Ombudsman wants Sandigan justice off Bong Revilla trial

The Office of the Ombudsman has asked Sandiganbayan Third Division Associate Justice Ronald Moreno to recuse himself from the P92.8-million malversation trial against former senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla, Jr. and six others, claiming Moreno’s prejudgement if not disrespect of prosecution witnesses.

In a 69-page motion filed before the Sandiganbayan Third Division, Ombudsman prosecutors said that Moreno’s demeanor and questions to the witnesses were unfair, unreasonable, disrespectful, and lacking in judicial restraint.

Ombudsman prosecutors said that during the bail hearings, Moreno questioned the credibility of state witness and former Public Works undersecretary Roberto Bernardo even before Bernardo took the witness stand, saying that another state witness, Henry Alcantara, was just being fooled by Bernardo.

Specifically, the Ombudsman took offense to Moreno’s remark “Nabukulan ka lang” (His gains one upped you) in reference to Alcantara, and his questioning of Alcantara’s inclusion as a state witness under the Witness Protection Program (WPP).

“Justice Moreno's remarks and line of questioning regarding Engr. Alcantara's admission to the WPP is alarming and potentially demonstrative of the Justice's lack of 'cold neutrality of an impartial judge',” the Ombudsman said.

“This apprehension is bolstered when he implied, albeit prematurely, that Bernado was the mastermind of the scheme. Furthermore, he even unfairly asked Alcantara if there was legal basis for the 30% share of the proponent, just to make a point that Alcantara's knowledge was based on hearsay,” it added.

Moreno was one of the two justices who voted to grant Revilla bail, with the decision stating that the prosecution failed to present evidence linking him to the non-existent P92.8-million flood control project in Pandi, Bulacan.

The Ombudsman prosecutors, however, clarified that their motion is not intended to question Moreno's integrity, competence, or good faith, but to ensure that their case will be given a fair shake.

“Even where actual bias is wanting, but where there are circumstances that reasonably create perception of partiality and bias, the same warrant an inhibition. Hence, the appearance of impartiality is essential in maintaining confidence in the administration of justice,” the Ombudsman said.

“The matter of inhibition is not only based on a judge's personal belief that he or she can remain impartial, but also whether the circumstances would reasonably cause a party or an objective observer to entertain doubts on his or her impartiality. Given all of the above, the prosecution is left with no other recourse but to seek for the recusal of Justice Moreno,” the Ombudsman added. — BM, GMA News