Revilla loses bid to stop ‘pork’ scam probe

By: Tetch Torres-Tupas - 11 years ago

Sen. Ramon “Bong” Revilla. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines – Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales denied the bid of Senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. to suspend the investigation on the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) scam.

In a 13-page Joint Order dated Jan. 28, which was released Thursday, Morales said there is “no prejudicial question exists to warrant the suspension of the preliminary investigation.”

There is a prejudicial question when a civil action and a criminal action are both pending, and there exists in the civil action an issue, which must be preemptively resolved before the criminal action may proceed because howsoever the issue raised in the civil action is resolved would determine the guilt or innocence of the accused.

In this case, however, the Ombudsman said the civil case for declaration of nullity of documents of sum of money and damages, which Revilla filed against whistle-blower Benhur Luy before the Cavite Regional Trial Court “has no bearing in the outcome of the criminal cases filed with the Ombudsman.”

Revilla, together with Senators Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada and Juan Ponce Enrile, has been slapped with a case for plunder in connection with the questionable use of PDAF.

The Joint Order explained that the issues in the criminal and civil cases are neither similar nor intimately related to one another, considering that “forgery or falsification, which is the gist of [the civil case], is not a necessary element of the [mentioned crimes].”

It added that the PDAF documents are not the sole or exclusive determinant of the existence of probable cause for plunder, malversation, or violation of the anti-graft law, as there appear to be other pieces of evidence (e.g., sworn statements of other witnesses, business records of companies controlled by Janet Lim Napoles, and reports from the on-site verification conducted by investigators in various provinces where the PDAF-funded projects were implemented).

The Joint Order considered the civil suit as an afterthought and ploy to delay the criminal proceedings, since Revilla already knew about the PDAF documents and the issue of authenticity or genuineness of his signature on the documents as early as 2011 when upon the Commission on Audit’s request for confirmation, he confirmed that the signatures appearing in the PDAF documents belonged to him and Cambe, instead of questioning the same.