Sandiganbayan junks MisOr vice governor’s graft dismissal plea
Text size
Three decades after the Marcopper mining disaster devastated Marinduque’s waterways, the province is again pressing the…
Housing is probably the biggest issue affecting people the world over.
Malacañang on Monday called for a more thorough investigation into the questioned flood control projects in Taguig…
The defense on Monday backed the move by senator-judges to exclude a prosecution witness who testified on the firearms…
The Sandiganbayan has denied the petition of former Misamis Oriental Vice Governor Jose Mari Pelaez to dismiss three graft cases against him, which involve alleged payroll anomalies in the provincial board.
In its ruling, the anti-graft court cited “insufficiency” of evidence presented by the defense in its motion.
To recall, Pelaez filed a motion for leave of court to file a demurrer to evidence, arguing that investigators failed to establish his guilt and claimed the prosecution’s witnesses’ testimonies were mere “allegations and were full of gaps, inconsistencies, and material contradictions.”
A motion for leave of court to file a demurrer to evidence challenges the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence, requiring the trial court’s approval to prevent the filing party from stalling proceedings.
“After examining the prosecution’s evidence and the parties’ arguments, the court rules that granting accused Pelaez leave to file his demurrer to evidence would merely cause a delay in the proceedings,” the court said.
The cases stem from an Ombudsman investigation into a complaint by board member Fredrick Khu, who alleged the presence of “ghost employees” in the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, then headed by Pelaez.
Prosecution asserted that irregularities in the board’s payroll from 2014 to 2016 substantiated these claims.
In response to Pelaez’s motion, the prosecution argued that they had established that the former vice governor acted with evident bad faith and/or gross inexcusable negligence, justifying the Ombudsman’s charges.
The prosecution also presented evidence that casual employees Lowell Zarate and Ricky Pagaran were directed to perform work at Pelaez’s private properties. Both Zarate and Pagaran testified in court.
The Sandiganbayan denied Pelaez’s motion for lack of merit, but the court noted that Pelaez retains the right to present evidence in his defense or submit his demurrer to evidence without leave of court.
A demurrer to evidence is a pleading by the accused to dismiss the case due to insufficient prosecution evidence. If granted in a criminal case, it results in an acquittal.
Since Pelaez’s motion for leave of court to file a demurrer was denied, the case will proceed, allowing him to present his defense.
