Sandigan defends Garcia plea ruling

MANILA, Philippines -  Justices of the Sandiganbayan’s Second Division handling the case of former military comptroller Carlos Garcia have appealed for public understanding over the approval of the plea bargaining agreement with the former general.

The magistrates of the anti-graft court, knowing how the public is outraged by the thought that only P135.4 million of what was allegedly stolen from government coffers was being returned, said, “It has never been our intention to denigrate the feelings of the people.”

“We understand and respect the feelings of a desolate people crying for the eradication of graft and corruption, for, we too, are angered by corruption.”

“We share with them the same dreams and aspirations of having a culture of corruption at least controlled, if not eradicated,” said the Sandiganbayan’s lengthy decision in junking the motion for intervention filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) last week.

The magistrates led by Associate Justice Samuel Martires said they have not set aside public opinion over the issue.

“We are not saying that the opinion of the citizenry is baseless. In fact, we were also amazed at the amount of money that the accused and his family own,” the justices said in the ruling.

The anti-graft court said approval of the controversial plea bargaining agreement between Garcia and the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) was based on “our bounden responsibility to administer justice with utmost impartiality which can only be done by an objective assessment of the facts proven and the applicable laws.”

“While it is most convenient and easy for the court to ride on the crest of the cascading and dominant influence of the public’s view, we must remain steadfast in our duty of being not only an independent trier of facts but an impartial, unbiased, fair, and honest dispenser of justice,” Martires, Associate Justice Teresita Diaz-Baldos, and presiding Justice Edilberto Sandoval said.

“Our findings that the accused is innocent may be unpopular. But we would rather tell the truth and be unpopular, than be a superstar because we satisfied public opinion by creating half truths and distortions,” the magistrates stressed.

The magistrates referred to how their decisions on the OSG motion and the plea bargaining agreement practically absolved Garcia of the crime of plunder because of the weak evidence presented by the prosecution halfway through the trial and the “equally weak” information filed in 2005.

Apparently expecting public outrage and noting that some lawmakers are even calling for their resignation, the magistrates have explained lengthily why they cannot convict Garcia.

The anti-graft court said the public was fed with misinformation by people “who are expected to be the sentinels of the rule of law.”

The OSG, on the other hand, sought before the Sandiganbayan to “suspend the proceedings” in the Garcia cases, declaring that it will be filing a consolidated motion for reconsideration of its May 9, 2011 ruling.

Solicitor General Jose Anselmo Cadiz said a motion for reconsideration of the Sandiganbayan decision junking a motion asking Justice Sandoval to inhibit because he had a son working with the OSP will be filed.

The OSG wants to intervene in the case as lawyer of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) with the end goal of having the plea bargaining agreement scrapped for allegedly being disadvantageous to the government.

The Sandiganbayan, however, rejected their arguments, ruling the OSG has no authority to intervene in the case and the AFP is not the offended party but the government of the Republic of the Philippines.

Under the plea bargaining agreement, Garcia is surrendering P135.4 million of his alleged unexplained wealth in exchange for being convicted of lesser crimes punishable only with maximum jail terms of 12 years.