at sina Mayor Hagedorn at Pepita Alvarez na nung tinignan ko ng maigi ay karnukha noong mga nakikita ko sa local TV na diurnano'y sangkot sa pagpatay kay Gerry Ortega. Tinanong ni Susoseo sa apat kung kilala nila ako pero lahat sila ay nagsabi na hindi. Tinanong naman ako kung kilala ko yung apat at sinagot ko din na hindi." (Emphasis ours)

68. Based on the statement of Lecias, it also appears that money from Alvarez and Hagedorn has been received by officers of the NBI. Lecias stated that:

1/ g. Mga Hang minute pal dumating si Father Robert Reyes. Pumasok siya doon sa kuwarto ni Rosauro Bautista kung saan naroroon sina Hagedorn at Pep ito Alvarez at sila ay nagusap-usap bago karni pumunta sa DOJ. Pagkagaling namin sa DOJ ay bumalik kami sa NBI sa mismong Anti-terrorism Division Office. Napansin ko na may mga pinaghahitian na mga pera mula sa dalawang attache case na dala ni Clinton. Ito ay nakita din ni Head Agent Rosauro Bautista, na kasama naming mula sa DOJ. Nagalit si Rosauro Bautista sa nakita kung kaya't tinadyakan niya ang dingding ng cubicle kung saan ito ay nasira. Dinig na dinig kong sinabi nya na "bakit ninamizav nyc na wala man lamang akong go

signal". Pagkatapos ay umalis na kami nina 5.1. Cedric Caabay at S.l. Pagaduan at bumalik na kami sa dorm ng NBI;"

69. The sum of all these peculiar circumstances paired with the coercion of witnesses and the peculiar and obvious interest of my political adversaries in this case has convinced me that I am being set-up to be the mastermind of the murder of Dr. Ortega.

rt

IV.. There isnopossible motive for me to order the killing ofDr'uOrtega. In

fad, I treated Dr. Ortega and the other members of his farni.Iy as ,close friends ..

70. As I already explained, I have no motive or reason to have Dr. Ortega / killed. At the time he was killed, I was no longer in office and also did not have \ any interest in the activities he opposed. In truth, he was a friend to me. ~----

71. I recall that after he had lost to me in the 2004 elections, Dr .. Ortega, through our conunon friend, current Board Member Rolando E. Bonoan, Jr.,52 requested that I help him settle debts he incurred during his incumbency as Board Member. He went to my office sometime in July 2004 and, in. the presence of my former Assistant Provincial Accountant Elino P. Mondragon/o I acceded to his request to take care of settling the amount to One Hundred Forty Three Thousand Four Hundred Forty Seven Pesos (P143,447 . .o0) with his creditors.

/ Despite the bitter battle we had and the insidious allegations he made against me ~ during the campaign, I did not hesitate to accede to his request.

72 .. I instructed Mr. Mondragon to see to it that the outstanding liabilities of Dr. Ortega were settled .. I was informed that Mr. Mondragon requested Haide T. Soro, the former Administrative Assistant in the Office of the Governor, to personally deliver the payments to the different creditors of Dr. Ortega.54

73. I also harbored no ill will or animosity against Dr. Ortega's family, as can be seen from the following:

73.1. In 1998, the father of Dr. Ortega, former Aborlan Mayor Rafael Ortega, ran for board member for the Second District of Palawan under the same ticket with me when I was still Vice Governor. Rafael Ortega received my full support.

52

A copy of the Aff:idavit of Board Member Rolando Bonoan, Jr. is attached hereto as Annex"lr'

A copy of the Affidavit of Elino P. Mondragon.is attached as Annex. "1" to Bonoan's Affidavit.

A copy of the Affidavit of Haide T. Sora with copies of receipts paid to suppliers is attached as Annex "2" to Bonoan's Mfidavit

53

54

39

_rol~'Cl-lrvf',or,

1(0 ~ \ \

IlG,\J ~ <I \.n~i'V1Shyt n

'-UU!L!'~t::~~t"uuu<tVll UI \JUV, joer rseyes Ortega v. Seratubias, et aI.

