SC affirms dismissal of plea to junk graft charges vs ex-PAGCOR exec

THE Supreme Court (SC) has affirmed the dismissal of a motion to junk graft charges against a former chairman of the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) for supposedly allowing the disbursement of movie tickets worth P26.7 million in 2008.  

In a five-page resolution dated March 2 and made public on September 29, the tribunal ruled that former PAGCOR chair Efraim C. Genuino filed an improper legal remedy with the High Court.  

“Clearly, petitioner (Mr. Genuino) availed of an improper remedy when he prematurely filed a petition for certiorari with the court, that is, before the Sandiganbayan could even hand down its final verdict in the case,” the court’s Third Division said in the ruling.  

A petition for certiorari accuses a court of failing to provide a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in a case.  

Mr. Genuino argued that the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan abused its discretion when it denied his motion for leave to file a demurrer to evidence. 

A demurrer to evidence asserts that the evidence presented by the opposing party is insufficient.  

Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, an order denying a motion for leave of court to file a demurrer to evidence is unappealable before a court’s judgment.  

The Sandiganbayan had said its denial of the motion for leave was “without prejudice to the said accused filing such demurrer/s to evidence without prior leave of court.”  

Mr. Genuino asserted that there was nothing illegal about the disbursement of the movie tickets, noting that the funds used came from PAGCOR’s own operating expenses, which were not part of the government’s share.  

In 2011, A PAGCOR board member filed a complaint before the Department of Justice (DoJ)  accusing Mr. Genuino of “causing damage and prejudice to the government” for allowing the purchase of movie tickets for casino patrons as a redeemable prize.  

The DoJ found probable cause and filed the case before the Sandiganbayan.  

Mr. Genuino did not immediately reply to a Facebook Messenger chat seeking comment on the latest court ruling. — John Victor D. Ordoñez