REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
SANDIGANBAYAN
Quezon City
SPECIAL DIVISION
PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES
Criminal Case No. 26558
Plaintiff,
For: Plunder
- versus
–
JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA,
Former President of the
Republic of the Philippines,
JOSE “JINGGOY” ESTRADA,
CHARLIE “ATONG” TIU HAY SY ANG,
EDWARD S. SERAPIO,
YOLANDA T.
RICAFORTE,
PRESENT:
ALMA ALFARO,
JOHN DOE also known
as
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, PJ, Chairperson
ELEUTERIO RAMOS TAN or MR.
UY,
VILLARUZ, JR., and
JANE DOE also known
as
PERALTA, JJ.
DELIA RAJAS,
JOHN DOES and JANE
DOES,
PROMULGATED: September
12, 2007
Accused.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - x
D E C I
S I O N
Republic Act
(RA) No. 7080 as amended was approved on July 12, 1991, creating
and introducing into our criminal legal system the crime of
“plunder”. This law penalizes public officers who would amass
immense wealth through a series or combination of overt or criminal
acts described in the statute in violation of the public trust. RA No. 7080 or
the Anti-Plunder Law was a consolidation of Senate Bill no. 733 and
House Bill No. 22752. The Explanatory Note of Senate Bill No.
733, quoted in the case of Estrada v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 148965,
February 26, 2002, 377 SCRA 538, 555), explains the reason behind the
law as follows: chan robles virtual law library
Plunder, a term chosen from other
equally apt terminologies like kleptocracy and economic treason,
punishes the use of high office for personal enrichment, committed thru
a series of acts done not in the public eye but in stealth and secrecy
over a period of time, that may involve so many persons, here and
abroad, and which touch so many states and territorial units. The
acts and/or omissions sought to be penalized do not involve simple
cases of malversation of public funds, bribery, extortion, theft and
graft but constitute plunder of an entire nation resulting in material
damage to the national economy. The above-described crime does
not yet exist in Philippine statute books. Thus, the need to come
up with a legislation as a safeguard against the possible recurrence of
the depravities of the previous regime and as a deterrent to those with
similar inclination to succumb to the corrupting influence of power.
The majority opinion in the above-cited
case, penned by Honorable Justice Josue N. Bellosillo, further
explained the rationale behind the Anti-Plunder Law
in this manner:
Our nation has been racked by scandals
of corruption and obscene profligacy of officials in high places which
have shaken its very foundation. The anatomy of graft and
corruption has become more elaborate in the corridors of time as
unscrupulous people relentlessly contrive more and more ingenious ways
to milk the coffers of the government. Drastic and radical
measures are imperative to fight the increasingly sophisticated,
extraordinarily methodical and economically catastrophic looting of the
national treasury. Such is the Plunder Law, especially designed
to disentangle those ghastly tissues of grand-scale corruption which,
if left unchecked, will spread like a malignant tumor and ultimately
consume the moral and institutional fiber of our nation. The
Plunder Law, indeed, is a living testament to the will of the
legislature to ultimately eradicate this scourge and thus secure
society against the avarice and other venalities in public office.
These are times that try men’s
souls. In the checkered history of this nation, few issues of
national importance can equal the amount of interest and passion
generated by petitioner’s ignominious fall from the highest office, and
his eventual prosecution and trial under a virginal statute. This
continuing saga has driven a wedge of dissension among our people that
may linger for a long time. Only by responding to the clarion
call for patriotism, to rise above factionalism and prejudices, shall
we emerge triumphant in the midst of ferment. [Emphasis supplied]
The present case is the first of its
kind to be filed charging the highest official of the land, a former
President, among others, of the offense of plunder. Needless to
state, the resolution of this case shall set significant historical and
legal precedents.
Throughout the six years over which the
court proceedings in this case unfolded, this Court confronted numerous
novel and complicated legal issues (including the constitutionality of
the plunder law, propriety of house arrest, among others), heard
lengthy testimonies from several dozens of witnesses from both sides
and perused voluminous documentary evidence and pleadings from the
parties. Considering the personalities involved and the nature of
the crime charged, the present case aroused particularly intense
interest from the public. Speculations on the probable outcome of
the case received unparalleled attention from the media and other
sectors of society. Indeed, the factual and legal complexities of
the case are further compounded by attempts to sensationalize the
proceedings for various ends.
However, this Court is ever mindful of
its imperative duty to act as an impartial arbiter: (a) to serve the
interest of the State and the public in punishing those who would so
severely abuse their public office and those private individuals would
aid them or conspire with them and (b) to protect the right of the
accused to be only convicted upon guilt proven beyond reasonable
doubt. Thus, the decision of this Court follows, upon no other
consideration other than the law and a review of the evidence on record.
STATEMENT
OF THE CASE
AND THE PROCEEDINGS
This case for plunder commenced with
the filing on April 4, 2001 of the Information which is quoted
hereunder:
INFORMATION
The undersigned Ombudsman Prosecutor
and OIC-Director, EPIB, Office of the Ombudsman, hereby accuses former
Joseph Ejercito Estrada, together with Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada, Charlie
‘Atong” Ang, Edward Serapio, Yolanda T. Ricaforte, Alma Alfaro,
Eleuterio Tan a.k.a. Eleuterio Ramos Tan or Mr. Uy, Jane Doe a.k.a.
Delia Rajas, and John & Jane Does, of the crime of Plunder, defined
and penalized under R.A. No. 7080,
as amended by Sec. 12 of R.A.
No. 7659, committed as follows:
That during the period from June, 1998
to January, 2001, in the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Court, accused Joseph Ejercito Estrada, by himself and
in conspiracy with his co-accused, business associates and persons
heretofore named, by taking advantage of his official position,
authority, connection or influence as President of the Republic of the
Philippines, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and criminally
amass, accumulate and acquire ill-gotten wealth, and unjustly enrich
himself in the aggregate amount of P4,097,804,173.17, more or less,
through a combination and series of overt and criminal acts, described
as follows:
(a) by receiving, collecting,
directly or indirectly, on many instances, so-called “jueteng money”
from gambling operators in connivance with co-accused Jose ‘Jinggoy’
Estrada, Yolanda T. Ricaforte and Edward Serapio, as witnessed by Gov.
