 |
| Stressing that all legal remedies are being considered, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales yesterday maintained that government prosecutors had sufficient evidence to prove former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. APEC | With reports from By Michael Punongbayan of PhilStar |
MANILA, Philippines – For those who worked to prosecute former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for plunder, it’s not yet the end of the line.
Stressing that all legal remedies are being considered, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales yesterday maintained that government prosecutors had sufficient evidence to prove Arroyo’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Morales told a news conference of several options, including the filing of an appeal that would seek a reversal of the Supreme Court (SC) decision the other day dismissing the plunder case against Arroyo.
For the ombudsman, the game isn’t over yet. Morales said her office is investigating Arroyo for another plunder case, also arising from her alleged involvement in the misuse of Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) intelligence funds amounting to more than P50 million from 2004 to 2007.
The SC on Tuesday said there was insufficient evidence in the plunder case filed against Arroyo over the misuse of PCSO funds totaling P366 million during her term, which ended in 2010.
The high court allowed the petition of Arroyo seeking to dismiss the charges against her for lack of sufficient evidence.
Morales said the filing of a new case against Arroyo would not violate the rule on double jeopardy since it was committed in a different time.
“If we can prove there was pillaging or ransacking of the public treasury… if after preliminary investigation, we believe that probable cause lies, then we will certainly hale her to court,” she said.
Morales added the SC decision granting the demurrer to evidence filed by Arroyo was unfortunate. The same petition was earlier denied by the Sandiganbayan.
“We were able to present strong evidence consisting of more than 630 documentary exhibits, the testimony of so many witnesses which are reflected in 43 transcripts of stenographic notes, as well as the records of the case from A to Z consisting of more than 40 folders and/or records of the case,” Morales said in a press briefing.
“So to us, these are exhaustive records which reflect that the prosecution was able to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the accused,” she stressed.
Morales added the Office of the Ombudsman has yet to receive a copy of Tuesday’s SC ruling on Arroyo’s case.
She said this is why she cannot yet comment on the contents of the ruling.
She admitted though the prosecutors were disappointed and disheartened.
“This is not the end of the line. We have other options, one or two of which we will exercise. They are not discouraged because they are very, very firm that they were able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt,” she said.
On accusations that Arroyo was persecuted and not prosecuted, Morales said these were mostly the opinion of others, especially defense lawyers.
“As far as the Office of the Ombudsman is concerned, we’re doing our job to prosecute the accused. To find probable cause or to dismiss the case if there is no probable cause. All these speculations are merely speculatory,” she stressed.
Morales believes the Sandiganbayan, which denied bail four times and denied the demurer to evidence filed by Arroyo, correctly assessed the evidence presented by the prosecution.
“We are only doing our mandate. We prosecute if necessary. We also dismiss cases if necessary too. We have to balance our role. We just don’t prosecute, we also dismiss if necessary,” Morales said.
“Do I have to win all cases I file? Do you have to fault the prosecutors if they lose cases? Do you have to fault the Sandiganbayan if their decisions are reversed?” she said in reaction to the reported call for her resignation.
In the same news conference, Morales debunked insinuations the Duterte administration’s stand that Arroyo should be released from hospital arrest had something to do with her acquittal. She stressed such claims are wrong.
“We are independent. We do not take orders from the President. We do not take signals from the President. We do our duty in accordance to what is expected of us. It is unfair to charge us to be lapdogs of the present administration. Do we look like dogs?” Morales remarked.
Arroyo’s legal team is eyeing the possibility of filing an impeachment complaint against Morales.
Ferdinand Topacio said they are considering filing the complaint before the House of Representatives.
Topacio said they are still awaiting the copy of the SC ruling, which he said would be the basis of filing the charges.
“Since Ombudsman Morales is an impeachable officer, we are considering betrayal of trust and culpable violation of the Constitution as the ground for her impeachment,” Topacio said.
