• Office of Minority Leader Edcel C. Lagman
• 0916-6406737/0918-9120137
• Official Website: http://www.edcellagman.com.ph
• 05 May 2011

          The ruling of the Sandiganbayan (Second Division) upholding the validity of the Garcia plea bargain agreement was not actually a blow to the Aquino administration’s anti-corruption campaign but a stern chastisement against the President and his allies for attempting to influence the decision of the anti-graft court.

           Since the inception of the Aquino administration, the President and his men have consistently demeaned judicial authority and sought to influence, if not supplant, judicial action with public opinion and propaganda.

           It is to the credit of the judiciary that it has preserved and asserted its independence against the encroachments and forays of the Executive.

           In defending the independence and integrity of the Sandiganbayan, the justices of the anti-graft court declared: “from the altered and baseless comments on the true facts and circumstances of the plea bargaining agreement, public opinion snowballed. While the court is used to be at the center of conflicting interest, and to be the object of criticism from losing parties, we have never seen such distortions and prevarications of facts from people who are expected to be sentinels of the rule of law.”

           The aforequoted disquisition appears to be a tirade against the President who went out of his way to galvanize public opinion against the plea bargaining agreement and also against the now-resigned Ombudsman and special prosecutors.

           The Sandiganbayan did not spare Heidi Mendoza whose testimony and proffered fraud audit were found to be weak, defective and insufficient to warrant conviction of Garcia for plunder.

           The Solicitor General was likewise denied personality to intervene in the case which was under the control of the special prosecutors of the Office of the Ombudsman.