Anti-corruption courts performing ‘below expectations’
Posted by: Avigail Olarte | January 12, 2007 at 8:12 am
Filed under: Governance
FOLLOWING the Office of the Ombudsman’s decision to file graft and extortion charges against former justice secretary Hernando Perez, Senate Minority Floor Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. said he hopes Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez “will really demonstrate her independence and fidelity to her constitutional duty” by acting on corruption complaints involving “other administration ‘big fish.’”
Pimentel was referring, for one, to former agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-Joc” Bolante who has been implicated by the Senate in the fertilizer-fund scam. The Ombudsman has yet to file charges against Bolante, following a Senate investigation last year recommending that he be tried for plunder. In 2004, former solicitor general Frank Chavez filed plunder charges against Bolante, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and other top government officials, for the diversion of P728 million in farm funds to Arroyo’s campaign last elections. The case is still pending.
“It seems the administration will make a sacrificial lamb out of former Secretary Perez to show before the nation that it is serious in running after corruption. It wants to create the impression that it is not tolerating corruption,” Pimentel told reporters yesterday.
Last year, the Philippines was third among countries in Southeast Asia with consistently high levels of perceived corruption, next to Burma and Indonesia. In a 2005 survey, the Hong Kong-based group Political and Economic Risk Consultancy ranked the country as the second most corrupt country in Asia.
|
MONEY INVOLVED IN CASES FILED AT THE SANDIGANBAYAN, 2001-2005
|
||
|
YEAR
|
AMOUNT
|
|
|
2001
|
4,687,194,311.80
|
|
|
2002
|
316,845,241.15
|
|
|
2003
|
1,311,343,896.58
|
|
|
2004
|
435,185,303.26
|
|
|
2005
|
417,062,753.04
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
7,167,631,505.83
|
|
The Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG), a non-government public policy think-tank, reported that the findings on the incidence of corruption have been dismissed by the Arroyo government as “mere perceptions.”
However, in the preliminary report of a research study conducted by CenPEG, in partnership with Tranparency International-Philippines, anti-graft agencies — the Ombudsman and Sandiganbayan — were found to be performing “below public expectations in the prompt and fair disposition of graft cases, and the prosecution and conviction of high-profile officials.”
Entitled “Is the Philippine Judicial System Effective in Fighting Corruption,” the study looked into the performance of the two agencies within Arroyo’s term, from 2001 to May 2006.
The study found that both institutions suffer a backlog of cases. In the Office of the Ombudsman alone, the report showed “a steady increase in the number of pending cases, giving the Ombudsman more workload every year.”
From 2000 to 2001, there was a carry over of 5,833 cases. By the end of 2005, the number of pending cases carried over to 2006 reached 11,132.
The Sandiganbayan, on the other hand, still has 3,909 cases pending.
|
DISTRIBUTION OF CASES FILED AT THE SANDIGANBAYAN, 2001-MAY 2006
|
||
|
DISPOSAL
|
FREQUENCY
|
PERCENT
|
|
Pending
|
3,909
|
53.4
|
|
Dismissed
|
1,494
|
20.4
|
|
Archived
|
1,413
|
19.3
|
|
Dismissed with trial
|
277
|
3.8
|
|
Withdrawn by the Office of the Special Prosecutor
|
54
|
0.7
|
|
Acquitted
|
51
|
0.7
|
|
Convicted
|
25
|
0.6
|
|
Transferred to other courts
|
36
|
0.5
|
|
Dismissed (respondent deceased)
|
28
|
0.4
|
|
Dropped from information
|
12
|
0.2
|
|
Acquitted (demurrer to evidence)
|
4
|
0.1
|
|
Pleaded guilty
|
1
|
0
|
|
TOTAL
|
7,324
|
|
CenPEG further said it is “quite troublesome” that for both agencies, more than half of the total number of cases in for criminal charges in 2005 were carried over to 2006, indicating “an increasing backlog in criminal cases.”
In fact, Sandiganbayan records show that only 27 “high-ranking” elective officials had been convicted in 27 years, from 1969 to May 2006. Of this, two were governors, the highest position that the Sandiganbayan ever charged and convicted. This was followed by mayors, which CenPEG said represented a small fraction compared to the total number of mayors in the country.
In fact from 2001 to May 2006, only 168 city or municipal mayors were charged; only five mayors had been convicted.
“The fact is, even the few ‘high-profile cases’ — or those involving top national officials — have been few, with most of the cases either dismissed, withdrawn or still pending,” CenPEG said.
The “high profile” cases listed by the Ombudsman include the plunder case against former President Joseph Estrada, who is now being tried before the Sandiganbayan, and the case against former First Lady Imelda Marcos. The Sandiganbayan convicted Mrs. Marcos on the charge that she had entered into an agreement disadvantageous to the government; the Supreme Court later reversed the decision.
“It should be noted that although cases filed with the Ombudsman and the Sandiganbayan did indicate the inclusion of high public officials, it is municipal and city mayors who comprised the bulk of the so-called “significant cases,” CenPEG said. But compared to the total number of cases, there were only a handful of cases involving mayors.
Majority of the cases involved private individuals and low-level officials in government agencies, government corporations, and local government units. The rest included governors and other provincial officials, department officials, and a few military and police officials.
Overall, Mindanao had the highest number of cases filed against governors and mayors, followed by Luzon and the Visayas.
Most of the cases filed before the Ombudsman and the Sandiganbayan involved violations of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, malversation, estafa, bribery, and plunder.
Culture of waste and corruption
“The greater the corruption is, the more the delivery of public services is wasted, “ CenPEG said, “The burden of proving that something is being done to curb graft and corruption falls on government including the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission as well as the investigation, prosecution, and adjudication bodies such as the Ombudsman and the Sandiganbayan.”
Calculating the money involved in all cases before the Sandiganbayan from 2001 to 2005, CenpEG revealed that over P7 billion could have been lost to graft. The biggest amount, P4 billion, involves the plunder case against Estrada. The second highest, P9.2 million, involves the pending malversation case against Mayor Gil Beltran of Tarlac and the third, P8.9 million, is connection with the case against Mayor Oscar Jaro of Imus, Cavite.
The late Haydee Yorac of the Presidential Commission on Good Government used to say that “the Philippines is the only country with so many laws and rules against corruption and the highest number of anti-graft institutions, but with so few convictions.”
In a study, the Supreme Court found that a case lodged at the Sandiganbayan takes almost seven years. Even former Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo himself said the Sandiganbayan suffers from “congestion problems” where cases cases involving high-ranking officials take more than 10 years to solve.
The High Court said the “backlog and inefficiency in the disposal of cases can be attributed to the fact that the anti-graft court has only 15 justices.” CenPEG said the Ombudsman is also partly to blame, as there have been reports criticizing the lawyers of Office of the Ombudsman for being “ill-prepared, uninformed, or unfamiliar with cases they handle.”
But University of the Philippines law professor Vicky Avena said there is another problem that could explain the dismal performance of the Sandiganbayan and the Ombudsman: “Because the judiciary’s power is passive, its mechanism does not commence until and unless there are those who discover corrupt activities and then become complainants who are willing to speak out. In fact, the judicial system will never truly succeed unless there is an official framework to protect and sustain the prosecution of wrongdoers till they are jailed and economically paralyzed.”
No comments yet.
feel free to leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.












