DOJ junks Jinggoy's perjury complaint vs. DPWH engineer

Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutors on Friday dismissed the perjury complaint filed by Senator Jinggoy Estrada against former Public Works and Highways Engineer Brice Hernandez due to a lack of evidence.

In a 12-page resolution, the DOJ Office of the City Prosecutor in Quezon City said Estrada failed to back up his accusation that Hernandez had malicious intent when the engineer accused Estrada of obtaining kickbacks from the government’s flood control projects.

“The respondent's primary accusation, that the complainant received kickbacks based on representations from his superior, fails to meet the standard for a willful falsehood. While subsequent witnesses denied these specific representations, and while the complainant has submitted his SALNs to show no unexplained wealth, the respondent has consistently maintained that he based his statements on his personal knowledge and involvement in the DPWH's operations and that he believed these statements to be true at the time he made them,” the resolution read.

“His defense that he was acting as a whistleblower, recounting what he understood to be the standard operating procedure based on his position and the information conveyed to him, remains plausible. The subsequent denials and the SALNs do not, by themselves, conclusively prove that the respondent knew his statement was false at the moment he swore to it,” it added.

Likewise, the Justice department said the sworn statement of Hernandez’s superior mentioned the specific list of projects that the engineer identified.

In addition, the DOJ cited that former Public Works Undersecretary Roberto Bernardo also made a November 14 alleged confirmation of Estrada’s alleged receipt of kickback, a statement that “lends further credibility” to Hernandez’s claim of having acted on information he perceived as reliable.

“As the Supreme Court has held, the complainant [Estrada] must prove not only that the statement was false, but also that the defendant did not believe it to be true. On this crucial element, the evidence suggests the respondent [Hernandez] may have been repeating what he, genuinely, even if mistakenly, believed to be true based on his insider role,” the resolution said.

In making his case, Estrada argued that Hernandez initially denied direct involvement in the flood control scheme and that such denials were later contradicted by contractor Sally Santos.

Government prosecutors, however, later said such inconsistency on the part of Hernandez is not enough to charge him with perjury.

“Under the established doctrine, these contradictory statements alone are insufficient to establish perjury without independent, corroborative evidence of which specific statement was deliberately false,” the resolution said.

“The respondent's explanation that his denials were contextual, specifically, that he denied personally and directly demanding money but admitted to a role under Bulacan First District Engineer Henry Alcantara’s orders with the funds intended for proponents- introduces ambiguity regarding the specific fact he asserted, further complicating a finding of a single, deliberate lie on a material point,” the Resolution added.

Finally, the DOJ said that while there is a possibility that Hernandez is ill-motivated, it does not necessarily mean that the ex-Bulacan First District Assistant District Engineer is lying about Estrada.

“While the respondent's statements may have been inaccurate, reckless, or made with poor motives, the evidence on record does not sufficiently demonstrate that he made them with the evil intent and legal malice that perjury requires. The respondent's position as a cooperating witness, providing information based on his role within the alleged corruption scheme, provides a context where good faith belief, however misplaced, can reasonably exist,” the resolution read.

“Wherefore, it is respectfully recommended that the complaint respondent Brice Hernandez for the crime of perjury under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 11594, be dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence to sustain prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction,” the resolution added.—LDF, GMA Integrated News