We are sorry, the requested page does not exist
SC upholds decision granting Napoles bail in one PDAF case
Pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles and former Masbate Rep. Rizalina Seachon-Lanete have been allowed to post bail after the Supreme Court dismissed a case related to the Priority Development Assistance Fund......»»
ICHRP welcomes acquittal of Maria Ressa in Philippine tax evasion case
The International Coalition for Human Rights in the Philippines (ICHRP) welcomes journalist and Nobel Prize recipient Maria Ressa’s acquittal from a Philippine tax evasion case......»»
Remulla sees De Lima acquittal in last drug case
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla thinks former senator Leila de Lima will likely be acquitted in her remaining drug case after a Muntinlupa court granted her bail on Nov. 13......»»
Malolos court asked to reverse Palparan acquittal
Manalo, the witness who led to the conviction of Palparan in a 2018 case asked the Malolos Regional Trial Court on October 23, to take a second look at the decision saying that their evidence was enough to prove conspiracy against Palparan and the accused......»»
DFA: No appealing Ranara verdict
The 15-year prison term of the 17-year-old killer of rape-murder victim Jullebee Ranara has not resulted from an irregularity, the Department of Foreign Affairs said Saturday amid bereaved kin’s outcry that the penalty was too lenient. While the DFA gave its support to Ranara’s family, Undersecretary for Migrant Workers’ Affairs Eduardo de Vega told the Daily Tribune that “there was no whitewashing of the case.” “We told the family that this is the maximum allowed by Kuwaiti law. The accused was not acquitted. There was no whitewashing of the case. In the Philippines, minors are even exempt from criminal responsibility,” he said in a text message. “The prosecution cannot appeal a judgment of acquittal, or even in cases of a conviction, there can be no appeal by the prosecution to raise the penalty,” he said. The DFA, late Thursday, announced that Ranara’s killer was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment by a Kuwaiti juvenile court. On top of the murder conviction, the court also meted another one-year jail term for driving without a license. Ranara was found lifeless in January. She was raped, impregnated, burned, run over, and left for dead in the desert by her employer’s son. The post DFA: No appealing Ranara verdict appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Malaysian court upholds ex-leader Najib’s audit tampering acquittal
A Malaysian court upheld on Tuesday the acquittal of jailed former prime minister Najib Razak on an audit tampering charge in the investigation into corruption at the 1MDB state wealth fund. Najib is serving a 12-year prison term on other graft charges related to the 1 Malaysia Development Berhad financial scandal. The plundering of the fund led to investigations around the world, including in the United States, Switzerland and Singapore, into the use of their financial systems to launder money. But Malaysia's Court of Appeal struck out the appeal by state prosecutors against the acquittal of the audit tampering charge after prosecutors did not submit documents in time, Najib's lawyer Mohamed Shafee Abdullah told AFP. "In this case, the prosecution evidently found no grounds for appeal, resulting in no petition being filed," he said in a statement. Najib, the 70-year-old leader of Malaysia for nine years until 2018, was acquitted in March after a Kuala Lumpur High Court judge ruled prosecutors failed to provide sufficient evidence that he had tampered with an audit report on scandal-racked 1MDB. That charge focused on allegations that Najib ordered a report by the government's official audit body on the 1MDB sovereign wealth fund to be altered in February 2016. Najib's co-accused, former 1MDB chief Arul Kanda Kandasamy, was also acquitted. The former Malaysian premier's acquittal from the tampering charge does not affect his current jail sentence and he faces dozens more charges that could lengthen that term. Najib's wife Rosmah Mansor was found guilty of graft in 2022 and sentenced to 10 years in prison. She remains on bail pending an appeal. The post Malaysian court upholds ex-leader Najib’s audit tampering acquittal appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Malaysia court drops graft charges vs deputy PM
