Executive Summary by the NBI on the PDAF complaints filed against Janet Lim-Napoles, et al.

Executive Summary by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) regarding the PDAF complaints filed against Janet Lim-Napoles, et al.

____________________

 

Republika ng Pilipinas
(Republic of the Philippines)
Kagawaran ng Katarungan
(Department of Justice)
PAMBANSANG KAWANIHAN NG PAGSISIYASAT
(NATIONAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION)
Manila

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Re: PDAF Complaints

After the conduct of its investigation on the Napoles PDAF Scam, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) finds sufficient evidence for the filing of complaints for plunder against five (5) lawmakers, and for malversation, direct bribery, and graft and corrupt practices act against three (3) other lawmakers. Also recommended to be charged in the complaints filed by the NBI and Atty. Levito D. Baligod, as private complainant, with the Ombudsman are some of the lawmakers’ chiefs-of-staff or representatives, the heads and other officials of three implementing agencies, and the several presidents of the NGOs set up by Napoles. The lawmakers found to be involved in plunder are the following:

1. Senator Juan Ponce Enrile
2. Senator Ramon Revilla, Jr.
3. Senator Jose “Jinggoy” Ejercito Estrada
4. Former Congresswoman Rizalina Seachon-Lanete (now Governor of Masbate)
5. Former Congressman Edgar Valdez (APEC Party-list)

Those involved in malversation, direct bribery, and other graft and corrupt practices are:

6. Former Congressman Rodolfo Plaza (Lone District, Agusan del Sur)
7. Former Congressman Samuel Dangwa (Lone District, Benguet)
8. Former Congressman Constantino Jaraula (Lone District, Cagayan de Oro)

The chiefs-of-staff or representatives of the lawmakers charged along with their superiors are:

9. Atty. Jessica Lucila Reyes – COS, Enrile
10. Atty. Richard Cambe – Staff, Revilla
11. Ruby Tuason – Representative, Enrile/ Estrada
12. Pauline Labayen – Staff, Estrada
13. Jose Sumalpong – COS, Lanete
14. Jeanette dela Cruz – District Staff, Lanete
15. Erwin Dangwa – COS, Dangwa
16. Carlos Lozada – Staff, Dangwa

The Heads of Agencies charged for either plunder or malversation, bribery and graft and corrupt practices are:

17. Alan Javellana – former President, National Agribusinees Corp. (NABCOR)
18. Gondelina Amata – President, National Livelihood Development Corporation (NLDC)
19. Antonio Ortiz – Former Director General (Technology Resource Corporation (TRC)
20. Dennis Cunanan – Former Deputy Director General (now Director General), TRC
21. Salvador Salacup – former President, ZNAC Rubber Estate Corporation (ZREC) (now Assistant Secretary Department of Agriculture)

The Napoles NGO Presidents also included in the complaint on charges of plunder as well as malversation are:

22. Jocelyn Piorato – Agricultura Para sa Magbubukid Foundation, Inc. (APMFI)
23. Nemesio Pablo – Agri and Economic Program for Farmers Foundation, Inc. (AEPFFI)
24. Mylene Encarnacion – Countrywide Agri and Rural Economic and Development Foundation, Inc. (CARED)
25. John Raymund De Asis – Kaupdanan Para sa Mangunguma Foundation, Inc. (KPMFI)
26. Evelyn Deleon – Philippine Social Development Foundation, Inc. (PSDFI)
27. Ronald John Lim – Ginintuang Alay sa Magsasaka Foundation, Inc. (GAMFI)

Lastly, the implementing agency officials and employees largely involved in plunder or malversation, bribery, or graft and corrupt practices by conspiracy are the following:

28. Victor Cacal – NABCOR
29. Romulo Revelo – NABCOR
30. Ma. Ninez Guanizo – NABCOR
31. Julie Johnson – NABCOR
32. Rodhora Mendoza – NABCOR
33. Alexis Sevidal – NLDC
34. Sofia Cruz – NLDC
35. Chila Jalandoni – NLDC
36. Francisco Figura – TRC
37. Marivic Jover – TRC

