MANILA, Philippines - The latest plunder complaint filed against dismissed Makati Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay Jr. could be another politically motivated act to destroy his father’s chances in the 2016 presidential election, two legal experts said yesterday.
Former University of the East law dean Amado Valdez and former Integrated Bar of the Philippines president Vicente Joyas said the complaint filed by lawyer Renato Bondal before the Office of the Ombudsman last week could be considered a form of harassment and part of a supposed demolition by perception.
Valdez believes that the latest complaint against the former Makati mayor could be connected to his father’s 2016 presidential bid.
“That seems to be the agenda, to create collateral damage on the candidacy of the vice-president (as well),” said Valdez.
“Yes, there is a possibility this is connected to VP. Guilty by association. It is a perception game,” he stressed.
Joyas criticized the supposed double standard of the Aquino administration in handling corruption cases to protect its allies.
He said he was still expecting that the cases pending before the Department of Justice and the Office of the Ombudsman agàinst administration allies would finally be resolved.
Otherwise, he would stick to his earlier statement that the Aquino administration is guilty of selective justice.
“There is still selective prosecution. Opposition candidates and supporters are now the subjects of prosecution,” Joyas said.
Bondal filed his P228-million plunder complaint before the Ombudsman last week against the dismissed mayor and two information technology (IT) companies.
Meanwhile, the two law experts reiterated that Binay could still invoke the condonation doctrine in questioning his earlier dismissal by the Ombudsman since the Supreme Court’s abandonment of the doctrine last October was prospective and would apply only in future cases.
They stressed that Binay may still question the dismissal order of the Ombudsman last month and take back the mayoralty post by invoking the doctrine, which condones administrative liability of reelected officials for acts committed in the previous term.
“He can still invoke the doctrine if the decision of his dismissal is premised on the non-application of the doctrine and Junjun invoked it in that case,” said Joyas.
Valdez stressed the importance of pointing out the “prospective” nature of the recent SC decision abandoning the condonation doctrine, as opposed to being “retroactive.”
He stressed that the alleged illegal acts charged against Binay supposedly happened before the doctrine was struck down by the high court.
“(Being prospective only) means it will only apply to cases committed after the decision. So Binay can still invoke the doctrine,” Valdez said.