NPS Docket No. IV-17~INQ-llA-00005 DOl, Manila

73 .. 2. I employed two of Dr. Ortega's brothers under my administration. Arne! Ort:ega, who is now a member of the Sangguniang Bayan of Aborla.i:l,w':<.lsso employed until 2007; while Jaime Ortega, who is now the mayor of Aborlan, was so employed until 2009~-

73.2 .. 1. Arnel V. Ortega, Dr .. Ortega's brother, was retained to act as Public Relations Aide II in the Provincial Governor's Office from 1 July to 31 December 2005. His main job was to assist in providing assistance to various Local Government Units in the different municipalities and in the implementation of different projects.55

73.2.2. Arne1 Ortega was again retained to act as Confidential Assistant II in the Provincial Governor's Office from 1 February to 31 December 200656 and again from 2 January - 31 March 2007.57

73.2.3. Just recently, Jaime Mawal Ortega was retained as Administrative Services Officer in the Provincial Governor's Office from 16 February to 30 June 2009.38

73 . .3. When the daughter of Arnel Ortega, Dr. Ortega's brother, was married, I stood as the principal sponsor at the wedding. The wedding reception was even held at my home in Aborlan, Gina Lopez of Bantay Kalikasan was my co-sponsor during the wedding.>?

73.4. In 2004, Dr. Ortega again approached Board Member Bonoan and asked for financial assistance for one of his daughters, who was then participating in a student exchange program and would be travelling to Korea. Again, I readily consented to help Dr. Ortega by providing financial assistance toDr. Ortega's daughter.

73.5, These acts I have done for Dr. Ortega and his family are corroborated by Board Member Rolando E, Bonoan, Jr. in his affidavit.s?

74. Dr .. Ortega was a respected commentator on radio and Project Director for Bantay Kalikasan. He was however also a politician having served as Board

. Member from 2001 to 200',tand a candidate for governor in the 2004 elections. I am sure that he understood, just as I do, that the cOl11ll!:entaries and allegations that we make against each other are\list part of politics .. ) At the end of the da~_ ~wer.e-£riends. This is the reason why there is no truth to these malicious allegations.

55 56 57

58

59

60

A copy of the Contract of Service is attached hereto as Annex "12 . ."

A copy of the Contract of Service is attached hereto as Annex "13<'

A copy of the Contract of Service is attached hereto as Annex 1114."

A copy of the Contract of Service is attached hereto as Annex "15." Pictures of the w,edding are attached hereto as Annexes 1/16" to "21.11 A !'Ot1V of tnf' Affidavit is attached hereto as Annex "11."

,,_vlI...II...1l!'LC.I,-rU.1..l'u"Q.V.1l 'UJ! UUV. JlUCll .l'\.t:;y'l;:;!:)


NPS Docket o. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DO], Manila

Conclusion

75. As can be seen from the foregoing, the charges against me are baseless and malicious. The only evidence linking me to the crime is the affidavit of a confessed conspirator to the murder of Dr. Ortega. This affidavit is, however, not admissible against me. Even assuming that this affidavit is admissible, it is so riddled with inconsistencies and dubious and incredible statements that it is not worthy of belief and should not be given any weight.

76. I would also like to emphasize that I have nothing to gain and everything to lose in masterminding the murder of Dr. Ortega. There is simply no reason I would want to have him killed.

77. My counsels have advised me that, while the motive of an accused in a criminal case might generally be immaterial, not being an element of the crime, motive could be important and consequential when the evidence on the commission of the crime would be short of moral certainty.sl The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that:

"Granting that proof of particular motive for taking the life of a human being is not indispensable to conviction for homicide, the absence of such motive is nevertheless important in determining which of two conflicting theories is more likely to be tru e ."62

78. In this easel where the incredible, inconsistent and malicious statement of a confessed killer is the only link to the crime, and where the circumstances surrounding its commission are at the very least peculiar, the lack of motive of the alleged perpetrator must be taken into consideration. This should be applied specially in this case where the crime charged is a non-bailable offense.

