The land acquisitions, using AFP-RSBS funds, amounted to about P703 million.
In a 25-page decision penned by Associate Justice Romeo Callejo Sr., the SC’s first division ruled that the anti-graft court did not commit any grave abuse of discretion, as Ramiscal had claimed, when it junked the retired general’s motion to quash the charges against him for falsification of public documents and violation of Republic Act 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Court records show that on Sept. 27, 2004, a panel of prosecutors, after thorough investigation into the allegations against Ramiscal, recommended to the Ombudsman the initial filing of five complaints for estafa through falsification of public documents and five other complaints for violation of RA 3019 with the Sandiganbayan.
The Ombudsman originally recommended the filing of 148 counts of estafa and graft, but the prosecutors cited the lack of manpower that could handle the voluminous cases.
In one of the cases, the Ombudsman accused Ramiscal of conspiring with lawyers Meinrado Enrique Bello, Manuel Satuito, head and documentation chief, respectively, of the AFP-RSBS’ legal division; Capt. Perfecto Quilicot Jr., project officer; and unidentified persons in the purchase of an allegedly overpriced 7,582-square-meter property in Tanauan, Batangas.
The accused allegedly made it appear through a bilateral deed of absolute sale dated April 23, 1997 that the property was purchased in the amount of P1,531,564.
The Ombudsman, however, said the actual purchase value of the Tanauan property was only P227,460, as indicated in the unilateral deed of absolute sale dated April 14, 1997, executed by landowners Mariano Plaza, Glicerio Plaza and Petra Maunahan, resulting in an overprice of P1,304,104.
Ramiscal subsequently filed with the Sandiganbayan’s fourth division an urgent motion for a hearing to determine probable cause and consolidate all cases. He also asked the division to defer the issuance of an arrest warrant against him pending resolution of his motion.
On Jan. 17, 2005, the anti-graft court, however, denied Ramiscal’s motion, saying the judicial determination of probable cause is not an adversarial proceeding but summary in nature.
While it ordered the issuance of arrest warrants for the accused, it held in abeyance its resolution on Ramiscal’s prayer to consolidate all the five estafa and five graft cases against him.
After Ramiscal posted bail, the anti-graft court junked his motion for reconsideration, including his plea to consolidate all the cases. Ramiscal subsequently brought the matter to the Supreme Court.
According to the tribunal, Ramiscal, together with his co-accused, conspired to perpetuate clear fraud on the government and the AFP-RSBS members by giving a semblance of regularity to real estate acquisitions at bloated prices.
"The fact alone that petitioner (Ramiscal) was aware, in each transaction, that the two counts of sale contain contradictory costs for every acquisition, and that he failed to rectify the same eloquently speak of his participation in the criminal malevolence," it said.
It noted that Ramiscal was a member of the AFP-RSBS’ investment committee that screened potential investments.
Hence, it said Ramiscal had "full knowledge of the transactions, from the time they were conceptualized until the properties were paid for."