Marcos family. Photo by Malacanang Photo Library
The Sandiganbayan has dismissed a P276-million wealth forfeiture case against former first lady Imelda Marcos and her late husband, former president Ferdinand Marcos Sr., involving several properties in the Philippines and the United States.
In a 30-page resolution dated October 4, 2024, the anti-graft court’s Second Division granted Imelda’s motion to dismiss the case because it violated the defendant’s right to a fair and speedy trial “since the records show hardly anything besides the plaintiff’s lack of diligence in handling the cases.”
“Scrutiny of the chronology of events, in this case, shows a plethora of motions for extension filed due to unpreparedness or lack of witnesses/documentary evidence, aside from pending incidents, and scheduled pre-trial cancellations contributing to the inordinate delay,” the resolution read.
The court observed that the delay had exceeded 30 years, referring to the numerous motions, filings, and orders related to the case.
It also pointed out that there has been no pre-trial, indicating that the trial has not yet commenced.
The court added that, even though the defendants did not raise the delay issue in every pleading, this could not be interpreted as waiving their right to do so.
“The burden is not upon them to ensure that the wheels of justice continue to turn or to expedite the pre-trial and start the trial within the bounds of reasonable timeliness,” it said.
Along with Marcos Sr. and Imelda, another respondent is Roman Cruz—a former president of the Government Service Insurance System and Philippine Airlines who was accused of acting as the Marcos couple’s crony.
In July 1987, the PCGG initiated a civil case aiming to forfeit two lots and two condominium units in Baguio City, a residential building in Makati, a piece of land, and six condominium units in California, along with a residential lot in Manila. Additionally, the PCGG requested P50 billion in moral damages and P1 billion in exemplary damages.
In 1989, Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos were declared in default for failing to respond to the lawsuit. However, in 1992, Imelda’s motion to address the allegations was granted, and she and Cruz submitted their pre-trial briefs.
In her July 16, 2024, motion to dismiss, Imelda argued that her right to a speedy resolution was violated, attributing the delay to the “defective complaint” and “frivolous motions.” She also claimed that her right to a fair trial was compromised, as potential defense witnesses are no longer available and essential documents may no longer exist.
In response, government lawyers noted no remaining allegations against the late President’s estate. They also pointed out that the Sandiganbayan had dismissed the case against Ferdinand Marcos Sr. in October 2012, citing insufficient evidence that Cruz was used as a dummy. (TCSP)
