Sandiganbayan upholds denial of ex-DPWH execs' bid to junk P289-M malversation case

The Sandiganbayan has upheld its earlier ruling denying the bid of seven former officials of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) to dismiss the malversation case filed against them over an alleged P289-million substandard infrastructure project in Oriental Mindoro.

In a resolution, the Sandiganbayan Sixth Division said the anti-graft court is not required to allow the filing of a demurrer to evidence if it finds no sufficient basis for it.

“There is no issue that courts have granted demurrers to evidence, and that it is a remedy available to an accused in a criminal proceeding," the resolution read.

"But none of the cases cited by the accused would support a conclusion that a court should always grant a Motion for Leave to File Demurrer every time one is filed,” it added.

The anti-graft court also said the arguments raised by the accused were nothing new and merely repeated points it had already addressed in its earlier ruling.

"The Court had studied and passed upon said arguments in the resolution sought to be reconsidered. It is a useless ritual for the Court to reiterate itself,” it said.

The court thus denied for lack of merit the motions for reconsideration filed by accused Gerald Pacanan, Dominic Serrano, Juliet Calvo, Dennis Abagon, Montrexis Tamayo, Lerma Cayco, and Felisardo Casuno.

A motion for leave to file a demurrer to evidence is a request by the accused asking the court to dismiss the case, arguing that the prosecution’s evidence is too weak to prove guilt.

If the court denies that request, the accused can still present their own evidence to defend themselves.

The accused may also choose to file a demurrer without first asking the court’s permission. But if that is denied, they lose the chance to present evidence, and the court will decide the case based only on the prosecution’s evidence.

Following the denial of their bid to dismiss the malversation case, the lawyers of the accused asked the anti-graft court to postpone the scheduled proceedings on Tuesday, June 23.

The defense counsels argued that they needed more time to discuss their legal options with their clients and the latter’s families.

Sandiganbayan Sixth Division Associate Justice Kevin Vivero initially said the resolution denying their bid to dismiss the case was not enough reason to defer the proceedings, stressing that all parties should be prepared to proceed regardless of the court’s ruling on pending motions.

“You cannot second guess what the court will do. You should have been ready, whether we grant the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence or not, especially for accused Abagon,” Vivero said.

Abagon was scheduled to take the witness stand on Tuesday for the first day of the defense’s presentation of evidence.

Vivero, however, later said the court would grant the defense’s request to cancel the hearing “in the higher interest of justice.”—MCG, GMA News