SC affirms dismissal  of P1.05 billion Marcos ill-gotten wealth case

MANILA, Philippines —  The Supreme Court on Wednesday affirmed the decision of the Sandiganbayan to junk a P1.052-billion civil forfeiture case against the family of President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. and their alleged associates due to lack of evidence.

The Supreme Court ruled that the anti-graft court "committed no reversible error in dismissing" the complaint for insufficient evidence in its September 2019 ruling.

"While it may be true that petitioner had submitted numerous pieces of evidence, many were excluded because they were not disclosed during the discovery process and others were excluded for violating the Best Evidence Rule," the Supreme Court said in its decision.

Originally filed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government in 1987, the forfeiture case, docketed as Civil Case No. 0008, seeks to recover from former first lady Imelda Marcos, the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr. and their alleged cronies Bienvenido Tantoco Sr., Bienvenido Tantoco Jr., estate of Gliceria Tantoco and Dominador Santiago, a total of P1.052 billion in alleged ill-gotten wealth, composed of P609.27 million in shares of stocks and P443.05 million in real properties.

The PCGG also sought P50 billion in moral damages and P1 billion in exemplary damages. The PCGG also sought to require the Marcoses and their co-defendants to pay temperate damages, nominal damages, and other expenses related to legal proceedings.

The lawsuit alleged that Santiago, the owner of Tourist Duty Free Shops Inc. (TDFS), used the company to secure favorable government deals for the Marcos spouses and their cronies. These deals included tax exemptions and operating franchises at international airports. The PCGG claimed that the Tantocos and Santiago acted as agents for the Marcos spouses, assisting in the unlawful acquisition of personal assets such as artwork, clothing, jewelry and real estate properties in New York.

Sandiganbayan affirmed its dismissal of the case in November 2019 after it found no merit in the PCGG's claims and most of the documents it submitted were photocopies with no proof of the original documents, which violated the Best Evidence Rule.

The Supreme Court wrote: "While it is truly disappointing that nothing has come of this case despite the lapse of 36 years spent in litigation, the Court agrees with the Sandiganbayan that petitioner's evidence is insufficient to support the allegations of its Expended Complaint by a preponderance of evidence."