MANILA, Philippines – The Sandiganbayan affirmed its dismissal of the plunder case against former agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante and other officials over the P723-million fertilizer fund scam.

In a resolution promulgated on February 6 and released to media on Tuesday, February 14, the anti-graft court’s special second division dismissed the motion for reconsideration filed by the prosecution last January.

The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) sought the reinstatement of the plunder charges against Bolante and other officials from the Department of Agriculture (DA) for allegedly misusing millions of pesos, and depriving farmers of needed supplies.

In its denial of the motion, the special second division said the prosecutors “ignorantly accused the court of going beyond its authority to determine probable cause for the purpose of the issuance of warrants of arrest.”

Prosecutors had argued that they didn’t need to present the evidence the court was looking for at this stage in the proceedings. They further noted that the court had not even issued an arrest warrant yet. 

The Sandiganbayan said it is not uncommon for a judge to assess evidence in a different manner.

The justices explained further that the finding of probable cause in the fiscal level does not automatically mean that the judge should immediately issue an arrest warrant.

The Sandiganbayan had earlier ruled there was nothing substantial in the prosecutors’ evidence, saying “no material participation, other than the release of the funds, could be shown to be attributable to Bolante.”

The fertilizer fund scam is said to follow the same scheme as the pork barrel scam, with DA funds funnelled to suppliers and foundations not reaching their intended beneficiaries – the farmers.

The Sandiganbayan had said that the prosecutors were only able to prove that ill-gotten wealth went to local officials and regional officials of the DA, but failed to connect Bolante to the scam.

“The prosecution must have overlooked the well-recognized power of the judges to dismiss a criminal case when the evidence on record clearly fails to establish probable cause for the issuance of the arrest,” said the February 6 resolution.

The justices cited a Supreme Court decision that allows them to dismiss charges even when probable cause had already been established.

The SC decision reads: “There is no reason to hold the accused for trial and further expose him to an open and public accusation of the crime when no probable cause exists.”

In a strongly-worded resolution, the justices also told prosecutors: “As the prosecution is wont in reminding this court not to intrude in the former’s executive functions, so must this court do also remind prosecution to refrain from interfering with the court’s judicial functions.” – Rappler.com