Court denies Jack Lam's bid to dismiss P50M gift case, maintains HDO

For lack of merit, the Sandiganbayan has denied the bid of businessman Jack Lam to dismiss the charge against him over his alleged P50 million gift to two high-ranking Immigration officials.

In a Resolution dated March 18, the anti-graft court said that the charge against Lam, which is a violation of Presidential Decree No. 46, was clearly stated in the criminal information filed by government prosecutors.

PD No. 46 sanctions public officials and employees from receiving, and private persons from giving, gifts on any occasion.

The Sandiganbayan also denied Lam’s pleading for the court to lift the Hold Departure Order (HDO) against him.

“The Court denies accused Lam's prayer for the lifting of the HDO. Aside from his bare assertion that the hold departure order issued against him was issued despite the apparent lack of prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction and is [allegedly a] grave abuse of discretion tantamount to lack or excess of jurisdiction, accused Lam failed to cite any valid ground for the lifting of the said HDO against him,” the court said.

“Accordingly, accused Lam's Motion to Quash is hereby denied for lack of merit,” it added. 

IGovernment prosecutors alleged that in November 27, 2016, then Bureau of Immigration Deputy Commissioners Al Argosino and Michael Robles received P50 million from Lam, also known as Lam Yin Lok of Fontana Leisure Park in Clark Field Pampanga, to facilitate the release of 1,316 Chinese nationals allegedly in the country in violation of immigration laws.

Likewise, state prosecutors stated in the criminal information against Lam that the amount was received by the Immigration officers through Wenceslao Sombrero, Jr., president of Asian Gaming Service Provider Association, Inc.

“The Information alleges that (1) accused Lam is a private person; (2) accused Lam, indirectly, through accused Sombero, gave the amount of P50 million to accused Argosino and Robles, who are both public officials; and (3) that the said P50 million was given to accused Argosino and Robles by reason of their official functions. Clearly, the Information alleges acts constituting Violation of Presidential Decree No. 46, contrary to accused Lam's insistence that there is no specific allegation as to his participation,” the Sandiganbayan said.

“At this stage in the proceedings, the Court is not yet concerned with whether the allegation of conspiracy has been proved as to accused Lam for the simple reason that the trial on the merits has not yet commenced, and the prosecution has not yet presented its evidence against him,” it added.

In seeking the junking of the charge against him, Lam cited that the Sandiganbayan, in a June 2021 decision, already dismissed the direct bribery and violation of PD No. 46 charges against Argosino and Robles.

The anti-graft court, however, said the same June 2021 decision is not a reason to junk the violation of PD No. 46 raps against Lam because there are still other pending criminal charges against Argosino and Robles that are only applicable to public officials.

“In the decision dated June 25, 2021, the court dismissed the cases for direct bribery and violation of Presidential Decree No. 46 as to accused Argosino and Robles because convicting and separately punishing them for plunder, direct bribery, and violation of Presidential Decree No. 46 will violate the constitutional proscription against double jeopardy, direct bribery and violation of Presidential Decree No. 46 being included in plunder. But this is not a ground for quashing the Information as to accused Lam,” the anti-graft court said.

“In contrast, accused Lam is included only in SB-18-CRM-0243, for violation of Presidential Decree No. 46. If, after trial on the merits, the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt accused Lam's guilt of violation of Presidential Decree No. 46, there will be no issue of violation of the constitutional proscription against double jeopardy because, unlike accused Argosino and Robles, accused Lam is not, at the same time, charged with, and found guilty of, direct bribery and/or plunder,” it added. —LDF, GMA Integrated News