Graft case vs. Lito Lapid junked due to delays in Ombudsman probe

The Sandiganbayan has dismissed the graft case filed against former senator Lito Lapid in connection with the fertilizer fund scam due to the “unjustified delay” in the Office of the Ombudsman’s conduct of its preliminary investigation.

In a 14-page resolution, the anti-graft court’s First Division granted the urgent motion for dismissal filed by Lapid and adopted in a separate motion by his co-accused Ma. Victoria Aquino-Abubakar, Leolita Aquino and Dexter Alexander Vasquez. 

The Sandiganbayan said the Office of the Ombudsman failed to justify why its preliminary investigation took three years and one month from the time a complaint against Lapid was filed in 2011.

A total of four years and six months had passed since the graft complaint was filed against Lapid until the time the information was filed before the Sandiganbayan in 2015. 

“It bears stressing that in case of delay, the duty is upon the State to prove that the delay was reasonable, or that the delay was not attributable to it. But the prosecution clearly failed to hurdle this burden since no plausible explanation was given to justify the delay in the Ombudsman’s preliminary investigation,” the Sandiganbayan said.

Lapid and five others are facing a case of violation of Sections 3 (e) and 3 (g) of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act for the alleged anomalous purchase of overpriced liquid fertilizers amounting to P4.761 million.

Based on the information of the case filed by the Office of the Ombudsman, the purchase was made without holding a public bidding. The Ombudsman further alleged that the purchased items were overpriced by as much as P4.268 million.

The offense was allegedly committed by Lapid and his co-accused sometime in May 2004 during his term as Pampanga governor.

The former senator asked the Sandiganbayan to dismiss the graft case against him because of the Ombudsman’s “inordinate delay” in filing the case.

In its defense, the prosecution justified the period it spent for preliminary investigation was “reasonable delay” due to the voluminous records, the number of participants in the case and the time needed to evaluate the evidence.

The anti-graft court, however, said the Ombudsman’s excuse was “unacceptable” since it is mandated by law to act promptly on complaints filed before it.

?The Sandiganbayan also noted that the Ombudsman failed to give a satisfactory explanation as to why it spent around nine months to approve the Sept. 18, 2013 resolution finding probable cause to indict Lapid and his co-accused.

“All in all, the unjustified delay during the Ombudsman’s preliminary investigation qualifies as vexatious, capricious, and oppressive. Without a reasoable explanation, the delay in the latter’s proceedings is unwarranted considering the adverse effects ad/or prejudice that such a long delay may cause upon the defense of the accused,” it said.

“From the foregoing discussions, the Court is constrained to grant the dismissal of the case on the ground of violation of the right of accused Lapid to the speedy resolution of his case,” the court added.

While the Sandiganbayan granted Lapid and his three accused’s motion for dismissal, it said the provincial government of Pampnaga can still hold the former senator liable for any civil liability in connection with the case in subsequent civil proceedings.

In the same ruling, the anti-graft court denied the motion of Lapid’s co-accused, Benjamin Yuzon, to dismiss the case against him due to lack of merit. — RSJ, GMA News