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (AFP) — A Malaysian court on Monday approved a prosecution request to drop all graft charges against the country’s deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, state news agency Bernama reported. Zahid was facing 47 charges of criminal breach of trust, corruption and money laundering related to the misuse of funds at a charity he founded. They were part of a raft of charges leveled at leading figures of the United Malays National Organization party after it was defeated at the polls in 2018, including former prime minister Najib Razak over massive corruption at state fund 1MDB. Prosecutors in Zahid’s case said they wanted more time to investigate his case “in more depth,” Bernama reported. Zahid, wearing a dark suit, hugged his supporters and family members who sat inside the packed courtroom when the decision was announced by the presiding judge. “My family and I are grateful that the court has discharged me of all 47 charges,” Zahid told a press conference. The court said Zahid’s discharge did not amount to an acquittal. He was appointed deputy PM after November’s election when his UMNO party joined the ruling coalition of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. Anwar was forced to ally with his former foes after falling short of an outright majority to form government. Zahid was discharged from another graft case in September last year for what a court said was lack of evidence. The post Malaysia court drops graft charges vs deputy PM appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Former Bataan gov off the hook
The Sandiganbayan announced on Sunday that it has cleared former Bataan Governor Leonardo Roman of a P3.66-million graft charge stemming from the anomalous construction of a mini-theater at the Bataan State College in 2004. Citing the prosecution’s failure to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the anti-graft court’s Second Division acquitted Roman of violating the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act or RA 3019 in a 41-page ruling. “As the prosecution, in this case, failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt all the elements of Section 3(e) of RA 3019 under which the accused was charged, accused Roman should be entitled to an acquittal,” said the Sandiganbayan. To recall, the case against Roman involved the alleged awarding of a P3.66-million mini-theater project of the Bataan State College in 2004 in favor of V.F. Construction despite no allocated budget or appropriation for the project. He was also accused of colluding with his co-accused executive assistant Romeo Mendiola, treasurer Pastor Vichauco, budget officer Aurora Tiambeng, and accountant Numeriano Medina by giving unwarranted benefits to V.F. Construction for the release of the sum. Filed before the Ombudsman, the case stemmed from a complaint-affidavit dated 1 September 2004 accusing Roman and his cohorts of the crime of malversation of public funds through falsification of public documents. Roman served as the governor of Bataan from 1986 to 2004. In 2006, the Ombudsman dismissed the complaint for lack of probable cause. The Supreme Court affirmed the Ombudsman’s decision to drop the criminal charge. The Ombudsman, however, filed the case before the Sandiganbayan in 2015 following the SC’s ruling to reverse the criminal charge of graft. Based on the prosecution’s probe, Roman entered a contract with V.F. Construction to construct a mini-theater and rendered his authorizations, approvals, and certifications for the P3.66-million payment. Investigation revealed that Roman certified the project as fully completed and issued the payment to the construction firm in two installments. However, more than five months after the final payment was made to the construction company, the CoA discovered that the mini-theater, contrary to Roman’s declaration, was incomplete. The structure, it said, was only 50.7 percent complete. In clearing Roman, the Sandiganbayan stressed that it was “not convinced” by the prosecution’s theory that the erstwhile governor’s execution of a contract and approval of the payment with the V.F. Construction despite the lapses was tantamount to graft. “The evidence on record is insufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there was bad faith, manifest partially, or gross inexcusable negligence on the part of the accused when he committed the questioned acts,” the Sandiganbayan said. According to the Sandiganbayan, while Roman may have committed mistakes in the performance of his duty, the fact remains that the evidence is insufficient to prove a serious breach of duty that was committed flagrantly, palpably, and with willful indifference or blatant and extremely careless manner. The post Former Bataan gov off the hook appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Court junks appeal to reverse De Lima acquittal
A Muntinlupa court has junked an appeal by state prosecutors to reverse the acquittal last May of former senator Leila de Lima in her second drug case, citing lack of merit......»»
Muntinlupa court junks DOJ s appeal to reopen De Lima s 2nd drug case
A Muntinlupa court has junked the prosecution's bid to reverse the acquittal of former Sen. Leila De Lima from one of her two remaining drug trafficking charges in May......»»