Luis ‘Chavit’ Singson, among other witnesses, in the aggregate amount
of FIVE HUNDRED FORTY-FIVE MILLION PESOS (P545,000,000.00), more or
less, in consideration of their protection from arrest or interference
by law enforcers in their illegal “jueteng” activities; and
(b) by misappropriating,
converting and miusing for his gain and benefit public fund in the
amount of ONE HUNDRRED THIRTY MILLION PESOS (P130,000,000.00), more or
less, representing a portion of the One Hundred Seventy Million Pesos
(P170,000,000.00) tobacco excise tax share allocated for the Province
of Ilocos Sur under R.A. No. 7171, in conspiracy with co-accused
Charlie ‘Atong’ Ang, Alma Alfaro, Eleuterio Tan a.k.a Eleuterio Ramos
Tan or Mr. Uy, and Jane Doe a.k.a. Delia Rajas, as witnessed by Gov.
Luis ‘Chavit’ Singson, among other witnesses; and
(c) by directing, ordering and
compelling the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) and the
Social Security System (SSS) to purchase and buy a combined total of
681,733,000 shares of stock of the Belle Corporatiion in the aggregate
gross value of One Billion Eight Hundred Forty-Seven Million Five
Hundred Seventy Eight Thousand Fifty Seven Pesos and Fifty Centavos
(P1,847,578,057.50), for the purpose of collecting for his personal
gain and benefit, as in fact he did collect and receive the sum of ONE
HUNDRED EIGHTY NINE MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P
189,700,000.00), as commission from said stock purchase; andchan robles virtual law library
(d) by unjustly enriching himself
in the amount of THREE BILLION TWO HUNDRED THIRTY THREE MILLION ONE
HUNDRED FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY THREE PESOS AND SEVENTEEN
CENTAVOS (P 3,233,104,173.17) comprising his unexplained wealth
acquired, accumulated and amassed by him under his account name “Jose
Velarde” with Equitable PCI Bank;
to the damage and prejudice of the
Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Various motions were filed by accused
Former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada (FPres. Estrada), Jose
“Jinggoy” Estrada (Jinggoy Estrada), and Edward S. Serapio
(Serapio). Accused Serapio filed his Urgent Omnibus Motion (a) to
Hold in abeyance the issuance of warrant of arrest and further
Proceedings; (b) to conduct a determination of probable cause; (c) for
leave to file accused’s motion for reconsideration and /or
reinvestigation; and (d) to direct the Ombudsman to conduct a
reinvestigation of the charges against accused Serapio dated April 6,
2001. While accused FPres. Estrada filed three (3) motions; (1)
Urgent Motion to Defer Proceedings, dated April 9, 2001, (2) Position
Paper Re: Probable Cause (ex abundante ad cautelam) dated April 9, 2001
which was joined by accused Jinggoy Estrada, and (3) Motion to (a)
remand the case to the Ombudsman for preliminary investigation
consistent with the Honorable Supreme Court’s Resolution in G.R. No.
147512-19 (Joseph E. Estrada v. Hon. Aniano Desierto, et al.); and (b)
hold in abeyance judicial action in the case particularly the issuance
of a warrant of arrest and steps leading thereto until after the
conduct of a proper preliminary investigation, dated April 11, 2001.chan robles virtual law library
In a Resolution promulgated on April
16, 2001, the Court directed the prosecution to submit to the Court not
later than April 18, 2001 the required affidavits, counter-affidavits,
and supporting evidence as well as other supporting documents
accompanying the Information, which were needed to determine the
existence of probable cause for the issuance or non-issuance of a
warrant of arrest. As directed, the prosecution filed on April
18, 2001 its Manifestation and Compliance.
On April 19, 2001, the prosecution
filed an Urgent Ex-Parte Motion to admit Amended Information, which is
quoted hereunder:
AMENDED
INFORMATION
The undersigned Ombudsman Prosecutor
and OIC-Director, EPIB, Office of the Ombudsman, hereby accuses former
PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, Joseph Ejercito Estrada a.k.a. “ASIONG
SALONGA” AND a.k.a. “JOSE VELARDE”, together with Jose ‘Jinggoy’
Estrada, Charlie “Atong” Ang, Edward Serapio, Yolanda T. Ricaforte,
Alma Alfaro, JOHN DOE a.k.a. Eleuterio Tan OR Eleuterio Ramos Tan or
Mr. Uy, Jane Doe a.k.a. Delia Rajas, and John DOES & Jane Does, of
the crime of Plunder, defined and penalized under R.A. No. 7080,
as amended by Sec. 12 of R.A.
