MANILA, Philippines—For the second time, the Supreme Court upheld the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan’s decision nixing the government’s bid to present additional evidence on the ill-gotten wealth case against former President Ferdinand Marcos, his wife, Imelda, now Senate President Juan Ponce-Enrile and several others.
In a two-page resolution dated March 13, 2012, the high court, voting 7-7, said the government’s motion for reconsideration contained “rehashed arguments.” With this latest resolution, the SC upheld its earlier Dec. 13, 2011, resolution favoring the Sandiganbayan ruling. The tie vote was tantamount to dismissal of the government motion.
“After considering the arguments raised in the motion for reconsideration [of the December 13, 2011, decision] filed by the Republic of the Philippines (petitioner), the Court resolves to deny the same for lack of merit,” the resolution read.
The high court also dismissed the government’s request for Chief Justice Renato Corona to inhibit from participating in the case due to his ongoing impeachment trial.
“The Court also resolves to deny the petitioner’s additional prayer that the Chief Justice voluntarily recuse himself from participating in the case. The Chief Justice had already weighed the merits of the case and voted on the main decision even before he was hastily impeached on December 12, 2011,” the resolution stated.
The high court last year dismissed for lack of merit the government’s petition that sought to overturn a Sandiganbayan resolution denying the admission of the deposition of Maurice V. Bane as part of its evidence in the said ill-gotten wealth case in connection with the purchase of the major shareholdings of Cable and Wireless Limited in Eastern Telecommunications Philippines Inc. (ETPI.
In the 61-page decision penned by Justice Arturo D. Brion, the court held that “the petition must ultimately fail as the Bane deposition is not admissible under the rules of evidence.”
Bane was former director and treasurer-in-trust of ETPI. His testimony was taken in London, England, on October 23 and 24, 1996, by way of deposition by petitioner government on oral examination before Consul General Ernesto Castro of the Philippine Embassy in London, England.
Although this case was filed in 1987, it was only in 1996 and 1997 that the first pre-trial conference was scheduled and concluded. In its pre-trial brief, the government offered to present Bane as one of its witnesses. In 1998, the Sandiganbayan denied the government’s motion to adopt Bane’s testimony, which the government did not question.
In April 1993, upon petitioner’s motion, the Sandiganbayan consolidated the case with 11 other cases, including Civil Case No. 0130, a petition filed by Victor Africa, as an ETPI stockholder, that sought a temporary restraining order on the twin orders of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) directing him, among others, to account for his sequestered ETPI shares and to cease and desist from exercising voting rights on the sequestered shares in the special stockholders’ meeting in 1991.
Upon consolidation, the government insisted that it should consider admitting as evidence Bane’s testimony, which was again dismissed by the anti-graft court due to the other accused’s failure to cross-examine him.
Others accused in the case include Jose Africa, Manuel H. Nieto, Jr., Roberto S. Benedicto and Potenciano Ilusorio.