Speedy justice should start now

The Supreme Court (SC), it seems, is in no hurry to act on the petition seeking to create “special courts” at the Sandiganbayan to handle the trial of plunder and graft cases involving lawmakers in their alleged misuse of pork-barrel funds. Retired SC associate justice Conchita Carpio-Morales, who now heads the Office of the Ombudsman, earlier filed the petition.

While the petition remains pending at the High Court, the Sandiganbayan proceeded last week with the raffle of the first batch of plunder and graft cases against three senators and 30 of their co-accused led by businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles. Three of five divisions of the Sandiganbayan — each composed of three justices — will handle the consolidated plunder and graft cases of Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr.

 Since she is the accused in all these cases, Napoles would have to hire more lawyers to handle her cases in all three divisions, for now. As of yesterday, the Sandiganbayan imposed travel ban on the three senators, Napoles, and their co-accused while undergoing trial for their respective plunder and graft cases.

The chief whistleblower on these Priority Development Assistance Fund cases, Benhur Luy pointed to Napoles who allegedly paid multimillion-peso “commissions” out of PDAF of lawmakers. The PDAF were allegedly coursed through bogus non-government organizations put up by Napoles. Kickbacks were also allegedly given to the respective chiefs of staff of the lawmakers and officials and employees in the PDAF implementing agencies of government.

Let’s see what compelled and prompted the Ombudsman to ask for “special courts” to try PDAF cases.

As chief prosecutor of graft cases, the Ombudsman received on September 16 last year the first truckload of evidence and complaints on the alleged PDAF scam from the Department of Justice-National Bureau of Investigation (DOJ-NBI). A total of 38 individuals, including the three senators were indicted. Five former congressmen and 30 individuals and government people were also named in the DOJ-NBI complaints.

It was only last June 6, or nine months after that the Ombudsman was finally able to file the plunder and graft cases against the three senators, Napoles and other co-accused.

To date though, the Ombudsman has yet to file PDAF cases against the five ex-congressmen named in the first batch of DOJ-NBI complaints. They are, namely, former Reps. Rodolfo Plaza (Agusan del Sur); Samuel Dangwa (Benguet); Constantino Jaraula (Cagayan de Oro); APEC party-list Rep. Edgar Valdez; and now Masbate Gov. Rizalina Seachon-Lanete.

Last November 29, the second batch of PDAF cases was subsequently submitted by the DOJ-NBI to the Ombudsman involving more members of Congress. They included Aquino administration allies like former Customs chief Rozzano “Ruffy” Biazon when he was Muntinlupa congressman.

While the Ombudsman has yet to rule on the second batch if there is probable cause to elevate the cases to the Sandiganbayan, the DOJ-NBI are set to submit the third and last batch of PDAF cases. Apparently, the Ombudsman is now in a state of panic at the rate these PDAF cases are piling up in her office.

As the chief administrator of judicial courts all over the country, the Ombudsman invoked the powers of the SC in Section 5, Article 8 of the Constitution to “promulgate rules concerning pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts.”

The Ombudsman asked the High Tribunal to create at least two special divisions in the anti-graft court to exclusively handle all the cases of plunder and graft involving the PDAF of certain lawmakers.

In their petition to the SC, the Ombudsman cited the “national magnitude of these cases, the complexities of the issues involved, the number of accused and the far-reaching consequences of these cases.” Moreover, the Ombudsman noted Section 3, Rule III, Part I of the Revised Internal Rules of the Sandiganbayan also provides for the creation of a special division “where compelling reasons and the interest of justice so require.”

But the anti-graft court chaired by presiding justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang unanimously opposed the request of the Ombudsman. In its comment submitted to the High Court last Monday, the Sandiganbayan insisted “there is no compelling reason and/or imperative need to create a special division or divisions.” Creating special divisions, the Sandiganbayan justices warned, could lead to prioritization of pork barrel cases to the detriment of other cases pending before the five divisions of the Sandiganbayan.

Undaunted by the tasks ahead of them, the Sandiganbayan justices trust themselves to rise to the challenge. The Sandiganbayan justices believe they can discharge their duties and functions without being unduly burdened by these PDAF cases in their respective courts.

From the first batch of PDAF cases, the Sandiganbayan third division chaired by Cabotaje-Tang got Enrile’s 16 plunder and graft cases. The Sandiganbayan first division chaired by associate justice Efren dela Cruz will handle the 17 plunder and graft cases of Revilla. The Sandiganbayan fifth division chaired by associate justice Roland Jurado will handle the 12 plunder and graft cases of Jinggoy.     

Incidentally, it turned out yesterday the lone vacancy at the fifth division of the Sandiganbayan remains unfilled. President Benigno “Noy” Aquino III has yet to appoint the replacement for the vacancy created by the retirement of former Sandiganbayan justice Francisco Villaruz in October last year.

Cabotaje-Tang, who previously chaired the fifth division, was promoted to take over Villaruz. Like SC chief justice Lourdes Sereno, Cabotaje-Tang was a junior associate justice when P-Noy promoted her over much senior colleagues to become the presiding justice of the Sandiganbayan.

Under the Constitution, the Chief Executive has within 90 days to name in office his appointee from receipt of the shortlist of nominees vetted by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC). But the Palace can antedate the appointment to comply with this requirement.

If President Aquino indeed wants speedy trial of the PDAF cases, all he has to do is to make sure no such vacancy remains unfilled beyond what is mandated by law.

And yet the Ombudsman wants two “special courts” for PDAF scam cases?