The Sandiganbayan has junked the forfeiture of unlawfully acquired properties case against Alfredo Romualdez, a brother of former First Lady Imelda Marcos, his wife Agnes and their other co-accused due to violation of the right to speedy disposition of cases.
In a 14-page resolution, the anti-graft court said that the civil case involving 42 properties was filed in 1996, but government prosecutors filed supplemental motions only in 2012 and 2016 to include the said properties.
“After the lapse of 20 years from the filing of the original petition and more than four years from the filing of its Supplemental Petition, the petitioner filed a Motion for Leave of Court to Amend Supplemental Petition to implead RLC as an additional respondent on the basis of a Deed of Absolute Sale executed in 2006, appending thereto the Amended Supplemental Petition. It bears emphasizing that from the time of the filing of the original petition until present, a period of 27 years had already elapsed,” the Sandiganbayan said.
“We are at a loss as to why it took the petitioner 16 years to file a supplemental petition; another four years to file its amended supplemental petition; and an additional four years to file its second amended supplemental petition. We also note that on various dates in 2019 and 2020 — or more than 20 years from the filing of its original petition in 1996, the petitioner Philippine government has sought either to postpone pre trial and/or suspend the proceedings,” the court added.
Further, the anti-graft court said that the lapse of over 20 years puts in question the ability of Romualdez to adequately prepare for the case given that he is almost 90 years old.
“Verily, the passage of such a long period has made preparation it difficult for Romualdez to secure the availability of the pieces of testimonial and documentary evidence. In like manner, the lapse of time has also made it challenging for RLC to gather evidence to support its position,” the Sandiganbayan said.
“The case has been pending for 27 years, yet the pre-trial has not yet even started. Considering the volume of documents needed to be presented in this case, it would not be far-fetched to conclude it would take some time before the case is resolved,” the anti-graft court added.
The Sandiganbayan said government prosecutors also repeatedly failed to comply with Court Resolutions issued in May, June and November 2022 and January this year tasking the prosecution to secure pertinent documents in connection with the civil case, including those involving other defendants.
“We point out that the petitioner has repeatedly failed to fully comply with this Court’s resolutions. Its flimsy excuses of voluminous workload and the delayed response of several government agencies to the PCGG (Presidential Commission on Good Government) to justify its failure to fully comply with this Court’s resolutions, fail to convince us,” it said.
“While we are aware that delay is not determined through mere mathematical reckoning but through the examination of the facts and circumstances surrounding each case, the sheer length of time this case has been dragging on, coupled by the petitioner’s failure to fully comply with our resolutions, rendered the delay inordinate, vexatious, and oppressive delays and, thus warranting the dismissal of the case,” the Sandiganbayan added.—LDF, GMA Integrated News
