Sandiganbayan junks graft raps vs. ex-DA chief Alcala over garlic import permit

The Sandiganbayan has junked the graft charges against former Agriculture Secretary Proceso Alcala involving his unlawful defiance of the ban on issuance of import permits for garlic from 2012 to 2013 due to insufficiency of evidence.

In a 34-page resolution dated January 5, the Sandiganbayan granted Alcala’s demurrer to evidence or pleading to dismiss the case without the defense presenting counter evidence because no witness was able to testify that Alcala used his influence to secure permits for a particular importer.

“Accused Alcala's demurrer to evidence is impressed with merit. When the evidence of the prosecution fails to meet the test of sufficiency, as in this case, the accused is under no obligation to present their own evidence, and the presumption of innocence must prevail,” the Sandiganbayan said.

“To compel the accused to proceed with trial under such circumstances would violate their fundamental right to due process,” the anti-graft court added.

The Sandigabayan noted that Alcala’s appointment of then Bureau of Plant Industry Director of Clarito Barron as Director and Lilia Cruz of the Philippine VIEVA Group of Companies, Inc. as chairman of the consultative body and Alcala-created National Garlic Action Team does not mean that the former secretary was partial to the Philippine VIEVA Group of Companies, Inc. in granting import permits for garlic.

“As stated in the Complaint filed by the NBI (National Bureau of Investigation) investigators before the Ombudsman, NGAT officers namely chairperson and vice chairperson were elected on June 6, 2013. However, the prosecution did not present any evidence detailing how the other members were chosen or who selected them. This lack of evidence weakens the claim that accused Alcala manipulated NGAT's composition to give select importers an advantage,” the Sandiganbayan said.

“Cruz was not the only garlic importer in NGAT. Record shows that 19 other garlic importers/growers were part of the [NGAT] membership. Thus, the appointment of Cruz, even if assumed to have been made by accused Alcala, does not in itself constitute evident bad faith or manifest partiality. It is the court's view that appointment alone is insufficient to establish criminal liability unless there is a clear showing that the appointing authority ordered or participated in the subsequent unlawful acts. A review of the evidence in this case shows that there is none,” the anti-graft court added.

Alcala’s criminal liability, the Sandiganbayan said, “cannot be established absent proof of his participation in or command of the market manipulation or abuse.”

The anti-graft court also dismissed the prosecution’s argument that Alcala's approval and referral of NGAT Resolutions 1 and 2 for BPI’s action allowed  Cruz and her cohorts to secure the bulk of import permits, saying these documents only stated the instruction  “for BPI’s information and consideration” and “for your appropriate action”, respectively.

“The phrase 'for your information and consideration' is not equivalent to an approval for implementation. The phrase 'for your appropriate action' is also not similar to an approval. Based on the foregoing, the court finds that the mere referral of the NGA? Resolutions to the BPI for consideration or for appropriate action, do not, in themselves, demonstrate bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence,” the Sandiganbayan said.

Likewise, the Sandiganbayan also cited that Alcala was not included among individuals whom the National Bureau of Investigation wanted charged in its 2015 complaint lodged before the Ombudsman, then headed by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales.

The graft charge stemming from the same NBI graft complaint against Alcala was only filed four years later, in 2019, or under the term of Morales’ successor, Ombudsman Samuel Martires.

“The NBI filed a complaint before the Ombudsman against several individuals for violation of R.A. No. 3019 and other various offenses. As confirmed by prosecution witness Marlon Tauli, accused Alcala was not included in the list of persons to be charged in the Complaint-Affidavit and the [NBI] endorsement letter to then Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales dated January 5, 2015. However, in the formal indictment, the Ombudsman charged Alcala with violating Sec. 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019,” the Sandiganbayan said.

“There is no evidence that would show accused Alcala influenced any employees or officials of the BPI to favor Cruz and the VIEVA importers, nor did he intervene in the processing and issuance of import permits. Accordingly, premises considered, the Demurrer to Evidence of Accused Proceso Alcala is granted and the case (Criminal Case No. SB19-CRM-0028) against him is ordered dismissed for insufficiency of evidence,” the Sandiganbayan added.

As a result, the anti-graft court also cancelled the cash bond posted by Alcala for his provisional liberty during the pendency of this case and ordered its return to the former Agriculture chief during the administration of the late President Benigno Aquino III.

The Hold Departure Order issued against Alcala in connection with this case was also recalled by the court. —LDF, GMA Integrated News