MANILA, Philippines—Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales denied the appeal filed by the senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. and Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada, Janet Lim Napoles and several others implicated in the pork barrel scam to drop the plunder case filed against them.
Denial of the appeal will pave the way for the filing of the plunder case against them.
In separate orders all dated June 4, the Ombudsman said the motions “carry verbatim repetitions of the issues and claims raised by respondents in their respective counter-affidavits.”
“Evidently, the motions for reconsideration are rehashes of the arguments previously raised by them and already resolved by this office,” the orders stated.
(From left) Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr.: Jail prospects. INQUIRER FILE PHOTOS
Morales, in her ruling said there was no violation of the right to procedural process because all the respondents were given the necessary documents for their counter affidavits and they were given enough time to answer the complaint.
“Finding of probable cause [to charge the respondents] was not based on suspicion but on the sworn complaints, testimonies of witnesses, PDAF (Priority Development Assistance Fund) public documents, COA report, business ledgers, corporate papers of Napoles’ non-government organizations, results of field verification and admissions of some respondents themselves in their submission,” the Ombudsman said.
Aside from Enrile, Morales also denied the appeal filed by Atty. Jessica ‘Gigi’ Lucila Reyes, Jose Antonio Evangelista II, Francisco Figura, Marivic Jover, Antonio Ortiz, Alan Javellana, Maria Julie Villaralvo-Johnson, Romulo Relevo, Chita Jalandoni, Filipina Tolentino Rodriguez, Emmanuel Alexis Sevidal, Sophia Daing Cruz, Gondelina Amata, Ofelia Ordonez, Mario Relampagos, Rosario Nuñez, Lalaine Paule, Marilou Bare, Janet Lim-Napoles, Jo Christine Napoles, James Christopher Napoles, Eulogio Rodriguez, Dorilyn Agbay Fabian, Nitz Cabilao, Ronald John Lim, Renato Ornopia, and John Raymond de Asis.
On the other hand, Morales partially granted the motion of respondent Consuelo Lilian Espiritu and ordered the filing of only 1 count instead of 2 counts of violation of the Anti-Graft Law.
Morales said she was able to establish that she did not process or sign the other set of disbursement vouchers involving the Technology Resource Center, the agency to which Espiritu is connected.
On the part of Revilla’s motion, the Ombudsman, in her 55-page Joint Order, also denied the motions filed by Richard Cambe, Janet Lim Napoles, Ofelia Ordoñez, Francisco Figura, Ma. Ninez Guañizo, Chita Jalandoni, Maria Julie Villaralvo-Johnson, Gregoria Buenaventura, Mario Relampagos, Rosario Nuñez, Lalaine Paule, Marilou Bare, Romulo Relevo, Ronald John Lim, Alan Javellana, Gondelina Mata, John Raymond de Asis, Sophia Cruz, Marivic Jover, Antonio Ortiz, Consuelo Lilian Espiritu, Emmanuel Alexis Sevidal, and Eulogio Rodriguez.
The Ombudsman, however, cleared Relevo of charges of violation of the Anti-Graft Law after he was able to show proof that he did not participate in any of the subject transactions in the case.
Meanwhile, in a separate 45-page Joint Order on the appeal filed by Estrada, the Ombudsman also denied the appeal filed by Francisco Figura, Marivic Jover, Antonio Ortiz, Emmanuel Alexis Sevidal, Sophia Daing Cruz, Gondelina Amata, Gregoria Buenaventura, Chita Jalandoni, Alan Javellana, Maria Ninez Guanizo, Maria Julie Villaralvo-Johnson, Mario Relampagos, Rosario Nuñez, Lalaine Paule, Marilou Bare, Janet Napoles, and John Raymond De Asis.
Revilla allegedly received kickbacks amounting to P224.5 million, Juan Ponce Enrile with P172.8 million kickbacks and Estrada with P183.79 million.
Napoles was charged with plunder, malversation, and corruption of public officials through the use of dummy non-government organizations that supposedly pilfered government money from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) of the lawmakers.
RELATED STORIES
Palace confident Ombudsman will file necessary cases vs ‘pork’ scam players
Palace not averse to special court trying pork barrel scam cases