US actor Kevin Spacey cleared of UK sex offenses
Hollywood actor Kevin Spacey was acquitted on Wednesday in Britain of nine alleged sex offenses, in the latest court victory for the Oscar winner who was one of the first huge stars felled by the #MeToo movement. The star of "American Beauty" and drama series "House of Cards", who turned 64 on Wednesday, was acquitted by majority verdicts in London following a trial lasting several weeks. "I'm enormously grateful to the jury for having taken the time to examine all of the evidence and all of the facts carefully before they reached their decision and I am humbled by the outcome today," he told reporters outside court. It comes less than a year after a New York court dismissed a $40 million sexual misconduct civil lawsuit brought against him, and follows charges of indecent and sexual assault being dropped in Massachusetts in 2019. Spacey's once-stellar career has been halted by the various allegations of sexual offences, which first emerged in 2017 and which he has always denied. The actor told Germany's Die Zeit that he expected to mount a comeback following the acquittal. "I know that there are people right now who are ready to hire me the moment I am cleared of these charges in London," he told the German national weekly. "The second that happens, they're ready to move forward." Madness The jury in London, which began considering the charges on Monday, cleared Spacey of all nine counts that he faced, after more than 12 hours of deliberations. The alleged offences included seven counts of sexual assault, one count of causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent, and one count of causing a person to engage in penetrative sexual activity without consent. They were said to have occurred in 2005 and 2008 in London, and in 2013 in Gloucestershire, western England. Jurors heard evidence from the four alleged victims, who cannot be named for legal reasons. British rock star Elton John was also among those to testify, as a witness for Spacey. The prosecution claimed he was a "sexual bully" who revelled in making others feel uncomfortable, including by aggressively grabbing men's crotches. One of victims, a former aspiring actor, said he woke up to find Spacey performing a sex act on him, suggesting the actor "drugged" him. He was accused of grabbing another man's crotch "so hard" while driving to a fundraising event, that the car nearly came off the road. Spacey, whose full name is Kevin Spacey Fowler, called the claims "madness" and a "stab in the back". He had been on unconditional bail since first being charged in Britain last year, and on Wednesday walked out of the south London court a free man. The Crown Prosecution Service said it had charged him following "a thorough investigation" by London's Metropolitan Police. "It is the role of the jury to consider the charges and we respect the decision of the court," a spokesman added. Career success Spacey enjoyed a highly successful decades-spanning career with roles such as a middle-aged father lusting after a teen in "American Beauty," a serial killer in "Se7en" and the villain in "Superman Returns". He worked as artistic director at London's Old Vic Theatre between 2004 and 2015. In 2017 he was one of the first stars caught up in the global #MeToo movement as he was accused of sexual assault by multiple young men. He was dropped from the final season of the political drama "House of Cards" and other projects. A New York court dismissed a $40 million civil sexual misconduct lawsuit brought against him in October last year. The complainant, actor Anthony Rapp, alleged the star had assaulted him when he was 14. He brought the civil case after being told it was too late to bring a criminal charge but failed to convince the jury in that case. In 2019, charges of indecent and sexual assault were dropped against Spacey in Massachusetts. The post US actor Kevin Spacey cleared of UK sex offenses appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Tribune, Marcos share good gov’t journey (17)
“Without fear or favor,” was how former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. chose the Daily Tribune motto in justifying his vote for the acquittal of Chief Justice Renato Corona in the 2012 impeachment trial. Marcos was one of three senators, the others being Miriam Defensor Santiago and Joker Arroyo, who voted to acquit, against 20 who voted to convict Corona. The senator-judges voted only on article 2 of the original eight charges in the impeachment complaint, which was Corona’s “failure to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth as required under the Constitution.” When Corona passed away in 29 April 2016, Marcos said that he had been a victim of a “great injustice.” “It is unfortunate that at the time of his death, he was still under this cloud that had remained above him since the impeachment trial,” Marcos lamented. He stressed that Corona was clearly a casualty of “selective justice.” History validated the points Marcos made as it was revealed that money was passed around, straight from a Palace slush fund, to influence the vote to oust Corona. In defense of his vote in the impeachment court, Marcos cited Lady Justice who “wears a blindfold for a reason.” “She is to render judgment based on law and evidence without regard to the circumstances and personalities of the parties involved,” he noted. He said that like Lady Justice, the senator-judges were bound to dispense justice “without fear or favor.” “An impeachment trial is sui generis. But, be that as it may, the Bill of Rights stands supreme over all the powers of government, including