Reverse Leila acquittal, court told
Government prosecutors have asked the Muntinlupa City Regional Trial Court to reverse its acquittal of former senator Leila de Lima on drug-related charges.
The Department of Justice panel of prosecutors headed by Ramoncito Ocampo Jr. submitted to the court a 91-page motion for reconsideration anchored on questioning the motives of those who recanted their statements against De Lima.
In dismissing the second of three drug cases against De Lima, the court afforded the former senator “reasonable doubt” on account of former Bureau of Corrections chief Rafael Ragos taking back his statement that he gave De Lima P10 million.
The case stemmed from the alleged actions of De Lima as DoJ secretary overseeing the New Bilibid Prison. She purportedly received money from drug lords detained at NBP in exchange for allowing them to remotely control their drug empires behind bars.
The prosecution noted that Ragos’ recantation came eight days before the 2022 presidential election, at the time that De Lima was seeking reelection as a senator.
“This clearly raises doubt as to the motive behind the sudden retraction,” part of the motion read.
Muntinlupa RTC Branch 204 Presiding Judge Abraham Joseph Alcantara, in his 13 May 2013 ruling, said the case against De Lima had lost its legs with the recantation.
Without Ragos’s statement, the trial court said: “The crucial link to establish conspiracy is shrouded with reasonable doubt.”
On 5 September 2016, Ragos executed an affidavit claiming that in November 2012, as BuCor OIC and together with aide Jovencio Ablen, he delivered a black bag containing P5 million to De Lima and her bodyguard, Ronnie Dayan, at the former’s residence in Parañaque City.
Ragos claimed they made another delivery of P5 million in a plastic bag in December 2012 to De Lima and Dayan. The money, according to Ragos, came from the proceeds of the drug operations of several high-profile inmates inside the NBP.
But Ragos retracted his statements against De Lima in May 2022.
The panel of prosecutors insisted that Ragos’ recantation did not debunk his original testimony given in open court and that there were other pieces of evidence on record to prove De Lima’s guilt.
The panel also cited numerous rulings of the Supreme Court which held that recantations of testimonies are viewed with suspicion and hardly given much weight.
“While recantation may give rise to suspicion, such suspicion, however strong, cannot solely serve as a gauge for determining the probative value of the recantation,” the DoJ panel said.
The prosecution pointed out that Ragos “extensively” testified before the court, the Senate, and the House of Representatives on his original testimony linking De Lima to the illegal drug trade inside the NBP.