Republic of the Philippines

CAPIZ STATE UNIVERSITY

Bailan, Pontevedra, Capiz

College of Education, Arts and Sciences

OUTPUT IN HUM. 422 (Logics, Ethics and Philosophy of Man.)

NAME: LEAH MAY GALLARDO

Research Work 1.​

1. Research a case of a politician/government entity who was accused of something (graft &

corruption, incompetence, abuse, etc) filed by the people of the Philippines. Write the details

about the case and its current proceedings/result of the case.

2. Research a case of a certain individual where self-defense was the cause of death of the

victim. Write the details about the case.

3. Research a libel case filed in court. Write the details of the case.

4. Discuss your reaction and reflection on the 3 cases and in accordance with ethics and morality.

Emphasize your stand per case and justify your stand.

1​. Research a case of a politician/government entity who was accused of something (graft &

corruption, incompetence, abuse, etc) filed by the people of the Philippines. Write the

details about the case and its current proceedings/result of the case.

Anti-graft court's Top 10 cases involve billions of pesos

The P4.098-billion plunder case vs former president Joseph Estrada tops the list of Sandigan
bayan cases with the highest sums involved

Details

MANILA, Philippines – The plunder and graft cases filed before the Ombudsman against the 3
senators implicated in the controversial pork barrel scam involve what appear to be among the
highest amounts in terms of ill-gotten money in the country's history.

Of the three, the cases against Senator Ramon Revilla Jr involve the highest amounts (a total of
P517 million or $11.87 million for graft, and P224 million or $5.14 million for plunder),
followed by Senator Juan Ponce Enrile (P345 million or $7.92 million for graft, P172 million or
$3.95 million for plunder) and Senator Jinggoy Estrada (P278 million or $6.38 million for graft,
P183 million or $4.2 million for plunder).

However high these figures may be, they still aren't the highest figures in the history of the
anti-graft court. The Sandiganbayan database shows that from 1979 to 2013, there are 7 cases
that involve amounts higher than those in Revilla's graft charge.

Here's a list of 10 cases that involve the highest amounts ever handled by the Sandiganbayan, as
reflect The plunder case filed in 2001 against Estrada involves the highest amount handled by the
anti-graft court so far. The case, filed after he was ousted in 2000, involves his acceptance of
proceeds from the illegal numbers game jueteng and his ownership of huge amounts of money in
a bank account under the name Jose Velarde.
Estrada was convicted in September 2007, and was detained until he was granted presidential
pardon a month later. The Sandiganbayan's 2013 compliance report says he still owes the
government over P400 million, roughly US$9 million. (READ: ​No closure yet on Erap Estrada’s
plunder case​)

Incidentally, his son Jinggoy is among those implicated in this case, but he was acquitted (along
with Edward Serapio) in 2007. (READ: ​How Jinggoy got away in his first plunder charge​)

2. P818 million ($18.77 million) – graft case vs officials of Philippine Export and Foreign
Loan Guarantee Corporation (Philguarantee) and two others

Philguarantee executive vice-president Cesar Macuja, vice chairman Rosendo Bondoc, Ronaldo
Zamora (personal lawyer of former president Ferdinand Marcos) and Vicente Chuidan were
charged in 1993 for violating section 3(a) of Republic Act 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act.

Section 3(a) of the said law states that it is unlawful for public officials to "[persuade, induce or
influence] another public officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules and
regulations duly promulgated by competent authority or an offense in connection with the
official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced to
commit such violation or offense."

Chuidian was allegedly a dummy of the Marcoses in several companies, and was said to have
influenced the Philguarantee officers to facilitate the procurement and issuance of a loan
guarantee in favor of the Asian Reliability Company Incorporated (ARCI) – which was 98%
owned by Chuidian. Philguarantee is a government-owned entity created by former president
Ferdinand Marcos in 1974 to guarantee loans for promoting businesses in the Philippines.

This case was dismissed in 1998.

