Rodolfo Lozada Jr.
Whistleblower Rodolfo 鈥淛un鈥� Lozada Jr., IT expert and former president and CEO of the state-owned Philippine Forest Corp. (PFC), has no regrets.
The star witness in the inquiry into the controversial national broadband network (NBN) agreement between the Arroyo administration and China鈥檚 ZTE Corp. in 2007 said he was not sorry for 鈥渟iding with the truth鈥� even as the Supreme Court affirmed his and his brother Orlando鈥檚 graft conviction for a land deal involving the PFC.
鈥淢y enemies made good with their threats that they will make me regret telling the truth,鈥� Lozada said in a statement addressed to his family and friends and informing them 鈥渨ith sadness鈥� that the high court had denied his appeal.
鈥淵es, they succeeded in sending me to prison. But they will not succeed in making me regret my decision to side with the truth and the people. Hindi ko pinagsisisihan ang ginawa kong pagpanig sa katotohanan,鈥� he said.
He asked his family and friends to 鈥渁ccompany me with your prayers,鈥� and thanked them for their support.
It was Lozada who blew the whistle on the supposed cost-padding and bribery involved in the NBN-ZTE deal, which was to have resulted in a telecommunications network linking government offices nationwide.
His testimony at a Senate inquiry in 2008, in which he tagged then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and her husband as the 鈥渕asterminds behind the NBN-ZTE crime,鈥� led to the cancellation of the deal.
He also testified that then Commission on Elections Chair Benjamin Abalos Sr. stood to gain a huge commission from the deal.
Four years after his testimony, the Ombudsman filed graft charges against Lozada and his brother.
10 years max
In a ruling dated July 28, 2021, but made public only recently on its website, the Supreme Court denied the Lozada brothers鈥� petition for review of the Sandiganbayan decision finding them guilty of graft and sentencing them to six to 10 years imprisonment and perpetual disqualification from public office.
In August 2016, the Sandiganbayan鈥檚 Fourth Division found Lozada guilty of one count of graft for awarding the lease contract of 6.599 hectares of public land under the PFC鈥檚 Lupang Hinirang Program to his brother Orlando without undergoing the regular application process. Orlando was likewise found guilty of graft.
The Lupang Hinirang Program grants leasehold rights over idle public lands to qualified applicants.
The antigraft court said Lozada awarded the land to Orlando, a consultant at the PFC, despite the latter鈥檚 not going through the usual application process of prequalification, auction and award.
It said that while PFC personnel did not have to go through the process, Orlando could not be considered an employee of the state corporation.
It also said Lozada acted in evident bad faith and manifest partiality when he allowed his brother to lease the land for P13,198 despite not being qualified.
鈥楿苍尘别谤颈迟辞谤颈辞耻蝉鈥�
The brothers had claimed that the Sandiganbayan violated their rights to a fair trial and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations against them.
Among other concerns, they also claimed that the court misapplied the concept of unwarranted benefit, manifest partiality, evident bad faith and conspiracy in concluding that they violated Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
But the Supreme Court ruled that the brothers鈥� petition for review on certiorari was 鈥渦nmeritorious.鈥�
鈥淲e are not persuaded by Rodolfo鈥檚 insistence that he did not give unwarranted benefit to Orlando since no lease agreement and tenurial instrument were executed in his favor and that, if at all, the issuance of a notice of award in Orlando鈥檚 favor merely gave him a 鈥榩referential right鈥� which was merely an inchoate right,鈥� it said.
The high court agreed with the Sandiganbayan that 鈥渢he petitioners conspired with each other, so that the lease of idle public land would be awarded to Orlando.鈥�
鈥淎s president of [the] PFC, Rodolfo was authorized to sign all documents, agreement and contracts relating to the award of leasehold rights. Thus, without Rodolfo鈥檚 approval, Orlando would not have been included in the list of bidders and issued a notice of award,鈥� it said.
It added that with the brothers鈥� actions taken together, 鈥渢he element of conspiracy is established.鈥�
The high court also said that the brothers鈥� constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations against them was not violated. 鈥淸T]he supposed variance between the award of leasehold rights and the notice of award did not materially impair [their] right to prepare for their defense,鈥� it said.
In the same year that Lozada and his brother were convicted of graft, the graft charges against Arroyo for the NBN-ZTE deal were dismissed. Abalos, similarly charged, was likewise acquitted.
Earlier this month, Arroyo was reelected representative of the second district of Pampanga and Abalos was proclaimed mayor of Mandaluyong City, his family鈥檚 bailiwick.
Lozada had said that the witness against him, Erwin Santos, was his former program manager at the PFC. He said Arroyo appointed Santos as his replacement, and convinced Santos to testify against him.
He lamented that the case against him came at a time when he was trying to 鈥渞ebuild鈥� his life after supposedly being harassed by the Arroyo administration. 鈥擶ith a report from Inquirer Research; SOURCE: Inquirer Archives
READ: Ex-whistleblower Jun Lozada: Better for gov鈥檛 to fund own internet sites