Napoles appeals demurrer denial by citing Arroyo's plunder acquittal

Former businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles has asked the Sandiganbayan to reconsider its verdict denying her motion to file a demurrer to evidence that sought the dismissal of the P183-million plunder charge against her over the P10-billion park barrel scam.

In a 30-page motion for reconsideration, Napoles invoked the Supreme Court ruling acquitting former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo of the P366-million plunder raps in connection with state charity funds due to the prosecution's failure to identify the main plunderer.

Napoles' camp argued that while the plunder information filed against Napoles identified former Senator Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada as the main plunderer being the custodian of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), the prosecution's 112 witnesses, including star witness Benhur Luy, did not identify Estrada as the main plunderer.

“All of the 112 additional witnesses did not testify that former senator Estrada was the main plunderer or mastermind of the present plunder case. Not even main whistleblower Benhur Luy testified to the effect that accused former senator Estrada was the mastermind of the PDAF scheme,” Napoles' motion read.

“As to beneficiaries (which comprised more than half of the additional witnesses), they merely stated that they have not received livelihood kits. As to the custodians, they merely brought with them the original copies of the document for identification," her motion said.

"Thus, applying the [Arroyo] case, the failure of the prosecution to allege and prove that the accused public officer personally benefited from the charge of plunder is fatal and therefore, warrants the dismissal of the case,” the motion added.

Likewise, Napoles' camp cited that the prosecution also failed to state in the plunder information how much Estrada, or his aide Pauline Labayen, received from the total cost of the project of P183,793,750.00 even if the prosecution has presented Daily Disbursemenht Records and Summary of Rebates which was testified on by Luy, Napoles' former financial officer.

The plunder law states that the offense is committed by “any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or other persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt criminal acts in the aggregate amount at least P50 million.”

The same law provides that a person who participated with a public officer in the commission of an offense contributing to the crime of plunder will likewise be punished for such offense.

“The alleged Daily Disbursement Records and Summary of Rebates do not prove anything. The hard disk files and the hard copy of the disbursement records do not prove the allegation that accused [then] Senator Estrada received kickbacks and/or rebates, neither do they prove that accused Labayen in fact received money from accused Napoles and/or any of the whistleblowers," read the motion.

"At the most, they show the existence of a file and a hard copy of it. The said file and its hard copy do not prove the supposed entries found therein. It is a list and nothing more.” it added.

Napoles claimed plunder was not presented in the case and therefore the anti-graft court has not validly acquired jurisdiction over what she said was a "non-existent" case. — MDM, GMA News