Julia Christine Botin

Sandiganbayan upholds acquittal of Enrile, Napoles, Reyes of plunder

Article (news)

Adrian Ayalin

ABS-CBN News

<div><img src="https://od2-image-api.abs-cbn.com/prod/editorImage/17490972298431749097228099.jpeg" style="width:950px" class="fr-fic fr-dib"/>Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Juan Ponce Enrile during the sectoral meeting at the Malacañang Palace on Feb. 13, 2024. KJ Rosales, PPA Pool </div>MANILA — The Sandiganbayan Special 3rd Division affirmed its decision to acquit former Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile — now chief presidential legal counsel — of plunder in connection with the pork barrel scam.In a resolution promulgated on May 29, 2025, the court also upheld <a href="https://www.abs-cbn.com/news/2024/10/4/enrile-gigi-reyes-napoles-acquitted-of-plunder-over-pdaf-scam-931">the acquittal of Enrile’s co-accused, his former chief of staff Gigi Reyes and graft convict Janet Lim Napoles.</a>In their motion for reconsideration, prosecutors reiterated that prosecution witnesses Benhur Luy and Ruby Tuason testified that Napoles had proposed the allegedly anomalous projects and that Enrile subsequently allowed the disbursement of his Priority Development Assistance Fund or PDAF for them.<div><a href="https://www.abs-cbn.com/news/2024/10/4/enrile-and-napoles-acquitted-1044">PHOTOS: In as accused, out as acquitted </a></div>“We find baseless the prosecution&#x27;s insinuation that the challenged decision had been based on the following: wrong and irrelevant considerations; selective and incomplete appraisal of the prosecution evidence; and, gross misapprehension of the facts and evidence,” the court said in the resolution penned by Associate Justice Ronald Moreno, with the concurrence of Associate Justices Bernelito Fernandez and Michael Frederick Musngi.In separate comments, Enrile, Napoles and Reyes said the prosecution&#x27;s appeal lacked merit and was violative of their right against double jeopardy.In its resolution, the court reiterated that the prosecution was given the opportunity to present and offer its evidence and to oppose the accused&#x27;s demurrers to evidence. “In sum, there was no showing that the trial was a sham, or that there had been a mistrial,” the court said. <div><a href="https://www.abs-cbn.com/news/2024/10/4/timeline-enrile-s-vindication-after-10-year-pork-barrel-scam-case-1028">TIMELINE: Enrile&#x27;s vindication after 10-year pork barrel scam case </a></div>The court also stressed that the prosecution failed to establish that Enrile received a percentage of the cost of any project funded by his PDAF.“None of the prosecution witnesses testified that they handed or transferred money to Enrile himself,” the court said.

In its resolution, the court reiterated that the prosecution was given the opportunity to present and offer its evidence and to oppose the accused's demurrers to evidence.

In its resolution, the court reiterated that the prosecution was given the opportunity to present and offer its evidence and to oppose the accused's demurrers to evidence.