Court points lack of precision in prosecutors’ revised plunder rap vs Napoles
Janet Lim-Napoles at Sandiganbayan during her arraignment on Thursday, June 26, 2014. NOY MORCOSO III/INQUIRER,net
MANILA, Philippines — For the government’s special prosecutors, alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles is a collaborator and a conspirator.
But under penal law, both could not be the same, so said the Sandiganbayan fifth division justices on Friday.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor led by Danilo Lopez received a lecture from the court’s Associate Justices when they insisted that collaborator and conspirator mean the same.
This as they sought to amend the plunder raps of Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr. to make the senators as the mastermind, and not Napoles.
“Collaboration as reflected in the amended information did not substitute conspiracy. It just reworded it by way of connivance,” Lopez told justices.
“The word conspiracy is synonymous with the word connivance,” he added.
But Associate Justice Alexander Gesmundo found it incredulous that the prosecutor would think the two legal terms are the same.
He pointed out that conspiracy and collaboration are two different words under the penal law.
He said conspiracy is an “act of one as an act of all,” while collaboration pertain to separate acts by individuals.
“Why did you change conspiracy to collaboration?… This is a criminal indictment. The word must be precise,” Gesmundo said.
Division chairman Associate Justice Roland Jurado raised the possibility of reprieve for Napoles if the allegations against her were lowered to collaboration from conspiracy.
“What will happen to Napoles, who is a private individual, (when) there is no more conspiracy?” Jurado added.
Napoles’ camp had defended that she could not be charged for plunder because she is a private individual. Plunder is a non-bailable offense for public officials.
During the same hearing, Napoles’ lawyer Stephen David withdrew their motion to quash the information against Napoles on this basis so that his client could be arraigned next week.
The prosecutors had defended that Napoles is still charged with plunder in the amended information because she is accused of conniving with public officials.
The prosecutors eventually withdrew their motion for the court to admit the information because the court warned them that Estrada may be released due to the amended charge.
On Thursday’s arraignment, meanwhile, the anti-graft first division denied the prosecutor’s motion for the court to admit the amended information on Revilla’s case. The prosecution panel had admitted before the court that the original information can stand as sufficient information for the plunder case.
RELATED STORIES
Told Jinggoy Estrada may be released, prosecutors withdraw revised rap
Jinggoy Estrada, Napoles camps cheer over ‘vague’ ‘defective’ plunder rap