No. 7659, committed as follows:
That during the period from June, 1998
to January, 2001, in the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Court, accused Joseph Ejercito Estrada, THEN A PUBLIC
OFFICER, BEING THEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,
by himself AND/OR in CONNIVANCE/CONSPIRACY with his co-accused, WHO ARE
MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY, RELATIVES BY AFFINITY OR CONSANGUINITY, BUSINESS
ASSOCIATES, SUBORDINATES AND/OR OTHER PERSONS, BY TAKING UNDUE
ADVANTAGE OF HIS OFFICIAL POSITION, AUTHORITY, RELATIONSHIP,
CONNECTION, OR INFLUENCE, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
criminally amass, accumulate and acquire BY HIMSELF, DIRECTLY OR
INDIRECTLY, ill-gotten wealth in the aggregate amount OR TOTAL VALUE of
FOUR BILLION NINETY SEVEN MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED FOUR THOUSAND ONE
HUNDRED SEVENTY THREE PESOS AND SEVENTEEN CENTAVOS [P4,097,804,173.17],
more or less, THEREBY UNJUSTLY ENRICHING HIMSELF OR THEMSELVES AT THE
EXPENSE AND TO THE DAMAGE OF THE FILIPINO PEOPLE AND THE REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINES, through ANY OR A combination OR A series of overt OR
criminal acts, OR SIMILAR SCHEMES OR MEANS, described as follows:chanrobles virtual law library
(a) by receiving OR collecting,
directly or indirectly, on SEVERAL INSTANCES, MONEY IN THE AGGREGATE
AMOUNT OF FIVE HUNDRED FORTY-FIVE MILLION PESOS (P545,000,000.00), MORE
OR LESS, FROM ILLEGAL GAMBLING IN THE FORM OF GIFT, SHARE, PERCENTAGE,
KICKBACK OR ANY FORM OF PECUNIARY BENEFIT, BY HIMSELF AND/OR in
connivance with co-accused CHARLIE ‘ATONG’ ANG, JOSE ‘Jinggoy’ Estrada,
Yolanda T. Ricaforte, Edward Serapio, AND JOHN DOES AND JANE DOES, in
consideration OF TOLERATION OR PROTECTION OF ILLEGAL GAMBLING;
(b) by DIVERTING, RECEIVING,
misappropriating, converting OR misusing DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY,
for HIS OR THEIR PERSONAL gain and benefit, public funds in the amount
of ONE HUNDRED THIRTY MILLION PESOS [P130,000,000.00], more or less,
representing a portion of the TWO HUNDRED MILLION PESOS
[P200,000,000.00] tobacco excise tax share allocated for the Province
of Ilocos Sur under R.A. No. 7171, BY HIMSELF AND/OR in CONNIVANCE with
co-accused Charlie ‘Atong’ Ang, Alma Alfaro, JOHN DOE a.k.a. Eleuterio
Tan OR Eleuterio Ramos Tan or Mr. Uy, and Jane Doe a.k.a. Delia Rajas,
AND OTHER JOHN DOES AND JANE DOES;
(c) by directing, ordering and
compelling, FOR HIS PERSONAL GAIN AND BENEFIT, the Government Service
Insurance System (GSIS) TO PURCHASE, 351,878,000 SHARES OF STOCKS, MORE
OR LESS, and the Social Security System (SSS), 329,855,000 SHARES OF
STOCK, MORE OR LESS, OF THE BELLE CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF MORE OR
LESS ONE BILLION ONE HUNDRED TWO MILLION NINE HUNDRED SIXTY FIVE
THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED SEVEN PESOS AND FIFTY CENTAVOS [P1,102,965,607.50]
AND MORE OR LESS SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY FOUR MILLION SIX HUNDRED TWELVE
THOUSAND AND FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS [P744,612,450.00], RESPECTIVELY,
OR A TOTAL OF MORE OR LESS ONE BILLION EIGHT HUNDRED FORTY SEVEN
MILLION FIVE HUNDRED SEVENTY EIGHT THOUSAND FIFTY SEVEN PESOS AND FIFTY
CENTAVOS [P1,847,578,057.50]; AND BY COLLECTING OR RECEIVING, DIRECTLY
OR INDIRECTLY, BY HIMSELF AND/OR IN CONNIVANCE WITH JOHN DOES AND JANE
DOES, COMMISSIONS OR PERCENTAGES BY REASON OF SAID PURCHASES OF SHARES
OF STOCK IN THE AMOUNT OF ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY NINE MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED
THOUSAND PESOS [P189,700,000.00], MORE OR LESS, FROM THE BELLE
CORPORATION WHICH BECAME PART OF THE DEPOSIT IN THE EQUITABLE-PCI BANK
UNDER THE ACCOUNT NAME “JOSE VELARDE”;
(d) by unjustly enriching himself FROM
COMMISSIONS, GIFTS, SHARES, PERCENTAGES, KICKBACKS, OR ANY FORM OF
PECUNIARY BENEFITS, IN CONNIVANCE WITH JOHN DOES AND JANE DOES, in the
amount of MORE OR LESS THREE BILLION TWO HNDRED THIRTY THREE MILLION
ONE HUNDRED FOUR THOUSAND AND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY THREE PESOS AND
SEVENTEEN CENTAVOS [P3,233,104,173.17] AND DEPOSITING THE SAME UNDER
HIS ACCOUNT NAME “JOSE VELARDE” AT THE EQUITABLE-PCI BANK.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
On April 20, 2001, the Court in its
Minute Resolution granted and admitted the prosecution’s Urgent
Ex-Parte Motion to Admit Amended Information dated April 18, 2001.
On April 25, 2001, the Court
promulgated its Resolution which stated:chan robles virtual law library
xxx
xxx
xxx the Court finds and so hold
that probable cause for the offense of PLUNDER exists to justify
issuance of warrants for the arrest of accused Former President Joseph
Ejercito Estrada, Mayor Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada, Charlie “Atong” Ang,
Edward Serapio, Yolanda T. Ricaforte, Alma Alfaro, John Doe a.k.a.
Eleuterio Tan or Eleuterio Ramos Tan or Mr. Uy, and Jane Doe a.k.a.
Delia Rajas.
No bail is fixed for the provisional
liberty of the accused for the reason that the penalty imposable for
the offense of plunder under RA No. 7080, as amended by Sec. 12 of RA
No. 7659, is reclusion perpetua to death.
Director General Leandro R. Mendoza,
Chief of the Philippine National Police, shall implement the warrant of
arrest upon service to him by Mr. Edgardo A. Urieta, Chief of the
Sheriff and Security Services Division of the Sandiganbayan. Once
arrested, all the accused shall undergo the required processes and be
detained at the PNP Detention Center, Camp Crame, Quezon City subject
to, and until, further orders from this Court.
On the 25th day of April 2001, on the
basis of the said Resolution, the Court issued an Order of Arrest and
Hold Departure Order for all the named accused in the present
information. The Philippine National Police (PNP) submittd its
Report of Compliance dated April 25, 2001 which stated:
1. That in compliance with the
Order of Arrest issued by the Honorable Court in the above captioned
criminal case, accused Joseph E. Estrada and Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada,
both residence of no. 1 Polk Street, North Greenhills, San Juan, Metro
Manila voluntarily surrendered to the undersigned on 25 April 2001 at
about 3:00 o’clock PM at said residence in the presence of their
counsels.
2. That right after their surrender,
they were brought inside Camp Crame, Quezon City for the required
processes and pending further orders from this Honorable Court they
shall be kept in Camp Crame;
A Compliance/Return of Warrant of
Arrest was also filed on April 26, 2001 by P/Chief Superintendent
Nestor B. Gualberto.
