Sandiganbayan dismisses ill-gotten wealth case vs alleged Marcos dummies

MANILA — The Sandiganbayan has dismissed the cases against alleged dummies of the late President Ferdinand Marcos Sr. who were charged in connection with Civil Case No. 0010 or the P2.4 billion ill-gotten wealth case against Marcos, his wife, former first lady Imelda, brother-in-law, Alfredo “Bejo” Romualdez, and their associates.

 In the 18-page Resolution, the anti-graft court’s Fourth Division said the plaintiff failed to prove the allegations against Olympio Bermudez, Geronimo Velasco, and Emilio Yap.

 The case was filed in 1987 by the Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG) involving properties belonging to the Bataan Shipyard and Engineering Company, Inc. (BASECO) and its subsidiaries.

 According to the amended/expanded complaint, Bermudez, Velasco, and Yap acted as dummies, directors, officers, nominees, or agents for corporations controlled by principal defendants Marcos, his wife, and Romualdez, which include BASECO, the Philippine Jai Alai Corp., and the Manila International Ports Terminal, Inc.

 The camps of Bermudez, Velasco, and Yap filed their respective Demurrers to Evidence, which were granted by the Court.

 A Demurrer to Evidence is an objection by a party to a charge due to insufficiency of proof.

 The Sandiganbayan contended that testimonies of the witnesses were weak. 

 “The plaintiff Republic of the Philippines only presented two witnesses, Maria Lourdes Magno and Antonio Rolando Eduarte, who are mere records custodians in the PCGG and BASECO, respectively,” the Resolution read.

 “Magno and Eduarte both testified that they have no personal knowledge as to the contents, preparation, execution, and issuance of the documents subject of their respective testimonies. Clearly, their testimonies are insufficient to prove the charges in the Amended Complaint,” it added.

 Magno is the chief administrative officer of the PCGG’s Library and Records Division, while Eduarte is the administrative officer of BASECO.

 The Court had also previously denied the admission of majority of the plaintiff’s exhibits, which supposedly did not comply with the Original Document Rule since these were only photocopies.

 The other documents, though admitted, were not able to prove the charges.

 “The plaintiff was not able to prove by preponderance of evidence that defendants Bermudez, Velasco, and Yap, by themselves and/or in unlawful concert and active collaboration with defendants Alfredo T. Romualdez, Ferdinand E. Marcos, and Imelda R. Marcos, planned, schemed, and devised strategies to unlawfully and unjustly enrich themselves at the expense of the plaintiff and the Filipino people,” the Resolution stated.

 It also noted that there was a failure to establish Bermudez, Velasco, and Yap as dummies of the principal defendants.

 “The plaintiff simply stated in its Comments that the defendants exerted significant influence and control within the corporations and had access to internal documents and transactions, making it highly improbable that they did not act as nominee, dummy, or agents of defendants Romualdez and spouses Marcos. This assumption, however, has to be backed by competent evidentiary substantiation,” the document pointed out.

The Resolution was penned by Fourth Division Chairperson Associate Justice Michael Frederick Musngi, and concurred in by Associate Justices Lorifel Pahimna and Maria Theresa Mendoza-Arcega.