Ombudsman withdraws motion to amend ‘pork’ raps

MANILA, Philippines - After being warned that revising the criminal complaint could result in the release of the accused from detention, lawyers of the Office of the Ombudsman yesterday backpedaled on its decision to amend the plunder complaint against Senator Jinggoy Estrada.

Government prosecutors withdrew the motion to amend the complaint against Estrada after the Sandiganbayan justices cautioned them that revising the original criminal complaint will mean that earlier rulings, including the finding of probable cause that was the basis for the issuance of arrest warrants, will have to be set aside.

In a hearing before the anti-graft court’s Fifth Division, magistrates led by Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Roland Jurado told ombudsman lawyers handling the pork barrel scam plunder case against Estrada of the consequences of amending the charge sheet.

“If I were you I will not amend the information,” the Sandiganbayan said, reminding the prosecution panel of the possible results. “We are just warning you of the effect of that amended information, (that) the accused will be released.” Ombudsman lawyers decided to heed the warning.

The Office of the Ombudsman had wanted to revise the criminal information against Estrada and Senators Ramon Revilla Jr. and Juan Ponce Enrile in order to stress that it was the lawmakers who primarily committed plunder and not alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles.

In the original complaint, the private individual tagged publicly as the mastermind of the pork barrel fund scam was the one accused of misappropriating the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) allocations of lawmakers.

In the proposed amendment, the Office of the Ombudsman said it seeks to correct vagueness and emphasize that it was the senators who amassed ill-gotten wealth and not Napoles.

On Thursday, the Sandiganbayan First Division that is hearing the plunder charge against Revilla denied the prosecution’s motion to amend the complaint amid strong objections from defense lawyers.

Revilla and Napoles and their co-accused were arraigned Thursday.

Estrada and his co-accused is scheduled to be arraigned on Monday, while the Sandiganbayan Third Divsiion chaired by Presiding Justice Amparo Caboteje-Tang is yet to order Enrile’s arrest.

Former Technology Resource Center (TRC) head Dennis Cunanan asked the Sandiganbayan yesterday to allow him to travel to Japan and the United States in July and August this year.

He was arraigned on graft charges Thursday before the First Division with Revilla, who is also facing a separate charge of plunder.

In a motion, Cunanan said he would be performing his duties as world secretary general of the Junior Chambers International abroad.

Insisting that he is not a flight risk, he asked the Sandiganbayan to allow him to travel to Japan on July 7 to 15 and to the United States on July 20 to Aug. 3.

If allowed, the anti-graft court will order Cunanan to post a travel bond on top of the bail he has already posted in exchange for temporary liberty while undergoing trial for graft.

De Lima: No prejudgment

Justice Secretary Leila de Lima yesterday belied a reported allegation of deposed President and now Manila City Mayor Joseph Estrada that she has prejudged the plunder case against his son Jinggoy in connection with the pork barrel anomaly.

De Lima said the former president might be mistaken in interpreting her media pronouncements on the strength of the case against the senator as a judgment of guilt.

“With due respect to Mayor Erap, I don’t think I’ve said anything that could be interpreted as prejudgment of the case against Senator Jinggoy. Whenever I’m asked if we are confident that our cases and evidence will withstand the test of trial, my consistent answer is ‘yes, we are confident’.

“Is that the same as saying or concluding that they are guilty? I’m not the court. I cannot say that,” she told reporters.

Estrada reportedly criticized De Lima over her alleged prejudgment of the case and even called for her resignation.

De Lima, who has just received her approval from the Commission on Appointments after four years in her post, said she could not understand where Mayor Estrada was coming from.

“I don’t know why President Erap would say such thing against me. What exactly did I say for him to react that way?” she asked.

De Lima said she could only respect the opinion of the former president, who himself was convicted of plunder by the Sandiganbayan in 2007.

“I respect people and their impressions of me. I don’t think I could still change them,” she lamented.

In a related development, De Lima defended the Office of the Ombudsman in its move to amend the information filed against Estrada and Revilla.

She believes that amendment of charges is allowed under the rules of court.

“It is elementary under rules of court that before arraignment, it is a right for the prosecution to amend whether formal or substantial amendment,” she explained.

Because of this, she said she could not understand why the First Division of the Sandiganbayan denied the motion of the special prosecutor to amend the charges filed against Revilla to make the accused a co-conspirator of Janet Lim-Napoles in the scam and not just a beneficiary.       

De Lima also pointed out that the amendment of the information was not an admission that the cases were weak.

“I don’t think it affects the strength of the cases. I believe that the ombudsman only wanted to amend the information to clear ambiguities in the earlier information that lawyers of the accused might take advantage of,” she stressed. – With Cecille Suerte Felipe