As to accused Serapio, the PNP’s Report
of Compliance reads in part:
2. That one of the accused named
therein, Atty. Edward S. Serapio, surrendered to the Chief, Philippine
National Police, through the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group
(CIDG) in Camp Crame, Quezon City on April 25, 2001 at about 9:45 PM
where the required processes were administered to him and pending
further orders from this Honorable Court he shall be kept in Camp Crame;
The Court, in its Minute Resolution
dated April 26, 2001, set the arraignment of the detained accused on
May 3, 2001 which was cancelled due to the different motions filed by
the accused. Accused Jinggoy Estrada filed his Motion to Quash or
Suspend dated April 24, 2001 and a Very Urgent Omnibus Motion dated
April 30, 2001. Among other motions, accused FPres. Estrada filed
his Motion to Quash dated June 7, 2001 and accused Serapio filed his
Motion to Quash (Re: Amended Information dated April 18, 2001) dated
June 26, 2001. In its Resolution dated July 9, 2001, the Court
denied all the aforesaid motions to quash and accused Jinggoy Estrada’s
Very Urgent Omnibus Motion dated April 30, 2001. The Court’s
Resolution dated July 9, 2001 was sustained by the Honorable Supreme
Court in the Decisions rendered in Joseph Ejercito Estrada vs.
Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001) and Jose “Jinggoy”
Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 148965, February 26, 2002).
On July 10, 2001, the Court denied the
motion to defer filed by accused FPres. Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada and
proceeded with the arraignment of accused FPres. Estrada, Jinggoy
Estrada, and Serapio under the Amended Information. The
accused having refused to enter a plea, the Court entered a plea of not
guilty for all the three (3) accused.
PETITIONS
FOR BAIL/HOUSE ARREST
With the detention of accused FPres.
Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada in Camp Crame on April 25, 2001, both
accused filed on the same day an Urgent Ex-parte Motion to Place on
House Arrest.
The Court on June 9, 2001, issued a
Resolution denying accused FPres. Estrada’s Urgent Ex-Parte Motion to
Place on House Arrest and issued an Order for the confinement of
accused FPres. Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada at Fort Sto. Domingo, Sta.
Rosa, Laguna, subject to the need for their continued confinement at
the Veterans Memorial Medical Center (VMMC) where they were then
confined. In view of the said resolution, accused FPres. Estrada
and Jinggoy Estrada, on June 13, 2001, filed an Omnibus Motion (Re:
Resolution promulgated on June 9, 2001) pressing in the alternative a
Motion for Detention in Tanay, Rizal.
On March 17, 2004, FPres. Estrada filed
a Motion to Modify Custodial Arrangement dated March 17, 2004 and, on
March 30, 2004, the counsel de officio of accused FPres. Estrada filed
a Manifestation dated March 29, 2004 informing the Court, among others,
that the said accused was willing to have his property in Tanay, Rizal
placed under the control and supervision of the Court and the
Philippine National Police for the duration of his detention.
On July 12, 2004, the Court issued a
joint resolution granting FPres. Estrada’s motion to modify Custodial
Arrangement dated March 29, 2004 subject to the conditions imposed by
the Court. Accused FPres. Estrada filed a Compliance and
Acceptance of Conditions on July 13, 2004. Since then, accused
FPres. Estrada has been detained in his property at Tanay, Rizal.
When the Court ordered the arrest and
detention of the accused in these cases, accused Serapio filed his
petition for bail on April 27, 2001. Accused Jinggoy Estrada’s
petition for bail was included in his Very Urgent Omnibus Motion dated
April 30, 2001.
Accused Serapio’s Petition for Bail was
deferred indefinitely as prayed for by the said accused while, on
August 14, 2001, accused Jinggoy Estrada filed an Urgent Second Motion
for Bail for Medical Reasons dated August 16, 2001 which the
prosecution opposed. On December 20, 2001, the Court issued its
Resolution denying accused Jinggoy Estrada’s Urgent Second Motion for
Bail for Medical Reasons.
Considering the denial of the said
motion for bail for medical reasons, accused Jinggoy Estrada, on April
17, 2002, filed an Omnibus Application for Bail dated April 16,
2002. After hearing, the Court issued a Resolution on March 6,
2003 which granted accused Jinggoy Estrada’s Omnibus Application for
Bail. The prosecution’s Motion for Reconsideration dated March 13, 2003
was denied in this Court’s Resolution dated April 30, 2003. The
aforesaid Resolutions granting bail to Mayor Jinggoy Estrada were
upheld by the Honorable Supreme Court in a Decision promulgated in G.R.
No. 158754, People vs. Sandiganbayan (Special Division) and Jose
“Jinggoy” Estrada (August 10, 2007).
As to accused Serapio, the Court’s
Resolution dated September 12, 2003 also granted accused-movant
Serapio’s Urgent Petition for Bail dated April 27, 2001. The
Court fixed the amount of bail of accused Serapio and Jinggoy Estrada
at Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) each which was to paid in
cash.chanrobles virtual law library
While the case was already in the trial
stage, on January 4, 2002 the counsels for the accused Estradas wrote a
letter to the Acting Presiding Justice requesting for a re-raffle of
the cases against the accused, citing as grounds the continuing
uncertain composition of the justices handling the cases against the
accused Former President, et al., at that time. The prosecution
filed its Opposition to Request for Re-Raffle On January 9, 2002 and
its Comment/Suggestion on January 10, 2002 that a Special Third
Division be constituted to be composed of the present Presiding
Justice, the only remaining member of the Third Division to which the
case was raffled, and two other Sandiganbayan Justices who are not
retirables within the next three (3) years. Justice Anacleto
Badoy, the Chairman of the Third Division, was due to retire on October
2002, while Justice Ilarde, the other member, retired on November 27,
2001. On January 11, 2002, the Sandiganbayan En Banc issued its
Resolution 01-2002 recommending to the Supreme Court that the cases
against accused FPres. Estrada, et al., be referred to a Special
Division. The Supreme Court on January 21, 2002 promulgated its
Resolution Creating the Special Division of the Sandiganbayan which
shall hear, try and decide with dispatch the Plunder Case and all
related cases filed or may hereafter be filed against accused FPres.
Estrada, and those accused with him, until they are resolved, decided
and terminated. In the Special Division of the Sandiganbayan, the
Supreme Court retained, as Junior Member, the present Presiding Justice
who was then the only remaining member of the Third Division to which
the Plunder Case was raffled, and designated the then Presiding Justice
Minita V. Chico-Nazario, as Chairperson, and Associate Justice
Edilberto G. Sandoval as Senior Member. This was not the first
time that a Special Division of the Sandiganbayan was constituted to
try a case. A Special Division was previously constituted to try
and decide the Aquino-Galman cases in that composition of the said
Division was also maintained until the case was decided notwithstanding
the subsequent changes in the composition of the Division due to
promotions and/or retirement of its members.
