The Sandiganbayan has affirmed its earlier decision that ordered the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cainta, Rizal to immediately proceed with the graft trial of former Anti-Red Tape Authority (ARTA) director general Jeremiah Belgica and four more officials.
The court’s Sixth Division denied in a 31-page resolution on Thursday, Oct. 9, the motions for reconsideration filed by Belgica and his co-accused, which asked the Sadiganbayan to reverse and set aside its Aug. 18 decision.
It pointed out that there is no ‘prejudicial question’ that would block the graft trial, dismissing the petitioners’ argument that two cases filed before and yet to be resolved by the Supreme Court should suspend the RTC proceedings.
‘As [.] discussed at length in the assailed Decision, the issues in the criminal case and those in the Newsnet and Now Tel cases are not intimately related. Thus, there is no ground for suspending the proceedings on the basis of prejudicial question,’ it said.
The Sandiganbayan explained that the cases filed before the SC center on whether ARTA has the authority to issue Orders of Automatic Approval (OAAs) that override actions made by the National Telecommunications Commission.
RELATED STORY: Ombudsman suspends ARTA chief, 4 other execs for 6 months
The graft case, on the other hand, discusses the regularity of a specific OAA issued on March 1, 2021, which affected frequencies already assigned to Dito Telecommunity.
Belgica’s co-defendants are ARTA Deputy Director General Eduardo Bringas, Division Chief Sheryl Pura-Sumagui, and Directors Jedrek Ng and Melamy Salvadora-Asperin.
They were accused of favoring NOW Telecom when ARTA issued the March 1, 2021 OAA granting the company 3G mobile frequencies, even though the NTC had previously assigned the same frequencies to Dito Telecommunity Inc.
Prosecutors also said NOW Tel was ineligible to receive the frequencies because of unpaid Supervision and Regulation Fees (SRF) and Spectrum User Fees (SUF).
As Belgica and his co-accused stated in their motions, the criminal case and the SC petitions involved identical issues and that ‘the regularity of the issuance of an OAA is intrinsically tied to the proper exercise of ARTA’s authority.’
However, the Sandiganbayan rejected this, saying that the arguments had already been considered and found without merit.
‘In fine, the respondents failed to convince this Court that the reversal of the assailed Decision is warranted,’ said the resolution, which was penned by Associate Justice Sarah Jane T. Fernandez, with Associate Justices Kevin Narce B. Vivero and Lord A. Villanueva concurring.