Philippine Star – 15 hours ago
Sen. Jinggoy Estrada was not victorious like his father Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada in his petitions before the Supreme Court (SC).
Yesterday, the SC dismissed the senator’s petitions to stop his trial for plunder in the Sandiganbayan, while Mayor Estrada won the disqualification case against him.
Speaking to reporters, spokesman Theodore Te said SC justices voted 9-5 to uphold the senator’s indictment based on the Office of the Ombudsman’s findings of probable cause.
“The Court dismissed the petition for failure of petitioner to obtain the required number of votes to grant the reliefs prayed for,” he said.
Voting to dismiss the senator’s petition were Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, Diosdado Peralta, Mariano del Castillo, Martin Villarama Jr., Jose Perez, Bienvenido Reyes, Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Marvic Leonen.
Dissenting were Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr., Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, Arturo Brion, Lucas Bersamin and Jose Mendoza.
Associate Justice Francis Jardeleza inhibited from the voting due to his previous participation in the case as solicitor general.
In his petitions, the senator asked the SC to void the Office of the Ombudsman’s finding of probable cause to file plunder and graft charges against him over alleged violation of his right to due process and equal protection of the law.
He said the Office of the Ombudsman’s resolution “grievously ignored, trampled upon and violated” his constitutional rights to due process when it denied his request and filed charges against him using affidavits which were not disclosed to him.
Among the affidavits that he had requested are those of Ruby Tuason and former Technology Resource Center director-general Dennis Cunanan, the counter-affidavits of National Livelihood Development Corp. president Gondelina Amata, and Budget Undersecretary for Operations Mario Relampagos, the consolidated reply of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), as well as the documents submitted by the other respondents in the pork barrel scam case and/or additional witnesses for the government.
The senator said he needed these affidavits and counter-affidavits so that he can be informed of the charges against him.
The Office of the Ombudsman had denied his request in a resolution issued last March 27, 2014 followed by the announcement a day later that it has issued a resolution charging him before the Sandiganbayan with plunder and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, he added.
The Office of the Ombudsman’s decision denying his request violated its own Rules of Procedure, Rule 112 of the Rules of Court, Article III of the Constitution and various SC decisions, he said.
The senator has another pending petition in the SC questioning the Sandigabayan’s decision to reject his bail petition.
In a statement from his place of detention in Camp Crame, the senator said he respects the SC decision dismissing his petitions.
He, however, reserves “the right to carry out the appropriate legal action later on, upon advice of my lawyers,” he added.
He and his lawyers have yet to receive a copy of the decision, the senator said. – Edu Punay, Christina Mendez