Ombudsman Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla has voiced sharp criticism over the Sandiganbayan’s handling of bail for individuals convicted of corruption, advocating for immediate imprisonment upon conviction rather than continued temporary liberty.
Speaking during his radio program on Saturday, Remulla questioned why so few convicted graft offenders serve jail time despite numerous convictions rendered by the anti-graft court and regional trial courts.
He argued that the constitutional presumption of innocence should no longer allow individuals to evade detention once a trial court hands down a guilty verdict, calling the judiciary overly lenient for failing to send convicts straight to prison.
“Sabi ko, marami naman ang nasisintensiyahan. Maraming nasisintensiyahan ang Sandiganbayan pero halos kaunti lang ang nakakulong. Paano? Sinasabi, meron daw tayong presumption of innocence at right to bail,” Remulla said.
“Pero ‘pag ika’y na-convict na sa lower court, convicted na sa Sandiganbayan, na-convict na ng RTC dito sa graft, dapat iyan kulong ka na. Ang problema, medyo sobrang bait ng korte at hindi ginagawa ‘yung trabaho na ipakulong ‘yung dapat ipinakukulong,” he added.
To address the issue, Remulla proposed that if post-conviction bail must be permitted, the amount should match the exact financial damage caused by the crime and be payable exclusively in cash rather than through surety bonds.
“Grant sila nang grant ng bail. Ang bababa pa ng piyansa. Dapat kasi diyan, ‘pag na-convict na ‘yung tao at talagang may petition for bail, ang bail should be set, if ever kung iga-grant mo ‘yan, at the cost of damage na ginawa ng tao,” he stated.
The Ombudsman confirmed that his office has formally requested a complete inventory of Sandiganbayan convictions to audit how many guilty individuals are actively serving their sentences.
He also expressed concern over systemic delays caused by unresolved motions for reconsideration on bail grants, pointing out that cases often drag on for up to 15 years due to endless extensions.
“Basta’t nagkaroon ng motion for reconsideration on a grant of bail, parang walang deadline ang judiciary… May rules sila na dapat sinusunod, hihingi sila permiso, ipapa-extend nila. Pero paano ‘yan, uupuan na lang nila forever? Umaabot ng 15 taon ‘yung kaso, nakaupo lang,” he remarked.
“Once a motion for reconsideration is filed against a grant of bail, it seems as though there is no deadline for the judiciary. They have rules that must be followed, but they ask for permission and seek extensions,” Remulla noted.