THE Office of the Ombudsman’s Chief Special Prosecutor, former Sandiganbayan justice Edilberto Sandoval, denied on Tuesday that politics had something to do with the anti-graft court’s order to grant former senator Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada bail for plunder and graft raps he is facing.
At a news conference, Sandoval said he trusted the Sandiganbayan’s Special Fifth Division in its decision to allow Estrada to post a bail of P1 million for plunder and P330,000 for 11 counts of graft after his detention for over three years.
He said his former colleagues cannot be controlled by politics in their decision.
“I don’t think so,” he said.
“I was there for 16 years. Those words saying there were politicians involved were all just hearsay.”
He, however, said the bail grant was questionable.
“I have trust and confidence even in the Sandiganbayan and Supreme Court that they will not have a sweeping application of the ruling, and that there must be a pinpointed main plunderer, otherwise it could affect many cases. We will cross the bridge when we reach it. We are ready to argue that,” he said.
Sandoval voted to grant bail to retired general Carlos Garcia, former comptroller of the Armed Force of the Philippines, who was charged with a P303-million plunder complaint filed by then Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo in 2010.
According to Sandoval, the Ombudsman is preparing a motion for reconsideration to appeal Estrada’s bail grant.
In 2016, the 5th Division composed of different justices denied Estrada’s first bail petition and his first motion for reconsideration in May last year. Estrada filed an omnibus motion.
Sandoval said a second plea in the guise of an omnibus motion was prohibited under the Rules of Court, adding Estrada’s second plea was meant to challenge the bail denial.
He cited the dissenting opinion of Associate Justice Zaldy Trespeses, who said the second bail should have been tackled during hearings, and that Estrada therefore could be considered a principal respondent under the “main plunderer” doctrine.
He, however, said the favorable ruling on Estrada’s second bail motion could set a precedent to the other respondents.
“I don’t think so. There is no need for the information to say that the accused was the main plunderer. All were charged in conspiracy, whether they be government officials, or private individuals. Definitely, one of them is main plunderer,” he said.
He said Sandiganbayan’s Sept. 15 bail grant to Estrada wrongly applied the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in its July 19, 2016 ruling that ordered the dismissal of the plunder case against former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
According to Sandoval, those involved in the Arroyo’s plunder case were all government officials of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office and Commission on Audit, while Estrada was accused of conspiracy with his staff, executives of a government firm, budget officials and businesswoman Janet Lim Napoles.
