Graft raps vs Imelda, Lucio Tan dismissed

The Supreme Court (SC) affirmed yesterday the dismissal of a graft case against former First Lady Imelda Marcos, business tycoon Lucio Tan and seven other people in connection with Tan’s purchase of the Maranao Hotel Resort Corp.

The hotel was one of the equity holdings of the Development Bank of the Philippines.

In an 11-page decision, the high court’s second division upheld the Sept. 5, 1997 resolution of the Office of the Ombudsman dismissing the complaint for violation of Republic Act 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, filed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government against Marcos, Tan, Harry Tan, Benjamin Jimenez, Leoncio Giron, Fermin Hebron and Joel Ibay, all members of the Board of Directors of the Sipalay Corp.; Don Ferry, former member of the DBP Board of Governors; and Estela M. Ladrido, acting executive office of the DBP.

The decision was penned by Associate Justice Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez.

The Supreme Court said that, as a general rule, it does not interfere with the investigatory and prosecutorial powers of the Office of the Ombudsman without any compelling reason.

However, the SC said this policy does not apply when there is grave abuse of discretion.

"In the case at bar, we hold that the Ombudsman committed no grave abuse of discretion in finding that there was no probable cause against the private respondent to hold them liable for violation of Section 3 (e) of RA 3019," read the SC decision.

"Probable cause signifies a reasonable ground for suspicion supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious man’s belief that the person accused is guilty of the offense with which he is charged."

The SC said the grounds for suspicion must be reasonable and supported by sufficiently strong circumstances.

"As previously discussed, the Ombudsman correctly found that some of the essential elements of the offense charged are not present," read the high court’s decision.

"Verily, we cannot attribute any arbitrariness or despotism to him.

Wherefore, the petition is dismissed. The resolution of the Ombudsman dated Sept. 5, 1997 dismissing petitioner’s complaint against private respondents in OMB case no. 0-91-0382 is affirmed.

Court records show that in 1984, the DBP, a government-owned and -controlled corporation, found itself in dire financial straits.

Therefore, the DBP decided to sell off some of its assets, and one of these was its equity holdings in the Maranao Hotel Resort

Corp., then owned by the Century Park Sheraton Hotel in Manila.

Pursuant to its resolution 1937, dated Aug. 22, 1984, the DBP board of governors offered to sell the shares for $8.33 million, or P150 million at the exchange rate then prevailing, either on a cash basis or for a down payment of 30 percent of the selling price.

The balance would be payable for a term not longer than five years with an interest rate of five percent per annum.

Upon the recommendation of Ma. Estela M. Ladrido, then DBP acting executive officer, the DBP board of governors approved the sale of the equity holdings in Maranao Hotel Resort Corp. to PCI management consultants, Inc., acting for an undisclosed foreign buyer for $8.4 million, but the sale did not push through.

Tan wrote then President Ferdinand Marcos, saying that he was interested in purchasing the equity holdings of DBP in Maranao Hotel Resort Corp.

His written offer was supposedly found by the PCGG among the documents left behind by the Marcoses at Malacañang when they fled during the EDSA I revolution in February 1986.

In filing the graft case against Marcos, Tan and their seven co-accused, the PCGG said that the accused had conspired and acted fraudulently to accumulate ill-gotten wealth to the prejudice of the government.

In his counter-affidavit, Tan alleged that he had no participation in the negotiations with DBP for the purchase of the Maranao Hotel Resort Corp. holdings nor in the execution of the contract.

On Sept. 5, 1997, the Office of the Ombudsman dismissed PCGG’s complaint, saying the acts of the DBP Board of Governors should not be condemned as a crime, but should even be lauded for their boldness in trying to save not only the Century Park Sheraton Hotel but the DBP itself.

The Office of the Ombudsman found no evidence of conspiracy among the private respondents.

In ruling in favor of Marcos, Tan and their co-accused, the SC noted that the assassination of former senator Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino in August 1983 led to a deepening socio-economic crisis which cast its shadow over the country.

"To remain solvent, DBP had to take the drastic step of unloading its shareholdings in several five-star hotels in Metro Manila, including the Century Park Sheraton Hotel," read the SC decision.

"The shares of DBP in Maranao Hotel Resort Corporation, which owned the Century Park Sheraton Hotel, carried a book value of P340.7 million.

"However, these shares were saddled with uncollected interests, penalties and surcharges, which made it difficult to offer them for sale," the tribunal said.

The SC agreed with the Office of the Ombudsman that in approving the sale of the shareholdings, the DBP officials did not give unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference.

"Bad faith does not simply connote bad judgment or negligence," it said.

"It imputes a dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong, a breach of sworn duty through some motive or intent or ill will.

"It partakes of the nature of fraud. In short, it is a manifest deliberate intent on the part of the accused to do wrong or to cause damage," the ruling said.

There is nothing on record to show that private respondent DBP officials were spurred by any corrupt motive or that they received any material benefit from the sale of the DBP shareholdings, the SC ruled.