THE Supreme Court (SC) has ordered the dismissal of the graft charges filed more than 30 years ago against former Senate president Juan Ponce Enrile and several known businessmen and entrepreneurs in the alleged siphoning of the P840.7 million in coconut levy funds.
Also dismissed for violation of their constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases were the charges filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) before the then Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) against businessman Jose C. Concepcion, Rolando dela Cuesta, Narciso M. Pineda and Danila S. Ursua.
The criminal charges against Eduardo M. Cojuangco Jr., Jose R. Eleazar Jr., Maria Clara Lobregat, and Augusto Orosa were dismissed on account of their deaths.
For civil liability, the SC said the government may still file a civil against the respective estates of Cojuangco Jr., Eleazar, Lobregat and Orosa, “as may be warranted by law and procedural rules.”
And if the civil case has been filed, the SC said the civil action “shall survive notwithstanding the dismissal of the criminal case in view of their deaths.”
The SC decision that was made public on Wednesday, Feb. 8, was written by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando for the court’s first division. Associate Justices Rodil V. Zalameda, Mario V. Lopez, Ricardo R. Rosario, and Jose Midas P. Marquez concurred.
The OSG’s complaint filed in 1990 was referred by the PCGG to the Office of the Ombudsman. In 1998, the OMB dismissed the charges and the dismissal led the filing of a petition before the SC.
On Aug. 23, 2001, the SC granted OSG’s petition and directed the OMB to proceed with the preliminary investigation of the graft complaints.
However, on July 7, 2004, the SC issued a resolution that set aside its Aug. 23, 2001 ruling “as the case was not yet ripe for decision.”
In brief, the complaint alleged that Cojuangco Jr. took advantage of his close relationship with the then late President Ferdinand E. Marcos for his own personal and business interests through the issuance of favorable decrees.
It said that Cojuangco Jr. caused the government to enter into a contract with him, through the state-run National Investment and Development Corporation (NIDC), through his Agricultural Investors, Inc. (AII) under terms reportedly disadvantageous to the government and in alleged conspiracy with the other respondents who were then members of the board of directors of the United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB).
The complaint also stated that all the respondents had "personal interest or material interest in the transactions."
Thus, the NIDC and the UCPB board members allegedly violated their duty as administrator-trustees of the Coconut Industry Development Fund (CIDF) when they reportedly conspired to siphon off of the CIDF funds to Cojuangco Jr.’s AII.
After discussing the right to speedy trial, prescription of graft charges and other issues, the SC said:
“With this case pending for over 30 years and possibly more without assurance of its resolution, the Cour recognizes that the tactical disadvantage carried by the passage of time should be weighed against petitioner Republic and in favor of the respondents (Enrile and others).
“Certainly, if this case were remanded for further proceedings, the already long delay would drag on longer. Memories fade, documents and other exhibits can be lost and vulnerability of those who are tasked to decide increase with the passing of years. In effect, there would be a general inability to mount an effective defense.
“Taken in its entirety, there is a clear violation of the respondents' constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases when petitioner Republic failed to provide sufficient justification for the delay in the termination of the preliminary investigation.
“Consequently, a dismissal of the case is warranted. While this Court has no doubt that the Republic had all the resources to pursue cases of corruption and ill-gotten wealth, the inordinate delay in this case may have made the situation worse for respondents.
“As the Supreme Court, We dutifully exercise cold impartiality while demanding accountability from the government and protecting the rights of all people.
“WHEREFORE, the petition is PARTIALLY GRANTED. Accordingly: The August 6, 1998 Review and Recommendation and the September 25, 1998 Order in OMB-0-90-2808, as approved by Ombudsman Aniano A. Desierto on August 14, 1998 and October 9, 1998, respectively, are REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
“Due to their supervening deaths, the Complaint for violation of Republic Act No. 3019 docketed as OMB-0-90-2808 is DISMISSED and the case is CLOSED and TERMINATED as against respondents Eduardo M. Cojuangco, Jr., Jose R. Eleazar, Jr., Maria Clara Lobregat, and Augusto Orosa.
“Consequently, their criminal liabilities and civil liability ex delicto are extinguished by Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code. However, for civil liability based on sources other than delict, petitioner Republic of the Philippines may file a separate civil action against the respective estates of Eduardo M. Cojuangco, Jr., Jose R. Eleazar, Jr., Maria Clara Lobregat, and Augusto Orosa as may be warranted by law and procedural rules; or if already filed, the said separate civil action shall survive notwithstanding the dismissal of the criminal case in view of their deaths.
“Due to the violation of the constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases, the Ombudsman is hereby ordered to DISMISS the Complaint for violation of Republic Act No. 3019 docketed as OMB-0-90-2808 against respondents Jose C. Concepcion, Rolando Dela Cuesta, Juan Ponce Enrile, Narciso M. Pineda, and Danilo S. Ursua. SO ORDERED.”
TAGS: #SC #Enrile #UCPB #Coconut levy funds #OMB