Philippines
National
No double jeopardy in Napoles' conviction for graft, malversation in P15.3-M PDAF -- Sandiganbayan
No double jeopardy in Napoles' conviction for graft, malversation in P15.3-M PDAF -- Sandiganbayan
The Sandiganbayan has ruled that there was no double jeopardy when a person is acquitted on a charge of corruption of public officers but convicted of graft and malversation of public funds in the same case involving the misuse of Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).
With its ruling, the anti-graft court dismissed the motion for reconsideration filed by businesswoman Janet Lim Napoles on her conviction for graft and malversation in the misuse of the P15.3 million PDAF of the late Davao del Sur 1st District Rep. Douglas R. Cagas.
Napoles had been acquitted by the Pasig City regional trial court (RTC) of corruption of public officers but was convicted by the Sandiganbayan of graft and malversation on the same P15.3 million PDAF.
She was sentenced to six to 10 years imprisonment for each count of graft, and 12 to 17 years imprisonment for each count of malversation.
In her motion, Napoles asked the anti-graft court to reverse her conviction not only for lack of evidence to support a guilty verdict but also for double jeopardy.
Double jeopardy “is a constitutional right of the accused (in a criminal case) against being prosecuted for the same offense for which he or she has been either previously acquitted or convicted.”
In a resolution the denied Napoles’ motion, the Sandiganbayan cited the Supreme Court’s (SC) 2005 decision which states: “… the constitutional right against double jeopardy protects from a second prosecution for the same offense, not for a different one. Thus, even if the case arose out of the same incident or transaction, the dismissal in the other case would not constitute double jeopardy against the accused in the other case if the quantum of evidence required to sustain both causes are not similar.”
It also cited a 2006 SC ruling which states: “… where two different laws define two crimes, prior jeopardy as to one of them is not obstacle to a prosecution of the other, although both offenses arise from the same facts, if each crime involves some important act which is not an essential element of the other.”
In Napoles case, the anti-graft court said:
“Indeed, there is no double jeopardy if a person is charged simultaneously or successively for corrupt practices under RA No. 3019 and the Revised Penal Code.
“The mere giving of gifts, offers or promises to a public officer under the circumstances that makes the receiver liable for bribery constitutes the crime of corruption of public officers, while the element of damage or injury should be present in the crime of violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019.
“Accused-movant Napoles, as private accused, was charged for conspiring with accused public officers in committing corrupt practices and malversation. She was not only charged for giving kickbacks, rebates or commissions, but also for giving unwarranted benefit, advantage, and preference in misappropriating public funds.”
The resolution that denied Napoles’ motion was written by Associate Justice Edgardo M. Caldona with the concurrence of Second Division Chairperson Oscar C. Herrera Jr. and Associate Justice Arthur O. Malabaguio.
Napoles’ co-accused – former Technology Resource Center (TRC) legislative liaison officer Belina A. Concepcion and private individual Mylene T. Encarnacion -- were also convicted in one graft charge and one malversation charge.
Former TRC group manager Maria Rosalinda M. Lacsamana and private individual Evelyn D. De Leon were also convicted in the other set of graft and malversation charges.
Their other co-accused - former Department of Budget and Management (DBM) undersecretary for operations Mario L. Relampagos, budget and management specialist Rosario S. Nunez, administrative assistant VI Lalaine N. Paule, administrative assistant VI Marilou D. Bare, former TRC deputy director general Dennis L. Cunanan, group manager Francisco B. Figura, chief accountant Marivic V. Jover, and internal auditor V Maurine E. Dimaranan were all acquitted of two graft and two malversation charges for failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The cases against former TRC director general Antonio Y. Ortiz have been ordered archived pending his arrest.
Earlier dismissed were the cases against Cagas on account of his death.