the power to impeach, and nowhere is this precept more opposite than in this case, where the government has mustered all the resources at its disposal not only to secure evidence against the chief justice but further to ensure his conviction,” Marcos had noted. He indicated that the crucial issues that had piqued the interest of the senator-judges, as well as of the public, “were outside the original ambit of the impeachment complaint” and were raised only after the filing of the complaint. “Evidence in some of these issues came from questionable sources, beginning with the unidentified ‘little lady’ who supplied documents anonymously, leaving them on gates and in mailboxes.” The “little lady” was later identified as a journalist who was doing errands for the Liberal Party to pin Corona and fulfill the wish of the late President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III to have the chief justice removed. Marcos said that “at the expense of the sub judice rule, evidence was presented to the public on several occasions even before they were formally offered before this court.” “Worse, information was grossly exaggerated with the apparent intention to predispose the public mind against the chief justice,” Marcos pointed out. He cited as an example the Land Registration Authority report with the “discredited” list of 45 properties and the unauthenticated Anti-Money Laundering Council report claiming that the chief justice had $10 million. Fair, impartial and just Still, Marcos said the chief justice sufficiently addressed the accusations against him with regard to the filing of his Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth and the disclosure of his real properties and peso deposits. Relative to his dollar deposits, the chief justice believed that he was under no legal duty to declare them pursuant to Republic Act 6426 which affords absolute confidentiality to all foreign currency depositors, Marcos indicated. “In view of the ambiguous situation created by the concurrent application of the 1987 Constitution, the SALN law and the FCDU law, and absent a determinative judicial pronouncement that resolves the contrary positions in this legal issue, the chief justice must be presumed to have acted in good faith,” Marcos said. He pointed out that “it has been held that not all omissions and misdeclarations in the SALN amount to dishonesty.” “When the furor has died down and this political storm has subsided, I know that like Lady Justice we shall find solace in the fact that this decision, though it may be not popular, was fair, impartial and just,” Marcos declared. The post Tribune, Marcos share good gov’t journey (17) appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Judge in Leila case recuses
Muntinlupa City Regional Trial Court Branch 204 Presiding Judge Abraham Joseph Alcantara has inhibited himself from overseeing the remaining illegal drug charge against former senator Leila de Lima. The decision of the judge came after he granted the prosecution’s eight-page motion, which requested his inhibition from Criminal Case 17-167. “Considering the aforementioned circumstances, I, as the Presiding Judge, will exercise caution and voluntarily refrain from presiding over the case, not because the prosecution’s assertion is true, but to eliminate any doubts regarding my credibility, integrity, and impartiality,” Alcantara said in his decision. The DoJ, in its motion, expressed concerns that Judge Alcantara’s prior acquittal of de Lima in Criminal Case No. 17-165 could potentially impact his handling of the ongoing case. Two of three drug cases filed against De Lima, about her actions as justice secretary under the administration of the late former President Noynoy Aquino, had been dismissed. The DoJ panel maintained it could “not help but be apprehensive” that Alcantara “will carry over his perceptions to the instant case.” It said that Alcantara recusing himself from the case would erase any doubt of impartiality or “any impression that he will similarly decide” as in the previous case. Section 1, Rule 137 of the Rules of Court provides that a judge “in the exercise of his sound discretion, (may) disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just or valid reasons,” the prosecutors said. They also cited a Supreme Court ruling that a judge may be prohibited from litigating a case “when circumstances appear that will induce doubt on his honest actuation and probity in favor of either party, or incident such state of mind.” Criminal Case No. 17-167, De Lima’s third and last case, was previously assigned to RTC Judge Romeo Buenaventura of Branch 256. It was re-raffled after Buenaventura last 15 June granted the motion of De Lima’s co-accused that sought his inhibition. The case was then assigned to Judge Alcantara. The information against De Lima under Criminal Case 17-167 alleged that she and her co-accused received P70 million in narcotics money, purportedly her share for allowing drug lords detained at the New Bilibid Prison to continue running their drug empires while behind bars. The post Judge in Leila case recuses appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Reverse Leila acquittal, court told
