THE Sandiganbayan Second Division has rejected the request of former Cagayan de Oro City Rep. Constantino Jaraula for leave of court to file a demurrer to evidence in a bid for the outright dismissal of two criminal charges against him.
Declaring that the testimony of prosecution witnesses and documentary exhibits were enough to support the allegations in the graft and malversation cases, the anti-graft court said the former lawmaker must prove his innocence by presenting evidence in rebuttal.
“After a careful study, the Court… finds that evidence adduced by the prosecution… appear to be prima facie sufficient for conviction of accused Jaraula and the other accused, unless successfully rebutted by defense evidence,” it declared.
Associate Justice Oscar C. Herrera Jr. penned the resolution, with Associate Justice Edgardo M. Caldona and Arthur O. Malabaguio concurring.
Based on information filed by the Office of the Ombudsman in 2018, Jaraula and officials of the Department of Agriculture (DA) were accused of involvement in the fraudulent disbursement of P3 million funds from the Department of Agriculture in 2004 under the Farm Input and Farm Implements Project (FIFIP).
Among those named co-defendants were CDO City agriculturist Godofredo Bajas, Department of Agriculture Region 7 technical director Jose Quitazol Sr., assistant regional director Antonio Rosal, regional executive director Eduardo Lecciones Jr., DA Region 10 technical director Joel Rudinas, assistant regional director Martino Cajita, accountant Caludia Artazo, and budget officer Ma. Reina Lumantas.
Charged as private defendants were Philippine Social Development Foundation Inc. (PSDFI) president Evelyn de Leon, vice president Annabelle Luy, treasurer Maria Fe Escabarte, auditor Jose Ardias, secretary Gertrudes Kilapkilap, and members Henry Bucalin and Luzviminda Bucalin.
The Ombudsman said the PSDFI was able to cart away P3 million that should have gone to the distribution of fertilizers to farmers.
In his motion, Jaraula asserted that the evidence presented by prosecutors did not amount to proof beyond reasonable doubt hence the cases should be thrown out.
The Sandiganbayan, however, noted that accused Bajas had earlier filed a similar motion which it had already denied.
In denying the defense motions, the court weighed the testimonies of 10 witnesses including government auditors, experts from the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA), bank officials, and CDO City executives as well as the paper trail of the FIFIP sum.
