THE Supreme Court has upheld the September 2019 decision of the Sandiganbayan junking government’s P1.05-billion civil forfeiture case filed against the late Ferdinand Marcos and former First Lady Imelda Marcos, parents of of current President Ferdinand Marcos Jr; and several of their cronies who allegedly acted as their dummies in acquiring expensive artworks, clothes, jewelry, and properties here and abroad.
In a decision made public yesterday, the High Court’s First Division dismissed for lack of merit the petition for review filed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government seeking the reversal of the anti-graft court’s decision dismissing the complaint against the Marcoses and the Tantoco family namely Bienvenido R. Tantoco Jr., Dominador R. Santiago, Bienvenido R. Tantoco Sr., Gliceria R. Tantoco, and Maria Lourdes Tantoco- Pineda for insufficiency of evidence.
The 25-page ruling also upheld a subsequent resolution of the Sandiganbayan junking the PCGG’s motion for reconsideration.
“While it is truly disappointing that nothing has come of this case despite the lapse of 36 years spent in litigation, the Court agrees with the Sandiganbayan that petitioner’s evidence is insufficient to support the allegations of its expanded complaint by a preponderance of evidence,” the SC said, adding that the PCGG’s reasoning is reduced to “mere speculations, insinuations and conjectures.”
It said pieces of evidence submitted by the PCGG evidences were excluded rightly by the anti-graft court because they were not disclosed during the discovery process while others were excluded for violating the “best evidence rule.”
Of the 11 exhibits and four testimonies admitted as evidence by the anti-graft court, the SC said the latter eventually concluded they were “either insufficient to prove the allegations of the expanded complaint, or were unrelated to the facts sought to be proved by the PCGG.”
To recall, the PCGG filed the case against the Marcoses and their cronies in 1987.
The PCGG said it is seeking the forfeiture of P609.27 million in shares of stocks and P443.05 million in real properties. The expanded complaint alleged that the Tantocos acted as dummies of the Marcoses.
But the SC held that the PCGG failed to prove its case, adding that the documents it presented are insufficient to prove that respondents concealed illegally obtained assets, or amassed ill-gotten wealth. With this, the SC said the anti-graft court did not err in junking the case and the subsequent motion for reconsideration of the PCGG of the assailed ruling.