79. I would like to emphasize that I am here being charged with a nonbailable offense, Thus, what is at stake here is my liberty. Even if these proceedings merely involve the determination of probable cause, I implore the Honorable Prosecutors to be circumspect in their analysis of the evidence presented by the Complainant, bearing in mind that they are tasked to balance "the intrinsic right of the State to prosecute perceived transgressors of the law, which can be regulated, and the innate value of human liberty, which can hardly be weighed."63

61 62

People vs. Leano, GR. o. 138886, October 9, 2001 .

People vs. Cortez. G.R. No. L-39461, February 24,1934; People v. Modesto, 25 SeRA. 36, 50-51 [1968]; People v. Boholst-Caballero, 61 SCRA 180/191 [1974]i People v , Tabije, 113 SCRA 191, 197 [1982]; People vs Lim, G.R. No. 86454 October 18', 1990; People vs. Delos Santos [G.R. No .. 131588. March 27,2001])

63

Allado vs. Mendoza, G.R. No. 113630, May 5, 1994.



80. Moreover, I would also like to emphasize that a preliminary investigation is in effect a realistic judicial appraisal of the merits of the case. Sufficient proof of the guilt of the accused must be adduced so that when the case is tried, the trial court may not be bound, as a matter of law, to order an acquittal.v' Indeed, there is a need to examine the evidence with care to prevent material damage to a potential accused's constitutional right to liberty and the guarantees of freedom and fair play, and to protect the State from the burden of urmecessary expenses in prosecuting alleged offenses and holding trials arising from false, fraudulent or groundless charges=

81. Finally, I implore the Honorable Prosecutors not to be swayed by opinion, or rush to conclusions in resolving this case. As I have stated earlier, what is at risk here is my liberty, if not my life. My lawyers have informed me about the Supreme Court case of Allado vs. Diokno,66 wherein two prominent lawyers from the University of the Philippines College of Law have been accused of the heinous crime of kidnapping with murder solely based on the sworn statement by a Security Guard named Escolastico Umbal, a discharge of the Philippine Constabulary, implicating them as the brains behind the alleged kidnapping and slaying.

82. Upon appeal, the Supreme Court found no probable cause against the two lawyers, citing the material inconsistencies and incredible statements included in the affidavit of the Security Guard. The Court also revisited the concept and implication of probable cause and reminded Prosecutors to act with circumspection, lest their thoughtless ways, methods and practices cause a disservice to their office and maim their countrymen they are sworn to serve and protect. The case provides:

II Indeed, the task of ridding society of criminals and misfits and sending them to jail in the hope that they will in the future reform and be productive members of the community rests both on the judiciousness of judges and the prudence of prosecutors. And, whether it is a preliminary investigation by the prosecutor, which ascertains if the respondent should be held for trial, or a preliminary inquiry by the trial judge which determines if an arrest warrant should issue, the bottomline is that there is a standard in the determination of the existence of probable cause, i.e., there should be facts and circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a prudent and cautious man to believe that the accused is guilty of the crime with which he is charged. Judges and prosecutors are not off on a frolic of their own, but rather engaged in a delicate legal duty defined by law and jurisprudence.

6S

Soria vs. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 153524-25, January 31, 2005.

Preferred Home Specialties, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 478 SCRA 387 (2005).

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega Y. Seratubias, et aL NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DO}, Manila

"In this instance, Salonga u. Paiio finds

application -

The purpose of a preliminary investigation is to secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution, and to protect him from an open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble, expense and anxiety of a public trial, and also to protect the state from useless and expensive trial. The right to a preliminary investigation is a statutory grant, and to withhold it would be to transgress constitutional due process. However, in order to satisfy the due process clause it is not enough that the preliminary investigation is conducted in the sense of making sure that the transgressor shall not escape with impunity. A preliminars investigation serves not only for the purposes of the State. More importantly, it is a part of the guarantees of freedom and fair p.lay which are birthrights of all wfw live in the countrv. It is therefore imperative upon the fiscal or the judge as the case may be, to relieve the accused from the pain of going ihru. a trial once it is ascertained that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a prima facie case or that no probable cause exists to form a sufficient belief 'as to the guilt of the accused (emphasis theirs).

