EVERY litigation must come to an end.
With this reminder to the government, the Sandiganbayan told lawyers of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) and the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) to start presenting evidence against remaining defendants in three coconut levy cases where pre-trial have been terminated and to wrap up pre-trial proceedings in three other cases.
The cases allege misuse of funds collected from levies imposed on coconut tillers in the 1970s-80s by the administration of President Ferdinand E. Marcos to help develop the coconut industry and lift farmers out of poverty.
In a 16-page resolution dated January 7, 2025, the anti-graft court’s Second Division ordered the initial presentation of evidence in Civil Case Nos. 0033-C, 0033-D, and 0033-E.
The remaining defendants in CC No. 0033-C are Rafael Abello, Enrique Cojuangco, and Marcos Cojuangco, with the Republic of the Philippines alleging manipulation of the coco levy funds by the grant of “anomalous and grossly disadvantageous settlements” between the United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB) and Agricultural Investors Inc. when the Bugsuk Island seed garden in Balabac, Palawan was called off.
A pre-trial order was issued on the case on August 9, 2000 but the trial never got underway.
Presiding Justice Geraldine Faith A. Econg penned the resolution with Associate Justices Edgardo M. Caldone and Arthur O. Malabaguio concurring.
CC No. 0033-D involves allegations of exorbitant payment for competing and non-operating oil mills to create a monopoly and control the price of copra through the establishment of the United Coconut Oil Mills (Unicom).
Based on records, the remaining respondents in CC No. 0033-D are Emmanuel Almeda, Rolando dela Cuesta, Mohammad Ali Dimaporo, Jose Eleazar Jr., Iñaki Mendezona, Danilo Ursua, and corporate defendants Cagayan de Oro Oil Company Inc., Legaspi Oil Co. Inc., Lucena Oil factory Inc., PCY Oil Manufacturing Corp., Thilagro Edible Oil Mills Inc., and Unicom.
A pre-trial order was issued on July 5, 2000 but the trial has yet to start.
In CC No. 0033-E, the only defendants left are Rolando dela Cuesta, Joseh Eleazar Jr. and Hermenegildo Zayco, who allegedly collaborated with the late businessman Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. in misappropriating millions in coconut levy funds to pay damages in an anti-trust lawsuit in California, USA and to bankroll projects and programs of former First Lady Imelda Marcos.
The pre-trial order in this case was issued on October 27, 2000 but government lawyers did not proceed to trial.
The PCGG and OSG won recovery of 64.98 percent of the United Coconut Planters Bank in 2003 in Civil Case No. 0033-A.
This was followed by another victory in Civil Case No. 0033-F on May 7, 2004 with the forfeiture in favor of the coconut farmers of a block of 33,133,266 shares of San Miguel Corp.
Both rulings were upheld by the Supreme Court in a 2012 decision.
However, attempts by the government to secure partial summary judgments in the other six coco levy cases failed, leading to the dismissal of the cases against Cojuangco, the Marcos couple, former Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, and several other associates on the ground of inordinate delay.
On the other hand, remaining bogged in pre-trial proceedings are: CC No. 0033-B which alleges dissipation of and misuse of coco levy funds through excessive payment of salaries, bonuses, and allowances by officers of COCOFED, Cocomark, and CocoLife; CC No. 0033-G concerning an alleged attempt to monopolize the soft drink industry with the purchase of Pepsi Cola Philippines; and CC No. 0033-H involving hundreds of millions in alleged behest loans.
“Ideally, the full presentation of the parties’ case should be favored over (the) termination of the proceedings on technical grounds. However, the invocation of substantial justice is not a magical incantation that will automatically compel courts to suspend procedural rules,” the Sandiganbayan said.
It reiterated that unreasonable delays in the proceedings have violated the rights of defendants as sustained by the Supreme Court.
“At present, it has been more than 37 years since the causes of action in these civil cases were first brought before this Court. It is an important fundamental principle in the judicial system that every litigation must come to an end,” the court added.