Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez said the CA’s ruling favoring Dante Tan was a big blow to the government’s campaign against graft and corruption.
"It is a substantial blow to the government when the Court of Appeals decides against you," he said. "If it is a criminal case, there is no more recourse. If it is a criminal case, you cannot appeal that because of double jeopardy."
However, Gonzalez said the government will obey the CA’s order.
"The Court of Appeals is the arbiter of the court," he said.
"At this point, we have no basis to speculate that the trial court might have acted adversely if such relief has been sought by the People in its opposition to demurrer to evidence," read the CA’s five-page decision penned by Associate Justice Godardo Jacinto.
"As pointed out in the challenged resolution, the prosecution had ample time and opportunity to pursue such appropriate recourse since it was much later on March 16, 2004 that the demurrer to evidence was acted upon by the court.
"Needless to state, that had such petition for certiorari against the aforesaid orders been filed with a higher court, the People could have urgently sought therefrom the immediate issuance of a temporary restraining order enjoining the trial court from acting on the demurrer to evidence during pendency of the certiorari proceeding."
On Dec. 21, 2000, the government filed two criminal cases against Tan for violation of the Revised Securities Act before the Pasig City regional trial court.
In the first case, the government accused Tan of being the beneficial owner of 84.03 million in BW Resources shares, constituting 18.6 percent of the company’s outstanding shares.
Tan allegedly failed to report his acquisition to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Philippine Stock Exchange within 10 days after becoming beneficial owner of the shares, the government added.
In the second case, Tan was accused of being the beneficial owner of 75 million BW Resources shares, which constituted 16.67 percent of the company.
On Dec. 11, 2003, Judge Briccio Ygana of the Pasig regional trial court Branch 153 declared as inadmissible some of the evidence the government had presented against Tan.
Ygana denied the government’s motion for reconsideration on Jan. 27, 2004.
On Jan. 29, 2004, Ygana granted Tan’s motion for leave to file a demurrer to evidence and ordered government prosecutors to file their opposition within 10 days.
On Feb. 18, 2004, government prosecutors filed their opposition and informed the court that they had endorsed to the Office of the Solicitor General the filing of a petition for certiorari before the CA.
On March 16, 2004, Ygana granted Tan’s motion for a demurrer to evidence.
Under the rules of court, a demurrer to evidence is a legal strategy in which the accused would waive his rights to present evidence on grounds that the case against him has no factual basis, and that the court could decide the case based on the prosecution’s allegations.
The court’s permission is needed before the accused can avail of a demurrer to evidence.