Sandiganbayan denies Enrile bid to junk testimony of prosecution witness

The Sandiganbayan has denied the bid of former Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile to exclude a prosecution witness’ judicial affidavit as evidence involving the P172-million plunder charge against him in connection with the alleged P10-billion pork barrel scam.

In a five page resolution dated January 13, the anti-graft court said lawyer Ryan Medrano’s judicial affidavit is allowed by court rules because Medrano—as one of the members of the Special Team I formed by the Office of the Ombudsman which conducted a fact-finding investigation on the release and use of Enrile's Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) —was an investigator who could testify on the authenticity, due execution and contents of, among others, the complaint he and his team prepared.

PDAF, known as pork barrel, used to be the discretionary fund of lawmakers provided under the national budget for the benefit of the public. The pork barrel scam, however, led to the Supreme Court declaring it as illegal in 2013.

“Atty. Medrano, together with the other members of Special Team I, evaluated documents from, among others, the Commission on Audit, and conducted interviews with some municipal officials, as well as the beneficiaries of the project funded by Enrile's PDAF. The Team then prepared a Complaint against Enrile, et al. for plunder and violation of Republic Act No. 3019, respectively,” the Sandiganbayan said.

The anti-graft court noted that the plunder case against Enrile will not stand or fall on Medrano’s testimony in a judicial affidavit, and that Enrile will be given the opportunity to cross-examine the witness in satisfaction of his constitutional right to confrontation.

“Enrile's culpability or innocence will not be based on the testimony of Atty. Medrano. While he (and the other Special Team 1 members) interviewed municipal officials, beneficiaries and 'whistle-blowers' who, for their part, executed their respective sworn statements, the probative value of these documents will still depend on, inter alia, whether the said witnesses will appear in court to identify their affidavits,” the resolution pointed out.

“Prescinding from these circumstances, the Court allows the use of the judicial affidavit of Atty. Medrano in the present case, subject to additional direct and cross-examination questions, in light of all the foregoing, the Court denies the Objection to the Use of Judicial Affidavit of Atty. Ryan P. Medrano filed by accused Juan Ponce Enrile for lack of merit,” it added.

Enrile, 96, is out on bail following the Supreme Court decision in August 2015 citing humanitarian grounds. — RSJ, GMA News