MANILA, Philippines—The Senate majority is moving in for the kill.

On Thursday, the majority will “hang” Sen. Manuel Villar, who is battling allegations he had used his position when he was Senate President to realign funding for the C-5 road extension project to benefit his real estate empire. Villar had announced his intention to run for president in 2010.

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino “Nene” Pimentel Jr. said that in ignoring calls for the inhibition of presidential aspirants from the proceedings, the Senate majority had turned into a “lynch mob of the American Wild West.”

“The leadership is just looking for a rope to lynch Manny [Villar]... never mind the rules of due process and fair play,” Pimentel said during Monday’s Senate session.

Quoting Vladimir Nabokov in his 1934 novel, “Invitation to a Beheading,” Pimentel likened Villar to Cincinnatus, a prisoner condemned to death, but who does not know when the end will come.

The Senate is set to reenact the surrealistic novel where “the judge whispers into the ear of the accused that he is guilty,” Pimentel said.

Ominously enough, one day before the scheduled “lynching,” Villar will lead the Senate media in an ocular inspection of C.P. Garcia Avenue, better known as C-5 at 8 a.m. Wednesday.

For his part, Sen. Panfilo Lacson said judgment day for Villar would come, not on Thursday. But during the presidential election in 2010.

“The people have to decide on May 2010 if [this] has had a telling effect on his political career, whether he is already a politically wounded animal,” Lacson said Monday in an interview.

He added that Villar was courting his own judgment day by snubbing the ethics investigation.

“It is not the sanctions to be imposed if ever. I think it is the presentation of evidence. If left unanswered, I think it is his undoing if he does not participate, that’s why we continuously urge him to participate,” Lacson said.

Meanwhile, the Senate Monday pushed through with its ethics investigation of Villar, rejecting separate calls for presidential aspirants in the upper chamber to inhibit themselves from the proceedings.

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, presiding over the hearing of the committee of the whole, despite a lack of quorum, declared that it was “a matter of duty” to ascertain the “conduct” of Villar in connection with the C-5 road extension project in Parañaque City.

When asked about the separate calls made by Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago and former Senate President Jovito Salonga for those gunning for the 2010 presidency not to take part in the investigation, Enrile said: “She can criticize but I’m the presiding officer. I will perform my duty according to my best light and my conscience, so help me God.”

Last week, Villar said he did not expect to get justice from the committee, especially from his potential rivals in the 2010 elections.

He also maintained his innocence, pointing out that there was no road diversion and double funding, as alleged by Sen. Jamby Madrigal in her complaint, as there were two projects—the first was the flyover in Sucat and the second, the Coastal Road flyover.

During Monday’s hearing, Enrile distributed the confidential copy of a preliminary report to the six members of the Senate minority.

The report included the legal counsel’s recommendation on whether there is credible and substantial evidence to support the complaint and if they should go ahead with the trial proper, dubbed an adjudicatory hearing.

“It’s a complete analysis of the evidence attached to the complaint and those that were presented during the last preliminary hearing on (Thursday). They are not conclusions but findings of fact based on the evidence presented,” Enrile said.

The senators were given three days to “study” the report.

Voting for the adoption of the report had been set for Thursday, and a simple majority of the senators present that day would be required for the report to be adopted, said Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri, majority leader.

Sen. Francis Escudero suggested that voting be held next Monday “in order to afford more time and to give those who [were] not present [Monday] the opportunity to be present in the Monday hearing given that it’s a session day.”

Lacson objected, prompting Enrile to rule that the three-day period was enough.

“[They are not asked] to comment but to make up their minds. They have to study the evidence. They have to indicate their vote. I want it recorded,” Enrile said. (Inquirer News Service)