Senate President Pro-Tempore Jinggoy Estrada during the weekly Kapihan sa Senado forum on Tuesday, June 4, 2024. Noy Morcoso/INQUIRER.net
The Sandiganbayan Special Fifth Division has granted the motion of Sen. Jinggoy Estrada to overturn his conviction for one count of direct bribery and two counts of indirect bribery for lack of sufficient evidence and information on the lesser offenses prescribed by the “variance” doctrine.
In a 26-page resolution on Thursday, the antigraft court ruled to reverse his direct bribery conviction in connection with the alleged misuse of pork barrel funds owing to the prosecution’s failure to provide “direct and convincing evidence” that Estrada received P1 million out of the P5 million his deputy chief of staff Pauline Labayen got from businesswomen Janet Lim-Napoles in 2008.
READ: Sandiganbayan reverses Jinggoy Estrada’s bribery conviction
The case stemmed from the records of Benhur Luy, Napoles’ cousin, and an Anti-Money Laundering (AMLC) report that found Estrada’s bank deposit of P1 million on the same day his aide Labayen also received P5 million.
But the court pointed out: “Apart from the identical dates of these transactions, no other evidence serves to establish the flow of funds from Labayen to Estrada.”
The special division also set aside the senator’s indirect bribery conviction as the original charge sheet lacked “essential elements” that could hold him liable for the lesser crime through the variance rule.
Crucial technicality
The variance rule, stipulated under the Rules of Court on Criminal Procedure, allows an accused to be convicted of a lesser predicate crime, provided that the alleged offense must also be described in the original complaint.
The indirect bribery conviction was attributed to the alleged P1.5 million and P4.2 million in payoffs to Estrada that Napoles separately coursed through Ruby Tuason, her supposed “collecting agent.”
But these details were not found in the complaint, the Sandiganbayan said, leading to “insufficiency of allegations to cover indirect bribery.”
“To sustain Estrada’s conviction for indirect bribery would undoubtedly violate his right to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him,” it noted.
Napoles’ separate motion for reconsideration, on the other hand, was partially granted, with the special division affirming her conviction for four counts of corruption of public officials in relation to transactions with Labayen, who remains in hiding.
Another conviction
The convicted businesswoman, who was the alleged mastermind of the P10-billion pork barrel scam that was exposed by the Inquirer in 2013, was sentenced to a minimum of eight years to a maximum of 10 years and eight months.
She is also fined P29.625 million on top of her civil liability in the amount of P262.034 million, with an interest of 6 percent per annum.
Her direct bribery conviction, however, was wiped out with the reversal of Estrada’s conviction in the same offense.
The resolution was penned by Associate Justice Ma. Theresa Mendoza-Arcega, with the concurrence of Associate Justices Rafael Lagos and Lorifel Pahimna.
Associate Justice Maryann Corpus-Mañalac gave her separate dissenting and concurring opinion, while Associate Justice Bayani Jacinto dissented.