Mamamayang Liberal Representative Leila de Lima on Wednesday sharply criticized the Department of Justice (DoJ) for attempting to overturn a Muntinlupa court’s decision that acquitted her of drug-related charges, accusing government prosecutors of subjecting her to “triple jeopardy.”

The former senator and Justice secretary has been cleared of all three drug charges filed by the Duterte administration since June last year, with the first case dismissed in 2021. The charges stemmed from her alleged involvement in illegal drug trading inside the New Bilibid Prison (NBP).

However, the DoJ panel of prosecutors filed a motion for reconsideration on 14 July, seeking to reverse the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 204’s ruling that acquitted De Lima and co-accused Ronnie Dayan in the second charge in May 2023. This marks the DoJ’s second attempt to challenge her acquittal.

“I don’t understand what the prosecution is trying to do! Put me in triple jeopardy after nearly seven years in unjust detention? This is no longer funny, it’s infuriating,” De Lima lamented.

The RTC’s decision cited the recantation of former Bureau of Corrections chief Rafael Ragos, a key prosecution witness, as grounds for dismissal. Ragos had previously testified against De Lima, accusing her of receiving P10 million in illegal drug proceeds from the NBP when she served as Justice chief from 2010 to 2015 under the administration of the late President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III.

Ragos had claimed he personally delivered the money to De Lima, allegedly intended to fund her 2016 senatorial campaign. However, he retracted his testimony in 2022, claiming he was coerced by then-Duterte Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II to implicate De Lima in the illegal drug trade.

In their motion, DoJ prosecutors argued that the court erred in crediting Ragos’ recantation and failed to justify why it should outweigh his initial testimony implicating De Lima.

“Witness Ragos presented no proof of the alleged coercion and did nothing about it. As such, his bare allegation should not be allowed to trample upon and make a mockery of the administration of justice by this Honorable Court,” the motion read.