Government prosecutors have asked the Muntinlupa City Regional Trial Court to reverse its acquittal of former senator Leila de Lima on drug-related charges. The Department of Justice panel of prosecutors headed by Ramoncito Ocampo Jr. submitted to the court a 91-page motion for reconsideration anchored on questioning the motives of those who recanted their statements against De Lima. In dismissing the second of three drug cases against De Lima, the court afforded the former senator “reasonable doubt” on account of former Bureau of Corrections chief Rafael Ragos taking back his statement that he gave De Lima P10 million. The case stemmed from the alleged actions of De Lima as DoJ secretary overseeing the New Bilibid Prison. She purportedly received money from drug lords detained at NBP in exchange for allowing them to remotely control their drug empires behind bars. The prosecution noted that Ragos’ recantation came eight days before the 2022 presidential election, at the time that De Lima was seeking reelection as a senator. “This clearly raises doubt as to the motive behind the sudden retraction,” part of the motion read. Muntinlupa RTC Branch 204 Presiding Judge Abraham Joseph Alcantara, in his 13 May 2013 ruling, said the case against De Lima had lost its legs with the recantation. Without Ragos’s statement, the trial court said: “The crucial link to establish conspiracy is shrouded with reasonable doubt.” On 5 September 2016, Ragos executed an affidavit claiming that in November 2012, as BuCor OIC and together with aide Jovencio Ablen, he delivered a black bag containing P5 million to De Lima and her bodyguard, Ronnie Dayan, at the former’s residence in Parañaque City. Ragos claimed they made another delivery of P5 million in a plastic bag in December 2012 to De Lima and Dayan. The money, according to Ragos, came from the proceeds of the drug operations of several high-profile inmates inside the NBP. But Ragos retracted his statements against De Lima in May 2022. The panel of prosecutors insisted that Ragos’ recantation did not debunk his original testimony given in open court and that there were other pieces of evidence on record to prove De Lima’s guilt. The panel also cited numerous rulings of the Supreme Court which held that recantations of testimonies are viewed with suspicion and hardly given much weight. “While recantation may give rise to suspicion, such suspicion, however strong, cannot solely serve as a gauge for determining the probative value of the recantation,” the DoJ panel said. The prosecution pointed out that Ragos “extensively” testified before the court, the Senate, and the House of Representatives on his original testimony linking De Lima to the illegal drug trade inside the NBP. It also questioned the court’s failure to consider the weight of the “corroborative and uncontroverted” testimony of Ablen, who testified that he accompanied Ragos in delivering the alleged drug money to De Lima’s residence. The panel also noted that Ragos failed to show evidence to back his claim that he was coerced into executing his initial affidavits and testifying before the court against the former senator. “With his stature and if Ragos indeed lived by his office creed, no amount of coercion could have swayed him. His empty claim of coercion could not have sacrificed his honor and the honor of his office by asserting untruthful statements which are not expected of a high officer of the premier investigatory arm of the government,” the DoJ panel said. The post Reverse Leila acquittal, court told appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
DOJ prosecutors ask Muntinlupa court to reverse De Lima acquittal
The Department of Justice has asked the Regional Trial Court of Muntinlupa City to reverse the acquittal of former senator Leila de Lima on the charge of conspiring to commit illegal drug trading inside the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa City. The panel of prosecutors headed by Provincial Prosecutor Ramoncito Ocampo Jr. in a 91-page motion for reconsideration, questioned the motive behind the recantation of its main witness, former officer-in-charge of the Bureau of Corrections Rafael Ragos, which became the basis for the trial court’s dismissal of the drug case against De Lima. The prosecution noted that Ragos’ recantation came eight days before the 2022 presidential election, where De Lima was seeking reelection as senator. “This clearly raises doubt as to the motive behind the sudden retraction,” the MR stated. “Verily, the precipitous recantation of NBI Deputy Director Rafael Marcos Z. Ragos is coming off as highly suspect and should not be the sole barometer and guiding threshold in rendering the assailed judgment,” it added. Muntinlupa RTC Branch 204 Presiding Judge Abraham Joseph Alcantara, in his 13 May 2013 ruling, gave weight to Ragos’ recantation in acquitting De Lima and bodyguard Ronnie Dayan. Without Ragos’ statement, the trial court said, “ the crucial link to establish conspiracy is shrouded with reasonable doubt.” The retraction it said “created reasonable doubt which warrants the acquittal of both accused.” On 5 September 2016, Ragos executed an affidavit claiming that in November 2012, as BuCor OIC and together with aide Jovencio Ablen, they delivered a black bag containing P5 million to De Lima and her bodyguard Ronnie Dayan at the former’s residence in Paranaque. Ragos said they made another delivery of the amount of P5 million contained in a plastic bag in December 2012 to De Lima and Dayan. The money, according to Ragos, came from the proceeds of the drug operations of several high-profile inmates inside the NBP. But the statements were recanted by Ragos in his affidavit executed in May 2022. The panel of prosecutors insisted that Ragos’ recantation was not able to debunk his original testimony given in open court and that there are other pieces of evidence on record to prove De Lima’s guilt. The panel also cited numerous rulings of the Supreme Court which held that recantations of testimonies are viewed with suspicion and hardly given much