COURT SHOOTS DOWN EX-MAYOR’S MOTION

Last year, Gungob, 7 other former town officials were charged with violations of anti-corruption law

The Sandiganbayan has denied former Consolacion mayor Avelino Gungob Sr.’s move to ask the justices to allow him to present evidence to prove his innocence relative to his graft case.

The anti-graft court’s 7th Division struck down Gungob’s motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence for his failure to comply with the requirements for the purposes of filing such pleading.

“Accordingly, for non-compliance with the requirement for purposes of a motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence, specific grounds not having been alleged in support thereof, the accused’s motion should fail,” read the Sandiganbayan’s three-page resolution.

A leave of court is a permission from the court to take action that would otherwise not be permissible. A demurrer to evidence has the same effect of a motion to dismiss, with the connotation that the evidence of the prosecution was not sufficient.

If the court grants a demurrer, the accused needs not to present his evidence and the court would decide on the case.

In case the court denies the demurrer, however, the defense would still be allowed to present its evidence.

In his motion, Gungob said he could show the insufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence.

He noted that the prosecution’s discrepancies on its evidence would not establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Replying to the mayor’s motion, the prosecution argued that the accused’s pleading should be denied for his failure to comply with the requirements pursuant to Art. 23, Rule 119 of the Rules of Court.

It said that the ground raised by Gungob is not specific.

In the resolution, the anti-graft court ruled that Gungob failed to cite the grounds in his motion for leave of court to file the pleading.

The accused failed to specifically state the required rule in saying that insufficient evidence could lead to dismissal of the case.

On the other hand, the Sandiganbayan ruled that Gungob may still file his demurrer to evidence without leave of court within 10 days.

Last year, the Sandiganbayan also struck down an attempt by Gungob to junk the graft case that he and seven of his then town hall officials are facing over the alleged procurement of overpriced fertilizers worth P249,000 in 2005.

The anti-graft court’s Fifth Division denied for lack of merit Gungob’s motion for judicial determination of probable cause and to dismiss the case.

In its resolution dated March 20, 2017, the Office of the Ombudsman charged Gungob and seven former town hall officers with violation of Sec. 3(e) of Republic Act 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

Named respondents were former municipal treasurer Rosalina Maglasang, former municipal accountant Lecelie Placibe, former municipal agriculturist Evangeline Puao, former municipal engineer Carlito Maglasang, former municipal social welfare, and development officer Florisa Bagasbas, former municipal assessor Marilou Herrera, and bids and awards committee members Siegfred Cataluna.