Good governance group wants Ombudsman to probe into Speaker Alvarez’s culpability in NAIA-PIATCO deal

A good governance group on Monday appealed to the Office of the Ombudsman to investigate if House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez profited from the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) Terminal 3's build-operate-transfer contract with the Philippine International Air Terminals Co. Inc. (PIATCO).

In a 16-page letter-complaint addressed to Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales, the Pinoy Aksyon for Governance and Environment (PAGE) urged the anti-graft body to investigate Alvarez considering that the MIAA-NAIA Association of Service Contractors (MASO) earned a favorable ruling from the Supreme Court in 2005.

"The Supreme Court’s decision in 2005 should have paved the way for a more thorough preliminary investigation of this case, but it appears that no resolution has yet been made," the group said.

"We are not unmindful of the fact that this Complaint was initiated by the MASO, but We, the People, are no less interested in its just resolution. We appeal to the Honorable Ombudsman to shine a light on MASO’s Complaint," it said.

MASO filed a plunder case against Alvarez and several other government officials before the Ombudsman in connection with the alleged anomalous deal, but the case was dismissed compelling the association to file another case before the Supreme Court.

In alleging that the PIATCO contract was illegal, MASO won favorable ruling from the Supreme Court.

PAGE claimed Alvarez should be charged with plunder, violation of Section 3(h) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and violation of Section 9 of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials for having business interests with Wintrack Builders Inc.

Emelita Alaverez, the Speaker's wife, was one of the incorporators of Wintrack which was subcontracted in 2014 to clear below-ground debris at the NAIA compound without the benefit of a public bidding.

PAGE presumed Emelita's shares in Wintrack were deemed as conjugal property under the Family Code, giving Alvarez direct interest in the company.

"Rep. Alvarez was prohibited by the Constitution from maintaining such interest: the Constitution provides that members of Congress may not be indirectly interested in any contract with the Government during their term of office," the group said.

PAGE noted the mere refusal of Emelita to divest from the company proves that Alvarez "indeed harbored a financial interest in Wintrack."

It is time for the Ombudsman to investigate if Alvarez is liable because the government paid Wintrack more than P132.5 million, according to PAGE.

"Clearly, Rep. Alvarez has evaded liability for his criminal and unethical actions involving the Wintrack Contact for years," its letter to the Ombudsman read.

"The People deserve a full and impartial investigation into Rep. Alvarez’s involvement in the Wintrack deal, and a reckoning for all that he has gained at our expense," it said.

Alvarez, however, had only one short response on the letter-complaint.

"That has long been dismissed," Alvarez told GMA News Online in a text message, referring to the plunder case. — with Erwin Colcol/VDS/KBK, GMA News