Delay

Justice delayed is justice denied.

On this principle, the courts have dismissed several high-profile cases due to “inordinate delay” on the part of the prosecution. In at least some of the dismissed cases, evidence of probable guilt may be considered strong.

Among the cases dismissed were those for graft filed against Zamboanga del Sur Rep. Aurora Cerilles, Ozamis City Mayor Reynaldo Parojinog Sr. along with Nova Princess Parojinog, former Bohol governor and now Rep. Rene Relampagos, Governor Edgardo Chatto, and former GSIS president Winston Garcia. Also dismissed for “inordinate delay” are several cases linked to the so-called “fertilizer scam.” These include cases filed against former senator Lito Lapid, Masbate governor Antonio Kho and others.

One remarkable case involves the graft case filed against Bataan Governor Leonardo Roman over the supposedly anomalous construction of a P3.66 million mini-theater in the province.

The Ombudsman had dismissed the case for lack of probable cause. The complainant, Enrique Garcia Jr., appealed the dismissal before the Supreme Court. After several years, the Supreme Court ruled on the matter and ordered the Ombudsman to file the case. The proceedings stretched for 11 years. When it was finally brought before the Sandiganbayan Special Second Division, the justices decided to throw out the case because of “inordinate delay.”

In the Roman case, the four years it took for the Supreme Court to rule on the matter contributed to the delay. But it took the Ombudsman five years to complete its preliminary investigation. That did not exempt the case from the calculation of inordinate delay, which is probably just.

The Supreme Court itself, in its 2016 ruling in the case of Lamberto Torres vs. Sandiganbayan, said the speedy disposition of cases covers not only the period within which the preliminary investigation was conducted. It includes, the Court says, all stages to which the accused is subjected to endure, including fact-finding investigations.

Citizens have a right to speedy trial. That is the basis for the dismissal of cases on the basis of “inordinate delay.”

True, the justice system is congested and short-handed. But the burden should rest entirely on the justice system. The congestion of cases to be dealt with must never be an excuse to unduly penalize ordinary citizens, whatever the merits of the charges filed against them.

A cardinal maxim here is that it is better to spare the guilty than to penalize the innocent. The first defender of that maxim ought to be the Supreme Court – even as the highest tribunal may itself be overloaded with cases, causing it to take years to rule on matters brought before it.

We know, of course, that sometimes there are reasons other than sheer congestion, causing cases to stall at the level of the Supreme Court. Should not the highest tribunal be harshest on itself when applying the rule on “inordinate delay”?

Jailed

Of all the high-profile cases that may be subject to the rule on “inordinate delay,” there is one case where the accused is actually kept in jail while the proceedings against him are stalled. This refers to the case of high-profile real estate developer Delfin Lee who is now detained at a jail in Pampanga on charges of syndicated estafa. The nature of the charges allows the courts to keep him detained without bail.

It is now nearly a decade since investigations commenced against Lee. The DOJ, under Leila de Lima, finally filed information at the San Fernando, Pampanga Regional Trial Court against the respondent in 2012. The judge ruled probable cause.

The judge’s ruling was appealed before the Court of Appeals. In 2013, the Court of Appeals ruled against the finding of probable cause for the crime of syndicated estafa and ordered the arrest warrant issued against Lee withdrawn.

The businessman walked the streets freely while government prosecutors filed for a TRO on the Court of Appeals ruling. The Supreme Court did issue a restraining order and Lee was arrested in 2014.

It is now four years since Lee was arrested and jailed. Despite four petitions for early resolution of the case, the businessman continues to languish in jail. He has become the poster boy for “inordinate delay.”

Ironically, the case against Lee remains in suspended animation even as the claim he defrauded the Pag-IBIG Fund of the fantastic sum of P6.4 billion pesos could no longer be sustained. The government housing fund eventually admitted it was never actually defrauded of that fantastic sum.

There is even no pending civil case against Lee for the collection of the fabulous amount he supposedly took from Pag-IBIG by fraudulent means. Several related cases filed by Pag-IBIG have all been dismissed for lack of probable cause.

On Jan. 12, 2012, the Makati City trial court ruled that it was in fact Pag-IBIG that was guilty of breaching its contract with Globe Asiatique, Lee’s real estate development company. The court even warned against allowing the government agency to escape liability by simply alleging that the defaulting buyers-borrowers are fictitious and spurious. The court ruling was based on admitted and undisputed evidence that Pag-IBIG approved all the fund membership and loan applications of buyers-borrowers and then post-validated their eligibility for loans.

The trial court ruling was affirmed and sustained by the Court of Appeals. It likewise ruled that the trial court judge did not commit grave abuse of discretion in handing down its judgment against Pag-IBIG.

Delfin Lee, it appears, remains a prisoner solely on the basis of the Supreme Court’s temporary restraining order.