Senator Riza. Quick two follows up, Sec, on the earlier issue of the reported destruction and tampering of DPWH documents related to this investigation. Is there a suspicion that DOJ, who is the higher person who might have ordered this?
Possibly higher. That is what we are looking at inside the office of DPWH and everything that can be mentioned. Sa mga sinumpang salaysay, wala akong makakatakas dito pagdating sa sospecha. Everybody's a suspect pag nandito na po sila. Everyone is a suspect all the way up to the top of food chain, ika nga sa DPW.
Opo, opo. And lastly po, kung mayroong mang kayong ma-establish na importanteng dokumento na na-tamper na o na-destroy na, paano pong gagawin? Paano po bubuin yung... chain of evidence tungkol sa iniimbestigan ng komite.
We will have to resort to secondary evidence pero that is an accepted mode under the rules of court and under evidence. At para ma-preserve po yung secondary evidence that still exists probably right now, meron po bang magagawa ang DOJ na pigili na itong reported na destruction at tampering ng dokumento dun sa kabilang department ng DPWH? Yung mga pinag-uusapan na po yan, as we speak ngayon, meron na ho kami mga taong nakikipag-usap sa kanila.
Salamat po, Secretary. Mr. Chair. Thank you, Senator JB. Let's limit our questions kay Secretary Remilia para mamaya sa mga ibang resource persons na lang. Senator JB?
Tego muna, meron tayong ano. Senator Soto is next? Wala?
Senator Soto? Wala? Senator Markuleta?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Secretary, a couple of days ago, in the last hearing when you were here, we somehow settled the issue that restitution is not a requisite for an applicant to the WPP. Is that correct? It's not in the law. But I say, it's not just the law that dictates this.
It's also what is morally right, what is expected of us. That's because even if it's not in the law, That's a given to our society. What do you mean by that, Mr. Secretary?
Because the requirements for admission to the witness protection are not in the law. The restitution is not part of it? Yes, it is not. But you don't mean that we can't lay out that, depending on the case?
Mr. Secretary, I am still in the stage where a particular applicant wishes to apply under that program. And there is a process. In the process, restitution is not one of the requisites, is that correct?
Yes, but in terms of this case being a financial crime, sir, this is a crime against the financial status of the Filipino people, of the Filipino public. I think that it's just right. Mr. Secretary, are you amending the provision of the law? No, sir.
No, sir. But that is how we run the Witness Protection Program. As a lawyer, Mr. Secretary, may I ask you?
In a criminal prosecution, the civil liability is impliedly instituted, is that correct? Of course. That's why.
It doesn't mean that if the criminal prosecution is finished, if you see that the person has criminal liability, because it is impliedly implied, that's where the restitution will happen. It will come after. How can you say that a person will be restituted?
Do you have findings on how it can be restituted? It's still applying. Don't change the requisite of the law, Mr. Secretary.
I thought when you came here, we understood. That's why our proceedings are blurred. That's why the chairman, I want to continue this, he said, he interviewed, he said, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, he interviewed, Goodwill. And sincerity should be done so that it is... Is this possible?
I respect your opinion, sir. It is not my opinion, it is in the law, Mr. Secretary. Yes, sir. But I am operating... The arbiter is the law.
May I speak, sir? Yes, you are. I'm operating from the vantage point of the reason behind the law, sir. What is the reason behind the law? We can get justice and justice can only be attained if there's restitution.
So that is the principle behind all of these things that we are talking about now. Mr. Secretary, restitution will come after? It cannot be before or after, sir.
It can come before or after. You said the law that it come before. There is no law.
Sir, we are operating on a unique set of facts. And all of these matters are being evaluated because the gravity of this financial crime cannot be underestimated. And the more assets that we are able to preserve at the outset, the better for our country, sir. Mr. Secretary, I'm very sorry for such a reasoning like that.
I'm very sorry, sir. Also, sir, I'm very sorry, too, if you do not agree with me. But I respect your opinion, sir, and we will carry out our job as we deem fit. Mr. Chair, I said I am not expressing an opinion here.
I am articulating the provision of law. You do not change the provision of law, Mr. Secretary. You may be disbarred from doing this. Then it's your opinion, sir. It's your option, sir.
I already said that I don't have an opinion on this. Then it's your option, sir. It is what you wish to happen. You may proceed with what you wish. You are the one giving the opinion.
You are putting the restitution to test the goodwill of a possible applicant. It is not in the law. Unless you are able to point out the provision of law that it came before.
It's not like that. You already said it and we admitted. Impliedly instituted ang civil liability but this will come eventually after the court has pronounced kung magkano ibabalik niya kung meron man. Not before. Thank you Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Please limit your question to Secretary Remoya. Yes, I just want to tell the Secretary to take care of Engineer Henry Alcantara.
That's all. Yes, thank you. Thank you.
Senator De La Rosa. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is just a point of clarification to me, Mr. Chair, because these disquietudes, it looks like it was already given in the previous hearings.
We want to have... As a matter of fact, undergoing evaluation. By whom, Mr. Chair?
DOJ. DOJ. We met with them already, and we will meet again with them tomorrow. Yes, sir. Mr. Chair, just para mas maganda kung isang bagsaka na makuha na sana lahat yan, mapahala na kaagad.
Mas maganda. Thank you. Thank you lang, Mr. Chair. Yeah, Mr. Chair, to Secretary Mulya, wala nga talaga sa batas yung bang mag-solay muna ng pera. Thank you.
Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair. Yes, Senator. So I would like to manifest that. The screams of thousands of people in the People Power Monument in Luneta.
Not only did they steal, they were also shouting, return their money. And I believe the Secretary of Justice heard that. And I believe Balacanang heard that.
That's why, due to the contractors, the officials, You have to bend the law to be able to please the people. The people of the country are higher in the law.