weight. “While recantation may give rise to suspicion, such suspicion, however strong, cannot solely serve as a gauge for determining the probative value of the recantation,” the DOJ panel said. The prosecution pointed out that Ragos “extensively” testified before the court, the Senate and House of Representatives on his original testimony linking De Lima to the illegal drug trade inside the NBP. It also questioned the court’s failure to consider the weight of the “corroborative and uncontroverted" testimony of Ablen, who testified that he accompanied Ragos in delivering the alleged drug money to De Lima’s residence in Paranaque City. The panel also noted that Ragos failed to show evidence to back his claim that he was coerced to execute his initial affidavits and to testify before the court against the former senator. “With his stature and if Ragos indeed lived by his office creed, no amount of coercion could have swayed him. His empty claim of coercion could not have sacrificed his honor and the honor of his office by asserting untruthful statements which are not expected of a high officer of the premier investigatory arm of the government,” the DOJ said. The post DOJ prosecutors ask Muntinlupa court to reverse De Lima acquittal appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Acquittal doesn’t shield accused from karmic debt
No matter how a former government official commits abusive and criminal acts while in office, followed by prosecution and incarceration after stepping out of office, there are rabid partisans who will express their support and sympathy either out of misplaced loyalty, or out of gratitude for past favors or out of ignorance of the past misdeeds. When such government official is acquitted by reason of failure of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, the partisans, as well as even those who genuinely pity the accused who has been clamped to jail before the acquittal pour out their sympathetic sentiments claiming that the detainee has been imprisoned unjustly for many years before being acquitted, as in the case of former senator and justice secretary Leila de Lima. Charged with three drug cases, she was jailed in 2016. Despite scoring two acquittals, with the last remaining drug case still pending she remains languishing behind bars, although relatively with less restrictive movements and enjoying some privacy being confined solo in her jailhouse, unlike ordinary convicts who suffer more. Given the change in the political environment from the time of her incarceration, where fortunes are altered for various reasons, it will not be surprising if she will be again exonerated in her last court case. Sympathizers lament that her six years of being deprived of freedom is undeserved and unjust since she has been acquitted in two cases and most likely will snatch another judicial victory unless the trying court strictly follows the rules on evidence. Let us grant that indeed she is really innocent in the drug cases filed against her, is it correct to say that her six years of being deprived of her liberty is an injustice? The answer must be negative because the law of karma applies to her. The accused has to pay a karmic debt she owes to former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. For those who have forgotten, let us revisit the past, particularly 15 November 2011. On that day, accompanied by her husband, former First Gentleman, and son, Congressman Mikey Arroyo, the former President, in an ambulance arrived at the Manila International Airport. She was wheeled into the departure VIP lounge wearing a face mask and a neck brace. Armed with a Supreme Court restraining order overturning an earlier travel ban issued by the late former President Benigno Aquino III, their lawyers tried to persuade the Immigration officials to allow them to depart for Singapore for medical treatment of a bone ailment The accused, as then-Secretary of Justice, in willful, brazen and blatant defiance of the Supreme Court order, commanded her subordinate officials in the Bureau Immigration, who of course complied, to prevent Arroyo from boarding the plane. On 16 July 2012, a P366 million plunder charge was filed against her. On 12 October 2012, a warrant of arrest was issued against her by the Sandiganbayan, which granted her plea for a hospital arrest owing to her illness. She was a virtual prisoner at the hospital and deprived of her liberty until 19 July 2016 when the Supreme Court freed her after it dismissed the plunder case against her. Undoubtedly, it was the accused who not only inhumanly stopped her from getting urgent medical treatment abroad and as the head of the prosecution arm of the Aquino government, but contributed greatly to her subsequent arrest and detention for more than four years. Accused De Lima may have escaped her criminal culpability by reason of a flawed acquittal in the drug cases but she could not dodge her accountably for the illegal act of stopping FPGMA from seeking medical treatment abroad. Her continued detention despite her acquittal is a deserving substituted punishment for the cruel and criminal offense she committed against the former Chief Executive. Her acquittal is not a shield to the unstoppable and inexorable operation of the law of karma. As an aside, this writer cannot fathom why FPGMA has not filed any criminal or administrative case or both against her tormentor, except to consider that the former has a forgiving heart. It is also a wonderment why the Supreme Court, on its own initiative, has not sanctioned the criminal, contumacious, and outrageous act of the former government official, when her act was in open defiance of its restraining order. The post Acquittal doesn’t shield accused from karmic debt appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