Finally, also included in the complaints for plunder, malversation, and corruption of public officials is the owner of the JLN Group of Companies and mastermind of the PDAF Scam operations:

38. Janet Lim-Napoles.

BACKGROUND

The NBI investigation started with the rescue of Benhur Luy by NBI agents from Reynald Lim at Napoles’ residence in Taguig City. Benhur was apparently being held by Napoles in order to prevent him from coming out and exposing what he knows about the PDAF Scam operation being conducted by Napoles through the JLN Group of companies and fake NGOs. Benhur had knowledge of this operation as a trusted employee and relative of Napoles. Because of Benhur’s revelations, the NBI conducted an investigation on the Napoles PDAF Scam Operations.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

During the course of the investigation, the NBI was able to gather its evidence from the following sources:

  1. The testimonies and documentary evidence of the whistleblowers who are former employees of JLN led by Benhur;
  2. Documents gathered from the COA, DBM, SEC, and Implementing Agencies of the PDAF projects such as Special Allotment Release Orders (SAROs), memorandum of agreements (MOAs), Notice of Cash Allocations (NCAs), legislator’s endorsement letters, project proposals, project activity reports, project profiles, inspection and acceptance reports, disbursement reports, disbursement vouchers, accomplishment reports; acknowledgement receipts, delivery reports, certificates of acceptance, photocopy of checks issues by NGOs, official receipts issued by NGOs; and
  3. COA Special Audit Report.

MODUS OPERANDI

From this evidence, the NBI came out with a detailed picture of the modus operandi used by Napoles in order to corner a huge share of the Lawmakers’ PDAF allocation. The scheme starts with an agreement between Napoles and the Lawmaker where the latter promises to designate Napoles’ NGOs as the recipient of his PDAF fund for purposes of supposedly implementing projects authorized in the DBM menu of projects that can be financed with the use of the Lawmakers’ PDAF.

In exchange for selecting the Napoles NGO, the Lawmaker in turn will receive from Napoles 40-60% of the cash value of the project as kickback. The Lawmaker first submits a list of projects to the DBM. The DBM in turn issues a SARO to the lawmaker who then endorses a selected Napoles NGO to the implementing agency. The implementing agency, in turn, without any public bidding, enters into a memorandum of agreement with the NGO for the implementation of the project. After all the documentation is completed, the DBM issues a Notice of Cash Allocation to the implementing agency. Upon receipt of the NCA, the implementing agency issues a check to the Napoles NGO which is deposited by JLN employees and the cash withdrawn and delivered to Napoles.

Along the way, the kickback of the Lawmaker is already paid in advance, first upon submission of the project list to DBM, second upon release of the SARO. The chief-of-staff of the lawmaker or his representative who facilitates documents and follow ups with agencies for the Lawmaker and Napoles also gets 1-5% of the project cost, also as kickback. Finally, Napoles gives 10% of the project cost to the head of the implementing agency, also as kickback. The rest is pocketed by Napoles after deducting the cost of overpriced supplies such as agricultural kits and training materials procured from a supplier enterprise which is owned by her, or the full remaining amount if there is no delivery at all.

FAVORING NAPOLES NGOs

The 10 NGOs used as conduits for the scam were ordered to be incorporated by Napoles through employees and other individuals associated with her such as relatives, house helps and drivers. These NGOs have interlocking incorporators, common auditors, and notaries public in their SEC documents.

The projects are awarded to these NGOs by the implementing agencies as endorsed by the Lawmakers without any corresponding appropriation law or public competitive bidding, in violation of government procurement rules. The Napoles NGOs are not even shown as qualified to bid for government projects costing millions of pesos. The MOA entered into by the implementing agency and the NGO also deliberately does not include provisions on control and management of funds and monitoring of project implementation that only proved convenient to the parties insofar as transparency and accountability are concerned.

