by HARRY ROQUE

The author is the director of the Institute of International Legal Studies at the University of the Philippines Law Center and is an assistant professor of law at UP Diliman.

THE ESTRADA plunder trial is truly unprecedented. It is the first time that a president, the most powerful official of the land — and, ironically, in Joseph ‘Erap’ Estrada’s case, probably the most popular ever — to be accused of a heinous criminal act. Estrada was the first Philippine president ever to be impeached. He was also the first to be placed under detention (albeit in a golden cage of Tanay), the first to undergo a full-blown criminal prosecution and now, the first to be convicted.

For all his faults though, and despite the verdict of guilt, the Filipino people owe Estrada some debt of gratitude, if only because he allowed democratic institutions to function. Lesser mortals would probably have used the power of their office to completely evade the wheels of justice, or perhaps simply skipped town a la former agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn ‘Joc Joc’ Bolante. But Estrada stayed, took the witness stand, and confronted his accusers.

While it is indeed the function of the judiciary to determine guilt or innocence, it is still up to the sovereign people to accept the legitimacy of any and all judicial pronouncements. Surely, Edsa I taught us that it is when people lose their belief in the judiciary that they exercise their sovereign prerogative, toppling even the strongest regimes. It is in this light that the following summary of evidence was prepared: to guide the people in the exercise of their sovereign prerogatives in passing their verdict on the legitimacy of the Erap decision. After all, the exercise of sovereignty should be based also on reason, not just on passion.

