Supreme Court upholds dismissal of cases vs 3 FM pals

The Supreme Court has upheld the Ombudsman’s dismissal of the P425 million behest loan cases of three Marcos cronies and denied the appeal for their revival filed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG).

Justice Sabino de Leon of the second division held that Ombudsman Aniano Desierto didn’t abuse his authority when he junked in November 1998 the cases against Carlos Fortich, Jose Ma. Ozamis and Julio Ozamiz, stockholders of the defunct Bukidnon Sugar Milling Co. (BUSCO).

"This Court has consistently held that the Ombudsman has discretion to determine whether a criminal case, given its facts and circumstances, should be filed or not. It is basically his call," De Leon wrote in his 10-page ruling.

The three cronies’ case stemmed from the $60-million loan (then equivalent to P425 million) granted by the Philippine National Bank to Busco in 1974. Desierto ruled that they could not pin down the trio due to "insufficiency of evidence."

De Leon pointed out that the PCGG, represented by the Presidential Ad Hoc Finding Committee on Behest Loans created by former President Ramos, had never even questioned Desierto’s dismissal in any of their pleadings.

"By their failure to squarely address the said issue, the finding of the Ombudsman that there is no sufficient evidence against respondents (cronies) so as to make them liable for prosecution remains uncontroverted," De Leon added.

The PCGG maintained the loan was illegal since it was secured with insufficient collateral and obtained with undue haste. Busco only had a P1.5 million paid-up capital then and it’s assets were only worth P374 million.,

The SC ruled, however, that such loan was "secured by collaterals" which composed of Busco’s "plant site, machineries and equipment as well as waivers of stockholders as regard their rights and interests over the same in favor of PNB."

Also, the High Court held the PCGG failed to allege in their complaint any concrete or overt act of the Marcos cronies to show that they unduly influenced the PNB officials in granting the P425-million loan.

The SC added there is no evidence showing that Busco officials committed any illegal acts in connection with the procurement of the loan. The tribunal, nevertheless, ruled that the behest loans case has not yet prescribed, as alleged by Busco officials.

It reiterated its ruling in 1999 on the case Presidential Ad Hoc Finding Committee on Behest Loans filed against Desierto that the 20-year prescription rule should start from the discovery of the commission and not from the day of such commission.

"The issue regarding the computation of prescriptive period for offenses involving the acquisition of behest loans has been laid to rest," the High Court stressed.