Defense lawyer Lawrence Hector Arroyo said an appeal or a motion for reconsideration of the ruling will not be allowed.
Arroyo cited an SC ruling where Morales, who was then an associate justice of the high tribunal, concurred in a decision that “as a rule, a judgment of acquittal cannot be reconsidered because it places the accused under double jeopardy.”
“To reconsider a judgment of acquittal places the accused twice in jeopardy of being punished for the crime of which the accused has already been absolved,” he said.
“In the case of former president Arroyo, no less than the SC has absolved her. The filing of a motion for reconsideration will place her in jeopardy of being punished for the same crime,” the defense counsel stressed.
Arroyo’s lawyers are using the same tool of demurrer to evidence in seeking the dismissal of the case against Arroyo stemming from the NBN-ZTE broadband deal.
The Sandiganbayan’s Fourth Division has allowed Arroyo to file such pleadings and will rule on the same after the ombudsman prosecutors are given the chance to comment or oppose.
If the demurrers to evidence are granted, Arroyo will be acquitted but if the pleading is denied, the defense counsels are expected to again elevate the same to the Supreme Court.
“It’s disappointing, but not at all surprising. We may have been successful in removing a chief justice loyal to Arroyo, but others have remained. We have also seen the majority of this Supreme Court unjustly grant the posting of bail for Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, who is also charged with plunder,” Dinagat Islands Rep. Kaka Bag-ao said.
“Perhaps it is high time to review and reform our laws that seek to deter public officials from stealing money from the government and, most of all, the Filipino people. This is a temporary setback in the quest for a clean and honest government that is worthy of the people’s trust. We will continue our crusade in all available arenas. At the end of the day, I still have hope for justice,” she said.
Akbayan Rep. Tomasito Villarin said the SC decision “is lamentable as it trumps justice over individual humanitarian considerations of people in high places who can have their cake and eat it too.”
“To say that the evidence is weak when factual determination was already done by the anti-graft court is in itself questionable. The case was not about political persecution of a former president but that of making high officials accountable to our laws and Constitution regardless of status in life,” he said.
Alliance of Concerned Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio blamed the Aquino administration, which he said failed “to build a strong case for plunder against former president Arroyo, despite being in power for six years.”
“As a result, she will not be held accountable for plunder even as she continues to enjoy impunity for her role in the extrajudicial killings of hundreds of activists during her term as president. Justice remains elusive for the Filipino people,” he said.
Party-list group Gabriela, which won two seats in the House of Representatives, said in a statement it was “dismayed and extremely disappointed at the Supreme Court’s dismissal of plunder charges against former president Arroyo and her consequent release from detention.”
It said the former president enjoyed perks and privileges even under detention.
The militant youth group Anakbayan blamed former president Benigno Aquino III for failing to secure the conviction of Arroyo.
“The Supreme Court ruling junking the charges against former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is a grave injustice against the Filipino people who were victims of Arroyo’s plunder, corruption, fascism and puppetry,” Anakbayan national president Vencer Crisostomo said.
“This proves that Aquino, despite his posturing against corruption, was not serious in making Arroyo accountable and may have in fact brokered a deal with Arroyo. Daang matuwid was a grand lie,” he added.
Crisostomo said Aquino betrayed the nation by filing weak cases against Arroyo and by deliberately bungling the cases.
Even the communists blamed Aquino for filing a weak case against Arroyo.
While corruption under the Arroyo government was Aquino’s favorite punchingbag, not a single top official was appropriately charged and punished for corruption, the Communist Party of the Philippines said in a statement.
“It is clear that the filing of charges against Arroyo was merely political playacting and a ploy to disenfranchise Arroyo and not so much a serious effort to attain justice for the tribulations suffered by the Filipino people,” it said.
