ALL INSIGHT

IT was all over the news this Thursday. The Sandiganbayan’s Third Division convicted me of graft, which to most is just one of those stories of corruption. However, for those learned of the law, this is one for the books since I was convicted for a crime that is not even punishable by the law.

A researcher from this newspaper sent me an email that same day: “We heard that you have been convicted by the Sandiganbayan on graft charges regarding the MRT 3. May we request a statement from you?”

I quickly replied to him this manner:

“Of course I will be exhausting all legal remedies available to overturn this miscarriage of justice.

“The term ‘ miscarriage of justice’ refers to a verdict that is clearly mistaken, unfair, or improper. Primarily, a miscarriage of justice is the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime they did not commit.

“In my case I was convicted of a crime of which the law does not even punish. The law prohibits the relationship ( up to third degree) between the bidder and the head of the procuring entity (HOPE). I am not the HOPE, but a mere end user representative in of the MRT 3. The DoTC ( Department of Transportation and Communication) was the procuring entity at that time.

“The decision of the Sandiganbayan is based on mere inferences and assumptions by the not on the evidence presented by the prosecution.

“I neither presented any evidence nor took the witness stand because one does not need to disprove what the prosecution has not proven.

“Finally, the court ruled that there was no conspiracy between the other PH Trams incorporators but presumed conspiracy between me and Soriano. I never directed [Arturo] Soriano to join PH Trams. It was them (the other accused) who invited him, without my knowledge. Conspiracy can never be presumed but must be proven like the crime itself — beyond reasonable doubt.”

Prohibited relationship

The conviction was for violation of Section 65 C(1) in relation to