Jun Lozada as THE EVIDENCE of the Truth on the ZTE NBN Scandal

There are different kinds of evidence under the Rules of Court of the Philippines.

The Rules classify evidence according to form into:

1, object or real evidence (Sec. 1, Rule 130)
2. documentary evidence (Secs. 2-19, Rule 130); and

3. testimonial evidence (Secs 20-51, Rule 130)

Testimonial evidence is that which is submitted to the court through the testimony of a witness. This testimony is what we are getting from our courageous witnesses like Jun Lozada and Joey de Venecia; and partly by the half-baked testimony of Romulo Neri, at the senate investigation.

Lozada is not only evidently credible due to his spontaneity and consistency. Joey de Venecia and Romulo Neri furthermore corroborate his testimony on material points such as the excessive overprice of US$130M commission of Abalos. According to Lozada’s testimony, said level of greed goes into the depths of the “forbidden zone” of corruption. In the opinion of Neri, the amount is “ immoderate greed”.

Likewise, the discordant and conflicting testimonies of the government functionaries are also evidences of lies and deception. The testimony of Sec. Gaite is also highly incredible because lending PhP .5 Million without evidence nor security for the big loan and only upon a text from someone you have met only twice runs counter to the grain of reality and the ordinary course of human experience.

With regards the attempt by Senator Miriam Santiago and other pro-administration senators to destroy the credibility of Lozada by questioning the witness’ personal integrity, let me cite relevant decisions of the court on similar issues.

In the “People of the Philippines vs. Sanchez” the former mayor of Calauan was convicted of rape with murder (or homicide?). The principal witness was the driver of the ambulance used by Sanchez in the abduction of the victims. The driver/mayor's side kick/witness was an accomplice--but least guilty--to the crime and had a less than admirable if not condemnable past. In believing the said witness' testimony against Sanchez, the Makati RTC Judge declared something to this effect: ' This is a crime hatched in hell; we can not expect witnesses who are angels' ( the word angel is mine but that was what the Honorable Judge meant."

The other case is the Aquino-Galman double murder case. One of the principal witnesses was the “crying lady” whose credibility was being impeached by cross examining her on her colored past. Her response: “My past does not at all destroy the truth of what I saw.” And the whole world found her a credible witness of the events that her eyes witnessed on that fateful day at the tarmac of the Philippine airport.

The Senate investigation remains to be the only avenue to the truth about the ZTE NBN scandal. The senate can ferret out the truth by its power to issue subpoena to force witnesses to attend at its hearing and to issue subpoena duces tecum to demand the delivery of documents which the guilty parties are keeping in their vaults.

Please be reminded that the evidences submitted to the Sandiganbayan during the trial of the plunder-convicted Estrada were records of the investigation and evidences gathered by the senate.

The road to truth is oftentimes paved with briers and thorns. But those who are sincerely searching for the truth should be ready to walk on fires and nails if necessary. Remember God's concrete proof of His/Her immeasurable Love for us? It is the mangled Body of the Son of God hanging on the cross.