Sandiganbayan affirms decision on Marcos, cronies
Published Nov 12, 2019 04:02 am
By Czarina Nicole Ong-Ki
The Sandiganbayan Second Division Division has affirmed its decision denying the complaint filed by the Philippine Commission on Good Governance (PCGG), which sought to reclaim the reported P102 billion ill-gotten wealth of former President Ferdinand Marcos and several of his cronies.
Sandiganbayan (MANILA BULLETIN FILE PHOTO)
The complaint was denied on August 5, so the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a motion for reconsideration on August 27. It was denied by the court on September 13, so another MR was filed on September 27.
In the assailed resolution dated August 5, Marcos and his cronies were let off the hook due to missing documentary evidences and unauthenticated affidavits.
"Wherefore, premises considered, for failure of the plaintiff to prove by preponderance of evidence any of the causes of action against defendants Ferdinand E. Marcos, Imelda R. Marcos, Rafael Sison, Placido Mapa Jr., Don Ferry, Jose Tengco Jr., Ramon Monzon, Generosa Olazo, Cynthia Africa, and Rodolfo Arambulo, the case against them is hereby dismissed," the dispositive portion of the ruling written by Associate Justice Lorifel Pahimna read.
The PCGG filed the complaint for reconveyance, revision, accounting, restitution, and damages for ill-gotten wealth against the Marcos, his wife Imelda, and their cronies on July 31, 1987.
The PCGG said that Roberto S. Benedicto took advantage of his close ties to the Marcos couple in securing loans for his bulk carrier companies, while the other accused - Tengco Jr., Mapa, Sison, and others - all from the Development Bank of the Philippines and incorporators of the bulk carriers - acquired assets and properties and hid them through their dummies.
The second MR requested for the "relaxation of the rigid observance of procedural rules in the interest of justice."
Since the case involved a significant amount of public funds, the OSG said that the injustice faced by the Republic and its people "is not commensurate with the degree of its counsel's mistake in inadvertently failing to comply with the prescribed procedure."
However, the anti-graft court noted that the original MR was already "laden with procedural defects." The second one, on the other hand, failed to provide any compelling reason to relax the rule.
"The Court also notes that the MR cannot be treated as a prohibited second motion for reconsideration as it does not assail the decision dated August 5, 2019 but seeks the reversal of the resolution dated September 13, 2019. It bears emphasis that Section 2, Rule 52 of the Rules of Court contemplates a situation where a second motion for reconsideration is filed by the same party assailing the same judgment or final resolution," the court explained.
"This is not the situation in the case at bar," it stressed.
In its 67-page ruling dated August 5, the anti-graft court said that the burden of proof in the civil forfeiture proceedings fell on the PCGG. The question it sought is whether or not the PCGG was able to adduce sufficient evidence to prove that the properties sought to be recovered are in truth ill-gotten and that the defendants, by virtue of their position, close association or relation with President Marcos and his wife, accumulated wealth by illegal means.
For defendants Sison, Mapa Jr., Ferry and Tengco Jr., the PCGG said that they, through the DBP, extended loan accomodations to Sison's companies - Aklan Bulk Carriers Inc., Fuga Bulk Carriers Inc., Coron Bulk Carriers Inc., and Ecija Bulk Carriers Inc. under terms and conditions grossly disadvantageous to the government. As a result, they were "unjustly enriched."
However, there was no evidence that proved that the defendants were in collaboration with the Marcoses when they offered the bank loans.
Monzon, on the other hand, was accused of being the "dummy" of Marcos' daughter, Imee, in several broadcasting corporations - Banahaw Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), International Broadcasting Corporation (IBC), and Radio Philippines Network (RPN). Olazo was likewise accused of the same.
But sadly for the PCGG, the court ruled that they "failed to illustrate how defendants acted as dummies... in acquiring ill-gotten wealth."
Former executive vice president of Traders Royal Bank (TRB) Leopoldo Vergara and former chairman Africa were accused of collaborating with the Marcoses in laundering their money in different foreign banks such as Bangue Paribas of France, Credit Swisse, Lombard, Odie and Cie of Switzerland, and California Overseas Bank of the United States.
But the evidence provided by the PCGG, which was a letter from the TRB, has not been identified nor authenticated by its author. As a result, it has no evidentiary weight.
The letter proves that Africa was indeed the former Chairman of the TRB. But the Sandiganbayan said that fact alone cannot be the ground for his liability. There was also no testimonial evidence against Africa and Vergara.
