Court asked to suspend Bong, Jinggoy

MANILA, Philippines - Government lawyers are asking the Sandiganbayan to order the suspension of Senators Ramon Revilla Jr. and Jinggoy Estrada while they are on trial for plunder and graft.

In separate motions filed with the anti-graft court’s First and Fifth Divisions yesterday, the Office of the Ombudsman said suspension orders should be issued against the senators pursuant to Section 5 of Republic Act 7080 or the Plunder Law.

Prosecutors cannot move yet for the suspension of Senator Juan Ponce Enrile since the Sandiganbayan Third Division handling his case has not yet issued a decision on his motion for determination of probable cause for the filing of plunder and graft cases against him.

Deputy Special Prosecutors John Turalba and Manuel Soriano Jr. said Revilla’s former chief of staff Richard Cambe should also be suspended.

“Any public officer against whom any criminal prosecution under a valid information under this Act, whatever stage of execution and mode of participation is pending in court, shall be suspended from office,” the ombudsman said, quoting provisions from RA 7080.

“Should he be convicted by final judgment, he shall lose all retirement or gratuity benefits under any law, but if he is acquitted, he shall be entitled to reinstatement and to the salaries and other benefits which he failed to receive during suspension, unless in the meantime, administrative proceedings have been filed against him,” RA 7080 states.

Revilla and Cambe were arraigned last June 26 while Estrada was arraigned yesterday. The two senators did not enter pleas, leading the courts to enter “not guilty” pleas on their behalf.

“Once the information is found to be sufficient in form and substance, the court is bound to issue an order of suspension as a matter of course, and there seems to be no ifs and buts about it,” ombudsman prosecutors said.

The ombudsman said jurisprudence sets the period of suspension pending trial at 90 days, but The STARsources said government lawyers are likely to push for an indefinite suspension as the three-month suspension for officials facing criminal cases in the past was based on the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and not the Plunder Law.

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, meanwhile, defended the prosecution panel’s move to amend the information or charge sheets for plunder against the senators, saying the proposed amendments were limited to form and would not change the theory of the case.

“The prosecutors were just being thorough,” she explained in a statement, citing a rule that a complaint may be amended as a matter of right before arraignment.

“The statements of the defense are mere speculations that are favorable to their client,” Morales said in response to opinions that the criminal complaints appeared to be weak or were hurriedly prepared.

“Given the meticulous effort that entailed the preparation of the more than 100-page resolutions, the same effort went into the drafting of the two-page information,” she said.

Morales said the public should remain vigilant to make sure corrupt officials and their minions are stopped from misleading the people and continuing their ways.

Two-hour arraignment

At the Sandiganbayan yesterday, Estrada stood in front of the magistrates of the Fifth Division for two hours, repeatedly refusing to enter a plea while charges of plunder and graft were being read to him during his arraignment.

As in the case of Revilla, the anti-graft court had to enter a plea of not guilty for him.

Estrada is being accused of pocketing P183.7 million in kickbacks for projects bankrolled using his Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).

Estrada was given a 10-minute break after almost an hour of listening to charges being read to him in front of Associate Justices Roland Jurado, Alexander Gesmundo and newly appointed magistrate Ma. Theresa Gomez-Estoesta.

After the break, the procedure continued for another hour. He was represented by lawyer Jose Flaminiano.

He said he had to refuse to enter a plea because he still has pending petitions before the Supreme Court (SC) questioning the Office of the Ombudsman’s decision to indict him for plunder and graft.

Some of Estrada’s co-accused in the graft cases, like Budget Undersecretary Mario Relampagos and other budget employees, also refused to enter a plea, citing pending motions for reconsideration with the SC.

Alleged PDAF scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, with counsel Stephen David by her side, pleaded not guilty to plunder and graft charges as did other respondents including former Technology Resource Center (TRC) head Dennis Cunanan and former National Agribusiness Corp. (Nabcor) president Alan Javellana.