"The facts of this case are fatefully distressing as they showcase the seeming immensity of government power which when unchecked becomes tyrannical and oppressive. Hence the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights, defines the limits beyond which He unsanctioned state actions. But on occasion, for one reason or another, the State transcends this parameter. In consequence, individual liberty unnecessarily suffers. The case before us,if uncurbed, can be illustrative of a dismal trend. Needless injury of the sort inflicted by government agents is not reflective of responsible gouernment. Judges and law enforcers are not, by reason of their high and prestigious office, relieved of the common obligation to avoid deliberately inflicting unnecessaru injury.

xxx

Counter-Affidavit of Gov. Joel Reyes Ortega v .. Seratubias, et al, NPS Docket No. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOL Manila

"The purpose of the BHl of Rights is to protect the people against arbitrary and discriminatory use of political power. This bundle of rights guarantees the preservation of our natural rights which include personal liberty and security against invasion by the government or any of its branches or instrumentalities. Certainly, in the hierarchy of rights, the Bill of Rights takes precedence over the right of the State to prosecute, and when weighed against each other, the scales of justice tilt towards the former, Thus, relief may be availed of to stop the purported enforcement of criminal law where it is necessary to provide for an orderly administration of justice, to prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive and vindictive manner, and to afford adequate protection to constitutional rights.

"Perhaps, this case would not have reached this Court if petitioners were ordinary people submissive to the dictates of goverrunent. They would have been illegally arrested and detained without bail. Then we would not have the opportunity to rectify the injustice. Fortunately, the victims of injustice are lawyers who are vigilant of their rights, who fight for their Uberty and freedom not otherwise available to those who cower in fear and subjection.

"Let this then be a constant reminder to judges, prosecutors and other government agents tasked with the enforcement of the law that in the performance of their duties they must act with circumspection, lest their thoughtless ways, methods and practices cause a disservice to their office and maim their countrymen they are sworn to serve and protect. We thus caution government agents, particu.larly the law enforcers, to be more prudent in the prosecution of cases and not to' beoblioious of human rights protected by the fundamental law, While we greatly applaud their determined efforts to weed societu offelons, let not their impetuous eagerness violate constitutional precepts which circumscribe the structure of ,,a civilized communitu" (Emphasis supplied.)

83.. In this case, it is my only request that the Honorable Prosecutors conduct a thorough evaluation of the evidence presented by the complainant. Although preliminary investigations are limited to determination of probable cause, sufficient proof of my liability must first be established .. Probable cause demands more than bare suspicion, but less than evidence which would justify conviction.r"


NPS Docket o. IV-17-INQ-llA-00005 DOl, Manila

84. If no such evidence is found, it is "imperative upon the fiscal or the judge as the case may be, to relieve the accused from the pain of going through a trial once it is ascertained that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a prima facie case or that no probable cause exists to fonn a sufficient belief as to the guilt of.the accused. x x x."68

85. Given the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted that the evidence adduced by the complainant is insufficient to show probable cause to form a belief as to my involvement in the murder of Dr. Gerry Ortega. Thus, the Complaint against me should be dismissed

86. I execute this Counter Affidavit to attest to the truth of the foregoing and to refute the allegations against me in the Complaint.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand on this ~ day of March 2011.

MARIO JOErf:REYES Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this ~\t;,\.day of March 2011 in Manila.

ST ATE PROSECUTOR

CERTIFICATION

ST

d am

I hereby certify that I have personally examined the affiant satisfied that he voluntarily executed and understood his affidavit.

68

Ortiz v. PaLaypayon, 234 SCRA 391, 396-397 (1994), citing Salonga v. Pano, et al., 134 SCRA ;1q.R Ll";1..L1.h?",nrlr.p-mn;»1n1' RnmM 1':l,hC;rRA;1q~ LlLlQ_dl'ln

~.

Counter-Affidavit Mario Joel Reyes Aka JTR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Counter-Affidavit Mario Joel Reyes Aka JTR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Manila

PATRIA GLORIA ORTEGA Complainant,

You might also like

Counter-Affidavit Mario Joel Reyes Aka JTR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Counter-Affidavit Mario Joel Reyes Aka JTR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

﻿Republic of the Philippines DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Manila

PATRIA GLORIA ORTEGA Complainant,

You might also like

Republic of the Philippines DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Manila