‘Sinning’ bravely

‘Abnormal times require extraordinary actions.

Last week journalist Jarius Bondoc wrote in his column in the Philippine Star some of the things that Romulo Neri, former chief of the National Economic and Development Authority, had told him in confidence about the controversial National Broadband Network-ZTE deal, the latest anomaly shaking the Gloria Arroyo’s shaky presidency.

It will be recalled that when Neri appeared before the Senate, he revealed the “Sec, may 200 ka dito” bomb that did in Comelec chairman Benjamin Abalos. But when the trail reached the doorstep of Gloria Arroyo, he invoked “executive privilege” which is defined as in the Supreme Court ruling on EO 464 as “the right of the President and high-level executive branch officers to withhold information from Congress, the courts, and ultimately the public.”

Neri’s withholding a crucial truth angered many who felt that as taxpayers, they have the right to know what the government is doing especially why and what for they and their grandchildren would be paying P16 billion. The question on everybody’s mind was: “Will the truth be forever kept from us?”

In his column last Oct. 1, Bondoc wrote this,

“Romy bared many frightening things when he called me morning of Apr. 20. I had written that the government was rushing to award the ZTE contract the next day in Boao, China, and that the NEDA, which he headed then, had approved the overpriced telecoms supply in a huff. Before I could ask anything, Romy blurted three items in succession: “This deal was the handiwork of Ricky Razon and Comelec chief Benjamin Abalos … I warned President Arroyo about this, and also told Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. … Abalos tried to bribe me P200 million.”

“I was stunned, and asked him to start over again by answering some basic questions. Like, how the NEDA got involved in this, and why a build-operate-transfer project suddenly became a negotiated supply purchase. He said “NEDA had to make an evaluation any which way.” Too, the law “allows the President to waive ODA (overseas development assistance) rules in a bilateral or government-to-government agreement.” He stressed that NEDA had no capacity to determine any overpricing, then explained the three steps in any NEDA project review.

“Three times Romy repeated he had warned Arroyo about the deal. He told her about the bribe offer, and she allegedly replied “then don’t accept it, but work on the approvals just the same.” He said Arroyo kept blaming Joey for the mess that was then brewing.

“The culprits in this deal, he said, are ZTE Corp., Razon, Abalos – and one more. When I asked why his NEDA approved the ZTE proposal when he knew all along it was stinky, he said, “GMA was pushing it, and it’s our job to process.” With pain in his voice, Romy said he had almost resigned the day before.

“Before he hung up, Romy said that my exposé had the potential to mar the administration’s chances in the May election. It was so explosive, he counseled, so I must be very careful.”

Many times, in a journalist’s work he is given information in confidence and nobody, not even a legally-elected president can make him reveal the source and things he had sworn to keep “in confidence.” Clearly, Bondoc broke his confidentiality pact with Neri.

But was it wrong?

I believe, Bondoc did the right thing in upholding public interest over journalistic ethics.

I can imagine it was not easy for Bondoc. But in life, we are all confronted with dilemmas. A sensitive writer once said, “There are dilemmas in which one ‘sins bravely’ however one decides.” That was what happened to Bondoc.

Some say that because of what Bondoc did, sources would be reluctant to share confidential information to journalists in the future. Maybe. Either way, the decision would result in consequences some of which may be difficult.

But I believe Bondoc’s revelation served public interest which should be paramount in every citizen’s order of priorities. Neri was wrong in following Arroyo’s order to invoke executive privilege when the information would reveal her complicity to the crime.

In Sen. Miriam Santiago’s speech last month on executive privilege, she quoted Lawrence Tribe, professor of constitutional law at Harvard, who said executive privilege is confined only to state secrets, informer’s privilege and internal deliberations.

State secrets relate to national defense or international relations. The information is of such nature that its disclosure would subvert crucial military or diplomatic objectives. Informer’s privilege is “government’s privilege to withhold from disclosure the identity of persons who furnish information on violations of law to officers charged with enforcement of that law.” Internal deliberations is defined as “intergovernmental documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations, and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated.”

Neri’s information regarding Arroyo’s order to ” work on the approvals” of the NBN ZTE contract despite her having been briefed about the flaws of the deal and the bribe offer of Abalos does not fall into any of three justifications for executive privilege.

But what is now clear to us is that Gloria Arroyo violated the Constitution that as president (even is it was illegally acquired) , she had the duty to “ensure that laws be faithfully executed.” Bribery is a criminal act and she closed her eyes to that. By forbidding Neri to tell the truth, she is obstructing justice.

Neri’s testimony will in no way destabilize the state. Gloria Arroyo, most probably. But Arroyo is not the state.

If Bondoc’s disclosure of Neri’s confidential information leads to the downfall of Arroyo, well and good. That would be good for democracy and the country. Thank you, Jarius.