6 hours ago
11
Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!
Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.
Visit Suniway.ph to learn
Ghio Ong - The Philippine Star
March 7, 2026 | 12:00am
The anti-graft court’s Sixth Division also denied former congressman Zaldy Co’s attempt to prevent it from calling him a fugitive.
Philstar.com / Irra Lising
MANILA, Philippines — The Sandiganbayan affirmed its earlier decision that denied the appeal of former senator Ramon Revilla Jr. and a former official of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) to cancel their graft cases for their involvement in the flood control scandal.
The anti-graft court’s Sixth Division also denied former congressman Zaldy Co’s attempt to prevent it from calling him a fugitive.
The anti-graft court’s Fourth Division denied their motions for reconsideration, which supposedly asked it to grant their “motions to quash the Information, defer the issuance of warrant of arrest, remand the case to the Office of the Ombudsman for reinvestigation and grant them leave to file a motion for reconsideration against the Jan. 12 resolution of the ombudsman.”
In its 19-page resolution last March 5, the court reminded Revilla and former DPWH Bulacan 1st district engineering office finance section chief Juanito Mendoza that “with the valid filing of the Information and the subsequent judicial determination of probable cause, exclusive jurisdiction over this case now firmly rests with the Court, the preliminary investigation has been completed and the executive determination of probable cause by the ombudsman has statutorily yielded to the jurisdiction of this Court.”
“The movants’ reiteration of their assertions, such as Revilla’s claim that his senatorial duties exempt him from liability, plus the insistence on considering evidence aliunde and Mendoza’s argument that his acts as an accountant were purely ministerial, are evidentiary in nature and matters of defense,” the resolution issued by Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Arthur Malabaguio said.
"Aallowing the case to be remanded for reconsideration or entertaining prohibited pleadings at this stage would cause unwarranted delays,” it said. — Aubrey Rose Inosante