The senator’s family, including his father Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada, attended the arraignment. Also present were the senator’s wife Precy, his mother former senator Loi Estrada and siblings Jackie and Jude.

“It hurts, but I know he will overcome it,” Estrada’s father said.

The former president said he is more worried about his grandchildren. “It’s mental torture on the part of the family,” he said.

He said his senator-son can defend himself and that he has assured him that “as long as you’re innocent, there’s nothing to fear.”

‘Cracks’ in case

After the arraignment, Senator Estrada read a handwritten statement assailing the Office of the Ombudsman and expressing confidence that the plunder and graft cases against him would eventually be junked.

“The cracks are already showing. The recent developments are indicative of the fact that the cases against us were rushed and railroaded,” he said, referring to how government lawyers had tried to amend the original plunder charge against him, Revilla and Enrile.

Ombudsman lawyers later backpedaled after the Sandiganbayan First Division denied the motion to amend the criminal complaint and after the Fifth Division warned that allowing changes would mean releasing Estrada from detention.

The ombudsman also withdrew the motion to amend the criminal charge against Enrile before the Third Division, apparently in anticipation of a similar reaction from the magistrates.

The proposed amendment was supposedly intended to shift the focus of the criminal cases to the senators from Napoles, who was reportedly being groomed as state witness. This was denied by Napoles’ legal team.

“Due process of law was not observed, especially during the preliminary investigation by the ombudsman. Because of its overzealousness to be gloried as heroes by putting us behind bars, the ombudsman haphazardly filed an Information before the Sandiganbayan,” Estrada said.

He said the fact that ombudsman lawyers had attempted to amend the plunder and graft cases “further bolsters what I have been saying all along that this is politically motivated with no other intent but to persecute the members of the opposition while protecting their allies.

“If there are truckloads of evidence against us and that the case is airtight as they initially say, why is there a need to amend the Information?” he said.

“I am very hopeful that the granting of bail will not be far behind as the evidence against me is really very weak,” Estrada said, noting that the prosecution had “already blundered their case against us.”

“I have been acquitted before of plunder, I hope to be acquitted again,” he said as he was escorted out of the Sandiganbayan and brought back to the Philippine National Police (PNP) Custodial Center at Camp Crame.

The Sandiganbayan said a decision on the motions for bail would be issued within the week.

The court also set preliminary conference on July 14, 15 and 16 and a pre-trial conference on Aug. 4.

Enrile’s lawyer Joseph Sagandoy also said cases against the senator and his two colleagues have weakened following the failed bid of prosecutors to amend the information.

“The motion to amend is an admission by the prosecutors of the defects in the informations which they attempt to cure or remedy. But now they withdrew the motion probably because they anticipate that the Sandiganbayan will deny it,” Sagandoy said. “The latest moves of the prosecution actually favor and strengthen the defense of Sen. Enrile.”

Cambe, meanwhile, filed a 44-page petition with the SC last Friday seeking the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) on his prosecution before the anti-graft court, citing violation of his constitutional right to due process.

Cambe alleged that the anti-graft body, in investigating the charges against him, had ignored his counter-affidavits and evidence and even attributed to him statements and defenses he did not make.

The petitioner also told the Court the graft investigators used the counter-affidavits of the other respondents against him without providing him copies of such counter-affidavits despite his request.

Contrary to the ruling of the ombudsman, Cambe said he did not make a “mere denial” of his signatures in the PDAF documents.

Cambe also stressed that he had submitted “uncontroverted” evidence to confirm that his signatures in the PDAF documents were “forgeries.”

“The uniform finding of two independent expert witnesses that the purported signatures of the petitioner in the PDAF documents were not affixed by the petitioner himself (hence, they are forgeries) cannot be arbitrarily rejected by the ombudsman and to do so would be a grave abuse of discretion,” he said in his petition.

Cambe is also detained at the Custodial Center at Camp Crame. With Marvin Sy, Edu Punay, Jose Rodel Clapano