Napoles seeks dismissal of plunder case anew

Convicted businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles has urged the Sandiganbayan to reconsider its earlier ruling denying her bid for outright dismissal of her plunder case.

In a 44-page supplemental motion for reconsideration, Napoles, through her lawyers maintained that state prosecutors from the Office of the Ombudsman failed to present any additional evidence showing that she conspired with former senator Jinggoy Estrada in the alleged amassing of wealth in connection with the alleged pork barrel scam.

“The long and short of it is that none of the additional witnesses and evidence presented by the prosecution was offered to prove that Estrada is the main plunderer (in the case) and that accused Estrada received the alleged kickbacks and commissions from accused Napoles and (John Raymund) De Asis,” the motion read.

Napoles said the prosecution even failed to establish the money deposited in Estrada’s bank accounts came from her or any of her representatives.

Napoles, in her motion for reconsideration filed last April, had already argued that the case filed by the ombudsman in June 2014 was fatally defective, as it did not identify the “main plunderer.”

In her supplemental motion, Napoles insisted the identification of main plunderer is required under Republic Act 7080 or the Plunder Law, which states that a private individual cannot be charged with plunder unless there is an allegation that he or she conspired with a public official who must be the principal in the case.

Napoles pointed out that while the prosecution charged that she, her bodyguard De Asis, Estrada and the latter’s former deputy chief of staff Pauline Labayen, conspired with each other in the commission of the crime, no evidence was presented to prove such allegation.

Napoles cited the July 2016 Supreme Court decision on the plunder case of former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in connection with the alleged misuse of the P366-million intelligence fund of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PSCO).

In its ruling, the SC reversed the Sandiganbayan First Division’s decision and granted Arroyo’s demurrer to evidence which prayed for dismissal of the case on the ground of the prosecution’s failure to identify the main plunderer.

“All the evidence of the prosecution, taken together, still fail to identify the main plunderer, an essential element of the crime of plunder as held in the GMA (Arroyo) case,” Napoles said in her motion.

The motion was filed on behalf of Napoles by her new set of lawyers led by Rony Garay from the law firm Garay Cruz and Associates and Jacinto Garcia Jr. and Peter Joey Usita from Usita and Pua Law Offices.

Stephen David, who represented Napoles since the case’s filing in 2014, remains her lead counsel.