Sen. Ralph Recto did not comment over the case but filed a proposal seeking to place the PCSO funds “beyond the reach of the most powerful person in the land” by earmarking it through the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. – With Jess Diaz, Perseus Echeminada, Edith Regalado, Paolo Romero, Artemio Dumlao
Stressing that all legal remedies are being considered, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales yesterday maintained that government prosecutors had sufficient evidence to prove Arroyo’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Morales told a news conference of several options, including the filing of an appeal that would seek a reversal of the Supreme Court (SC) decision the other day dismissing the plunder case against Arroyo.
For the ombudsman, the game isn’t over yet. Morales said her office is investigating Arroyo for another plunder case, also arising from her alleged involvement in the misuse of Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) intelligence funds amounting to more than P50 million from 2004 to 2007.
The SC on Tuesday said there was insufficient evidence in the plunder case filed against Arroyo over the misuse of PCSO funds totaling P366 million during her term, which ended in 2010.
The high court allowed the petition of Arroyo seeking to dismiss the charges against her for lack of sufficient evidence.
Morales said the filing of a new case against Arroyo would not violate the rule on double jeopardy since it was committed in a different time.
“If we can prove there was pillaging or ransacking of the public treasury… if after preliminary investigation, we believe that probable cause lies, then we will certainly hale her to court,” she said.
Morales added the SC decision granting the demurrer to evidence filed by Arroyo was unfortunate. The same petition was earlier denied by the Sandiganbayan.
“We were able to present strong evidence consisting of more than 630 documentary exhibits, the testimony of so many witnesses which are reflected in 43 transcripts of stenographic notes, as well as the records of the case from A to Z consisting of more than 40 folders and/or records of the case,” Morales said in a press briefing.
“So to us, these are exhaustive records which reflect that the prosecution was able to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the accused,” she stressed.
Morales added the Office of the Ombudsman has yet to receive a copy of Tuesday’s SC ruling on Arroyo’s case.
She said this is why she cannot yet comment on the contents of the ruling.
She admitted though the prosecutors were disappointed and disheartened.
“This is not the end of the line. We have other options, one or two of which we will exercise. They are not discouraged because they are very, very firm that they were able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt,” she said.
Doing their job
Morales defended her prosecutors, believing they were not at fault because they did their best in handling the case.On accusations that Arroyo was persecuted and not prosecuted, Morales said these were mostly the opinion of others, especially defense lawyers.
“As far as the Office of the Ombudsman is concerned, we’re doing our job to prosecute the accused. To find probable cause or to dismiss the case if there is no probable cause. All these speculations are merely speculatory,” she stressed.
Morales believes the Sandiganbayan, which denied bail four times and denied the demurer to evidence filed by Arroyo, correctly assessed the evidence presented by the prosecution.
“We are only doing our mandate. We prosecute if necessary. We also dismiss cases if necessary too. We have to balance our role. We just don’t prosecute, we also dismiss if necessary,” Morales said.
“Do I have to win all cases I file? Do you have to fault the prosecutors if they lose cases? Do you have to fault the Sandiganbayan if their decisions are reversed?” she said in reaction to the reported call for her resignation.
In the same news conference, Morales debunked insinuations the Duterte administration’s stand that Arroyo should be released from hospital arrest had something to do with her acquittal. She stressed such claims are wrong.
“We are independent. We do not take orders from the President. We do not take signals from the President. We do our duty in accordance to what is expected of us. It is unfair to charge us to be lapdogs of the present administration. Do we look like dogs?” Morales remarked.
Arroyo’s legal team is eyeing the possibility of filing an impeachment complaint against Morales.
Ferdinand Topacio said they are considering filing the complaint before the House of Representatives.
Topacio said they are still awaiting the copy of the SC ruling, which he said would be the basis of filing the charges.
“Since Ombudsman Morales is an impeachable officer, we are considering betrayal of trust and culpable violation of the Constitution as the ground for her impeachment,” Topacio said.
Defense lawyer Lawrence Hector Arroyo said an appeal or a motion for reconsideration of the ruling will not be allowed.
Arroyo cited an SC ruling where Morales, who was then an associate justice of the high tribunal, concurred in a decision that “as a rule, a judgment of acquittal cannot be reconsidered because it places the accused under double jeopardy.”