During the same year, the counsel de
parte of accused FPres. Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada all withdrew their
appearances. The Court on March 1, 2002, in order to protect the
rights and interest of the accused, appointed the Public Attorneys
Office (PAO) and those who have been recommended by the Board of
Governor of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, to represent accused
FPres. Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada as counsel de oficio, namely, Former
Presiding Justice of the Sandiganbayan Manuel Pamaran, Atty. Prospero
Crescini, Atty. Irene Jurado and Atty. Manuel Malaya. The PAO
lawyers mentioned their duration as counsel de oficio, hence, (Ret.)
Presiding Justice Pamaran and the private practitioners represented
accused FPres. Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada up to the time the
prosecution rested its case and submitted to the Court its Formal Offer
of Evidence. However, before the presentation of the evidence for
the defense, accused FPres. Estrada, in a Letter dated September 1,
2004, informed the Court that he have decided to re-engage the services
of the members of his original de parte panel of lawyers.
Upon conclusion of the presentation of
prosecution evidence and after the Court have ruled on the offer of
evidence of the prosecution, accused FPres. Estrada, Jinggoy Estrada
and Serapio filed their respective motion for leave of court to file
demurrer to evidence. In a Joint Resolution dated March 10, 2004,
the Court granted accused FPres. Estrada’s Motion for Leave to File
Demurrer to Evidence in Criminal Case Nos. 26905 and 26565 while it
denied the same motion of all the accused in Criminal Case No. 26558
for lack of merit. Subsequently, the Demurrer to Evidence of
accused FPres. Estrada was filed. In its Joint Resolution dated
July 12, 2004, the Court resolved to deny FPres. Estrada’s Demurrer to
Evidence in Criminal Case No. 26905 but granted the Demurrer to
Evidence of FPres. Estrada in Criminal Case No. 26565.
After the presentation of the evidence
for accused FPres. Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada, accused Serapio
manifested that he opted not to present his own evidence but adopted
the evidence presented by FPres. Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada. The
said accused then formally offered their evidence. The Court
issued its resolution on the formal offer of evidence for accused
FPres. Estrada, Jinggoy Estrada and Serapio. On the other hand,
the prosecution manifested that it was not presenting any rebuttal
evidence but formally offered additional evidence and tendered excluded
evidence in its Supplemental Formal Offer of Exhibits [Re: Exhibits
Identified, Presented, and Marked during the Cross Examination of
Defense Witnesses] with Tender of Excluded Evidence dated March 29,
2007. The Court issued its Minute Resolution dated April 19, 2007
on the said additional offer of evidence of the prosecution.
In an Order dated May 9, 2007, the
Court gave the parties a period of time to file their respective
memoranda and scheduled the Oral Summation requested by accused FPres.
Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada on June 15, 2007. After the Oral
Summation, the case was submitted for decision.
Incidentally, on November 10, 2006, the
National Bureau of Investigation filed its Return of “Alias” Order of
Arrest, informing the Court that one of the accused in this case, Atong
Ang was extradited from the United States of America and was already
under the custody of the said agency. At his arraignment, accused
Atong Ang refused to enter a plea and the Court entered a plea of not
guilty for the said accused.
On January 24, 2007, when the case was
scheduled for Pre-Trial only for accused Atong Ang, the prosecution and
the said accused, assisted by his counsel, manifested in open court
that they had executed a Plea Bargaining Agreement. The Court’s
Resolution dated March 14, 2007 approved the Plea Bargaining Agreement
entered into by the parties.
On March 19, 2007, during accused Atong
Ang’s re-arraignment, the said accused pleaded guilty to a lesser
offense of Corruption of Public Officials under Article 212 in relation
to Article 211 of the Revised Penal Code. On the same day, the
Court rendered its decision against accused Atong Ang sentencing said
accused to “two (2) years and four (4) months of prision correccional
minimum, as minimum, to six (6) years of prision correccional maximum,
as maximum, and to pay the amount of P25,000,000.00 to the Government
as his civil liability”. Accused Atong Ang immediately filed a
Petition for Probation (with Motion to Deduct Period of Preventive
Imprisonment from the Term of Imprisonment and to Post Bail Pending
Resolution thereof) which the Court granted in a Resolution dated May
25, 2007. Accused Atong Ang is now under probation.
STATEMENT
OF THE STIPULATIONS OF
THE PARTIES AT PRE-TRIAL
After the arraignment of the accused,
the pre-trial was conducted which led to the issuance of the Amended
Pre-Trial Order dated June 14, 2001, quoted in part hereunder:
When this case was called for pre-trial
on September 3, 2001, accused JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA, JOSE “Jinggoy”
P. ESTRADA appeared, assisted by counsels, Atty. Jose B. Flaminiano,
Atty. Cleofe Villar-Verzola, Atty. Rene A. V. Saguisag and Atty.
Raymond Parsifal A. Fortun. Accused Edward S. Serapio likewise
appeared, assisted by his counsels, Atty. Sabino Acut, Jr. and Atty.
Martin Israel L. Pison. The People was represented by Ombudsman Aniano
A. Desierto, Deputy Ombudsman Margarito P. Gervacio, Jr., Deputy
Special Prosecutor Robert E. Kallos, Ombudsman Prosecutor III Antonio
T. Manzano and Humphrey T. Monteroso.
The accused Estradas and Edward S.
Serapio submitted their WAIVER OF APPEARANCE dated September 3, 2001
stating as follows:
Accused Joseph Estrada, Jose “Jinggoy”
Estrada and Edward S. Serapio hereby waive their appearance during the
pre-trial and the trial of this case subject to the conditions that:
a) whenever his/her/their name/s/are
mentioned at any stage of the proceedings of this/ these case/s whether
in testimonial or documentary evidence, such name/s refer/s to
his/her/them; and
b) whenever his/her/their
appearance shall be require by the Court at any time, they will appear,
otherwise warrant/s shall issue for their arrest.
