Sandiganbayan keeps Bonoan as co-accused in Estrada graft case

MANILA, Philippines — The Sandiganbayan has denied an attempt by Ombudsman prosecutors to remove former Department of Public Works and Highways Secretary Manuel Bonoan as a co-accused in a multimillion-peso graft case also involving Sen. Jinggoy Estrada.

In a 12-page resolution promulgated Aug. 3, the anti-graft court's Second Division rejected the prosecution's motion to exclude Bonoan from the charge sheet before his arraignment.

Prosecutors filed the motion on June 29, arguing that Bonoan's removal was necessary to secure his cooperation and testimony as a state witness in the investigation and prosecution of related offenses.

They argued that because Bonoan had not yet been arraigned, the change was merely formal and would not prejudice Estrada, who pleaded not guilty on June 4.

Estrada's defense opposed the motion, saying Bonoan's removal would fundamentally alter the prosecution's theory of the case.

Under the original charge, prosecutors alleged that Estrada and Bonoan acted in conspiracy. Removing Bonoan would shift the case toward holding Estrada individually liable for allegedly acting "by himself and/or through Sec. Bonoan."

The defense argued that the change would deprive Estrada of defenses based on the absence of a conspiracy between him and Bonoan.

The ruling

The Sandiganbayan agreed that removing Bonoan after Estrada's arraignment would unfairly prejudice the senator.

"The proposed amended information removes the only co-accused and purported conspirator of accused Estrada from the case, thereby modifying the theory of criminal liability from one predicated on conspiracy to one imposing individual liability on the part of accused Estrada," the court said.

Because Estrada had already been arraigned, the court said he was entitled to rely on the allegations in the original Information in preparing his defense.

"The exclusion of his co-accused will compel him to prepare a different defense... Instead of focusing on an allegation of collective criminal responsibility, accused Estrada will confront a different theory that focuses exclusively on his personal acts and omissions," the court said.

The Sandiganbayan also rejected the prosecution's reliance on Soberano v. People, noting that none of the accused in that case had been arraigned when prosecutors sought to amend the charge.

Estrada's arraignment, the court said, limited the prosecution's discretion to alter the Information.

Bonoan may still be sought as witness

The Sandiganbayan said prosecutors may instead seek Bonoan's discharge as a state witness under Rule 119, Section 17 of the Rules of Court.

Under the rule, prosecutors must present evidence at a hearing showing that Bonoan's testimony is absolutely necessary and that he is "not the most guilty."

"The prosecution is not precluded from subsequently seeking accused Bonoan's discharge as a state witness as it remains at liberty to seek his discharge at the appropriate stage of the proceedings, provided that the requisites under the rules are met," the court said.

The case stems from allegations that Estrada and Bonoan conspired between July 2024 and March 2025 to reduce funding for infrastructure and flood control projects in Bulacan by P213.75 million.

The Ombudsman alleged that the reduction was intended to facilitate "kickbacks" or "commissions" equivalent to 25% of the project budgets in exchange for awarding contracts to favored contractors.

• Latest
• Trending