3. P694 million ($15.93 million) – graft case vs National Sugar Trading Corporation
(NASUTRA) offficials

NASUTRA officials Roberto Benedicto (chairman of the board), Jose Unson (executive vice
president), and Jaime Dacanay (vice president) were charged with violation of section 3(e) of RA
3019 for importing raw sugar without prior authority.

Section 3(e) of the said law states that it is unlawful for public officials to "[cause] any undue
injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted
benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This
provision shall apply to officers and employees of offices or government corporations charged
with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions."

The illegal sugar importation was said to have "[forced] local sugar prices to go down and
coerce/compel sugar producers or traders to restore sugar trading and control back to NASUTRA
and thus enabling the accused NASUTRA officers to rake in millions of pesos in profit and
commission from sugar trading along to the damage and prejudice of the government and the
public interest."

The case was dismissed in 1997.

4. P685 million ($15.72 million) – graft case vs judiciary employees and 4 others

Manila RTC deputy register of deeds Yolanda Alfonso, branch clerk of court Raymundo
Vallega, and 4 private individuals were charged in 1994 for violating section 3(e) of the
anti-graft law.

No other information is easily available about this case, except for what the Sandiganbayan
database indicate: that the case was "transferred to other court" in 1995.

5. P660 million ($15.15 million) – graft case vs Government Service Insurance System
(GSIS) officials

GSIS vice president/comptroller Richard Martinez and chief executive officer Amado Epino
were charged in 2000 for violating section 3(e) of RA 3019.

Like the previous case, no other information is available except that it was withdrawn by the
Office of the Special Prosecutor in 2001.

6. P533 million ($12.23 million) – 2003 graft case vs Public Estates Authority (PEA)
officials and 6 state auditors

In 2003, 20 PEA officials and some state auditors from the Commission on Audit (COA) were
charged with violation of section 3(e) of RA 3019 in relation to the overpriced Diosdado
Macapagal Boulevard.

It was revealed by former PEA board director Sulficio Tagud that the project was overpriced,
and that all requests by contractor JD Legaspi Construction for price adjustment were approved
by the PEA board. Based on the Sandiganbayan database, the case remains pending.

7. P520 million ($11.93 million) – graft case vs former trade minister Roberto Ongpin,
former Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas chief Jaime Laya, and former Philguarantee president
Rosendo Bondoc

A graft case was filed in 1995 against Ongpin, Laya and Bondoc for violating section 3(e) of RA
3019 after they allegedly conspired in the approval of a big loan of the Construction and
Development Corporation of the Philippines.

The case against Ongpin was dismissed in 2003, while the case against Bondoc was dismissed in
2004. As for Laya, his case was dismissed also in 2004 after the Sandiganbayan upheld the
immunity granted to him by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG).

8. P511 million ($11.73 million) – graft case vs former Philippine National Bank (PNB) vice
president Domingo Ingco Sr and two others

Ingco, along with top officials of Cresta Monte Shipping Corporation, was charged in 1993 with
violation of sections e and g of RA 3019 for conspiring to have the company's loan applications
approved even without some of the necessary requirements satisfied.
Violation of section g of the law refers to "entering, on behalf of the Government, into any
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the
public officer profited or will profit thereby."

The case was dismissed in 1997.

9. P432 million ($9.91 million) – graft case vs. Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP)
officials

DBP chairman Rafael Sison and executive vice president Jose Tengco Jr were charged in 2011
for violation of section 3(e) of RA 3019.

No other information is easily available, except that the case remains pending.

Sison was acquitted by the anti-graft court for a separate graft case in 2012 for extending a loan
guarantee to a company that has allegedly not provided sufficient collateral.

10. P400 million ($9.18 million) – graft case vs Gregorio Araneta III (son-in-law of former
president Marcos) and 8 others

A graft case was filed in 1986 after the supposed transfer of a major portion of the assets of the
Pantranco North Express Inc (PNEI) to the North Express Transport Inc (NETI), a
newly-organized corporation principally owned and controlled by Araneta.

An investigation reportedly show that there were certain terms and conditions that made it
possible to permit PNEI assets, including those which were not included in a projected sale to
NETI, to be prematurely delivered to NETI.

