Sandiganbayan upholds dismissal of forfeiture case involving 4 Marcos properties

The Sandiganbayan has upheld its December 2019 decision dismissing the forfeiture case against the late former President Ferdinand Marcos, Sr. and his family, citing lack of evidence.

In a July 22 decision on Civil Case 0002, the anti-graft court said that the Philippine government failed to prove that the following four properties under the Marcos family's control were illegally acquired:

• the Currimao Beach House, registered in the name of Ferdinand Marcos under TCT No. T-12494;
• the house in Pandacan, Manila, under the full control and supervision of the Marcoses and registered in the name of the heirs of Vicente Romualdez;
• the Batac Museum, which is under the control and supervision of the Marcoses; and
• the Batac Guest House, under the control and supervision of the Marcoses.

Civil Case 0002, filed by the Office of the Solicitor General against the Marcos family in 1987, seeks to recover the wealth of the Marcoses involving 106 properties "which they acquired during their incumbency as public officers; funds and other property are manifestly out of proportion to their salaries/other lawful income and income from legitimately acquired property which defendants have failed to establish as having been lawfully acquired."

"Bearing in mind the rule that technical rules of procedure and evidence shall not be strictly applied to cases for forfeiture of ill-gotten wealth such as the one at bar, the Court afforded the plaintiff the opportunity to submit further evidence in support of the subject report. Unfortunately, no such evidence was forthcoming," the Sandiganbayan said.

The anti-graft court cited that the Philippine government, in its compliance pleading dated April 25, 2022, admitted that all material and relevant documents and pieces of evidence for the said case have already been presented during trial.

"Considering that the evidence already offered by the plaintiff during trial do not sufficiently establish its claims as to the properties mentioned above that are purportedly still within the Marcoses' control, the Court is constrained to deny the plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration dated 29 December 2019 as regards the said properties," the Sandiganbayan said.

"Wherefore, the plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration dated December 29, 2019, insofar as the properties that allegedly have not yet been recovered by the government are concerned, is denied for its failure to prove its claims through a preponderance of evidence," it added.

The Sandiganbayan, however, partially granted the Philippine government's Motion for Reconsideration on Civil Case 0002 in July 12, 2021, given that 47 out of the 106 properties in the said P200-billion Civil Case 0002 were already recovered, if not forfeited in favor of the Philippine government.

"The Court resolved that a sweeping dismissal of the entire complaint on the ground of the Best Evidence Rule (now Original Document Rule) is not warranted, considering that many of the subject properties have long been recovered by the government," the Sandiganbayan said.

"Consequently, the Court ordered the plaintiff to submit a report as to the status of the properties subject of its original complaint and all the subsequent amendments thereto," it added. — BM, GMA News