THERE is a distinction between an accused who stands and defends himself and one who disregards court processes.
In the case of a former officer of the Philippine Air Force, that difference means having to stand trial for six criminal charges after his co-defendants and fellow PAF officers successfully got their own cases dismissed.
The Sandiganbayan Fifth Division, in a resolution dated Sept. 27, 2024, denied the motion for reconsideration of former PAF First Lieutenant Danilo Pangilinan, wherein he insisted that all six cases against him should be quashed.
In the ruling penned by Associate Justice Maryann E. Corpus-Mañalac, the court reiterated its stand in the assailed Aug. 15, 2024 resolution that Pangilinan does not share the safe legal footing as his co-accused whose cases were dismissed way back 2010 and 2011.
Associate Justices Rafael R. Lagos and Kevin Narce B. Vivero concurred.
“Pangilinan’s insistence that he and his co-accused whose cases were already dismissed are similarly situated fails to persuade. Unlike Pangilinan, his co-accused moved to quash the information before arraignment and within months following the filing of the information. It is significant to note that Pangilinan did not concern himself with the result of the preliminary investigation when he left the country for the United States of America in 2008,” the Sandiganbayan said.
The cases stemmed from a 1994 letter-complaint filed by one Carmelita U. Ramirez before the Office of the Ombudsman for the Military and other Law Enforcement Officers (MOLEO) alleging conspiracy among the defendants to defraud the government through ghost deliveries of Air Force supplies and materials worth P89 million.
A fact-finding investigation conducted by the MOLEO coincided with a similar effort by the PAF’s Office of the Inspector General (OTIG) which found that there were ghost deliveries of assorted supplies and materials at the 5th Fighter Wing Basa Air Base amounting to some P24.4 million and unaccounted supplies and materials worth about P42.6 million.
MOLEO investigator Rudiger Falcis recommended indictment against several PAF officers for six counts of Violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019 and six counts of malversation of public funds through falsification of public documents. This was approved by Criminal and Administrative Investigation Bureau director Orlando Casimiro.
However, in 2010, the Sandiganbayan granted the motions to quash filed by accused Lt. Gen. Leopoldo S. Acot, B/Gen. Ildefenso N. Dulinayan, Lt. Col. Santiago B. Ramirez, Lt. Col. Cesar M. Cariño, Maj. Proceso T. Sabado, Maj. Pacquito L. Cuenca, 1Lt. Marcelino M. Morales, M/Sgt. Atulfo D. Tampolino and Remedios Diaz.
On Sept. 16, 2011 the court also granted the motions to quash filed by respondents Jose Gadin, Jr., Glenn Orquiola, Herminigilda Llave, Gloria Bayona and Ramon Bayona, Jr.
However, the cases against Pangilinan and three other accused who remained at large remained active.
On his return to the country on May 30, 2024, Pangilinan was arrested and had to post P90,000 bail bonds for his provisional liberty.
In his motion for reconsideration, the accused invoked the doctrine of stare decisis, insisting that the ruling in favor of his co-defendants should likewise apply in his cases.
He said the finding that the Ombudsman incurred a delay of 15 years in its investigations before filing the cases in court also affects his defense since he is charged in the exact same cases.
The court, however, said the key difference between Pangilinan and the other defendants was the fact that they invoked their constitutional right in a timely manner while he did not.
“The Court finds no compelling reason to set aside its August 15, 2024 resolution. An accused who fails to timely assert that right may be found to have waived it despite [the fact] that the prosecution failed to sufficiently explain the prolonged preliminary investigation,” the Sandiganbayan said.
