The Sandiganbayan on Monday cited the inordinate delay as the reason for its dismissal of the graft charge against state witness Marina Sula in connection with her alleged involvement in the fertilizer fund scam in 2004.
In a resolution, the anti-graft court’s Fifth Division granted the motion to dismiss the charge against Sula for she was deprived of her right to a speedy trial.
“The delay of more than a decade runs afoul of the Constitutional protection afforded by the right to speedy disposition of cases. More than 10 years to investigate a case is unreasonable even under the circumstances extant in the case at bar,” the court resolution stated.
“From the foregoing, by itself, the time that this case spent pending preliminary investigation with the Ombudsman already reeks of inordinate delay,” it added.
Sula’s case pertains to the allegedly anomalous acquisition of P3.2 million worth of liquid fertilizers from the Masaganang Ani Para sa Magsasaka Foundation Inc. without public bidding in 2004. Sula was president of a non-government organization Masaganang Ani para sa Magsasaka Foundation Inc.
In her motion, Sula took note of the delay in the filing of her case at the Office of the Ombudsman only in April 2011when in fact the alleged crime was committed in 2004 or seven years after the alleged crime took place.
The Ombudsman then filed the case at the Sandiganbayan in September 2016.
Sula, one of the whistleblowers of the multi-billion pork barrel fund scam, also appealed for the dismissal of her case since her co-accused were already acquitted.
Sula’s co-accused in the case were former Palawan governor Joel Reyes, former Department of Agriculture officer-in-charge regional technical director Rodolfo Guieb and regional executive director Dennis Araullo—whose cases had already been dismissed by the Sandiganbayan.
The prosecution said the delay in Sula’s case was “attributable to the ordinary processes of justice and was even necessary and beneficial for the accused to be afforded due process of law.”
But the Sandiganbayan said that the prosecution not only “undermine the right to speedy disposition, it also belittles the prejudice caused by the prolonged pendency” of the case.
“The psychological, financial and emotional burden on the accused to be a respondent to a criminal complaint for so many years, likewise, cannot be taken lightly,” the resolution read.