Comparative Table of Prosecution and Defense Arguments (People vs. Estrada) I. PARAGRAPH “a” Amended Info: ALLEGED JUETENG PAY-OFFS
PROSECUTION	DEFENSE
A) AS TO JOSEPH ESTRADA IT HAS BEEN INCONTROVERTIBLY ESTABLISHED THAT THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PESOS OF JUETENG PROTECTION MONEY THAT HAD BEEN COLLECTED AND ACCUMULATED AS BRIBES WERE COLLECTED AND ACCUMULATED ON ACCOUNT OF, AND FOR, ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA. 1) ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA ACCESSED AND EXERCISED OWNERSHIP, CONTROL AND DISPOSITION OVER THE SAID COLLECTED AND ACCUMULATED JUETENG PROTECTION MONEY (p.118) 2) THE VOLUMINOUS DOCUMENTS AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTION ESTABLISHED WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY THAT SAID JUETENG PROTECTION MONEY COLLECTED AND ACCUMULATED AS BRIBES WERE GIVEN TO, AND/OR ENDED UP WITH, ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA OR HIS DUMMIES/NOMINEES WHO ARE PERSONS CLOSELY CONNECTED WITH HIM (p.161) a) Luis Singson testified that: he went to Estrada’s house in Polk St. and met Estrada, Charlie Ang and Bong Pineda there. he and Ang were asked by Estrada to deliver jueteng money to him he and Ang started collecting jueteng money in August 98 he started delivering jueteng money in September 98 he delivered jueteng money to Estrada every 15 days he was the lone collector starting November 98 due to a disagreement between Estrada and Ang he listed all the collections and expenses in a ledger he personally delivered a total of P200M to Estrada Yolanda Ricaforte is Estrada’s auditor for the jueteng money Ricaforte prepared the ledger from August 1999 to August 2000 he transferred the remaining balance of the jueteng money to Estrada’s auditor, Yolanda Ricaforte, in August 1999 jueteng collections from August 1999 until August 2000 were deposited to Estrada’s bank accounts, which were in Ricaforte’s name there was an attempt on his life to prevent him from making an expose. Two mobile patrols attempted to ambush him in San Marcelino St., Manila he was instructed by Estrada to give P200M to Atty. Edward Serapio b) Emma Lim testified that: she was instructed by Singson to collect money from Bong Pineda and Jinggoy Estrada c) Carmencita Itchon testified that: she received 12 collections from the messengers of Singson and Anton Prieto d) Federico Artates (a security escort of Singson) testified that: he collected P5M from Bong Pineda the P5M was delivered to the presidential residence by Emma Lim e) Jamis Singson (a personal aide of Singson) testified that: he accompanied Artates when the latter collected money from Bong Pineda he accompanied Lim when she delivered the money to Malacañang f) Vicente Amistad (a security escort of Singson) testified that: he collected money from Bong Pineda in 1999 and 2000 he collected money from a security escort of then Mayor Jinggoy he delivered the money to Singson g) Edelquin Nantes, Rosario Bautista, Shakira Yu, Vergel Pabillon, Edgardo Lim Alcaraz and Emma Aguila Gonzales (Equitable-PCI Bank branch managers) testified that: Yolanda Ricaforte opened, maintained and later closed saving accounts in the bank Ricaforte applied for manager’s and cashier’s checks h) Antonio Martin Fortuno (Equitable-PCI Bank Pacific Star branch manager) testified that: on April 25, 2000 checks were deposited into a “bearer” account at his branch the checks were withdrawn from April 27, 2000 up to May 11, 2000 the withdrawn amounts were deposited into the Erap Muslim Youth Foundation maintained at Equitable-PCI Bank in Strata 100 i) Aida Basila (Equitable-PCI Bank branch manager) testified that: there were 28 inter-branch deposits from their branch amounting to P200M made into the Erap Muslim Youth Foundation’s savings account from April 21 to May 11, 2000	A) The prosecution failed to show beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Estrada committed the act of “amassing, accumulating and acquiring” wealth, particularly, the act described in paragraphs “a” of the “Amended Information” (Jueteng Bribery) (p.78) 1) Principal witness Singson had strong motive to get back at Pres. Estrada (p.114) a) Singson himself testified that: he asked Ang to reserve the franchise or license of Bingo 2-balls in Ilocos Sur Ang instead gave the Bingo-2 franchise to Singson’s political rivals b) Luis Asistio testified that: Singson told him about the former’s disappointment after the Bingo-2 ball was given to his political rivals c) Alfredo Lim testified that: when he and Asistio talked to Singson about the attempt on the latter’s life, Singson said that he is mad at Ang because the latter gave the Bingo-2 ball franchise to his opponents d) Estrada testified that: Singson was against the legalization of jueteng 2) Testimony of Singson comes from a polluted source, as Singson himself has confessed to covering up his crimes (p.119) 3) ‘Ledgers’ relied on by Singson are hearsay 4) No evidence was presented that accused protected or tolerated Jueteng (p.126) a) Estrada testified that: he never met Singson, Pineda and Ang in Polk St. he never received P5M or P10M from Singson every 15 days he never knew about the ledgers of Singson he never received money from Carmencita Itchon and Emma Lim Yolanda Ricaforte was not his jueteng auditor he never ordered Singson to give P5M to Laarni Enriquez and P65M to William Gatchalian 5) Foundation was a legitimate educational foundation aimed to assist Muslim youth (p.128) a) Danilo Reyes (a trustee of the EMYF) testified that: Dr. De Guzman organized the EMYF he was told by Dr. De Guzman that the foundation is part of Estrada’s vision to held develop young Muslim leaders and that it will be among the beneficiaries of the ERAP Golf Cup the foundation’s funding came from the P100,000 contributions of the incorporators and the P10M received from the ERAP Golf Cup in the summer of 2000 the foundation received a P200M donation he was told by Atty. Serapio that the donor wanted to remain anonymous b) Salvador Domona, Sohayle Hadji Marangit, Janice Halim Negrosa, Roque Morales testified that: they were scholars of the EMYF c) Estrada testified that: his Erap Muslim Youth Foundation is not a bogus foundation intended to launder jueteng protection money he was not a signatory to any of the foundation’s bank accounts 6) Singson’s testimony replete with inconsistencies and lies (p.130) a) Noel Vallo (police chief inspector) testified that: a vehicle beat the red light they pursued the vehicle and stopped it they discovered that Gov. Singson was inside the vehicle he called Police Supt. Rodolfo Azurin because Singson complained that they are being harassed b) Rodolfo Azurin (police superintendent) testified that: he immediately convinced Singson to come with them to the Western Police District headquarters in Manila when they reached the WPD headquarters, they issued a traffic violation ticket to Singson’s driver and confiscated the sirens and blinkers attached to the vehicle Singson complained to the media present that they were being harassed because he was not in favor of the PAGCOR Bingo 2-ball c) Arturo Paglinawan (police superintendent) testified that: the blotter showed no recorded complaint by Singson against the police who were in Marcelino St.
