Padilla insists he replied to obstruction raps

Sen. Robinhood Padilla —Inquirer photo/Niño Jesus Orbeta MANILA, Philippines — The Office of the Ombudsman maintained it had not received any reply from Sen. Robinhood Padilla regarding the obstruction of justice complaint filed against him over his alleged role in Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa’s escape from Senate custody. Padilla on Monday denied he ignored the Ombudsman’s summons. “What the Ombudsman said that I did not comply with their request to file my counteraffidavit is unfortunate because this is not true,” he said in a manifestation at the Senate convening as an impeachment court. He insisted he filed a counteraffidavit, even showing a copy at the Senate. “This one I’m holding is the original copy, because to me, the original copy is important.” Article continues after this advertisement READ: Ombudsman: Robin ‘ignored’ summons in Bato ‘escape’ probe Padilla’s lawyer, Julius Henry Balteza, affirmed the senator’s position that he filed his counteraffidavit on July 9, the deadline for that submission. Balteza also showed reporters the original copy marked “received” with a stamp of the Office of the Ombudsman. “For now we will not divulge any legal matters concerning the counteraffidavit of the case, but our position is that the obstruction case against Senator Padilla has no merit,” Balteza also said. Padilla blamed the media for reporting the “propaganda” that he ignored the summons. Article continues after this advertisement Yet it was Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla himself who said on Friday that Padilla “ignored” his summons, as Remulla put it. According to Remulla, Padilla and his fellow respondents, Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano and dismissed Senate sergeant at arms Mao Aplasca, were given a “non-extendible period of 15 days” to respond to the obstruction-of-justice complaint filed on June 3 by activist coalition Tindig Pilipinas. Article continues after this advertisement The Ombudsman said Padilla “has not said anything about the cases and the summons given to him.” The media, including the Inquirer, had repeatedly sought a response from Padilla to the Ombudsman’s remarks, but he did not reply. ‘Not in our system’ Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano also maintained there was no response from the Senator. “It’s good that he submitted a counteraffidavit, which he said is an original, but it does not reflect in our system,” Clavano said in Filipino. “We will rely on what our system says and we will take it from there.” Cayetano and Aplasca had filed their respective counteraffidavits, according to Clavano. On May 11, National Bureau of Investigation agents enforcing an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court tried to arrest Dela Rosa, who appeared in the Senate after hiding for more than six months to take part in Cayetano’s coup against then Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III. Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again. Your subscription has been successful. Dela Rosa was then granted “protective custody” by the new Senate leadership, but left the premises in the wee hours of May 14, accompanied by Padilla, following a shooting incident at the Senate that President Marcos himself described as “fake.” Dela Rosa has disappeared since and the government now considers him a “fugitive from justice.” —WITH A REPORT FROM KEITH CLORES