By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA — Civil society groups on Wednesday assailed the Sandiganbayan’s decision to grant former senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. bail in his P92.8-million malversation case, warning that the ruling could further erode public confidence in the country’s fight against corruption.
The coalition Tindig Pilipinas and other civic groups staged a protest outside the anti-graft court, arguing that influential public officials should not receive treatment different from ordinary Filipinos accused of wrongdoing.
The groups said the ruling sends a “dangerous message” that wealth, political connections and former public office can influence how justice is experienced in the Philippines.
“Justice cannot be selective,” the coalition said, stressing that accountability should apply regardless of a person’s political position or influence.
The protest followed the July 31 ruling of the Sandiganbayan Third Division allowing Revilla to post P1 million in cash bail after finding that the prosecution had failed to establish that the evidence of his guilt was strong enough to justify continued detention.
The ruling, however, does not amount to an acquittal.
Revilla remains on trial for graft and malversation allegations involving an alleged ghost flood-control project in Pandi, Bulacan, and the criminal proceedings will continue.
The distinction is important as the former senator’s bail becomes a flashpoint in the broader debate over accountability for alleged corruption in government infrastructure projects.
The civic groups nevertheless argued that the decision could deepen public frustration at a time when allegations involving questionable flood-control projects have triggered wider investigations into government officials, contractors and lawmakers.
Tindig Pilipinas convenor Francis Joseph Aquino Dee described the ruling as another example of what the coalition considers a double standard in the justice system.
The groups said the campaign against corruption would lose credibility if public officials and politically influential individuals were perceived to be receiving advantages unavailable to ordinary defendants.
They also warned that public office should never be treated as a shield against accountability.
The Sandiganbayan, however, based its bail ruling on the strength of the prosecution’s evidence at this stage of the proceedings.
The court’s finding does not resolve the ultimate question of Revilla’s guilt or innocence.
That question remains to be determined after the trial and presentation of evidence by both sides.
Revilla has previously faced other legal proceedings arising from the controversial pork barrel controversy, but the present case concerns the alleged P92.8-million ghost flood-control project in Bulacan.
The continuing trial is expected to keep the former senator’s alleged role under judicial scrutiny.
For the protesters, however, the issue goes beyond Revilla himself.
It is about whether the justice system can convince the public that the same rules apply to everyone.
Bail is not a verdict. But the public reaction to Revilla’s release shows that every high-profile corruption case is now being judged not only inside the courtroom, but also against the public’s demand for equal accountability.
ia/xf
