The Sandiganbayan has granted former Bureau of Customs (BoC) chief Nicanor Faeldon’s request to forgo testifying in his own defense in a graft case involving alleged anomalies surrounding P34.043 million worth of smuggled rice in 2017.

Instead, Faeldon will present his former chief of staff as a substitute witness.

Citing emotional and mental distress following the death of a close family friend, Faeldon argued he was "not in the proper emotional and mental state to make the necessary preparations... to take the witness stand and testify."

He asserted that his refusal to testify for himself is a "right that can be exercised at any stage of the trial" and "should not be construed as a waiver of his right to present all available evidence in his defense."

Moreover, he stated that his chief of staff's testimony would likely be "substantially" the same as his own, as it would primarily concern the processes, procedures, and administrative matters within the BoC — information he posits crucial to his defense.

Faeldon, along with four co-accused, is facing two counts of violating Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The charges stem from the alleged unauthorized release of at least 40,000 bags of forfeited Vietnamese white rice through the Port of Cagayan in 2017. The rice shipment allegedly entered the country without permits, taxes, or customs duties.

The complaint was initially filed by former senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, who identified Faeldon as the primary culprit. Faeldon denied the allegations, claiming Lacson’s complaint was not based on personal knowledge but on third-party sources.

The prosecution opposed Faeldon’s motion, arguing that the substitute witness was irrelevant to the case and not listed in any of the official records or documents related to the shipment. They also warned that permitting a non-involved individual to testify could "open the floodgates" to testimony from unrelated personalities, contrary to court rules.

Despite this, the Sandiganbayan ruled in Faeldon’s favor, stating that his right to present evidence in his defense outweighs the prosecution’s objections. The court emphasized that the substitute witness could offer what Faeldon described as “critical evidence” without delaying the proceedings.

"In the court's view, allowing Faeldon to present his intended substitute witness will serve the ends of justice. In this way, Faeldon will be able to present what he claims as 'critical evidence' to his defense without causing a delay in the proceedings or prejudice to the prosecution," the court ruled.

This comes after Faeldon earlier sought to have the graft charges dismissed before trial, arguing that the prosecution's evidence was too weak to support a conviction. That petition was denied earlier this month, with the court saying it would "only unnecessarily stall the proceedings."