Substantial justice trumps need for speed: Sandiganbayan
THE Sandiganbayan has allowed a former officer of the Department of Finance (DOF) to adopt the testimonies of witnesses in other cases before a different division and the documents they identified as part of her defense in 16 corruption charges over the objections of government prosecutors.
In its 14-page resolution issued last January 16, the Seventh Division reversed its November 22, 2023 ruling that barred the said additional evidence after the prosecution complained that the transcript of the testimonies and the appended documents were introduced on the last hearing date for the defendant to terminate her presentation.
Accused Asuncion Magdaet was a former Textile Division reviewer under the DOF’s One-Stop-Shop Inter-Agency Tax Credit and Duty Drawback Center (DOF-Center).
Based on a 2009 indictment, she was named co-accused of DOF Undersecretary Antonio Belicena, DOF- Center deputy executive director Uldarico Andutan, and executives of Filstar Textile Industrial Corporation over the alleged fraudulent processing and issuance of multi-million pesos worth of tax credit certificates from 1994 to 1996.
Graft investigators of the Office of the Ombudsman said Filstar was not qualified to receive tax credit incentives – a rebate of import taxes and duties a manufacturing firm has paid to bring in raw materials to produce the export items.
In her Motion for Reconsideration, Magdaet pointed out that all the TCC scam cases are being handled by only one office which is the Office of the Special Prosecutor hence it would be impossible for the handling prosecutors not to be aware of the testimonies and the documents she sought to be admitted as part of her defense evidence.
The defendant added that it was her lawyer who paid for the court fees to obtain the transcript of stenographic notes since she is now unemployed and has no other source of income.
Prosecutors countered that allowing the late admission of the testimonies and the support documents is a violation of due process and the people’s right to speedy disposition of cases.
They added even the exchange of arguments and pleadings regarding the issue has already caused a delay in the resolution of the cases even
