Manila: The Sandiganbayan has dismissed appeals filed by individuals accused in one of the Pharmally contracts cases, which challenged the Ombudsman's decision to temporarily withdraw the charges for further examination.
According to Philippines News Agency, the anti-graft court's First Division, in a six-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Maria Theresa Mendoza-Arcega and promulgated on December 12, denied the motions for reconsideration. The court found that the accused "failed to raise any new and substantial arguments, and no cogent reason exists to warrant a reconsideration of the Court's resolution." The resolution further noted that the motions repeated arguments previously addressed, justifying a summary denial of reconsideration.
The court had earlier approved the prosecution's request to withdraw information, allowing the Office of the Ombudsman to reinvestigate the cases for potential violations of Republic Act 3019, known as the Anti-Graft Law. Similar motions to withdraw charges have been granted in other Pharmally cases after Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla instructed the Office of the Special Prosecutor to withdraw cases that had not reached arraignment. Remulla argued that his predecessor, Samuel Martires, had filed cases missing key facts and evidence that appeared intentionally weakened.
The motions for reconsideration, deemed meritless, were filed by former Department of Budget and Management Procurement Service officer-in-charge Lloyd Christopher A. Lao, Pharmally Pharmaceutical director Linconn U. Ong, financial manager Lin Weixiong, former deputy Ombudsman Warren Rex Liong, and Pharmally corporate secretary Mohit C. Dargani. The accused argued that the Sandiganbayan's decision to allow the withdrawal of charges compromised justice and judicial stability, suggesting it was a tool for political ends.
The charges concern Section 3(e) of the Philippines' Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019), which sanctions public officials who cause undue injury to any party, including the government, or provide unwarranted benefits to private individuals through partiality, bad faith, or gross negligence. This legal provision targets corrupt acts where officials misuse their power to favor or harm others, regardless of personal financial gain, by demonstrating bias, dishonesty, or extreme carelessness.
