The tendency of this administration to be hasty and obstinate in its actions is getting to be more and more alarming and dangerous. The prevailing public perception now is that the daang matuwid is a railroad. And this perception has been ingrained in the public mind because of its recent moves particularly its blatant meddling into purely legislative function of enacting laws by rushing Congress to act on the RH bill; and more tellingly, its hurried filing of criminal charges especially against the former president and past officials identified with her.
To be sure, the people of the Philippines including myself would really like to see that all those responsible for wrongdoings in the previous government are prosecuted and penalized. But this end can only be expeditiously and successfully attained after a careful and deliberate study of the actions to be taken and a strict observance of the basic process required in the proper filing of the charges.
Indeed, under the rule of law, even if there is an overwhelming public opinion that a person has committed a violation of law, he/she is still presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt pursuant to a process that starts even before the filing of the charges in court. After all, even the most notorious criminal or persons already caught in the act (in flagrante) are still entitled to due process of law. And usually, the rash and hurried filing of the charges is at variance with this process.
A case in point here is the filing of the complaint for the non-bailable offense of electoral sabotage against ex-president Arroyo. The government already announced to the media its plan to file said charges. But no formal investigation was started until it became imminent that Arroyo may be able to go abroad in view of a TRO issued by the Supreme Court against the Hold Departure Order (HDO) issued by Department of Justice (DOJ) Secretary De Lima. Despite the TRO, De Lima enforced the HDO and then in three days, the electoral sabotage complaint was filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasay City which then issued the warrant of arrest. This warrant thus rendered the TRO moot because Arroyo was already arrested, detained and thus prevented from leaving the country.
This filing of the electoral sabotage case turned out to be really precipitate and hasty as shown by the subsequent developments in the case. Arroyo questioned said complaint before the RTC by filing a motion to be released on bail on the ground that the evidence against her is weak, which is really a legal ground for an accused to be released on bail even if the offense charged is non-bailable. And true enough, after eight months of hearing Arroyo’s motion, the Pasay City RTC granted it because the prosecution evidence is really weak. So it ordered the release of Arroyo upon posting P1 million bail. Lately even her co-accused, former Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos was also granted bail mainly because the evidence against him is weak.
And this brings us to the second case in point. This is the complaint for plunder filed by the office of the Ombudsman on July 10, 2012 before the Sandiganbayan against Arroyo, and former PCSO and COA officials. This complaint stems from two complaints using the transcript of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee inquiry on the alleged PCSO fund mess more than a year ago. The first complaint was filed by Risa Hontiveros, a known oppositionist during the Arroyo regime, Danilo Lim, a leader of a coup against Arroyo and a certain Regalario. The second complaint was filed by the PCSO itself through its current Board Secretary Ed Araullo.
Apparently, the Ombudsman’s office has already completed its fact finding investigation of the charges and recommended what charges to file. But a review committee was still formed to review the recommendation. Apparently such review was for purposes of finding out whether the charges against Arroyo et.al can be upgraded into plunder. Thus the Review Joint Resolution recommended the filing of such charges but exonerated Ermita for lack of evidence even if, like Arroyo, he also approved additional PCSO confidential intelligence fund in 2009.
The foregoing sequence of events in the plunder case clearly show that it was filed in anticipation of the resolution of the Pasig RTC granting bail to Arroyo in the electoral sabotage case so that if she is released, she will be re-arrested again for the non-bailable offense of plunder. As expected, Arroyo’s lawyers questioned the filing of the plunder charges, so the Sandiganbayan deferred the issuance of the arrest warrant.
The plunder complaint accuses Arroyo et.al. of “conniving, conspiring, and confederating with one another and then and there willfully, unlawfully and criminally amass, accumulate, and/or acquire directly or indirectly, ill-gotten wealth in the aggregate amount of Php 365,997,915.00” through a series of criminal acts described therein specifically, diverting funds from the PCSO budget to its Confidential/Intelligence Fund (CIF) and thereafter withdrawing the above mentioned amount and transferring the same into their possession and control by taking advantage of their respective positions.
Records show that Arroyo was charged mainly because of her marginal “OK” appearing on the requests for additional CIF which falls within her function and duty as President under LOI 1282. Apparently, she was implicated because of “conspiracy”, where the act of one is the act of all.
According to Black’s Law Dictionary, “the essence of conspiracy is an agreement or consultation to do an unlawful act, or do a lawful act in a lawful manner”. “Mere knowledge, approval, or attempt on the part of one to perpetrate an illegal act is insufficient (People vs. Link, 6 N.E. 2nd, 206). Following these definitions, is there a conspiracy here? Was there an agreement or consultation among the accused?
Before filing a criminal charge in court, there must be probable cause, or a “reasonable ground for belief in the existence of facts warranting the trial of a case”. Is there probable cause here?
These are questions which would not have arisen if a thorough and deliberate investigation was conducted giving the accused an opportunity to be heard. Pinoys really expect this administration to succeed in its fight against graft and corruption. But this cannot happen if cases are filed hurriedly. Haste makes waste, or even failure.
Our email address: attyjosesison@gmail.com.