Sandigan denies leave of court of Pangasinan solon Espino in black sand mining case

The Sandiganbayan has denied the bid of Pangasinan Representative Amado Espino Jr. for a leave of court that would allow him to contest his graft case over his alleged role in illegal black sand mining operations in 2011.

The Sixth Division said Espino can still file his demurrer to evidence, a motion seeking an outright dismissal of the case on the ground of weak evidence, despite the denial of his motion for leave.

The same motion of former Provincial Administrator Rafael Baraan and former Provincial Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Officer Alvin Bagay was also junked.

Then-Governor Espino and his co-accused, however, risk waiving their right to present further evidence to prove their innocence once they opt to file a demurrer. The move will then force the Sandiganbayan to rule either an acquittal or conviction based on the evidence of the prosecution.

The prosecution had charged them for two counts of graft for allowing Alexandra Mining and Oil Ventures Inc. to conduct magnetite and mineral extraction activities, and to recover magnetite sands during or incident to their soil remediation operations in a golf course at Barangay Sabangan in Lingayen Gulf.

Espino, in conspiracy with Baraan, allegedly gave a small scale mining permit (SSMP) in favor of Alexandra mining despite the lack of the necessary clearance certificates and accreditation.

In his motion for leave, Espino said the prosecution was unable to prove that the issuance of the SSMP caused undue injury to the government. He also flagged the prosecution for failing to produce original documentary evidence.

The Sandiganbayan said these arguments from Espino are best discussed during a full-blown trial and not through a demurrer.

“Espino, Jr., et al.'s arguments that there was no actual magnetite/black sand mining and that they did not act in a manner attended by manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence, among others, are evidentiary in nature and are matters of defense, the truth of which can best be passed upon after a full-blown trial on the merits,” the court said. — MDM, GMA News