outbrain
Close  

Sandigan rejects shortcut in gov’t bid to recover coco levy firms

/ 06:10 PM May 18, 2017
Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco Jr. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco Jr. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA — The Sandiganbayan has again thumbed down the government’s bid for an early resolution of two civil cases to recover several companies allegedly bought by Marcos associates using coconut levy funds.

In a recent 13-page resolution, the court’s Second Division affirmed its June 2 ruling that earlier denied the request for summary judgment on Civil Cases Nos. 33-B and 33-D

ADVERTISEMENT

The denial of the summary judgment plea means the cases will still have to go to trial nearly 30 years since the parent suit Civil Case No. 33 was filed in July 1987.

The court said the defendants, including businessman Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. and former Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, raised arguments that “can only be resolved in a full-blown trial” and not by cutting the proceedings short.

FEATURED STORIES

Civil Case No. 33-B concerned the disputed ownership of Cocofed Marketing Corp. (Cocomark) and United Coconut Planters Life Assurance Corp. (Cocolife).

Meanwhile, 33-D covered the companies created through the Coconut Industry Investment Fund (CIIF), including United Coconut Oil Mills (Unicom) and 16 other mills.

The government, represented by the Presidential Commission on Good Government and the Office of the Solicitor General, said four Supreme Court rulings from 2012 to 2015 have declared coconut levy funds to be public funds.

They argued these rulings have warranted the reconveyance of the companies by virtue of a summary judgment, believing that the public nature of the companies was established already.

But the court disagreed with this contention and said the Supreme Court actually declared the coconut levy funds to be merely “prima facie” public funds.

enrile2

Former Senator Juan Ponce Enrile. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO/RAFFY LERMA

Since coconut levy proceeds are considered public funds only at first impression, their character would still have to be subject to a “rebuttal or contradictory evidence,” according to the Sandiganbayan.

The court said it could not simply order the reconveyance of the companies to the government “when the defendants made denials of the plaintiff’s material allegations and correspondingly raised genuine issues on the matter.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Among the issues raised by Cojuangco are questions on whether the companies were really bought with coconut levy funds, whether the defendants are their beneficial owners, and whether a coconut monopoly was established by acquiring the mills.

According to the court, the government is required to address Cojuangco’s issues by presenting evidence to show the companies did not become legitimately private.

“A summary judgment can be rendered only when there are no questions of fact in issue or where the material allegations of the pleading are not disputed,” read the resolution penned by Justice Michael Frederick L. Musngi.

Justices Oscar C. Herrera Jr. and Zaldy Y. Trespeses concurred with the resolution.  SFM

Read Next
EDITORS' PICK
MOST READ
Don't miss out on the latest news and information.
View comments

Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get access to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & other 70+ titles, share up to 5 gadgets, listen to the news, download as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000.

TAGS: Civil case, Civil Case No. 33, Civil Case No. 33-B, Civil Case No. 33-D, civil suits, coco levy, coco levy cases, coco levy firms, Cocofed Marketing Corp, Coconut Industry Investment Fund, courts, denial of request for summary judgment, Eduardo Cojuangco Jr., Juan Ponce Enrile, Justice Michael Frederick L. Musngi, Justice Oscar C. Herrera Jr., Justice Zaldy Y. Trespeses, litigation, Office of the Solicitor General, Presidential Commission on Good Government, recovery of companies funded by coconut levy, Sandiganbayan, trials, United Coconut Oil Mills, United Coconut Planters Life Assurance Corp.
For feedback, complaints, or inquiries, contact us.


© Copyright 1997-2020 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.