Sandiganbayan junks fertilizer scam case vs Cuenco,Yapha

CEBU, Philippines - The Sandiganbayan has affirmed the dismissal of the case filed against former Cebu congressmen over a “fertilizer scam” due to the “unreasonable delay” in the disposition of the complaint during the fact-finding investigation.

Associate Justice Rafael Lagos denied the motion for partial reconsideration filed by the prosecution against former legislators Antonio Cuenco and Antonio Yapha Jr.

"The prejudicial effects of the delay should be appreciated in light of the particular circumstances extant. In these cases, the long unexplained delay only serves to bolster the finding of the existence of prejudice to the accused," read the resolution.

In its motion, the prosecution maintained that the period of delay should not include the fact-finding investigation, since this is only an evaluation stage.

It said that no constitutional right was violated as claimed by Cuenco and Yapha since the fact-finding investigation is the stage where gathering of evidence was conducted for the filing of a complaint for preliminary investigation.

It added that Yapha and Cuenco were neither accused nor respondents yet.

"In the fact-finding investigation, a ‘no-contact’ with the subject of the investigation policy is adopted. This is to avoid tampering, loss or destruction of evidence at the subject's disposal. There is no right that is violated as there is no deprivation of life, liberty or property," the prosecution said.

In their opposition, Yapha and Cuenco said the arguments of the prosecution were rehashed, adding that their right to speedy disposition of their case is guaranteed by the Constitution.

The anti-graft court agreed, saying there should be balancing of the right of the accused to speedy disposition of cases.

Lagos said even if the fact-finding investigation was only preparatory and separate from the preliminary investigation proper, it does not excuse the prosecution for the unreasonable delay.

"The court does not see any reason from its earlier ruling that the prosecution has not satisfactorily explained the delay," the Sandiganbayan said. (FREEMAN)