Morales on dismissed cases: ‘You win some, you lose some’

By: Marc Jayson Cayabyab - 8 years ago

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales at the Meet the Inquirer forum. TRISTAN TAMAYO

Win some, lose some.

This was the statement of Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales when asked for her reaction to a string of high-profile cases dismissed by the Sandiganbayan and the Supreme Court.

During the Meet the Inquirer forum on Tuesday, Morales said she has kept on advising the Ombudsman prosecutors to remain diligent despite a spate of dismissed cases this year.

“You win some, you lose some. I told them to be more diligent, to be more earnest in prosecuting cases. And I usually confer with them when we win or lose cases,” Morales said.

“As far as raising the morale of prosecutors is concerned, I visited them during the Christmas party. I talked to them to keep on the good work,” she added.

The most recent was the dismissal of the plunder cases against former agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn “Jocjoc” Bolante and former Agriculture Secretary Luis Ramon “Chito” Lorenzo in connection with the fertilizer fund scam during the Arroyo administration.

The Sandiganbayan Special Second Division dismissed the cases on the grounds that state prosecutors had failed to provide evidence that the two men amassed ill-gotten wealth from the scheme.

READ: Sandigan clears 2 ex-agri execs of plunder in fertilizer fund scam

Morales lamented that the Ombudsman resolution penned by then Overall Deputy Ombudsman Orlando Casimiro found probable cause to file plunder charges against Bolante, Lorenzo and Agriculture Assistant Secretary Ibarra Poliquit, but did not recommend other charges like malversation, technical malversation and graft.

“This resolution approved by the overall Ombudsman Casimiro, they only indicted the three public respondents for plunder. Whereas the rest of the respondents, which means regional directors and private respondents, were indicted for malversation, technical malversation and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act,” Morales said.

“Unfortunately, the three public respondents were not indicted for malversation, technical malversation and graft,” she added.

They were charged for allegedly accumulating P265.6 million in kickbacks from the P723 million fertilizer funds under the Farm Input Farm Implement Program of the Department of Agriculture under the Arroyo administration.

But the court said the prosecution failed to provide evidence they amassed kickbacks, even though the panel dropped one of the accused Jose Barredo Jr. who testified that he was the runner in delivering kickbacks to local officials.

READ: Plunder case revived vs Lorenzo, Bolante in P723M fertilizer scam

Morales said the office would file a motion for reconsideration, even all the way up to the Supreme Court if there is a question of law on grave abuse of discretion.

“We would file a motion for reconsideration, and if denied we could make out a question of law out of it. We could find grave abuse of discretion, and raise it to the Supreme Court,” Morales said.

Another plunder case involving former President now Pampanga Representative Gloria Arroyo was also dismissed, this time by the Supreme Court for lack of evidence.

The dismissal of the case freed Arroyo after over four years in hospital detention. Arroyo has since resumed her duties for her last term as congresswoman and is now deputy speaker.

FULL TEXT: Supreme Court decision on Arroyo plunder case

Morales said Ombudsman cases are being dismissed because the Ombudsman differs from the justices in the appreciation of guilt in corruption cases.

“From the time the case is filed in court, the prosecutors gather additional evidence to beef up all the evidence gathered during the preliminary investigation. But it’s only the court, the justices, which determine if one is guilty or innocent,” Morales said.

“Unfortunately, the Sandiganbayan justices and the Ombudsman prosecutors do not sometimes have the same line of thought. So natalo yung mga iba, nanalo rin kami sa mga iba (So we lose in some cases, but we win in others as well),” Morales said.

One case she considered a “feather on her cap” was when the Supreme Court sustained the finding of probable cause for plunder against former senator Ramon Revilla Jr., who is detained for plunder over the pork barrel scam.

READ: SC junks Bong Revilla plea to dismiss 200M plunder case

“If we go by the rulings of the Supreme Court, of course we’re proudest if they sustain us like the recent one. In Revilla, while talks were circulating weeks before that we will lose and all that, but it was to our surprise that the decision was unanimous, except one who dissented,” Morales said, referring to the lone dissenter Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr.

“He was the ponente, but he was voted out by the majority, and to us that’s a big feather on our cap,” Morales added.

The other cases the Ombudsman lost before the Sandiganbayan were the malversation and graft cases against Senator Sherwin Gatchalian over the anomalous bank buy-out deal with the Local Water Utilities Administration, the graft charges over the allegedly overpriced National Broadband Network deal with ZTE firm against Arroyo, former poll chairman Benjamin Abalos and former socioeconomic planning secretary Romulo Neri, among others./rga