CA nullifies De Lima acquittal

MANILA, Philippines — The Court of Appeals (CA) has declared null and void the acquittal of former senator Leila de Lima in one of the three dismissed drug charges against her, ruling that the Muntinlupa trial court judge in the case failed to substantiate the basis for the acquittal.

In a 12-page ruling, the CA’s 8th Division said Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 204 Judge Abraham Joseph Alcantara committed grave abuse of discretion when he cleared De Lima and her co-accused Ronnie Dayan in 2023 of charges of conspiring and conducting illegal drug trade in the New Bilibid Prison (NBP).

Alcantara had cited the recantation of one of the witnesses against De Lima, former Bureau of Corrections chief Rafael Ragos, saying that without his testimony, “the crucial link to establish conspiracy is shrouded with reasonable doubt.”

Ragos previously testified that he personally delivered a total of P10 million to then justice secretary De Lima at her residence. The money was supposedly proceeds from illegal drug trading by convicts at the New Bilibid Prison.

In 2022, however, Ragos recanted his testimony, saying that then justice secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II had coerced him to implicate De Lima in the illegal drug trade.

The CA ruling stemmed from a petition for certiorari filed by the Office of the Solicitor General, which argued that Alcantara failed to substantiate his perception of the alleged insufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence to convict De Lima. The OSG said the judge did not analyze the entire evidence on record and did not cite the legal bases for his
conclusion, instead relying solely on Ragos’ recantation.

In ruling in favor of the OSG, the CA said the judge “failed to conform to the standards of clarity, transparency, and reasonableness mandated by the Constitution and the Rules of Court” in acquitting De Lima and Dayan.

It said that Alcantara failed to discuss the specific proven facts and the laws upon which his pronouncement of acquittal was based. It also said he did not state the particular statements which Ragos specifically retracted, or the effects of the retracted statements to those proven by the prosecution, nor which particular element of the crime was not proven.

The appellate court said it is incumbent upon the judge to identify and examine the fundamental elements of the crime and determine which among them, if any, lacked evidentiary support or were materially affected by Ragos’ recantation.

The CA remanded the case to Muntinlupa RTC Branch 204 to decide the case in accordance with the rules.

The ruling, which was made public on May 15, was penned by CA Associate Justice Eleuterio Bathan. It was concurred by Associate Justices Nina Antonio-Valenzuela and Florencio Mamauag Jr.

De Lima faced three drug charges over her alleged involvement in the illegal drug trade in the NBP when she was justice secretary, all of which has since been dismissed.

The first and last drug charges were dismissed through demurrer of evidence in February 2021 and in June 2024.

The drug charges, which were filed during the Duterte administration and which De Lima has consistently claimed were trumped up and politically motivated, subjected the former senator to almost seven years in jail effectively making her unable to fulfill her duties as lawmaker.

De Lima unfazed

Reacting to the CA ruling, De Lima said she will file for a motion for reconsideration, and stressed that the overturned court decision will not block her return to public service.

“We have read the decision of the Court of Appeals to return to the Regional Trial Court one of the cases where I was acquitted. This decision is surprising because the CA appeared to ordering the lower court to repeat the writings of its decision because it is not very clear,” she said in a statement yesterday.

“However, this will not be a stumbling block to my return to public service and I will continue my preparation in pushing for Justice and Reforms in Congress,” she added.

De Lima said that they believed that all the answers to the questions of the CA are in the records of her case.

“Maybe, we just need to point again to them in our Motion for Reconsideration all the specific portions of the records where the answers to their questions can be found,” De Lima said.

“We will appeal the decision of the CA up to the Supreme Court if needed. Meanwhile, this does not mean that my acquittal has no effect. My acquittal is final and unappealable because of the principle of double jeopardy, while the CA decision is appealable up to the Supreme Court,” she added.

“Now, my acquittal in RTC has more weight,” she further said.

De Lima said the CA did not say that it reversed her acquittal, but it only ordered the RTC to clear the contents of its decision.

“We believe that it is no longer necessary because the ruling of the RTC is very clear,” De Lima said. – Jose Rodel Clapano