Sandigan upholds Napoles conviction for lesser crime
Pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles
MANILA, Philippines — A special division of the Sandiganbayan has junked the separate pleadings of alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles and former APEC party list lawmaker Edgar Valdez, challenging their direct bribery and corruption conviction over the diversion of public funds for fictitious projects.
In a 20-page resolution promulgated on July 8, the five-man Special Fifth Division rejected Napoles’ motion for reconsideration as it maintained that the “variance doctrine” in finding the two accused guilty of less severe crimes did not violate any constitutional rights.
READ: Sandigan clears Napoles of graft raps in P15-M ‘pork barrel’ case
The court, however, partially granted Valdez’s motion, but in connection only with the bank deposit worth P1 million to a joint account with his wife Thelma. The money was found to have come from a nongovernmental organization (NGO) that was “not sufficiently proven” to be under Napoles.
Napoles and Valdez were acquitted of plunder charges in October last year. But the businesswoman was found guilty of corruption of public officers, while the former representative was convicted of direct bribery.
Article continues after this advertisementCourt’s assertion
In citing the variance rule, the antigraft court asserted that the “precise liability of direct bribery [for Valdez] and corruption of public officials [for Napoles] was based on the number of occasions Valdez accepted and received commissions from Napoles in consideration of such endorsements, which was already fully threshed out in the court’s decision.”
Article continues after this advertisementThe variance rule, stipulated under the Rules of Court on Criminal Procedure, allows an accused to be convicted of a different crime. But the crime must also be discussed and detailed in the original complaint.
The court stressed that the complaint mentioned that Valdez “directly or indirectly” received payoffs amounting to P57.8 million from Napoles, who allegedly controlled the NGOs, namely, Masaganang Ani Para sa Magsasaka Foundation Inc.; Philippine Social Development Foundation Inc.; and Social Development Program for Farmers Foundation Inc.
The three NGOs were handpicked to become project partners to be funded by Valdez’s Priority Development Assistance Fund allocation from 2004 to 2010.
“In the same vein, the element of corruption of public officials can be clearly gathered from the foregoing allegations,” read the court resolution.
“Accused Valdez and Napoles were adequately apprised that the plunder information included the lesser offenses of bribery and corruption … They were not caught by surprise and were not oblivious to these lesser offenses,” it said. “They should have been able to intelligently prepare [for] and defend [against these].”
