The complaint filed by the Philippine Commission on Good Governance was denied on August 5, so the OSG filed a motion for reconsideration on August 27. It was denied by the court on September 13 because the prosecution failed to provide a notice of hearing, which is a violation of the Rules of Court. Because of this, another MR was filed on September 27.
The PCGG filed the complaint for reconveyance, revision, accounting, restitution, and damages for ill-gotten wealth against the Marcos, his wife Imelda, and their cronies on July 31, 1987. Since the case involved a significant amount of public funds, the OSG said that the injustice faced by the Republic and its people “is not commensurate with the degree of its counsel’s mistake in inadvertently failing to comply with the prescribed procedure.”
The anti-graft court added that the second MR cannot be treated as a “prohibited” second MR, since “it does not assail the decision dated August 5, 2019, but seeks the reversal of the resolution dated September 13, 2019.” For defendants Sison, Mapa Jr., Ferry and Tengco Jr., the PCGG said that they, through the DBP, extended loan accomodations to Sison’s companies – Aklan Bulk Carriers Inc., Fuga Bulk Carriers Inc., Coron Bulk Carriers Inc., and Ecija Bulk Carriers Inc. under terms and conditions grossly disadvantageous to the government. As a result, they were “unjustly enriched.”
But sadly for the PCGG, the court ruled that they “failed to illustrate how defendants acted as dummies… in acquiring ill-gotten wealth.”
Philippines Latest News, Philippines Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: CNN Philippines - 🏆 13. / 63 Read more »
Source: inquirerdotnet - 🏆 3. / 86 Read more »
Source: manilabulletin - 🏆 25. / 51 Read more »
Source: inquirerdotnet - 🏆 3. / 86 Read more »
Source: manilabulletin - 🏆 25. / 51 Read more »
Source: rapplerdotcom - 🏆 4. / 86 Read more »