Meanwhile, Arambulo was accused of establishing California Overseas Bank "with the use of purloined funds." But the court found that the evidence presented against him is insufficient to establish its claim.
Sandiganbayan (MANILA BULLETIN FILE PHOTO)
The complaint was denied on August 5, so the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a motion for reconsideration on August 27. It was denied by the court on September 13, so another MR was filed on September 27.
In the assailed resolution dated August 5, Marcos and his cronies were let off the hook due to missing documentary evidences and unauthenticated affidavits.
"Wherefore, premises considered, for failure of the plaintiff to prove by preponderance of evidence any of the causes of action against defendants Ferdinand E. Marcos, Imelda R. Marcos, Rafael Sison, Placido Mapa Jr., Don Ferry, Jose Tengco Jr., Ramon Monzon, Generosa Olazo, Cynthia Africa, and Rodolfo Arambulo, the case against them is hereby dismissed," the dispositive portion of the ruling written by Associate Justice Lorifel Pahimna read.
The PCGG filed the complaint for reconveyance, revision, accounting, restitution, and damages for ill-gotten wealth against the Marcos, his wife Imelda, and their cronies on July 31, 1987.
The PCGG said that Roberto S. Benedicto took advantage of his close ties to the Marcos couple in securing loans for his bulk carrier companies, while the other accused - Tengco Jr., Mapa, Sison, and others - all from the Development Bank of the Philippines and incorporators of the bulk carriers - acquired assets and properties and hid them through their dummies.
The second MR requested for the "relaxation of the rigid observance of procedural rules in the interest of justice."
Since the case involved a significant amount of public funds, the OSG said that the injustice faced by the Republic and its people "is not commensurate with the degree of its counsel's mistake in inadvertently failing to comply with the prescribed procedure."
However, the anti-graft court noted that the original MR was already "laden with procedural defects." The second one, on the other hand, failed to provide any compelling reason to relax the rule.
"The Court also notes that the MR cannot be treated as a prohibited second motion for reconsideration as it does not assail the decision dated August 5, 2019 but seeks the reversal of the resolution dated September 13, 2019. It bears emphasis that Section 2, Rule 52 of the Rules of Court contemplates a situation where a second motion for reconsideration is filed by the same party assailing the same judgment or final resolution," the court explained.
"This is not the situation in the case at bar," it stressed.
In its 67-page ruling dated August 5, the anti-graft court said that the burden of proof in the civil forfeiture proceedings fell on the PCGG. The question it sought is whether or not the PCGG was able to adduce sufficient evidence to prove that the properties sought to be recovered are in truth ill-gotten and that the defendants, by virtue of their position, close association or relation with President Marcos and his wife, accumulated wealth by illegal means.
For defendants Sison, Mapa Jr., Ferry and Tengco Jr., the PCGG said that they, through the DBP, extended loan accomodations to Sison's companies - Aklan Bulk Carriers Inc., Fuga Bulk Carriers Inc., Coron Bulk Carriers Inc., and Ecija Bulk Carriers Inc. under terms and conditions grossly disadvantageous to the government. As a result, they were "unjustly enriched."
However, there was no evidence that proved that the defendants were in collaboration with the Marcoses when they offered the bank loans.
Monzon, on the other hand, was accused of being the "dummy" of Marcos' daughter, Imee, in several broadcasting corporations - Banahaw Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), International Broadcasting Corporation (IBC), and Radio Philippines Network (RPN). Olazo was likewise accused of the same.
But sadly for the PCGG, the court ruled that they "failed to illustrate how defendants acted as dummies... in acquiring ill-gotten wealth."
Former executive vice president of Traders Royal Bank (TRB) Leopoldo Vergara and former chairman Africa were accused of collaborating with the Marcoses in laundering their money in different foreign banks such as Bangue Paribas of France, Credit Swisse, Lombard, Odie and Cie of Switzerland, and California Overseas Bank of the United States.
But the evidence provided by the PCGG, which was a letter from the TRB, has not been identified nor authenticated by its author. As a result, it has no evidentiary weight.
The letter proves that Africa was indeed the former Chairman of the TRB. But the Sandiganbayan said that fact alone cannot be the ground for his liability. There was also no testimonial evidence against Africa and Vergara.
Meanwhile, Arambulo was accused of establishing California Overseas Bank "with the use of purloined funds." But the court found that the evidence presented against him is insufficient to establish its claim.