Presumption of innocence applied


In the June 30, 2010 issue of this paper, I wrote about the presumption of innocence. This is enshrined in Section 14[1], of Article III of the Constitution (the Bill of Rights) which provides that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved.



For the reason that the accused is presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, conviction must rest, as well-settled jurisprudence tells us, not on the weakness of the defense but on the strength of the prosecution. "When the prosecution fails to discharge its burden, an accused need not even offer evidence in his behalf." (People vs. Castro, et al., G.R. No. 122671, November 18, 1997).
*****
The recent exoneration by the Sandiganbayan of former Governor Hector S. Sanchez and all his other co-accused again proves how the presumption of innocence is applied by our courts. I had the privilege of being the defense lawyer of former governor Sanchez in this case, and also of Neptaly Tañon, in collaboration with his wife, Public Prosecutor Rizalina V. Tañon, who was given special authority to defend her husband.
*****
The case arose out of a purchase by the provincial government of Catanduanes in early 2000 of 10 units shotgun at P18,500 each. According to the criminal complaint or information filed with the Sandiganbayan against former governor Hector S. Sanchez, Neptaly Tañon, Ireneo del Rosario, Felipe Almojuela and Luis Ribano, Jr., the price of each shotgun was only P12,400, thereby having an overprice of P6,100 each, or P61,000 for the ten units.
*****
During the hearing of the case, however, the prosecution presented only three witnesses: two investigators of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), namely, Atty. Ramilo Quinto and Ariel Jonathan Contreras, and a cashier of a branch of the company which sold the firearms, Shooters Guns & Ammo Corp.
*****
The NBI investigators did not have any personal knowledge of the price of the subject shotguns at the time they were purchased. And so, for being hearsay, the testimonies of these witnesses cannot legally support any inference of overpricing. With respect to the cashier of another branch of the seller, neither did she testify on the price of the shotguns at the time of the purchase.
*****
In fact, to compound the prosecution’s woes, the prosecution itself, perhaps unwittingly, submitted in evidence a price list of various shotguns being sold in 1998 by Shooters Guns and Ammo Corp. at P22,312.50 each, which is almost four thousand pesos higher than the P18,500.00 paid for by the provincial government. And so, instead of establishing an overprice, what the prosecution succeeded in showing was that the price for the purchase was way below the market price. The shotguns were actually purchased by the province at a bargain. If this were a basketball game, what the prosecution did was to make a perfect three-point shot in the opposing team’s goal!
*****
And so, when the prosecution rested its case and it was already the turn of the defense to present evidence, we decided not to present any defense anymore. We instead filed a Demurrer to Evidence which prayed that the case be dismissed because the evidence submitted by the prosecution was not sufficient to sustain a finding of guilt. We pointed out to the Sandiganbayan that because of the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused, suspicion no matter how strong, cannot be a basis for conviction. The prosecution must rely on the strength of its evidence and not on the weakness of the defense. The accused need not prove his innocence because that is presumed. Consequently, if the evidence adduced by the prosecution does not establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the accused need not adduce any evidence in his favor to secure a judgment of acquittal. The presumption of innocence continues until sufficient evidence is introduced to overcome his presumed innocence, and his guilt is established.
*****
True enough, the Sandiganbayan dismissed the case for insufficiency of evidence without the need of any evidence from the defense anymore.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Share

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites