This guy fled to the US when he was summoned to testify at a Philippine Senate hearing into a fertilizer fund scandal. The US seems a favorite destination for fleeing Philippine politicos who find themselve in hot water. Unfortunately, the US govt. seems to have some questions about Joc-joc as well!
Cheers, Ken Hanly Joc-Jocs fear of NPA a hoary tale, wont pass asylum test senators By Angie M. Rosales 07/27/2006 Far from fearing death in the hands of the communist New Peoples Army (NPA) as his reason for seeking political asylum in the United States, former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn Joc-Joc Bolantes escape from the Philippines may be rooted in the alleged discovery by American authorities of his supposed hidden wealth, as Bolante allegedly owns a string of prime real estate properties abroad and their purported questionable acquisition is said to be the reason behind his plea for political asylum. Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr., quoting his source, yesterday disclosed this information on Bolantes case in the US, where he remains detained at the San Pedro detention center in California, bolstering earlier reports that money-laundering activities had cropped up in his case, which launder activities could be linked to a very powerful presidential couple. Pimentel, however, emphasized he is still in the process of verifying this information given by his sources through official channels. Reports on Bolantes move coincided with information reaching Pimentel that US authorities had been alerted to the allegedly numerous acquisitions of the former DA official real state properties even in some European countries, the circumstances of which were claimed to be questionable. This information came up because of the continuing silence of the government, particularly the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), relative to the circumstances of his arrest and detention, a lot of speculations are now coming out. Obviously this (information) could have been culled from a possible anti-money laundering charges that may have been slapped against him and the reason for his current detention, he said in an interview. Pimentel said graft charges could have also been filed against him because he might not have been able to justify the acquisition of these expensive residential homes on the basis of his salary. Information unverified up to this time is that Bolante had been purchasing villas and all kinds of expensive residential places abroad and this came to the attention of the US government, Pimentel said. Senator Franklin Drilon also junked the reported NPA threat on Bolantes life as the reason for seeking asylum, saying he is a favored friend of the presidential couple and could easily be provided protection by the government. As this developed, senators rallied behind the extradition of Bolante, who reports said is set to ask the federal immigration authorities in the US next week for political asylum claiming that the NPA is out to get him. Both opposition and administration senators appeared unanimous in stating that Bolante is not qualified for this, nor can he seek the status of a refugee as cases pending in the country against him are not political in nature. Even administration ally Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, chair of foreign relations committee, pointed out that if the government seriously pursues getting hold of Bolante, he will likely get extradited to the Philippines because it will not be easy for him to defend his reason for seeking refuge in the US. Pressure on the Palace by the senators to mount extradition proceedings against the former DA official embroiled in the alleged embezzlement of almost P3 billion in fertilizer funds during the election period in 2004, could further intensify in the days to come after the NPA vehemently denied Bolantes claim, saying he is not even in the NPAs target list. Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP)-NPA spokesman Gregorio Ka Roger Rosal refuted Bolantes charges on their supposed assassination plot against him saying that this is a fabrication probably done for Bolante to evade facing charges in the country. Like the rest of the Filipino people, we want Bolante who is the principal player in the P2.8 billion fertilizer fund scandal to be repatriated to the Philippines so he could spill the beans about how he connived with Malacanang to use the fertilizer fund as well as the recovered Marcos wealth to bankroll Gloria Arroyos 2004 electoral campaign and bribe various government and election officials to secure her victory. The disclosures are of utmost interest to the Filipino people and the revolutionary forces, Rosal said in an issued statement. Pimentel also questioned the claim of US officials regarding a canceled visa. Why should the cancellation of the visa be attributed to the fault of Bolante? Pimentel asked. He noted that in a case like this, the visa cancellation could only be effected by the government. Santiago, a noted constitutional law expert, said that the chances of Bolante being returned to the countrys jurisdiction is big especially if government will pursue extradition proceedings because of his apparent lack of reasonable grounds. Not even claims against his life by the NPA would suffice, she said as this would require substantial proof or evidence. It will not be easy for Bolante to escape deportation or extradition to the Philippines by means of his seeking the status of a refugee that is by the means of seeking asylum in the US, Santiago pointed out. She further explained that under the law creating the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), a refugee is defined as somebody who has a well-founded fear of persecution in his home country and to return him would be against conventional international law because no person should be willfully turned over to authorities who will likely kill him or incarcerate him for life. So its not easy to say that a person who is seeking refuge in another country because of a well-founded fear of persecution, he may have of fear, but if there is no good foundation for the fear then normally the host country will extradite him anyway. In his case, he is citing the provision in the charter of the UNHCR that a refugee is a person who has a well-founded fear of persecution for his political opinion and we know that in an international law, political offenders are given social status because we want to protect the independence of mind of the individual but in particular, in American law, fear of a contrary political opinion in the country requesting extradition is not sufficient if the person cannot prove or does not show probable cause why hes afraid. So he first has to show that theres ideological motivation of those who are seeking to assassinate or otherwise to prejudice his physical safety. Notwithstanding these explanations, the senator further noted that Bolante may also have to hurdle a special provision in the American law. They have a slew of anti-corruption laws and one of the provisions in effect, applies to Bolante because the political refugee status is not allowed to be a cover for a person who alleges he is seeking refuge because of feared political persecution but is actually a fugitive from the processors of his own country with the effect to the corruption laws in that country. So if a person is just fleeing from his country but is implicated in certain corruption cases in that country, the US will turn him over. The US does not want to be known as a haven for crooks, she said. Senators Drilon and Panfilo Lacson also seconded Santiagos contention. Political asylum can only be resorted to if youre subject to a persecution by the government. Persecution because of political beliefs is a ground for asylum, said Drilon. Lacson also raised the same issues, even chiding Bolante for claiming persecution when he said that the former DA official is known to be associated with the administration. Furthermore, Lacson said extradition is an Executive Department initiative and there is no showing on the part of the administration to file a petition on this matter. Sen. Rodolfo Biazon, on the other hand, urged the government to begin the process of having Bolante extradited to the country and face prosecution before the courts here, not persecution and block his application for asylum. This threat from the NPA can be negated by protection from the AFP, the PNP or even by a task force so that he can come back to the country and help put a closure on the issue of fertilizer scam. The Philippine government definitely is not out to prosecute Bolante but they should prosecute him based on the findings of the Senate committee on agriculture which has found probable cause to hold him liable for graft and corruption. Malacañang, believed to be the source of the report of an NPA threat claim of Bolante, yesterday announced it is prepared to give protection to the former official, if Bolante requests this. We will provide the necessary protection if he (Bolante) decides to come back, said Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita in a press briefing. I dont see any reason we should be embarrassed by what he (Bolante) said. But right now, I dont have any information yet about what he said. He just invoked that, Ermita said. With Sherwin C. Olaes
