Cebu-based businessman and alleged drug trafficker Peter Lim has asked the Department of Justice to conduct a separate preliminary investigation into the illegal drug charges filed against him and his co-respondents.
In a five-page motion, Lim asked the DoJ’s panel of prosecutor to hold a separate preliminary investigation against him on ground that his defense might not be given due attention by the investigating fiscals.
“Mr. Lim is concerned that his defenses and the obvious lack of evidence against him might not be given due attention in view of the number of respondents and transactions involved in the case,” Lim said.
“Worse, his defenses might not only be glossed over and overshadowed as this Panel of Prosecutors may concentrate on the defenses raised by the other respondents,” the motion said.
According to Lim, the complainants in the case relied on the statements of Marcelo Adorco, the former bodyguard of the late Albuera, Leyte Mayor Rolando Espinosa. Rolando is the father of self-confessed drug lord Kerwin Espinosa.
“From Adorco’s own statements, it is clear that the alleged transactions between: (a) Kerwin and Co/Impal, on one hand; and (b) Kerwin and ‘Peter Lim,’ on the other hand, are separate, distinct and totally unrelated,” the businessman said.
“Considering that he is being charged with a non-bailable offense, and in order to prevent undue prejudice to him, Mr. Lim respectfully requests that this Panel of Prosecutors conduct a separate preliminary investigation against him to fully protect his constitutional right to due process,” Lim’s motion stated.
Resigned Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II had reconstituted a new panel of prosecutors composed of Senior Assistant State Prosecutor Juan Pedro Navera, Assistant State Prosecutor Anna Norren Devanadera, and Prosecution lawyer Herbert Calvin Abugan.
In his order, Aguirre empowered the panel to continue the preliminary investigation on the cases against the two alleged drug kingpins.
He made the move after being criticized when a panel of prosecutors of the DoJ issued the Dec. 20, 2017 resolution dismissing the drug complaint filed by the Philippine National Police-Criminal Investigation and Detection Group's Major Crimes Investigation Unit.
“The Resolution dated Dec. 20, 2017 dismissing this instant case be vacated and the above-mentioned case be remanded to a new panel of prosecutors for purposes of conducting the continuation of the preliminary investigation/clarificatory hearing and to allow the complainant and respondents to submit additional pieces of evidence in support of their respective positions,” Aguirre said, in his order dated March 19.
The DoJ chief said he issued the directive pursuant to his powers provided under Republic Act No. 10071 (Prosecution Service Act of 2010) in relation to DoJ Department Circular No. 004, dated Jan. 4, 2017 regarding the automatic review of criminal complaints.
This move would allow the parties, including the CIDG, to submit additional evidence in support of their respective positions.
The controversial resolution promulgated by Assistant State Prosecutors Michael John M. Humarang and Aristotle M. Reyes recommended the dismissal of the drug charges against Lim, Espinosa, Co and several others.
The resolution, affirmed by Senior Assistant State Prosecutor Rex F. Gingoyon and approved by acting Prosecutor General Jorge Catalan, cited the lack of evidence and supposed inconsistencies in the testimony of Espinosa's aide Marcelo Adorco, the lone witness cited in the CIDG complaint.
The CIDG insisted that any inconsistency on the part of Adorco was minor and did not affect the testimony on material points proving Espinosa's liability.
The complainant accused Espinosa of conspiring with several drug couriers and “shabu” suppliers Lim, Co, and Impal, to sell and distribute drugs from Makati City to selected areas in central and eastern Visayas.
While maintaining that the dismissal was not the final verdict on the case, Aguirre and the original panel have said it was not the DoJ prosecution's duty to gather evidence for either the complainant or the respondents.
