Prosecution can’t call accused in pork barrel scam as hostile witness – Sandiganbayan

MANILA, Philippines – The anti-graft court Sandiganbayan has ruled that government prosecutors cannot call an accused in the pork barrel scam as a hostile witness.

In a 10-page resolution, the Sandiganbayan Seventh Division said prosecutors cannot make the accused, former Technology Resource Center (TRC) budget officer Consuelo Lilian Espiritu, as a hostile witness as as it could violate their right against self-incrimination.

Hostile witness, also known as adverse witness, are people whose testimony are contrary to the position of the party who called them. The right against self-incrimination ensures that no person would testify against oneself.

Associate Justice Georgina D. Hidalgo penned the ruling, while Associate Justice Ma. Theresa Dolores C. Gomez-Estoesta and Associate Justice Zaldy V. Trespeses concurred.

The court’s decision stemmed from the case involving Espiritu. The Sandiganbayan said she cannot be compelled to testify in the corruption trial against former TRC director general Antonio Ortiz and legislative liaison officer Maria Rosalinda Lacsamana, even if she is not an accused in the specific case.

“To require Espiritu to be placed on the witness stand as a witness for the prosecution runs counter to the constitutional guarantee against self-incrimination,” the Sandiganbayan said.

In the decision, the Sandiganbayan took note of the lack of proof that Espiritu “freely, voluntarily and intelligently expressed her consent to testify” as prosecution witness or that she was she informed of the consequences of the intended testimony.

The cases stemmed from the alleged irregularities in TRC’s transfer of sums from the Priority Development Assistance Fund of former Citizens Battle Against Corruption representative Joel Villanueva, who is now a senator, to the Masaganang Ani para sa Magsasaka Foundation Inc. (MAMFI). MAMFI was the alleged bogus foundation created by Janet Lim Napoles.

In the case proceedings, Lacsamana objected to the prosecution’s plan to use Espiritu as a witness, saying that it would jeopardize the latter’s own cases. Espiritu was a co-accused in graft cases involving former Muntinlupa City congressman Ruffy Biazon, who is now Muntinlupa mayor, and former Oriental Mindoro congressman Rodolfo Valencia.

Lacsamana said that Espiritu may be prosecuted in the case she’s not involved in if she mentions anything that will incriminate herself. Lacsamana also noted Espiritu’s statement in her counter-affidavit, where the latter said she had no personal knowledge about the decision in the MAMFI project since the public bidding and the selection and accreditation of nongovernment organizations as project partners are outside of the responsibilities of a budget officer.

“While this court adheres to the rule that the prosecution has the prerogative to choose the evidence or the witnesses it wishes to present in the course of the trial, it should be remembered that if the testimony sought to be elicited has no relevance to the issue sought to be established, the testimony will serve no purpose,” the anti-graft court said in its ruling. – Rappler.com