THE Supreme Court has overturned the Sandiganbayan’s 2018 conviction of former first lady Imelda Marcos on seven counts of graft involving her alleged financial interests in Swiss foundations.
The Supreme Court First Division granted Marcos’ appeal and set aside the Sandiganbayan’s Nov. 9, 2018, decision in seven criminal cases, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The decision, penned by Associate Justice Rodil Alameda, was issued on June 10 and released on Wednesday.
The Court found serious evidentiary and legal flaws in the prosecution’s case, particularly its reliance on Swiss documents that were not properly authenticated.
It stressed that private documents generally cannot be admitted as evidence unless their authenticity is established. It found that the prosecution failed to sufficiently prove the authenticity and evidentiary value of key documents used to link Marcos to the alleged financial interests.
The Court also rejected the Sandiganbayan’s characterization of the Swiss foundations as “businesses” covered by Section 3(h) of Republic Act 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
The Sandiganbayan had ruled that the foundations were used to open bank accounts, transfer funds and manage investments for the benefit of the Marcos family, effectively treating them as businesses.
The Court disagreed, saying the prosecution failed to establish under the applicable Swiss and Liechtenstein laws that the foundations were businesses within the meaning of the anti-graft law.
The Court noted that some of the foundations were established under Liechtenstein law, while the prosecution relied in part on a journal article discussing Swiss law.
It said the prosecution should have presented the applicable foreign laws and demonstrated how those laws applied to the foundations involved in the cases.
“Doubts on the coverage of the term ‘business’ should be resolved against the State and in favor of the accused-appellant,” the Court said.
The Court likewise stressed that criminal convictions must rest on admissible and relevant evidence, and that the prosecution carries the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The seven cases involved allegations that Marcos maintained financial or pecuniary interests in private foundations in Switzerland and Liechtenstein while she was a public official.
The Sandiganbayan convicted her in 2018, prompting her appeal to the Supreme Court.
