Jinggoy Estrada cites ‘Arroyo doctrine’ in asking Sandiganbayan to junk plunder case

Former Senator Jinggoy Estrada has formally sought the outright dismissal of his plunder case before the Sandiganbayan, arguing there that there was insufficient evidence that he illegally amassed P183 million through the misuse of his congressional entitlements.

The camp of Estrada filed his 115-page demurrer to evidence before the Sandiganbayan Fifth Division on March 29.

Estrada cited the 2016 Supreme Court decision in Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo vs People of the Philippines and the Sandiganbayan, which required the prosecution to state a main plunderer among all the accused.

Estrada said the prosecution failed to cite the mastermind in his case, in connection with his alleged involvement in the pork barrel scam between 2004 to 2012.

"Based on the prosecution's evidence, the so-called PDAF Scam was supposedly perpetrated even without the participation of Sen. Estrada and that it was able to continue without his cooperation," he said in the demurrer.

Estrada, who is seeking to return to the Senate in the 2019 elections, said the Sandiganbayan already ruled that the evidence against him cannot support a guilty verdict when it granted his application for bail in 2017.

"No cogent reason exists to disturb the pronouncement of the honorable court in its resolution granting bail to Sen. Estrada. As the honorable court held, 'in the absence of strong evidence to show the main plunderer, there can be no strong evidence of guilt of the accused," Estrada said.

Whistle-blowers

The former lawmaker said even the whistle-blowers failed to establish his link to the scheme, noting none of them saw him receive his supposed kickbacks from convicted plunderer Janet Lim Napoles.

Estrada mentioned the testimonies of state witnesses Benhur Luy and Ruby Tuason.

The statement of Luy in court was nothing more than hearsay since he admitted that he had no personal knowledge if the kickbacks indeed went to the pocket of Estrada or the middlemen of the scheme, the demurrer stated.

Estrada said this negated Luy's summary of rebates detailing who and when the misused PDAF was received.

"Mr. Luy states unequivocally that he does not know if any money he claims to have disbursed was actually transmitted to or received by anyone other than the supposed middlemen and admits in open court that his information and records of such alleged delivery are based merely on the oral claims of these middlemen," he said.

Tuason, one of the middlemen, told the Sandiganbayan she delivered the money to the office of Estrada in the Senate, but no CCTV footage showed her in possession of any bag during her visits.

Estrada also claimed his refusal to be introduced to Napoles, upon the suggestion of Tuason, shows his lack of intention to be involved in the scheme. He said he only met Napoles in 2008. 

"While Ms. Tuason described Sen. Estrada's response to the offer to be given a commission was 'non committal,' the subsequent action of Sen. Estrada left no doubt that he had no intention to participate in any such scheme or be a party to any such conspiracy—Sen. Estrada cancelled the transaction and returned the money he had never agreed to receive in the first place!"

Furthermore, Estrada said his letters to various implementing agencies endorsing the Napoles-led foundations is not enough to prove his criminal liability.

Estrada said the documents bared no proof the letters were received by the concerned agencies.

"Thus, as a matter of law, Sen. Estrada is entitled to be declared innocent, to be acquitted, and to the dismissal of the charges against him," Estrada said.  —NB, GMA News