Those charged with violation of RA 3019 were Araneta and officials of the Philippine National
Bank (PNB), National Investment and Development Corporation (NIDC), and PNEI. The case
against Araneta and 4 others were dismissed, while the 4 others were acquitted.

Other big cases

The plunder case filed in 2012 against former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and 9 others
placed 12th in the list, as it invoves P365 million ($8.38 million). The case is in connection with
the alleged misuse of Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) intelligence funds during
the latter years of Arroyo's administration. (READ: ​Arroyo, 9 others charged with plunder​)

The case was filed a week before President Benigno Aquino III delivered his State of the Nation
Address (SONA) that same year.

Meanwhile, the case filed in 2005 against former military comptroller Major General Carlos
Garcia ranks 15th with P303 million ($6.95 million). Garcia, his wife and 3 children were
charged for illegal accumulation of wealth.

The Office of the Ombudsman entered in February 2010 into a plea bargain agreement with
Garcia. The Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order on the plea bargain deal in
2013. (READ: ​SC stops Garcia plea bargain deal​) ​– Rappler.com
2. Research a case of a certain individual where self-defense was the cause of death of the
victim. Write the details about the case.

Basil Parasiris was a 41-year-old businessman who lived with his wife and two children in the
South Shore region of Montreal. In the early morning hours of March 2, 2007, the Parasiris
family was awakened by a surprise visit from nine police officers from the suburb of Laval. The
police suspected Parasiris of drug trafficking and had a warrant to search his home. In order to
prevent Parasiris from being able to destroy potential evidence, this warrant allowed the cops to
use “dynamic entry” and enter the home without knocking. They entered Parasiris’s bedroom
with their guns drawn, but Parasiris grabbed his .357 Magnum and ​fired at them​. Constable
Daniel Tessier was shot twice and killed instantly while Parasiris’s wife and another officer were
wounded in the ensuing gunfire. When Parasiris realized the intruders were police officers, he
immediately dropped his weapon.

Parasiris was charged with first-degree murder, but maintained that he only acted in self-defense
to protect his family. Since the police officers were in plainclothes and did not identify
themselves, Parasiris assumed it was a robbery attempt. Even though Parasiris admitted to being
involved with drug trafficking years beforehand and there was a small amount of cocaine found
in his house, there was nowhere near enough evidence to justify the use of a “dynamic entry”
search warrant. A judge determined that the warrant was illegal and would be inadmissible in
court. In June 2008, Parasiris was ​put on trial and acquitted​ of the shooting of Constable Tessier.
He did eventually receive a 20-month sentence for storing illegal firearms in his home, but ​was
paroled​ after only serving five months.
3. Research a libel case filed in court. Write the details of the case​.

Trillanes to file libel case vs Thinking Pinoy's RJ Nieto

(UPDATED) Senator Antonio Trillanes IV says the case stems from the blogger's 'fake news'
that US President Donald Trump supposedly called him a 'little narco'

MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – Senator Antonio Trillanes IV said on Tuesday, November

7, that he will file a libel case against Thinking Pinoy blogger RJ Nieto for allegedly peddling
"fake news" that he is a drug lord.

Trillanes said in a news briefing on Tuesday that the complaint will be on Nieto's post on a
column on the supposed exchange between a journalist and US President Donald Trump,
wherein the US chief allegedly tagged the senator as a “little narco.”

“​Pine-prepare ng abugado ko ‘yung libel case. Kakasuhan na namin siya ng libel​ (My lawyers
are already preparing the libel case. We will already file a libel against him),” Trillanes said on
Tuesday.

Last week, a couple of columnists came out with a story about Trump supposedly calling
Trillanes a “little narco” who met with US Senator Marco Rubio – the first, written by ​Pilipino
Star Ngayon​ columnist Al Pedroche. ​Philippine Star​ columnist Mary Ann Reyes wrote a column
citing the same information.
Pedroche has since apologized to the senator, and Trillanes accepted his apology. On Saturday,
Trillanes said he was also waiting for an apology from Nieto and Reyes.

