Rappler unpacks SC ruling on Estrada plunder, bribery case

CHEERS TO Rappler for an explainer that dissected the case of Senator Jinggoy Estrada and thoroughly discussed the ruling of Sandiganbayan.

On January 19, the Sandiganbayan released a 396-page decision acquitting Estrada of plunder but convicting him of three counts of bribery in the so-called pork barrel scam. Most accounts merely recorded parts of the ruling without sorting its separate but related portions, rendering these reports perplexing. 

Included in Lian Buan’s explainer, the anti-graft court found that the evidence was “not sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt the crime of plunder.” The report detailed the court sentence: Estrada was ordered to pay a PHP3 million fine and was sentenced from eight to nine years for one count of direct bribery and two to three years for two counts of indirect bribery. Estrada’s lawyers said they were appealing the decision. 

Court’s decision

As recalled in the explainer, Estrada was accused of having pocketed PHP180.9 million in kickback payments for his participation in the Napoles’ scam. This was based on the records of Benhur Luy, an associate of businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles who kept track of the transactions. 

Napoles, dubbed the “pork barrel scam queen” by the press, set up fake nongovernment organizations in 2013 and asked lawmakers to allocate their Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) for non-existing projects.

In coming up with the decision, Buan reported, the court used “a combination of hard evidence and logic” to verify the alleged kickbacks. After verification, the court counted only PHP9.875 million received by Estrada as kickback, which is below the PHP50 million threshold for plunder. 

Buan’s article explained why Estrada was acquitted of plunder and proceeded to explain his conviction of three counts of bribery. While the alleged kickback received did not justify a plunder charge, it was a significant amount and should have been reported, but which previous reports did not highlight.

The report also added context: Estrada refuted any accusation of collusion with Napoles and claimed he only ever saw her at social gatherings. But he also argued that he only chose projects from a menu provided to the senators for their fund. His signatures appeared on the endorsement letters for Napoles’ NGOs.

Buan also included the court’s discovery that PHP1 million was documented and matched with NGO withdrawals, and a Special Allotment Release Order had been deposited in Estrada’s bank account. The remaining PHP8.875 million was found to have been sent to Pauline Labayen, Estrada’s Senate appointments secretary.

Reporting the acquittal

Reports from ABS-CBN News, GMA News Online, Rappler, Inquirer.net, and Philstar.com were largely limited to discussing his acquittal and conviction but failed to highlight—or even mention—the context and new information in the decision on Estrada’s case. 

All reports, including Buan’s, briefly recalled the case of Senator Bong Revilla who was cleared of plunder charges by the Sandigan Court.

In the case of Estrada, the amount of money involved in the bribery should have been included, to indicate the scope of the crime for which he was convicted. There may not have been enough evidence to find him guilty of plunder; but his guilt for accepting bribes was established by the court, the amount of which should be known to the public. Buan said clearly the court found that “Estrada is a public officer, he received bribe money, and he endorsed a bogus NGO for his PDAF project.”  

Time may have erased the memory of the scandal that showed how easily public officials could line their pockets with people’s money. Unfortunately, it has been more difficult to bring to justice those who cooperated with Janet Napoles to enrich themselves in public office. 

At present, journalists have to sift through layers of information to make sense of the ruling and to report the decision accurately. There were some reports which suggested weakness in the case against Estrada. But Buan has made very clear that the court found sufficient evidence to convict Estrada of accepting bribes, creating a fake organization designed to receive funds through the Napoles system. 

This reference should hold through further coverage of the case as it moves with its appeal and all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary. 

Journalists should try harder to engage public interest in these cases. Buan’s way of story-telling—breaking down information and thoroughly discussing each aspect—helps the public understand the truth of wrongdoing by government officials. Hopefully, it will build the public resolve to keep their like out of public office.