The aforementioned three (3) accused
verbally manifested in open Court that they fully understand and agree
with their conditions contained in their Waiver of Appearance.
xxx
xxx
xxx
The prosecution, the accused Estradas and accused Serapio agreed to
stipulate on the following facts, as proposed by the prosecution to wit:
1. That accused Joseph Estrada
(“Estrada” for short) took his oath of office as President of the
Republic of the Philippines on 30th June 1998, [cf. Proposal No. 1(For
all specifications) of accused Estrada’s Proposed Stipulation of Facts
of the defense dated 01 August 2001];
2. That accused Joseph Estrada is
married to Dra. (now Senator) Luisa P. Ejercito; [cf. Proposal No. 2
(For all Specifications) of accused Estrada’s Proposed Stipulation of
Facts of the defense dated 01 August 2001];
3. That accused Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada,
Jr. (“Jinggoy” for short) is the son of accused Joseph Estrada; [cf.
Proposal No. 3 (For all Specifications) of accused Estrada’s Proposed
Stipulation of Facts of the defense dated 01 August 2001;
4. Edward S. Serapio is a lawyer and a
former professor of law at the Ateneo de Manila University School of
Law; [cf. Proposal No. 1 of accused Atty. Edward Serapio’s Request for
Stipulation of Facts and Admission of Documents dated 01 August 2001;
5. On April 29 1999, Atty. Serapio was
appointed by President Joseph Estrada as Presidential Assistant for
Political Affairs with the rank of Undersecretary. [cf. Proposal No. 2
of accused Atty. Edward Serapio’s Request for Stipulation of Facts and
Admission of Documents dated 01 August 2001;
6. He accepted such appointment. [cf.
Proposal No. 2. 1 of specification of accused Atty. Edward Serapio’s
Request for Stipulation of Facts and Admission of documents dated 01
August 2001.
The other stipulations of facts
proposed by the accused Estradas and admitted by the prosecution were:
1. That From 1998-2001, Mr. Luis
“Chavit” Singson was elected Governor of the province of Ilocos Sur;
[cf. Proposal No. 6 (For all Specifications) of accused Estrada’s
Proposed Stipulation of Facts of the defense dated 01 August 2001];
2. That the amount of P40 Million was
withdrawn by a person representing herself to be accused Alma Alfaro
from Land Bank of the Philippines-Shaw Branch on 28th August 1998; [cf.
Proposal No. 5 of specification (b) of accused Joseph E. Estrada and
Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada’s Stipulation of Facts and Admission of
Documents dated 01 August 2001.
The accused Estradas proposed and the
prosecution admitted the following stipulation of facts:
1. That accused Joseph Estrada
personally knows Mr. Rodolfo “Bong” Pineda; [cf. Paragraph 13 of
the Prosecution’s Additional Stipulation of Facts dated 01 August 2001];
2. That accused Joseph Estrada
personally knows “Atong” Ang; [cf. Paragraph 17 of the Prosecution’s
Additional stipulation of Facts dated 01 August 2001];
3. That accused Joseph Estrada
personally knows Mr. Lucio Co; [cf. Paragraph 23 of the Prosecution’s
Additional Stipulation of Facts dated 01 August 2001];
4. That accused Joseph Estrada
personally knows Mr. Jaime Dichaves; [cf. Paragraph 24 of the
Prosecution’s Additional Stipulation of Facts dated 01 August 2001];
5. That accused President Estrada
is a close and childhood friend of Carlos A. Arellano; [cf. Paragraph 1
Re: Belle case of the Prosecution’s Additional Stipulation of Facts
dated 01 August 2001];
6. That accused President Estrada
appointed Carlos A. Arellano as Chairman of the Social Security System
on July 1, 1998; [cf. Paragraph 2 re: Belle case of the Prosecution’s
Additional Stipulation of Facts dated 01 August 2001];
7. That Carlos A. Arellano was
appointed by accused President Estrada as President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Social Security System; [cf. Paragraph 3 re: Belle case
of the Prosecution’s Additional Stipulation of Facts dated 01 August
2001];
8. That accused President Estrada
knew of the existence of Belle Corporation; [cf. Paragraph 7 re: Belle
case of the Prosecution’s Additional Stipulation of Facts dated 01
August 2001];
Proposed Stipulation of Facts of the
prosecution admitted by accused Serapio:
1. That Erap Muslim Youth
Foundation (hereinafter the “Foundation”) has a huge fund of more
than P211 Million.chan robles virtual law library
The only issue that was raised by the
parties for resolution is whether or not accused JOSEPH EJERCITO
ESTRADA, JOSE “Jinggoy” P. ESTRADA and ATTY. EDWARD S. SERAPIO are
guilty of the offense charged in the Amended Information.
The accused Estradas raise also the
issue of whether or not the allegations in the information would
constitute the crime of plunder as defined by R.A. No. 7080. (COMMENT
ON, AND MOTION TO CORRECT PRE-TRIAL ORDER DATED SEPTEMBER 13, 2001,
filed by accused Estrada’s on September 21, 2001)
The evidence submitted by the prosecution and the defense in support
of, or in denial, of the speculations of the predicate acts adverted to
in each of the paragraphs are discussed hereunder in seriatim:
EVIDENCE
PRESENTED:
RE: SUB-PARAGRAPH A OF THE AMENDED
INFORMATION
(a)
by receiving OR collecting, directly or indirectly, on SEVERAL
INSTANCES, MONEY IN THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF FIVE HUNDRED FORTY-FIVE
MILLION PESOS (P545,000,000.00), MORE OR LESS, FROM ILLEGAL GAMBLING IN
THE FORM OF GIFT, SHARE, PERCENTAGE, KICKBACK OR ANY FORM OF PECUNIARY
BENEFIT, BY HIMSELF AND/OR in connivance with co-accused CHARLIE
‘ATONG’ ANG, JOSE ‘Jinggoy’ Estrada, Yolanda T. Ricaforte, Edward
Serapio, AND JOHN DOES AND JANE DOES, in consideration OF TOLERATION OR
PROTECTION OF ILLEGAL GAMBLING;
The alleged co-conspirators of accused
Former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada named in this paragraph (a)
are: Charlie “Atong” Tiu Hay Sy Ang (Atong Ang), Jose “Jinggoy”
Estrada, Yolanda T. Ricaforte (Ricaforte) and Edward S. Serapio.