Trillanes maintained on Tuesday that there was nothing irregular about his trip to the US, where
he met with lawmakers, including ​Republican Senator Marco Rubio​, one of the critics of the
Duterte administration's bloody drug war.

When asked at the Tuesday briefing, the senator said he would still pursue a libel case against
Nieto even if he apologized.

"Well, tapos na e. Kung baga, may deadline naman ‘yan. So I'll be filing that in the days to
come.... Doon sa cybercrime offense of libel, pasok na siya. Kasi, 'yung narco na ni-label ako...
Narco? Para akong drug lord? That’s derogatory; that’s libelous. Wala e, bogus e, alam nilang
ginawa lang nila," he said.

(Well, it's already done. There's a deadline for this. So I'll be filing that in the days to come.... He
will fall under the cybercrime offense of libel. Because, that narco label... Narco? I'm like a drug
lord? That's derogatory; that's libelous. Nothing. It’s bogus. They know that they just made it
up.)

He said Nieto and other online defenders of Duterte seem to find it so difficult to admit their
mistake.

"'Yung shinare niya na article tapos nag-comment siya based on that article...nag-apologize na
nga ‘yung columnist na ‘yun.... Pero siya na nag-share noon, determinado siya e. Kasi itong
mga ito, kagaya rin ‘yan ng amo nila na si Mr Duterte, na parang sinisilihan kapag
mag-apologize e. Parang napakabigat para sa kanila na umamin na nagkakamali,"​ he said.

(He shared the article then commented on it...the columnist [who wrote it] already apologized....
But he, who was the one who shared it, is really determined. This person, like his master, Mr
Duterte, feel uneasy at the prospect of apologizing. Admitting a mistake seems so hard for them
to do.)

As for his US trip, Trillanes said he was puzzled as to why it became a "big deal" when other
Philippine senators have also gone on foreign trips. (READ: ​Trillanes says he only presented
'facts' in meeting with US senator​)

In September, the senator filed criminal charges – including cyber libel – against another
pro-administration blogger, ​Palace Communications Assistant Secretary Mocha Uson​, for
spreading "fake news" that he owned offshore bank accounts and for other alleged unlawful acts
committed by the official. –​ Rappler.com
4. Discuss your reaction and reflection on the 3 cases and in accordance with ethics and

morality. Emphasize your stand per case and justify your stand.

Reaction and Reflection on the 3 cases

Case no. 1 the plunder and graft cases of the former president Joseph Estrada

The plunder case former president Joseph Estrada he is top list in sandiganbayan cases with the

highest sum involving case Estrada got a highest amount in terms of ill-gotten money in the

country, law states that it is unlawful for public officials to influence other public officer to

perform constituting violations of the rules by competent authority or offense in connection with

the official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to influence to commit such violation. For

me, as a politician he/she never been a corrupt because a lot of people become poor.

Case no. 2:

Basil Parasiris is the business man who lived with his family and two children, Parasiris family

was surprised visit from the nine police officers, and they accused Parasiris of drug trafficking,

but Parasiris went to his room to get gun and he fired at them, but Parasiris realize that he want

to trust of them even though there is no permission in the authority to search his house.

Parasiris was maintained that he only act to protect his family because the police officers that

come to his house are not wearing this uniform, so that he cannot identify the police officers. A
judged determined that the warrant has illegal, he did eventually receive a 20 month sentence for

storing illegal firearms in his home but he was paroled after only serving five months.

For me as Parasiris I well do same that he did because I want to protect my family in dangerous

people and I am the responsible to care my family.

Case no.3 ​Trillanes to file libel case vs Thinking Pinoy's RJ Nieto

Senator Trillianes are going to file a libel case for Nieto for allegedly pedding “fake news” that

he is a drug lord. Being accused by a crime which do not committed is such a terrible experience

that could happen in someones life. Based on the Trillianes and Nietos case it was shocking news

that brought the netizens different reactions. It is evidently that Trillianes dignity and reputation

cause a broken image of him.