Danding asks SC to reverse ruling in graft case

Business tycoon Eduardo "Danding" Cojuangco has asked the Supreme Court to reverse its June 21 ruling giving the San—diganbayan the go-signal to prosecute him in a 1990 graft case.

Branding the case as "politically motivated," Cojuangco, chairman of the food and beverage giant San Miguel Corp., said the charges against him should have been dismissed outright.

The case stemmed from Co—juangco’s acting as alleged dummy of about 33 million shares in Manila Bulletin reportedly belonging to the late President Marcos. It has been pending for 11 years.

Through his counsel, former Solicitor General Estelito Mendoza, Cojuangco said he has always been the subject of "persecution and oppression" of every government and asked that this be stopped.

"Among the so-called cronies, (I) have been the most severely and persistently targeted for harassment and prosecution. All properties perceived to belong to (me) were, without prior hearing and evidentiary basis, sequestered. The sequestration of (my) properties continues notwithstanding the lapse of 15 years," he said.

Nevertheless, Cojuangco suggested that the Supreme Court en banc rule on the merits of the case. "The (High Court) should address the merits of the issue of whether there is probable cause which justifies the issuance of warrant of arrest against (me)," he said.

In a nine-page resolution, the High Court ruled that Cojuangco’s motion questioning the arrest warrant which the Sandiganbayan issued for him in June 1990 has no basis at all since the anti-graft court had complied with the rules.

"No grave abuse of discretion can be ascribed to the Sandi—ganbayan when it issued the resolution," the High Court said, adding that prosecutors found evidence that Cojuangco received nine "dividend checks" from Bulletin Publishing Corp.

Cojuangco posted P100,000 bail in advance, in anticipation of an adverse ruling from the anti-graft court, which he eventually got. With the High Court’s ruling, his arraignment will now push through.

The Supreme Court said the Sandiganbayan justices even "went beyond" their duty in determining probable cause because they reviewed the findings of Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) probers who conducted the reinvestigation.