The paragraph also refers to unidentified co-conspirators by the usual
“Jane Does” and “John Does”.
I. EVIDENCE FOR THE
PROSECUTION
The principal witness of the
prosecution in this first specification of the predicate acts of
plunder is Former Ilocos Sur Governor Luis “Chavit” C. Singson.
He testified extensively on the charge that FPres. Estrada accumulated
ill-gotten wealth in the above-mentioned amount through the monthly
remittance to him of seems of money collected from operations of
illegal gambling, commonly known as “jueteng”, based in the different
provinces of the country allegedly in consideration of the prosecution
or unimpeded operation of said illegal gambling.
The gist of the testimony of Singson
relative to paragraph (a) of the Amended Information is set forth
hereunder:
GOVERNOR
LUIS “CHAVIT” CRISOLOGO SINGSON (Gov. Singson) was 61 years old,
married, a businessman, and a resident of Mabini Street, Poblacion,
Vigan, Province of Ilocos Sur at the time he took the witness stand as
prosecution witness. The examination of the witness was done by
Solicitor General Simeon Marcelo under the control and supervision of
the Ombudsman who was present. The counsel de oficio of accused
FPres. Estrada and Jinggoy Estrada, (Ret.) Justice Manuel R. Pamaran,
objected to the appearance of the Solicitor General, which the Court
noted. [TSN dated July 17, 2002, pp. 166-167] The testimony of
Gov. Singson was presented to corroborate the testimonies of
prosecution witnesses Maria Carmencita Itchon, Emma B. Lim and the
Equitable PCI Bank Branch Managers where Ricaforte opened accounts, and
to prove that accused FPres. Estrada, Jinggoy Estrada, Atong Ang,
Ricaforte, Serapio and the other accused, in conspiracy with one
another, amassed and accumulated ill-gotten wealth for principal
accused FPres. Estrada’s benefit while he was the 13th President of the
Republic of the Philippines in the amount of Four Billion Ninety Seven
Million Eight Hundred Four Thousand One Hundred Seventy-Three
Pesos and Seventeen Centavos (P4,097,804,173.17), part of which was
derived from:
(1) the collection of jueteng
protection money from November 1998 to August 2000, in the amount of
Five Hundred Forty Five Million Pesos (P545,000,000.00) more or less
and the amount of Two Hundred Million Pesos (P200,000,000.00) also from
the said illegal gambling protection money; and
(2) misappropriation, diversion and
conversion for his personal gain as benefit public funds in the amount
of One Hundred Thirty Million Pesos (P130,000,000.00) more or
less, representing a portion of the Two Hundred Million pesos
(P200,000,000.00) Tobacco Excise Share allocated for the Province of
Ilocos Sur under Republic Act No. 7171.
Gov. Singson was also presented by the
prosecution to prove that Jinggoy Estrada and Serapio conspired with
and/or acted as co-principals by indispensable cooperation of FPres.
Estrada in the running of the illegal numbers game of jueteng and in
the receipt by FPres. Estrada of jueteng protection money; that accused
Jinggoy Estrada regularly collected jueteng protection money every
month from January of 1999 to August 15, 2000, as an indispensable part
of the amassing and accumulating ill-gotten wealth by principal accused
FPres. Estrada and as part of the series and/or combination of overt or
criminal acts constituting the crime of plunder; that Serapio conspired
with FPres. Estrada and the other accused in receiving the Two Hundred
Million Pesos (P200,000,000.00) which came from jueteng operations and
in hiding and/or laundering the same through the banking system and
that Serapio was the personal lawyer of FPres. Estrada and that in
furtherance of the conspiracy he set up various juridical entities to
mask and/or hide various illegal proprietary and business interests of
FPres. Estrada. Gov. Singson would also identify certain
documents, checks, pictures and other facts relevant to the foregoing,
which tend to prove the combination and/or series of overt and criminal
acts, constitutive of the crime of plunder (and to oppose the petition
for bail of Jinggoy Estrada. Gov. Singson’s testimony was also
offered to prove the illegal use of alias). [TSN dated July 17,
2002, pp. 168-174]chanrobles virtual law library
Gov. Singson testified that he was
called by FPres. Estrada at his house in Polk Street, Greenhills, on
August of 1998. Gov. Singson was then the Provincial Governor of
Ilocos Sur. Gov. Singson went to Polk Street in the
evening. He was assisted by a security guard towards the kitchen
where he found Atong Ang and FPres. Estrada talking how to expand the
operations of jueteng, an illegal numbers game, in the provinces where
there was yet no jueteng protection money. Shortly, Bong Pineda
arrived. Gov. Singson heard FPres. Estrada told Bong Pineda that
starting on that day not to bring money at his house because it was
very obvious. Gov. Singson did not know Bong Pineda very much but
he saw Bong Pineda in Congress when he was investigated regarding
jueteng. The jueteng money would protect jueteng operator from
being arrested. FPres. Estrada then instructed Bong Pineda to
give the money to Atong Ang or to Gov. Singson because the latter was a
Governor so it would not be obvious if he brought money to FPres.
Estrada. [TSN dated July 17, 2002, pp. 178-187]
According to Gov. Singson, the day
after the aforementioned meeting, Atong Ang started meeting with the
jueteng operators in his office near the municipal hall of San Juan.
[Ibid, p. 188] Atong Ang and the operators were bargaining how
much protection money from each province will be given to FPres.
Estrada. [Ibid, p. 193] After the final talk, they started
collecting jueteng protection money, specifically from August of 1998.
[Ibid, p. 203]
Gov. Singson knew FPres. Estrada for
almost thirty (30) years before August of 1998. FPres. Estrada
was not yet a mayor but a movie actor as Gov. Singson’s mother was a
producer. [Ibid, p. 191] Gov. Singson first met Atong Ang at the
cockpit and gambling places. He had known Atong Ang for a long time
even when FPres. Estrada was still the Vice President. According
to Gov. Singson, Bong Pineda was a close “compadre” of FPres. Estrada
while his son, Jinggoy Estrada, was Bong Pineda’s godson by marriage.
[Ibid, p. 197]
Gov. Singson claimed that he was
present in not all but several meetings of Atong Ang with the jueteng
collectors. He was present when there was an agreement on the
three percent (3%) of total collections in every province, as fixed by
Atong Ang. [TSN dated July 22, 2002, pp. 12-13] Jueteng money was
delivered to FPres. Estrada initially every end of the month, starting
September of 1998 and later every 15th and at the end of the month.
