The Sandiganbayan has dismissed the ill-gotten wealth case filed against 10 minority stockholders of Eastern Telecommunications Philippines, Inc. (ETPI) for allegedly holding the shares for the late former President Ferdinand E. Marcos.

"The narration of grand scheme or design to perpetrate fraud to amass ill-gotten wealth by the Marcoses using the defendants (the minority stockholders) as dummies alleged in the complaint without one-on-one correspondent with any documentary and testimonial evidence is too good to be true," the anti-graft court said.

Dismissed was the civil case filed against Rosario N. Arellano, Victoria N. Legarda, Angela N. Lobregat, Benito V. Nieto, Carlos V. Nieto, Manuel V. Nieto III, Ma. Rita N. Delos Reyes, Carmen N. Tuazon, and Ramon Nieto Jr. as legal representatives of the late Ramon V. Nieto, and Benigno Manuel Valdes, legal representative of the late Rafael C. Valdes.

They were included in Civil Case No. 0178 which was filed before the Sandiganbayan on Oct. 29, 1997 for reportedly holding 3,305 shares of stocks in ETPI for the benefit of the Marcoses.

They filed their demurrer to evidence on Oct. 16, 2023 to dismiss the case on the weakness of the prosecution’s evidence to sustain a conviction.

They told the anti-graft court that the prosecution failed to prove that their ETPI shares are ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses. They said there was no evidence that would support the prosecution's allegation that the funds used to acquire the ETPI shares belonged to the government or any of its branches. There was also no proof offered that would show how Nieto Group is holding the ETPI shares for the benefit of the Marcos family, they added.

In granting their demurrer, the Sandiganbayan said it "cannot simply take hook, line, and sinker, the innuendo baited by the plaintiff."

"The narration of grand scheme or design to perpetrate fraud to amass ill-gotten wealth by the Marcoses using the defendants as dummies alleged in the complaint without one-on-one correspondent with any documentary and testimonial [evidence] is too good to be true," the court said.

It also said: “In the present case, we have thoroughly reviewed the records and are convinced that plaintiffs have failed to sufficiently prove their allegations.”

It pointed out that fraud is a serious allegation and the burden of proof lies in the prosecution. Without any strong evidence to support its claim, the court said it is constrained to grant the defendants' demurrer.

The prosecution failed to show credibly “that the purported fraudulent transfer and recording of the shares in their individual names were undertaken to conceal its true ownership, allegedly part of the ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses.”

"In our jurisdiction, fraud is not presumed. It must be proved by clear and convincing evidence and not by mere conjectures and speculations," the court stressed.

Associate Justice Lorifel L. Pahimna wrote the 19-page resolution with the concurrence of Fourth Division Chairperson Associate Justice Michael Frederick L. Musngi and Associate Justice Georgina D. Hidalgo.