Ombudsman Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla on Tuesday, May 26, said the Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) is set to file plunder and malversation charges before the Sandiganbayan against Senator Jinggoy Estrada in connection flood control issue.

Remulla said the “Information” against Estrada was already nearing completion and may be filed as early as Thursday morning, May 28.

“Ang pinakamalapit na, hinog na hinog na, at pipirmahan ko maya-maya ‘yung information against Senator Jinggoy Estrada. Information to be filed to the Sandiganbayan as soon as possible. Hopefully Thursday, we’ll file it first thing in the morning (The nearest one, which is already very ripe, is the information against Senator Jinggoy Estrada, which I will sign later. The information will be filed before the Sandiganbayan as soon as possible. Hopefully by Thursday, we will file it first thing in the morning),” Remulla said in a press briefing in Quezon City.

Asked about the nature of the case, the Ombudsman replied: “Plunder and other related offenses. Related sa flood control (Plunder and other related offenses related to flood control).”

“Malversation and plunder both come in,” he said, pertaining to Estrada.

Remulla explained that the filing had been slightly delayed after the OMB reviewed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) resolution and found portions that needed correction and refinement.

“Kaya medyo natagalan ng konti, noong binasa natin ’yung DOJ resolution, may nakitang kailangan ng corrections, kaya ayaw namin magfile ng information na hindi pulido (It took a bit longer because when we reviewed the DOJ resolution, we saw portions that needed corrections, and we did not want to file an information that was not polished),” he said.

“Pinulido lang namin kaya inabot ng mahigit isang linggo. Pinag-aralan at pinaayos ang mga dapat ayusin na mas malinaw ’yung kasong ilalahad natin sa Sandiganbayan (We refined it, which is why it took more than a week. We studied and corrected the necessary portions so the case we will present before the Sandiganbayan will be clearer),” he added.

As such, the Ombudsman disclosed that Estrada has co-accused in the case, although he said some individuals had already turned state witnesses.

“Mayroon, pero ang iba kasi sa kanila state witness na. Mga nakuha na natin nabigyan ng proteksyon ng batas sapagkat kailangang-kailangan ’yung testimonya para magkatuloy-tuloy ang mga kaso (Yes, but some of them have already become state witnesses. Those we obtained have been given protection under the law because their testimonies are necessary for the cases to proceed continuously),” Remulla said.

He underscored that the OMB was ensuring all evidence had already been secured before formally filing the case in court.

“Sinasabi ko nga lagi, when I came into this office, gusto namin pulido ang kaso. Tsaka gusto namin, pagfile ng kaso, ang ebidensya hawak na namin lahat. Wala na kaming kakapain pa (As I always say, when I came into this office, we wanted cases to be polished. And when we file cases, we want to already have all the evidence in our hands. We no longer want to search for anything else),” he said.

“Dire-diretso natin ilalahad, kasi ang problema nga, historically sa cases ng Ombudsman sa Sandiganbayan, maraming inaabot talaga ng ilang taon kasi nagkakaproblema sa ebidensya at delatory tactics (We will present everything continuously because historically, cases of the Ombudsman before the Sandiganbayan take years due to problems involving evidence and dilatory tactics),” he added.

Remulla said the Ombudsman would likely seek a continuous trial once the case is filed.

“At least for these cases na mahalaga sa taumbayan (At least for these cases that are important to the public),” he said.

The Ombudsman also said that the Supreme Court (SC) should revisit previous doctrines on plunder, saying certain requirements imposed by jurisprudence were allegedly not found in the law itself.

“[W]e think that it’s about time that the courts revisit the doctrine of plunder, especially the Supreme Court,” Remulla said.

“Or otherwise it’s going to become a dead law. I don’t think that was the intent of the legislature (Otherwise, it is going to become a dead law. I don’t think that was the intent of the legislature),” he added.