Graft court resets Perez arraignment

The arraignment of former Justice Secretary Hernando “Nani” Perez and three co-accused on the criminal charges in connection with the $2-million extortion involving former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez, was reset anew by the Sandiganbayan yesterday, pending resolution of a petition to stop their prosecution before the anti-graft court.

The first division of the anti-graft court, chaired by Presiding Justice Diosdado Peralta, moved the arraignment of all four accused on graft charges, specifically violation of Section 3 (b) of R.A. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), to July 18 after it found ample grounds to first resolve the separate motions to quash earlier filed by accused.

Peralta said the argument of the lawyers of Perez and his wife Rosario that the Office of the Ombudsman lacks authority to file the charges against them since Jimenez had already withdrawn the original complaint, cannot be waived until after the arraignment.

He gave the prosecution 15 days to file comment or opposition to the motion to quash and also the defense lawyers to file the corresponding reply 15 days thereafter.

The court, however, denied in open court the accused’s motions to suspend proceedings “in the absence of temporary restraining order (TRO) from Supreme Court,” citing Section 7 of Rule 65 of Rules of Court.

Lawyers of the former justice secretary, led by Marcial Balgos, cited three ground in their motion to quash: facts charged in the information do not constitute an offense, Sandiganbayan has no jurisdiction over the crime charges, and that the Ombudsman had no authority to file information.

Speaking to reporters after the 9 a.m. hearing yesterday, Perez again questioned the filing of charges against him.

“This case should have not been filed considering the motion of desistance of Mr. Jimenez. My constitutional right has really been violated. As you know, this case had the longest investigation before the Ombudsman,” President Arroyo’s first Justice secretary stressed.

Perez has accused the Ombudsman of violating his constitutional right to speedy trial for the six-year delay of its investigation on the extortion case.

"Then all of a sudden Nani Perez was used as deodorant,” he said.