MANILA, Philippines — State prosecutors from the Office of the Ombudsman blocked the move of former Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile seeking the recusal of Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang from handling his plunder case in connection with his alleged involvement in the pork barrel fund scam.
In a 10-page opposition paper submitted to the Sandiganbayan Third Division, the prosecution said Enrile's motion “does not cite just or valid grounds” to warrant Tang's recusal.
“The motion is not based on clear and convincing evidence as the relevant circumstances cited by accused Enrile are pure speculations and conjectures,” the prosecution's opposition paper read.
Tang chairs the Third Division which is handling the plunder case against Enrile, his former chief of staff Jessica Lucila “Gigi” Reyes and the alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles.
It can be remembered that in his motion filed late last month, Enrile, through his lawyers led by former Solicitor General Estelito Mendoza, called for Tang's voluntary inhibition from handling the case, saying the latter's appointment by former President Benigno Aquino III supposedly “subconsciously” affects the verdicts she renders.
READ: Trial of Enrile's plunder case must proceed — Sandigan
Enrile specifically cited the Third Division's “unusually” swift denial of his motion for bill of particulars in July 11, 2014 as, well as of his motion to dismiss the case on January 31, 2017.
Enrile maintained that the Third Division erred in its two rulings as the information of the cases allegedly does not identify the “combination or series of overt criminal acts” he and his co-accused committed which led to the supposed amassing of ill-gotten wealth.
In its opposition paper, the prosecution said the arguments raised by Enrile do not warrant Tang's consideration and voluntary inhibition as they were “sweeping, speculative and has no factual or legal ground to stand on.”
The prosecution said there was not even a slight explanation in Enrile's motion on how Aquino's appointment of Tang supposedly affected her decisions. The prosecution pointed out that Enrile even acknowledged in his notion that Tang “has the qualifications of an Associate Justice or of the Presiding Justice of the Sandiganbayan... despite being the most junior among the Associate Justices of the Sandiganbayan at the time.”
The prosecution further pointed out that the Supreme Court, in its previous rulings, had already maintained that a mere decision unfavorable to the accused/movant is not a sufficient ground to call for the judge's recusal.
Lastly, the prosecution said Tang's recusal “will unduly delay the proceedings,” noting that under the Sandiganbayan's internal rule, the inhibition of a division chairman calls for the re-raffling of the case to another court division.
“While voluntary inhibition rests on the discretion of the judge or magistrate, it must be done with caution, lest it become a resort of litigants trying to delay the resolution of the cases against them or of those parties who, in seeking other venues that maybe 'friendlier' to their cause, would attempt to smear the reputation of a member of the Bench,” the prosecution said.
Enrile's former chief of staff, Reyes, has a similar motion calling Tang's inhibition from the case, due to the magistrate's alleged “partiality” against her. The prosecution has yet to file its comment on Reyes' motion.
READ: Gigi Reyes seeks bail for plunder case
Enrile, through Reyes, is accused of amassing P172.83 million worth of kickbacks by allegedly allocating his Priority Development Assistance Fund or pork barrel to the fake foundations allegedly owned by Napoles.
Reyes and Napoles are currently detained at the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology Female Dormitory in Camp Bagong Diwa in Taguig City.
Enrile, on the other hand, was released from hospital arrest at the Philippine National Police General Hospital in August 2015 after the SC granted his petition for bail.