The trial of Sen. Jinggoy Estrada’s graft cases on the alleged misuse of his discretionary public funds or pork barrel will proceed as the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan junked his plea to dismiss the cases for lack of merit.
In a 22-page resolution, Sandiganbayan’s Special Fifth Division said there was no cogent reason to reverse its earlier resolution that denied Estrada’s demurrer to evidence, which would effectively dismiss his remaining graft charges involving the alleged misuse of his Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) amounting to over P200 million.
The funds were allegedly diverted to fake livelihood projects that were endorsed to non-government organizations allegedly owned by businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles, who has had numerous convictions over the misuse of the pork barrel funds.
The anti-graft court rejected Estrada’s argument that there should not be any prosecution for graft since there was already a prosecution against him for plunder from the ‘same set of facts and the same set of transactions.’
The court said there was nothing in the Rules of Court or the laws that there was a directive to dismiss a separate case for graft on account of the charge ‘being a predicate act in a prior case for plunder.’
It also maintained that the prosecution has presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case to support a guilty verdict.
‘The only reason to sustain such an argument would be if the same places the accused in double jeopardy, which is not the case herein, as shall be discussed by the court later,’ the resolution read.
The Sandiganbayan also disagreed with Estrada’s argument that the prosecution failed to prove that there was an intent to commit wrongdoing on his part, saying he never knew of the supposed scheme to misuse his PDAF.
The court cited the testimony of Ruby Tuason, who testified she met with Estrada and told him of the scheme of Janet Napoles and that she personally delivered amounts to him at the Senate and at his house.
It also cited the testimony of Benhur Luy, who said he had endorsement letters signed by Estrada through a member of his staff.
‘Estrada’s insistence on the innocuousness of his endorsements is belied by its repetition and deviation from the established procedure,’ the court said.
‘Estrada’s endorsement letters directly implicate him for the crimes charged and there is no basis for his argument that his letters were merely recommendatory,’ it added.
The Sandiganbayan set the presentation of defense evidence on Oct. 2.
The resolution, dated Oct. 1, was signed by Associate Justice Zaldy Trespeses, the division chair; and Associate Justices Maryann Corpus-Mañalac and Maria Theresa Mendoza-Arcega.