MANILA, Philippines–The Sandiganbayan third division junked Jessica Lucila “Gigi” Reyes’ motion to suspend proceedings for her plunder case over the pork barrel scam.
In a resolution, the court said the Supreme Court’s resolution dated June 10, 2014 ordering the anti-graft court to proceed with the raffle the consolidated pork barrel scam cases “is an eloquent signal that the proceedings in these cases should now take its normal course.”
“Wherefore, premises considered, accused Jessica Lucila Reyes urgent motion to suspend proceedings is denied for utter lack of merit,” the resolution read.
The resolution was signed by division chair Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang, and members Associate Justices Samuel Martires and Alex Quiroz.
Reyes is the co-accused of Enrile in the plunder charge over the pork barrel scam, the alleged systemic scheme of pillaging lawmakers’ public funds to ghost projects for kickbacks.
Enrile and Reyes were both ordered arrested by the court after it found probable cause to hold them on trial.
Ruby Tuason, a self-confessed former aide of alleged scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, has testified that she personally handed to Reyes millions of pesos in kickbacks for Senator Juan Ponce Enrile in meetings in restaurants. Tuason said in a Senate hearing that in some of the meetings, Enrile was even present.
Meanwhile, Reyes, Enrile’s resigned chief of staff, denied the allegations, saying her right to due process was violated when she was not given Tuason’s affidavit.
Reyes had asked the anti-graft court to suspend proceedings on the plunder charges against her so as not to prejudice the Supreme Court’s pending decision on her motions for a temporary restraining order and a writ of preliminary injunction.
In a 10-page urgent motion before the Sandiganbayan, Reyes has said the anti-graft court should just wait for the Supreme Court’s decision on her plea for a temporary restraining order against the warrant, as well as a writ of preliminary injunction.
Reyes’ camp in the motion also said suspending the proceedings would save the court some time and resources “should the Supreme Court find that the Ombudsman violated the accused’s constitutional rights and annul the assailed resolutions issued by the Ombudsman.”
“As the Supreme Court has required the Ombudsman to comment on the petition within 10 days from receipt of the order before ruling on accused application’s for injunctive relief, and three days have already elapsed since then, no substantial delay or prejudice will be caused by suspending proceedings against the accused in the meantime,” the motion read.
RELATED STORIES
Sandiganbayan finds probable cause vs Enrile
Gigi Reyes lawyer slams prosecution over Ruby Tuason affidavit
