Court affirms graft, multiple falsification raps against Paulate, aide
THE Sandiganbayan has denied a motion by actor-turned-Quezon City councilor Roderick Paulate to dismiss graft and falsification charges against him and his liaison over the hiring of 30 alleged ghost employees eight years ago.
In their motion, Paulate and Vicente Bajamunde argued that the charges lacked merit because of the time it took government prosecutors to investigate and charge them.
In a 26-page resolution, the anti-graft court argued that there was no delay in the conduct of preliminary investigation by the Office of the Ombudsman because while government prosecutors took five years and 11 months to investigate and eventually charge Paulate, such timeline was justified since “there were no vexations, capricious or oppressive delays in the disposition of the case before the Office of the Ombudsman.”
“The question of how much lapse of time is consistent with the constitutional guarantee of speedy trial and speedy disposition of cases varies with the particular circumstances. There is no constitutional basis for holding that the right to a speedy trial can be quantified into a specified number of days and months,” the Sandiganbayan said.
“Thus, the mere passage of time is not sufficient to establish denial of a right to speedy disposition,” the Sandiganbayan said.
The anti-graft court also said that cases must be decided based on their distinct facts, and that dismissing criminal cases based on the right of the accused to speedy trial mandates the courts to carefully weigh the circumstances attending each case.
“The [anti-graft] court took into consideration the complexity of the issues involved; the number of witnesses that needs to be investigated; and the number of annexes submitted which the investigating officer has to assess and verify in the performance of his/her duty to determine the existence of probable cause. All these, including accused-movants’ filing of several motions for reconsideration and supplemental motion for reconsideration, contribute to the time to complete the process,” the Sandiganbayan said.
“Based on the foregoing the Court finds the period of five years and 11 months in the conduct of preliminary investigation not lengthy or capricious, oppressive, and vexatious. It should be noted that the concept of speedy disposition of cases is flexible and so a mere mathematical reckoning of the time involved is insufficient. LLANESCA T. PANTI
The post Court affirms graft, multiple falsification raps against Paulate, aide appeared first on The Manila Times Online.