IT took many years but the Sandiganbayan said it still intends to start hearings on six counts of graft filed against an accused who was implicated in the alleged ghost deliveries of P89 million worth of “supplies and materials” for the Philippine Air Force (PAF) way back 1994.
In a 15-page resolution dated August 15, 2024, the anti-graft court’s Fifth Division denied the motion to quash filed by accused Danilo Pangilinan, who was named the private defendant together with top PAF officials when the cases were filed in 2009.
Among those originally indicted by the Office of the Ombudsman were former PAF Commanding General Leopold Acot, Brig. Gen. Ildefonso Dulinayan, Lt. Col. Santiago Ramirez, Lt. Col. Cesar Cariño, Maj. Proceso Sabado, Maj. Pacquito Cuenca, 1Lt. Marcelino Morales, M/Sgt. Atulfo Tampolino, Remedios Diaz, Jose Gadin, Jr., Glenn Orquiola, Herminigilda Llave, Gloria Bayona, and Ramon Bayona Jr.
The cases were based on findings from the Office of the Inspector General (OTIG) and the audit of the Armed Forces Deputy Chief of Staff for Comptrollership that there were “ghost deliveries of assorted supplies and materials” in one of its units.
The same findings said the ghost deliveries were worth P24.43 million and traced to the 5th Fighter Wing Basa Air Base in addition to “unaccounted supplies and materials worth P42,592,257.61.”
These were forwarded, together with available records, to the Ombudsman for the Military and Other Law Enforcement Offices (MOLEO) in February 1995.
On July 10, 1996, a recommendation for the filing of graft charges was submitted by the graft investigation officer and was approved by then Deputy Ombudsman Orlando Casimiro.
But in 1998, then Special Prosecutor Leonardo Tamayo recommended the dropping of the charges only to be reviewed and reversed in 2003 when Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo took over.
Curiously, it was not until October 6, 2009 that the six information for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act were filed with the Sandiganbayan.
The many years of delay in the investigation became the basis for the dismissal of the cases by the Sandiganbayan in 2010. This was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2016.
On May 30, 2024, after being at large for 15 years since the cases were filed, Pangilinan was arrested but was released after posting bail.
The defendant said the same rules that applied in the dismissal of the cases against his co-accused should apply to him.
The court, however, disagreed as it sustained the argument of prosecutors that Pangilinan is not similarly situated as his co-defendants having shown an intent to evade prosecution.
Invoking the SC ruling in the case of Cagang v. Sandiganbayan, Fifth Division, the court held that the right to speedy disposition of cases may no longer be invoked it if can be demonstrated that the accused acquiesced to the delay.
“The inaction of an accused who remains insensitive to the implications and contingencies of the projected criminal prosecution, despite knowledge of it, could mean that the supervening delay was without his or her objection and therefore, impliedly with his acquiescence,” the Sandiganbayan said.
Even as the presence of delay in the Ombudsman’s investigation was established, it said records show that Pangilinan did not raise a finger to challenge the delay.
While the other defendants moved for the quashal of the information once the cases were filed in court, the Sandiganbayan noted that Pangilinan did not do anything.
“Unlike his co-accused who remained in the Philippines, Pangilinan left for the United States of America in 2008. For nearly three decades from the time he filed his counter-affidavit, he did not concern himself as to what has become of the criminal complaint,” the court noted.