43 farmers in Kidapawan rally acquitted
The Municipal Trial Court in Cities disclosed on Tuesday that it has acquitted the 43 Kidapawan City farmers who were involved in the 2016 protest where they allegedly assaulted policemen. Documents obtained from the Public Attorney’s Office showed the judgement of acquittal was handed down last 18 May by Judge Rebecca Elena B. de Leon of the MTCC. “The Court holds that it finds the evidence for their conviction with no recourse other than dismiss the case which is tantamount to a judgment of acquittal,” said the decision penned by De Leon. The demurrer to evidence, according to PAO who represented the farmers, told the court that the evidence of the prosecution is “insufficient to prove their guilt with moral certainty and beyond reasonable doubt.” Of the 61 farmers pinpointed as participants in the clash with policemen during the protest action, only 43 of them were arrested and charged. The protest stemmed on the farmers’ plea for rice supply from the government due to severe drought that hit their farms. “We laud the court for giving justice to said farmers. This decision proves that justice will flow like a river in our country as the PAO and its poor clients are waiting for swift and just victories for the Filipino people,” said PAO chief Persida Rueda-Acosta. To recall, the farmers staged a protest on 20 March to 1 April 2016 organized by cause-oriented groups Bayan Muna, Gabriela, Anak Pawis, Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas and Apo Sandawa Lumadhong Pananghiusa Cotabato in front of the Spotswoods Methodist Church in Kidapawan City. In the MTCC’s decision, the court stressed that on 1 April 2016 the protesters started throwing stones when “PSSupt. Alexander Tagum ordered the police and fire officers to engage after a five-minute ultimatum was given to protesters to disperse and clear the highway.” Reports had it that two farmers were killed and 13 others were injured during the clash. The post 43 farmers in Kidapawan rally acquitted appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Acquittal flawed, recantation witness’ intimidation unproved (2)
The 39-page decision on the De Lima case by the Regional Trial Court of Muntinlupa City Branch 204, contains a recitation of facts and circumstances as alleged in the complaint and as testified to by witnesses, as well as the reasons for the verdict of acquittal. The accused who was then Secretary of Justice was charged with accepting drug money to fund her senatorial campaign from the drug lords operating the illegal trafficking of prohibited drugs inside the national penitentiary. Two witnesses namely Jovencio Ablan, an NBI agent, and Rafael Ragos, former Bureau of Corrections officer-in-charge, testified that on two separate occasions – 25 November and 21 December 2012 – the two of them delivered a total of P10 million to De Lima at her residence in South Bay Subdivision, Parañaque City. Both of them testified that on 24 November 2012, the black bag containing P5 million was received by the other accused, Ronnie Dayan, personal driver of De Lima, who handed it to the latter. Likewise, the two witnesses testified that on 15 December 2012, the 2nd delivery of P5 million to De Lima was made by them at the same aforesaid residence. It was Dayan who received the plastic bag containing the money. Ragos saw De Lima receiving the money from Dayan. Quoted hereunder is the testimony of Jovencio Ablen as narrated by the court on Pages 5 and 6 of the decision: “Jovencio “Jun” Ablen is an intelligence agent connected with NBI Intelligence Division. From November 24, 2012 to December 15, 2012, he received verbal instructions to assist Deputy Director Ragos on some investigations, particularly at the Bureau of Corrections Maximum Security facility where there was a grenade explosion incident. On Nov. 24, 2012, at or about 8:00 o’clock in the morning, he received a call from Deputy Director Ragos, who picked him up from his house and told him that they will deliver money to “Lola” pertaining to them Sec. de Lima. He saw bundles of money in one-thousand-peso bill denominations allegedly amounting to Five Million Pesos and they delivered the money to the residence of accused De Lima at Laguna Bay corner Subic Bay, South Bay Subdivision, Paranaque City. When Ragos was approaching the pedestrian gate, he saw accused Dayan already standing there as the pedestrian gate was open. Ragos handed over the black bag to Dayan. While going towards the house, he saw then Sec. de Lima outside the main entrance and accused Dayan tried to hand over the black bag to her. On December 15, 2012, he was again instructed by Ragos to accompany him. They proceeded to accused De Lima’s house to bring one plastic bag containing money. Upon approaching the pedestrian gate, Ragos handed the transparent plastic bag supposedly containing Five Million Pesos to accused Dayan.” On the other hand, the testimony of Rafael Ragos is reproduced below as found on pages 9 and 19 of the court’s decision, to wit: “Deputy Director Rafael Marcos Z. Ragos testified that they delivered on two (2) occasions sum of money to accused Dayan and De Lima.” On November 24, 2012, he found a black bag in his quarter’s bedroom and when he opened it, he saw bundles of money, which was placed thereat by a trustee called “Jordan.” After the latter told him he could not identify the person who delivered the said bag, Deputy Director received a telephone call from Hans Tan, a high-profile inmate involved in drugs who told him to deliver the Five Million Pesos to accused Dayan and De Lima.” (To be continued) The post Acquittal flawed, recantation witness’ intimidation unproved (2) appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Acquittal flawed, recantation witness’ intimidation unproved (1)
