Following the killing of his father who was tagged as a drug trafficker, and after his arrest for similar offenses in 2016, Rolan ‘Kerwin’ Espinosa had described himself as a drug dealer.
The Philippine legal system, however, works in mysterious ways. Since 2020, Espinosa has won a string of court victories, allowing him to run for mayor of Albuera in Leyte last May – and win – on a platform of fighting the drug scourge.
Fortunately, there are other ways of skinning a cat. The Manila Regional Trial Court has ordered the forfeiture of Espinosa’s multimillion-peso assets deemed to be fruits of his illegal drug activities.
The assets include real estate properties, 13 vehicles plus a motorcycle, deposits in multiple bank accounts, watercraft including jet skis along with pistols and shotguns.
In a separate case, the Manila RTC also ordered the forfeiture of assets including P61 million in bank deposits of an accused international drug financier, Sally Ang Nina and her cohorts.
The court orders were sought by the Anti-Money Laundering Council in partnership with the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, the Philippine National Police and National Bureau of Investigation.
In 2020, Manila RTC Judge Silvino Pampilo Jr. cleared Espinosa of two drug charges, but convicted him of illegal gun possession. Other court victories for Espinosa followed: in 2021, Makati RTC Judge Gina Bibat Palamos dismissed a drug trafficking case; in June 2023, Makati RTC Judge Veronica Tongio-Igot cleared Espinosa of conspiracy to sell illegal drugs, and in September 2023, Manila RTC Judge Janice Yulo-Antero also dismissed a case for illegal possession of guns and explosives.
In March 2024, the Court of Appeals ordered the revival of the drug cases dismissed in 2020. But in June last year, another drug case against Espinosa, filed in his home province of Leyte, was dismissed by Baybay RTC Judge Carlos Arguelles.
Legal authorities have explained that the evidence requirement for civil forfeiture cases is lower than the evidence to convict a defendant ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ in a criminal case. In forfeiture, mere ‘preponderance of evidence’ will do, if the asset is deemed to have come from illegal sources.
While this victory in a civil case is a welcome development, it remains to be seen whether the court order can be enforced. The nation is still waiting for the execution of the Sandiganbayan order for former senator Bong Revilla together with the estate of his late chief of staff Richard Cambe and plunder convict Janet Lim Napoles to jointly return to national coffers P124.5 million that was misused in Revilla’s pork barrel.
Revilla’s camp argues that his acquittal in the criminal case means he cannot be held liable in the civil case. Perhaps the forfeiture of Espinosa’s assets can lead to clarity in this issue, and the recovery of ill-gotten wealth.