MANILA, Philippines - Seeing the divided ruling on the petition as a sign of possible reversal, former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo now intends to appeal the decision of the Sandiganbayan that denied her bail on the case involving alleged misuse of funds from the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO).
Arroyo’s lead defense counsel Anacleto Diaz yesterday said they are preparing to move for a reconsideration of the anti-graft court’s ruling. He expressed confidence that the outcome will be positive since the justices were divided in their decision.
Voting 3-2, the anti-graft court denied the bail petitions of Arroyo and former PCSO budget and accounts manager Benigno Aguas based on the former president’s approval of cash advances requested repeatedly by then PCSO general manager Rosario Uriarte from 2008 to 2010.
“The resolution was not unanimous, out of five members, two found no evidence to keep her in detention,†Diaz said, adding that the court admitted in its 47-page resolution that there was no direct evidence of conspiracy, only an implicit one.
“The court merely found implicit or implied conspiracy, but how can that be when the very core of that conspiracy which had the power how the funds were used – the members of the board of directors of the PCSO – were all granted bail by the Sandiganbayan as it cited no strong evidence was presented against them. Why do they have a different ruling on the former president?†he said.
The Sandiganbayan First Division, headed by Associate Justices Efren de la Cruz as chairman and Rodolfo Ponferrada and Rafael Lagos, last June granted the bail petition of Arroyo’s co-accused, former PCSO general manager Sergio Valencia and former PCSO directors Manuel Morato and Raymundo Roquero, finding that the evidence presented against them during the bail hearings were weak.
However, De la Cruz, another contender to the post of presiding justice of the anti-graft court, and Lagos, an appointee of President Aquino, voted to deny bail for Arroyo and Aguas while only Ponferrada voted to grant them bail.
As the division level requires all justices to vote unanimously, the bail petition of Arroyo and Aguas was submitted to a division of five justices where only a majority decision was required.
Two more justices were designated to comprise the division of five – recently appointed Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang and Associate Justice Jose Hernandez.
Tang voted to deny Arroyo and Aguas bail, ensuring that a majority decision is achieved while Hernandez resolved to grant her bail.
Diaz said they will definitely question the ruling because the court made assumptions that were not part of the evidence presented during the hearing.
“The resolution drew inference upon inference and cited evidence not presented by the prosecution to claim that the monies withdrawn by Uriarte were brought into the Office of the President. A theory was supplied which the prosecution did not allege,†he said.
In his dissenting opinion, Ponferrada said no evidence was presented to establish the existence of plunder. Hernandez shared his view, saying he found no strong evidence in the participation of Arroyo and Aguas.
He said that the right of an accused to post bail granting weak evidence is a constitutional right that should afford the accused innocence until proven otherwise. – With Perseus Echeminada