Case Summary (G.R. No. 136506)
Procedural Background
The petition seeks to annul the August 6, 1998 Review and Recommendation by the Ombudsman dismissing a complaint against the private respondents for violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic Act No. 3019. The complaint had initially been filed on February 12, 1990, pertinent to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) established on November 20, 1974, regarding the development of hybrid coconut seed nuts, which the Office of the Solicitor General contended was grossly disadvantageous to the government.
Allegations of Graft and Corruption
The complaint outlines serious allegations against respondent Cojuangco Jr. and others, including manipulating the CIDF for personal gain, causing undue financial damage to the government, and violating fiduciary duties. The CIDF was created to help revitalize the coconut industry, yet funds were allegedly siphoned off to benefit private interests, notably Cojuangco’s corporate entity, Agricultural Investors, Inc. (AII).
Legislative and Contractual Framework
Presidential Decree No. 582 established the CIDF, which was designed to finance a nationwide coconut-replanting program using high-yielding hybrid seeds. Subsequent agreements and decrees purportedly ratified the original MOA, leading the Ombudsman to conclude that the contract was sanctioned, despite the alleged irregularities.
Dismissal of the Complaint
The Ombudsman dismissed the complaint by stating that the offense had prescribed under the ten-year limitation set by Republic Act No. 3019 as interpreted from previous case law. It decided that the ten-year period commenced with the execution of the MOA in 1974, thus exceeding the permissible timeframe for filing the complaint.
Arguments on Prescription
The Solicitor General argued against the Ombudsman's dismissal, positing that the alleged actions constituted ill-gotten wealth claims, which are imprescriptible under Article XI, Section 15 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Furthermore, it was contended that the contract was void and thus not ratifiable, rendering the Ombudsman's interpretation flawed.
Timeliness of the Petition
Procedural issues arose regarding the timeliness of the petition for certiorari, particularly since it was filed outside the sixty-day period following the denial of the motion for reconsideration. However, legislative amendments concerning the rules of court were considered to apply retroactively, allowing the petition to be deemed timely filed.
Judicial Interpretation of Graft Allegations
The Court concluded that the Ombudsman acted with grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the complaint based solely on the assertion of prescription. It reiterated that the nature of crimes involving alleged conspiratorial behavior often means that discovery of the offense occurs much later, supporting the assertion that the prescriptive period should
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 136506)
Case Overview
- The case involves a petition for certiorari filed by the Republic of the Philippines against Ombudsman Aniano A. Desierto and several private respondents, including Eduardo Cojuangco, Jr., Juan Ponce Enrile, and others.
- The petition seeks to annul the Review and Recommendation dated August 6, 1998, which dismissed the complaint against the respondents for alleged violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act No. 3019).
- The petition also challenges the Order dated September 25, 1998, which denied the motion for reconsideration of the Review and Recommendation.
Factual Background
- On February 12, 1990, the Office of the Solicitor General initiated the complaint for violation of R.A. No. 3019 before the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG).
- The complaint was later referred to the Office of the Ombudsman and docketed as OMB-0-90-2808.
- The complaint alleges that Eduardo Cojuangco, Jr., due to his close ties to then-President Marcos, manipulated governmental processes to favor his personal and business interests, particularly concerning the Coconut Industry Development Fund (CIDF).
- The complaint also details specific transactions that allegedly resulted in the siphoning of approximately P840 million from the CIDF to Cojuangco's corporation, Agricultural Investors, Inc. (AII).
Legal Developments
- A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was signed between AII and the National Investm