DESPITE invoking human rights, a former official of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and a private defendant will still end up in jail after the Sandiganbayan Seventh Division threw out their motions for reconsideration.
In its resolution dated April 21, 2025, the anti-graft court denied the last-ditch attempt of Napoleon Anas and private defendant Janette Bugayong to challenge their conviction on criminal offenses.
Anas was convicted of 38 counts of violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and 38 counts of estafa through falsification of public documents, while Bugayong was found guilty of 15 counts of both criminal charges.
Each count of graft carries a penalty of imprisonment for six to eight years with perpetual disqualification from public office. On the other hand, for each conviction for estafa, the court imposed two years and four months to ten years.
The cases were based on the audit findings of former State Auditor Linda Marasigan, who found that six DPWH officials and the private defendants conspired to defraud the government by falsifying repair records on various vehicles in the DPWH fleet between 2000 to 2001.
Prosecutors said they traced a total of 4,406 bogus transactions that cost the government more than P82 million but the ruling of the Sandiganbayan Seventh Division only covered 41 counts of graft and 41 counts of estafa.
When the decision was released last March 14, neither Anas nor Bugayong showed up in court, although their lawyers were present.
In their separate Motions for Leave to Avail of Post-Judgment Remedies both dated March 27, 2025, Anas and Bugayong both invoked health reasons for their non-appearance during promulgation.
The counsel for Anas said he has been diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease with borderline old age dementia.
For her part, Bugayong said she is suffering from Deep Vein Thrombosis, which requires medical treatment.
The Sandiganbayan was unimpressed, noting that both accused had already lost their standing in court after their absence during the promulgation of the judgment. To regain the same standing and be recognized by the court, they must surrender themselves.
“In their respective motions, accused Bugayong and Anas invoke their constitutional human rights like an absolute blanket against lawful processes in judgments of conviction. The service of sentence is certainly a limitation on the right to liberty,” the court said.
It pointed out that both defendants would have enjoyed the right to appeal their conviction if they had shown up in court during the promulgation of the judgment.
“Invoking human rights does not substitute for availing of the proper remedies at the proper time. This was done and submitted when the judgment of conviction had already attained finality. Justifications are futile at this point,” the court added.
