SC upholds DOJ-NBI vs. solon over ‘pork’

The Supreme Court has upheld the recommendation of the Department of Justice and the National Bureau of Investigation before the Office of the Ombudsman to indict House Deputy Speaker Rep. Rufus Rodriguez for graft and other criminal offenses.

Rodriguez allegedly received around P2 million in kickbacks from his priority development assistance fund (PDAF) or pork barrel fund. 

In a 15-page resolution made public on October 29, the SC’s Second Division found no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the DOJ and the NBI in recommending to the Ombudsman a preliminary investigation for the eventual filing of charges before the Sandigabayan against Rodriguez.

The NBI, in its executive summary dated August 7, 2015, found Rodriguez along with several other lawmakers used his PDAF in illegal transactions with Janet Lim-Napoles’s non-government organizations (NGOs) to profit from the simulated disbursements and utilization of his PDAF.

Based on its investigation, the NBI said all of the NGOs of Napoles were ghost ones used as mere conduits for the purported implementation and liquidation of projects financed by the PDAF .

However, the bulk of the funds was allegedly pocketed by lawmakers, their representatives and officials of the implementing agencies, according to the NBI. 

Napoles, who was suspected to be the architect of pork barrel scam,  is currently in detention following her conviction for plunder, graft and other charges related to the multi-million pork barrel fund scam.

In particular, the NBI found sufficient evidence to prosecute Rodriguez for malversation of public funds, direct bribery, and violation of the provisions of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

Then DOJ secretary and now detained Senator Leila de Lima approved the NBI’s recommendation against Rodriguez.

In assailing the validity of the DOJ and NBI’s filing of the complaint against him, Rodriguez argued the respondent agencies acted in excess of their jurisdiction and/or grave abuse of discretion, amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in conducting a formal investigation against him in relation to the Napoles PDAF scam.

The petitioner said his right to due process and equal protection of the law was violated when they conducted an investigation and recommended his indictment without giving him the opportunity to be heard.

As a consequence, Rodriguez said he was not able to present evidence to  refute the accusations against him.

But the Court declared the NBI’s investigation and the subsequent issuance of the executive summary and letter-complaints against the petitioner were done merely in the performance of  its mandate.

“The NBI did not perform a judicial or quasi-judicial function when it recommended to the  Ombudsman furthr fact-finding investigation or the corresponding preliminary investigation for the eventual filing of the appropriate charges before the Sandiganbayan. Instead, the findings of the NBI were merely recommendatory and still subject to the Ombudsman’s actions,” the SC noted.

The high court also found no merit in Rodriguez’ claim that the NBI and the DOJ went against its own internal rules by refusing to issue a subpoena and take or require his sworn statements.

“There is not even a vested right granted by law to any person under investigation to participate in the proceedings before the NBI,” the SC ruled.

“Consequently, there being no grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of  jurisdiction on the part of the NBI in conducting an investigation on the person of petitioner as to his participation in the Napoles PDAF Scam, the Court finds no ground to nullify the NBI’s investigation,” it said.