The Sandiganbayan has dismissed another forfeiture case against the Marcos family and their cronies, which aimed to recover the amount of P581.3 million worth of real properties and other assets alleged to have been illegally acquired during the martial law period of the late former president Ferdinand Marcos Sr.

In a 45-page decision, the Second Division of the anti-graft court stated that the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, failed to present sufficient evidence to prove that the mentioned properties and assets were ill-gotten.

“All told, absent sufficient evidence that may lead to the conclusion that the subject properties were indeed ill-gotten wealth, the court cannot simply order the return of the same to the national treasury,” stated Associate Justice Arthur Malabaguio in the decision.

Associate Justices Oscar Herrera Jr. and Edgardo Caldona supported the mentioned ruling.

The said case was filed by the PCGG in 1987 with the aim of recovering the amount of P581.304 million worth of real properties and shares of stocks allegedly obtained illegally by Marcos Sr., his wife, former first lady Imelda Marcos, and their business associates and dummies.

President Marcos and his children, Sen. Imee Marcos and Irene Marcos-Araneta, were included as substitute defendants and heirs of Marcos Sr., while their mother Imelda was one of the original defendants.

Apart from the Marcos couple, other defendants in the case include the married couple Modesto Enriquez and Trinidad Diaz-Enriquez, the married couple Rebecco Panlilio and Erlinda Enriquez-Panlilio, Leandro Enriquez, Roman Cruz Jr., and Don Ferry.

Based on the information presented in the case, the Panlilio and Enriquez couples served as dummies for Marcos Sr. and his wife in owning and controlling 11 corporations: Ternate Development Corp., Monte Sol Development Corp., Olas del Mar Development Corp., Philroad Construction Corp., Ocean Villas Condominium Corp., Fantasia Filipina Resort Inc., Sulo Dobbs Food Services Inc., Philippine Village Hotel Inc., Puerto Azul Beach and Country Club Inc., Silahis International Hotel Inc., and Hotel Properties Inc.

The PCGG also claimed that the Panlilio and Enriquez couples were given loans and provided financial assistance, resulting in losses for the government.

In the decision, the Second Division stated that the sole witness presented by the PCGG, their records custodian Maria Lourdes Magno, had no personal knowledge of the execution, authenticity, and veracity of the documentary evidence presented during the trial, including bank records of the corporations, Securities and Exchange Commission documents, deeds of sale, deeds of assignment, and transfer of certificate of titles to the subject properties.

As a result, the Second Division deemed all of Magno’s testimonies as hearsay.

“(Magno) is merely in possession of the subject documents in view of her position as records custodian of PCGG. Thus, the documents presented by the plaintiff lack basis, and witness Magno’s testimony on this point could not be taken at face value,” stated the Second Division.

Furthermore, the court noted that the documents presented by the PCGG were only photocopies, with many of them being illegible.

The PCGG was also deemed to have failed to prove the existence of original documents.

“The plaintiff (PCGG) did not even attempt to provide a plausible reason why the originals were not presented, neither did the plaintiff present any compelling ground why the court should admit the aforementioned documents as secondary evidence absent the testimony of the witnesses who had executed them,” stated the Second Division.

In conclusion, the court stated that the presented documents did not indicate that the Marcos couple acquired the corporations.