“To reconsider a judgment of acquittal places the accused twice in jeopardy of being punished for the crime of which the accused has already been absolved,” he said.
“In the case of former president Arroyo, no less than the SC has absolved her. The filing of a motion for reconsideration will place her in jeopardy of being punished for the same crime,” the defense counsel stressed.
Arroyo’s lawyers are using the same tool of demurrer to evidence in seeking the dismissal of the case against Arroyo stemming from the NBN-ZTE broadband deal.
The Sandiganbayan’s Fourth Division has allowed Arroyo to file such pleadings and will rule on the same after the ombudsman prosecutors are given the chance to comment or oppose.
If the demurrers to evidence are granted, Arroyo will be acquitted but if the pleading is denied, the defense counsels are expected to again elevate the same to the Supreme Court.
Blaming Noy and the high court
Lawmakers criticized the high court for dismissing the plunder case against Arroyo and ordering her release.“It’s disappointing, but not at all surprising. We may have been successful in removing a chief justice loyal to Arroyo, but others have remained. We have also seen the majority of this Supreme Court unjustly grant the posting of bail for Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, who is also charged with plunder,” Dinagat Islands Rep. Kaka Bag-ao said.
“Perhaps it is high time to review and reform our laws that seek to deter public officials from stealing money from the government and, most of all, the Filipino people. This is a temporary setback in the quest for a clean and honest government that is worthy of the people’s trust. We will continue our crusade in all available arenas. At the end of the day, I still have hope for justice,” she said.
Akbayan Rep. Tomasito Villarin said the SC decision “is lamentable as it trumps justice over individual humanitarian considerations of people in high places who can have their cake and eat it too.”
“To say that the evidence is weak when factual determination was already done by the anti-graft court is in itself questionable. The case was not about political persecution of a former president but that of making high officials accountable to our laws and Constitution regardless of status in life,” he said.
Alliance of Concerned Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio blamed the Aquino administration, which he said failed “to build a strong case for plunder against former president Arroyo, despite being in power for six years.”
“As a result, she will not be held accountable for plunder even as she continues to enjoy impunity for her role in the extrajudicial killings of hundreds of activists during her term as president. Justice remains elusive for the Filipino people,” he said.
Party-list group Gabriela, which won two seats in the House of Representatives, said in a statement it was “dismayed and extremely disappointed at the Supreme Court’s dismissal of plunder charges against former president Arroyo and her consequent release from detention.”
It said the former president enjoyed perks and privileges even under detention.
The militant youth group Anakbayan blamed former president Benigno Aquino III for failing to secure the conviction of Arroyo.
“The Supreme Court ruling junking the charges against former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is a grave injustice against the Filipino people who were victims of Arroyo’s plunder, corruption, fascism and puppetry,” Anakbayan national president Vencer Crisostomo said.
“This proves that Aquino, despite his posturing against corruption, was not serious in making Arroyo accountable and may have in fact brokered a deal with Arroyo. Daang matuwid was a grand lie,” he added.
Crisostomo said Aquino betrayed the nation by filing weak cases against Arroyo and by deliberately bungling the cases.
Even the communists blamed Aquino for filing a weak case against Arroyo.
While corruption under the Arroyo government was Aquino’s favorite punchingbag, not a single top official was appropriately charged and punished for corruption, the Communist Party of the Philippines said in a statement.
“It is clear that the filing of charges against Arroyo was merely political playacting and a ploy to disenfranchise Arroyo and not so much a serious effort to attain justice for the tribulations suffered by the Filipino people,” it said.
Sen. Ralph Recto did not comment over the case but filed a proposal seeking to place the PCSO funds “beyond the reach of the most powerful person in the land” by earmarking it through the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. – With Jess Diaz, Perseus Echeminada, Edith Regalado, Paolo Romero, Artemio Dumlao
No comments:
Post a Comment