The Sandiganbayan has affirmed its decision which dismissed the claim of the government on the shares of stocks of Eastern Telecommunications Philippines, Inc. (ETPI) that were registered in the names of the relatives of businessmen Manuel Nieto Jr. and Jose Africa.

In a resolution, the anti-graft court denied the motion for reconsideration filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) which contested the July 29, 2025 ruling that dismissed for lack of merit the Complaint for Reconveyance, Reversion, Accounting, and Restitution with Prayer for Writ of Preliminary Attachment filed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG).

In its motion, the OSG argued that it was imprudent and premature for the Sandiganbayan to resolve the case before the Supreme Court (SC) could reach a final decision on the petitions filed before it.

The OSG pointed out that one of the key issues raised in the SC petitions was whether the shares held by the so-called "small individual shareholders," who are the same defendants of the case in ETPI are ill-gotten and subject for reconveyance.

It pleaded with the anti-graft court to suspend the resolution of its motion for reconsideration.

In denying the motion, the Sandiganbayan said: "Even if the Court were to treat the plaintiff's (OSG) motion plainly as a motion to suspend the proceedings, it must still be denied."

The anti-graft court explained that judicial courtesy should only be applied "if there is a strong probability that the issues before the higher court would be rendered moot and moribund as a result of the continuation of the proceedings in the lower court."

In this case, the Sandiganbayan said that since it has acquired jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter, it is precisely the proper forum to determine whether their ETPI shares are ill-gotten.

It said: "Thus, the Court exercised sound discretion to proceed with the resolution of the case instead of paralyzing the proceedings. In doing so, the Court considered both the Supreme Court's prior pronouncements in related cases and the procedural developments following the Third Division's decision in Civil Case No. 0009. Suspending the proceedings after a decision has already been rendered would serve no practical or legal purpose."

The eight-page resolution was written by Associate Justice Lorifel Lacap Pahimna with the concurrence of Associate Justices Michael Frederick L. Musngi and Gener M. Gito. Associate Justices Sarah Jane T. Fernandez and Ronald B. Moreno dissented.

Civil Case No. 0178 was filed against defendants Andres L. Africa, Victor Africa, Lourdes A. Africa, Nathalie A. Africa, Jose Enrique A. Africa, Paul Delfin A. Africa, Rosario N. Arellano, Juan de Ocampo, Racquel S. Dinglasan, Victoria N. Legarda, Angela N. Lobregat, Benito V. Nieto, Carlos V. Nieto, Manuel V. Nieto III, Ramon V. Nieto, Ma. Rita N. Delos Reyes, Evelyn A. Romero, Rosario A. Songco, Carmen N. Tuazon, and Rafael C. Valdez on October 29, 1997.

Nieto, Africa, and several others were accused of reportedly holding 3,305 shares of stock in ETPI for the benefit of the late former President Ferdinand E. Marcos and his wife, Imelda.

The complaint is an offshoot of another complaint for reversion in Civil Case No. 0009, which the anti-graft court granted in favor of the government on Dec. 4, 2019. The court ruled that the late President Marcos acquired ill-gotten wealth through the use of ETPI shares.

However, the Sandiganbayan said that the ruling in Civil Case No. 0009 does not equate to the same conclusion in Civil Case No. 0178.