MANILA, Philippines - Deficiencies and other weaknesses in the plunder complaint filed in 2005 by then Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo against former military comptroller Carlos Garcia forced the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) to enter into a plea bargaining agreement with the accused.
“Otherwise, Garcia goes scot-free and the government gets nothing,” according to Deputy Special Prosecutor Jesus Micael yesterday.
Micael made the statement to The STAR after the Sandiganbayan lifted its Dec. 22 gag order that barred all parties to the case from granting interviews to the media.
“We have to swallow the bitter pill because of dearth of testimonial evidence to pin down Garcia,” Micael said.
The Sandiganbayan cited the testimonial evidence that may result in an acquittal during last Monday’s hearing on the motion for intervention filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).
Micael pointed to the charge sheet against Garcia accusing him of plundering some P303 million from the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).
He also cited the information filed by Marcelo and then Special Prosecutor Dennis Villa-Ignacio that alleged Garcia received bribe money from unknown, unspecified, or unnamed suppliers and contractors.
Micael though refused to directly refer to the complaint as “defective.”
Also, the allegations of undue influence on Garcia, upon receiving the alleged bribes, were also unspecified considering that testimony to prove such allegations is needed to convict the former general.
Worse, Micael said the P303-million worth of alleged ill-gotten properties “were not completely validated upon the filing of the information” which is why prosecutors now handling the case were only able to validate around P135.4-million worth of questionable assets.
“Marcelo and Villa-Ignacio failed in that aspect,” Micael stressed.
He noted Marcelo and Villa-Ignacio are no longer connected with the OSP along with those who handled the investigation against Garcia because they have also resigned.
“We tried to find suppliers and contractors but they remain unknown up to now. We were trying to remedy the deficiencies, the weaknesses,” Micael told The STAR.
According to Micael, the present prosecutors of the case are left with the task of how they can prove that Garcia received money and prove the crime of plunder beyond reasonable doubt.
Hoping
It may be an uphill battle with the Sandiganbayan regarding the case but Malacañang said they are still hoping that the anti-graft court could see it through in favor of the government.
“Hopefully, we can still convince our Sandiganbayan justices on why the government does not agree with such a kind of deal, the plea bargaining agreement,” presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda said.
“The OSG believes that it has a case against General Garcia and that’s the reason why it seeks to intervene before the Sandiganbayan. It has presented its own interpretation of the case and we would like to prove to the Sandiganbayan justices that there is sufficient case against Garcia,” he said.
Lacierda disagreed with the claim of the Sandiganbayan justices that the OSG had been made aware of the plea bargain deal since September 2010 when it sought to lift the freeze order the court issued on several of Garcia’s assets.
Lacierda said he would not want to teach Cadiz what to do, and it was up to him.
“I think Joel Cadiz would try to remedy the situation. Now that this has become a public outcry, he is on top of the situation right now, and whatever deficiencies were pressing in the past are now being addressed by Joel Cadiz,” Lacierda said.
Responding to claims that the government might still recover alleged ill-gotten wealth of Garcia even with an acquittal through forfeiture proceedings, Micael said this is not true.
In order for the government to claim its rightful share in Garcia’s $765,000 condominium unit in Trump Park Avenue, New York and his US bank accounts worth around P13.5 million, a criminal conviction by the Sandiganbayan is necessary under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT), Micael explained.
In a forfeiture case, which is civil in nature, Micael said the Philippines would not be able to claim the US assets especially since Garcia’s wife Clarita and sons Timothy Mark, Ian Carl, and Juan Carlo were not even served summons.
“Sharing of the property abroad is by reason of criminal case even for a conviction on plea of guilt. It’s a requirement of the MLAT,” he said.
The condominium unit in New York, which is roughly worth P43.1 million based on the peso-dollar exchange rate at the time of the purchase, is considered to be a prime property in the US.
Micael said the property stands on Trump Park Avenue, which is named after American business magnate and real estate developer Donald Trump.
This means it is a property of high value, which is unlikely to depreciate, Micael pointed out.
‘Extremely lucky’
After the Sandiganbayan lifted its gag order, officials of the Office of the Ombudsman and the OSP are expected to categorically answer all the attacks it has been receiving since the plea bargaining agreement was made public on Dec. 16, 2010 when Garcia was allowed to plead guilty to direct bribery and facilitating money laundering and was subsequently released on bail.
“The problem with critics is they make criticism without looking at entire records of the case before they open their mouths,” Micael lamented.
He said it is also wrong to say that the plea bargaining agreement with Garcia was a midnight deal of the administration of former President Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo.
He said the current administration of President Aquino would benefit from the agreement.
The Office of the Ombudsman is expected to call for a press conference anytime today or tomorrow to finally explain its position on the plea bargaining agreement and answer allegations of irregularity.
During last Monday’s hearing, Sandiganbayan presiding Justice Edilberto Sandoval, as chairman of the Second Division, and Associate Justices Teresita Diaz-Baldos and Samuel Martires, grilled Assistant Solicitor General Amparo Tang for more than an hour on the issues she is raising in the OSG’s motion to intervene.
“Are we not protecting the interest of the government,” the justices told Tang on the issue of why Garcia’s assets have already been ordered transferred in the name of the Republic of the Philippines if the plea bargaining agreement has not been approved. –With Delon Porcalla