The Sandiganbayan has junked former Quezon City mayor Herbert Bautista’s bid to dismiss the graft case in opposition to him involving a P32-million computerization venture, citing irrelevant argument.
In a seven-page Resolution dated June 22 however launched on Tuesday, June 27, the anti-graft courtroom stated Bautista was incorrect in invoking the Rules of Civil Procedure to argue that the state prosecutors’ pre-trial temporary is non-compliant for failure to state the aim of the paperwork or reveals supposed to be supplied as proof, in addition to substance or abstract of the witnesses’ respective testimonies.
The Sandiganbayan stated that the prosecution’s pre-trial temporary is aboveboard for the reason that Rules of Civil Procedure will not be relevant in Bautista’s graft case, which is ruled by the Rules of Criminal Procedure.
“Accused Bautista cavils that the amended pre-trial brief [of the prosecution] is fatally defective for non-compliance with the rules governing pre-trial in civil cases, specifically Rule 18 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. At this juncture, it must be emphasized that what primarily governs the pre-trial of this case is the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure,” the Sandiganbayan stated.
The Rules of Civil Procedure, the courtroom stated, solely apply in a suppletory (supplementary) character, not as an alternative, to legal instances.
“Consequently, whether or not the prosecution’s pre-trial briefs contain a description of the purpose of the documents or exhibits intended to be offered, or the substance or summary of the witnesses’ respective testimonies…ultimately, the non-filing or lack of substantial compliance thereof, is not a ground for the dismissal of a criminal case under the present Rules,” the Sandiganbayan added.
Bautista, in his protection, contended that because of procedural transgressions by the prosecution, the federal government’s pre-trial briefs in opposition to him are however a mere scrap of paper and needs to be declared a failure on the a part of the state prosecutors.
Subsequently, Bautista insisted that the failure to file a pre-trial temporary has the identical impact as failure to look on the pre-trial, together with dismissal of the case with prejudice.
The anti-graft courtroom, nonetheless, was not satisfied.
“In criminal cases, the duty of the prosecution is to establish the guilt of the accused by proof beyond reasonable doubt, whereas the duty of the defense is to parry the prosecution’s thrusts. The duty of the court is to then receive the parties’ respective viewpoints, carefully weigh the same, and render judgment in accordance with law,” the Sandiganabayan stated.
“In the same way that the prosecution cannot impose upon the accused how to set up his defense, the accused cannot dictate on the general strategy employed by the prosecution. Accused Bautista’s carpings, therefore, find no relevant advocacy at this instance,” the Sandiganbayan added.
GMA News Online has reached out to Bautista for remark and can publish his reply as quickly because it turns into out there. — BM, GMA Integrated News
Source: www.gmanetwork.com