[Ibid, p.14]
On October of 1998, Gov. Singson and
Atong Ang brought the jueteng protection money of about Nine Million
Pesos (P9,000,000.00) for the said month to FPres. Estrada at his
house, in No. 1 Polk Street in Greenhills, but FPres. Estrada and Atong
Ang had a nasty quarrel about the sugar allocation request of Atong Ang
which was denied by FPres. Estrada. Gov. Singson brought home the
said P9,000,000.00 but, the following day, FPres. Estrada called him up
asking him to pay F.P. Estrada’s obligations which went on until the
said amount was consumed and Gov. Singson was instructed by FPres.
Estrada to continue the collection of the jueteng money. [Ibid, pp. 26,
22-23]
Gov. Singson continued the collection
as instructed by FPres. Estrada, still with the help of Atong Ang, from
November of 1998 until August of 2000. The amounts of money
collected from jueteng during the said period were listed in the ledger
per month and per province. The ledger also listed the expenses
paid for using the jueteng protection money. [Ibid, pp. 24-27]
Every fifteen (15) days, Gov. Singson
himself delivered protection money to FPres. Estrada in the amount of
Five Million Pesos (P5,000,000.00) or a total of Ten Million Pesos
(P10,000,000.00) every month. Emma B. Lim delivered once the
jueteng money to FPres. Estrada in Malacañang. The
protection money was delivered usually in cash but sometimes in
check. Chavit Singon presented to this court two (2) sets of
ledger. The first set consisted of nine (9) pages covering the month of
November of 1998 up to July of 1999 (Exh. W7 to Exh. E8). The
September 1998 and October 1998 collections were not reflected in the
said ledger since the ledger was done only after FPres. Estrada and
Atong Ang quarreled in October 1998. The second set of ledger
covered the months of August of 1999 to August of 2000 (Exh.A-4 to Exh.
A-4-d). [TSN dated July 22, 2002, p. 27-31]
Gov. Singson prepared the pages of the
first set of ledger (Exh. W7 to E8) with the help of Emma B. Lim
and Ma. Carmencita Itchon and on the following year, Ricaforte joined
them. [Ibid, pp. 35-36]
The pages of the second set of ledgers
starting August of 1999 to August of 2000 [Exhibit A-4 and submarkings]
were prepared by Ricaforte under the supervision of Gov. Singson who
also checked the said ledger. [Ibid, pp. 36-37]
Ricaforte was introduced to Gov.
Singson by FPres. Estrada before his birthday on April 19, 1999.
She was designated by FPres. Estrada as auditor because
FPres. Estrada was strict with money. Gov. Singson
was thankful for Ricaforte’s designation because he did not want FPres.
Estrada to distrust him. [Ibid, p. 40] Gov. Singson considered
Ricaforte as the employee of FPres. Estrada with respect to the jueteng
collections because not only was she introduced to Singson by FPres.
Estrada, the latter also told Singson to give her Eighty Thousand Pesos
(P80, 000.00) monthly salary.
Ricaforte held office at LCS Building
owned by Gov. Singson. [Ibid, pp. 42-43] Gov. Singson did
not know Yolanda Ricaforte or her husband Orestes Ricaforte before
April of 1999. Gov. Singson identified Ricaforte from a picture
(Exh. A-6-b-1) where she was seated beside Menchu Itchon, the assistant
of Gov. Singson. The picture was taken during the wedding of
Raquel, the daughter of Gov. Singson where FPres. Estrada and his wife
Senator Loi Ejercito stood as wedding sponsors. [Ibid, p. 45-48]
According to Gov. Singson, the jueteng
collections were placed in a scratch paper as they came every fifteen
(15) days, at the middle and the end of the month or five (5) days
after the end of the month. When all the collections had arrived,
the list was finalized and then transferred to the computer. The
ledgers were prepared upon instructions of FPres. Estrada because the
latter was strict with money. [Ibid, pp. 37-40, 41-42]
Gov. Singson explained in detail the
entries on the left hand portion of the ledger for November of 1998 up
to July of 1999. In the province of Ilocos Sur, the total
collection for fifteen (15) days was Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos
(P750,000.00), in the province of La Union for 15 days, Five Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) total collection, while in Bulacan for 15
days, One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) total collection (Exh. W7) of
protection money for FPres. Estrada. The entries for the other
provinces were similar. On the left side column were the names of the
provinces, the middle column pertained to the number of days,
i.e., whether for 15 or 30 days and the right column, the total
amount of collections of jueteng protection money, in order that
jueteng operators will not be “arrested” or apprehended. There
was one (1) collector for three (3) provinces. [Ibid, pp.
53-54]
In the second set of ledger (Exh. A-4
to A-4-d) Ricaforte gave a code name for every province below the title
“Theme”. The number of days, either 15 or 30, under the title
“days” and the total amount of protection money for FPres. Estrada
below the title “points” were indicated in the ledger. [Ibid, pp. 55-56]
Gov. Singson narrated that when FPres.
Estrada was still the Vice President, they were already collecting
jueteng money but not in all provinces. When FPres. Estrada
assumed the presidency, he called Gov. Singson and Atong Ang to start
jueteng collections in provinces without protection money. Atong
Ang talked to certain persons in the said provinces so that the
collection of protection money could start. Every province had a
collector but sometimes there was one collector for three (3)
provinces. The collections were submitted to Gov. Singson but
sometimes they would get the money from the house of the
collectors. The jueteng collections which FPres. Estrada asked
Gov. Singson to operate for FPres. Estrada’s own benefit was at the
national level, meaning nationwide. They did not interfere with
jueteng operations at the lower level. Before there were
“Kangaroo” type of jueteng operations or “Guerilla Type”. They
did it on their own and they did not pay protection money. When
the jueteng operators gave protection money to FPres. Estrada, they
were not apprehended anymore although there were instructions to the
contrary which were for show or for record purposes only. [Ibid, pp.
59-64]
There were local officials who did not
allow jueteng like Governor Lina in Laguna. He changed the Provincial
Commander several times but jueteng still continued. In the other
places the protection money for jueteng given to the local officials
was different from that given to the higher levels. [Ibid, pp. 65-66]
