Government prosecutors rebuffed anew

Don’t trivialize the judicial process.

Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Francis Garchitorena castigated the Office of the Ombudsman anew yesterday for trifling with the justice system by hastily filing then abruptly withdrawing a string of criminal cases against deposed President Joseph Estrada.

It was the second time that the anti-graft court rebuffed the state prosecutors for trying to withdraw five of eight charges against the disgraced leader to focus on the more serious charge of economic plunder.

Garchitorena rued that state prosecutors "trivialized the judicial process" because the charges had been filed and the arrest warrants already issued against Estrada.

In yesterday’s session, Ombudsman Aniano Desierto told the Sandiganbayan Fourth Division headed by Justice Narciso Nario that he wanted to withdraw the five lighter cases to prevent Estrada’s lawyers from using them to delay court proceedings.

Desierto said he believed Estrada’s lawyers would invoke the "double jeopardy" principle to delay trial of the cases since the five lesser charges involved alleged crimes linked to the main case of plunder.

Garchitorena scored the Ombudsman for allegedly insulting the court by filing the cases then immediately withdrawing them.

"If it is only the plunder case they are interested in, why did they file so many cases? Were they not taking this seriously?" Garchitorena asked.

Nario asked Desierto if the grounds he cited for withdrawal of the five cases were legal.

The magistrate said there was probable cause for the charges, prompting the court to issue a hold-departure order and an arrest warrant against the accused.

"We are surprised that you moved for the withdrawal of these cases when you claimed that you have sufficient evidence against the accused," Nario told Desierto.

For his part, Justice Nicodemo Ferrer pointed out that Desierto did not state "double jeopardy" in his motion to withdraw the cases.

Ferrer also brushed aside Desierto’s claim that the defense panel might employ delaying tactics, saying it was merely the Ombudsman’s perception and may not necessarily be true.

"There is an understanding that the series of withdrawals was done because you are afraid of double jeopardy. Why didn’t you put it directly in your motion to withdraw?" Ferrer asked Desierto.

The justices also observed that withdrawal of the cases was being done piecemeal.

Nario gave Desierto five working days within which to file his memorandum stating his reasons for withdrawing the five cases.

Desierto vowed that this time, he would not fail to cite "double jeopardy" as a reason for his move.

Meanwhile, Solicitor General Simeon Marcelo rejected calls for the impeachment of Desierto for allegedly fumbling on the graft cases before the Sandiganbayan.

He said Desierto knows his job and that the Ombudsman’s critics must bring their complaint to the Supreme Court.

He said, however, that initiating an impeachment case may be moot and academic since Desierto’s term was already about to expire.

The opposition coalition Puwersa ng Masa-Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (PnM-LDP) renewed its call for Desierto’s immediate resignation "in order to spare the country from further embarrassment before the eyes of the international community."

In a statement, PnM-LDP spokesman Crispin Remulla said Desierto has already maligned the integrity of his office and has become a tool for persecution of Estrada.

Remulla charged that resignation "is the most honorable thing a government official should do because he cannot perform his function very well." — With reports from Shiela Crisostomo