Bong Revilla pushes for dismissal of his plunder rap
November 30, 2017 | 9:50am
Former Sen. Ramon Revilla claimed that if the court would closely look into the documentary exhibits of the prosecution, it would appear that only an amount of P36.5 million was received by his former chief of staff Richard Cambe on his behalf. The former senator pointed out that since he and Cambe are the alleged “main plunderers” in the case, the received money must be divided between them, thus his supposed kickbacks would only amount to P18.25 million, way below the threshold amount of P50 million for a crime to be considered as plunder. File
MANILA, Philippines — Citing the Office of the Ombudsman's “grossly and patently inadequate” evidence, former Sen. Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. has asked the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan to allow him to file a demurrer which would seek the dismissal of his plunder case over the multibillion-peso pork barrel scam.
In his 57-page “motion for leave to file demurrer to evidence” Revilla maintained that none of documentary evidence as well as witnesses presented by the ombudsman's prosecution team could prove that he committed the elements of a plunder offense provided under Republic Act 7080 or the Plunder Law.
Revilla, through his team of lawyers led by former Solicitor General Estelito Mendoza, said the prosecution also failed to establish the “combination or series of overt criminal acts” he supposedly committed in order to amass kickbacks or commissions from the pork scam, which based on the charge sheet filed by the ombudsman in June 2014, amounted to P224.5 million.
“No evidence has been presented by the prosecution of any amount allegedly received by Revilla by way of 'kickbacks' or commissions from [Janet] Napoles or any of her representatives. On the contrary, the witnesses of the prosecution have denied that any amount of money has been received by Revilla,” the motion, filed before the Sandiganbayan First Division, read.
A demurrer is usually filed by the defense after the prosecution finished its presentation of evidence. It is a legal strategy employed by an accused to seek the case's dismissal on the ground of the supposed weak evidence of the prosecution without having the need to present his or her counter exhibits.
But under the Rules of Court, an accused may first seek the permission of the court before filing a demurrer so as not to lose his or her chance to present counter-evidence if the demurrer gets denied.
Revilla, together with his former chief of staff Richard Cambe and the alleged pork scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles are facing a plunder case before the First Division in connection with the alleged misuse of the former senator's Priority Development Assistance Fund or pork barrel.
Based on the information of the case, Revilla, through Cambe, received from Napoles a total of P224,512,500 in kickbacks of commissions in exchange for the allocation of his PDAF to the latter's bogus non-government organizations.
Cambe and Napoles recently filed their own motions also asking the court to allow them to file their respective demurrer.
In seeking the court's permission to file a demurrer, Revilla pointed out it was not even proven by the prosecution that the kickbacks allegedly received by Cambe on his behalf indeed reached him.
“Parenthetically, Revilla does not admit the amount allegedly received by Cambe, and emphatically denies that whatever that amount may be, that Cambe received it in his behalf. Like any other alleged fact, these must be proven beyond reasonable doubt,” the motion read.
Revilla further claimed that if the court would closely look into the documentary exhibits of the prosecution, it would appear that only an amount of P36.5 million was received by Cambe on his behalf.
The former senator pointed out that since he and Cambe are the alleged “main plunderers” in the case, the received money must be divided between them, thus his supposed kickbacks would only amount to P18.25 million, way below the threshold amount of P50 million for a crime to be considered as plunder.
Revilla also washed his hands on the supposed non-implementation of his PDAF-funded projects by his chosen Napoles-linked NGOs. He argued that four government officials presented by the prosecution during his bail hearing all affirmed that a lawmaker's endorsement of NGOs for PDAF projects “may not be regarded as overt criminal acts” but on the contrary, is an act “authorized and required by pertinent legislation and regulations of the Department of Budget and Management.”
Revilla said all that was proven by the testimonies of pork barrel scam primary state witness Benhur Luy and the other whistleblowers was that they were the ones who organized the bogus NGOs, falsified the accomplishment reports for what were supposed to be “ghost projects,” deposited PDAF money to the bank accounts of NGOs and withdrew the money, allegedly upon the order of their boss, Napoles.
“Consistent with the evidence submitted by the prosecution, there would not be any piece of evidence, which would even suggest that accused Revilla was involved, or had even knowledge of what Benhur Luy and the other whistleblowers together with Janet Lim Napoles did to apparently implement PDAF projects but which turned to be 'ghost projects' and 'misappropriate the proceeds' thereof,” the motion read.
Revilla further pointed out as admitted by the bank representatives presented by the prosecution as witnesses “the AMLC has not issued any 'freeze order' on any of the bank accounts of Revilla or his family, particularly on the ground of 'unlawful activity.'”
“Since the accused is under detention, for nearly four years now, his release from detention is not just a constitutional right but a vindication that before the Sandiganbayan, the search for justice is not a Don Quixote effort,” Revilla said.
Revilla and Cambe are detained at the Philippine National Police Custodial Center in Camp Crame, Quezon City while Napoles is detained in Camp Bagong Diwa in Taguig City.
Just in September of this year, Revilla's former fellow Sen. Jinggoy Estrada was released from detention after the Sandiganbayan Fifth Division granted his petition for bail. The court said the prosecution failed to present evidence showing that he is the main plunder in the case filed against him, which also stemmed from the “pork” scam.
Former Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, who is also facing a plunder case over the pork scam, was granted bail by the Supreme Court in August 2015 for humanitarian considerations.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
Philstar
x
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest
Trending
By Celia Cazale | 1 day ago
By Bella Cariaso | 1 day ago
8 hours ago
By Pia Lee-Brago | 1 day ago
Latest
By Pia Lee-Brago | 16 minutes ago
By Cecille Suerte Felipe | 16 minutes ago
By Daphne Galvez | 16 minutes ago
By Mayen Jaymalin | 16 minutes ago
Recommended
1 day ago
1 day ago
2 days ago
April 22, 2024 - 12:00am
