The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the dismissal of a plunder case against former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada, El Shaddai leader Mariano “Mike” Velarde and his son, Franklin, and 15 other persons in connection with the P1.22 billion purchase of 7.9 hectares of land owned by the Velarde family for the C-5 link of the Manila-Cavite Toll Expressway project.

In a resolution written by Justice Teresita J. Leonardo de Castro, the SC dismissed the petition filed by lawyer Ernesto Francisco Jr. who wanted a reversal of the 2001 decision of the Office of the Ombudsman dismissing his complaint.

The SC said that the Office of the Ombudsman did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Francisco’s complaint with a ruling that stated the questioned purchase was a legitimate transaction.

“The abuse of discretion must be so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act at all in contemplation of law, as where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of passion or hostility.

“We do not find this situation to be present in the instant case so as to merit a reversal of the questioned resolution and order issued by respondent Office of the Ombudsman,” the SC said.

Also affirmed by the SC was the dismissal of the complaint against Estrada, the Velardes and their corespondents, former Executive Secretary Ronaldo Zamora, former Public Works and Highways Secretary and Toll Regulatory Board Chairman Gregorio Vigilar, former Prime Minister Cesar Virata of the Coastal Road Corp., Luis Virata, Manuel Zamora, Mariano Benedicto II, Ramon Dumaual, Ruben De Ocampo, Frisco San Juan, Arsenio Yulo, Patrick Gatan, Luis Medina-Cue, Soledad Medina-Cue, Rey Divino Daval-Santos and Silvestre De Leon.

“We find no cogent reason to weigh all over again the evidence in this case and to reverse the findings of the public respondent (Ombudsman)...

as it does not interfere with the discretion of the Ombudsman to determine whether there exists reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof….

“This rule is based not only upon respect for the investigatory and prosecutor powers granted by the Constitution to the Office of the Ombudsman but upon practicality as well. Otherwise the functions of the courts will be grievously hampered by immeasurable petitions assailing the dismissal of investigatory proceedings conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman,” the SC stressed.

Questioning the purchase of the 7.9-hectare Paranaque property belonging to AMVEL Land Corporation owned by the Velardes, Francisco claimed that the acquisition of the land for the right of way use in the C-5 link was done in apparent haste at an “outrageously high price” with the connivance of then President Estrada.

Francisco claimed that the Velarde property consisted of undeveloped agricultural lands and salt-making beds but which had been reclassified as residential and later sold to the government at a price which was more than 2,300 percent of their total declared market value and 11,700 percent of their total assessed value.

He pointed out that the purchased price for the right-of-way acquisition “should be the equivalent of the zonal value plus 10 per cent thereof” based on Administrative Order No. 50, which then President Estrada issued on Feb. 17, 1999.

Thus, he stressed that since the zonal value of the subject parcels of land was set the year before at P4,500 per square meter by the Department of Finance, the purchase price should have been P4,950 only, for a total purchase price of P394.21 million instead of P15,350 per square meter as paid for by the government.

The Velardes maintained that the purchased property was not overpriced since the land had been classified as commercial areas and not agricultural or residential as claimed in the complaint.

“The final purchase price was imposed upon AMVEL by the government, and respondent Velarde had no hand in fixing the said amount. Private respondents (the Velardes) merely acted within the bounds of their duties and powers as officers of AMVEL,” they said.

In dismissing the complaint, the Office of the Ombudsman ruled that the purchase benefitted the government with savings of more than P369 million, saying that at P15,355 per square meter, the amount is far below the original recommendation of the Paranaque City Appraisal Committee to purchase AMVEL's land at P20,000.”