DELIBERATE FAILURE OF CONTROL, MANAGEMENT, MONITORING

As a result, indicators of anomalous project implementation were ignored, such as recurring beneficiaries of the same or similar training, overpricing, ghost beneficiaries, or simple non-delivery of the NGO on the project. What is given priority is complete submission of liquidation documents on overpriced supplies or ghost delivery of supplies and lists of bogus beneficiaries, without any validation of the same through ground monitoring in the community supposed to be benefitted by the project.

In the end, there is really nothing to monitor, because all the funds that were supposed to be used for the project had in reality already been pocketed by the lawmaker, Napoles, the head of the implementing agency, the lawmaker’s chief of staff, and probably other officials whose signatures were needed to facilitate the scam and are bribed to look the other way. This is the very reason why no one among the actors, who are all responsible for ensuring the legitimate use of public funds through the actual implementation of projects at full cost of the funds released therefor, take no action or interest whatsoever in performing this obligation.

PLUNDER, MALVERSATION, BRIBERY, GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES

The five (5) lawmakers committed plunder in conspiracy with Napoles and officials of the implementing agencies when said lawmakers each accumulated more than P50 million through a series of transactions over time through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, and malversation of the cash value of the project cost allocated from the lawmakers’ PDAF and through their acceptance of kickbacks or commissions.

The amount of plunder accumulated by each lawmaker representing the kickbacks received from Napoles is as follows:

1. Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile - P172,834,500
2. Sen. Ramon Revilla Jr. - P224,512,500
3. Sen. Jinggoy Estrada - P183,793,750
4. Former Cong. Rizalina Seachon-Lanete - P108,405,000
5. Former Cong. Edgar Valdez - P56,087,500

On the other hand, the three (3) Congressmen involved in malversation, direct bribery, and other graft and corrupt practices and the amount of kickbacks they received from Napoles are as follows:

6. Former Congressman Rodolfo Plaza
(from total PDAF allocations of Php79,500,000.00)
- Php42,137,800.00
7. Former Congressman Samuel Dangwa
(from total PDAF allocations of Php54,000,000.00)
- Php26,770,472.00
8. Former Congressman Constantino Jaraula
(from total PDAF allocations of Php50,500,000.00)
- Php20,843,750.00

The crimes of plunder, malversation, bribery, and other graft and corrupt practices were thus committed when said lawmakers received from Napoles kickbacks amounting to 40-60% of the cash value of the project cost for every project endorsed by the lawmaker to a Napoles NGO. These kickbacks are the lawmaker’s bribe for giving undue favor to a Napoles NGO, or represent his illegally contracted share from a malversation scheme designed to misuse and misappropriate public funds entrusted to him, and which he appropriates instead for private gain rather than the public benefit intended by law.

In order to accomplish all this, the lawmakers took advantage and abused their official position and authority as Senators and Congressmen of the Republic, thereby unjustly enriching themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the people and the Republic. The acts constituting the offenses were performed willfully, deliberately, and maliciously with the legislators knowing fully well that their act of receiving the large amounts of cash from Napoles for their private use resulted in the corresponding diminution of the funds actually expended for the public purpose intended by law.

RECOMMENDED OMBUDSMAN ACTION

The NBI recommends to the Office of the Ombudsman that the respondents named in the transmittal letter-complaints be subjected to the corresponding preliminary investigation for purposes of filing the corresponding charges before the Sandiganbayan.

It, however, remains the prerogative of the Ombudsman after an evaluation of the complaints and their attachments whether or not to conduct further fact-finding investigation on the complaints instead of immediately setting the same for preliminary investigation.

____________________

ERRATUM: The reproduced document below is a corrected version; TRC stands for “Technology Resource Corporation” and not “Training and Resource Center.”

Click to download the PDF file