MALACAÑANG on Monday, May 28, defended Solicitor General Jose Calida after critics lambasted him over the alleged multi-million-peso government deals bagged by his family-owned security services firm.
Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque Jr. said there was "no conflict of interest" on Calida's part, since the top government lawyer resigned as chairman and president of Vigilant Investigative and Secutiry Agency Inc. (VISAI) before he assumed office as solicitor general in 2016.
"My reading of the Constitution and the anti-graft law supports the conclusion made by the SolGen that there is no conflict of interest. He resigned all his corporate posts because he became SolGen," he told Palace reporters.
Early May, Calida was slapped with a graft complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman in relation to VISAI bagging P150.815-million contracts from six government agencies.
Complainant Jocelyn Marie Acosta-Nisperos, in her petition, also claimed that Calida still owned 60 percent of VISAI's capital stock.
On Saturday, May 26, Calida belied the allegations hurled against him, saying that he had complied with Section 9 of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees or Republic Act (RA) 6713 when he quit his post at VISAI prior to his appointment in government.
Section 9 of RA 6713 states that "a public official or employee shall avoid conflicts of interest at all times."
Roque backed Calida's recent statement, and stressed that while the latter had admitted that he has stock ownership, the Solicitor General made it clear that "he is not exercising any management powers in the company."
"The shares of which are still owned by his family. And he has not entered into any contract with his own office -- to the Office of Solicitor General," Roque said.
The Palace further noted that a government official having a stock ownership is not prohibited, as provided by Section 13, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution.
Under Section 13, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution, no incumbent public official shall "directly or indirectly practice any other profession, participate in any business or be financially interested in any contract or with any franchise or special privilege granted by the government or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality."
"Stock ownership obviously is not covered. You have to be part of management to be guilty of violating Section 13. And it is also mirrored in RA 6713," Roque said.
"The prohibition is to directly or indirectly have any financial or material interest in any transaction requiring the approval of their office... But if it's not in his office, then, I don't see the conflict of interest," he added.
Roque then said that the accusations against Calida were nothing but retaliation from critics, who were obviously "hurt" by the Supreme Court's decision to grant the quo warranto plea filed by the Solicitor General against ousted Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.
On May 11, the high court voted 8-6 in favor of Calida's quo warranto case and nullified Sereno's appointment as the chief magistrate.
"You know why these allegations have surfaced against Calida. He won the quo warranto petition he filed. His critics, those who are hurt by the ruling on the quo warranto case, are going after him because of that. It's obvious," Roque said. (SunStar Philippines)