Sara Duterte camp slams ‘political’ dismissal of raps vs Madriaga

MANILA, Philippines — The camp of Vice President Sara Duterte on Friday slammed what they described as the “political decision” of prosecutors to dismiss the perjury complaint against Ramil Madriaga.

Duterte’s spokesperson Paolo Panelo Jr. made the statement after the Office of the City Prosecutor (OCP) of Taguig City issued a 19-page resolution Thursday, junking Duterte’s complaint against Madriaga due to “insufficiency of evidence.”

READ: Taguig prosecutors dismiss Sara Duterte’s perjury case vs Ramil Madriaga

Article continues after this advertisement

“A prosecutor who truly weighed the evidence would not have reached this result,” Panelo said in a statement. “It can therefore only be a political decision.”

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

Panelo noted that they have to file this complaint with OCP Taguig, which he stressed is under the Department of Justice headed by Secretary Fredderick Vida. 

Vida is part of the Cabinet of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the vice president’s former ally.

“We understood the political realities from the outset, and publicly warned of this possibility,” he said.

According to Panelo, Duterte’s case was “airtight” with the first complaint containing 300 pages and the second 50-page second perjury complaint, supported by five additional corroborating testimonies

Article continues after this advertisement

“If a complaint of that strength can be discarded, then the message is simple: a man may brazenly lie under oath against the Vice President, and this administration will protect the lie if it is politically useful,” he said/

“Indeed, it would seem that they could not afford to do otherwise because this would amount to confirmation from the government itself that one of the bases for the impeachment against the vice president was perjured testimony,” he continued.

Article continues after this advertisement

The prosecutors, in their resolution, noted that while Duterte presented evidence disputing respondent’s assertions, it  “does not establish prima facie with reasonable certainty of conviction that respondent knowingly and willfully made materially false statements under oath” under Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code.

It was in March when Duterte filed her first perjury complaint before the Taguig Prosecutor’s Office against Madriaga after her supposed former aide submitted an affidavit to the Office of the Ombudsman claiming that he had delivered large sums of money to different people under her instructions.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Duterte has denied such accusations, noting that she does not personally know Madriaga. /jpv