MANILA, Philippines - The Sandiganbayan dismissed yesterday a P58-million graft case filed against the wife of Vice President Jejomar Binay and five other respondents, ruling that the evidence was not sufficient to prove alleged overpricing of furniture for the Makati City Hall.
The anti-graft court’s second division said there is insufficient basis for the trial of former Makati City mayor Elenita Binay, who was implicated in the alleged overpriced purchase of furniture worth over P58 million in 2000 and 2001.
Her fellow respondents, identified as former city administrator Nicanor Santiago Jr., general services department head Ernesto Aspillaga and private defendants Li Yee Shing, Jason Li and Vivian Edurise of the private company Office Gallery International Inc., were also cleared.
Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice and second division chair Edilberto Sandoval, who penned the ruling, said the prosecution failed to present enough evidence to eventually prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
“This court is duty-bound to spare the accused from the unnecessary burden, expense and anxiety of having to defend themselves in public trial,” the 69-page decision read.
“The admission made in open court early on by the prosecution that the information they filed in this case does not conform with evidence on record foretold a bleak conclusion to this case.”
Records show that during trial, Prosecutor Rodrigo Coquia supposedly confessed that the charge sheet against Binay was unclear about whether the accused were charged with causing undue injury to the government or giving unwarranted benefits to a private firm.
Even though newly appointed Commission on Audit (COA) commissioner Heidi Mendoza was among the witnesses presented by government lawyers to prove their case, the Sandiganbayan said the testimony that the alleged overpricing was found only by simply comparing the layout plan with the purchase request and purchase order is not strong enough.
“It is beyond belief that the prosecution came to court with evidence comprising merely a bare comparison of the number of partitions purchased,” the anti-graft court said, adding that there was not even a confirmatory physical count of the partitions that were actually used for the furniture for city hall.
“In the face of the weakness of the prosecution’s case to prove the elements of the offense charged against the accused, there remains no further reason to hold them for trial under the present indictment,” the ruling stressed.