THE Supreme Court (SC) has affirmed the dismissal by the Sandiganbayan of the P1.050-billion civil forfeiture case filed against the late strongman Ferdinand Marcos Sr., former First Lady Imelda Marcos and several associates who allegedly acted as their dummies in acquiring expensive artworks, clothes, jewelry, and properties here and abroad, including franchises to operate tourist duty-free shops.
In a 25-page decision made public on July 19, the SC First Division dismissed for lack of merit the petition for review filed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), seeking the reversal of the Sandiganbayan’s decision of September 25, 2019, dismissing the expanded complaint against the Marcoses and the Tantoco family , namely Bienvenido R. Tantoco, Jr., Dominador R. Santiago, Bienvenido R. Tantoco, Sr., Gliceria R. Tantoco, and Maria Lourdes Tantoco- Pineda, for insufficiency of evidence.
The SC also affirmed the Sandiganbayan’s November 20, 2019 resolution which denied the motion for reconsideration of the PCGG.
“In order to consider petitioner’s evidence as sufficient to prove the allegations of its expanded complaint, the Court has to perform many leaps of logic, engage in presumptions, and create inferences based on other inferences in order to bridge the gaps in the evidence adduced. In the face of such gaps; petitioner’s allegations in its expanded complaint are reduced to mere speculations, insinuations· and conjectures,” the SC said in a decision penned by Associate Justice Ricardo Rosario.
“Thus, while it is truly disappointing that nothing has come of this case despite the lapse of 36 years spent in litigation, the Court agrees with the Sandiganbayan that petitioner’s evidence is insufficient to support the allegations of its Expanded Complaint by a preponderance of evidence,” it added.
The SC noted that while the PCGG submitted numerous pieces of evidence, many were excluded because they were not disclosed during the discovery process and others were excluded for violating the “Best Evidence Rule.”
It noted that only 11 exhibits and four testimonies were admitted as evidence.
However, after evaluation by the anti-graft court of the remaining admissible evidence, it concluded that such pieces of evidence were either insufficient to prove the allegations of the expanded complaint, or were unrelated to the facts sought to be proved by the PCGG.
Aside from failing to prove the allegation that the Tantocos were dummies of the Marcoses, the Court said the PCGG failed to prove that 5 percent of the franchise tax paid by the Duty Free Shops were to Mrs. Marcos.
The PCGG filed the forfeiture case in 1987 to recover assets and properties from the Marcos family and their alleged cronies, composed of P609.27 million in shares of stocks and P443.05 million in real properties.
The expanded complaint also alleged that the Tantocos acted as dummies of the Marcoses in acquiring franchises to operate tourist duty-free shops at international airports, hotels and commercial centers.
However, the SC declared: “Clearly, these documents are insufficient to prove that respondents concealed illegally obtained assets, or amassed ill-gotten wealth.”
“Accordingly, the Sandiganbayan was correct in dismissing the Expanded Complaint for Reconveyance, Accounting, Restitution and Damages against all the respondents,” it added.
Image credits: Mike Gonzalez via Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 3.0
SC upholds Sandigan junking of ₧1-B case vs Marcoses, pals
Source: News Paper Radio
0 Comments