SC junks P840-M coco levy raps vs enrile, others

After over three decades, the Supreme Court (SC) has ordered the dismissal of the graft charges filed against former senator and now chief presidential legal counsel Juan Ponce Enrile and several others over the alleged siphoning of P840.7 million in coco levy funds during the administration of the late president Ferdinand Marcos.

In a 53-page decision signed by Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando, promulgated on Jan. 16 and published on Feb. 8, the high court directed the Office of the Ombudsman to dismiss the complaint filed against Enrile, businessman Jose Concepcion, Rolando dela Cuesta, Narciso Pineda and Danila Ursua.

It also ordered the dismissal of the graft case against Eduardo Cojuangco Jr., Jose Eleazar Jr., Maria Clara Lobregat and Augusto Orosa “due to their supervening deaths.”

The court, however, said “for the civil liability based on sources other than delict,” the government may file separate civil charges against Cojuangco Jr., Eleazar Jr., Lobregat and Orosa “as may be warranted by law and procedural rules.”

“If already filed, the said separate civil action shall survive notwithstanding the dismissal of the criminal case in view of their deaths,” the SC said.

It also stressed that the Aug. 6, 1998 review and recommendation and the Sept. 25, 1998 order of the Office of the Ombudsman be set aside and reversed.

Before this, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a complaint with the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) on Feb. 12, 1990 against Enrile, Cojuangco Jr., Lobregat, Dela Cuesta, Eleazar Jr., Concepcion, Ursua, Pineda and Orosa for the violation of the Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

The Office of the Ombudsman dismissed the case on Aug. 6, 1998 on the ground of “prescription of offense,” prompting the government to elevate the case before the SC, which reversed and set aside the Ombudsman ruling on Aug. 23, 2001 and ordered the Ombudsman to proceed with the preliminary investigation of the case.

But the SC issued a decision on July 4, 2004, setting aside its Aug. 23, 2001 ruling as it emphasized that the case at that time was not yet “ripe for decision.”

“With this case pending for over 30 years and possibly more without the assurance of its resolution, the court recognizes that the tactical disadvantages carried by the passage of time should be weighed against petitioner (government) and in favor of the respondents (Enrile and others),” the SC said.

“Certainly, if this case were remanded for further proceedings, the already long delay would drag on. Memories fade, documents and other exhibits can be lost and vulnerability of those who are tasked to decide increases with the passing of years. In effect, there would be a general inability to mount an effective defense,” it added.

The complaint filed against Enrile and others stemmed from the allegations of the PCGG that Cojuangco Jr. had taken advantage of his close relationship with the late president Ferdinand Marcos for his own personal and business interest through the issuance of decrees favorable to him.

An agreement was entered into between the government and Cojuangco Jr. through the state-run National Investment and Development Corp. (NIDC) to implement the vital purpose of the Presidential Decree 582, which created the Coconut Industry Development Fund.

Cojuangco Jr. started developing a coconut garden in Bugsuk Island, Palawan through its Agricultural Investors Inc. which allegedly benefited from the program through the NIDC.