Sandiganbayan denies Herbert Bautista’s bid to junk graft raps

The Sandiganbayan has junked former Quezon City mayor Herbert Bautista's bid to dismiss the graft case against him involving a P32-million computerization project, citing irrelevant argument.

In a seven-page Resolution dated June 22 but released on Tuesday, June 27, the anti-graft court said Bautista was incorrect in invoking the Rules of Civil Procedure to argue that the state prosecutors’ pre-trial brief is non-compliant for failure to state the purpose of the documents or exhibits intended to be offered as evidence, as well as substance or summary of the witnesses’ respective testimonies.

The Sandiganbayan said that the prosecution’s pre-trial brief is aboveboard since the Rules of Civil Procedure are not applicable in Bautista’s graft case, which is governed by the Rules of Criminal Procedure.

“Accused Bautista cavils that the amended pre-trial brief [of the prosecution] is fatally defective for non-compliance with the rules governing pre-trial in civil cases, specifically Rule 18 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. At this juncture, it must be emphasized that what primarily governs the pre-trial of this case is the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure,” the Sandiganbayan said.

The Rules of Civil Procedure, the court said, only apply in a suppletory (supplementary) character, not as a substitute, to criminal cases.

“Consequently, whether or not the prosecution’s pre-trial briefs contain a description of the purpose of the documents or exhibits intended to be offered, or the substance or summary of the witnesses’ respective testimonies...ultimately, the non-filing or lack of substantial compliance thereof, is not a ground for the dismissal of a criminal case under the present Rules,” the Sandiganbayan added.

Bautista, in his defense, contended that as a result of procedural transgressions by the prosecution, the government’s pre-trial briefs against him are but a mere scrap of paper and should be declared a failure on the part of the state prosecutors.

Subsequently, Bautista insisted that the failure to file a pre-trial brief has the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial, including dismissal of the case with prejudice.

The anti-graft court, however, was not convinced.

“In criminal cases, the duty of the prosecution is to establish the guilt of the accused by proof beyond reasonable doubt, whereas the duty of the defense is to parry the prosecution’s thrusts. The duty of the court is to then receive the parties’ respective viewpoints, carefully weigh the same, and render judgment in accordance with law,” the Sandiganabayan said.

“In the same way that the prosecution cannot impose upon the accused how to set up his defense, the accused cannot dictate on the general strategy employed by the prosecution. Accused Bautista’s carpings, therefore, find no relevant advocacy at this instance,” the Sandiganbayan added.

GMA News Online has reached out to Bautista for comment and will publish his reply as soon as it becomes available. — BM, GMA Integrated News