MANILA, Philippines - Former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo wants the Office of the Ombudsman to submit to the Sandiganbayan its original resolution charging her with graft and technical malversation for the alleged misuse of Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) funds.
The charges against her have been upgraded to the non-bailable offense of plunder.
Her motion for judicial determination of probable cause will be heard before the anti-graft court tomorrow.
Through lawyer Anacleto Diaz, Arroyo questioned why the original findings were not made part of the records of the preliminary investigation.
“The records of the preliminary investigation elevated to this Honorable Court do not show that the Panel created by the Ombudsman by her Office Order No. 530 to conduct the preliminary investigation of the case a quo, issued any Resolution as required by Section 4, Rule 112 of the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure,” read the motion.
“Accused GMA received information, and so alleges, that the Panel actually issued a Resolution exonerating accused GMA of the crime of Plunder for lack of evidence. Such information is based on newspaper reports that the Panel had in fact issued a Resolution and that its findings materially differed from the findings and conclusions made in the Review Joint Resolution of the Ombudsman.
“The accuracy of these newspaper reports was not denied or contradicted by the Office of the Ombudsman. On the contrary, it implicitly admitted the accuracy of the Report that its own Panel of Investigators had made divergent findings because it exonerated accused GMA of the crime of Plunder.”
STAR sources earlier bared that the original panel of probers only recommended the filing of graft and technical malversation charges against Arroyo.
However, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales allegedly modified the recommendations, upgraded the charge to plunder and did not furnish the Sandiganbayan with copies of the original resolution.
Arroyo said if the original resolution had exonerated her of plunder, doubt will emerge whether probable cause to charge her with the crime exists.
“At the very least, any material finding in the original resolution of the panel which is different from, or contradictory to, the findings in the Review Joint Resolution may prompt this Honorable Court to more carefully scrutinize the evidence on record to ascertain whether enough evidence truly exists to support the present charge of plunder,” read the motion.
Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Sandiganbayan may order the document to be produced, she added.
Arroyo said an examination of the evidence presented during the preliminary investigation will show whether the Office of the Ombudsman had appreciated or disregarded vital evidence that could show grave abuse of discretion.
“A court faced with a 50-50 proposition of guilt or innocence always decides in favor of innocence,” read the motion.
“A prosecutor, conscious that he represents the offended party, may decide to leave the problem to the discretion of the court.
“Faced with an Information charging a manifestly non-existent crime, the duty of a trial court is to throw it out. Or, at the very least and where possible, make it conform to the law.”
Arroyo’s lawyers said the Office of the Ombudsman has failed to show certainty in its position and that it has charged a manifestly inexistent crime of plunder.
“None of the sums involved, not even a single cent, passed the hands of accused GMA, and that on the contrary, the disbursement of the subject funds have passed audit by the COA which found the same properly disbursed and liquidated,” the lawyers said.