B) AS TO JINGGOY ESTRADA ACCUSED JINGGOY ESTRADA’S COMPLICITY BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION AND/OR INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION IN THE SERIES OF TWICE-A-MONTH COLLECTION AND RECEIPT OF JUETENG PROTECTION MONEY AS BRIBE, OWING TO ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA HAVING TAKEN UNDUE ADVANTAGE OF HIS POSITION AND AUTHORITY, HAD BEEN INCONTROVERTIBLY ESTABLISHED. (p.176) 1) THE FOREGOING COMPLICITY BY DIRECT AND/OR INDISPENSABLE PARTICIPATION OF ACCUSED JINGGOY ESTRADA IN THE SERIES OF TWICE-A-MONTH COLLECTION AND RECEIPT OF JUETENG PROTECTION MONEY AS BRIBES BETRAYS A PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR AND/OR PARTICIPATION IN, AND BENEFIT FROM, ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA’S OTHER ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING THE DIVERSION OF PUBLIC FUNDS CONSTITUTING THE SHARE OF ILOCOS SUR IN TOBACCO EXCISE TAXES UNDER REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7171. (p.223) a) Luis Singson testified that: Jinggoy Estrada also received jueteng money and even collected from Bulacan b) Emma Lim testified that: she was instructed by Singson to collect money from Bong Pineda and Jinggoy Estrada she was given a United Overseas Bank personalized check by Jinggoy in March 2000 she deposited in Singson’s account the check given by Jinggoy	7) No independent corroborating evidence to Singson’s testimony (p.142) B) Assuming the act was committed, the particular act described in paragraph “a” (on jueteng bribery) was committed by Governor Chavit Singson, not by accused Estrada. a) Jinggoy testified that: he was never a jueteng collector for Bulacan he never kept P1M from his monthly collections he did not know Jamis Singson, Emma Lim and Vicente Amistad he never asked Singson to exclude him from the expose
II. PARAGRAPH “b” Amended Info: MISAPPROPRIATION OF R.A.7171 FUNDS
PROSECUTION	DEFENSE
THE PLAN TO DIVERT, CONVERT AND MISAPPROPRIATE PUBLIC FUNDS AMOUNTING TO ONE HUNDRED THIRTY MILLION PESOS (P130,000,000.00) DERIVED FROM THE SHARE OF ILOCOS SUR IN THE TOBACCO EXCISE TAXES COLLECTED UNDER REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7171 ORIGINATED FROM ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA. (p.310) A) THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD SHOWS THAT PUBLIC FUNDS AMOUNTING TO ONE HUNDRED THIRTY MILLION PESOS (P130,000,000.00) WAS DIVERTED, CONVERTED AND/OR MISAPPROPRIATED FOR PRIVATE USE AT THE INSTANCE OF ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA. (p.314) 1) Luis Singson testified that: he agreed to give Estrada 10% of the releases from the Tobacco Excise Tax Ang told him that the President needed P130M out of the released P200M he agreed to Estrada’s request because he was afraid that the latter might stop the release of other funds in the future Ang gave him the names of Alma Alfaro, Eleuterio Tan and Delia Rajas so that the P130M will be coursed through their bank accounts he and Ang delivered the money to Estrada’s house in Polk St. Estrada received P70M 2) Ma. Elizabeth Balagot and Caridad Rodenas (Land Bank branch managers) testified that: P130M was transferred from LBP Vigan to LBP Shaw Alma Alfaro encashed P40M, while three manager’s check, totaling P90 M, was issued for Eleuterio Tan 3) Prosecution: the three manager’s checks (totaling P90 M) were deposited on 31 August 1998 to Eleuterio Tan’s Westmont Bank account and were withdrawn in varying amounts on the same day. 4) Federico Artates and Jamis Singson testified that: they saw the four boxes of money withdrawn by Tan taken out of Westmont Bank the money was transported to the house of Ang’s mother before it was delivered, on the same day, to Estrada’s house in Polk St. B) THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD SHOWS THAT SEVENTY MILLION PESOS (P70,000,000.00) OF SUCH PUBLIC FUNDS DIVERTED, CONVERTED AND/OR MISAPPROPRIATED FOR PRIVATE USE WAS GIVEN TO ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA, WHILE THE REMAINING AMOUNTS OF TWENTY MILLION PESOS (P20,000,000.00) WENT TO HIS WIFE (LOI EJERCITO), FIFTEEN MILLION PESOS (P15,000,000.00) WENT TO HIS SON (ACCUSED JINGGOY ESTRADA), AND TWENTY-FIVE MILLION PESOS (P25,000,000.00) WENT TO HIS FRIEND (ACCUSED ATONG ANG). (p.325) C) THE BARE DENIALS OF ACCUSED JOSEPH ESTRADA CANNOT OUTWEIGH THE CHAIN OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE WHICH PROVES THAT HE BEGAN THE SERIES OF EVENTS WHICH LED TO HIS MISAPPROPRIATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS AMOUNTING ONE HUNDRED THIRTY MILLION PESOS (P130,000,000.00).(p.327)	A) The prosecution failed to show beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Estrada committed the act of “amassing, accumulating and acquiring” wealth, particularly, the act described in paragraphs “b” of the “Amended Information” (Misappropriation of R.A.7171 Funds) (p.145) 1) Testimony of Gov. Singson on withdrawal and delivery of money patently incredible (p.157) a) Estrada testified that: he did not ask for 10% of the Tobacco Excise Tax he knew Atong Ang but Ang never delivered P130M to his house his wife and son Jinggoy were never given a portion of the P130M during the alleged time of delivery, he was already staying at Malacañang Singson’s charge is politically motivated Singson was blaming him for the misappropriation of the funds the money could not fit four boxes as stated by the prosecution witnesses Ang could not carry the money because its weight is equivalent to the weight of 2 ½ sacks of rice b) Jinggoy Estrada testified that: he never received a portion of the P130M Tobacco Excise Tax 2) The prosecution’s remaining evidence reveal Chavit Singson’s complicity in the withdrawal of the tobacco excise tax funds, nothing more (p.163) 3) The minor prosecution witnesses do not prove the guilt of Pres. Estrada beyond reasonable doubt (p.179) B) Assuming the act was committed, the particular act described in paragraph “b” (on the Misappropriation of R.A.7171 Funds) was committed by Governor Chavit Singson, not by accused Estrada.