The acquittal of disgraced former justice secretary and ex-senator Leila de Lima by a Muntinlupa City court, the second of three illegal drug cases filed against her, drew congratulatory messages from opposition allies who could not resist pontificating that justice has been rendered by the acquittal. One lady senator was quoted as saying in reference to the acquittal: “Though the course is long, justice is finally prevailing… The false narrative and web of lies that led to her imprisonment is finally being undone. “She added that she’s confident that De Lima will get full vindication and eventual liberty, in reference to the latter’s 3rd drug case. Being an incorrigible oppositionist and not being a lawyer, one can understand the absence of factual basis and depth of her allegation that falsehood was the basis of the incarceration of her former colleague. The accused underwent administrative and judicial processes in the determination of probable cause before she was clamped in jail. Another senator belonging to the minority paid tribute to the court rendering the favorable judgment “for being true to its mandate to dispense justice without fear or favor by strictly following the evidence.” This gentleman lawmaker, who is a lawyer, may not have read the decision in full, because if he did, the court’s gross failure to strictly observe the rules on evidence particularly in the evaluation of the recantation of a previous testimony made under oath and in court, would have not escaped his legal mind. Another former opposition senator who was a former secretary of justice expressed hope that the accused would be granted bail in her third drug case since the principal witness had already recanted, adding that the charges being fabricated, the officials of the previous administration responsible for filing them should be held accountable. Either this lawyer is biased in favor of a fellow party member and former fellow senator or there is a need for him to go back to law school to brush up with his rules on evidence. Another scoundrel of a lawmaker, rejected by the electorate for a return to his former position and who has a reputation for spreading lies against his political opponent expressed elation over the acquittal and tweeted on his Instagram that “redemption and vindication” for the accused is in the offing, putting an end to her incarceration. Another former anti-Duterte administration opposition joined in the chorus saying that the acquittal was a welcome development even if it had taken years for the court to render the verdict. He chimed in: We have from Day 1 called for the dismissal of the charges but, as the saying goes, better late than never. “He obviously has forgotten his procedural law and opted to be a misguided partisan for the detained lawmaker.” A member of Congress from Albay, echoing the same opposition line, stated: “It is long overdue, given there was no case in the first place as the witnesses were just forced to lie in court. “Apparently, he has not read the case as well, making allegations not supported by court records.” Having been trained in law, this writer went over the decision of the court to examine the testimonies as narrated by the latter in its recitation of facts as well as the arguments propounded by it in support of the exoneration. Let us put them under a microscope in a manner of speaking and see if the decision is in accord with the facts and the law. (To be continued) The post Acquittal flawed, recantation witness’ intimidation unproved (1) appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»
Dela Rosa hopes De Lima’s acquittal ‘devoid of politics’
Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa said he hopes the acquittal of former Senator Leila De Lima in one of two drug-related cases against her is “devoid of politics.” “Well, if that decision — I hope — is devoid of anything or any consideration [but] if it's based purely on the merits of the case, then I am glad if justice be served in that case,” Dela Rosa said in a radio interview on Friday. Dela Rosa emphasized that all court decisions “should be devoid of politics.” “But if that has consideration of something or under the influence of what or there’s questionable — questions behind that, ay ibang usapan yan (that another topic). Justice must be served properly sa mga ganitong kaso regardless kung sino siya. Ganun dapat ang mangyari (in cases like this regardless of who the person is. That's how it should happen),” he said. Meanwhile, Amnesty International’s interim Deputy Regional Director for Research Montse Ferrer said De Lima’s acquittal was long overdue. “We urge the authorities to also quash the remaining drug case and to ensure that her application for temporary freedom in this pending case is processed speedily and fairly,” she said. Ferrer called on the Marcos administration to make “those responsible for De Lima’s arbitrary detention” accountable. “Beyond Leila de Lima’s long-overdue release, the Marcos administration must work towards holding accountable those responsible for her arbitrary detention, which clearly violated her rights to liberty, presumption of innocence, and other fair trial guarantees, ” she added. The post Dela Rosa hopes De Lima’s acquittal ‘devoid of politics’ appeared first on Daily Tribune......»»