Sandiganbayan junks one in every of ill-gotten wealth circumstances vs Marcos, others

(1st UPDATE) The anti-graft courtroom dismisses the case after the petitioner fails ‘to show by preponderance of proof the fabric allegations contained within the amended grievance’

MANILA, Philippines – The Sandiganbayan’s Fifth Division dismissed a civil case towards the late tyrant Ferdinand E. Marcos and others in relation to the alleged ill-gotten wealth of the dictator’s household.

In a 156-page choice, the anti-graft courtroom dismissed the case stemmed from alleged reversion, reconveyance, and accounting towards Marcos and different respondents as a result of petitioner’s failure to show the allegations.

“IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, this case for reversion, reconveyance, and accounting towards defendants Peter A. Sabido, Luis A. Yulo, Nicolas Dehesa, Ferdinand E. Marcos, Rafael Sison, and Don M. Ferry, is DISMISSED for failure of the plaintiff to show by preponderance of proof the fabric allegations contained within the amended grievance,” the choice reads.

JUST IN. Sandiganbayan fifth Division junks one of many ill-gotten wealth circumstances vs late tyrant Ferdinand Marcos, spouse Imelda, and others.

The case is a civil motion in relation to reconveyance, reversion, and accounting damages. @rapplerdotcom — Jairo Bolledo (@jairojourno) February 22, 2023

“Accordingly, the sequestration of herein defendant company, Lianga Bay Logging Co., and Yulo King Ranch, is hereby declared LIFTED,” it added.

Affiliate Justice Maria Theresa Mendoza-Arcega penned the choice, whereas Affiliate Justices Rafael Lagos and Maryann Corpus-Mañalac concurred.

In the meantime, the respondents named within the choice are as follows:

Late dictator Marcos

Imelda Marcos

Peter Sabido

Roberto Benedicto

Luis Yulo

Nicolas Dehesa

Jose Tengco Jr.

Rafael Sison

Cesar Zalamea

Don Ferry

Defendant firms: Liangga Bay Logging Co., Phil. Built-in Meat Company, YKR Company, and PIMECO Advertising Company

The case is without doubt one of the many expenses filed towards the Marcoses, which sought to recuperate the ill-gotten wealth that they had acquired in the course of the late dictator’s regime.

“This can be a civil motion towards defendants Peter A. Sabido, Ferdinand E. Marcos, Imelda R. Marcos and the remainder of the defendants within the above-entitled case to recuperate from them ill-gotten wealth consisting of funds and different property which they, in illegal live performance with each other, had acquired and collected in flagrant breach of belief and of their fiduciary obligations as public officers, with grave abuse of proper and energy, and in brazen violation of the Structure and legal guidelines of the Republic of the Philippines,” the ruling reads.

The ruling

Based on the anti-graft courtroom, the proof towards Marcos and different respondents did not show the allegations made by the state. It added that the proof additionally fell quick in displaying that the properties in query are dummy corporations owned by the late tyrant and his household.

“Notably, no competent proof was submitted to indicate that the previous President had any hand in YKR, Lianga, and all different firms listed within the amended grievance, or within the acquisition of defendant Yulo in his personal identify of his shares,” the ruling says.

The Sandiganbayan added that the state’s case towards Marcos was anchored on the testimony of presidency witness and former head of Safety Financial institution and Belief Co. Rolando Gapud, who mentioned in his affidavit that the businesses have been “usually held” by Marcos. Nevertheless, the anti-graft courtroom famous that jurisprudence says “an affidavit is merely rumour proof when its affiant or maker didn’t take the witness stand.”

In the meantime, within the case of Sabido and Yulo’s shares of inventory, the courtroom mentioned there was no proof introduced that might show that the inventory belongs to the state.

“Neither is there proof that respondents took undue benefit of their connections or relationship with former President Marcos or his household, family and shut associates, have been in a position to purchase these shares of inventory,” the Sandiganbayan added.

Different dismissals

On November 3, 1990, the Presidential Fee on Good Authorities (PCGG) and Benedicto entered into an settlement, the place each events agreed over the conveyance, switch, and cession of PACIFO in favor of the federal government. This was in trade for Benedicto’s immunity.

In a decision dated October 2, 1992, the anti-graft courtroom dropped Benedicto from the case. Afterward, Zalamea raised that the declare towards him had already been extinguished “in view of the total settlement of the declare of the plaintiff.” On November 2, 1995, the courtroom additionally junked the case towards him.

In the meantime, Tengco argued that the declare towards him had additionally been extinguished as a result of the reason for motion towards him was based mostly on the Growth Financial institution of the Philippines’ mortgage to PACIFO. His case was additionally dismissed.

In 2010, the Sandiganbayan additionally lifted the sequestration order towards PIMECO.The anti-graft courtroom additionally granted the demurrer to proof filed by YKR Company and a minimum of six of ten heirs of the late Yulo.

That is among the many newest wins of the Marcoses within the nation’s anti-graft courtroom. On February 1, the late tyrant’s household suffered a significant loss within the Sandiganbayan after the courtroom barred them from retaking their forfeited belongings. –